NE Diagonal Trail - Detour Update
The other day I reported about the lack of a detour at the Stinson corner on the Diagonal Trail. I was excited to see on Friday swift work was being done to improve the safety at this construction zone.
But when I rode the detour I wondered how successful the detour actually was. Particularly because of the 90 degree angle required to enter and exit on/off the trail and on/off the detour,
and most specifically, because of this:
What is this? Is this better than the rutted self-made detour cyclists had made? I don't think so. What the heck do I do with this? How do I get down and up without getting off my bike? What crossed my mind is 1. Did people who bicycle make this detour? Doesn't seem like it. 2. What have I done? I am seeing people opting not to go through this mess and use the rutted self-made detour still ~ and my concerns for that path of travel still remain. Maybe I shouldn't have said anything. Boo.
But then I thought about it some more.
Yes, this entrance/exit point is completely worse than the self-made detour was. BUT overall this detour is MUCH safer than than previous option. My main concerns have been addressed.
At once I felt THE POWER OF ONE - for bad and for good. For bad - I contributed to taking something bad and sort of making it worse. That's not what I wanted. BUT for good - look what I, as one individual, had the power to do. I spoke up, my voice was heard, and what I personally feel is a MUCH safer intersection for those in my community, as well as myself, was put into place (quickly). Bicyclists and pedestrians are respected here. And really, at the end of the day I am mostly happy with that.
It's Saturday, so I can't tell the City how I feel - but I wanted you to know. I'll be sure to follow up with the City, but in the meantime I didn't want people automatically going to the wrong mental space on this detour. Let's look at this situation as one of respect for bicylists and pedestrians.
And think about it, this was just little ol' me saying something. Just think what a greater voice with more people can do for positive change in our City. You, me, US ~ WE - all behind the singular voice of the MINNEAPOLIS BICYCLE COALITION. We can make a difference when it comes to things longer lasting than a bicycle detour. When we join together with a constructive voice, a positive voice, and citing the facts calmly and clearly ~ WE can get things done. After all, this isn't just about me, it's about all of us.
New Kenilworth Trail Details and Questions
Complicated. It's probably the only way to describe the situation around managing freight rail with the forthcoming Southwest Light Rail Transit project.
July 17th, the Metropolitan Council (which is managing the SW LRT project) released a bunch of new information that relates to design in the Kenilworth Corridor and impacts to Kenilworth Trail.
An Open House near the Kenilworth Trail drew more than 300 people, including many bicycle supporters.
Here are some key info with observations included:
-
The base cost for addressing freight rail challenges is $85 million. Each of the figures below is in addition to that. -
Relocation of the freight rail to St. Louis Park seems highly unlikely given an extra $200+ million price tag and local impacts. -
Building an LRT tunnel in the Kenilworth Corridor costs at least an extra $150 million, which isn't accounted for in the current project budget. It would also mean eliminating the 21st Street Station. -
The cheapest option is relocating the Kenilworth Trail at an extra $35-40 million. There are not a lot of details on this, but it would go along the Cedar Lake Parkway trail and includes new overpasses. It likely would take people about one mile out of the way for a trip between the Midtown Greenway and Kenilworth Trail and downtown. It would also eliminate most of the Kenilworth Trail. Neither of those are attractive options. -
The second cheapest option is fitting the freight rail, LRT, and trail on the ground level. This requires the removal of 26 residential properties and costs an extra $50-55 million. The available packet does not include information on how narrow the trail would be in this scenario. It's hard to evaluate this option without more information, but previous indications are that the trail would get quite narrow and certainly most or all of the greenspace would be lost. The City of Minneapolis has previously opposed a similar design (City has opposed co-location all together). -
They also include an option that elevates the trail. That seems unlikely given previous input. It costs an extra $50-55 million.
The reality is that all of these options have challenges. The Coalition is still evaluating and will report more later.
Did you attend the meeting? What's your take?