Arterial Bus Rapid Transit Corridors

[Tcmetro]

Is it going to be one of those massive and over-engineered intersections like what they did at Penn and Lyndale across 494?

Do we have another thread somewhere for the 494 project? Anyway, they've got videos up on MNdot's project website that show the current designs for all of the Phase 1 work in some detail. The layout for Portland is shown as being a Tight Diamond, not a Single Point like Lyndale and Penn. Lots of other interesting details in the videos.

Also, this project appears to have received a $60m federal grant yesterday.

I've posted about 494 (and pretty much all other road projects) in the roads thread: viewtopic.php?f=18&t=1268

[MNdible]

OK, if mods want to move some of this discussion over there, that's cool. Although there might be enough details as this evolves to justify its own thread.

[Trademark]

How long will the bus only lanes be on Lake Street

[Hero]

Hopefully at least from the green line to blue line stations. This stretch is so bad I've gotten out and walked faster than the bus traveled. If they can get this section up to a reasonable speed I'd be happy with the B line just being that stretch with the rest being left as the 21.

[Hero]

Plagiarizing a tweet of mine: Right now, MSP's METRO system isn't a cohesive network. Mostly you use one line and that's it. But in the next three years, that will change dramatically. METRO will go from 4 direct transfers (leaving aside some of the de-facto, but not direct transfers possible in downtown Minneapolis) to 14, and the B Line will account for 6 of them. These expansions will not just add miles to the METRO network, but they will significantly reshape the way that people can use the network by making in-network transfers far more available and useful.



Add the now-funded (or mostly funded) E, F, and Gold Lines, and you get to 23 possible transfers between METRO services alone (again, with a lot of partial transfers in downtown Minneapolis).

I've always hated the lack of east/west service in south Minneapolis. Choose between infrequent service or the slow and crowded 21. If they can make route 515 every 15 minutes why not the 23? Or extend the A line to the future E line?

[alexschief]

How long will the bus only lanes be on Lake Street

Here's the "Balanced Bus Priority" concept which they are pushing forward. It will be complicated, they are trying to not just speed up the bus but also add bicycle facilities and slow general traffic.

From the latest report (page 116):

• Full bus-only lanes between Dean Parkway and Dupont Avenue
• A 4-to-3-lane conversion with new left-turn lanes and a single-direction bus-only lane in two segments of Lake Street: from
Dupont Avenue to Blaisdell Avenue and from 5th Avenue to 21st Avenue
• A 4-to-3 lane conversion with new left-turn lanes and bicycle lanes between 28th Avenue and the Mississippi River
• Transit signal priority, queue jump signals, and other intersection treatments for bus priority in Minneapolis
• Bus-specific intersection treatments at five locations in St. Paul (unchanged from the Extensive Bus Priority concept)

In map form:


I do think we will need to see the detailed sketches before saying anything for sure, but I think there are smart people with the right goals who are working on negotiating this space and that the end result will be pretty positive for the B-Line's speeds.

[tmart]

How long will the bus only lanes be on Lake Street

Here's the "Balanced Bus Priority" concept which they are pushing forward. It will be complicated, they are trying to not just speed up the bus but also add bicycle facilities and slow general traffic.

From the latest report (page 116):

• Full bus-only lanes between Dean Parkway and Dupont Avenue
• A 4-to-3-lane conversion with new left-turn lanes and a single-direction bus-only lane in two segments of Lake Street: from
Dupont Avenue to Blaisdell Avenue and from 5th Avenue to 21st Avenue
• A 4-to-3 lane conversion with new left-turn lanes and bicycle lanes between 28th Avenue and the Mississippi River
• Transit signal priority, queue jump signals, and other intersection treatments for bus priority in Minneapolis
• Bus-specific intersection treatments at five locations in St. Paul (unchanged from the Extensive Bus Priority concept)

In map form:


I do think we will need to see the detailed sketches before saying anything for sure, but I think there are smart people with the right goals who are working on negotiating this space and that the end result will be pretty positive for the B-Line's speeds.

Maybe there will be something quite surprising in the sketches but as it stands this looks pretty mediocre. It's not clear to me what a single bus lane accomplishes other than making one direction much faster than the other. (I've seen some configurations where one outer lane is bus-only in the morning and the other in the evening, to accommodate peak, but I don't understand how that would apply to Lake, which is perpendicular to the main commute.) The true bus lanes only exist on the overwide highway portion, where they're easiest to implement but matter the least, and vanish around the 35W and Hiawatha chokepoints.

There's a lot I like about aBRT as an upgrade for local buses, but given that Midtown LRT feels increasingly unlikely to happen, I don't think mixed-traffic (or mixed-traffic-plus) is adequate for the corridor.

[HKM]

Maybe there will be something quite surprising in the sketches but as it stands this looks pretty mediocre. It's not clear to me what a single bus lane accomplishes other than making one direction much faster than the other. (I've seen some configurations where one outer lane is bus-only in the morning and the other in the evening, to accommodate peak, but I don't understand how that would apply to Lake, which is perpendicular to the main commute.) The true bus lanes only exist on the overwide highway portion, where they're easiest to implement but matter the least, and vanish around the 35W and Hiawatha chokepoints.

There's a lot I like about aBRT as an upgrade for local buses, but given that Midtown LRT feels increasingly unlikely to happen, I don't think mixed-traffic (or mixed-traffic-plus) is adequate for the corridor.

I agree with this. I am really curious what estimated performance looks like between Lyndale & Minnehaha (or at minimum between 35W & Hiawatha) for the "balanced bus priority" concept (two separate stretches of one-direction bus lanes) with the under consideration queue jumps at Lyndale, Bloomington, and Cedar vs. full bus lanes.

[talindsay]

Yes. that's my sense too. The "dedicated" lanes are too short and mostly in the sections where it's easiest, and hence least valuable. The station upgrades will be nice, and the offboard payment and multi-door boarding will help, but I don't think the bus lanes will be nearly enough to fundamentally alter the characteristics of this line.

[Trademark]

We should not be prioritizing bikes versus buses in the segments where the single bus lanes are being implemented. We have the greenway right there and bike lanes should also be added onto 31st street. This is one of the most crucial routes that desperately needed dedicated bus lanes in the whole stretch.

[DanPatchToget]

How long will the bus only lanes be on Lake Street

Here's the "Balanced Bus Priority" concept which they are pushing forward. It will be complicated, they are trying to not just speed up the bus but also add bicycle facilities and slow general traffic.

From the latest report (page 116):

• Full bus-only lanes between Dean Parkway and Dupont Avenue
• A 4-to-3-lane conversion with new left-turn lanes and a single-direction bus-only lane in two segments of Lake Street: from
Dupont Avenue to Blaisdell Avenue and from 5th Avenue to 21st Avenue
• A 4-to-3 lane conversion with new left-turn lanes and bicycle lanes between 28th Avenue and the Mississippi River
• Transit signal priority, queue jump signals, and other intersection treatments for bus priority in Minneapolis
• Bus-specific intersection treatments at five locations in St. Paul (unchanged from the Extensive Bus Priority concept)

In map form:


I do think we will need to see the detailed sketches before saying anything for sure, but I think there are smart people with the right goals who are working on negotiating this space and that the end result will be pretty positive for the B-Line's speeds.

So the Dupont-Blaisdell and 5th-21st segments would have a bus lane in either the westbound or eastbound direction but not both?

[Bakken2016]

I think the point is to still advocate for full bus lanes!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Oreos&Milk]

A single center bus lane with stoplight and intersection priority to transition to the curb side would be a very good usage of space, (allowing both direction ROW busses to take turns) yet I doubt that would work long term..

I don’t think we should build bike lanes on Lake St. seems redundant since the greenway has better ROW and is much safer.. I do think we need better and more connections to allow people to lock up their bike in the trench climb stairs, elevator, or ramp up and go from there on foot.

Focusing on trying to do to much for everyone is just going to end up doing nothing but cause worse congestion and traffic.. I’m worried..

[HKM]

We should not be prioritizing bikes versus buses in the segments where the single bus lanes are being implemented. We have the greenway right there and bike lanes should also be added onto 31st street. This is one of the most crucial routes that desperately needed dedicated bus lanes in the whole stretch.

To be clear, the report is only considering bike lanes on Lake Street from 28th Avenue and the Mississippi River (where the Greenway is furthest from Lake Street), as well as between E Bde Maka Ska & Hennepin, citing the Minneapolis Transportation Action Plan for those two stretches. I agree on the bus lanes and don't think the B Line can live up to its full potential without full bus lanes between Hennepin & Hiawatha at a bare minimum (which would still be a compromise compared to the "extensive bus priority" concept of full bus lanes all the way to the river).

[Trademark]

We should not be prioritizing bikes versus buses in the segments where the single bus lanes are being implemented. We have the greenway right there and bike lanes should also be added onto 31st street. This is one of the most crucial routes that desperately needed dedicated bus lanes in the whole stretch.

To be clear, the report is only considering bike lanes on Lake Street from 28th Avenue and the Mississippi River (where the Greenway is furthest from Lake Street), as well as between E Bde Maka Ska & Hennepin, citing the Minneapolis Transportation Action Plan for those two stretches. I agree on the bus lanes and don't think the B Line can live up to its full potential without full bus lanes between Hennepin & Hiawatha at a bare minimum (which would still be a compromise compared to the "extensive bus priority" concept of full bus lanes all the way to the river).

Thanks for the clarification. I think that those are fair places to have bike lanes as there is the necessary space for it. As for uptown I think a two way bike path is probably justified too the lake and I would maybe even extend the bike lanes to Girard and have bike traffic turn south from there onto a new trail to 31st street.

[Didier]

I honestly think the public might be more supportive of aBRT if it was called anything but aBRT.

[COLSLAW5]

I honestly think the public might be more supportive of aBRT if it was called anything but aBRT.

why?

[thespeedmccool]

I honestly think the public might be more supportive of aBRT if it was called anything but aBRT.

Considering that the public generally can't tell the difference between regular and aBRT bus routes, I disagree.

aBRT makes a big difference to regular transit riders, but most people are not transit users, and their reactions are mostly "cool, new bus shelters" or "stupid bus lanes."

That aBRT is distinct from regular city busses is a distinction known only to planners and some riders. I don't think naming it anything different would attract much attention at all (though I agree acronyms are in general not effective public relations.)

[twincitizen]

The prevalence of bad & unnecessary acronyms/initialisms in transit planning isn't discussed enough. This can be said about government in general, but it seems especially bad in transit because we often ask the public to use these terms rather than keeping them contained to technical documents.

Case in point: it takes longer to say "el ar tee" than it does to say "light rail". Why is anyone saying "el ar tee" ever, in any context? And too often you'll see it misspelled as "LTR" online, because (I assume) people think it's an abbreviation for LighT Rail. LRT begat BRT, which begat aBRT. Thanks, I hate it. Please just call it "rapid bus" when talking to the non-nerd/non-planner public. Who cares whether it's an exclusive transit guideway or not. To the public, buses are buses.

The A Line has higher ridership, even post-pandemic, than the 84 ever did because it's reasonably fast and frequent, and a first-time rider can step up and understand exactly where it goes. No one really cares that it doesn't have its own lane, except perhaps during the State Fair. The name being easy to remember probably helps a little, but probably not a ton. I do worry a little that as we grow from A all the way to J, K, L and beyond, the memorableness(?) of the branding begins to fade. We should probably just re-number all bus routes at some point and ditch the letter system. I'd suggest reserving #s 1-20 for aBRT routes / routes with the highest ridership.

Despite the annoying terminology, I don't think "aBRT" actually gets used much by the public, except maybe at open house meetings. At this point, a small but growing slice of the broader public has heard of or used the A Line or D Line. I think the opening of the B and E Lines will significantly boost awareness of "letter buses" as those routes extend further into "choice rider" territory and connect to important destinations.

That's a lot of words to say that aBRT does suck as a term, but I agree with thespeedmccool that it doesn't matter as much as is being suggested above.

[DanPatchToget]

I don't see the issue with the aBRT term. I think at least for us transit nerds it's easily distinguishable from regular BRT, which emphasizes more dedicated lanes/busways (or it should anyway, too bad a lot of places slap the BRT term on something as simple as just a bus with fancy colors). I suppose for the general public maybe "better bus" is a good term to use interchangeably with aBRT, so in theory people know it's supposed to be a better bus service than the existing bus service, but not quite the big upgrades that could/should come with BRT.

I do however take issue with aBRT/BRT/better bus being called light rail on rubber wheels, or being described as light rail but cheaper. I know at least one Star Tribune writer likes to use that term/description every time they write an article about the subject. Unless that bus has fully dedicated right-of-way for the whole route, I don't think that's a truthful description.