Couple thoughts (though this is very general and can be moved off the St Paul Streetcar thread..)
1) As annoying as it is for us, local buses have their....
Well, for most of the aBRT lines proposed, well over 90% (mostly 98-99%) of existing riders are within one local stop of proposed stations (at 0.3 to 0.5 mile spacing). I think most here share a concern for the elderly, but in many cases they'll be close to an "arterial-like" station spacing anyway. Metro Transit would do well to expand dial-a-rides for the extremely few people who would no longer be within a comfortable walk. I'm not sure how the long block faces make reaching stations more difficult, though. You'd have to travel that N/S distance (or E-W in StP) regardless of if blocks were smaller...
I would say the aBRT model from a stop-spacing perspective shouldn't be implemented for every local route, just 1/4 mile stop spacing on the 1/2 mile grid streets. In fact, my preference would actually be to go from 1/8 mile spacing to 1/4 mile system wide with most stops getting the station amenities. Overall route frequency would still be good (not aBRT + reduced local, just high local frequency), but capital costs obviously higher.
2) Since many local routes operate frequently on roads that don't have frequent traffic signals, the utility of adding the equipment to extend green lights becomes less and less relevant to how you can decrease travel time.
That's only one of the benefits aBRT design brings. Maybe instead of the electronic systems, the streets get mini-roundabouts installed in lieu of stop signs. Or blinking reds/yield for the cross streets with the bus line getting signal-less priority.
3) Often local routes travel on streets which are primarily SFH residential; even the smallest planned aBRT shelters would probably be opposed by nearby residents, because of the light and resulting increase in loitering and noise.
Boo. Political-will issues shouldn't be a reason not to try/do something. If the area is urban enough to talk about putting in aBRT lines, it's urban enough (even if SFHs) that a bump-out with a shelter, heat, and lights should be commonplace.
4) The local routes don't usually require the general frequency that the currently planned aBRT corridors require, because even optimistically their maximal ridership is pretty low. Creating inconsistent frequencies throughout the system, though, undermines the easy-to-remember frequent promise of the main routes.
Our system right now is hard to remember/know. I'm not sure how it would be different other than the base expected frequency for the whole system gets better.
5) Quite simply, one of the biggest bonuses for things like LR, streetcar, aBRT etc. is that there are relatively few of them, which makes them easier to remember and conceptualize...
So let's make the base bus system easier to understand. Fewer spurs, fewer turns or jaunts to side streets. More grid like. No matter which direction you walk you'll hit a major bus line that comes every 10-15 minutes most times of the day, and at the stop will be a system map that shows how the line interacts with the larger system (particularly the faster/more frequent LRT lines).