Rush Line Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Roads - Rails - Sidewalks - Bikeways
DanPatchToget
Landmark Center
Posts: 220
Joined: March 30th, 2016, 1:26 pm

Re: Rush Line Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby DanPatchToget » November 30th, 2016, 2:34 pm

So will this be given a color soon? Purple Line, Pink Line, or...?

Vagueperson
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 198
Joined: June 17th, 2014, 7:13 am

Re: Rush Line Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby Vagueperson » November 30th, 2016, 8:09 pm

Don't you think they'll have to finalize the LPA first? I don't really like the idea of bus lines and LRT lines both having colors and regular buses having numbers. Ok with the LRT.

Interesting notes here: http://transitmap.net/post/130115038055 ... s-question

We have green, blue, red, orange, and gold.

Of yellow, brown, silver, pink, or purple I'd choose silver. Like a silvery polar bear.

bptenor
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 136
Joined: November 11th, 2012, 9:28 pm

Re: Rush Line Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby bptenor » November 30th, 2016, 9:58 pm

Ooo I like silver; never thought of that! I think that's quite appropriate since this line will terminate in White Bear Lake. But I agree that a "fancy bus" doesn't deserve a color.

a) Implement aBRT per Metro Transit's plan
b) Initiate all-day express bus service on 265 (current frequencies are abysmal) and work on increasing corridor ridership
c) Reserve the final LPA for LRT in Phalen/RC ROW per Alternative 8. We can wait for the best option, and I think this is it.

mamundsen
Foshay Tower
Posts: 871
Joined: November 15th, 2012, 10:01 am

Re: Rush Line Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby mamundsen » November 30th, 2016, 10:42 pm

Yes! I agree with bptenor. I even live on the end of the corridor and think we are rushing this. No pun intended. If the ridership isn't going to be there, don't spend the money.

Vagueperson
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 198
Joined: June 17th, 2014, 7:13 am

Re: Rush Line Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby Vagueperson » December 1st, 2016, 9:52 am

I think I agree with bptenor, as well. I'm just worried about how long it will take. There is a proposal for a 100 unit apartment building at Payne and Phalen Blvd. Phalen Blvd is a good place for a transit line, in my opinion.

Also, if the aBRT plan is implemented, I'm curious how they will do the routes 61 and 54. Currently, the 61 goes, infrequently, along 7th and Arcade. The 54 would do the same, though I don't know the frequency. The aBRT would also take that route. That would lead to a hell of a lot of bus traffic on those two streets. I like the 64, but I feel Phalen and Payne deserve a bit better in the mix.

Online
Tcmetro
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1154
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 8:02 pm
Location: Chicago (ex-Minneapolitan)

Re: Rush Line Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby Tcmetro » December 1st, 2016, 1:17 pm

After an LPA is selected, the Metropolitan Council has to amend the line into the Transportation Policy Plan. That's when a color will be assigned.

Metro Transit's arterial BRT study, conducted about 5 years ago, said that the E 7th line would use Arcade, Maryland, and White Bear Avenue to reach Maplewood Mall. The 61 would be truncated to Maryland and Arcade. Metro Transit's service improvement plan also mentions large improvements to the 61, including longer span of service, more frequent service, and Sunday service.

I think that with all the programmed and potential improvements, the N/NE part of Saint Paul is due for a route restructure. 62 could become full frequent, 3 could be transitioned into a Maryland crosstown line and removed from Rice St, 71 could be simplified and improved, and 54/64 restructured and rationalized.

EOst
Capella Tower
Posts: 2073
Joined: March 19th, 2014, 8:05 pm
Location: North End, Saint Paul

Re: Rush Line Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby EOst » December 1st, 2016, 1:42 pm

Tcmetro wrote:3 could be transitioned into a Maryland crosstown line and removed from Rice St
I think about this constantly. There isn't a single crosstown bus across 35E between downtown Saint Paul and Larpenteur (Arlington on the west). To Ward 6 by bike from here is 2.5 miles and maybe twenty minutes on a bike; it's 4.5 miles and 45 minutes by bus, not including a half-mile walk. If I lived farther south, I'd have to bus downtown. It's awful.

Vagueperson
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 198
Joined: June 17th, 2014, 7:13 am

Re: Rush Line Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby Vagueperson » December 1st, 2016, 2:13 pm

I'd be very interested to hear how others would redraw the bus lines in this area to be more rational.

I was aware of the service improvement plans for the #61, but as far as a truncation at Maryland/Arcade do you mean it would not enter downtown St. Paul?

bptenor
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 136
Joined: November 11th, 2012, 9:28 pm

Re: Rush Line Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby bptenor » December 1st, 2016, 7:39 pm

This would take a lot more thought, but yes, a full restructure of routes north and northeast of downtown is desperately needed. The lines on the map are far from intuitive, and there are vast swatches that aren't covered by any practical service. I live downtown St Paul, so I have an easier time than some, but it still takes an awfully long time to get anywhere north or east.

RailBaronYarr
Capella Tower
Posts: 2677
Joined: September 16th, 2012, 4:31 pm

Re: Rush Line Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby RailBaronYarr » December 2nd, 2016, 12:41 pm

I had spent a little time thinking about which routes would make sense to turn into aBRT routes and be re-structured a little bit when I wrote this: https://streets.mn/2015/12/22/how-to-spe ... n-transit/ Here is the Google Map https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid= ... sp=sharing

I didn't intend it to be a fantasy map of train routes, but rather which bus routes should see upgrade to aBRT in addition to the studied ones. I didn't think about rationalizing the remaining locals, however. As always, I'd probably change a few things if I went back again. At the time, I liked the idea of a 3->aBRT still serving downtown, but could easily be convinced otherwise.

Vagueperson
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 198
Joined: June 17th, 2014, 7:13 am

Re: Rush Line Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby Vagueperson » December 2nd, 2016, 3:42 pm

Still, this map shows both an "East 7th aBRT" and a "North Mpls/StP Crosstown aBRT" taking 7th and Arcade. I think a StP Crosstown aBRT sounds great, but why not go up Payne?

RailBaronYarr
Capella Tower
Posts: 2677
Joined: September 16th, 2012, 4:31 pm

Re: Rush Line Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby RailBaronYarr » December 2nd, 2016, 3:56 pm

IIRC, I wanted to leave as many of the aBRT routes as possible the way MT studied them to avoid changing implementation costs. I also did NOT include the Rush Line as part of my "regional transit on the cheap" proposal, which may have influenced routing decisions. Not here to defend any choices.

Vagueperson
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 198
Joined: June 17th, 2014, 7:13 am

Re: Rush Line Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby Vagueperson » December 19th, 2016, 9:48 pm

I forgot that East 7th has another bus line: the 74

So when the 54 extension is implemented (RUSH line doc says mid-2017), 7th street will be served by routes 54, 61, and 74. It could have the MetroTransit aBRT line, as well.

With all of that I really want the RUSH Line to take Phalen Blvd, either via Jackson or 12th for easy transfer to the Green Line outside of downtown.

Should the LPA be decided in isolation of these other routes?

Also, I still don't understand the plan for truncating the 61 with the aBRT plan. Is there a source for this?

User avatar
Tiller
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 753
Joined: January 17th, 2015, 11:58 am

Re: Rush Line Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby Tiller » January 17th, 2017, 1:51 pm

A document (PAC meeting agenda for January 19th) with some new information has been posted:
http://media.wix.com/ugd/6977a0_1f7a8df ... 1a032a.pdf

Vagueperson
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 198
Joined: June 17th, 2014, 7:13 am

Re: Rush Line Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby Vagueperson » January 17th, 2017, 2:07 pm

Pages 36-39 show downtown routing options. I thought Option 8 was out because it interlines with Green Line, but it's still discussed here. I really like how Options 1 & 8 offer a connection with the Green Line at Robert Street without having to go all the way through downtown. This provides a quicker east-west ride if downtown is not the destination.

twincitizen
Moderator
Posts: 5809
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
Location: Standish-Ericsson

Re: Rush Line Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby twincitizen » January 17th, 2017, 2:23 pm

I would not be surprised if this plan is ultimately mothballed, meeting its fate by a combination of resistance (running buses along the Vento trail is not going to be popular) and lack of enthusiasm (BRT not politically sexy, especially at $650MM).

Metro Transit is rolling out the 54 extension to Maplewood Mall, so Ramsey County is using that as justification for not selecting aBRT (because Metro Transit is effectively already doing so, without the fancy stations and new buses). This is what we get for letting politicians plan our transit system, instead of allowing professional transit planners to make decisions. I'll be shocked, shocked if this dedicated BRT plan gets built as currently planned. "half the ridership of Gateway for 1.3x the cost!" is a real winner with the FTA, I'm sure.

Unless somehow dedicated BRT is also chosen for Riverview and the two projects get interlined and go through the FTA process as one line, this thing ain't getting built anytime soon.

I actually think this should be put on the shelf, while allowing the 54 extension to become a raging success and gradually upgraded to aBRT. If Riverview is built out as light rail / streetcar "hybrid", as seems somewhat likely, it may be best to later pursue the Rush corridor as a future extension of that line, but that only works after Riverview is up and running. If Riverview LRT/streetcar gets you as far as Lowertown, extending it north/east of there would seem an obvious proposition...eventually.

EDIT: I see we already hashed this out on the previous page and mostly were in agreement that this is a disaster viewtopic.php?f=18&t=1534&start=300#p124793

mamundsen
Foshay Tower
Posts: 871
Joined: November 15th, 2012, 10:01 am

Re: Rush Line Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby mamundsen » January 17th, 2017, 3:40 pm

I live along the line (sort of, would be a long walk) and I have no desire for this line. the 54 extension does MOST of the job and will be implemented THIS YEAR. I work in Minneapolis and I've said it before, I think that the number of riders from Maplewood Mall to Mpls (270) far outweighs the MM to St Paul (265), and this is shown in the express frequencies.

270 - freq 5-15 mins.
265 - freq 30 mins

User avatar
Tiller
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 753
Joined: January 17th, 2015, 11:58 am

Re: Rush Line Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby Tiller » January 19th, 2017, 9:59 am

Is anyone attending the meeting today? They're supposed to have more detailed/accurate ridership and cost numbers. I can't make it because work.

Vagueperson
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 198
Joined: June 17th, 2014, 7:13 am

Re: Rush Line Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby Vagueperson » February 13th, 2017, 12:35 pm

New document day: http://media.wix.com/ugd/6977a0_3ef7e0b ... dfadca.pdf
Looks like Phalen Blvd is getting most of the attention. Big question in my mind is how an Arcade Street station would work.
If it's at the bridge it's close to both the Seeger Square shopping center (needs major redevelopment) and the Beacon Bluff / 3M undeveloped site. But it's not very "walkable" and would require an elevator.

I once imagined it going along Wells, through Seeger Square, then back to Phalen along Neid Lane. Further from Beacon Bluff site, closer to existing homes, would necessitate rebuilding the Seeger Square center, a welcome consequence!

User avatar
Tiller
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 753
Joined: January 17th, 2015, 11:58 am

Re: Rush Line Corridor (Alternatives Analysis)

Postby Tiller » February 14th, 2017, 8:40 am

Well this is probably competitive enough to get funding now (assuming we figure out our local match situation).

So option 8 through downtown & hwy 61 North of 694 would be:
~85-90% dedicated guideway
~5.7k daily ridership
~50 min end-to-end travel time
~$12.5-13M annual O&M costs (including the $4.9M new feeder services)
For a cost of $409M.

Bonus: taking away existing travel and parking lanes in some places.
http://i.imgur.com/g7JDlEQ.jpg

They also say this [trigger warning]:
"P&R stations have highest daily boardings[;] need to make sure project has enough parking capacity"


Return to “Transportation”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Tcmetro and 1 guest