Metro Transit Network Now Plan

[Tcmetro]

I spent some time going through the plan - these are the things that stood out to me:
-

• High-frequency service: There's a good amount of expansion here. The 4, 14, 17, 22, 58, 64, 68, 515, Green Ext, Gold, E, and G line service increases are going to significantly increase the coverage of the high-frequency network. Some of these routes are already close to meeting the definition, so hopefully the idea is to expand to the point that they can all be officially considered "high-frequency".
  -
• Key express network: The express routes that will make up this network will be improved to 15 mins at peak. The off-peak service on these routes ranges from 60 to 120 mins. It looks as though they are scheduled with 1 midday bus going back and forth. Not great service, but will help attract downtown express riders back that might have more flexible schedules post-pandemic.
  -
• Express network restoration: The express network that is being restored is relatively barebones. There's a handful of routes that will only be providing 1 or 2 trips each way. IMO, there should be a standard of at least 3 trips each way for any route.
  -
• New suburban local routes: There's a number of new routes being proposed to connect with the Gold Line or to restructure the express network in Brooklyn Park. A lot of these routes look like they won't be great performers, like the 301 (Woodbury to Cottage Grove), 354 (Woodbury-Newport-IGH-Airport), 701/702/703 Brooklyn Park express feeders, 221 (Landfall-Oakdale/Imation), 229 (Little Canada-Shoreview). I hope that these new routes do well, but often times that is not the case with this kind of service.
  -
• Weekend service: Some routes like the 61 and 219 finally get 7 days/week service, but there are a handful of all-day routes that won't get Saturday and/or Sunday service. The 25 still won't have Sunday service, the other routes are all 3-digit suburban locals.
  -
• Simplification of branches: The 14, 38 (23-612 combo route), 64, 68, 71, and 74 are some of the routes that will be vastly simplified. There's still a handful of routes that have branches which could be cleaned up by splitting off new routes.
  -
• METRO BRT local shadow lines: While the 16 and 19 will formally be removed, the 5, 21, and 60 routes are still in the plan. These offer low frequencies and IMO should be considered for removal as well.

[angrysuburbanite]

There's something very symbolic in the fact that while two expensive transit lines of questionable benefit trudge closer to their death this week, Network Now still keeps moving forward at a relatively fast pace. It shows that the investments needed to improve our transit system are mundane and relatively inexpensive. None of the things in Network Now, perhaps aside from the METRO routes, will get big groundbreaking ceremonies or make headlines, but they will arguably be of a larger impact on transit riders than either Riverview or the Purple Line. The expansion of the high-frequency network and overall improvement of frequencies, span of service, and legibility of the system will do more than those two projects ever could. To make it even better, it will be rolled out around the same time as the new payment system, making it way easier for new riders to try these improved services. Not to be hyperbolic or anything (it's still not perfect, look at that gaping hole in the SW metro), but the Network Now initiative need to be celebrated. Metro Transit is showing that it understands the basics of good transit service, and will finally start to deliver it to a larger portion of the Twin Cities. Many major US transit agencies are going to see major cuts in service and declining reliability toward the end of the 2020s due to funding deficits, but Metro Transit will be doing the exact opposite with its dedicated funding source and rapidly expanding METRO system. I look forward to seeing these improvements come to fruition.

[Nick]

It's obviously bad (and an enormous scandal no one will ever get to the bottom of) that we've blown hundreds of millions of dollars and a decade futzing around half-planning bad projects so that various county commissioners would have content for their email newsletters, but with the momentum on the aBRT lines, a couple bad projects cancelled, the way better Blue Line extension routing, and basic policing significantly improving conditions on the trains, I'm feeling more positive about the system than I have in a while.

[DanPatchToget]

There's something very symbolic in the fact that while two expensive transit lines of questionable benefit trudge closer to their death this week, Network Now still keeps moving forward at a relatively fast pace. It shows that the investments needed to improve our transit system are mundane and relatively inexpensive. None of the things in Network Now, perhaps aside from the METRO routes, will get big groundbreaking ceremonies or make headlines, but they will arguably be of a larger impact on transit riders than either Riverview or the Purple Line. The expansion of the high-frequency network and overall improvement of frequencies, span of service, and legibility of the system will do more than those two projects ever could. To make it even better, it will be rolled out around the same time as the new payment system, making it way easier for new riders to try these improved services. Not to be hyperbolic or anything (it's still not perfect, look at that gaping hole in the SW metro), but the Network Now initiative need to be celebrated. Metro Transit is showing that it understands the basics of good transit service, and will finally start to deliver it to a larger portion of the Twin Cities. Many major US transit agencies are going to see major cuts in service and declining reliability toward the end of the 2020s due to funding deficits, but Metro Transit will be doing the exact opposite with its dedicated funding source and rapidly expanding METRO system. I look forward to seeing these improvements come to fruition.

I agree that parts of this plan will be beneficial at a low cost, but I don't see why we can't do that and expand our transitway network at the same time. Local bus improvements are great, but it won't help much for those traveling longer distances where a local bus takes at least three times longer than driving. For choice riders that means driving will continue to be the mode of transportation more often than not, and for dependent riders it means trips by transit will continue to take longer and that's less time out of their day for other things.

In 2017 I expected our transit system would look way different in 2027, and in a good way. What's being shown in the Network Now plan doesn't exactly give me optimism. Some parts are good, some parts not so good, some parts I think won't last a year, and a few parts I think to myself "wasn't there supposed to be a train or a BRT line there by now?"

[Vagueperson]

In my East St. Paul neighborhood, here's what concerns me...

The 64 won't go east of Payne and the 58 (formerly 54) won't go west of Arcade north of 7th. So there's no opportunity to transfer between 64 and 58 unless you're on E 7th st. I think it's about a half mile between Payne and Arcade. I guess it's our fault for having two commercial streets deserving transit service so close to one another.

One solution would be to have them swap their north of Maryland routes so they overlap for that short bit between Payne and Arcade along Maryland. In my mind that would make the 64 route closer to what it has been and the 58 route closer to what the 61 has been (on our side of town). And it would allow transfers between the two on Maryland Ave.

Thoughts?

I just realized that the changes to the #3 route would solve my problem. There is a lot to examine in these suggestions!

[kdo5581]

In 2017 I expected our transit system would look way different in 2027, and in a good way. What's being shown in the Network Now plan doesn't exactly give me optimism. Some parts are good, some parts not so good, some parts I think won't last a year, and a few parts I think to myself "wasn't there supposed to be a train or a BRT line there by now?"

I'd be curious to hear more about what you think are good and not so good.

[twincitizen]

It's obviously bad (and an enormous scandal no one will ever get to the bottom of) that we've blown hundreds of millions of dollars and a decade futzing around half-planning bad projects so that various county commissioners would have content for their email newsletters, but with the momentum on the aBRT lines, a couple bad projects cancelled, the way better Blue Line extension routing, and basic policing significantly improving conditions on the trains, I'm feeling more positive about the system than I have in a while.

Time for another Strib op-ed?

Kinda crazy that this Network Now draft and Network Next (aBRT plan from 2021) will need to be updated in light of this week's news regarding Riverview, Purple Line, and the pending official cancellation of Nicollet Streetcar*. Met Council is also in the early stages of the 2050 TPP and will need to make adjustments prior to adopting that policy document late this year or early 2025. I'm not sure what Metro Transit's timeline will be for amending Nextwork Next to prioritize West 7th and Nicollet over some of the other corridors. Nicollet was among the highest scoring, and West 7th not far behind, so they certainly should take priority over like the H Line on Como. F & G Lines are probably locked in at this point due to being partially or fully funded and coinciding with road work on those corridors.

*If folks haven't heard, although some state legislation was passed a few years ago allowing the "Nicollet value capture district" funds to be spent on bus or streetcar, streetcar was still the official policy of Minneapolis and in the Met Council TPP. Minneapolis City Council will soon adopt a resolution officially killing streetcar as the mode choice, and Met Council's draft 2050 TPP does not include streetcar.

[COLSLAW5]

I think the biggest thing that was holding back a nicollet BRT was the bridge and connecting road not being built yet. Hopefully that is still on track for 2025 and then BRT maybe not long after?

[Tcmetro]

I recall hearing that money was being allocated for the next three lines. Given the recent news about expanding the uses for the Nicollet funds beyond streetcars and the end of work on the Riverview project, my opinion is that Nicollet and W 7th St are likely to be two of the three new lines.

Hopefully they can coordinate a W 7th St line with MnDot's work on that street in 2029, but a Nicollet line is probably going to be 2030 at the earliest.

[twincitizen]

I recall hearing that money was being allocated for the next three lines. Given the recent news about expanding the uses for the Nicollet funds beyond streetcars and the end of work on the Riverview project, my opinion is that Nicollet and W 7th St are likely to be two of the three new lines.

Hopefully they can coordinate a W 7th St line with MnDot's work on that street in 2029, but a Nicollet line is probably going to be 2030 at the earliest.

That funding was the F (Route 10), G (Rice-Robert), and H (Como-Maryland) Lines and is currently dedicated to those specific routes. It would take some procedural maneuvers to redirect to other lines. Even if Metro Transit spun up a new study tomorrow, I don't think there's any chance of West 7th or Nicollet bumping F or G from the top of the queue. Those corridors are basically all set to be built during upcoming road construction projects on portions of their corridors, though construction schedules for both are now into 2027-28.

H Line I'm less certain about since planning for station locations hasn't even begun. I won't be shocked to see West 7th move ahead of H Line...and it wouldn't even necessarily "delay" the H Line since it doesn't even have projected years of construction or opening yet. The best thing the West 7th corridor has going for it is that MnDOT is going to rebuild that street in 2028-29, with or without aBRT, but hopefully with!

[Tcmetro]

I see. I thought I'd seen something about the J, K, and L lines but it was funding without details (or perhaps unfunded but included in the 5 year budget).

EDIT: Just checked, the J, K, and L lines are in the transportation capital program on page 94. They seem to be a few years out, and are probably still looking for funding. I know that items this far out in the plan tend change as they come into focus.

https://metrocouncil.org/About-Us/Publi ... udget.aspx

[twincitizen]

https://metrocouncil.org/Council-Meetin ... pdate.aspx
I posted too soon! The Presentation was updated with more B and E line information, specifically in regards to local bus service, which diverges from the network now plan significantly.
- Route 21 will be completely eliminated. This differs from the original plan where it ran hourly along most of Lake Street.
- Route 27 will be restored as local service instead, though it spends most of its time north of Lake Street. Network Now called for its permanent discontinuation.
- Routes 612 and 23 will be officially combined as route 38, consistent with Network Now.
- Route 6 will be truncated to Uptown and run on Xerxes only and cover most of the stuff south of Southdale.
- Local service on Selby and up to Snelling & University will be covered by an extension of route 70 rather than a new route 60 proposed in Network Now. This is a significant frequency downgrade from route 60 as it is presumably going to run hourly rather than every 30 minutes. My guess for this one is that MT doesn't have enough operators to create a new route at this time. Hopefully route 60 is eventually added.

Will these changes (as well as Better Bus Route changes to Rte 7) be rolled into the final plan for Network Now before that gets approved by Met Council?

[angrysuburbanite]

Network Now Framework has a number of changes to the Network Now plan.
https://www.metrotransit.org/network-now-framework
https://www.metrotransit.org/Data/Sites ... educed.pdf
Notable changes:
- Widened span of service on most high frequency routes later in the night.
- Gold Line extension added, 94 discontinued.
- Route 6 will be rerouted west of Bde Maka Ska via 39th St W and Minnetonka Blvd to West Lake Street Station
- Upper Harbor Terminal branch removed from route 7 plan
- Route 21 fully discontinued (RIP), route 27 restored and extended instead as per summer service changes
- Route 30 extended to Robbinsdale via Douglas Drive
- Route 46 extended to Opus during rush hours
- Route 60 removed from plan, route 70 extended instead
- Route 62 fully discontinued
- Route 68 removed from high frequency network, rerouted via Smith Avenue in West St. Paul
- Route 74 simplified on the East Side
- Route 75 frequency increased, now runs on Saturday, and is rerouted east
- Route 83 no longer leaves Lexington Avenue
- 301 extended to increase coverage
- 534 shortened, frequency increased to 30 minutes all day. Weekend services added.
- 536 rerouted off of France Avenue by Normandale
- 539 slightly extended
- 546 frequency increased during the day, extended along Normandale Blvd
- 802 added to replace local service from 805
- 805 rerouted along Coon Rapids Blvd
- Route 852 now ends at Northtown Mall, transfer to 805 results in improved service along the discontinued segment
- 250, 270, 768 all upgraded to hourly midday service - all Key Express Network routes now run every 15 mins during peak, 60 in midday
- Route 114 midday trips removed from plan
- Route 146 removed from plan, similar routing provided by 156
- Routes 225 and new 229 extended much further north
- 264 extended to Shoreview, limited midday service
- 275 upgraed to 30 minute frequency during peak
- 355 removed from Key Express Network, 4 trips during peak
- 652 upgraded to 30 minute frequency during rush hour
- 672 restored to Orono
- 701, 702, 703 removed from plan, 763 and 766 added to plan instead.

[Silophant]

Maybe I'm just missing it, but is there anything in there that defines what the different time periods mean? I'm assuming PM Rush still goes until 6:30, and evening starts then, but where's the transition to Night? 10pm? A few routes mention "late night" service, does that imply service past midnight? I have become too old to be a frequent late-night transit rider, but it'd be nice to know.

[Bakken2016]

Maybe I'm just missing it, but is there anything in there that defines what the different time periods mean? I'm assuming PM Rush still goes until 6:30, and evening starts then, but where's the transition to Night? 10pm? A few routes mention "late night" service, does that imply service past midnight? I have become too old to be a frequent late-night transit rider, but it'd be nice to know.

The Met Council presentation mentioned that the C Line/D Line and then 10 and 18 will have late night service past 1am.