Public Transit News / Current Events (MN only)

[Bakken2016]

I love the idea of extending the A Line to take over the route #46 bus route. It would make connections to both the D-Line and Orange Line. However, I don't remember whether there is a D-Line bus station at 46th St.. If not passengers would need to walk two blocks south to 48th & Chicago to make a transfer.

The D Line has a station at 46th and 48th.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rube Dali]

I love the idea of extending the A Line to take over the route #46 bus route. It would make connections to both the D-Line and Orange Line. However, I don't remember whether there is a D-Line bus station at 46th St.. If not passengers would need to walk two blocks south to 48th & Chicago to make a transfer.

There is a D-Line stop at 46th. So an A-Line connection is doable.

[alexschief]

Per an email from Friday:

F Line construction will begin in 2028 instead of 2025, to take advantage of MnDOT's broader work on the whole Central corridor. That will probably mean that the line will launch with the final pick of 2029 instead of the final pick of 2026, although Metro Transit notes that the opening date is yet to be determined.

Almost goes without saying, but clearly in hindsight work on F/G/H should've come in a different order. I'm not sure when MnDOT's plans came into clearer view and necessitated this switch. Given that the F Line is one of the only aBRT routes that is targeted for Small Starts entry, I assume they are looking to bundle some road reconstruction elements into the overall project cost and get more money out of the federal share.

[thespeedmccool]

Per an email from Friday:

F Line construction will begin in 2028 instead of 2025, to take advantage of MnDOT's broader work on the whole Central corridor. That will probably mean that the line will launch with the final pick of 2029 instead of the final pick of 2026, although Metro Transit notes that the opening date is yet to be determined.

Almost goes without saying, but clearly in hindsight work on F/G/H should've come in a different order. I'm not sure when MnDOT's plans came into clearer view and necessitated this switch. Given that the F Line is one of the only aBRT routes that is targeted for Small Starts entry, I assume they are looking to bundle some road reconstruction elements into the overall project cost and get more money out of the federal share.

I feel like MNDOT changes project schedules on a whim all the time. Met Council may have been caught off guard by MNDOT's Central schedule, especially considering that MNDOT's been planning something on Central for years.

Funny how when MNDOT's timelines shift, no one points and cries "delay!" like they do when transit projects get moved.

[Silophant]

Yep, MnDOT is completely opaque with regards to their project schedules. I've been following the MnDOT University/Central planning process pretty closely since I live a block off of University, and this is the first indication that they're actually planning on reconstructing Central at a specific date rather than "sometime in the future". Hopefully Metro Transit is able to shift resources around and get moving on the G and H lines a little quicker, and gets a new slate picked out in case Minneapolis suddenly decides to schedule a Como rebuild for 2031 or something.

[EOst]

Not much potential to accelerate G Line since its timeline is set by Rice and Robert re-dos. H Line maybe, though the overlap of Purple Line may be complicating.

[Silophant]

Oof. Time to get J, K, and L lines picked out, I guess. Man, it really seemed like we had some momentum going.

[thespeedmccool]

I think the Met Council is lobbying for J, K, and L funding in the bonding bill this year, but I think they're only getting the remaining funding for the H Line.

Not to mention that Dibble is trying to make bus projects even more expensive. Last year was two steps forward; this year is one step back.

[twincitizen]

Just when it seemed like we were finally going to see aBRT lines open faster than one every three years (2016-A, 2019-C, 2022-D, 2025-B). It seems likely the E line will open in 2026, so that'll break the pattern at least. Then the plan seems to be to open the G Line in two phases, late 2027-28 (Rice) and late 2028-29 (Robert) if everything goes right. When selecting the F, G, and H Lines a few years back, Johnson-Lyndale (Route 4) just barely missed the cut. It should be the next route up for aBRT, unless the study gets a fresh look before "promoting" another route.

Looking back at the Network Next study completed in early 2021, it seems they should do a mild refresh of that study now that some of the underlying factors have changed, such as shifting ridership patterns post-pandemic, the new route for the Blue Line extension, Purple Line shifting to Maryland & White Bear Avenue, and official(??) cancellation of the Nicollet Streetcar. The next highest scoring routes that weren't advanced through the Network Next study were Nicollet, Broadway-Cedar (combining the north leg of the 14 and south leg of the 22), Randolph-East 7th (74), and Lowry. Not discussed in the study at all were ideas that have been mentioned on this forum like extending the C Line to the southside and extending the A Line along 46th. Extending the A Line to 50th & France should be given serious consideration, as that would hit transfer points to the D, E, and Orange Lines, the latter of which could use the ridership boost.

[mister.shoes]

On the topic of the A — or anything running west on 46th, really — Lakes Hiawatha and Nokomis are quite the E/W transit barrier. Literally nothing connects 28th to Cedar south of 42nd. Running transit on the Parkways is taboo (forbidden?), but doing so on the short section from Mel-O-Glaze to Caribou wouldn’t be all bad.

[Silophant]

They try not to, but the 11 runs on St. Anthony Parkway for a short distance where it's the only route through the rail yard. So there's precedent.

The 6 might too? I can't remember if that section on the south shore of Bde Maka Ska is technically a parkway or not.

[trkaiser]

There are a lot of moving pieces related to the F line and the rebuild of Central Avenue. Columbia Heights recently won a grant of $25M for rebuilding Central, so they're also looking to avoid doing two rounds of work on the same corridor. There are also some large-scale redevelopments that haven't been finalized yet and will impact the designs -- the old Rainbow site at Central and 44th and the old Medtronic campus off of 53rd on the border with Fridley. This will create a very complicated intersection once the F line is routed through. The Alatus (former Rainbow site) could include more than 600 housing units, all of which will impact how that property connects to Central.

[Nick]

Reupping a ten year old complaint: they need to bring back the non-rush hour 94.

[Bakken2016]

Reupping a ten year old complaint: they need to bring back the non-rush hour 94.

It runs non-rush, just not nights and weekends. But yes nights and weekends need to be brought back.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[twincitizen]

From the latest Connect newsletter: Join us June 18 for a rail anniversary railgate!

This June, the METRO Blue Line will reach 20 years of service and the METRO Green Line will reach 10 years of service. Join us at Target Field Station on Tuesday, June 18, for a railgate celebrating these milestones and the future expansion of our METRO network.
Where: Target Field Station plaza
When: Tuesday, June 18, 4:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m.
(stick around for the Twins game at 6:40 p.m.)
What: Music, food, lawn games and more!
For more information, email [email protected].

[Korh]

Not to be too much of a downer, but I would of thought that after 20 years we would of had more then 2 frequent train lines in the cities (although tbf I was 6 and probably didn't know anything beyond it was cool)
I wonder how we compare to other cities in terms of how long it takes to add more rail after the first/new line was added

[Tom H.]

Yes, only two lines, but ~52 miles once both extensions are complete, which (according to Wikipedia) is comparable to Denver's LRT system which has 8 lines.

If we really wanted to, we could claim 4 lines once the extensions are open by running an EP to MOA service plus Brooklyn Center to St Paul service. That's just an operational choice though. The actual trackage length is pretty decent for a few decades of investment.

[Zkools20]

Yes, only two lines, but ~52 miles once both extensions are complete, which (according to Wikipedia) is comparable to Denver's LRT system which has 8 lines.

If we really wanted to, we could claim 4 lines once the extensions are open by running an EP to MOA service plus Brooklyn Center to St Paul service. That's just an operational choice though. The actual trackage length is pretty decent for a few decades of investment.

Agreed 100% yes it would be nice to have more lines to make it look more full but we have decent amount of track mileage. And it seems like many cities who add new lines just “extend” them from their downtowns and call it a new line where we could just the name or color of both extensions to make it look like we added more lines. I rather keep it simple and not have many different line colors that easily could’ve been keeping the same color or name so out of towners know how to get around on trains

[DanPatchToget]

Yes, only two lines, but ~52 miles once both extensions are complete, which (according to Wikipedia) is comparable to Denver's LRT system which has 8 lines.

If we really wanted to, we could claim 4 lines once the extensions are open by running an EP to MOA service plus Brooklyn Center to St Paul service. That's just an operational choice though. The actual trackage length is pretty decent for a few decades of investment.

I think Denver's A Line should be included as part of the LRT system. While it's considered commuter rail it has light rail levels of service (every 15 minutes in both directions throughout the day).

The Green Line Extension has taken way too long to be completed, and thanks to poor decisions made a decade ago it's taking much longer than it should have to complete it. As for the Blue Line Extension I'm not holding my breath on that until they actually begin construction. Seems like they keep making the planning process longer and longer to reach an impossible goal of pleasing everyone along the route. Same for Riverview.

On the aBRT side we've done a decent job of rolling those out, though it's frustrating that for some (all?) of them we have to wait to coordinate with road projects. With BRT we were told it would be quicker to roll out than light rail, and that hasn't been the case.

All that is to say with the huge success we had with the Hiawatha Line/Blue Line 20 years ago we should've taken full advantage of it and moved the other transit projects forward as quickly as possible. Instead however time was wasted kicking the can down the road, and a pandemic happened, ridership plummeted leading to people being transit agnostic, inflation has gone way up, the stigma around transit (and the problematic people causing this stigma) has gotten worse, all of which has made it much more difficult to get these projects built. Yes there needs to be a process for these projects, but it should not take this long.

[Korh]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but when ever looked into the history behind the blue line, Jessie Ventura's name pops up both self claiming that he's the reason why it got built despite the GOP and DFL digging in their heels and that there would of been more lines built if he had gotten a second term. But given that it's Ventura, I'm going take what ever he says with a massive grain of salt at best.