Nicollet Mall

[John]

According to the City of Minneapolis Facebook Page

Three design teams are competing to transform and revitalize Nicollet Mall. Want to see their ideas? Come to the Guthrie Theater on Tuesday Sept. 17 where their visions will be unveiled.

Just an FYI ,the presentation starts at 5 pm on Tuesday. Should be interesting.

[min-chi-cbus]

Strib editorial on the redesign: http://www.startribune.com/opinion/edit ... 97131.html

Jesus. "Welfare mothers" AND "low lifes." Can the Strib *get* any more inhumane? What a sorry state of public conversation we have today.

Yeah, I saw that as well. Also "Welfare mothers and their screaming babies". I'm not even sure what that's supposed to mean....do rich babies not scream? Our children scream and they're neither rich or on welfare. I'm not sure if those words were purposely put in there for shock or irony, or if the journalist actually was that naive.

[Tom H.]

If you can get past the questionable word choices, the discussion regarding public spaces and their place in modern society is somewhat interesting and, I think, valid.

[David Greene]

If you can get past the questionable word choices, the discussion regarding public spaces and their place in modern society is somewhat interesting and, I think, valid.

The point of highlighting this language is that it's completely (unintentionally) ironic. The purpose of these public spaces is to have people from a variety of backgrounds interacting in order to break down barriers. When you actually meet and talk to poor people, you don't think of them as "lazy" or "welfare mothers" or creatures to be pitied. You see them as human and hopefully begin to understand a bit about their situations.

That the Strib uses stereotyping language in an article about bringing people together in public spaces is not just jarring, it's actually completely missing the point about the article's own message.

[John]

If you can get past the questionable word choices, the discussion regarding public spaces and their place in modern society is somewhat interesting and, I think, valid.

Totally agree. The original Nicollet Mall was built in an era when public safety was not an issue in Minneapolis. The street was the retail center of the Upper Midwest. The demographics of the city were much more homogeneous and decidedly middle class. The city is vastly different now. It's becoming socially and ethnically polarized. The design needs to address some of these contemporary realities and do something positive to create a better sense of community cohesion. A very tall order!

[Silophant]

I've got a night class, but is anyone planning to go to the design presentation tomorrow at the Guthrie?

[mullen]

this is over thinking. we aren't re-making the wheel here. the mall isn't going to solve societal problems. what westminster church has done with their nicollet frontage just to the south of the church is a great example. give people a place they want to be. places to sit, casual activities to engage, pleasant, simple design elements. oh, and get rid of that awful 80's teal color. it sucks.

and the mall should be a total bike/pedestrian street similar to what every major city in Europe enjoys. some transit mix is fine but pedestrians should be given priority. a "walking street". a place you want to stroll. what a concept.

[nate]

^^^ Agree completely.

Also, pedestrianizing the mall would create the opportunity for really exceptional street/skyway connections, instead of tiny staircases shoehorned into the sidewalk.

[MNdible]

I'll fight to keep transit on the mall. It just makes too much sense.

[twincitizen]

Yep. In a reality where we didn't make Marq2 a bus tunnel, and aren't tunneling LRT under Nicollet, we have no option but to keep local buses on the mall. It seems the streetcar is getting closer and closer to reality. I would not be opposed to a Nicollet Mall that had significatly fewer buses and no taxis, cop cars, delivery vehicles, etc. Nicollet Mall without transit is simply incompatible with every approved city and regional policy in existence. Local buses would destroy Marq2 performance during rush hour. It's a shame we didn't build a bus tunnel instead of spending what we did on Marq2. It's a shame we're not talking about a bus/streetcar/LRT tunnel under Nicollet now.

I apologize for repeating myself, but in a tunnel-free Downtown Minneapolis, there will always be surface transit on Nicollet Mall. Let's focus on making it better, faster, and more compatible with the other things we like about the mall instead of going on and on about "getting rid of busses(sic)".

Note: That comment was not directed at any one person here, but at every commenter everywhere (MinnPost, Mayor Rybak's Facebook posts, etc.) whose first instinct is that buses are the #1 problem with Nicollet Mall.

[min-chi-cbus]

I'm not sure what kind of tunnel people are talking about, but a MAJOR transit "tube" beneath Nicollet and/or 5th would be a very smart idea to start saving for at some point soon! This tube should be large enough to house 1-2 rail lines in each direction AND possibly 1-2 lanes of traffic in each direction (for buses, taxis, delivery trucks, etc., but not citizens). I worry that with the continued expansion of the agreed-upon network of LRT with essentially four lines coming together downtown (or two lines criss-crossing through downtown) that the amount of rail traffic could cause substantial delays for passengers trying to cross 5th St (and eventually Nicollet if any kind of subway or trolley ever gets built down that corridor, which I think would be an inevitable addition to any future expansion efforts to the regional rail network).

I don't know what the current volume of LRT trains is per day downtown, but imagine up to four times that volume in downtown between the "Interchange" and the future inevitable "central station" in DTE! We're not there yet but that doesn't mean we can't start having that discussion, as more and more corridors are proposed and/or built.

[David Greene]

Note: That comment was not directed at any one person here, but at every commenter everywhere (MinnPost, Mayor Rybak's Facebook posts, etc.) whose first instinct is that buses are the #1 problem with Nicollet Mall.

Amen.

[David Greene]

I don't know what the current volume of LRT trains is per day downtown, but imagine up to four times that volume in downtown between the "Interchange" and the future inevitable "central station" in DTE!

Where do you get "four times?" We're not going to do anything close to that for many decades, if ever.

[RailBaronYarr]

I'll ask it again, and excuse me if this makes me a total n00b, but what is the extra cost of a relatively shallow C&C tunnel under the Mall if we're already tearing it apart? How much longer would each block be closed/affected compared to just a street re-do? Can tunnels carry buses for now and LRT later on or is there significant re-work in that scenario (beyond adding the power lines, rails, etc). I'm just curious to have the discussion..

[nordeast homer]

It depends on how much infrastructure is under there. I've got to believe with the ages of some of the buildings that the sewer, water and electric are possibly shallower. Aren't there a couple of walkways that cross under the mall too, or am I mistaken?

[MNdible]

Woofner and I had discussed this in an earlier thread. It's the type of project that makes a lot of sense. I would guess that just building a simple tunnel would triple the cost. But we'd also need to provide a ton of vertical circulation. It still probably makes sense, though.

It would need to be transit only, no taxis etc. You'd want only all electric buses and streetcars down there.

I personally think this would be a much better way of spending the streetcar money -- enhanced bus service through a downtown tunnel.

[Gman12]

I'll ask it again, and excuse me if this makes me a total n00b, but what is the extra cost of a relatively shallow C&C tunnel under the Mall if we're already tearing it apart? How much longer would each block be closed/affected compared to just a street re-do? Can tunnels carry buses for now and LRT later on or is there significant re-work in that scenario (beyond adding the power lines, rails, etc). I'm just curious to have the discussion..

Probably astronomical. From what I am aware of there is a lot of infrastructure underneith, plus everything else I'm unaware about would make it more. There is water, communications, and Xcel has a substation, high voltage transmission and distribution under Nicollet. If we look at the light rail project from 10 years ago, Xcel had to move transmission for that and that wasn't even a tunnel. I remember newspaper articles saying how over budget that ran, due to the diffuculty of moving infrastructure around.

[Minnekid]

You can't have underground light rail until the city is large enough population wise and land wise. Downtown is too small for this right now and Nicollet isn't long enough for a subway type development. Unless the Sunway goes all the way to uptown and had like 4 stops it could kind of makes sense, but not really as that is too expensive. As the city grows much later that is a possibility.

[woofner]

Nicollet Mall has had two major reconstructions in the last 50 years. These reconstructions may have arranged the utilities to a potentially obstructive location, but there should be no surprises left down there. Considering the reconstruction will involve some degree of utility rearrangement in order to remove the sidewalk heating infrastructure, this may be the best opportunity downtown for a relatively cheap cut-and-cover tunnel.

Also, I'd favor significant stop consolidation - I'd think it would be possible to get it down to two stations in the tunnel and still not lengthen anyone's trip thanks to avg speed improvements. Also there may be opportunities to use existing basements.

[Minnekid]

Where in theory would you have the two stops woofner?