Tag Archives: lrt

$70 million needed for freight rail interchange not accounted for in Southwest LRT alternatives evaluation

Posted on by
7

MNDOT says that in order to accommodate the proposed alignment of the Southwest LRT line in the Kenilworth corridor, which currently includes a freight rail line, a $70 million rail interchange would need to be constructed in Saint Louis Park to reroute freight trains.  From the Strib:

The new [freight] connection is under study because the Kenilworth corridor is part of the route selected for the proposed southwest light-rail line between Minneapolis and Eden Prairie.

Hennepin County, which owns the Kenilworth corridor, says pinch points along the route — between Cedar Lake and Lake of the Isles — do not leave space for both freight and light rail. The county has planned the light-rail line assuming the freight tracks would be moved.

The County may have planned the line this way, but it didn’t include these costs in the capital cost estimates for the 3A route.  This is from the Locally Preferred Alternative Evaluation Documents, Technical Memo #7A – Capital Costs:

Freight Rail Modifications – Modifications to freight rail operations were not separately quantified in the LRT alternative cost estimates. The relocation of TC&W near Louisiana Avenue is not considered a cost of any LRT alternative in this project. Minor shoofly alignments associated with bridge construction are included in the cost of the bridge in this estimate.

I assume this means that none of these costs made it into the Draft EIS which is under review by the Federal Transit Administration.

Train in the Woods

Posted on by
7

The Minneapolis Station Area Strategic Planning Document for the Southwest Transitway is a pretty good piece of analysis.  It lays out the existing conditions at each of the five station locations, including barriers to pedestrian access and other details of urban form important to transit-oriented development.  It provides what seem to be realistic recommendations for opening-day improvements, as well as hypothetical build-out scenarios for transit-oriented development around the stations.

While I disagree with some of the specific design elements (low-density, over-parked development at Royalston, bike trail intersecting with pedestrian realm at Van White), I realize those details are all likely far from finalized, and overall I think the document is a great jumping-off point to decide where public investment is needed, how regulation might need to change, and what questions still need answering.  It provides details where there used to be few, and that moves the line one step closer to successful implementation.

What the plan illustrates that frustrates me so much, is how inappropriate the routing decision for the Southwest LRT line through Minneapolis really is.

Continue reading →

Could new FTA “livability” funding rules change Southwest LRT route?

Posted on by
10

The two alignment choices in Minneapolis

The big news this week is that the planned Central Corridor LRT line will get three new stations between Minneapolis and Saint Paul, and the reason seems to be the new FTA rules which relax the sole focus on cost-effectiveness from travel time savings to include broader goals of “livability“.  With the three new stations, the project would not have met a “medium” rating for cost-effectiveness, and therefore would not likely not have been funded by the FTA under the old rules.

What implication might this have for the planned Southwest LRT line and its contested route?  It’s hard to say, but it certainly seems like the alternative routes should be re-assessed under the new formula before telling the feds that 3A is the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA).  More below the break.

Continue reading →

Creating Real Transity Improvements in Uptown Part 2: The Potential of Arterial BRT

Posted on by
7
Kansas City MAX Station. That's a nice bus stop.

Kansas City MAX Station. That's a nice bus stop.

In a previous post, I promised some insight into creating substantial transit improvements in the Uptown/LynLake areas of Minneapolis now that LRT is basically off the table.  In what is hopefully the first in a series of guest posts by different transit experts, I’ve asked a Metro Transit planner who is involved in transitway planning throughout the region to give his (or her) insight.  As our guest will reiterate, the opinions seen here are personal (although professionally informed) and do not represent the opinions of Metro Transit.

As a reminder, I’ve asked our guest to limit the response to improvements that could really be implemented, and are not wildly expensive or politically infeasible. And, of course, ideally these improvements should have the potential to significantly increase ridership and make the overall transit experience in the area better.


First I’ll thank Brendon for the opportunity to contribute to this excellent blog. Net Density does a great job offering posts that are understandable and approachable, but also of sound technical merit and well-reasoned professional planning. I will aspire to match these qualities in my post.

Second, I will note that the information contained in this post is meant only to advance the transportation planning professional discourse. It is my own work, and does not necessarily reflect the policies of my employer.

Introduction

Many residents of Minneapolis neighborhoods, and those in the planning community were frustrated by the HCRRA decision to pursue Southwest LRT on route 3A, via Kenilworth corridor. Given the current greater density and increased transit usage along Lake Street, Hennepin, and Nicollet, many came away with a desire for rapid, high quality transit improvements. This post does not revisit the many, justified reasons for 3A. Instead, it focuses on the many, justified reasons for transit improvements in several additional corridors in Minneapolis and St. Paul.

High quality improvements are warranted in south Minneapolis. In this post, I will respond to Brendon’s request to detail planned improvements. I’ll also point to other regions’ experiences with realistic, implementable investments in transit speed and quality.

Continue reading →

Southwest LRT Policy Advisory Committee recommends Route 3A

Posted on by
2
kenilworthviaduct.jpeg

Some pedestrian-friendly development along Route 3A

On Wednesday, the Policy Advisory Committee for the Southwest LRT project voted to recommend Route 3A, also known as the Kenilworth Alignment.  Ralph Remington, Minneapolis City Council member representing southwest Minneapolis, was the only dissenting vote.

Remington said the average daily ridership formula the Federal Transit Administration uses to approve rail projects favors suburban rail lines over those serving the inner city because it doesn’t count weekend ridership or trips to special events like Twins or Vikings games.

“I think the formula is flawed,” Remington said. ” I still believe the greater number of citizens in Minneapolis are not being served” by the chosen route.

Without a rail link, the citizens of Uptown and southwest Minneapolis will be disconnected from the rest of the rail system, Remington said.

Train Brian iPhone app tells you when the next Hiawatha train is coming

Posted on by
Reply

tb_screenshot1

Even though the Twin Cities only has one LRT line, it already has an iPhone app to tell you where the nearest station is and when the next train is coming.  Train Brain was developed by Andy Atkinson and sells for $1.99 on iTunes store.  Minnpost has a write up on the application and the summary of an interview with Andy.  I concur with the author, Metro Transit should buy this application, or maybe better, hire Andy to build a full system app.

To be fair, Metro Transit has it’s own trip planning tool, NexTrip, that is accessible with an iPhone or other mobile device.  But it is not location- or time-aware.  The first thing you have to do is scroll through hundreds of routes to find yours, not easy or quick on a mobile device.

Target Field light rail station will be crowded

Posted on by
8
image CC licensed by flickr user dgwallick1

image CC licensed by flickr user dgwallick1

Way back in July I toured Target Field as part of a Sensible Land Use Coalition event.  Overall I was very impressed with the future home of the Twins (how can you not play baseball outdoors?), especially the entrance from First Avenue and the open concourse design.

One thing I heard made me do a spit-take though.  Our tour guide said that when surveyed, 40% of fans said they would like (or plan to, I can’t remember his exact phrasing) take the train to the game.  Four-Oh percent.  Our tour guide was kinda the project manager for the County, so I assume he knows what he is talking about.

Target Field holds 40,000.  If there is a sell out, that means 16,000 people say they would ride the train.  Knowing there is a difference between what people say they will do, and what they actually do, let’s assume only 30% actually ride the train (maybe a few stay late after the game to enjoy downtown).  That means 12,000 people will stream out of target field onto 5th Street after the ninth inning.  Each three-car train can hold 360 people.  That means 34 3-car trains would be needed to move all those transit-hungry baseball fans out of downtown.  If there is a 5 minute headway between trains that is 2 hours and 50 minutes.  If they somehow increase that to 2 minutes between trains it is an hour and 8 minutes.

The consultant that did the transportation demand management plan had a nifty simulation showing people streaming out of the stadium, and she said it could be done, but I still don’t understand how you can overcome the math.  Either people will soon realize that the train is too crowded (or, more accurately, the wait is too long) and move to other modes, or Met Transit has some tricks up its sleeve to quickly move all those people.

Southwest Transitway Open House – Why I’m Still For 3C

Posted on by
7
Basically a bus.

Basically a bus.

I left Thursday’s Southwest Transitway open house in Minneapolis with a better understanding of the benefits of route 3A, and also the methodology by which the consultants have identified that as the “best” route.  However, I remain unconvinced that 3A is the best alternative, for a few reasons, including reasons that are not considered during the LPA decision-making process (but maybe should be). After the break, I’ll start with reasons that the FTA cares about.

Continue reading →

The Transport Politic sums it all up

Posted on by
3

Yonah Freemark at the Transport Politic has written an indispensable summary of the Southwest LRT routing alternatives. This is the post I wish I had written, plus his maps are prettier than mine!  His take on the FTA ridership accounting rules is especially interesting.

If you haven’t read it, go there now and arm yourself with talking points before you hit one of the open houses.