Rules for rail

Now that the Riverview Corridor “modern streetcar” has been canceled, it’s time to review what role rail transit could have in the Twin Cities metro. The following are necessary to justify its great cost:

Absolute security
Dedicated right-of-way
Stoplight control if on an arterial
Regional routing
Average speed of 35 mph or more
No honor system

Absolute security means zero tolerance and real enforcement. Dedicated right-of-way means physical design separating rail from all other modes. Stoplight control means turning signals green from red, not just prolonging an existing green light. Regional routing means long trips that are faster than any bus and link high-density destinations and stations. Average speed above 35 mph means fewer stations, where the train goes to 0 mph. No honor system means no unsecured boarding — physical access to stations requires payment.

While we’re at it, how about enclosed platforms designed with boarding doors on the platforms that open only when a train has arrived to a full stop? Elevator lobbies have doors. The Terminal One rail shuttle at the airport has platform doors. Why not transit train platforms? And how about transit police substations on each platform, not just squad cars? After all, we are trying to get people to switch from cars to transit. Wouldn’t policing transit be more effective with platform police stations? When Northstar or Amtrak board and deboard passengers, there is a conductor checking tickets. Expand that to metro rail in general.

Finally, consider tunnels and elevated viaducts. Given current cost overruns, subways and elevated trains might not be much more expensive and would for certain be more efficient and faster.

Mathews Hollinshead, St. Paul

Plug it back in and start over

I regret the demise of Ramsey County’s plan for a streetcar line between St. Paul and the airport. But, let’s treat it as a course correction and move on to something more likely to succeed. I am an amateur in civic capital projects but I have some observations.

The planning and management seemed scattered across multiple agencies, making the “who decides what?” question quite confusing.

The option analysis seemed to drag on forever, in part to ensure universal input. The downside was rising impatience and cynicism.

As an observer, I was made well aware of neighbors’ objections but was less aware of evidence-based upsides for the project. I view an increment of a few minutes of travel time to be near-irrelevant versus environmental and urban development concerns.

Now that we have opportunity, let’s rethink the project objectives in hopes of meeting current needs in a better way. For example, since the original planning, 3,800 new living units are being developed at Highland Bridge, adjacent to the 7th Street corridor. Shouldn’t we try to meet that new need? Let’s start again and do better.

Joel Clemmer, St. Paul

Thanks, MAC

I read with interest Frederick Melo’s excellent story, “Riverview Corridor rolls to a close with no streetcar, and no bus” (Sept. 7). Ramsey County officials are wringing their hands about canceling further planning on a streetcar project that: a) was intensely opposed by businesses in this important commercial corridor, b) would increase transit travel times relative to current bus operations, and c) would cost 2 billion (that is not a typo) dollars. How was this a difficult decision?

The story quotes Ramsey County Commissioner Rafael Ortega as stating that federal funds could potentially have been secured for up to half the overall price tag. However, $1 billion is still an immense amount for a locally led project of questionable overall merit. And, as we have seen from other mega transit projects (e.g. Southwest Light Rail Transit here in the Twin Cities), actual costs always increase substantially relative to preliminary, planning-level cost estimates.

Per the story, the County is blaming opposition from the Metropolitan Airports Commission for ending the streetcar dream; if this is true, County leaders should be thanking the MAC for saving them from themselves. As a retired transportation planner, the fact that the streetcar option was championed for as long as it was (devouring huge investments in planning analysis along the way) is quite remarkable to me.

Peter Langworthy, St. Paul

With all this in mind, are polls meaningful?

I have a question about polling maybe someone among your readership could answer.

I have been around quite awhile now and have never been polled. Furthermore, I don’t think I know anyone who has reported ever being polled. I’ve always imagined that polling would be done by telephone, but today many people no longer have a landline. This could vary by location, income, education, age, etc. To my knowledge, cell phone numbers are not listed in any organized published form. On top of that, I suspect it is only certain types of people who would agree to being polled.

With all of this in mind, I am wondering how polls could possibly be representative of the general population. Are polls meaningful?

G.J. Mayer, Lino Lakes

Smile at Snelling instead

I am writing to suggest that the MNUFC replace the billboard at University and Snelling Avenues. Several times a week I drive north on Snelling, and turn left at University to go to the Midway Y. Sitting in the left turn lane, I see above me the billboard with the oversized face of an angry young man, yelling at this troubled intersection. It casts a negative shadow on everyone below, and makes me wonder what the team intended with the sign.

Please replace this sign with happy, smiling faces. That would better represent the team and the vibe you’re trying to create at this busy intersection. We need something more positive at the corner of University and Snelling.

Russell Myers, St. Paul

Related Articles

Marc Champion: Putin’s ‘troll farm’ isn’t necessary. We have our own

Other voices: Ukraine needs more weapons and the permission to use them

Matthew Yglesias: Not even Musk could discipline Trump’s spending

F.D. Flam: Too many emails? Tame your inbox by thinking like a monkey

David Fickling: China has piles and piles of coal, wasting away