M1 Rail contract awarded

[rb336]

I, too, have no clue what a "merton" is and can't find anything on google to explain it. DetroitDave, please enlighten us

[TexasT]

Well, again, the same arguments were there when the PM was developing; "it goes in a useless circle"... "we're car dependent sprawled out city".. "it's not mass transit"... "no one will use it"

each and every one of the critiques was proven true.

Was the People Mover built as it was intended to be?

[TexasT]

what I'm against is the unmitigated praise it gets as being "regional" or "mass transit"/light rail. It's a downtown trolley for hipsters and professionals to use because they don't want to ride the bus that currently serves that route... and hopefully lead to some development along the very short route and some gentrification.

I'll somewhat agree with that. It's a start. You have to change people's mentalities towards mass transit first. That's what our first line in Houston did [[but we had to wrestle public money to do so). Hopefully, that's what will happen here too.

[bailey]

Was the People Mover built as it was intended to be?

Nope. And neither is the M1...which is why it's deja vu.

[TexasT]

Nope. And neither is the M1...which is why it's deja vu.

At what point did the single-direction, one loop PM become the reality instead of the full plan? Because you can look at the plan for that and know it's a bad idea. I don't feel the same way with the M1.

[Eber Brock Ward]

And yet Houston's light rail line carries fewer riders than the current Woodward bus. That's a success?

And it would also be about median in Chicago, with similar daily ridership to the orange and green:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_'L'

Are about half of Chicago's rapid transit lines not a success in your view? You know, to put your argument in context.

[[Ps - Houston's is particularly successful when you consider that it's light rail and not rapid transit)

[bailey]

At what point did the single-direction, one loop PM become the reality instead of the full plan?

About the time someone realized that that city had lost 1/3 of it's tax base and the light rail lines from the 'burbs that were supposed to feed it were never going to be built because those people were not going to come downtown...and many of them were working diligently to ensure "detroiters" couldn't get out there either.

Because you can look at the plan for that and know it's a bad idea.

yes, and so apparently did a lot of people at the time, but Uncle Sam had already given the money and it was half built. CAY didn't want a bunch of cement pillars littering downtown...so we went ahead and finished it.

I don't feel the same way with the M1.

I think it's PM version 2.0. It's STILL not going to be fed by any feeder line. It's going to be fed by buses and feed buses.

But hey, it's getting a lot of private funding and those with the gold make the rules. The Gilbertonians demanded it, they've designed it[[and ignored all experts in that design) and they'll get it. So, again...bring it on. Maybe doing the same thing [[building a downtown, limited use circulator), slightly differently will work this time.

[Hermod]

I still maintain that there would have been a lot more regional support for a Woodward line if they had started in Pontiac and worked in towards downtown Detroit. The current plans may well end up being just an easy way for Wayne State students to go downtown, get plastered, and get home without a DUI.

[ghettopalmetto]

I think it's PM version 2.0. It's STILL not going to be fed by any feeder line. It's going to be fed by buses and feed buses.

Except the Woodward streetcar will be "fed" by pedestrians. You won't have to drive all the way downtown to have it take you the last couple blocks. Given the increased residential populations in both Downtown and Midtown, this is self-evident.

It's stupid to talk wistfully about "feeder routes" when you don't yet have anything to feed. It's worth noting, however, that buses are used to supplement the busiest subway systems in the nation and around the world. I think they'll be sufficient to supplement any light rail and streetcar service in Detroit.

. So, again...bring it on. Maybe doing the same thing [[building a downtown, limited use circulator), slightly differently will work this time.

Just because it doesn't work for YOU doesn't make it "limited-use". One could also argue that I-696 or M-53 are "limited-use", but that didn't stop the State of Michigan from pouring billions of dollars into those concrete canyons.

The differences are that the streetcar:
1. Goes both directions. Perish the thought!
2. Travels beyond walking distance. What a concept.
3. Uses readily-available, tried-and-true technology that won't be obsolete on opening day.

[Lowell]

I still maintain that there would have been a lot more regional support for a Woodward line if they had started in Pontiac and worked in towards downtown Detroit. The current plans may well end up being just an easy way for Wayne State students to go downtown, get plastered, and get home without a DUI.

Amen to that. Maybe this has been asked before, but how fast can the cars go and are the chainable, like subway cars? The reason I ask is should the fairly tale of a high speed transit route [subway/el] up Woodward to Pontiac come true, could those cars transparently blend in? Or would it all have to be at street level?

[bailey]

Except the Woodward streetcar will be "fed" by pedestrians.

Sigh. So, the buses that currently serve the busiest bus route in they city AREN'T served by pedestrians?

You won't have to drive all the way downtown to have it take you the last couple blocks.

No, i'll have to drive ALMOST all the way downtown and have it take me the rest of the way. Which I could do now if I wanted to ride the bus.

This is the woodward line on rails. that's it. It's side running, in traffic, not grade separated and has a crap load of stops. my question is why bother? why not save the money and just dress up some buses to look like trains. That is what the rest of the plan calls for anyway.

Just because it doesn't work for YOU doesn't make it "limited-use". One could also argue that I-696 or M-53 are "limited-use",

regardless of whether one uses 696 or 59..etc, most anything they might buy or need likely traveled to the store in which they bought it via those roads.

The differences are that the streetcar:
1. Goes both directions. Perish the thought! [ and then, when one needs to get to the job or home NOT on the 3 miles of line, one needs to get into a car or change modes and make transfers]
2. Travels beyond walking distance. What a concept.[ yet most of it's stops are within walking distance of each other and 4 of its stops [[1/3rd of the line) are within the PM circle or walking distance to it.]
3. Uses readily-available, tried-and-true technology that won't be obsolete on opening day. [true, but so do the buses that service that line...imagine if we spent a quarter billion on making our regional buses the most efficient, best run system in the country?]

[ghettopalmetto]

Sigh. So, the buses that currently serve the busiest bus route in they city AREN'T served by pedestrians?


This is the woodward line on rails. that's it. It's side running, in traffic, not grade separated and has a crap load of stops. my question is why bother? why not save the money and just dress up some buses to look like trains. That is what the rest of the plan calls for anyway.

Because, as I and others have stated ad nauseum:

1. Streetcars are a permanent route. You don't have to guess if-and-when it's going to turn off the route. You know exactly where it's going to go, and where it's going to stop. This is attractive to riders. And if you spend the money to put down rails, businesses know that the route isn't going to magically disappear.

2. Ride quality is far better and smoother. Steel-on-steel has less friction than rubber-on-asphalt, so vehicle performance is smoother. There are less moving parts in an electric engine, which means the engine [[and vehicle) last longer. These things can last over 50 years, compared to 12 for a bus.

3. Streetcars operate on electricity, avoiding the volatility in price of diesel fuel.

regardless of whether one uses 696 or 59..etc, most anything they might buy or need likely traveled to the store in which they bought it via those roads.

Makes you wonder how Detroit survived nearly 300 years without those freeways, doesn't it?

It's clear you're penned in your own paradigm. And if that's the case, then why do you bemoan anyone's plans to make Detroit a better place? Anyone who's looked at the news in the past month will tell you that OLD PARADIGMS HAVEN'T WORKED IN DETROIT. It's time to move forward in spite of curmudgeons.

[bailey]

1. Streetcars are a permanent route. You don't have to guess if-and-when it's going to turn off the route. You know exactly where it's going to go, and where it's going to stop. This is attractive to riders. And if you spend the money to put down rails, businesses know that the route isn't going to magically disappear.

The People Mover isn't permanent? Are people concerned it's going to be re-routed? Is THAT why the development along it never materialized? I always wondered. Thanks for that.

2. Ride quality is far better and smoother. Steel-on-steel has less friction than rubber-on-asphalt, so vehicle performance is smoother.

of the reasons people don't ride the bus, I don't think bumpy ride is high on it... but ok. Maybe not having such shitty roads might be a place to mitigate that?

[3. Streetcars operate on electricity, avoiding the volatility in price of diesel fuel.

As to this and the rest of your point 2, I must have hallucinated those electric, natural gas, and hybrid buses I've seen operating elsewhere.

It's clear you're penned in your own paradigm. And if that's the case, then why do you bemoan anyone's plans to make Detroit a better place? Anyone who's looked at the news in the past month will tell you that OLD PARADIGMS HAVEN'T WORKED IN DETROIT

Yes, old paradigms don't work .. which is why I can't understand why we're pretending PM version 2.0 is not an old paradigm.

I live and work here. I would like what get's done to actually work and I'd like to see coherent, functioning regional mass transit. This isn't that. As it is, I see people playing sim city and ignoring expert opinion and not really giving two shits whether a trolley on a a tiny stretch of one arterial road actually makes any sense.

[Eric_c]

I posted this back in 2007 and it's still relevant:

I believe that practical, efficient mass transit throughout Metro-Detroit would enhance the current state of the region, PROVIDED the system's right-of-ways are conceived from the onset as development engines for new urban commuter corridors. A Detroit-area rapid transit system,with few exceptions, would not necessarily do well to try to mimic current auto routes. Instead, residents and community leaders would be wise to view the development of such a system as a way to promote brand-new economic development in under-utilized areas throughout the region. Public investment in a properly planned and executed network of transit AND appropriate zoning could credibly enhance Southeastern Michigan's economy by creating opportunities for private investment in areas where there are currently, seemingly few.

I see the return of streetcars to Woodward Avenue as the initial step toward the realization of a true regional transit system and the development of urban commuter corridors. Woodward stands out as the most logical place to institute such a line as it lends itself almost immediately to transits' highest and best use. At once, the urban density of the corridor combined with the current level of disinvestment indicates that a strategyof public commitment to attract private capital to the area would yield the greatest potential return.

In the form of a dedicated streetcar line, even if initially limited to between Campus Martius and the Boulevard, this public commitment would increase the value of property throughout the corridor. A transit line would promote in-fill and spin-off developments, increase the desirability of the route as a place to live and conduct business, as well as providea practical means of commuting [[even if only initially) between Downtown, Midtown and New Center.

It is my contention that traditional streetcars are the mode of transportation best suited to Woodward Avenue and the otherradials,particularlyinthe CBD. Streetcars would be ideal along these routes because the overall scale of the street allows for their efficient function. I wouldn't advocate "station stops" or fifty-mile-per-hour vehicles - especially between Downtown and New Center. By the same token, I wouldn't consider old-fashioned streetcars on Big Beaver or Wayne Roads, either! Streetcars offer affordable, comfortable, quiet transportation along a permanent route. Stops do not need to be elaborate structures, and wheelchair access is not a problem on modern vehicles.

The metro area will have some type of improved transit sooner or later, but I also believe that the area has sprawled out too far from the core to make any ONE model practical on a regional level. Regardless, we would be best served by building a permanent system that keeps as it's purpose the stabilization of existing areas and the sensible pioneering of new growth in previously-undeveloped or less-desireable sections of the metro. A Woodward streetcar line, as an example, would do both.

[ghettopalmetto]

The People Mover isn't permanent? Are people concerned it's going to be re-routed? Is THAT why the development along it never materialized? I always wondered. Thanks for that.

Because the DPM doesn't go anywhere that you can't cover on foot. It's cumbersome. To get to it, you have to drive all the way to it, pay to park, buy a token, enter the system, wait for a train, then ride a couple blocks that you could have easily covered on foot. Never mind that it only goes in a single direction.

of the reasons people don't ride the bus, I don't think bumpy ride is high on it... but ok. Maybe not having such shitty roads might be a place to mitigate that?

And make the road lobby happy to boot. Because that's all that's allowed is roads roads roads. Have you not been paying attention? Do you not realize that one-third of Detroiters don't have access to a car? And that the region is collapsing under its own job sprawl, which limits the number of jobs accessible by transit? Sorry, man. The Ward Cleaver days are over. Hate to burst your bubble.

Maybe MDOT shouldn't be paving cornfields if they're so concerned about the quality of streets in Detroit? You don't think Dan Gilbert and Roger Penske can get an asphalt truck and roller?

As to this and the rest of your point 2, I must have hallucinated those electric, natural gas, and hybrid buses I've seen operating elsewhere.

Those still have internal combustion engines = moving parts. No hybrid bus is going to last 50 years, no matter how earthy we think it is, or what color we paint it, or if we put a rocket nose on the front of it.

I live and work here. I would like what get's done to actually work and I'd like to see coherent, functioning regional mass transit. This isn't that. As it is, I see people playing sim city and ignoring expert opinion and not really giving two shits whether a trolley on a a tiny stretch of one arterial road actually makes any sense.

You're ignoring people who actually have experience *riding* good transit. You're letting the good be the enemy of the perfect. The New York City subway wasn't built overnight, and neither will any regional transit system in Detroit. You must start Somewhere, or you'll never get Anywhere.

[Hermod]

Ride quality is far better and smoother. Steel-on-steel has less friction than rubber-on-asphalt, so vehicle performance is smoother. There are less moving parts in an electric engine, which means the engine [[and vehicle) last longer. These things can last over 50 years, compared to 12 for a bus.

Only if the tracks are well-maintained. If the tracks get the same level of maintenance as the city streets, the streetcars will ride rough as well.

[bailey]

Because the DPM doesn't go anywhere that you can't cover on foot.

agreed, but then why is a 1/3rd of the M1 line inside or walking distance to the PM line?

It's cumbersome.To get to it, you have to drive all the way to it, pay to park, buy a token, enter the system, wait for a train, then ride a couple blocks that you could have easily covered on foot. Never mind that it only goes in a single direction.

Yes, agreed. But if you don't live on the M1 line, it's the same story. You either drive somewhere, park then ride...or take a bus [[that up until now ran the M1 route) part of the way, then switch to the M1 line.

Do you not realize that one-third of Detroiters don't have access to a car? And that the region is collapsing under its own job sprawl, which limits the number of jobs accessible by transit? Sorry, man. The Ward Cleaver days are over. Hate to burst your bubble.

I'd appreciate it if you'd stop with the [[at this point it must be) willful mis-characterization of my problems with this plan. MY ENTIRE POINT IS THAT THIS IS NOT SERVICING THE 1/3 OF DETROITERS[[and those in the burbs) THAT DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO A CAR.

other than all caps I don't know how to make that more clear because I've said it multiple times. this goes nowhere NOT served by VERY highly utilized buses. It DOES NOTHING to make getting to a job NOT on the line [[or heck, the CoD's only Meijers) ny easier or faster. It's primary purpose will be as a parking shuttle for suburbanites and as a circulator between destinations and along a route already fully serviced [[serviced badly..we all agree) by buses.

Maybe MDOT shouldn't be paving cornfields if they're so concerned about the quality of streets in Detroit? You don't think Dan Gilbert and Roger Penske can get an asphalt truck and roller?

Maybe. I would think with Penske's experience paving over most of Belle Isle, he's the one to talk to about that.

You're ignoring people who actually have experience *riding* good transit. You're letting the good be the enemy of the perfect. The New York City subway wasn't built overnight, and neither will any regional transit system in Detroit. You must start Somewhere, or you'll never get Anywhere.

Well, actually I have lived in various places both in the US and abroad that have "good" transit. That is my point. WHY should we ignore what is good and what works for something that is a half assed measure? I mean you're still not getting from the airport to downtown...you're still not getting anywhere NOT on Woodward and you're not getting outside of Detroit anytime this generation. It shouldn't take 30, 40, 50 years to get a rail line from CBD to the fucking airport or to Royal oak. We are the LAST 'major' city doing this..not the first. This stuff should not be this difficult.

This is typical Detroit... eating shit and trying to pretend it's steak.
Build anything, no matter how superfluous or half assed because..well, it's SOMETHING.

It's getting built... so whatever. I'll happily eat crow all day long if in 10 years we're breaking ground on something that actually services something not on woodward or reaches outside Detroit.

[mwilbert]

Steel-on-steel has less friction than rubber-on-asphalt, so vehicle performance is smoother.

Yes, it has less friction. No, that isn't what makes the ride smoother.

[mwilbert]

1. Streetcars are a permanent route. You don't have to guess if-and-when it's going to turn off the route. You know exactly where it's going to go, and where it's going to stop. This is attractive to riders. And if you spend the money to put down rails, businesses know that the route isn't going to magically disappear.

This may well be true in general, but it is a nonsensical argument in this case. I would say that there is a greater likelihood that the M1 stops running than that there is no bus service on Woodward between downtown and New Center.

[michimoby]

This is typical Detroit... eating shit and trying to pretend it's steak.
Build anything, no matter how superfluous or half assed because..well, it's SOMETHING.

It's getting built... so whatever. I'll happily eat crow all day long if in 10 years we're breaking ground on something that actually services something not on woodward or reaches outside Detroit.

The anti-Daniel Burnham, perhaps?

I have to remind myself that we can't expect Detroit's approach to development to have the audacity of projects you find in other cities. But that's also because there's been severe resistance to most, if not all, attempts at progressive development over the past several decades.

Will the M1 be a boondoggle? I certainly hope not, but there's also some kudos earned to even developing it in the first place.

But let's also not assume this is only taking place in Detroit... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cincinnati_Subway

[Spartan]

agreed, but then why is a 1/3rd of the M1 line inside or walking distance to the PM line?

The biggest differences are that this goes in a straight line and in both directions. It is more useful for longer travel, and getting between New Center/Midtown/Downtown, not so much within them. Even so, it will be more convenient to hop on M1 and ride it down Woodward than it would be to walk. 90% of the time, walking is more convenient than taking the PM because you're going one way and there are very few direct trips.

[bailey]

The biggest differences are that this goes in a straight line and in both directions.

so do the buses that currently run that stretch of woodward.

It is more useful for longer travel, and getting between New Center/Midtown/Downtown, not so much within them.

well, again...so do the buses that run that route right now. Imagine if 250 million was dropped on making sure they ran on time and kept in good working order?

My issue is the same people saying you can walk anywhere served by the PM have no issue with THREE M1 stops ... Congress, CM, GCP on or inside the PM line and then another stop out front of CoPA.

I know we're all flyover state fatties, but seriously. GCP to CM is 4 blocks. GCP to larned/Congress is only another 2. Isn't some of the alleged justification for this to get people walking on the street? how is that accomplished if you have a stop on every other corner?

so, it will be more convenient to hop on M1 and ride it down Woodward than it would be to walk. 90% of the time, walking is more convenient than taking the PM because you're going one way and there are very few direct trips.

well, 90%? I mean if I'm coming or going from CM park... 50% of the time I'm going to go in the direction the PM is and it would be just as easy to walk to the back side of Compuware and take the PM up to GCP....OR I could you know...walk the couple of blocks from CM to GCP.

I agree it makes it marginally easier to ride from Congress to GCP up Woodward than going the long way around via PM or walking.. but if you can't walk from Congress to GCP... why can't you take a bus?

Of course the question is rhetorical....we all know why it's going where it is in the CBD and it's because the main benefactor wants it running in front of [[and stopping at) his buildings' front doors...whether it makes any sense or not.

[mwilbert]

Look. As currently conceived the M1 has few if any logistical benefits over a bus, and some significant deficiencies. However, the people who think the M1 will be an improvement are probably not focusing on that aspect of it, but on the idea that there are a lot of people who will not take a bus, but might take a streetcar, and on the idea that a streetcar looks like part of the progress being made in downtown and midtown. It is pointless to argue that a bus would move people up and down Woodward just about as well, because that isn't the improvement that is being sought.

[bailey]

Look. As currently conceived the M1 has few if any logistical benefits over a bus, and some significant deficiencies. However, the people who think the M1 will be an improvement are probably not focusing on that aspect of it, but on the idea that there are a lot of people who will not take a bus, but might take a streetcar, and on the idea that a streetcar looks like part of the progress being made in downtown and midtown. It is pointless to argue that a bus would move people up and down Woodward just about as well, because that isn't the improvement that is being sought.

100% agree. This is all about aesthetics and nothing to do with logistics. which is why I think this is such waste of an opportunity to do something other than lipstick a pig.

[mwilbert]

100% agree. This is all about aesthetics and nothing to do with logistics. which is why I think this is such waste of an opportunity to do something other than lipstick a pig.

What opportunity is that? The people paying want lipstick.