As an avid transit rider and someone who has spent an embarrassingly long amount of time staring at the Metro Transit map, I’ve had quite a few “why on earth did/didn’t they do that?” moments.
Some are pretty significant, like the overall lack of frequency and coverage, or an ideological opposition to the opt-outs. Most are small potatoes that individually could be fixed in a quarterly service change or two and/or they just don’t really matter that much in the grand scheme of things.
Nevertheless, I’d like to take a moment to scream into the void in the hopes that maybe some of them will be fixed.
The Numbers Mason, What Do They Mean!
If you’re reading this, it’s probably safe to assume that you’ve adapted to the idiosyncrasies of the Metro system. You roughly know what route number/letter/color/name or combination thereof you need to take to and from your destination, and their respective variants.
But if you take a step back for a moment and try to analyze the current method of organization — as I partially did in my recent bus rapid transit article — you’ll begin to realize that actually it doesn’t make any sense at all.
Why does a bus with only half-hour frequencies get a dedicated color?
Why don’t the ones that run every 10-15 minutes?
Why are the trains also colors, but not the really long one which instead is the only route with a name? Except, wait, it does have a number? I thought only buses had numbers! Well, except the ones that have letters or colors, of course.
And we can’t forget the routes that have numbers and letters, which is most of them. Actually, wait: How do variants work again?
To be fair, the underpinnings of Metro Transit’s route organization are actually really smart. There’s just a few edge cases that need sorting. For the uninitiated, they’re (generally) organized in the following fashion:
| 1-49 | Local routes serving Minneapolis. |
| 50-59 | Express variants of select local routes (except the 54). |
| 60-93 | St. Paul local routes. |
| 110-119 | Metro Transit-operated routes that serve the University of Minnesota. |
| 120-129 | U of M–operated routes. |
| 130-149 | Downtown commuter routes that are only on the freeway for a short time. |
| 94 and 150-199 | Express Routes primarily operating in Minneapolis and St. Paul. |
| 200-899 | Suburban bus services. Starting with the 200s in the north/northeast metro, they count up clockwise until reaching the 800s in the north/northwest metro and includes the Northstar (888) and Northstar Link (887). In theory numbers below x50 are locals and x50 and above are express, but there are some exceptions. |
| 900-999 | Special and placeholder routes, like state fair service or LRT replacement buses. I suspect some internal system(s) require all routes to have numbers, so in practice many of these |
| Letters | “Arterial BRT,” or aBRT, routes. Metro Transit’s own homegrown improvements. Technically numbered in the 900s. |
| Colors | Various ranging from fake BRT routes to light rail. All were originally local government projects to start. Also technically numbered in the 900s. |
| Variants/deviations | These are the least consistent and most numerous of the bunch. They have a letter usually based on either a location, like the 4P that goes up Penn Avenue vs the 4L on Lyndale, frequency, in the case of the 18A, C, D and E, and/or direction, like the 21 vs the 21A. |
While being the largest headache and the worst inconsistency, the sheer number of variants means they can’t all be fixed at once. I know it’s something Metro Transit is slowly chipping away at, so I’ll try to leave this one alone.
It’s worth noting that many of these routes, like routes 50-59 and 130-49, are still suspended due to COVID cuts. Many of them are unlikely to return, and as such I’ve got no quarrels with reassigning them for other purposes. As best I can tell the last time the system was rationalized like this was the turn of the millennium. We’ve seen many bus routes come and go since then, plus the addition of our entire train and BRT systems. I think it’s about time to take another pass at it.
Shuffling the Deck
If it were up to me, Metro Transit’s route organization would look something like this:
- 1-19: current and future aBRT routes, although I would change the name to just “arterial,” “core” or maybe “urban express.”
- 20-49: Local routes serving Minneapolis.
- 50-59: Routes primarily serving the U of M.
- 60-89: St. Paul local routes.
- 94, 100-199: All-day express suburban buses like the 94 and 645, including the Orange and Red lines as they resemble the former more closely than they do true BRT.
- 200-899: same as current, but follow the local/express distinction.
- 900s: no change, except add Northstar Line(s).
- Letters: Northstar Line(s).
- Colors: Any fully or almost fully grade-separated rapid transit that isn’t commuter/regional rail — i.e., any LRT, BRT (a la Gold/Purple Lines) or streetcar lines.
Additionally, under the current system there is a general trend that north-south routes are even numbers and east-west routes are odd. It’s maybe a 60-40 split between routes that follow this rule and ones that don’t, but if we’re throwing away the entire numbering system anyway, I think this would make a good addition.
I’m the Map
These changes obviously need to be reflected on the Metro Transit system maps, and naturally I have a few suggestions there too. Yes, “maps” is correct here, and my first proposal involves the relatively unknown “hi-frequency” map, which shows just the sections of routes that have at least 15-minute frequencies. It’s a strange one, partially because it highlights many of the issues I just talked about. Local buses — but only certain segments on most routes — intermingle with highway BRT, aBRT, and LRT lines. Yet the Red Line is noticeably absent.
System Map
These routes were also highlighted on system maps, which sort of made sense when they were color coded by line. Some of you may remember that these routes had dedicated signage as well, which has since disappeared. I think it’s time we finally rip the Band-Aid off and make the high frequency map obsolete.
Getting rid of the highlighting was a good choice as it clashed with the current color palate. However, I do think showing the sub-15 minute frequencies on the map is a good idea, since most people will just walk up to a stop and not feel the need to check the schedule.
There’s a trend in the system map’s color scheme where darker and thicker lines mean more frequent service. Less frequent routes are light blue, shifting to either pink for express or dark purple for local buses, before changing to the grays of the aBRT lines and colors of the LRT and BRT, all three of which show stop locations. Likewise, the line thickness starts at 1.5 points (1 pt. = 1/72 of an inch) for rush hour only buses and increases to 5 pts. for the LRT.
Oh yeah, on the latest map, the 30, 65, 67, 83, 87, and part of the 68, all use the wrong line size.
Again, this is an incredibly smart, intuitive way to sort lines. It ensures those with the best service that connect the most popular destinations stand out. There are just a few edge cases that annoy me, particularly the Orange and Red lines. I hate to beat a dead horse like this, but it’s why they frustrate me as it essentially paints them as equivalent to the light rail when they very much aren’t.
The Northstar also breaks this pattern with its 6 pt. thick, striped line despite running only four round trips per weekday. However, it’s also a unique transportation mode with much higher capacity, higher speeds and larger stop spacing than anything else, so I see the logic.
While I like the current look, I did shake things up a bit. Keeping with the tradition of thicker and darker = more frequency, high frequency local and express buses are black and gray, respectively. They also have a line thickness of 4.5 pts., in between that of the frequent/all-day buses (3.5 pts.) and the colored lines. All-day express service was changed to the same light blue as rush hour to match the local bus convention and because it matches the gray better. Even though most of us think of brown as a neutral shade, it is in fact just dark orange. As such, I think it makes a good bridge between the shades of the high frequency buses and the colors of the LRT and BRT lines, which is why I chose it for the arterial routes.
N+1
One feature of the old maps I think we should bring back is showing bike locker locations. I often hear stories from friends about having to ask the bus driver to haul their bike onboard as the front rack is full. It’s not often, but sometimes the driver refuses, and they have to wait for the next bus. That, and several increasingly common types of bikes are incompatible with current bus racks, like fat tires and e-bikes.
Showing the locations of lockers at bus stops will encourage people to make these trips as it will bring awareness to the program and free up space on buses. Besides, we already show park-and-ride locations, why should they be the only multimodal trips that matter?
That’s a Missed Connection
Despite being the operator for the vast majority of the Twin Cities metro, at times it feels like Metro Transit is running two different systems that just happen to be in close proximity. This was made especially clear to me two years ago on Thanksgiving when I was trying to get to my place in northeast Minneapolis to my sister’s place near Cathedral Hill. Taking the 6 to stadium village, I then had to make a double transfer to the Green Line and 63. On a normal weekday, this adds about 20 minutes in layovers to the trip time. I’m sure it’s even longer on weekends or a holiday. Although, the bus driver I had that day didn’t seem to know what a time point was, so it probably evened out in my case.
It took quite a bit of staring at the system map (as one does) before it finally clicked: there’s really only about a dozen bus routes that connect the two cities, and half of those barely touch one of them (23, 30, 33, 67, 74 and A Line) while another three are express buses with limited operating hours (94, 355, 363). That just leaves the 3, 21, 61 and the Green Line as the only real intercity routes, and the 61 doesn’t even run on Sundays or holidays!
Ultimately, this ties back into the overarching service reduction issue, but there’s a few small tweaks that might help alleviate this problem without a larger increase in manpower:
- Extend the 46 down Montreal Avenue to the terminus of the 83. This also adds a connection to the 54.
- Run both the 61 and 94 throughout the weekend.
- Extend the 67 into downtown Minneapolis. Yes, I know the idea is to make people transfer to the Blue Line. Personally, I think having a transfer in the literal last mile is unnecessary.
- Move the eastern terminus of the 30 to Raymond instead of Westgate. This will add connections to the 67 and 87 while keeping its current connections.
- Extend the 6 to Westgate to connect with the 63. The E Line will do this, but it should be done sooner.
- Maybe extend one of the west metro express buses into downtown St. Paul? I’ll admit this is more for a sense of parity with the 355/363 than anything.
Metro Transit did fix one of my suggestions before I could publish this: Extending the 83 the half mile to Rosedale Center so it connects to the 32 and all of the north-central buses. Credit where credit is due.
Odds and Ends
Of course, these aren’t the only routes that need tweaking. There are all sorts of strange choices! For example, what’s up with the south end of the 11? I get having the school loop, but surely making it a separate deviation is more effort than it’s worth when it adds maybe a minute to overall trip times. Just make it the normal route.
The 225 and 227 have similar issues. During the AM rush the 225 goes north from Rosedale center, while the 227 goes south from the Shoreview Target offices. The reverse is true in the evening rush. However, they both perfectly overlap during the midday, leaving Rosedale and arriving at Shoreview at literally the exact same time every hour.
I question the utility of any of this. At the very least, the 225 and 227 should be offset by a half hour and frequency added for both to operate during rush hour. Alternatively, if they must interline like this, find a way to properly combine the two routes into a circulator.
Anticipating Future Problems
Looking to the future, I’d like to discuss a couple fixes for things involving future aBRT lines.
Extending the 10/Future F Line
The first concerns the 10/F Line. When the Coon Rapids–Foley Northstar/ Amtrak station opens at the current park-and-ride, it will be one of if not the best served intercity rail station in the state, with at least four round trips per day by each. As such, it will need proper local transit connections. As it’s only about 2 miles from Northtown Transit Center, it makes sense to extend the 10 and future F line up here, and possibly the 25 and 804 as well. Northstar stations have always lacked good transit connections, which I’ve complained about for a while.
St. Paul Shuffle
The second one is the G Line: OK, I know I said I’d stop talking about variants, but I just looked at the 71’s schedule for the first time and it’s disgusting.
While it’s the worst offender, I’d say all the north-south routes through downtown St. Paul are a hot mess. Fixing this is part of the plan with the G Line, but since nothing concrete has been decided yet, I figured I’d take a stab at it.
- Gray: G Line, as designed, 11.5 miles long, up to 10-minute headways.
- Fuchsia: 68, most mileage from current 68 + 62D, extended to some new housing developments on the south end and straightened through Thompson Ave., terminates at Robert St. and 11th St., 17 miles, half hourly.
- Pink: 72, combined north ends of 62 and 71 since many of these trips interline, 15 miles, hourly.
- Purple: 76 (or 71 but I’m trying to be consistent with my own rules), deviation to Inver Hills Community College eliminated as 68 now provides an equal level of service, extended down Concord Blvd., 15.5 miles, hourly.
- Teal: 78 (or 75), rerouted to cover parts of the old 68, 12.5 miles, hourly.
My main goals were to keep the same number of frequencies and coverage, with expanding coverage, eliminating branches, and minimizing new routes and route length as secondary goals. I also tried to keep existing routes intact. I’ve never taken any of these buses, so I don’t know which north-south combinations are best. Also, I eyeballed the frequencies based on what current route segments have.
An alternative is to modify the 65, which stops just short of downtown St. Paul at Grand and Dale. It’s another case of “why doesn’t this just go into downtown” where really, I know why and I disagree. Same as the 67, I think having a one seat ride is the better option as opposed to forcing a transfer in the literal last mile. A more interesting option is to extend the route south on Smith Ave. to Thompson St., absorbing that section of the 62D once G Line service starts up.
I wanted to give the East Side the same treatment, but with the Purple Line in limbo and the H Line still in the idea phase that will have to wait. I’m sure if I stared at the map long enough I’d end up redoing the entire network, something that both exceeds the scope of this article and that I am not being paid to do.
Just One More Thing…
I don’t go down there much, but this giant no-touching-zone in the south metro? It irks me. Bring back the 417!
My final complaint — and this is an extremely niche gripe — is the lack of transit-accessible skiing! The Minnesota Valley Transportation Authority recently moved the Link bus to connect to the Red Line instead of going farther south into Burnsville. Now it’s a mile and a half walk to get to Buck Hill instead of one-third of a mile. That route in particular is out of Metro Transit’s control, so can we please get a seasonal extension to the 540 to get to Hyland Hills?
Getting it Off My Chest
While far from perfect, I think Metro Transit runs a great service, by and large. Obviously, I would love to see more routes, more frequencies and the return of 24/7 service, but all these take large amounts of time and resources to implement. Sometimes it’s OK to sweat the small stuff.
Changes like these can be implemented fairly quickly, and can often form the backbone for some of these larger changes. Even if they don’t, sometimes it feels good to just scream into the void a little. If nothing else, putting these words to print allows me to get these thoughts out of my head and move on … and move on I shall.