Editorial counterpoint: Pause — and plan anew — on Southwest light rail

The Southwest light rail project is a disaster, 19th-century technology at 22nd-century prices. However, transit in the corridor still can, and should, be redesigned and greatly improved.

The key is to understand that the right of way can still be repurposed as a bus rapid transit (BRT) and small-vehicle route.

I laid out a plan for this eight years ago in a Star Tribune counterpoint. What follows is an updated version of that article.

Back in 2014 Republican legislators wanted an alternative. Minneapolis officials responded with a challenge, saying the lawmakers should offer up "… a BRT-only, no-rail transit system. Then we could have a real debate."

A "real debate" would still be welcome in 2022! But let's expand our scope to a comprehensive vision of what we can truly do with transit. Let's think and plan using our knowledge of current and emerging technology. Let's plan on the scale — with the 100-year time frame and public-private coordination — that founded our Minneapolis park system.

A Southwest light-rail alternative should be shaped by three future-focused considerations: vehicle size, service frequency and automated driving.

Let's use Metro Mobility-size vehicles — 24 passengers and one lift, combined with existing SouthWest Transit BRT buses. These cost about $70,000 new, compared with $3 million per light-rail car.

Here's your obvious thought: "Bob, you're crazy! Economies of scale — it's a slam dunk — light rail is the way to go!"

Well, let me sit you down for a shocking fact: I ran the numbers for part-time drivers (we'll need almost 700) at $17 per hour. Even with about 10 times as many discrete daily trips, the $35 million annual operating cost is about the same as the Met Council's $32.7 million light-rail operating cost estimate.

Let's now consider the advantages of having 10 times as many discrete trips. The service frequency could be much higher — every five minutes or better. We could tailor express runs for speed, with specialty runs and door-to-door shuttles to bring people to a much finer grid of destinations. Over decades, we could tailor a small-vehicle system for both speed and access. We could also integrate school bus, Uber/Lyft and public transit into one system.

Automated driving is still coming. When it happens — when drivers become the equivalent of elevator operators — the cost per driver ($0) will become the same for a Metro Mobility-size bus and light rail. Which system do we want our children and grandchildren to have when the switch begins? That's the decision we're making today. Still!

This approach could include a later plan for small Midtown Greenway vehicles from a new Greenway/Lake Street transit station on Interstate 35W, to and from downtown using existing MNPass lanes that are guaranteed congestion-free.

I agree with House Minority Leader Kurt Daudt and State Senate President David Osmek, and disagree with the Star Tribune Editorial Board ("Audit, but don't halt, Southwest light rail," Feb. 8). In the short term — a year or two — let's just stop the Southwest light rail project. We need to regroup.

I'm a Republican candidate for governor with some new (well, in this case, eight-year-old) ideas. But unlike the other GOP candidates I won't shut up about this reality: Trump is an insurrectionist and must never be allowed on a ballot again. This is why the GOP/Trump machinery is trying to cancel me.

Let's demand a transit revolution. Let's build for future generations, instead of rebuilding the past.