Green Line Extension - Southwest LRT

[DanPatchToget]

The South Cedar Lake Trail isn't reopen yet, but based on what I've seen so far I wanted to compare and contrast to how the trail looked pre-construction in Hopkins and St. Louis Park.

A lot of trees were removed along the trail, and it looks like they aren't going to plant new trees on the south side of the trail. Hopefully trees on the north side of the trail will grow large enough to provide some shading for the trail. The trail also won't be completely flat like it was before, but in exchange for that the crossings of Blake, Wooddale, and Belt Line will be grade-separated. I hope at a later time they'll consider building a trail bridge over Excelsior Boulevard, or even better would be calming Excelsior so the intersections aren't as massive as they are now. I'm not sure how wide the trail will be, but it looks like 12 feet based on the paved segment between Wooddale and Belt Line. I think it's a lost opportunity to provide a little more room either by having shoulders for walkers to use or a separate trail for walkers like on the Midtown Greenway and part of the North Cedar Lake Trail. When Southwest LRT eventually opens, along with all the current and future development around stations, the South Cedar Lake Trail is going to be a busy bicycle highway.

[Trademark]

The South Cedar Lake Trail isn't reopen yet, but based on what I've seen so far I wanted to compare and contrast to how the trail looked pre-construction in Hopkins and St. Louis Park.

A lot of trees were removed along the trail, and it looks like they aren't going to plant new trees on the south side of the trail. Hopefully trees on the north side of the trail will grow large enough to provide some shading for the trail. The trail also won't be completely flat like it was before, but in exchange for that the crossings of Blake, Wooddale, and Belt Line will be grade-separated. I hope at a later time they'll consider building a trail bridge over Excelsior Boulevard, or even better would be calming Excelsior so the intersections aren't as massive as they are now. I'm not sure how wide the trail will be, but it looks like 12 feet based on the paved segment between Wooddale and Belt Line. I think it's a lost opportunity to provide a little more room either by having shoulders for walkers to use or a separate trail for walkers like on the Midtown Greenway and part of the North Cedar Lake Trail. When Southwest LRT eventually opens, along with all the current and future development around stations, the South Cedar Lake Trail is going to be a busy bicycle highway.

I would be shocked if they built a bridge over excelsior. The time to do it was as they are building the light rail bridge they're already closed the street to build it. They could've just made the bridge slightly wider. Definitely a missed opportunity.

[DanPatchToget]

How long was Belt Line closed for the pedestrian bridge construction? I can't imagine a road closure for a pedestrian bridge would be as long as the massive bridge for the light rail over Excelsior.

[Trademark]

The office of the legislative auditor just dropped their report on the Southwest LRT: Budget and timeline.

https://www.auditor.leg.state.mn.us/

[Korh]

Kenilworth was a mistake.

[Trademark]

Kenilworth was a mistake.

Kenilworth without freight rail is not a bad route. We should be emphasizing speed in our trunk light rail lines. (Which is why Broadway section of Blue line should be grade separated. But when the freight line wasn't going to be relocated that should have been enough to throw out the Kenilworth alignment.

[Korh]

Kenilworth was a mistake.

Kenilworth without freight rail is not a bad route. We should be emphasizing speed in our trunk light rail lines. (Which is why Broadway section of Blue line should be grade separated. But when the freight line wasn't going to be relocated that should have been enough to throw out the Kenilworth alignment.

This might be an unpopular opinion but I blame it on both the freight railroad and the bike trail
I am partly convinced that even if TC&W had agreed to relocate as soon as construction began we still might of ended up with a shallow tunnel because of think of the tail users/nature, heck I think I remember seeing an argument/sign saying don't turn Kenilworth into something like the Hiawatha trail. Still might of been cheaper over all a might of been able to ditch the crash wall (although that's solely on BNSF), but we can only imagine IF at this point.

[Trademark]

Kenilworth was a mistake.

Kenilworth without freight rail is not a bad route. We should be emphasizing speed in our trunk light rail lines. (Which is why Broadway section of Blue line should be grade separated. But when the freight line wasn't going to be relocated that should have been enough to throw out the Kenilworth alignment.

This might be an unpopular opinion but I blame it on both the freight railroad and the bike trail
I am partly convinced that even if TC&W had agreed to relocate as soon as construction began we still might of ended up with a shallow tunnel because of think of the tail users/nature, heck I think I remember seeing an argument/sign saying don't turn Kenilworth into something like the Hiawatha trail. Still might of been cheaper over all a might of been able to ditch the crash wall (although that's solely on BNSF), but we can only imagine IF at this point.

I think the trail is partially to blame, and they would have put some mitigation efforts in for the trail. But the bike lobby doesn't have the same power as the railroads to force hundreds of millions of dollars to be spent on a project to put it in a tunnel when the right of way was available.

[Silophant]

The fact that the trail has been completely closed for construction for 3+ years and will be for 3+ more should tell you all you need to know about the theoretical power of the bike lobby.

[Korh]

Implying it wasn't mostly Kenilworth NIMBYs annoying the right people to put in the tunnel.

[DanPatchToget]

Kenilworth was a mistake.

Kenilworth without freight rail is not a bad route. We should be emphasizing speed in our trunk light rail lines. (Which is why Broadway section of Blue line should be grade separated. But when the freight line wasn't going to be relocated that should have been enough to throw out the Kenilworth alignment.

This might be an unpopular opinion but I blame it on both the freight railroad and the bike trail
I am partly convinced that even if TC&W had agreed to relocate as soon as construction began we still might of ended up with a shallow tunnel because of think of the tail users/nature, heck I think I remember seeing an argument/sign saying don't turn Kenilworth into something like the Hiawatha trail. Still might of been cheaper over all a might of been able to ditch the crash wall (although that's solely on BNSF), but we can only imagine IF at this point.

I think you're barking up the wrong tree. Blame the Met Council and Minneapolis for assuming that St. Louis Park and the railroad would go along with their crappy reroute plan. Also Minneapolis kept claiming St. Louis Park agreed to the reroute, but they couldn't provide an official document backing up that claim.

Also blame whoever (Hennepin County Rail Authority?) approved the townhouses, which created the pinch-point that made colocation of freight, LRT, and trail impossible. I know I've said this before but just a reminder that as late as the 1980s there were at least 3 tracks where the pinch-point now is.

At least the Met Council didn't choose either a longer tunnel that would go under the channel or a second shallow tunnel north of the channel to appease the rich NIMBYs. That'd be a billion dollar increase and the whole route would be done at the same time as Riverview is completed in 2032 (assuming that stays on schedule, which I won't hold my breath on).

[Trademark]

Kenilworth without freight rail is not a bad route. We should be emphasizing speed in our trunk light rail lines. (Which is why Broadway section of Blue line should be grade separated. But when the freight line wasn't going to be relocated that should have been enough to throw out the Kenilworth alignment.

This might be an unpopular opinion but I blame it on both the freight railroad and the bike trail
I am partly convinced that even if TC&W had agreed to relocate as soon as construction began we still might of ended up with a shallow tunnel because of think of the tail users/nature, heck I think I remember seeing an argument/sign saying don't turn Kenilworth into something like the Hiawatha trail. Still might of been cheaper over all a might of been able to ditch the crash wall (although that's solely on BNSF), but we can only imagine IF at this point.

I think you're barking up the wrong tree. Blame the Met Council and Minneapolis for assuming that St. Louis Park and the railroad would go along with their crappy reroute plan. Also Minneapolis kept claiming St. Louis Park agreed to the reroute, but they couldn't provide an official document backing up that claim.

Also blame whoever (Hennepin County Rail Authority?) approved the townhouses, which created the pinch-point that made colocation of freight, LRT, and trail impossible. I know I've said this before but just a reminder that as late as the 1980s there were at least 3 tracks where the pinch-point now is.

At least the Met Council didn't choose either a longer tunnel that would go under the channel or a second shallow tunnel north of the channel to appease the rich NIMBYs. That'd be a billion dollar increase and the whole route would be done at the same time as Riverview is completed in 2032 (assuming that stays on schedule, which I won't hold my breath on).

Why was the reroute a crappy plan?

[DanPatchToget]

Several reasons:
1) The uphill grade going from the east-west tracks to the north-south tracks, which would require more locomotives so they don't stall, and that means increased costs and impacts to TC&W's operations.

2) The reroute would have 7 grade crossings including one next to a high school. TC&W's existing route has 5 grade crossings. The Met Council considered a giant berm through St. Louis Park, which would've eliminated some of the grade crossings, but it would require taking some properties including St. Louis Park High School's football stadium.

3) The tracks that form the reroute (Canadian Pacific's MN&S Spur) weren't exactly built for freight trains, and especially not for trains the TC&W has that go 30 miles per hour and reach lengths of 50-120 railcars.

[Korh]

I think you're barking up the wrong tree. Blame the Met Council and Minneapolis for assuming that St. Louis Park and the railroad would go along with their crappy reroute plan. Also Minneapolis kept claiming St. Louis Park agreed to the reroute, but they couldn't provide an official document backing up that claim.

Also blame whoever (Hennepin County Rail Authority?) approved the townhouses, which created the pinch-point that made colocation of freight, LRT, and trail impossible. I know I've said this before but just a reminder that as late as the 1980s there were at least 3 tracks where the pinch-point now is.

At least the Met Council didn't choose either a longer tunnel that would go under the channel or a second shallow tunnel north of the channel to appease the rich NIMBYs. That'd be a billion dollar increase and the whole route would be done at the same time as Riverview is completed in 2032 (assuming that stays on schedule, which I won't hold my breath on).

Is the Hennepin County Rail Authority responsible for most of the rail trail corridors in the area because if they are I think they've been remarkably short sighted the past few decades.
In this specific case I think they should of kept either the Kenilworth or the Greenway trench free from any development/trail building for the SWLRT despite me probably clocking in hundreds of miles on both of them. I'm at the point where if the midtown greenway streetcar gets moving, I'm expecting it will suffer the some of the same problems SWLRT has been facing if not worse such as push back from trail users/residents and having to spend more in engineering costs because developments have been encroaching inside the ROW

[DanPatchToget]

I think you're barking up the wrong tree. Blame the Met Council and Minneapolis for assuming that St. Louis Park and the railroad would go along with their crappy reroute plan. Also Minneapolis kept claiming St. Louis Park agreed to the reroute, but they couldn't provide an official document backing up that claim.

Also blame whoever (Hennepin County Rail Authority?) approved the townhouses, which created the pinch-point that made colocation of freight, LRT, and trail impossible. I know I've said this before but just a reminder that as late as the 1980s there were at least 3 tracks where the pinch-point now is.

At least the Met Council didn't choose either a longer tunnel that would go under the channel or a second shallow tunnel north of the channel to appease the rich NIMBYs. That'd be a billion dollar increase and the whole route would be done at the same time as Riverview is completed in 2032 (assuming that stays on schedule, which I won't hold my breath on).

Is the Hennepin County Rail Authority responsible for most of the rail trail corridors in the area because if they are I think they've been remarkably short sighted the past few decades.
In this specific case I think they should of kept either the Kenilworth or the Greenway trench free from any development/trail building for the SWLRT despite me probably clocking in hundreds of miles on both of them. I'm at the point where if the midtown greenway streetcar gets moving, I'm expecting it will suffer the some of the same problems SWLRT has been facing if not worse such as push back from trail users/residents and having to spend more in engineering costs because developments have been encroaching inside the ROW

I believe the HCRRA is responsible for all but a few rail-trail corridors within the county.

I don't mind trails on the right-of-way as long as there's space to add transit (BRT or rail) later. Depending on where along the Midtown Greenway it either fails or accomplishes this, and since the Midtown Greenway Coalition will only accept a single-track streetcar it's already off to a bad start before even beginning detailed studying.

I'm also not necessarily against development close to the right-of-way as long as it can help support a rail-trail and future transit. However, selling part of the right-of-way for development is a big no-no to me.

In my perfect world development would be heavily concentrated along any right-of-way the rail authority purchases so building BRT or rail would be a no-brainer. Instead we had to route Southwest LRT through wetlands, swamps, and pockets of forest to reach developments with enough density to support high-frequency transit but still aren't exactly friendly to anyone who doesn't drive. Meanwhile along the Minnesota River Bluffs LRT Regional Trail it's mostly forest and single-family homes (including the only gated community in the Twin Cities) despite being purchased by the county a few decades ago for future transit use.

[Trademark]

I think you're barking up the wrong tree. Blame the Met Council and Minneapolis for assuming that St. Louis Park and the railroad would go along with their crappy reroute plan. Also Minneapolis kept claiming St. Louis Park agreed to the reroute, but they couldn't provide an official document backing up that claim.

Also blame whoever (Hennepin County Rail Authority?) approved the townhouses, which created the pinch-point that made colocation of freight, LRT, and trail impossible. I know I've said this before but just a reminder that as late as the 1980s there were at least 3 tracks where the pinch-point now is.

At least the Met Council didn't choose either a longer tunnel that would go under the channel or a second shallow tunnel north of the channel to appease the rich NIMBYs. That'd be a billion dollar increase and the whole route would be done at the same time as Riverview is completed in 2032 (assuming that stays on schedule, which I won't hold my breath on).

Is the Hennepin County Rail Authority responsible for most of the rail trail corridors in the area because if they are I think they've been remarkably short sighted the past few decades.
In this specific case I think they should of kept either the Kenilworth or the Greenway trench free from any development/trail building for the SWLRT despite me probably clocking in hundreds of miles on both of them. I'm at the point where if the midtown greenway streetcar gets moving, I'm expecting it will suffer the some of the same problems SWLRT has been facing if not worse such as push back from trail users/residents and having to spend more in engineering costs because developments have been encroaching inside the ROW

I believe the HCRRA is responsible for all but a few rail-trail corridors within the county.

I don't mind trails on the right-of-way as long as there's space to add transit (BRT or rail) later. Depending on where along the Midtown Greenway it either fails or accomplishes this, and since the Midtown Greenway Coalition will only accept a single-track streetcar it's already off to a bad start before even beginning detailed studying.

I'm also not necessarily against development close to the right-of-way as long as it can help support a rail-trail and future transit. However, selling part of the right-of-way for development is a big no-no to me.

In my perfect world development would be heavily concentrated along any right-of-way the rail authority purchases so building BRT or rail would be a no-brainer. Instead we had to route Southwest LRT through wetlands, swamps, and pockets of forest to reach developments with enough density to support high-frequency transit but still aren't exactly friendly to anyone who doesn't drive. Meanwhile along the Minnesota River Bluffs LRT Regional Trail it's mostly forest and single-family homes (including the only gated community in the Twin Cities) despite being purchased by the county a few decades ago for future transit use.

You speaking real facts. Suburbs should be incentivized to build their density around future corridors it's why I wish it's crucial to have a real rapid transit plan for a network based approach after 2030 when our network of 8 aBRTs are built. Blue and green line extensions gold and rush and Riverview under construction. What's next!

We need trunk lines that must be high speed and high frequency. The more compromises made the worse it is.

[Bakken2016]

Got to tour the City West Station and the Hwy 62 Tunnel!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DanPatchToget]

I visited the City West Station site today and it's truly going to be a very isolated station. I wouldn't be surprised if it has the lowest ridership of any station on the Green Line Extension. There will only be one way to access it, which is a frontage road along Highway 62. There won't be a direct trail to Optum, so walking between there and the station will take 7-8 minutes, which isn't terrible but if there was a direct trail the walk would only be 3-4 minutes.

They really should've routed the tracks differently in this area, but since we're stuck with it I think the best way to make City West Station more useful are trail bridges or tunnels across 62 and 212. This would greatly expand the walkshed of City West Station. Depending on frequency and routing some local bus routes to/from City West Station could also help.

[Tcmetro]

During the SW LRT planning process OPTUM was anticipated to greatly expand their campus in the direction of the light rail station. With the advent of work from home those plans might be in jeopardy. It does prevent a good opportunity for housing development however...

[Bakken2016]

I visited the City West Station site today and it's truly going to be a very isolated station. I wouldn't be surprised if it has the lowest ridership of any station on the Green Line Extension. There will only be one way to access it, which is a frontage road along Highway 62. There won't be a direct trail to Optum, so walking between there and the station will take 7-8 minutes, which isn't terrible but if there was a direct trail the walk would only be 3-4 minutes.

They really should've routed the tracks differently in this area, but since we're stuck with it I think the best way to make City West Station more useful are trail bridges or tunnels across 62 and 212. This would greatly expand the walkshed of City West Station. Depending on frequency and routing some local bus routes to/from City West Station could also help.

I was told during the tour that will be trail access to the surrounding neighborhood.