Suburban Transit (Opt-out Services Providers)

[Tcmetro]

Pre-pandemic they were very peak focused so redeploying resources to local routes likely still amounts to a service cut.

Given that local ridership has recovered faster than the peak/downtown oriented ridership it wasn't a bad idea. The other opt-out agencies (Maple Grove, Plymouth, Southwest) are still only operating peak/downtown express service and have a much lower rationale for existing in a remote working world.

[Korh]

Speaking of ridership decided to update the old ridership chart (and decided to use the data from the FTA National Transit Database instead of the APTA cause they where missing numbers for both the MVTA and Metro Link in the past two reports).


full: https://i.imgur.com/CjJV5cV.png

[Tom H.]

I was a Southwest Transit rider for a long time, and while the peak-time express busses were truly convenient (they just had busses lined up and sent them off as they filled - probably 90 second headways), anything other than that was a hassle. I don't know the state of their finances, but if the Green Line extension siphons off any significant portion of (what remains of) their express ridership, might they be forced to "opt in"?

[DanPatchToget]

I believe this was said pre-pandemic so it could be different now, but I remember SW Transit stating they didn't plan to cut any express service when the Green Line Extension opened. I think there is/will be just enough demand that SW Transit can offer decent peak-time frequency on express service to downtown in addition to light rail, but we'll have to wait and see. I doubt SW Transit would ever consider being folded back into Metro Transit, and if any major change happened it would be SW Transit and MVTA merging.

[Trademark]

MVTA at their last board meeting has said they want to expand Connect by 350%. I guess you can kiss a huge chunk of their regular routes goodbye.

It's beyond time for opt-outs to be banned. The only good opt-out is a non-existent opt-out.

[thespeedmccool]

MVTA at their last board meeting has said they want to expand Connect by 350%. I guess you can kiss a huge chunk of their regular routes goodbye.

It's beyond time for opt-outs to be banned. The only good opt-out is a non-existent opt-out.

I'll drink to that

[DanPatchToget]

MVTA at their last board meeting has said they want to expand Connect by 350%. I guess you can kiss a huge chunk of their regular routes goodbye.

It's beyond time for opt-outs to be banned. The only good opt-out is a non-existent opt-out.

Banning opt-outs I'm definitely not opposed to, especially if they continue making Metro Transit look like a rival and keeping Metro Transit out of their turf as much as possible. However, do we know for sure expanding Connect means the loss of regular routes? If regular routes are dropped and replaced by Connect, is it necessarily a bad thing? Connect has to be reliable and affordable of course, but suburban local routes usually lack the reliability with 60-minute or less frequency and potentially a long walk to/from the bus stop.

[Korh]

I think a lot of people here seem to be against it because it's maybe a step or two above uber or lift in terms of public transit.
I'm not as opposed to it as others since the service area isn't huge (your not using it to get from Burnsville to downtown Minneapolis) and they could ideally use as a feeder service to their main transfer points and routes, correct me if I'm wrong but if you buy a connect ticket you can transfer to an express and local route without a change.

[Trademark]

MVTA at their last board meeting has said they want to expand Connect by 350%. I guess you can kiss a huge chunk of their regular routes goodbye.

It's beyond time for opt-outs to be banned. The only good opt-out is a non-existent opt-out.

Banning opt-outs I'm definitely not opposed to, especially if they continue making Metro Transit look like a rival and keeping Metro Transit out of their turf as much as possible. However, do we know for sure expanding Connect means the loss of regular routes? If regular routes are dropped and replaced by Connect, is it necessarily a bad thing? Connect has to be reliable and affordable of course, but suburban local routes usually lack the reliability with 60-minute or less frequency and potentially a long walk to/from the bus stop.

When they expanded Connect this summer they massively cut service. I'm not saying there will be no regular routes. But you can't expand this service by 350% without it having some effect on the service.

MVTAs planned redesign (which disappeared from their website after they started pushing connect). Had a ton of 15 and 30 minute frequency routes.

[Trademark]

I think a lot of people here seem to be against it because it's maybe a step or two above uber or lift in terms of public transit.
I'm not as opposed to it as others since the service area isn't huge (your not using it to get from Burnsville to downtown Minneapolis) and they could ideally use as a feeder service to their main transfer points and routes, correct me if I'm wrong but if you buy a connect ticket you can transfer to an express and local route without a change.

The problem with MVTA connect and Microtransit in general is that it does not scale. It starts off being a very attractive service with low wait times and door to door service. But once it gets popular more and more people use it. And those weight times creep up right now it's about a half hour on average and wait times above an hour are common.

Unlike a bus you can't plan exactly when it's going to come so your left gambling maybe it comes in an hour, maybe it comes in 5 minutes.

This is not to mention the fact that microtransit is expensive and can't move more than 4 trips in an hour per vehicle.

[DanPatchToget]

MVTA at their last board meeting has said they want to expand Connect by 350%. I guess you can kiss a huge chunk of their regular routes goodbye.

It's beyond time for opt-outs to be banned. The only good opt-out is a non-existent opt-out.

Banning opt-outs I'm definitely not opposed to, especially if they continue making Metro Transit look like a rival and keeping Metro Transit out of their turf as much as possible. However, do we know for sure expanding Connect means the loss of regular routes? If regular routes are dropped and replaced by Connect, is it necessarily a bad thing? Connect has to be reliable and affordable of course, but suburban local routes usually lack the reliability with 60-minute or less frequency and potentially a long walk to/from the bus stop.

When they expanded Connect this summer they massively cut service. I'm not saying there will be no regular routes. But you can't expand this service by 350% without it having some effect on the service.

MVTAs planned redesign (which disappeared from their website after they started pushing connect). Had a ton of 15 and 30 minute frequency routes.

I doubt MVTA's redesign would've gone exactly as proposed, or even if it did sooner or later there would be cuts when ridership doesn't meet expectations.

There's definitely a place for fixed-route local service in the suburbs, but the haphazard way suburbs (mostly the outer ring ones) developed makes it very difficult for fixed-routes to achieve good ridership. Demand-response transit is to me the best we can do for those areas, and instead of seeing its problems as reasons for removing it, they should be seen as places for improvement.

[Tcmetro]

Many of MVTA's local routes have really low ridership. They went on a big local service expansion since the pandemic hit, and it is not surprising that some of those routes have been curtailed.

As for the other opt-outs, Maple Grove and Plymouth never had their own local service (although Maple Grove did briefly have the Metro Transit Route 720) and have invested in their dial-a-rides. SW Transit's local bus efforts were always very low ridership, and the Prime dial-a-ride service more effectively serves their population.

[Trademark]

Many of MVTA's local routes have really low ridership. They went on a big local service expansion since the pandemic hit, and it is not surprising that some of those routes have been curtailed.

As for the other opt-outs, Maple Grove and Plymouth never had their own local service (although Maple Grove did briefly have the Metro Transit Route 720) and have invested in their dial-a-rides. SW Transit's local bus efforts were always very low ridership, and the Prime dial-a-ride service more effectively serves their population.

The fact that cities are allowed to only prioritize their own users on a PUBLIC transit network with state money is despicable. Not saying they can't run any express routes, but they should be required to be accessible for those who don't live there.

There are so many potential transfers to Metro Transit that are left on the table.

Local suburban routes are keeping 48% of their riders from 2019 to 2021 versus 10% of suburban express routes. Local suburban routes are the future for the larger metro's public transit. But they need to get rid of as many deviations as possible, and run higher frequency on main routes like Yankee Doodle, and Pilot Knob.

[Tcmetro]

Maple Grove, Plymouth, and Southwest Transit's dial-a-rides go outside of their service areas to make connections to Metro Transit and everyone is allowed to ride, not just residents of their respective cities.

Yankee Doodle and Pilot Knob have very limited walksheds and are really low density. The reason for the deviations is to access apartment complexes, shopping centers, and industrial areas where the riders are actually going to.

Metro Transit offers even worse local bus service in the suburbs that they serve, a lot of them don't even have regular service. The routes they do run are in relatively high demand areas like Brooklyn Park and Bloomington.

[Trademark]

Maple Grove, Plymouth, and Southwest Transit's dial-a-rides go outside of their service areas to make connections to Metro Transit and everyone is allowed to ride, not just residents of their respective cities.

Yankee Doodle and Pilot Knob have very limited walksheds and are really low density. The reason for the deviations is to access apartment complexes, shopping centers, and industrial areas where the riders are actually going to.

Metro Transit offers even worse local bus service in the suburbs that they serve, a lot of them don't even have regular service. The routes they do run are in relatively high demand areas like Brooklyn Park and Bloomington.

In the case of most of their deviations it's to try and provide front door service to apartment buildings because yes, some of them are a few blocks away from the arterials. But people can walk that 1/4 mile to a 1/2 mile to the bus. All throughout the metro people do this already. And the speed differences from having to wait at extremely long light cycles to turn left will allow more frequency to be run.

Another factor for Dakota County is that most of the region has really good wide multi-use paths on both sides of the arterials unlike many other regions. So walking and biking to high frequency routes are a lot more doable then most suburbs.

Metro Transit does need to improve their service to suburbs too. And that's where I think 50% of the sales tax money needs to go for increased service. Most routes in the suburbs should have 30 minute frequency. And very realistically could with the additional $150 million in operations ($450 total sales tax - $50 to operate the transitways that the counties don't pay for anymore, - $100 for other priorities leaves $300 for service. 50% to urban areas and some first ring suburbs to enhance and expand high frequency service, and 50% to expand coverage and usability of the system)

[DanPatchToget]

https://www.mvta.com/news-items/winterservicechange/

MVTA winter service changes include Route 495 service to MSP Airport Terminal 1 and extension of the Orange Link to Blackhawk Park & Ride and Apple Valley Transit Station.

[Trademark]

https://www.mvta.com/news-items/winterservicechange/

MVTA winter service changes include Route 495 service to MSP Airport Terminal 1 and extension of the Orange Link to Blackhawk Park & Ride and Apple Valley Transit Station.

The Orange Link will also go from 30 minute frequency to 60 minute frequency as a result of this change.

[DanPatchToget]

https://www.mvta.com/news-items/winterservicechange/

MVTA winter service changes include Route 495 service to MSP Airport Terminal 1 and extension of the Orange Link to Blackhawk Park & Ride and Apple Valley Transit Station.

The Orange Link will also go from 30 minute frequency to 60 minute frequency as a result of this change.

Ah, they neglected to mention that in the article.

The route is useful, too bad they took away some of the usefulness with less frequency. Also wonder why they chose Blackhawk Park & Ride for the northern/eastern terminus. At the very least they should route it north on Cliff Lake Road for Target, Cub, and other stores along that street and then turn south on Blackhawk to reach the park & ride.

[Tcmetro]

My guess is that the ridership isn't that strong and they're trying to make new connections to increase ridership. The extended route with lower frequency still uses the same amount of resources.

The south end of the route from Burnsville Center and Fairview Hospital to Apple Valley Transit Station duplicates the 442 and 447 and the north end along Cliff Road is low density and has few access points, so I don't expect ridership to change much.

[Bakken2016]

It's probably time to revive the Orange Line Extension, and connect it down to the Burnsville Center area at least.