The Green Line (Minneapolis, Bloomington, Richfield: 2013, buy, income)

[Mr. In-Between]

Yeah, they never could have gotten that one funded in a million years. The Hiawatha Corridor was the only option that had a chance of getting through.

[rogead]

A look at any successful mass transit system in the world makes a few things clear. The transit infrastructure is designed to move the greatest number of people as efficiently as possible, to the most desired destinations within the region. The system operates on a hub and spoke principal which uses the hub as a transfer point. The hub is the portion of the metro area with the highest density of employment, entertainment, and cultural destinations. The spokes travel along routes which represent the highest levels of residential density.

It is true that the hundreds of square miles which include the suburban and exurban portions of the metro area, accumulatevly offer more jobs than does Downtown Minneapolis. However, The CBD of Downtown Minneapolis has the highest density of jobs of any location in the entire metropolitan area--and it's not even close--the most job intensive portions of Downtown St Paul, The U of M, and the MOA each have about one quarter to one third of that job density. Outlying suburban regions have only a fraction of that density. That's why a transit or commuting pattern map of the metro area is focused on Downtown Minneapolis, with secondary emphasis on The MOA/Airport and Downtown St Paul.

As for residential density, The Green Line route will travel through, and adjacent to, the most densely populated census tracts in the metro area. The option of being able to travel to either downtown and to The U of M without need of a vehicle will allow for greater job opportunities, even as it lessens the burden on some of the most heavily travelled roads in the metro area.

In every metropolitan area there are individuals who have a derogatory and/or dismissive attitude towards the central city itself. There certainly are those here who have little if anything good to say about Minneapolis. However, the fact remains that Downtown Minneapolis is the engine that drives this metropolitan area, the state of Minnesota, and indeed most of The Upper Midwest. This is where the greatest density of destination points exist within the region.

[golfgal]

The second most dense job cluster in the TC is the 494 stretch from Bloomington to Edina. That 5 miles stretch of road has 150,000 jobs. Add in Eden Prairie and you add another 50,000 jobs to that figure and go the other way to Eagan and there is another 50,000 jobs....so, how again is Minneapolis the "center" of the universe?

http://stats.metc.state.mn.us/stats/...ent_MS2010.pdf

[Thedosius]

Originally Posted by golfgal

....so, how again is Minneapolis the "center" of the universe?

I missed the part where someone called Minneapolis the center of the universe.

Originally Posted by rogead

In every metropolitan area there are individuals who have a derogatory and/or dismissive attitude towards the central city itself. There certainly are those here who have little if anything good to say about Minneapolis.

Very nicely put and very, very true. It's just a type of bigotry, and it speaks more poorly of the bigot than the target. It's also self-defeating because this kind of thinking damages the entire region not just Minneapolis due to the economic connectedness of the entire metro area.

However, the fact remains that Downtown Minneapolis is the engine that drives this metropolitan area, the state of Minnesota, and indeed most of The Upper Midwest. This is where the greatest density of destination points exist within the region.

True, and again nicely put.

[Glenfield]

Originally Posted by Thedosius

LRT does not service a small percentage of the population.

Recent events in Atlanta show the potential for disaster facilitated by "uni-modal" transportation. LRT is part of a network and it removes a small portion of users from the freeways. That small portion of users lessen incidents of saturation and gridlock that does not just impact Minneapolis. And though that portion is small, it is like the weight of an orange added to one side of a balanced teeter-totter- the actual weight is small but the impact is dramatic. And there is a watershed threshold of "busy but flowing" and "gridlocked" when it comes to freeway traffic.

Your thinking on this matter is very parochial and extremely short-sighted. It's like saying that the FAA should not improve service at Chicago O'Hare because that would only benefit Chicago. Since transportation is inherently a network, making the nodes work better makes the entire system work better. This is why flight delays in Chicago can impact people catching flights in LA, or free-flowing traffic on the other end of the metro impacts your commute.

Though it is true that far more business activity takes place in the suburbs, the single largest cluster of business activity is in downtown Minneapolis. You can take a 45 minute walk around 10% of Minnesota's gross state product in downtown Minneapolis. Suburban business is more scattered and less concentrated, and so is traffic to it. Even so, encouraging more "business nodes" serviced by mass transit in the suburbs would be of benefit to us all because the NETWORK of traffic is becoming ever more saturated and ever more likely to bog down. Bogged down traffic costs money. That 10% of the states GSP is impacted by traffic issues, and the state's GSP does impact you, though it is not a direct impact and takes broader and far-sighted thinking to perceive that.

If you have never ridden LRT once but live in Minnesota, LRT benefits you. That's part of the reason the business community (including the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce) split with Governor Pawlenty to push for transit-heavy traffic infrastructure several years back. Business understands that a smooth-flowing network requires smooth-flowing access to the major nodes of that network, and that our region competes in part on our infrastructure. We're behind our competitors, unfortunately, in our transit infrastructure in large part due to our (hopefully past) parochial and short-sighted approach to it. We need to change, and I'm happy to report that I believe we are changing in a positive direction.

This is a very well thought out and written post. I have never fancied myself a LRT proponent, thinking the cost was too high for the number of riders and when compared to buses as a mass transit alternative. But your argument about diversifying the transit system is a good one, and while I can't say I'm completely sold, it certainly is a reasonable way to look at the situation. Thank you.

[Thedosius]

Originally Posted by Glenfield

This is a very well thought out and written post. I have never fancied myself a LRT proponent, thinking the cost was too high for the number of riders and when compared to buses as a mass transit alternative. But your argument about diversifying the transit system is a good one, and while I can't say I'm completely sold, it certainly is a reasonable way to look at the situation. Thank you.

No- thank YOU. I don't need everyone to agree with me and I respect disagreement. I don't respect dismissal. You respect what I say but disagree and that's perfectly valid. That kind of attitude makes for good discussion and helps foster an environment where we can learn from each other.

[golfgal]

Originally Posted by Thedosius

No- thank YOU. I don't need everyone to agree with me and I respect disagreement. I don't respect dismissal. You respect what I say but disagree and that's perfectly valid. That kind of attitude makes for good discussion and helps foster an environment where we can learn from each other.

Interesting.....

[Mr. In-Between]

Originally Posted by Glenfield

This is a very well thought out and written post. I have never fancied myself a LRT proponent, thinking the cost was too high for the number of riders and when compared to buses as a mass transit alternative. But your argument about diversifying the transit system is a good one, and while I can't say I'm completely sold, it certainly is a reasonable way to look at the situation. Thank you.

This is pretty close to where I come down on the subject, as well. I've never been a big fan of light rail or commuter rail, but over the years, the arguments have become persuasive enough that I'm willing to accept that it's probably a necessary evil. A solution that's perhaps not quite as bad as the alternatives. And that's about as much of a fan of it as I'm ever going to be.

I'm curious, though... from reading Golfgal's posts, I begin to wonder if a line from, say, the MOA to Eden Prairie along the 494 corridor would someday be a logical extension of the system. Acquisition costs for some of the stations would be high, but if they could use the freeway right-of-way for much of the rail line, that might make it comparatively economical.

[Glenfield]

Originally Posted by Albert_The_Crocodile

This is pretty close to where I come down on the subject, as well. I've never been a big fan of light rail or commuter rail, but over the years, the arguments have become persuasive enough that I'm willing to accept that it's probably a necessary evil. A solution that's perhaps not quite as bad as the alternatives. And that's about as much of a fan of it as I'm ever going to be.

I'm curious, though... from reading Golfgal's posts, I begin to wonder if a line from, say, the MOA to Eden Prairie along the 494 corridor would someday be a logical extension of the system. Acquisition costs for some of the stations would be high, but if they could use the freeway right-of-way for much of the rail line, that might make it comparatively economical.

It past threads, the argument against rail along the 494/694 loop has been that while riders could drive to a park and ride at the starting point, the fact that the businesses are spread out and surrounded by parking lots would make foot travel from the station at the end to the rider's place of employment impractical, especially in the winter. And experience with feeder buses and BRT is that they take too long and people won't use them.

Had the business districts in the loop been built with mass transit in mind, then LRT might have worked, but they were really designed to be accessed only be car.

[northsub]

Originally Posted by rogead

Here's a story and a map which looks at the value (as opposed to the cost) of urban mobility. The example in this story assesses The Minneapolis/St Paul Metro Area in regards to the number of jobs that can be reached within half an hour via public transit. This is, of course, exclusive of the upcoming Green Line.

This Map Wants to Change How You Think About Your Commute - Emily Badger - The Atlantic Cities

Any idea what the yellow area is referring to? "bus frequency was significantly increased along a particular line"