  Emu_steve Member Username: Emu_steve Post Number: 419 Registered: 11-2006 |
http://modeldmedia.com/develop mentnews/dtogs10307.aspx Those 3 routes (Michigan Ave. to Dearborn Fairlane, Woodward to 8 Mile and Gratiot also to 8 Mile) sound really good to me. I assume the designs would presume that drivers would drive to the termini (Eight Mile and Woodward or Gratiot and Fairlane) and then take the rapid transit. While hyped to help the carless, etc. I suspect the big thing would be for folks working downtown or those coming for sports or entertainment. I really like those routes. | ||
Mackinaw Member Username: Mackinaw Post Number: 3329 Registered: 02-2005 |
Especially when the Free Press yesterday proclaimed that there is a parking shortage for Tigers and Lions games (whatever). But yeah it would be awesome. | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 1175 Registered: 02-2006 |
It needs to go AT LEAST to the transit center in downtown R.O. No questions. But, since DDOT is doing the study, I understand they can't go further than the city limits. | ||
E_hemingway Member Username: E_hemingway Post Number: 1261 Registered: 11-2004 |
quote: Immediately yes, but if a light rail line went up Woodward to 8 mile, watch those inner ring suburbs cry out for an extension into Oakland County. They would probably be falling over each other to have their own stop(s). L Brooks may not like light rail, but he would probably get out of the way of that train and start talking seriously about extending a light rail line north. | ||
Jasoncw Member Username: Jasoncw Post Number: 398 Registered: 07-2005 |
All three look great! Do any of them!  | ||
Scs100 Member Username: Scs100 Post Number: 1254 Registered: 12-2006 |
^^ Agreed. | ||
Apbest Member Username: Apbest Post Number: 589 Registered: 03-2006 |
I like the constant of service in midtown/new center regardless of the selected route | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 1176 Registered: 02-2006 |
Just a thought: wherever a line is to end (not immediately, in "phase 1" but when planning is finished) the terminal should probably be near an interstate, and a park and ride lot be built. For better or worse, we cannot serve the entire region with transit off the bat...so we might as well serve who we can, and build park and rides for anyone else who might be interested. | ||
E_hemingway Member Username: E_hemingway Post Number: 1263 Registered: 11-2004 |
The park-and-ride terminals should be farther out on the lines in low-density communities, such as name your favorite exurban township. The stops in more densely populated urban areas/city cores should not have the park-and-ride option. Those need to be centered on the premise of walkable communities. The nation's best transit systems, such as D.C.'s Metro, use this philosophy. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 2895 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: What needs to be considered is the return on investment. Frankly, I despise the massive park-and-ride lots on the DC Metro. Most of the low-density outlying areas would be better served by commuter rail. Riders from near the ends of the lines tend to only ride inbound in the morning, and outbound in the evening, whereas in the urban core, people make trips at all hours of the day in all directions. Parking garages are horrifically expensive to construct, and park-and-ride is the most expensive way to get people onto transit. Compared to walking, it's a difference of $20,000 per rider in capital costs (never mind the maintenance of the garage). | ||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 1211 Registered: 04-2006 |
A line up Woodward would really help Highland Park out, so that gets my vote. Plus, a Woodward line would be the logical centerpiece or a Detroit train system. But really I'd be happy with any of those options. They all seem to be good ideas. | ||
Transitrider Member Username: Transitrider Post Number: 12 Registered: 01-2007 |
More info on the DTOGS Public input sessions here: http://www.dtogs.com/Events.ht ml Don't forget there's also the TRU meeting tonight in the Guardian Building, focusing on Transit-Oriented Development: http://www.detroittransit.org/ and finally, "transit czar" John Hertel is having an open house meeting this Friday: Detroit Regional Mass Transit open house Friday, July 27, 2007 at 10:00am SEMCOG, Buhl Bldg, 535 Griswold The Regional Transit Coordinating Council will display the objectives for the Detroit Regional Mass Transit Initiative at an open house on Friday, July 27. The public is invited and comments are welcome. The initial project goal is to develop a Comprehensive Regional Tarnsit Service Plan that will encompass Southeast Michigan's tri-county area by creating new mass transit modes and enhancing existing services. With questions, contact John Swatosh, RTCC Deputy Director, 313-393-3333. | ||
Upinottawa Member Username: Upinottawa Post Number: 915 Registered: 09-2005 |
A light rail combo of options 1 and 2 with bus rapid for option 3 would be a wonderful start when tied into the AA-DTW-Detroit commuter line and hopefully a Pontiac-Detroit commuter line. I suspect Ferndale would lobby to have the Woodward line cross eight mile. | ||
E_hemingway Member Username: E_hemingway Post Number: 1265 Registered: 11-2004 |
Ferndale, Royal Oak, Birmingham, Pontiac and host of other smaller inner-ring suburbs would all make a lot of noise to have it extended farther north. | ||
Rbdetsport Member Username: Rbdetsport Post Number: 322 Registered: 11-2005 |
Why can't we put in all of these lines into one application so we get a bigger grant and a better starting system? And as far as Oakland and Macomb Counties getting extensions, could they put in their own FTA Application after the line is built to expand it? | ||
Transitrider Member Username: Transitrider Post Number: 13 Registered: 01-2007 |
Rb: so many of the previous studies and proposals have failed because they were too big, or required regional cooperation and no one could agree. (For example, the initial Ann Arbor to Detroit study claimed that they did not have the required comparable ridership numbers for the federal application which is why it's going with a smaller-scale commuter service.) DDOT, on the other hand, does have real ridership numbers, and can make a stronger, more focused application for this first phase. So what DDOT is doing is taking what parts they have under their control geographically, politically and financially, and getting a first phase started. Anyone could join up later on, or in parallel, if they want to. It seems John Hertel's work will be to focus on the bigger picture issues like regional cooperation, funding and politics, which seems to be something he is good at. Be sure to attend both meetings to find out more! | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 1177 Registered: 02-2006 |
Just to clarify, in no way am I suggesting we should jog the line out to I-75 and 8 in order to build a park and ride, or to build a parking garage at Woodward and Grand Blvd. I'm talking about if we decide that it's not practical to go further than Birmingham, let's extend it the extra 2-3 miles out to Somerset and have a park and ride. Get those people off 75, plus give everyone in between a way to get to either downtown or the Somerset/Big Beaver corridor. (Message edited by focusonthed on July 24, 2007) | ||
Defendbrooklyn Member Username: Defendbrooklyn Post Number: 337 Registered: 11-2005 |
"I suspect Ferndale would lobby to have the Woodward line cross eight mile." That would be a great idea...each city the line extends into should pay for the construction and maintenance... I wonder where the stops would be in Ferndale? 8 and 9 8, 8 1/2 (marshall), 9 I love all the hype... | ||
Professorscott Member Username: Professorscott Post Number: 554 Registered: 12-2006 |
Why that payment model, Defend? Each city didn't pay for the construction and maintenance of I-75 and I-696. So the State should pay for highways, but individual cities should have to pay for transit? | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 1178 Registered: 02-2006 |
Stops every half mile, unless not necessary for some reason (no population, etc). There would have to be a stop at the Fairgrounds on Woodward...so: Marshall Just north of 9 Mile, after the turnaround Pleasant Ridge Kenilworth/10 Mile 4th Street/11 Mile Catalpa 12 Mile 13 Mile/Coolidge - Beaumont That would be a good place to stop for a first O.C. phase. Should be extended to: 14 Mile Maple - Birmingham Big Beaver/Adams (could even transfer to commuter rail there if that ever happens) Somerset | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 1179 Registered: 02-2006 |
The dilemma is: do you cater to Detroiters desire not to walk by creating more stops, or do you conform to the comparatively low density of the metro area, and have fewer stops? | ||
Professorscott Member Username: Professorscott Post Number: 557 Registered: 12-2006 |
Focus, I think you follow the national model for light rail and put stops every 1/4 to 1/2 mile, less often in lower-density areas. Part of the benefit of improved transit, though, is to allow for increased density in the corridor, so you would anticipate some increases in density. Incidentally, though the region as a whole is fairly low density, the Woodward corridor below 16 Mile Road is not. I also like continuing it through B'ham to Somerset; Troy's Big Beaver Corridor Redevelopment Plan anticipates improved transit. | ||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 1217 Registered: 04-2006 |
For it to really serve people on the corridor well, the stops should probably be spaced about a half mile from each other (using the metrics of the only train system that I'm an expert on navigating... NYCTA). This would mean about 16 stops between 8 Mile and the CBD. If it extends past 8 Mile, they would probably need to implement some type of parallel express train line to keep it time effective. | ||
E_hemingway Member Username: E_hemingway Post Number: 1266 Registered: 11-2004 |
Metro Detroit's "low density" is a myth. We have much more density than a lot of recent light rail lines that have been recently installed in smaller cities, such as Minneapolis. Phoenix (Hello, horizontal city!) is even building a light rail line. Also, all of those lines have been roaring successes with ridership numbers way beyond expectations. quote: http://metromodemedia.com/feat ures/Transitdensity0020.aspx Although many people swear they would never take a train, initial opponents to light rail usually come around quite quickly after the tracks are laid. This is from the same story: quote: | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 3482 Registered: 10-2004 |
Stolen from the Wiki: quote: | ||
Defendbrooklyn Member Username: Defendbrooklyn Post Number: 339 Registered: 11-2005 |
Iheartthed, An express train would be a must...People who wanted to commute to and from work would quickly become annoyed stopping every 1/4 - 1/2 mile trying to get downtown. Pscott, you are probably right...the state should pay for it. | ||
Rb336 Member Username: Rb336 Post Number: 754 Registered: 02-2007 |
I want those pneumatic tube systems we were promised in all that sci-fi stuff... | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 2903 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: That's what a commuter train would be for--to service the lower-density, outlying suburbs. | ||
E_hemingway Member Username: E_hemingway Post Number: 1267 Registered: 11-2004 |
That's crap Livernoisyard. Washington D.C.'s Metro system was "over-designed" as you implied and it has been one of the most successful light rail systems in the world, according to this Washington Post story. Detroit deserves no less than what D.C. has received. Ambiance Of Metro Might Take Sharp Turn By Lena H. Sun Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, July 2, 2007; Page A01 Metro's new general manager wants to get rid of the carpet in trains, brighten the lighting in stations and increase advertising in stations, trains and buses. In many places, such mundane changes would be met with a shrug. But this is the Washington area Metro, which has long prided itself on a dignified ambiance that is supposed to make it better than the average commuter system. The changes are intended to help make the nation's second-busiest subway more modern and functional. As the system struggles to keep pace with growing demand, Metro's new top executive, John B. Catoe Jr., wants to focus the agency's limited resources toward moving people to and from work and away from some costly features that gave the subway a distinctive, first-class feel when it opened 31 years ago. With ridership continuing to swell, the debate over those trade-offs is sharpening. "We need to be open to change and willing to do some things differently while at the same time being mindful of the coherence that results from the original concept," said Chris Zimmerman, a Metro vice chairman who has served on the board for nine years. "When the system opened, the idea was, 'How do we get people in suits and ties to get out of their nice cars and get on a train?' " he said. "Now we have 800,000 passengers showing up on a weekday." Record numbers are taking the train. Four of Metro's all-time top 10 ridership days took place in June. On June 22, the night of a Washington Nationals baseball game, evening ridership between 7 p.m. and 3 a.m. was the largest in agency history. Change, Catoe says, is inevitable, and he describes these as cosmetic. Dim stations need brighter, energy-efficient lighting. More advertising could generate much-needed revenue. Eliminating carpet would save money and allow mechanics to fix train wheels and brakes. High-quality art at station entrances and on walls would give passengers an experience beyond the ride itself. Dan Tangherlini, formerly Metro's interim general manager, started the push for brighter lights and no carpet last year. No one is planning to alter the most distinctive feature of the system: the vaulted arches in the underground stations. "We won't take away any of the majesty," Catoe said in an interview, calling the design of the stations "timeless and brilliant." Still, change comes slowly to Metro, which several years ago hired a consultant and debated at length before deciding to alter the color scheme inside the rail cars. "I'll probably run into trouble with the 'stewards of the system,' " Catoe noted. Such stewards worry that adjustments, however minor, have the potential to alter Metro's identity. Unlike commercial transit systems that cashed in on every square foot of rentable space, or utilitarian ones that gave "passing notice to amenities," the Washington Metro was built as something different, wrote Metro architect Harry Weese. As part of that approach, "a certain dignity and even elegance is sought after" to raise the image of mass transit, he noted. "In Washington, since this is the system owned by all the people of the United States, it is particularly important that no stigma of cheapness or of the bargain basement be attached to it. With this in mind, the designers of the system are working to capitalize on the best practice and produce something that is the highest state of the art." Zachary M. Schrag, who wrote "The Great Society Subway: A History of the Washington Metro," said those at Metro haven't always been aware of its architectural significance. "It's one of the three great works of public architecture in Washington since World War II," he said, along with the National Gallery's East Wing and Dulles International Airport. Even changing the color of the blinking platform edge lights at Metro Center from white to red was a "massive departure from the landmark architectural design," Schrag said. Metro is testing different-colored light-emitting diode bulbs that are more energy-efficient. Red means stop, and Metro wants to see whether that will keep riders from getting too close to the platform edge. A few riders have noticed the change. "The red ones are ugly," said Mary Burke, who rides the Green and Red lines. "They look like the gates of Hell." Many riders, while appreciative of Metro's unique architecture, say their priority is reliability. "It's a Cadillac system, and that's part of the problem," said Fred Marinucci, a Red Line commuter for 20 years. "It's hard to maintain a Cadillac system." Still, the more time riders have spent on the New York subway, the more they appreciate everything that makes the Washington Metro different. In New York, "it's not a question of red lights or white lights at the platform," Schrag said. "It's a question of how much gum you're standing in." In Washington, carpet was a luxurious touch designed to lure suburbanites out of their cars. Carpet was supposed to signal to people that better behavior was expected, that "this is a nice train and don't mess it up," Schrag said. But over time, the carpet itself has gotten messed up. In the winter, people track in salt and mud; in the summer, the humidity breeds mold "and little things grow in there, and it doesn't smell so good," Catoe said. Metro will be testing different kinds of nonskid flooring this summer. Switching from carpet saves money because vinyl, for example, is easier to clean and doesn't need to be replaced as often. Carpet, on the other hand, is vacuumed once a week, shampooed every two months and replaced every five years; it costs Metro $5,200 to replace carpet in one car, officials have said. Two weeks ago, Catoe requested that carpet no longer be installed in older rail cars that are being overhauled. Riders will start seeing the transition in the fall, he said. Down the road, Metro might switch from solid-colored train seats to a single multi-colored design to save money. Dave Kubicek, the new chief mechanical officer in charge of rail car engineering, design and maintenance, said it doesn't make sense for Metro to stock more than 90 seat configurations in different colors. Newer cars have cushions in burgundy, blue and sand; the older cars have orange and brown. Catoe's effort to expand advertising, which the board approved Thursday, is even more controversial. He wants to see banners inside stations, graphics on the floors, and ads on blank platform pylons, rail car ceilings and Metro's Web site. How much advertising to allow has so divided the Riders' Advisory Council that the group hasn't been able to agree on a position, said Chairman Michael Snyder. "A lot of people think Metro is a shrine or monument that shouldn't be plastered with advertisements," he said. Others think that as long as advertising is controlled, they would rather see more advertising than higher fares. The Metro board, said member Peter Benjamin, want to minimize intrusion into a system "of beautiful lines and beautiful style." He was assured by Catoe at Thursday's meeting that the advertising could be changed if board members did not like it. Former Metro board member Cleatus Barnett, 81, who served for 32 years, fought hard to preserve Metro's aesthetics. He was so loyal to the original color scheme of the rail cars -- orange, gold and brown -- that when Metro bought new cars with an updated interior of red, white and blue, one seat in the rear of each new car was upholstered in yellow in deference to Barnett. In an interview from Pensacola, Fla, where he retired to several years ago, Barnett warned against too much advertising. Metro shouldn't "look so gaudy you want to turn your head away," he said. In the past, Metro has found compromises that took note of design. During the late 1990s, the board, after a long debate, chose more expensive textured brick-red ceramic tile instead of yellow plastic bumpy strips to give warning underfoot to blind riders that they were near platform edges. The strips were rejected in part because some board members thought they would spoil the design. They would have been placed over Metro's signature granite edge. "I don't think Metro should be frozen in time," Schrag said. "I just think that in making these decisions, respect for the original design should be one of the factors." | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 2904 Registered: 10-2003 |
^^^The Washington Metro is actually heavy rail. |
