Page 63 of 146

Re: Star Tribune Blocks

Posted: October 18th, 2013, 11:53 pm
by Minnekid
The small st paul parks are the best example that small parks could work. There just has to be development around them, which there will exist to make them an intimate and busy park.

Re: Star Tribune Blocks

Posted: October 19th, 2013, 12:04 am
by stock345
^i was always curious if that could have been an option for the blocks adjacent to the library.

Re: Star Tribune Blocks

Posted: October 19th, 2013, 12:06 am
by alleycat
The Green Bridge at Mile End Park in London more or less does this. Even has shops under the bridge. Oh man does this take me back to my semester abroad in east London.

https://www.google.com/search?q=mile+en ... 1&ie=UTF-8

Re: Star Tribune Blocks

Posted: October 19th, 2013, 2:58 pm
by Didier
Is there any reason why the two parks could not be connected creatively, such as through a land bridge?

Re: Star Tribune Blocks

Posted: October 19th, 2013, 4:13 pm
by Wedgeguy
Didier wrote:Is there any reason why the two parks could not be connected creatively, such as through a land bridge?
They very well could build one. It would just be an added expense to build such a feature. But yes, it is a viable option when financing is not limited.

Re: Star Tribune Blocks

Posted: October 19th, 2013, 4:37 pm
by Didier
Well it's not like closing off those two streets is "free," given that it's a bunch of extra square footage to develop.

Re: Star Tribune Blocks

Posted: October 19th, 2013, 4:38 pm
by mamundsen
To me a land bridge only makes sense if the roads are sunken or the entire park is raised up. I do not think it makes sense here.

Re: Star Tribune Blocks

Posted: October 21st, 2013, 12:31 pm
by twincitizen
More details about the potential retail building(s) wrapping the parking ramp: http://finance-commerce.com/2013/10/msf ... r-stadium/

Re: Star Tribune Blocks

Posted: October 21st, 2013, 1:11 pm
by Tyler
twincitizen wrote:More details about the potential retail building(s) wrapping the parking ramp: http://finance-commerce.com/2013/10/msf ... r-stadium/
You got me super exited, but now I'm just confused. It seems to me they're talking mostly about the small parcel facing the plaza. But what I'm more interested in is the other 80% of the block. Maybe this quote indicates they are looking at other uses for that street frontage as well? One can hope!
What we are looking at would be potential development both around the linear frontage and side of the parking structure, as well as potentially on the rooftop,

Re: Star Tribune Blocks

Posted: October 22nd, 2013, 2:59 pm
by stockman
Regardless of whether the streets are kept open, the park will be a great asset to downtown. The land bridge could be very cool, but it would be cost prohibitive. Again, I kindly suggest that you can do a lot with some traffic calming that could make a nice connection, keep costs low and still keep the streets open. I have the feeling that if this isn't done now, it will be done in the future.

Re: Star Tribune Blocks

Posted: October 22nd, 2013, 7:12 pm
by 2trill2spill
Why not one or two relatively simple pedestrian/bike bridges they cant be much more then a couple million. That way if the City and County want a land bridge or to close off the road in the future they can. But i feel like this would be the best approach for now, so Ryan can get the show on the road.

Re: Star Tribune Blocks

Posted: October 23rd, 2013, 10:17 am
by MNdible
Bike/pedestrian bridges at this location just don't make much sense. Nobody is going to walk up and down two flights of stairs (let alone the ramps that ADA would require) when they can very easily cross at grade. Even in an un-throated condition, these roads aren't that wide or that busy -- it's not like crossing a six lane freeway.

Re: Star Tribune Blocks

Posted: October 23rd, 2013, 10:24 am
by Didier
I would envision some sort of gradual incline, like the bridges that go over Washington Avenue on the U of M campus, rather than some contraption involving stairs. If the Yard is going to have any sort of hills or bumps built into it, a natural connection shouldn't be that difficult.

Re: Star Tribune Blocks

Posted: October 23rd, 2013, 10:35 am
by RailBaronYarr
MNdible wrote:Bike/pedestrian bridges at this location just don't make much sense. Nobody is going to walk up and down two flights of stairs (let alone the ramps that ADA would require) when they can very easily cross at grade. Even in an un-throated condition, these roads aren't that wide or that busy -- it's not like crossing a six lane freeway.
If not that busy, why not close them? ;)

Re: Star Tribune Blocks

Posted: October 23rd, 2013, 10:54 am
by MNdible
RailBaronYarr wrote:If not that busy, why not close them?


I know you're just poking, but anyway...

I've said before that I think closing Portland makes sense. I think that Park needs to stay open as a two way north of 6th Street (most of the time -- could be closed during special events). Just because roads aren't super-busy doesn't mean that they can just go away.

It took us about 4 decades to break up the super block north of Washington where the old railyards were. I'm not sure we should turn around and create a new super block here.

Re: Star Tribune Blocks

Posted: October 23rd, 2013, 12:27 pm
by Tyler
MNdible wrote: I've said before that I think closing Portland makes sense. I think that Park needs to stay open as a two way north of 6th Street (most of the time -- could be closed during special events). Just because roads aren't super-busy doesn't mean that they can just go away.
Really hope this is how they do it -- it keeps 90% of the benefit to the park. Not sure why it has to be all or nothing.

Re: Star Tribune Blocks

Posted: October 23rd, 2013, 12:31 pm
by RailBaronYarr
I'm on record with agreeing with exactly what MNdible said. Just wanted to poke.

Re: Star Tribune Blocks

Posted: October 23rd, 2013, 12:38 pm
by mullen
county had no problem closing 5th street. city agreed to it. maybe if they were running a rail line down park or portland peter mclaughlin would support this. sorry, had to be a little snarky.

but i agree it's not really a big deal having the streets open. a lot of this area is closed off during vikings game anyway. i think there could be adequate pedestrian flow with some wide, prominent cross walks and lights. make it inviting and easy to pass between park blocks. it's all in the design. if these remain one way freeways as they are south of downtown that would be an issue. i don't feel the county did enough with the repaving project of these streets south of downtown and i feel they are doing little with the proposed minnehaha ave reconstruction for pedestrians and bikers.

Re: Star Tribune Blocks

Posted: October 23rd, 2013, 1:28 pm
by twincitizen
Two letters to the editor in the Strib today, both in favor of keeping the park space continuous. One for full closures, one for shallow trenches, both well written.

http://www.startribune.com/opinion/lett ... 50581.html

Re: Star Tribune Blocks

Posted: October 23rd, 2013, 3:11 pm
by RailBaronYarr
^^ and the piece on environmental fear-mongering was equally enlightening.