New Amtrak New Center station info?

[JonWylie]

Dearborn isn't urban? It's more urban than most parts of Detroit.

But Ford's Dearborn campus is not as urban as the area surrounding MCS

[intelligentBeing]

IMO the big focus still needs to be a much more localized AA - DTW - Dearborn - DET [[MI Central) line. I could be wrong but I would think this would have a larger support/benefit to these communities. Being able to ride to the airport is a lot more effective than just being able to ride to CHI or Toronto since DTW gives you access to every major city in the world [[including CHI and TOR). Fully support the CHI - DET - TOR line too but the DTW connection is really what would allow residents and visitors to travel to and from the area with ease.

[JonWylie]

IMO the big focus still needs to be a much more localized AA - DTW - Dearborn - DET [[MI Central) line. I could be wrong but I would think this would have a larger support/benefit to these communities. Being able to ride to the airport is a lot more effective than just being able to ride to CHI or Toronto since DTW gives you access to every major city in the world [[including CHI and TOR). Fully support the CHI - DET - TOR line too but the DTW connection is really what would allow residents and visitors to travel to and from the area with ease.

I vaguely remember a plan to connect Detroit, AA, and Toledo through DTW, that would accomplish the goal of connecting the cities to DTW, but also allow Amtrak to service the east coast from Detroit and AA.

[casscorridor]

IMO the big focus still needs to be a much more localized AA - DTW - Dearborn - DET [[MI Central) line. I could be wrong but I would think this would have a larger support/benefit to these communities. Being able to ride to the airport is a lot more effective than just being able to ride to CHI or Toronto since DTW gives you access to every major city in the world [[including CHI and TOR). Fully support the CHI - DET - TOR line too but the DTW connection is really what would allow residents and visitors to travel to and from the area with ease.

A Chicago-Detroit-Toronto high speed line would take at least a decade to plan and build, if not more. Whereas an effective commuter rail between Pontiac-Detroit-Metro Airport-Ann Arbor could be up and running in only a few years, after modest improvements to stations and tracks and investment in new or refurbished rolling stock.

I say the line should not terminate at Detroit because many cities across the world are opting for commuter lines that run through the city rather than terminate at the center. This makes for more efficient operations and can serve more customers and reach more destinations at more times of the day. See London's Crossrail, Paris' RER or the proposed improvements to Boston's commuter rail system.

[Satiricalivory]

Dearborn isn't urban? It's more urban than most parts of Detroit.

No it is not. Dearborn's urbanism is nearly entirely bungalows and stripmalls. When people talk about urbanism that's attractive to talent they mean mixed use and walkable, usually central cities, amenities like theaters and museums and parks. No city in Michigan has more of this than Detroit.

[Satiricalivory]

My recollection with the Toronto service is that some trains from Chicago would go to Toronto and some would go to Pontiac. So if you wanted to go from Detroit to Toronto you would have to go to Dearborn first.

The tracks that go to Toronto are literally right behind MCS, trains have to go there to cross the border. Why would they not make a stop there?

[Burnsie]

The tracks that go to Toronto are literally right behind MCS, trains have to go there to cross the border. Why would they not make a stop there?

Dearborn is the last station shared in common by a Chicago-Pontiac or Chicago-MC Depot train. The Pontiac line diverges from the MC Depot line at Junction Ave., by the former site of the Cadillac plant.

[Burnsie]

A Chicago-Detroit-Toronto high speed line would take at least a decade to plan and build, if not more...

Amtrak has only indicated a wish [[and that's all it is at this point) for *a* Detroit-Toronto train, not specifically a high speed train. It would simply go at the same speed that VIA does on the route, up to 100 MPH using conventional equipment.

[Gistok]

Dearborn is unique in that it has the vast land area of the thousands of acres of the former Fairlane estate. That part of Dearborn is low density with some midrise buildings, office parks and strip malls. The rest of the city is high density residential [such as the area around Fordson High School, or along Michigan Ave].

As for saying Detroit has museums and theatres, etc, that is true... but it is only in a small 2 sq. mile area, which ironically Dearborn is closer to the theatre/museum district, than vast stretches of NW and NE Detroit. So everything is relative. Being in an inner ring suburb doesn't put you at any sort of disadvantage than living in the neighborhoods of Detroit has, outside of living Downtown/Midtown, and unfortunately much cheaper auto insurance.

[bartocktoo]

No it is not. Dearborn's urbanism is nearly entirely bungalows and stripmalls. When people talk about urbanism that's attractive to talent they mean mixed use and walkable, usually central cities, amenities like theaters and museums and parks. No city in Michigan has more of this than Detroit.

That's just not true. Especially Michigan Avenue in Dearborn. Both East and West Dearborn are much more dense than most of Detroit. And I think you just admitted it's more urban than Detroit. So is Royal Oak, so is Harper Woods, Southfield, and the Pointes for that matter. At least outside of downtown and midtown. Outside of there you don't see anything other than bungalows and stripmalls. Go to the west side or the east side of Detroit and argue that they are urban...they aren't.

[bust]

But Ford's Dearborn campus is not as urban as the area surrounding MCS

Also debatable:

1. Is the area surrounding the existing New Center / Midtown station or MCS more urban?
2. Which one is most likely to further urbanize faster?
3. Where would improved service see the most use?

Seems like Wayne State and CCS [administration/faculty/students] would be more receptive than Corktown "squeaky wheels". Depends a lot on what Ford does with MCS, though.

I strongly support a station at MCS, especially with a direct route to Toronto [even better to Montreal, Quebec City too].

My expectations may be low, even if my hopes too high.

[angry_fred]

Also debatable:

1. Is the area surrounding the existing New Center / Midtown station or MCS more urban?
2. Which one is most likely to further urbanize faster?
3. Where would improved service see the most use?

Seems like Wayne State and CCS [administration/faculty/students] would be more receptive than Corktown "squeaky wheels". Depends a lot on what Ford does with MCS, though.

I strongly support a station at MCS, especially with a direct route to Toronto [even better to Montreal, Quebec City too].

My expectations may be low, even if my hopes too high.

To me the obvious answer here is to just add a couple Toronto to Chicago trains thru MCS, and keep a couple per day running the existing route. It's already part of the plan to add trains, so let's just split them up between the two Detroit stations.

Also, running a couple commuter-only trains along each route [[A2-MCS and Pontiac-DET/further) would be super useful

[bust]

^^I hope so!

[Satiricalivory]

That's just not true. Especially Michigan Avenue in Dearborn. Both East and West Dearborn are much more dense than most of Detroit. And I think you just admitted it's more urban than Detroit. So is Royal Oak, so is Harper Woods, Southfield, and the Pointes for that matter. At least outside of downtown and midtown. Outside of there you don't see anything other than bungalows and stripmalls. Go to the west side or the east side of Detroit and argue that they are urban...they aren't.

If you think Dearborn or Southfield [[LMFAO!!!) or any of these suburbs seriously compete with what is available in central Detroit then you don't know what walkable urbanism with amenities is or you're lying to yourself. The retail on Michigan in Dearborn can't even compete with say Livernois as an example, it's nowhere near as walkable. I'm also pretty sure the entire west side by itself has a higher density than Dearborn and it's bigger.

Your whole argument is a little absurd, you're saying Dearborn is more urban than Detroit as long as you cut out and ignore all the most urban and dense areas of Detroit. Uh okay, sure I guess?

It is completely irrelevant to somebody living in Corktown or Downtown, Midtown, Woodbridge, New Center, West Village etc. If Dearborn has a higher density than Brightmoor or some random neighborhood on the east side.

There is a reason Ford went there, and it's obviously because Dearborn does not have the ability to attract talent and never seriously will.

[casscorridor]

Dearborn is unique in that it has the vast land area of the thousands of acres of the former Fairlane estate. That part of Dearborn is low density with some midrise buildings, office parks and strip malls. The rest of the city is high density residential [such as the area around Fordson High School, or along Michigan Ave].

Lol. Dearborn is not "high density residential," the city's residential stock consists almost exclusively of low density suburban tract housing. High density is Manhattan, which has a population density of 70,826/sq mile. Dearborn has a population density of only 3,839/sq mile.

[Gistok]

Lol. Dearborn is not "high density residential," the city's residential stock consists almost exclusively of low density suburban tract housing. High density is Manhattan, which has a population density of 70,826/sq mile. Dearborn has a population density of only 3,839/sq mile.

Maybe you better go back and re-read this thread... HIGH DENSITY Detroit is nowhere near high density NYC or Chicago, and likely never will be. But no one [besides you] is talking about anywhere other than metro Detroit, and those areas that have higher or lower density IN RELATION TO DETROIT.

[ShadowSoarer]

Just to add more population density numbers:

Hamtramck - 13,539/sq mile [[2020)

Downtown Detroit - 3,671/sq mile [[2010, although population grew by ~29% based on 2018 estimates)

Midtown Detroit - Couldn't get consistent number but ranges from 6,961 - 13,214/sq mile

Detroit [[2020) - 4,787 sq/mile

Detroit at peak population [[1950s) - 13,330/sq mile

Philadelphia [[2010) - 11,233/sq mile

DC [[2020) - 11,686/sq mile

Boston [[2020) - 14,388/sq mile

Chicago [[2020) - 11,783/sq mile

These are city wide averages, but it is pretty crazy to think that at Detroit's population density in the 1950s was higher than some of the major cities today on this list.

[Don K]

How cool would it be to return the station to Michigan Central? I'm sure Ford has no use for the train shed part of the station and the entire project could benefit with the addition of more foot traffic and the injection of MDOT money were they to be tenants. In San Francisco, the Ferry Building is a thriving marketplace, but still acts as a terminal for many ferries that traverse that bay. It even serves for the Amtrak shuttles.

It would be pretty cool to have MCS used as a train station again, but it only works if your sole objective is to move people in and out of downtown Detroit, because continuing the present service to Oakland County would require a fairly long backup move to the junction where trains presently go to New Center. Assuming the Michigan Central tracks can be made high-speed enough to be competitive door-to-door with airplanes so business travelers would use the train, way more business traffic would be generated through the stops in Royal Oak, Troy, and Pontiac than would ever be generated by MCS [[if you haven't noticed, for about 35 years now Troy has had more office space than downtown Detroit).

Were I still traveling to Chicago on business I would definitely drive to the Troy station to catch a train, but I would not drive to MCS, because that would negate the time advantage of having a nearby station rather than driving to Metro. Travelers from Chicago would have the same calculation if they were attending meetings in Troy.

In any event, I'm not sure that MCS has better accessibility to downtown than does New Center. It is, after all, a couple of miles from the major offices of Detroit, and is probably less accessible for the majority of people in Detroit who might potentially take a weekend in Chicago. I totally get the nostalgia for MCS as a major rail hub, but for a lot of reasons I just don't think that status is ever coming back. Be satisfied that MCS will survive as a center of commerce and not just as ruin porn.

[Don K]

Okay, I just looked at a map, and MCS is definitely closer to Downtown than is the New Center station. I think my other points remain valid, though. New Center allows Amtrak to access more business and vacation travelers than would MCS. Were Amtrak to run trains to Toronto [[aspirational at this point), MCS would be a logical stop on the way to Chicago or else onward to New Center and Oakland County, and I'm sure Ford would entertain the idea of leasing some space for a ticket counter and connections to trainsheds.

[KnnNike]

It would be pretty cool to have MCS used as a train station again, but it only works if your sole objective is to move people in and out of downtown Detroit, because continuing the present service to Oakland County would require a fairly long backup move to the junction where trains presently go to New Center. Assuming the Michigan Central tracks can be made high-speed enough to be competitive door-to-door with airplanes so business travelers would use the train, way more business traffic would be generated through the stops in Royal Oak, Troy, and Pontiac than would ever be generated by MCS [[if you haven't noticed, for about 35 years now Troy has had more office space than downtown Detroit).

Were I still traveling to Chicago on business I would definitely drive to the Troy station to catch a train, but I would not drive to MCS, because that would negate the time advantage of having a nearby station rather than driving to Metro. Travelers from Chicago would have the same calculation if they were attending meetings in Troy.

In any event, I'm not sure that MCS has better accessibility to downtown than does New Center. It is, after all, a couple of miles from the major offices of Detroit, and is probably less accessible for the majority of people in Detroit who might potentially take a weekend in Chicago. I totally get the nostalgia for MCS as a major rail hub, but for a lot of reasons I just don't think that status is ever coming back. Be satisfied that MCS will survive as a center of commerce and not just as ruin porn.

Troy with 100% certainty does NOT have more office space than downtown Detroit.

1Q19-Detroit-Office-Market [[ngkf.com)

Detroit CBD has 14.7 million square feet of office space downtown, 16.3 if you count New Center, and this ignores any big projects coming online since Q1 2020. Troy has 13.3.

Moreover, downtown office space growth and vacancy are on a positive trajectory, whereas Troy's is heading downwards.

Nobody wants to be stuck in shitty suburban office parks anymore, so stop trying to make it sound like Troy is now somehow the new center of business in the region.

[bartocktoo]

Troy with 100% certainty does NOT have more office space than downtown Detroit.

1Q19-Detroit-Office-Market [[ngkf.com)

Detroit CBD has 14.7 million square feet of office space downtown, 16.3 if you count New Center, and this ignores any big projects coming online since Q1 2020. Troy has 13.3.

Moreover, downtown office space growth and vacancy are on a positive trajectory, whereas Troy's is heading downwards.

Nobody wants to be stuck in shitty suburban office parks anymore, so stop trying to make it sound like Troy is now somehow the new center of business in the region.

The Suburban vs. City tiffs are really old. There isn't a big difference in office space, and CBD is more expensive. Hopefully people that live in this region want to see the region as a whole to grow. Obviously COVID had an impact in 2020, but according to your link, office vacancy grew in every community in the Detroit Metro Area, and even Ann Arbor, in 2020. Troy, and Southfield, by the way, were considered the "new center of business" in the region at points in time over the last 30 years, and if you don't know that, you don't know the region.

[angry_fred]

So back on topic: Have we heard anything about Amtrak's willingness to add trains and justify a bigger station?

Ridership truly is a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you only run 2-3 trains per day, you'll have less people per train vs a schedule that runs 5-10.

Once you hit the sweet spot of about 5 [[each way) it starts becoming a valid option for commuters, which will send ridership soaring. Of course, this will require track upgrades, but that's something mdot appears to be working on

[Burnsie]

So back on topic: Have we heard anything about Amtrak's willingness to add trains and justify a bigger station?

Ridership truly is a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you only run 2-3 trains per day, you'll have less people per train vs a schedule that runs 5-10.

Once you hit the sweet spot of about 5 [[each way) it starts becoming a valid option for commuters, which will send ridership soaring. Of course, this will require track upgrades, but that's something mdot appears to be working on

The only thing we know is a desire to add service to Toronto, based on the line drawn on the national wish map released a few months back. It's all waiting on the infrastructure bill and other Congressional funding. Depending on how much if any that adds up to, MDOT would decide how much if anything it wants to contribute, whether it would involve extending a train or adding a new one. Then you have to start talks with CP Rail, CN, VIA, maybe Essex Terminal Railway for use of their routes, Ontario Transportation Ministry, Ford for a spot at the station. Amtrak spokesman Marc Magliari said service could get going by 2035, bleh.

[angry_fred]

The only thing we know is a desire to add service to Toronto, based on the line drawn on the national wish map released a few months back. It's all waiting on the infrastructure bill and other Congressional funding. Depending on how much if any that adds up to, MDOT would decide how much if anything it wants to contribute, whether it would involve extending a train or adding a new one. Then you have to start talks with CP Rail, CN, VIA, maybe Essex Terminal Railway for use of their routes, Ontario Transportation Ministry, Ford for a spot at the station. Amtrak spokesman Marc Magliari said service could get going by 2035, bleh.

What a mess. Congress needs to make it easier to add passenger lines on a 1-2 year cycle... 15 is just insane

[Atticus]

The easiest and least expensive option is to make the necessary improvements to get VIA rail to extend its current rail service from Windsor over into Detroit. Once that happens, money could be used to increase the frequency of VIA service if necessary. But there is no need for AMTRAK to run its own trains from Detroit to Toronto.

A lot has changed in the past two decades in regards to border security. And since all passengers on a Chicago-Toronto or Toronto-Chicago train would need to get off the train and go through customs/immigration anyway, there is no need for it to be the same train. Further, once you are through the tunnel, there is an easy rail route to New Center [that yes goes right past MCS). Point being, there is no longer a reason to not make everyone “connect” in Detroit. The connection is a necessity. But the bigger challenge would be reworking the rail route on the Windsor side, from the tunnel to the existing VIA rail line.

As for the MCS vs New Center discussion, New Center just makes more sense for the station logistically. Both New Center and MCS are far enough out of downtown that proximity doesn’t matter, even if MCS is slightly closer. The Oakland County service [[and potential for even Macomb service if you want to dream) alone are enough to justify New Center as where the depot should be. Philadelphia and DC both have train stations that aren’t immediately adjacent to the downtown, and it works. It could work in Detroit too.