Miami expanding its PeopleMover, the "MetroMover" for the 2nd time. Why can't we?

[renf]

Thank you, Jason, for the helpful and accurate information.

[K-slice]

The land along the route, excluding the land within the DDA's boundaries, has a taxable value of $350 million. If a TIF district was created around this land, a 30% increase would be $7.5 million in new property tax revenue per year. Why 30%? Existing properties would increase in value. 10% is just rent going from $1,500 to $1,650. Then there's new development. There was that new apartment building in Harbortown that barely even got noticed. It has a taxable value of $11 million. So figure a handful of decent sized developments get built along the route, and then the Uniroyal site gets developed somewhat densely. Not turning Jefferson into Miami or Toronto, just a moderate amount of development more than usual.

You only factor this into one calculation, as if BRT or streetcar expansion with dedicated lanes wouldn't dive the same action from government in regards to taxation or property value increase.

Then there's income tax. Ignoring the potential of wealthier people moving into existing housing, if 1,000 new households moved in, making $40k per year, the city would get about $1 million in new income tax per year.

See above, more benefits factored in to only one scenario.

Before the pandemic, DDOT bus service along the route cost $10,800 per day [[$4 million per year) to operate. The People Mover's extension would cost about $3 million per year. So there's another $1 million per year.

Greatly underestimating what the new line would cost to operate.
LINK: "according to the city of Detroit's 2017 consolidated annual financial statement, the People Mover cost $25.4 million to operate in 2017"

The improved service quality and connectivity would increase ridership. The current People Mover gets about 5,500 riders per day. The QLine about 3,200. There's about 25,000 people who live along the route. If you figure 7,000 rides a day with an average fare of $1, that's $2.5 million per year.

This stat is just incorrect, Daily PM ridership was 4,383 in 2019 and in decline since 2015, Covid notwithstanding.
LINK LINK

I'd love to see the source for your population number since my source shows a total population of 18,714 between Lafayette Park, Elmwood Park, Rivertown, Islandview, and West village. LINK

Finally, I would not "figure" 7,000 rides per day because if your population number holds true, you're assuming that 14% of the local population is going to be riding every day. And that's the best case scenario assuming every rider is making 2 trips per day, 7 days per week, which is both highly unlikely and well above the transit numbers for most US cities.

LINK: "Some 21% of urban residents use public transit on a regular basis"
LINK: "In 21 counties, at least 15 percent of commuters use transit — about three times the national average". None of them outside of the NE corridor besides Chicago.

I'm sure I could keep going but these glaring flaws in the numbers, as well as the obvious bias, basically make the whole argument moot.

[Gistok]

^ K-slice.... some of your figures are wonky as well. Your population figures are not useful, since you linked to a population "per square mile" map... which also doesn't include the Gold Coast, nor the Barry subdivision [where the Manoogian Mansion is located].

Also, your people mover costs per annum are also skewered. The huge PM maintenance facility was originally built to house 100 PM cars, although only a fraction of that are housed there. So what percentage of the annual fee $25.4 million fee is maintenance center related? That portion of the costs would not go up much with an increase in the PM size and car numbers.

So before complaining whether someone else's stats are moot, perhaps you should revisit your stats as well.

[Jason]

I appreciate that you took the time to reply. I'll go through and address your points.

You only factor this into one calculation, as if BRT or streetcar expansion with dedicated lanes wouldn't dive the same action from government in regards to taxation or property value increase.

I did include that for a QLine expansion, but only 60% as much. The reason that transit increases values is because the transit is an amenity that makes an area more desirable, and so people are willing to pay more to be there. The QLine didn't actually provide transit as an amenity, because it didn't improve service quality from the status quo buses that were already running there.

But a People Mover expansion would be a dramatic increase. Using the vehicle's acceleration/deceleration of 1 m/s^2, max speed of 100 km/h, and station dwell time of 20 seconds, it would take 6:09 to get from end to end on a Jefferson expansion. According to google maps it takes about 8 minutes to drive that and according to the bus schedule 14 minutes by bus. The Jefferson bus currently runs every 25 minutes [[I think it used to be 20). The QLine "at least every 15 minutes", but a metro, every few minutes. And there's definitely no rule saying that those other modes need to have those frequencies, but the more you improve the frequencies, the more you increase operating costs. Buses and streetcars don't have great reliability. Some of it could be improved by the agency running better, and some of it could be improved by fixing trouble spots along the route, but a lot of it is just the reality of running on the ground where it interacts with stuff and things can get messy, and being operated by human beings. Automated metros have nearly perfect reliability.

Anyway, the point is that being able to walk out your door and get anywhere downtown even faster than driving is something that has practical value. Even for people further out riding the bus downtown, even considering the time it takes to transfer, their trips are still faster.

Greatly underestimating what the new line would cost to operate.
LINK: "according to the city of Detroit's 2017 consolidated annual financial statement, the People Mover cost $25.4 million to operate in 2017"

The city spends $6.5 million a year on the People Mover, which one of your other links confirms. The People Mover does transit police for DDOT and the QLine, which shows up as an operating expense. The state also subsidizes all transit agencies operating costs by about 30% [[which I included in the previous post's math. DDOT gets another ~10% in federal subsidy). But for what the city pays, it's only $6.5 million. You can look up the operating and ongoing capital costs of the different agencies at the FTA's Agency Profiles page. Just remember to subtract the transit police from the People Mover.

I didn't use the current People Mover's operating costs for the extension because of the nature of the system. The People Mover has a control room which is staffed while it runs. But once the control room is staffed, doubling or tripling the size of the system doesn't increase the number of people in the control room, it just increases the size of the diagram on the monitors. There are still other costs, the extension would have electricity and janitorial costs, and the additional vehicles would have maintenance costs. So for the People Mover's operating costs, I took the operating costs from the SkyTrain's Evergreen Extension. This extension did not require building another operations and maintenance facility, it was just more track, stations, and vehicles, operating from the system's existing infrastructure. So I took the operating costs for their extension and scaled them to the length of our extension. I didn't try to do more adjustments than that. For example, they're running trains every few minutes just like we would be, but their trains have 2-3 times as many vehicles as ours would, and their stations are over 4 times bigger, so it would take more mechanics etc for them to operate than us. So it's even possible that my operating costs are higher than they should be, but I don't know by how much.

For the QLine I just used the existing one's operating costs. Since it's not automated, doubling the service means doubling the drivers. The current operations and maintenance facility isn't big enough for more vehicles, so an extension would either require building another one and using both at the same time, or building a bigger one and wasting the old one. Because they operate in the street and because of their motor type, they require more maintenance than the People Mover's vehicles do, so doubling the number of vehicles is closer to doubling the amount of maintenance work on them. It's true though that there would still be some cost savings of some kind, which I didn't include.

Also, one way of reducing operating costs is by speeding up the service. If you can do what used to take 1 hour, in 45 minutes, you've saved 15 minutes of labor, gas, etc. A QLine expansion down Jefferson would almost certainly have dedicated lanes. But the inverse of this is that you can improve service quality without increasing costs. idk 100% for sure, but I think the QLine was intended to have 5 minute headways. The route takes about 30 minutes round trip by car, and they have 6 vehicles. So for Jefferson, having dedicated lanes doesn't mean it would cost less than the QLine, it would just mean the line would run more frequently.

This stat is just incorrect, Daily PM ridership was 4,383 in 2019 and in decline since 2015, Covid notwithstanding.
LINK LINK

You can see on the wikipedia page that you linked to that the People Mover has hovered around 2.2 million [[6,000 daily) since 2006. After JLA closed it still had 1.9. 2019 was 1.6, and I think that was the year they didn't do the auto show in the winter and then it didn't happen later because of covid? My 5,500 is just 2 million per year which seems to be the ridership now that JLA is gone.

I'd love to see the source for your population number since my source shows a total population of 18,714 between Lafayette Park, Elmwood Park, Rivertown, Islandview, and West village. LINK

Finally, I would not "figure" 7,000 rides per day because if your population number holds true, you're assuming that 14% of the local population is going to be riding every day. And that's the best case scenario assuming every rider is making 2 trips per day, 7 days per week, which is both highly unlikely and well above the transit numbers for most US cities.

LINK: "Some 21% of urban residents use public transit on a regular basis"
LINK: "In 21 counties, at least 15 percent of commuters use transit — about three times the national average". None of them outside of the NE corridor besides Chicago.

Like Gistok said, that map is missing some areas. I just went through and added up the census tracts [[https://mtgis-portal.geo.census.gov/...ed2b2fd7ff6eb7) but I just kind of did it roughly, so it might be off a little. It doesn't really affect the point I was making though. 1,000 new households is not an unreasonable increase.

Using county/metro/regional modal share stats like that isn't really useful or insightful. If there are 25,000 people along the route, and I think public transit is like 1% for metro Detroit, you're saying that 250 people per day would ride a transit route there.

Modal share changes from area to area based on the what kinds of trips people are making and what mode is the best way of making those trips. For everyone along that stretch of Jefferson, the People Mover would be the fastest mode for getting around their broader neighborhood, for shopping, errands, school, and things like that. Also, that area has a strong commuting relationship to downtown [[which would only strengthen over time), so even for commuting to work, the People Mover would be the fastest mode.

That area also doesn't exist within a bubble. There are stores, restaurants, hotels, Chene/Franklin Park, the riverwalk, a hospital, charter schools, belle isle, and more, which are of interest to people living outside of that area, but which are currently hard to access with transit.

And more than that, someone can be riding the extension without actually having a destination along the route. Anyone taking the bus downtown from the east would have their trip reduced by 8 minutes. They'd also see an improvement in bus reliability, because the routes would become shorter and simpler and would no longer be going through operationally difficult areas. I imagine that the remains of the Van Dyke and Jefferson would be merged into a new L shaped route, which would greatly improve bus access on the east side [[Jefferson is currently very isolated from the rest of the east side in the bus network).

I do want to clarify though that the 7,000 I figured isn't the total ridership of the line. It's only new rides. Everyone who currently rides the replaced bus routes would instead ride the People Mover, and everyone entering from outside the area would transfer onto the People Mover. But this doesn't matter for this math, because whether you're paying your fare to DDOT or the People Mover, they're both part of the city.

[Canadian Visitor]

As someone from Toronto, who is pro-transit, and make regular use of same notwithstanding that I am also a car owner and driver.........

I think the idea, in theory, of extending Detroit's People Mover makes sense.

However, there is something to be worked out first.

In general, Detroit requires significantly better public transit in general, meaning, much more frequent buses.

Toronto's suburban bus routes run vastly higher ridership volumes than the current People Mover; and in fact, some pull annual ridership that compares with all public transit in Detroit put together.

D-DOT's annual ridership, pre pandemic was something in the range of 2M per month, or about 24M per year.

For comparison's sake, Toronto's Finch West bus service did over 1.4M per month in 2018, or about 17M per year.

To drive traffic on transit you need 'choice' riders. People who could drive, but will choose transit instead to avoid the cost/hassle of parking, traffic jams, because they'ed like to get work done or read a book on their commute.

Amenities matter, comfy, attractive service with bells and whistles helps; but nothing makes up for infrequent service.

If you have to wait 20M, 30M, or more for a bus, especially if getting where you want to go involves transferring to a second route, it makes a commute entirely unpleasant if not just a non-starter.

The place to start is a network of services that all run every 15M or better.

Then a core service on key routes serving major employers, universities, shopping areas etc, that run ever 10M or better, so you don't even need to check a schedule, you just show up at a stop and the next vehicle will be along shortly.

Then you start to swank the service up a bit. Attractive bus shelters and next-bus screens at every stop, telling you on a cold day whether you have time go grab a coffee across the street, or you need to hold tight for the bus that will arrive in only 2M.

Then as ridership expands dramatically and the buses start to fill, you get to the point where rapid transit [[LRT, Skytrain, Subway make a lot of sense).

Just building a single line of 'x' number of stations, that aren't supported by a good network of frequent services is a recipe for empty vehicles, low ridership and a public asking why they spent all that money to run empty trains or buses.

There will always be a chicken and egg problem that you need good service to attract riders, and you need riders to afford the good service.

The key is pushing forward as much as practical on the former, and being prepared for ridership growth to lag a bit and need a few years to catch up.

***

What I would suggest on the rapid transit front for Detroit is this, whether People Mover or some other variation of rapid transit ultimately makes the most sense, figure that out, lay out the route, and while land values in Detroit remain relatively cheap, buy up all the necessary land, and just 'bank it'. It will save gobs of money years down the road.

One of things that make building new transit so expensive in Toronto and NYC is that land is insanely expensive. A tiny little parcel in downtown Toronto, not even big enough for one tower, just traded for north of 100M CAD [[about 80M USD). When you think of what you have to buy up to make transit work or how deep you have to dig to go under everything, it sends costs to the moon.

So buy the land now for a route that will get built in 10, 15 or 20 years.

But think carefully about how to make that work; and make sure to upzone all the land around the prospective stations for hirise development in order to make that idea make more sense, sooner.

[stasu1213]

I appreciate that you took the time to reply. I'll go through and address your points.



I did include that for a QLine expansion, but only 60% as much. The reason that transit increases values is because the transit is an amenity that makes an area more desirable, and so people are willing to pay more to be there. The QLine didn't actually provide transit as an amenity, because it didn't improve service quality from the status quo buses that were already running there.

But a People Mover expansion would be a dramatic increase. Using the vehicle's acceleration/deceleration of 1 m/s^2, max speed of 100 km/h, and station dwell time of 20 seconds, it would take 6:09 to get from end to end on a Jefferson expansion. According to google maps it takes about 8 minutes to drive that and according to the bus schedule 14 minutes by bus. The Jefferson bus currently runs every 25 minutes [[I think it used to be 20). The QLine "at least every 15 minutes", but a metro, every few minutes. And there's definitely no rule saying that those other modes need to have those frequencies, but the more you improve the frequencies, the more you increase operating costs. Buses and streetcars don't have great reliability. Some of it could be improved by the agency running better, and some of it could be improved by fixing trouble spots along the route, but a lot of it is just the reality of running on the ground where it interacts with stuff and things can get messy, and being operated by human beings. Automated metros have nearly perfect reliability.

Anyway, the point is that being able to walk out your door and get anywhere downtown even faster than driving is something that has practical value. Even for people further out riding the bus downtown, even considering the time it takes to transfer, their trips are still faster.



The city spends $6.5 million a year on the People Mover, which one of your other links confirms. The People Mover does transit police for DDOT and the QLine, which shows up as an operating expense. The state also subsidizes all transit agencies operating costs by about 30% [[which I included in the previous post's math. DDOT gets another ~10% in federal subsidy). But for what the city pays, it's only $6.5 million. You can look up the operating and ongoing capital costs of the different agencies at the FTA's Agency Profiles page. Just remember to subtract the transit police from the People Mover.

I didn't use the current People Mover's operating costs for the extension because of the nature of the system. The People Mover has a control room which is staffed while it runs. But once the control room is staffed, doubling or tripling the size of the system doesn't increase the number of people in the control room, it just increases the size of the diagram on the monitors. There are still other costs, the extension would have electricity and janitorial costs, and the additional vehicles would have maintenance costs. So for the People Mover's operating costs, I took the operating costs from the SkyTrain's Evergreen Extension. This extension did not require building another operations and maintenance facility, it was just more track, stations, and vehicles, operating from the system's existing infrastructure. So I took the operating costs for their extension and scaled them to the length of our extension. I didn't try to do more adjustments than that. For example, they're running trains every few minutes just like we would be, but their trains have 2-3 times as many vehicles as ours would, and their stations are over 4 times bigger, so it would take more mechanics etc for them to operate than us. So it's even possible that my operating costs are higher than they should be, but I don't know by how much.

For the QLine I just used the existing one's operating costs. Since it's not automated, doubling the service means doubling the drivers. The current operations and maintenance facility isn't big enough for more vehicles, so an extension would either require building another one and using both at the same time, or building a bigger one and wasting the old one. Because they operate in the street and because of their motor type, they require more maintenance than the People Mover's vehicles do, so doubling the number of vehicles is closer to doubling the amount of maintenance work on them. It's true though that there would still be some cost savings of some kind, which I didn't include.

Also, one way of reducing operating costs is by speeding up the service. If you can do what used to take 1 hour, in 45 minutes, you've saved 15 minutes of labor, gas, etc. A QLine expansion down Jefferson would almost certainly have dedicated lanes. But the inverse of this is that you can improve service quality without increasing costs. idk 100% for sure, but I think the QLine was intended to have 5 minute headways. The route takes about 30 minutes round trip by car, and they have 6 vehicles. So for Jefferson, having dedicated lanes doesn't mean it would cost less than the QLine, it would just mean the line would run more frequently.



You can see on the wikipedia page that you linked to that the People Mover has hovered around 2.2 million [[6,000 daily) since 2006. After JLA closed it still had 1.9. 2019 was 1.6, and I think that was the year they didn't do the auto show in the winter and then it didn't happen later because of covid? My 5,500 is just 2 million per year which seems to be the ridership now that JLA is gone.





Like Gistok said, that map is missing some areas. I just went through and added up the census tracts [[https://mtgis-portal.geo.census.gov/...ed2b2fd7ff6eb7) but I just kind of did it roughly, so it might be off a little. It doesn't really affect the point I was making though. 1,000 new households is not an unreasonable increase.

Using county/metro/regional modal share stats like that isn't really useful or insightful. If there are 25,000 people along the route, and I think public transit is like 1% for metro Detroit, you're saying that 250 people per day would ride a transit route there.

Modal share changes from area to area based on the what kinds of trips people are making and what mode is the best way of making those trips. For everyone along that stretch of Jefferson, the People Mover would be the fastest mode for getting around their broader neighborhood, for shopping, errands, school, and things like that. Also, that area has a strong commuting relationship to downtown [[which would only strengthen over time), so even for commuting to work, the People Mover would be the fastest mode.

That area also doesn't exist within a bubble. There are stores, restaurants, hotels, Chene/Franklin Park, the riverwalk, a hospital, charter schools, belle isle, and more, which are of interest to people living outside of that area, but which are currently hard to access with transit.

And more than that, someone can be riding the extension without actually having a destination along the route. Anyone taking the bus downtown from the east would have their trip reduced by 8 minutes. They'd also see an improvement in bus reliability, because the routes would become shorter and simpler and would no longer be going through operationally difficult areas. I imagine that the remains of the Van Dyke and Jefferson would be merged into a new L shaped route, which would greatly improve bus access on the east side [[Jefferson is currently very isolated from the rest of the east side in the bus network).

I do want to clarify though that the 7,000 I figured isn't the total ridership of the line. It's only new rides. Everyone who currently rides the replaced bus routes would instead ride the People Mover, and everyone entering from outside the area would transfer onto the People Mover. But this doesn't matter for this math, because whether you're paying your fare to DDOT or the People Mover, they're both part of the city.

Jason do you think it would be more cost efficient to build an elevate rail system to that would travel northward on Woodward than tearing up Woodward in order to install tracks and stations for light rail?

[Lowell]

Great posts Jason and Canadian Visitor. Very informative and thought stimulating. Well worth the time to read them.

[royce]

The are two major questions I have when talking about expanding the People Mover down Jefferson Avenue. The first is, "Where are you going to build the stations? And the second question is, "How many stations are needed? If you look at the People Mover stations in relation to their surroundings, they are huge. Many buildings along Jefferson are relatively close to the street. The stations would have to jut out into the street taking up a lane or two on each side of Jefferson. Also, the columns would take away a lane on each side of the street, eliminating bike lanes. Also, what businesses would want a station built in front of them? What apartment owner or tenant would want one of these stations in front of their apartment building or apartment?

The second question I have is, "How many stops/stations are needed? If space is an issue, then logically as few as possible would be built. However, what would the distances be between stops/stations, a half-mile, a mile, or every two miles? I know busses are supposed to have stops every so many blocks. How would the People Mover expansion spread out the stops/stations along Jefferson? Again, because of space-restraints, can the stops/stations be built evenly? There are parking lots along Jefferson that can house a station, but will property owners be willing to give up parking spaces to put up a station or give up property that they can no longer use for other purposes?

Again, expanding the People Mover down Jefferson is an expensive proposition. And again, that's my two cents.

[stasu1213]

The are two major questions I have when talking about expanding the People Mover down Jefferson Avenue. The first is, "Where are you going to build the stations? And the second question is, "How many stations are needed? If you look at the People Mover stations in relation to their surroundings, they are huge. Many buildings along Jefferson are relatively close to the street. The stations would have to jut out into the street taking up a lane or two on each side of Jefferson. Also, the columns would take away a lane on each side of the street, eliminating bike lanes. Also, what businesses would want a station built in front of them? What apartment owner or tenant would want one of these stations in front of their apartment building or apartment?

The second question I have is, "How many stops/stations are needed? If space is an issue, then logically as few as possible would be built. However, what would the distances be between stops/stations, a half-mile, a mile, or every two miles? I know busses are supposed to have stops every so many blocks. How would the People Mover expansion spread out the stops/stations along Jefferson? Again, because of space-restraints, can the stops/stations be built evenly? There are parking lots along Jefferson that can house a station, but will property owners be willing to give up parking spaces to put up a station or give up property that they can no longer use for other purposes?

Again, expanding the People Mover down Jefferson is an expensive proposition. And again, that's my two cents.

You are right. It would be an expensive task to expand the People Mover eastward on Jefferson. It probably would be just as expensive to have a Qline running on Jefferson from downtown to Alter Road. Had Detroit kept it's streetcars this problem would not had existed. The elephant in the room the lack of a dependable mass transit system in Detroit. DDOT service had improved a few years back when Dan Dirk had came over from SMART to head DDOT. For reasons unknown he had left DDOT and the quality of service had decreased especially under this new director who is clueless on an effective system. Jefferson need a rapid bus system with a dedicated middle lane and very few stops.

[Richard]

Jason do you think it would be more cost efficient to build an elevate rail system to that would travel northward on Woodward than tearing up Woodward in order to install tracks and stations for light rail?

The debate about elevated verses street level can be traced back to the 1920s,when it comes to mass transit and rail,it’s been around for awhile one would think it is a fairly simple process.

Lots of factors go into determining cost per mile with building transit,elevated rail as in PM and mono rail is cheaper and faster mostly because you can manufacture the components off site and just assemble the completed project on site.

It can be a difference between 40 million per mile verses up to 200 million per mile street level.

In theory if you took a street like Woodward and did a Mono rail or PM down the middle but kept it like 5’ off the ground it becomes feasible.

Detroit costs are Detroit costs ,what Miami paid is irrelevant,it’s not true numbers,just like saying Europeans have lots of rail transit,they do but there are several factors,non union labor,contractors are paid less,the government partially funds development and operating costs after implementation,their stations are bare bones.

In the U.S. congress does not allow cities to use federal funds on operating costs after implementation,in the UK like many other countries,it is a national rail system.

Forget about Miami for a second and not overlook there is an entire light rail line being built from Miami up the east coast all the way to Jacksonville also expanding to connect to Orlando and Tampa.

Orlando has a Brightline system that has been expanding every year and connects all the cities that because of sprawl covers more then double of the Detroit metro region.

The light rail is being done by Virgin and a mixture of private and public funding.

We have a tendency to fixate on the cost of implementation verses the methods of implementation.

It was not the government that built the rail and street car
system’s of days past,it was private money,the problem in this country is as soon as it becomes a government contract or city contract it becomes a printing press of money,it’s free money anyways so things become bloated way out of proportion.

If you really want to get serious about rail,light or street,before getting obsessed about numbers you have to decide how you want to implement it because that is what determines what the numbers will be,that’s a massive difference between 40 million per mile verses 100 million and even 40 million per mile is insane.

These conversations are all well and good but it scares people away when you start throwing insane cost to implement numbers and fosters opposition because your not looking at all of the options available,that’s the first step.

The Detroit region has some of the best engineers, innovators and designers in the world and are stumped when it comes to implementing 1800s methods of transportation. Seriously ?

Do not take this the wrong way but you used to show the world how it was done and now with this you are trying to follow everybody else.

[stasu1213]

The debate about elevated verses street level can be traced back to the 1920s,when it comes to mass transit and rail,it’s been around for awhile one would think it is a fairly simple process.

Lots of factors go into determining cost per mile with building transit,elevated rail as in PM and mono rail is cheaper and faster mostly because you can manufacture the components off site and just assemble the completed project on site.

It can be a difference between 40 million per mile verses up to 200 million per mile street level.

In theory if you took a street like Woodward and did a Mono rail or PM down the middle but kept it like 5’ off the ground it becomes feasible.

Detroit costs are Detroit costs ,what Miami paid is irrelevant,it’s not true numbers,just like saying Europeans have lots of rail transit,they do but there are several factors,non union labor,contractors are paid less,the government partially funds development and operating costs after implementation,their stations are bare bones.

In the U.S. congress does not allow cities to use federal funds on operating costs after implementation,in the UK like many other countries,it is a national rail system.

Forget about Miami for a second and not overlook there is an entire light rail line being built from Miami up the east coast all the way to Jacksonville also expanding to connect to Orlando and Tampa.

Orlando has a Brightline system that has been expanding every year and connects all the cities that because of sprawl covers more then double of the Detroit metro region.

The light rail is being done by Virgin and a mixture of private and public funding.

We have a tendency to fixate on the cost of implementation verses the methods of implementation.

It was not the government that built the rail and street car
system’s of days past,it was private money,the problem in this country is as soon as it becomes a government contract or city contract it becomes a printing press of money,it’s free money anyways so things become bloated way out of proportion.

If you really want to get serious about rail,light or street,before getting obsessed about numbers you have to decide how you want to implement it because that is what determines what the numbers will be,that’s a massive difference between 40 million per mile verses 100 million and even 40 million per mile is insane.

These conversations are all well and good but it scares people away when you start throwing insane cost to implement numbers and fosters opposition because your not looking at all of the options available,that’s the first step.

The Detroit region has some of the best engineers, innovators and designers in the world and are stumped when it comes to implementing 1800s methods of transportation. Seriously ?

Do not take this the wrong way but you used to show the world how it was done and now with this you are trying to follow everybody else.

Richard I am glad that you had given me a sensible answer. Detroit need to come out of the Stone Age and into the 21st century when it come to transportation. Having an effective alternative mode of transportation will make this city more attractive to newcomers [[ individuals and corporations alike) and help increase the population of this city. Businesses look at how a city could provide for its employees as one of the factors of them setting up in that city. Adequate transportation for their employees to get to work is close if not the top of their lists. Many businesses overlook Detroit for Detroit had not provided that type of quality service. Everyone doesn’t want to live downtown. Outsiders may want to live as far as Ann Arbor and would like to hop a train or light rail to get them to their downtown place of employments and back home away from the so called hustle and bustle.

[royce]

Richard I am glad that you had given me a sensible answer. Detroit need to come out of the Stone Age and into the 21st century when it come to transportation. Having an effective alternative mode of transportation will make this city more attractive to newcomers [[ individuals and corporations alike) and help increase the population of this city. Businesses look at how a city could provide for its employees as one of the factors of them setting up in that city. Adequate transportation for their employees to get to work is close if not the top of their lists. Many businesses overlook Detroit for Detroit had not provided that type of quality service. Everyone doesn’t want to live downtown. Outsiders may want to live as far as Ann Arbor and would like to hop a train or light rail to get them to their downtown place of employments and back home away from the so called hustle and bustle.

Good points, stasu1213. When it comes to mass transit in the Detroit area, the attitude of most who live here is that it's too expensive, or nobody wants it. The truth is it is expensive initially, and there are many who want it. We just can't come together to figure out the best way to do it for this region. I think the People Mover and the Q-Line point to the inadequacies of each system. Are there alternatives to these forms of transportation? Yes, but are we as a region willing to find one that works and implement it?

One of the arguments against mass transit is that we don't have the population for it. Isn't the metro area like four million people? Another argument against mass transit is that we don't have the infrastructure for it. We have six arterial roads that are wide enough to put some form of mass transit train down the middle of them. Woodward, Gratiot, Grand River, and Michigan all get even wider at some point on their journey, allowing for more room for transit down the middle of them. Also, we have miles of freeways that could run a train down the center lanes. The powers that be have talked for years about making Detroit a world class city, but their actions don't support that claim. What has to happen is a change in attitude. The attitude that says, "We can," has to overrule the attitude that says, "We can't'."

[Jason]

Canadian Visitor, I agree. Before the pandemic, DDOT's bus service was headed in the right direction. The major bus routes had 15 minute or better peak headways, and ran 24/7, and many of the others ran every 20 minutes. Adjusting some routes and bumping up service a bit and improving some user experience issues would have gotten it to being a pretty solid bus system. Since then, because of the bus driver shortage, service has been severely reduced and has become abysmally unreliable. They've been working on redesigning the bus network, which should be released for public comment soon, and I think that will improve things, and it will hopefully be a good foundation for improving the system moving forward. I also very much agree about land, especially because Detroit currently has enough open land to save money by building it elevated.

Stasu1213, light rail is good for when you have a route that very rarely interacts with roads, but isn't completely grade separated, and which does need to run on roads in some areas. In that situation, it can be built cheaply, and have good service, and the amount of money it would take to completely grade separate the line isn't worth it. But in Detroit, all of our potential routes are big busy roads which light rail doesn't work well in. Light rail was invented to save money by avoiding expensive grade separation, but nowadays you can often save more money with automation.

Royce, the northern half of Jefferson would be used for the elevated guideway and stations, which would be similar to the Copenhagen Metro. A parking lane would be underneath the guideway beam next to the street, and a two way bike track would be under the other beam, with urban space [[cafe seating, art, landscaping, etc.) in between. This leaves enough space for two car lanes in each direction, and 15'-16' sidewalks on each side. One lane of parking, and the turn lane, would be removed, and the remaining lanes would be 10' wide.

The first station would be Lafayette Park, overlooking Lafayette Park/Greening of Detroit Plaza, similar to the way the Copenhagen Metro station overlooks the water. Next would be Elmwood Park, at Dubois Street, which would require demolishing an empty building to make a new plaza to connect with the path network to the north. Next would be Jos Campau, which would have the recent narrow path expanded onto the parking lot to make a new plaza. The guideway would shift off of Jefferson and onto the Uniroyal site, where there would be another station, where it would go back onto Jefferson after Gabriel Richard Park [[leaving plenty of road space for the intersection with Grand Boulevard), before going back onto Jefferson, to another station near Van Dyke. So there aren't any stations directly blocking any buildings, and only 2-3 properties need to be taken [[but aren't strictly required). There are only a handful of buildings that are tall enough and close enough to the guideway to cause serious sound issues, and they're still not as close as buildings downtown are. Overall it's a pretty simple and straightforward project.

[Canadian Visitor]

Canadian Visitor, I agree. Before the pandemic, DDOT's bus service was headed in the right direction. The major bus routes had 15 minute or better peak headways, and ran 24/7, and many of the others ran every 20 minutes. Adjusting some routes and bumping up service a bit and improving some user experience issues would have gotten it to being a pretty solid bus system. Since then, because of the bus driver shortage, service has been severely reduced and has become abysmally unreliable. They've been working on redesigning the bus network, which should be released for public comment soon, and I think that will improve things, and it will hopefully be a good foundation for improving the system moving forward. I also very much agree about land, especially because Detroit currently has enough open land to save money by building it elevated.

We are definitely on the same page here.

Stasu1213, light rail is good for when you have a route that very rarely interacts with roads, but isn't completely grade separated, and which does need to run on roads in some areas. In that situation, it can be built cheaply, and have good service, and the amount of money it would take to completely grade separate the line isn't worth it. But in Detroit, all of our potential routes are big busy roads which light rail doesn't work well in. Light rail was invented to save money by avoiding expensive grade separation, but nowadays you can often save more money with automation.

Here, I don't so much want to disagree as to flesh out what you're saying a bit.

So, Toronto often refers to its exclusive ROW streetcar lines as LRT [[Harbourfront, Spadina, and St. Clair)

These are long street cars [[multi-unit) which have exclusive lanes not occupied by cars, but which cross traffic lights at grade.

Truthfully, most have exceedingly high passenger volumes, but have under performed expectations on journey time. [[how long it take to make a trip from one end of the line to the other).

This is at least, in a part, a function of sometimes absurd stop spacing [[stops that are literally under 250 yards apart, to use your system of measure).

Its also a function of poor, or absent transit-priority traffic lights, notwithstanding may far-side stops/stations which were designed with transit-priority in mind.

Its very important to weigh these 'details' when evaluating different 'technologies'.

******

Can one build, mostly, at-grade and still go automated? Yes. But, it likely requires perimeter fencing around the tracks so that mid-block crossings are not an issue.

It also requires grade-separation at intersections to avoid the same problem.

This is what is being done with Toronto's Eglinton Crosstown West Extension.

Where it is variably at-grade, with stations under intersections, and also, at other points, elevated.

Frankly, the combination in our case is a bit wacky, as dropping down and going up again multiple times inflates construction costs, and can have operational pains too with winter weather.

But I digress.

I think elevated can be a good technique, but one does need to understand its limitations as well.

1) Stations directly over roads create massive and unwelcoming shadows, they generally preclude trees/flowers underneath and can be quite imposing and have an adverse effect on the area.

2) For reasons above, stations are generally best located off to the side of any road right-of-way, which means buying the land for them, and of course, not demo'ing any heritage or beloved buildings in the process. This somewhat inflates the costs.

3) Automated does save money, how much is a question of how well capacity can be manipulated. If, for instance, a design can allow for a single track, [[for both directions) with periodic passing tracks, and automation can manipulate that efficiently, you might get a say, 3-minute headway that delivers great bang for the buck. However, there is a limiting factor, that for each section w/o passing track, you're building in a capacity constraint.

Automation can also allow trains to run closer together, safely, but this typically requires universal twin-track, unless you're doing a loop.

When you can run trains tighter together, you can run shorter trains and build smaller stations. But again, you need to be mindful that should you want added capacity in the future, the land needs to be bought and the station design structured to allow for longer trains/platforms.

Many Vancouver Skytrain station did this; they were built smaller, but designed to be extended in the future.

***

Deep tunneling is by far the most expensive approach. Shallow tunnels aren't nearly as costly, if done 'cut and cover'. However, the latter leads to longer road closures during construction which hassle adjacent businesses and homeowners.

[Richard]

Richard I am glad that you had given me a sensible answer. Detroit need to come out of the Stone Age and into the 21st century when it come to transportation. Having an effective alternative mode of transportation will make this city more attractive to newcomers [[ individuals and corporations alike) and help increase the population of this city. Businesses look at how a city could provide for its employees as one of the factors of them setting up in that city. Adequate transportation for their employees to get to work is close if not the top of their lists. Many businesses overlook Detroit for Detroit had not provided that type of quality service. Everyone doesn’t want to live downtown. Outsiders may want to live as far as Ann Arbor and would like to hop a train or light rail to get them to their downtown place of employments and back home away from the so called hustle and bustle.

The PM and the Qline on their own may seem pointless,but in the bigger picture they will play a part of it gets to that.

The one thing the feds stress is connect ability,take Orlando for instance,when they started establishing their rail system the first thing they did was to connect all of the surrounding cities into one mainline,then they fed off of that mainline with spurs.

The reason being is it splits costs,the city of Orlando gets FTA funds,the next city gets their FTA funds etc it all gets thrown into the pot as a common interest.

I kinda think to start out with Detroit needs to be looking at establishing those main connections again first before entertaining the legs.

Because you are combining forces with the entire metro and beyond and splitting costs.

Years ago when I was younger and more energetic,I actually looked into buying the rights from the last defunct rail system in Detroit,at that time it included the old right a-ways that connected the burbs together,because also at that time there were some burbs that were not willing to get on board,but it was simple enough to just bypass them.

A regional mainline actually benefits the region.

The thing is,we can have this discussion and have had it over and over and yet here we are again.

Getting anything established is hard and it takes time,and it takes political will power,the one thing I will say,everybody knows what needs to be done,it is achievable for Detroit and the region.

Not to get into politics but like it or not,politics plays a major role in all of this when it comes to getting things done,as an outsider I am seeing no change from back when I was interested in establishing something then today,very few of your local politicians are even on board with any of this.

Thats what the job is for the person sitting there saying,I am only one person how can I even possibly do anything to get this moving,you have to find those politicians and work them,that is why they are there,if you have to call them everyday,call them.

There is a saying,A squeaky wheel gets the grease and in local politics if you are not a squeaky wheel,you will never be heard.

You know what needs to be done,you are not wrong or alone,there are thousands in the community and around the entire metro area that have the untapped ability to get it done and feel the same way,just have to be that relentless squeaky wheel and never take no for an answer or listen to reasons as to why you cannot do it,because you can,it’s been proven all across the country that it can be done.

The state is sitting on hundreds of millions in federal infrastructure funds,a lot of those were supposed to be for mass transit projects,now is about the time to say - hey,pandemic is over with how about we get back on track with this rail system.

When was the PM built and when was the QLine built,all that time inbetween and all this time after the Qline was built nobody has even applied for FTA funds,in that time frame,that was enough lost funding opportunity that you could have had 4 trains from Detroit to Ann Arbor stacked on top of each other.

The younger folk are the ones that are tasked with getting this done,it’s your time to get it done and make an impact.

The bridge to no where got funding 8 billion dollars by that time it is done,if somebody can figure out how to raise 8 billion to build a facade,surly you guys can figure out how to get funding for a simple train that is actually useful and serves the community from Detroit to Ann Arbor and points in-between.

Once you do that adding the spurs for the last mile becomes natural,because at that point it just makes sense.

[K-slice]

Too many wild assumptions [[swiss cheese has fewer holes than some of these assertions), too many inaccurate figures, and too much ignoring the facts. I could go back though again and point out how so much of the post is wrong [[for example, averaging the wiki PM ridership data gives us 2.00 mil/yr, not 2.2 mil, with a declining trendline), but to do so when the data is twisted or ignored would be an exercise in futility. I can see your conclusion is already drawn and no amount of facts are going to get in the way.

Like an Illich rendering, it's a pretty picture with no substance behind it.

Hopefully the powers that be can get us more at-grade rail rather than giving it to Lyle Lanley here.

[Richard]

The powers that be clearly would prefer you not to have any rail,in case if you have not noticed.

You are correct on the numbers,you cannot say it cost X amount per mile to run rail in Miami or X amount to run in Toronto,and that point has already been brought up because of land costs and hundreds of other different variations and say it will never work in Detroit,because Detroit numbers will be different and not a base.

Thats why people apply to the FTA for funding to do what is called a feasibility study,that will determine true costs.

What you can do,because at this point we are not reinventing the wheel or trying to establish something that nobody else has in history,is use statistical data.

Because it is already established over the entire country based on multiple different scenarios,each city is different but a basic set of metrics apply to all of them,it always has.

You are also looking at long term investments,you cannot say no way in hell Detroit of today would support a horse drawn street car,but cities think long term.

During the bankruptcy and before,people were saying that Detroit will never come back,but here you are steadily moving forward,you are looking at the Detroit of today while building the Detroit of tomorrow.

The only thing that remains an unanswered question when it comes to mass transit rail numbers was had not GM systematically phased out local rail or the street cars would ridership had declined to the point where it was no longer feasible to maintain and they would have faded away anyway.

They started out privately owned,Wildner who owned a large part of white star lines IE: titanic and sister ships established and owned and made millions off of the Philadelphia street car lines,so there was money it it at one time.

Yes the car came into play,white flight moving to the suburbs also decreased ridership and then the cities had to start absorbing the costs and shutting lines down.

No different in the UK ,thousands of miles of rail was eliminated,small towns were left out of the loop and centuries old train stations left to rot after closing.

But here we are today,we have to take the big picture into context and where are we going with all of this save the planet crap,where is that trend going ?

We know you can move freight and people with mass transit more cost effective and less impact on the environment then with cars,in the same amount of time it takes to move 6000 cars over a freeway a raised rail PM can move 40,000 people.

I agree with at-grade 100% but if you are looking at installing cheaper and faster,you can run a mono rail system 3’ off of the ground or any height.

It’s cheaper because it is prefabricated off site,to install it just takes footing pads every X amount of yards you do not have to dig up the entire length of ground.

The reason they go with raised or mono rail is to not disturb existing infrastructure,easier to cross roads etc.

Our little street car system is ground level on dedicated tracks and crosses many streets,4 miles long and is a replica vintage street car,it took 4 years to reach its 1 millionth customer.

The flip side of that is go to Orlando,their rail cars is the same size as a Amtrak car,they run at-grade in traffic and and people are slow learners as to it is best not to get in front of them in your car and tragically people also think it is okay to walk out in front of them while thinking a 100,000 lbs will stop on a dime.

At any rate that is a regional Detroit thing,there is no reason to fudge about with numbers and statistics without a feasibility study.

That feasiblity study will give you your options,they say these are your options and this is the implementation costs for each option,that’s when public input comes in,because you are paying for it.

Keep in mind,momentum is building across the world and it is being implemented in some cities where cars are simply not allowed in the downtown,any car does not matter if it is EV or not,even Tampa has started to allow golf carts as a mode of transportation in the downtown.

So not today but sooner then we think the trends are changing,so we are not looking at just today,where are we going to be in 10 years or more and how do we get ahead of that verses waiting until it is to late.

You guys know that song all to well of what happens when you depend on something that goes away and what happens when you stop being forward thinking and complacent,you get knocked back 50 years and are playing catch up.

But you are being forced to which makes it expensive,proactive verses reactive.

The Detroit of today is not going to be the same 10 years from now,no different then it was 10 years ago.

You are basically building a city,like it or not mass transit is a critical part of that and needs to be addressed if you intend on being competitive in the future.

It’s to early to be debating at-grade,mono rail,PM etc.

I would say and purely speculation but it would probably be more cost effective for a mainline,Detroit to Ann Arbor to have a hybrid,mono rail that drops to at-grade when it hits the population densities.

The thing that has already been established is the cost factor of mono rail verse at-grade,but nobody says you have to stick the mono rail type system up in the air,it’s cost of implementing that you are looking at.

Brightline started in Orlando,it now runs up the east coast connecting Miami to Orlando and everything in-between and is working on the leg from Orlando to Tampa and west coast of Florida and expanding to Jacksonville,Las Vegas,California,it’s the largest PRIVATE rail system being established in over a century.

It started as a 2 mile train connecting 3 cities together,a majority privately funded.

So nobody can say it cannot be done,because it is being done.

[stasu1213]

Light rail could be integrated in the filling in of I375 project. The line could run northbound from Jefferson to the tracks that sit next to Dequindre. Detroit has many unused or lightly traveled streets that some type of rail system could be installed. Warren Avenue would be perfect for a crosstown line from Detroit to Westland. 8 mile Road is another crosstown thoroughfare that a rail system could be installed which could travel from Harper Woods north to Northville. I was highly disappointed that improving mass transit for southeastern Michigan wasn't included in the topics of debates during the Gubernatorial debate. Governor Whitmer, eventhough part of the younger generation x, is not a forward thinking Governor. Millions of dollars had been spent and are being spent on infrastructure which construction on the roads are moving at a snail's pace.

[royce]

Royce, the northern half of Jefferson would be used for the elevated guideway and stations, which would be similar to the Copenhagen Metro. A parking lane would be underneath the guideway beam next to the street, and a two way bike track would be under the other beam, with urban space [[cafe seating, art, landscaping, etc.) in between. This leaves enough space for two car lanes in each direction, and 15'-16' sidewalks on each side. One lane of parking, and the turn lane, would be removed, and the remaining lanes would be 10' wide.

The first station would be Lafayette Park, overlooking Lafayette Park/Greening of Detroit Plaza, similar to the way the Copenhagen Metro station overlooks the water. Next would be Elmwood Park, at Dubois Street, which would require demolishing an empty building to make a new plaza to connect with the path network to the north. Next would be Jos Campau, which would have the recent narrow path expanded onto the parking lot to make a new plaza. The guideway would shift off of Jefferson and onto the Uniroyal site, where there would be another station, where it would go back onto Jefferson after Gabriel Richard Park [[leaving plenty of road space for the intersection with Grand Boulevard), before going back onto Jefferson, to another station near Van Dyke. So there aren't any stations directly blocking any buildings, and only 2-3 properties need to be taken [[but aren't strictly required). There are only a handful of buildings that are tall enough and close enough to the guideway to cause serious sound issues, and they're still not as close as buildings downtown are. Overall it's a pretty simple and straightforward project.

So, Jason, the PM expansion would only go to Jefferson and Van Dyke? Also, I saw the video on the Copenhagen Metro and it is above ground only for a short time, then it goes underground like a subway. Also, the stations that were shown appear to be twice the size of the PM stations. Jason, I appreciate your calculations and layout for the PM expansion, but I still can't see how a PM expansion would work along Jefferson. That's my two cents.

[stasu1213]

I think that bloggers on here who are critical of our suggestions probably work for city government or are elected officials themselves who don’t what change.

[stasu1213]

Does an elevated rail have to be encase in cement or concrete as the People Mover is? Can an elevated system be constructed using steel? Would using steel for it’s structure make it cheaper and easier to build instead of concrete?

Canadian visitor is right. The bus system need much improving. How many whom are on the board of DDOT actually commute to work on busses? Yes it’s great to have WiFi but if the system is strapped for cash maybe the WiFi should be ditched in favor for more drivers or mechanics. There need to be an attachment with those who sit on the board of DDOT with commuting experiencing by bus on a daily basis. More daily commuters need to sit on the board. SMART and DDOT should collaborate their schedules so when commuters who need to transfer from one system to another bus of SMART will be there to pick up passengers from the arrived DDOT bus or visa versa.

[canuck]

Here is a bit of a long winded description of Montreal's upcoming automated lightrail system. There are a lot of other videos but this one is interesting because it provides a historical breakdown and financing as well as future developments. It is the largest transit project in Canada and has at grade, elevated and underground lengths. The trainsets are being tested daily [[for a year now), I see them when crossing the New Champlain bridge to Montreal's downtown. The trains are 2 cars in length, unimpeded gangways [[boa) running every 2.5 minutes at rush hour, depending on demand. Covid and post-Covid has really pushed downtown's office vacancy rate up quite a bit, but long term, this is really going to help fluidity in commuting.

https://youtu.be/-OuGEaPLZ0g

[kuuma]

Does an elevated rail have to be encase in cement or concrete as the People Mover is? Can an elevated system be constructed using steel? Would using steel for it’s structure make it cheaper and easier to build instead of concrete?

NYC and Chicago's elevated lines are both steel. I never realized concrete was that much more expensive, but if it is, we could probably see it for even less.

Also just wanna say, absolutely loving this thread. Jason, I appreciate your measured outlook of the financial side of what transit expansions would look like here in Detroit, and to see the numbers support it too.

I always felt the RoI for public transit infrastructure is much more intangible and seen in the form of things like property value, neighborhood desirability and passive draw for new residents, quality of life by way of reduced traffic, air quality improvements and reduced gas use when you don't have to drive your local errands, and new opportunities for business and culture to come up in more dense and walkable areas. All of which is hard to quantify, and when one looks at it from a reductive standpoint of simply "does the construction/operation costs get paid for by fares y/n" it sort of ignores all those more nuanced benefits. So it's great to look at your numbers and see it also spelled out in terms the skeptics can digest.

[Jason]

Thanks guys, I appreciate the kind words and also the discussion.

I haven't shared renderings in the past, because they're very much in progress, but hopefully these help visualize what I was trying to describe earlier.

[Richard]

Here is a bit of a long winded description of Montreal's upcoming automated lightrail system. There are a lot of other videos but this one is interesting because it provides a historical breakdown and financing as well as future developments. It is the largest transit project in Canada and has at grade, elevated and underground lengths. The trainsets are being tested daily [[for a year now), I see them when crossing the New Champlain bridge to Montreal's downtown. The trains are 2 cars in length, unimpeded gangways [[boa) running every 2.5 minutes at rush hour, depending on demand. Covid and post-Covid has really pushed downtown's office vacancy rate up quite a bit, but long term, this is really going to help fluidity in commuting.

https://youtu.be/-OuGEaPLZ0g

The interesting part about that

Montreal regional population 4.3 million with a GDP of 180 billion.

Detroit regional population 4.3 million with a GDP of 241.6 billion.

Tax rate in Montréal for over $116,000 is 29% 33% over 200k federal

Detroit region now is 24% and 32% federal respectively.

So in theory Detroit region has a higher GDP but has less investment in infrastructure compared to Montreal,it’s 99% politics because you can see the funds are there and you have 2 matching sets of numbers and one set is 50 billion more then the other,one is expanding rail the other is not.




The thing with fully automated,Brightline had 40 people killed in the first 2 years,mostly from suicide and the rest at crossings with people trying to beat the train,even though it only takes a matter of seconds for it to go through the crossing.

I wonder if the Montreal one has tested things like that? Like throwing a crash test dummy in front of the train and see if it saves lives,it may just be a given though,more rail equals more deaths.