Blue Line Extension - Bottineau LRT

[angrysuburbanite]

"Light rail project encounters new obstacle in Minneapolis' North Loop: Major utility lines "
https://m.startribune.com/light-rail-pr ... lmob=y&c=n

"We look at it as just normal coordination [with utilities], although this one takes a little more work," said Nick Landwer, Metro Transit's director of transit system design and engineering. "We're working with the Xcel team to simplify how to get the work done. It doesn't pose an issue at all."

Project opponents were not appeased: "It's just another example of the Met Council not doing their due diligence on these projects," said Matt Bruns, who lives in the 918 Lofts along 10th Avenue, now part of the Blue Line extension route in the North Loop.

I still cannot believe some people are looking at SWLRT and BLRT as apples to apples. They are so much different from each other.

Sort of tangential, but do people really think that abolishing the Metropolitan Council is going to do anything to make LRT projects cheaper? They do realize it is a countrywide issue, right? (also, doesn't MnDOT have appointed leadership as well? How is it any different than the Met Council?)

[Tom H.]

This is the second LRT article in a few weeks with a sensationalized headline, in which actual experts or project managers literally say "it's not a problem", "there's no concern", but continues to just credulously quote and both-sides the NIMBYs.

[angrysuburbanite]

As icing on the cake, they even mention the other "tracks in wrong location" one in this article!

Also, obligatory Star Tribune comment section sucks remark. That was worse than usual, though.

[MNdible]

Sort of tangential, but do people really think that abolishing the Metropolitan Council is going to do anything to make LRT projects cheaper? They do realize it is a countrywide issue, right? (also, doesn't MnDOT have appointed leadership as well? How is it any different than the Met Council?)

The primary purpose of abolishing the Met Council is to make Scott Dibble feel important.

[Nick]

Yes, it is odd, given how many thousands of words have been spilled on this topic in the press, that no one has really scratched the surface on what's going on there.

[Silophant]

I'm not going to hate not having both the House and Senate transportation leaders be completely beholden to the whiniest neighborhood in Minneapolis.

[thespeedmccool]

The Met Council is a nationwide model and that means it's very hard to convince DFLers to neuter or significantly change it. The GOP just wants it dead, so Dibble and Co. have to convince their fellow partisans of any changes and that's hard.

Shifting LRT construction management to MNDOT as is currently proposed is hardly a concession at all. Shifting ADA costs to Met Council and stripping their ability to spend sales tax dollars on LRT are huge concessions and should get killed.

Met Council estimated the H Line will cost over $100 million if Dibble gets his way. This anti-Met Council tirade needs to be stopped.

Afield of the topic at hand, but I can't help myself.

[StandishGuy]

Meh. More than $3 billion for a route anticipated to have fewer than 15,000 daily riders? Crystal and Brooklyn Park just don't have the density and people-oriented land uses to warrant LRT. Plus, Botineau Blvd is truly awful for humans walking to proposed station locations with abismal car-oriented land uses. Things have changed so dramatically after the pandemic related to commuting and travel. patterns and planners should have recognized this fact. Geez. Target doesn't even require their workers to go intoo their offices on either end of the line. Why should we run a train all the way to a corn field in Brooklyn Park?

I'm transit dependant and live in the heart of south Minneapolis. However, bus service has been cut back so much that I can't rely on it any more as it only comes once an hour for way too much of the time. Metro Transit and area counties just need to invest in more ABRT in the short term until, hopefully, ridership returns. Too much money is being wasted on expensive rail and BRT that serves unwalkable, transit-hostile place. The Orange and Red lines suck. Northstar sucks. The Gold and Green Lines will suck because they go to low-density, auto-oriented places, and nothing about those places is going to change.

I am a transit dependent person who is very supportive of investing in

[Tom H.]

Strib: Lawmakers frustrated by delays, cost overruns enlist MnDOT on light rail project

[angrysuburbanite]

If Met Council staff members reject a MnDOT recommendation regarding a light-rail line, work cannot move forward on that part of the project until the dispute is resolved, the law states.

Would be funny if MnDOT's involvement results in higher costs and delays. MnDOT has less railway experience than the Met Council. They better not water down the project too much!

[twincitizen]

Supplemental EIS documents posted, public hearings planned in July: https://metrocouncil.org/Transportation ... t-EIS.aspx

[Nick]

Happy to see they were able to get a chapter on transportation in there!

[thespeedmccool]

Those updated ridership estimates are... bleak. Fewer riders in 2040 than the D Line has today is, uh, awful.

I guess the D Line is longer than BLX, but not by that much, jeez.

And to further caveat my pessimism, BLX will increase ridership on other parts of the system as well, but still.

[Wezle]

Is that the updated ridership numbers from 2023 or the estimate they made earlier this year with 2022 numbers? They said that they'd update their estimates this summer with 2023 data which should boost the estimates by a little bit.

Historically, the LRT ridership estimates have been pretty conservative for both the green and blue lines as well.

[BikesOnFilm]

It's worth remembering that the Green Line was meeting 2030 projected ridership within the first few years of operation. It might be less about the line's potential and more about setting a low bar that they can celebrate later versus a high one they'll be cudgeled with by opponents in the future.

[COLSLAW5]

https://app.publiccoordinate.com/#/projects/BLRT/map

just wanted to put this here again so people can go make comments on the existing plans

[Wezle]

Seems like the map has been closed to comments through August, however the environmental assessment is open to commenting so do that instead! granted the EIS is pretty huge.

[thespeedmccool]

It's worth remembering that the Green Line was meeting 2030 projected ridership within the first few years of operation. It might be less about the line's potential and more about setting a low bar that they can celebrate later versus a high one they'll be cudgeled with by opponents in the future.

I don't think this is a document where they can do that. They need the feds to approve this, and I don't think they'd deflate ridership estimates in work with the feds.

Rail is the right mode for this corridor, so these estimates are mostly just symptomatic of reduced overall transit ridership.

[Tcmetro]

The ridership model that is used is the same for all transit projects. There may be regional drivers that may push actual ridership over the model (or vice versa) by things like development once the line is completed, parking cost and availability, local perception of transit, special events, etc.

[Wezle]

I certainly agree on needing to extend 8th Ave in North Loop, as I've been obsessed with that idea for over a decade. It really needs to connect to 3rd Street, not just the bare minimum of connecting to 4th. It looks like they could get nearly 60' of ROW measuring from the edge of Salvation Army's loading dock to the edge of the pavement of the Cameron building's parking lot. You could squeeze out a few more feet by narrowing the parking lot's drive aisle and going to all compact parking, going diagonal, etc.

Edit: Jesus Christ that loading dock is new, built sometime in the past 5 years. It infuriates me that the City has had the 8th Ave connection in small area plans for 15-20 years, but has made less than zero effort to acquire or preserve the ROW to make it happen. They could have acquired an easement when the Cameron building was vacant for years or when it needed approvals for residential conversion a decade ago. They could have acquired an easement from Salvation Army as well during the planning for the loading dock addition. The way things are going the City will probably let Shafer-Richardson plop another apartment building directly where 8th Ave would go.

According to a recent presentation to the Met Council, the updated imagery that they're showing now includes a connection of 8th Ave between N 5th St and N 3rd St. Looks like you're getting what you were hoping for TwinCitizen!

https://metrocouncil.org/Council-Meetin ... pdate.aspx