  Detroitman Member Username: Detroitman Post Number: 1012 Registered: 06-2004 |
Employers push for study to expand People Mover By Sherri Begin 6:00 am, October 9, 2006 A group of Woodward Corridor employers hopes to raise $200,000 to study a privately funded expansion of the People Mover to link the riverfront to the New Center. The expansion would extend the People Mover tracks three miles up the corridor in both directions from its current one-way loop in the downtown area and cut time and cost off the project if it were pursued with private rather than federal transportation funding, said Marsden Burger, chairman and CEO of Cabintaxi Corp. in Detroit and the group’s convener. The city already has one of the most advanced, fully automated, steel-wheel light-rail systems in the world, he said, so it makes sense to build on it. “Long-term, this (expansion) wouldn’t impact just the Woodward Corridor, but all of Detroit,” Burger said. Companies behind the effort sent a letter last week to Gov. Jennifer Granholm, Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick and Wayne County Executive Robert Ficano, informing them of the effort to privately fund an initial study. In addition to Cabintaxi, the group includes Henry Ford Health System, Trizec Real Estate Services L.L.C., the New Center Council and Metropolitan Organizing Strategy Enabling Strength. Each attended an Aug. 3 meeting hosted by Crain’s Publisher Mary Kramer to discuss the issue of transportation, which Crain’s readers identified as their top concern following the Super Bowl. “What’s good for Detroit is good for Henry Ford,” said William Schramm, the health system’s senior vice president, strategic business development. An expansion of the People Mover potentially would bring current and new employees and residents to Henry Ford as patients, he said. It also would enable the large numbers of students who regularly move back and forth between Henry Ford and Wayne State University’s medical school to do so more easily. It also would “promote city growth and real estate values because it would support increased demand,” said Jerry Burgess, vice president of Trizec’s Detroit group. Burgess, chairman of the New Center Council, said an expansion also would benefit the New Center area by bringing additional people into it, expanding the market for retailers there. The Detroit Medical Center and Wayne State also attended the group’s initial meeting. The DMC still is considering its formal response, according to the letter sent out last week. Wayne State said it plans to send its own letter supporting the discussions on a possible expansion but will support whatever initiative Kilpatrick proposes. The existing People Mover infrastructure would keep the cost of the expansion down, said Burger, who came to Detroit in 1980 to help build the system as past director of product application for the former UTDC USA in Washington, now part of Bombardier Inc. Based on Detroit’s previous People Mover construction and similar projects in Vancouver, Toronto and New York City, Burger estimates the expansion would cost about $200 million. It wouldn’t require annual operating subsidies since existing infrastructure could handle additional riders and in fact, would bring in increased revenue through token sales, he said. Among the topics yet to be discussed by the group is how the expansion would be funded. One possibility is key employers in the city purchasing tokens in advance, Schramm said. The group’s goal is to accomplish the project with private funding, but it could include some city or state funding if either chooses to buy tokens in advance as well, Burger said. A tax on parking spaces, as has been done in other cities, could be another form of funding, Schramm said. http://www.crainsdetroit.com/a pps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/2006 1009/SUB/61006042/-1/toc | ||
Itsjeff Member Username: Itsjeff Post Number: 7008 Registered: 10-2003 |
That'd be a hellofa thing. Taking the PM from downtown to the Fisher Building, then crossing the Lodge to get to HFH. | ||
Bob Member Username: Bob Post Number: 1178 Registered: 11-2003 |
This is great news since it is initiated by existing businesses that are finding a way to get things done. It's a long way from being reality, but this is a good sign that companies are taking the initative. | ||
Track75 Member Username: Track75 Post Number: 2406 Registered: 10-2003 |
Sounds great, but that's getting pretty big for a one-loop system. If they keep it as one big loop, a trip from eastern CBD to western CBD (Greektown-Cobo) would require a six mile detour up and down Woodward. Quicker just to walk. Still, the trade-off is probably worth it for getting access between the CBD and New Center. | ||
Mind_field Member Username: Mind_field Post Number: 624 Registered: 10-2003 |
Hopefully midtown and New Center would have it's own separate loop with a connecting station somewhere, or possibly a couple connecting stations. If this happened coupled with a light rail line in from Ann Arbor or even up Woodward into Royal Oak, Birmingham, and Pontiac, we'd finally be catching up to the rest of world in terms of rail transit. | ||
Scottr Member Username: Scottr Post Number: 62 Registered: 07-2006 |
the best part of this is definitely that it's being undertaken by the private sector. sure, it's only a 'study' at this point, but just the fact that it's getting this attention says a lot for how far detroit's rennaisance has come. government interest is great, but private interest is far better. however, i must agree with the concerns if it remains a single loop. i imagine the study will show that a separate loop (or possibly 2 separate loops) would work better than a single long loop. whatever they end up doing, i think it will definitely help detroit, particularly in getting more investment in areas further outside the cbd. | ||
Gravitymachine Member Username: Gravitymachine Post Number: 1336 Registered: 05-2005 |
good idea at its core, a idotic way of going about it. putting rail in the street would be a HELLUVA lot cheaper than running a concrete elevated railway three miles and back. bring back the damn streetcars already! | ||
3rdworldcity Member Username: 3rdworldcity Post Number: 299 Registered: 01-2005 |
What's that big circular thing way up there in the sky, peach or apple? Private funding for a $200 million project? Has anyone checked current People Mover ridership and the current subsidy situation? Get serious. Granholm will have to commit to buy a billion tokens. Then again, the DDA will probably think the idea is the greatest thing since the invention of the automobile and will probably fund the whole thing. What's really frightening is that so many people take the proposal seriously. Listen, kids, this empereor has no clothes. Must be a very slow news day at Crains. Or, my calendar's wrong and it's really April 1st. | ||
Stecks77 Member Username: Stecks77 Post Number: 108 Registered: 08-2006 |
I wonder if the casino's have any interest in this idea? With the exception of the Greektown casino the others aren't situated in very good locations to be involved in the study and possible funding of an expansion, but they certainly have the cash for a private investment. | ||
Apbest Member Username: Apbest Post Number: 200 Registered: 03-2006 |
no one would (especially the private sector) would support a 1 way loop that long "The expansion would extend the People Mover tracks three miles up the corridor in both directions from its current one-way loop in the downtown area and cut time and cost off the project" they desire to make it two way | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1818 Registered: 10-2003 |
Somebody better tell Crains that the DPM isn't as high-tech or modern as they think it is! | ||
Detroitstar Member Username: Detroitstar Post Number: 203 Registered: 01-2006 |
I'll believe it when I see it. | ||
Eastsidedog Member Username: Eastsidedog Post Number: 739 Registered: 03-2006 |
For mass transit to work it has to connect dense residential areas with workplaces. This proposal, for the most part, connects two workplaces together - New Center and Downtown. Woopee. The loop will be just as dead as the loop downtown. When are people gonna get it? Run a line up Jefferson to the Gross Pointes or a line up to Pontiac on Woodward, so commuters can take it to work! Then you'll have ridership. | ||
Tkelly1986 Member Username: Tkelly1986 Post Number: 143 Registered: 01-2004 |
I like the idea, and would love them to think further and have a separate line go to Metro Airport....oh, man is that a pipe dream. But in all seriousness, they will probably have a 2 path train down there; that would surely cut the costs. I doubt that a giant loop is being studied; it makes no since right now. | ||
Mayor_sekou Member Username: Mayor_sekou Post Number: 85 Registered: 09-2006 |
200 million for one line of the two car people mover is a bit too much to swallow, seeing as we are eventually the ones who are going to have to pay for it. I dont know how much 200 mill can buy, but couldnt it get us a light rail system up woodward for much cheaper? How many city bus drivers or buses could that buy? Maybe this group should look into the light rail idea instead of trying to make the useless people mover useful. | ||
Genesyxx Member Username: Genesyxx Post Number: 596 Registered: 02-2004 |
Haven't we all been talking about the People Mover expanding down Woodward? Now, there's some movement and we're skeptical? | ||
Toledolaw05 Member Username: Toledolaw05 Post Number: 56 Registered: 04-2006 |
Build it - everyone who lives at WSU or in the New Center area would ride it downtown to the bars, restaurants, sporting events. | ||
Apbest Member Username: Apbest Post Number: 201 Registered: 03-2006 |
read the article about the twins transit accesible park on SSP http://forum.skyscraperpage.co m/showthread.php?t=117527 maybe a new Red wings arena could have the new people mover line open up right into the concorse, making parking anywhere in the city possible | ||
Stecks77 Member Username: Stecks77 Post Number: 111 Registered: 08-2006 |
Mayor_sekou: Did you read the post? "Privately Funded" Will it be free? NO Eastsidedog: Downtown and Wayne State aren't residential? They may not be traditional suburbs but there are more people living there then you think and a ton of development is going on. Will it serve everyone in the city? Of course not, but its a start. | ||
Bob Member Username: Bob Post Number: 1181 Registered: 11-2003 |
Not to mention connect, the cultural center to downtown. People can park in Midtown, go to the DIA, hop on an expanded People Mover, and go have dinner downtown. Or people staying in hotels downtown and ride it out to the museums. | ||
Mayor_sekou Member Username: Mayor_sekou Post Number: 89 Registered: 09-2006 |
Surrreeee itll be privately funded sure. I wouldnt mind shelling out the additional tax dollars that is at least going to pay for a portion of this if it served everyone in the city. But it wont and Eastsidedog is correct in order for any transit system to be effective it must connect workers to their homes something this will not do. Dont get me wrong im all for public transport and im happy private corps are taking an interest in transit. I just dont think spending 200 mill on a people mover expansion is an efficient usage of resources, especially when there are other forms of public transport available that may be cheaper to build and/or maintain. | ||
Stecks77 Member Username: Stecks77 Post Number: 113 Registered: 08-2006 |
Pessimist. You won't get a large scale mass transit system overnight. Not in this town, at this time, with this economy so get over it. Did they build all the NYC subway lines in one project? It took years and years of development and growth. Alot of people in this town have never even experienced mass transit that doesn't just go in a mile long circle. They don't understand the full potential. Mass transit in this town will have to come in bits and pieces. I don't disagree that there are better systems but if this is truly paid for by the private sector, I'll take it. In the future we can possibly develop another system to funnel into the People Mover. If the track from the airport to the New Center ever gets built wouldn't that possibly connect up with the People Mover? (Message edited by stecks77 on October 09, 2006) | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 2912 Registered: 08-2004 |
Without getting into the financial specifics, I would have liked a PM extension as a one way loop that went up John R to New Center, and come back down Cass, with the Cass route going over to Park Ave. in downtown, and the John R route starting at Witherell going out from downtown. The loop would have its' connector to the existing downtown loop at the Grand Circus Park PM station. That way folks would only have a maximum 2 block walk on a round trip. (Cass to John R or vice versa) However, if the PM columns can handle a double track as easily as a single track, then it would make more economic sense to have the PM as a 2 way double track going up/down Woodward with a "needle loop" again using Park/Witherell at the southern terminus. But then we run into the problem with the Thanksgiving Day parade. | ||
Gravitymachine Member Username: Gravitymachine Post Number: 1338 Registered: 05-2005 |
exaclty. and to stecks point:
exactly why the people mover technology (single loop elevated concrete viaduct) is the dumbest way to go about this. its hardly modular or expandable like a street car or other ground level transport options. | ||
Apbest Member Username: Apbest Post Number: 202 Registered: 03-2006 |
the article references a 3 mile two-way loop, however Im not sure where they want to build it. If it's down woodward, I'd prefer street based light rail on woodward (aesthetically that is)...eliminate two of the lanes on woodward on either the west or east side of the ave. and move the traffic over, leaving those two lanes against the sidewalk dedicated to two way, trains...see Dallas DART http://i13.photobucket.com/alb ums/a291/bitmapbandito/trainwe copy.jpg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wi kipedia/en/d/db/08130408l.jpg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wi kipedia/commons/thumb/9/97/DAR T_rail.jpg/300px-DART_rail.jpg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wi kipedia/en/b/b9/Dart_akard.jpg Not that I don't like the look of the newly painted people mover cars, I do..but I am put off by the idea of those large concrete guideways down wooward | ||
Eastsidedog Member Username: Eastsidedog Post Number: 742 Registered: 03-2006 |
Stecks77, Downtown and New Center are not primarily residential. They are primarily job centers with the cultural center in between. If you work downtown and live in New Center and vice versa, you can take a bus between the two locations very easily - the Woodward bus is easily the most reliable line in the Detroit area and runs 24 hours. I used to live downtown and bus to New Center to work everyday - a very easy trip up Cass. My arguement is that the vast majority of Detroit's population lives in the neighborhoods and commutes either downtown or to the suburbs to work. Most of the workers in Downtown and New Center commute from Detroit's neighborhoods or the suburbs (just look at all those parking spaces and all that traffic). Personally, I believe that the primary purpose of mass transit should be to get people to work. But it seems that many in Michigan think mass transit is an entertainment venue or roller coaster ride, which it not. Sometimes I get the feeling that the Big 3 are sitting behind the desks of folks who plan mass transit saying, "Yeah, mass transit is great! But just make sure it's just a weekend thing - make sure no one can take it to work!" Yeah, those who work between downtown and New Center could use it to go to work. But how many people is that? I'm curious does anyone have population estimates for that stretch? I looked online but was unable to find anything. | ||
Trainman Member Username: Trainman Post Number: 223 Registered: 04-2006 |
I'm willing to pay more for the fuel tax to fund mass transit because Michigan has a lower then average tax and we can afford to raise it a little more. I don't think this alone is enough. The best solution is for all of us to do more to help others such as just doing simple things like taking a bus downtown instead of jumping on the freeway to help SMART get more communities to opt in and to convince our federal and state leaders to invest in public mass transit. It's time to come together on mass transit in Detroit to help ensure our area can attract more jobs and increase commerce. | ||
Kenp Member Username: Kenp Post Number: 115 Registered: 03-2006 |
Our fuel tax is not low and good luck raising it. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4552 Registered: 10-2003 |
Eastside, You walk before you run. You seem to be saying that unless a comprehensive system is gotten off the ground tomorrow, than you'd rather see nothing. It's about compromise. If this group of employers is looking to take the first step, I'm not going to fault or disparage them for that. I think their doing this simply to spark interest and bring more people into the discussion. They are the catalyst, not the entire solution, and I think they realize that, especially considering they are having a tough road just coming up with money for the study, let alone the proposed loop. Mass transit is always going to have to be a private-public partnership. They are picking up their end, now it's time for the more private intervention and the public to pick up their end of this if they really want this realized. | ||
Eastsidedog Member Username: Eastsidedog Post Number: 743 Registered: 03-2006 |
Lmichigan, I'm not saying comprehensive system or nothing. But just ONE line (be it rapid bus, light rail, elevated rail, you name it) up ONE main thouroughfare to ONE dense residential area would do wonders for relieving traffic and become a popular commuter line - probably over night. But no, they can't propose something that extends up to Boston-Edison or Ferndale - NO it must stop at New Center so no one can take it from the neighborhoods to work. Shit! What would we do with all those driveways! | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 515 Registered: 02-2006 |
Kenp, don't encourage him. | ||
Eastsidedog Member Username: Eastsidedog Post Number: 745 Registered: 03-2006 |
amatuers. don't do it Kenp! | ||
Jasoncw Member Username: Jasoncw Post Number: 250 Registered: 07-2005 |
WSU students would use it, and WSU is building more dorms. But I agree that a sucsessful system would go into the neighborhoods to take people to work. | ||
Kenp Member Username: Kenp Post Number: 116 Registered: 03-2006 |
how bout them tigers | ||
Eastsidedog Member Username: Eastsidedog Post Number: 746 Registered: 03-2006 |
Thank you Jasoncw!  Am I going crazy? Please let me know if I am. Thanks in advance. | ||
Sumotect Member Username: Sumotect Post Number: 248 Registered: 08-2004 |
The system is a technology that we have expertise in. It appears to be modular. Just keep expanding it in chunks, until everyone is connected. The Woodward corridor is just the second module. Also, lets make the cars here and not have to buy them from another country. In Europe they are talking about mag lev busses. http://www.economist.com/scien ce/tq/displayStory.cfm?story_i d=7904103 Something like that would allow us using existing right of ways, and allow for a highly flexible system. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1819 Registered: 10-2003 |
Why does everything think flexibility is a positive aspect of transit? | ||
Rbdetsport Member Username: Rbdetsport Post Number: 175 Registered: 11-2005 |
I will say it right now. The only reason why I would not want this system is if a Woodward Rail Line was put into place and stopped in New Center because of the PM. I think it would be awesome to have the rail lines coming into Downtown on the spokes and still have an extensive people mover system. The people mover would be for tourist and short trips, while the extensive rail system would be for suburban residents. Then there would be a couple of commuter rail lines. Someday I hope to see a system as huge as Boston's. | ||
Detroitnerd Member Username: Detroitnerd Post Number: 686 Registered: 07-2004 |
Dan, Flexibility is important in any new transit system so that we can retain the ability to disconnect neighborhoods as they are disinvested and depopulated. Jesus, putting rails down in the road so that people know we have a commitment to providing transit to a neighborhood? That's crazy, man. | ||
Apbest Member Username: Apbest Post Number: 203 Registered: 03-2006 |
but i mean its only important to an extent. A bus system is truely the most flexible system...but is it the best? | ||
Gravitymachine Member Username: Gravitymachine Post Number: 1339 Registered: 05-2005 |
that is crazy. we should build a miles long elevated concrete edifice instead, that is the most sensible course of action! flexibility-wise AND infastructure investment per mile wise!!! again. bring back the goddamn street cars! | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4553 Registered: 10-2003 |
Eastside, how many people in the ring just outside of the Grand Boulevard actually commute to downtown? This PM expansion would be there, more than anything else, to serve tourists and students, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. Let a private company run this, while the public sector works towards a comprehensive light-rail system that serves the inner-metro. | ||
Fury13 Member Username: Fury13 Post Number: 1215 Registered: 10-2003 |
"A bus system is truely the most flexible system...but is it the best?" In metro Detroit, because of the stigma attached to riding the bus, only poor people will ever patronize a bus-based system. To attract the middle class folks (and their money), you need some form of rail. | ||
Jimaz Member Username: Jimaz Post Number: 732 Registered: 12-2005 |
Segways for the masses! Weeeeeeee! | ||
Detroitnerd Member Username: Detroitnerd Post Number: 687 Registered: 07-2004 |
*laugh* I'm with you Gravitymachine. Let's build miles and miles of 20-foot-high track on reinforced concrete. Sure it'll require expensive elevators at each stop for the handicapped. Sure it'll make mass transit much more expensive than it need be by a factor of 10 or more. Sure it'll be prohibitively expensive to expand and difficult to maintain and service. Sure it's more in line with 1960s visions of the future. Sure it's a system that has not been the foundation of a transit system anywhere of a theme park, but, but but ... But motorists will like it because it won't compete for road space with cars. And plus they just, you know, look really cool and stuff. | ||
Stecks77 Member Username: Stecks77 Post Number: 115 Registered: 08-2006 |
Eastsidedog: I never said New Center and Downtown were primarily residential centers. I simply felt you were underestimating the amount of people that actually live between the river and New Center between the Lodge and 75. Once again, I realize the People Mover is not the best system but do all of you want to sit around and wait for the government to organize, plan, and pay for the "perfect" mass transit system for this area? Its not going to happen anytime soon. I'll take what I can get now from the private sector and build off of that in the future. | ||
Tetsua Member Username: Tetsua Post Number: 802 Registered: 01-2004 |
Wouldn't it be nice to have a system like Hudkina posted towards the bottom of this link? http://forum.skyscraperpage.co m/showthread.php?t=117532 | ||
Miketoronto Member Username: Miketoronto Post Number: 320 Registered: 07-2004 |
This is a great idea. You guys may not think it is the best idea, but connecting downtown and New Centre by rail is a great idea. Downtown and New Centre are pretty far apart. Believe it or not, downtown and New Centre are about the same distance as Toronto's first subway under Yonge Street, that connected downtown with Yonge-Eglinton. And now look at T.O. Rail has grown from that single little line. That is how it will have to be in Detroit. A rail line connecting such major destinations as downtown, New Centre, the university, medical centre, cultural centre, etc, is a big step. Just think of the improvments to bus service that could come also. All of a sudden buses would not need to continue into downtown. They could end at people mover stations in New Centre, and other areas along the line. That would free up a ton of buses to provide improved service to the neighbourhoods. | ||
Jasoncw Member Username: Jasoncw Post Number: 251 Registered: 07-2005 |
A subway would be really cool! Let's do that instead :p But yeah, I see your point. Hopefully this will get built and it will do what people hope it to do. | ||
Bob Member Username: Bob Post Number: 1182 Registered: 11-2003 |
And Chicago's El system was not built all at once but over a 100 years. If business in Detroit is saying this is important enough to pay fo rthe study themselves, this is a very good sign. | ||
Tkelly1986 Member Username: Tkelly1986 Post Number: 146 Registered: 01-2004 |
Now, what I do not understand is why the People Mover to Metro is unfeasible. If you compare Chicago and Detroit, the airports are literally the same distance away (Metro 18, O’Hare 17). A similar model could be used and the people mover could follow the median of I-94 or there can be a more direct round going south through the Zug Island area and connect at Cobo along the riverfront. That would boost the corridor it is on; (riverfront), have park and rides (along the part that takes I-94); thus help with parking in the city and congestion on I-94 and be the link we need to the airport…………I know, the money factor; but still, the blue line in Chicago was built during a time when it was losing much if its industrial base and population and considered a less than desirable place to be….. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1821 Registered: 10-2003 |
The big reason, tkelly, is this: The People Mover technology is antiquated, unreliable, and more expensive than conventional rail systems. There are very few replacement parts available, much less people who understand the software. A massive upgrade would be needed for such an extension. | ||
Bob Member Username: Bob Post Number: 1187 Registered: 11-2003 |
And the study may tell them that they need to use more conventional technology for such an extension. But the fact that they want to do this and pay for the study is a good step. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1822 Registered: 10-2003 |
Well, you know, when your political leaders fail you time and again, SOMEONE has to step up for the good of the region. God knows Detroit City Council is too busy bickering about who inherits what out of Kay Everett's hat collection. | ||
Quickdrawmcgraw Member Username: Quickdrawmcgraw Post Number: 68 Registered: 10-2005 |
Woodward is wide enough to handle either dedicated bus lanes or light rail. | ||
Nellonfury Member Username: Nellonfury Post Number: 191 Registered: 03-2005 |
It won't be long before the 20th birthday of the people mover arrive and is this the best way to celebrite it....EXPAND THAT TRAIN!!!! | ||
Andylinn Member Username: Andylinn Post Number: 227 Registered: 04-2006 |
you guys on this forum... always looking at the downside (except for those looking at the upside) anyone TALKING about transit in detroit should be applauded... | ||
Dougw Member Username: Dougw Post Number: 1369 Registered: 11-2003 |
This is good news, even if I think light rail is a slightly better option. At least this gets us more into a public debate about which form of rapid transit to run up Woodward, than a debate about whether to add any transit at all.
This point is intriguing. If true, that's a huge point in favor of the plan. I'm suspicious that that's really true, though. A parking tax would be a good way to provide ongoing funding. I assume the people mover technology can support train cars going in both directions on a single track, since the people mover was going back-and-forth a few years ago when the RenCen station was being redone. If that's the case, the most cost-effective setup would probably just be a single 2-way line going up Woodward, and then along West Grand over to HFH. A loop sounds like a big waste of money. Each station could have a stop in each direction (see Hudkina's diagram on the skyscraperpage thread above). Keep the total number of stops reasonably small, maybe between 5 and 8 total. I still think light rail is somewhat preferable to this, mainly because it could be more easily expanded further up Woodward into Oakland county for a real transit line. Either solution is vastly preferable to BRT on Woodward, though. | ||
Digitaldom Member Username: Digitaldom Post Number: 526 Registered: 08-2004 |
Ok honestly 200 million is CHEAP.. Jesus that shocked me when they said it.. seriously that is cheap.. The big dig cost billions.. and this project actually would travel the same distance.. Companies spend MILLIONS everyday.. Heck the company I work for makes over 300 million in profit every year.. | ||
Dougw Member Username: Dougw Post Number: 1373 Registered: 11-2003 |
I don't think I'd go quite *that* far, given that this is only a 3-mile transit line. A light rail line running the same distance would probably cost about half as much, I think? Sure, the big dig was insanely expensive, but that's not a typical case. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1829 Registered: 10-2003 |
The DPM cost $200 million for the existing 3-mile line--in 1986 dollars. A modern light rail line, which would be less prone to breakdowns, have higher speeds, and boast a higher capacity, could probably be built for about $50-60 million/mile--in 2006 dollars. | ||
Bob Member Username: Bob Post Number: 1192 Registered: 11-2003 |
Well for starters, the maintinance building was built with expansion in mind. It was built to hold a lot more cars than the system currently has. I'm sure the computer system that runs the DPM can probably also run the new system. There are a couple cost savings right there. Since you are using existing technology, that probably cuts down on engineering/design costs. Another thing that ate up funds was buying property to put the stations. I'm sure there is city owned property in enough places along Woodward that this is not an issue. For example, put a station right in front of the DIA. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1830 Registered: 10-2003 |
Aren't streets owned by the City??? Again, the problem with the DPM is that the technology is out of date. The software--incredibly obsolete--would need a significant upgrade. No matter what technology you use, there will always be engineering/design costs. Rail is an existing technology, but each project still requires engineering. Clunky 1970s technology would still require engineering to design a new segment. I would be *very* surprised if DPM is cheaper to build than light rail running in the street. | ||
Bob Member Username: Bob Post Number: 1194 Registered: 11-2003 |
In the past year, the DPM computer was massively upgraded. The city paid for it....that's why it hasn't shut down like it used to during the Auto Show in years past. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1831 Registered: 10-2003 |
But was it upgraded to handle an additional "leg" of track, with an even greater number of trains, switches, etc? Most likely, the most recent upgrade was merely a measure to correct problems that had been occurring. If the technology were actually useful, more cities than Detroit and Miami would have built systems. | ||
Jams Member Username: Jams Post Number: 3889 Registered: 10-2003 |
Some are State-owned, possibly some are County-owned (can anyone offer more info?) | ||
Apbest Member Username: Apbest Post Number: 206 Registered: 03-2006 |
OTHER SYSTEMS USING SAME TECHNOLOGY Toronto's Scarborough RT line Vancouver's Skytrain a 49km long system (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wi kipedia/commons/3/34/Vancouver _Skytrain_Current_Map.PNG) # England * Docklands Light Railway # Germany * Dortmund's H-Bahn # Japan * Hiroshima: Astram Line * Kobe: Port Liner, Rokko Liner * Komaki: Peach Liner * Nagoya: Linimo, Nagoya Guideway Bus * Osaka: New Tram (Osaka Municipal Nanko Port Town Line/OTS New Tram Technoport Line) * Saitama Prefecture: New Shuttle * Sakura: Yamaman Yukarigaoka Line * Tokyo: Yurikamome, Nippori-Toneri Line (opens 2007) * Yokohama: Kanazawa Seaside Line # Malaysia * Putra Light Rail Transit # The Philippines * Manila Light Rail Transit System * Manila Metro Rail Transit System # Portugal * Oeiras: SATU - Sistema Automático de Transporte Urbano # Singapore * Bukit Panjang Light Rapid Transit * Sengkang Light Rapid Transit * Punggol Light Rapid Transit # Taipei * Muzha Line # USA * Lake Buena Vista, Florida: Disney Monorail, Disneyworld * Detroit, Michigan: Detroit People Mover -- elevated loop system (Downtown People Mover) * Jacksonville, Florida -- in the form of a monorail (the Jacksonville Skyway) (Downtown People Mover) * Miami, Florida: Metromover (Downtown People Mover) * Las Colinas, Dallas, Texas -- Las Colinas APT System | ||
Upinottawa Member Username: Upinottawa Post Number: 560 Registered: 09-2005 |
If I am not mistaken, Vancouver and Toronto also use the same technology. Vancouver's Skytrain is the city's main rail based transit system. The system continues to be expanded and the system also uses new Mark II trains. Transit proponents in Vancouver continue to push Skytrain expansion. There are several new lines that have recently been completed or are being built. The Skytrain will eventually expand to the airport in order to handle traffic for the 2010 Winter Olympic Games. I am sure this system has been upgraded from what Detroit currently uses. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V ancouver_SkyTrain Toronto SRT line uses the same technology. From what I understand the line is going to be replaced with elevated light rail. The SRT was envisioned to complement the city's subway system. I think most people who use the system consider it to be a failure. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S carborough_RT_%28TTC%29 | ||
Ndavies Member Username: Ndavies Post Number: 2223 Registered: 10-2003 |
The problem with the people mover is it was built as a demonstration project. Only four systems in the world were built this way. The technology is too expensive. More traditional approaches are far cheaper. Here are some links to the technology used in the people mover. Including some links to Toronto's similar system and their angst over lengthing/replacing their people mover style transit line. http://www.answers.com/topic/d etroit-people-mover http://www.answers.com/topic/b ombardier-advanced-rapid-trans it http://www.transit.toronto.on. ca/subway/5107.shtml http://transit.toronto.on.ca/a rchives/weblog/2005/06/25-edit orial.shtml | ||
Ndavies Member Username: Ndavies Post Number: 2224 Registered: 10-2003 |
You'll also note that Bombardier no longer makes the trains used in the people mover. They would have to significantly upgrade the tracks to use the new trains or pay Bombardier a substantial amount of money to make the old trains. I don't see either solution being good. It would be simplier to use a less costly system for any expansion. The Vancouver and Kuala Lumpur lines use newer trains than the ones used by the DPM. | ||
Andyguard73 Member Username: Andyguard73 Post Number: 138 Registered: 03-2006 |
Does any one know if it be possible to convert the existing people mover tracks into elevated light rail? It seems like if it were it would be easier to expand later into a street level system. | ||
3rdworldcity Member Username: 3rdworldcity Post Number: 310 Registered: 01-2005 |
Try these numbers on for size. Assume the promoters borrowed the entire $200,000,000 proposed cost for 30 years at a fixed rate of 6% per annum. The debt service (P & I) is $1,199,101.05 per month, $39,970.04 per DAY, assuming the project came in on budget (you think?). Assume for the sake of argument the fare is $1.00 per passenger. Number of required passengers per day to cover debt service - 39,970. But add on the cost for electricity (astronomical), wages and benefits, insurance, repairs, maintenance, marketing etc., etc. Figure 10,000 passengers per day at best, do the math on the cost per passenger. Currently the DPM claims about 5000 passengers per day; highly inflated I would think. It's estimated by DPM that the city subsidizes every $.50 fare by at least $3.00. (All above numbers are pre-tax, but that doesn't even count.) Have the promoters send me $200,000 for the "study" I just did, above. They don't have to spend any more time on this deal, which has to be a joke. | ||
Burnsie Member Username: Burnsie Post Number: 684 Registered: 11-2003 |
Andyguard73-- I think you could classify the People Mover as light rail. There are different types of light rail. And yes, I'm pretty sure the People Mover's tracks are non-standard and incompatible with traditional 2-rail, 4' 8.5" gauge (both heavy and light rail) tracks. | ||
Bobj Member Username: Bobj Post Number: 1201 Registered: 11-2003 |
3rdworldcity - your numbers are compelling - as I see it, the only way to make it work is for the Feds to pay for it (unlikely) or if ridership would dramatically increase for some reason - I don't know what might drive that. But I don't see how it could be a private, for profit venture. | ||
Andyguard73 Member Username: Andyguard73 Post Number: 141 Registered: 03-2006 |
Thanks Burnsie, thats what I mean. Could the PM be converted to standard rail tracks? | ||
Bussey Member Username: Bussey Post Number: 252 Registered: 12-2003 |
Why would you have to build upon the existing PM line ? ***If not mentioned above already*** Couldn' t you just make a transfer station at grand circus park to extend out to New Center and beyond down Woodward? | ||
Jasoncw Member Username: Jasoncw Post Number: 252 Registered: 07-2005 |
That's what would make the most sense to me. I mean, even if the people mover was extended, it's still a one way track, and they wouldn't share the same tracks, it would be a two seperate loops that share a station or two. And I don't think that any of the loops should share trains. One of the only good things about the people mover is that it's simple. You don't need to figure out routes or times or anything. | ||
Apbest Member Username: Apbest Post Number: 207 Registered: 03-2006 |
there's no way a 3 mile extension would by a one way loop...the article even says two way | ||
Upinottawa Member Username: Upinottawa Post Number: 564 Registered: 09-2005 |
Light rail (on street) from Dearborn to Ferndale (or Royal Oak) via Downtown would be a much better feeder system for the DPM. Any new loop would need to be two way. Vancouver's system is two way. | ||
Tetsua Member Username: Tetsua Post Number: 806 Registered: 01-2004 |
It would be nice to have this system be bidirectional, instead of having to ride in a circle to get to your destination. | ||
Upinottawa Member Username: Upinottawa Post Number: 566 Registered: 09-2005 |
Any other cities in North America (or even Europe) who are building loops instead of lines? | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1836 Registered: 10-2003 |
It depends how you define "loop". I believe Chicago is looking at a circular line to provide an outer connection between the spokes of the L trains. They're also studying the STAR line, which would be a circumferential commuter rail line, connecting the spokes of the Metra system. | ||
Ndavies Member Username: Ndavies Post Number: 2228 Registered: 10-2003 |
There are plenty of loops on other mass transit lines. However, they usually are bidirectional loops. Downtown Chicaco is called the loop because of the downtown elevated transit loop. The London underground has a few loops in it. Having a loop doesn't stop it from being bidirectional. | ||
Tetsua Member Username: Tetsua Post Number: 807 Registered: 01-2004 |
The DC Metro is another example of a bidirectional Loop system which is very efficient. The advantage to systems like this is the fact that they can juntion with several other lines (Future expansion of the train system). | ||
Bussey Member Username: Bussey Post Number: 253 Registered: 12-2003 |
Go to any German city and you will find very functional transit systems that have lines, loops and all of it on the "honor system" You are not forced to pay if you don't want to. They have police that supposedly travel the system randomly checking for tickets but in my two weeks there I saw none such activity. If you can go to http://www.lodging-germany.com /info/Berlin/berlin-7citymapub ahn.htm | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1837 Registered: 10-2003 |
No loops on the DC Metro! All five lines are bi-directional linear. | ||
Upinottawa Member Username: Upinottawa Post Number: 567 Registered: 09-2005 |
Okay, let me modify the question: any North American or European cities building loops where the city's only form of rail transit is a loop? Bussey: did the Munich U-Bahn, but I bought I ticket. They make you pay your fines in Euros over there.... | ||
Bussey Member Username: Bussey Post Number: 254 Registered: 12-2003 |
What are you trying to say.... are you asking a question regarding the Munchen U-Bahn or are you making a statement about the one, or i, ticket you bought... I know they make you pay Euros. My friend who goes to school over there was busted once for not having a ticket and had to pay a 20 Euro fine. I just never saw anyone enforcing this law while I was traveling on the U and S Bahns of Frankfurt, Berlin and Munchen. | ||
Chitaku Member Username: Chitaku Post Number: 809 Registered: 03-2006 |
Enough studying, just do it! | ||
Tetsua Member Username: Tetsua Post Number: 808 Registered: 01-2004 |
Well maybe I didn't explain myself quite right with calling the DC system a "loop" system, but here's what I was trying to say. It's a crude photoshop image with 3 lines (No need to explain why these lines wouldn't work logistically, just an example). Having a system like this enables the trains to junction at more than one point.  | ||
Upinottawa Member Username: Upinottawa Post Number: 568 Registered: 09-2005 |
Bussey: sorry for the confusion. I was just confirming that the German systems run on the honour system. "Did" was meant as in "have done" rather than to start a question with respect to Munich's U-Bahn. With respect to the Euro thing, I was saying that I paid for the ticket because fines in Euros are more painful than fines in American dollars due to the exchange rate. I wasn't suggesting that you did not pay for your trip. I was trying to make a joke. My original question (above) still stands. I have the suspicion the answer is no. Really this additional "proposed" loop is still only going to serve a limited number of people. If Detroit's system was more extensive, such a loop might complement the system, but unfortunately such is not the case. A train to nowhere Part II that connects to another train to nowhere is still a train to barely anywhere. Even if it is tri-directional! | ||
Ndavies Member Username: Ndavies Post Number: 2229 Registered: 10-2003 |
Sorry upinottawa, I don't understand your logic. You have to expand what you have. You can't build the entire thing at once. This is the most logical next step. Connecting what you have to the closest population/business center makes sense. This can then be expanded out Woodward to the suburbs. You can only eat an elephant one bite at a time. Midtown, the area between new center and downtown, is also one of the regions within the city that is growing. This would definitely help increase this area's current draw. This stretch would be the first area of any mass transit buildout. | ||
Dougw Member Username: Dougw Post Number: 1376 Registered: 11-2003 |
Why on earth would any city want to do that? My guess is that the answer is no. I assume you mean a city where the only form of rail transit is a series of loops. I could see a city having only one loop as the hub of an incomplete system (see Detroit). A straight two-way line from Detroit's CBD to the new center would not only be cheaper than a loop, but it would be significantly easier for riders to understand. | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 521 Registered: 02-2006 |
Just to clear something up, Chicago's Circle Line (Silver Line) will not actually be a loop, but more of a "Block-C" shape, connecting the radial lines outside the loop, with the likely alignment being a corridor along Ashland or Western (if I remember). It will have terminal stations, and does not connect back upon itself. I believe the Metra connector line will operate under a similar principle. Picture the radial roads in Detroit, turn Detroit on its side so it resembles Chicago, and then these connector lines will serve the purpose of 8 mile road. | ||
Upinottawa Member Username: Upinottawa Post Number: 570 Registered: 09-2005 |
Ndavies, the problem with building a second loop is that it would be difficult to expand in the future. The RenCen reconstruction severely hurt the DPM since the DPM had to use infrequent bypass service. A street car line like the one proposed by TRU would still serve midtown (down Woodward) and could be expanded North and West as funds permit. If the second loop was to be bidirectional, then why not build upon Vancouver's Skytrain concept and build one line out to midtown and a second line going west up Michigan Avenue rather than build a loop to Midtown. A linear system could cover more distance (and serve more people) using the same amount of track as the loop. | ||
Dougw Member Username: Dougw Post Number: 1377 Registered: 11-2003 |
(I don't want to speak for Ndavies, but I don't think he was necessarily advocating a loop configuration.) The original article isn't clear on whether the proposed expansion would be a loop or not, it merely says "The expansion would extend the People Mover tracks three miles up the corridor in both directions". The fact that the article doesn't mention that it would be another loop makes me think that it would probably be a single bi-directional line, not a loop. Which makes sense, as there is not really any good reason to have it be loop, unless there is some overwhelming obstacle to creating a single bi-directional line. (if for example, the DPM cannot fork to handle a bi-directional station) | ||
Bussey Member Username: Bussey Post Number: 255 Registered: 12-2003 |
If this study is anything like what most corporations do in initial planning phases then probably nothing is confirmed right now and any possibility is possible. | ||
Digitaldom Member Username: Digitaldom Post Number: 528 Registered: 08-2004 |
One clafication is that the DPM actually is heavy rail.. and it uses linear motion motors to propel the trains. Light rail is usually defined as being seperate but interacting with traffic.. And usally has over head lines feeding power into the trains. DPM does not have this issue.. I don't believe you can retrofit the DPM trains to run street level. Now funny you say about trains themselves.. If you look at the Detroit Web Site they actually put out an indepedant bid to retrofit and modernize the trains about 6 - 12 months ago. Thanx, Dan | ||
Mayor_sekou Member Username: Mayor_sekou Post Number: 106 Registered: 09-2006 |
Loops are good ideas if the system is extensive enough and the loop is in a area where there alot of employees or attractions like someone mentioned the Circle line in central london is a good example because it connects all of the other lines together without forcing all rail lines to come from one central area. Which is good in decentralized southeastern michigan a loop for the northern burbs and a loop that wraps around Grand Blvd/Jefferson with lines in between would cover the area very thouroughly. I also dont like above ground rail like the DPM its not very pleasing to the eye and not to mention noisy. This extension if it went up woodward it would probably be those Chicago el cover the whole street type of deals that I really am not fond of. Light rail on the street would not be so obtrusive and not to mention it would be cheaper to build and maintain making further extensions more likely. | ||
Lowell Board Administrator Username: Lowell Post Number: 3098 Registered: 10-2003 |
This discussion may be all be pie in the sky, because 3WC's cold hard facts are awfully blunt. But we can dream too. So the conversation becomes a bit of a manifestation of the gathering excitement that the stumbling revival of downtown Detroit is creating -- even more juiced by the Tiger's pennant run. What if the tooth fairy instead dumped his $200 million into that stretch and create the ultimate model bus system? Where a bus appeared every 7 minutes in busy times, like jjaba's Grand River buses of yore? But spotless, silent, fumeless, internally powered electic machines that appeared exactly on time and ran around the clock. Couldn't that be done for a fraction of the proposed cost [way low IMO] of a rail system and provide flexibility? Perhaps the DOT could sell that route to the private investors or partner with them. | ||
3rdworldcity Member Username: 3rdworldcity Post Number: 312 Registered: 01-2005 |
Lowell: Best idea re: efficient bus system.Compariively, so simple and at relatively little cost. Especially great if GM builds the buses. R: cost. American Airlines recently completed its new Skytrain system at DFW which circles it's four terminals. Bi-directional. Length is maybe 1.8 miles. Time to build, about 3 years. Cost: $1.5 billion. It's a fantastic system, by the way. | ||
Urban_shocker Member Username: Urban_shocker Post Number: 275 Registered: 12-2003 |
Re: loop vs. single-line, anything and everything is on the table at this point, but original discussion has been around single-line, up John R with DMC support, up Cass without it. Keep in mind too that no two pieces of the original track were alike, because of the need to wind around the downtown streets and buildings. A straight expansion could be much cheaper for the modularity it would allow. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1838 Registered: 10-2003 |
Actually, the DPM is not heavy rail. The proper term is Automated Guideway Transit. While the DPM is grade-separated, it does not use high-level platforms for boarding, which is, in fact, the distinguishing characteristic. Heavy rail systems are also able to run in consists of up to 10 cars, and thus are built to handle much higher capacities. AGM is more of a novelty mode, typically used for tourist attractions and in airports. As 3rdworldcity noted, it's incredibly expensive to build, especially for the results achieved. $1.5B for 1.8 miles? You could build ten miles of the Washington Metro for that much money. | ||
Apbest Member Username: Apbest Post Number: 217 Registered: 03-2006 |
what costs 1.5bil dollars? | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1839 Registered: 10-2003 |
| ||
Llyn Member Username: Llyn Post Number: 1656 Registered: 06-2004 |
Why is it that I just hate that idea... even though it makes a lot of sense? Drawbacks are few (traffic control and congestion for example). Somehow, when I ride a train it just feel so much better than on a bus. Especially if it's for any distance. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1840 Registered: 10-2003 |
Which is why BRT will never match the performance of rail. The ride quality is just so much better on a train, and the electrically-powered vehicles have much better acceleration characteristics than internal combustion buses. Remember kids, there was a reason National City Lines substituted buses for streetcar lines--to get people off transit and into cars! No way no how a bus is going to even come close to what light rail can do--no matter how sexy the paint job is, or how you "brand" it. And going back to Lowell's post, why do so many Detroiters think "flexibility" is a positive aspect of transit? Don't the existing bus routes more-or-less follow the routes of the old DSR streetcars? How much flexibility do you need? | ||
Dougw Member Username: Dougw Post Number: 1378 Registered: 11-2003 |
True 'nuf, I don't really see it happening unless somehow the feds pay for a large portion of the $200 mil. (as with the people mover) Even with the DMC/HFH/etc chipping in, and they're not exactly flush with cash. Which is why light rail feels like a happy medium between cost and quality. $60 mil for a light rail line along that route is at least somewhat doable. Even better if part of that cost could be covered by the $100 mil AA-Det federal grant. I'm not opposed to trying BRT along some routes, as Detroitplanner and others have said we probably need to try a few different modes to see what works best for our region, as a system start to grow. But you need to put the higher-quality/more expensive modes (e.g. LRT) on the most important routes, and Woodward is the most important. If we put BRT on Woodward, we've pretty much screwed ourselves into not having LRT anywhere. Not to mention the fact that we already have buses every 10-15 minutes along Woodward, BRT would only be a modest improvement. Instead, put LRT on Woodward, and try BRT on a mix of other routes such as 8 Mile. (Then watch over the following years to see which modes have the most success and foster transit oriented development, etc.) (Message edited by Dougw on October 13, 2006) | ||
Digitaldom Member Username: Digitaldom Post Number: 531 Registered: 08-2004 |
That why I said before I was EXTREMELY suprised by the low price tag of 200 mil or so.. that's seemed really low for me.. Does anyone know how much it would cost to go underground? Just curious... | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 525 Registered: 02-2006 |
I don't know, but it would surprise me to see any substantial from-scratch subway systems anywhere in the US ever again. | ||
Upinottawa Member Username: Upinottawa Post Number: 574 Registered: 09-2005 |
Focus: you're probably right. Isn't it bizarre that the richest country in the history of our planet may never again have the funds to build a subway system in a non-subway city? (Message edited by upinottawa on October 14, 2006) | ||
Ltorivia485 Member Username: Ltorivia485 Post Number: 2839 Registered: 08-2004 |
Subways are much more expensive than on-ground or above-ground transit systems. They take longer to build too. | ||
Bussey Member Username: Bussey Post Number: 258 Registered: 12-2003 |
Are you guys oblivious to what happened in LA? http://www.geocities.com/los_angeles_coast/public_transportation.html Developed the entire system in 1990 (Message edited by bussey on October 14, 2006) | ||
Upinottawa Member Username: Upinottawa Post Number: 575 Registered: 09-2005 |
Thanks Bussey. | ||
Bussey Member Username: Bussey Post Number: 259 Registered: 12-2003 |
It can happen here. If you build it they will come. (Message edited by bussey on October 14, 2006) | ||
Trainman Member Username: Trainman Post Number: 226 Registered: 04-2006 |
The Michigan Department of Transportation no longer supports public bus service because IT COSTS TOO MUCH On November 1, 2006 we will by majority vote replace state fuel taxes with property taxes with the promise of rail bringing back the rider-ship essential to support mass transit But, it is only a promise at this time | ||
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner Post Number: 262 Registered: 04-2006 |
"On November 1, 2006 we will by majority vote replace state fuel taxes with property taxes with the promise of rail bringing back the rider-ship essential to support mass transit" Please cite the ballot, I am unaware of this. Does this mean gas will go down by 20 cents a gallon? |
