  W_chicago Member Username: W_chicago Post Number: 59 Registered: 01-2008 |
http://blog.mlive.com/snapshot s/2008/12/foxtown_light_rail_p lan_passed.html http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.d ll/article?AID=/20081205/METRO /812050386 http://www.crainsdetroit.com/a rticle/20081204/FREE/812049988 /-1 http://www.freep.com/article/2 0081205/NEWS06/812050397/1008/ NEWS What do you all think? I don't like the "nonprofit corporation" running the transit system. I'd rather see a public authority, either DDOT or a new regional authority. I also hope the DDOT proposal for the light-rail down the center is what is finally built, not the curbside idea. | ||
Detourdetroit Member Username: Detourdetroit Post Number: 443 Registered: 10-2003 |
wouldn't it be great to use the auto/meltdown federal $$$ to cut and cover and build us a real subway...so we can start building us a real city??? | ||
Johnnny5 Member Username: Johnnny5 Post Number: 870 Registered: 06-2005 |
A city without people and without jobs has no need a mass transit system. | ||
Detourdetroit Member Username: Detourdetroit Post Number: 445 Registered: 10-2003 |
detroit's next industry could be rebuilding itself as a green place to do business. there's a lot of jobs in infrastructure. and a lot more people willing to do them if they're out of work. | ||
French777 Member Username: French777 Post Number: 630 Registered: 10-2006 |
So does this mean that within 26 months we will have Woodward Light Rail? | ||
Parkguy Member Username: Parkguy Post Number: 350 Registered: 04-2007 |
Johnnny5: Detroit is still a huge, populous city. It is just not as big as it used to be. Even with its shrunken population WITHIN the city boundaries, it is still one of the largest cities in the country. As we remake this region, transit will be an important factor. Fixed-guideway transit drives development. That has been the rule in every case over the last two decades, even in Southern California, which was deliberately designed to serve the auto. | ||
Dtowncitylover Member Username: Dtowncitylover Post Number: 412 Registered: 02-2008 |
Pittsburgh and Cleveland have shrinking populations and they both have light rail; and both are experiencing urban renewal. Whether there is a correlation between the two (LR and urban renewal) is up to debate. | ||
Tkelly1986 Member Username: Tkelly1986 Post Number: 485 Registered: 01-2004 |
I really hope the two plans merge, I am not a fan of the current private plan for rail along the sides....We need rapid transition rail down the center, otherwise what's the difference between the private plan and a bus. | ||
Warrenite84 Member Username: Warrenite84 Post Number: 448 Registered: 01-2007 |
I hope the two plans come together, and the Detroit 3 get their bridge loans. Will these two factors induce Dan Gilbert of Quicken Loans to reveal his plans for the Statler and Hudson's sites? I hope he does, even if the project completion date gets pushed back a little. | ||
Living_in_the_d Member Username: Living_in_the_d Post Number: 324 Registered: 01-2008 |
Yeah, I concur, Let D.D.O.T. get this done, Both Rail, B.R.T., and Hybrid. That is the purpose of a transit agency, Most likely the future of Detroit is the D.T.A.,(Detroit Transit Authority) (Message edited by living in the d on December 06, 2008) | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 7584 Registered: 08-2004 |
I was going to say something snarky about DDOT, but then I remembered that Living_in_the_d (whom I've had the pleasure of meeting) works for them, and with dedicated folks like him, I guess it's worth a try!  Hey B****, Did you end up leaving that streetcar picture you got from me... at work, or did you have to take it home for fear of its' safety (by your coveting coworkers)? Gistok | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 5295 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: Aren't most transit agencies "nonprofit corporations"? No offense toward Living_in_the_d, but DDOT, as a municipal agency, is the exception. Unfortunately, DDOT is at the mercy of the city bureacracy and competing municipal priorities, and suffers because of it. This is an excellent step forward. Best of luck! | ||
Urbanophile Member Username: Urbanophile Post Number: 3 Registered: 11-2008 |
Michigan and Detroit have gigantic problems and an expensive rail transit system is not the answer. Rail investments have not stop Cleveland or Buffalo from continuing to struggle economically. This might make sense in a growing city, but not a shrinking one. | ||
Glowblue Member Username: Glowblue Post Number: 40 Registered: 09-2008 |
quote: Cleveland and Buffalo are struggling a lot less than Detroit, though. Also, despite shrinkage, Detroit is still a big city in a huge metro area. Successful light rail projects have been undertaken in cities and metros much smaller than Detroit. Moreover, Detroit and the metro area have done the "no rail transit" thing for decades, and look where it's gotten us. Taking a longer view, mass automobiling probably won't exist anymore in 25-30 years, so may as well (re)build a non-automobile transportation network so people get get around when oil is $300/bbl. | ||
Living_in_the_d Member Username: Living_in_the_d Post Number: 325 Registered: 01-2008 |
Yeah, G*****! Where have You been Mench!, The streetcar picture is in its 47th printing run! Everyone had to have a copy, It was a runaway smash hit! And then someone got creative and made a black and white version, Way cool artsy retro looking thing. The original is now safe at home with Me and Mrs. d nicely displayed. Don't wait so long to call or write this time either! (Message edited by living in the d on December 06, 2008) | ||
Detroit313 Member Username: Detroit313 Post Number: 766 Registered: 02-2006 |
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200 81206/ap_on_el_pr/obama_econom y;_ylt=AlGxwrcVyb86HSKoMSSFH2dH 2ocA I have a hunch, O- will kick some major funds Detroit's way! <313> | ||
Mwilbert Member Username: Mwilbert Post Number: 466 Registered: 11-2007 |
The federal infrastructure money that is likely to be available is money that is going to have to be spent quickly--use it or lose it. There is no way to build a subway system quickly because there is too much stuff under the ground that you have to move and since everyone knew that there wasn't any money, I doubt there are even rudimentary plans. On the other hand, I could easily see some light rail money coming though. Light rail could be constructed in fairly short time if no one tries to obstruct it. Litigation is always time-consuming. | ||
J_to_the_jeremy Member Username: J_to_the_jeremy Post Number: 143 Registered: 03-2007 |
I really hope the DDOT plan gets the green light, it will help the region so much more than the curbside, three mile plan... | ||
W_chicago Member Username: W_chicago Post Number: 60 Registered: 01-2008 |
It would be nice to see the DDOT plan expanded further too, and I think this is more likely if Obama and the next Congress up transit funding. Light-rail down Jefferson, Gratiot, Woodward, Grand River, Michigan and Fort as the first major phase on the transit plan, then expanding the rail to other major corridors (think Warren, Livernois, Mack, McNichols, 7 Mile, 8 Mile, ect). The more rail the better. Also, the we can add more bus lines with more reliability and frequency that connect with rail. We could have a city that it is not needed to own a car at all. If there is a shift back to the cities, than a Detroit with a excellent and comprehensive mass transit system will be in a good position to experience re-population and investment into the city. | ||
Living_in_the_d Member Username: Living_in_the_d Post Number: 326 Registered: 01-2008 |
Yeah, Mr. chicago, You have echoed the sentiments of all good transit people everywhere on this thread, This is the future of transit, and it should be for the people, By the people, and with the people. Kudos! | ||
Novine Member Username: Novine Post Number: 904 Registered: 07-2007 |
"Michigan and Detroit have gigantic problems and an expensive rail transit system is not the answer. Rail investments have not stop Cleveland or Buffalo from continuing to struggle economically. This might make sense in a growing city, but not a shrinking one." I've read Urbanophile's criticisms of rail plans in Midwest cities and I have to say that a lot of his points are dead-on. Still, if there's any place where rail makes sense in the city, it's along the Woodward corridor, especially if it continues north into the OC. (Message edited by Novine on December 08, 2008) | ||
Glowblue Member Username: Glowblue Post Number: 42 Registered: 09-2008 |
Pittsburgh began building their light rail system in 1984, the nadir of the steel industry collapse. I'd say that Pittsburgh is a successful city. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 6512 Registered: 10-2003 |
Well, it's not a cure-all, but I don't know any serious person that believes that, and I'm not sure if anyone is selling it as such. But, whether it is or isn't, an urban area should have them for simple freedom of movement reasons, and particularly a region as large as Detroit. | ||
Bob Member Username: Bob Post Number: 1907 Registered: 11-2003 |
This is the closest we have gotten to getting light rail for a long time. I am not going to complain about this being built nor the manner it is built, just as long as it happens. | ||
Steelworker Member Username: Steelworker Post Number: 1205 Registered: 02-2004 |
i was just in phoenix and they are just as sprawling and spread out as detroit and they just built a light right line with priority over traffic | ||
W_chicago Member Username: W_chicago Post Number: 66 Registered: 01-2008 |
I'll be happy with anything, but honestly only putting rail down Woodward is not enough. Woodward certianly NOT the only corridor deserving of transit. Remember how many streetcar lines Detroit had? The area from Livernois east to Grosse Point and from the River north to Davison is pretty dense and old. Much of it has been destroyed, but putting transit back into this still dense core area of the city would help make it more dense, on the caliber of Chicago neighborhoods. For example smaller north-south streets corridors running parallel to Woodward in the central city such as Linwood, Dexter, 14th St, 12st, Woodrow Wilson, Hamilton, Oakland and Joseph Campau, are all deserving of being redeveloped with better transit and dense mixed-use development. Of course none of this could happen within the context of the market, because the market has left Detroit in rubble. The only way I can think of to rebuild to Detroit is through massive social intervention -local, regional and national. (think Green Jobs Corps that could rebuild transit infrastructure and retrofit buildings to be green, while constructing new ones to fill in the gaps and give jobs and housing to millions. | ||
Bob Member Username: Bob Post Number: 1908 Registered: 11-2003 |
With Obama's proposed investment in infrastructure, who knows how much more of the just released transit plan done by Hertel will actually be done. But we have to start somewhere. And Woodward is the most logical. Also, we will have the Commuter Rail starting between AA and Detroit which will be connected to downtown by the proposed Woodward light rail. For an area that has killed transit plans for years because of political infighting, the fact we have made it this far is huge. | ||
Professorscott Member Username: Professorscott Post Number: 1725 Registered: 12-2006 |
Aren't the "big four" voting today on whether to approve Mr. Hertel's regional plan? I seem to recall reading about that somewhere. | ||
Townonenorth Member Username: Townonenorth Post Number: 459 Registered: 10-2007 |
Here it is. Posted: Monday, 08 December 2008 5:43PM Regional Mass Transit Plan Approved Southeastern Michigan's Big Four - the executives for Wayne and Oakland Counties, Macomb Counties Commission Chairperson and the Mayor of Detroit - made history Monday afternoon. They unanimously approved a Regional Mass Transit Plan for Detroit - the first step in getting mass transportation in the region. Regional Transit CEO John Hertel says, "the 25-year plan covers everything from arterial rapid transit, which is the new hybrid buses, bus-rapid transit, which is almost like rail, and then the light rail and some commuter rail." So what are the next steps? Step two involves the task of creating an authority to operate the new system. And then step three is to secure local and federal dollars to pay for it. But Hertel is confident funding can be secured for his plan even in these economically challenging times. He says, "because of president-elect Barack Obama's attitude about this, and his concern about infrastructure, I think the chances of the federal money being there are significantly higher." © MMVIII WWJ Radio, All Rights Reserved. Transit Plan Approved ( (Message edited by townonenorth on December 08, 2008) | ||
French777 Member Username: French777 Post Number: 633 Registered: 10-2006 |
GREAT NEWS! WOW L. Brooks Patterson came through! I was watching the Demo on youtube and some of the stops seem useless to me like Calvert, 7 mile, and others between New Center and State Fair grounds | ||
Sg9018 Member Username: Sg9018 Post Number: 309 Registered: 10-2006 |
Speaking about Transportation , WJBK has a link to the TRIP report on the 'Top 100 Transportation Headaches' in Michigan I-94 tops the list. Also Mich. Roads Twice as Bad as Rest of U.S Here is the link to the news report, http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/my fox/pages/Home/Detail?contentI d=8027533&version=1&locale=EN- US&layoutCode=VSTY&pageId=1.1. 1 and a link to the report and more info from Fox 2, http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/my fox/pages/Home/Detail?contentI d=8025097&version=2&locale=EN- US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=1.1. 1 | ||
Retroit Member Username: Retroit Post Number: 566 Registered: 04-2008 |
My thoughts: 1. $22-29 million per mile. That's how many times more than a road, which can carry a lot more traffic? 5 times? 2. $8 million per year "state supplement" (i.e. My/Our Money) 3. $103 million in "private" money. So if private sources see this as such a great investment, why does it need a "state supplement"? Are there no other worthy investment opportunities for $103 million? I'm not completely against all rail transit, but it has to make sense based on residential density and traffic congestion. I guess I need some convincing. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 5309 Registered: 10-2003 |
^^^ 1. Roadway construction costs vary depending on the type of project, whether or not it is at grade, whether access is limited or not, etc. To use a highway figure, an MDOT proposal from 10 years ago had a 7-mile reconstruction of I-94 pegged at about $1.3 billion, or nearly $200 million/mile. Freeway capacity is typically about 1200 vehicles per lane mile. Light rail can potentially move around 8000 persons per track per hour, if I recall correctly. Of course, this depends on the type of right-of-way and operating speed. 2. $8 million a year is a pittance compared to how much *state* and *federal* money is used to maintain the road network. Further, rails don't need to be rebuilt every 25 years. | ||
Urbanophile Member Username: Urbanophile Post Number: 7 Registered: 11-2008 |
I don't think rail transit is a bad thing. There are plenty of things that you could do that would be outright harmful, but rail isn't one of them. I'm sure it would have some benefits. But is this where you want to shoot your bullet? Is this the point you want your leaders spending their most precious bandwidth, management time and attention, on? Is this where you want to burn up your political capital? Is it worth a tax increase to pay for it in an already too high tax region? It's not my first choice. If you look at the top performing cities in the Midwest in terms of population growth, job growth, etc., four cities jump out from the pack in the million plus metro category: Columbus, Indianapolis, Kansas City, and Minneapolis. Only the last one has a rail system. Laggards like St. Louis and Cleveland do have them. Laggards like Milwaukee and Detroit don't. I just don't think it moves the needle one way or another, though it can induce some development along favored corridors if you want. Dittos for other things like pro sports. (Indy and Columbus are nearly identical in many respects, but Indy has NFL and NBA teams while Columbus has NHL and MLS, but having the Colts doesn't seem to have differentiated them much from a numbers perspective). BTW: Charlotte's very successful light rail line only carries 16,000 riders per day. That's a drop in the bucket compared to the total trips taken in Detroit. Ultimately the choice is up to the people of Michigan, if they are the ones paying for it. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 5310 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: And that's ONLY 8000 less parking spots they have to provide downtown. Never mind the entire CATS system has seen growth since the opening of the light rail, and the projections for this point in the service were 9000 riders per day. If you want to compare apples to apples, compare that 16,000 number to the number of cars that drive the same parallel 9.5 mile stretch of South Boulevard. While you're at it, why don't you just compare the daily traffic counts on Woodward to the total number of trips taken in Detroit? It'll be just as meaningless. | ||
Ray Member Username: Ray Post Number: 1172 Registered: 06-2004 |
I'm so sick of living in the only major city in the world without mass transit. Build the damn transit and quit making lame excuses as to why we don't need it or can't have it. It's retarded. There are 4 million people here, we need to stop spending billiong on more highways and bring back the freaking trains. | ||
Glowblue Member Username: Glowblue Post Number: 43 Registered: 09-2008 |
quote: Michigan has a lower tax burden than most states in the US. Contrary to right-wing myth, Michigan is not struggling due to high taxes: http://www.taxfoundation.org/f iles/bp58.pdf quote: Well, you're first choice is to pay people to leave the state. I'd much rather use the money to create work here, than to pay people to move somewhere else. | ||
Detroitnerd Member Username: Detroitnerd Post Number: 3872 Registered: 07-2004 |
Bus Rapid Transit. Wheee. Everybody pile on the loser cruiser. It's "almost" like rail. | ||
Glowblue Member Username: Glowblue Post Number: 44 Registered: 09-2008 |
quote: If BRT is done properly (dedicated ROWs, traffic signal priority), it can be as fast and reliable as light rail, while having only slightly lower capacity (which probably won't be a problem in SE Michigan, and if it is, it's a good problem to have) and slightly less comfort, while having a much smaller startup cost. I prefer light rail myself, but BRT is the next best thing, and cost much less money. Plus, if successful, a BRt line can be converted to light rail with less difficulty than a normal road, since the ROW already exists. | ||
Dtowncitylover Member Username: Dtowncitylover Post Number: 414 Registered: 02-2008 |
One cannot compare Milwaukee with Detroit. Detroit has a much bigger population and metropolitan area. Milwaukee is also well connected to Chicago, with Amtrak running 6-7 trains a day with a journey time of and hour and half (yes, it does take longer for us because of our cities' distances between each other). Detroit deserves better mass transit. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 5314 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: If BRT is constructed in such a way as to be competitive with light rail, i.e. dedicated rights-of-way, boarding stations, signage and wayfinding, fare machines, etc, the initial capital costs are often very comparable to light rail. Cleveland's new BRT line cost $250 million for 7 miles, which puts it right in line with recently-constructed light rail systems. Of course, BRT also has to contend with the price of diesel, as well as the requirement to periodically resurface and reconstruct the running surface. Light rail faces neither of these astronomical operating expenses. In most cities that have constructed light rail, BRT was evaluated as one of the alternatives. Cleveland is the only city that constructed BRT, and that's only because their light rail option (for some reason) considered a subway tunnel, which dramatically reduced the cost-effectiveness. It's rumored that former Greater Cleveland RTA Chief Ron Tober left the agency for Charlotte because of the bias in the study (and relocated to a city that was dedicated to building rail). But hey, if you're happy with a 25-year, $250 million roadway landscaping project, knock yourself out. The truth is, if BRT were to be "done properly", it would look and cost a lot like a light rail line, but with a lower capacity, higher operating expense, and far lower quality of service. | ||
Novine Member Username: Novine Post Number: 910 Registered: 07-2007 |
"If you look at the top performing cities in the Midwest in terms of population growth, job growth, etc., four cities jump out from the pack in the million plus metro category: Columbus, Indianapolis, Kansas City, and Minneapolis." Let's ask why that is true. Columbus is a sprawling capital city that continues to annex outward. It's effectively annexed most of the growth that has taken place in the area. Indianapolis is a consolidated city-county government. Again, it has been able to capture much of the area growth that way. Kansas City, I believe, has a form of consolidated area government. Minneapolis benefits from a tax-sharing arrangement where revenue from growth in the suburbs is shared with the city. All of these arrangements help to maintain the core cities in a way that Detroit and other Midwest cities don't. | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 8022 Registered: 02-2004 |
Trainman, where are you? | ||
Detroitnerd Member Username: Detroitnerd Post Number: 3882 Registered: 07-2004 |
What Novine describes is covered well in David Rusks "Cities without Suburbs," a book that says Michigan has some of the laws most hostile to center-city annexation in the country. | ||
Detroitman Member Username: Detroitman Post Number: 221 Registered: 06-2004 |
State Senate attaches west Michigan project to Woodward rail legislation By Bill Shea http://www.crainsdetroit.com/a rticle/20081211/FREE/812119963 | ||
Novine Member Username: Novine Post Number: 974 Registered: 07-2007 |
According to the Snooze, the transit legislation passed. "they passed legislation paving the way for a Detroit light rail connection between Hart Plaza and the New Center area, and a law needed for a $288-million expansion of Detroit's Cobo Center appeared headed for approval." "Sen. Jason Allen, R-Traverse City, said the light-rail legislation creates a model for development of mass transit systems, not only in Detroit, but elsewhere in Michigan. It's important when gasoline prices are rising, making auto travel expensive, he said." http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.d ll/article?AID=/20081219/POLIT ICS/812190426 |
