Riverview Corridor Streetcar

[froggie]

Anyone have copies of the old Riverview studies? Did they ever talk about using the CP Ford Spur?

You can find the old study at the MnDOT Library, which is where I found it and photocopied several pages.

[Tcmetro]

Here's an old concept for a Riverview-Rush Line LRT I drew up a long time ago:

https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=20 ... 2,0.676346

[HiawathaGuy]

Posted in the 7th Street BRT thread as well:

Transit in Riverview Corridor getting fresh look
September 13, 2014
http://www.startribune.com/local/west/275016591.html

[ProspectPete]

The ford rail spur, along with the land that the old Ford plant sits on, is a great opportunity to tie in Union Depot to the airport and MOA. Furthermore, looking at the PDF by the city shows how it skirts right along some of the newer TOD projects like Schmidt lofts and Victoria park...even Ford pkwy and Cleveland are within walking distance of the terminus of the spur, although they could run it where they want to when they are in that clearing.
I hope they realize what a once in a city lifetime opportunity they have before them and don't blow it. I also wish I was younger and could see how it all turns out since I know the glacial pace that transit projects move at in St Paul.

[mulad]

Just so we have it in this thread too, there was an F&C article about a TIGER grant for studying the spur line from near West 7th & St. Clair to the former Ford plant. The study itself is budgeted for $200k, so this provides half the money for that.

Here's a study proposal from 2013: http://www.stpaul.gov/DocumentCenter/View/72236 (PDF, takes a while to load)

[David Greene]

Due to the nature of the river gorge, any LRT would pretty much have to cross at the Fort Snelling/MN-5 bridge, right? The feds aren't going to like a new bridge over a national park. How would a CP spur line transition to that bridge?

[kellonathan]

Due to the nature of the river gorge, any LRT would pretty much have to cross at the Fort Snelling/MN-5 bridge, right? The feds aren't going to like a new bridge over a national park. How would a CP spur line transition to that bridge?

I would like to echo this. It's going to be a challenge to tie an LRT line coming out of the spur to the existing blue line ROW. Seems like there is a similar Google Maps already posted above, but here is my take on the possible alignments I drew a while ago.

https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid= ... Q_q8p3SwKk

On an unrelated thought, I propose calling this corridor "METRO Red Line" if it ever gets built as a rail corridor. I can't get over the fact that we 'wasted' a valuable primary color on a quasi-dysfunctional suburban bus service. (If we can't take the existing Red Line out of the METRO scheme, I think we could rename it something like "METRO Red Line Link.")

Oh, my pipeline dream.

[mulad]

We've tossed around a bunch of ideas before. kellonathan's suggestion of building a new bridge from that spur of the spur is nice since it could impact as few as 3 or 4 properties -- the cost of the new bridge would be substantial, though. I've tended to prefer following West 7th, which has a fair amount of room available if you don't mind knocking out a few apartment garages and modest commercial buildings. Add a second deck to the MN-5 bridge, and you can have an "at-grade" station for the historic Fort Snelling site. Linking that into the existing airport tunnels or creating new tunnels becomes tricky, though.

[MNdible]

Since we're talking about fantastical routings, wouldn't it be easier as well as more beneficial (even if it takes things a little bit more out of their way) if it looped up through the redeveloping Ford site, and then either across the Ford Parkway Bridge, or perhaps across a new bridge that could straddle the dam and then through the MN Veterans Facility?

[EOst]

That would significantly limit its utility for DT St. Paul -> Airport/MOA, though. I'd imagine it would add at least 10-15 minutes to the trip.

[MNdible]

10 minutes, tops, assuming two additional stops. But I think that's a totally worthwhile detour based on the utility you'd be adding to the line. Like with the Green Line, you can't get too hung up on end-to-end routings, because not that many people will actually use it that way. I guarantee you that you'll have more people using the line to go from western St. Paul to downtown Minneapolis (via a transfer to the Blue Line) than you will from downtown St. Paul to the airport.

In addition, having LRT serving the Ford site will definitely make the likelihood of high density development there more likely.

[VAStationDude]

Agreed. Once you're on the light rail it's only 8 minutes from 46th street to the airport. St Paul Avenue and W7th to the airport by bus is about six minutes. I think connecting the below the bluff part of Highland Park to downtown Minneapolis with a two seat rail ride is more beneficial than improving the airport transit service only slightly. Obviously I haven't run the numbers but the grade separated bits required by a route over highway 5 bridge would have to be more expensive than the longer route through the Ford site to the 46th street station.

[David Greene]

Y'all are also ignoring the regulatory hurdles to another bridge over the gorge.

[ProspectPete]

I love the fantasy map by kellonathan, but maybe nix the Edgecumbe road stop. Nothing really there but a fire station.
Also, what about the bridge, crossing a bit north so it would cross nearer to the lock and dam (Wauban park and the VA)?
It could still tie into the Blue line as you had it.
Bridges are expensive yes, but this would give more bang for the buck than the shallow tunnels coming soon to a forest near you.
Also, could it be a multi use bridge (bikes and peds) like they just made in Portland?
Like this: http://www.citylab.com/commute/2014/08/ ... rs/378665/

[kellonathan]

Guys, guys, guys. Sorry it wasn't clear enough on my fantasy map. It's not a bridge---it's a tunnel. I know it's going to be ridiculously expensive, but if we can build a tunnel between lakes, why the hell not?

[MNdible]

Well, if it's a tunnel that goes under the river that's starting on top of the bluff... you've got a little bit of a topography problem to deal with.

[mulad]

The gauge on your snark-o-meter may be sticking.

[RailBaronYarr]

As long as we're talking fantasy crossings at 46th (or near), I'll toss this idea out again... Midtown Line and Riverview are one in the same. Using planned Greenway travel times, known Blue Line travel times, and estimated Riverview travel times using an existin rail corridor (not on W 7th), a Yellow Line could go from West Lake to Midtown, interline with Blue Line tracks, head to Ford Plant, and reach the southern edge of DT StP in about 35 minutes (I estimated 20 minutes to go from 46th/Hiawatha to DTSP based on Blue Line run times over long distances). Those looking to go DTSP-MSP could make a single, rail-to-rail transfer at 46th or choose to take a direct route aBRT down W 7th (whenever that happens).

Many areas of St Paul (including the new Ford Plant neighborhood) get a single-seat ride to many S Minneapolis neighborhoods, including Uptown. This also represents a much faster travel time from West Lake to DTSP than taking the future SWLRT Green Line - an estimated 8 minutes from West Lake to Nicollet plus the ~48 minutes from Nicollet to Central - 56 total. Worth the transfer penalty (avg 5 minutes).

I don't know the cost difference between a 46th/Ford bridge crossing vs MN-5 (Maybe this study will evaluate both?), and I'd be curious to see the ridership hit by losing a direct MSP connection (of course, buses do exist).

[froggie]

Well, if it's a tunnel that goes under the river that's starting on top of the bluff... you've got a little bit of a topography problem to deal with.

Yep.

I did a little more analysis on this. River elevation at that point is 687ft. Figure you need about 60ft of depth to clear the bottom of the river, so that puts bottom of the rails at 627ft. On the St. Paul side, the rail line at Edgcumbe Rd is just under 810ft in elevation...let's call it 807ft. That's 180ft elevation change.

Maximum allowable consistent grade for LRT is 6%. For 180ft of elevation change, that means 3000ft is needed to clear the bluff. That would put the start of the tunnel about 300ft west of Edgcumbe Rd.

The Minneapolis side is more troublesome. Hwy 62 is about 830ft in elevation at the Hiawatha interchange. The LRT bridge is about 25ft above that, which puts the LRT tracks at an elevation of about 855ft, or a 228ft elevation change from the river. At a 6% grade, that means a distance of 3800ft. Wrapping it around the way kellonathan suggests, it wouldn't be able to clear the freeway until it's almost across from the GSA building. There's no way to tie it into the existing LRT overpass and keep the grade at or under 6%.

I just don't see it as feasible. You're looking at a mile-and-a-third long tunnel under a major river and navigable waterway, through sensitive parkland, potential Superfund sites (on the old Bureau of Mines property), and with a sharp corner (to get it across the freeway and tied into the GSA station). Much more realistic would be tying it into 46th or the Hwy 5 bridge, though personally I'd reserve Ford Bridge for a streetcar and run LRT down under Fort Snelling to the airport. This is what I came up with several years ago for the Riverview corridor.

[kellonathan]

Thanks for your insightful analysis, froggie. (and thanks for redirecting the discussion to be more practical and productive.)

With all the cost issues aside (for now), I am still trying to figure out how to
- efficiently diverge from the Blue Line tracks (operation and signal-wise)
- cross MN-55 and head to the river without touching the historic Fort Snelling
- and of course, cross Mississippi and merge w/ W 7th St. at grade.

Now I am imagining crossing over MN-55 and go underground to reach the 'lower-deck' of MN-5 bridge end cross Mississippi. And just like every other fantasy ideas, I don't know if utilizing the existing MN-5 bridge (i.e. adding a lower-deck) is feasible---just letting my imagination fly for now.

(*I updated my map with more feasible river crossing idea. Just in case if anyone's still interested.)