My Vision For Twin Cities Transit

As time has gone by, my single-minded vision of restoring transit in the Twin Cities to the state it was in 18 September 1970 has been modified. I have come to realise that this vision is grossly inadequate to the needs of today and would cause serious problems if implemented.

In its place, I now hold a dual vision: that of a "basic" transit system, consisting of the bus service as it was before the MTC took over Twin City Lines, and a "peripheral" system to fill in the gaps between historical idealism and modern-day reality.

The best working model I can think of for the dual system I envision is the transit hodgepodge (I'm using that word in a positive sense even though that's unusual) that is Los Angeles County, California. There is a basic framework county transit system as well as various municipal transit systems like Torrance Transit and the Big Blue Bus, and a seperate commuter rail agency.

What is unique about the setup in Los Angeles is there is little "jurisdictional" conflict: if you are in Santa Monica and want to take a local ride, you're allowed the choice between the Big Blue Bus and the LA County Metro. It may make more sense fare-wise to take one or the other, but there's no law banning "competition" as there is in some states (Minnesota used to have such restrictions, as I remember very well from when I used to take the North Suburban and Medicine Lake buses, which were required by law to go past the end of the MTC routes on the same streets before letting anyone off [Rice and Arlington in the case of North Suburban, Highway 55 and Wirth Parkway in the case of Medicine Lake]).

My vision for the Twin Cities is a "basic" system equal to what existed in 1970. Municipalities would be able to provide their own supplemental "peripheral" transit service, and the rail/BRT "new tech" services could be a seperate agency from bus operations. In addition, tax rates for the support of the transit system would vary depending on the level of service provided in each municipality.

The beginnings of what I am talking about actually exist now. These are the "opt-out" suburbs that started their own bus lines in the 1980s because MTC failed to serve them commiserate with the taxes they paid. Plymouth, Maple Grove, the southwest suburbs, the Minnesota Valley, Shokapee, and Prior Lake are the pioneers in this field. But my plan goes beyond opting out. It means cutting back basic service to 1970 levels and devolving anything beyond that to municipalities, including all suburbs and the two central cities. This would provide both rigidity and flexibility at the same time.

"Quiet Buses" on Commuter Routes?

I have a suggestion that Twin Cities Metro Transit or any of the opt-out suburban bus systems could use to increase choice rider satifaction on rush-hour commuter buses. I think some buses on these routes could be designated as "Quiet Buses" without cell phone usage, loud conversation, or other unnecessary noise. The idea comes from Amtrak, which has "Quiet Cars" on some East and West Coast trains that are used by commuters.

Of ocurse there are limitations on what buses this would be appropriate for:

1) Realistically this will only work on rush-hour express buses to the suburbs. Perhaps it will work on a few routes that are technically considered "limited stop" rather than express as long as there is no significant turnover of passengers along the way.

2) It should only be done on routes with more than one bus per half-hour period. This is because the "Quiet Bus" is intended as a voluntary program for those who actually want it. The only way this can be reasonably enforceable is if people who would rather be able to talk on cell phones or to others on the bus have an alternative bus a few minutes before or after.

3) Proportionally more buses in the AM peak than the PM peak would be appropriate for this program, as it would give people an opportunity to rest on the way to work.

4) The designation as a "Quiet Bus" needs to be both in the hand schedule and the destination sign.

The New Northwest Suburban Routes

Metro Transit's new Northwest Suburban routes, effective 30 May 2009, can be viewed here. As someone who formerly lived in Brooklyn Park near 72nd and Broadway, I can homestly say this is an improvement. However, I have a few comments:

Route 717: This new routing, going from Brooklyn Center and Robbinsdale to Plymouth via 42nd Ave. N. is going to be quite useful, especially the fact that it enters Plymouth. Not since the days of Medicine Lake Lines being an independent bus company (essentially pre-1990) has there been midday, non-express bus sevrvice within Plymouth. The only flaw I see in the new 717 is the lack of weekend service. Couldn't it have at least run on Saturday too?

Route 755/756: I'll combine these two since they are similar and on the same schedule. I am disappointed in the elimination of midday service on Highway 55 and on Boone Ave. N. I think the General Mills service should be made part of Route 675 -- express from downtown via Hwy. 55, through the General Mills area, then on to I-394 as a reverse commute route. I also think the 755/756 and the 705 should serve parts of Plymouth, but in today's political climate with Plymouth having its own separate bus service, the Metrolink, this is unlikely. The 717 will have to do.

Route 705: The replacement for lost midday service on the 755/756. In a way this is good as it will provide all-day operation all along Winnetka Ave. My main objection is the lack of weekend service and the ending of a radial line to downtown Minneapolis at off-peak hours.

Laura bless the new buses.

Northeast Minneapolis Suggestions

I would like to make two suggestions for improving bus service in Northeast Minneapolis:

1) Create a new route from the West Bank of the U of M campus to Northeast, possibly using the bridge that's immediately to the east of the new I-35W bridge.

2) Create all-day Limited Stop service on Central Avenue, 6 AM to 6 PM, Monday through Saturday, either by expanding the span of service on Route 829 or by instiuting Limited Stop trips on Route 10.

Duluth Transit Authority Changes

The Duluth Transit Authority is planning a few service changes soon, the most significant of which is the termination of Route 10 at the Miller Hill Mall and using a shuttle to transport people to the nearby stores. While I generally support this (especially if they make the shuttle free), I think it would be better if Route 10 skipped the Mall altogether and stayed on the highway till Target, connecting with the shuttle there.

Another route change that's interesting is the elimination of the Fitgers route. Now, I can understand eliminating this short stub of a route, but I also think they should consider putting all East Main Line routes back on Superior Street between downtown and Walgreens rather than having them on First and Second Streets. The time savings for East Siders would be worth it.

More disturbing is the proposal (not on their website but mentioned in the Duluth media) to build a transit centre on Michigan Street, requiring buses to pull off Superior Street as well as spending all that money on buildings rather than bus service. Of course, the feds are at fault for this; they are more willing to fund "capital improvements" than actual bus service. In a sane society, Duluth would get weekend evening bus service and Superior, Wisconsin would get daily evening service before any buildings, etc. were built.

"Lux Bus"

One of my fantasies for about the last 15 years has been to own a luxury bus company. While that will realisitically never happen in my life, check out what's happening in San Francisco:

http://www.bauerswi-drive.org/ . Cool, eh?

Comments on Northstar Fares

I've reviewed the proposed Northstar fares at http://www.metrocouncil.org/news/2009/news_637.htm and while I generally believe the fares are fair, I have two significant concerns, which should be obvious from the excerpt below:

The Council is proposing fares that are priced according to a tier system, based on the distance away from downtown Minneapolis. The proposed weekday cash fares (one way) to downtown Minneapolis from the five suburban stations anticipated to be open by late 2009 are:
Big Lake – $8.00
Elk River – $6.00
Anoka – $4.00
Coon Rapids – $4.00
Fridley – $3.25
For customers not traveling downtown, the proposed one-way fare between stations is $3.25.

My concern is not the fares to/from downtown, which I think are reasonable, but the non-downtown flat fare of $3.25 violates the concept of basing fares on distance, and leaves a fare loophole for people travelling from Big Lake to Minneapolis. It would be possible to buy a $3.25 ticket from Big Lake to Fridley, de-board the train, buy a $3.25 ticket from Fridley to Minneapolis, and take the next train for a grand total of $6.50 instead of $8.00. Of course this 30-minute time penalty to save $1.50 probably isn't worth it to most commuters, but it is a logical hole in the system which really shouldn't be allowed to exist.