Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Take a drive around 494/694 and look left and right. There are business centers all around that loop--Woodbury, Oakdale, Inver Grove Heights, Mendota Heights, the airport, all of the Bloomington/Richfield area, Eden Prarie, Minnetonka, etc., etc., etc. How can you miss all the buildings?? Like I said earlier, run the look with the rail, have buses to connect businesses that aren't within walking distance, just like they have on the current line. Why would it be any different?
Most suburban work centers are clustered, much in the same way as downtown is clustered. Look at how the stops are layed out in Bloomington, serves that area quite well hitting several major employers in the area, Health Partners, the numerous businesses around Appletree square, MOA, etc.
Golfgal, I have some thoughts on this:
#1. I think that if you looked at the numbers, you would find that every suburban commercial node added together does not equal downtown Minneapolis, whether in terms of office population or square footage of space. I have my doubts that it equals downtown St. Paul, either. Don't get me wrong-- living in Pittsburgh has taught me how balanced our metro actually is in terms of suburban offices. That has an incredible benefit to alleviating vehicular traffic and distributing wealth among communities (in terms of commercial property taxes). Still, though, there is not better terminus for a public transit line in the cities than downtown Minneapolis....second to that, downtown St. Paul, and third the 494 strip in Bloomington, which our current lightrail already serves.
#2. One of the reasons our current design is so effective is because both ends of the line are attractive destinations, which means that the attractiveness of residential real estate the entire length of the line between those termini goes up. Your idea mimics that a bit, but your fatal flaw is in connecting several commercial nodes....there's not enough room there for residential development. Effective transit is going to connect residents to businesses, which brings me to my next point:
#3. How many people's daily commutes consist of driving along the 494/694 loop from home to office? Most of the office commuters are coming from far-flung suburbs like Chaska or Victoria or Hudson. Some may be coming from inner-ring suburbs, commuting against rush hour to get to their jobs. Either way, The correct way to do the transit is a wheel-and-sprocket, with different spurs serving residents in all directions of the businesses. Again, the only place that type of capitol investment makes sense is in our downtowns....and it is exactly what met council's regional vision for transit calls for.
#4. One of the primary reasons to construct lightrail as a means of transit over bus routes is because lightrail has the potential to spur property development, and buses do not. This is primarily because a light rail has a scheduled stop at each station, so there is attractiveness for people to board and depart the line at various stations, and there is attractiveness to live or work near the station, since you know that there is consistent, frequent transit service there. Developing lightrail along the freeway loop would not encourage development in the way that our current lines do, because the freeway acts as a physical barrier to the development, as well as a physical barrier to residents and workers walking to/accessing the line. And it is just one of many barriers....the suburbs need to densify *significantly* before your plan would make sense.
All-in-all, while I understand your vision and understand the idea behind it, I don't think it would ultimately work as well as you suppose. Maybe if Metro Transit ran a few express buses along the length of the loop, with feeder buses into the commercial nodes....but not light rail...
How is it less feasible to stop before getting to Minneapolis then it is to go to Minneapolis (passing these businesses along the way) transfer to another bus and drive BACK the way you came to stop at the business you already passed once? You can still run express buses but why not some local routes too?
Depending on the location, some local bus routes already do exist (from MOA through Bloomington to Southtown to Southdale, for example). It would be WONDERFUL to have more, but with the suburban bus routes they really run into ridership issues. It then becomes a chicken-and-egg situation; people won't take the bus if it doesn't come frequently, but the transit companies can't justify running them frequently (some of those bus routes lose enough money as it is) unless they have more riders.
I do agree that there's a lot that can potentially be done to improve suburb-to-suburb bus service, though. And while I love light rail as much (or more) than the next person, at this point in time any kind of suburban ring route would be best served by buses. And as spokes going into downtown are constructed (at glacial speed, this being the Twin Cities), they do revamp local bus routes, which will be of use to both those connecting to LRT as well as those just looking for better local bus service in the 'burbs. There's also projects like the Red Line (the Cedar Avenue BRT); options like that could well provide better transit service suburb-to-suburb in the future.
If the suburbs can tighten up their development and increase the walkability factor, it will be easier for public transportation solutions to be developed. That seems to be the trend, so perhaps down the road it will be easier to effectively run better suburb-to-suburb fast service. I think everyone acknowledges the fact that there are a lot of people who live and work along that loop, but there's got to be a practical way to actually provide them with transit options.
We lived in LA for a period, and really loved the public transportation options there. In addition to LRT and BRT (and some other options) they had Rapid buses, which were really long bus routes that had limited stops. Something like that would great in the Twin Cities, IF they could figure out the stops and wrangle up the ridership. Still, I'd like to think that something like that could potentially be a good starting place for doing suburb-to-suburb ring commuting options.
Depending on the location, some local bus routes already do exist (from MOA through Bloomington to Southtown to Southdale, for example). It would be WONDERFUL to have more, but with the suburban bus routes they really run into ridership issues. It then becomes a chicken-and-egg situation; people won't take the bus if it doesn't come frequently, but the transit companies can't justify running them frequently (some of those bus routes lose enough money as it is) unless they have more riders.
I do agree that there's a lot that can potentially be done to improve suburb-to-suburb bus service, though. And while I love light rail as much (or more) than the next person, at this point in time any kind of suburban ring route would be best served by buses. And as spokes going into downtown are constructed (at glacial speed, this being the Twin Cities), they do revamp local bus routes, which will be of use to both those connecting to LRT as well as those just looking for better local bus service in the 'burbs. There's also projects like the Red Line (the Cedar Avenue BRT); options like that could well provide better transit service suburb-to-suburb in the future.
If the suburbs can tighten up their development and increase the walkability factor, it will be easier for public transportation solutions to be developed. That seems to be the trend, so perhaps down the road it will be easier to effectively run better suburb-to-suburb fast service. I think everyone acknowledges the fact that there are a lot of people who live and work along that loop, but there's got to be a practical way to actually provide them with transit options.
We lived in LA for a period, and really loved the public transportation options there. In addition to LRT and BRT (and some other options) they had Rapid buses, which were really long bus routes that had limited stops. Something like that would great in the Twin Cities, IF they could figure out the stops and wrangle up the ridership. Still, I'd like to think that something like that could potentially be a good starting place for doing suburb-to-suburb ring commuting options.
Walkabitliy isn't the issue. There are transit stations with parking lots where people can keep their cars although many of the transit stations are in very walkable areas to begin with. In our son's example, he can drive the mile (or walk in nice weather if he wanted) park his car at the transit station and bus to/from work. The stop by his office is across the street with minimal traffic. Same goes for pretty much every commercial concentration off the loop. Run the rails to the junctions/stops, have buses to run a loop to the businesses in the area. It's actually pretty simple--just expensive.
Express bus service is already well used and not the issue at all. It's the suburb to suburb transit that stinks.
I was referring to express buses that serve suburb-to-suburb destinations. The Rapid line run through suburbs. So, too, does BRT. The Cedar BRT is only in the suburbs, although it doesn't make a loop. Still, something like that could be expanded, running from MOA to Eden Prairie or similar. Actually, I don't know what the long-term plans are; for all I know they're already working on some sort of idea to link the ends of the SW Corridor line with the MOA transit center. I'm sure there is transit potential there, but whether or not it's enough to justify rail -- at least now -- is another story.
And walkability IS an issue when it comes from getting from the station to the end destination; park-and-ride lots are fine on the one end, but once you get to the destination you've got to be able to get to to the workplaces. Running a shuttle bus adds both more time (making it less appealing to commuters) and a lot more money, and in all but a few places most of the businesses aren't very densely concentrated. And I have walked around a lot of the office areas around the loop; they're not really set up well for pedestrians -- especially pedestrians who are accustomed to driving (which they most likely are, if they live and work now. That is changing, but there's a long way to go.
If there were more people going to your son's work from your destination, it would be easier for them to justify running a direct bus.
I was referring to express buses that serve suburb-to-suburb destinations. The Rapid line run through suburbs. So, too, does BRT. The Cedar BRT is only in the suburbs, although it doesn't make a loop. Still, something like that could be expanded, running from MOA to Eden Prairie or similar. Actually, I don't know what the long-term plans are; for all I know they're already working on some sort of idea to link the ends of the SW Corridor line with the MOA transit center. I'm sure there is transit potential there, but whether or not it's enough to justify rail -- at least now -- is another story.
And walkability IS an issue when it comes from getting from the station to the end destination; park-and-ride lots are fine on the one end, but once you get to the destination you've got to be able to get to to the workplaces. Running a shuttle bus adds both more time (making it less appealing to commuters) and a lot more money, and in all but a few places most of the businesses aren't very densely concentrated. And I have walked around a lot of the office areas around the loop; they're not really set up well for pedestrians -- especially pedestrians who are accustomed to driving (which they most likely are, if they live and work now. That is changing, but there's a long way to go.
If there were more people going to your son's work from your destination, it would be easier for them to justify running a direct bus.
Well, there are a lot of people that work in that building and nearby buildings. We have friends that work nearby and they would love a bus route too. Maybe with the new transit station in town they will put a route in that direction. It would hit Thomson/Rueters, a huge Wells Fargo complex, several smaller businesses in Mendota Heights and could easily cross over the Mendota bridge linking to the light rail. Makes sense to me.
I don't know that running shuttle buses from the end of a rail line would really add that much more time. If someone could take the light rail from the transit station in Burnsville--which is PACKED with cars every day--to 35/494 area, a shuttle bus could run to Best Buy, US Bank, Normandale towers in probably less than 15 minutes. The ride up on the light rail would be less than 10 minutes probably since they won't have any traffic then route the buses as needed. The light rail could then continue on to Minneapolis. I think that people that don't need a car during the day would jump at the chance to not have to sit in traffic on 35 every day.
I know that the Met Council is studying this issue as we were asked to participate in a survey about a year or so ago. It was addressing suburb to suburb commuting.
#1. I think that if you looked at the numbers, you would find that every suburban commercial node added together does not equal downtown Minneapolis, whether in terms of office population or square footage of space. I have my doubts that it equals downtown St. Paul, either. Don't get me wrong-- living in Pittsburgh has taught me how balanced our metro actually is in terms of suburban offices. That has an incredible benefit to alleviating vehicular traffic and distributing wealth among communities (in terms of commercial property taxes). Still, though, there is not better terminus for a public transit line in the cities than downtown Minneapolis....second to that, downtown St. Paul, and third the 494 strip in Bloomington, which our current lightrail already serves.
those perceptions, especially in terms of the amount of office space in the suburbs are wrong, and especially in regards to the significance of the ST Paul CBD which has always been the ugly step-child in TC office environment.
2010 Q4 office space inventory (in million sq ft)
27.7 Mpls CBD
18.0 Southwest
_8.5 West
_7.5 Southeast
_7.3 St Paul CBD
and these figures do not include the Northwest & Northeast. In fact, the suburban office environment is nearly 30% higher than the Minneapolis and St Paul CBDs combined.
most of the significant leasing activities are also occurring in the suburbs as well and will continue to do so in order to attract their needed employees.
those perceptions, especially in terms of the amount of office space in the suburbs are wrong, and especially in regards to the significance of the ST Paul CBD which has always been the ugly step-child in TC office environment.
2010 Q4 office space inventory (in million sq ft)
27.7 Mpls CBD
18.0 Southwest
_8.5 West
_7.5 Southeast
_7.3 St Paul CBD
and these figures do not include the Northwest & Northeast. In fact, the suburban office environment is nearly 30% higher than the Minneapolis and St Paul CBDs combined.
most of the significant leasing activities are also occurring in the suburbs as well and will continue to do so in order to attract their needed employees.
Those figures are just competitive office space numbers. St. Paul's downtown area has just over 17 million total square feet in office space (competitive, government, and owner occupied). And Minneapolis' number is just over 30 million, about 24+million in competitive, another 5m+ in owner occupied, plus more in government space.
The numbers for the suburbs are higher as well, not counting owner occupied/gov space too. But likely not nearly as much as a city like St. Paul's or even Minneapolis.
Those figures are just competitive office space numbers. St. Paul's downtown area has just over 17 million total square feet in office space (competitive, government, and owner occupied). And Minneapolis' number is just over 30 million, about 24+million in competitive, another 5m+ in owner occupied, plus more in government space.
The numbers for the suburbs are higher as well, not counting owner occupied/gov space too. But likely not nearly as much as a city like St. Paul's or even Minneapolis.
one only has to walk through a St Paul skyway during lunch-time to know St Paul is not relevant to the area's commercial real estate industry.
those perceptions, especially in terms of the amount of office space in the suburbs are wrong, and especially in regards to the significance of the ST Paul CBD which has always been the ugly step-child in TC office environment.
2010 Q4 office space inventory (in million sq ft)
27.7 Mpls CBD
18.0 Southwest
_8.5 West
_7.5 Southeast
_7.3 St Paul CBD
and these figures do not include the Northwest & Northeast. In fact, the suburban office environment is nearly 30% higher than the Minneapolis and St Paul CBDs combined.
most of the significant leasing activities are also occurring in the suburbs as well and will continue to do so in order to attract their needed employees.
I don't think anyone discounts the fact that there are a tremendous amount of office space in the suburbs; what these numbers are not showing, however, is that those numbers are not as concentrated as what you find in downtown Minneapolis, which is a big part of the reason downtown Minneapolis remains the central transit hub, with some suburban locations (MOA, for one) acting as secondary hubs. But who knows, maybe some day there will be a BRT or LRT connection between the ends of the Hiawatha Line and the Southwest Corridor (just like they are talking about a cross-town streetcar linking those lines through south Minneapolis).
Obviously suburban commercial space is more heavily concentrated in some areas, and of course the Metro Council is hoping that new development will be built along future light rail stations. But the fact remains that downtown Minneapolis remains a major destination, which makes it an ideal anchor for end of a spoke. To get the most out of, however, ideally other stops along the line will also be destinations themselves. The proposed stops on the SW Corridor, for example, seem to be a blend of stops in places that are already destinations, as well as locations where it is hoped the stop will spur development.
Here's a useful Metro Council document with some nice graphs showing density of jobs (using jobs per acre measurements): http://www.metrocouncil.org/planning...Appendices.pdf
As you can see, the suburban job centers are much lower in terms of density than are either Minneapolis or St. Paul.
let's face it, the only reason that the light rail was built to St Paul was so that the state legislators would have someplace to go for lunch.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
