urbanMSP

And no mention about the tunneling options available for streets/pedestrians. The Midtown Greenway/rail corridor rides atop a two+ story berm from 31st Ave to the river in Seward, and no one really complains about it.

It's irritating that local media repeat the phrase "two story berms through St. Louis Park" with no context.

What kind of context would make this better in anyone's neighborhood. If elevating rail through the historic main drag of a first ring suburb, and removing homes and businesses to do so, on the list of good options ... why is elevating a bike trail through a park outrageously out of limits?

Just asking.

I'm not dead set on one option or the other, but it bothers me that co-location is being sold as a panacea for all of St. Louis Park. Co-location of freight and LRT actually hurts the station areas around Wooddale and Beltline. Getting freight out of that section of SLP would be a big benefit to development (existing and future) at their two innermost stations. I biked the trail recently and there were ugly freight trains just parked in front of newer apartments near Hwy. 100, as seen on Google maps, oblique view: http://goo.gl/maps/VSf8b

If I was an SLP resident in that area, I'd most certainly be in favor of relocation.

The Mitchell Station is close to several large apartment communities with large immigrant communities (two around Mitchell and Valley View) and one large complex that is under construction on the NE corner of 212 & Mitchell. It would still be barely walkable to SW Station (I've done it!), but it's much less convenient.

If the station is closer to Wallace Road (as the current plan shows), the walk to SW Station from the apartments will be shorter in many cases.

I biked the trail recently and there were ugly freight trains just parked in front of newer apartments near Hwy. 100, as seen on Google maps, oblique view: http://goo.gl/maps/VSf8b

If I was an SLP resident in that area, I'd most certainly be in favor of relocation.

Trains have to go somewhere, I'm sure you didn't mean it that way, but it implies they can't be near newer apartments- so they have to go by where the underclass live?

If I was an SLP resident in that area, I'd most certainly be in favor of relocation.

True. But you could say you moved in to those buildings and weren't surprised there were trains, while the other side of town could say they didn't expect to get an abundance of more freight near their schools and back yards and lose businesses to accommodate the newer apartment dwellers over there. Aaaaaaand we're back to the utilitarian analysis of things again.

Of course the way politicians are affected, the home owners of decades come out and vote more than the "transient" apartment renter. So, you know ...

It's irritating that local media repeat the phrase "two story berms through St. Louis Park" with no context. At what height, for what distance, and to what effect? You'd think the Berlin wall was being proposed.

The berms are quite high and will effectively divide the area as any freeway would. They will run pretty much through the heart of St. Louis Park.

And no mention about the tunneling options available for streets/pedestrians. The Midtown Greenway/rail corridor rides atop a two+ story berm from 31st Ave to the river in Seward, and no one really complains about it.

The context is very different. Minneapolis residents clamored for grade separation at the time. It was an improvement over the existing at-grade line.

With the SLP re-route option the community is getting new tracks and a new berm. Yes, there are existing tracks there and a berm for about half the length of the proposed one, but the tracks are little-used and the existing berm is much shorter and has been there forever. People knew what they were getting when they moved there.

The current relocation plan wasn't on *anyone's* radar a year ago. Not Met Council, not Hennepin County, no one. That is part of the reason people are upset. Yes, people were upset by the plan to use the current rails as well but a good number of those people were upset because they didn't see that plan as workable and long stated their belief that it would need major changes. And they were right.

No one is going to be entirely happy with whatever outcome we get, but a shallow tunnel seems by far the best compromise solution we have available, especially if they start trimming the cost as stated at the CAC meeting yesterday.

It's irritating that local media repeat the phrase "two story berms through St. Louis Park" with no context. At what height, for what distance, and to what effect? You'd think the Berlin wall was being proposed.

The berms are quite high and will effectively divide the area as any freeway would. They will run pretty much through the heart of St. Louis Park.

And again, the noise pollution from a heavy freight engine that high in the air over a neighborhood should not be overlooked. I saw in the proposal that the top of the engine would be 53 feet above the neighborhood in the highest spots. Can anyone honestly say that they would like to have that in their backyard. It's not like you can put up a sound wall to deal with that.

It's irritating that local media repeat the phrase "two story berms through St. Louis Park" with no context. At what height, for what distance, and to what effect? You'd think the Berlin wall was being proposed.

The berms are quite high and will effectively divide the area as any freeway would. They will run pretty much through the heart of St. Louis Park.

The tracks are already there, though. It'll make things a bit worse, of course, but there will still be a number of crossings. Probably better than the average freeway.

And again, the noise pollution from a heavy freight engine that high in the air over a neighborhood should not be overlooked. I saw in the proposal that the top of the engine would be 53 feet above the neighborhood in the highest spots. Can anyone honestly say that they would like to have that in their backyard. It's not like you can put up a sound wall to deal with that.

I really wish these lines could be converted to electric operation, since that would dramatically cut the noise levels. I'm not sure it's worth it though -- probably cheaper to add air conditioning and noise insulation to the existing buildings that aren't sufficiently closed up already.

And again, this is a fairly modest increase in traffic to an existing line that doesn't have much traffic to begin with. I live next to a line that sees 50-60 trains per day -- it's definitely an adjustment since I basically have to live with my windows closed all the time, but this area will only see 1/10th as much traffic.

The tracks are already there, though. It'll make things a bit worse, of course, but there will still be a number of crossings. Probably better than the average freeway.

To be precise, the tracks will be moved from where they are now, a few blocks into an area where they aren't that is an area currently with homes and businesses. If there is a slight positive out of it, it will eliminate three at grade crossings (Dakota, Lake, Walker) because the tracks will now pass overhead.

Yes, part of the route would move the existing tracks to make them straighter, and most of the route would be raised up higher than it currently is to help with those grade separations.

http://finance-commerce.com/2013/09/ede ... orter-lrt/

Behind pay-wall, so I can't see details. Says EP warming to terminating at EP City Center. Do they mean the Town Center station (listed on the map)?

http://finance-commerce.com/2013/09/ede ... orter-lrt/

Behind pay-wall, so I can't see details. Says EP warming to terminating at EP City Center. Do they mean the Town Center station (listed on the map)?

I'm pretty sure they mean Southwest Station.

Am I the only person who is completely sick of the pissing matching between Minneapolis and St. Louis Park. They have been focused on collaboration and consensus building and talking and studying for three years now and all it has done is drive up the price by hundreds of millions of dollars. The locally preferred alternative was decided on in 2010 and we're still talking about it and wanting more study. For the love of God what have we been doing for the last three years?

I think it's about time for the Governor to step in and lock the decision makers in the room, not local stakeholders, not activist, not residents, the people that can actually make a decision along with technical experts and say "You have 48 hours to come up with a solution and how to finance what ever that solution is. And if you don't I'll make the decision and then nobody will be happy"

I understand that we want people to feel that they're engaged, their input is heard and their concerns are address but at this point this is getting ridiculous. This is the real world and real money is being spent, a lot of real money. That means that not everybody is going to be happy with the solution and just because the fact that 3 trees will be removed from your back yard doesn't justify the public having to spend an extra $100 million to save those trees. In the real world feeling get hurt, not everybody is going to be happy in the end, someone is going to end up pissed off but people get over it and learn to live with the hand they're dealt. I think Mick Jagger said it best "you can't always get what you want, but if you try some times you get what you need"

I know that will piss people off and leave plenty of people with hurt feelings but as my father says it's time we either crap or get off the pot. And we past that point years ago. But here we are still debating the same issues three years later with no real solution in sight.

I think an issue with doing that is the lines not worth expendin 'political capitol' on.
Certainly legislators are independent of Governor.

Star article on railroad power ( to name another entity the Executive can't boss around)
http://m.startribune.com/news/?id=225600682&c=y

Let's just give up on this one and focus on an area that actually wants LRT. These ongoing problems and inevitable price increases are ruining the perception of LRT and putting our whole system behind.

Am I the only person who is completely sick of the pissing matching between Minneapolis and St. Louis Park. They have been focused on collaboration and consensus building and talking and studying for three years now and all it has done is drive up the price by hundreds of millions of dollars. The locally preferred alternative was decided on in 2010 and we're still talking about it and wanting more study. For the love of God what have we been doing for the last three years?

This is the process. SW LRT really hasn't taken any longer than our other lines. We'll pretty much know everything in a couple of weeks.

The CMC votes Oct. 3 and the Met Council votes Oct. 9. They'll have municipal consent wrapped up by the end of the year.

OMF is set, the Eden Prairie alignment is set. The freight decision has effectively been made and it's a shallow tunnel in Kenilworth. Only question now is how long it will be.

Let's just give up on this one and focus on an area that actually wants LRT. These ongoing problems and inevitable price increases are ruining the perception of LRT and putting our whole system behind.

The "inevitable price increases" are caused by two things: FTA ruling that the freight issue is part of the LRT project. An examination of historical documents will show that this was a surprise to all of the local oficials. The second is improvements to the line. The budget isn't going up appreciably due to time or inflation. It's because we're making the line better! An LPA ridership refresh showed a gain of ~6,000 daily riders. It will be even more once they look at the new alignment.

And these areas DO want LRT. SW LRT is a key part of the transit network. Without it we leave a lot of people in cars in the most job-rich region in the metro.