Minneapolis southwest LRT
The Minneapolis SWLRT line was fast tracked by the federal government years ago but is becoming bogged down in local political disputes. Yesterday Betsy Hodges, the Mayor of Minneapolis spoke out against the plan at the SWLRT Corridor Management Committee meeting but was outvoted by the suburban representatives 11-2. State law directs the Metropolitan Council to seek municipal consent of the communities that LRT lines go through, but is fuzzy on what happens if they deny it. It is possible that Minneapolis might deny municipal consent to the project.
http://www.minnpost.com/sites/defaul...tLRTMap640.png
Some history of the project:
Quote:
Southwest LRT plan is 'advanced but not endorsed'
By Brian Lambert | 10/15/13.
The Southwest LRT as of today … Pat Doyle of the Strib says: “Controversial plans for a light-rail line to the southwest suburbs were advanced but not endorsed Monday by key policymakers who withheld judgment on digging nearly a mile of tunnels in a recreational corridor of Minneapolis. The unusual decision came on the eve of talks on the project scheduled Tuesday involving Gov. Mark Dayton, Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak, Hennepin County officials, legislators and Metropolitan Council chair Susan Haigh, whose agency is planning the $1.55 billion rail line. … The decision to avoid taking a stand underscores the contentious nature of the Southwest Corridor light-rail plan, which is opposed by Rybak and some City Council members, and adds more uncertainty to the project’s future.”
But … . Steve Inman, a Minneapolis resident, argues in a Strib commentary: “I am disappointed that the Star Tribune Editorial Board, suggesting that ‘it’s time to move forward,’ has concluded that the ‘Shallow tunnel plan is best for Southwest LRT’ (Oct. 13). We’ve all grown weary of this never-ending process. However, when Metropolitan Council officials are pressed with questions on design, engineering and environmental impact, there is a striking lack of substantive information. One can only conclude that this hastily created plan has not been thoroughly studied to determine the true cost in dollars and sacrifice. … Selection of the shallow-tunnel option not only violates promises made to Minneapolis but results in precisely the type of outcome the environmental review process is designed to avoid: a single community bearing all of the negative impacts of a governmental action while accruing none of the benefits.”
http://www.minnpost.com/glean/2013/1...d-not-endorsed
|
Quote:
200+ skeptics offer blunt appraisals of Southwest Light Rail plan
By Karen Boros | 01/08/14.
They don’t like the proposed route of Southwest Light Rail through what is now recreational space.
They don’t think it serves potential Minneapolis riders.
And they said repeatedly that they don’t trust the Metropolitan Council to make wise decisions.
Those were the blunt messages from more than 200 people who filled Minneapolis’ Kenwood Recreation Center gym at the first of two public meetings planned to get input on the project.
The second meeting is Thursday at the St. Louis Park Recreation Center, where it is doubtful the messages will be much nicer.
“I am very, very late to this conversation,” said Dan Cramer of Grassroots Solutions, who was hired by the Metropolitan Council to conduct both meetings.
Large posters explaining the project surrounded half the room, with tables designated for discussion topics filling the floor space.
“There is a lot of frustration, there is a lot of anger, there is a lot of mistrust,” said Cramer, who had read transcripts of previous public meetings. “I am really sorry about that and I realize one meeting can’t change that.”
Participants divided themselves by discussion topics and spent an hour debating water quality, the light rail route through the Kenilworth Corridor, ridership by Minneapolis residents, as well as options for freight trains, tunnels and vegetation.
Their comments on freight trains and water quality will be forwarded immediately to two staff groups currently conducting studies on those topics. The groups’ work is expected to be complete by the end of the month.
Comments on all of the topics will be presented to “decision-makers” involved in the final plans for Southwest Light Rail line, which is expected to cost $1.5 billion.
“The hunger for federal money on the part of everybody in this process is trumping good planning and design,” said a representative from a freight-lines discussion table in his report.
His group said they would prefer the current three or four freight trains a day that travel through the Kenilworth Corridor to the proposed 200 light rail trains a day. The group favored moving the light rail line to St. Louis Park.
“There was distrust and fear, kind of a skepticism, of the whole process,” said a representative from a water-quality discussion group. “We are afraid of polluting and losing our lakes.”
“Most of the people at our table opposed the route completely,” she added. “There’s no room for development. Why not have the route go away from the lakes and to businesses it could help?”
A representative from the discussion group dealing with vegetation and green space drew applause from the crowd when he said: “At our table it was pointed out that the Metropolitan Council has allocated a great deal of money for suburban mitigation, close to $300 million, to move the alignment in the suburbs. Why isn’t this line serving a greater population density within Minneapolis?”
Large posters explaining the project surrounded half the room, with tables designated for discussion topics filling the floor space.
He added: “This line runs through neighborhoods that are neither dense nor have a population that would use this corridor. It is not moving people who desperately need transportation.”
The general consensus of the crowd seemed to be that routing the line through Uptown was a better alternative than sending it through the narrow strip of land between Cedar Lake and Lake of the Isles.
“Uptown has a burgeoning population,” said a woman from another discussion group. “We’d really love to see southwest neighborhoods with dense populations served by mass transit. This alignment doesn’t do that.
“This current alignment favors suburban riders over Minneapolis riders, and it was based on federal criteria under the Bush administration,” she added, pointing out that the rules have changed under President Obama and now focus on urban density.
|
Quote:
Southwest LRT proposal rumbles into ‘near-death experience’ territory
By Judy Keen | 10/25/13.
Is it time to pull the plug on the Southwest Corridor light-rail line? Or is it already unraveling in slow motion?
After more than a decade of debate, there’s still no consensus on the route, and the $1.55 billion project was postponed when Gov. Mark Dayton last week called for a delay of up to 90 days so more studies can be conducted and more alternatives considered.
The decision to kick what was an imminent vote down the road is raising questions about the project’s viability, the availability of federal funds and future political implications.
It’s not easy to discern a resolution to the dispute at the heart of the postponement.
Minneapolis opposes current plans for construction of two shallow tunnels next to freight rail and bike trails in the city’s Kenilworth corridor. Opponents say light-rail trains would be above ground for too long, disrupting bicycling and other recreational activities. Trains would emerge from tunnels to cross a bridge over a channel between Cedar Lake and Lake of the Isles.
Minneapolis has for years endorsed light rail at grade level in the Kenilworth corridor in exchange for the rerouting of its current freight-train traffic.
An alternative Southwest Corridor plan would have shifted those freight trains through St. Louis Park, making room for light-rail trains at grade. Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak preferred that option; metro leaders rejected it.
After meeting with suburban officials on Tuesday, Dayton said he wants to find a way to reach consensus among the cities that would be served by the line.
http://www.minnpost.com/politics-pol...ight-rail-plan
|
Quote:
Planners recommend shallow SW LRT tunnels and a bridge over channel
By Joe Kimball | 03/31/14.
Southwest Light Rail planners have approved a plan to build shallow tunnels under a trail and a bridge over a channel, in the latest action for the rail line that would run from downtown Minneapolis to Eden Prairie.
Minneapolis officials have opposed that portion of the plan, which now calls for "two shallow LRT tunnels to be built in the Kenilworth Corridor under the trail, with light rail trains emerging for about 20 seconds between them on a new at-grade LRT bridge over the channel between Cedar Lake and Lake of the Isles."
Planners for the Metropolitan Council said:
The recommendation preserves homes, businesses, a trail used by over a half-million pedestrians and cyclists a year through the Kenilworth neighborhood and railroad tracks used by freight trains carrying commodities for shippers in more than two dozen west-central Minnesota farming communities.
http://www.minnpost.com/political-ag...e-over-channel
|
Quote:
Latest Southwest LRT options give Minneapolis unwanted freight trains, shallow tunnels
By Karen Boros | 03/27/14.
Minneapolis appears to be getting the freight trains it didn’t want and the shallow tunnels it rejected as planning continues for the Southwest Light Rail route through the Kenilworth Corridor.
The re-routing of the freight trains through St. Louis Park no longer appears an option after the Twin Cities and Western Railroad rejected the plan, citing safety concerns.
The Southwest LRT Management Committee, which includes city officials from communities along the proposed route from Eden Prairie to the edges of downtown Minneapolis, reviewed the remaining options this week before its scheduled vote on the final proposal next Wednesday.
“We dither at our peril,” Hennepin County Commissioner Peter McLaughlin told the group Wednesday. He pointed out that the Southwest line last year was one of 10 similar projects competing for federal money.
“All but two of those have been moved forward. Southwest is one of the two that hasn’t,” said McLaughlin. “Treading water is making a decision. Treading water is costing us money, and it’s not going to advance a new transit system for this region.”
By 2015, there could be 15 projects seeking federal funding, including projects in New York, Chicago and Boston.
http://www.minnpost.com/politics-pol...-trains-shallo
|
Quote:
Hodges' dissent didn't sway Southwest LRT panel's 11-2 backing of shallow-tunnel plan
By Marlys Harris | 04/03/14.
It was a foregone conclusion that the Southwest LRT Corridor Management Committee would endorse the plan to send the proposed commuter line through shallow tunnels and over a bridge in the scenic Kenilworth Corridor between Cedar Lake and Lake of the Isles. And so it did, despite the determined opposition of Betsy Hodges, mayor of the largest and most populous municipality in the project, who insisted that the project, as constituted, was unfair to Minneapolis.
That assertion was "astounding," said Peter McLaughlin, a committee member and a Hennepin County commissioner. The line "will bring thousands and thousands of people to Minneapolis."
In previous meetings about the line, emotions had run hotter than pizza ovens, and normally calm citizens turned purple with rage. But the 150 people who came to hear the proceedings at Beth El Synagogue in St. Louis Park on Wednesday seemed somewhat dispassionate — possibly because they already knew how the vote would go. A few Kenilworth residents pleaded with Hodges to stand fast in her objections to the LRT plan. "Use every legal means at your disposal to fight this plan," directed one of her constituents.
http://www.minnpost.com/cityscape/20...ow-tunnel-plan
|
While on the face of it, it looks like opposition in Minneapolis is coming from NIMBYs in one of the state's richest and most politically connected neighborhoods; underlying that is a sense that this route was poorly planned from the beginning. It runs through some of the least dense areas of the city and does nothing to serve nearby dense areas. The alternate route that went through those denser areas was rejected because of the cost of building a tunnel for ten blocks through the south side. Now with the new tunnel through park land being proposed, the current route is almost as expensive as the rejected one and serves far fewer people.
http://3kpnuxym9k04c8ilz2quku1czd.wp...W-Density1.jpg
http://3kpnuxym9k04c8ilz2quku1czd.wp...SW-Poverty.jpg
http://3kpnuxym9k04c8ilz2quku1czd.wp...Mode-Share.jpg
If anyone is interested in the 100 plus page debate on this line at UrbanMSP, here is a link to that thread:
http://urbanmsp.com/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=5
|