All posts in the topic Cars on Nicollet Mall (Short link)
Summary
- There are 41 posts — by 30 authors — in this topic.
- Latest post made by Michael Jensvold at 2007 Nov 16 04:26 UTC
Two recent Star Tribune stories about removing buses from, and adding cars to, Nicollet Mall illustrate the downtown retailers' outdate attitudes toward transportation and transit. http://www.startribune.com/10241/story/1538600.html http://www.startribune.com/10241/story/1536017.html The downtown retailers' collective position throughout the Access Minneapolis ten-year transportation planning process has been essentially to move buses away from their stores and bring more cars closer. There is also a strong undercurrent that those people waiting for buses downtown are bad for business. Folks need to realize that 'those people' ARE their business. We need to become hip to the fact that displacing one vehicle that carries forty customers to make more room for vehicles that carry one customer each is bad business. It is this thinking that has helped lead us to the climate and transportation spending crises today. As a proponent of alternative transportation it has been distressing to see the downtown retailers championing an outdated mid-20th c. transportation model. To be fair, it is not only the downtown retailers that cling to this belief that cars = economic prosperity. The corporate leaders I come in contact with constantly express this idea, as do small and large business owners. Let's face it, car = prosperity is pretty much an American credo. This attitude is damaging our environment and causing over-spending on freeways and roads. Mobile sources (cars, trucks, trains, planes and ships) are the primary contributor to greenhouse gasses. We can't afford to maintain the interstate system we have today even as we plan to expand our freeways. Let's evolve on our approach to transportation. Let's embrace alternatives - buses, trains, streetcars, bikes and peds - and the people who choose them. We need to improve the pedestrian realm to better support transit. We need to acknowledge that ALL streets in our city should be bike streets. And please, please let's let go of this self-destructive, deeply held belief that only more cars will make us economically viable. Peace, Robert Lilligren Ward 6 Phillips West
"There is also a strong undercurrent that those people waiting for buses
downtown are bad for business.… Folks need to realize that 'those people' ARE
their business."
I suggest these generalizations are not useful for setting policy. Some people
waiting for buses are bad for some businesses. Some people are indeed
customers, while others are only making a transfer on the way to be customers
somewhere else. I can agree that more people broadly means more business. The
tricky bits are which people, which businesses, and when. Trickiest of all, who
decides the winners and losers?
"one vehicle that carries forty customers"
For the couple of commuter hours those vehicles carry 40+ people. Their status
as customers is undetermined. Outside commuter hours, those vehicles are mostly
empty on most of their routes. Empty seats deliver no customers.
"car = prosperity…" "corporate leaders I come in contact with constantly
express this idea, as do small and large business owners."
I suggest the equation is stated backward. Prosperity equals car seems to
follow history better. As people earn increasing wealth, they choose personal
on-demand transportation. For a century that personal on-demand transport has
taken the form of fossil-fueled autos. There's no reason to expect that
fossil-fueled autos are the ultimate expression of personal transport
technology. There is reason to expect that, as oil becomes scarce and
environmental impacts are properly priced, personal transport will take new
forms. Try to look past the stinky metal boxes people are using these days and
focus on the desires those boxes satisfy. Unless we can dictate an
anti-historic change in human nature, people, generally :-), will seek ways to
get where they want when they want in an environment entirely under their
control.
It is accommodating this desire, and as many other desires as possible, which
makes a place economically viable. The suburbs have been kicking our butts for
decades. Can we learn from them? When will we determine that anti-auto elitism
is an outdated attitude?
As I read it, nearly everyone in business is asking for better accommodation
for auto-oriented customers. It's not just some *wacky minority*. If all the
business people express the same need, why do we dismiss or demean them as
clinging to an outdated vision? Business can't (and shouldn't be made to) wait
for some idealistic social engineering program to change those customer
preferences. If there is to be policy aimed at preserving and increasing
economic activity in Minneapolis, that policy should listen to demand rather
than insist on supply.
Mark Fox
East Division (Audubon Park)
- Unless we can dictate an anti-
- historic change in human nature,
- people, generally :-), will seek ways
- to get where they want when they
- want in an environment entirely -
- under their control.
I read this email (and am responding) from a VERY crowed train in London, many
of the people I am looking at appear very prosperous to me.
Of course, this is consistant with the above statement, in that under the
living conditions in London, the train gives people far more control over their
ability to get where they want, than the impossibly congested and unpredictable
roads.
Plus, on a train people have luxury of participating in important community
discussions on their local e-democracy.org forum - during their commute, so it
does not detract from their precious family time.
Sounds like a win-win to me.
I recognize that conditions in Mpls are no where near those of London. However,
I mean to make the point that there is nothing NATURAL or clear-cut about
choosing a car as your mode of transportation.
Conditions in Mpls may be quite different in 50 years and people may make very
different choices. The London TUBE is over a hundred years old.
(FYI - I agree with the point about making assumptions about the bus riders. I
would suspect that for some downtown businesses, very few of their customers
arrive on bus. But, that is really besides the point. I still think that a
comfortable pedestrian zone is in everyones interest).
Tim Erickson
(Still have not reaced my stop, but am certainly moving much quicker than the
poor folks stuck in their cars).
St. Paul (today in London)
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
Mark Fox, when was the last time you took a bus?
I ride several times a day, and rarely ride on a bus that is even less than
half full. Believe it or not, most routes fill up most on weekends, when
reduced schedules cram more riders onto fewer buses that end up going way off
schedule.
Maybe are you seeing those buses on Nicollet Mall that are near the end of
their route and as such have already dispatched most of their passengers?
If free shuttle service is implemented on Nicollet I guarantee you won't see
any more empty buses.
Since the reality is that there are busses on the mall (and will be
for the foreseeable future) it seems to me that the Downtown Business
Council should be discussing what stores and amenities appeal to
people who ride the bus. Target, for example, seems to be doing
pretty well and though I can't prove it, I strongly suspect many of
the people who shop there are bus riders. I certainly see Target
shopping bags on the 3 Bus going home on a regular basis.
Instead, they've decided to banish bus riders from the mall in favor
of cars under the assumption that cars bring business (or at least
the business they want).
It's clearly a class based bias. The DBC would prefer to have more
upscale shoppers. They assume said shoppers drive cars. They also
assume said upscale shoppers are afraid of the people that ride the bus.
Thankfully, the City Council has other plans. We can only hope that
they stick to them rather then give into a rather odd push for yet
another street for cars downtown.
Personally, I don't mind the busses on the mall, but if we are to get
rid of them I'd prefer they be replaced with bicycles and
pedestrians. Boulder, CO, for example, has The Pearl Street Mall
- a wonderful pedestrian mall that's full of street life and shops
and runs for several blocks downtown. Something like that, with bike
lanes in the middle, would be wonderful.
Jim McGuire
Como
"I mean to make the point that there is nothing NATURAL or clear-cut about
choosing a car as your mode of transportation."
Which misses the point about how autos are only the current form of personal,
on demand transport. People used to choose horses. Others walk or pedal, but
the world is very small for human-powered travelers.
"I recognize that conditions in Mpls are no where near those of London." "under
the living conditions in London, the train gives people far more control over
their ability to get where they want, than the impossibly congested and
unpredictable roads"
Yes, get outside of central London to witness the *sprawl* and crowded
Motorways. Add 5 million people to the Twin Cities, and sure, you can trumpet
how full the train is. But don't ignore how full everything else is. It's as if
the communal transit faithful believe they can isolate the urban core from the
vast territory which supports it, or from its unique situation in history. The
tube does not *give people control*. The people delegate control, and pay for
the privilege. Their sphere of action is limited to the service area and to the
service schedule, they make themselves hostage to transport unions, and expose
themselves to several unique and catastrophic risks. That many in a huge,
super-dense metropolis choose the cost of riding the tube over the cost of
motoring into the City is no refutation of my argument that people prefer
personal on-demand transport. Several billions in China and India are getting
off the train and into cars as fast their incomes will allow.
"Maybe are you seeing those buses on Nicollet Mall that are near the end of
their route and as such have already dispatched most of their passengers?"
They're still empty. And were empty for most the route. Policy is great at
providing seat-miles, but has failed to deliver sufficient customer traffic to
meet the demands of commerce.
"It's clearly a class based bias. The DBC would prefer to have more upscale
shoppers. They assume said shoppers drive cars. They also
assume said upscale shoppers are afraid of the people that ride the bus."
To use the language *class-based bias* poisons the well. Great rhetoric, but
lousy reasoning. A preference for shoppers with more money to spend is sensible
business. What business wants their customers to have less money? That people
with more money to spend in support of business drive cars is demonstrated
fact. That's part of the point I was making about prosperity. That people
better-able to support business prefer to avoid the uncivility and danger found
on communal transport is also no assumption. This preference has been confirmed
in repeated surveys.
"Plus, on a train people have luxury of participating in important community
discussions on their local e-democracy.org forum - during their commute, so it
does not detract from their precious family time."
This uncovers more layers of the communal transit mythology. As proposed and
built in the 21st-Century USA, transit trains are a luxury good. Sure, they're
sold as a benefit to the poor, but the poor (and every rider) could just as
easily get to where they're going on a bus. The communal transit faithful get
to worship their sense of urban nostalgia on the backs of everyone else. Why
not build every faith a billion-dollar church?
That people in cars are *wasting time* betrays an arrogance or prejudice about
motorists. First, the alleged wasting can only happen during commuter hours.
The other 20 hours of the day, the trip is faster by auto. That people choose
to commute is not a waste, but a cost. The suburban living and/or suburban job
is evidently worth the time spent getting there. We are not qualified to judge
how other people spend their time. Some motorists mitigate the time cost (or
even make it a benefit) by using it to plan for work and *decompress* so that
upon returning home they're in better spirits to enjoy family life. Motorists
participate in community activities by telephone, or via radio. Maybe
E-Democracy should consider audio streaming and voice-to-text services. Unless
we don't want to include the heretics...
Policymakers will likely continue insisting they know more about business than
businesspeople. Their policy takes us is into a future city that is home only
to the very rich and the very poor.
Specifically on Nicollet Mall: I say get rid of the buses. They're loud and
they stink. Get rid of the taxis, too. Make it a linear park. Of course, like
most of us spouting suggestions, I do not have an investment there. But if
we're praying and dreaming rather than thinking things through, let's make
Nicollet a pretty place nobody can get to.
Mark Fox
Between the 4 and the 10 (Audubon Park)
I fail to see what adding cars to Nicollet Mall adds. From a retail
standpoint, you can't park on the mall, its to narrow for on street
parking nor are there any ramps or lots on the mall (at least north of
the Hyatt/Loring and Millennium Hotel ramps.
Back before LRT we were told there would be a downtown circulatory bus
which would be the only set of buses on the mall. Alas, LRT came but
the circulatory bus never materialized. Welcome to RT Rybak and Tim
Pawlenty's version of America.
I'll agree that the diesel version of the buses currently run on many
routes are a negative for the outdoor eating establishments. The
natural gas and hybrid versions are much better, both from an odor and
noise standpoint.
The council got part of it right, take off the bus routes. Adding cars
is bizarre. Let's take off all of the vehicles, except perhaps police
and fire and make it a true pedestrian mall.
BTW, lets take the panhandlers off the mall too.
Terrell Brown
Loring Park
Terrell's comment re panhandlers is somewhat ironic. The panhandlers are
ensconced in every nook and cranny on Macy's perimeter and I assume
Macy's is a client of the Downtown Business Council who is trying to
drive (NPI) traffic to the Nicollet Mall stores.
Bill Dooley
Kenny
At 11:33 AM 11/10/2007, Mark Fox wrote:
>"It's clearly a class based bias. The DBC would prefer to have more
>upscale shoppers. They assume said shoppers drive cars. They also
>assume said upscale shoppers are afraid of the people that ride the bus."
>
>To use the language *class-based bias* poisons the well. Great
>rhetoric, but lousy reasoning. A preference for shoppers with more
>money to spend is sensible business. What business wants their
>customers to have less money? That people with more money to spend
>in support of business drive cars is demonstrated fact. That's part
>of the point I was making about prosperity. That people better-able
>to support business prefer to avoid the uncivility and danger found
>on communal transport is also no assumption. This preference has
>been confirmed in repeated surveys.
"A preference for shoppers with more money is sensible business"
I suppose, then, that discount stores are not practicing sensible
business? Perhaps they should all close down so we can have more
upscale shops everywhere. That, apparently, is the only "sensible
business" model.
My rhetoric was not only Great (thanks for the compliment) but right
on. The DBC is proposing not to target the shoppers that are already
there, but to have them removed from the mall so that they can target
a different demographic. You call this "sensible business". I'll
use a term that I've often seen applied to mass transit by the right
- social engineering. It's a conscious decision to attempt to change
the demographics of downtown so that they can build their businesses
around people that aren't currently there (but might be if we get rid
of those scary bus riders). So, yes, I'll state it again. It's class bias.
>Specifically on Nicollet Mall: I say get rid of the buses. They're
>loud and they stink. Get rid of the taxis, too. Make it a linear
>park. Of course, like most of us spouting suggestions, I do not have
>an investment there. But if we're praying and dreaming rather than
>thinking things through, let's make Nicollet a pretty place nobody can get to.
I'm not sure if this was a cut at me or not. I did make reference to
a very successful pedestrian mall in Boulder and suggested something
liek that for the mall. I'm not sure what Mark means by the phrase
"that no one can get to." Last time I checked, most people still
have feet. They seem to be able to use them in Boulder. I guess
that's not the case here.
Jim McGuire
Como
Since Terrell Brown raised the issue of the downtown circulator, I'll repeat
and expand on what I said in Friday's story. The downtown circulator service
is coming to the Mall as soon as the reconfiguration of Marquette and 2nd Avs.
is completed--potentially at the end of 2009. The reconfiguration of those two
streets was aided by the $133 million grant awarded by the federal government
last summer, which still needs a state match. The Marquette/2nd revisions will
increase the number of bus lanes on these streets from one to two, so that
express buses can leapfrog each other, stopping every other block. This gets
40 percent of the bus traffic off the Mall. Metro Transit says it will convert
the remaining buses on the Mall--all of them locals--to hybrid gas-electrics,
although CM Lisa Goodman remains skeptical of that promise.
Once the Mall has only local buses, MT has agreed to allow all buses
deadheading downtown to serve as local circulator service that would allow
movement between the Convention Center and Hiawatha Line, along the Mall.
The Marquette/2nd changes are squeezing out the bike lanes there. The plan is
to have bikers return to using the Mall 24 hours per day, rather than the
off-peak 12 hours. One possibility is that there will be narrow bays where the
Mall bus stops are so that bikers can pass buses at these stops on the safer
left side of the bus.
There was sharp debate in the city's Bike Advisory Committee the other day
about the Marquette/2nd bike lanes. But bikers will be permitted to use the
passing bus lane on those streets during off-peak hours under the council's
approval of the downtown traffic plan. And the city will explore 24-hour use
of the lanes for that purpose. The BAC voted Wednesday to support a one-year
test of the latter idea.
There are also likely to be changes in the Hennepin Avenue bike lanes as that
street is converted to two-way traffic, but the intent is to keep lanes there.
Steve Brandt
Star Tribune
Attention Downtown Retailers:
The economy sucks.
You are on the most densely packed retail street in the cities.
You are on a block of land bordering three streets choked with cars.
Your building is often times directly connected to a parking garage.
You can't get a car anywhere near the Gap @ MOA.
Can't we, people, human beings, have one street, just one street to call our
own?! Is that too much to ask?
Is my only value in this city as a consumer?
I am not a consumer.
I am a citizen.
And the streets belong to the citizens.
And what are we to do about those parking garages that are largely empty most
of the day?
Still in Cedar Riverside
Still not duped into buying a car
Xan Cassiel
All these ideas are simply pie in the sky, all gloss no substance.
When it comes to the Nicollet Mall, however, the MTC (at that time) paid for
the restructure of the mall specifically to accommodate bus traffic. How then
do we compensate the bus company for that investment and for the cost of moving
the buses to different routes? And it will cost a bundle.
RT and the Council have agonized over the money they don't have to keep the
city functioning with police, fire, and public works. If they were not lying
about that, then what is being talked about here but wasting money on something
that doesn't need to be done. There is no point to painting the kitchen while
the roof is still leaking and the basement is flooded.
We can't have libraries or the NRP but we can dick around with moving the
buses?
Madness, nothing but madness. I'm sick of it.
WMarks, Central
On Nov 10, 2007, at 8:01 PM, wizard marks wrote:
> We can't have libraries or the NRP but we can dick around with
> moving the buses?
Our mayor can't seem to properly park, never mind drive a car. At
least one council member has had difficulty separating his drinking
from his driving. And they deem themselves transportation planners?
May I propose a modest solution. The Prius the mayor never had
authority to buy in the first place then voided the warranty of by
having it modified will be sold to the highest bidder. The purchase
price and modification costs less the auction proceeds will be
deducted from the Mayor's salary. The $400 monthly "car allowance"
the council gave themselves so they could commute about our two
township sized city will be replaced with a Metro Transit pass, the
cost of which will be deducted pre tax from their salaries.
To enable the mayor and council's transportation planning fantasies,
they will be loaded into a city 15 passenger van and driven by a
qualified city driver to the next local model train show. From their
petty cash budgets they can purchase N scale trains, trollies,
streetcars, busses, and scenery to their hearts desire. An unused
storage room deep within the city hall subbasements will be
designated the "Transportation Play, or excuse me, Planning Room".
With adult supervision, the mayor and council will be free to build
the transportation systems of their dreams there, provided their
frequent model train crashes don't result in any HazMat incidents or
power outages.
from Hawthorne, where we know how to keep out cars off the sidewalks
and trains on track...
Dyna Sluyter
I'm glad that CM Lilligren is able to tell the business leaders who their
actual customers are...
?
Businesses thinking of setting up shop in Minneapolis?? Meet the city council!
Anthony Thompson
Standish
Providing auto access to Nicollet solves nothing.
More people would dine outdoors on Nicollet Mall if there weren't buses passing
by continuously. Adding cars would not help, but hurt, in this regard. Get rid
of all motorize transportation so you can expand outdoor dining. Those are the
type of people you want to draw into the area if you're looking for crossover
retail business.
While not related to cars --- I just learned that the first shipment of new
Metro Transit hybrid buses is in and will be on display this week. One of the
things the City Council has been pushing for as part of the "Access Minneapolis
Transportation Action Plan" is for all of the buses on the Mall to be hybrids.
If we must have buses there at least they can be cleaner.
Here are more details:
Metro Transit will parade its fleet of new hybrid electric buses onNicollet
Mall during the noon hour on Thursday, November 15.
The parade will be preceded by a short program at noon in the IDSCrystal Court
(on the mall between 7th and 8th streets). Details of theprogram are still
being firmed up.
After the program, guests will step outside to witness a parade upNicollet
Mall of as many as 19 new 40-foot hybrid buses wrapped in thelivery of Metro
Transit's Go Greener Initiative. These buses - and 150more that will be
delivered by 2012 - are quieter, get 22 percent betterfuel mileage and emit 90
percent fewer emissions than the buses theywill replace. They also represent
Metro Transit's commitment to theAccess Minneapolis transportation plan that
calls for only hybrid buseson Nicollet Mall once transit improvements are made
on Marquette andSecond Avenue South.
The buses, which began arriving in late October and are being preparedfor
service, will be in operation November 19 primarily on routes 17 and18 that
serve the Mall on about 1/3 of local bus trips.
-----------------
Seems like a bit of good news to me.
Cam Gordon
Seward
Actually, I think the overall solution would be replacing the buses with
streetcars. The streetcar presents no on sight air pollution, is quieter, and
is much easier to configure handicapped access with platform level entrances,
etc.
Many years ago (1970.s) Oak Park, IL built a mall on their Lake Street. There
was no transit on the mall, police on scooters were chasing bicyclists
continually (bicycles prohibited), and of course no cars. At the time a shoe
store manager complained to me that the mall impeded access for his older
customers who could no longer be dropped off in front of his storefront. That
mall no longer exists.
The Nicollet Mall in Minneapolis was the *first* economically successful mall
of this type, in the country. There are reasons for that. Better primary
(human) access is just one reason.
For decades we have spent huge sums of money providing facility and access for
cars only, and in the process destroying infrastructure and deleting human
access in favor of cars. It does not work. I think the business community has
been late in understanding this.
Cleaner and quieter buses will be an improvement, but we can do better.
Portland OR figured a way for streetcars and bicycle lanes to be compatible on
the same street. We can too.
Paul Nelson
Ward One - District 7
Hyde Park
Thanks for the good news! I vaguely recall some kind
of promise to the downtown neighborhood that the buses
on Nicollet Mall would "soon" all be low or zero
emission buses.
When I lived downton and walked to work but bused
everywhere else for my transportation, my doctor
started requiring me to wear a special filtering face
mask over my mouth and nose during "bus rush hour"
when I walked to and from work down Nicollet Mall from
my home because the amount of exhaust was literally
making me sick by aggravating lung problems.
Whereas downtown residents already are between several
freeways and of course have all the other exhaust form
traffic to deal with, the worst and heaviest of the
exhaust from all those buses on one street just pushed
my lungs beyond their tolerance level.
I look forward to moving back downtown at some point
in the future and look forward to enjoying cleaner
fresher air on Nicollet when I visit restaurants and
stores until then.
David Strand
Currently in Plymouth, MN
Story re Downtown Council study which has cars returning to Nicollet Mall. Blame it on the skyways By Michelle Bruch Downtown Council consultant recommends focusing retail on streets "The skyway system is hurting retailers, according to a consultant that analyzed Downtown stores. "Cities get their life from their streets," said Midge McCauley, a principal of Economics Research Associates. "When you take people off the streets, that dilutes the activity." The Minneapolis Downtown Council, a group that advocates for the business community, hired Economics Research Associates this year to conduct a retail demand analysis of Downtown." Here is the rest of the story: http://www.downtownjournal.com/index.php?&story=10373&page=65&category=54 Bill Dooley
Xan! I LOVE your post! HERE HERE!!!
If retailers want car filled streets, they have hundreds of choices!
Retailers YOU MOVE,
NOT THE BUSES!!!!!
Say on, Sister, say on! It's government by sleight of hand.
Plus, having cars on the mall makes no sense. Where will they go?
They'll drive down the mall but to visit any of the businesses they
have to leave the mall. It's a two-way two-lane street. One driver
stops to let out one passenger and traffic is backed up for blocks,
with accompanying red faces, bad language, horns honking, and
blood-pressure spikes. Will all those cars provide a more pleasant
environment for outdoor dining than the buses do? Will there be less
exhaust and fewer noxious fumes?
I fail to see the point of it.
Jeane Moore
On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 20:01:31 -0600 (GMT-06:00), you wrote:
>All these ideas are simply pie in the sky, all gloss no substance.
>
>When it comes to the Nicollet Mall, however, the MTC (at that time) paid for
the restructure of the mall specifically to accommodate bus traffic. How then
do we compensate the bus company for that investment and for the cost of moving
the buses to different routes? And it will cost a bundle.
>
>RT and the Council have agonized over the money they don't have to keep the
city functioning with police, fire, and public works. If they were not lying
about that, then what is being talked about here but wasting money on something
that doesn't need to be done. There is no point to painting the kitchen while
the roof is still leaking and the basement is flooded.
>
>We can't have libraries or the NRP but we can dick around with moving the
buses?
The main problem I have with downtown shopping is I can't afford to shop or eat
at most places along the mall. And I've noticed most of the people who can
afford to shop and eat down here prefer to hop in their cars and head home to
the suburbs to shop and eat closer to home. I don't buy much when I shop along
the mall, even at Target, because I either have to get it home on the bus or
have my husband drive down from Anoka to pick me up (the hole we live in up
there is cheaper than a similar hole would be down here). I commute by bus
because it's cheaper, more convenient (we try to pick a place to live on or
very near a bus line) and I can relax on the bus both ways, so I'm not a
nervous wreck when I get to work or back home.
Perhaps the condo dwellers will shop more down here, but I understand that many
condos are going unsold and some condo projects are going on hold. And as for
the buses smelling bad, that's nothing compared to a line of cars idling in
sigle file along the mall for blocks waiting for the light to change so they
can make a left turn to get to 394 or 94 or 35.
You're not going to be able to MAKE people want to shop or eat more downtown.
Have they really tried to see what the people already here really want for
shopping and dining? I haven't heard about the downtown business groups or
city council sending pollsters out along the mall to ask what people really
want. Those of us who only have a half hour for lunch and a 45 minute commute
home aren't going to have lunch at a sit-down restaurant, or stick around for
dinner, except for special occasions. What are the actual demographics for the
people who work down here? Who spend their days down here? Who live down
here?
You've got cars on Hennepin and the only businesses that have been able to stay
open there are the Brass Rail and the Gay 90s. Maybe Nicollet doesn't need more
cars, but more bars (with naked people!)!
As I remember, when Nicollet Mall was redone the curves were straightened out a
bit to accommodate rail. All hail hybrid buses and all but a streetcar would be
so well suited to Nicollet, even if it's just Washington Ave to the Convention
Center or the Leamington Ramp. With bus stations at either end a free streetcar
shuttle would
1) quiet down the street, making it more hospitable to outside dining and
walking,
2) get people (including shoppers) moving up and down the street easier and a
little faster,
3) show people what a modern streetcar is like and how it is not a bus (or an
old streetcar).
(Denver has a similar system using buses. It has been running for years and is
very successful, providing a fulcrum for their very successful and ever more
expansive light rail system.)
If this line were to be extended down south Nicollet, the boom to 'Eat Street'
(oh how I hate that name) would be enormous, especially from tourists, and it
would spur the development of the Kmart site (the worst thing the city had done
to itself until we decided to start burning our trash downtown), acres of
underdeveloped land and parking lots (if that's not redundant).
(Parenthetically)
Xan Cassiel
The (Once) Mighty West Bank!
(RIP: North Country, Viking, New Riv, Dania Hall, Municipally Owned Parking,
Hard Times?)
Ed Kohler wrote:
> Providing auto access to Nicollet solves nothing.
>
> More people would dine outdoors on Nicollet Mall if there weren't buses
passing by continuously. Adding cars would not help, but hurt, in this regard.
Get rid of all motorize transportation so you can expand outdoor dining. Those
are the type of people you want to draw into the area if you're looking for
crossover retail business.
>
>
Mark Anderson:
I have to agree that there would be little benefit to again giving cars
access to Nicollet Mall. I think the way to make the Mall nicer would
be to ban cars, buses, and bikes from the street, so folks could easily
cross the street without risking their lives. I don't understand why
anyone now eats outside on the Mall next to the loud, smelly buses. But
it would be truly nice to eat on the sidewalk if there were only
pedestrians in sight.
Anderson&Turpin wrote:
> I have to agree that there would be little benefit to again giving cars
> access to Nicollet Mall. I think the way to make the Mall nicer would
> be to ban cars, buses, and bikes from the street, so folks could easily
> cross the street without risking their lives. I don't understand why
> anyone now eats outside on the Mall next to the loud, smelly buses. But
> it would be truly nice to eat on the sidewalk if there were only
> pedestrians in sight.
This would appear to be intuitively obvious to the most casual of
observers.
Why hasn't this happened?
It may be intuitively obvious, unfortunately experience doesn't back up
intuition. In the late 1970's and early 80's many downtowns created a
pedestian mall in their downtown only to see businesses along the mall suffer.
Many such pedestrian malls have been ripped up and cars brought back into the
mix.
It appears that cars and buses, along with their noise and smells, bring a
certain vitality to a downtown roadway. Urban studies have shown that if
people, when driving in a downtown area, are not able to see the businesses
from their car window, they tend to forget about them and don't visit. Add to
that the fact that buses and cars don't seem to deter visitors from sidewalk
restaurants and you can understand the desirability of bringing cars to
Nicollet Avenue. (Figlio has had the longest running sidewalk dining in the
City and it sits next to one of the busiest streets in the City - coincidence?)
I'd love to be able to walk and cross streets, eat, and shop without cars
maring the experience, unfortunately I would be left with little to visit
except for boarded-up storefronts and stray papers blowing down an empty
street.
Dean E. Carlson
Ward 10, East Harriet
Dean writes:
It appears that cars and buses, along with their noise and smells, bring a
certain vitality to a downtown roadway. Urban studies have shown that if
people, when driving in a downtown area, are not able to see the businesses
from their car window, they tend to forget about them and don't visit.
Me:
... and that's why Hennepin Avenue downtown is so vital?
Putting the snark aside, Hennepin Avenue downtown actually proves a broader
point I was (poorly) trying to make: It's just not ONE thing that makes an
urban place vital. It's a whole of mix of things. I think the Public Space
people call it 10 levels of activity or something like that. Just as
putting cars on Hennepin doesn't by itself automatically make it vital and
fun, removing buses and cars from Nicollet transform that streetway either.
Dean E. Carlson
Ward 10, East Harriet
I would be interested to hear from bicyclists about the plan to lift the
restriction banning bikes on the Nicollet Mall between 6:00AM - 6:00PM
weekdays. Would this actually make a difference to you? This change is
scheduled to happen after Marquette and 2nd Avenues are rebuilt eliminating the
bike lanes but allowing bikes on the outside transit lanes during "off peak"
hours ( a test will hopefully result in bikes being allowed 24/7).
Do commuter bicyclists want to use Nicollet Mall at any hour of the day? Or,
would you rather ride with the buses on Marquette and 2nd?
Hennepin Avenue will be a whole nother issue!
Huge benefit to have bikes on Nicollet mall much easier and safer than bike
lanes on Hennepin & Marquette.
Carl Holmquist
CARAG
In the late 1970's and early 80's many downtowns created a pedestrian mall in
their downtowns in imitation of us.
It only worked in a few places. Ours (as well as Denver's) actually works very
well. It is full of activity during the day. Drivers not seeing what's on the
street has the same effect here as drivers not seeing the Gap when they go by
MOA - downtown mpls, like a shopping mall is a destination in itself. This is
not true of business areas in the states where pedestrian or transit streets
have not worked.
Hennepin is actually full of activity at night, especially on weekends. The
things that are harming Hennepin are the atrocities that have been built there:
City Center, the Skyway Theatre, and (uhg) Block E. Not to mention the break in
continuity of store fronts because of parking lots, public housing, schools,
empty store fronts. And of course all the damned cars.
(In fact when block E was at its skankiest is when it was at its liveliest. It
was the focus of the city. How can we tell? When the Twins won the world series
and everyone poured into the streets, where did they go? Hennepin. Even though
the dome was at the other end of dt, people instinctively headed for Hennepin.
And then they drunkenly headed up light posts.)
Overseas, pedestrian malls are wildly successful whether they have cars or not.
Camden in London (two lanes, no parking), Champs-Élysées (superwide, traffic in
the middle, sidewalks as big as our streets), the entire centre of Copenhagen
(no cars for block after block), Las Ramblas in Barcelona, etc, etc..
Uptown is also its own destination, but why people eat outside at Figlio?
probably because so many people eat inside. If you take (some of) the cars
away, more people would eat outside.
Opening the mall to bicycles would help with the number one problem bicyclists
in mpls encounter, the police.
Xan Cassiel
Cedar Riverside is my own destination
Richard Anderson wrote:
>Do commuter bicyclists want to use Nicollet Mall at any hour of the
>day? Or, would you rather ride with the buses on Marquette and 2nd?
>Hennepin Avenue will be a whole nother issue!
The answer to this is simple. The Nicollet Mall is the best street
in downtown Minneapolis to ride a bicycle on, hands down. That's why
you see so many bicyclists ignoring the current ban - they'd rather
rise a ticket then risk life and limb on the Hennepin Avenue turn
lanes. (They're painted as bike lanes, but I've seen far too many
cars who have difficulty with that concept).
Jim McGuire
Como
Bikes are risking more than a ticket riding on Nicollet Mall so long as the
buses are on the mall. Frankly, even though a bus has at least six mirrors, the
driver still cannot see a bike much of the time. I've seen some hair raising
bike-bus tangles over time. Some folks damn near bought the farm trying to
compete with buses on that mall.
WMarks, Central
> (They're painted as bike lanes, but I've seen far too many
> cars who have difficulty with that concept).
Driving east on hennepin and taking a left onto 7th by block E, you
are all the way left then there is a bike lane then bus/cop lane. Be
as careful as you can be, but a bike coming up behind you is extremely
hard to see.
John Harris
webber-camden
Well, it's a three/four year old dead horse to beat but I still claim
branding rights to a Segway rental at both ends of the mall. Walking, biking or
scooting along with a trolley line sounds still all right to me. I've witnessed
70's plus folks enjoying those rides. The novelty alone would draw a numbers of
curious.
Jon Gorder
Cathedral Hill
<email obscured> wrote: It may be intuitively obvious, unfortunately
experience doesn't back up intuition. In the late 1970's and early 80's many
downtowns created a pedestian mall in their downtown only to see businesses
along the mall suffer. Many such pedestrian malls have been ripped up and cars
brought back into the mix.
Ye have little faith of the agility and dexterity of a biker. That's the
perspective of one of many bikers who aren't afraid of no friggin' buses.
"The things that are harming Hennepin are the atrocities that have been built
there: City Center, the Skyway Theatre, and (uhg) Block E. Not to mention the
break in continuity of store fronts because of parking lots, public housing,
schools, empty store fronts. And of course all the damned cars."
I suggest it is not the inanimate objects which hold Hennepin back, but the
animate ones. Commerce caters to the people who are nearby, and the survey
given above implies those people are either not customers or parking and going
somewhere else. Toss out any range of epithets about people who can afford to
recreate in more pleasant environs. They will not hear you, they're at the
mall. The ugly over-sized MOA, where the walk from parking or transit to
storefront is far, succeeds. Perhaps in no small measure by catering to
everyone except the *most colorful* layabouts who decorate Hennepin (and
Nicollet).
"Overseas, pedestrian malls are wildly successful whether they have cars or
not. Camden in London (two lanes, no parking), Champs-Élysées (superwide,
traffic in the middle, sidewalks as big as our streets), the entire centre of
Copenhagen (no cars for block after block), Las Ramblas in Barcelona, etc,
etc."
Way back near the beginning of this thread I typed "It's as if the … faithful
believe they can isolate the urban core from the vast territory which supports
it, or from its unique situation in history." Nicollet is not in France or
Spain. Those places may provide instruction, but we would be fools to copy.
Much like those who failed to emulate the temporary success of Nicollet in the
last century.
"I'd love to be able to walk and cross streets, eat, and shop without cars
marring the experience, unfortunately I would be left with little to visit
except for boarded-up storefronts and stray papers blowing down an empty
street"
There is some study of the advantages of living in a city in the early stages
of decline. The built amenities are never crowded. Maybe we should ignore the
needs of businesses and savor the serenity of decay.
Mark Fox
East Division (Audubon Park)
ps-- "Is my only value in this city as a consumer?"
A politician would never tell you so, but your value to the City is the tax you
pay and the time you donate in support of City goals. You may have additional
value to your fellow citizens, but the people are not the government.
wizard marks wrote:
> Bikes are risking more than a ticket riding on Nicollet Mall so long as the
buses are on the mall. Frankly, even though a bus has at least six mirrors, the
driver still cannot see a bike much of the time. I've seen some hair raising
bike-bus tangles over time. Some folks damn near bought the farm trying to
compete with buses on that mall.
>
Unfortunately MTC bus drivers are some of the worst behaved drivers in
downtown Minneapolis. Witness the bus that ran the red light and bowled
over the SUV a week or so ago.
Being a guy who lives downtown and has walked to work for better than
half of the last decade, I've noticed that bus drivers seem to feel that
it's legit to run a red light if they at least tap their horn a couple
of times while the light is still yellow. (Watch during any rush hour
and you will see this during nearly any cycle of the lights).
Granted drivers from the 'burbs aren't much better even though they
relieve us from the noise pollution of the taps on the horn, but MTC
doesn't bother with such common courtesy as signaling departure from the
curb or crossing 2 or 3 lanes of traffic when it is time to make a left
hand turn.
Public transportation is vital, however, image is everything and MTC (or
MTCO these days) could do a lot to improve their image if they would
learn to actually stop when the light turns red or signal if they are
going to enter traffic or cross a couple of traffic lanes.
Let's clean up the Mall, kill the bus routes, add a circulator, and
generally make it a pleasant place to be. Seems like a no-brainer to me.
Terrell Brown
Terrell Brown said:
"Unfortunately MTC bus drivers are some of the worst behaved drivers in
downtown Minneapolis. Witness the bus that ran the red light and bowled
over the SUV a week or so ago."
Come on, Terrell -- the bus drivers are far better drivers than the rest of the
drivers on downtown Minneapolis streets!
They drive thousands of miles every day, and accidents of any kind are pretty
rare. (That's why you heard about the one with the SUV -- it was newsworthy,
because bus accidents are so uncommon.)
Those drivers are professionals, on the downtown streets every day, in the
worst of the traffic -- yet they come thru with very few accidents. They
really deserve some credit for that.
I think I agree with Tim. As a bicyclist I would much rather share a bus lane than a traffic lane with automobile drivers from the burbs. Bus drivers don't necessarily like us but at least they don't try to kill us (too often). Richard Anderson Loring park On Nov 15, 2007 12:30 PM, Tim Bonham <email obscured>> wrote: > Terrell Brown said: > > "Unfortunately MTC bus drivers are some of the worst behaved drivers in > downtown Minneapolis. Witness the bus that ran the red light and bowled > over the SUV a week or so ago." > > Come on, Terrell -- the bus drivers are far better drivers than the rest of the drivers on downtown Minneapolis streets! > > They drive thousands of miles every day, and accidents of any kind are pretty rare. (That's why you heard about the one with the SUV -- it was newsworthy, because bus accidents are so uncommon.) > > Those drivers are professionals, on the downtown streets every day, in the worst of the traffic -- yet they come thru with very few accidents. They really deserve some credit for that. > > Tim Bonham > Standish Ericsson/Ward 12, Minneapolis > Info about Tim Bonham: http://forums.e-democracy.org/contacts/timbonham > > This topic's messages may be viewed at: http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/7omcP9MlLIuO9vsi9pSjTY
Need help? Please contact technical support. To support your forum, please donate.
Hosted by E-Democracy.Org. Powered by OnlineGroups.Net using GroupServer.