About those Southwest light-rail options
Posted on October 7th, 2008 – 2:03 PMBy Roadguy
A short item I put together for this morning’s paper about the three possible Southwest alignments has generated nearly 60 comments. There’s also an online poll.
19 Responses to "About those Southwest light-rail options"
Hey Roadguy,
Your link is to a photo from Dan. Funny photo, but not what you wanted to link.
Whoops! That photo is for a future post. I’ve scooped myself!
Thanks for the heads-up. The link is fixed.
What I don’t get about that poll is that “through Uptown” and “under Nicollet” are both talking about the same route. There are only two choices for routes in Minneapolis; the other choice is to do with where it goes in Eden Prairie, which is not included on the poll.
I’m cool with the non-nicollet option that goes through eden prarie — turns out the nicollet option would more than likely preclude any greenway streetcars. Leaving the option for upgrading the lake street BRT to a streetcar in existing row (but not impacting the existing paved bike/walk lane) is good policy.
Downside, it reduces the likelyhood of a 394 LRT. As northwest (bottineau) will likely use the other side of the downtown east-west tracks. It also reduces the likelyhood of north-west LRT downtown, hurting chances of a northeast LRT, too.
The online poll points out a flaw in the planning of the system that needs to be addressed soon.
Considering the SW LRT on its own, more than 50% of the respondents have picked ‘thru Uptown in Minneapolis’ - even though like Chris O says, that really is the same option as ‘under Nicollet’. This points to the fact that most people (currently 75% of respondents choosing one of those two options) think Uptown should have some form of rail transit thru to Downtown.
What the poll and the planners are failing to include in the decision making process is the potential for running a trolley down the Midtown Greenway, that would serve as a feeder line to both the SW and Hiawatha LRTs, AND the multitude of bus lines on Hennepin, Lyndale, Nicollet, Park/Portland, and Chicago. Not to mention another 6 potential trolley lines under consideration of which Hennepin & Nicollet are two!
SW LRT along the Kenilworth trail with trolley on the Greenway (that is easily converted to LRT at a future date) needs to be an option that is considered in the planning. Given the other options on the table, do we really want taxpayers making the false choice of “thru Uptown/Nicollet tunnel” or Uptown not getting service at all?
It is definitely a point I plan on making at one of the upcoming meetings. Someone needs to put this all together (LRT, trolley, BRT, HOT lanes, etc) and make the case for a full-system that can be proposed, planned, funded and built in tandem, not piece-meal. Check out Denver’s plan called FasTracks for an idea as to how a Metro plans for the entire area - not one line at a time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FasTracks
http://www.rtd-fastracks.com/main_26
The green line (aka Route 3A)on the map accompanying Roadguy’s story is the way to go.
1. Kenilworth through Minneapolis and snaking through the EP Bermuda, er Golden, Triangle. The Kenilworth corridor is much wider than the Midtown Greenway corridor allowing for the trains and the trails to better and more easily coexist.
2. It serves North Minneapolis, with two stations that would spur much needed Transit Oriented Development.
3. It connects seamlessly to the Hiawatha and Central Corridor lines, as well as to the North Star line.
4. The City of Minneapolis has plans for a Streetcar line on Nicollet which would better serve Eat Street while being much less disruptive during construction.
5. The City of Minneapolis has plans for a Midtown Greenway Streetcar line which would connect Uptown to the rail system without having to disrupt the cycling and walking trails to the same extent that a larger LRT system would require.
6. It just makes the best sense when you balance cost, service and when one looks at this question in the context of the greater regional transit system.
Agree with 3A. Matty’s reason #3 is the one I’ve been preaching the most.
An interesting tidbit in barryS’ link is the statement that LRT isn’t designed to reduce congestion, but rather to give people the option to not be stuck in it. However, I don’t see how it can’t reduce congestion at least a little when every rider equals one less car on the road and there are close to a million rides taken on the Hiawatha Line every month.
I, too, am surprised at the flawed poll. Seriously. Through Uptown = Under Nicollet.
Also, “Along the bike trails” = “direct connection with Hiawatha line”.
I also believe if folks hoping for rail through Uptown and under Nicollet understood LRT would displace potential (real) street cars that they would switch votes for adjacent to the bike trail.
The comments to the story are fantastic. It’s great to see how many people love the light rail until it adversely impacts them. The want it unless they bike on the trail and then it’s a terrible idea.
I agree with Matty and Froggie that you need to connect to the hub, making 3A or 1A the only viable options, as unfortunate as it is that it is not closer to Uptown.
Then, comparing the two southern spurs, 3 is the better option. There are more stops and more destination points.
25 years from now, when the entire system is up and running, we’ll all wonder how anybody could resist the lines at all. When was the last time someone questioned the value of the El in Chicago?
We want lines to connect to the Hiawatha/Central terminus at the Multi-Modal? How about a line parallel to 394 joined with the Bottineau line.
Lets connect Uptown to Downtown with the underground rapid-transit-grade link it deserves.
Prof S - it’s amazing that those bike trail lovers don’t seem to get that not one bike trail will be removed. Not one.
A line along 35W is much more realistic than a line along 394, Matt.
A direct line from Uptown can then feed into that.
Until then, run Southwest via Kenilworth and get the Minneapolis streetcars built.
I love it when those of us who often disagree can agree on an issue like this one. That must be a sign of some sort. I hope our decision makers are reading. . .
Barry,
FasTracks is hardly a case we should be looking to replicate. The project’s promoters low-balled the cost forecasts in order to sell the entire project to a narrow margin of voters. They are now reaping what they have sown. Since the vote was approved, cost overruns have already appeared on the order of $2-2.5 billion, in addition to some project elements already being scaled back.
They also cannot back out of their commitment to build all the lines, lest they risk revolt from the fragile coalition of governments that signed on to the plan.
Southwest must, must, MUST go through the Kenilworth corridor. That is the only way to properly serve the North Minneapolis community. We already cut them off from the rest of us with I-94 and I-394. We cannot do that again. Otherwise it’s not transportation. It’s amputation.
This is a racial justice issue.
Southwest should go through Uptown.
Minneapolis has fine urban neighborhoods, but without rapid transit. This is a no brainer in my estimation.
There are indeed advantages to linking lines together, and North Minneapolis should be served by connecting two lines to the end of the current Hiawatha line - one along the proposed Bottineau corridor and the other going out to Plymouth via the Hwy 55 corridor.
The Southwest line should come through Minneapolis via Uptown, making a truly urban transit system - eventually passing through Downtown and over the River into Northeast (another urban neighborhood that deserves high quality transit, would be served well by that transit, and would make transit work).
The social justice argument for using the SW line to take the Kenilworth alignment is weak. It will barely touch North Minneapolis - nothing compared to what a 55 line or a Bottineau line would do.
Alex B.,
Jobs, jobs, jobs. Neither Bottineau or a 55 line (which at this point is less than a fantasy) would actually take people from North Minneapolis to jobs in Eden Prairie. That’s why Southwest needs to go through the Kenilworth corridor.
Minneapolis is going to collapse if we don’t do something to address the inequity of opportunity in North Minneapolis. We cut them off from the rest of the city with I-94 and I-394. We don’t provide any convenient way for those folks to get south of I-394 on transit. It’s time we do.
This isn’t just about North Minneapolis, it’s about the whole city and ultimately the metro area. No one wants to see Minneapolis fail. Look at what’s happening in SE Michigan with the collapse of Detroit. We are headed that way unless we do something to eliminate inequity.
The Van White station would be the gateway to North Minneapolis. Bryn Mawr and Harrison are making lots of small area plans assuming that station will be there.
I should add that Bottioneau also needs to be routed through North Minneapolis to get people to jobs in Maple Grove and surrouding areas.
The thing we need to understand is that there is no one job center anymore. Jobs are everywhere. There are more jobs in the suburbs than in the core downtown areas. We need to provide access to get everyone to everywhere.
