urbanMSP

Any idea what Olson will look like post-LRT? Right now it's a really awkward 6-lane + 2 two-way frontage road design, with buses stopping in the right lane and weird intersections due to the frontage roads. We could do a lot more with fewer lanes, inviting TOD and moving just as many buses/cars. Excellent spot for a Multiway Boulevard!

Maybe the point is that to maximize benefit, something drastically different should be done?

It's extremely unlikely the plan will change. This project has already had one do-over. Given that, why waste the time and energy tilting at windmills?

Any idea what Olson will look like post-LRT? Right now it's a really awkward 6-lane + 2 two-way frontage road design, with buses stopping in the right lane and weird intersections due to the frontage roads. We could do a lot more with fewer lanes, inviting TOD and moving just as many buses/cars. Excellent spot for a Multiway Boulevard!

I would definitely love to see a rework of Olson, but it's outside the scope of this project. Yes, that stinks and it is a perfect example of segmentation but again, we have to work within reality.

We should ensure the design doesn't do anything to preclude future investments. Right now I believe the plan is to run the LRT down the wide boulevard. I don't think that precludes anything, does it?

Maybe the point is that to maximize benefit, something drastically different should be done?

It's extremely unlikely the plan will change. This project has already had one do-over. Given that, why waste the time and energy tilting at windmills?

I'd rather tilt at windmills rather than spend all my energy convincing myself of the validity of the process that leads to clearly ridiculous outcomes.

I personally think that the Golden Valley Station will be more useful than the Plymouth Station. The 7 can easily extend up to GV Road, and the 30 can continue along Noble and Douglas and replace the 14 when that gets converted to Arterial BRT. Basically what I'm saying is that Golden Valley is better because it has connections to both the east and the west.

I personally think that the Golden Valley Station will be more useful than the Plymouth Station. The 7 can easily extend up to GV Road, and the 30 can continue along Noble and Douglas and replace the 14 when that gets converted to Arterial BRT. Basically what I'm saying is that Golden Valley is better because it has connections to both the east and the west.

Well I guess if we have to choose I can see your point. But my point is we shouldn't have to choose. If we can afford $160MM for tunnels for rich white people, we can afford another Northside station.

David, I thought the choice was less based in money and more about haveing two station so close together. I could see having both though. I think the Plymouth Ave station would be a bigger draw to the park since it's right by the Chalet. Also, I'm fine with the routing along the park, but I REALLY want to line to be more connected to North Memorial Hospital.

David, I thought the choice was less based in money and more about haveing two station so close together. I could see having both though. I think the Plymouth Ave station would be a bigger draw to the park since it's right by the Chalet. Also, I'm fine with the routing along the park, but I REALLY want to line to be more connected to North Memorial Hospital.

I asked at the Northside DEIS hearing and it is both. There's a budget concern but my sense is that this is more about resident opposition than anything.

I agree a better connection to North Memorial is important.

It was my impression that the choice was:
Golden Valley Rd Station AND Plymouth Station
-or-
Golden Valley Rd Station.

Perhaps early in the scoping it was an either/or proposition, but in more recent documents GVR Station seems a sure thing.

And I agree with David (and others) that it should be both. Don't fixate too much on the stations, focus on the 1/4-mile and 1/2-mile walk-sheds. They don't overlap that much.

And yeah, a station in the 34th-36th Ave N area to serve North Memorial is a no-brainer. I still haven't seen a good reason why that isn't included or even why it was never considered. Having been following this since scoping (2011), it doesn't seem like it was ever on the table. The D2 alignment (Penn-Broadway) would have served North Memorial, but similar consideration was not given to the D1 alignment...it's a bit strange. 36th would even offer a bus connection. It's certainly far enough from the downtown Robbinsdale station at 42nd.

Man, it's almost as if we should be running high-capacity transit modes through actual urban areas instead of parks. Imagine that.

Ok, you can snark or you can work with what we've got to maximize benefit. Your choice.

Did you copy/paste this from one of your posts in the SWLRT thread?

Any idea what Olson will look like post-LRT? Right now it's a really awkward 6-lane + 2 two-way frontage road design, with buses stopping in the right lane and weird intersections due to the frontage roads. We could do a lot more with fewer lanes, inviting TOD and moving just as many buses/cars. Excellent spot for a Multiway Boulevard!

Posted back on Page 11, this video does a great job of explaining the preliminary route.

Found this on the Bottineau Transitway website. It is flyover simulation video of the Bottineau Transitway.

Apparently the City of Minneapolis is opposed to LRT signal pre-emption on Olson Highway:

http://minneapolismn.gov/meetings/tpw/WCMS1P-124484

Do you guys think that liberals really believe that they can reduce VMT without making driving less convenient or are they just pretending?

The Southwest LRT decisions influencing Bottineau LRT discussions. Lower income home owners angrily wonder why they lose their home for rail while wealthy Kenilworth homes get $160M in tunnels.

http://www.startribune.com/local/north/261027911.html

Well...

I'm as anti-suburb, anti-car, pro-transit, as they come, but their point is 100% valid. Why should we raze less privileged peoples' home for light rail when we'll spend hundreds of millions so wealthy people, WHO LIVE NEXT TO A RAIL CORRIDOR, don't have to see light rail trains? The comparison is perfectly valid no matter how much the powers that be pretend it's not.

Hennepin County Commissioner Mike Opat said: “We are planning this complicated project. We’re always taking the long view of 50 to 60 years.”

If that were the case, SWLRT would tunnel through uptown and Bottineau would go down Broadway in North Minneapolis

Because people with money control everything. That's not news. It's unfair, but it's not news.

I coulndt agree more, that this is as apples to apples as it gets. I always have thought the easiest solution to the SWLRT debate was to raze the row of townhouses to create room to have the LRT, freight and trail all at grade.

It's not necessarily apples to apples -- despite the fact that I think the Kenilworth tunnel is throwing $160 million down the drain by producing absolutely no transit value. But with Bottineau, these property takings probably aren't necessary if Hennepin County transportation engineers in Medina would de-stroad it and maybe even cut a lane.

Anyone able to find the proposed design for this stroad? I can't find it on the Hennepin site or the Bottineau site.

Here's the alignment along Broadway but it doesn't show property takings: http://bottineautransitway.org/library/ ... nt%20B.pdf

Of course it shows the LRT surrounded by full stroad, 12' lanes and 14' turn lanes.

This should be the Hennepin page for the project.

http://www.hennepin.us/residents/transp ... oklyn-park

Maps are there. It's one hell of a wide stroad proposal.

Oh wow. http://www.hennepin.us/~/media/hennepin ... 9-2014.pdf

Aren't they getting ahead of themselves? I realize this is the LPA for Bottineau, but it still seems early to start designing a stroad with a median for future rail transit.