urbanMSP

There's a TAB Update on the engagement process thus far. The only real piece of news (that won't surprise anyone here), is that the 11 corridors marked for further engagement in August have been shaved down to 10, with the W. 7th / Rt. 54 corridor disappearing without explanation.

I was told it was only there as a possible backup if Riverview would fall through. So I guess they are pretty confident about rail on West 7th.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nothing in the data that jumps out as surprising. The top rated corridors were:

1. Lyndale-Johnson (Yes, should definitely be aBRT)
2. Nicollet (Yes, obviously)
3. Central (Yes, obviously, should be paired with Nicollet as one route)
4. West 7th-WBA (Partially will be covered with Riverview Rail)
5. Como-Maryland (I think this is a key corridor, but because the ridership is so unbalanced, I'm not sure it should be an aBRT priority)
6. Broadway-Cedar (Hopefully will be partially covered by the Blue Line Extension)
7. Rice-Robert (Yes, obviously)

Then there was a big, and unsurprising drop-off.

I don't think anyone will change their mind too much, but I think I'd pretty clearly support the F, G, and H Lines being Rice-Robert, Nicollet-Central, and Lyndale-Johnson, and all three being advanced more or less simultaneously in time.

And then there's 63rd/Zane, which still baffles me. Though I don't live in the area the current bus route serves so perhaps I'm underestimating its potential.

And then there's 63rd/Zane, which still baffles me. Though I don't live in the area the current bus route serves so perhaps I'm underestimating its potential.

I remember looking at the stats for Route 724 when I used to work for MT, and it was one of the most productive routes they had (in terms of passengers per in-service hour).

There are so many apartment buildings within the catchment area of the route. The ability to have a high quality route to connect to Brooklyn Center and Minneapolis would be amazing.

Honestly I think it would be a logical extension of the C line

Looking at the map, the Lyndale-Johnson corridor follows the Penn branch of the 4. That's probably the right choice ridership-wise, but it means that the Lyndale-Johnson BRT won't be on Lyndale for even two full miles, which is kinda funny.

I wouldn't take that as gospel. I know Minneapolis' study of Bryant Ave is looking at moving buses back to Lyndale to focus on other modes. I certainly hope they decide to do that, it makes the most sense to me to run transit down Lyndale at least to 50th (3.58 mi), while Bryant becomes a dedicated bicycle corridor.

I hadn't heard about shifting the buses to Lyndale, although that probably makes sense. Would this also pull the 18 buses off of Grand? Both of these routings are vestiges of the old streetcar routes, and probably no longer make a lot of sense. Both Grand and Bryant have some modest commercial nodes along these stretches, but probably not enough to justify maintaining service.

The reconstruction of Lyndale with the medians and parking bumpouts probably wasn't done with bus stops in mind, so that might be one complication.

In general, I'm all for the strategy that (given our constrained right of ways on major arterials) not all roads can be all things for all people. Dedicating Bryant to be an upgraded and top-notch bicycle facility and Lyndale an upgraded transit facility seems like a good strategy -- and one that we ought to keep in mind for the stretch north of Lake Street.

Update being given to the Met Council full meeting next week.

Short-term: Central, Como-Maryland, Johnson-Lyndale, Rice-Robert
Mid-term: Grand, Nicollet, West Broadway-Cedar
Long-term: 63rd-Zane, Lowry, Randolph-E 7th

F Line decision in March/April 2021.

https://metrocouncil.org/Council-Meetin ... s-PPT.aspx

Update being given to the Met Council full meeting next week.

Short-term: Central, Como-Maryland, Johnson-Lyndale, Rice-Robert
Mid-term: Grand, Nicollet, West Broadway-Cedar
Long-term: 63rd-Zane, Lowry, Randolph-E 7th

F Line decision in March/April 2021.

https://metrocouncil.org/Council-Meetin ... s-PPT.aspx

Surprised at Como-Maryland making short-term! But Central Ave has to be the F Line imho.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm probably just out of the loop on this, but anyone know why Nicollet and Central are being considered as separate aBRT projects and not a single corridor like they were back when streetcar was supposed to be happening?

I'm probably just out of the loop on this, but anyone know why Nicollet and Central are being considered as separate aBRT projects and not a single corridor like they were back when streetcar was supposed to be happening?

It's definitely because of the streetcar, look at the justification in the powerpoint, and it shows that it got a lower score due to the planning of the streetcar.

I forgot who I asked, but during a Zoom meeting about planning for the next aBRT routes I asked why the Nicollet and Central lines aren't combined and they said it's because the route would be too long and lead to reliability issues.

I forgot who I asked, but during a Zoom meeting about planning for the next aBRT routes I asked why the Nicollet and Central lines aren't combined and they said it's because the route would be too long and lead to reliability issues.

Yet, the reason the route is so long is because it's been drawn that way. A combined route could easily be drawn shorter. I'm not sure why the Central portion would need to go any further north than the Medtronic HQ, and the CHTC would otherwise be a natural stopping point. The Nicollet portion could also stop whenever you want it to, just tie it into any of the Orange Line BRT stations near American Boulevard.

The question isn't a technical one, it's one of trade-offs. I want to see a combined route, because to me, the most important thing is to have service that is balanced by bridging downtown. It doesn't make sense to cut off service halfway through the highest demand area (basically within the 494/694 loop). What is more valuable, having one aBRT line which runs through the entire high-demand travel zone, or having two aBRT lines that serve half of that zone but also serve outlying low-demand areas?

I'd want to concentrate the best service where there is the most demand. The best type of network design is a high frequency grid, not a hub and spoke.

Surprised at Como-Maryland making short-term! But Central Ave has to be the F Line imho.

Not only that, but it was the highest-scoring one too. As someone who recently moved to the East Side, I'd love to see that line come to fruition soon - it'd make it much easier to commute to my job in Roseville without a car (faster bus service plus staying north of downtown St. Paul would be huge) and having connections to Maryland Ave., UMN, and downtown Minneapolis would be fantastic.

Update being given to the Met Council full meeting next week.

Short-term: Central, Como-Maryland, Johnson-Lyndale, Rice-Robert
Mid-term: Grand, Nicollet, West Broadway-Cedar
Long-term: 63rd-Zane, Lowry, Randolph-E 7th

F Line decision in March/April 2021.

https://metrocouncil.org/Council-Meetin ... s-PPT.aspx

Seems to be a discrepancy between slides 19 and 20... Slide 19 shows Randolph/East 7th as Tier 2 and Grand as Tier 3 (as well as Randolph/East 7th having a higher score), and slide 20 has them the other way around.

Good catch. I guess we'll probably see a corrected version in a few days when they do the public outreach.

I'm a little surprised there hasn't been a bigger push for the Lowry line based on equity and investing in the Northside. Moving forward North MPLS is going to have great connections going N/S yet limited E/W at least with LRT/BRT/aBRT.

I would also like to think that somehow state/county/city leaders are able to come up with a way to fund all these lines well before 2040, that might be a pipe dream though

Based on how hard they've worked to piggyback on other roadwork for the A, C, and E lines, I suspect the Central BRT will happen whenever the Central and University improvements that MnDOT is currently developing a vision for do. Hopefully it's not too far out.

I'm a little surprised there hasn't been a bigger push for the Lowry line based on equity and investing in the Northside. Moving forward North MPLS is going to have great connections going N/S yet limited E/W at least with LRT/BRT/aBRT.

I would also like to think that somehow state/county/city leaders are able to come up with a way to fund all these lines well before 2040, that might be a pipe dream though

Where would it go? To Roseville? It might be better to simply increase the frequency of the current bus 32 line and use it as a connector between the various BRT lines and Blue Line Ext. Northside has the C Line and 14 and 9 going E/W, the 32 and 30 buses are less reliable.