urbanMSP

A lot of what this is straying towards is already covered in the recent discussion on this thread:

https://forum.streets.mn/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=1137&start=140

Alright guys... Aggressive arguing in this thread is limited to 3A vs. 3C alignment discussions only

I think Mitchell Station will (and should) get built eventually...but for the sake of getting the line funded and built, it should never have been added back into the plans. I have no idea why Met Council added it back, when they know CTIB (the counties paying for 30% of this thing) want the budget to come down significantly. It's not like Eden Prairie was ever going to withhold consent over Mitchell Station. It sounded like they were already working toward a compromise with Southwest Transit on use of the station. Now if Met Council has to remove Mitchell Station again, it's going to look bad. I'm fairly certain that Eden Prairie would have to vote on consent again. What probably needs to happen is a directive from the FTA that the budget needs to come down.

On the flip side of cutting the budget vs. enhancements... I'm kind of a big fan of grade separation at Beltline Blvd. That would be really great for both the trail and LRT to be elevated over Beltline Blvd. That's something I'd like to see St. Louis Park continue to push for. It's probably among the most important of the various "enhancements" that cities are looking to get out of the contingency fund.

Here's a question... did the number of jobs/housing/etc used in the EIS and all other planning documents use the current walk-shed, future walk-shed, or 1/2 mile radius? Seems misleading to use anything more than most will use given the planned improvements to pedestrian connections. I'll also note that walking more than 10 minutes to/from a station, even with new sidewalks, is not the same as 10 minutes in the city. Walking along 40+ mph roads with little-to-no shade or windbreak and completing the journey through a parking lot is not comfortable. In a city people may be willing to walk 12-15 minutes to a line like this if the environment is right...

Well in EP everyone is always out and walking, either just for a stroll or for getting from A to B. Technology road is a 30 mph lower usage road, especially during the hours of 9-3. And our city has done a good job with tree cover and shading on sidewalks.

Is 3C even still on the table? Is there a point in arguing? It may be misinterpreting but it seems like many on here still want 3A to pass. Is that true? I would rather have nothing at all than allow this light rail to skip Uptown.

3C was never really an option. It was a half baked idea that deserved to die on the drawing board. It will live forever in the dreams of people that wouldn't have had to guide it through local and federal approvals, design it, build it or operate it. Luckily our region is getting a better line that will immensely improve access and further reinforce downtown Minneapolis as a dynamic regional hub. Enhanced bus service and grade separated street car in the green way is far superior to 3C.

The best criticism of the line is the project partners acquiescence to property owners in Minneapolis. The town homes should have been bought out and at grade co location utilized.

I would rather have nothing at all than allow this light rail to skip Uptown.

Light rail is not skipping Uptown.

https://forum.streets.mn/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=1049

strib has nice interactive showing mpls station sites.
http://www.startribune.com/local/blogs/267489931.html

Sorry David and VAStationDude, I don't buy those arguments. I do think that 3C was a bit half-baked, but simply because it makes more sense to route along Hennepin or Lyndale rather than Nicollet.

I would rather have nothing at all than allow this light rail to skip Uptown.

Light rail is not skipping Uptown.

https://forum.streets.mn/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=1049

The problem with the Midtown Corridor is that it is a Minneapolis pipe dream rather than something Metro Transit intends to build.

Clearly Midtown doesn't have enough planned park and rides...

Clearly Midtown doesn't have enough planned park and rides...

Before the snark gets turned up too high, recall that Central was built without a single park and ride. Southwest will, of course, have a lot of park and rides.

Is 3C even still on the table? Is there a point in arguing?

It's passed on! This alignment is no more! It has ceased to be! It's expired and gone to meet its maker! It's a stiff! Bereft of life, it rests in peace! If urbanites didn't sit around here pining for it, it would have been recycled by now. Its metabolic processes are now history! It's off the twig!
It's kicked the bucket, it's shuffled off the mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the choir invisibile!! THIS IS AN EX-ALIGNMENT!

It may be misinterpreting but it seems like many on here still want 3A to pass.

It has passed. It is not a hypothetical. Barring Minneapolis losing its mind and doing something unconscionably stupid like denying municipal consent it's over.

Is that true? I would rather have nothing at all than allow this light rail to skip Uptown.

*forehead desk*

We get what we deserve, and if nothing at all is what you'd prefer, you'd be amazed at the big piles of nothing till the horizon we'd get if Minneapolis denied local consent.

I would rather have nothing at all than allow this light rail to skip Uptown.

Light rail is not skipping Uptown.

https://forum.streets.mn/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=1049

The problem with the Midtown Corridor is that it is a Minneapolis pipe dream rather than something Metro Transit intends to build.

This CAN'T be true! David Greene says that Midtown Corridor is right around the corner! He assured the 3C "pipe dreamers" that we shouldn't fret about that line to the suburbs because actual existing density was going to get a line very soon. That assurance means that it is a real thing.

This CAN'T be true! David Greene says that Midtown Corridor is right around the corner! He assured the 3C "pipe dreamers" that we shouldn't fret about that line to the suburbs because actual existing density was going to get a line very soon. That assurance means that it is a real thing.

It amazes me at how rude and inconsiderate so many people on this site can be. You have every right to disagree with David, but when you take it to this level, you just look immature. Congrats.

This CAN'T be true! David Greene says that Midtown Corridor is right around the corner! He assured the 3C "pipe dreamers" that we shouldn't fret about that line to the suburbs because actual existing density was going to get a line very soon. That assurance means that it is a real thing.

It amazes me at how rude and inconsiderate so many people on this site can be. You have every right to disagree with David, but when you take it to this level, you just look immature. Congrats.

I'm sorry that you are offended.

However, I need to point out that I'm ridiculing someone's OPINION. I'm not attacking someone as a human being. Are you familiar with formal debate and logical fallacies? Probably the biggest logical fallacy is ad hominem attack. Ridiculing someone's opinion ISN'T an ad hominem attack. If I wrote 100 words about why David Greene should be ignored because he has a stupid haircut, it would be an ad hominem attack which would expose my comment as a logical fallacy. Also, David Greene may have an amazing hairstyle, I've never met him but I am familiar with his philosophy on transit with is the subject of debate on a forum site dedicated to transportation in the "Twin Cities" metro area.

In case you are interested, go back through this thread and see that I've thanked David Greene (and others) for caring about this city and transportation WHILE vehemently disagreeing with them on philosophy.

3A vs 3C has been argued (ad nauseum) and 3C lost. However, David Greene keeps talking about "equity" for the north side as major support for his argument for 3A. Minor support was that Bottineau would serve the denser parts of the north side so we shouldn't worry about the alignment of SWLRT. Now we see that the "leading contender" for Bottineau appears to be doing the SAME thing that 3A does - create the fastest possible path from the outer reaches to downtown while barreling through right of ways that have little to no density with a few stops on the north side to tamp down argument from north Minneapolis. Who could have foreseen such a plan for Bottineau? Myself and others predicted that 3A would set a dangerous precedent for light rail that primarily serves the suburbs and we are already seeing evidence of that with Bottineau.

David Greene also characterized the "Midtown Corridor" streetcar as being virtually imminent to serve the density in Uptown. I stand by my position that Midtown Corridor isn't going to happen for quite some time (10 years + ?) and any suggestion otherwise should be subject to ridicule.

Feel free to ridicule MY position, I won't be offended.

3C hasn't lost until there's shovels in the ground! (joking . . . mostly)

However, I need to point out that I'm ridiculing someone's OPINION.
...
Feel free to ridicule MY position, I won't be offended.

Why must we ridicule ANYONE's opinion? How about we just stick to reasoned debate and dial back the snark/sarcasm meters a bit.

"Let's dial back the sarcasm"

::rolls eyes

Who could have foreseen such a plan for Bottineau?

Pretty much anyone paying attention. There are plenty of Northsiders happy with the plan. Others, not so much. Please stop lumping all Northsiders into one bucket.