Green Line Extension - Southwest LRT

[David Greene]

I disagree; now's the time when this thing is pretty much sealed up. David Brauer was joking on Twitter this morning - what's the point of even having a public comment/review when all the parties released a buttoned-up little agreement this morning? Seems rather pro forma to me.

It's not signed yet.

But testifyig about Midtown is not to get it included in the SWLRT project. It's to raise its profile and attract champions.

[David Greene]

You testify to keep your realistic victories in the conversation.

3C? No. Accelerating the implementation of Midtown? Yes!

Eliminating the southern tunnel? No. Moving the impound lot? Yes!

You take every good opportunity you have to keep your issue in the public conversation.

[exiled_antipodean]

^ Great post. Thanks.

[mattaudio]

Is it too much to ask for them to build the West Lake station with a Midtown LRV connection in mind? What's the status on that? I do agree it's wise to be pragmatic at this point (my 3C comment was a joke, mind you) but I'm hoping that being mindful of future Green/Midtown synergy at West Lake is indeed pragmatic.

[David Greene]

Is it too much to ask for them to build the West Lake station with a Midtown LRV connection in mind? What's the status on that?

It's in the MOU but there's no detail about what "Midtown-ready" means. It might be worthwhile to come and express your thoughts if you have some ideas on it.

[talindsay]

For example, if they could actually build a wye (or at least a multi-crossover switch) into the Southwest line to accommodate the eventual merge points of the two lines. Current conceptual drawings don't even show the two lines interchanging, so raising the idea of planning for their eventual interchange point now might seem to be jumping the gun, but Metro Transit wants to have operational flexibility, and that means a full-speed double interchange like what they *almost* built at the Green/Blue interchange point.

[Suburban Outcast]

They could at least allow enough space on the Southwest tracks to allow a future wye, and then have the terminus of Midtown use the same platforms for Southwest's West Lake station (unless that would cause scheduling conflicts). Otherwise a single track for Midtown could be connected to Southwest just past the station via a switch. There could be a side platform for the one track for Midtown at West Lake, and then have it split into a double-track layout past Lake Street.

[talindsay]

Part of the challenge is that operational through-routing is more likely to be justified for a service that runs between the Greenway and the downtown than between the Greenway and EP; but since the West Lake station will be *south* of the Midtown tie-in, they would need to have a separate Midtown-specific station at West Lake to actually allow operations to go north from the Greenway. A wye would have to be large enough to accommodate the movement, which would put substantial distance between a Midtown West Lake platform oriented along the Greenway and a Green Line West Lake platform oriented along the Green Line ROW. So in the short term, when they don't really plan to through-route trains between the two segments anyway, they would be better off using the Green Line platform by bringing the Midtown track south. I don't care if they actually build a wye when they construct the Southwest portion, but I do really hope (against all expectations to the contrary) that they will at least plan for how the complex station and wye would be constructed with minimal disruption later. I think a Midtown line is eventually going to be a no-brainer, and I think it won't take long for people to see the potential value of a service that runs north from the Greenway; it would be much easier if they put in some planning effort now.

[Suburban Outcast]

Yeah I understand why they wouldn't build a wye now, but one thing that seems to hamper our expansion with rail transit is making it difficult to make changes on existing lines (such as the MOA terminus on the Blue Line, Downtown Minneapolis, etc.). Luckily they can still make some changes in the design if it's needed so they can build West Lake in a way so it can support an additional platform or having the existing platforms to be interlined with the Midtown streetcar/LRT. I think the meetings should help since it seems a few UrbanMSPers are going.

[grant1simons2]

So who's here right now? This is a weird weird meeting.

Edit: They got through 34/99 speakers at 9:00 I left. The meeting did not seem to help, just gave more headaches

[David Greene]

So who's here right now? This is a weird weird meeting.

Edit: They got through 34/99 speakers at 9:00 I left. The meeting did not seem to help, just gave more headaches

I was there. Things sped up quite a bit after you left. I was speaker 63 (BCV master plan, commuter rail layover, impound lot, Midtown, check) and I got out about 9:45 with a very tired toddler.

I had a quite different reaction to the meeting. I'll just copy my Facebook thoughts:

Tonight's hearing on Southwest LRT was, with few exceptions, very civil and respectful on a difficult topic for the city. People from all walks of life expressed the many varied and complex feelings about the project, something that has not happened in public meetings on this project before, and I've been to *a lot* of public meetings on this project.

Thank you, everyone. Even if I strongly disagree with your positions, thank you.

It was, I think, the very best public hearing I've ever attended.

[grant1simons2]

Im sure if I had stayed it would have gotten better. I had a headache and had to bike back to Eden Prairie (which would have been easier if there was you know.. a light rail) I'm pretty sure I was sitting behind you.

[mullen]

i watched some of it online. there were a couple of cringe worthy speakers (these people seem to attend a lot of these forums, i've seen them around), but I agree overall it was good meeting and good for people to vent and put things out there. i did notice more time was spent on the equity issue, which might have caused some opposition people to not speak.

[acs]

I read somewhere that the deadline has been pushed back til August 29th and Minneapolis hasn't scheduled a vote til August 19th. If that is true, how will it affect the timeline of this project? Why does this need to take another month and a half? I'd rather have this thing done before 2020.

[mattaudio]

There are statutory comment periods/lead times that the city must adhere to. It has to go through a standard cycle and can't be expedited much.

[seanrichardryan]

Finally, a bit more detailed history of the corridor that I only knew through files of old photos-

http://www.minnpost.com/macro-micro-min ... -long-time

What people now view as 'parkland' is really just overgrown industrial wastelands filled with weeds.

[seanrichardryan]

Also, the book mentioned is required reading for URBs students. If you haven't read it- do.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/0816622361/ref=cm_sw_su_dp

[grant1simons2]

I think it was great seeing Hodges face when she saw Bob Carney up there. He's a real crowd pleaser for all the cotton tops that were in the crowd (cotton tops = old people)

[talindsay]

I think it was great seeing Hodges face when she saw Bob Carney up there. He's a real crowd pleaser for all the cotton tops that were in the crowd (cotton tops = old people)

Pro tip: if you have to explain your terms of disparagement they probably aren't very good or appropriate.

[grant1simons2]

My name sticks. It's just a joke anyways, my grandma taught me it one day, she called herself one so I see no problem. I have a lot of respect for the elderly but when in comes into stopping progress like removing the tunnel and allowing this line to go on, there's a problem. This is a line for a future generation and for the workers of today.