SEMCOG to spend $200K on Ann Arbor-Detroit rail study

**Novine** · May-21-09, 11:21 PM

"Members of the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments approved spending an additional $200,000 today to allow a Washington consulting company to conduct a computer analysis to determine whether the freight and commuter trains -- both of which would use the estimated 38.5 miles of track -- together run smooth schedules."

Detroit News

Trainman · May-24-09, 12:59 PM

I can do this much better and for less. Give me $100k and I'll save the taxpayers money and get the job done to coordinate all the trains and the buses and fill them up with passengers.

**HazenPingree** · May-24-09, 10:48 PM

let's do another study to find out that we need transit.

**dtowncitylover** · May-24-09, 11:14 PM

Originally Posted by andylinn

let's do another study to find out that we need transit.

This isn't intended for that. It's to make sure that freight and commuter trains can run together with any conflicts. I think it's good we just can't throw this type of rail together. I hope you were only being sarcastic.

Trainman · May-25-09, 09:25 AM

Originally Posted by dtowncitylover

This isn't intended for that. It's to make sure that freight and commuter trains can run together with any conflicts. I think it's good we just can't throw this type of rail together. I hope you were only being sarcastic.

The purpose is not to make sure that freight and commuter trains can run together with any conflicts. I know because I work in the transportation industry.

Southeast Michigan will get mass transit. Go to google and type in Sao Paulo, train, bus and you will see the future of Detroit. Yes, it's true that trains are coming but what southeast Michigan really badly needs are decent paying jobs first so the people can afford the nice things that SEMCOG, MDOT and the TRU want. Try telling that our leaders and they will not listen because they do not have to. The truth is that YOU people in DY will again vote YES next August 2010 to again bail out SMART.

And then again and again to bail out the banks, the car companies. It's all about raising taxes and lots of money to make the rich richer.

We were promised more mass transit in 1995 by SEMCOG. We got less mass transit, more slums and fewer jobs instead.

So, who do you DY'ers want to believe? SEMCOG? or Trainman?

Retroit · May-25-09, 11:28 AM

There's nothing to study in my opinion; passenger trains should have the right-of-way. Freight can wait.

**Beech Cricker** · May-25-09, 03:19 PM

I don't understand the big deal here...there really isn't that much freight traffic on the "Michigan Line" these days. As a result, NS attempted to unload a lot of this route within the last few years until the STB foiled them.

**dtowncitylover** · May-25-09, 10:03 PM

Originally Posted by Trainman

The purpose is not to make sure that freight and commuter trains can run together with any conflicts. I know because I work in the transportation industry.

Southeast Michigan will get mass transit. Go to google and type in Sao Paulo, train, bus and you will see the future of Detroit. Yes, it's true that trains are coming but what southeast Michigan really badly needs are decent paying jobs first so the people can afford the nice things that SEMCOG, MDOT and the TRU want. Try telling that our leaders and they will not listen because they do not have to. The truth is that YOU people in DY will again vote YES next August 2010 to again bail out SMART.

And then again and again to bail out the banks, the car companies. It's all about raising taxes and lots of money to make the rich richer.

We were promised more mass transit in 1995 by SEMCOG. We got less mass transit, more slums and fewer jobs instead.

So, who do you DY'ers want to believe? SEMCOG? or Trainman?

So tell us almighty Trainman, what is the purpose of the study?

I agree though, commuter should have the right of way.

**doctors** · May-26-09, 08:40 AM

What detroit really needs is Woodward avenue subway between downtown and pontiac but at the very least to Royal Oak. A bus on steel wheels just doesn't cut it.

The way this area is spread out it would be no different from the rail project in Los Angeles.

**ghettopalmetto** · May-26-09, 02:42 PM

Originally Posted by doctors

The way this area is spread out it would be no different from the rail project in Los Angeles.

Which "rail project in Los Angeles" do you mean?

And how is a Detroit-Pontiac [[or at least Royal Oak) subway line a suitable replacement for a Detroit-Ann Arbor commuter rail line?

**professorscott** · May-26-09, 02:58 PM

Ah, Coleman Young's dream of a Woodward subway. I haven't thought about that in years.

It's worthwhile to note that none of the transit studies in the current century - SEMCOG's "SpeedLink" study in about 2001, the M1 Rail project, the DTOGS effort - proposed a subway for anywhere in the region. Three different groups, all working on ways to improve transit, all looking at Woodward as a keystone, and not one of them suggests a subway.

That leads me and Sir William of Ockham to the conclusion that a subway might not be the best solution for that corridor.

Having said that, the regional plan now in effect includes at-grade commuter rail from Detroit to Pontiac, so it's very likely heavy rail is in the future for the Woodward corridor, just not underground and several hundred yards east of Woodward.

**Glowblue** · May-26-09, 03:36 PM

Originally Posted by professorscott

Ah, Coleman Young's dream of a Woodward subway. I haven't thought about that in years.

It's worthwhile to note that none of the transit studies in the current century - SEMCOG's "SpeedLink" study in about 2001, the M1 Rail project, the DTOGS effort - proposed a subway for anywhere in the region. Three different groups, all working on ways to improve transit, all looking at Woodward as a keystone, and not one of them suggests a subway.

That leads me and Sir William of Ockham to the conclusion that a subway might not be the best solution for that corridor.

Having said that, the regional plan now in effect includes at-grade commuter rail from Detroit to Pontiac, so it's very likely heavy rail is in the future for the Woodward corridor, just not underground and several hundred yards east of Woodward.

The problem with subways is that they're really expensive to build. They're superior to light rail in every other way, though.

**Hypestyles** · May-26-09, 03:52 PM

i'm not sure why it takes $200K just to "study" the issue.. just get it done! implement the rail cars, new tracks, buses, whatever it takes..

**ghettopalmetto** · May-26-09, 04:00 PM

Originally Posted by Hypestyles

i'm not sure why it takes $200K just to "study" the issue.. just get it done! implement the rail cars, new tracks, buses, whatever it takes..

Sure, just throw some shit together any which ham-handed way, and it'll be fine.

The $200k is enough to pay for the equivalent of one engineer to work on this for 9 months. That's why it takes $200k "just to study" the issue.

**Hypestyles** · May-26-09, 04:07 PM

$200K is still too much..

but I hope the project gets going sooner than later.. there's always going to be a "but wait!" among certain elected officials and especially in a group like SemCog...

**ghettopalmetto** · May-27-09, 07:29 AM

Originally Posted by Hypestyles

$200K is still too much..

How do you figure that $200k is "too much"? How much money, in your opinion, *should* this work cost?

Or would you rather hire unqualified people at a lower pay rate who will put a steaming log on the table.

**wolverine** · May-27-09, 08:00 AM

I'll do it!

Retroit · May-27-09, 08:55 AM

The technology is already in place. The movement of trains is very well controlled nowadays. Passenger trains could easily be given the right-of-way. If that means that freight shippers will have to send out their loads a day earlier to allow for time wasted sitting off on sidings waiting for the passenger trains to pass, then so be it.

This is nothing more than the freight operators dragging their feet and the reluctant government [[wouldn't want to lose any campaign contributions from the freight train operators) showing the voters that they "are doing something".

**professorscott** · May-27-09, 09:31 AM

Well, the freight operators have a significant advantage in all of this: they own the track. Also, there is no law or policy that requires [[or can require) freight trains to wait for passenger trains. When a railroad owned track and ran both passenger and freight trains over it, the railroad had the right to decide who ought to wait for whom, and uniformly held up freight traffic in favor of passenger trains because the railroad decided that was in its own best interest.

But now things are different. We are dealing with Amtrak here, and in certain places [[including southwest Michigan) Amtrak owns the railroad track and can decide the priorities. But in southeast Michigan, Amtrak does not own one inch of track, and so to a great extent is at the mercy of the owners.

If you own a house, but rent a room to a tenant, who controls what goes on in the house: you or the tenant? Railroads aren't any different.

Now, Michigan could buy or build railroad track, then this argument would be moot, but Michigan hasn't the money. The City hasn't the money either. The "region" can't buy a postage stamp or a stick of chewing gum, because the "region" does not exist in any meaningful way. So we have a multi-county planning agency, SEMCOG, which has no experience building railroads or running any kind of service whatever, and God bless them they are doing the best they can with this, and I wish them luck. But they are negotiating from the weakest of positions.

Having to spend $200K to prove something every experienced planner already knows is true, is a sign of the weakness of SEMCOG's position. Nothing against SEMCOG, you understand; they didn't put themselves in this box, but they're in it.

**Beech Cricker** · May-27-09, 09:36 AM

professorscott, well said regarding track ownership and train movement priorities. Not only that but the owning freight railroad pays the taxes on this property.

**Hypestyles** · May-27-09, 01:42 PM

...i'd like to see the cost cut in half.. careful planning is honorable.. but there's always the risk of sustained planning for its own sake..

**wolverine** · May-27-09, 01:49 PM

Originally Posted by Hypestyles

...i'd like to see the cost cut in half.. careful planning is honorable.. but there's always the risk of sustained planning for its own sake..

I don't think you understand. They didn't just make up this cost. They aren't going to hire some intern to use the modeling software to make these decisions.

Hiring a good engineer or consultant costs a lot of money to offer valuable expertise on the subject.