Arterial Bus Rapid Transit Corridors

Roads - Rails - Sidewalks - Bikeways
VAStationDude
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 782
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 10:30 am

Re: Arterial Transit Corridor Study ("rapid bus")

Postby VAStationDude » September 6th, 2012, 8:44 pm

The Snelling corridor is the right place for rapid bus to debut. High profile connections to two rapid transit lines, relatively short and a few key congested intersections that could benefit from bus signal priority. There are also numerous intersecting regular bus lines along the route which would benefit from improved shelters and ticket machines. As long as the met council doesn't water down the proof of payment fare system, rapid bus will be a huge improvement, even on the relatively speedy 84.

mulad
Moderator
Posts: 2802
Joined: June 4th, 2012, 6:30 pm
Location: Saint Paul
Contact:

Re: Arterial Transit Corridor Study ("rapid bus")

Postby mulad » November 28th, 2012, 7:58 am

I'm beginning to think of the Red Line BRT as "bus-only shoulder 2.0" at this point, which makes it easier for me to envision other places that could use similar treatments.

Snelling Avenue already has bus-only shoulders between Hoyt Avenue at the Saint Paul/Falcon Heights border up until the MN-36 interchange in Roseville, so many of the same design ideas should probably be implemented there. It might be nice to see stations with bridges or tunnels across Snelling built, at least near County Road B (HarMar) and near Larpenteur. At the southern end of the BOS zone and beyond, additional stations at Hoyt or Dan Patch/Midway could be built with the added purpose of getting State Fair crowds across the roadway without waiting for stop lights to turn.

There's also the freeway-esque segment between Pierce Butler Route and Dan Patch Ave/Midway Parkway, which also has bus-only shoulders (kinda sorta, for a short distance) and a lot of room consumed by auxiliary lanes.

I could see converting the bridge over Como Avenue into a station somewhat like the planned I-35W/Lake Street structure (except with bus lanes on the outside). I'd like to do the same with the bridge at Energy Park Drive, but that's in an auxiliary lane that runs between the Energy Park Drive ramps and the ramps to Pierce Butler Route, which could cause complications, but it might be possible to make room by forcing traffic to merge.

User avatar
woofner
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1327
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 10:04 am

Re: Arterial Transit Corridor Study ("rapid bus")

Postby woofner » November 28th, 2012, 2:12 pm

Speaking of Snelling and Rapid Bus, there are layouts for some of the Rapid Bus stops depicted in the recommendations that came out of the Snelling Multimodal Study:

http://www.dot.state.mn.us/metro/projec ... lingstudy/

Looks like the quasi-freeway area will be improved quite a bit, although possibly some of the segments that you have in mind for bus-only shoulders will get bike lanes instead. I would hope that the long term plan is to add an in-line station to that overpass, but presumably that's cost-prohibitive for now?
"Who rescued whom!"

kbee
Block E
Posts: 16
Joined: December 5th, 2012, 6:57 pm

Re: Arterial Transit Corridor Study ("rapid bus")

Postby kbee » December 9th, 2012, 12:25 pm

I'm sure many of you have seen this article in the StarTrib already http://www.startribune.com/local/south/ ... ml?refer=y

It's disappointing to see a suburban county with such a small stake in the proposed arterial BRT network (only a portion of one of the 12 corridors, Robert St, itself a very low priority, will be located in Dakota Co) play such a large role in naming the system. Sadly, the ABRT system will likely depend on CTIB funding so pleasing the Dakota Co commissioners is important.

It seems to me that Rapid is the obvious choice. It is the emerging standard for this type of "enhanced bus" mode (see LA, Seattle, Albuquerque, etc.) and reflects the primary purpose of the project: improving travel times in high ridership urban corridors.

Tcmetro
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1354
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 8:02 pm
Location: Chicago (ex-Minneapolitan)

Re: Arterial Transit Corridor Study ("rapid bus")

Postby Tcmetro » December 9th, 2012, 6:18 pm

Rapid Bus won't be funded by CTIB. And the Red Line is about on par with the rapid bus proposal anyways, so I don't get their complaints.

twincitizen
Moderator
Posts: 6211
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
Location: Standish-Ericsson

Re: Arterial Transit Corridor Study ("rapid bus")

Postby twincitizen » January 3rd, 2013, 1:37 pm

Pioneer Press reports on Snelling Ave Raid Bus: http://www.twincities.com/localnews/ci_ ... ould-begin

The comments are...unsettling. Somehow the comments on PiPress are less civil than those on Strib. You'd expect the opposite since Strib is completely anonymous, while PiPress uses Facebook comments and one's real identity.

It might be time to break Snelling BRT into its own thread since this is actually happening. Some of the other corridors could be several years away still and we won't hear much on them (American Blvd, Robert St, etc)

User avatar
spectre000
Union Depot
Posts: 301
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 9:05 pm
Location: Downtown St. Paul

Re: Arterial Transit Corridor Study ("rapid bus")

Postby spectre000 » January 3rd, 2013, 2:10 pm

twincitizen wrote:The comments are...unsettling. Somehow the comments on PiPress are less civil than those on Strib. You'd expect the opposite since Strib is completely anonymous, while PiPress uses Facebook comments and one's real identity.
It's easy to block users on the PP facebook comments section. I've blocked many, makes its much more enjoyable.

twincitizen
Moderator
Posts: 6211
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
Location: Standish-Ericsson

Re: Arterial Transit Corridor Study ("rapid bus")

Postby twincitizen » January 3rd, 2013, 4:25 pm

[offtopic]Meh. After PiPress editorialized in favor of Voter ID and more or less supported the Marriage Amendment, I try to avoid their site on principle. I guess I couldn't resist this time.[/offtopic]

mulad
Moderator
Posts: 2802
Joined: June 4th, 2012, 6:30 pm
Location: Saint Paul
Contact:

Re: Arterial Transit Corridor Study ("rapid bus")

Postby mulad » January 16th, 2013, 11:53 pm

Looks like Metro Transit is taking another shot at naming the arterial network. A new survey is here. Your new choices are:
  • Dash
  • Direct
  • Go
  • Wave
  • Zip
  • Zoom
Compare to the previous list:
  • Connect
  • Max
  • Move
  • Rapid
  • Select
  • Swift

twincitizen
Moderator
Posts: 6211
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
Location: Standish-Ericsson

Re: Arterial Transit Corridor Study ("rapid bus")

Postby twincitizen » January 17th, 2013, 10:45 am

Worth mentioning that in the last round, "Rapid" was the clear winner, but blocked by one or two Dakota County commissioners who cried foul. Metro Transit declined to continue that fight and sour any relationships.

I wonder why the new survey didn't include any of the previous options. "Go" and "Direct" are the only ones on the new list that aren't completely repulsive. The new list makes every single option on the old list look good in comparison.

If not "Rapid", I'd settle for "Select" or "Connect".

In the end, the name is far less important than the implementation, but at the very least it shouldn't be a tacky name that people will make fun of (entire new list)

Viktor Vaughn
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 607
Joined: July 10th, 2012, 6:37 pm

Re: Arterial Transit Corridor Study ("rapid bus")

Postby Viktor Vaughn » January 17th, 2013, 10:50 am

Wow. The new list is universally terrible. If you agree, I'd like to hear some fresh suggestions from the Urbanmsp think tank. Maybe we can come to a consensus and lobby metro transit before they name our most important bus routes zip, dash or wave...

Viktor Vaughn
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 607
Joined: July 10th, 2012, 6:37 pm

Re: Arterial Transit Corridor Study ("rapid bus")

Postby Viktor Vaughn » January 17th, 2013, 10:52 am

Twincitizen, I agree "select" is a decent choice. It's a good differentiator without being to campy.

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7942
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Arterial Transit Corridor Study ("rapid bus")

Postby mattaudio » January 17th, 2013, 11:09 am

How about "the bus" and we can make all regular bus routes operate at this level of service.

Tcmetro
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1354
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 8:02 pm
Location: Chicago (ex-Minneapolitan)

Re: Arterial Transit Corridor Study ("rapid bus")

Postby Tcmetro » January 17th, 2013, 11:45 am

I voted for Go and Direct, although I would really like to see a Rapid. I'm not a big fan of Select, but I guess it isn't a big deal.

In other news, the TPP will be amended soon to include a Penn Ave line as well as an extension of the Chicago line along Fremont-Emerson.
http://councilmeetings.metc.state.mn.us ... %20ppt.pdf

mulad
Moderator
Posts: 2802
Joined: June 4th, 2012, 6:30 pm
Location: Saint Paul
Contact:

Re: Arterial Transit Corridor Study ("rapid bus")

Postby mulad » January 17th, 2013, 11:57 am

mattaudio wrote:How about "the bus" and we can make all regular bus routes operate at this level of service.
Yes, this would be my preferred option -- focused on the Hi-Frequency network first, although I am still a big fan of making 1/4-mile spacing the standard for all routes immediately.

Anyway, my preference with the new list was Dash, then Go, and finally Direct.

User avatar
woofner
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1327
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 10:04 am

Re: Arterial Transit Corridor Study ("rapid bus")

Postby woofner » January 17th, 2013, 12:25 pm

mulad wrote:
mattaudio wrote:How about "the bus" and we can make all regular bus routes operate at this level of service.
Yes, this would be my preferred option -- focused on the Hi-Frequency network first, although I am still a big fan of making 1/4-mile spacing the standard for all routes immediately.
In the absence of evidence that a marketing campaign tied specifically to this service will have any impact on ridership, this is a really good idea (I mean folding aBRT into the existing Hi-Frequency brand). It would have the advantage of allowing for incremental improvement, which is also likely to be more consistent than improvements that depend on the FTA (I'm still not sure of the proposed funding source for aBRT). Also, I think introducing another brand could add to complexity, especially in a system with multiple providers already.

For the moment, every high frequency route could benefit from a limited stop overlay service, but the downside would be that there will hopefully be high frequency routes in the future that don't really need any limited stop service - the 46 might be one example.
"Who rescued whom!"

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7942
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Arterial Transit Corridor Study ("rapid bus")

Postby mattaudio » January 17th, 2013, 12:48 pm

Ahh, my beloved 46. I wish it connected into St. Paul, instead of having to transfer at 46th Street/Blue Line, Highland Park, or West 7th and St. Paul Ave. Wouldn't it be great if these crosstown Mpls routes just interlined with E-W routes in St. Paul and headed downtown?

twincitizen
Moderator
Posts: 6211
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
Location: Standish-Ericsson

Re: Arterial Transit Corridor Study ("rapid bus")

Postby twincitizen » March 28th, 2013, 11:54 am

Met Coucil has amended the 2013-16 Transpo Improvement Program (TIP) to include:

$8.8 million for limited stop transit service on Chicago and Portland avenues in Minneapolis and Richfield, and American Blvd. in Bloomington

$7.5 million for limited stop transit service in St. Paul and Maplewood

I'm a little unclear what the second one is, because neither the Snelling Ave or West 7th aBRT lines go to Maplewood. East 7th aBRT is far from ready-for-primetime, so I doubt it's that...but maybe? Or it's just a typo/crossed wire.

As far as I understand, the 3 aBRT lines that have a green light are the following, in order of implementation:

Snelling (Rosedale to 46th St Blue Line)
West 7th (MOA to SPUD, basically a Route 54 with better marketing/branding/stations)
Chicago (DT Mpls to MOA via Chicago, Portland, American Blvd)

As I understood from the aBRT study documents, all other lines needed further study or were awaiting the outcome of other studies (Midtown, Nic-Central as Streetcars, Hennepin has to wait until SWLRT is a go, etc)

Tcmetro
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1354
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 8:02 pm
Location: Chicago (ex-Minneapolitan)

Re: Arterial Transit Corridor Study ("rapid bus")

Postby Tcmetro » March 28th, 2013, 12:25 pm

I think they want to get E 7th out of the way. It's likely a political choice as the west metro is getting all the rail lines.

A W 7th-E 7th line would be quite nice, and basically completes what the Riverview project was before it was cancelled in 2002.

EDIT: In other news, Snelling BRT has a webpage: http://www.metrotransit.org/snelling-brt

twincitizen
Moderator
Posts: 6211
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
Location: Standish-Ericsson

Re: Arterial Transit Corridor Study ("rapid bus")

Postby twincitizen » March 28th, 2013, 12:50 pm

I just skimmed the addendum to the aBRT study, where the Chicago BRT line was expanded to included the entire Route 5 Chicago-Fremont corridor and Penn Ave BRT was added (both of these things happened in response to the Bottineau alignment decision). http://www.metrotransit.org/Data/Sites/ ... dendum.pdf

EDIT:

In this case, I am happy to stand corrected.

On page 7 of this PDF (or page 4 of "Project List") it clearly spells out the various allocations.

Snelling and W 7th are funded in 2015. Chicago and E 7th are funded in 2016. The vast majority of the funding comes from federal CMAQ grants, including bus purchases, technology improvements, and "service demonstration" expenses. I assume Metro Transit/Met Council will still need to raise local funds for the capital improvements to station areas. If we get even a .25% transit tax increase, that would be a drop in the bucket.
Last edited by twincitizen on March 28th, 2013, 2:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.


Return to “Transportation”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: grrdanko and 3 guests