Blue Line Extension - Bottineau LRT

[EOst]

Reducing Broadway to one lane in each direction to cram light rail down the center is preferable to a good bus route... why, exactly?

Penn & Broadway is 20 minutes to downtown (Nicollet & 8th) via the 14; if rail down Broadway had stops at (for connectivity) Emerson/Fremont, somewhere between Lyndale and Washington, and Plymouth, that's five stops before Nicollet (TFS + Hennepin), which is about 20 minutes on both Hiawatha and Central. Even if you cut one of those stops (Lyndale?), would you see a significant speed increase? Maybe travelling from Penn/Broadway to Washington/Broadway, but is that a common trip?

Would it increase reliability? Right now the 14 is at 87%; is Central right now dramatically more reliable than that? You'd have to maintain local service too alongside the rail line; would having one lane in each direction harm the local bus's reliability? (It certainly has on Washington.) And most importantly; how would it affect the businesses on Broadway that weren't anywhere near one of the new stops? Would they be able to survive a major drop in auto traffic?

Broadway is not an easy route.

[amiller92]

Reducing Broadway to one lane in each direction to cram light rail down the center is preferable to a good bus route... why, exactly?

Because that's not the choice. The choice is running the train through places and stuff and near people who will use it or run the train in a rail corridor near next to a park (arguably solely for the benefit of suburban commuters).

Bus vs train is a whole different argument.

[MNdible]

To echo what EOst said:

Archiapolis asked a big picture question about our vision for LRT (can't find the original reference), and although he framed it in a very negative fashion, I think he mostly got it right. Surface running LRT is just not a great fit for providing service to very constrained, close in neighborhoods. It's too disruptive, the stops are too far apart, and the service improvement over less expensive and less disruptive aBRT or streetcar service doesn't make sense.

Someday, when our densities and our funding allows significant tunneling, this math will look different.

[FISHMANPET]

For what it's worth, that's basically why I wasn't a fan of 3C, is that it wouldn't really provide much local connectivity, and then also that it would be harder to build more locally serving transit when people can say "well uptown already has that train why do they want more?"

[twincitizen]

It seems the choices we are actually being presented with are to build the next two trains through unpopulated rail corridors or to not build them at all.

Regardless of the urban portion of the route, I'd feel a lot better about the Blue Line Extension if downtown Robbinsdale were the size (and potential intensity) of downtown Hopkins. I'd feel even better than that if it connected to a second "legacy town" that had potential for intensification (ohai Osseo!) Very generally speaking, this route looks a hell of a lot better if you stop at 85th Avenue. Everything beyond that is complete nonsense.

[Archiapolis]

To echo what EOst said:

Archiapolis asked a big picture question about our vision for LRT (can't find the original reference), and although he framed it in a very negative fashion, I think he mostly got it right. Surface running LRT is just not a great fit for providing service to very constrained, close in neighborhoods. It's too disruptive, the stops are too far apart, and the service improvement over less expensive and less disruptive aBRT or streetcar service doesn't make sense.

Someday, when our densities and our funding allows significant tunneling, this math will look different.

To echo what amiller is saying:
I am looking for a platform for development and fixed rail is an excellent platform for such development. Bus routes (no matter how "rapid") are not that platform.

I've acknowledged and stated my biases. I would go further to say that transit "geeks" have their own biases which look to move units from here to there and save minutes doing so. Those goals are important but are secondary to my desired outcomes.

The only apology I will make for my negativity is to say that the communication about the transit vision for the region is not being executed very well and were reflected in my framing.

LRT = suburbs to cities
Streetcar = commercial corridor

IF this is the desired paradigm and could be communicated by decision-makers, it would be appreciated and it would set up an understandable expectation. However, it doesn't appear to be that black and white as evidenced by Central Corridor.

I think it is pardonable for "amateurs" to look at Central Corridor and go, "Yeah, that would be great on Broadway." Then, when it is explained that is is IMPOSSIBLE, to be confused. On page 18 of this thread in my original rant I said that I drove down to the university after not having been through during construction and was met with a three minute inconvenience versus the street that I had grown accustomed to through the acquisition of two degrees. As an amateur, I look at areas of Broadway that might be tight and say, "Good riddance, to car traffic" and look at the areas of Broadway that I care about and say, "All of those lanes + a boulevard and all of that surface parking... you HAVE to be able to make a beautiful street section out of that." If these inconveniences, takings, slight slowdowns to turn and diverted traffic are the "price" to pay for a development platform that DESPERATELY needs it then I think that is a good sacrifice.

However, these arguments have failed and the concerns were apparently too great.

Last point then I really, seriously will shut up. Please stop offering "streetcar" as a panacea to amateurs. At the pace we are going, we appear to be a LONG way away from a Broadway streetcar. The frustration that I am expressing is that the development platform that I was hoping to see on Broadway in the form of an LRT line has turned into a promise of a streetcar "someday" and that is extremely depressing. It appears that I don't have the constitution to get in the muck and mire of transit development so applause/cheers/best of luck to those who do.

[amiller92]

To echo what EOst said:

Archiapolis asked a big picture question about our vision for LRT (can't find the original reference), and although he framed it in a very negative fashion, I think he mostly got it right. Surface running LRT is just not a great fit for providing service to very constrained, close in neighborhoods. It's too disruptive, the stops are too far apart, and the service improvement over less expensive and less disruptive aBRT or streetcar service doesn't make sense.

Someday, when our densities and our funding allows significant tunneling, this math will look different.

I don't think tunneling is in the cards in my lifetime. I'd be open to a street car on Broadway instead, but that isn't going to happen for at least two decades.

We can and probably will build an LRT line, so there might as well be something in it for the city, and in particular for the north side, when we do it.

There won't be, and we'll go ahead as is planned, but that kinda sucks.

[David Greene]

We can and probably will build an LRT line, so there might as well be something in it for the city, and in particular for the north side, when we do it.

There won't be, and we'll go ahead as is planned, but that kinda sucks.

Olson freaking goes right through the Northside! No one can seriously say Bottineau brings "nothing" to the Northside. Maybe it's not the route you prefer through the Northside, but there are a bunch of people who live there who are damn excited about it.

[trigonalmayhem]

Olson is for most intents and purposes the southern border of the north side. The couple neighborhoods south of it really have very little in common with the entire rest of actual north Minneapolis. If you're going to be pedantic and use street designations sure, OK, but the bulk of the actual people living in the north side are not along Olson.

[MNdible]

Lest people jump on this, West Broadway is not the same as Washington Avenue. Washington has the benefit of being immediately adjacent to a one way couplet and an eight lane Interstate freeway that could immediately pick up the slack. What adjacent street would people propose shifting the Broadway traffic to? This stretch of Washington never really had any driveable destinations to begin with -- it was only being used to pass through to get to somewhere else. Broadway has a great number of destinations that are dependent on access by automobile. Because the remaining bus traffic on Washington was only going straight, no turn movements needed to be accommodated.

So, you're trying to move mixed traffic down a single lane in each direction (no on-street parking and minimum sidewalks, obvs) with buses stopping in that traffic lane and cars trying to make all turning movements from that traffic lane.

[trigonalmayhem]

I'd also like to point out that Bryn Mawr is demographically pretty different from the other north Minneapolis neighborhoods, so it kind of undermines the equity argument.

[amiller92]

Olson freaking goes right through the Northside! No one can seriously say Bottineau brings "nothing" to the Northside. Maybe it's not the route you prefer through the Northside, but there are a bunch of people who live there who are damn excited about it.

And we're back to David fantasy land where the north side gets a big win by being skirted by a train.

No, David, it's not nothing. But it's nowhere near what the north side would get out of a train that actually served its people and places.

[mattaudio]

Having a train down Olson is fine. Which is why we should just stub out the Blue Line to Olson/Penn for now. How much would it cost to add stations at Penn and Van White? $100m? I sure wish we could build these lines incrementally rather than one big shot in the dark.

[mplser]

wait they aren't already planning stations at penn and van white? that's really dumb

[trigonalmayhem]

Having a train down Olson is fine. Which is why we should just stub out the Blue Line to Olson/Penn for now. How much would it cost to add stations at Penn and Van White? $100m? I sure wish we could build these lines incrementally rather than one big shot in the dark.

This. What's so wrong with incremental extensions?

[VacantLuxuries]

I sure wish we could build these lines incrementally rather than one big shot in the dark.

Ding ding ding. Both SWLRT and BOTLRT are expansions to an already existing service. Even if we lost out on the federal matching funds, and even if future stub expansions cost more due to inflation, it would make far more sense to build slowly to areas that have a definite need for transit. And by the time the next expansion on the docket is Brooklyn Park, maybe there's something there to justify it. If not, maybe Maple Grove decides they want it after all, and we're not bound by a decision made a decade ago to build somewhere else.

[VAStationDude]

wait they aren't already planning stations at penn and van white? that's really dumb

They are.

[RailBaronYarr]

Lest people jump on this, West Broadway is not the same as Washington Avenue. Washington has the benefit of being immediately adjacent to a one way couplet and an eight lane Interstate freeway that could immediately pick up the slack. What adjacent street would people propose shifting the Broadway traffic to? This stretch of Washington never really had any driveable destinations to begin with -- it was only being used to pass through to get to somewhere else. Broadway has a great number of destinations that are dependent on access by automobile. Because the remaining bus traffic on Washington was only going straight, no turn movements needed to be accommodated.

So, you're trying to move mixed traffic down a single lane in each direction (no on-street parking and minimum sidewalks, obvs) with buses stopping in that traffic lane and cars trying to make all turning movements from that traffic lane.

I'm not saying you're wrong, or that doing LRT at grade down some of these corridors does make sense. I just want to challenge some of the underlying assumptions of inability for people to change modes. There's a significant gap in bike+walk+transit mode share and potential mode share (people living within 5 miles or less travel distance). I bet there are an even higher % of non-work trips taken by car that could easily shift modes.

I think we all buy the notion that business districts rely on parking, traffic, etc to attract their customers. Again, not saying this isn't true to a certain extent, but I also think there are far more walk/bike-ups to businesses than we (or the owners themselves!) know today (a study for 36th & Bryant I can't link to showed well over 50% of patrons arrived by foot). And, again, I think a good chunk of the folks that do arrive by car could easily shift modes if made safe (biking) or more frequent/reliable (bus). Arguing at the margins here, but I doubt it's as doom and gloom as you'd say (but also not super easy wave the wand like many believe).

[David Greene]

Olson is for most intents and purposes the southern border of the north side. The couple neighborhoods south of it really have very little in common with the entire rest of actual north Minneapolis.

In what way? They're all in ward 5. They're all relatively poor. They're all racially diverse.

This is the old "not the *real* North" argument BS.

I'd also like to point out that Bryn Mawr is demographically pretty different from the other north Minneapolis neighborhoods, so it kind of undermines the equity argument.

Er...Harrison? Heritage Park? Sumner-Glenwood? Near-North? Willard-Hay?

Bryn Mawr wasn't even in my thought ballpark.

No, David, it's not nothing. But it's nowhere near what the north side would get out of a train that actually served its people and places.

You're really reaching for that indignation.

[Nick]

You're really reaching for that indignation.

Reply 666 in this thread!

Great forum this week all, it's been just great.