  Sg9018 Member Username: Sg9018 Post Number: 250 Registered: 10-2006 |
Detroit light rail link may be only the beginning for mass transit The article is about Detroit's future with transit. In the Free Press, http://www.freep.com/article/2 0090104/NEWS02/901040435 | ||
Spiritofdetroit Member Username: Spiritofdetroit Post Number: 1218 Registered: 11-2006 |
Good news. These projects must be completed. | ||
Rid0617 Member Username: Rid0617 Post Number: 385 Registered: 03-2008 |
Only problem I see is until there are places for people to work who's going to ride it? | ||
Fafafooey Member Username: Fafafooey Post Number: 31 Registered: 12-2008 |
Interesting article, though some of the comments posted to it reveal there is still huge bias to overcome if viable mass transportation is to become a reality here. | ||
Spiritofdetroit Member Username: Spiritofdetroit Post Number: 1219 Registered: 11-2006 |
I think the downtown rail to the new center would be viable - remember none of these systems will be self sustaining in the beginning, if ever. No mass transit systems are. But, a few years down the line it could help change the regional mindset. Also, the Detroit/Airport/Ann Arbor link should be pretty successful. I know thousands of UM students who come from out of state and are, to their chagrine, met with a $50 cab or shuttle ride from the airport to campus. The bus system, The Michigan Flyer, connecting EL, AA, and DTW has been very successful thus far, in case that is any indication of how a train system may work. And still, there are many businessmen and women who fly into Metro and work downtown. Worth a shot - we need a hail mary in this town | ||
Crumbled_pavement Member Username: Crumbled_pavement Post Number: 645 Registered: 08-2007 |
Fafafooey, you mean comments like this one? ========================== from ando2000 of freep.com: I've taken mass transit planning courses at college (civil engineer) and every class ended the same way. The professors told us their is not a single mass transit system in the united states that makes money or even comes close to breaking even. NY city comes the closest to breaking even because it runs at 100% capacity most of the time. I've taken 3 classes at two different colleges and the same comment is made every time, so this looks like another hole the state of michigan is digging for itself. (Message edited by Crumbled_pavement on January 04, 2009) | ||
Crumbled_pavement Member Username: Crumbled_pavement Post Number: 646 Registered: 08-2007 |
Another interesting commment . . . ========================== from Tkabs of freep.com: I totally agree with MiCharlie124. I lived in Michigan until I was 32 and now live in Long Beach, CA. My husband takes the train every day (an hour ride) into downtown LA for his job. Mass transit is far from perfect in CA, but at least we have something that makes sense. One of the reasons we bought our house is because it's close to the train station, which my husband rides his bike to. Imagine if people in the suburbs could take a train into Detroit for work, sports and entertainment. The city would change immediately. But the reason this will never happen is because people in the suburbs are terrified that the trains will go both ways, and Detroiters will also travel out of the city. No one will admit it, but racism is one of the big reasons Detroit and its suburbs will never have a mass transit system that works. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 4117 Registered: 10-2003 |
The comment above (on the freep website) is telling. During the transportation engineering course I took, we were told more-or-less the same thing. The focus was always on widening roads, and any talk of transit was limited to, "What? You think you can just run more empty buses to solve a traffic problem?" The reason for this, I believe, is fairly simple, especially from an engineering standpoint. It's EASY for an engineer to plug-and-chug into empirical equations to determine whether or not a road needs to be widened. The more specialized our professions have become, the more they have focused on mere number-crunching, without any sort of consideration for qualitative, or God forbid, economic benefits. Basically, this is the though process that dominates when you concede the entirety of your transportation planning to mindless plug-and-chug roadway engineers. | ||
Fafafooey Member Username: Fafafooey Post Number: 32 Registered: 12-2008 |
Crumbed_pavement: That's exactly the type of comment i was referring to (and which I highly doubt the veracity of). My argument is Detroit needs viable public transportation for many reasons (it reduces the dependence on cars and enable those without vehicles other options, cuts down on gasoline usage, reduces emissions in the area, etc.), not simply the narrowly focused one of "Does it make a profit or not?" The intangible benefits of having decent public transportation cannot be measured in terms of ROI alone. | ||
Warrenite84 Member Username: Warrenite84 Post Number: 463 Registered: 01-2007 |
I'd like to see how they will combine the TRAIL & DTOGS plans. I like the curbside plans from New Center to Downtown but feel the median based LRT that DTOGS promotes would work better North of that, particularly in Oakland County. The TIF,(Tax Increment Financing), will certainly help draw businesses to spots on/near the route. I am reasonably hopeful this line could put momentum into residential developments that have been put on hold, along with others as far as Cass Ave. (One exception, Detroit 3 dropping to 2 or 1, or none). | ||
Retroit Member Username: Retroit Post Number: 660 Registered: 04-2008 |
Gasp! $10.5 billion? Gasp! Let's see, we could build about 70,000 homes for that amount. How many people are going to use this? Wouldn't it be cheaper to provide them with chauffer-driven limousines? Gasp! Gasp! Someone, call my doctor! Honey, stash the money! | ||
Bearinabox Member Username: Bearinabox Post Number: 1113 Registered: 04-2006 |
Why would we want to build 70,000 homes? Nobody is buying the ones we have. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 4118 Registered: 10-2003 |
I stole this from urbanplacesandspaces.blogspot. com. Does any of it sound familiar? From Executive Director's Report by William C. Barr, Parking Magazine (the journal of the National Parking Association), Fall 1962, p. 9. "In spite of the need to move urban traffic, many urban highway programs have been stalemated for one reason or another. In Washington, DC there has been an effective, organized citywide drive to curtail highway construction. The Washington program includes an Inner Loop Freeway which would serve the purpose of bypassing through automobile traffic and permit the citizens who live in the outlying areas to have greater accessiblity to the downtown area. The opponents of this program have succeeded in persuading Congress to hold in abeyance the necessary appropriations until a study regarding the need for a subway and rapid rail transit system is completed. Such a program for Washington, DC, is obviously not feasible from an economic point of view and would serve no useful purpose. Metropolitan Washington is a 'lateral' area. As a result, there is little, if any, heavy concentration of people in a given suburban area. If they were to use such a rapid transit system they would be requited to drive considerable distances to the pick-up stations... states that motorists would continue to shun public transit if they were paid to ride it." | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 4119 Registered: 10-2003 |
From the same source: A 1940 General Electric advertisement for streetcars.  | ||
Tkelly1986 Member Username: Tkelly1986 Post Number: 439 Registered: 01-2004 |
An article last year mentione the private and public light rail plans would mearge in early 2009. Any update on this? Is there still hope this will happen? | ||
Fishtoes2000 Member Username: Fishtoes2000 Post Number: 710 Registered: 06-2005 |
Driving isn't self-sustaining either. One study found that 30% of the costs for driving are not paid by user fees (like fuel taxes.) And this isn't taking into account the external costs of driving, e.g. parking requirements. | ||
Ray Member Username: Ray Post Number: 568 Registered: 06-2004 |
It alwayws pains me to have to agree with DaninDc. This bull about Mass transit systems not making money is beyond belief. How much money does MDOT make? Billions and untold billions on our crumbling roads at tax payer expense. THAT is the cost black hole. The sophistry in response is that the "gas tax" is really a "user fee" paid by motorists as if somehow this were free money. The flaw in the argument is that it's still a tax and everyone in Michigan is a motorist who directly or indirectly pays the tax. So we all pay the tax just as if it were siphoned out of the general fund. We could tax ourselves the same amount as the "gas tax" and call it a transit tax and build a glistening transit system 10 times over. The automobile is an environmental, ecomomic and sociological nightmare machine. Besides the staggering cost of road infrastructure, just think of the other incredible ancillary costs and externalities of the automobie. Billions of persons hours per year sitting in traffic. Accidents and death. Insurance. And what about the social stratification and the resulting cancer of inner city poverty as every literate, middle class person in America is free to live 30 miles away from the nearest poor person. The losss of mobility for people who cannot drive (and the time wasted by others having to drive them). Traffic law enforcment. Not to mention the wholesale destruction of our towns and cities and the creation of a nightmare scape of suburban sprawl with it's soul destroying monotony and isolation. Oh, how about the f'ing trillion dollar wars in the Mideast, which would have the geopolitical significance of Sudan (i.e. no US military involvment) if it weren't for our dependence on gasoline for driving. Oh, gosh, I also forget, about climate change, which no poses a credible threat to the existance of our civilication in the next century. But, hey, every mass transit system in the US requires a least a ten million dollar per year subsidy. My God, for a typical metro area that's something like 10 cents per person per month. We cannot tolerate such expense! We must therefore build yet another freeway at $20 million per mile and not get caught up in some fool-mass transit give-away. Mass transit is esssentially free compared to the ruinous costs of our suburban automobile oriented built environment. | ||
Retroit Member Username: Retroit Post Number: 662 Registered: 04-2008 |
Bearinbox: "Why would we want to build 70,000 homes? Nobody is buying the ones we have." I realize that the people of Detroit are moving out of the city to homes in the suburbs. I thought it might be a good idea to provide them with an alternative. After all, we're going to need someone to ride on mass transit. (Unless of course you were just being facetious.) | ||
Mdoyle Member Username: Mdoyle Post Number: 508 Registered: 10-2006 |
Retroit, people arent moving out of detroit because their homes are crummy their moving due to lack of city services, basic education, and infrastructure. There are plenty of nice homes in nice neighborhoods in the city. Come visit some time. (Message edited by mdoyle on January 04, 2009) | ||
Mwilbert Member Username: Mwilbert Post Number: 486 Registered: 11-2007 |
Transit shouldn't be expected to make money. Roads don't make money, and they have large externalized costs. Transit is a public service. It allows the young, the poor, the elderly and other non-drivers to get around and be more independent. It makes a city more attractive to visitors. It enables different kinds of development that appeal to different demographics. Metro Detroit may not be able to afford to improve this public service. Maybe the money would be better spent on something else (but definitely not on 70,000 houses!) However the mere fact that it would be expensive shouldn't exclude the possibility. The Detroit public schools are expensive, and as far as I can tell almost completely useless--spending money on transit would be much more sensible. | ||
Retroit Member Username: Retroit Post Number: 669 Registered: 04-2008 |
I didn't intend to hijack this thread and turn it into my soapbox for why Detroit neighborhoods need to be rebuilt. My intention was to point out the fact that it makes no sense to invest in mass transit when the housing stock is deteriorating and vanishing at such an alarming rate. Yes there are nice homes/areas, but there are also "prairies" of desolation. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 4122 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: If you provide good transit service to a corridor, it suddenly becomes a much more attractive place to live and do business. I would expect, as numerous other cities have, to see investment cropping up within a 10-minute walk radius of light rail stations--PROVIDED that zoning allows for it! | ||
Russix Member Username: Russix Post Number: 169 Registered: 11-2006 |
Does anyone have any more information on the design of TRAIL? Has anyone heard of any attempt to gather public input into its design? Is it fair for a private entity to build a public utility without any public input and then demand that it be operated by a public subsidy? Don't get me wrong, I'm all for light rail in Metro Detroit, but I don't like being subjected to the P&G model railroad club. No taxation without representation please. | ||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 3654 Registered: 04-2006 |
quote: I wonder do these professors include tax revenue from businesses who otherwise wouldn't be around without the public transit systems in place. | ||
Melocoton Member Username: Melocoton Post Number: 63 Registered: 01-2008 |
I agree with Russix. Aside from those problems with its funding and lack of public accountability, a rail line from New Center to downtown is really pretty lame, and if that gets built, one fear I have is that nothing else will ever be built. Then we'll be stuck with People Mover The Next Generation. In the Freep article a big question seems left out, though. Maybe some people on this forum can explain? The problem is whether, or if, the TRAIL or the DDOT plans are compatible or not. Will one, the other, or both be built? If they're competing plans, as I assume they must be, will a decision ever be made? Who will make it? The Freep says that Jo Ann Watson is in favor of the DDOT plan from downtown to 8 Mile (as am I), but it also says that the TRAIL plan is moving ahead with this tax financing. This is all confusing. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 4124 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: Sidewalks don't make money, either, so we shouldn't bother building them. Nobody wants to walk, anyway. | ||
Novine Member Username: Novine Post Number: 1023 Registered: 07-2007 |
To rant for as second, the comments on articles at the Freep.com are a cesspool of stupidity. It's the one thing I hate most about the Free Press web site and I'm convinced that they do it for the sole purpose of jacking up page views to sell web advertising. They could create a Forum to allow those idiots to post to their hearts content. But instead every time I want to read an article at the Free Press web site, I always get to finish the article with the idiotic musings of some nitwit, many of whom appear to have zero connection to Detroit and often are racist or bigoted. The Free Press must be proud to provide a forum for such drivel. | ||
Digitalvision Member Username: Digitalvision Post Number: 1320 Registered: 11-2003 |
Yah, I don't read the Freep much for that reason, Novine. I think this is a great step in the right direction and will increase the property values of that corridor. You now really could live in that corridor and work/live/play and not need a car. A semi-insulated life, but a great one nevertheless. You instantly have practical access to jobs in the two biggest job-providing areas of the city, groceries, entertainment, riverfront - everything. p.s.- I couldn't help but think I was playing Sim City with a thread title like this one - heck, half the titles on this forum could belong in that game :-) | ||
E_hemingway Member Username: E_hemingway Post Number: 1505 Registered: 11-2004 |
quote: Roads, especially freeways, are an even bigger black hole for tax dollars. | ||
Eric_c Member Username: Eric_c Post Number: 694 Registered: 11-2003 |
Wondering where the yard/service facilities would be located? Anyone read anything? Any speculation? If the system ever expands, it would need a reasonably substantial area I would think. |
