Page 43 of 60

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Posted: November 12th, 2020, 11:52 am
by DanPatchToget
"Small but loud and well-connected group of opponents" is the definition of handwaving away the opposition. You know who has a good read on the size of the opposition? The elected officials making these compromises.
Handwaving away opposition is ignoring it. We know there's opposition, and we look at the reasons why people are opposed and find ways to address their concerns without canceling the project altogether. But there are also arguments where we have to make a case for why those arguments are inaccurate, such as people thinking Riverview will bring crime, or that West 7th will be destroyed with light rail/streetcar. There's valid arguments, and then there's fear mongering and pretending no other place on Earth has something similar to what's proposed for Riverview.

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Posted: November 13th, 2020, 4:51 pm
by alexschief
Ramsey County is forming two public advisory committees for the Riverview Modern Streetcar Project to increase outreach to and amplify the voices of people who live, work and recreate on and near the corridor. Applications for both the Community Advisory Committee and the Station Area Planning Task Force will be accepted through December 15, 2020.

These committees will serve during the Engineering and Pre-Environmental Phase (EPE) of the project which will last for approximately three years (early 2021 – late 2023). Applications may be submitted online beginning November 12, 2020 at www.riverviewcorridor.com.
Full message here

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Posted: February 3rd, 2021, 1:18 pm
by Tcmetro
Policy Committee meeting tomorrow: https://www.ramseycounty.us/residents/r ... ngs-events

Preferred alternative selected by Q1 2022 according to the powerpoint.

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Posted: February 3rd, 2021, 2:54 pm
by Bakken2016
Policy Committee meeting tomorrow: https://www.ramseycounty.us/residents/r ... ngs-events

Preferred alternative selected by Q1 2022 according to the powerpoint.
Does that mean like where the stations will be located and if it uses west 7th or the cp spur?

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Posted: February 3rd, 2021, 3:32 pm
by Tcmetro
Pretty much, yes. They will choose the alignment that will proceed into the engineering phase which is usually quite firm. Sometimes there will be changes during engineering but they are generally minor.

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Posted: February 4th, 2021, 8:25 am
by alexschief
I've written a lot about how bad and dumb the "modern streetcar" mode choice is on this project, but we should take a moment to also note that there is absolutely no reason for stations at both Maynard and Davern, and both Montreal and Homer.

Sort of emblematic of the weird priorities of this project that it plans for some of its densest stop spacing at the least dense portion of the corridor.

The proposed draft P&N states:
The purpose of the Riverview Corridor project is to provide transit service that enhances mobility and accessibility for residents, businesses and workers and supports economic opportunities within the project area, particularly in low income neighborhoods.
Seems hard to square "enhances mobility and accessibility" with downtown-to-airport travel times that are longer and less reliable than the #54 bus.

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Posted: February 4th, 2021, 8:54 am
by EOst
I've written a lot about how bad and dumb the "modern streetcar" mode choice is on this project, but we should take a moment to also note that there is absolutely no reason for stations at both Maynard and Davern, and both Montreal and Homer.

Sort of emblematic of the weird priorities of this project that it plans for some of its densest stop spacing at the least dense portion of the corridor.
The Maynard/Davern area is in fact the densest part of the corridor outside of downtown. This is typical in Saint Paul; we have big concentrations of density in fringe areas that were developed from the 1960s on (Shepard/Davern, Rice/Larpenteur, Burns/McKnight, Hamline/Jessamine, etc.) with a lot of single family areas between them and downtown. That's a big part of the story of how the city's population stayed fairly steady through the urban renewal era when Minneapolis's fell.

Homer is also a significant employment center that would not be very accessible from Montreal.

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Posted: February 4th, 2021, 9:53 am
by Tcmetro
Davern and Maynard is quite egrigious, you could realistically build a station between the two. Homer is more questionable, I would just eliminate it. Madison/St Paul Av makes more sense for residential access. I'd imagine the hard decisions on stations will be made over the next year.

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Posted: February 4th, 2021, 10:11 am
by alexschief
I've written a lot about how bad and dumb the "modern streetcar" mode choice is on this project, but we should take a moment to also note that there is absolutely no reason for stations at both Maynard and Davern, and both Montreal and Homer.

Sort of emblematic of the weird priorities of this project that it plans for some of its densest stop spacing at the least dense portion of the corridor.
The Maynard/Davern area is in fact the densest part of the corridor outside of downtown. This is typical in Saint Paul; we have big concentrations of density in fringe areas that were developed from the 1960s on (Shepard/Davern, Rice/Larpenteur, Burns/McKnight, Hamline/Jessamine, etc.) with a lot of single family areas between them and downtown. That's a big part of the story of how the city's population stayed fairly steady through the urban renewal era when Minneapolis's fell.

Homer is also a significant employment center that would not be very accessible from Montreal.
You're right about the concentration of homes at Maynard/Davern area, but I'm talking about this stretch of the corridor as a whole. There's no real justification for four stations in this area. Three is defensible, but two (probably Davern and Homer) would really be ideal.

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Posted: February 4th, 2021, 10:32 am
by EOst
But you need Montreal for the likely bus transfer--I'm not sure buses could even make that turn from Montreal to southbound 7th to get to a Homer station. The 83 is also a pretty likely candidate to get extended down there.

Worth pointing out too that there are two intersections of Maynard/7th, and the Maynard stop would go at the northern one (and probably even slightly north of it--I think this stop was previously called Alton).

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Posted: February 4th, 2021, 11:18 am
by alexschief
But you need Montreal for the likely bus transfer--I'm not sure buses could even make that turn from Montreal to southbound 7th to get to a Homer station. The 83 is also a pretty likely candidate to get extended down there.
Why not just extend those routes to Otto?
Worth pointing out too that there are two intersections of Maynard/7th, and the Maynard stop would go at the northern one (and probably even slightly north of it--I think this stop was previously called Alton).
Even the distance between Davern and Alton is less than a third of a mile. It's really way too small, and I think it's a product of the streetcar mindset and not an LRT mindset. 500m is about the minimum stop gap you'll see in some European streetcars.

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Posted: February 4th, 2021, 11:25 am
by DanPatchToget
Between Maynard and Grand the 54 has 10 stops, and as of now Riverview is proposed to have 7 stops, plus the one at Davern.

Riverview has the extra stop at Davern, Riverview wouldn't have a stop at St. Paul Avenue, the Homer stop for Riverview would replace the 54's stops at Rankin and Mickey's Diner, the Montreal stop would replace the 54's stop on Albion, and Riverview wouldn't have a stop on Tuscarora/Watson.

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Posted: February 4th, 2021, 11:34 am
by talindsay
I dunno, back when CCLRT was being planned I didn't want them to build the infill stations because it would slow down the line, but I was wrong - accessibility and mobility isn't the same as speed, and when the two come in conflict with each other, accessibility and mobility is the more important of the two most of the time. Two additional stops won't change the end-to-end time enough to make a useful mode unuseful, and so based on the experiences we've seen with the CCLRT - where the infill stations have had significantly better ridership than expected, and where their inclusion sent a clear signal about the line's commitment to mobility and accessibility for the communities most impacted by the line's construction - I'd lean toward keeping more stations.

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Posted: February 4th, 2021, 1:49 pm
by tmart
I agree that there are too many stations planned; it would be smart to consolidate the Davern and Homer stops into a single station somewhere like Rankin or Madison. I think especially given that other concessions have already been made that will slow things down (like less traffic separation/a mixed-traffic segment) the criticism is particularly salient.
I dunno, back when CCLRT was being planned I didn't want them to build the infill stations because it would slow down the line, but I was wrong - accessibility and mobility isn't the same as speed, and when the two come in conflict with each other, accessibility and mobility is the more important of the two most of the time. Two additional stops won't change the end-to-end time enough to make a useful mode unuseful, and so based on the experiences we've seen with the CCLRT - where the infill stations have had significantly better ridership than expected, and where their inclusion sent a clear signal about the line's commitment to mobility and accessibility for the communities most impacted by the line's construction - I'd lean toward keeping more stations.
I agree with the principle but I just don't see how these two stations--especially Maynard--improve mobility in a meaningful way. The current plan is basically to serve both ends of the Sibley Plaza parking lot! Neither stop has any walkshed on the northwest side of 7th, either, and the Homer stop is just the edge of an industrial park. Even from a pure mobility perspective I think Madison has a stronger argument than either of these two--it more directly serves the apartment buildings to its south, and it's accessible from the other side of the street (St. Paul Ave).

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Posted: March 27th, 2021, 5:22 pm
by twincitizen
Presentation for the 4/1 PAC meeting: https://www.ramseycounty.us/sites/defau ... mittee.pdf

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Posted: March 30th, 2021, 11:46 am
by Bakken2016
Just found out that I will be serving on the Riverview Corridor Station Area Planning Task Force!

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Posted: March 31st, 2021, 7:32 am
by tmart
Just found out that I will be serving on the Riverview Corridor Station Area Planning Task Force!
Very exciting! I know you'll be a strong advocate for a good, LRT-style transit project.

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Posted: March 31st, 2021, 7:42 am
by seanrichardryan
According to my twitter feed, a lot of really smart urban folks have been appointed to the advisory committee.

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Posted: March 31st, 2021, 9:46 am
by r2b2
While I'm mainly curious about how the West 7th stretch is going to turn out, it's interesting to see possible changes to the MOA stop in the presentation slides (page 13 of the pdf), especially as they just renovated that station.

Re: Riverview Corridor Streetcar

Posted: March 31st, 2021, 10:20 am
by DanPatchToget
While I'm mainly curious about how the West 7th stretch is going to turn out, it's interesting to see possible changes to the MOA stop in the presentation slides (page 13 of the pdf), especially as they just renovated that station.
While I was hoping for a station relocation on the north side of MoA, I still welcome this potential relocation so it wouldn't be in a dark parking ramp anymore. As long as they make sure accessibility to MoA is still good of course.