urbanMSP

The price of parking in Stp is not really the point I was going for. I live in St, Louis Park so a quick drive into one of the ABC ramps off 394 then jumping on the Green line from the warehouse station was more of what I was trying to say. I have nothing against riding the bus. However when Joe pubic is told this line is being built to unit both cores. That led me to perhaps foolishly believe I would expect a travel time as fast or faster then the bus line it replaced. The great thing about all of this? All of a sudden I read.

She also pointed out that most transit riders will be making trips within the corridor, rather than traveling the length of it like a commuter rail line. "This is really about station-to-station service," she said.

When I read between the lines that tells me locals only! Who is anybody to say how you use a light rail line? The trip times are to long and you the user are told "what did you expect you are using it wrong." They have a month to fix this so really much of this is pure spec. However being told I am planing to use this line incorrectly, it's about station-to-station service really puts a bad taste in my mouth.

However this quote really bothers me. While I am only one "choice" rider and that may not make that big of a deal in the whole scope of things. I remembered reading that this line was going to re-connect the link between both down towns. Putting in rail how much each core means to each other. I took that to mean being able to park in one of the large ABC ramps and train it to StP for any number of events. I guess in a months time we will see just how fast it takes from dt to dt.

Isn't parking generally cheaper in Stp? Or does it become pricier during events?

And I'll agree that most trips aren't going to be between Target Field Station and Union Depot. If you want to go downtown to downtown the 94 is a faster option, even though it's a crappier experience. Most people will be going between neighborhoods along the corridor or to/from a single downtown from/to a different neighborhood. But it's still a pretty shitty justification for long travel times. Point to point the Green Line should take as long as driving, and preferably be faster.

I am also one of the folks who didn't fully digest all of the details of the article. MPR was baiting and I took it. I have to agree that peoples point of origin and final destination seems irrelevant. Seems like a cop out. I wonder how much of that was due or not due to the reporter pressing the issue and demanding a response. What I also want to know is what the test train experience was like for MPR. I am seeing a lot of test trains stopping at stations for far longer than it would it would ever take to pick up passengers as the instructor is talking to the operator, pointing things out, etc etc. If MPR was on any of those trains, then of course their times are going to be screwed. If they were on those trains and didn't divulge that this was going on, shame on them.

I have faith that they will cut that time back down to 40 minutes.I can see the hesitancy in the faces of operators in places like the WATM. I think I would be a little skittish driving a train on the street, and through a university where people are zoned out. Woof! They have no choice but to make it a better experience than hoping in your car. Speed matters, despite whatever Fuhrmann says.

I feel like nobody should be surprised at this point to hear that the green line will primarily be used for local, station to station commuters. That's been the case pretty much from the start.

It's pretty much been stated all along that if you want to get from one downtown to the other, the 94 is still your best bet. Rather MetroTransit makes improvements to the 94 to make it something people will choose over a rail line is yet to be seen, but at least that is there intention.

This guy seems to think rail service should offer a speedy experience:
"One value of a built-out, interconnected rail system is that time does matter end to
end because it’s a connection. Theoretically, one should be able to leave St. Paul, hop on light rail, transfer in Minneapolis and take the Blue Line to the airport in a reasonable period of time.

If the point of the Green Line, however, is primarily to serve a short hop from one station to another, St. Paul already had that system — the bus."

http://blogs.mprnews.org/newscut/2014/0 ... le-option/

It's just a bunk editorial reacting to a bunk news article. And doesn't the 54 connect downtown St Paul to the airport? If you wanna take the train all the way from downtown St Paul to the airport because ~trains~ then be my guest, but don't complain about travel time when there's already a shorter route.

And the bus wasn't cutting it on University Ave. Reliability was horrible, and that's an incredibly important factor, as important, or in some ways more important, than frequency. Debate if LRT as we built was the "best" choice for the corridor, but I don't think anyone can reasonably argue that the status quo was satisfactory.

A 26-minute bus trip now, eh?

MT is forcing riders between the cores to use LRT during evenings and weekends, as the 94 bus will be eliminated during those times. During midday periods, frequencies on the 94 are being reduced from every 15 minutes to every 30 minutes.

What is useful about the 94 is the ability to travel between the downtowns in less than 30 minutes. Due to the design of the network, it is entirely possible for someone to make a timed connection a 30-minute frequency bus in Downtown St. Paul, hop on the 94, then have a timed connection to a 30-minute frequency bus to one of the Minneapolis neighborhoods. By eliminating the option of the 94, which can connect the downtowns in 25 minute, riders must take the light-rail for 40 minutes and add another 10 minutes on either side of the trip for transferring.

Or we could reduce frequency on those routes to 45 minutes

Investment along Green Line tops $2.5 billion

http://www.startribune.com/local/minnea ... 16991.html

"In all, 121 projects are within a half-mile of the Green Line. The Met Council also singled out 36 other projects, many of them student housing, more than a half-mile away but still in the vicinity of the light-rail tracks."

"Metro Transit estimates that the train will take about 40 minutes to get from one downtown to the other, despite a report Wednesday by Minnesota Public Radio that suggested test times were averaging 67 minutes."

Maybe we should find something else to complain about?

I'm new in town. Name your favorite watering holes or Resturaunts along the green line!

What I also want to know is what the test train experience was like for MPR. I am seeing a lot of test trains stopping at stations for far longer than it would it would ever take to pick up passengers as the instructor is talking to the operator, pointing things out, etc etc. If MPR was on any of those trains, then of course their times are going to be screwed. If they were on those trains and didn't divulge that this was going on, shame on them.

MPR wasn't on any of the trains. They had one reporter sit at union depot, and another at target station. When a train left, they called the reporter on the other end with the time and the number on the train, then they waited for it to get to the other end and recorded how long it took. They did this for a number of trains, and took an average. They stated this in the piece that was on the radio.

Frankly, I don't think it was all that sensationalized (other than the headline). They did some research and reported on it, and they gave Metro Transit an opportunity to respond, which they (metro transit) took advantage of. If you didn't listen to or read the entire story, then that's not MPR's fault.

"
If the point of the Green Line, however, is primarily to serve a short hop from one station to another, St. Paul already had that system — the bus." http://blogs.mprnews.org/newscut/2014/0 ... le-option/

Bob is sort of MPR's Souch when it comes to urban issues.

All the more reason for an express intercity rail between SPUD & the interchange, no?

Maybe in 50 years. Once we have multiple rail lines - commuter, regional, and HSR - we can make sure they all interline between Minneapolis and SPUD, and then allow SRO between stations with a paid local transit fare. Not gonna happen soon though, but hopefully we have that vision for decades out.

"
If the point of the Green Line, however, is primarily to serve a short hop from one station to another, St. Paul already had that system — the bus." http://blogs.mprnews.org/newscut/2014/0 ... le-option/

Bob is sort of MPR's Souch when it comes to urban issues.

Sort of. I'm fairly certain he lives in Woodbury. So you can imagine how often he takes the 16 or 50 (never). He has no idea what he is talking about. I'd wager that basically all suburbanites imagine the Green Line is supposed to be some kind of express train between the downtowns.

Sort of. I'm fairly certain he lives in Woodbury. So you can imagine how often he takes the 16 or 50 (never). He has no idea what he is talking about. I'd wager that basically all suburbanites imagine the Green Line is supposed to be some kind of express train between the downtowns.

Yes, but at least some (at least according to comments sections I've seen) also believe it should have run up along Energy Park Dr so it could stop at big park n rides to serve north suburban commuters to either downtown.

They must mean I-94. Yes, I-94 is what should have run along Energy Park Drive so it could have been built along rail yards and industrial sites rather than cutting through the heart of a neighborhood.

Do they have any data showing or at least estimating the percentage of people who actually are commuting downtown-downtown?

Won't the majority of people either be commuting either to the U or mostly between neighborhoods in Saint Paul (or to DT) anyways? Along with Capitol-Downtown lunch break stops maybe?

Some consolidated charts, showing scheduled travel times for the 16, 50, and 94 (split into two because the 94B is considerably slower than the 94C and 94D). I used the times listed for stops closest to those stations, and had a flat 35 minutes for the Green Line. Because of it's designated right-of-way, the Green Line should be like a fast 16 or fast 50. The thing to focus on is the area between the red and orange/yellow plots for those routes vs. the Green Line. Even if reality forces that to be nudged upward by a few minutes, there's still a big chunk of the day where everyday riders along the route should see considerable reductions in travel time.





Next, I'll probably try to add some estimation of wait time into the overall trip durations.