Trains.com

U of MN Redux...

2017 views
7 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Saturday, April 17, 2010 7:00 AM

I think that the school served as a point man for a lot of people who wanted the light rail line built somewhere else or not at all, not unlike the Mayo Clinic in Rochester.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    October 2001
  • From: US
  • 591 posts
Posted by petitnj on Friday, April 16, 2010 8:34 PM

 Yes, the very day that the legislators were to vote to condemn the street running through the University, they (the University) agreed to the arbitrator's position that design can continue and the easement will be provided. This is an amazing case of NIMBY.

And (shhhh, don't tell anybody) wait until they discover that there is a significant increase in Ozone near the sparking overhead line. I sure hope they don't discover this.

BTW, the faculty paper proposed that the train run on batteries when passing through the University to ensure that no EMF was propagated. The EMF from the beat up Toyotas running down the avenue is 100 times more intense than that from the light rail. This street is a major thoroughfare through the campus. The Central Corridor will cut in 1/2 the number of buses running on that street. That will be nice!

 

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Friday, April 16, 2010 5:27 PM

According to trans new wire the U of MN collasped just under the threat of legislative action. Now we will see if they try to delay or stop the work otherwise. U of MN appears to be very arrogant. When is the next legislative session?i

  • Member since
    May 2009
  • 798 posts
Posted by BNSFwatcher on Thursday, April 15, 2010 2:53 PM

Why don't they rename it "University of the Holy See in Minnesota" or "University of the District of Columbia - West"?  The state pays the bills, but has no oversight?  The inmates are running the asylum!  Jeg forstar ikke!   Uff da meg da!  Slukk lyset!  Ha en fin dag!

Hays  -- Vil du ha en liten skvett akevitt?

  • Member since
    October 2001
  • From: US
  • 591 posts
Posted by petitnj on Thursday, April 15, 2010 5:47 AM

 The University of Minnesota has created a whole website with corporate speak trying to defend their position on the Central Corridor. http://www.lightrail.umn.edu/

In their press releases and videos there is not one single actual measurement or fact that shows how the light rail will affect research facilities. The only numbers are research dollars. There is a faculty report that lists attainable standards, but apparently faculty reports don't mean as much as VP press releases. The truth is that the vibrations and electromagnetic fields are too small to measure and the U is just throwing up a smoke screen. 

The real reason for this problem is that the University of Minnesota is a separate entity (not part of the State of Minnesota or the cities if Minneapolis or St. Paul). Being separate it thinks it owns the land on which it resides and thus can insist on demanding that the light rail get an easement across "its" property. Yes the state legislature doesn't have control over the University because the University is its own country. The only thing the state does is write checks to support the University. 

 This is all just a lawyer full-employment act. 

And yes the University is empty during the summer but certainly these research projects go on year-around. From the sound of the faculty reports, it appears that the Central Corridor folks have done enough to prevent interference with the nearby labs. The University is still not satisfied

The dispute has been given to arbitration as it is now starting to hold up progress on the Central Corridor. Hopefully the arbitrator will have better luck than the Central Corridor folks on satisfying the University.

 

 

 

  • Member since
    May 2009
  • 798 posts
Posted by BNSFwatcher on Wednesday, April 14, 2010 3:57 PM

Doesn't the U of MN basicly (sp?) estivate during the summer?  Would they rather have the work done when the 'academic' year is in full-swing?  No, you can't ever satisfy a NIMBY or a gopher!  Uff da! 

Hays

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Mpls/St.Paul
  • 13,892 posts
Posted by wjstix on Tuesday, April 13, 2010 4:56 PM

As I understand it, the current issue isn't even about the trains per se, but rather the need to re-route some auto traffic this summer in order to do street work as a preliminary to tracks being laid - kinda like what's being done now in downtown St.Paul.

Stix
  • Member since
    May 2009
  • 798 posts
U of MN Redux...
Posted by BNSFwatcher on Tuesday, April 13, 2010 4:11 PM

...coming up!  Should be fun.  I'll bet there are more vibrations coming out of the womens' dorms than the transit system would produce.  The NIMBYs are alive and well.

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy