QLine, Huntington Place bills get approval in late-night final session in Lansing

[Jason]

For BRT, it doesn't make any sense to take the vehicle type that is the most expensive to operate and has pretty much the lowest quality rider experience, and build a really big expensive system around it.

Streetcars are more comfortable to ride than buses, but their service is slower and less reliable than buses. Except under certain conditions where there are a lot of passengers, they cost more to operate, and they have much much higher capital costs. They make sense when the city already has a legacy streetcar system, since you don't have to pay to build what is already built.

Light rail on roads, even in the center with its own lanes, doesn't really make much sense, because being in the road its still constrained by being in a mixed environment. It's not safe for light rail to go much faster than cars even if they're not sharing lanes. And the train headways have to correspond to sensible traffic light timings. It just costs way too much for the quality of service being provided.

Light rail that is built somewhere with existing grade separation, like an existing rail right of way, or freeway median or undeveloped land, can be cheap to build and can have good service quality. A lot of money can be saved by going onto a street sometimes instead of going over or under it. There's two issues though. First is that most of the time these cheap ROWs aren't located where people want to go, and there's not the land use planning and development activity to change that. Second, the better it is for light rail [[the more grade separated it already is), the easier it is just to go all the way and make it completely grade separated, and do it as a metro. Metros in general have better service quality and are cheaper to operate. And if it's 100% grade separated you can automate it, which dramatically lowers operating costs, and even reduces capital costs.

So for most situations BRT and light rail end up being in this awkward middle where they often get the worst of both worlds.


Regardless, any city that plans on having transit in the long term should not have all of their routes being buses. It's like buying cheap used clothes, wearing them once, and throwing them away, because it's too expensive to install a clothes washer and dryer. Or eating fast food for every meal because it's too expensive to buy a stove. Investing in the appropriate modes saves money in the long run.

[renf]

Thank you, Jason, for your thoughtful reply. Chicago was apparently successful in locating some of the CTA lines in the medians of the city's
expressways. Cleveland has had both light and heavy rail systems for decades. They recently extended the light rail system from Terminal Tower through the Flats and on to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.
Until fairly recently Detroit benefitted from commuter rail service from
Pontiac and from Jackson/Ann Arbor. It would not be excessively costly to increase that service. Indeed Amtrak today runs three trains each way every day that cover the Pontiac to Jackson route.
As employment continues to increase rapidly in downtown Detroit and downtown sports, entertainment and culture venues continue to prosper, there will be a need for increased energy efficient public transit. And the city's total population appears to be about to grow.
The success of the privately financed Brightline commuter rail service in greater Miami appears to suggest the extensive commuter rail system can
be operated without huge governmental subsidies. And it appears that
investors are willing to assist in building high speed intercity rail systems
that will link Houston and Dallas as well a Los Angeles with Las Vegas.
Amtrak has invested extensively in upgrading the Michigan Central line from Detroit to the Indiana border but their passengers trains are still
slower and less frequent than what Michigan Central provided their
passengers with in the late 1940s.

[Burnsie]

Until fairly recently Detroit benefitted from commuter rail service from
Pontiac and from Jackson/Ann Arbor...
As employment continues to increase rapidly in downtown Detroit...
The success of the privately financed Brightline commuter rail service in greater Miami appears to suggest the extensive commuter rail system can
be operated without huge governmental subsidies.

Pontiac-Detroit commuter service ended in Oct. 1983, and AA-Det commuter service ended in Jan. 1984, 39 years ago. It had been cut back from Jackson in June 1982. I wouldn't describe that as "fairly recently."

Does employment truly continue to "increase rapidly" in downtown Detroit?

Brightline is a special case. The policies of its operator, Florida East Coast Railway, cannot be compared to those of passenger-hostile Class 1 freight railroads that any Detroit commuter rail operator would have to contend with.

[stasu1213]

I think that the only reason turned out to be a so called failure from the start is because it was going to rake business away from DDOT's Woodward line. Entities probably lobbied Council or some parts of City government to change the the original track layout for the Qline and now that it's running increase the wait time between trains so that waiting passengers would get discourage and hop on a bus to get to their destinations. Call me a conspiracy nut but I said from the beginning that things would be put in place to make the operation on the line ineffective. Once Target and other store, entertainment venues, and other business opens especially in the New Center area, the Qline will be worth having and put to good use