Prospect Park - General Topics

Northeast, Near North, Camden, Old St. Anthony, University and surrounding neighborhoods
User avatar
Nick
Capella Tower
Posts: 3006
Joined: May 30th, 2012, 9:33 pm
Location: Loring Park, Minneapolis

Re: Prospect Park - General Topics

Postby Nick » April 25th, 2017, 6:35 pm

Serafina wrote:
April 25th, 2017, 1:21 pm
The Planning Commission also apparent almost killed the Malcolm Yards proposal yesterday following a staff report recommending denying the move from "Industrial" to "Transitional Industrial" for the site, but there was vigorous neighborhood support of it at the meeting.
We voted for it 7-1! The comp plan change, technically, not any specific development proposal.

Didier
Capella Tower
Posts: 2434
Joined: June 3rd, 2012, 10:11 am
Location: MSP

Re: Prospect Park - General Topics

Postby Didier » April 26th, 2017, 11:42 am

More info: https://www.minnpost.com/politics-polic ... ign=buffer

Also, what are people's views on adding another transitway crossing at 30th Avenue? Part of me thinks access via Malcolm would be plenty, but perhaps two medium crossings would be better than one busy crossing at Malcolm.

twincitizen
Moderator
Posts: 6203
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
Location: Standish-Ericsson

Re: Prospect Park - General Topics

Postby twincitizen » April 26th, 2017, 1:45 pm

Props to Peter Callaghan for a really well-written article. He succinctly sums up why staff took the position they did, and why the Planning Commission decided to go against the staff recommendation. Staff doesn't make policy; that's the role of policymakers (City Council & Planning Commission). Staff's job is to interpret, administer, and enforce the codes/rules/plans that are currently on the books, in this case the existing Comprehensive Plan. I think staff acted correctly in recommending against the Comp Plan amendment and the Planning Commission correctly bucked that recommendation, deciding that a policy change was appropriate for this area.
Among the staff conclusions were that: “The proposed change would not be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan goals and policies, and would be premature given that critical conversation and analysis are currently underway regarding employment and employment disparities as part of the citywide Comprehensive Plan update.”

“Under the policies of the current Comprehensive Plan, which have been reaffirmed multiple times, it is not in the City’s interest for redevelopment of this land to be used for uses other than industrial or office,” the department found.

Serafina
Block E
Posts: 22
Joined: March 18th, 2015, 8:25 am

Re: Prospect Park - General Topics

Postby Serafina » April 26th, 2017, 2:10 pm

I second the props to Peter Callaghan on the article. He delineation of the issues is very helpful.

As far as transitway crossings go, the consensus in the neighborhood is that they are important to have. I'm torn and prefer to take a wait-and-see approach as the development plans solidify. Right now, if I recall correctly, the plan is for the new parkland to extend from what is currently a community garden on the south side of the transitway up to the grain elevators on the north side. It seems unlikely that people arriving at Prospect Park Station by the community garden would walk all the way up to Malcolm to cross the transitway, even once the lovely planned Green 4th Street is lovely and green.

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

Re: Prospect Park - General Topics

Postby FISHMANPET » April 26th, 2017, 2:20 pm

Isn't the role of the Planning Commission also to interpret existing policy and make sure developments are consistent with the comprehensive plan? Though I guess a comp plan amendment is by definition not consistent with the comp plan as written, so if they're expected to review, it there must be some expectation that there will be some policy guidance from the Planning Commission.

Didier
Capella Tower
Posts: 2434
Joined: June 3rd, 2012, 10:11 am
Location: MSP

Re: Prospect Park - General Topics

Postby Didier » April 26th, 2017, 3:17 pm

Serafina wrote:
April 26th, 2017, 2:10 pm
It seems unlikely that people arriving at Prospect Park Station by the community garden would walk all the way up to Malcolm to cross the transitway, even once the lovely planned Green 4th Street is lovely and green.
If you're on foot or bike, you can already access the transitway from 29th Avenue, which is the road where the Prospect Park LRT station is, and also on 30th Avenue, so that's not so much an issue.

The bigger concern is whether cars should be allowed to cross at one or both locations, or if they should instead be routed through Malcolm. I'm torn on extending 30th. It'd be marginally more direct than Malcolm, but eastbound University traffic will still have to be routed through Malcolm, so essentially this would serve to cut off 1-2 blocks of driving for half the cars, all the while adding another crossing to the transitway.

So I kind of lean toward restricting crossings of the transitway.

Serafina
Block E
Posts: 22
Joined: March 18th, 2015, 8:25 am

Re: RE: Re: Prospect Park - General Topics

Postby Serafina » April 26th, 2017, 5:09 pm

Didier wrote:
Serafina wrote:
April 26th, 2017, 2:10 pm
It seems unlikely that people arriving at Prospect Park Station by the community garden would walk all the way up to Malcolm to cross the transitway, even once the lovely planned Green 4th Street is lovely and green.
If you're on foot or bike, you can already access the transitway from 29th Avenue, which is the road where the Prospect Park LRT station is, and also on 30th Avenue, so that's not so much an issue.

The bigger concern is whether cars should be allowed to cross at one or both locations, or if they should instead be routed through Malcolm. I'm torn on extending 30th. It'd be marginally more direct than Malcolm, but eastbound University traffic will still have to be routed through Malcolm, so essentially this would serve to cut off 1-2 blocks of driving for half the cars, all the while adding another crossing to the transitway.

So I kind of lean toward restricting crossings of the transitway.
It's true that with the low vehicle traffic on the transitway, that's probably not an issue. And with the planned district parking, hopefully the whole area can be more friendly for people on foot and bike.

A traffic light at Malcolm, however, like the one at the western end of the transitory, would be welcome sooner rather than later. Drivers seem very confused coming from Surly.

Sent from my SD4930UR using Tapatalk


martykoessel
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 197
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 9:12 am

Re: Prospect Park - General Topics

Postby martykoessel » April 27th, 2017, 11:34 am

Re: Serafina "Drivers seem very confused coming from Surly."

Hmm. I wonder why that could be?




PS: Just in case iit needs to be said, this is supposed to be lighthearted. I'm not really saying that drivers coming from Surly are drunk.

Didier
Capella Tower
Posts: 2434
Joined: June 3rd, 2012, 10:11 am
Location: MSP

Re: Prospect Park - General Topics

Postby Didier » April 27th, 2017, 12:54 pm

That's why I'm a little hesitant to add more crossings to the transitway, though. All of those crossings seem to create confusion for drivers, for whatever reason.

BoredAgain
Landmark Center
Posts: 251
Joined: July 3rd, 2014, 1:38 pm
Location: Lyndale Neighborhood

Re: Prospect Park - General Topics

Postby BoredAgain » April 27th, 2017, 4:00 pm

Didier wrote:
April 27th, 2017, 12:54 pm
That's why I'm a little hesitant to add more crossings to the transitway, though. All of those crossings seem to create confusion for drivers, for whatever reason.
I drive and have crossed that intersection with a car, so I feel fully capable of speaking for everyone else on this issue.

It is confusing because we are so unaccustomed to yielding for a crossing that does not have cars or train tracks on it. Also, given the size of the intersection and the level of traffic on the transitway, we (drivers) would normally be expecting a four way stop, which is not the case here. Finally, the geometry of the intersection is abnormal. The transitway is narrower than a normal street and the fact that the corners are designed to discourage turning makes the crossing "feel weird".

lordmoke
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1377
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 1:39 pm
Location: Nicollet Island

Re: Prospect Park - General Topics

Postby lordmoke » April 27th, 2017, 4:27 pm

As a heavy bicycle user of the transitway, I would advocate against adding more crossings for reasons already articulated here. I've lost count of the number of close calls I've had with Surly patrons failing to yield the right of way at the Malcom crossing. Furthermore, the University owns the land the transitway sits on (I'm assuming the crossings exist through easements) and receives no benefit by adding lights that would only slow down their own traffic from current speeds. So that scenario seems unlikely.

Slight aside, but the commercial and industrial truck drivers crossing the transitway do a terrific job of abiding by the posted ROW.

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

Re: Prospect Park - General Topics

Postby RailBaronYarr » April 28th, 2017, 9:29 am

Couldn't the buses, which already have signal preemption technology installed (for the light at Energy Park Drive) (...right?.) just get priority at these signals? The city/developer should pay for the cost of the technology on the signals, but I think there's public benefit to having additional crossings and most of the drawbacks to the University (delay) can be mitigated.

EOst
Capella Tower
Posts: 2304
Joined: March 19th, 2014, 8:05 pm
Location: North End, Saint Paul

Re: Prospect Park - General Topics

Postby EOst » April 28th, 2017, 1:43 pm

Buses might get priority, but bikes sure wouldn't. The fewer stoplights on the Transitway the better, IMO.

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

Re: Prospect Park - General Topics

Postby RailBaronYarr » April 28th, 2017, 3:09 pm

I dunno, I guess it's not that hard to imagine that the stoplight would remain green for the transitway unless a car 'begs' to cross it, or very, very long timed signals to cross it. There are bike detectors/cameras that could give someone approaching a (rare) red light on a bike an green within short order. The same could be done for bikes trying to cross it - detect a bike and give an immediate green unless it knows a bus is coming, and only give the green for a few seconds (whereas cars trying to cross must wait a while).

The Green Line was pretty rough at the beginning, but if we can figure out how to give it priority along a busy street with tons of stoplights that have varying amounts of cross traffic (but all much higher than in PP), I think we can make it work here.

ProspectPete
Union Depot
Posts: 308
Joined: August 6th, 2013, 12:49 pm

Re: Prospect Park - General Topics

Postby ProspectPete » April 28th, 2017, 4:00 pm

With all the new construction, (housing, athletic infrastructure, and restaurants) I wonder if a stop would ever be put in near 29th or 30th on the intercampus bus way.

wheresmysocks
Block E
Posts: 4
Joined: January 26th, 2015, 10:02 pm
Location: Saint Paul

Re: Prospect Park - General Topics

Postby wheresmysocks » May 2nd, 2017, 7:42 pm

I agree that the presumed Surly patrons have been the most egregious offenders of rolling stops/failure to yield, compared to commercial traffic which usually gives both ways a long look before moving. All three traffic lights on the transitway are triggered by ground-based detectors, ones that I can consistently trigger on bike. I'd be okay with a light at Malcolm that follows the same basic pattern of a far detector (timed for a bus to catch the leading edge of a green and a bike to catch the tail end) and one at the intersection--people will hopefully be less likely to play chicken with me at a red light vs. a stop sign with blinking light.

Silophant
Moderator
Posts: 3826
Joined: June 20th, 2012, 4:33 pm
Location: The Gateway

Re: Prospect Park - General Topics

Postby Silophant » June 22nd, 2017, 5:53 pm

Not one, but two new apartment buildings by Prospect Park Station hit the CPC CoW agenda for next week.

First, 4th St Lofts, a 6-story, 163-(micro)unit, student-oriented building at 29th and 4th, in the curve of the LRT track.

Second, Aeon is proposing a five-story, 70-unit affordable building at 30th and 4th, across 30th from the Green on 4th project.

While it's good to see continued development here, I'm a little underwhelmed by these projects. More affordable housing is good, but I had dared to hope we'd be almost done with student-oriented housing in this area. More importantly, the new green 4th street will be active and cool, but neither of these buildings seems to do a particularly good job addressing it.

Qhaberl
Foshay Tower
Posts: 807
Joined: February 25th, 2016, 9:51 am

Re: Prospect Park - General Topics

Postby Qhaberl » June 23rd, 2017, 8:09 am

I don't think the new student housing is a bad thing. Most of the new buildings, rise at Prospect Park, green on fourth, there's another one but I don't know the name, are not student housing. I think it's good to have a nice mix of market rate, affordable, luxury, and senior housing in the area.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Didier
Capella Tower
Posts: 2434
Joined: June 3rd, 2012, 10:11 am
Location: MSP

Re: Prospect Park - General Topics

Postby Didier » August 30th, 2017, 7:57 pm

Here's a video about the stormwater plans for the Towerside district

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrY1ohM ... ovdelivery

User avatar
Anondson
IDS Center
Posts: 4046
Joined: July 21st, 2013, 8:57 pm
Location: Where West Minneapolis Once Was

Re: Prospect Park - General Topics

Postby Anondson » August 30th, 2017, 9:15 pm

Good stuff.


Return to “Minneapolis - North, Northeast, and Southeast / University of Minnesota”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests