Skip to Content

Support MinnPost

David Greene

Minneapolis, MN
Commenter for
4 years 24 weeks

Recent Comments

Yes and no. Cost was one factor.

The bigger factor is that Kenilworth is a better route for Minneapolis.

Why don't you ask the people that actually live there?

I'm sick and tired of all kinds of people purporting to speak for Northside residents. Why don't you go and *ask* them if they'll use it? Because I can assure you, they will say "yes!"

I don't know your background Rich but it is beyond infuriating that relatively wealthy white southwest Minneapolis residents assume they know what is best for Northsiders.

Paul, the stations serving North Minneapolis are not in the Kenilworth corridor. There are no tunnels there.

By law, ridership projections cannot include proposed development for an area. The areas around Penn, Van White and Royalston are ripe for redevelopment, which is one of the reason Near North residents want the line. They know the economic boost it could bring all along Glenwood and elsewhere. Google the Basset Creek Valley Master Plan to see what the neighborhoods have envisioned. We have an incredible opportunity to transform an area of poverty and lift up residents to become an area...

SWLRT will interline with the Green Line. That's why it's called the "Green Line Extension." It will go to exactly the same downtown stops as the Green Line. It will also go to the U of M and St. Paul.

There are lots of good jobs in walking distance from SWLRT stations. Beltline, Wooddale, Blake, Downtown Hopkins, Opus, Golden Triangle, Town Center and Southwest Station all have walkable jobs in the area. It's easier some places than others but all have jobs in walking distance...

Posted on 02/03/14 at 12:11 pm in response to Southwest rail report seeks pathway to overcome impasse

It is very hard to tell what the proposal is from the report, so I have no insight. Hopefully we'll learn more at the CAC/BAC meeting tonight.

Posted on 01/28/14 at 05:06 pm in response to Met Council takes on metro-area’s inequality

> Nowhere in the piece do I see a commitment to the underlying problem of why a person is so poor that
> he/she cannot provide for their family or finds themself in the middle of the lake.

That is exactly what equity-based solutions get at.

Or are you of the belief that people are in the middle of the lake solely due to their own fault?

Posted on 01/29/14 at 10:32 pm in response to Met Council takes on metro-area’s inequality

We have the data and we know some of the solutions. We just need the will to implement them.

And I know well the difference between equality and equity, thank you very much. That's why I used the word "equity."

Outcomes matter. While outcomes don't need to be the same, they do need to reflect equal opportunity. Our well-documented outcomes clearly demonstrate we have a system based on inequity.

Some solutions that we have so far been unable to implement:


Posted on 01/14/14 at 11:21 am in response to Southwest LRT’s path hung up by two intractable positions

An Uptown alignment isn't viable for several reasons.

- The ridership is not significantly higher
- It costs $150 million more than even tunnels in Kenilworth
- It would be hugely disruptive to the Greenway and Nicollet Ave (no on-street parking, for example)
- It would impact more historic properties
- Trip times would be longer

It's not that "new" transit riders is the benchmark. It's the fact that because the existing bus network in Uptown has...