Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Roads - Rails - Sidewalks - Bikeways
cooperrez
Landmark Center
Posts: 246
Joined: October 2nd, 2014, 10:46 am
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby cooperrez » February 28th, 2017, 2:53 pm

Welcome to the forum and thanks for the post. I expect this meeting to be heated. I hope they have a larger space secured than last week's Oppidan Project meeting at Hiawatha Park Rec Center, might help keep the tension level down.

hiawather
Metrodome
Posts: 57
Joined: February 28th, 2017, 2:10 pm

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby hiawather » February 28th, 2017, 3:20 pm

I unfortunately don't see an option to edit my post. I meant to write "Hiawatha (and surrounding neighborhoods)...Nextdoor site".

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7752
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby mattaudio » February 28th, 2017, 3:59 pm

That NO crowd used to love it when I parked Car2Gos in front of their houses. They were whiners about that, about Minnehaha Park plans, about everything.

hiawather
Metrodome
Posts: 57
Joined: February 28th, 2017, 2:10 pm

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby hiawather » February 28th, 2017, 4:14 pm

Yes, unfortunately as I've spent more time on Nextdoor I've come to the conclusion that it ought to be named "NIMBYdoor". Clearly there are valid concerns but they are not expressed as loudly or often as...the other concerns.

I should reiterate that I'm in the Hiawatha neighborhood of Minneapolis so I'll admit I've paid little attention to the (majority) part of the line running through St. What's-It-Called-Again?

Concerns are, in general (some nonsensical, some valid):

- safety: LRT's a killer! My kids won't be able to run into the street anymore if a ball flies out of my yard!
- noise/vibration: one guy insists all forms of rail will be louder than buses - it can't even be debated because it's so, so true
- increased traffic in general (not sure why this is an argument used against rail, but it is...)
- decreased home values for the homes directly on the tracks
- overhead power lines
- 'why did we just build BRT there when we're going to build rail'
- "We'll lose a lane of traffic each way! The sidewalks will be smaller!" (despite...facts)
- The trains HAVE to blow their horns at every intersection (despite...facts)
- We won't be able to cross 46th on foot anymore! (this one puzzles me the most. Perhaps there is some connection between walking over embedded rails and spontaneous combustion that I'm ignorant of).
- All change is bad, always and forever
- Why would we pay so much for an end-to-end system that doesn't save time?


It doesn't seem to matter if the discussion is about LRT or streetcars/trollies, though there seems to be a slight preference for trollies (if rail of any kind is considered at all).

David Greene
IDS Center
Posts: 4617
Joined: December 4th, 2012, 11:41 am

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby David Greene » February 28th, 2017, 4:24 pm

- Why would we pay so much for an end-to-end system that doesn't save time?
Beyond that, everything else is noise.

This line ain't happening as rail.

Silophant
Moderator
Posts: 4471
Joined: June 20th, 2012, 4:33 pm
Location: Whimsical NE

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby Silophant » February 28th, 2017, 4:32 pm

As an aside, I'm a little jealous of everyone who gets to read interesting/toxic conversations on Nextdoor. The downtown version is pretty much just Craigslist.
Joey Senkyr
[email protected]

cooperrez
Landmark Center
Posts: 246
Joined: October 2nd, 2014, 10:46 am
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby cooperrez » March 2nd, 2017, 2:51 pm

Story from KSTP:

http://kstp.com/news/riverview-corridor ... e/4414027/

Pretty sure all the riders will be flashing gang signs too.

amiller92
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1983
Joined: October 31st, 2014, 12:50 pm

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby amiller92 » March 2nd, 2017, 3:00 pm

Dude, the street would be less busy and as it currently exists, has to be terrible to live next to.

cooperrez
Landmark Center
Posts: 246
Joined: October 2nd, 2014, 10:46 am
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby cooperrez » March 2nd, 2017, 6:03 pm

KSTP is here covering the meeting. I guess they're expecting heated discussion.

User avatar
FISHMANPET
IDS Center
Posts: 4241
Joined: June 6th, 2012, 2:19 pm
Location: Corcoran

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby FISHMANPET » March 2nd, 2017, 10:10 pm

Isn't there some giant park we can run this through so we don't have to upset any neighbors?

Silophant
Moderator
Posts: 4471
Joined: June 20th, 2012, 4:33 pm
Location: Whimsical NE

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby Silophant » March 2nd, 2017, 10:51 pm

It does seem like, in addition to the rail corridor, we should be considering having RVLRT replace the trail on the river side of Shepard. Possibly in a tunnel under the trail.
Joey Senkyr
[email protected]

Vagueperson
Union Depot
Posts: 311
Joined: June 17th, 2014, 7:13 am
Location: Payne-Phalen, St. Paul

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby Vagueperson » March 3rd, 2017, 7:28 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.

TroyGBiv
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 658
Joined: July 6th, 2012, 10:33 pm

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby TroyGBiv » March 4th, 2017, 1:34 am

KSTP hates LRT... they have never done a positive story about it... Hubbard is against all forms of public transit... if you search their news regarding transit you will not find a single story that is even neutral...

User avatar
Tiller
Foshay Tower
Posts: 964
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?

Vagueperson
Union Depot
Posts: 311
Joined: June 17th, 2014, 7:13 am
Location: Payne-Phalen, St. Paul

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.

twincitizen
Moderator
Posts: 6368
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/

talindsay
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1533
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.

twincitizen
Moderator
Posts: 6368
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)

User avatar
Tiller
Foshay Tower
Posts: 964
Joined: January 17th, 2015, 11:58 am

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby Tiller » April 4th, 2017, 12:21 pm

Does anyone have some information on this?
False information distributed about Riverview Corridor Project
On April 1, 2017, a third-party, not associated with the Riverview Corridor Transit Study, distributed information on official-looking letterhead advertising a public meeting on April 1 and stating the Riverview Corridor route had changed. There was not a meeting scheduled for Saturday, April 1 and the information in the flyer was false.

It has come to our attention that some neighbors acted on the information and attempted to attend the falsely advertised public meeting. The Riverview Corridor Transit Study team has gone to great lengths to seek meaningful public participation in our work to improve transit connections in Saint Paul. We value the time people choose to contribute to this work and take your ideas and concerns very seriously. We seek to be respectful of your time.
(quote from the Riverview website)

twincitizen
Moderator
Posts: 6368
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
Location: Standish-Ericsson

Re: Riverview Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby twincitizen » April 4th, 2017, 3:10 pm

I saw that too. Crazy.

Unrelated, but I never realized how drawn out the timeline for this project was. Project documents (which are more likely to be "best case" than "worst case") have construction starting in 2023 and the line opening in 2026 at the earliest. That's a damn long time!

Assuming Ramsey County will actually select a route and mode by the end of 2017 (as they are supposed to), they're planning for the project development and engineering process to take 5 years ('18-'22)? Mind you, this line is magnitudes shorter and simpler than Southwest (which at this point has taken a similar length of time, but that's with >2 years of unplanned delays). It's almost as if they know this thing is going to get hung up in court, etc. and want to be realistic from the get-go. That or the lengthy schedule has something to do with Ramsey County's funding ability. Recall, this line was to be up to 80% funded by CTIB, with less federal support than previous lines. Even with a sales tax increase (if CTIB manages to split), it will take Ramsey County some time to be able to fund this project. I suppose one benefit of the drawn out timeline is that we'll (hopefully) have a Democratic President by the time a federal grant agreement would happen (2022ish). On the bright side, Riverview's timeline is so lengthy that a one-term Trump administration is unlikely to cause it any delays!


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 41 guests