Rugbyman Member Username: Rugbyman
Post Number: 255 Registered: 06-2005
| Posted on Monday, February 25, 2008 - 9:53 am: | |
I wouldn't be too concerned about it's effect on the DTOGS study. It's not as though anything's been announced. Think of it as a contingency plan or even an enhancement to the city's case to the Feds. "Sure we're serious. We're so serious that $100M is being pledged to construct part of it- you just have to come up with the other (insert dollar amount here)." And if DTOGS doesn't go through at least they'll have good, solid LRT ridership and redevelopment numbers to make another pitch a few years later for a system expansion. |
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed
Post Number: 2741 Registered: 04-2006
| Posted on Monday, February 25, 2008 - 10:32 am: | |
quote:This won't satisfy rapid transit folks because it really doesn't serve the populous. Transit only works if it connects people to a destination. This plan merely connects destinations. It won't satisfy the rapid transit folks because this isn't a rapid transit system. But it will greatly increase the efficiency of transit along that little stretch of Woodward. It would take 6 buses to carry as many people as one of these trains could carry. These trains will also probably operate on a more reliable schedule than any bus line currently operating in metro Detroit... |
401don Member Username: 401don
Post Number: 279 Registered: 11-2007
| Posted on Monday, February 25, 2008 - 11:49 am: | |
"Some of the people who might be approached" - Ilitch, Karmonos, Gilbert and Penske. Took some deep thinking to come up with that list. |
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 5367 Registered: 10-2004
| Posted on Monday, February 25, 2008 - 12:54 pm: | |
If this were installed, it would be unconscionable for SMART or DDOT to continue to provide their bus service along that stretch for those routes that terminate downtown. Otherwise, it would be wasteful duplication of service. |
Eboyer Member Username: Eboyer
Post Number: 81 Registered: 01-2007
| Posted on Monday, February 25, 2008 - 12:56 pm: | |
401don, don't be surprised if some of those names are the private investors. |
E_hemingway Member Username: E_hemingway
Post Number: 1571 Registered: 11-2004
| Posted on Monday, February 25, 2008 - 12:56 pm: | |
So otherwise, SMART and DDOT wouldn't be a wasteful duplication of service? |
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed
Post Number: 2742 Registered: 04-2006
| Posted on Monday, February 25, 2008 - 1:24 pm: | |
quote:So otherwise, SMART and DDOT wouldn't be a wasteful duplication of service? Please ignore his shortsighted response. It completely ignores logistics issues, such as the thousands of people who live along the Woodward bus lines but outside of the service area of this proposed line. |
Genesyxx Member Username: Genesyxx
Post Number: 865 Registered: 02-2004
| Posted on Monday, February 25, 2008 - 1:28 pm: | |
" Passengers would ride two-car streetcar-style trains powered by overhead electrical wires and running on steel rails embedded in the street and operated by a driver, the study shows. Each car could carry more than 150 people. " Hey, the trolley's back! |
E_hemingway Member Username: E_hemingway
Post Number: 1572 Registered: 11-2004
| Posted on Monday, February 25, 2008 - 1:48 pm: | |
My point was that DDOT and SMART shouldn't exist as they do today. In a perfect world DARTA would be running regional transit. Thanks for that little parting gift Engler! |
Figebornu Member Username: Figebornu
Post Number: 72 Registered: 01-2008
| Posted on Monday, February 25, 2008 - 2:03 pm: | |
Detroit still does not get it. A light rail between Hart Plaza and Grand Blvd? What a stupid plan. What Metro Detroit needs and should have to make it work is underground trains that has veins running throughout SE Michigan from Port Huron to Ann Arbor, from downtown Detroit to Auburn Hills and even to Flint. Anything less is a scam. |
Danindc Member Username: Danindc
Post Number: 3911 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Monday, February 25, 2008 - 2:04 pm: | |
quote:My point was that DDOT and SMART shouldn't exist as they do today. In a perfect world DARTA would be running regional transit. Thanks for that little parting gift Engler! I think a huge problem with the current service is that DDOT gets mired down in City of Detroit bureaucracy. In any other large city, the transit agency is separate from city government. The benefits are pretty obvious: insulation from (persistent) budgetary woes, removal of politicization, and necessary latitude to provide and improve customer service. As it stands now, any of the clowns on Council could effectively roadblock even the most common sense service improvements, like stops that indicate which route stops there. DDOT has, hands-down, the absolute worst signage anywhere; how is one supposed to know that a "No Standing" sign is actually a bus stop??? SMART, on the other hand, is too small, underfunded, and geographically spread thin to have much effectiveness. |
Transitrider Member Username: Transitrider
Post Number: 48 Registered: 01-2007
| Posted on Monday, February 25, 2008 - 2:13 pm: | |
Iheart, I don't think that's what EH meant. There have been talks of merger since the 70s, but I tend to think of it as a red herring. EH, I know what you mean, but lately SMART and DDOT have been better differentiating their services. DDOT provides city, local service, and SMART provides limited commuter to downtown and suburb-to-suburb service. The 2 obstacles to consolidation are labor contracts and funding. SMART is funded by a regional suburban millage, DDOT from the city's general fund. Labor helped kill one of the DARTA attempts. And for the most part administration is the only duplication (you still need a similar number of buses, drivers, garages, etc.) But projects like Detroit-MetroAirport-Ann Arbor will require a regional transit authority, so some pieces may fall into place. In the future we might see something like PACE (suburban bus) and CTA (city bus) operating under RTA in Chicago. Still, there are better low-hanging fruit like improvements (see other thread), coordination, information/signs/maps/web that can be worked on now. As for this Woodward proposal, it's possible the private funding could count as the local match for the DTOGS federal application, so they may complement each other. This sounds like Marsden Burger's proposal to extend the DPM to New Center, with private beneficiaries along the route chipping in for capital costs, but with streetcars. I like the idea of extending the PM to make it more useful, and there is probably an opportunity for that as the rest of the network comes around. Marian Ilitch mentioned something about wanting the PM to come to MCC last fall, but nothing definitive: http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs .dll/article?AID=/20071128/ENT 11/711280314 Either way, this is good start to some private-public partnerships. |
Living_in_the_d Member Username: Living_in_the_d
Post Number: 85 Registered: 01-2008
| Posted on Monday, February 25, 2008 - 2:46 pm: | |
Yeah, This Thread is cool in the fact that I learn something new everyday about transit, And it effects on long term development. Amazing. |
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed
Post Number: 1699 Registered: 02-2006
| Posted on Monday, February 25, 2008 - 2:49 pm: | |
NO EXPANDING THE PEOPLE MOVER! |
Ltorivia485 Member Username: Ltorivia485
Post Number: 2995 Registered: 08-2004
| Posted on Monday, February 25, 2008 - 3:11 pm: | |
I propose monorail for the entire Detroit area. An underground system will not work (we have ancient sewer lines, salt mines, and who knows what else underneath). We have very incompetent and uncreative leadership in this state. |
Danindc Member Username: Danindc
Post Number: 3912 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Monday, February 25, 2008 - 3:27 pm: | |
quote:I propose monorail for the entire Detroit area. An underground system will not work (we have ancient sewer lines, salt mines, and who knows what else underneath). We have very incompetent and uncreative leadership in this state. ROME has ancient sewer lines. PARIS has ancient sewer lines. Detroit does not. Please educate yourself on this issue, for your own sake. Your statement above is highly ironic. |
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin
Post Number: 5538 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Monday, February 25, 2008 - 3:27 pm: | |
Ltorivia was being sarcastic I think Dan.... |
Rbdetsport Member Username: Rbdetsport
Post Number: 463 Registered: 11-2005
| Posted on Monday, February 25, 2008 - 3:28 pm: | |
How bout this- This private group gets out of the way of DTOGS and build there line along Atwater from the Rencen to Belle Isle and up the Dequindre Cut to Eastern Market. Boost the East Riverfront Area greatly. They could get there sponsorship money from GM, UAW, Eastern Market Corp, Riverfront Conservancy, Lafayette Park, Belle Isle Money(Grand Prix), and some minor contrabutions from the Housing developers. |
Detroitnerd Member Username: Detroitnerd
Post Number: 1942 Registered: 07-2004
| Posted on Monday, February 25, 2008 - 3:43 pm: | |
Ltorivia never tires of pushing the monorail idea. It'll be like the FUTURE! (Um, in 1967, that is.) Yeah, monorails are great. They raise the cost of construction to prohibitive levels while making sure nothing is in the way of our precious automotive traffic. That's why they're building them everywhere. (not!) |
Miguel Member Username: Miguel
Post Number: 1 Registered: 02-2008
| Posted on Monday, February 25, 2008 - 4:33 pm: | |
What’s the point of spending millions of dollars on this type of project when you could simply improve the efficiency of buses that the city already has? There really isn’t much of a difference between riding a bus down Woodward and riding a streetcar/rail type transport is there? |
Detroitnerd Member Username: Detroitnerd
Post Number: 1945 Registered: 07-2004
| Posted on Monday, February 25, 2008 - 4:36 pm: | |
Buses cannot carry 150 people, age out faster, pollute more, etc. etc. But, most importantly, light rail drives investment. When developers see rail embedded in the street, they know that the locality is serious about transit. And that's why they'll invest so much money when they see it. Bus lines? Feh, they're "flexible" -- in other words, the bus line can get yanked no problem. |
Hans57 Member Username: Hans57
Post Number: 277 Registered: 05-2006
| Posted on Monday, February 25, 2008 - 4:43 pm: | |
The simple fact is that local businesses see a light rail line or a street car line as a permanent fixture, something that will always bring customers to their door. Also, many people see buses as transportation for lower class individuals, whereas a train is more romantic and dignified. |
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 5370 Registered: 10-2004
| Posted on Monday, February 25, 2008 - 5:02 pm: | |
Miguel is correct. However, if indeed the private sector wants to foot the entire capital costs, then so be it. However, if those bus routes that currently parallel the streetcar line are allowed to continue along that stretch of Woodward, then THAT would be utterly wasteful, and then this project would be another Detroit-class boondoggle. If the streetcar is installed, then have those parallel parts of the affected bus routes turn around in the New Center and have those passengers transfer to the streetcars. This opens up two possibilities: (1) keep the headways of the affected bus routes the same and run fewer buses and save money. This is attractive to a city nearing or entering bankruptcy, or (2) keep the same number of buses and reduce the headways by not having an affected bus having to add those unnecessary nine miles along Woodward per round trip per bus. My gut reaction is that the bureaucrats running the bus systems would not reduce the size of their operations because they don't appear to supervise their current drivers whose truancy/absentee rates are currently ridiculous. |
Dannaroo Member Username: Dannaroo
Post Number: 189 Registered: 05-2006
| Posted on Thursday, February 28, 2008 - 9:25 am: | |
Overall, I like this idea proposal and it being privately funded seems like it could get things moving a bit quicker. But instead of just being a loop right on Woodward, I think it would be a bit more effective in the long-run if it ran out from downtown one block east of Woodward (John R?) and back into downtown one block west of downtown (Cass?). I think this would spur a bit more development along those corridors, serve more people (it would be a little bit closer to higher concentrations of residents) and I don't think to walk one block to get to the main street is asking too much (nor is it asking too much to potentially walk two blocks to get back to the train for your return trip. Also, because these streets are not state controlled highways (like Woodward is), it might cut down on the red tape that needs to be worked through. All this being said, I know that these streets of course don't have the visibility or name recognition that Woodward has. |
Hybridy Member Username: Hybridy
Post Number: 222 Registered: 08-2006
| Posted on Thursday, February 28, 2008 - 11:46 am: | |
Dubai is getting the largest elevated monorail system in the world. Doesn't that sound backwards? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D ubai_Metro |
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 5428 Registered: 10-2004
| Posted on Thursday, February 28, 2008 - 11:58 am: | |
Dubai (in the UAE) has some of the world's wealthiest citizens per capita (because it already had that distinction over twenty years ago). Their economy is wisely diversified, and after the oil revenues cease, they will make out OK... Detroit is no Dubai! They literally import foreigners to work for them. They're not rich but will be able to take mass transit... (Message edited by LivernoisYard on February 28, 2008) |
Downtownguy Member Username: Downtownguy
Post Number: 121 Registered: 07-2004
| Posted on Thursday, February 28, 2008 - 1:32 pm: | |
^^ Excellent point, Dannaroo. |
Emu_steve Member Username: Emu_steve
Post Number: 582 Registered: 11-2006
| Posted on Saturday, March 01, 2008 - 10:29 am: | |
quote: "This won't satisfy rapid transit folks because it really doesn't serve the populous. Transit only works if it connects people to a destination. This plan merely connects destinations. I am still for it, its a decent start. But only with the possibility of future expansion." Agree 100% with this comment. I live in No. Virginia and take mass transit to work each day. I can take a bus from my house to the Pentagon and then the subway downtown. OR I can drive directly to a subway station, park and go downtown. In Detroit, I'd think they'd need a big parking lot or garage by the fairgrounds, and let folks park and ride the transit. IF the parking at the fairgrounds + the transit fare < the cost of driving and parking downtown it would probably be accepted by the public. For me, it cost $8 per day. Driving to work would be 3 bucks gas + say 12 bucks parking. Big difference!! and employees (usually Fed. Gov't) get subsidies if they take mass transit instead of driving. |
Emu_steve Member Username: Emu_steve
Post Number: 583 Registered: 11-2006
| Posted on Saturday, March 01, 2008 - 10:44 am: | |
One point about destinations. It seems this line would have the same limitations as PM. Who would use it? Maybe someone from the City of Detroit who needed to get to a meeting at Wayne or DMC. That kind of intra-day business trip. Where it doesn't help is the so called "journey to work" - getting from home to the employee's usual office. In D.C. most trips on the subway are 'journey to work' trips not a trip from the employee's office to another office or client during the work day. BTW, it might be useful for things like Tig games if there was cheap parking say near WSU and then hop the transit. Better then paying 20 bucks near the stadium. |
Danindc Member Username: Danindc
Post Number: 3943 Registered: 10-2003
| Posted on Saturday, March 01, 2008 - 1:06 pm: | |
quote:In D.C. most trips on the subway are 'journey to work' trips not a trip from the employee's office to another office or client during the work day. It's true that most transit trips (anywhere) are "journey-to-work" trips--but so are roadway trips. Steve, if you lived in the District, you'd see that people use the transit system heavily during non-rush hours as well. For those who love the prevalance of surface parking lots in downtown Detroit, consider the requirements imposed by your beloved new stadiums and entertainment district. If there were a transit system, you wouldn't have Mike Ilitch receiving subsidies to create more useless parking lots. As baseball season approaches:
quote:Directions to Nationals Park Unless you have reserved parking surrounding Nationals Park, Metro and Nats Express are the best way to go to the game. http://washington.nationals.ml b.com/was/ballpark/directions. jsp Land for parking, or land for productive uses? Seems like a no-brainer to me. |
Living_in_the_d Member Username: Living_in_the_d
Post Number: 114 Registered: 01-2008
| Posted on Sunday, March 02, 2008 - 3:43 pm: | |
Yeah, I have a feeling that the DTOGS study will have the necessary information to propel this project forward, With everyone benefitting, especially the beautiful citizens of Detroit. |
Dougw Member Username: Dougw
Post Number: 2072 Registered: 11-2003
| Posted on Sunday, March 02, 2008 - 8:23 pm: | |
quote:It seems this line would have the same limitations as PM. Who would use it? There are big advantages to this system over the People Mover: 1. It is much cheaper per linear mile than the PM. 2. It does practically connect a much larger area of the city than the PM: The CBD, Brush Park/Cass Corridor, Wayne State and the New Center. Whereas the PM is pretty much just the CBD. 3. Most importantly, it can be expanded up Woodward much more easily than the PM to become even more useful. IMO, in terms of practicality, cost, long-term benefit, and likelihood of being implemented, this is the best Detroit transit proposal I've seen in many years. I wouldn't change a thing. John Hertel apparently knows what he's doing. |
Tetsua Member Username: Tetsua
Post Number: 1448 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Sunday, March 02, 2008 - 8:35 pm: | |
http://www.crainsdetroit.com/a pps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/2008 0302/EMAIL/266877697/1070 |
Dougw Member Username: Dougw
Post Number: 2073 Registered: 11-2003
| Posted on Sunday, March 02, 2008 - 9:22 pm: | |
Good article... Excerpt:
quote:Fast lane to light rail Private-sector money could cut years from process By Bill Shea Private-sector money behind a $103 million light-rail transit loop on Detroit's Woodward Avenue could mean decades trimmed from the project's planning and could reinvigorate other transportation projects already in the works, mass transit insiders say. "I suspect there would be some streamlining that would shave years off the process," said Eli Cooper, transportation program manager for Ann Arbor. "We're talking about cutting years off of the planning phase. (Private money) could save 20 years." Private money paying for construction means a considerable amount of bureaucracy at the local, state and federal levels is removed from the equation, said Cooper, who monitors transit projects in the region. He estimated such a project could be running in two to three years. Crain's Detroit Business first reported last week that a private-sector proposal, known as the Woodward Transit Catalyst Project, would involve a mass transit line on 3.4 miles of Woodward, but few details have emerged, including the names of potential investors. ... Private money behind transit projects is the wave of the future, said Douglas Bowen, managing editor of 150-year-old New York City-based Railway Age magazine. "It seems somewhat radical, but you're going to see more of that nationwide," he said. "For cities that don't have an established public transit culture, you're going to have people of means benevolently force-feeding the concept down to the general public level." ... |
Bob Member Username: Bob
Post Number: 1696 Registered: 11-2003
| Posted on Sunday, March 02, 2008 - 9:40 pm: | |
Of course the state has to approve letting them use the right of way on a state route. |
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul
Post Number: 2378 Registered: 10-2006
| Posted on Monday, March 03, 2008 - 12:26 pm: | |
"...a 2007 study by the University of Detroit Mercy indicates money from the city's general fund, a dedicated tax or user fees would subsidize operational costs." I thought that I did a pretty decent job of keeping up with the alma mater, but don't remember hearing about this study. Anyone have a link to it? |
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul
Post Number: 2379 Registered: 10-2006
| Posted on Monday, March 03, 2008 - 12:31 pm: | |
"'It seems somewhat radical, but you're going to see more of that nationwide,' he said. 'For cities that don't have an established public transit culture, you're going to have people of means benevolently force-feeding the concept down to the general public level.'" http://www.crainsdetroit.com/a pps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/2008 0302/EMAIL/266877697/1070 Interesting phrasing of an idea. I suppose it is hard to argue that private groups shouldn't be "benevolently force-feeding the concept down to the general public level." Is it in any way a bad idea? |
Rugbyman Member Username: Rugbyman
Post Number: 260 Registered: 06-2005
| Posted on Monday, March 03, 2008 - 12:52 pm: | |
I think that's kind of the definition of a special interest group, isn't it? For what other purpose would they exist than to advocate for a narrow, likely currently unrecognized, interest. |
Mackinaw Member Username: Mackinaw
Post Number: 4470 Registered: 02-2005
| Posted on Monday, March 03, 2008 - 1:15 pm: | |
That point of view is legitimate. It's true, especially for Detroit. Most people are ignorant to the benefits of quality transit because they haven't had the chance to experience it. The survival of such a system should ultimately rely on market factors-- i.e. do people decide in favor of using it?-- but in the meantime, a market has to be created in the first place. Detroit will be better off just for trying. |
Ray Member Username: Ray
Post Number: 1088 Registered: 06-2004
| Posted on Monday, March 03, 2008 - 11:06 pm: | |
Check out the half-harted support from Doug Rothwell of DEtroit Renaissance: "These are just such broad plans, it's hard to react to. In theory, if you can connect these lines together, this would be a positive," While applauding the private sector's willingness to fund construction, the question about subsidizing the operational costs — estimated in the study at $4.2 million to $5.6 million annually — raises questions, Rothwell said. Hmm. it's a dollar per year per person. I'm truly convinced that the political and business leadership of our area is INSANE. I don't really know if this particular plan is the right one, but my God everyone should be jumping up and down at the slightest hope of moving forward with mass transit. And Rothwell of all people is worried about the $5 million. We spend $5 million a DAY on our Godforsaken road system. We spend $5 million an HOUR on gasoline during each rush hour. I need a drink and a quick trip to Chicago. |