Lots of things happening in or around BP this year. What does anyone think about the possible redevelopment of the vacant land? apartments?
Will we get infill housing, will crosswinds or someone continue to fill the southern portion of the nabe?
Any thoughts
I have heard that there have been some talks with the folks who did some condos in art center.
The redevelopment is basically inevitable; the area is too well-located relative to the increasing housing demand downtown and in midtown.
But the timing is always uncertain. Assembling financing for projects in Detroit takes a long time, and the whole EM thing adds additional confusion to the governmental side of it. As usual, you just have to wait to see the contracts signed.
No doubt that will be an up and coming area. Once they break ground for M1 Rail it'll go nuts.Quote:
Originally Posted by jaytheory
M-1 won't do much. This is not a major improvement to the regional transit system. It is an expensive way of carrying those who feel that they are to good to sit on a bus.Quote:
Originally Posted by professorscott
Well, if it going to do anything for anyplace it will do it for Brush Park. However I suspect the good professor may have had his tongue in his cheek.Quote:
Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner
i think the M-1 wont make that big of a difference because it only goes from downtown to new center. i could walk this distance and more over i'm not saving a whole lot of time or money as i could drive this distance in the comfort of my own vehicle. however, if the M-1 went all the way to 8 mile then my story changes, if i live in Sherwood forest but work downtown then hopping on the light rail would be a quick and convenient way to get about.Quote:
Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner
I can't wait for M1, because I am too good for a bus!
1953
From what I've heard from city agencies, BP is ripe for the picking, but they are looking to redesign the overlay plan for the area to prevent Crosswinds-type projects from happening again. Think Philly or Toronto type low-rise mixed use.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScienceFair
Whats wrong with the Crosswinds plan?
LOL If you're too good for the bus you're too good for the streetcar! You would not believe how many times I have heard people say such things at public meetings and mean it seriously in the last 20 years!Quote:
Originally Posted by 1953
The mode won't do much to increase ridership, but it will attract a small number of 'choice riders' who will stay at downtown hotels and want an adventure to the DIA.
Deja vu. Heard the same things a decade ago back home in Houston when we got our one light rail line "that goes nowhere!!!" "Not enough people live downtown!" "We're a car culture!" "Nobody will use it!" "LOLWUT?" Fast forward a decade and the first line is getting an extension and four more lines are in the works.Quote:
Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner
Takes a while to change a culture I guess.
I don't know why we have to go over this a million times, but things like M-1 are just as much about increasing development along the route as it is about actually moving people. It's a legit criticism if you're looking at it purely in terms of transportation, and you can decry it if you'd like, but that's not the only reason [[or sometimes even the main reason) streetcars and light rails are developed along certain corridors. M-1 WILL spur higher densities along Woodward and it's immediate side streets if it does nothing else, at all.
Don't get me wrong, I do support it, but expectations need to be realistic. The Euclid BRT has brought billions in new Development to the Core of Cleveland, but it is much longer and connects to more bus and rail lines than what M-1 will do. Yes it is good to have a better connection to the Amtrak Station, but the only other major line that will feed it will be the 14 [[Warren Crosstown). My biggest fear is that once it is in place the Woodward busses will stop N of New Center and folks will be delayed in getting downtown because they will need to wait and transfer to the new line in order to increase its numbers.Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasT
Doubtful. DDOT and M1 are separate entities and will be for the foreseeable future. Outside of some sort of grant or other kicker, there is no reason for DDOT to share its ridership with M1 through such an arrangement.Quote:
Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner
Under RTA they are not separate entities. DDOT, SMART and M-1 will have to run as complimentary services.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eber Brock Ward
The RTA will have review powers over grant applications and such, which gives them an oversight role, but they will most definitely continue to be separate entities for the foreseeable future.Quote:
Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner
Have you read the legislation? It requires a unanimous [[9/9) vote of the Board in order to acquire an existing transit provider. Even then, were that vote to occur, which is unlikely in the short- and medium-term, it would need to be either [[1) approved by a majority of a popular vote in every constituent county or [[2) be structured so as to ensure that the RTA assumes *no* liabilities and other legacy costs of the existing provider.
If you're coming at it from the regional master plan angle, or the designated recipient/grant applicant angle, it would be optically bad and politically unlikely that the RTA would funnel Woodward corridor ridership to an entity [[M1) that is likely not a "public transportation provider," and thus generally not subject to the auspices of the RTA, under the Act.
With the 2/2/2/2/1 makeup of the Board's voting members, too much meddling in the providers' business is a nonstarter, barring something else like some large foundation or someone dangling grant money out there in a quid-pro-quo. For a real-life example of how this dynamic works, look to the only two analogous organizations to our current RTA, which are Chicago's RTA and San Fran's MTC.
I saw a movie about the Brewster Projects, last year, at the N'namdi center in Midtown. There was a rep there from the city as well as the film-maker and one of the Avalon Bakery owners. It was a short documentary, actually well done, though, for me, a bit on the Ruin Porn With People side.
The filmmaker had obvious empathy for the folks who once lived there - though the reminisces of latter day crackheads in one of the buildings was overly long.
It seemed, at this event, that they were laying a basis for redeveloping the buildings, though the official line seemed to be that they were going to be demolished.
EBW
The RTA will control the purse strings in regard to funding and will be the agency in charge. However they will let the agencies remain separate for as long as it makes sense to. The previous RTCC arrangement makes the new RTA arrangement look downright progressive.
I disagree in that I believe the legislation makes it clear that they won't be "letting the agencies remain separate" because the RTA lacks any real ability to acquire or otherwise cause the merger of any agencies.Quote:
Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner
I also think you overstate the ability of the RTA to avoid the purse-strings. Once the paeans to regional harmony are done, it will be each county to themselves and the board will turn into a horse-trading marathon. And while the RTA does have that oversight power, the 5% state money penalty, and a few other tools, found in Section 8 or otherwise, the organization is, sadly, more toothless than beast.
It's only when the RTA receives a dedicated and substantial source of funding -- be it from the vehicle registration fee, the ad val property tax [[lol), or some other source -- that the RTA can really make magic happen. As it stands, it's basically the Board, the CAC, the public transportation advisory council, and the throwaway $250k that they have to work with, and that's not that much. Maybe a staff of 2-3 people, if they hire a qualified CEO[[?).
I am hopeful long-term, though.
So is Crosswinds going to demolish the units they built that were never sold and sit abandoned before they build NEW units in Brush Park ??
Brush Park will be converted to "Brush Parking Lot" when they build the hockeyball stadium.
Well if it is well policed with a more 'choice ridership' it will be different from a standard ride on the DOT busses which overall I know would not want to endure.... LOL!
Quote:
Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner
Well, for one, the units are practically worthless. Look at the resales. These "prime" condos in a "hot" area are worth less than if they were located in farmland in hicksville Northern Macomb.Quote:
Originally Posted by Detroit Stylin
But I'm sure the taxpayers will be asked to subsidize even more condos, so they can be resold 10 years down the line for 20% of construction costs.
How does this support light rail? Wouldn't Houston be a good example of why not to build light rail?Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasT
They built a single line in Houston, ridership sucks [[lower than the current Woodward bus ridership in Detroit), so now they're considering spending even more on light rail, hoping eventually ridership doesn't suck
Oh, and downtown revitalization? Since they opened the light rail on Houston's Main Street, the Macys closed [[last major store downtown), as did a number of nearby retail outlets. I thought rail transit was supposed to revitalize downtowns?
What evidence do you have for such a claim? And please don't tell me other cities built light rail and development followed, because there's no way to parse out the causal relationships.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dexlin
It would be like me claiming that no light rail spurs higher densities. After all, there was no light rail built down hundreds of urban corridors throughout the world, yet they experienced densification.