Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Roads - Rails - Sidewalks - Bikeways
Bakken2016
Metrodome
Posts: 60
Joined: September 20th, 2017, 12:40 pm
Location: Windom South

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby Bakken2016 » October 13th, 2017, 9:55 am

http://www.startribune.com/advisory-com ... 450675033/

This article is so biased towards small business owners. And not actually informing the public about the project.

Bakken2016
Metrodome
Posts: 60
Joined: September 20th, 2017, 12:40 pm
Location: Windom South

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby Bakken2016 » October 13th, 2017, 9:56 am

http://www.startribune.com/advisory-com ... 450675033/

This article is so biased towards the buisnesses along West 7th. It does not actually inform the project about the project and the good that it will bring.

mamundsen
Foshay Tower
Posts: 863
Joined: November 15th, 2012, 10:01 am

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby mamundsen » October 13th, 2017, 12:57 pm

The map in the STrib article doesn't show the jog over to Fort Snelling Blue Line station and the Airport. It has Hwy 5 highlighted instead. Oops!

HiawathaGuy
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1318
Joined: June 4th, 2012, 12:03 pm

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby HiawathaGuy » October 13th, 2017, 3:20 pm

Bakken2016 wrote:
October 13th, 2017, 9:56 am
http://www.startribune.com/advisory-com ... 450675033/

This article is so biased towards the buisnesses along West 7th. It does not actually inform the project about the project and the good that it will bring.
I hadn't heard that they planned to burrow under Fort Snelling before either - which the article states, besides mentioning the new adjacent Hwy 5 bridge across the Mississippi. I'm cool with that, seems far less disruptive to the whole Fort area, since it's quite the conjected area already. I'm exciting to see more about the new bridge and tunneling.

EOst
Capella Tower
Posts: 2060
Joined: March 19th, 2014, 8:05 pm
Location: North End, Saint Paul

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby EOst » October 13th, 2017, 4:07 pm

Surprised they're going to pick that fight (the new bridge).

HiawathaGuy
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1318
Joined: June 4th, 2012, 12:03 pm

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby HiawathaGuy » October 13th, 2017, 4:43 pm

EOst wrote:
October 13th, 2017, 4:07 pm
Surprised they're going to pick that fight (the new bridge).
It's a new adjacent bridge - and I'm not really sure why it would be a fight? The existing bridge can't handle the weight, and even if it could, I don't see how trying to convert it to 1 car lane in each direction, like the UofM bridge, wouldn't be a bigger fight to pick!

tmart
City Center
Posts: 40
Joined: October 6th, 2017, 10:05 am

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby tmart » October 13th, 2017, 5:15 pm

The Friends of the Mississippi River generally put up opposition to any new river crossings--even a bridge for the Midtown Greenway adjacent to the existing rail bridge got the axe. But they might get away with it here since nobody could conceivably argue this stretch is pristine.

EOst
Capella Tower
Posts: 2060
Joined: March 19th, 2014, 8:05 pm
Location: North End, Saint Paul

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby EOst » October 13th, 2017, 5:21 pm

I believe they announced their opposition to a new bridge here last year.

SkyScraperKid
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 142
Joined: May 14th, 2016, 1:41 pm

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby SkyScraperKid » October 13th, 2017, 8:59 pm

well... I just started a group called "Friends of train transit" and I/we oppose not building a new bridge & not giving trails their own lane so....

tmart
City Center
Posts: 40
Joined: October 6th, 2017, 10:05 am

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby tmart » October 13th, 2017, 9:15 pm

SkyScraperKid wrote:
October 13th, 2017, 8:59 pm
well... I just started a group called "Friends of train transit" and I/we oppose not building a new bridge & not giving trails their own lane so....
I think you're being sarcastic, but it would be nice if we had more coordinated and vocal transit lobbying. The FMR have been very effective at conservation and research, but also lobbying, grassroots organizing, and advocacy.

SkyScraperKid
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 142
Joined: May 14th, 2016, 1:41 pm

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby SkyScraperKid » October 13th, 2017, 9:17 pm

tmart wrote:
October 13th, 2017, 9:15 pm
SkyScraperKid wrote:
October 13th, 2017, 8:59 pm
well... I just started a group called "Friends of train transit" and I/we oppose not building a new bridge & not giving trails their own lane so....
I think you're being sarcastic, but it would be nice if we had more coordinated and vocal transit lobbying. The FMR have been very effective at conservation and research, but also lobbying, grassroots organizing, and advocacy.
Yea I was, but yea it would be nice if we were more organized but that will never happen! :lol: ...I mean we all know why haha.

EOst
Capella Tower
Posts: 2060
Joined: March 19th, 2014, 8:05 pm
Location: North End, Saint Paul

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby EOst » November 10th, 2017, 3:23 pm

If we can call things like the A Line and the C Line "rapid transit" with only limited rapid transit features (only limited stops, off-board ticketing, and some signal priority) can we start calling this a "rapid streetcar"?

Bakken2016
Metrodome
Posts: 60
Joined: September 20th, 2017, 12:40 pm
Location: Windom South

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby Bakken2016 » November 10th, 2017, 3:27 pm

EOst wrote:
November 10th, 2017, 3:23 pm
If we can call things like the A Line and the C Line "rapid transit" with only limited rapid transit features (only limited stops, off-board ticketing, and some signal priority) can we start calling this a "rapid streetcar"?
I did contact them, and if they go with a streetcar vehicle it will be apart of the METRO system and assigned a color.

Bakken2016
Metrodome
Posts: 60
Joined: September 20th, 2017, 12:40 pm
Location: Windom South

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby Bakken2016 » November 10th, 2017, 3:28 pm

http://www.startribune.com/public-weigh ... 456524713/

There was a public engagement event last night, more than 100 people, sounds like more support than not.

David Greene
IDS Center
Posts: 4594
Joined: December 4th, 2012, 11:41 am

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby David Greene » November 10th, 2017, 3:31 pm

Bakken2016 wrote:
November 10th, 2017, 3:27 pm
I did contact them, and if they go with a streetcar vehicle it will be apart of the METRO system and assigned a color.
I think that's right for this line but would not be appropriate for the as-conceived Nicollet streetcar. That should probably get a letter designation.

Bakken2016
Metrodome
Posts: 60
Joined: September 20th, 2017, 12:40 pm
Location: Windom South

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby Bakken2016 » November 10th, 2017, 3:43 pm

David Greene wrote:
November 10th, 2017, 3:31 pm
Bakken2016 wrote:
November 10th, 2017, 3:27 pm
I did contact them, and if they go with a streetcar vehicle it will be apart of the METRO system and assigned a color.
I think that's right for this line but would not be appropriate for the as-conceived Nicollet streetcar. That should probably get a letter designation.
I see it two ways though.

1) Riverview is basically LRT, minus a small portion that is shared right of way. So I can see why it is being considered for the METRO system. It also is rail and are other intracity rail lines are denoted by a color.

2) Nicollet Streetcar could go to either naming convention though. There will be people who say well it is a rail line in Twin Cities Metro, it should be a color, and vice versa for a letter designation.

For consistency, I think I would prefer all rail lines to have a color designation.

EOst
Capella Tower
Posts: 2060
Joined: March 19th, 2014, 8:05 pm
Location: North End, Saint Paul

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby EOst » November 10th, 2017, 3:52 pm

For me, stop spacing matters more for METRO lines than shared ROW or anything else. The Nicollet-Central line would look very different from the other LRT/BRT or Riverview on the system map.

Silophant
Moderator
Posts: 3000
Joined: June 20th, 2012, 4:33 pm
Location: 9Marq

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby Silophant » November 10th, 2017, 3:53 pm

I'd say we should circumvent the issue by building Nicollet/Central as aBRT. If it is a streetcar, though, I agree that colors are the way to go for rail lines, even if the streetcar operates more like aBRT than LRT or hBRT.

Bakken2016
Metrodome
Posts: 60
Joined: September 20th, 2017, 12:40 pm
Location: Windom South

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby Bakken2016 » November 10th, 2017, 3:58 pm

Silophant wrote:
November 10th, 2017, 3:53 pm
I'd say we should circumvent the issue by building Nicollet/Central as aBRT. If it is a streetcar, though, I agree that colors are the way to go for rail lines, even if the streetcar operates more like aBRT than LRT or hBRT.
I have talked to the Manager of aBRT at Metro Transit, and they aren't ruling out aBRT on Nicollet Ave even if the city of Minneapolis builds streetcar. I think that is mainly due to needing to serve past Lake St she said.

David Greene
IDS Center
Posts: 4594
Joined: December 4th, 2012, 11:41 am

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby David Greene » November 10th, 2017, 4:24 pm

Silophant wrote:
November 10th, 2017, 3:53 pm
I'd say we should circumvent the issue by building Nicollet/Central as aBRT. If it is a streetcar, though, I agree that colors are the way to go for rail lines, even if the streetcar operates more like aBRT than LRT or hBRT.
Except we've already explicitly decoupled colors from mode. We've already said just because something is on rubber tires doesn't mean it shouldn't get a color. The converse is that just because something is on rail doesn't mean it should get a color.

I agree with EOst, stop spacing, capacity and frequency/availability are way more important than mode. It makes more sense to me that colors=limited stop, high capacity, high availability.


Return to “Transportation”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest