Stadium LRT Station, Ped Bridge & Plaza (MSFA block)

Downtown - North Loop - Mill District - Elliot Park - Loring Park
MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5797
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Stadium LRT Station, Ped Bridge & Plaza (MSFA block)

Postby MNdible » July 26th, 2016, 3:03 pm

Well, yes. That would in fact probably be the perfect time to undertake this project.

VAStationDude
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 782
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 10:30 am

Re: Stadium LRT Station, Ped Bridge & Plaza (MSFA block)

Postby VAStationDude » July 26th, 2016, 5:34 pm

The transfer is not a problem right now. Schedules have five minutes of padding and the east bound trains wait through the Chicago and 4th light cycles.

Will your righteous indignation pay for the cost and inconvenience of weeks long bus bridges?

VikingFaninMaryland
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 128
Joined: July 24th, 2015, 7:27 pm

Re: Stadium LRT Station, Ped Bridge & Plaza (MSFA block)

Postby VikingFaninMaryland » July 26th, 2016, 5:35 pm

Archiapolis wrote:
Squidward wrote:I stood on the bridge for about 15 minutes during the stadium open house.
The majority of light rail riders did not seem to understand the bridge would help them cross the street, so they just walked over on street level.
Sad and ugly use of public $.
Obviously this is confirmation bias but this pretty much nails the entire thing.

I can't believe that no one *ahem* VikingfaninMaryland *ahem* hasn't pointed out that there will be barricades and cops and tasers to keep people from crossing the tracks/street at grade and instead herd them onto this abomination.

It isn't just a question of whether it looks decent or not. It's the lack of foresight given the importance of this stop with all of the development happening in DTE (or whatever it is officially being called now) coupled with an expenditure that transports people 60-80' for entertainment compounded by what an equivalent dollar figure would buy in transit improvements elsewhere.

A literal $1 Billion construction project (not to mention the dollar figures associated with the rest of the development in this area) and no one thought, "Hey, what are these parallel lines running through this plan?"

I said it several pages up when this whole things started but it is egregious that LRT wasn't being discussed/redesigned in parallel with the stadium so that the whole platform could have been reconfigured for center platform and/or, a tunnel through the parking ramp to the stadium. Initially I said that a tunnel would be expensive and difficult given the structural challenges in the parking ramp but that was when I thought "we" would be on the hook for every penny to get riders to the People's Stadium and it was very late in the game (see argument above RE: egregious oversight).

IF this stop had been designed comprehensively with the stadium and the park, imagine an amazing pedestrian tunnel that would move people safely through this zone, integrated with the park and the plaza that would have been negotiated comprehensively with ALL of the construction and thus paid for with Wilf/NFL money and some public money if needed.
Do you want some cheese with that whine? An “abomination”? Really? For such a pedestrian looking bridge (pun intended), that's a little strong don't you think?

The DTE development is an immediate consequence of U.S. Bank Stadium being built. When planning could have been done - long before the planning of the stadium - you were looking at an island of surface parking lots and run down (and soon to be abandoned) buildings - (StarTribune / the Metrodome?). On a good day in the City planning offices, the future of DTE was grim. People then could not be held to account for what was not known that was not on the planning horizon (until the Wilf’s decided to build on the Metrodome - a decision which initiated the DTE boom). [The clinical term associated with those who refuse to attribute the revitalization of DTE to the Wilf's decision is "dissociation".] Those responsible for transportation today had to work with what they had - a site with severe engineering constraints owing to the necessity of doing everything on a parking ramp roof.

Unless it ends up being too small, the pedestrian bridge is appropriate for its intended use and properly scaled for its known purpose. And the Vikings paid for the pedestrian bridge (the whiney narrative on waisted taxpayer dollars has become such a Pavlovian conditioned response that people can’t help but say otherwise - even when its not true).

The only thing egregiously ugly - “an abomination” - is the curved arched wall that serves to hold up the LR station’s canopy. As far as the pedestrian bridge goes, its functional, reasonably elegant and has clean lines even if its not work of art.

The decision to built the pedestrian bridge was based on projected usage patterns when the US Bank transit station is pegged to serve as (a hoped for and planned) central release/pick-up point for up to 40% of those attending Viking games (or other large-scaled planned events) through the LR system. That's up to 20,000 people in a constricted location in a reasonably tight period of time. In that scenario, the large movement of people alongside the ongoing movement of LR trains running in both directions at 90 second intervals would cause a substantial disruption in the ability to move both people and trains - all at a time when there will be high volumes of road traffic running in all directions - with large parking ramps emptying out into traffic in the immediate vicinity.

And folks here feign not recognizing the need of such a bridge to take pressure off an easily recognizable choke point? Really? I’m happy for you that forums like this exist where you can pretend that such considerations are confabulations of the mind to at least some who are willing to entertain that view. But to keep from not being laughed out of a room, don’t attend any forums where traffic flow professionals - both government and private sector - attend. (I’m looking out for you)

Not accounting for such a recognized choke point would undermine the timely movement and flow of people, trains and road traffic. This in turn would undermine the desirability of using the LRT for game purposes.

In situations where you expect to have large volumes of people alongside 90 second to 2 minute intervals wrt to trains, central platforms can cause substantial congestion. The bridge is not for those days when there is average, distributed and dispersed usage, but for those times when there will be a crush of people alongside a coordinated transit plan to move large volumes of people to and from the game where issues of transferring trains will not be an issue at that node at that time.

The decision to build the pedestrian bridge was based on the findings of transportation studies undertaken in conjunction with traffic flow studies leading to the building of the stadium along with known flow patterns where transportation nodes are effectively co-located with sports facilities. The MTC endorsed those findings. Having said that, the findings are also a “duh” and one suspects the hyper reactive hostility is simply yet another outlet for those who hate the stadium and the Wilf’s - and want yet another place to vent. What type of cheese with that whine?

As pedestrian walkways go, it’s mildly above average. As far as it relevance in the scheme of the plan, it is completely defensible.

mullen
Foshay Tower
Posts: 986
Joined: June 4th, 2012, 7:02 am

Re: Stadium LRT Station, Ped Bridge & Plaza (MSFA block)

Postby mullen » July 27th, 2016, 6:06 am

i don't know, I used it over the weekend. works and looks fine to me. (the bridge)

mullen
Foshay Tower
Posts: 986
Joined: June 4th, 2012, 7:02 am

Re: Stadium LRT Station, Ped Bridge & Plaza (MSFA block)

Postby mullen » July 27th, 2016, 6:11 am

at the open house, upon exiting the stadium they had the plaza gated in such a way as to funnel people to use the bridge to cross Chicago unless you wanted to walk over towards the ticket office area and cross that intersection there.

sushisimo
Landmark Center
Posts: 232
Joined: June 2nd, 2012, 3:47 pm

Re: Stadium LRT Station, Ped Bridge & Plaza (MSFA block)

Postby sushisimo » July 27th, 2016, 7:40 am

I walked over the ped bridge, took a look from below. I like it more than I thought. I just don't care for the arches by the station. I understand the artistic connection to the river, but ugh. Is there a precedent for removing commissioned art like this? Maybe move it to Scherer Park.

nBode
Union Depot
Posts: 323
Joined: August 20th, 2013, 3:25 pm
Location: University of Minnesota

Re: Stadium LRT Station, Ped Bridge & Plaza (MSFA block)

Postby nBode » July 27th, 2016, 9:59 am

I'd be all for relocating the arches. They just don't fit with the context of the site anymore. They would be great somewhere else. I also think that restroom/concessions/parking entrance building needs to be redone in some fashion.

User avatar
FISHMANPET
IDS Center
Posts: 4602
Joined: June 6th, 2012, 2:19 pm
Location: Corcoran

Re: Stadium LRT Station, Ped Bridge & Plaza (MSFA block)

Postby FISHMANPET » July 27th, 2016, 10:37 am

It's kind of amazing just how crappy this whole area looks because nobody planned more than 5 seconds ahead of time and just kept dumping concrete in. We have TWO bridges that cross Chicago. We've built how many plazas here? We spent millions of dollars on the other end of Downtown on The Interchange to facilitate transfers between two transit lines that don't exist yet, while ignoring this end of downtown where the transfer does currently exist.

Sure, maybe there would be problems doing X, but again, that's not actually the point I'm making here. The point is that these things were never even considered. Nobody stopped to think ahead, they just built built built. And every load of concrete poured, every steel beam installed, every piece of public art makes it harder to reconfigure this area, in the off chance any leaders get struck by lightning and suddenly develop some vision.

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5797
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Stadium LRT Station, Ped Bridge & Plaza (MSFA block)

Postby MNdible » July 27th, 2016, 10:48 am

And my point is that it's really arrogant and really easy to look back with 20/20 hindsight and bemoan that people didn't build what you wanted them to. Just because people didn't correctly predict the future doesn't mean that they didn't look to the future. That's the problem with actually building stuff -- as opposed to just talking, when stuff actually gets built, it becomes painfully obvious in the ways that your best efforts to anticipate future needs and future plans missed the mark.

talindsay
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1544
Joined: September 29th, 2012, 10:41 am

Re: Stadium LRT Station, Ped Bridge & Plaza (MSFA block)

Postby talindsay » July 27th, 2016, 12:33 pm

I think he's suggesting it wasn't their best efforts. And there's good reason to believe he's right.

User avatar
FISHMANPET
IDS Center
Posts: 4602
Joined: June 6th, 2012, 2:19 pm
Location: Corcoran

Re: Stadium LRT Station, Ped Bridge & Plaza (MSFA block)

Postby FISHMANPET » July 27th, 2016, 12:50 pm

Yes, exactly. I'm not mad that X wasn't built, I'm mad that it was never even considered. I literally want someone to look at this and say, for example, gee it's really weird that we have two bridges duplicating each other! I want someone to look at this place, realize how dumb it is, and try to prevent it from happening in the future.

RailBaronYarr
Capella Tower
Posts: 2702
Joined: September 16th, 2012, 4:31 pm

Re: Stadium LRT Station, Ped Bridge & Plaza (MSFA block)

Postby RailBaronYarr » July 27th, 2016, 1:14 pm

Is MNdible seriously suggesting that when Hiawatha LRT was designed and built there was no possible way for the planners to know that transferring to another LRT line at the stadium site was a very distinct possibility? Of all the people in the region/state, transit planners and Met Council representatives/TAB members should have been the *most* optimistic about the Central Corridor being built in the not-distant future (as opposed to conservative exurbanites, legislators, etc who actively want/ed to see all LRT killed)? And the ped bridge, which was put forward literally during the construction of the skyway from the stadium to the parking ramp. All the reasons given for the ped bridge (LRT operations, future SWLRT drawing passengers to the WB platform, etc) were well-known when the stadium was given the green light.

Yeah, hindsight is usually bit clearer than anything else. But this is a case where it clearly wasn't even given consideration, as FMP claims. Just like! It would have been nice if the Met Council had even considered doing a downtown tunnel study during Blue Line construction, or in the years between it and Green Line approval. It wasn't, and even though we're all mostly aware of the headaches the current infrastructure is gonna present for the next 40 years, the Met Council **still hasn't** commissioned a study. It's a valid frustration!

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5797
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Stadium LRT Station, Ped Bridge & Plaza (MSFA block)

Postby MNdible » July 27th, 2016, 1:22 pm

But clearly you have no way of knowing what was considered, you only know what was actually built.

I assume that by "the two bridges," you're referring to the pedestrian bridge and the skyway. I'll admit that's pretty absurd, but don't we still understand that the skyway is intended for VIP use only (and that its construction was mandated by the stadium legislation)? I've always liked Matt's suggestion that the pedestrian bridge should also have connected across 4th Street -- it would be unfortunate if the new design doesn't accommodate a future connection there.

HiawathaGuy
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1556
Joined: June 4th, 2012, 12:03 pm

Re: Stadium LRT Station, Ped Bridge & Plaza (MSFA block)

Postby HiawathaGuy » July 27th, 2016, 1:25 pm

RailBaronYarr wrote:Is MNdible seriously suggesting that when Hiawatha LRT was designed and built there was no possible way for the planners to know that transferring to another LRT line at the stadium site was a very distinct possibility? Of all the people in the region/state, transit planners and Met Council representatives/TAB members should have been the *most* optimistic about the Central Corridor being built in the not-distant future (as opposed to conservative exurbanites, legislators, etc who actively want/ed to see all LRT killed)? And the ped bridge, which was put forward literally during the construction of the skyway from the stadium to the parking ramp. All the reasons given for the ped bridge (LRT operations, future SWLRT drawing passengers to the WB platform, etc) were well-known when the stadium was given the green light.

Yeah, hindsight is usually bit clearer than anything else. But this is a case where it clearly wasn't even given consideration, as FMP claims. Just like! It would have been nice if the Met Council had even considered doing a downtown tunnel study during Blue Line construction, or in the years between it and Green Line approval. It wasn't, and even though we're all mostly aware of the headaches the current infrastructure is gonna present for the next 40 years, the Met Council **still hasn't** commissioned a study. It's a valid frustration!
I think most everyone on here agrees with you. But I guess I'm left wondering who has reached out to City/County/Met Council/State resources to better understand this. I know a lot about planning, but I certainly can't say I know enough to say that no one ever considered things. It sure seems like no one has - and it is strange that Target Field has gotten so much attention, while US Bank Stadium hasn't. It is puzzling, and seems like a really good article for someone to write.

If we're always going to be playing piecemeal with our transportation system, then there ought to be more further future-proofing, since we have about 10 years between each rail line...

It just seems like other cities/metro regions 'get it' with regards to how their transit systems work in their downtown cores. Our trains still have to stop for stoplights! That's insane.

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5797
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Stadium LRT Station, Ped Bridge & Plaza (MSFA block)

Postby MNdible » July 27th, 2016, 1:30 pm

RailBaronYarr wrote:Is MNdible seriously suggesting that when Hiawatha LRT was designed and built there was no possible way for the planners to know that transferring to another LRT line at the stadium site was a very distinct possibility?


No, I'm suggesting that at the time it was built, they needed to decide if they were going to build a station with a central platform, a side platform, or both. In retrospect, they should have probably scraped together some more cash from the couch cushions and built both. But they didn't, because that probably seemed like an exotic and expensive option, especially given the difficulty in getting that first line built. So instead, they built the side platforms, understanding that the event loading demands would make a central-only option unworkable.

Not sure why this concept is so difficult to understand.

And not sure why the pedestrian bridge really even plays into this discussion.

talindsay
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1544
Joined: September 29th, 2012, 10:41 am

Re: Stadium LRT Station, Ped Bridge & Plaza (MSFA block)

Postby talindsay » July 27th, 2016, 1:50 pm

They wouldn't have had to build a central platform, but they could have left space for it.

User avatar
FISHMANPET
IDS Center
Posts: 4602
Joined: June 6th, 2012, 2:19 pm
Location: Corcoran

Re: Stadium LRT Station, Ped Bridge & Plaza (MSFA block)

Postby FISHMANPET » July 27th, 2016, 3:49 pm

If the transformer next to the tracks is a problem with putting in a center platform, then it was caused by a lack of foresight. If the placement of the pedestrian bridge piers causes a problem putting in a center platform, then it was caused by a lack of foresight.

For the THIRD time Mndible, the problem is not that a thing wasn't built, it's nobody ever thought about building out the location to support that in the future. I'm fine that a center platform wasn't built when the Hiawatha line was originally built. I'm not fine with the idea that it's not laid out in such a way to accommodate a center platform someday. Everything we build in this space, like the pedestrian bridge that makes it harder to in the future change the geometry of this station area is failure of forward thinking.

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5797
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Stadium LRT Station, Ped Bridge & Plaza (MSFA block)

Postby MNdible » July 27th, 2016, 4:13 pm

Thanks for bolding the shit out of your comment. Now everything you've said is undoubtedly true.

VAStationDude
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 782
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 10:30 am

Re: Stadium LRT Station, Ped Bridge & Plaza (MSFA block)

Postby VAStationDude » July 27th, 2016, 4:33 pm

That we wouldn't spend tens of millions, interrupt rail travel for months and negatively affect long term ridership over a minor issue is a sane use of transit funding, sound customer service and wise stewardship of a valuable public asset. I'd say we planned correctly even if no thought was put into bridge pier placement.

I wasn't paying close attention to Hiawatha Line planning so I don't know why we ended up with side platforms but that's where we're at right now. Get a fitbit and the extra 50 steps required for the forty second walk between platforms will count towards meeting for daily goal.

User avatar
FISHMANPET
IDS Center
Posts: 4602
Joined: June 6th, 2012, 2:19 pm
Location: Corcoran

Re: RE: Re: Stadium LRT Station, Ped Bridge & Plaza (MSFA block)

Postby FISHMANPET » July 27th, 2016, 4:51 pm

VAStationDude wrote:That we wouldn't spend tens of millions, interrupt rail travel for months and negatively affect long term ridership over a minor issue is a sane use of transit funding, sound customer service and wise stewardship of a valuable public asset. I'd say we planned correctly even if no thought was put into bridge pier placement.

I wasn't paying close attention to Hiawatha Line planning so I don't know why we ended up with side platforms but that's where we're at right now. Get a fitbit and the extra 50 steps required for the forty second walk between platforms will count towards meeting for daily goal.
OK, also not reading what I'm saying. I'll not repeat it a fourth time so please go back and read my posts again before giving reasons why we're not right now tearing up the platform this instant.


Return to “Minneapolis - Downtown”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Creole4u and 3 guests