Next stop: Oakland?: Suburbs study expansion of Woodward rail

[Jason]

Since Woodward is owned by the state, it's possible that the state could do something on it without as much input, but so far the light rail projects are being done by cities [[Detroit, and this cluster of cities in Oakland County). I'm not sure though.

[pkbroch]

The Eight mile bridge at Woodward is three lanes with no median only a concrete barrier. Has it been discussed how this would work. Would they cut traffic to one or two lanes. There is also the same problem where Woodward goes under 696. Some of the service drives on these locations have only two through lanes.

How would light rail overcome these problems. Have there been any studies.

[Eric_c]

The Eight mile bridge at Woodward is three lanes with no median only a concrete barrier. Has it been discussed how this would work. Would they cut traffic to one or two lanes. There is also the same problem where Woodward goes under 696. Some of the service drives on these locations have only two through lanes.

How would light rail overcome these problems. Have there been any studies.

I always imagined it would go around the bridge on the surface, but what do I know?

[animatedmartian]

Also what about the left turnarounds? Are they just going to put the rails through them and push the stopping line back?

[ghettopalmetto]

The Eight mile bridge at Woodward is three lanes with no median only a concrete barrier. Has it been discussed how this would work. Would they cut traffic to one or two lanes. There is also the same problem where Woodward goes under 696. Some of the service drives on these locations have only two through lanes.

How would light rail overcome these problems. Have there been any studies.

You would either have to route the tracks [[and overhead catenary) around the bridge, or install some pretty significant reinforcement to the existing bridge structure.

[Bham1982]

A community might have influence but it doesn't mean they have a say in whether the system goes through or not.

I'm confident that a community that doesn't want light rail isn't going to have it.

Light rail needs parking, pedestrian access, rights-of-way, and interconnectivity. A community could easily restrict any of these variables.

The State isn't going to build a light rail stop without local buy-in.

[Novine]

"The State isn't going to build a light rail stop without local buy-in."

Which doesn't mean that the route can't go through the community, which was my point. Birmingham can't stop a line going through the city.

[Jason]

And if they need parking or some other land to do something they could just buy it, which is what they would need to do anyway.

[ferntruth]

The intervals are already spaced one-mile apart starting at six mile. It wouldn't make sense to have half mile intervals after that just because it's Oakland County. Maybe people on this forum live in OC so they think they deserve it. But only three stations are neccesary - 9 Mile/Ferndale, 10 Mile/696/Zoo, 11 Mile/Royal Oak. And that will be a costly expansion as is. Hopefully this expansion would be coupled with a Michigan Ave/Dearborn line, which is much more important because it connecrs FAR more employers to employees.

You really need to get over your inferiority complex regarding OC.
Make up your damned mind - first you want it to expand to OC, now you think its more important for a Michigan Ave / Dearborn line? How about it being just as important? Otherwise, this magic train is DOA at the Detroit border.

[rbdetsport]

You would either have to route the tracks [[and overhead catenary) around the bridge, or install some pretty significant reinforcement to the existing bridge structure.

The most recent rebuild of the Woodward bridge at 8 Mile was built with the intent to hold light rail in the future.

[dtowncitylover]

I've always thought that a commuter rail to Pontiac would be too short [[but also too far for light rail) and that it would have to extend to Flint...but I digress...

[casscorridor]

You really need to get over your inferiority complex regarding OC.
Make up your damned mind - first you want it to expand to OC, now you think its more important for a Michigan Ave / Dearborn line? How about it being just as important? Otherwise, this magic train is DOA at the Detroit border.

Michigan line to Dearborn IS more important. But that doesn't mean the Woodward line shouldn't go to Royal Oak. I was just saying six or seven stations is too many, three will work just fine.

Also, the Woodward line as proposed doesn't need to go to OC to survive, but it would be nice. It will still have sufficient ridership if it terminates at the fairgrounds.

[professorscott]

Also, the Woodward line as proposed doesn't need to go to OC to survive, but it would be nice. It will still have sufficient ridership if it terminates at the fairgrounds.

Agreed. The DDOT 53 Woodward bus doesn't go past the fairgrounds, runs every 8 minutes most of the day, and is usually sardine-can full of people most of the trip.

[BShea]

The Eight mile bridge at Woodward is three lanes with no median only a concrete barrier. Has it been discussed how this would work. Would they cut traffic to one or two lanes. There is also the same problem where Woodward goes under 696. Some of the service drives on these locations have only two through lanes.

How would light rail overcome these problems. Have there been any studies.

URS tells that that MDOT has told them that the bridge at 8 Mile won't support a light rail line, so it has to curve around at street level. And while I don't profess to understand all the reasons or details, experts have told me that running the line from 8 Mile to 11 Mile would be about $500 million alone.

[ghettopalmetto]

The most recent rebuild of the Woodward bridge at 8 Mile was built with the intent to hold light rail in the future.

"Intent" is a lot different than "load-carrying capacity"!

I can't imagine that MDOT would have spent the money to provide structural load-capacity for something that may or may not come to fruition. I think it goes without saying that Coordination is not one of the hallmarks of the Woodward light rail project thus far.

[royce]

Also what about the left turnarounds? Are they just going to put the rails through them and push the stopping line back?

I have envisioned that light rail from McNichols to Maple could exist in the left lane next to the median. Cars would not be allowed in the left lanes except for making a Michigan left turn. To cross Eight Mile and I-696, a traffic light would be installed just prior to those intersections, allowing for the light rail car to cross over from the left lane to the furthest right lane. To return to the left lane a similar traffic light and crossing would be installed to allow the light rail car to cross back over to the left lane.

[DetroitPlanner]

Since Woodward is owned by the state, it's possible that the state could do something on it without as much input, but so far the light rail projects are being done by cities [[Detroit, and this cluster of cities in Oakland County). I'm not sure though.

Doubtful. MDOT has a Complete Streets policy.

[DetroitPlanner]

"Intent" is a lot different than "load-carrying capacity"!

I can't imagine that MDOT would have spent the money to provide structural load-capacity for something that may or may not come to fruition. I think it goes without saying that Coordination is not one of the hallmarks of the Woodward light rail project thus far.

In addition, it would make logical sense to not take it over the bridge at all. 8 Mile is a very busy corridor and I would assume there would be need for stops there for transferring as well as to get off for the future shopping center.

[speaknow]

Sigh...Here we go again. I remember the last rail/mass transit fiasco during the 1970s when the Ford Administration made federal funding available for mass transit in metro Detroit. The same factions that blocked that deal from fruition [[leaving us with the DPM) are at it again. The private/foundation sector actors that have pledged the private funding are upset because the proposed downtown to W. Grand Blvd initial phase isn't curbside [[even though the plan encouraged by the U.S. Transportation Dept., the entity with the "big bucks" necessary to start the system, doesn't support curbside service).

L. Broooks as "toned down" the rhetoric because he's tight with Dave Bing. So his public comments have been "I'm going to need convincing to support this" is different from when he said "Hell no" in the 70s because of his dislike of the Coleman Young Administration. I believe its going to be a very bumpy ride so having gone through this before, I have strong misgivings about all the parties involved "burying the hatchet" [[not in each other) so that this project can get off the ground.

[Supersport]

While ideally I would like a line from downtown all the way to Pontiac, I have to agree with the argument that it just doesn't make sense north of Maple. If I recall, there aren't even sidewalks along that stretch are there? The density simply isn't there, and the expense would be hard to justify. That said, that doesn't mean Pontiac should be hung out to dry. The Amtrak line from Ann Arbor with various stops, ending in Pontiac could cover the link to Pontiac. While an east/west connecting line may not be feasible, a rapid transit bus route from the Woodward line to either the Royal Oak or Birmingham stop would allow you to transfer and get to Pontiac. Another alternative would be to loop into the Birmingham station, also allowing a transfer.

[DetroitPlanner]

L. Broooks as "toned down" the rhetoric because he's tight with Dave Bing. So his public comments have been "I'm going to need convincing to support this" is different from when he said "Hell no" in the 70s because of his dislike of the Coleman Young Administration. I believe its going to be a very bumpy ride so having gone through this before, I have strong misgivings about all the parties involved "burying the hatchet" [[not in each other) so that this project can get off the ground.

Umm Brooks was NOT in Oakland politics in the 1970's. In the 80's he was the prosecuter and in the 90's he was the County Exec. He and CAY's time at the helm hardly overlapped. Daniel Murphy was probably the politico who had the most influence in Oakland back in the 1970's.

[iheartthed]

Umm Brooks was NOT in Oakland politics in the 1970's. In the 80's he was the prosecuter and in the 90's he was the County Exec. He and CAY's time at the helm hardly overlapped. Daniel Murphy was probably the politico who had the most influence in Oakland back in the 1970's.

Was there even an Oakland County executive back then? Wasn't that position created in the 70s?

[hudkina]

Michigan line to Dearborn IS more important. But that doesn't mean the Woodward line shouldn't go to Royal Oak. I was just saying six or seven stations is too many, three will work just fine.

This isn't commuter rail we are talking about here. Streetcars typically have stops every 1/3 to 1/2 mile. Keep in mind that those walking to the station don't necessarily live directly on Woodward. If you have a stop every 1 mile you are losing a lot of people that live within 1/2 mile of the line but more than 1/2 mile from an actual stop. For example, take the stretch between 11 and 12 Mile roads:



The blue lines represent areas that are within 1/2 mile walking distance of stops at 11 Mile and 12 Mile roads. The red represents areas that would be included if a stop was added at Catalpa Drive. As you can see if you only have the two stops there is a massive zone that doesn't have direct access to the LRT line. Adding a stop in between would probably bring thousands more people within walking distance of the LRT.

[hudkina]

BTW, here is the most plausable location for a "Pleasant Ridge" station:


Here is an example of how I would construct a station:


I would move the two turnarounds about 125 ft to the north. I would add crosswalks connecting Oxford and Fairwood to the south end of the station. I would put a light at each turnaround. Cars that want to make a "Michigan left" will have to stop at the light while Woodward through traffic has the right of way. I would then give the turnarounds a "left turn" green signal. Obviously the lights would be timed so that the trains would pass through the turnarounds while Woodward through traffic has the right of way.

I think each turnaround would ideally need such a stoplight to keep possible accidents to a minimum. That may not be practical, and in some cases, I think it would probably be better to remove some turnarounds.

[animatedmartian]

http://www.freep.com/article/2011080...yssey=nav|head