M-1 rail discussion

[bust]

Here's the solution but MDOT would never imagine this in a million years. The answer to a Detroit-Ann Arbor rail line is to put a commuter rail on M-14/I-96/Fisher Fwy. It could go from Main Street in Ann Arbor [[underground there) to and along M-14 to I-96 through Livonia, Redford, and Detroit. It would end along the Fisher Freeway at Woodward. The rail would be in the center of the freeways with a small number of stops. What I want to know is, "Why can't it be done?"

From a user perspective that would be phenomenal. Even better were it to use 94 instead of 96. Then it can also provide airport service, providing that utility Detroit and Ann Arbor desperately need. Within the Detroit border it can even run down Michigan avenue, providing service to an area poised for growth.

But of course we're just dreaming. Few Michigan legislators, as they exist today, will get on board. There is always the next election...

[dtowncitylover]

Here's the solution but MDOT would never imagine this in a million years. The answer to a Detroit-Ann Arbor rail line is to put a commuter rail on M-14/I-96/Fisher Fwy. It could go from Main Street in Ann Arbor [[underground there) to and along M-14 to I-96 through Livonia, Redford, and Detroit. It would end along the Fisher Freeway at Woodward. The rail would be in the center of the freeways with a small number of stops. What I want to know is, "Why can't it be done?"

Because that would probably require a billion dollars and a decades worth of commuting headaches. I would imagine working with the rail companies and using existing tracks would be easier and cost effective.

I say threaten to nationalize the railroads in the state and don't bluff. I don't understand why railroads are private, they should be publicly owned administered by public corporations. They should be maintained and run just like roads and freeways.

[LP_85]

From a user perspective that would be phenomenal. Even better were it to use 94 instead of 96. Then it can also provide airport service, providing that utility Detroit and Ann Arbor desperately need. Within the Detroit border it can even run down Michigan avenue, providing service to an area poised for growth.

But of course we're just dreaming. Few Michigan legislators, as they exist today, will get on board. There is always the next election...

If there is ever another light rail line built, I think this would actually make a lot of sense to do next. I can understand the argument for BRT on other corridors [[even though I'm biased towards rail), but having a solid transit link to the airport is essential. I could see a line running out from downtown along Michigan towards Dearborn, which could also serve the considerable density of Southwest Detroit. At Wyoming, it would turn and follow the alignment of 94, with one or two stops before ending up right at [[at least) one airport terminal. Maybe continue on to Ann Arbor, since we're already talking hypotheticals.

From a total layman's perspective, it looks like that stretch of freeway actually has quite a bit of room to add rail, either alongside or in the median. As opposed to 96, which would probably require a lot more modification, and just had a huge chunk totally rebuilt anyway.

One thing I read about the proposed commuter rail is that the trains would not stop right at the airport; passengers would need to take a shuttle between the terminal and station. That's not great for people hauling luggage. It would be ideal for any transit connection to serve the terminal[[s) directly.

[royce]

Because that would probably require a billion dollars and a decades worth of commuting headaches. I would imagine working with the rail companies and using existing tracks would be easier and cost effective.

I say threaten to nationalize the railroads in the state and don't bluff. I don't understand why railroads are private, they should be publicly owned administered by public corporations. They should be maintained and run just like roads and freeways.

So, how are negotiations currently working out with the rail companies with existing tracks for the Detroit-Ann Arbor rail project? Attempt to nationalize railroads and see what power they have when they shut-down the transportation of major products for a week. My suggestion circumvents having to deal with the railroads. Waiting for them to use their rails for local transportation needs will take decades and probably billions of dollars in payoffs to make things happen. Giving the railroads so much land for tracks is one of the biggest mistakes this country has ever made. Also, another reason why this country will never have high-speed rail-lines.

[royce]

From a user perspective that would be phenomenal. Even better were it to use 94 instead of 96. Then it can also provide airport service, providing that utility Detroit and Ann Arbor desperately need. Within the Detroit border it can even run down Michigan avenue, providing service to an area poised for growth.

But of course we're just dreaming. Few Michigan legislators, as they exist today, will get on board. There is always the next election...

That's not a bad idea. However, running the rail along the freeway would mean a commuter or Chicago-El-type train. I chose 96/75 over 94 because 96/75 is wider than 94 in the city.

[Hermod]

I say threaten to nationalize the railroads in the state and don't bluff. I don't understand why railroads are private, they should be publicly owned administered by public corporations. They should be maintained and run just like roads and freeways.

Detroit essentially "nationalized" the city lines of the Detroit United Railway by refusing to renew their charter. They also put so many restrictions on the operations of the suburban lines of the DUR that it was major cause of their bankruptcy and abandonment. Detroit created the Detroit Street Railways [[DSR) to operate and maintain the city streetcars lines and the nascent bus lines. How did that all work out?

[Hermod]

Giving the railroads so much land for tracks is one of the biggest mistakes this country has ever made. Also, another reason why this country will never have high-speed rail-lines.

The railroads were not "given land" in populated areas. They were given powers of condemnation which allowed them to force sale of land at market prices. The railroads were given alternate sections of public lands as an incentive for them to extend their tracks though sparsely populated areas where economics would not currently support a railroad. The railroads then sold the land cheaply to native and immigrant farmers to create customers for the railroad.

While we don't have high speed passenger lines, we have the most efficient and productive freight rail system in the world. When you are waiting [[and fuming) at a crossing for a long freight train, just ponder if each of those freight cars were two semitrailer trucks clogging the roads.

[LP_85]

That's not a bad idea. However, running the rail along the freeway would mean a commuter or Chicago-El-type train. I chose 96/75 over 94 because 96/75 is wider than 94 in the city.

Not necessarily; Portland's system does exactly that with light rail trains. Lots of streetcar systems in Europe also run in their own right of way. It'll run basically anywhere you can lay tracks.

96 may be wider, but it doesn't seem like there's anything but road in that right of way. Adding rail lines would probably require getting rid of traffic lanes. 94 west of Wyoming mostly seems to have either pretty wide grass embankments or a wide median, and east of Wyoming it could run along Michigan Ave.

[rbdetsport]

I really feel that if you are going to build an airport line, you need to utilize Michigan Avenue up until at least Telegraph. This alignment runs through the density of Dearborn and West Dearborn, which I think is necessary for an airport line. Once you get to Telegraph it can either jot south to use 94 to Merriman or continue on Michigan to Merriman. In terms of I-94 rail, I have always thought about this stretch working just like the Dan Ryan in Chicago. It could be an option to make a spur. Build Michigan Ave line and the I-94 could be an express line to the airport from the East Side up to Van Dyke. Van Dyke is a logical termini because it could connect to BRT or LRT along Van Dyke up to Utica. This connection would connect Macomb County directly to the airport instead of taking the Gratiot Line downtown first. The I-94 line would function and look more like a HRT line than a LRT line but would use LRT technology.

[Whitehouse]

Great to see those renderings on page one. The look a lot like the Randstad rail vehicles that are used as trams in The Hague and connect that city with Rotterdam.


This was a rendering from 2004.





This was a mock-up.



And this is what they look now in service.

[drjeff]

So the track installation has been going on for quite some time and most of the area between Grand Circus and Campus Martius is done, apparently. However, the part of Woodward that is not train tracks is still in horrible condition in places. Why the hell was the roadway not replaced when they had the damn street closed?

[Detroit Stylin]

Because they are replacing the road as they lay the rail

[drjeff]

Because they are replacing the road as they lay the rail

No they aren't, at least not everywhere. Like I said there are parts of lower Woodward where the rail has been laid but the road in between is still shit.

[rbdetsport]

No they aren't, at least not everywhere. Like I said there are parts of lower Woodward where the rail has been laid but the road in between is still shit.

If I recall correctly, the pavement is being replaced from I-75 to New Center. The lower Woodward corridor was replaced not that long ago.. That is unfortunate that there are already issues down there.

[SDCC]

I was getting my bacon fix at Whole Foods last Friday and noticed they have completed the east side of Woodward and have started tearing up the west side Woodward. Warren was closed in both directions @ Woodward as well; looks like it’s coming along.

[casscorridor]

The more I travel to different cities in the world [[not just the United States), the more I see how important buses are to the transportation infrastructure.

Buses are the foundation that makes everything else work. The M1 rail really isn't rapid transit, but rather a downtown streetcar, which is fine, just don't claim it's something it's not. Same with buses, there is no such thing as "bus rapid transit," yet there is nothing wrong with buses. We need buses!

They should come frequently, all routes should run at the least 4 times an hour if not 6-10 times an hour or more. High traffic bus stops should have displays that tell you when the next bus comes, and all bus stops should have shelters and signage that tell you what buses stop there, and how frequently in addition to a route map! Moreover, contactless payment system should be introduced to eliminate the need for shuffling for change, which slows buses down. Finally, bus lanes for all major routes! Detroit has no excuse for not having bus lanes, the streets are wide and there is very little traffic congestion.

These improvements don't make "bus rapid transit" they simply make for a functional bus system that will be the backbone of any future proper rapid transit system [[i.e. regional light-rail or subway).

[Bobl]

Without wasting space copying casscorridor's post, his entry makes a lot of sense. Best post here in a while, in this old former Cass Corridor guy's opinion.

[drjeff]

Specifically the problem is the intersection of Woodward and Witherell. Both sets of tracks are laid there but nothing was done to the horrible blacktop in between. South of there it's smooth pavement in between and north of there everything is being replaced as far as I can tell.

[swede1934]

I have read with interest the various suggestions in this thread on rail lines out the spoke roads. If only the DSR management in the 1950's had resisted the influence of GM and had not destroyed the four remaining PCC lines, the taxpayers of Detroit would be facing spending millions, not Billions, to update an existing fast transit system. Based on examples from Toronto and Philadelphia, the PCC's would have had to be replaced around 1980, and would have needed to be replaced again about now. BTW, from actual experience, I can tell you that the PCC's on Woodward were faster than any bus, short of an express with no stops til 8 Mile.

[royce]

The more I travel to different cities in the world [[not just the United States), the more I see how important buses are to the transportation infrastructure.

Buses are the foundation that makes everything else work. The M1 rail really isn't rapid transit, but rather a downtown streetcar, which is fine, just don't claim it's something it's not. Same with buses, there is no such thing as "bus rapid transit," yet there is nothing wrong with buses. We need buses!

They should come frequently, all routes should run at the least 4 times an hour if not 6-10 times an hour or more. High traffic bus stops should have displays that tell you when the next bus comes, and all bus stops should have shelters and signage that tell you what buses stop there, and how frequently in addition to a route map! Moreover, contactless payment system should be introduced to eliminate the need for shuffling for change, which slows buses down. Finally, bus lanes for all major routes! Detroit has no excuse for not having bus lanes, the streets are wide and there is very little traffic congestion.

These improvements don't make "bus rapid transit" they simply make for a functional bus system that will be the backbone of any future proper rapid transit system [[i.e. regional light-rail or subway).

I agree busses are important. I find maintaining them, however, is not cost-effective. Despite those that say a light-rail system is more expensive. I disagree and am in favor of light-rail replacing busses on major arteries.

Woodward, Gratiot, Grand River, Michigan, and Jefferson should all have light-rail over busses. They are indeed wide enough to dedicate lanes to light-rail. However, from all of the configurations I have seen of dedicated lanes for light-rail and BRT for that matter, they don't address one thing that's very important here in Michigan: left-turn lanes. Left-turn lanes are a necessary evil. In addressing the issue of left-turn lanes and dedicated light-rail lanes, my solution is simple: use portions of the left-turn lane for the light-rail stops. Use the farthest left lane of the street, in both directions, as a quasi-dedicated lane, where cars are allowed to use only when getting ready to make a left turn. Raise that part of the left-turn lane where passengers will be waiting with an elevated platform and surround it with a concrete wall or metal barriers to protect them from on-coming traffic. On Woodward, north of McNichols/Six Mile, use the median for the light-rail stops.

Light-rail is cleaner than busses [[and in the long run I would argue that it is cheaper), but it wouldn't be cost-effective to use them on every Detroit thoroughfare. The major Detroit thoroughfares are enough. I do hope that one day that DDOT and SMART merge and then have enough money to convert the busses on major thoroughfares to light-rail.

[casscorridor]

I agree busses are important. I find maintaining them, however, is not cost-effective. Despite those that say a light-rail system is more expensive. I disagree and am in favor of light-rail replacing busses on major arteries.

Woodward, Gratiot, Grand River, Michigan, and Jefferson should all have light-rail over busses. They are indeed wide enough to dedicate lanes to light-rail. However, from all of the configurations I have seen of dedicated lanes for light-rail and BRT for that matter, they don't address one thing that's very important here in Michigan: left-turn lanes. Left-turn lanes are a necessary evil. In addressing the issue of left-turn lanes and dedicated light-rail lanes, my solution is simple: use portions of the left-turn lane for the light-rail stops. Use the farthest left lane of the street, in both directions, as a quasi-dedicated lane, where cars are allowed to use only when getting ready to make a left turn. Raise that part of the left-turn lane where passengers will be waiting with an elevated platform and surround it with a concrete wall or metal barriers to protect them from on-coming traffic. On Woodward, north of McNichols/Six Mile, use the median for the light-rail stops.

Light-rail is cleaner than busses [[and in the long run I would argue that it is cheaper), but it wouldn't be cost-effective to use them on every Detroit thoroughfare. The major Detroit thoroughfares are enough. I do hope that one day that DDOT and SMART merge and then have enough money to convert the busses on major thoroughfares to light-rail.

I think you are missing the point here. You are creating a false dichotomy between buses and rail, and actually feeding into the pro "BRT over Light Rail" camp. It's not either or. Any effective public transport system has buses as the backbone to everything supporting the higher modes such as light-rail or subways. In fact, look at many transit-rich cities in the world and you will find that buses make up the majority of transportation trips, despite the fact they are they excellent metro systems. This is usually overlooked because Metro systems are a source of municipal pride, and often a major symbol or landmark of a city, while buses are more under the radar, like other infrastructure [[roads, sewage, etc). That doesn't mean we don't need both.

[gthomas]

When will we get to see renderings of some sort of the M-1 rail stations? Also, why haven't any actual construction started yet on the stations, will this be the last touch and finishes while the streetcar line is being tested? Anyway, good seeing progress daily. Starting to get a feel of how it will run up and down Woodward.

[SpartanDawg]

When will we get to see renderings of some sort of the M-1 rail stations? Also, why haven't any actual construction started yet on the stations, will this be the last touch and finishes while the streetcar line is being tested? Anyway, good seeing progress daily. Starting to get a feel of how it will run up and down Woodward.

not sure ... wouldn't be surprised if they started soon. i for one have noticed that they will definitely be pretty large, which is great

the plots on the sidewalk which they have left unfinished in areas of woodward that are now completely paved are pretty big. the two spots i have noticed are both on the northbound side of woodward, just south of the traffic light at Mack and just south of the traffic light at Canfield... there's large sections of the sidewalk that are 'walled off' and just dirt right now, rather than the surrounding sidewalks which they have completely paved.

[mtburb]

Couple things I noticed today.

-Heading northbound on Woodward, the track abruptly ends when you get off of the Campus Martius circle, but it starts again at Gratiot. Are there plans to fill this gap in?
-In front of the Majestic Theater, if you look into the gravel hole, a rail sticks out at some points. Is this for M-1 or was this a remnant from the previous streetcar?

I also noticed that they have just strung new traffic lights at Woodward and Burroughs, but they haven't been turned on yet. I believe this was the first time I've ever seen a light at this intersection, but was there previously a light there?

[gthomas]

Another concern, well question. With the freeway bridges nearly completed, at I-75 weren't their plans to have a small retail building over the freeway along Woodward? Why wouldn't the Ilitch family coordinate with M1 rail and Mdot? Is the building still planned over I-75?