Riverview Corridor Streetcar

[MN Fats]

Of course, remember this line will involve not one but *two* interchanges - we're all focusing on the junction with Hiawatha (because it looks harder) but they almost certainly will want to connect this with the Green line to run into SPUD and the maintenance facility. I expect the easiest way at that end is a junction just past StP Central station, with Riverview extending farther southwest along 4th. But that too would need to be a simple double-turnout junction as opposed to the big fancy junction they put in Cedar-Riverside, since it will be quite constrained.

How would it get to 4th from 7th though? Around the Xcel and along 5th? Someone posted a map earlier where it turned down to Exchange and followed the ramp up to Kellogg. Where would it connect? Or maybe it won't connect and just have a stop on the backside of SPUD?

[acs]

Regarding the downtown st. Paul end, how realistically would it be to go from the railroad tracks/Shepard up Eagle Pkwy to a stop at 7 corners gateway across from the xcel center? It could then go along 7th street before making the turn to connect at central and SPUD.

[nate]

I would think that connecting to the Green Line at 7th would make sense, because 7th is wide and the geometry would work better, and there is that big open space across from MPR that the switches could fit into.

[FISHMANPET]

I'm sure MPR would love train switching going on outside their building

[ProspectPete]

So there is any way this line would just use the existing Ford Plant spur ROW to get out of downtown to davern? Or is the desire to have it go down 7th for the majority of the corridor?
Along that ROW spur there are many businesses and housing developments.... SP public schools, summit brewing, Johnson bros, Pearson, for example as well as a surprising number of high density housing clusters (Victoria park, all the housing by Alton, Madison, Stewart, theodest apartments on St. Paul Ave, as well as the new development proposed for 7th and davern).

There is so much open platform space in the union depot between the Amtrak platform and the bus stops. Is there any consideration of having it's stop there, or do they want it in the green line tracks? Something to consider with all the congestion on the shared tracks in DT mpls.

Lastly is there discussion to every send this east from the depot up what I assume would be a new bridge for Kellogg to the east side?

Just curios.

[mister.shoes]

Someone on here had a great idea (and map!) to run it joint with Green line to the Central Station. Then from there, split and go along 5th Street to Smith Ave. Smith Ave past United and then south to W 7th. W 7th to Randolph-ish (Osceloa Ave, maybe?) to the RR ROW. RR ROW to where it crosses W 7th just west of St. Paul Ave. I found that to be a brilliant routing. It hits lots of high-intensity uses closer in, then switches to faster running as the major nodes thin out, then back to W 7th to get across the river.

[mattaudio]

Here are a few older ideas:
http://goo.gl/maps/AefNx
http://goo.gl/maps/ck8N7
My idea was if there's funding to be below grade past Xcel and Smith Ave (which is unlikely in our current environment) that the portal would be in the cliff below the high bridge approach, then connecting seamlessly to the rail ROW. But this could be done at grade too, with a turn onto Cliff Street. I just don't see how LRT, even LRT-lite, could work on West 7th with dedicated ROW.

To ProspectPete's SPUD comment, I wonder if the cheap-out solution would be to stay below the cliff near downtown and approach SPUD via the concourse, then loop around near the OMF to the Green Line. But with the fully developed blocks and narrow ROW near the Green Line OMF, I can't see how that would work unless they route it through the OMF.

Edit:
A 2011 concept for trackage in DT St. Paul: http://goo.gl/maps/Fxpw2
And the old concept for regridding the West 7th/Shepard area: http://goo.gl/maps/XxWS5

[froggie]

I'm working on revising my own idea for Riverview, but I believe an at-grade LRT connection from West 7th to 5th into downtown is possible. Such a rail connection could then tie into the Green Line via a Y-connection at 5th and Cedar.

Regarding West 7th vs. the CP Spur, one should keep in mind that the CP Spur merges into the Merriam Park Subdivision near Western Ave. So you'd pretty much need to take West 7th into downtown from there anyway. I had mentioned previously that traffic volumes on West 7th east of I-35E are low enough to where you could probably get away with dropping a lane in favor of LRT...here's a potential cross-section of how to do it.

There are several potential ways to connect between West 7th and the CP Spur...I use Toronto St in my rendition.

[twincitizen]

Keep in mind, they have said they will be considering a hybrid LRT/streetcar (also known as a tram outside of North America) that could run in mixed traffic on West 7th. So I think Froggie is onto something there. You're probably in the right ballpark of where to make the transition from rail ROW to street-running as well, in the general vicinity of the Schmidt brewery.

Politically, I doubt that St. Paul would give up lanes (or on street parking), let alone MNDOT (it still carries MN-5 after all...which is dumb). Not to mention, a long section of the roadway in question has already gone on a road diet, and is now 3 lanes. It only goes back up to 4 lanes east of Goodhue (more or less, at Mancini's).

While running on-street from Randolph all the way into downtown would obviously be slower than staying in the rail ROW, keep in mind that St. Paul also studied streetcar on W 7th out to Randolph. This could be a two birds with one stone situation. While it would make for a significantly slower transit line, it would have much higher ridership by running through a dense area, even in mixed traffic. It would prevent St. Paul from building a separate streetcar line, which is certainly a regional benefit.

[holmstar]

I think it's a real possibility, especially since it's apparently a goal to redo the 5/Shepard road interchange in order to direct traffic onto Shepard road rather than down 5/7th.

[mattaudio]

A friend from the wrong side of the river has a request in to their PW staff to try and get those concepts (I know at least froggie was interested)

[holmstar]

Here's my idea, presuming full W7th alignment. It uses 6th street in order to avoid issues with the Ordway/MPR, and would require a new or modified hwy 5 bridge with an upper deck. Two options for crossing 55/62.

https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid= ... 8Bw9coRUA4

[mattaudio]

Unless they mess with that awful Alliance Bank ramp, or do a larger radius turn as part of a Macy's block redo, I can't imagine they could do a 90 degree turn from Cedar to 6th.

5th would probably be a better option, if that lawn hill in across from MPR couldn't be repurposed for a wide swing onto 7th. 5th would only be a 45 degree turn, similar to the 45 degree turns on each end of the station for the Green Line.

I wonder about the possibility of using 5th or 6th though, since they aren't that wide, but are the primary east-west couplet connecting 94 on both sides of town. 5th and 6th are shockingly tight west of Rice Park near the blank walls of Travelers. One could be converted to two-way traffic, but in many spots it would have to be one traffic lane each way. Not that it would be the worst thing. The ideal solution would probably be a cut and cover tunnel, since there could be a natural portal on 5th between the Ecolab block and the Pioneer Press building. But I bet that would be too expensive for this project.

[mulad]

5th has been down to one lane for the duration of the Ordway expansion project, so I really don't think there would be much trouble to convert either 5th or 6th to a two-way street and concentrate bus/LRT on the other.

[holmstar]

Unless they mess with that awful Alliance Bank ramp, or do a larger radius turn as part of a Macy's block redo, I can't imagine they could do a 90 degree turn from Cedar to 6th.

The 90 degree turn at 12th & cedar appears to be a 90ft radius. It appears that this would be possible at 6th if the turn began 60ft from the corner of the curb. It wouldn't have to clip the sidewalk at all.

[mattaudio]

Maybe they could do a Washington Ave Transit Mall type of thing on 5th west of Cedar, and then a bi-directional bus mall east of there. The only problem would be finding a way to accommodate vehicular access on the street such as the PiPress lot, the Lawson ramp, the Ordway/Xcel docks, and the Traveler's underground ramp. But that's really it as far as vehicular access between 7th Circle and Cedar Street... a one-way access woonerf from 5th to Washington would be fine, or maybe some sort of access easement between the docks and the Travelers parking lot. And then a one-way from St. Peter to Wabasha for Lawson parking. The block between Landmark Center and Rice Park would be an excellent LRT station, with the block east in front of the St. Paul Hotel being an excellent bus stop location, but those blocks are shorter and would be blocked by a 3-car LRT train.

6th Street would be an excellent conversion to two-way traffic, since it better aligns with the 94 ramps at both ends of downtown (especially on the east end with that jog from 5th to 6th). One lane each way would probably be fine, but there could be an eastbound second lane (off-peak parking) from 7th to a right turn on St. Peter. 94 traffic headed to the northern reaches of downtown would probably take the 10th St exit, or 5th St exit with a left turn onto 7th Stroad.

[MN Fats]

Back towards the other terminus, is it at all viable for the train to go through, rather than over, the hwy 5 tunnel? Would widening the tunnel/bridge cost less than adding a second deck? Having the train run literally next to Fort Snelling has to be an issue anyways, as nice as it would be for it to run at-grade.

[holmstar]

I like the idea of using 5th, but I wonder if there's enough room for switches when the curve needs to start almost immediately when leaving central station. Also, there would almost certainly be a requirement for noise mitigation near the Ordway. Not that it would be a deal breaker. Just a rehash of what happened with MPR and the U of M Labs.

[mattaudio]

I think running a LRT at grade would be a decent compromise if we were able to get rid of the cloverloop around the Ft. Snelling Chapel, and if an upper deck meant an at-grade walkbike connection between Ft. Snelling and East River Road in St. Paul. Heck, with an interchange modification to eliminate the loop around the chapel, http://goo.gl/maps/StSdq the "tunnel" could be doubled in length to provide stronger connections to the Thomas C Savage Visitors Center.

If the train was placed on or under the existing traffic deck, it would probably require a complete rebuild of the cut and cover tunnel either to widen it or to put trains below the Hwy 5 traffic. Not that it would be the worst thing.

[HiawathaGuy]

Back towards the other terminus, is it at all viable for the train to go through, rather than over, the hwy 5 tunnel? Would widening the tunnel/bridge cost less than adding a second deck? Having the train run literally next to Fort Snelling has to be an issue anyways, as nice as it would be for it to run at-grade.

Studying google street view (admittedly for way too long), there is enough room on the west side of Hwy 5 approaching the Fort Road bridge to run the train. Even the Shepard Road overpasses could accommodate the trains. So I think it could be possible to add a side train bridge, allowing for a walkway deck on top (since the new train bridge would take away the sidewalk connection between Shepard & Fort Snelling State Park). The issue is what to do on the other side... one would think the tunnel (land bridge?) could be widened to allow the train to go underneath - but then there are the on ramps and grade issues that only become more complex to get up to the Blue Line.

One thought I had was to have the train bridge follow Fort Road bridge, but then turn and follow the bluff a bit, surfacing at the top near the out lots of the State Park Visitor Center, then following Bloomington Road underneath Hwy 62, as many have shown. I don't know how crazy expensive that might be, to essentially double the length of the bridge for the train - but it would essentially keep the train from needing to go under/through the actual Fort - or interact with the church, or the Hwy 5/62/Mendota Bridge interchange. Just not sure about grade (I believe it's only about a 20ft climb from the Fort Road bridge to the top of the bluff on that side). But not sure how realistic it would be to have the bridge piers go all the way down to the river trail (old train route) below to support that span. MAP

Just crazy things I've thought about while we all fantasize about this crossing the river and connecting into the track north of the airport tunnel.