Now Playing: The Hiawatha Line

In my walking travels, I've seen the effect of Twins home games on our Light Rail line, coming and going.  Over Memorial Day weekend I saw some sad faces at the 46th St. Station, one a young child dutifully wearing his Twins jersey.  But the Hiawatha train that pulled up was packed, unable to take on those 10 or so passengers.  This was about an hour before the first pitch.  One had the good sense to follow me to a waiting bus.  I wonder if the others ever made it to the game, and if so, what inning.

This weekend, I took a grandchild on the Northstar, transferring to the Hiawatha.  The Twins were getting thumped by Atlanta, so we got caught in the boarding queues for the LRT.  We were packed like a cattle car, standing room only all the way to the Mall of America.  Supposedly MOA is not a Park and Ride, but experienced riders probably know that they may get shut out at the 28th Ave Station / Park and Ride further up the line.

One of my fellow upright travelers told of how it should work, like at Comiskey Park (U.S. Cellular Park now) in Chicago, home of the Chicago White Sox.  Pointing at our fancy LRT car he said, "this is just show business."  He's exactly right.  It's flashy and expensive but as a significant transportation carrier, it's insignificant.  And you can't depend on it for mission critical trips to the stadiums or the airports, not unless you leave at least an hour earlier.  It's always something with LRT, like when they let you board downtown but somehow forget to tell you that the line is closed further down where you'll find a slower though much more comfortable bus waiting to limp through the rest of the stops.

Oh but the people involved are so happy spending our money on this nonsense.  The beginnings of the Central Corridor are underway and the dreamers are already picking out prints and colors for the third line to Eden Prairie and many more after that.  And there is already talk of another blast from the past, a downtown train terminal.  I'd be amused except that the total tab for all this dreaming is at least $ 10 billion to build, billions more to subsidize, then tens of billions more to rebuild them all after their typical 30-40 year lifespan.  And of course, there's the collateral damage of displaced businesses - and a fatality a year per line.

And it's all for show as the man said.  It's like the storied cable cars of San Francisco, fun for tourists, but nothing you'd really depend on to get you somewhere on time.  OK, we have the Hiawatha.  Let it end here and strike the set.

Comments

[Hiram]

How would the economics of the LRT look if the price of gas rises substantially, making cars economically unfeasible? If that happens, will the decision to build the LRT turn out to be a good one or a bad one?

Transportation policy requires long term planning, and it's success can't be properly evaluated in terms of what's happening today but what will happen ten or twenty years from today.

[The Big Stink]

In 30 years, I've been told, LRT has to be routinely replaced - tracks, cars, rails, everything. The sad fact is, an no one inside the legislature will tell you this - LRT is a guaranteed money loser. It will require subsidies under every conceivable scenario. Now, if gas goes through the roof and the economy really flounders that means less people will have the money or the reason to ride LRT.

We would have been better off having a dedicated bus line built along that corridor. Heck, cabs might be more economical.

[Brent Metzler]

You have to start at square one. You can't have a vibrant, dependable, comprehensive light rail system without laying down the first track somewhere.

I get it, it's not enough. But it is a start and in a decade or 2 hopefully we'll have a better rail system built.

[The Big Stink]

Here's another angle: We were told businesses and high-rises would spring up all along the line. They haven't. In Portland, the legislature got so impatient with the lack of commerce happening on their lines they had the state subsidize businesses to relocate there - to the tune of almost as much as the rail line itself. Now they have a lot of struggling businesses along their light rail line with owners who keep their doors open because of state handouts. So much for the "multiplier" effect.

[Hiram]

"In 30 years, I've been told, LRT has to be routinely replaced - tracks, cars, rails, everything."

All forms of transportation have to be maintained. In this case, it seems the railroad cars last considerably longer than the average family vehicle.

[The Big Stink]

So, then, every 30 years you have to throw another billion at it? Wasn't a talking point when it was built, was it? Somehow, the LRT cartel and the media overlooked that little detail.

[Hiram]

I would like to think maintenance would be conducted on a continuing basis. I think the fact that the LRT, like any railroad system, like any road, would have to maintained was the sort of thing to obvious to be mentioned.

[The Big Stink]

Look at any other LRT line. According to the expert I heard on Hugh Hewitt, every 30 years they have to gut it or trains start falling off tracks.

[Speed Gibson]

I believe the grand design has 7 lines. So, we'd have to rebuild one every 4-5 years, at least $200 million a year average + at least $100 million in operating subsidies. We could rebuild a lot of aging school buildings for that, even sneak in a Vikings stadium.

[Speed Gibson]

And this is mega millions for show business and about as needed as the Shubert Theater.

[Brent M]

Over 30 years it could cost a typical driver over $200,000 in vehicle related costs.

Average daily ridership for the Hiawatha line in 2008 was reported to be 30,000. If we can get 30,000 drivers out of their vehicle and to their jobs, and shopping and entertainment, over 30 years, $200,000 per rider turns out to be $7 billion dollers.

Not too bad a tradeoff for a small $300 annual investment. And a generous reduction in CO2 emissions.

Undoubtedly the ridership numbers will continue to rise, especially as new lines are completed and operational. And it will also spur more development along the new lines as well as the development that has already ocurred around the hiawatha line.

[Speed Gibson]

That $200k for 30 years includes a lot of transportation that LRT will never provide, like vacations, hauling kids to events, grocery shopping, etc. As I pointed out, you cannot even rely on LRT for sporting events where it actually goes. You get to Target Field or back on their timetable, if you get there at all, very likely standing all the way.

Plus - in our climate - let's look at the increased health care costs of LRT, from extra exposure to heat and cold and rain walking and waiting for it. Oh, and the slips and falls on icy sidewalks, too. And the increased risk of being shot or mugged. These costs can be documented far more than second hand smoke and we outlawed that. Clearly, we must outlaw LRT as well.

[The Big Stink]

No study conducted has indicated there is, in any metro area, a substantive reduction in traffic. Most of the 30,000 you cite would take the bus if the train weren't an option. Not many would drive. These are people who A) don't have cars, B) can't afford to park downtown or C) don't want to fight traffic. For them it's a cost-effective option. Many (most?) of them drive to depots to take the train. Buses aren't as sexy as trains, but their purposes are the same. For the life of me I can't understand why some consider a static rail line preferable to a moveable bus route.

[Brent]

You know, my family has 2 vehicles. I'm pretty sure I'm not unusual in that regard. One minivan that hauls the family around and subcompact that does nothing more than make the trip back and forth to the office.

It is the subcompact that could be replaced by mass transit, not as you suggest, the family vehicle. Which, as you point out, has a functional use as well at this point of time.

[The Big Stink]

Brent: You have the freedom to own two cars. It is predicated on ECONOMIC freedom. If you make everyone pay for public transit only a fraction of people use, you are incrementally eroding other people's economic freedoms. Since the envioronmental argument is based on wishful thinking and interpretive numbers, one might assume the drive for LRT is actually a smokescreen for government (read: unions) to grow their fiefdoms.

[Bmetzler]

Um, no, you only have the freedom to own 2 cars if you have the wealth to afford 2 cars.

Having ECONOMIC freedom does not equal having wealth. There could be economic freedom and you could still be as poor as dirt. And what then?

The secret is that I didn't always have 2 vehicles. For over 2 years in 2007 through 2009 I could only afford one vehicle and regularly took the bus to the office. I *had* economic freedom, but that didn't mean I had the ability to get to the office without public transportation.

It was only an unexpected set of situations that I ended up having 2 vehicles and as you can probably imagine, but transportation costs are much higher now then when I was able to use mass transit. (well, I could still use mass transit, and do for some things, but it is awkward to be paying for a vehicle anyways, and not using it)

If I could, I would choose mass transit over a 2nd vehicle again. Also as you said a number of riders already depend on mass transit for their transportation needs. If we were to stop making "everyone pay for public transit only a fraction of people use" what would those people do?

4 years ago, before I personally was dependent on mass transit I probably had similar feeling as you with regard to public transportation. If they can't afford a car, that's their problem, forget about them. Now I know that it's not their problem it is society's problem. The ability to access dependable transportation should be a basic right of society.

Not only should we be investing in mass transit as a fundamental asset to the community but the government should also be encouraging people to choose mass transit over driving alone for the many benefits mess transit provides.

Now that I have experienced the need for having mass transit myself, I am a member of the Transit for Livable Communities, and in addition to that I will vote in November for candidates that support an increased investment in mass transit.

[Hiram]

But freedom is something we trade on occasion for benefits. That's what contracts do. We all benefit from roads, whether we use that particular road or not.

[The Big Stink]

Your desire for benefits end when they reach into my wallet without my consent, my friend. Freedom is not the ability to get what you want simply because it's what is best for your constituency. The Constitution is supposed to guard against that.