Minneapolis Street Film

The Feds make all the difference

The Central Corridor line is coming. What has become obvious with the new president and significant changes to evaluating projects is that federal politics ruled most of our local decisions. This was simply the case if planners wanted this project to happen. While most won't agree with the process, it seems the Met Council was willing and able to play the funding game. This actually has been a positive change since we are getting the three additional stations and hopefully some more improvements down the road.

From the MPR story:

Politics in Washington also has contributed to the sometimes bumpy road for Central Corridor. The project was largely engineered during the Bush administration, which created a difficult terrain for planning light-rail lines by making cost-effectiveness the primary criteria for evaluating new transit proposals.

Bell said the "cost-effectiveness index" dominated many of his decisions, as it meant that local planners had to say "no" to a tunnel or an alternate route through the university, just as they first said "no" to the neighborhoods that wanted more stops.

Under the Obama administration, cost-effectiveness is no longer the most important benchmark for evaluating projects. That has given local communities a lot more flexibility. So what would have happened if light-rail planners waited for a more transit-friendly administration in Washington?

McDonough, the Ramsey County commissioner, said elected officials debated that very question nearly three years ago. He said the Central Corridor was competing with more than 100 projects across the country, but it gradually slugged its way to the top. As one of six federal transit projects included in Obama's budget, it's poised to receive a commitment for federal funding this fall.

Even with all the struggle and controversy, the new line will be a great project that will help complete a Twin Cities transportation network.

Fighting Giants

So two of the oldest institutions in Minnesota think they know better how to plan and build transportation, than those that actually do it for a living. In todays world with LRT, street cars, subways, elevated trains, trolleys, and all the other sorts of transit avalable around the world, the University of Minnesota (U) and Minnesota Public Radio (MPR) think that no real mitigation can be proposed for their issues.

What is really ironic about this situation is that neither have taken any internal steps to fix this problem, not that they should, but why not be pro-active? The U should be relocating it's sensative laboratories if it really generates millions of dollar for the University. MPR should have some idea how to further sound proof their studios in a dense urban core location. If we could step out of our bubble for a moment we would realize that these are minor issues for a project that is going to change the Twin Cities region forever, in a good way.

From the MPR story:

Scientists like David Blank are at the heart of the debate. Blank, a chemistry professor at the U, reports to work by taking 55 stairs down to the sub-basement of Koltoff Hall on Washington Avenue.

Blank works with laser beams. His lab contains two giant tables littered with mirrors and prisms that steer the lasers in different directions. Blank and his team of researchers are watching how these pulses of light move, so they can help develop the next generation of solar cells.

What's under the table is just as interesting. Its feet are cylinders the size of propane tanks, filled with compressed air.

Blank built his laser systems to rest on the air because light waves are vulnerable to even the smallest vibrations. That's also why his lab is located deep down in Kolthoff Hall.

The tables are designed to hold up against the constant ruckus from buses and trucks on busy Washington Avenue, which is 130 feet from his lab. But he doesn't know how the tables will manage the different vibrations from the proposed light-rail trains along the avenue.

Last year, the university spent $40,000 on lobbying on matters related to the Central Corridor, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. By its own estimates, the university has spent at least $500,000 on outside consulting over issues of vibration and electromagnetic interference, and $1 million in professional staff time.

I realize the U has to keep its own interests at heart, but this seems like an instiution that would rather keep building parking lots and garages to collect more revenue from it's 40,000 students. It really boggles the mind why the U wouldn't want LRT at its front door, but something is simmering just beneath the surface. For the sake of my readers, I won't even begin to discuss the MPR lawsuit and issues.

In the shadow of I-94

The building of Interstate 94 tore through the Rondo neighborhood in St. Paul during a time this was the norm in urban renewal. Like most interstate and expressways built, neighborhoods were bulldozed over to make sure that these new arteries could exist through the heart of our major cities. Not only does the physical structure remind long term residents of what was lost, this devastating event has cast its shadow over the building of the Central Corridor line.

The Central Corridor line is the largest capital investment in the history of Minnesota so people do have a lot to be worried about. The building of the Central Corridor line has little in common with the history of I-94.

Local Council Member Carter:

The 31-year-old Carter, a former track star at Central High School, wasn't alive when the interstate tore apart Rondo. But he grew up hearing stories about the neighborhood. His great-grandfather, Mym Carter, led a jazz string band in on a horse-drawn buggy down Rondo Avenue. And Carter's grandfather owned a handful of commercial buildings that the councilman says he probably would have inherited.

Carter's own father, who lost his childhood home to the freeway project, often shared his memories of Rondo on car trips around St. Paul with his kids.

"Growing up, we'd ride I-94, and just before the Dale Street bridge, he'd say, 'You're in my bedroom -- now!'" Carter recalled. "And for those folks who lived that, and even for someone like me, who grew up hearing the stories of Rondo far before I ever knew what the letters LRT stood for, and grew up with a gut, gut feeling about how horrible a tragedy Rondo was, I think it's understandable somebody can look at [light rail] and say, 'No thanks.'"

That doesn't mean residents should resist light rail, Carter said. But there is a lesson to be learned from Rondo:

"It happened so long ago, but we're still in the shadow of Rondo," he said. "That's exactly what makes it so important that we choose our steps very carefully now.

Will our past overshadow our future? While the Met Council could, and should, do a better job of engagement, we need to starting looking at our future that include the Central Corridor.

Reconnecting the Twin Cities

The Central Corridor Line has been on the planning stages for over 30 years now. The train that would connect downtown St. Paul to downtown Minneapolis and run through the heart of neighborhoods is a regional game changer. We need better transit in the Twin Cities, but the road blocks for the central corridor have been many and often. Currently, three separate lawsuits threaten the project and meeting the federal deadlines to secure the $500 million. Issues such as route, alignment, and noise vibrations seems to be a never ending discussion. We have no mitigation plan for the 1,000 business that are going to loose 85% of on-street parking and see 30-50% revenue drops during construction.

The line is still right in my opinion, but it seems that the Met Council might have gone about engagement in the wrong ways:

Even in Minneapolis, the Hiawatha project produced no fewer than eight lawsuits. None succeeded in delaying or halting the project. But to say that every transit project spurs a flurry of lawsuits just isn't true.

There's an art to bringing together different factions, said business consultant and light rail advocate Bill Knowles of Salt Lake City, which built two light-rail lines over the past 11 years and now has three more lines under construction. Knowles said after the first light-rail project, which disrupted some downtown businesses, the process for building future lines got easier, not harder.

He said what he's heard about Central Corridor make him think something has gone off track.

"I'm just totally amazed," Knowles said. "When an entity like a university has to sue, it really speaks to lousy communication, doesn't it? The fact there's lawsuits, and the fact that there's still these people who are rounding themselves up individually tells me there's apparently not anybody big enough who is in control of that situation. And consequently, people are flying off on their own deals."

Is the Central Corridor line our modern day urban renewal or is a project this large going to break some eggs regardless? It seems that too many issues are still unresolved, but the rush to get federal funding always makes other stakeholders issues secondary at best.

Streetcars, Light Rail, and the Central Corridor project

MPR has been running a series all last week on the Central Corridor Line that will be running between downtown Minneapolis and St. Paul. This week I plan on running my own blog posts that will cover each segment and give my two cents. First, to understand why we need the Central Corridor Line I think this MPR story about the old streetcar system, and museum, will set the stage.

Like most cities 50 years ago the Twin Cities had an extensive streetcar network that got folks around town. Today, just like most major American cities we have buses as are main mode of public transportation. What happened in that time period that we took so many steps back in our transportation planning?

Check out this interactive map for stories and history of University Avenue.

Home

“As upbeat, jazzy music sets the mood for fun, a happy family in roller skates finishes the match point of a hockey game played out on a strip of nondescript tarmac. Thus begins Swiss-French filmmaker Ursula Meier’s debut feature, Home—in stark contrast to what lies ahead. Marthe (Isabelle Huppert), Michel (Olivier Gourmet) and their three children live a peaceful existence in a remote house that borders a long-unused stretch of highway. When the route one day suddenly opens to commuters, this bohemian clan’s daily routine is thrown into disarray: Ever-sunbathing Judith (Adélaïde Leroux) must endure the catcall honking that overpowers her portable stereo, while it quickly becomes impossible for the younger children, Julien and Marion, to safely “cross the street” to catch their school bus. What begins as annoyance and inconvenience, however, soon crosses over into paranoia, as the incessant traffic noise leads to sleep deprivation and fears concerning prolonged exposure to exhaust loom large. Refusing to relocate, and in an obstinate yet futile attempt to maintain some semblance of the normality they once enjoyed, Marthe and Michel increasingly resort to isolationism and a literal blockade. Alternately tense, touching, absurd and frightening, Home is an invasion movie of another sort—where the space crafts are vehicles and the aliens are ordinary motorists. With its unique style, dark humor and tragic-hopeful denouement, Meier’s film is sure to be one of the most discussed of the Festival. “ --Jeremy Quist, SFIFF