Public Transit News / Current Events (MN only)

[mulad]

That's possible, though I don't think it's especially unusual for commuter trains to go on major freight lines. Metra in Chicago has lower than average costs per revenue hour, although they do own some track themselves.

[talindsay]

No, it's got nothing to do with trackage rights - a perpetual right to track time slots was negotiated as a capital expense during construction, so that doesn't come in as an operational cost at all.

[FISHMANPET]

Aren't some of the Metra routes operated by freight railroads and just paid for by Metra? Whereas Northstar is actually run by MetroTransit? Could it be that a freight railroad is just way better at running a train on their own tracks than a transit agency with almost no mainline train experience is at running a train on someone else's tracks?

[HiawathaGuy]

But in all seriousness, wasn't bloomington central the original station besides MOA? Then MOA wouldn't allow park & ride at their ramps so they added 28th street? then American Blvd was added after the line opened for who knows what reason?

Actually, American Blvd & Bloomington Central were always a part of the plan, along with the final MOA stop. When that P&R adjacent to the MOA on 24th Ave. was changed to a station within the mall's transit area, the 28th Ave S station was added, with the American Blvd. station put on hold until future money was available.

As this area continues to develop over the next few decades, I have no doubt the ridership numbers will continue to increase. I'm completely okay with a forward-thinking station plan. It does seem weird that one of the stations wasn't dropped, but with McGough spending $1MM+ to embed the rail through their property, I believe removing Bloomington Central wasn't an option.

[mulad]

Aren't some of the Metra routes operated by freight railroads and just paid for by Metra? Whereas Northstar is actually run by MetroTransit? Could it be that a freight railroad is just way better at running a train on their own tracks than a transit agency with almost no mainline train experience is at running a train on someone else's tracks?

BNSF employees crew the Northstar trains -- I believe Metro Transit handles things like maintenance of the trains and stations, though. Metra is a mix of directly-operated and contracted services -- some routes have track that's entirely owned by Metra while others only have short bits of Metra track. Metra might be able to pull in some revenue from allowing freights on their track and balance things out a bit, but I'm not sure how much of an impcat that would have.

Anyway, I think there's often a bit of a price premium to contracting out to the railroad, but direct operation often requires the transit company to own the tracks themselves.

[nate]

Good stuff. It would be nice to make a table including the projected ridership from the various DEISs.

Ask and ye shall receive:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_FcNu ... sp=sharing

All projection data taken from final EIS, available on the Met Council's website.

I find it interesting and not all that surprising that the three missing Green Line stations added late in the game outperform several stations on the Blue Line. None of them are the worst-performing stations on the line. Hamline even outperforms Lexington which I guess isn't all that surprising given the retail component there. As I recall, even in the DEIS none of those stations was the worst-performing so even that is not a surprise. The whole saga is a great example of structural racism.

Based on percentage of projected ridership, the three infill stations are the most successful on the line. It is insane that they were left out in the first place.

[talindsay]

Two things that interest me about that comparison:
1. Amazing how many stations are already well above the 2030 projection.
2. It looks like current ridership is driven more by local population, and less by transfers, than they expected: the stations that are well below projections (and remember those are 2030 projections so it's not like it's an issue) are mostly the major transfer points, whereas stations with above-expected ridership are mostly not.

One notable oddity is how much lower Eat Bank station is than projected. This could just be 2014 vs 2030 of course, but I'm betting the fact that the U chose to downplay the line as a trunk for campus circulation has a lot to do with this too.

[mulad]

I'm betting the ridership model didn't take the summer lull (and the smaller winter break lull) into account for the UMN campus. That could easily explain a big chunk of the difference for East Bank. Comparing to the (back-calculated) early data from June, the early ridership at East Bank was 2,767 versus 3,871 for the end-of-year stats, so it must have been somewhere around 4,500 daily for much of the in-session periods. Still a long way from the 6,680 mark, but considerably closer. West Bank and Stadium Village are performing much better than expected, so it might be that UMN ridership is more spread out than the model thought (in contrast to downtown St. Paul where ridership is concentrated at Central).

[David Greene]

Maybe this fits better under one of the legislative threads.

https://www.facebook.com/events/383996358449679

I'm riding with Frank Hornstein on Monday. I'll try to get the scoop on the trnsportation funding situation in the House.

[RailBaronYarr]

I find it interesting and not all that surprising that the three missing Green Line stations added late in the game outperform several stations on the Blue Line. None of them are the worst-performing stations on the line. Hamline even outperforms Lexington which I guess isn't all that surprising given the retail component there. As I recall, even in the DEIS none of those stations was the worst-performing so even that is not a surprise. The whole saga is a great example of structural racism.

I don't mean this in a mean/super-snark kind of way, but I think it's enlightening that the models and supercomputers and engineering assumptions (similar to ones that spit out ridership for certain SWLRT stations) would leave those stops out in the first place and even then underestimate them *may* not be entirely trustworthy. I'm really glad there was a big push to add those stations in, and the results speak for themselves (freeway-LRT-alignment pushers be damned!).

[David Greene]

I'm riding with Frank Hornstein on Monday. I'll try to get the scoop on the trnsportation funding situation in the House.

Well so much for that. I got a nasty stomach bug this morning.

[cowboyjones]

It wouldn't surprise me if the ridership at some of those low ridership transfer points are going to be above the 2030 projections is just a few years. Snelling, of course, will get the A-line this summer. Downtown East Ridership should jump a bit after the Wells Fargo project is finished. Prospect Park through Fairview rely on infill, and the Capitol Station is so close already, just needs a few more bureaucrats. I feel like the downtown Minneapolis stops will reach their target after the extension is finished, but I don't know if they have separate projections for that. As it is now, the Downtown residential developments along Nicollet won't, I don't think, increase ridership much unless residents are going to jobs on either end of downtown. And St. Paul just needs more jobs.

[MSPtoMKE]

Presented without comment:
http://www.metrotransit.org/help-name-t ... sit-mascot

Help name the new Metro Transit mascot

Metro Transit’s ‘T’ logo is coming to life as the agency’s new mascot – and you can help us name it!
Send us your suggested name on Twitter or Facebook or drop us an e-mail through the ‘Contact Us’ page.
Suggested names should be gender-neutral and reflect the mascot's role as a friendly, helpful and enthusiastic transit user.
The new mascot is expected to begin making appearances at community events this spring.

[xandrex]

When I saw the mascot this morning, I just wondered who in the marketing department dreamt up this crazy idea.

[FISHMANPET]

My first reaction was "nightmare fuel."

[PhilmerPhil]

Minneapolis is having a similar contest with their new logo/mascot:

[twincitizen]

Suggested names should be gender-neutral and reflect the mascot's role as a friendly, helpful and enthusiastic transit user.

Tranny

[Nick]

My first reaction was "nightmare fuel."

Wasn't even copying you:

https://twitter.com/nickmagrino/status/ ... 9058279424

Okay: the cartoon arms with real legs, what's going on?

[FISHMANPET]

It's bad enough as a drawing, but can you imagine that thing actually walking around an event?

Honestly if they need a physical mascot those As and Bs in the commercials seem like a better fit (though you need twice as many unpaid/poorly paid interns per event).

But this kind of fits my ongoing idea that Metro Transit has no idea what marketing is or how to do it or how to be effective.

Further, the logo is boring. Don't put it on a mascot. If this was Boston where they call their system "The T" I can see highlighting the T in the logo. But every transit system has a logo with a shape and the letter T and most of them are boring at best. I feel like Metro Transit's branding is actually pretty good and modern looking, which to me seems like a really good signal that this is a functioning transit system. And also I think the MetroTransit brand is pretty good and useful considering how some cities have so many different entities providing transit that it can give you a headache. But the logo ain't nothing special. Don't make it a mascot.

[talindsay]

Somebody was high.