The news on transit isn’t good.
In 2015, Twin Cities transit provided almost 86 million rides. In 2022, it provided about 40 million rides, or a reduction of almost 55% in less than 10 years.
This decline isn’t just driven by the pandemic. Local transit ridership declined 25% in the six years prior to the pandemic. Uber and Lyft provide a superior product. Increasing minimum wages and worker shortages means low-income persons are purchasing cars and are therefore able to access better jobs. The shift to telework, due to the pandemic, hit the region’s biggest transit destination — downtown Minneapolis — the hardest. The metropolitan area is projected to grow only 18% over the next 20 years, and Minneapolis is only projected to grow by by 8 1/2%, cementing the area’s current level of density and travel patterns. Nothing says current ridership is going to change.
Crime on transit has increased 50% over the last year and we have few solutions. No one wants to be a cop. Government has struggled to find effective non-sworn solutions. Concerns about over policing has reduced penalties for bad behavior. Crime will continue to affect people’s choices to use transit into the future.
Despite the plummeting ridership, the transit operating budget went up 15% from 2020 to 2023. The cost per ride for 2022 is $26. The original cost estimate for Southwest LRT was $1. 3 billion. The current cost estimate is $2.7 billion. If you assume the same 2021 ridership as Hiawatha LRT and prorate the $2.7 billion over 30 years, Southwest will cost around $90 a ride to build. These just are unacceptable costs.
The current transit system is focused primarily on getting people into downtown Minneapolis, which in the past, had the bulk of transit accessible jobs. LRT, express buses and commuter rail were developed to reduce congestion on the highways. However, currently, although congestion still exists, transit’s ability to fight it is severely diminished because the congestion is not limited to traffic into downtown at certain times of the day. Rather, people are traveling at different times a day and going to a variety of places.
We need to rethink big bus service. A backbone of core service is needed but ridership has declined to the point where many routes are just not sustainable, either from a cost or a safety perspective. But how to provide mobility for those who truly need it? In the suburbs, Southwest Metro’s South West Prime service functions like a government-subsidized Uber in places where private Uber is too expensive. You use an app to request service and a car takes you either to your destination or to a transit mainline. It scales its costs, discounting rides to medical providers for low-income persons while charging a premium for things like trips to the airport. Costs are competitive with big bus service.
Metro Transit is also experimenting with smaller transit. They have recently launched Metro Transit Micro, an Uber-like small bus service with an app. They are piloting this in one of the densest areas of mobility need — North Minneapolis. Micro transit focuses on access to destinations within North Minneapolis, with connections to mainline service for people who need to go further. Because it is small vehicles, it is safer.
The time for nibbling around the edges is gone. There are cheaper, safer and better options for people with mobility needs. It is time to rethink transit as we know it.
Tamara Kaiser, East Bde Maka Ska.
Hennepin, It's Time
I want to thank you for running Margaret Anderson Kelliher's thoughtful letter to the editor in the December issue.
The reconstruction of Hennepin Avenue has caused much consternation and conflict in the community, but as Ms. Kelliher rightly points out, it's necessary and I trust her ability to superintend the project with care.
I have a favorite elm tree at Hennepin and Franklin that I've passed every day for eight years that I hope makes it. But sometimes changes have to be made.
Prior to the current reconstruction effort, Hennepin Avenue has not been significantly altered since the late 1950s, and the downtown portion contained sections of sewer dating back to the 1880s.
It is for the best that we update infrastructure dating to the horse-buggy-and-derby-hat and chrome-fin-and-white-wheel-tire eras.
Thomas Regnier, Lowry Hill
Gratitude for Kenwood Businesses
I wanted to share my appreciation for our local Kenwood businesses that have contributed so much to our neighborhood. I rely on them frequently but must admit that I take them for granted, so I wanted to give them all a shout out.
Starting with the oldest, a howl out to Kenwood Pet Clinic that opened its doors in 1971 and is now owned by Drs. Jeff Schulman and Craig Turino. All of our many dogs have gone to Kenwood Pet Clinic because of their excellent care and friendly staff.
I love to pop next door to visit (without the dogs) FrameStyles owners Trudy Frederick and Michael Kokesh. Celebrating 37 years in January, their high quality framing and artistic guidance has been invaluable to many art lovers, including myself.
Around the corner, I love seeing the new art installations going up at the Bockley Gallery, thanks to owner and curator Todd Bockley. Established in 2005, it has highlighted many local, national and international artists.
Next door, school-age artists, maybe future Bockley exhibitors, are creating, exploring and having fun at Artrageous Adventures with owner and lead instructor Amanda Vallone. Celebrating 14 years this January, Artrageous Adventures is a wonderful resource for families with young children.
To have The Kenwood, a local restaurant gem in the neighborhood, is thanks to chef/owner Joel DeBilzan and his team. Weekend brunch or dinner, it’s a great spot to run into neighbors while enjoying a tasty meal.
Then to be able to walk next door to Birchbark Books, owned by award-winning author Louise Erdrich, is a gift to the neighborhood and attracts visitors from near and far. Their curated assortment of books and Indigenous artwork adds great depth to our neighborhood.
Join me in supporting our local neighborhood businesses and take a moment to thank them for sticking around and enriching our community, even through tough times.
Courtney Cushing Kiernat, Kenwood
Make Cedar ADA Accessible
I appreciate the sentiment of CAC member Constance Pepin to preserve nature, (Cedar-Isles: Nature First, opinion, Dec. 2022 issue) in her opinion but she is choosing to prioritize animal corridors over accessibility and recreation. There needs to be a balance between nature and recreation and I believe the area can have both.
The recreation I'm referencing is simply decent, safe walking paths for the areas at Cedar Lake where they don't exist. I would not label good walking paths as amenities but rather they are standards that allow all people to connect to the area. Walking is the top rated activity for the Chain of Lakes by park visitors.
Put simply, Cedar Lake needs more people to use it. Of course, this is blasphemy to the residents who want to maintain the area hidden and secluded, but an empty, unused park evokes an uncomfortable feeling for many and the area is avoided.
Colleen Casey, an ADA mobility expert, said this about access issues while touring Cedar Lake, "...in looking at the park I felt a sense of how so often people with disabilities are on the outside looking in.”
This leads me to ask who is being included and who is being excluded in the newly renovated spaces in Minneapolis parks? How things will ever change for people with physical disabilities?
The Park Board said this regarding ADA access: "Considering ADA compliance is important. Ensuring people of all abilities can access regional parks and trails creates equity across the system. Equity is the access for all people to services and resources.”
Since 2011, the Park Board has initiated a range of efforts to address equity, inclusion and diversity. Consideration of equity also is a requirement for park master plans in the Met Council's 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan. According to the Met Council's 2016 Regional Parks Visitor Census Data, seniors, ADA and people of color are underrepresented among those who visit the regional park system.
The plan throws these principles in the garbage.
(Ron) Jack Werner, Lake Forest (St. Louis Park)
Commonsense and Nature-first on Cedar Lake
I would like to commend the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board for recognizing that completing a path around Cedar Lake isn’t workable, as articulated on page 154 of the draft Cedar-Isles plan:
"Unlike the majority of other lakes in the park system, Cedar Lake doesn’t have a paved trail that travels around the entire lake. The entire shoreline around Cedar Lake is owned by MPRB in varying widths, as narrow as seven feet and as wide as fifty, with the southeast shoreline adjacent to residential yards. During engagement, MPRB heard feedback that some folks wanted to be able to travel around the entirety of Cedar Lake, similar to how other trails are designed.
Though ideas to create a connection were proposed and discussed in depth during the engagement process, no trail connection is proposed due to challenges to make a full connection on land with existing width in some areas along with a strong disinterest in a boardwalk.
Instead, the design proposes an expanded littoral edge and improved shoreline buffer. Once the shoreline is restored, MPRB should then assess whether a future connection is possible amidst the shoreline restoration.
Please contact the Park Board to support this commonsense, nature-first approach.
Curt Gunsbury, Cedar-Isles-Dean
2040 Plan Survey is an Injustice to the Community
The Minneapolis 2040 plan calls for increasing the housing supply and diversity of housing types throughout the city, which are laudable goals.
Under the guise of a City of Minneapolis Land Use Rezoning Study, the city planning team is seeking public input and feedback on its decision making process.
I spent nearly two hours responding to 15 open-ended questions such as “What types of commercial uses should be allowed in the RM1 Goods and Services District as part of a multi-story mixed used building with residential uses?” and “Should Transit built form districts allow new dwellings with less (sic) than 4 units?"
In my 45-year career in marketing and communications, which included survey research, I have never seen such an incomprehensible, rhetorical, self-serving survey instrument.
It is a prime example of “talking to oneself.” In my judgment, the survey questions have no inherent value or relevance to "increasing the housing supply and diversity of housing types throughout the city.”
This so-called survey is an injustice to the community.
Sandra Nelson, East Isles
Cedar-Isles Plan Is a Win for Safety
I’m someone who bikes, walks, takes the bus and drives – often within the same week. I am also a City Council-appointed member of the City’s Bicycle Advisory Committee, a committee that is tasked with advising Public Works, the City Council and the Mayor on safety elements of transportation projects as they relate to bicyclists. I'm also co-chair of that committee’s Engineering Subcommittee.
It is through that lens that I view any project, asking how it solves potential hazards or dangers to pedestrians or cyclists. Looking at the safety elements in the current draft plan of the Cedar-Isles Plan, if it were implemented exactly as-is, I’d say it’s a win for the safety and comfort of park users.
Northwest Cedar Lake Bottleneck and Point
Take, for example, the northwest corner of Cedar Lake, where a full two-way parkway for drivers is crammed into a narrow space that also includes eight feet for bicycles (two feet below the recommended minimum for two-way traffic) and maybe, sometimes, occasionally three or four feet for pedestrians, well below the recommended minimum of eight feet for pedestrian traffic. There also is only paint to delineate the separation between bicyclists and pedestrians and about four inches of curb to separate bicyclists from vehicles on the parkway.
That’s really dangerous and unnecessary. The parkway is very wide there and has extra space that can be used for widening paths. There are occasional boulevards that can be used for widening paths, and there are plenty of buckthorn trees that can be removed to add a ledge that supports additional width for paths and possibly viewing areas so that people can enjoy the parks.
Another example is near Cedar Point Beach on the west side, where canoeists and kayakers are often seen toting their boats in the bike path due to a significant grade separation between bicycles and pedestrians. The draft Cedar-Isles Plan solves that as well, adding a walkway in the area to keep pedestrians safe until the two grades meet at the beach parking lot.
East Cedar Woods
A third example of how the plan solves problems and makes things safer for all users can be found in the East Cedar woods.
Currently, there’s a conflict between park users who are on foot and those on bikes. The new draft plan provides a safe space for both types of park users, adding a soft-surface bike trail on the far eastern edge that lets park users circumnavigate Cedar Lake without using pedestrian paths or cutting through woods that have clear sight lines due to buckthorn removal.
Two-Way Biking on Lake of the Isles
One final example is more in the long-term plans for the park and less in the immediate future, and that’s to add a second lane of bicycle traffic alongside Lake of the Isles upon reconstruction of the parkway (slated for 30 or more years from now). Currently, as a frequent park visitor, I’d estimate that one of every 20 bicyclists on the parkway is traveling the wrong way on a one-way path. That means there’s demand for a second direction. We’re past the days of park users looping from lake to lake.
Modern bicyclists might choose to do a loop, or they might want to bike to a specific point like an archery range near Bde Maka Ska, or bike to pick up a puppy tail at Isles Bun & Coffee. There’s also the future light rail line, whether we like it or not, near 21st Street that’ll be the closest station to residents of Uptown. When we allow people to bike only one way by lakes, we’re either inviting people to ride the wrong way to get somewhere they need to get to quickly, or forcing people to not use the parks. Neither of those is a solution to the problem, which is why I support this sensible plan to create an off-street two-way bicycle route in the future.
When you’re reading through this plan, I urge you to put aside any preconceived notions of what should and shouldn’t be there and think about how each item will enhance a certain group of park users’ experience and safety.
Aaron Shaffer, Kingfield.
