Green Line / Central Corridor construction thread (archive)

[twincitizen]

An updated staff/employee/student email from yesterday indicates that EMI testing on campus will begin Thurdsay, Aug. 8. The testing times are still 1am-5am, so I'm still not sure if that means that testing will begin Thursday AM or Friday AM (Thursday 'night').

Sounds like it's tonight, er tomorrow morning, from 1am-5am. Sadly, way past my bedtime these days.

[Wedgeguy]

An updated staff/employee/student email from yesterday indicates that EMI testing on campus will begin Thurdsay, Aug. 8. The testing times are still 1am-5am, so I'm still not sure if that means that testing will begin Thursday AM or Friday AM (Thursday 'night').

Sounds like it's tonight, er tomorrow morning, from 1am-5am. Sadly, way past my bedtime these days.

At present they are working on testing, from the west bank station to the Stadium Station. This is for timing, this does not include the testing for the University with the science buildings issues there at the end of the Washington Ave bridge. My landlord said he had the train up to 40 MPH going across the Washington Ave bridge. They are working on timing and see how fast they can go and how easy it will be to slow down and speed up going on the hill of the east bank.

[mullen]

the more caternary the more transit friendly. oh, except if you're st louis park.

that's one of the joys of traveling to a city with great transit. intersections full of wire overhead and tram lines going to and fro.

[mulad]

With some of the chatter we've had about ridership modeling, I thought it might be good to post what is projected for the Central Corridor segment of the Green Line. I'm convinced I posted this before (I remember some comments about the East Bank ridership figure), but can't find it -- maybe it was back in the Minnescraper days. Anyway, a lot of the numbers seem to make sense, but others feel way off-base too. These are projections for year 2030, when the overall ridership of the line is supposed to be 42,170 (which has always looked more like an opening-day level to me...).

• West Bank: 1,170
• East Bank: 6,660
• Stadium Village: 950
• Prospect Park: 940
• Westgate: 1,140
• Raymond Avenue: 1,250
• Fairview Avenue: 1,880
• Snelling Avenue: 2,540
• Hamline Avenue: 600
• Lexington Parkway: 570
• Victoria Street: 400
• Dale Street: 550
• Western Avenue: 270
• Capitol/Rice Street: 900
• Robert Street: 340
• 10th Street: 1,710
• Central: 1,130
• Union Depot: 1,960

That adds up to 24,900, which would leave 17,270 to divide up among downtown Minneapolis stations.

[the_elop]

I've been wondering why they project 10th Street to have higher ridership than Central. Central's in the heart of downtown, the closest stop to the Xcel Center and the Ordway, and is getting a skyway connection.

[twincitizen]

With some of the chatter we've had about ridership modeling, I thought it might be good to post what is projected for the Central Corridor segment of the Green Line. I'm convinced I posted this before (I remember some comments about the East Bank ridership figure), but can't find it -- maybe it was back in the Minnescraper days. Anyway, a lot of the numbers seem to make sense, but others feel way off-base too. These are projections for year 2030, when the overall ridership of the line is supposed to be 42,170 (which has always looked more like an opening-day level to me...).

• West Bank: 1,170
• East Bank: 6,660
• Stadium Village: 950
• Prospect Park: 940
• Westgate: 1,140
• Raymond Avenue: 1,250
• Fairview Avenue: 1,880
• Snelling Avenue: 2,540
• Hamline Avenue: 600
• Lexington Parkway: 570
• Victoria Street: 400
• Dale Street: 550
• Western Avenue: 270
• Capitol/Rice Street: 900
• Robert Street: 340
• 10th Street: 1,710
• Central: 1,130
• Union Depot: 1,960

That adds up to 24,900, which would leave 17,270 to divide up among downtown Minneapolis stations.

I can't see Union Depot having that kind of ridership anytime soon. That one's definitely a future figure for when the Green Line connects to other inter-city and intra-city transportation. I agree with you that the line will have very good ridership right off the bat.

So...why was Robert Street Station built at all? I recall that it used to be called "Capitol/Robert", until they shifted the "Capitol" moniker to Rice Street Station. That didn't happen until 2010-11 IIRC, so maybe plans for Robert were too far along to be axed. It seems like a waste since many of those 340 riders would shift to Capitol or 10th Street.

[David Greene]

So...why was Robert Street Station built at all? I recall that it used to be called "Capitol/Robert", until they shifted the "Capitol" moniker to Rice Street Station. That didn't happen until 2010-11 IIRC, so maybe plans for Robert were too far along to be axed. It seems like a waste since many of those 340 riders would shift to Capitol or 10th Street.

There are an awful lot of government offices on Robert.

[mulad]

Yeah... I had expected years ago that they would have reused the old streetcar alignment to the extent possible, turning from University down MLK Jr. Blvd and following that until Cedar Street, but it made some sense to give more direct access to the government buildings -- I'm still not so sure it made enough sense, considering that it lengthened the route, but there is some logic to it.

Actually, I'm a little suspicious that the two capitol-area numbers got transposed, but that still doesn't make a whole lot of sense since there will be a decent amount of transferring going on at Rice & University (like from southbound buses to westbound trains).

[twincitizen]

Robert Street is also the closest station to Regions Hospital. That ridership figure seems absurdly low...for 2014 even, let alone 2030. Weird.

Do you still have absolute faith in engineers and ridership projection numbers, David?

[nate]

I can't wait to see the ridership numbers once the line opens -- if nothing else, it will give us a real-world baseline to evaluate the engineer's projections. A lot of those numbers seem pretty low, to me. But I'm only going by gut instinct.

[Wedgeguy]

I've been wondering why they project 10th Street to have higher ridership than Central. Central's in the heart of downtown, the closest stop to the Xcel Center and the Ordway, and is getting a skyway connection.

I'd say the government buildings that are with in a few block and out in front of the station.

[David Greene]

Yeah... I had expected years ago that they would have reused the old streetcar alignment to the extent possible, turning from University down MLK Jr. Blvd and following that until Cedar Street, but it made some sense to give more direct access to the government buildings -- I'm still not so sure it made enough sense, considering that it lengthened the route, but there is some logic to it.

That's not why it was routed that way at all. It was routed around the capitol because the Board of Capitol Area Architectural and Planning (I think) objected to running the LRT exactly where the streetcars used to go.

It cost the project a pretty penny, too. Absurd.

[talindsay]

It was routed around the capitol because the Board of Capitol Area Architectural and Planning (I think) objected to running the LRT exactly where the streetcars used to go.

It cost the project a pretty penny, too. Absurd.

On the positive side, it means LRT service won't be interrupted by the many events that take place in front of the Capitol. There would have been a major disruption for the Twin Cities Marathon, for example.

[ECtransplant]

Wouldn't it be easier to relocate those other things than mess with the LRT service?

[talindsay]

Wouldn't it be easier to relocate those other things than mess with the LRT service?

That's not the *reason* for the route choice, it's just a bonus. I think the *reason* had to do with aesthetics of the Capitol Grounds. But while routing in front of the Capitol might have made more sense operationally, running it behind adds only a little bit of time (maybe a minute) and does make it possible to directly serve the Courts, the hospital, and other things that would have been farther from a station otherwise. Seems a pretty minor difference, really.

[David Greene]

But while routing in front of the Capitol might have made more sense operationally, running it behind adds only a little bit of time (maybe a minute) and does make it possible to directly serve the Courts, the hospital, and other things that would have been farther from a station otherwise. Seems a pretty minor difference, really.

Except that the trackwork and cuts aren't cheap. I don't have the numbers in front of me but I've got to believe running at grade in front of the capitol would be quite a bit less expensive than digging trenches and running extra track.

[min-chi-cbus]

.....I had expected years ago that they would have reused the old streetcar alignment to the extent possible, turning from University down MLK Jr. Blvd...

Off-subject, it's a tad embarrassing that the only MLK Jr. Blvd in the Twin Cities metro area is a quarter mile long. It's not even in an African American neighborhood! I personally think Minneapolis should rename a major Northside street to "MLK Jr"......perhaps Broadway, Penn or Fremont, but I prefer Broadway because it doesn't have a Southside component and it's the major thoroughfare and (was) the center of commerce for most of the North Side.

I can see why Minneapolis didn't do this in the 60's, but not anymore.

[cowboyjones]

Does anybody know if they are going to completely eliminate Routes 16 and 50?

[mulad]

The 50 is going away. The 16 is planned to be shortened so it will run from downtown St. Paul to the UMN campus (near TCF Bank Stadium), but will no longer go all the way into downtown Minneapolis. However, the Green Line will shut down in the late overnight hours like the Blue Line does today, and for those few hours, the 16 will go all the way from downtown St. Paul to downtown Minneapolis.

[mattaudio]

So we'll have another line on our overly-complex transit map that represents a bus route that only runs that part of its journey in the middle of the night?