Public Transit News / Current Events (MN only)

[MNdible]

I hope we didn't pay very much for this study.

The real crux of this situation is explained at the end of the article -- there was a bottleneck at the Crosstown which was clogging traffic there, limiting capacity and thus allowing traffic beyond that point to flow relatively smoothly. That bottleneck was removed, and of course it's going to pile up at the next bottleneck (the I-94 to I-35 commons).

Which is not to say that they shouldn't relocate the Lake Street bus stops, but if you think that will solve the overall problem, you're dreaming.

[RailBaronYarr]

I don't think this study was paid for.. I think it was done by a graduate student at the U under David Levinson (unless I'm crazy). In which case the author is paying to do this work for the general public.

I agree the final conclusion is a no-brainer - add lanes, remove stupid designs at one point and shift the congestion to another. However, it is important to note that the backups occurring at the 94/35W commons would be much less severe if people drove slower between Crosstown and downtown on 35W (and, presumably, if people did the same on 94 west-bound). Yes, the design there isn't optimal and at the peakest of peak times it would still back up, but a more constant, slower flow would reduce brake-slamming incidents.

I was shocked that the posted speed on the new signs could be taken as anything other than an advisory speed. In fact, I assumed they were the legal posted speed limit, as that's how it works in Germany, Italy, and France (at least according to the native co-workers I spent time with there). Speed limits are those posted on physical signs (or none at all on ze Authobahn) unless electronic ones dictate otherwise. Makes sense to me.

[UptownSport]

Which is not to say that they shouldn't relocate the Lake Street bus stops, but if you think that will solve the overall problem, you're dreaming.

You're referring to me?
I said center stops would "speed up traffic" not "solve the overall problem".
There is a difference.

And theres certainly open dreaming on this board, why should it stop if it were me?

[MNdible]

You're referring to me?

No, not really. It was the rhetorical "you", mostly pointing to the study and the article. As I said, the center lane bus stop at Lake Street makes a ton of sense, and anecdotally, I feel like people may be catching on to how to react to the speed indicators and why they're useful.

But the capacity and design problems at the Commons are so fundamental that these other things are mere window dressing.

[talindsay]

I don't think this study was paid for.. I think it was done by a graduate student at the U under David Levinson (unless I'm crazy). In which case the author is paying to do this work for the general public.

It was done by John Hourdos, who most certainly isn't a graduate student under David Levinson - he's the Director of the Minnesota Traffic Observatory. I don't know the funding for this project, but Dr. Hourdos most certainly *does* know what he's doing.

[RailBaronYarr]

I don't think this study was paid for.. I think it was done by a graduate student at the U under David Levinson (unless I'm crazy). In which case the author is paying to do this work for the general public.

It was done by John Hourdos, who most certainly isn't a graduate student under David Levinson - he's the Director of the Minnesota Traffic Observatory. I don't know the funding for this project, but Dr. Hourdos most certainly *does* know what he's doing.

My bad, I saw Levinson post it and thought this was a student of his doing research work (which he posts a lot). I also didn't mean any disrespect or to make it seen like Dr Hourdos doesn't know what he's doing.

[mulad]

Not really "transit", but MnDOT has rolled out a site with interactive maps showing things like all of their programmed highway upgrades.

Main site: http://mndot.maps.arcgis.com/home/index.html
Programmed and Planned Projects: http://mndot.maps.arcgis.com/home/webma ... 08e9ddbf06

[Tcmetro]

It looks like Shakopee and Prior Lake are considering merging into MVTA. Probably a good idea, and hopefully MVTA has some better planners who can redesign the mess that is the reverse commute and circulator lines.

http://www.savagepacer.com/news/local_g ... 617d2.html

[UptownSport]

Not mass transit, but a mode of transit goes away;

http://www.startribune.com/local/south/227612061.html

Too bad the system couldn't be installed in a circulator where it would be of good use; Rosedale to Har-Mar or a compact downtown.

[FISHMANPET]

Google bought the old cars from the recently dissembled Sydney Monorail, and turned them into conference rooms:
http://thenextweb.com/google/2013/10/10 ... rail-cars/

[nordeast homer]

I was always disappointed when they would talk about the monorail like it was intended to make money. I don't think you ever have a system like that to make money, it is a value add to a facility like that. The fact that they believed it was to be profitable to run the monorail makes it sound like they didn't build in costs for maintenance or repairs like they should have.
I did always think it was funny that it didn't have a stop on the far end so people could use it as a transportation system rather than a "ride".

[UptownSport]

Do the Siberian Yaks turn a profit?

Interesting article says they will need a transport system after their expansion.

They wouldn't?

[Tcmetro]

The Shakopee/Prior Lake transit merger into MVTA hit the Strib:

http://www.startribune.com/local/south/ ... y#continue

[Tom H.]

Hmm... I wonder if they gave any thought to a merger with SouthWest Transit instead. Geographically, it seems to make a little more sense (since most trips are to/from the Minneapolis CBD) than MVTA.

[Tcmetro]

I did some research in the city council meetings of Shakopee and Prior Lake. They talked to SW Transit, MVTA, and Met Council/Metro Transit. They felt that it was best to have merger talks with MVTA.

There is also some information in the Scott County Transit Review Board meetings: http://bluexpressbus.com/newsletters.php

[mulad]

Interesting infographic posted to Metro Transit's Facebook page regarding the use of passes in the Go-To family during 2012, which I will replicate in text form (plus an extra rides per pass figure I calculated):

• Metropass: 270 participating employers, 33,754 passes in use, 12 million annual rides (356 rides per pass)
• College Pass: 51 participating colleges, 17,823 passes in use, 3.24 million annual rides (182 rides per pass)
• U-Pass: University of Minnesota, 44,133 passes in use, 5.06 million annual rides (115 rides per pass)
• Student Pass: 39 participating high schools, 5,672 passes in use, 1.91 million annual rides (337 rides per pass)

Folks may also be interested in the "Good Question" from this week's Rider's Almanac, which discussed the history and purpose of transfers at Metro Transit/Twin City Lines. Unfortunately, they kind of missed the point of the question, which was really that Metro Transit only gets about $1 in revenue per trip because of that transfer policy -- less than $1 on busy, frequent routes, but more than that on infrequent and express routes -- so why don't we just get rid of transfers and charge everyone $1 per trip (though maybe still $2 or $3 for express)? I had suggested that in a blog post back in 2011. There are good reasons not to do it, of course, but on the whole I've felt it would be a benefit since a lot of folks balk at the $2.25 (peak) or $1.75 (non-peak) standard fares, not realizing that transit passes are valid for 2.5 hours. Oh well, it was still an interesting article.

[UptownSport]

Good way to reduce ridership and get people back into cars ride a connecting busses for a few blocks each, then end up paying way more per day.

[FISHMANPET]

It's easier to get fast frequent service to many disparate destinations when you have more transfers. Transfers are good, we shouldn't be discouraging them.

[MNdible]

To me, the issue isn't so much whether or not there are transfers involved -- it's straight up distance. If you live close in, you're paying a too much for a short ride, and you don't get a seat because the bus is already full and running behind schedule from everybody else who got on earlier.

[mulad]

It's easier to get fast frequent service to many disparate destinations when you have more transfers. Transfers are good, we shouldn't be discouraging them.

From my point of view, I'm tapping my Go-To card whenever I board, no matter whether I'm transferring or boarding for the first time, so it makes little difference. To MNdible's point, transfers are somewhat of a proxy for distance, and are way, way easier to implement and understand than zone-based fares. There are definitely cases where a short trip will have multiple transfers and long ones will have few or none, but on average, I think it works out.

The things I worry about are 1) Transit-dependent people running errands during the middle of the day (who currently pay $1.75 for 2.5 hours and could end up paying $4, $5, or $6 for the same trip afterward), and 2) Proof-of-payment (do we really want to print out a ticket for every single trip that's paid with cash? There are places where that's done, of course... And there are some potential timing issues.)