The latest proposals to route a light rail thru Minneapolis and its inner suburbs was put back under study last week as no one wants either the light rail or the re-routed freight trains thru their neighborhoods. The study committee proposed shallow tunnels thru Minneapolis so that existing freight trains and bike trails could be maintained. Unfortunately, that boosted the price to $1.5B (plus). I don't know what these suburbs want, but our inner ring suburbs are dying as roads slowly expand to eat all their taxable property. But the suburbs don't want the freight trains and the cities don't want the light rail.
Recent studies have shown that our existing light rail (which took 30 years to get built) has attracted very significant housing and development. Too bad the suburbs affected by the Southwest Corridor cannot see the benefits of getting this project done.
The metro council committee voted for the shallow tunnel through Minneapolis, but there are doubts that St. Louis Park and Minneapolis will approve the plans. State law requires that towns affected approve the plans. Why isn't that the law for roads? Cities always approve roads for fear that the Department of Transportation will not approve other expenditures to maintain their roads.
Everyone wants light rail -- just through someone else's backyard.
Americans are frightened of change. I don't care what project you propose, the NIMBYs and BANANAs will come out of the woodwork like cockroaches and drive the cost into the stratosphere with law suits and hearings and studies all the while screaming about their property values. It doesn't matter if it's a road, a freeway exit, a rail project, a department store, a new drive up window, etc. You cannot make NIMBYs happy, you have to eventually just run over them or nothing will ever get built.
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
Ultimately, light rail is designed to serve the people who live near the route. It is a different matter than the other examples, because it isn't involved in interstate commerce. I believe it serves no purpose to dismiss this as NIMBYism. There are two sides (at least) and both have valid arguments. it is far better to find common ground.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Certainly it's better to find common ground, it always is. The problem is so much of NIMBY-ism amounts to "I've got mine, and to hell with you!"
The Twin Cities and Western is the railroad whose access to the BNSF main line will be affected by the light rail corridor. They just released a report listing the economics of their customers. This report is to justify expenditure of funds to reroute TCW and not lose this valuable transportation resource.
And the suburb affected by rerouting TCW just lost houses and commercial properties in the most recent upgrade of Interstate 394. No complaints; just folks taking their generous buy-outs and leaving.
Firelock76 Certainly it's better to find common ground, it always is. The problem is so much of NIMBY-ism amounts to "I've got mine, and to hell with you!"
Perhaps the TC light rail folks need to see how Portland did it. There, living near the rail is considered desirable by the residents. Perhaps they had more input and didn't feel like it was shoved down their throats.
There does seem to be a double standard that operates in relation to this. When residents complain about increased traffic and noise on a freight line, the Nimby's are told, "Shut up. The railroad was there first." But when you want to add new rail ROW, it doesn't matter that the Nimby's were there first.
To negotiate, you have a facilitator put each party in the other guy's shoes. Otherwise it is just folks shouting.
The mayor is in his last term and lives too close to the proposed line. His neighbors are all millionaires and he doesn't want to have to live with them if he votes for a blue collar light rail through their neighborhood.
This will be very interesting. The first light rail (downtown Minneapolis to the airport) took 40 years to build. The next to St.Paul took 10 years. It will be interesting to see how long it takes to settle this.
Cannot the freight railroad and light rail share the existing RofW? Is there no way it can be widened to accomodate three or four tracks?
The TCW line runs through the wealthiest part of town. That rail corridor is already rail and a trail. Many Minneapolis houses would have to be bought to widen it. One proposal was to put the light rail in a tunnel under all of this but that would add $300M. There is another rail line (ex Minneapolis Northfield and Southern) that passes over the TCW but it is a very lightly traveled line that the CP takes a couple cars down to Bloomington every day. To reroute the TCW over MNS would route large trains over a line that weaves thru the neighborhoods and very near the high school. The TCW wants much of that line straightened out which would also take many homes. This would be the ideal option for the light rail, but who knows how this will be settled. See www.swlrt.org
The best answer would be for all three to share a trench, three tracks if one can accomodate all freight, otherwise four. Might take some houses but leave the community better off than continuing anything on grade.
Not enough space between the housing along that line. That would be 1 trail, 1 rail and two light rails. The regional commission voted OK, but still needs individual approval of the suburbs and Minneapolis. Won't happen.
FWIW, San Diego light rail shares tracks with a freight operation. Separation is by time; the freights run only at night after the light rail has quit.
Don M.
I really don't see the "Hassle" in all this.
1. The "rails to trails" system was to preserve the ROW in case of future needs/use. (unless I have this mixed up with "rail Banking") In this case, "the needs of the many, should take precedence over the needs of the few".
I mention this because the ROW for the M&St.L parallels the TC&W from Hopkins to West lake st. There's sufficient room to construct a light rail , allow for the TC&W 's ROW, and EVEN ride a bike or two along it. (AND,there are no really notable areas to claim NIMBY)
The TC&W's ROW is sufficient to allow a parallel ROW for Light Rail, from Hopkins to Minnetonka (Nee Glen Lake.), and further , to Victoria & more
2. The suggestion to use the MN&S ROW by the TC&W, is kinda "dumb" It probably would be feasible for a streetcar, but not a freight railroad. However, what's wrong with routing the light rail over it?
3.Is there something wrong with re-occupying the " trench" that extends from Lake of the Isles to Hiawatha, and to the Mississippi.? In Milwaukee days it was double tracked, but I doubt that would be necessary given TC&W's current traffic load. Back in the day, I don't think anyone fussed about freights running over that route.
The vote on a route was just delayed for "at least 3 months" as alternative routes are studied. Add another couple of hundred million to the cost and another year of haggling. All of your suggestions are great, but there is not enough room on the existing ROW to accommodate 3 rails and a trail. And once a trail is created it is nearly impossible to reroute.
An alternative would be to take the line east from the Lake Calhoun area to the existing Hiawatha "Blue Line". This would add nearly 15 miles to the route and overload an already busy light rail line.
Re: the TC&W ROW- There was (in days gone by), enough room for 2- 2 track RR's , and room for a path too.As for the bike path, my earlier comment on the needs of the few...........still holds I'm getting my info from GOOGLE Earth.
Use of the" Trench" that parallels Lake St. would be a win-win for everyone, as it would give TC&W the potential for better interchange w/ BNSF , & perhaps CP & UP. In that case, the light rail could go as planned to the terminal. Major costs would be laying of track in the trench, & crossings @ grade at Hiawatha ave. The track connection would be at Midway for interchange.
One other point worth considering: TC&W does not have an overwhelming level of traffic. The Milwaukee line was originally double track, triple in spots. Could be that the configuration could be 1 trk TC&W, 2 Trks Light rail, and a bike path too.
If the light rail is so good why do I a MN taxpayer have to fund it? Why not run northstar trains on the TC&W line rather than a new light rail? Why not Find a private business to run it if its so good? Or why don't they give twin cities businesses an incentive to move outstate where there is plenty of infrastructure and dying towns due to lack of jobs. The northstar and Hiawatha lines have done nothing to help with traffic congestion. driving hiawatha is worse now than b4 light rail was built and hwy 10 and i94 are still jammed in the mornings. We need outstate jobs where people want to live.
f45gnbn If the light rail is so good why do I a MN taxpayer have to fund it? Why not run northstar trains on the TC&W line rather than a new light rail? Why not Find a private business to run it if its so good? Or why don't they give twin cities businesses an incentive to move outstate where there is plenty of infrastructure and dying towns due to lack of jobs. The northstar and Hiawatha lines have done nothing to help with traffic congestion. driving hiawatha is worse now than b4 light rail was built and hwy 10 and i94 are still jammed in the mornings. We need outstate jobs where people want to live.
Because it's good for the general financial health of the community. When our light rail project was being planned, the people who oppose every publicly funded project made the exact same statements. The now operating Blue line is exceeding all the ridership projections and they are now realizing that they should have made the parking lots and station platforms larger. The rail project will not magically eliminate the traffic congestion on parallel highways, but neither will building another lane and tearing up the highway to widen it will make traffic much worse for several years.
The building boom is resuming.
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/10/10/4378397/light-rail-brings-apartment-boom.html#.UlgvqCrD_IV
Driving through South End these days is like touring one giant building site, with eight apartment and mixed-use complexes under construction and two more on the way. When the current projects are complete, they’ll add more than 1,700 apartment units to the corridor. Three others, including Fountains, have opened in the past year.
The Lynx light-rail line is the engine behind much of the construction. The recovery of the homebuilding industry is behind the timing.
...Fountains – with one-, two- and three-bedroom units renting from $950 to $1,900 – has filled 204 of its 208 units since opening at the end of May, said Proffitt Dixon managing partner Stuart Proffitt.
...The boom in residential development is expected to double the neighborhood’s population of about 3,200 by the end of 2015, Smith said. And the population growth is driving business growth: A 55,000-square-foot Publix supermarket is under construction on a 4-acre lot at 2300 South Blvd.
Why don't they just close up a route of streets and make them a light rail ROW?
Modeling the "Fargo Area Rapid Transit" in O scale 3 rail.
The whole situation sounds remarkably similar to what occurred when street railways began developing in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Everybody wanted a street railway route to serve their neighborhood but on the next street over. In Chicago around 1900 or so, the Ashland Avenue route was forced one block over onto Paulina St from about 12th St to Chicago Avenue because of the outcries of the merchants and residents on Ashland (it was a rather trendy neighborhood at the time).
I thought it was interesting that one of the issues against the line was that it would run trains next to a grade school, and some folks feared kids would get run over all the time. I went to school at a grade school (Central Elementary in Richfield MN) next to a rail line and we managed to get along without any fatalities. Both high schools in town, Richfield High and Holy Angels Academy, were/are next to the railroad too...in fact at Richfield High, the rail line runs thru the campus, between the main school buildings and the football and baseball fields.
Minneapolis City Council approved the plan on nearly the last day they could. This is the final city approval of the route and now the plan goes to the feds. My councilwoman objected because of the affect the rail line might have on our lakes and parks. The area they are most concerned is an old rail yard that is now a lightly used bike and hiking trail. Seems they prefer the traffic jam of interstate 394 built right on top of this park is far superior to actual transportation that the light rail would provide.
One wonders if the deadlines for approval should just be 2 weeks since they are approved at the last minute anyway and very few substantial changes are made in the months and years of arguing where the shrubs should be planted.
I was wrong to predict that this line would never be approved. Now how many more roadblocks will be thrown up? There is hope!
Maybe you want some line built, but it really is up to the majority of residents of the area served. You can make a feeble attempt to trivialize their opposition, but that doesn't change things just because their values are different from yours. But when all else fails, call them NIMBYs.
I watched this happen in Brookfield, WI about 20-30 years ago. Wisconsin and Southern was trying to reactivate the Brookfield, WI to Waukesha remnant of the former Milwaukee and Mississippi line that runs to Prairie Du Chien. Milwaukee Road ceased operations on it.....approx 1985, it layed dormant for 15 years and Wisconsin rail banked it. Meanwhile the suburbanites built subdivisions right up to the 150-200 ft right of way which is heavily wooded up to the track bed. As soon as Wisconsin and Southern made an application to reactivate the line.........the lawyers came out of the woodwork.
W&S had to back down as it could not afford the legal challenges. Not sure if the line was kept in the WisDOT rail bank but the rails and steel bridges were still in place the last I checked. If there is ever Milwaukee to Waukesha passenger rail service this line cuts about 7-8 miles off the other existing route via Duplainville, WI. So I am hopeful that it is still rail banked for the future at least when the lawyers can be overcome with a "what is best for the larger community" argument.
I can see some of the landowners opinion that they were sold lots and the RE agent downplayed the rail line as waiting to be torn up. OTOH, the landowners failed to do their due dilligence and the easement was clearly marked on all maps at the time they bought their homes.
It would be really sad if this cutoff to the CN line through Waukesha had to be torn up because of a very few property owners. Just the waste in diesel fuel alone to use the more dog legged Duplainville route to Waukesha makes me cringe.
Being a representative government has its disadvantages. It is not the "majority of the population" that decides on legislation. It is our representatives and they do their best to let the public voice their questions about something like this. And we call them NIMBY's because only the neighbors show up to protest. Was there a protest from the citizens of St. Paul.. No, they are benefiting from the Green line.
But the representatives listen and make decisions for us. If a few vocal detractors can drive legislative decisions, we would get no where. We have to let the system work and it does. In this case, the Metro Council found money for each of the cities along the way to bribe them into liking the line. There are still those who don't like it and perhaps there will be law suits and such. But the future is not to build more roads. Cars cannot support the transportation we need for metropolitan areas. We are building systems for safe, efficient, long distant, and permanently located corridors. I don't like that this line is going thru some parks, but that route is far superior to tearing up houses and building more freeway.
But of course the NIMBY's are back with a law suit:
http://www.kare11.com/story/news/local/2014/09/08/lawsuit-aims-to-derail-southwest-light-rail/15309379/
Argument is based on sparks from catenary catching ethanol tank cars on fire? No chance, considering the plenty of other places that light rail is close to railroad ROWs, and the fact that tank cars are commonly used on the NEC!
NIMBYs file law suits, fight the results of required impact studies, and throw as many other obstacles as possible in the way of projects. They often slow it down by years. Then, when it finally gets built over their objections, they scream about the cost overruns caused by the delays.
Phoebe Vet NIMBYs file law suits, fight the results of required impact studies, and throw as many other obstacles as possible in the way of projects. They often slow it down by years. Then, when it finally gets built over their objections, they scream about the cost overruns caused by the delays.
And after it gets built and in use for a period of time - they can't imaging living without it.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.