Green Line Extension - Southwest LRT
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 6378
- Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
- Location: Standish-Ericsson
Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)
Job opening for David Greene: http://www.hnampls.org/documents/Transi ... anizer.pdf
Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)
There are a lot of people in Minneapolis who do want this built in their neighborhood. It is just that they live in Uptown and Whittier, not Kenwood...What we need is some real old fashioned political leadership. Yes there is plenty of blame to spread around, but if our new mayor really wants to get this built, then she'll need to be bold and risk offending some of her core constituents: the cidna cohort who "favors transit" as long as it is built "somewhere else". Ultimate hypocrytical nimby's. I call our new mayor out for not willing to risk offending her core constituency. The only way this gets built is through the kenilworth corridor without tunnels. We can't afford the tunnels, and so as far as that goes the council did the right thing.
Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)
QFTThere are a lot of people in Minneapolis who do want this built in their neighborhood. It is just that they live in Uptown and Whittier, not Kenwood...
Joey Senkyr
[email protected]
[email protected]
Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)
There are a lot of people in Uptown who like to see this built through Whittier. Uptown gets all the benefit with no negatives, while in Whittier, Nicollet Avenue gets trashed.There are a lot of people in Minneapolis who do want this built in their neighborhood. It is just that they live in Uptown and Whittier, not Kenwood...
Whittier will be better served by the Nicollet streetcar than 3C.
Oh god, did I really just get dragged back into this argument?
- mister.shoes
- Wells Fargo Center
- Posts: 1298
- Joined: November 26th, 2012, 10:22 am
Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)
New MPLS route:
West Lake Station --[Greenway, entering tunnel at east end of the Mall]--> The Mall Station --[Tunnel under Hennepin]--> 24th Street Station --[exit tunnel in the bottleneck in the grassy area by Lincoln Ave and run the tracks right down the center of the street, sacrificing one auto lane in each direction (oops)]--> Vineland Place Station --[follow the current Hennepin alignment to the Basilica and turn west on Dunwoody, moving Hennepin to its original alignment in front of the buildings]--> Van White Station --> Royalston Station --> Target Field Station
It adds distance and some time over the Kenilworth route, as well as a net addition of one station. However, from West Lake all the way to Vineland Place is almost entirely grade-separated and despite losing auto lanes in the Triangle, this route would have massive ridership making up for it. IMoO
West Lake Station --[Greenway, entering tunnel at east end of the Mall]--> The Mall Station --[Tunnel under Hennepin]--> 24th Street Station --[exit tunnel in the bottleneck in the grassy area by Lincoln Ave and run the tracks right down the center of the street, sacrificing one auto lane in each direction (oops)]--> Vineland Place Station --[follow the current Hennepin alignment to the Basilica and turn west on Dunwoody, moving Hennepin to its original alignment in front of the buildings]--> Van White Station --> Royalston Station --> Target Field Station
It adds distance and some time over the Kenilworth route, as well as a net addition of one station. However, from West Lake all the way to Vineland Place is almost entirely grade-separated and despite losing auto lanes in the Triangle, this route would have massive ridership making up for it. IMoO
The problem with being an introvert online is that no one knows you're just hanging out and listening.
-
- IDS Center
- Posts: 4092
- Joined: June 3rd, 2012, 9:33 pm
- Location: Merriam Park, St. Paul
Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)
Q. What, what? A. In da butt.
-
- Stone Arch Bridge
- Posts: 7759
- Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
- Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield
Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)
Yikes the neighborhood orgs don't pay.Job opening for ** http://www.hnampls.org/documents/Transi ... anizer.pdf
Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)
For what it is worth, I live in Whittier, not Uptown. This is a piece of infrastructure that will most likely be in use for centuries, it is more important to do it right than it is do shield businesses from a year or two of disruption. The streetcar provides virtually no improvement in travel times over the 18. It is toy train set for yuppies, and a waste of money.There are a lot of people in Uptown who like to see this built through Whittier. Uptown gets all the benefit with no negatives, while in Whittier, Nicollet Avenue gets trashed.There are a lot of people in Minneapolis who do want this built in their neighborhood. It is just that they live in Uptown and Whittier, not Kenwood...
Whittier will be better served by the Nicollet streetcar than 3C.
Oh god, did I really just get dragged back into this argument?
I know this forum is sick of the 3A vs 3C discussion, but the fact is that the powers that be have never been able to put to bed the notion that it is the wrong route. Outside of 50% of the posters here, it is what normal people in the city tend to think. It is why it doesn't have any popular support from the community outside of a small subset of urbanism and transit geeks and the institutional players of the Metropolitan Council and Hennepin County. The fact that it is controversial even among urbanists is damning. The sort of people who post in a forum like this one should be its' most enthusiastic advocates.
Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)
Or maybe we're just a little more pragmatic and realize that at this point in the process going back to the AA process is both politically very difficult and would do a lot of harm to the future of our region's transit in the mid-term.The sort of people who post in a forum like this one should be its' most enthusiastic advocates.
-
- Capella Tower
- Posts: 2625
- Joined: September 16th, 2012, 4:31 pm
Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)
Like or hate Obama's recent transpo budget proposal (and if it will actually pass through Congress as written), doesn't that seem to alleviate some of the fear that returning to an AA process and getting back in queue won't be as big of an issue for regions/projects like ours?
-
- US Bank Plaza
- Posts: 768
- Joined: November 2nd, 2012, 8:59 am
Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)
Excellent breakdown.For what it is worth, I live in Whittier, not Uptown. This is a piece of infrastructure that will most likely be in use for centuries, it is more important to do it right than it is do shield businesses from a year or two of disruption. The streetcar provides virtually no improvement in travel times over the 18. It is toy train set for yuppies, and a waste of money.There are a lot of people in Uptown who like to see this built through Whittier. Uptown gets all the benefit with no negatives, while in Whittier, Nicollet Avenue gets trashed.There are a lot of people in Minneapolis who do want this built in their neighborhood. It is just that they live in Uptown and Whittier, not Kenwood...
Whittier will be better served by the Nicollet streetcar than 3C.
Oh god, did I really just get dragged back into this argument?
I know this forum is sick of the 3A vs 3C discussion, but the fact is that the powers that be have never been able to put to bed the notion that it is the wrong route. Outside of 50% of the posters here, it is what normal people in the city tend to think. It is why it doesn't have any popular support from the community outside of a small subset of urbanism and transit geeks and the institutional players of the Metropolitan Council and Hennepin County. The fact that it is controversial even among urbanists is damning. The sort of people who post in a forum like this one should be its' most enthusiastic advocates.
Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)
Sorry I don't remember this talking point coming up before. How would Nicollet be trashed? Given that one of the official options is a $200m tunnel for Kenilworth, do you think it's realistic that at this point in the process there wouldn't be an option for a 3C alignment with a southern portal in the Greenway? Assuming a $200m mitigation budget, don't you think that what little impact a tunnel (running, after all, under the street) would have could be smoothed out of the design?Whittier will be better served by the Nicollet streetcar than 3C.
I certainly agree if your point is that 3C would not necessarily be easier politically. Of course right now we're only hearing from the advocates in Uptown; if there was an actual proposal we'd also be hearing from the Trilby Busches of Transit. But I'm trying to establish what would actually be harmful to "Eat Street".
"Who rescued whom!"
- FISHMANPET
- IDS Center
- Posts: 4241
- Joined: June 6th, 2012, 2:19 pm
- Location: Corcoran
Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)
I think the convential wisdom is that it would be a cut and cover tunnel, meaning Nicollet would be torn up for construction.
-
- US Bank Plaza
- Posts: 764
- Joined: June 1st, 2012, 10:30 am
Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)
There was talk during the AA process about an open cut between the Greenway and 28th. A covered tunnel was the official alternative but, even with $200 million in mitigation, the open cuts could come back if (when?) tunneling/underground station costs mount. A portal south of 94 wouldn't exactly be great for the neighborhood either even if two through lanes and full width sidewalks remained.
Of course all of this is moot since 3C is never happening in any of our lifetimes.
Of course all of this is moot since 3C is never happening in any of our lifetimes.
-
- IDS Center
- Posts: 4617
- Joined: December 4th, 2012, 11:41 am
Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)
Umm...no. The city council did *not* pass the stronger resolution that said they will deny municipal consent.I'm calling it, . Aaaaaand LRT dies on SWLRT. Really, it was inevitable. Just a slow motion train wreck. Doubt that SLP won't just take the bait and likewise.
If you look back several (hundred? ) pages, I stated long ago that the cities would likely deny municipal consent at least once. That's part of the negotiating process.
There is absolutely nothing surprising going on here.
-
- IDS Center
- Posts: 4617
- Joined: December 4th, 2012, 11:41 am
Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)
That is exactly the problem with a canceled SWLRT. It affects everything else.What happens when people who live around Wirth Park in Golden Valley organize and elect an anti-Bottineau majority to their council? What happens when St Paul residents don't think that a Gateway LRT is worth retaining walls in their backyard?
But this is not a cancellation of SWLRT. Everyone needs to take a deep breath.
-
- IDS Center
- Posts: 4617
- Joined: December 4th, 2012, 11:41 am
Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)
This is pretty much right on the mark. I don't think it will make discussion any more heated. It's already quite hot. What it does is put pressure on the Met Council and SLP. That's simply a negotiation strategy.That's not to say its construction is inevitable - it's certainly possible it could die - but this is most certainly not the death-knell. This is the opening salvo in the final battle of this line's construction. Minneapolis took its prerogative as the regional core to force this round of debate to commence on the City's terms, and that could kill the line but it's more likely to cause more heated compromise discussions.
The DFL would look mighty stupid if they can't build SWLRT with Democrats in total control when we built Hiawatha and Central with Republicans and Independencers in the governor's office.
Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)
The construction on Eat Street in 2001 or so didn't exactly kill it, did it?
Of course it's possible that in the course of constructing the cut-and-cover tunnel they'll hit a nest of tremors, thus busting the budget. But it's more likely that that cut-and-cover tunneling in a fairly new (mostly 1950s), low-density area will go as predicted. A half-block of street barricaded at the center for a portal is not ideal but it's also not going to ruin the neighborhood. The only people who would notice it are people who want to cross the street and obviously pedestrians are used to getting shit on.
You're right though, idle speculation. Sorry but I prefer the Minneapolis in my mind. Back to the real one:
So will the Met Council grow a pair and build it over the objections of either Mpls or SLP? Will someone force the two to bang out a compromise and who would that be? Is either scenario likely?
Of course it's possible that in the course of constructing the cut-and-cover tunnel they'll hit a nest of tremors, thus busting the budget. But it's more likely that that cut-and-cover tunneling in a fairly new (mostly 1950s), low-density area will go as predicted. A half-block of street barricaded at the center for a portal is not ideal but it's also not going to ruin the neighborhood. The only people who would notice it are people who want to cross the street and obviously pedestrians are used to getting shit on.
You're right though, idle speculation. Sorry but I prefer the Minneapolis in my mind. Back to the real one:
I never intended to equate this with cancellation, but probably my rhetoric made it seem like I did. Sorry, I was bummed. Minneapolis certainly did harden their stance by rejecting one of the compromise alternatives, so it does make the death of the project more likely. But sure, no fat ladies are singing.But this is not a cancellation of SWLRT. Everyone needs to take a deep breath.
The problem with the strategy is that it makes SLP dig in too, and ultimately the Met Council doesn't care much about this project, other than the staff whose job it is to care. Sue Haigh and Dayton have made it clear that transit is not their forte or their priority. If it were, he would have found a way to put something in the bonding bill for it. If it were, they would have taken a stronger approach than to let SLP's and Mpls' already-intractable positions get even less tractable.What it does is put pressure on the Met Council and SLP. That's simply a negotiation strategy.
I really doubt that the DFL is worried about the Republicans getting credit for LRT. Most Minnesotans don't really care one way or another. Those who are motivated remember that both Hiawatha and Central happened over the attempts of Republicans to defund them (Sviggum & Pawlenty, respectively).The DFL would look mighty stupid if they can't build SWLRT with Democrats in total control when we built Hiawatha and Central with Republicans and Independencers in the governor's office.
So will the Met Council grow a pair and build it over the objections of either Mpls or SLP? Will someone force the two to bang out a compromise and who would that be? Is either scenario likely?
"Who rescued whom!"
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 91 guests