The study set out to address all general public transit services funded by the Metropolitan Council, including Metro Transit and services sub-contracted by the Council, such as Roseville Circulator and North Suburban Lines. This complexity makes the system difficult for users to decipher. It also discourages customers from using the system for new purposes, and limits them instead to the one or two trips they have learned how to complete. The network design bears the mark of an era when Minneapolis and St. Paul had separate transit systems. Service in low-density suburban areas fails to maximize convenience and efficiency.
Service tends to be confusing, infrequent and limited by time of day.
This shows a difference in local initiative rather than absence of regional strategy. Adding convenient, fast and safe transfers can significantly improve travel times for many trips. These goals imply totally different service designs, and the choice between them is purely a value judgment. Figure 1 on the following page depicts the Productivity and Coverage goals. Staff estimated that the existing system is about 60 percent justifiable by productivity and 40 percent justifiable by coverage.