Re: Gold Line BRT (Gateway Corridor)
Posted: October 3rd, 2018, 12:56 pm
Gotta artificially drive usage of Union Depot so we can pretend the quarter billion dollars spent to restore it for two trains a day was worth it.
Architecture, Development, and Infrastructure of the Twin Cities
https://urbanmsp.com/
Like Silophant said, to make people go through Union Depot so it looks busy more than just when the Empire Builder goes through.What is the projected ridership of the Gold Line? IIRC it is in the 5-7k range. A 2% increase in project budget that results in a 10-20% increase in ridership is a steal at twice the price. Why, exactly, wouldn’t we want to do this?
I'm curious how much that would cost and how much ridership would be gained from that. Assuming it replaces Route 94 then the majority if not all of those riders would switch, maybe a microscopic amount from the Green Line, and people from the eastern suburbs who would have a one-seat ride to/from Minneapolis (how many people that is I don't know).I'm still not getting what this "LOOP" is... an extension from Union Depot to Smith Ave that crosses downtown and doesn't force a transfer to the Green Line? That's not a loop, that's an extension. And it makes sense.
Know what else makes sense and would drive ridership? Extending it to Minneapolis over I-94...
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1mJMag ... sp=sharing
I am on the Gold Line CBAC. While I disagree with Commissioner McDonough's stance on the issue of the "loop" - I do understand his vision for the Depot.Gotta artificially drive usage of Union Depot so we can pretend the quarter billion dollars spent to restore it for two trains a day was worth it.
The concept of using downtown circulators to connect to suburban transit services has been tried and has failed. Minneapolis built lots of infrastructure for this concept: The transit facilities in the A/B/C, Gateway, and Leamington ramps were built with circulator service in mind. Instead, we've settled on routing transit through the central business district with multiple stops along the way. Marq2 is the most efficient example of this concept. Then again, since Minneapolis CBD drives transit ridership in our metro, maybe it doesn't matter where people transfer from the Gold Line to Green or Route 94. Then again, that's another great reason to interline the Gold and Rush Line BRT through Downtown St. Paul, then back onto I-94 to Downtown Minneapolis (replacing Route 94).The vision for Union Depot was to make it a facility to do quick and easy transfers between modes and lines. In reality, that vision was compromised from the very beginning when the decision was made to have the Green Line stop at the front instead of back of the building.
Were those ramps ever used by express buses, and if so how long did that last? I think Southwest Transit used them at one point, but only for Twins express service to Target Field.The concept of using downtown circulators to connect to suburban transit services has been tried and has failed. Minneapolis built lots of infrastructure for this concept: The transit facilities in the A/B/C, Gateway, and Leamington ramps were built with circulator service in mind. Instead, we've settled on routing transit through the central business district with multiple stops along the way. Marq2 is the most efficient example of this concept. Then again, since Minneapolis CBD drives transit ridership in our metro, maybe it doesn't matter where people transfer from the Gold Line to Green or Route 94. Then again, that's another great reason to interline the Gold and Rush Line BRT through Downtown St. Paul, then back onto I-94 to Downtown Minneapolis (replacing Route 94).The vision for Union Depot was to make it a facility to do quick and easy transfers between modes and lines. In reality, that vision was compromised from the very beginning when the decision was made to have the Green Line stop at the front instead of back of the building.
My understanding is that Minneapolis built the infrastructure to support it, but never actually implemented a true circulator system. Unless you know otherwise, I don't think it's fair to say that it has been tried.The concept of using downtown circulators to connect to suburban transit services has been tried and has failed.
You're disappointed by putting the station closer to origins/destinations? The sensible place to do a "quick and easy transfer" between buses and the Green Line is Central Station (which also works for most if not all existing routes that serve downtown, not just those that terminate there). There's nothing quick about getting to the back of Union Depot, whether it's on foot from the surrounding area, or on a bus making its way in and out.I am on the Gold Line CBAC. While I disagree with Commissioner McDonough's stance on the issue of the "loop" - I do understand his vision for the Depot.Gotta artificially drive usage of Union Depot so we can pretend the quarter billion dollars spent to restore it for two trains a day was worth it.
It isn't about "artificially driving usage" at all. The vision for Union Depot was to make it a facility to do quick and easy transfers between modes and lines. In reality, that vision was compromised from the very beginning when the decision was made to have the Green Line stop at the front instead of back of the building. All these years later many - MANY - people and officials remain very disappointed by this decision.
The concept of using downtown circulators to connect to suburban transit services has been tried and has failed
Strawman argument. I'm arguing in favor of the downtown loop for the Gold Line, for cripe's sake. Please don't put words in my mouth.
You're disappointed by putting the station closer to origins/destinations?
It seemed like you were including yourself in the "many - MANY - people" who were disappointed by it (I can think of a few reasons why one might support the Gold Line extension even while disagreeing with the Green Line station placement). If that's not what you meant, then read my previous post as "they" instead of "you".Strawman argument. I'm arguing in favor of the downtown loop for the Gold Line, for cripe's sake. Please don't put words in my mouth.
You're disappointed by putting the station closer to origins/destinations?
People connected to the Green Line project and involved in that decision say that it was a primarily budget-conscious decision to run the Green Line in front of the Depot, and really had almost nothing to do with "putting the station closer to origins/destinations".
Still boggles my mind that they're still considering it just so they can say people are actually using the depot throughout day. With a stop near the depot entrance it seems to be a win-win for a downtown routing. I'm sure a handful of Gold Line riders will go inside the depot for whatever reason (just visiting, taking Amtrak or an intercity bus, connecting with a local bus, an event, etc.).http://www.startribune.com/gold-line-bu ... 499353131/
Downtown routing chosen by advisory committee, but will still be studying ending at Union Depot. Glad this is going in the right direction.