Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Roads - Rails - Sidewalks - Bikeways
User avatar
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 618
Joined: January 17th, 2015, 11:58 am

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby Tiller » March 4th, 2017, 4:02 pm

Do any of you see major barriers or benefits to extending the Riverview corridor up East 7th to around Arcade Street? This would encompass the proposed first line of a St. Paul streetcar network. It would hit Metro State, which is just out of reach of the Gateway Corridor and might not be the route choice of the Rush Line.
It would add about 1.5 miles depending on the route.
If this was a thing that happened, It'd probably be a good idea to extend it the extra .5 mile to just south of the rail ROW to allow for a transfer to the Rush Line for those heading further north. 2 miles and 4 stations shouldn't cost too much. The short bridge over 94 and retrofitting/replacing the 7th St Bridge (or building a new small one adjacent to it) would probably be the most costly portions of it.

On another note, I recall there being a note from the St Paul streetcar study website:

"The City has completed work on the Streetcar Feasibility Study at this time. The City Council's resolution supporting the results of this study also directed that the Starter Line not be studied in more depth until the Ramsey County-led Riverview Corridor Study has made a recommendation."

Given what we know about the likely outcomes for the Riverview and Rush lines at this point, what might St Paul do with their streetcar study? Build a link similar to what Vagueperson mentioned, from Lowertown up E 7th St (which would overlap with the route 54 extension)? Maybe a new starter line on Payne Ave or Grand or something?

Nicollet Mall
Posts: 132
Joined: June 17th, 2014, 7:13 am

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby Vagueperson » March 4th, 2017, 11:39 pm

Streetcars on Payne Avenue please! We'll need a new City Councilmember first. Rice Street would also be a great corridor and has a friendly council member already.

I agree that extending Riverview up for a connection to Rush makes sense. I was thinking that could happen at Arcade/Phalen. However, it seems you're suggesting it could happen at Earl. Currently Earl is not a suggested stop for the Rush Line, however it was of interest to Mike Rogers a while back. He thought that a stop at Earl would be good in order to have a bus connection between the Rush Line and the Gold Line at Earl and Hudson (Earl also has a traffic light at Maryland and could be designed to have a straight shot up to Lake Phalen). Unfortunately, Earl is above grade at both Phalen and 7th streets and doesn't seem like a great development spot.

As for Riverview on East 7th, Commissioner McDonough responded to the suggestion with "We are talking about it." I take that as a good sign. I have a great deal of respect for Commissioner McDonough.

Posts: 5621
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
Location: Standish-Ericsson

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby twincitizen » March 10th, 2017, 8:12 am

Jesus, they aren't going to make a route decision until September http://www.startribune.com/riverview-co ... 415827704/

Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1426
Joined: September 29th, 2012, 10:41 am

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby talindsay » March 10th, 2017, 8:29 am

Seriously though, no reason to rush. The CTIB disbanding documents show Ramsey taking 70% of the cost (local match?) and Hennepin taking 30%; with Hennepin basically committing singlehandedly to pay for both Southwest and Bottineau, it's going to be a while before they can afford this one, and I know the CTIB at least was mulling doing this one without a federal grant. Even if it ends up being under $1B total (which is totally reasonable), that makes for a huge chunk of change right after the county's paid almost $1B each to Southwest and Bottineau. And Ramsey probably isn't in a rush to spend $700m themselves.

Posts: 5621
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
Location: Standish-Ericsson

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby twincitizen » March 10th, 2017, 9:58 am

True, there is no real reason to rush now, with the pending breakup of CTIB, not to mention the uncertain future with federal funding for transit. But on the other hand, this Alternatives Analysis was supposed to be complete a year ago.

My main criticism is that they should have separately studied the river crossings first, then started the full-scope AA. RCRRA is just lighting money on fire and holding pointless additional public meetings while they struggle to come to a decision on this. I would love to hear the backroom actual politics on this (i.e. which route does Commissioner Ortega support, which route does Commissioner McLaughlin support, etc.) because that is ultimately a huge factor in the decision on these LRT routes (e.g. Bottineau, Southwest)

Return to “Transportation”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: alleycat, BoredAgain and 3 guests