urbanMSP

Since my car died, for the last couple of weeks I've been taking the Green Line from West Bank to Union Depot to get to work. Honestly for commuting it is not that bad, given that I have a laptop and can get a ton of work done. Not everyone has that ability of course but I hardly notice the time.

Why don't you take a bus or bike to downtown and catch the 94? From my place down at 36th & Fremont to work at 7th Place & Robert St takes about 45 minutes door to door if I bike to the bus (and, in the evenings, get off the bus first chance to avoid 7th St slowdowns). I've driven quite a few times and the drive takes 30-35 minutes consistently.

I have looked at Metro Transit's trip planner multiple times and 114 + Green Line is always faster than 6 + 94, primarily because of the transfer penalty downtown. Plus it's easier to work on smoother-riding LRT.

I could bike but I've gotta get my bike into ride-able condition.

The 53 is faster to get home because the 114/113 doesn't run at that hour. I don't think the 94 does either, at least not at the time I need it to. Trip Planner always says take the 53.

Driving for me is a bit shorter than for you, about 25-30 minutes. Most of that is because I generally drive outside of the worst rush-hour times.

Green line sets ridership record of 1.25 m in September, 45,644 average daily riders helped out by strong usage for events.

http://www.startribune.com/green-line-r ... 332785241/

Still, I'd venture to guess they could hit 60k if they could just speed it up by 10 minutes.

Green line sets ridership record of 1.25 m in September, 45,644 average daily riders helped out by strong usage for events.

http://www.startribune.com/green-line-r ... 332785241/

Still, I'd venture to guess they could hit 60k if they could just speed it up by 10 minutes.

That's really is remarkable! Thanks for posting this article. I agree that with a few minor tweaks, ridership could grow even more.

At the rate ridership is growing, it'll hit 60K on its own sometime in 2017.

It would be nice if the train were faster, but ridership numbers seem to indicate that lack of speed is not a dealbreaker. I live in the middle of the line, and frequency was a far greater consideration than speed when I made the decision to ride to work rather than drive.

I'd be curious to know the cost of the ideas that get thrown around, and how much time they'd save and riders they'd attract. My guess is you'd need a combination of full signal priority and eliminating four or five stations to cut ~10 minutes off the total time...not worth it in my opinion.

But full signal priority comes at no real cost.

Financially, no. But it would mess with pedestrian circulation at major intersections and it would have a negative impact on car traffic. So it comes with a political cost that needs to be considered.

I think 5 minutes could be shaved off by giving the train in downtown st paul and two out of the three major intersections (Dale, Lex, Snelling). Oh, and of course, the 280 crossing can easily add on a minute if you don't with the lottery at that intersection.
Another thought: anyone figure out why is there a stop light at Carleton Ave just west of Raymond?

Another thought: anyone figure out why is there a stop light at Carleton Ave just west of Raymond?

Pedestrian crossing. I bet the residents wanted it.

At least that one doesn't affect the train at all -- it just stops roadway traffic.

At least that one doesn't affect the train at all -- it just stops roadway traffic.

While rare, I have been on the train several times and have been stopped by that light.

On a side note, it seems that Vandalia has become a bit better over the past couple weeks. It seemed like trains were getting stopped their 80% of the time. Now I would say it is around to 30%-50% of the time. 280 is still a mess though.

On a wb train that made Fairview, Prior, Cleveland, Vandalia, hampden, raymond, Franklin and both 280 lights. It can be done!

On a wb train that made Fairview, Prior, Cleveland, Vandalia, hampden, raymond, Franklin and both 280 lights. It can be done!

^^^
Interesting article regarding St. Paul
http://www.roadsbridges.com/going-green

Interesting article regarding St. Paul
http://www.roadsbridges.com/going-green

If you look at the PDF attached to the article it states that the average cross street vehicle delays decreased by 11 seconds after predictive priority was deployed, and turning mainline traffic delay decreased by 23 seconds. The only thing that increased was the pedestrian delay, but only by 4 seconds.

I know each intersection is different, but if predictive priority is improving traffic flow, how come St. Paul hasn't implemented or at least tested it at the "high-volume" intersections?

Pedestrian volumes at Dale, Lexington and Snelling would certainly lead to much higher average pedestrian delay. there are always multiple people crossing each phase at busy intersections but few and often none at minor streets. Predictive priority restarts the east west crossing phase. Because major intersections are significantly wider the pedestrian phase is longer than at minor intersections. Continually extending that long pedestrian phase would result in greater increases to vehicle delay at major intersections.

I am sure there are many reasons why it won't work or make sense but I think it would be cool to a have a connection between the West Bank station and Cedar Riverside station skirting Currie Park so service could run between Green and Blue lines without connecting at the Metrodome station - it could be called the Teal line.

I was coming back from a game at TCF Bank Stadium and I found the transfer from the Green Line to the Blue Line extremely difficult. Have any ideas been proposed to create a transfer station around Currie Park or at the crossover between the lines? This would create a quicker connection between the two lines. Additionally, this could also help ease some of the congestion during Vikings games, since people would have another platform they could easily walk to.

I proposed that in the streets.mn post I wrote in my journal months ago but haven't typed up or submitted yet. I make that transfer twice a day and it's less than ideal.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

Or at the very least have a center shared platform at the downtown east stop. It's been stated that this isn't possible due to the parking garage underneath, which is a pity, since now would've been the ideal time to do it. That is, before the stadium is up and running and before the pedestrian walkway is built.

Aside from a center platform, the simplest option for improving the transfer would be to implement signal priority on the LRT tracks in downtown Minneapolis. If the trains can be more consistently scheduled downtown, then there could potentially be a more reliable transfer with 2-5 minutes to make it between platforms. Of course, the heavy ridership during events can easily throw schedules out of whack, and emergency vehicles in the vicinity of sports venues or elsewhere along the line can muck with signal timing since they get the greatest preference at intersections that have signal priority east of downtown.

There's even a passive signaling option downtown even though they don't have a proper signal priority setup -- just get the lights to go "green" in a consistent sequence so they can go between downtown stations without needing to stop. The speed of the train should be the primary driver of the signal timing along 5th Street. The city may already try to do that, but I don't know.

Timing of transfers is much better now than it was when I started transferring back in December. It's almost always a 2-5 minute wait for the train, rather than having to run to the other platform to get to the train that's already there.