Too much LRT craze

Could it be our region is a little bit overdone in its LRT craze? I was searching for updates on the new HCMC Clinic in South Whittier at 28th and Nicollet. A SW Journal article had a comment that went:

Why isn't HCMC planning to incorporate light rail into their plans? If they don't it will effectively kill the proposed Southwest LRT route connecting the most populated areas of the city. Their new building will sit right in the middle of the proposed route! Why isn't the county working with HCMC on this? United Health Group in Eden Prairie is building an LRT stop into their new building for this route! Building another route that doesn't connect major hubs like hospitals, convention centers, businesses, and high density apartments/condos is a waste of money and opportunity.

Unfortunately, I have no idea who the poster is and I cannot say whether or not this comment has merit. LinkedIn says he worked in Chaska so I'm guessing nowhere near Minneapolis. The reason I must evaluate the commenter in order to weigh the comment is that more and more often the suburbanites and upper-class Minneapolitans involved in the discussion have grossly out of touch understandings of transportation acquisition.

This all goes back to the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1956 and the racist targeting of black and minority neighborhoods. The obliteration of our inner city blocks came easy when old men wielded power over eminent domain and utopian architecture. There was no one to stop demolition of blighted areas. Today in our region, MNDoT is being fought eyeteeth by suburban owners in the direct path of exurban highway expansions. This round, the people targeted have money and time.

But unfortunately, people still are complacent and uninterested in these proxy battles. To most, transportation is a God given right of government, no matter who is in the way, the path must be made clear and true. From three-car garage to multi-story parking garage, suburbanites rule the landscape, boosting our population to its estimated 3.2 million.

LRT, the new way into Downtown, is a benefit for the good, an improvement to the common. Thus is there a distorted view of the incredible leaps of luck to purview.

Three final routes to the Southwest LRT line and few are listening.

The Whittier neighborhood remains adamantly opposed to the LRT line ripping through Nicollet Avenue and destroying the last vestiges of a renewed South Minneapolis. Construction will kill Eat Street even if the routes are diverted to 1st and Blaisdell.

And even still, Whittier will have no station at the heart of its activity center.

Once I-35W ravaged South Minneapolis, splitting the community into two halves. It seared Whittier on one side. I-94 came and choked it on the north. The tragedy of the commons came far too easy in the 1960s, leaving the mansions of once millionaires derelict and abandoned.

And now, Whittier is being asked to take one for the region, once again. Perhaps it is telling that the upper-class west suburbanites believe "the city wants this" through it. Perhaps their ancestors once said, "the city wants I-394."

As the clinic slowly rises from the ashes of the GFI meat processing plant, the 3C Route will come closer to absolute impossibility. Perhaps Whittier owes the clinic one, even if it did do battle in Zoning & Planning.

Boutique roads

Downtown Journal reports the Park Board has confirmed it will close Plank Road on October 5, 2009 while it investigates alternatives that will cost over $400,000 to pave, something the Park Board doesn't just easily throw up on a plate.

Plank Road is something I call a boutique road. It's a historic artifact that, as the article states, provides a short-term solution. The road is a series of old growth tree planks bolted into the ground. Often wood was the easy solution in Old Minneapolis to the dirt or gravel roads. The Park Board obviously considered it very kitsch and underestimated the popularity of the emerging residential version of the Mills District. All those BMWs don't come small.

In the Warehouse District, many side streets off Washington have been left unpaved, and while traditional pavers are cute to look at, they do feel jarring. Often the sight is common of loosened bricks that have rebounded from the pressure of being run over. Minneapolis Public Works tends to deplore the idea that they have to "repair" these outdated roads. Saint Paul on the other hand still holds fast that it keep its brick roads. They've reinvented the mortar and sealing processes to finally produce streets that hold like they were freshly done in 1890.

Importantly though, the need to keep these roads is clearly an aesthetic question. The aesthetics speak of values, tradition, and history. It says, we care about the past, enough to spend some extra resources to hold dear to them. But like everything boutique, it doesn't last very long without upkeep and who tomorrow will carry the tradition.

Boutique roads are refreshing taste. They make a statement in a way that invigorates the public realm. But how much public will is there when certainly not all who live around them can afford to pay the easement.

Washington Avenue Bridge Rebuild

From the Prospect Park list:

MORE ON THE WASHINGTON AVENUE BRIDGE
John DeWitt, Chair, PPERRIA Transit Committee

There was a good explanation of what's going on with the Washington Avenue Bridge at Thursday's Central Corridor Citizens' Advisory Committee meeting.

Bottom line: The bridge will remain open except for occasional overnight or weekend closures.

Many of us are probably aware that the pedestrian deck has been closed except for the center portion. When engineers from URS analyzed the bridge for suitability for light rail, they included the upper deck and its support columns as they were part of the structure. That analysis showed that the outer columns supporting the pedestrian deck could collapse with standing loads, e.g. a large crowd of people. If one column collapsed, it was likely that others would collapse like dominos.The results were sent to the Central Corridor Project Office where the in-house consultants, DM JM Harris, verified the results and a decision was made to fence off the outer edges of the pedestrian deck until repairs could be made. Hennepin County is now planning those repairs which will be made in 2009.

The bridge itself is actually two independent bridges, one for eastbound traffic, the other for westbound traffic. Each bridge is supported by two pre-assembled beams of high-strength steel which is no longer used. The analyses showed that the bridge is at the limit of what it can support before LRT is added. It's not uncommon for permits to be issued for overweight trucks. That will no longer be allowed for this bridge.

In addition, the bridge is fracture critical. The failure of a single beam will result in bridge collapse ala the 35W bridge. There is a 2019 deadline for the repair or replacement of all fracture critical bridges.

Plans: The bridge decks today simply rest on the beams. They are not a part of the structure. The decks will be replaced with composite decks which become part of the structure. That will strengthen the bridge but it will remain fracture critical. Two additional beams will be built between the two existing beams for each half of the bridge. That will result in a non-fracture critical bridge that can safely carry light rail trains.

Because there are two independent bridges, each can be rebuilt separately. During construction, there will be one lane open in each direction on the side not being rebuilt. There may be occasional overnight or weekend closures of the entire bridge. The Central Corridor Project Office has budgeted $30 million for repairs. Anything over that will be picked up by Hennepin County with, hopefully, some help from MnDOT. Work will begin in 2010.

Disclaimer: I'm not a bridge engineer so I'm just explaining what I heard at the CAC meeting.

The Washington Avenue Bridge rebuild is heating up to be another issue entirely besides the fact that the Marcy Holmes neighborhood is already upset over the limiting of Washington Avenue to one lane in each direction. Several concerns come out of the most recent update. University students crowd the bridge daily and confining them to the central span of the deck does not seem any more safer considering the same column beams are used throughout the bridge. This brings us to the issue of whether the bridge is safe at all right now when other bridges in the state are being closed for the mere presence of potential fracture (see DeSoto Bridge). A complete closing right now would mean literally no intercampus access for University students, a re-routing of the busiest bus lines (16 and 3 notably), and a traffic backup on the very few alternative Mississippi River crossings.

The latest update indicates the Washington Avenue bridge is actually two independent spans where one can be rebuilt while the other is open. The possibility of one fracture critical span open to two lanes of traffic brings reminders of causes of the I-35W bridge collapse which included loads on the bridge being off-balance with construction materials and closed lanes. Not only would one span be subjected to more traffic than before but to longer durations as the same thousands of cars spend more time squeezing through. On another point, it has not been determined whether students could still use the top of the bridge during this time.

In another perspective, most local residents while worried, have always used varying routes to get around Southeast Minneapolis. The oncoming issue will be how construction delays will affect the area in the short-term.

Historic Preservation Commission critique

A seething comment came across the Prospect Park neighbor e-list recently:

HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMENT
Our comment, as owners of a house already "governed and restricted" by the "Rule" of the Heritage Preservation Commission, would be that it has been a colossal hassle to have to deal with the HPC to get "No Change" permissions let alone permits for changes we saw as necessary (tearing down a collapsing 85 year old garage, replacing an even older more dilapidated garage not big enough for a small car, replacing collapsing porches, replacing a decrepit leaking roof, etc.)Except for our first encounter years ago, which was handled by a relatively responsive person, we have subsequently been dealing with a relatively unresponsive, poorly managed committee which is obviously understaffed. It takes months and months. We had to go through Councilman Gordon's office to get our contact person to even respond to phone calls (voice mail is only phone access), email ( "I'll get back to you" means good luck hearing from me unless you come down to the planning office and surprise me on my day on call.) The supervisor absolutely never answered queries, even though the office suggests that he be called. Suffice it to say, some of you may find yourselves regretting not resisting this designation. Gilded age?

The Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) is one of many typical planning tools in large and small cities in the Midwest and prominently on the East Coast. Though Minnesota's history is relatively recent in the context of America, much of our original architecture is approaching or has passed the 100 year mark. With bountiful and beautiful North Woods lumber, multitude of quarrying sites (of which some amazing granite comes from) and an efficient transportation system in the former century has resulted in buildings that have substance and are visually compelling to preserve.

Minneapolis has never been a great friend to its old structures, bulldozing amazing buildings in the name of modernization. The HPC wasn't formed until 1972, well beyond the years of urban renewal. HPC's main role is to designate historic properties or whole areas (which are not necessarily registered National Historic Landmarks), regulate when someone wants to change things up under a designation, and ensure development is historically sensitive and proper when deemed necessary by CPED (aka the Planning Department).

This recent comment comes in a long history of anguished homeowners. It is true that HPC is under-staffed. Funding is mostly to blame. City funding has steadily been reduced since the late 1990s (the Local Government Aid which began in the 1970s). Visionary and fat planning departments are not typical of many larger cities anymore in Minnesota. However in Minneapolis, much of planning was consolidated under recent mayors (Rybak considerably reducing the department when he combined it with the economic development authority). Government as such operates very tight nowadays, but is it too lean?

Part of HPC's inability to deliver true city-services (that is historic planning assistance) is that HPC is essentially a citizen advisory board. This "citizen-run" function also causes upset especially when its citizens against each other (see De La Salle football field).

HPC service being one in dozens of different functions of planning means that its not at the forefront being a sort of accessory role (most development does not fall under a historic designation). Unfortunately there is not quite a clear way to improve the historic preservation system considering that city funds are still very tight and expansion of any department is frowned upon (yes even in a liberal city). Perhaps the only instigator for more staff and resources being devoted to HPC is if more development were to occur in historic areas such as the river front and mansion areas. As such, homeowners will need to continue griping and going after their Council Member to truly get through the system in a reasonably efficient manner.

Capstones: When design stops being useful

Increasingly, suburban cities have become well aware that design is no longer the doctrine by which we can build our communities around. When New Urbanism and the bible of Duany Plater-Zyberk and Company hit the architecture circles, it was as if the design field was given new hope that it could indeed rise from the ashes of the dead "architect era." Suddenly urban design firms were a new player on the scene, attempting to deliver the solution that what looks right is what makes a project successful. When the market tumbled in the past few years, many of our local New Urbanist style projects found that it just isn't enough to make things perfect.

At the Excelsior and Grand project, it was billed as the downtown away from Downtown and through the project tours, revealed each setback and building scale was precisely measured and quantified to achieve DPZ's ideals of urbanism. The inviting central collonade, fountains and winding walkways gave way to realizations that in terms of traffic flow, not only was the "heart" of E&G not entirely functional but utterly defied the suburban standards set throughout the city.  So much flora meant the pedestrians were confused and so were the cars.  

And after two years half the shops closed up. 

One factor may have been parking.  People complained they could not find parking even though there were two parking ramps placed equidistant from the center.  The City reasoned that it was because not even advertising was given to them.  Design might have played a role, they are not inviting to cars with an extremely tight and cave like environment, the ramps looked designed for private use. If design speaks, signs don't do much to proclaim the public amenity. 

Thus to solve these disconnections, the city gave up on perfection and realized they needed E&G to become compatible with the surrounding environment. The next phases built L-shaped buildings to create the allusion of parking and then signs to lead cars to the ramps. This suburban design-type, the L-shape, is a marker of business and helps associate potential shoppers to the building function. A Trader Joe's went in, the first one in the State into an L-shape building with parking. 

The City also decided to build more "side" streets so one could pick and choose where to "enter" the E&G complex and access the rear buildings. Since most SLPers are used to the grid style of Minneapolis and the older western suburbs, this was something compatible to local residents as much as a strip mall parking lot is. As critical mass of activity is now being generated, on-street parking is being maximized.

At Burnsville's Heart of the City, the first phase proudly proclaimed the intersection of Nicollet and Burnsville Parkway with the Grande Market Plaza but was weak to invite residents in. The New Urbanist ideal of mass buildings situated together with thin alleyways meant the actual "entrance" to the complex was virtually hidden a city block away. But the unusual part was that since both streets could not be converted to allow on-street parking, no one understood where exactly to park. This lack of understanding between existing function and new function simply made Grande Market Plaza a beautiful building but not much else. What ultimately suffers in the first phase is that the mass of buildings did not accomodate an inherent need for businesses in suburbia to be seen. The spacing and flow needed to be open, separated, and identifiable by eye, not conglomerated into one solid unit. And surprisingly, the public only has access to the first floor of the building. The interior as well suffered from the cave-like maneuvering of St. Anthony Main/Riverplace.

Though now years afters its construction, the building is finally succeeding in some parts due to Jensen's Cafe, the second phases entirely wiped out the urbanist model completely, going for instead the height-density and car-flow style that Edina had already pioneered with its Centennial Lakes project. Cars must be able to visibly, somehow, identify that something is there to be accessed and utilized, generating the customer. The third phase too will likely see more accessibility and integration of pedestrians and vehicles flowing THROUGH the complex instead of merely arriving at it.

In the end, New Urbanism attitudes should not stifle creative solutions to existing paradigms and place undue expectations. It may not necessarily be building capacity for future growth as carefully governed patterns and pathways may not be very flexible in accomodating flow changes later. Though transit is due to increase in the third-ring suburbs, one must consider the principles of use and economics, and not merely design. 

Back to 500,000

Minneapolis peaked in the 1950 Census at over 571,000 people. One wonders, how did so many people fit together? When analyzing the smaller metropolitans of similar size, one wonders why did Minneapolis lose so much when others like Portland actually continued to grow in size? Today the population hovers around 380k and is still considered at its low point.

How would 500,000 people fit back into the city? Unfortunately there is not enough current housing stock to satisfy the American dream, nor is the stock up to modern standards. Thus accordingly, the revised Minneapolis Plan finally understands that no new growth will be single-family homes or people who will decide to squeeze their family into a duplex or apartment. And since townhomes are no longer an economically feasible bridge between house and apartment, all new growth will indefinitely be in the form of high-density projects. The problem is no one is catering to those who produce growth.

Suburban growth is a reflection of multiple members in one family, of households, and beyond that the connections they produce. Kin drives decisions as to where other family members might locate. Thus true population growth will certainly be in families. And not necessarily those who have children, but more than one in a household. This is essential in an urban environment where space is scarce to truly produce any gains. Development is computed in units and even a skyscraper will only yield 200 or so units, not enough to affect the overall population scheme.

Thus while developers can offer what is needed to build the city, the sociocultural and economic aspect is still not met. The market for families rests in the suburbs and the "bang for buck" home for dollar continues to be ever greater. What the market is defining for families then must be defined for Minneapolis. It is possible to tailor a condominium building to families but it requires the developer and city to recognize their client from the start. The needs of households are not merely physical demands of space, but of qualities of ease, safety, and living within means. Even in market downturns, one must see that sales are still made and that they still fall within these parameters. Developers need not see this kind of unique endeavour as a chance, but as a journey that will better their name in the end. Governments must see that to live out their goals and obligations, they must know humility and recognize the necessity of appealing to those who have abandoned the "urban."

Back to 500,000 is not unrealistic but a lesson that will need to be learned. The opposite is a stagnant place that will see true abandonment that has befell many Minnesota cities already.

City of Bicyclists

Yours truly was interviewed by Minnesota Public Radio on a piece regarding biking. At times I found myself trailing off and of course naturally those catchy quotes when you're not in public-relations mode end up bring printed. Overall it was a lesson of humility but of course it presented me a decent introspective look. Last month I talked about pedestrians, now lets talk about bicyclists.

Inbetween a car and your own body is a bicycle. It still wins over a segueway mostly because you have better control by mechanical function and can go really fast and really slow when you please. It offers personal mobility that is most acceptable to an urban environment. This is proven in European and American cities were biking has become a mode of transportation as much as lattes are common. Former distinguished Professor John Adams would likely praise the bike as accomplishing the proportion of transportation accomplishing distance. In a Minneapolis setting, where goods and services are within 3-5 miles of a house, a bike is much like a car, getting you there when you need without waiting.

Now how can we become a better bikable city? To address this adequately, we must see it in a regional context. Our region by reason of infrastructure and placement is limited to a certain formula. Lets start. Biking like cars have two cultural modes -- one being practicality the other being leisure. Within practicality we find "commuting" and "trips."

We could say a regional commute is anyone in a third ring suburb to 30th Street in all directions. Most trips occur within the span of tens of blocks. Outside of the inner core neighborhoods, biking trips are not inter-regionally feasible, meaning you're limited to pathways set aside by Three Rivers park district or willing to battle through suburban streets. Similarly attaining goods or services outside the inner core would be impossible because most major goods can only be bought in a suburban context and need to be hauled in a car. The distance of grocery store to home is simply not a feasible option to be biking to Cub Foods twice a week.

In terms of leisure, regionally the system (and I mean the bike trail system) is seen in a circular fashion, as bringing you on a scenic tour and for exercise, but not destination based. Within the core, leisure is seen somewhat the same (the Grand Rounds Scenic Byway for example), but more often than not, biking is used as the means to move between places. The urban core is actually more destination based since biking is quite often seen as safe for bar-hopping.

In looking at these contexts, improvements to our system should focus then on each component individually, instead of implementing full standards (as County engineers might prefer). Long-distance commuting trails should focus most on speed. During the workdays they are heavily used and riders go fast. During the weekends they're a bit more relaxed. Thus trails should be wider and marked shared speeds or divided lanes when possible to emphasize their commuting corridor function. Urban core trails should then take into consideration "arrival" riders and slowly integrate regional riders who arrive into the urban network. Trails here should emphasize connecting destination points such as east to west and north to south.

It also may seem counter-intuitive but urban trails need to be better paved, maintained and better marked because of so many multiple uses and so many more regular riders. No one will be too upset over some gravel when they're riding around the Fort Snelling trail, but they certainly will on the Midtown Greenway.

I have also pushed to city engineers to seriously consider shared lane bike markings. We already know that drivers frequently violate the striped bike lanes that cut along city roads and that the sweepers aren't out enough to cover cleaning the extra feet of lane width. Shared lane implies probably half the room allowed for a bike lane but a generally unmarked wide lane along street parking. If we should emphasize the street as "community" we should give shared lanes a test-run. Separating functions of a street means that cars don't have to respect pedestrians or bicyclists. Instead shared lanes invite cars into play.

Planners often speak of intermodal functions in transportation. We should perhaps be viewing our bus stops more comprehensively than we do now. We should view more of them as stations, as important nodes than merely a dot on a line. Knowing that a bus can't serve every street, we must over-emphasize these transportation corridors and bring cars and bicyclists to them. There is currently an absolute disconnect between physical planning and transportation planning. There is no synthesis of transportation modes as well. To achieve a better bicycle city, it may take much more communication than currently exists between agencies.