Whatever Happened To Planning? I’ll Tell Ya

In last Sunday’s Editorial page of the Star Tribune, there was a rather scathing article about two developments supposedly “off the grid”; the Vikings Stadium in Blaine and Target’s Expansion in Brooklyn Park. According to the article, these two projects are considered prime examples of fringe development. Fringe development is implied from the “off the grid” comment in the article.

First off, both Brooklyn Park and Blaine, although about 15-20 minutes from Minneapolis, are not outside of the 7-county Metro and are in the Metro Urban Service Area or MUSA line created by the Metropolitan Council to limit development outside of the 7-county metro. The author suggests that the council should be monitoring projects like these more closely and provide special treatment or incentive for projects locating along transit lines both existing and proposed.

While I like the Tribune’s opinion on the need of investment in public transit, I think the choice of projects is a little unjustified. Target Corporation has been in Brooklyn Park for a long time. The BP is my hometown, and there has been a lot of excitement generated around Target’s expansion of their corporate campus and the development that it will bring to Brooklyn Park.

I take offense to the notion that this project will generate sprawl. Cities that should be criticized for inducing sprawl should be Champlin Park, which has done a terrible job of curbing their rate of expansion. Meanwhile, Brooklyn Park has experienced growth over the past 30 years gradually by opening up parcels of land for developers every 10 years. This has allowed for a diverse housing stock and the potential for investment in new housing. With Target Expanding, the value of housing here will increase, great for current home owners, and it will put pressure to finish crucial transportation infrastructure such as highway 610, and redevelop areas of Brooklyn Park such as the apartments at Zane and continue the Village North redevelopment site.

Plus, the Target Expansion in Brooklyn Park is right next door to Coon Rapids; a stop along the Northstar Commuter Rail line. Perhaps, Metro Transit or Target could run a shuttle from the station to the campus?

As for development that should be criticized, how about the rapid growth that is happening beyond the MUSA line, and out further beyond the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Council? The council dictates development inside the 7-county metro or what is known as the existing Twin Cities MSA but anything outside of it, is up to the people working in Greater Minnesota.

As for the Viking Stadium, I sort of agree. However, the stadium could do well if done right. Personally I would rather see the Vikings remain in downtown Minneapolis and the Metrodome site be redeveloped, however, if Blaine can benefit from the new investment brought by the stadium who are we to stop them?

As for the proposed “extra credit” for development locating near existing or proposed transitways, what would the extra credit be in the form of? Tax breaks? Not likely. Reduction of fees? Try again. I suggest the Star Tribune propose some forms of incentives and stop picking on Brooklyn Park and the Target Expansion.

Favorite Urban Studies Posts

As an Urban Studies major here at the University of Minnesota, I have a large interest in writing about development in the Twin Cities and Minnesota. Over the time that I have had this blog I've written a lot about this topic and have some personal favorites and without furthur adeu here they are...

Central Corridor

One of my first posts when I first started this blog way back in September 2005

Maglev on University of Minnesota Twin Cities campus

One of my ideas of replacing the Campus Connector system with Maglev transit, I think it would be great, but probably way too expensive

A Commuter Rail Line Named…Northstar

Future Predictions on Urban Development of the Twin Cities

One of my best posts on this topic. Thank you to everyone that wrote in.

That's a good start to the list. Some of my current posts have been pretty good too in my opinion. What was really exciting was being published in the Minnesota Daily. I know most of you in the blogoshphere wouldn't care, but it was cool to see my name in a student newspaper as well as on their website. Plus, i got 25 extra credit points in my persuasion theory class for being published. Hopefully I can have some new topics in the near future, although we are nearing crunch time for Spring Semester. These next coming weeks are going to be crazy, wish me luck.

Andrew

I GOT PUBLISHED!!!

...In the Minnesota Daily, the student paper of the University of Minnesota. Check it out at the Daily's site.
Or you can read it here too...

University priorities
In the Friday Daily, there was an editorial, “Prioritizing transportation,” stating that the proposed Central Corridor light-rail line would benefit the University more than a University football stadium that has been proposed on the site of the Huron Boulevard Parking Complex. Although I agree with the author that the University and its students will benefit from the Central Corridor project, we do not need to give up a new stadium to get the project done.
In the editorial, the author states that the University has a seat on the planning committee for the Central Corridor. While the University is a major stakeholder affected by the project, this does not mean that the University can afford to put financial backing toward the project. State, federal, county and city resources can be used for this purpose, however it takes political capital to commit to the project.
I do agree with the author that the University should use its political power to stand with local transit advocates and state legislators to support the project. In the March 22 Pioneer Press, there was an article stating that the Federal Transit Administration approved the cost-effectiveness analysis of the Central Corridor. The next steps in the process will be the public commentary of the draft environmental impact statement. I suggest University students attend and state their opinions.
Light-rail transportation on the Central Corridor will benefit University students and employees, but so will a new football stadium. The stadium will add to the quality of life on campus, encourage the trend of students living on campus and bring a stable source of funding to University athletics.
At most universities, revenue from football pays for the cost of the football program and all the nonrevenue sports programs. A new stadium will help us fund these athletic programs. The stadium and the Central Corridor project are actually complementary. Events at the stadium will encourage use of corridor transit, and the availability of transit to the stadium will reduce the congestion associated with stadium events. We can and should have both a stadium and light rail.
Andrew Wambach University urban studies undergraduate

Central Corridor…No tunnel, No Train

Ah the Central Corridor, the Twin Cities second light rail line that may never be. This line has been the topic of many discussions in the world of transit advocacy and in the local papers including the Minnesota Daily

The Columnist for the Minnesota Daily, Angela Gray, must have attended the Transit Summit at St. Thomas before writing the article. I was impressed on how she interviewed some important figures of the Central Corridor Partnership and business owners located in the corridor. She even interviewed students around campus to see if they would support a light rail line going through campus. However, the student that she interviewed stated that a tunnel would not be crucial and that "students will adapt". I highly disagree.

A few weeks before the article in the daily was published, there was an article in the Star Tribune on Planning Officials, The University of Minnesota, and the controversial tunnel. A local blogger has commented on this issue as well. He has the story linked in his post. I suggest you read it.

Some crucial information left out in both of these articles has been the cost. They skimmed the surface of the cost of the project in Grays article of the project being around $800 Million, when really the project is closer to $900 Million. The project total cost in 2003 dollars was about $840 Million. The Metropolitan Council hopes that it can cut the cost by eliminating the tunnel underneath Washington Avenue. The figure is an estimated $140 Million. I assume most of the cost of tunneling would be the engineering improvements necessary to turn the Washington Avenue Bridge into a triple-decked bridge with Pedestrian on top, Traffic in the middle, and light rail on the third rung.

Without the tunnel, the light rail will be forced to run on the surface, eliminating two lanes of traffic on each side of Washington Avenue simply because it is not wide enough to support central median operation, parking, sidewalks, and two lanes of traffic. This is Washington Avenue, not University that is 120 ft. in width.

I wish planners had more foresight than 25 years. They should be planning for one hundred years. Then again, with the way cities change and re-arrange themselves it is difficult to see what changes in technology and the built environment will occur over the years.

Last week, while enjoying a conversation with a friend of mine at Royal, I got into a discussion with someone sitting behind me about how backwards the current University alignment is. He tried to sell to me that the line should be located 2 blocks North of University Avenue. He also tried to sell to me that we needed more vertical economic development, basically transit villages with very large multi-block “sky-cities”.

I had two major disagreements with his proposal. The first was the location. 2 blocks north of University Avenue is where the Red Rock/Northstar connection is planning on running on the freight ROW. The second is the cost. A proposal that includes such large planned development like a transit village would put the total cost probably into the Billions. Although I agree that development like a “sky-city” would be awesome for the Twin Cities, right now with all the space we have available there is no pressure for land conservation and thus development like this is seen as overkill. For those interested in these types of development I suggest viewing Discovery Channel’s series Extreme Engineering.

Last issue to write about is the controversy of the intersection of University and Snelling Avenues. I agree with the author of twin city sidewalks, that the light rail may need to be elevated over this intersection like the Lake St. station which would be cool or be put underground which is pretty unlikely. I think an elevated station would be the best bet. As for the owner of the Midway Bookstore, I hope his store is where the first plank goes for the station. Just think, had he supported the rail he probably would have gotten a much better facility and benefited from a more walk-able University Avenue.

Back to my original topic, this Tunnel is crucial. If the tunnel is not in place, it will add more congestion and suck up tax dollars just as Republicans say it will. Let’s not let this happen. I encourage all members of the University of Minnesota to encourage planners and the powers that be, that the Central Corridor has to have a tunnel or needs to be put on the shelf until other rail projects such as Northstar are completed.

Whew, a pretty lengthy post…ENJOY!!!!

Andrew

A Commuter Rail Line Named…Northstar

I’ll explain myself for the title. I was trying to copy “Streetcar named Desire”- a movie title with a form of public transportation in it and another movie that I hope to see in the near future. Thursday night I visited the open house/public hearing for the Northstar Commuter Rail Line which would be Minnesota’s first Commuter Rail project. Side note- last night I watched “A Streetcar named Desire” and that movie was weird.

I arrived at the Heywood Office Building of Metro Transit at 4:30 after taking the #19 bus from Seven Corners on the edge of Downtown Minneapolis and University of Minnesota West Bank. The open house didn’t start until 5:30, so I waited in the lobby and chatted with the ladies that were setting up and greeting guests as they arrived for the open house/public hearing. Through my conversations with these ladies, I found out my official title in the world of Transportation advocacy. I am now an official Rail Transit “groupie”. The ladies in the front compared me to a young man who like me was from the University of Minnesota and was a “die hard” for the Hiawatha Line and attended almost all of the public meetings. I am glad that I now possess another title in addition to my self made title of die-hard or true believer.

Once people began to arrive for the open house/public meeting, I began to work the floor and look at the information they had posted on numerous slides in the conference room and talk with the people in the yellow shirts that were helping answering questions and presenting figures. The NCDA or the Northstar Corridor Development Authority did a great job of presenting facts and figures, and even had a rendered animatic of the Northstar Commuter train as it would appear in operation and how the stations would look, similar to the rendering that was done for the Central Corridor a few months ago created by the Central Corridor Partnership. In some of the slides, there were renderings of the bi-level coaches that Northstar will use. I asked one of the guys in yellow, whether he knew that Northstar would buy their locomotives and coaches from Bombardier or from another company and asked him how they would do it. The man explained to me that the process is a lot more complex than just placing an order with a supplier like Bombardier. There is an entire process dedicated to acquiring vehicles that needs to go through the FTA as well and takes up the majority of resources. I assume the Met Council will choose Bombardier because we have already worked with them for the LRVs used on the Hiawatha line and will be used on the Central Corridor as well.

At the open house I ran into some familiar important figures. The first was Mark Fuhrman, the project leader of Northstar. I had met Mark during one of Frank Loetterle’s Fundamentals of Transit Planning a year ago and so we chatted for a few minutes. I told Mark that my studies in Urban and Regional Planning had continued to progress and that this semester I was taking two graduate level classes that related to transportation planning. I also told him about my small internship with Transit for Livable Communities (TLC) the previous semester and the work we did researching for the Central Corridor and how I worked with the Midtown Greenway Coalition and had attended a number of their public meetings and workshops as well. Mark seemed impressed with my activities since the last time we had talked, and I informed him that if he had any work available or possibilities for internships over the summer that he should feel free to contact me. I left my information with his staff, and I hope that is enough to at least get my foot in the door and get credit towards my Urban Studies degree. I also met with Brian Lamb, the general manager for Metro Transit who recognized me as I returned to my chair. I chatted a while with him about my recent activities and expressed my hopes for Northstar in that it puts pressure on other transit projects such as Red Rock and Central Corridor.

Also at the meeting, I met a man from my home town of Brooklyn Park. He asked me if I knew anything about the Northwest BRT line which would run along 81 up into the Northwestern Suburbs. It turns out that he lives near the Crystal Airport and has taken an interest in all of the recent articles about the Crystal Airport in the Brooklyn Park SunPost. Having not been at home, I hadn’t really had the chance to read up on the current development plans, however, my dad sent me the articles and I have since been brought up to date.

The meeting was long but very interesting to attend and see what was going on in the world of Northstar development. Also included in the plans for Northstar, was the mentioning of the potential of the Twins Open Air Stadium located next to the Minneapolis Multimodal station for Northstar and Hiawatha. When Kristen and I took the express bus 766 out to Brooklyn Park we drove past the sight, and it was interesting to observe already the condo/loft conversions underway in those areas. It will be interesting to see what further ramifications investment in transportation infrastructure will have on our Twin Cities. In Friday’s Star Tribune there was an article about an upcoming exhibit on cities and art specifically about the Twin Cities and Minneapolis and the demise of the Milling Industry on the Riverfront being shown sometime in February. I hope to make my next post about predictions on development and what the future may look like for the Twin Cities. However, to predict the future one must understand the past. With that in mind, I picked up two books both by Larry Millet titled Lost Twin Cities & Twin Cities: Then and Now both books that cover in great detail the changes that the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul have gone through over the past decades.

To learn more about Northstar click here. Also be sure to check out my previous post on the Central Corridor if you haven’t already, at the end there are links to many Transportation related sights for the Twin Cities

Until next time, see you all on the train as the smoke rises from the engines!!! WOOT-WOOT!!!!

Andrew “the transit groupie” Wambach

Central Corridor

(Note) Picture on left origionally posted in the Minneapolis Star Tribune and obtained from the Metropolitan Council Website, and is of the Hiawatha LRT Line. Thought it would add to the post!!.

As I was heading over the Washington Avenue Bridge today, I had a realization: There are way too many busses on Campus. Especially on Washington Avenue, which besides University Avenue/4th St. is the main thorough fair in and out of Campus. Washington connects the two main banks of the U of M campus (East and West) and is therefore pretty busy in the morning, lunch period, and evening rush hours. This can be seen by the amount of pedestrian and bus traffic in and around stadium village during the lunch period, and the sheer amount of congestion this area experiences during the three time periods listed above.

In Geography 3371: Cities Citizens, and Communities, I have been given the opportunity through CSL (Career Student Learning) to intern with Transit for Livable Communities (TLC). TLC is a major advocacy group for the development of Transitways, bike and pedestrian friendly paths, and Transit Oriented Development in the Twin Cities metro area and region. The major focus of our group’s internship is the Central Corridor Light Rail project. The Central Corridor is an 11-mile corridor consisting of Washington Avenue and University Avenue between the downtowns of Minneapolis and St. Paul Minnesota also known as the Midway District. Historically, the Midway district was serviced by the streetcars and was a location of heavy shipping, industry, commercial, and residential development. In the 1950’s the streetcars were ripped out and replaced by the bus system, it was a very complicated issue and a number of people went to jail. Ultimately the Twin Cities lost one of the best streetcar networks in the country, and we have been struggling to get back to that glory ever since.

Currently the area is serviced by the Route #16, #50 and #50S bus lines operated and owned by Metro Transit. The Express bus 94B, C, and D operate on Highway 94 and offer express service between the two downtowns with higher speeds than the routes #16 and #50.

Our main task with Central Corridor is to help determine the actual path of the LRT and ease the process of implementation. Also, we have to consider how to keep the current residents from being displaced from new development and the higher densities that are expected (hoped for) with the running of LRT between Minneapolis and St. Paul. Which brings me to my opening paragraph. The planners want the LRT to run on the surface until Washington Avenue and then tunnel under the East Bank of Campus and then re-surface on University Avenue all the way to Downtown St. Paul. Sounds pretty cool huh?

Howver, there are some problems with this plan. If the city planner wants to tunnel, then he should tunnel starting on Washington Avenue, underneath Cedar Avenue right before the West Bank Skyway/Blegan and Whiley Hall complex. By placing the tunnel further back, we can dig below existing utility lines and have underground stations on both the West and the East bank sides of campus, with either express elevators going to the street level for campus connectors, and plaza level for students/guests etc. similar to what was done at the Lindberg Terminal. The University would be asked to contribute in a number of ways. Have architectural students create plans for University Subway Stations both at East and West Banks and any of the other stations that students interested in the project would like. At the same time, the University could buy advertising space on a couple of the trains and have them painted in Maroon and Gold motifs with Goldy the Gopher on one of the trians. At the same time, professional architects and designers will plan out station designs as well. University United should be contacted and asked to voice their opinions as well. I have contacted and worked with this group before and they are very determined to make University Avenue more like the grand Baroque Avenues and Boulevards with intense commercial, but predominantly residential development.

However, creating stations on both sides of the river could cause problems with headways and running times. There are already two-three stations relatively close to the University of Minnesota West bank. These are the Cedar Riverside Station, the Metrodome Station, and to the extreme the Franklin Station. However, adding another station beneath the west bank, could potentially decrease the amount of bus activity above ground and provide new tunnels for the Gopher way, and a true connection from both sides of the West Bank underground than across the West bank skyway.

Platforms underground would be reached by elevators or escalators (depending how far down we dig) and once on the platform the other side could be reached by pedestrian bridges that cross over to the other side, or tunnels that go under the tracks/trains and come up on the other side.

Another problem concerning the underground stations is passenger security. Underground stations would have to be well lit and potentially have barriers to entry similar to New York subway stations. Otherwise, campus security could monitor these facilities as well as officers of the Transportation Police Department. By creating barriers to entry, Minneapolis and the State of Minnesota could begin using a system like the Metro Pass; many people already buy discounted transit passes including many students who use the UPass program.
The decision to go underground was made after seeing the incredible amount of bus traffic already on Washington Avenue on campus including Campus Connectors and Shuttles, Metro Transit, Southwest Transit, and Metro Valley Transit Authority (MVTA) all operating in this space and having to contend with heavier traffic.

Now that I have covered some of the issues with the tunnels proposed by the Central Corridor, it is time we addressed some of the surface effects. I know some of you are asking me, “you started this argument with buses, get to the buses already.” I am about to do just that. By implementing the CC LRT plan; the train would replace the limited service provided by the route #50 and #50S. The route #16 would still provide service to all other stops. Most likely, the 94B would still run on Highway 94 depending upon the success of LRT.
Some classmates of mine have argued that the LRT will only make things worse along University Avenue. University Avenue is one of the busiest Truck corridors in addition to regular traffic. By running LRT down the middle, it may be difficult to maintain University Avenues uses as a truck route. In addition, two lanes of traffic may be eliminated in both directions to make room for trains and stations. To eliminate this problem, the LRT may have to be elevated similar to Chicago’s L line. Although this would increase the costs and diminish the appeal, it would allow for stations to be placed in the locations picked out and not interfere with traffic, until entering downtown St. Paul and the Union Depot which has plans to be turned into a multi-mode station for both the CC LRT and the Red Rock Commuter Rail Line running from St. Paul to Rochester.

My classmates have also argued that the CC will not solve commuting problems if there are too many stations. The CC will have to be fast, and get people from Downtown Minneapolis to Downtown St. Paul in under 30 minutes (my desired figure). The #50, can get you to downtown St. Paul in about 45-50 minutes depending upon traffic, the #16 takes about an hour or more at the most, it’s worse with traffic. If the CC can provide commuter service to both downtowns, then it might be as successful if not more than Hiawatha. We will just have to wait and see what Metro Transit and the Council decide.

The Central Corridor is a very ambitious plan. Meaning that it is going to be expensive. Hiawatha, which was a longer corridor and had more stations, ended up costing about $725 Million Dollars and that was with a trimmed budget. Because of the tunneling and infrastructure costs of elevating CC, the cost of the project could potentially be in the billions. This is why, Metro Transit, and the Metropolitan Council, need to be careful and listen to the public before going and building something as extravagant as the CC LRT. I, like most people in the Urban Studies program here at the University of Minnesota, want to see this project get the green light and pass with flying colors. To do this, the citizens of Minneapolis, St. Paul, and the region need to get involved and push for a reform in the way our Transportation system is funded. A dedicated sales tax, as has been done in many other cities in the United States, could help Minnesota reach her goal of a dedicated public transportation system by 2030, and allow for new residential and commercial development in the cores of both downtown Minneapolis and St. Paul that we are already seeing in the Loft and Condo boom. Just imagine the amount of cars on the road if we don’t invest in a new system, our entire workdays will be spent on the highways. And gas prices are only going to increase, unless our nation spearheads the move toward renewable energy sources.

Time to get down from the soapbox, but to emphasize that public involvement is needed and appreciated. We as citizens, control what is implemented. Although it may not seem like that at times under the current administration, this is still a Democracy. Citizens of this State and region have a duty to plan and anticipate the future so that we can tell our leaders what we feel is best for the state of Minnesota, our role in the Midwest, the Nation, and the Global Economy.

For any questions:
Email: wamb0011@umn.edu

For news and how to get involved in other transportation projects around the region: (URLS’s)
Northstar Commuter Rail: http://www.northstartrain.org/
Central Corridor: http://www.centralcorridor.org/
Metro Transit: http://www.metrotransit.org/
Metropolitan Council: http://www.metrocouncil.org/
Transit for Livable Communities: http://www.tlcminnesota.org/


Thank you,
Andrew Wambach
University of Minnesota Twin Cities
Urban Studies