Discuss Detroit Archives - Beginning January 2006 DPM Expansion Much Needed Previous Next
Top of pageBottom of page

Andylinn
Member
Username: Andylinn

Post Number: 21
Registered: 04-2006
Posted From: 68.40.195.233
Posted on Saturday, April 22, 2006 - 8:09 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Quoting Dr. Detroit from a recent post:

"Detroit should at least expand light rail down woodward to new center with stops at medical center, wayne state and then new center. This would spur development in that corridor. The city would not have to wait for someone's else to give us permission. Ask the voters to approve a 2 cents sale tax in the city."

I think he's totally right. It makes both Midtown and Downtown more viable. You can live in a loft at merchants row, take the DPM to the cass corridor stop, and walk to a show at the magic stick. you can live in a $300 apartment in midtown, and grab a ride down to Oslo. This would be FANTASTIC. In addition, I think a route to SW and Corktown would be AMAZING, and much needed.

However, I believe that a 33% raise in sales tax would further punish struggling innercity businesses... Though I bet you could increase the fare to about $.60 or $.65 (from the current $.50) without any dramatic shift in ridership... Also, I bet that major companies would be interested in paying some money to have the DPM stop right in their business... For example, the businesses at the new Market (Mercado?) in SW might be willing to chip in for a stop at their structure... which would GREATLY benefit their businesses... As a very near future Midtown dweller, I would use this "NEW" DPM almost every day, even to just go down to Jimmy Johns (by the Hard Rock Cafe) or get Sushi at Oslo. This could be the future...

Discuss...
Top of pageBottom of page

Motorcitymayor2026
Member
Username: Motorcitymayor2026

Post Number: 726
Registered: 10-2005
Posted From: 24.231.189.137
Posted on Saturday, April 22, 2006 - 9:06 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

read some of the other posts in that same thread. A DPM expansion is not pheasible, and there are NO plans for it. Antoher program will have to take over
Top of pageBottom of page

Drdetroit
Member
Username: Drdetroit

Post Number: 56
Registered: 04-2006
Posted From: 68.79.91.116
Posted on Saturday, April 22, 2006 - 9:08 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Motor - Where doe's your brain get " not pheasible" from???? my brain says it is!!!
Top of pageBottom of page

Mackinaw
Member
Username: Mackinaw

Post Number: 1401
Registered: 02-2005
Posted From: 141.213.173.94
Posted on Saturday, April 22, 2006 - 9:28 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I've always thought that the people mover should be expanded to the Medical Center/Wayne State. The current loop is so small, and usually is not a practical way of getting around (walking is usually more efficient w/i that loop).

Building new tracks and connecting them to the current ones is do-able I'm sure, but probably costly.

I could see it riding along Brush/Cass and crossing over Woodward by Farnsworth. How nice would that Wayne State/downtown connection be? Or to be able to go from Jefferson to Brush Park or Cass Park quickly?

However, would putting unsightly above-ground rail enhance Brush Park? Most would find it undesirable.

I would rather see bus-only lanes on Woodward and Cass/2nd linking rapid and frequent buses between Wayne State and Downtown. Our streets are already wide enough. Buses do the job, and no rail-building would be neccesary. An awesome example of a link between a college-area and a downtown is the bus system in Pittsburgh between the borough of Oakland (university of Pittsburgh and the medical center) and the Golden Triangle, which is about the distance from New Center to downtown here, if that. They have a very efficient bus system, with bus only lanes because they are so frequent.

Ann Arbor also has a downtown bus system (at least during part of the year), which works well without even having bus-only lanes.

My proposal would be to leave the People Mover, it is good enough for getting people (especially intrigued tourists and suburbanites who don't want to walk) around downtown, and can work out well for big downtown events when people decide to park at distant locales. For the midtown to downtown link, pursue modern buses and create a frequent and reliable system. And make it free for Wayne students and employees!
Top of pageBottom of page

Hysteria
Member
Username: Hysteria

Post Number: 91
Registered: 02-2006
Posted From: 152.163.100.8
Posted on Saturday, April 22, 2006 - 11:38 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Quote:

My proposal would be to leave the People Mover, it is good enough for getting people (especially intrigued tourists and suburbanites who don't want to walk) around downtown, and can work out well for big downtown events when people decide to park at distant locales. For the midtown to downtown link, pursue modern buses and create a frequent and reliable system. And make it free for Wayne students and employees!
______________________________ _________________

Seems I always agree with Mackinaw ... The People Mover does what it needs to do, especially with tourists. However, it would be neat to have it travel the Woodward corridor at least to New Center.
Top of pageBottom of page

Royce
Member
Username: Royce

Post Number: 1593
Registered: 07-2004
Posted From: 69.209.162.226
Posted on Sunday, April 23, 2006 - 3:11 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

The people mover covers a loop downtown. That's what it's there for, and during major events it does a great job getting people around that loop. Since Woodward has busses there is no need to add a People Mover line from downtown to the New Center.

Better yet, use a given number of busses as "People Mover Shuttles" for trips only to the New Center. Charge a fee of only $0.75. Have the bus stop at only half the usual stops. The quickness of these trips might encourage more people in the New Center area to come downtown for lunch and vice versa. Hey, why not build some parking structures in the New Center area and encourage sports fans to "park and ride" these shuttles to the games, eliminating major traffic jams on game days.
Top of pageBottom of page

Lmichigan
Member
Username: Lmichigan

Post Number: 3585
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 67.172.95.197
Posted on Sunday, April 23, 2006 - 3:18 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

The People Mover may have adapted to do what it currently does, but it was always intended as a much larger system. So, to say that its potential is totally realized, or implying that it's as good as it ever could have been is false, IMO.

Then, again, this has been discussed to death, before.
Top of pageBottom of page

Bob
Member
Username: Bob

Post Number: 933
Registered: 11-2003
Posted From: 205.188.116.137
Posted on Sunday, April 23, 2006 - 12:00 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

LMichigan is correct, as we have discussed to death, the DPM was supposed to be much like the Loop in Chicago, part of a much larger system. The cost of building an extension to New Center would cost way too much money. I'm all for it, but it will not happen in the current political climate. The city does not have the money and the suburbs will not pay for it. The feds would pay most of the cost of building it, but the city would be on its own for maintaining it. Let's put more stock in getting the AA to Detroit train up and running. The best way to show that mass transit is important to our future is to use what we have. Ridership is the only way our stupid leaders will realize there is a need for improved mass transit.

(Message edited by bob on April 23, 2006)
Top of pageBottom of page

Royce
Member
Username: Royce

Post Number: 1594
Registered: 07-2004
Posted From: 69.209.162.226
Posted on Sunday, April 23, 2006 - 12:02 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Lmichigan, the People Mover(PM) may have been intended to be a larger system, but who's going to pay for this larger system? Who's going to ride this larger system? The actual daily ridership for the "current" People Mover system has always fallen short of the projected ridership. Based on the current PM system, why waste money building a larger system most people won't use?

(Message edited by royce on April 23, 2006)
Top of pageBottom of page

Ltorivia485
Member
Username: Ltorivia485

Post Number: 2597
Registered: 08-2004
Posted From: 199.74.87.98
Posted on Sunday, April 23, 2006 - 12:58 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Royce, that's because most Detroiters do not live OR work in the downtown area. If you expanded it to where people live and work, the ridership will increase substantially.

That's common sense right there.
Top of pageBottom of page

Royce
Member
Username: Royce

Post Number: 1595
Registered: 07-2004
Posted From: 69.209.162.226
Posted on Sunday, April 23, 2006 - 3:01 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Ltorivia, the "if you build it they will come" mantra sounds great and would appear to make common sense, but the cost to build an expanded system doesn't.
Top of pageBottom of page

Gistok
Member
Username: Gistok

Post Number: 2015
Registered: 08-2004
Posted From: 4.229.90.181
Posted on Sunday, April 23, 2006 - 6:33 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I have never been inside the Peoplem Mover HQ over on Times Square. But isn't the PM maintenance area (where the cars are stored at night) big enough to handle many times the number of cars that are stored there? I wonder what the building capacity is (# of PM cars), versus what it currently houses?
Top of pageBottom of page

Motorcitymayor2026
Member
Username: Motorcitymayor2026

Post Number: 733
Registered: 10-2005
Posted From: 24.231.189.137
Posted on Sunday, April 23, 2006 - 6:51 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

there are currently 11 cars.... 2 cars per train
Top of pageBottom of page

Andylinn
Member
Username: Andylinn

Post Number: 22
Registered: 04-2006
Posted From: 68.40.195.233
Posted on Sunday, April 23, 2006 - 6:59 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I Agree with Ltrovia, that because few live near any DPM stations, fewer than desired ride the damn thing... get it out to new center, mditown, and SW, and people will ride it.
Top of pageBottom of page

Bob
Member
Username: Bob

Post Number: 937
Registered: 11-2003
Posted From: 205.188.116.137
Posted on Sunday, April 23, 2006 - 7:19 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I thought their were 12 cars total. The DPM maintenance building was built with the idea of system expansion, and can hold many more times the cars that are currently there. Although I have never actually been inside of it. Does anyone in the forum have pictures of it?
Top of pageBottom of page

Motorcitymayor2026
Member
Username: Motorcitymayor2026

Post Number: 736
Registered: 10-2005
Posted From: 24.231.189.137
Posted on Sunday, April 23, 2006 - 7:56 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

there are only 11 now..... there may have been 12 at one point (that would make sense)....only 11 currently functional, at least.
Top of pageBottom of page

Detroitplanner
Member
Username: Detroitplanner

Post Number: 11
Registered: 04-2006
Posted From: 152.163.100.8
Posted on Sunday, April 23, 2006 - 8:51 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

City of Detroit has no legal authority to pass a sales tax of any kind nor does it have the beuracracy to collect it. Only the state by law collects sales tax. You would cause businesses to close and move across the street to dearborn or warren. This would suck even more dollars and jobs out of the city.

Detroit needs a system that serves its poor and elderly as its first customers. These folks eithe cannot or should not drive. How many poor folks go down to the hard rock or jimmy john's to eat?

The system needs to connect to both employment centers and service centers. Downtown is only one of at least two dozen 'nodes' in the city where transit needs to be improved. It also needs to connect seamlessly with the suburbs so that Detroiters can get to jobs and suburbanites can too.

Transit must be done with a regional approach. Please look at SEMCOG's Detroit to Ann Arbor Study, this is only one of a dozen major corridors in its transit plan.

www.semcog.org

(Message edited by detroitplanner on April 23, 2006)
Top of pageBottom of page

Deputy_mayor_2026
Member
Username: Deputy_mayor_2026

Post Number: 10
Registered: 04-2006
Posted From: 64.12.116.204
Posted on Sunday, April 23, 2006 - 9:42 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I do not think that adding more track to Midtown would increase ridership to any degree needed to substaniate such a project. Mass transit will always lose money, but it must bring in some revenue. This seems like a dead issue, and I have only been here for a short while. Detroit cannot afford to add onto the DPM, the sales tax is quite lofty at best, and there is much more potential in the Ann Arbor to Detroit mass transit.
Top of pageBottom of page

Lmichigan
Member
Username: Lmichigan

Post Number: 3586
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 67.172.95.197
Posted on Sunday, April 23, 2006 - 9:52 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Royce, I was not even advocating an expansion for the People Mover, necessarily, but thanks for assumming. What I was simply saying is that the full potential of the system is not necessarily realized, and it's not as good as it could get.
Top of pageBottom of page

1953
Member
Username: 1953

Post Number: 768
Registered: 12-2004
Posted From: 65.54.98.30
Posted on Sunday, April 23, 2006 - 11:16 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Buses are dumb. Light rail is needed.
Top of pageBottom of page

Ray
Member
Username: Ray

Post Number: 672
Registered: 06-2004
Posted From: 68.42.220.37
Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 12:46 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Did someone say mass transit always loses money?

Hmm. How much money does the state "lose" on road construction and maintenance? The automobile is an ecological and sociological, disaster. We haven't even gotten to potentially devastating climate change wrought by cars or the fact that the resulting dependence on foreign oil has us tangling with these jackasses in the middle east at $10 billion per month.
Top of pageBottom of page

Mackinaw
Member
Username: Mackinaw

Post Number: 1406
Registered: 02-2005
Posted From: 141.213.173.94
Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 1:32 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Rapid bussing is what we need between Midtown and Downtown.

To reconcile a train, elevated or not (preferably not, like I said, would you want DPM tracks outside your house?), the connection needs to be more than just a few miles. Detroit-Royal Oak, or much better, Detroit-Ann Arbor is what we need. And bring back streetcars on Jefferson!
Top of pageBottom of page

Ltorivia485
Member
Username: Ltorivia485

Post Number: 2599
Registered: 08-2004
Posted From: 129.105.104.122
Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 2:07 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Mackinaw, it's better to have elevated tracks rather (i'm not saying we need to use trains, that is where we need monorail, which is more environmentally attractive) than tracks on the same street level as the homes and vehicles. Most people will oppose it unless it can fit within the neighborhoods' aesthetics.
Top of pageBottom of page

Lmichigan
Member
Username: Lmichigan

Post Number: 3588
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 67.172.95.197
Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 2:09 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Aesthetics mean very little. I find it hilarious that some are even bringing it up as a major issue when every other big city and their momma' has lines run up and down all kinds of streets and all kinds of neighborhoods, historic and modern alike.
Top of pageBottom of page

Ltorivia485
Member
Username: Ltorivia485

Post Number: 2600
Registered: 08-2004
Posted From: 129.105.104.122
Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 2:34 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

And where are we supposed to have these lines on the streets, LMichigan? Maybe you haven't realized reality, but most of the surface area within Detroit is already utilized (subways are simply out of the question) and most local residents will rise in protest if a "train" line runs through and "destroys" their neighborhoods.
Top of pageBottom of page

Lmichigan
Member
Username: Lmichigan

Post Number: 3589
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 67.172.95.197
Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 3:07 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Sorry, but lines are being expanded and reworked in all types of cities all the time. You're not going to make me believe that somehow Detroit would rail against rail because of something as silly as aesthetics, when many of these neighborhoods aren't all that aesthetic to begin with, and no one is complaining.
Top of pageBottom of page

Ltorivia485
Member
Username: Ltorivia485

Post Number: 2601
Registered: 08-2004
Posted From: 199.74.87.98
Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 4:27 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

LMichigan, I'm not an advocate of urban renewal. Most of the rail systems in older cities (New York, Chicago) are almost a century old. All I'm saying is that when you reach the more aesthetic-looking neighborhoods (and they do exist in Detroit near the suburban borders), they will throw a hissy fit.
Top of pageBottom of page

Detroitduo
Member
Username: Detroitduo

Post Number: 592
Registered: 06-2005
Posted From: 194.138.39.52
Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 5:14 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

OK, being a resident of Brush Park with an address on Woodward, I would appose an elevated anything on Woodward. If a rail, rapidbus, whatever goes in (which I think it SHOULD), then it must be on street level.

btw, I rode the monorail in Vegas and not only was it more uncomfortable then the people mover to ride, I did not find it any more asthetically pleasing.

I think, given the monetary situation and political climate, Detroit should put in a dedicated Rapid bus line with stops up and down Woodward, from Campus Martius to New Center. It would have it's own lane and dedicated stops. And I am sorry, but I think all of you against a rapid-bus solution are missing the point. The money for anything else doesn't exist and it will NOT exist for the next 20 or 30 years. Create something usable, clean and convenient, and people will use it.
Top of pageBottom of page

E_hemingway
Member
Username: E_hemingway

Post Number: 584
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 68.42.176.123
Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 6:52 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

This is the best chance for effective light rail up woodward. The map for the plan is on page 6.

http://www.detroittransit.org/ Ann%20Arbor%20Detroit.pdf

The findings from the Ann Arbor to Detroit mass transit study are set to be announced in June. There are five plans under consideration. Among them are TRU's plan, lightrail along Michigan, rapid bus, commutter train along existing tracks and one more I can't remember.

Read through the TRU proposal. Building that out is quite cost effective and simple.

Also, any form of mass transit is not self-sustaining anywhere. Road construction doesn't pay for itself either.

Since mass transit lines are almost always proposed along major corridors -- i.e. woodward or 8 Mile -- residents rarely squeel about them. Businesses, which mainly inhabit those areas along corridors, would love to see more mass transit. Also, adding light rail, elevated or not, raises property values significantly. I have a feeling not too many people will go off the deepend if the value of their home practically doubles.

Lastly, this has been discussed to death in the past. And the people discussing it then are very knowledgeable about the issues and have posted a lot of insider information about it all. The search link is your friend young noobs. It unlocks more information than you can possible imagine. Plus, it's just over there.
/____________
\
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 516
Registered: 10-2004
Posted From: 69.242.223.42
Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 9:57 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

"Most of the rail systems in older cities (New York, Chicago) are almost a century old."

This seems to be an obvious English or geographic flaw. Older than what? Detroit is over 300 years old, whereas Chicago is less than that.
Top of pageBottom of page

Mackinaw
Member
Username: Mackinaw

Post Number: 1407
Registered: 02-2005
Posted From: 141.213.173.94
Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 10:07 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I'm taking Detroitduo's word here.
Top of pageBottom of page

Ltorivia485
Member
Username: Ltorivia485

Post Number: 2602
Registered: 08-2004
Posted From: 199.74.87.98
Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 12:08 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Livernois, stop being an a$$. New York and Chicago have some of the oldest mass transit systems in the country. Ideally, the cities were gradually built around mass transit in the 20th century.
Top of pageBottom of page

Upinottawa
Member
Username: Upinottawa

Post Number: 311
Registered: 09-2005
Posted From: 198.103.184.76
Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 12:15 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I like the TRU proposal, although the line should end at Ferndale or Royal Oak (with BRT to Pontiac/A. Hills).

At this time, expanding the DPM does not make a lot of sense: we should be feeding people into the DPM rather than spending money to make the DPM a little bigger without providing quality mass transit to get people to the DPM in the first place.
Top of pageBottom of page

Boo
Member
Username: Boo

Post Number: 126
Registered: 01-2004
Posted From: 63.117.185.99
Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 1:03 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

i think extending the people mover along some of the "spokes" (esp woodward) would be key in boosting ridership and effectiveness of the system. however, one thing that i wonder is whether a multi-mode system would work where the new segments of the train could use more advanced + less expensive technology and would transfer at the existing DPM stations. for instance, imagine a woodward train that connected to the existing grand circus park station so riders could transfer to other parts of downtown using existing DPM tracks?

also, the city has already launched renaissance zones- why not DPM zones? add incentive to build near the stations- additional ridership is additional income. (not sure on the cost/benefit though)

now for a dumb idea- in the summertime why not have an open-air car go around the tracks so that people can really have the feel of a roller coaster. liabilities aside, a couple laps on a sunny day could be a relaxing trip.

"keep arms in vehicle at all times..."
Top of pageBottom of page

E_hemingway
Member
Username: E_hemingway

Post Number: 585
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 68.42.176.123
Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 1:19 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

L. Brooks Patterson. That's the reason the TRU plan doesn't go up into Ferndale or Royal Oak. He has been quite negative about light rail in the past, even though local leaders in both Royal Oak or Ferndale would love to see a line going right up Woodward. TRU and other mass transit advocates would love to see it, too.

However, I could see that changing under the right circumstances. Let's say for a minute TRU's plan for Detroit-Ann Arbor gets the green light and funding in whatever form is approved. Is it too hard to imagine that LBP wouldn't want to be left at the station and would start lobbying to see the Woodward line extended to Pontiac, or at least Royal Oak? LBP has been publicly positive about mass transit, but he's a bus supporter. However, if the dominos started to fall toward the TRU plan, I could see LBP swallowing his pride to make sure Oakland County isn't left behind. If Oakland County gets in line then the whole anti-mass transit house of cards falls. The Detroit-Ann Arbor line could be just the impetus to make that happen ... in theory. Then again, a lot of stuff looks good in theory.
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 520
Registered: 10-2004
Posted From: 69.242.223.42
Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 2:04 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

"Livernois, stop being an a$$. New York and Chicago have some of the oldest mass transit systems in the country. Ideally, the cities were gradually built around mass transit in the 20th century."

I see that Miss Perfect just shifted the "older" reference from cities to mass transit in a instant...
Top of pageBottom of page

Ltorivia485
Member
Username: Ltorivia485

Post Number: 2603
Registered: 08-2004
Posted From: 199.74.87.98
Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 2:36 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Livernois, since when did I say that New York and Chicago are older than Detroit in terms of establishment (technically New York City is older than Detroit, but that's not my point here)? FIND WHERE I EVEN SAID THAT EXPLICITLY. I was specifically speaking in terms of mass transit. New York City and Chicago are older when it comes to mass transit systems. Again, stop being an a$$.
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 522
Registered: 10-2004
Posted From: 69.242.223.42
Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 2:51 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

"Most of the rail systems in older cities (New York, Chicago) are almost a century old."

As I said earlier, "older" than what? I don't care about NY's elderly status as I knew it was older than Detroit. But not Chi-Town. You were obviously using their mention in a Detroit context.

I was only messing with you anyway. Try to use less ambiguous wording...
Top of pageBottom of page

Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc

Post Number: 1418
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 67.100.158.10
Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 3:21 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

The DPM technology is obsolete, and expensive. Any enhanced transit option within the city would be best served by light rail.
Top of pageBottom of page

Upinottawa
Member
Username: Upinottawa

Post Number: 312
Registered: 09-2005
Posted From: 198.103.184.76
Posted on Monday, April 24, 2006 - 3:42 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I believe that Toronto's "Scarborough RT" uses the same technology as the DPM. Apparently, the Toronto Transit Commission is planning to replace that system as it is expensive and obsolete.

the following is an excerpt from http://transit.toronto.on.ca/s pare/0206.shtml :

To serve such lower density neighbourhoods in Scarborough with an equally rapid (but cheaper) form of transit, the TTC proposed the construction of the Scarborough LRT (essentially a streetcar line on private right-of-way). CLRVs would operate on a grade separated route between the end of the Bloor-Danforth subway line to the Scarborough Town Centre. It would effectively move the number of people who would use the service, and it would be cheaper to build than an extension of the subway.

The Scarborough LRT became today's Scarborough RT when the Province of Ontario convinced the TTC to modify the project to use newfangled Intermediate Capacity Transit System (ICTS) vehicles, with electromagnetic motors and the possibility of automatic train control. To convince the TTC to make this change, the Province agreed to pay for all cost overruns. In the end, the Province kept their word, and supplied the TTC with an additional $100 million to complete the line.

The ICTS technology has been a modest success, with systems sold to Detroit, Vancouver and elsewhere. However, the TTC has been less than impressed with the operation of the Scarborough RT. An additional $27 million was required to improve its reliability, and the service has generally not met expectations. The twenty-eight vehicles which service the line are unique to the TTC fleet, and there is little prospect of extending the line east or west, or adding new ICTS lines elsewhere in the system.

My beef with ICTS is that it is doing everything that streetcars on private right-of-way can do, and it is doing it with a significantly higher price tag. The ICTS system was designed to bridge the "intermediate capacity" of 10000 to 20000 passengers per peak hour. Streetcars on private right-of-way also bridge that gap. ICTS cars can be coupled together for increased capacity. So can streetcars. ICTS cars can load passengers from high level platforms, speeding up operations. So can streetcars (with modifications). ICTS cars can run automatically, although the TTC does not make use of this feature. So can streetcars (with modifications).

It all prompts me to ask, why are we attempting to reinvent the wheel, here? It seems to me that we already have an Intermediate Capacity Transit System vehicle at our fingertips: it's called a streetcar on private right-of-way.

Add Your Message Here
Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.