Decide Southwest commuter route

  • Article by: GAIL DORFMAN
  • Updated: August 6, 2013 - 6:55 PM

Southwest light rail has been studied for years. More delay would be a mistake.

  • 38
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
copper88Aug. 6, 13 8:46 PM

This is a fabricated issue. Just move the bike and running trail down the Dean Parkway which is about a block east of the LRT corridor and be done with it. There is no reason to even talk about the other options. If any tunnels are to be built, build them downtown where they are needed. Building them out in the woods is a waste of resources.

36
10
bleavitAug. 6, 13 9:01 PM

If Ms. Dorfman still thinks that running freight trains up the proposed incline along the Bass Lake Spur and around three turns adjacent to SLP high school is a safe and viable route then she is the only one. I thank G-d for the folks at Safety in the Park and the TC&W for all they have done to keep SLP safe.

27
4
DLBabatzAug. 6, 13 9:26 PM

As this letter from Gail Dorfman states, SLP has always said they would only accept the freight re-route if A) there was no feasible co-location option, and B) certain mitigation was funded by the project and not by local SLP funds. In the final 8 proposed options from the Met Council, there are 6 feasible co-location options. Albeit there are critics of each of those 6. The Met Council's last proposal for the re-route does not address the mitigation requirements of SLP if any of the 2 re-route options are selected. Therefore, it is right for the City of St Louis Park and the residents to oppose both of the current re-route options, and support any/all the current co-location options. Lets keep this project going with one of the cost effective co-location options.

23
3
davedvergAug. 6, 13 9:34 PM

Engaging the community is something that has been lacking in this project all along. The community has been ignored and kept from key meetings in order for this boondogle to move forward. No surprise that Gail is looking out for her own interests and forgetting the interests of those she used to serve.

24
15
aarghmebuckoAug. 6, 13 9:47 PM

Or you could do the cheap option and keep the rail and LRT at grade in the original corridor and either buy out condos, move the trail, or relax the distance requirements and accommodate all three. Nah - better to build a $300 million subway in the one place where a subway doesn't make sense. I feel for the planners on this project, as it appears that most of the big decisions are being (or have already been made) by politicians over a glass of merlot.

24
4
DLBabatzAug. 6, 1310:00 PM

Let's be clear. The Kenilworth corridor is not parkland, but rather a rail corridor. Years ago, the Hennepin County Railroad Authority purchased the corridor to preserve it as a rail corridor, not parkland. It wasn’t “Hennepin County Parks” (now Three Rivers Parks) that purchased the corridor. Yes, a portion of the corridor was loaned to put a bike trail on it, but it never became parkland. I ride my bike through the corridor often. It is clear to me that there is enough right of way to support both its primary purpose, freight and LRT and to support the bike trail. But let us be clear that the bike trail, as much as we all enjoy using it, is a secondary use for this rail corridor. It is a rail corridor first. While there are critics of co-location, the Met Council has demonstrated that there are 6 feasible co-location options. Four of them are less expensive than both of the freight re-location options.

33
5
cjkmyersAug. 6, 1310:42 PM

FULL DISCLOSURE: My house is adjacent to the tracks where the freight train would be rerouted. My children attend the school adjacent to the school playground that would be razed for a twenty-foot wall on which they would place the train amplifying the sound as the train travels through St. Louis Park. My children attend swimming lessons in the pool that will be within feet of the wall. They utilize the athletic fields which will be separated from their school by the freight train wall. I run each morning past the homes and businesses that will be razed to make way for NEW CONSTRUCTION OF A TRACK. I also run and bike the trails in Kenniworth. FULL DISCLOUSRE: Ms. Dorfman failed to mention that she served St. Louis Park in the 90’s as both a city council member and MAYOR. WHY? Did she receive kickbacks? Did she receive votes for Hennepin County Commissioner from the residents of Mlps with a promise to take the freight train out of the FREIGHT COORIDOR and run it through the heart of the city for which she was responsible? Ms. Dorfman, you stated that SLP agreed to run the train through the city in the 1990s provided it was done right. The people of SLP have asked for FULL DISCLOSURE and an understanding of what mitigation might look like. Neither Hennepin Cty (initial govt leader, nor MET Council (current) will commit to mitigation. YOU are supposed to be a leader in Hennepin County that represents a part of SLP. How can you report this in your counterpoint and have done nothing to aid the clause I would imagine you fought for on our behalf. Are you afraid mitigation is too expensive? Will the Feds cancel the project? I am for a comprehensive rail system done correctly and with FULL DISCLOSURE. I am for wide passages where rails and trails can coexist. I am NOT for walls. If you want to make a difference Ms. Dorfman, make sure this is “done right” for SLP and MPLS.

20
7
jms8998Aug. 6, 1310:53 PM

Pick one of the colocation options and move forward. Building a new, really long bridge incline for the train to clime, then curve onto a new 20 foot earthen berm to be built for a new railroad through the entire city, while buldozing all the homes and businesses and covering all the streets in it's path, makes more sense to you for some unknown reason. Safety is a concern, livability is concern, the unsighty effects for people left living along both sides of the 2 story wall is a concern, etc etc. Colocation makes much more sense than this nonsense, works perfectly well for other cities, and can here also. You don't have to do anything with freight like you say .. not at all .. but nice try with the propaganda in your article.

19
2
jstwondrngAug. 7, 13 1:26 AM

Dorfman has sold out her community. Obviously her "friends" in Kenwood have more influence on her then her former SLP constituents. Her election can't come soon enough.

11
4
hobie2Aug. 7, 13 1:39 AM

She missed the part that by the time the project has been inputted by everyone, the end result is like tomato soup made by a committee of cooks - it has few tomatoes and little water and is basically unpalatable... And when a project starts with a bad premise and is fed half-truths and avoids the obvious solution by wrong assumptions not even properly investigated, it ends up as a bridge to nowhere... MN light rail's biggest problem is that it is not designed for moving people - it is designed for making a statement. Thus it is out in the open, poking and probing at the flow of society - instead of not being seen and just moving people... And it lacks foresight - Unlike some modern systems, it can never be used to supplement light trucks, forever condemning trucks to fill the roadways.

12
6

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT