Woodward rail project held up because of usage disputes

[wolverine]

The more this project waits, the more Detroit loses.

[Bham1982]

The LRT Downtown loop is necessary because it connects out of town travelers [[using the intermodal station to be built in New Center), and points north to access Cobo, RPTC, and the Ren Cen without a transfer to the People Mover. The People Mover is perfectly fine for CBD access. Their uses IMHO are complementary. The LRT loop will access the People Mover loop at 4 stations, [[Financial District, Millender Center, Ren Cen, and one block from Bricktown Station).

There is no intermodal station "to be built" in New Center.

If you're referring to the Amtrak station, it badly trails even the ridership in Dearborn, and I don't think you get too many businessmen riding it.

And even if they did, they would all hail taxis going downtown. I travel plenty for my job and taxis are always more convenient, even in super-transit-friendly cities like NYC or in Europe, because your employer is paying for it.

[Russix]

I lived in Europe for many years, system like that is great .... But if You can't connect suburbs to it it's pointless.... The entire metropolitan area should be connected like that. At least one track on Hall rd east-west, Gration from Detroit to Hall rd, Van Dyke or Mound rd from D to Hall rd, Grand River all the way.... and more lines connecting Detroit parts . The short track running just on Woodward to 8 mile is pointless...

Oakland County is more than welcome to expand the system into their territory. Please send your comments to L. Brooks Patterson
2100 Pontiac Lake Road
Executive Office Building – 41W
Waterford, MI 48328
Phone: 248-858-0484

[Russix]

The LRT Downtown loop is necessary because it connects out of town travelers [[using the intermodal station to be built in New Center), and points north to access Cobo, RPTC, and the Ren Cen without a transfer to the People Mover. The People Mover is perfectly fine for CBD access. Their uses IMHO are complementary. The LRT loop will access the People Mover loop at 4 stations, [[Financial District, Millender Center, Ren Cen, and one block from Bricktown Station).

If the LRT ended at GCP, a Cobo or JLA patron would have to ride the People Mover towards Greektown and around to get there, adding unnecessary congestion on the PM during the Auto Shows, etc.

Unnecessary congestion? The PM needs all the congestion it can get or just be taken down.

[Russix]

Why does this light rail need to go south of GCP in the first place? The People Mover is going to be considered pointless if this thing goes to Jefferson.

I'm writing Mayor Bing to tell him to dump the expense of routing LRT downtown and the private investors.

[BrushStart]

There is no intermodal station "to be built" in New Center.

If you're referring to the Amtrak station, it badly trails even the ridership in Dearborn, and I don't think you get too many businessmen riding it.

And even if they did, they would all hail taxis going downtown. I travel plenty for my job and taxis are always more convenient, even in super-transit-friendly cities like NYC or in Europe, because your employer is paying for it.

Ridership isn't high at the New Center stop because it isn't connect to anything. It's isolated. You get there, and your stranded.

Cabs? In New Center? Good luck with that. Maybe on a Friday and Saturday evening you'll find some running up and down Woodward, but otherwise, you're going to have to call ahead for service. It isn't like Manhattan. I'm beginning to wonder if you've even been to Detroit.

Transit systems have to be connected to be effective. You can't just have isolated stops, there has to be other connectors, like light rail or buses. It's the same problem with Metro Airport. There is only one bus [[the 125) that runs from Downtown to the airport, and it isn't even a direct route. It is no wonder tourists don't come downtown- they can't get there without a $50.00 ride from Metro Cab. Fail.

[Bham1982]

Cabs? In New Center? Good luck with that. Maybe on a Friday and Saturday evening you'll find some running up and down Woodward, but otherwise, you're going to have to call ahead for service. It isn't like Manhattan. I'm beginning to wonder if you've even been to Detroit.

Please read my post again. I never wrote any of these things.

Again, I wrote that there is no New Center intermodal station. And if there were any sort of rail-based business demand, they would all take cabs,

I never claimed that cabs did anything in Detroit in the present.

BTW, I totally disagree that New Center Amtrak ridership is poor because of isolation. How is just off Woodward, in the heart of the city, isolated? It could barely be less isolated. I can't think of a single better rail-based location in city limits.

The reason, IMO, is because ridership is heavily suburban-oriented, because folks don't want to leave their cars there overnight, and becuase of [[likely wildly exaggerated) safety concens.

[BrushStart]

Please read my post again. I never wrote any of these things.

Again, I wrote that there is no New Center intermodal station. And if there were any sort of rail-based business demand, they would all take cabs,

I never claimed that cabs did anything in Detroit in the present.

How could there ever be business demand if the system is dysfunctional? Would ANYONE take a train to Chicago, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, or elsewhere if it just dumped them off in one part of town without being able to get anywhere else? The thought of it is ridiculous. The stop isn't a failure because there is no demand. There is no demand because the stop is a failure because it is not accessible. The lack of other transit has rendered it useless. Your comprehension of this, or lack thereof, is the reason people in Metro Detroit believe transit doesn't work. We build incomplete and inadequate systems because we believe they won't work, and then, when they don't work, we say it's because transit can't work, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy that we're committed to. To be clear, Metro Detroit is not some place in the twilight zone where transit just won't work. The demand for it is here, if only the system was designed properly.

BTW, I totally disagree that New Center Amtrak ridership is poor because of isolation. How is just off Woodward, in the heart of the city, isolated? It could barely be less isolated. I can't think of a single better rail-based location in city limits.

It is isolated. It is isolated from everything except what is in New Center. It's not isolated in terms of being off the grid, but unless you have a meeting at the Fisher Building, what good is taking Amtrak to New Center? You can't get downtown. You can't get to Midtown. You can't get to the Airport. You can't get to Royal Oak. You can't get to Southfield. You can't get anywhere conveniently or easily except New Center. That is colossally stupid.

The reason, IMO, is because ridership is heavily suburban-oriented, because folks don't want to leave their cars there overnight, and becuase of [[likely wildly exaggerated) safety concens.

The ridership is heavily suburban-oriented because people have no other choice. There is nothing but cars and roads with no real alternative. There is no urban transit, except a shitty, segregated bus system with old-ass vehicles that don't take you to important places like the airport. There's one Amtrak stop that leaves you stranded. There is an elevated tram that is useful only if you already drove your ass downtown and parked your car in a parking lot to use it. That's why there's no demand, okay.

[fryar]

Well, while we're rehashing everything: They don't need multiple downtown stops.

[royce]

The issue of whether or not to have curb-side running lanes or center-running lanes for the LRT has me going back and forth. I like curb-side running lanes because they maintain many parking spots along the LRT route. In D-DOT's video of their LRT version, the areas where the stations are planned force traffic to the right, eliminating very important parking spots along Woodward, especially in front of the retail strip at Woodward and Grand Boulevard. Also, I don't like the fact that cars will be moving at top speeds right along the curb where the stations will be located. In addition, the center-running lanes eliminate the ability to make left turns at most side-streets, forcing drivers to go several blocks before they can make a left turn.

Now, I like center-running lanes because the LRT doesn't have to share the road with cars, allowing it to run much faster than if it ran along the curb-sides of Woodward. Moving faster with fewer stops is a plus if the LRT system wants riders to give up their cars and choose to ride the LRT.However, as I mentioned earlier, center-running lanes eliminate important parking lanes around the planned stations, and this can hurt the businesses in that area. So which is best, curb-side running lanes or center-running lanes? I do have a solution but it will have to wait 'til later. I've got to go now.

[Jason]

I'm always surprised that more people don't fall off platforms and on to tracks, especially in busy stations, but I guess everyone manages.

[Rocko]

I'm shipping up to Boston to go ride the T, because I was there all weekend and its a fantastic system that EVERYONE uses. It's funny that they're not trying to slash bus service, as DDOT is.

So which is best, curb-side running lanes or center-running lanes? I do have a solution but it will have to wait 'til later. I've got to go now.

A subway? Maybe we should scrap LRT all together and run a subway under Woodward instead! At least there are no curves to deal with.

[Brian1979]

They would be tearing Woodward up and repaving it correct? Then let's just put the LRT underground and run a subway up Woodward instead, then you won't even have to worry about any of this. I was hoping they'd run a rapid transit subway down Michigan then down the median of I-94 to Metro and have LRT on Woodward, Grand River and Gratiot.

[Russix]

The issue of whether or not to have curb-side running lanes or center-running lanes for the LRT has me going back and forth. I like curb-side running lanes because they maintain many parking spots along the LRT route. In D-DOT's video of their LRT version, the areas where the stations are planned force traffic to the right, eliminating very important parking spots along Woodward, especially in front of the retail strip at Woodward and Grand Boulevard. Also, I don't like the fact that cars will be moving at top speeds right along the curb where the stations will be located. In addition, the center-running lanes eliminate the ability to make left turns at most side-streets, forcing drivers to go several blocks before they can make a left turn.

Now, I like center-running lanes because the LRT doesn't have to share the road with cars, allowing it to run much faster than if it ran along the curb-sides of Woodward. Moving faster with fewer stops is a plus if the LRT system wants riders to give up their cars and choose to ride the LRT.However, as I mentioned earlier, center-running lanes eliminate important parking lanes around the planned stations, and this can hurt the businesses in that area. So which is best, curb-side running lanes or center-running lanes? I do have a solution but it will have to wait 'til later. I've got to go now.

There is no parking around curb-running stations either unless you choose to park on the tracks.

[Junkin4Life]

They would be tearing Woodward up and repaving it correct? Then let's just put the LRT underground and run a subway up Woodward instead, then you won't even have to worry about any of this. I was hoping they'd run a rapid transit subway down Michigan then down the median of I-94 to Metro and have LRT on Woodward, Grand River and Gratiot.

That would be BRILLIANT!!!!

[MaxSpeed]

Here is what we should buy . Pesa , manufacturer from Poland has been building advanced light rail systems for years, selling them all over the world. Pesa 120Na is the newest model of light rail designed for busy , metropolitan areas. check out the video --->http://youtu.be/IBpYCxWONa8
They produce also larger trains for medium and long length transport like Grand Rapids to Detroit. Check out this vid for larger models ----> http://youtu.be/RWoGqSxReOU
For people really intrested here is their web site www.pesa.pl , when you go there switch language to English , then got section with trams. Hiring experienced companies like this to purchase equipment from, and different rail design companies is the key to build modern Metro Detroit.

[Hypestyles]

hmm... with all the debate on expanding 1-94, a rail line would be beneficial.. especially if the government keeps deferring to the private rail companies instead of nationalizing the rail routes..

[mwilbert]

There is a rather large cost difference between repaving a road and building a giant tunnel under it. Repaving the road after you were finished would be a rounding error in the cost of putting in a subway tunnel.

[canuck]

Here is what we should buy . Pesa , manufacturer from Poland has been building advanced light rail systems for years, selling them all over the world. Pesa 120Na is the newest model of light rail designed for busy , metropolitan areas. check out the video --->http://youtu.be/IBpYCxWONa8
They produce also larger trains for medium and long length transport like Grand Rapids to Detroit. Check out this vid for larger models ----> http://youtu.be/RWoGqSxReOU
For people really intrested here is their web site www.pesa.pl , when you go there switch language to English , then got section with trams. Hiring experienced companies like this to purchase equipment from, and different rail design companies is the key to build modern Metro Detroit.

Niceski! But also, any contract given to an equipment provider should stipulate a
high percentage of parts manufacturing and assembly in Detroit. That is a standard thing and given the importance of Detroit's transit task, the higher the better.

[EL Jimbo]

There is a rather large cost difference between repaving a road and building a giant tunnel under it. Repaving the road after you were finished would be a rounding error in the cost of putting in a subway tunnel.

Which is why, if my suggestion of filling in the trenches of all our below street level expressways and replacing them with surface level boulevards or other major arterials ever happened I would propose putting subway lines in before we filled in the trenches with dirt. This way, the holes are already dug.

[Warrenite84]

Bham1982, the DEIS January, 2011 shows a station at Piquette St [[Amtrack), Executive Summary, Page ES-5. Why would they they label Piquette St. as the "Amtrack" station if there would not be a planned intermodal station? Piquette St. is South of the train track viaduct there at Woodward, adjecent to a traction power substation and vehicle storage and maintainance facility site.

Russix, concerning post #79, if you have ever been on thePeople Mover during the auto show, you would agree that at that period, the PM does get crowded with commuters to and from Greektown.

The PM is only a CBD circulator. The Downtown Alternative A1 is still necessary, with its minimal loop connecting the RPTC, Cobo, Ren Cen, and next to three PM stations. I just don't see the need to dump an Amtrack passenger off at Grand Circus Park, with the need to transfer a third time onto the PM for points South. [[Amtrack-LRT-PM).

Brian1979, unless you have about Two Billion Dollars to blow on a subway, we will have to settle for what can be leveraged from the philianthropic donations of our monied neighbors.

[Brian1979]

I wish I could present this to Mayor Bing. I made up a rough draft of a mass transit system for the city of Detroit. This is what I got to this point:

Woodward Line [[Downtown to 8 Mile): Jefferson, Cadillac Square [[transfer to the Grand River, Gratiot and Michigan lines at Cadillac Square), Grand Circus-Foxtown, Sproat-Alfred, Mack-MLK, DMC-Canfield, Warren, Edsel Ford, Grand Blvd-New Center, Euclid, Holbrook, Collingwood, Cortland, Davison, McNichols, Palmer Park-Margaret, 7 Mile, State Fair, 8 Mile.

Miles: 9.3
Stations: 19

Grand River Line [[Downtown to Greenfield): Cadillac Square [[transfer to Woodward, Gratiot, Michigan), Washington-Times Square, Adams, Lodge, 12th, Warren, Edsel Ford, Grand Blvd W, Maplewood, Joy, Livernois, Oakman, Wyoming, Meyers-Fullerton, Schafer-Schoolcraft, Greenfield

Miles: 9.01
Stations: 16

Gratiot Line [[Downtown to 7 Mile): Cadillac Square [[transfer to Michigan, Grand River, Woodward), Greektown-Tigers-Lions
Russell, St. Aubin-Vernor, Mack, Mt. Elliott, Warren-Grand Blvd E, Burns, Harper, Conner, St. Patrick, Houston-Whittier, McNichols-Seymour, 7 Mile

Miles: 8.01
Stations: 14

Michigan Line [[Downtown to Metro Airport via I-94): Cadillac Square [[transfer to Woodward, Gratiot, Grand River), Michigan-Washington, 3rd-Bagley, Trumbull, Wabash, Fisher-Jeffries, Grand Blvd W, Michigan-31st, Livernois, Cecil, Lonyo, Ford-Wyoming, Rotunda, Greenfield, Outer, Telegraph, Inkster-Ecorse, Metro Airport.

Miles: 19.5
Stations: 18

Grand River, Woodward and Gratiot would all be LRT. Michigan would be rapid transit. Michigan would also be a subway until I-94 then run in the median of I-94. Cadillac Square would be the hub of the system with transfers to all lines. 51 stations, 45.82 miles total.

I used Cleveland's RTA as the model to this. Cleveland is half the size of Detroit and the population density is the same in both cities. Cleveland's system has 52 stations total and 37 miles total, so one more station than my dream system and almost 9 miles less track so what i drew up here is pretty much the same thing as Cleveland's system. I used street names a lot for station names because I didn't know what names to use. I don't see why something like I drew up can't happen in Detroit, it would increase property values along the lines and encourage development along Detroit's main spoke streets. I think that if there was one more line to add to this it would be Jefferson out to Alter or Conner.

[Hermod]

Of course, otherwise the Y approach wouldn't work at all. But the driver has to move from one end to the other. You still call it a turnaround.

You are confusing terminology.

In railroad terms, a "wye" is a means of turning around a single ended train without using a loop or "balloon" track. Double ended trains can be reversed by a simple "crossover" at the end of track which allows them to move from one track to the other. You will also want crossovers at various points along the line to permit broken down trains to be by-passed [[though it really slows things down when that happens, it doesn't bring things to a complete halt).