Riverview Corridor Streetcar

[DanPatchToget]

One thing that increasingly concerns me (and now I'm going to be the broken record) is the lack of a coherent transit plan for Downtown St. Paul.

I'd probably prefer your concept of turning 5th over to transit, but the current plans are not completely discordant, and I think that's why there hasn't been a rush to propose an alternative. The Green Line represents an existing condition, and the Rush, Gold, and Riverview routes kinda do agree with each other. The idea of split one-way lines is nothing new and works in cities all over. No aBRT nor the Red Rock Corridor is currently in serious planning, and when other projects come up, they can adapt to the existing set-up easily by following the N-S and E-W trails already blazed by the existing projects.

There's a lot of synergy already. All three take the existing trunk routes on 5th and 6th as a starting point. Gold and Riverview will stop at or near the existing Central Station and the Union Depot. Both are also envisioned to stop Rice Park and at Kellogg (although, as I mentioned above, I think the Rice Park stop should be eliminated). I haven't seen it made official anywhere, but it's obvious that these stops could and should serve both modes on one platform, just as buses use the East Bank Station at the U. Even though the Gold Line is still in design, Riverview is so far out that it might be tricky to build the(se) Gold Line station(s) to LRT specifications, but I'm sure they could be designed in a way to allow future expansion.

The Rush/Purple Line comes into downtown at a slightly different angle, but it will share the Gold Line stations at Robert St, the Green Line Robert Street Station (I think this stop will eventually be renamed), and will also serve the Union Depot. So the only spot where all four services meet is the Union Depot, but that's probably fine, and will certainly make Commissioner Ortega happy.

Buses don't use the East Bank Station platforms, but they do operate on the tracks going through the station.

I'm not too familiar with how transit routes are configured in St. Paul, but is there something like Marq2 in Minneapolis, or is something like that being proposed for Gold/Rush/Riverview?

[Trademark]

Is there any reasoning to why there is no stop for the Xcel Energy Center? Seems strange for no stops between grand avenue and the green line. Unless i missed something in the project documents.

[Tcmetro]

There are proposed stops at Kellogg and at Washington (Rice Park/Landmark Center).

[Trademark]

There are proposed stops at Kellogg and at Washington (Rice Park/Landmark Center).

That was the exact same places I put in my fantasy map that im working on. Thanks for the info

[Vagueperson]

https://www.metrotransit.org/Data/Sites ... _hazel.pdf

This includes Green and Gold. You can imagine the Rush just coming down Robert and meeting the Gold Line routing. I can't remember the Riverview routing, tho.

[mattaudio]

The problem with the Rush Line approach from the north is that you have to choose...
1. Go east to SPUD and terminate there?
2. Go west through the CBD and terminate west of Xcel Energy Center like the Gold Line will?
3. Have some circuitous routing that does both?

That's why I wish the Rush Line was approaching downtown from the east (maybe E 7th or Kellogg bridge) so it could route via SPUD then CBD then Smith Ave just like the Gold Line. Bonus: Then Gold and Rush could both get onto I-94 and run express to Minneapolis replacing route 94.

[Vagueperson]

Advantage of Rush going on current routing rather than E7th or Kellogg is allowing a transfer to the Green Line without going into DT StP. I like the idea of Rush heading into DT MPLS, but people have complained about the length of routes and I'm just skeptical it would happen.

[EOst]

Presentation on Riverview: http://agenda-suite.com:8080/agenda/ram ... /36048.doc

[mamundsen]

Is there a chance this still gets moved to the CP rail spur? Why is that shown on the LPA and labeled as to be studied still?

[Tiller]

Is there a chance this still gets moved to the CP rail spur? Why is that shown on the LPA and labeled as to be studied still?

They plan on analyzing using W 7th vs the CP Rail Spur in more detail before deciding on which of the two they'll use (and how), but only for the highlighted section (I think from around Randolph to Davern).

[Oreos&Milk]

Presentation on Riverview: http://agenda-suite.com:8080/agenda/ram ... /36048.doc

If there is no plan to merge this line with the midtown streetcar line I think this line should be labeled under the letter system instead of giving it an actual color likely being purple (yes, red line would be revoked as well eventually too!) I know we’re not up to it yet but the R Line would be pretty fitting. Granted we’re not building tons more lines in the future but when we run out of main colors there is gonna be the subconscious agreement that we are done expanding the system, and instead focusing on improving existing infrastructure.

It’s just bugs me that’s all. Besides that I’m liking everything I been seeing so far, plus south loop stations sharing a platform with blue and r line trains !lol so New York! Visitors probly be like ooooo they ran out of colors already. Plus it would help strengthen the branding of the letter system too as they wouldn’t all be busses. Of course I’m nit picking, but just want to see if everyone disagrees with me.

[Tcmetro]

The latest Riverview Corridor fact sheet says that the project has moved into the engineering and pre-environmental phase as of this month. The high-level timeline provided puts opening date as 2032-2033.

https://www.ramseycounty.us/sites/defau ... 020%29.pdf

A project Policy Advisory Committee was named on 9/15/2020. The Community Advisory Committee and the Technical Advisory Committee are still being assembled, and should be completed soon. The CAC will begin accepting applications in December. I'd suggest anyone interested in the project who lives in the area throw their name in the ring!

https://www.ramseycounty.us/residents/r ... committees

[talindsay]

Wow, I've been tracking these projects long enough to know that an opening date of 2033 is realistic, but the fact that they're *already* predicting it that far out seems kind of outrageous. To me this seems like a higher-value line than the [s]Bottineau[/s] Blue Line Extension, and it's less expensive and easier to engineer to boot.

With the dedicated sales tax funding, and with Ramsey County able to take the lead without political interference from others, I'd hope that they'd be optimistically thinking they could start construction in four years or so, putting an opening date more in the 2029-2030 range.

I suppose crossing the river requires coördination with Hennepin County, the National Parks Service, Met Council, etc., so that's probably where the longer timeline comes from. But that being a single complicated area, one would hope they could do the whole rest of it in parallel with the complex talks around the bridge. Of course, if the four "lines" that have reached advanced engineering and design have taught us nothing else, they've definitely taught us that any multi-agency project detail can derail the whole project indefinitely.

[EOst]

With the dedicated sales tax funding, and with Ramsey County able to take the lead without political interference from others, I'd hope that they'd be optimistically thinking they could start construction in four years or so, putting an opening date more in the 2029-2030 range.

Bear in mind that the sales tax funding also has to cover Ramsey County's share of the Gold Line local match and the entire Rush Line local match, and that those projects are both closer to construction than Riverview. My understanding is that Ramsey County's local option sales tax revenue is fully committed with those three projects through approximately 2050.

[twincitizen]

I kind of gasped at that 2033 timeline too, but mostly because just ~3 years ago when they completed the AA, they were saying 2027/8, or about 10 years out at the time. It’s one thing when a project gets delayed for reasons (see: SWLRT, Bottineau), but it’s another when the schedule is already slipping during pre-engineering. Given that 2030 is now just 9 years away, it does seem correct that this won’t be running sooner than 2033, based on the glacial progress being made and many engineering challenges / cost increases likely to be revealed.

My understanding is that Ramsey County's local option sales tax revenue is fully committed with those three projects through approximately 2050.

I’m guessing that 2050 number was generated prior to COVID-19 decimating sales tax receipts too. River view and Bottineau falling behind schedule might be necessary for more than just technical/engineering reasons.

[fehler]

Ten years per rail line is about right on schedule. 2004-Hiawatha, 2014-Central, 2024?-Southwest.

[talindsay]

Oh man, Southwest better be before 2024...

[Bakken2016]

Oh man, Southwest better be before 2024...

It’s scheduled for 2023


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Silophant]

Well, that's a good trend! In that case, the next one should open up in 2032, though it remains to be seen if it's Riverview or Bottineau.

[alexschief]

There is the first policy advisory committee meeting for this project on Thursday. It is open to the public, and there is possibly a time for public comment. I'm definitely going to listen in, but I hope that some folks who actually might hold some sway will be inspired to call in and tell Ramsey County that this project will be a joke unless it gets the full LRT treatment.

Link here: https://www.ramseycounty.us/residents/r ... ngs-events