urbanMSP

I'm sorry, but the notion that the sloped wall on the south side of the Midtown trench is somehow sacrosanct makes a parody of historic preservation.

Just because something is old does not give it intrinsic veto power over any subsequent improvement.

This is like the supposed "railroad historic district" that the feds required the Met Council to study the impacts from Southwest LRT construction. This "railroad historic district" consists of gravel pits, a freeway viaduct, and a crumbling retaining wall*.

*The retaining wall supported a railroad trestle, and if the trestle were still there then I could see the merit of studying impacts to that, but it was torn down decades ago.

The abundant green of the Midtown Greenway trench isn't an incidental quality, it's key to the success of the trail as a recreational amenity and intimately connected to its appeal as a commuting option. You can see that in the very different use that a trail like the Hiawatha trail.

Sometimes there are comments here that seem to think people are actually routing algorithms whose only goal is optimizing travel times to the greatest possible degree. We aren't, and we don't think that way.

I mean, it's kind of absurd to contrast the Greenway with the Hiawatha Trail and come to the conclusion that it's the grass that makes the Greenway more popular. It may be a factor, but let me list a few other possible factors:
* The Greenway is wider than Hiawatha
* The Greenway has a consistent asphalt path for its entire length, while the Hiawatha trail meanders and changes surface
* The Hiawatha Trail actually looks like a sidewalk along various stretches, while the Greenway looks like a road
* The Greenway is grade-separated, while Hiawatha is not
* The Hiawatha Trail has busy street crossings at some regularity, which are tied in with railroad-style LRT operations, while the Greenway does not
* The Hiawatha Trail has very low density along most of its length, while the Greenway has high density along most of its length
* The Hiawatha Trail has a somewhat difficult entry path into the only dense area along its length (downtown) while the Greenway cuts right through the center of its high density neighborhoods
* The Greenway has grass, sloping walls along some of its southern exposure, while the Hiawatha Trail does not.

I don't know that one could genuinely argue that the final point is the one that drives use.

The abundant green of the Midtown Greenway trench isn't an incidental quality, it's key to the success of the trail as a recreational amenity and intimately connected to its appeal as a commuting option. You can see that in the very different use that a trail like the Hiawatha trail.

Sometimes there are comments here that seem to think people are actually routing algorithms whose only goal is optimizing travel times to the greatest possible degree. We aren't, and we don't think that way.

It's not that at all; I just don't think that modifications to the walls are inherently incompatible with that appeal. Here's a spot where climbing/hanging plants help maintain that sense of greenery even with a retaining wall. Here's a segment where the walls are vertical but there's still a buffer of wild greenery.

It's not like there are two options, one being zero changes and the other being a concrete ditch à la the Los Angeles River. It's also not likely that there would be any reason to remove all the sloped walls, or shrubs, or whatever other feature--the corridor varies in width and any changes would probably be focused on chokepoints. In fact, it's really the bridges that I worry about as a more likely sticking point than the walls.

What talindsay and tmart said, but also, the "green" part of the Greenway is most definitely not historic. It should definitely be a key part of any future design, but I don't understand insisting on keeping any single particular feature.

The B line has been funded!

Amazing!

I don’t think it’s funded yet. Doesn’t it still need the state senate to vote?

I don’t think it’s funded yet. Doesn’t it still need the state senate to vote?

It does. My bad I didn't read that correct and got to excited

The governor still needs to sign it (and he has announced that he will), but the bill just passed the Senate 64-3.

Bus Rapid Transit Lines
$55,000,000
For design, engineering, right-of-way
acquisition, and construction of the B line bus
rapid transit line between Minneapolis and St.
Paul, and the D line bus rapid transit line
between Brooklyn Center and Bloomington.
To the extent money remains after the B line
and D line projects are completed, this
appropriation is also for preliminary design,
design, and engineering of the E line bus rapid
transit from Minneapolis to Southdale Transit Center.

Big week for BRT news: the Draft Corridor Plan has been posted. Probably the biggest surprise is that they're pitching an "Extensive Bus Priority" scenario in which the outer general-purpose lane would become a bus-only lane for the entire width of Minneapolis - from the river to Excelsior Boulevard.

Very cool to see them pushing for (or at least mentioning) a dedicated lane. This is basically the biggest missing feature in the arterial BRT network so far.

I really hope they consider a few extra stops on Lake St. Adding Dupont (serving Cub Foods), Pleasant (serving Karmel Mall), and 12th Ave (Powderhorn Park) could eliminate the need for the 21 bus completely and allow the B Line to run even more frequently.

Ethan Fawley on Twitter seemed to suggest that just converting the outside lanes to bus-only lanes is unlikely for safety reasons:

Do people on here think the plan is doable? The bus lanes would be ideal. The C Line is basically a limited stop line in some ways. Bus lanes would let this line become more. Also, where the bus stops in the traffic lanes, is going to be a mess. It is a mess on Penn Ave, and there isn't as much traffic there.

I mean the bus stops in traffic lanes now so it can't be worse, right?

If Midtown LRT were happening there would be less pressure for a dedicated bus lane west of Hiawatha. East of Hiawatha a dedicated lane seems more doable.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

I mean the bus stops in traffic lanes now so it can't be worse, right?

If Midtown LRT were happening there would be less pressure for a dedicated bus lane west of Hiawatha. East of Hiawatha a dedicated lane seems more doable.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

There is a difference between a bus pulling over and partially blocking a lane, then stopping dead in a lane with the station bump outs. There will be accidents.

You'd also have to ban left turns throughout much of the corridor, or else replace bumpouts and parking with new left turn lanes. Not saying this is a bad thing or unworkable, but something to be considered. Based on my observations, Lake Street is already a de-facto single through lane due to the amount of traffic stopped to make left or right turns.

Seems to me if you did a traffic study you'll find that the bus lanes will increase the flow of traffic overall. Since the buses won't be blocking the traffic lanes and the bus lane would also serve as a buffer between the sidewalk and traffic. Also cars veering around buses raises the chances of accidents and impedes the flow of traffic.

Yeah, Lake St is already a mess. Especially in the winter when people still insist on parking on it on heavy snow years. Midtown rail could be so great, especially if they could line it up with the Blue and Green lines. Disappointing that we have heard so little about it from our politicians.

A rail line down the greenway would really fix alot of the transit issues on lake st.
I know there was a issue as to why it wasnt pushed for but im not sure what it was.