http://fwrail.org/overview.htm
Or is this just another dream? I saw a poster with this website and system map hangin near the front of the one on Mack and Woodward and checked the site and it all looks legit. Does anyone know what the deal with this is?
That is amazing. Someone really put a lot of work into that site. The Onion, maybe? I just hope that some international traveler doesn't book a week here and expect the Freshwater Railway to be real. Sigh. My guess: activists or a college urban studies project.
Fantasy transportation. Someone creative doing some creative things based on real world things. There was a thread about this and I think the person who created that might have posted about it...I don't remember. But yea, it's not real.
I can remember single-car commuter rail that ran on what this site calls the Michigan Line, which ran until about the mid-'70s. The cars didn't use a separate engine and coach-- they were mid-engine coaches. They ran from Jackson, I think, to Detroit every day. I know they went at least as far out as Chelsea, because I saw them there a few times, and they were heading west toward Jackson.
These were essentially just like the old interurban cars from a hundred years ago.
Hello:
Went onto the site and after a few clicks I found this explanation:
http://offtherail.metrio.org/
I remember this from some months back. I think the creator has more than done his/her homework on it, and there are many good aspects to it. It does have a major design flaw in my opinion, though. The rail system is centered on MCS. While I love that building, and think it can have a useful future, I think it's future isn't in rail. Any effective transit system needs to be centered downtown. MCS is not currently a destination for many people, or near any destinations. Don't hate me, I just think that's realistic about the building, and the purpose of a broad commuter rail system. If the trains all centered on MCS, how many commutes would that make fast and convenient? Hardly any, I think. Which means there would be no riders.
On another note- and I am not trying to start a fight here- I think that transportation money would be FAR more effectively spent to create commuter rail [[light or heavy rail), and improved bus service, as opposed to proposed/appropriated money for intercity "high speed rail." I bet that many more hours of driving would be eliminated [[and I do not have hard stats) by improving local transit that spending it on romantic notions of intercity rail. People do most of their travel near home.
I know the governor has proposed some things for transit in SE Michigan. Regardless of whatever is done [[I have not had the time this week to look hard at his proposals), it must be remembered that all this money is extremely finite, and always will be. Practical local things to make commuting easier need to be the focus. New and better buses, integration of urban and suburban systems, and realistic rail projects, like a commuter rail to Ann Arbor that also serves the airport, and light rail traversing our main commercial spine [[M1 Rail) are much more practical uses of that same money, in my opinion. Also creating small scale transit supporting infrastructure [[bike racks on buses and throughout urban areas and adjacent to transit stops; park & ride parking lots at transit stations) is a relatively low cost proposal that can be phased in over time based on demand and development.
Okay, them's my transit thoughts for the day.
Okay – I can't / won't do a fancy website for local transportation, but here's an idea to throw out there.
Large, long, low, speed bumps on major roads, that have power generating load cells in them. A flashing sign for warning. The power output feeds the Urban transit rail system, so you have the choice of a somewhat unpleasant car ride to get where you want to go – or a pleasant Urban rail ride that is mostly powered by the vehicles that you want to replace. A bump for a wake up call wouldn't hurt at 3 am either. This is all off the shelf technology. Every ten years, a new power source will be reviewed for the system.
Cheap start up costs, and reviewed by law every ten years.
Keep Wayne County out of it. :[[
I'm not anti Wayne Co., just Politics as usual. Can we be a fresh water nation?Quote:
Keep Wayne County out of it. :[[
I've been saying Milwaukee Junction shoud be a huge transfer station for all lines heading north. The Hamtramck station would be the second, after the plant, on the way to Royal Oak.
Hey, at least we can pretend.
Wasn't there a long thread about this system about 6 months ago?
I agree with Hamtragedy about Milwaukee Junction, and "back in the day", that was how it functioned, in a way. DSR busses used to meet the GTW commuter trains and ferry passengeers from the jct. to New Center.
Mikey in Brooklyn. I agree at first blush that the location of the enormous train station makes poor sense for public commuting. However, the location is logical when you realize the location of the rail tunnel and that trains using the station were not commuter, but intercity trains. Detroit had other stations too that were much closer to downtown that served commuter traffic more effectively. Therese were located where Wayne County Community College now stands as well as where the Ren Cen now stands. In fact, if you look at some of the bridges for the deck over the Lodge Freeway you can see that the beams are massive and closely spaced. This gives a hint that these once held an incredible amount of weight, locomotives with passenger cars!
If we can figure out a way to re-establish passenger travel between the Michigan and Ontario, we would go a long way justifying at least one business at the train station. That business would be either a major VIA or AMTRAK stop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner
Ok thats explains it. I thought I had fallen asleep and all of a sudden found myself in the year THIRTY eleven as extensive at that was and I didnt hear a peep about it. Thanks for clearing that all and reinforcing what I knew all long...
I disagree. Many train stations are located in periphery areas. Philadelphia and Cincinnati's aren't downtown. And Chicago's is in a horribly inconvenient location in the west loop and poorly served by mass transit, yet people seem to make it workQuote:
Originally Posted by MikeyinBrooklyn
If some light rail connected MCS...problem solved. And there's plenty of space to build the obligatory Detroit-mega-parking deck.
Something interesting I noticed when looking at some archive photos.Quote:
Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner
http://dlxs.lib.wayne.edu/cgi/i/imag...-X-28056]28056
http://dlxs.lib.wayne.edu/cgi/i/imag...-X-77305]77305
The rail yards were directly adjacent to the waterfront and there is a terminal station where you mentioned, but it looks like they could have connected the two sides if the wanted to, and possibly there could have been a station where Hart Plaza currently sits. Michigan Central, in theory, could have been placed there and we'd have a downtown hub.
Could it have been a deliberate choice not to connect to two sides?
Another thing is Detroit still had an extensive streetcar system so they could have just built a hub connected to that.
Btw, this map shows a good view of the rail lines and the station names.
http://cartweb.geography.ua.edu:9001...view-dhtml.xsl
What could have been...:[[
Found it on the Support Detroit Transit facebook page 2 months ago: http://www.detroityes.com/mb/showthread.php?11201-Freshwater-RailwayQuote:
Originally Posted by Detroit Stylin
I don't know anything else about it.
I doubt it. Remember while railroads were important access to the river was important as well then. Previous to freeways, the best [[and most cost effective) way to get around the great lakes was by boat. There had to be a linkage between the CBD and the water for this to work. RR yards overtaking the entire riverfront would make it impossible for passenger ships to carry much in the way of cargo.Quote:
Originally Posted by animatedmartian
They might have been called 'Budd Cars'? Rode one from Niagara area to CN mainline to Niagara about 25 years ago. Did the job, and seemed quite simple compared to a full train.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkguy
I agree 100% with you about MCS. Although having a bunch of rail lines start\end there would probably spur development, we're not looking to spur development in new area, but instead build out from existing areas.Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeyinBrooklyn
I would also say that if we ever did do a big regional plan like this I wouldn't want it to be centered on RPTC either. Ideally, I think the center transit hub should be somewhere on Woodward in the CBD.
But regardless of a few disagreement, I love the plan that's on that website. Imagine living in Ann Arbor and working downtown and not even driving a car!
Are these going to be short rail lines or busses that will go through these short distance areas?
A major inter-city rail station in Detroit will be located at the site of MCS. That's where the rail tunnel to Canada is located. A high-speed line from Chicago to Toronto and Montreal will go through MCS.Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeyinBrooklyn
http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article...-is-a-priorityQuote:
He said adding a passenger rail link to Detroit Metropolitan Airport is a priority.
Snyder also said improving passenger and freight rail service “paves the way” for growth in agriculture and manufacturing, enhances property values and stimulates local economies.
He said Michigan is well-positioned to become a major transportation hub linking the economies of Montreal and Toronto in Canada to Detroit, Chicago and St. Louis.
It is closer to happening then you may think.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamtragedy
Glad to help. Let me know when you need to remember that Faygo and Better Made are made in Detroit!Quote:
Originally Posted by Detroit Stylin