B Line Lake St Rapid Bus, Midtown Rail Transit

[MNdible]

I'm not sure, but my guess is that these bridges are deemed historical and a tacked on steel viaduct would be a non-starter. I would think that a sympathetic addition/renovation to the existing structures should be achievable for $100 million. Or possibly less.

I guess the question is, assuming that there are no stops between West Lake and Hennepin, is it really that big of a deal if most of the section in between the two stations is single tracked? I don't think it would be, but I could be mistaken.

[seanrichardryan]

I was thinking of an entirely separate structure, adjacent to the concrete viaducts. Something simple but functional.

[mattaudio]

Public comments from the May meetings. Good job to all the UrbanMSPers who weighed in.
http://metrotransit.org/Data/Sites/1/me ... etings.pdf

[FISHMANPET]

Is it just me or is "the public" just the worst? There's a lot of good thoughts expressed in properly constructed sentences, but there's plenty that's... not.

[mattaudio]

To be fair, some comments were from meeting-sized notepads where people wrote bullet points.

The idea of a dual alternative (aBRT on Lake to Midway and streetcar/LRT from West Lake to Midtown) seems duplicative and unnecessarily expensive....

unless....

Greenway streetcars rose onto the elevated Blue Line platform at Lake, then interlined with the Blue Line from Lake Street to VA Medical Center. Then there could be a wye between 62 and Fort Snelling Station and then continuing on via Riverview Corridor to St. Paul. Riverview could also serve trains from MOA/Airport as well via the wye. One seat rides from Downtown St. Paul to Uptown AND the airport, and aBRT from Uptown to Midway.

[mattaudio]

Is it just me or is "the public" just the worst?

http://metrotransit.org/Data/Sites/1/me ... -photo.jpg

[mattaudio]

Responding to the discussion about road diets on E. Lake and Twincitizen's point that it would impact streetcars (see Longfellow grocery thread)

How exactly would that work? It seems like MT was serious about using LRVs for Greenway Streetcar (which makes sense given the dedicated ROW west of lake) but obviously this would not be an option if the streetcar went down East Lake.

Also, I passed on Froggie's suggestion at the public meetings to incorporate grade separation from Hiawatha to 29th Ave under Lake Street, then emerging at grade for the run down E. Lake.

Finally, I wonder if there's ever an option to have center-running streetcars using gauntlet tracks and center islands every few blocks? That would be cool. Otherwise I like the idea of prominent bus/streetcar bulbs separated from the curb by cycletracks if there was a road diet. Obviously with the current 4 lane + parking/bumpout arrangement, this is not possible.

All in all, E. Lake is quite a bit better thanks to the recent project, at least east of 27th Ave. West of there, it's still stoplight craziness and missed development opportunity near Target and the car sewer overpass.

[talindsay]

How exactly would that work? It seems like MT was serious about using LRVs for Greenway Streetcar (which makes sense given the dedicated ROW west of lake) but obviously this would not be an option if the streetcar went down East Lake.

Wait, why is this obvious? Sure, it makes it a bit tighter and requires more road work, but LRVs just like ours are used in shared traffic lanes all over Europe. They might choose not to do it, but I don't see any reason that it "obviously would not be an option".

Also, I passed on Froggie's suggestion at the public meetings to incorporate grade separation from Hiawatha to 29th Ave under Lake Street, then emerging at grade for the run down E. Lake.

Actually, that was my idea. But Froggie is super smart and has figured out a lot of things I talk about all the time so I'm glad to share credit.

Finally, I wonder if there's ever an option to have center-running streetcars using gauntlet tracks and center islands every few blocks? That would be cool. Otherwise I like the idea of prominent bus/streetcar bulbs separated from the curb by cycletracks if there was a road diet. Obviously with the current 4 lane + parking/bumpout arrangement, this is not possible.

I don't know a lot about the use of gauntlet track, but I think it's rarely used for much distance. Still, it might be an interesting exercise to look at the possibility. Remember though that gauntlet track is still essentially single-track, with the only big advantage being that it can revert to double-track without switches. That's also a liability however, since it means that you lose some of the ability to re-route around problem spots when accidents and problems occur.

All in all, E. Lake is quite a bit better thanks to the recent project, at least east of 27th Ave.

I absolutely agree that E. Lake is much improved; personally I would hope that streetcar on E. Lake would be accomplished without widening the overall ROW dedicated to roadway, because one of the best parts about the new arrangement is how much it narrowed the portion of roadway pedestrians need to cross.

After emerging from the short tunnel section at 29th (or so), I imagine the streetcar running in the center in a shared traffic lane, with narrow center-island platforms at 31st, 36th, 44th and the River Parkway. if they wanted they could add stops at 33rd, 39th, and 42nd, but personally I don't think that's necessary. The platforms can be narrow like the ones on Toronto's newer streetcar lines, with only an awning-style shelter, thus allowing the roadway to widen only maybe 12 feet at the platform locations. Split narrow center platforms on either side of the intersection would work quite well and allow the street to stay narrow. Sure, any cars running in the streetcar lane would have to either wait behind the streetcar or change into the one open traffic lane, but traffic is never too heavy on East Lake east of 29th so I don't think it would be an issue.

West of there, it's still stoplight craziness and missed development opportunity near Target and the car sewer overpass.

I guess I'm not too worried about the "missed development opportunity" because nothing has been done to preclude this opportunity in the future. If they do build the streetcar the way I envision (platform near Hiawatha before diving under Lake Street, reemerging at about 29th) then it will be a good thing that the Target parking lot *isn't* developed, as it will make excavation easier. Once that project would be completed, it would then become a prime development opportunity. And if they chose to actually put a small streetcar station *in* that short tunnel section, then any new business at the corner of 26th and Lake would be right at the station entrance, making it an even better development opportunity. I don't think it would make sense to put a station in the tunnel however, for cost reasons.

[mattaudio]

What if there was an open air station sort of in the payless shoe parking lot, taking advantage of private development north of Lake and E/W of Minnehaha to provide vertical circulation. Win.

[talindsay]

Hmm, interesting idea. If the north side of Lake Street remains undeveloped it's possible they could pull that off. It might make for some awkward track-turning in the short tunnel section - I'd just figured gentle curve under Hiawatha gets the track under Lake Street, reemerging at 29th, whereas this would require taking the tunnel over away from Lake Street briefly before bringing it back under, but it still might be worth it. It would be nice to have a station right at the center of that node, and that might be a good way to accommodate it while controlling costs.

[mister.shoes]

What if the track didn't turn and the "open air station" was really a big sunken plaza in the parking lot that connected to the actual platform underneath Lake? Lake would essentially be a short bridge section between 26th and 27th. More or less expensive/challenging than curving the tracks?

[mulad]

Forgive me if these ideas have been tossed around before, but I was just thinking that it might be better for a Midtown Greenway streetcar service to turn north and hit somewhere in Southeast Minneapolis (like UMN) rather than continuing to St. Paul like the route 21 bus.

The red line below follows the MN Commercial railroad corridor across the river to I-94, then crosses it to go up Emerald Street to the Green Line's Westgate station on the border with St. Paul.

The blue lines demonstrate some UMN-area possibilities -- a link to the Stadium Village station, one to West Bank station, and another option to interline with a University Ave/4th Street streetcar, potentially running as far as Hennepin/Central to meet up with the Nicollet-Central streetcar.

[RailBaronYarr]

What if we let the greenway corridor be whatever it is and plan for a future subway running under Lake, with an interlining subway that branches north as you show that eventually runs under University after running in the Dinkytown Trench for a bit.

https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=20 ... 5,0.617294

I feel like Met Council and even us on this site often get sucked in to evaluating corridors in a vacuum a little. Either wrt their own system and future options or with how they link up to MnDOT projects that preclude, politically or feasibly, better transit options. I drew this up as an amalgamation of a few things I'd seen, what will most likely happen (Blue + Green lines, a few aBRT corridors, etc) but put a 30+ year spin on what we could hope to achieve for mobility within and between the cities. Focus on the most dense and dependent areas first (Lake, North, UMN), as well as providing single-seat or single transfer rides to as many jobs, homes, and destinations as possible. Thoughts? Move this to a "transit fantasy" thread?

[FISHMANPET]

Loops are generally bad from an operations standpoint, because there's no recovery place Unless you're going to install pocket tracks where the subway intersects with the yellow line, and force a transfer, there will be problems . Also Jarrett Walker (who I'm a fan of) says that loops aren't usually very useful, because who wants to go in circles. But that "loop" is pretty large, and I think Jarrett is mostly talking about local circulators when he makes that commentary.

Though I do like connecting University Ave NE to the rest of the city, I have some friends that live there and I wish it wasn't so disconnected transit wise. I feel like it should be relatively easy to get from that area to Downtown or the UofM campus from those neighborhoods. The density may not exist now for high capacity transit, but run some aBRT down University to the UofM and Downtown and I think you'd see some densification there. I think it's a great neighborhood.

[MNdible]

I like this line connecting to Raymond.

[talindsay]

Forgive me if these ideas have been tossed around before, but I was just thinking that it might be better for a Midtown Greenway streetcar service to turn north and hit somewhere in Southeast Minneapolis (like UMN) rather than continuing to St. Paul like the route 21 bus.

The red line below follows the MN Commercial railroad corridor across the river to I-94, then crosses it to go up Emerald Street to the Green Line's Westgate station on the border with St. Paul.

The blue lines demonstrate some UMN-area possibilities -- a link to the Stadium Village station, one to West Bank station, and another option to interline with a University Ave/4th Street streetcar, potentially running as far as Hennepin/Central to meet up with the Nicollet-Central streetcar.

Living right against the MN Commercial corridor you highlight in red, I can say that would be a really poor choice for routing a streetcar because it's purely R1A (low-density) residential or light industrial usage against that corridor; it's so tempting, so obvious, and so close to my house that I want to like the idea but it would be a stinker of a route because there's just no good destination along it. Lake is far superior because of all the business nodes, and the potential for serious redevelopment.

The idea of cutting up through Seward might be an idea worth considering, however. I suspect Lake Street across to Marshall would still be the obvious winner - there's just a lot more commerce there - but I hadn't considered cutting up through Seward. There was an old streetcar line that ran up 36th Ave South and then followed 25th Street, jogging up to Franklin perhaps along 31st (I don't recall exactly what it did in north Seward), and there's a legacy of wider streets and some business nodes still today from that history, so that might make more sense than slipping up 27th or 29th, both of which are pretty sleepy. It's certainly worth some thought.

I will note though that the 21 runs 10-12 minute frequencies between Hiawatha and University, while the 9 runs every half hour through Seward. Assuming there's any sanity to bus schedules, that indicates that there's a lot more traffic on Lake - even east of Hiawatha - than through Seward.

[mulad]

Yeah, staying in the RR corridor is cheap and easy (shades of SWLRT and yet still not as bad as Kenilworth...), but it happens to lead to a Mississippi River crossing which is under-utilized. It'd be nearly impossible to get dual-track on that bridge for a streetcar, though 1/4- to 1/3-mile of single track probably isn't a dealbreaker. My preference at this point would probably be for the 26th/Franklin connection instead.

While I think East Lake Street has some good potential, I just tend to feel that things peter out really quickly when you get over to St. Paul. If a line continued to St. Paul, I'd be inclined to have it go down Cretin or Cleveland to Grand (or Summit, which would raise holy hell, but would probably be worthwhile with a nice right-of-way and probably much better travel time than Grand).

Anyway, the University of Minnesota area has always lacked for north-south connectivity, and I figured some of these ideas might help with that. Another thought is that such a line might fit into a Grand Rounds "missing link" across the BNSF/Union Pacific yard area if one ever gets built, connecting the Prospect Park area with the Como neighborhood and points north. But of course people have been trying to make that connection for a century, and it's been hard enough to just get a road put in let alone a transit line.

[kellonathan]

I also had a really similar idea for a while---cheap and easy (while questionable) solution to extend Greenway Streetcar (only if ever built) from East Lake-Midtown Blue Line station to U of M - Dinkytown - Marcy-Holmes and Hennepin-1st Ave NE for future Nicollet-Central streetcar connection.

Wouldn't this be an easy way to go to Midtown and Uptown from U of M campus or even from Northeast? Pretty good substitute/complement for #6U and/or #2?

[tabletop]

I wonder how structurally sound that bridge is. I want to say I remember them saying it would need significant structural upgrades to the bridge if they wanted to put a bike lane across it.

[RailBaronYarr]

Seems like if you're already considering extending a Midtown Corridor streetcar (or track that supports LRT vehicles) east, it wouldn't be a huge deal to just continue it through to St Paul. I think the StP streetcar study having Selby get surface transit makes sense, but I really like the idea of heading down the the Grand/Summit area with grade separation.

Would Summit really be that unfeasible? The Parkway gives 85'+ of space to do cut & cover without interrupting traffic flow for residents, and businesses along Grand Ave stay happy during construction. Upon completion you get a fairly rapid transit service a block away from the business/population and tourist-heavy stretch that also happens to serve St Thomas & Macalester. You could easily just continue on to connect the Children's Hospital, the X, and then interline with the Green Line when you hit Cedar to meet up with the Union Depot. You then have a corridor that St Paul already identified as important (Streetcar study has a line running all the way out to St Thomas along Grand) that happens to connect in to a bunch of valuable MInneapolis locations. It can be higher speed (albeit with likely wider stop spacing but mainly thanks to underground operation) to offer a different link from downtown to areas. Save money and build an aBRT line along Grand for the local trips. You also get a little bit of surface LRT tracks along W 7th from Grand to Cedar to reduce the cost of a future LRT down that corridor to MSP (or if they're dead set on a streetcar in the near-term, they can interline downtown).

The biggest challenge in grade separation comes along the Greenway and then what you would do for the 1.6 mile stretch of Summit without the parwkway. Lots of mansions, churches, etc (high-rollers) that wouldn't be happy about the disruption from c&c (understandably).