Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Roads - Rails - Sidewalks - Bikeways
Mdcastle
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1209
Joined: March 23rd, 2013, 8:28 am
Location: Bloomington, MN

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Postby Mdcastle » October 6th, 2021, 8:24 pm

Is there some reason they couldn't just remove signal preemption and have the 5 mph trains wait to cross 24th like they wait at multiple intersections on the other end (and just about every intersection on the Green Line?). Or would it still not be enough, maybe because of the volume of eastbound to northbound traffic? Could that traffic be encouraged to use Lindau instead of Killebrew and not cross the tracks?
I'm not opposed to a more grandiose solutions , just thinking out loud.

DanPatchToget
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1645
Joined: March 30th, 2016, 1:26 pm

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Postby DanPatchToget » October 6th, 2021, 11:22 pm

Does that crossing have signal preemption? When a southbound train is approaching sometimes the signals don't activate immediately, and the train stops just short of the crossing. Might be because the crossover switch in the MOA isn't lined for them yet, so the train has to wait.

I'd rather we just eliminate that complicated crossing, and if I could go back in time and decide the alignment for the Hiawatha Line it would've been above-grade with the station and transit hub located where the Radisson Blu now stands. That way there would still be close and easy access to the mall without the complicated crossing at 24th & Killebrew.

BoredAgain
Union Depot
Posts: 321
Joined: July 3rd, 2014, 1:38 pm
Location: Lyndale Neighborhood

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Postby BoredAgain » October 7th, 2021, 8:45 am

Part of me always hoped that the tracks for the red line would turn west after leaving the American Boulevard station, stop near IKEA and then continue down American Boulevard to serve that corridor. I recognize that the density there doesn't justify it yet, but that stretch of Bloomington that butts up against 494 is growing consistently.

tmart
Rice Park
Posts: 488
Joined: October 6th, 2017, 10:05 am
Location: Expat

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Postby tmart » October 7th, 2021, 1:48 pm

Part of me always hoped that the tracks for the red line would turn west after leaving the American Boulevard station, stop near IKEA and then continue down American Boulevard to serve that corridor. I recognize that the density there doesn't justify it yet, but that stretch of Bloomington that butts up against 494 is growing consistently.
It would also be a very nice transfer to/from the Orange Line.

Mdcastle
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1209
Joined: March 23rd, 2013, 8:28 am
Location: Bloomington, MN

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Postby Mdcastle » October 8th, 2021, 8:03 am

We get all these visions for what we'd like an area to be, but Home Depot and Target and Walser Toyota need to go somewhere. As a resident of Bloomington I don't want to have to drive to Burnsville to buy a toilet flapper or get my oil changes. They might as well stay on American as anywhere else, and they're right by freeway exits. That's where the city wants such high traffic uses. Right now the city is focusing on densifying Lyndale, so maybe we can find room for Freeway Ford somewhere on American and build a aBRT line down Lyndale.

User avatar
VacantLuxuries
Foshay Tower
Posts: 973
Joined: February 20th, 2015, 12:38 pm

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Postby VacantLuxuries » October 8th, 2021, 10:14 am

but Home Depot and Target and Walser Toyota need to go somewhere.
They aren't required to stay in their present form, at the very least. Cities aren't serving at the pleasure of businesses, big box retail and auto dealerships can choose to adapt to new urban forms that waste less land (as they've proven they can do in countless other markets) or they are free to locate elsewhere.

They're welcome to be part of the future, but they shouldn't be allowed to keep everyone in the asphalt wasteland of the mid 20th century.

LakeCharles
Foshay Tower
Posts: 898
Joined: January 16th, 2014, 8:34 am
Location: Kingfield

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Postby LakeCharles » October 8th, 2021, 10:22 am

We get all these visions for what we'd like an area to be, but Home Depot and Target and Walser Toyota need to go somewhere. As a resident of Bloomington I don't want to have to drive to Burnsville to buy a toilet flapper or get my oil changes. They might as well stay on American as anywhere else, and they're right by freeway exits. That's where the city wants such high traffic uses. Right now the city is focusing on densifying Lyndale, so maybe we can find room for Freeway Ford somewhere on American and build a aBRT line down Lyndale.
The vast majority of new stores that Target has built in the last 5 years are urban-style stores, most in mixed-use developments. They are not only capable of doing so, they clearly want to be doing it! So if Bloomington densifies, Target would be happy to follow their lead.

uptownbro
Rice Park
Posts: 451
Joined: February 10th, 2020, 11:00 pm

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Postby uptownbro » October 8th, 2021, 10:32 am

Agreed. Target seems to have zero issue with being part of a mixed use development. Even there remodel of the lake street target was designed to embrace the blue line as best as possible given the building. They and Amazon seem to be leading the pack for big retail on shifting to smaller/ less car centric retail.

DanPatchToget
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1645
Joined: March 30th, 2016, 1:26 pm

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Postby DanPatchToget » October 11th, 2021, 7:47 pm

Some notes from the CAC meeting tonight that I'm typing out while they're fresh in my mind from the meeting:
-both MOA and the city don't want Riverview included with the existing grade crossing at 24th Avenue & Old Shakopee Road considering the already long wait times with the Blue Line
-two options are being considered for relocation of the light rail station at MOA, both are next to 82nd Street & 24th Avenue, one is an at-grade station (Option 1) and one is an elevated station (Option 2)
-both options would have four tracks and two platforms, one platform for Riverview and one platform for the Blue Line
-Option 1 has a pedestrian skyway across 24th Avenue to connect to the existing transit station and MOA
-Option 2 has the platforms above 24th Avenue, and there would be access to the existing transit station and MOA
-the existing Highway 5 tunnel under Fort Snelling must be used, no widening of the existing tunnel or a brand new tunnel through there
-two options are being considered for Riverview using the existing tunnel, both include keeping four lanes, the first option has mixed-traffic operation across the bridge and trains operating in the middle lanes, while the second option has single-track dedicated ROW operation for Riverview on the north side of the bridge and tunnel
-both options would include removing the ramp from westbound 62/55 to airport-bound Highway 5 and filling in that land
-the first option would require trains to cross airport-bound Highway 5 at-grade, so traffic and/or railroad crossing signals would be installed
-the second option would have a single-track segment for half a mile or three-quarters of a mile

For MOA Station I like Option 2 the most. According to the presentation the travel time from 28th Avenue to the bus platforms at the transit center would be slightly shorter than the existing alignment, but the amount of walking between the elevated light rail platform and the transit center would be longer (I believe it was 44 seconds of walking with the existing alignment vs 2 minutes of walking with Option 2).

For the Highway 5 Tunnel I like the second option, though if it were up to me it would be double-track dedicated ROW and two car lanes. However, the single-track segment is very short, and I'd rather have dedicated ROW than trying to shoehorn trains with cars on that bridge and tunnel.

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

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Postby Tiller » October 11th, 2021, 7:56 pm

-two options are being considered for Riverview using the existing tunnel, both include keeping four lanes, the first option has mixed-traffic operation across the bridge and trains operating in the middle lanes, while the second option has single-track dedicated ROW operation for Riverview on the north side of the bridge and tunnel
-both options would include removing the ramp from westbound 62/55 to airport-bound Highway 5 and filling in that land
-the first option would require trains to cross airport-bound Highway 5 at-grade, so traffic and/or railroad crossing signals would be installed
-the second option would have a single-track segment for half a mile or three-quarters of a mile
:(

Mixed traffic and/or single-tracked. The elected officials calling the shots on this clearly don't use public transportation and are unwilling to prioritize it, even when spending over $1B.

Bakken2016
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1019
Joined: September 20th, 2017, 12:40 pm
Location: North Loop

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Postby Bakken2016 » October 11th, 2021, 8:00 pm

I agree, it’s definitely disappointing to here about mixed traffic/single tracking.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Online
Silophant
Moderator
Posts: 4470
Joined: June 20th, 2012, 4:33 pm
Location: Whimsical NE

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Postby Silophant » October 11th, 2021, 8:16 pm

So, Hwy 5 would be a limited-access 60mph freeway that also has LRVs merging onto it occasionally? Bonkers. Single-tracking for half a mile seems perfectly fine, there's never going to be better than 10-minute frequency on this line anyway with the Blue and Green interlinings on each end. It's still medium infuriating that that was never seriously considered for the Kenilworth corridor to avoid that tunnel that's eating the whole project.
Joey Senkyr
[email protected]

seanrichardryan
IDS Center
Posts: 4092
Joined: June 3rd, 2012, 9:33 pm
Location: Merriam Park, St. Paul

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Postby seanrichardryan » October 11th, 2021, 8:21 pm

Well, technically it's 50 through the tunnel area. I'd like to to see the Mendota Bridge and this section downgraded into parkways.
Q. What, what? A. In da butt.

DanPatchToget
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1645
Joined: March 30th, 2016, 1:26 pm

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Postby DanPatchToget » October 11th, 2021, 8:34 pm

So, Hwy 5 would be a limited-access 60mph freeway that also has LRVs merging onto it occasionally? Bonkers. Single-tracking for half a mile seems perfectly fine, there's never going to be better than 10-minute frequency on this line anyway with the Blue and Green interlinings on each end. It's still medium infuriating that that was never seriously considered for the Kenilworth corridor to avoid that tunnel that's eating the whole project.
With mixed-traffic operation the speed limit would be reduced to 35 mph, and with single-track operation the speed limit for car traffic would be 45 mph. They acknowledged there would need to be physical changes along the roadway to control driver behavior since just having signs won't make people slow down.

Good point about Kenilworth though. I wish I could find the study that showed a single-track option and why it was rejected, but I believe it was because of inconsistency with the rest of the double-track light rail network and the possibility of not being able to have 10-minute frequency in each direction. Seeing that both of those reasonings aren't being considered for Riverview makes me raise an eyebrow.

thespeedmccool
Union Depot
Posts: 347
Joined: January 29th, 2021, 1:02 pm

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Postby thespeedmccool » October 12th, 2021, 12:21 am

The Met Council/Metro Transit should make it clear they don't support this and refuse to be involved so Ramsey County will send this back to the drawing board. No reason at all we're talking about $1 billion+ for single-track, mixed-traffic operation.

If it it's this or nothing, I'd almost rather have nothing. I'm confident that expensive projects like the Green Line extension are worth the money because they'll provide a great service, but this is getting worse by the month. This project will neither further the political cause of transit nor improve service for riders. Streetcar to Bloomington makes no sense; this has to be LRT or aBRT.

DanPatchToget
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1645
Joined: March 30th, 2016, 1:26 pm

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Postby DanPatchToget » October 12th, 2021, 12:43 am

The Met Council/Metro Transit should make it clear they don't support this and refuse to be involved so Ramsey County will send this back to the drawing board. No reason at all we're talking about $1 billion+ for single-track, mixed-traffic operation.

If it it's this or nothing, I'd almost rather have nothing. I'm confident that expensive projects like the Green Line extension are worth the money because they'll provide a great service, but this is getting worse by the month. This project will neither further the political cause of transit nor improve service for riders. Streetcar to Bloomington makes no sense; this has to be LRT or aBRT.
How do you know Metro Transit and the Met Council are against it? Seems to me they support it, or are at least neutral.

One of the reasons I hate that Riverview is called a streetcar is because people seem to assume the entire route will be a slow and mixed-traffic mess like the streetcar failures around the country. This is not a "streetcar to Bloomington", this is light rail that will have short segments of mixed-traffic operation in St. Paul. Where exactly those segments will be and how long they will be, I don't know, and I wish the planners were more clear on that. However, for now I remain optimistic this will be an upgrade over the 54, which is already close to aBRT standards besides not having off-board fare payment. Single-track on a short stretch isn't optimal but not the end of the world either. I've seen tram routes in Europe with single-track and/or mixed-traffic operations that still perform well.

Trademark
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 642
Joined: March 31st, 2019, 11:22 am

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Postby Trademark » October 12th, 2021, 6:10 am

The Met Council/Metro Transit should make it clear they don't support this and refuse to be involved so Ramsey County will send this back to the drawing board. No reason at all we're talking about $1 billion+ for single-track, mixed-traffic operation.

If it it's this or nothing, I'd almost rather have nothing. I'm confident that expensive projects like the Green Line extension are worth the money because they'll provide a great service, but this is getting worse by the month. This project will neither further the political cause of transit nor improve service for riders. Streetcar to Bloomington makes no sense; this has to be LRT or aBRT.
How do you know Metro Transit and the Met Council are against it? Seems to me they support it, or are at least neutral.

One of the reasons I hate that Riverview is called a streetcar is because people seem to assume the entire route will be a slow and mixed-traffic mess like the streetcar failures around the country. This is not a "streetcar to Bloomington", this is light rail that will have short segments of mixed-traffic operation in St. Paul. Where exactly those segments will be and how long they will be, I don't know, and I wish the planners were more clear on that. However, for now I remain optimistic this will be an upgrade over the 54, which is already close to aBRT standards besides not having off-board fare payment. Single-track on a short stretch isn't optimal but not the end of the world either. I've seen tram routes in Europe with single-track and/or mixed-traffic operations that still perform well.
Has it ever been confirmed that they are planning on using more than one car trains?

Bakken2016
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1019
Joined: September 20th, 2017, 12:40 pm
Location: North Loop

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Postby Bakken2016 » October 12th, 2021, 6:30 am

The Met Council/Metro Transit should make it clear they don't support this and refuse to be involved so Ramsey County will send this back to the drawing board. No reason at all we're talking about $1 billion+ for single-track, mixed-traffic operation.

If it it's this or nothing, I'd almost rather have nothing. I'm confident that expensive projects like the Green Line extension are worth the money because they'll provide a great service, but this is getting worse by the month. This project will neither further the political cause of transit nor improve service for riders. Streetcar to Bloomington makes no sense; this has to be LRT or aBRT.
How do you know Metro Transit and the Met Council are against it? Seems to me they support it, or are at least neutral.

One of the reasons I hate that Riverview is called a streetcar is because people seem to assume the entire route will be a slow and mixed-traffic mess like the streetcar failures around the country. This is not a "streetcar to Bloomington", this is light rail that will have short segments of mixed-traffic operation in St. Paul. Where exactly those segments will be and how long they will be, I don't know, and I wish the planners were more clear on that. However, for now I remain optimistic this will be an upgrade over the 54, which is already close to aBRT standards besides not having off-board fare payment. Single-track on a short stretch isn't optimal but not the end of the world either. I've seen tram routes in Europe with single-track and/or mixed-traffic operations that still perform well.
Has it ever been confirmed that they are planning on using more than one car trains?
Pretty sure it is one car trains due to spacing, basically think MUNI in San Francisco, where most is dedicated and some parts are mixed traffic.

Trademark
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 642
Joined: March 31st, 2019, 11:22 am

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Postby Trademark » October 12th, 2021, 6:37 am



How do you know Metro Transit and the Met Council are against it? Seems to me they support it, or are at least neutral.

One of the reasons I hate that Riverview is called a streetcar is because people seem to assume the entire route will be a slow and mixed-traffic mess like the streetcar failures around the country. This is not a "streetcar to Bloomington", this is light rail that will have short segments of mixed-traffic operation in St. Paul. Where exactly those segments will be and how long they will be, I don't know, and I wish the planners were more clear on that. However, for now I remain optimistic this will be an upgrade over the 54, which is already close to aBRT standards besides not having off-board fare payment. Single-track on a short stretch isn't optimal but not the end of the world either. I've seen tram routes in Europe with single-track and/or mixed-traffic operations that still perform well.
Has it ever been confirmed that they are planning on using more than one car trains?
Pretty sure it is one car trains due to spacing, basically think MUNI in San Francisco, where most is dedicated and some parts are mixed traffic.
Yet another reason why it IS just a streetcar to Bloomington. Building something with such obvious capacity limitations for the next 100 years is unbelievable and is a sign that this project needs to go back to the drawing board. I know perfect is the enemy of the good. But I'm struggling to see the good in this project. Capacity isn't there, speed isn't there, reliability isn't there, improvement over existing services isn't there. This project needs to be cancelled.

Also cutting out the westbound 55 to airport 5 connection seems a little wierd to me. I guess they're just going to push airport traffic on to 494 from 62 so not the biggest deal in the world but when news gets out about this I expect a huge negative reaction.

alexschief
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1140
Joined: November 12th, 2015, 11:35 am
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Postby alexschief » October 12th, 2021, 7:38 am

-two options are being considered for Riverview using the existing tunnel, both include keeping four lanes, the first option has mixed-traffic operation across the bridge and trains operating in the middle lanes, while the second option has single-track dedicated ROW operation for Riverview on the north side of the bridge and tunnel
I am going to become the Joker.
One of the reasons I hate that Riverview is called a streetcar is because people seem to assume the entire route will be a slow and mixed-traffic mess like the streetcar failures around the country. This is not a "streetcar to Bloomington", this is light rail that will have short segments of mixed-traffic operation in St. Paul. Where exactly those segments will be and how long they will be, I don't know, and I wish the planners were more clear on that. However, for now I remain optimistic this will be an upgrade over the 54, which is already close to aBRT standards besides not having off-board fare payment. Single-track on a short stretch isn't optimal but not the end of the world either. I've seen tram routes in Europe with single-track and/or mixed-traffic operations that still perform well.
I think the reason people assume it will be a streetcar to Bloomington is that it is a streetcar to Bloomington.

If it's "light rail except with single-track and mixed-traffic segments in the most congested areas" then that's not light rail, that's a streetcar. The most congested areas are where dedicated right-of-way is the most important. The most congested areas are where dedicated right-of-way is the most important. The most congested areas are where dedicated right-of-way is the most important. Ramsey County doesn't get partial credit for having a train that runs on its own right-of-way only in the areas where it would move at free flow speeds anyway.

If you're going to spend $2B on a transit line, it needs to meaningfully outperform a bus. A one-car streetcar will offer only a minor increase in capacity, no significant increase in travel time, and potentially significant deterioration in reliability vis-a-vis the already quite successful #54 bus. Either do it right or don't do it at all. Every month that Ramsey County advances work in this bad direction is money and time wasted.


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 56 guests