Arterial Bus Rapid Transit Corridors

Roads - Rails - Sidewalks - Bikeways
mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7752
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: D Line - Chicago-Fremont/Emerson Rapid Bus

Postby mattaudio » March 6th, 2019, 3:43 pm

What lines come after the ones that are planned through the original study?

Online
Silophant
Moderator
Posts: 4470
Joined: June 20th, 2012, 4:33 pm
Location: Whimsical NE

Re: Arterial Bus Rapid Transit Corridors

Postby Silophant » March 6th, 2019, 4:08 pm

If it were up to me, they'd just go down the list of highest ridership routes. So, after the DBE Lines, the F Line should be Nicollet-Central (hopefully we can stop pretending the streetcar will happen), then it's time to give the by then 15-year-old aBRT study the boot and move on to the 2, 3, and 4.
Joey Senkyr
[email protected]

Multimodal
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 714
Joined: March 4th, 2016, 7:55 am
Location: Oh, no, the burbs!

Re: Arterial Bus Rapid Transit Corridors

Postby Multimodal » March 6th, 2019, 4:16 pm

If it were up to me, they'd just go down the list of highest ridership routes. So, after the DBE Lines, the F Line should be Nicollet-Central (hopefully we can stop pretending the streetcar will happen), then it's time to give the by then 15-year-old aBRT study the boot and move on to the 2, 3, and 4.
In a perfect world, there’d be money not only for converting the highest ridership existing routes, but also planning new routes that would help create an extensive grid of routes that would allow people to get to current and (re-)developing areas, covering a wide swath of the Twin Cities.

A network of interconnecting routes that could replace car travel, rather than only a hub-and-spoke system.

twincitizen
Moderator
Posts: 6368
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
Location: Standish-Ericsson

Re: Arterial Bus Rapid Transit Corridors

Postby twincitizen » March 6th, 2019, 4:52 pm

Quoting myself from the previous page, these are the remaining 5 from the initial study. I laid out the reasons why they may or may not still be considered for aBRT. Broadway would be a super obvious candidate if not for that pesky streetcar study. Nicollet-Central should be happening no matter what happens with that streetcar plan, due to the vast difference in route length. Heck, it should have been the first line...it scored highest after all.
(6) Regardless of whether the streetcar is dead or not, I'm sure we're all hoping that Nicollet-Central aBRT will be revived by Metro Transit in the next few years. The streetcar was only ever going to serve a small portion of the route, while aBRT was planned to stretch from 494 to 694 (and beyond...hey a true "regional" project!)
(7) Then there's Robert Street, which will presumably get studied again at some point...it was a very high priority for CTIB, and likely remains one among Ramsey and Dakota County Commissioners.
(8) American Boulevard, which came up relatively weak in the initial study, will always have a political constituency, and possibly someday an actual ridership constituency, as a link between Southwest Transit Station (Green), Southtown (Orange), and MOA (Blue/Red). We don't need it now, but something to think about for 2030ish.
(9) I'm not sure what to make of East 7th. At least for the next 10-15+ years it will be the beneficiary of the Route 54 extension. Once Riverview is up and running as LRT/streetcar, and Rush BRT is duplicating some of the functions of East 7th aBRT, it's tough to say whether/how this half-segment of the current 54 could be a viable aBRT route by itself.
(10) Ok I totally forgot about West Broadway, but the City somewhat recently did another separate study with a result that was so confusing I haven't heard a word about it since the study ended. What was the mode choice even? Streetcar maybe kinda but probably gonna revert to aBRT?? Who even knows.
But yes, it would make sense to look at the 2, 3, 4 and the highest ridership St. Paul routes next. The 63 and/or 74 would seem a good candidate from a geographic perspective, and would have connections with the A Line. A Rice-Robert Street line is almost too obvious, as a north-south spine to intersect with the Green Line.

Going beyond just existing local routes, a Washington Avenue aBRT line is pretty obvious too, connecting North Minneapolis, North Loop, Gateway, Mill District and Seven Corners. That could continue down Cedar Ave as part of a longer route. A route like that could make a lot of sense and not directly overlap any existing service. It would largely be a straightened-out hybrid of the 14 & 22.

tmart
Rice Park
Posts: 488
Joined: October 6th, 2017, 10:05 am
Location: Expat

Re: D Line - Chicago-Fremont/Emerson Rapid Bus

Postby tmart » March 6th, 2019, 4:59 pm

As a general aBRT thought, opening a new line every 3 years isn't that slow of a pace, as much as we like to whine around here. That's actually pretty good, in the abstract. The real problem is that we didn't open the first one until 2016, after studying aBRT in 2011. Getting a new aBRT line every 3 years would be a great thing if the first one had opened in 2010, not 2016. As it is, we really need to pick up the pace on planning the lines that will come after the D, B and E Lines. In addition to those 3 lines opening in 2022, 2023(?) and 2024 (in a perfect world), the next 3 lines should be opened annually as well. '8 by 2028' would be a good goal.
IMO there are basically two ways of looking at aBRT: either it's an incredibly watered-down LRT/BRT project, or a suite of meaningful but incremental service improvements that have been bundled together and sold as if they were a BRT/LRT-style transitway capital project. In my opinion, neither one paints a super flattering picture.

If it's the former, getting the timeline down to 3 years seems like a bit of a Pyrrhic victory, since it came at the cost of removing the dedicated guideway, the stations, and basically any capital improvements other than some marginally-fancier shelters with curb bumpouts and acquiring some new vehicles that are nominally exclusive to these lines.

If it's the latter, it raises the question of why we have to jump through this entire 3 year process to begin with. What do we accomplish here that we couldn't accomplish by choosing a kinda-sorta-similar existing bus route and redesigning/improving it? Why do we need to wait for a street reconstruction to do things like adjust stop spacing, increase frequency, rename a line with a letter, print nice new maps, and all-door boarding? Why not roll those things out for a critical mass of the high-frequency network ASAP, then implement capital improvements to shelters and vehicles and off-board fare kiosks per-line as the right times come up?

To be clear, I like these lines and I think the end result is good. But I think it's absolutely reasonable to be critical of the process and the timelines when the nature of the project is so different from, say, SWLRT.

Multimodal
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 714
Joined: March 4th, 2016, 7:55 am
Location: Oh, no, the burbs!

Re: Arterial Bus Rapid Transit Corridors

Postby Multimodal » March 6th, 2019, 10:07 pm

Perhaps another way of looking at aBRT is like looking at the evolution of a road.

A path becomes a country road which becomes a 2-land county road which becomes a state road and then perhaps a federal highway. It’s incremental.

There are local trains, commuter trains, intercity trains, & high speed rail.

If aBRT becomes successful, it could lead to further infrastructure changes, and perhaps dedicated ROW if it can usurp the role of cars.

We don’t have to go from local bus service to LRT in one fell swoop.

alexschief
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1140
Joined: November 12th, 2015, 11:35 am
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Arterial Bus Rapid Transit Corridors

Postby alexschief » April 9th, 2019, 8:17 am

B Line meetings coming up soon.

https://www.metrotransit.org/b-line-meetings
I hadn't noticed (until I was corrected on Twitter) that the B-Line planning scope has been expanded to include Selby and downtown St. Paul.

I hope that anyone who attends these meetings will press for the project to include that corridor. To me, it's a no-brainer. Ending the line in downtown St. Paul, a major employment, entertainment, and residential node, should be a clear priority. In-between, the Selby section of the line contributes 2,750 weekday riders to the #21. That's a significant number, even if ridership on that stretch is below the average for the rest of the line, it's still a high ridership corridor by system-wide standards. Moreover, this is a corridor that was formerly redlined, and today Selby forms the southern border of Met-Council designated Racially Concentrated Areas of Poverty. There is a practical and moral case for aBRT service down the Selby corridor. If you go to this meeting, please speak up about it.

It's more of an open question to me as to whether the B-Line should even jog to meet the Green Line at University. Personally, I've found that turn to be pretty irritating when you're on the #21, but I don't know what the data says about people transferring, it might be worth it.

mamundsen
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1195
Joined: November 15th, 2012, 10:01 am

Re: Arterial Bus Rapid Transit Corridors

Postby mamundsen » April 9th, 2019, 12:07 pm

If I'm reading this correctly, the Snelling and University intersection could soon be home to Green, A, AND B lines? It's just a question of if this is the end of the B line or if it continues on to St Paul. This intersection and surrounding areas needs some serious upgrades!

Minnehahaha
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 131
Joined: February 15th, 2014, 10:49 pm
Location: Hamline Midway

Re: Arterial Bus Rapid Transit Corridors

Postby Minnehahaha » April 9th, 2019, 5:09 pm

It's too bad they can't accelerate the long-term plan (if it is still being considered) for extending Shields Ave. through what's left of Midway Center and across to Hamline Ave. It's close enough for B Line (and Route 21) to Green Line connections but out of University Avenue traffic.

EOst
Capella Tower
Posts: 2424
Joined: March 19th, 2014, 8:05 pm
Location: Saint Paul

Re: Arterial Bus Rapid Transit Corridors

Postby EOst » February 3rd, 2020, 1:59 pm

Not sure if it was mentioned anywhere else here, but the TAB recently revised their funding criteria to create a set-aside category of $25m to "provide funding to deliver one complete arterial bus rapid transit project. Previous solicitations did not make room for these larger projects and required them to be broken up into multiple Transit Expansion or Transit Modernization applications across funding cycles."

https://metrocouncil.org/Transportation ... n-NEW.aspx

Glen on Portland
Block E
Posts: 3
Joined: September 18th, 2019, 2:32 pm
Location: Elliot Park

Re: Arterial Bus Rapid Transit Corridors

Postby Glen on Portland » February 5th, 2020, 2:13 pm

Not sure if it was mentioned anywhere else here, but the TAB recently revised their funding criteria to create a set-aside category of $25m to "provide funding to deliver one complete arterial bus rapid transit project. Previous solicitations did not make room for these larger projects and required them to be broken up into multiple Transit Expansion or Transit Modernization applications across funding cycles."

https://metrocouncil.org/Transportation ... n-NEW.aspx
I spotted this last week. I wasn't entirely sure what to make of it. On one hand, having a category for these projects, which likely score well on most metrics, would mean they're not in direct competition with other smaller projects in contention as they're just categorically different. There could be a funding angle I'm not seeing though.

twincitizen
Moderator
Posts: 6368
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
Location: Standish-Ericsson

Re: Arterial Bus Rapid Transit Corridors

Postby twincitizen » February 7th, 2020, 11:56 am

I wonder if this is a savvy backstop for D Line if the legislature is unable to keep it in the bonding bill this year*. If D Line isn't fully funded this year, opening date will start to slip, if it hasn't already. Construction was initially targeted for 2020-21 (with a faint hope of it opening late '21, but probably June '22 as the A & C Lines both opened late, and in June). It has to get funded ASAP if there is any hope of opening in 2.333 years from today.

From Metro Transit's website:
$55 million has been identified for the D Line project to date, including funds for replacing buses in the corridor with BRT vehicles, and some federal funds for station construction. An additional $20 million is needed to build stations along the entire D Line.
*For real though, with aBRT being included in Governor Walz's proposal, and a DFL majority in the House, it would be a failure if DFLers can't manage to keep it in the compromise bill, even if the dollar amount shrinks from the $55MM Walz proposed. That said, the GOP Senate is going to do everything in their power to keep the bonding bill around $1B, a far cry from the $2B Walz proposed. I'd guess the final bill will be in the $1.2-1.4B range, and I really would not be surprised if aBRT doesn't make the final cut. It just doesn't have the institutional support or lobbying or strong labor backing that competing priorities like higher education buildings, water infrastructure, etc. all seem to have. As they say, "politicians like to hold shovels, not brooms". No matter how important we all think it is, aBRT (replacing a bus with a better bus) will never be more than a broom.

Online
Silophant
Moderator
Posts: 4470
Joined: June 20th, 2012, 4:33 pm
Location: Whimsical NE

Re: Arterial Bus Rapid Transit Corridors

Postby Silophant » February 7th, 2020, 12:34 pm

I'm kinda wondering that too, especially with the phrasing "provide funding to deliver one complete aBRT project". $25M isn't enough to build any of the complete or planned lines - even the relatively short C Line was $37M - but it is enough to cover the remaining funding gap for either the D Line or the B Line.
Joey Senkyr
[email protected]

EOst
Capella Tower
Posts: 2424
Joined: March 19th, 2014, 8:05 pm
Location: Saint Paul

Re: Arterial Bus Rapid Transit Corridors

Postby EOst » February 7th, 2020, 2:01 pm

Note that this is a category for the next round of regional solicitation, i.e. available for 2024-25.

User avatar
Tiller
Foshay Tower
Posts: 964
Joined: January 17th, 2015, 11:58 am

Re: Arterial Bus Rapid Transit Corridors

Postby Tiller » August 7th, 2020, 3:03 pm

From back in 2018 when they extended the 54 Bus, in the brief presentation available online about it, they mentioned improved "10 minute peak" service on W 7th. How frequent was the peak/off peak service for the 54 on W 7th before that?

In theory, that 3 year CMAQ funding will be running out in less than a year, June 2021. It would be nice if this was used as an opportunity by Saint Paul and Maplewood to look at additional investments in the corridor.

https://metrocouncil.org/Council-Meetin ... te-54.aspx

Tcmetro
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1767
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 8:02 pm
Location: Chicago (ex-Minneapolitan)

Re: Arterial Bus Rapid Transit Corridors

Postby Tcmetro » August 7th, 2020, 3:47 pm

Peak service was every 15 min in the AM peak and 12-15 min in the PM peak from what I remember.

Tcmetro
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1767
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 8:02 pm
Location: Chicago (ex-Minneapolitan)

Re: Arterial Bus Rapid Transit Corridors

Postby Tcmetro » August 13th, 2020, 6:58 pm

Well, it looks like Network Next is well underway and we are getting the first look at the new list of possible BRT lines.

A presentation will be made to the Transportation Advisory Board later this month. Other changes to Network Next include postponing the local and express study to 2021 and choosing the METRO F Line route in April 2021.

https://metrocouncil.org/Council-Meetin ... pdate.aspx

In previous BRT analysis and still in the running:
  • Nicollet - Downtown Minneapolis to American Blvd (#18)
  • Central-University - Downtown Minneapolis to Northtown (#10)
  • W Broadway-Cedar - Robbinsdale to 38th St Blue Line (#14/#22) - extended south along Cedar compared to old plan
  • W 7th-White Bear - MOA to Maplewood Mall (#54) - W 7th St segment restored after previously being removed
  • Robert-Rice - Robert/Mendota to Little Canada (#62/68) - extended north along Rice
New BRT corridors:
  • 63rd/Zane - Brooklyn Center to Starlite (#724)
  • Lowry - Robbinsdale to Rosedale (#32)
  • Johnson-Lyndale-Penn - Silver Lake Village to American/Knox (#4)
  • Como-Maryland - Downtown Minneapolis to Sun Ray (#3 with extension to Eastside of St Paul)
  • Grand - Westgate Station to Downtown St Paul (#63)
  • Randolph-E 7th - Highland Park to Sun Ray (#74)
BRT corridors in previous plans, now removed:
  • American Blvd (#542)
  • Snelling - northern extension to Ammunition Plant (#225)
New BRT corridors considered, but not recommended:
  • 2nd Ave NE (#11)
  • Franklin/University (#2)
  • E Hennepin/Larpenteur to White Bear (#61)
  • 38th St to Highland Park (#23)
  • 66th St to MOA via 12th Ave (#515)
  • Century to Woodbury (#219)

Uptown46
Metrodome
Posts: 66
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 12:19 pm

Re: Arterial Bus Rapid Transit Corridors

Postby Uptown46 » August 13th, 2020, 7:45 pm

Is 38th Street eliminated or not? The map shows it as eliminated. The chart shows it as advancing. I would love this corridor to advance!

2nd St NE also shows a discrepancy. Text of the presentation states 11 not 13 corridors, so they're probably out.

Tcmetro
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1767
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 8:02 pm
Location: Chicago (ex-Minneapolitan)

Re: Arterial Bus Rapid Transit Corridors

Postby Tcmetro » August 13th, 2020, 7:49 pm

Yeah, I think the table is off - two rows highlighted in the wrong color. Still good routes for frequency bumps!

Online
Silophant
Moderator
Posts: 4470
Joined: June 20th, 2012, 4:33 pm
Location: Whimsical NE

Re: Arterial Bus Rapid Transit Corridors

Postby Silophant » August 13th, 2020, 8:22 pm

I wonder how the table in slide 14 is ordered - I hope that's not the preliminary ranking. It would make sense to have Central and Como/Maryland near the top, but after 63rd Ave/Zane? Of course, I think the 724 is one of the highest performing suburban routes, and there's a case to be made for regional balance, especially with BBLRT probably several years out yet.

Kinda funny to see West 7th back in the mix, nearly five years after St. Paul/Ramsey County threw it away for the promise of LRT in 2028.

Surprising that the 2 didn't make the cut, especially with the upcoming reconstruction of Franklin. I wonder if the 2 is up for reconfiguration in the 2021 portion of the plan?
Joey Senkyr
[email protected]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 51 guests