Green Line Extension - Southwest LRT

[David Greene]

In order to take this conversation in a slightly different, but hopefully interesting, direction I started this thought experiment today. I'm not looking to pick more fights, but to get thoughts and opinions from you all. While I support 3A wholeheartedly, I'm not trying to make a case for it here, just presenting thoughts and questions.

I'll try to highlight assumptions in asterisks.

*Assume 3A is built*

*Assume a Greenway streetcar is built*

*Assume a Nicollet streetcar is built*

All fairly reasonable assumptions, I think. Probably all will be up and running within 2-3 years of each other assuming they go forward.

Given this, how could we enhance the system to provide a service approaching what people would expect a 3C Southwest LRT to provide? Here's what I came up with, in rough order of what I think would be the most bang for the buck.

- Fewer Nicollet streetcar stops north of Lake into downtown (*assume same stops as 3C on Nicollet*)
- Exclusive right-of-way for the Nicollet streetcar
- Run Midtown LRVs out to western Green Line EOL
*Assume Midtown will use Type II LRVs*
*Assume there is enoguh headway available since Blue and Green lines share trackage downtown*
*Assume same headway on Green Line and Midtown (7.5 minutes peak)*
*Assume challenges in single track sections are manageable*

Does anyone have educated guesses as to the marginal cost of these options? Here's my crack at or more questions about some of them:

- Fewer Nicollet stops - Might save $ (how much?) but decrease accessibility to the streetcar
[What is the cost of a streetcar platform? Would local bus service need to be increased to compensate?]

- Exclusive right of way on Nicollet - Little marginal cost over the existing plan, possible business mitigation for lost parking

- Extend Midtown to western EOL ~$13.2 million * N, where N is the number of Midtown LRVs needed for POR
*Assume LRV cost of $3.3 million (Type II LRV cost)*
*Assume need 4x number of vehicles (distance from West Lake to EOL is about 3x the Midtown corridor distance)*
*Assume no multi-vehicle trains on Midtown*

To me, extending the Midtown corridor southwest sounds cool in theory but isn't very cost-effective. N * $13.2 million is pretty high just to avoid a transfer. A private right-of-way for Nicollet is more plausible but will run into political opposition. Dropping Nicollet stops will also draw political opposition but is probably easier than an exclusive ROW.

So the $10,000 question is, which, if any, of these investments is worth doing to improve transit service to/from Uptown and Whittier? Note that a faster Nicollet streetcar would also benefit neighborhoods east of Nicollet, particularly those bordering the Greenway.

The next, possibly more controversial question is, what is the marginal benefit of 3C over the enhanced streetcar options proposed above? Is it worth the marginal cost? I see the marginal benefit of 3C is avoiding two transfers, one at West Lake and one at Nicollet/Greenway. I admit there may be others I'm not smart enough to think of. That's where you all come in. How much is reasonable to spend to avoid two transfers?

[EDIT: Originally I assumed $150 million marginal cost for 3C (over 3A with a shallow tunnel given the Southwest AA) but that's not right since building streetcars from West Lake to Nicollet and from the Greenway into downtown costs money which wouldn't be spent in a 3C scenario.]

Finally, if we were to implement the enhanced streetcar service, would it be worth delaying improvement to Hennepin Ave. bus service? If so, by how many years? *Assuming limited pot of transit money*

[Mdcastle]

Am I missing something, or would you only need to do two transfers if you were coming from Eden Prairie or Hopkins and wanted to wind up on Nicollet somewhere short of downtown? What percentage of the ridership would that be as opposed to those that stay on the LRT to go downtown or only transfer once to get somewhere on Lake Street.

I'll never ride this thing (I don't go downtown and if I did it would be a lot simpler to drive to Hiawatha or even forgo the light rail and take the straight shot driving downtown on I-35W) but I do want to see it happen. I get the idea the project is spinning it's wheels right now because no one can agree on anything as far as what to do in Minneapolis.

[David Greene]

Am I missing something, or would you only need to do two transfers if you were coming from Eden Prairie or Hopkins and wanted to wind up on Nicollet somewhere short of downtown?

That's correct. Or for the reverse trip. There are two transfer points. West Lake would be used for trips to/from Uptown from/to the southwest. Nicollet would be used for trips two/from Uptown from/to downtown.

What percentage of the ridership would that be as opposed to those that stay on the LRT to go downtown or only transfer once to get somewhere on Lake Street.

That's a good question. It gets at the marginal benefit of 3C. What is it, exactly? No one would have to make two transfers for a single trip given the existance of 3A. The advantages I see with 3C is a one seat ride between Uptown/Whitter and downtown, a one seat ride between Uptown/Whittier and thre southwest suburbs and a faster trip on Nicollet. My guess is that more people in the Uptown/Whitter area travel to/from downtown but I have no data to back that up. The proposed streetcar enhancements are meant to get at the Nicollet trip time, which I *think* is the most important component missing with 3A vs. 3C.

EDIT: This whole exercise was inspired by Peter Wagenius' statement that Minneapolis is pushing for a tunnel to try to approach something similar to assumed conditions in Kenilworth with a freight reroute. I'm taking the same tack, seeing what 3C proponents might push for to get something approaching 3C. I don't think it would be out of line for said proponents to push the city to approach the streetcar projects from this angle.

I get the idea the projelct is spinning it's wheels right now because no one can agree on anything as far as what to do in Minneapolis.

I think "spinning its wheels" is a bit of an exaggeration. Issues like this come up with large projects. People are taking a look and trying to figure out a compromise. Remember that no one had seen a concrete plan until about a month ago. People need time to digest things. We'll get there.

[mattaudio]

None of these connect Uptown and Downtown with a one seat ride faster than a walking pace.

[David Greene]

None of these connect Uptown and Downtown with a one seat ride faster than a walking pace.

That's just not true. A bus today is faster than a walking pace. What is the difference between:

- Hop a Midtown streetcar at Uptown station
- Transfer to a (fast) Nicollet streetcar at Nicollet

and

- Hop a 3C LRV at Uptown station

It's one transfer. The travel (moving) time should be roughly the same. At most there will be a 7.5 minute wait during peak but that's the extreme case. The average case is more like a 3-4 minute wait.

If you don't think that's worth exploring, fine. I won't lose any sleep over it. But I think this kind of approach is realistic and something 3C backers should consider pushing for given that 3C ain't gonna happen.

If there is some other benefit of 3C I'm missing, please speak up. Like I said, I'm looking for solutions, not fights.

[RailBaronYarr]

I have high doubts that a mixed-traffic streetcar on Nicollet making stops every other block will be "fast," particularly during rush hours. I'm obviously of the opinion that even at-grade investments like a streetcar (or enhanced bus) should just operate in their own lane (or share it with other bus lines). That's a discussion for the Nicollet Corridor thread.

But to answer your question..

http://www.minneapolismn.gov/www/groups ... 112389.pdf Page8 shows that from Lake St to 3rd/Washington would be 20 minutes. Let's call it 18 to the Blue Line (where 3C-1 would intersect). Add in the 3-4 minute transfer time average (during peak-only, would a 3C LRT run 7.5 minute headways more often throughout the day? I'm not sure on this). I'll give a Midtown Streetcar the benefit of the doubt on average travel speed @ 17 mph including dwell time, so from the Hennepin station to Nicollet would be a ~3.5 minute ride. Add in the average 3.5 minute wait time when you get to the Hennepin streetcar station. This is a total of 28+ minutes to go from Hennepin and Lake to Nicollet and 5th.

As for the walking pace: http://goo.gl/maps/6QLXA ~50 minutes. Obviously a hyperbole, but to assume that a journey (that doesn't include walking TO the station to begin with or wherever one is going downtown) taking 28+ minutes (or more, depending on traffic, time of day headways, etc) is absurd. People in Uptown (along with other neighborhoods) deserve the dignity of actual rapid, frequent transit that doesn't inconvenience them with transfers (plus vertical circulation) that takes the same time someone driving downtown from Burnsville (off-peak, obviously) would perceive. As Jarrett Walker would say, hundred million dollar transit investments should compete with driving, not walking/biking. A Midtown/Nicollet combo clearly competes with the latter (in time and convenience).

I'm 100% behind both corridors if 3A gets built as-is, I just think the Nicollet corridor could use some wider stop spacings and dedicated ROW.

[twincitizen]

David, excellent post at the top of this page. As much as I hate to admit it, 3C (or anything resembling it) isn't going to happen, barring a miracle/revelation/epiphany in the coming month(s).

Here's one major benefit of 3C that I feel really gets swept under the rug: the potential reducing the volume of cars from two major bottlenecks -- Hennepin/Lyndale and Hennepin/Lake/Lagoon (both directions of traffic, for both intersections) That potential is certainly diminished when you bring transfers into the mix. 3A+Midtown still has the potential to capture a bunch of reverse commuters, if the frequencies are high enough and transfer penalty minimized. By putting Uptown, Lyn-Lake, the heart of Whittier, and Stevens Square on the REGIONAL transit system, we'd have a real opportunity for those folks to go carless. Yes, streetcars will help, but I'd venture that far fewer folks will be willing to give up their cars if the main transit trip replacing their car requires a transfer, even if rail-to-rail.

[RailBaronYarr]

Just for reference, a 3C-1 LRT would take 15.9 minutes from West Lake to Downtown, so I would trim down Uptown-Downtown travel time to 14 minutes or so. That's a 44% improvement over the Midtown/Nicollet combo and much more in-line with travel time from the core of Uptown to a similar location in Downtown by driving ( http://goo.gl/maps/LYqQm ). Just sayin'.

[David Greene]

I'm 100% behind both corridors if 3A gets built as-is, I just think the Nicollet corridor could use some wider stop spacings and dedicated ROW.

That's in fact exactly what I suggested. Maybe it got lost in a long post.

I'm asking whether 3C supporters think a Nicollet streetcar with fewer stops and/or dedicated ROW is worth fighting for. If 3C was worth fighting for, wouldn't these changes to the Nicollet corridor also be worth fighting for? I think there is a real chance for 3C supporters to get something done if they act soon.

A streetcar doesn't have to stop at every platform, right? It operates more like a bus than an LRT as far as I'm aware.

[twincitizen]

Finally, if we were to implement the enhanced streetcar service, would it be worth delaying improvement to Hennepin Ave. bus service? If so, by how many years?

I'm not sure what you mean by this. For one, which streetcar line are you talking about in reference to delaying Hennepin?

Secondly, and this gets at a MAJOR problem, what delay are you referring to? It's kind of irrelevant. There is NO PLANNED IMPROVEMENT TO HENNEPIN AVE BUS SERVICE. Yes, Hennepin was obviously included in the aBRT study, but it has completely fallen to the bottom (off?) of the list. There has been no explanation given by Metro Transit as to why Hennepin has been de-prioritized. The queue for the first four to five aBRT lines has been established out to 2018-19 and Hennepin isn't on the list. Right now it looks like Snelling, West 7th (& later east), Penn, and Chicago-Emerson. Washington-Broadway is Minneapolis' next starter streetcar line priority. Hennepin ain't getting shit for a long, long time unless an elected official takes a stand and does something about it. Activism may be necessary to make this happen before 2020.

[David Greene]

Yes, streetcars will help, but I'd venture that far fewer folks will be willing to give up their cars if the main transit trip replacing their car requires a transfer, even if rail-to-rail.

Ok, so you're saying that the cost of a transfer is bigger than I'm describing. There's a social cost (traffic) in addition to the individual cost (trip time).

Since I don't even know where to look for studies on that kind of thing and it makes sense to me at some level, let's run with it. What could we do to reduce the cost of that transfer? Anything? Would running Midtiown and Nicollet at higher frequencies help? How much higher? What's the cost?

Those are the kinds of questions that are going to be asked if people pursue this. I personally think it's worth pursuing and getting answers to these questions. Unfortunately, I don't have time to organize such a thing. I might be interested in participating in the effort in some way if others organize it.

[David Greene]

I'm not sure what you mean by this. For one, which streetcar line are you talking about in reference to delaying Hennepin?

I'm saying if we make improvements to the Nicollet and/or Greenway streetcars, it will cost money that could be used for something else. Since we're talking about Uptown transit service, I'm asking that *if* such costs delayed improvements on Hennepin, would they be worth it.

Secondly, and this gets at a MAJOR problem, what delay are you referring to? It's kind of irrelevant. There is NO PLANNED IMPROVEMENT TO HENNEPIN AVE BUS SERVICE.

Here's the funny thing. I know what you mean when you describe the current public aBRT plans put forward. However, at some CAC meeting (Midtown, I think), someone (wish I could remember who!) said Hennepin is definitely on the schedule. I don't know if they were talking about full-on aBRT or something else. "Enhanced bus," maybe? I asked a bit about it but couldn't get any details. Perhaps it was wishful thinking.

EDIT: I quickly ran through the arterial study and it appears Hennepin is waiting for the broader local bus restructuring around Southwest LRT. The report makes it sound like Metro Transit wants to look holistically at how LRT, aBRT and local bus will work as a system in the area. That seems like the right approach to me. It's not on the official schedule because that system planning hasn't been done yet. I don't think it's delayed because no one thinks it's worth investing. They're looking longer-term and trying to figure out how the system will work.

Perhaps the person I talked to has some information about the scheduling of Hennepin upgrades once all the service planning is done.

[RailBaronYarr]

You're right, suggestions got lost in the long-post. Personally, I think the section of Nicollet from Lake (or just south of it) all the way through downtown deserves more than slightly wider stop-spacings and dedicated ROW. If a Nicollet Ave streetcar using Type II LRVs in dedicated ROW , signal priority/preemption, etc could get from Lake to 5th in 7-8 minutes, I'd be shocked. Perhaps this is a technical reality and running a single LRV (or nice, gas-powered articulated bus) every 7-10 minutes 18 hours a day is far more realistic financially and politically than digging a C&C tunnel. Problem is, I don't see all those things happening. Even though I think both Hennepin and Nicollet deserve this exact treatment, along with a few other corridors (into NE and North, Chicago as well).

I like the way you laid out a few options on Midtown running further SW to offer current residents of Uptown single-seat rides out to the SW burbs, but agree a cost-benefit run doesn't pass the eye test. I'd rather see MT take a smart approach to the Midtown Corridor thinking 10 years out by extending east to StP and maybe out to Wayzata (assuming they ever get some nodes to support it) rather than duplicate service along the SW line. I was actually quite pleased with the latest Midtwon pdf showing stop locations/design and mostly double track, so I see very little room for improvement there (as far as Uptown goes).

Since I don't live in Minneapolis (yet), I don't know what type of influence I could ever possibly have on a Nicollet line. I gave feedback already on reducing stops, giving dedicated ROW, and building a full corridor by bus rather than a 1/3 corridor by rail for double the price in the online survey. Not much more I can do...

[woofner]

Hennepin was obviously included in the aBRT study, but it has completely fallen to the bottom (off?) of the list.There has been no explanation given by Metro Transit as to why Hennepin has been de-prioritized.

I was told by one of the consultants who worked on the aBRT study that Hennepin would be delayed until the Southwest LRT restructuring study was complete. I would say this is a bad explanation, but is technically an explanation. Edit: David, I see you made this observation already, so I'll expand on why I don't think it's a good reason to delay aBRT implementation. When you do a restructuring study, you have to assume some constants. They will assume that Uptown will continue to be a regional center, for example. The existing demand on Hennepin justifies aBRT infrastructure right now, so that should be a constant in their restructuring study anyway. So what, then, is the reason for delaying implementation of infrastructure you assume will be built anyway?

Hennepin ain't getting shit for a long, long time unless an elected official takes a stand and does something about it. Activism may be necessary to make this happen before 2020.

This is a great point and really drives home the fact that the City of Minneapolis doesn't take enhanced bus seriously, which indicates to me that their thinking about transit -- certainly at the elected level but also staff -- is astonishingly shallow.

I'm asking whether 3C supporters think a Nicollet streetcar with fewer stops and/or dedicated ROW is worth fighting for. If 3C was worth fighting for, wouldn't these changes to the Nicollet corridor also be worth fighting for?

This a great question, but you have to take it to the next step. Since dedicated ROW on Nicollet would require removing parking, would this fight be any less challenging than fighting for 3C?

[David Greene]

You're right, suggestions got lost in the long-post. Personally, I think the section of Nicollet from Lake (or just south of it) all the way through downtown deserves more than slightly wider stop-spacings and dedicated ROW. If a Nicollet Ave streetcar using Type II LRVs in dedicated ROW , signal priority/preemption, etc could get from Lake to 5th in 7-8 minutes, I'd be shocked.

Is that the benchmark? 3C was going to be at grade and at the mercy of signals as well, so I wouldn't expect a Nicollet streetcar to have a shorter trip time than 3C. The time loss is in the transfer, I think, not the ride (assuming fewer stops and dedicated ROW).

Another question: how much time is lost with a mixed-traffic implementation? Quite a bit I would assume, but how much? For comparison, Metro Transit is predicting end-to-end travel times in Midtown at ~27 minutes for enhanced bus on Lake and ~15 minutes for a Greenway streetcar, so a dedicated ROW without signals on that corridor apparently gets you places twice as fast. Nicollet probably can't approach that (for streetcar or 3C) due to the signals.

I like the way you laid out a few options on Midtown running further SW to offer current residents of Uptown single-seat rides out to the SW burbs, but agree a cost-benefit run doesn't pass the eye test. I'd rather see MT take a smart approach to the Midtown Corridor thinking 10 years out by extending east to StP and maybe out to Wayzata (assuming they ever get some nodes to support it) rather than duplicate service along the SW line.

Totally agree. A lot of people want extended service to St. Paul. The problem is that it costs a lot more to go from Hiawatha eastward.

Since I don't live in Minneapolis (yet), I don't know what type of influence I could ever possibly have on a Nicollet line. I gave feedback already on reducing stops, giving dedicated ROW, and building a full corridor by bus rather than a 1/3 corridor by rail for double the price in the online survey. Not much more I can do...

Actually, there is. People quite rightly expect their officially-gathered comments to be mostly ignored. The real influence comes in building relationships with planners and the politicians who will approve the plan. It's a *lot* of work but it is the way to really get things done on these projects. It starts by going to public meetings and introducing yourself. Then following up with a phone call and face-to-face meetings. It's more powerful to act as a group than as an individual.

The Stops for Us people (in one form or another) spend at least five years cultivating those relationships and building them all the way up to the top (Secretary LaHood) to get the rules changed and secure their victory. I don't think that much time would be needed on Nicollet (we probably don't have it anyway) but it's pretty straightforward to start a relationship with city council members. Even the mayor's office is pretty accessible if you can show you have a significant group of people behind you.

Relationships with planners are important because they'll take the time to explain things in (sometimes painful) detail in face-to-face meetings. I've found that I generally don't learn anything new as far as the broad results of analyses but I often get more useful insight by sitting down for some dedicated nerd talk with planners.

[MumfordMoses]

Some people on this board remind me of my grumpy neighbors who continue to complain about LRT noise and commuter parking nine years after the line opened. At some point those who feel they got short end of a political decision need to move on. With my neighbors, smugness and stubbornness leads them to yell at strangers who legally park their cars in the neighborhood and call 311 several times a week for various bs reasons. Clearly posting the same 3C fantasies over and over again isn't psychopathic and pathetic like my neighbors' behavior but both groups should move on.

I'm not sure if you're taking a shot at some of my posts. I'm merely expressing my opinions. I don't post much here, which should be obvious.

As for "strangers who legally park their cars" in various neighborhoods - could not be further from the truth on my 2400 block of Colfax. There seem to be at least 3 really cool neighbors who invested in private driveways, in part to get their cars off the streets so renters can have parking availability. But these neighbors, just over the course of the past month, have been locked into their driveways, several times, because intellectually challenged residents continue to park in their driveway entrance. The great excuse just this past week was one of these car owners saying "there is no where to park . . . why are you giving me a ticket . . . OMG, OMG?"

Even worse, when one of my other neighbors had to move last week & yes he put pylons & signs out on the street, which didn't stop people from parking in between them, he, the moving company he hired, and other neighbors, had to wait nearly 2 hours for two cars to get tagged and towed. The "other neighbors", you bet, were two of the neighbors I described above with private driveways, each barricaded by illegally parked cars. The ever reliable "311" had to come tow two different cars so the movers could safely park and proceed with their job & my neighbors could leave to do meaningful daily chores. No one was interested in asking those who were "legally parked" to move their cars, but some good folks came down, voluntarily to help the situation. The stunning reality many of us accepted: even during a work day, weekday, our block nearly hit a critical mass of parking shortage. It's not like this everywhere, mind you, but it's getting worse.

I consider myself pretty engaged with my neighborhood - I walk or ride my bike daily, my daughter as well, & yes we own a car, but my wife is a so-called reverse commuter. There are no effective bus routes to her job in bum-F- Blaine. Over the years it's become obvious the street I live on, Colfax, as well as other streets in the neighborhood, feel the squeeze of parking, esp during winter when the roads can suddenly narrow & one-side parking is enforced. I've literally done the "vulture" flight with my car too many times, that is I must drive a 3-6 block area scavenging for parking. Shoot, I've sometimes parked 8 blocks from my house, in a zone where the car needs to be removed by my wife by 8a, next day. She would prefer leaving for work a little after 8 Not fun. Our family has done a small part, we long ago got rid of the second car & my daughter has no interest in driving, despite being of legal age for at least 2 years now. Her biggest complaints are the bus lines that make too many stops on her way to work DT (17 & 6). I feel her pain, which is partly why I raised my points about proposed streetcars, which are likely to stop every 2 blocks.

I simply prefer if my elected officials had the foresight to create transit that better addresses density, long term vision, smart growth, more inclusive ridership, less congestion, while at the same time providing effective options for citizens to consider going without car ownership. I don't think 3a does the above for Mpls, other communities, yes. Thus, I can accept 3a because the folks out in burbs are equally important. I've heard others arguments on here, heck David Greene raised good points about the BCRMP - though after reading various PDFs on it yesterday (in excess of 100 pages) - I think it's far from the most important development vision facing Mpls. I, for one, would love to see a dramatic plan for k-12 education because Mpls schools went south during my daughter's k-12 tenure. Striving for high quality public schools is absolutely a critical urban-regional planning issue.

The 3a-3c debate was settled, I know as much. It doesn't mean 3a was the best choice, nor should 3c proponents roll over and accept it.

[RailBaronYarr]

So pathetic that removing parking would be a 'hard' political fight given so many easy, quick, market-based options to mitigate it (with business patrons along Nicollet walking perhaps a block further than they currently do.. boo hoo). Do business owners in Uptown actually know what the travel mode of their patrons is? Do they know what their loss would be if on-street parking were removed in lieu of a faster, more frequent transit option? What would happen to their business if the street/sidewalk out front were safer and more attractive?

As for Southwest, I think I'll pick the battles that are within the realm of winning from here out... removing the 21st Station (even if they do co-location at grade), a better proposal for the VW area, ensuring Midtown Corridor can interline, etc etc.

[David Greene]

When you do a restructuring study, you have to assume some constants. They will assume that Uptown will continue to be a regional center, for example. The existing demand on Hennepin justifies aBRT infrastructure right now, so that should be a constant in their restructuring study anyway. So what, then, is the reason for delaying implementation of infrastructure you assume will be built anyway?

I can't really argue with that.

This is a great point and really drives home the fact that the City of Minneapolis doesn't take enhanced bus seriously, which indicates to me that their thinking about transit -- certainly at the elected level but also staff -- is astonishingly shallow.

It is indeed. The current city council seems to see "good transit" as shiny rail projects and completely ignores the possibilities with buses. This is one of the reasons I support Lisa Bender. She understands what transit really is.

Since dedicated ROW on Nicollet would require removing parking, would this fight be any less challenging than fighting for 3C?

Good question. I would say yes. A dedicated ROW wouldn't cost much more than the current POR (perhaps up to $1 million for fencing?), unlike 3C vs. 3A. Parking issues can be mitigated by sharing off-street parking and/or doing metering on Blaisdell and 1st. You won't have the CEI problems with Nicollet that existed with 3C. I don't think there are show-stoppers to a dedicated Nicollet ROW in the way there were for 3C. Of course, this would all have to be studied to confirm that. But they're studying it right now, which is why now is the time to act.

The parking issue is mostly a political one. Political problems can be solved.

[woofner]

Having facilitated the Whittier neighborhood's initial conversation about 3A vs 3C, I doubt that cost is much of a factor for them. I'm even more confident that parking is a potential deal-breaker for them. How much that matters politically depends on who's in office, of course. I'm quite certain that losing parking on Nicollet would trigger a vigorous grassroots opposition, though.

[RailBaronYarr]

Is that the benchmark? 3C was going to be at grade and at the mercy of signals as well, so I wouldn't expect a Nicollet streetcar to have a shorter trip time than 3C. The time loss is in the transfer, I think, not the ride (assuming fewer stops and dedicated ROW).

Another question: how much time is lost with a mixed-traffic implementation? Quite a bit I would assume, but how much? For comparison, Metro Transit is predicting end-to-end travel times in Midtown at ~27 minutes for enhanced bus on Lake and ~15 minutes for a Greenway streetcar, so a dedicated ROW without signals on that corridor apparently gets you places twice as fast. Nicollet probably can't approach that (for streetcar or 3C) due to the signals.

Well, 3C would have had a tunnel for a good chunk, right?. If I'm not mistaken, this document (pg 40) shows from 4th St/Nicollet to 28th/Nicollet would take 8.1 minutes via 3C-1 (maybe this is incorrect info, but I remember seeing another chart buried in this thread showing terminus to Lake/Nicollet area being sub-10 minutes). So I undershot it a bit by saying 7-8 minutes given 28th and not the Greenway, but still, that's roughly half the time. And yes, my benchmark is to not be competing in the realm of walking/biking and more in line with competing with driving. Drivers get the convenience (as well they should for paying for the car, though they don't pay for congestion and parking always) of being in a personal, spacious, controlled environment they own with the freedom of choice in destination and timing. They (myself included when I drive) shouldn't get a major advantage in operating speed. That's my benchmark for good transit service.

EDIT: I should have made it more clear in my other post that the reason I was saying I'd be shocked if at grade transit (even with ROW, signal, widened stops, etc) could do the journey in that time was simply because sub-10 minutes was done with a wide-stopped LRT underground. But this is exactly what I think really should go along Nicollet and even up Central north of the river for 1-2 miles. That would make a more local (yet frequent and dedicated ROW) bus (or streetcar) make a lot more sense at grade, though it would seem to me that shifting it over to Lyndale to provide better total network coverage would also make sense. Just spitballin and obviously way too much of this is non-SW LRT related. Apologies.

It's a *lot* of work but it is the way to really get things done on these projects. It starts by going to public meetings and introducing yourself. Then following up with a phone call and face-to-face meetings. It's more powerful to act as a group than as an individual.

I know, everybody's busy. But between work, work travel, commute, my double MBA course schedule, dogs, and a cat, I barely have time to fit in the few Metro Transit/Met Council meetings I've been able to attend. Especially since attending things like this require me to drive 30 minutes back in to the city. Come May I'll be done with school and likely back up in Mpls, so I can take a more active role.