Snyder to propose high-speed bus network to knit Detroit, suburban systems

[ghettopalmetto]

This "plan" is just a re-warming of SEMCOG's "Speedlink" plan from a ways back.

There is No. Such. Thing. as a "rapid transit bus". What hokum.

[R8RBOB]

This "plan" is just a re-warming of SEMCOG's "Speedlink" plan from a ways back.

There is No. Such. Thing. as a "rapid transit bus". What hokum.

I think it is safe to say that high-speed bus falls in the same word group as "clean coal"

[1953]

I like that the governor is proposing solutions and I think this one has some merits, but I'm frankly never going to get on a bus. Build me a light rail line and I'll start using mass transit.

[ghettopalmetto]

I like that the governor is proposing solutions and I think this one has some merits, but I'm frankly never going to get on a bus. Build me a light rail line and I'll start using mass transit.

On an intuitive level, you're exactly right. With the length of those proposed routes, buses become too unpredictable schedule-wise, and too uncomfortable ride-wise.

Nobody would ever accuse an 18-wheeler of being able to rocket up-and-down Gratiot. So why does the Gov expect buses to perform any better? Diesel engines have certain limits to their acceleration abilities.

Cleveland spent $250 million and 25 years to build a 7-mile bus line that averages 12 miles an hour--and that's *with* prepaid fares, dedicated lanes, and some modicum of traffic signal pre-emption. In other words, even with SEMCOG, er Snyder's "rapid" bus system, you're talking about a 45-60 minute bus ride just to get from downtown to Eight Mile Road. You'd think maybe one person in Michigan could learn from that example before rolling out another steaming pile.

[iheartthed]

This "plan" is just a re-warming of SEMCOG's "Speedlink" plan from a ways back.

There is No. Such. Thing. as a "rapid transit bus". What hokum.

Yeah, it is: http://www.michigandaily.com/content...irport-detroit

Look at the date on that. There is no more of a transit system in place today than the day that article was written. And they wonder why so many people have fled Michigan...

[bailey]

On an intuitive level, you're exactly right. With the length of those proposed routes, buses become too unpredictable schedule-wise, and too uncomfortable ride-wise.

Nobody would ever accuse an 18-wheeler of being able to rocket up-and-down Gratiot. So why does the Gov expect buses to perform any better? Diesel engines have certain limits to their acceleration abilities.

Cleveland spent $250 million and 25 years to build a 7-mile bus line that averages 12 miles an hour--and that's *with* prepaid fares, dedicated lanes, and some modicum of traffic signal pre-emption. In other words, even with SEMCOG, er Snyder's "rapid" bus system, you're talking about a 45-60 minute bus ride just to get from downtown to Eight Mile Road. You'd think maybe one person in Michigan could learn from that example before rolling out another steaming pile.

Most people would think that. But as our local populace proves time and time again through those they put in office, if you thought that you'd be wrong.

The vast majority of this region are pathologically against being taxed for something they think [[reality is irrelevant) will serve either a population [[read: poor minorities/detrotiers) or an area [[read: detroit/woodward corridor) more than it serves them or their own. They have no wish nor maybe even the ability to understand nuance or logic when it comes to explaining the inefficiencies and waste that spending on roads and highways creates versus investment in rational, coherent, functioning regional mass transit.

I've said it before, and I'm sure I'll say it again... because with this proposal, I'm continually proved right.... whatever the worst possible solution to the transit problem question on the table is, it will be the proposal that is eventually adopted or advocated for.

[R8RBOB]

Most people would think that. But as our local populace proves time and time again through those they put in office, if you thought that you'd be wrong.

The vast majority of this region are pathologically against being taxed for something they think [[reality is irrelevant) will serve either a population [[read: poor minorities/detrotiers) or an area [[read: detroit/woodward corridor) more than it serves them or their own. They have no wish nor maybe even the ability to understand nuance or logic when it comes to explaining the inefficiencies and waste that spending on roads and highways creates versus investment in rational, coherent, functioning regional mass transit.

I've said it before, and I'm sure I'll say it again... because with this proposal, I'm continually proved right.... whatever the worst possible solution to the transit problem question on the table is, it will be the proposal that is eventually adopted or advocated for.

Snyder is going for the lesser of two evils. He knows he will never get the Legislature to agree on a light-rail project that would connect Detroit with Ann Arbor to the west, Pontiac to the north and Mt. Clemens to the east. Instead, he will sell the idea that "high-speed buses" could supply the region's transit needs. As the video on the Onion showed, the reason why Obama would go from a high-speed train setup to a high-speed bus setup is the massive reduction in cost. This was suppose to be a joke to get a laugh in and I read this morning that Snyder is preparing to propose that very idea. I'm laughing because I don't believe it...

[urbanhat]

http://www.freep.com/article/20111026/BLOG2505/111026019/Rapid-transit-rolling-our-way-?odyssey=nav|head

There are a lot of reasons Detroit is not Curitiba, but at least he's right that a Regional Authority is the key to getting something that works.

[cramerro]

While I agree that light rail along the major corridors would be best, the idea of bus rapid transit is an improvement over regular bus. The RTCC plan that was approved by the 'big four' and was to be the basis for DARTA's investing called for a phased approach along the spokes. First step was "Arterial Rapid Transit" which is just enhancements to speed the bus and increase frequency. Then BRT, then LRT. Allows you to make improvments system-wide to gradually ratchet up service across the whole area instead of doing what we're undeniably facing right now with the Woodward LRT. Hundreds of millions of dollars [[the ONLY dollars) from the Feds for anything other than regular bus is going into the full-bore LRT up Woodward... well, at least up to 8 Mile. From there, its up to whoever feels like it to try and provide a network of other options to get to the fairgrounds. And in the city, they are cutting all routes - so they'll have to cut more if they plan to route more frequency/capacity toward the crosstown routes that can feed the LRT.

Take a step back and think about how federal projects go down, across the country. Everyone has needs. This isn't a winner-take-all where we get Obama so excited about Detroit that he gives us an entire $500M pot all at once that we spend on all three LRT lines. Never mind that a "Detroit to Ann Arbor LRT" that is in so many posts as one of the three spokes would cost like $1.2 B even along current lanes... that's over 38 miles of track along Michigan avenue, some of it along farm fields. The steps will be incremental even in a best-case scenario. BRT is not permanent, but it represents a marked improvement over the status quo. My read on all of you nay-sayers is that you'd rather have nothing than what he's suggesting. Guess I shouldn't be surprised.

[ghettopalmetto]

While I agree that light rail along the major corridors would be best, the idea of bus rapid transit is an improvement over regular bus.

Is it though? In what regard?

If the idea is to have a bus route with a reduced travel time, there isn't any reason why "express" [[i.e. "skip-stop") bus service couldn't be implemented immediately.

First step was "Arterial Rapid Transit" which is just enhancements to speed the bus and increase frequency. Then BRT, then LRT. Allows you to make improvments system-wide to gradually ratchet up service across the whole area instead of doing what we're undeniably facing right now with the Woodward LRT.

This is what is always said. Yet this has never been done anywhere in the world. Anywhere. Ever. Bullshit radars should be exploding when you hear this.

[urbanhat]

Instead, he will sell the idea that "high-speed buses" could supply the region's transit needs. As the video on the Onion showed, the reason why Obama would go from a high-speed train setup to a high-speed bus setup is the massive reduction in cost. This was suppose to be a joke to get a laugh in and I read this morning that Snyder is preparing to propose that very idea. I'm laughing because I don't believe it...

BRT is, in fact, real, and quite serious--at least in the rest of the world. The real joke is metro Detroit's repeated failures to build anything resembling regional transit. The rest of the world is laughing at us because we've been trying to do this since at least the 60's and we fall flat on our face every time. If you don't believe me, I suggest spending some time in cities that actually have their act together.

That said, I'm still skeptical. There are two questions here. First, is BRT an efficient and attractive mode of transport? In general, the answer is overwhelmingly YES. Here's a video from Bogota: http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/01/2...brt-in-bogota/. I recently rode the Metrobus in Mexico City, which was very fast and actually more comfortable than the subway.

Second, will BRT work for the Detroit region? Welllll, maybe... but there are some pretty big barriers. The region doesn't have the density of cities like Bogota, so even if everyone wanted to ride it [[unlikely), service would still be pretty infrequent. One advantage of rail transit is that it encourages denser development around stations, which makes transit more efficient. BRT can sometimes spur development, but it seems unlikely here. And to be successful, BRT really has be well-designed and operated... cities like Bogota had more stronger leadership and regional capacity than we have. I think a better example for Detroit would be Los Angeles, which is obviously a huge, sprawling, car-loving metropolis, yet has had some success with BRT.

[Danny]

Since D-DOT and SMART busses are going Ka'put! Snyder, the Nerd wants new high speed busses. 'Not going to work' sez.... The Republicans in the Michigan Legislature.

[ghettopalmetto]

BRT is, in fact, real, and quite serious--at least in the rest of the world.

By "rest of the world", I think you mean "South America".

First, is BRT an efficient and attractive mode of transport? In general, the answer is overwhelmingly YES. Here's a video from Bogota: http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/01/2...brt-in-bogota/. I recently rode the Metrobus in Mexico City, which was very fast and actually more comfortable than the subway.

The problem is, by the time you construct a "rapid" bus line that approaches the performance of light rail, you might as well build light rail, which is cheaper to operate.

[Detroitnerd]

Aaarrrggghhhh!!! When will this BRT bullshit DIE????

[urbanhat]

By "rest of the world", I think you mean "South America".



The problem is, by the time you construct a "rapid" bus line that approaches the performance of light rail, you might as well build light rail, which is cheaper to operate.

There are BRT systems in India, China, and South Africa, among others. There are fewer in Europe because European cities already have rail. And a lot of European cities have recently built BRT-like lines to complement rail.

Yeah, I agree, light rail is usually better in terms of performance, but it's vastly more expensive to build.

[Detroitnerd]

Yeah, I agree, light rail is usually better in terms of performance, but it's vastly more expensive to build.

And much less expensive to operate, with higher job creation multiples and much better service...

[ghettopalmetto]

Yeah, I agree, light rail is usually better in terms of performance, but it's vastly more expensive to build.

That's what we are sold, but it's a myth. The finest example, as I've cited above, is Cleveland's Euclid Corridor bus line. It cost $250 million for 7 miles, or $36 million per mile. That's right in the neighborhood of what a brand new light rail line costs. Most of the money went toward landscaping and purchasing new vehicles.

The problem that fact-based persons face is this:

THERE ARE WILDLY VARYING DEFINITIONS OF WHAT CONSTITUTES BUS "RAPID" TRANSIT.

In some cases, it's different signage and prepaid fare payment. In other cases, it's a dedicated bus lane marked with paint. In still more cases, it's fewer stops.

ALL of the above are cheaper than constructing light rail. ALL of the above have been used to sell bus "rapid" transit. NONE of the above come close reaching the capacity, performance, ride quality of light rail.

It's just lipstick on your grandfather's diesel bus. And you don't need some grand plan or millions of dollars to paint the Gratiot buses purple, install farecard machines, maps, and timetables and rename it the Purple Line. That could be done anywhere, almost immediately. It would be an improvement over existing bus service, yet I'd hardly call that "rapid transit".

[1953]

It strikes me that someone who would invest along a transit line would be far more willing to invest near light rail than bus rapid transit because the switching costs are far greater with light rail. To quit light rail, you'd have to pay to remove the tracks and systems behind it; to quit rapid bus, all you have to do is keep the buses in the yard.

[Danny]

This "plan" is just a re-warming of SEMCOG's "Speedlink" plan from a ways back.

There is No. Such. Thing. as a "rapid transit bus". What hokum.

When you have a public transit bus that goes non stop, going over 90 miles a hour until it reaches it destination. That thing would be called rapid transit bus.

[ghettopalmetto]

When you have a public transit bus that goes non stop, going over 90 miles a hour until it reaches it destination. That thing would be called rapid transit bus.

No, that's called "exceeding the speed limit". But theoretically, such a thing is called a Commuter Bus, which most other large cities already have. Its purpose and operating characteristics are far different from that of rapid transit. Basically, a commuter bus functions just like a commuter train, but handles lower-volume routes where the railroad tracks don't go.

Then again, folks here on DYes barely know the difference between "light rail" and "commuter rail", so I digress.

[Hypestyles]

SEMCOG payed lip-service to regionalism but concentrated too much energy/resources in advocating for highway/road building/rebuilding, and little on light rail developments.. they certainly hadn't put together a real, formal transit authority.. so i'm not sure what good they've been in that regard.. meetings, meetings, meetings, but what action?

--So will Snyder's proposal have some real teeth? Is he willing to "get tough" regarding the main combatants in regionalizing [[Oakland/Detroit) in putting together an authority? I can see that becoming a snafu.. I can see Patterson and his confederates stumping for antitax absolutism.. from the Detroit side, I can see certain officials and 'activists' decrying it as a Lansing plot to kill the city bus service..

Hopefully the lines will eventually include grand river, michigan ave., all the Mile roads..

[corktownyuppie]

I'm, too, frustrated with SEMCOG...but we have to remember that they are limited in their authority since they don't actually control any money nor do they control any legislation. At best, they're an "advisory body" that the politicians should be listening to when they need expert opinion.

They don't have the power to create a formal transit authority, though I'm sure it would be one of their first objectives if they were actually players in the process rather than outsiders.

[Detroitnerd]

A main problem is that SEMCOG is stacked with people who fundamentally misunderstand and distrust cities, and conflate "sprawl" with growth. You take a dense city that requires mass transit to be vibrant and then give it to people who don't understand transit at all. It's not a coincidence that Detroit looks as it does after having its transit ripped out and its transpo policy given over to people with the mindset of county-level highway planners.

This isn't a problem everywhere, though. In fact, it becomes less of a problem when regional planning organizations are more representative and more democratic, giving votes and voices to city residents.

SEMCOG disburses about $1 billion in federal funds each year. Now, in 2006, SEMCOG had allocated three delegates to the city of Detroit, representing perhaps 800,000 people. Meanwhile, Livingston County —with a population of less than 200,000 people — was given four delegates.

DC Streetsblog reported, "Discrepancies like this can be especially insidious for people of color. For example, at the time of the lawsuit, Detroit was more than 80 percent African-American. Meanwhile Livingston County, on the opposite extreme, is less than one percent African-American, according to a court deposition.

"In a symbol of regional failure, Detroit is unique among large metros for operating separate transit systems for its central city and the surrounding suburbs — a byproduct of the Motor City’s stark racial segregation. That creates a logistical nightmare for transit riders. ..."

Myron Orfield, author of “American Metropolitics, says of SEMCOG, “It is really probably the worst in the country. Detroit builds massive highways into cornfields and doesn’t reinvest in the existing infrastructure or build transit. Detroit is a catastrophe.”

With organizations like this, we're never going to have regional planning that really understands cities, transit, urban development, etc.

For the DC Streetsblog article, see here: http://dc.streetsblog.org/2011/07/21...ny-u-s-cities/

[j to the jeremy]

A main problem is that SEMCOG is stacked with people who fundamentally misunderstand and distrust cities, and conflate "sprawl" with growth. You take a dense city that requires mass transit to be vibrant and then give it to people who don't understand transit at all. It's not a coincidence that Detroit looks as it does after having its transit ripped out and its transpo policy given over to people with the mindset of county-level highway planners.

This isn't a problem everywhere, though. In fact, it becomes less of a problem when regional planning organizations are more representative and more democratic, giving votes and voices to city residents.

SEMCOG disburses about $1 billion in federal funds each year. Now, in 2006, SEMCOG had allocated three delegates to the city of Detroit, representing perhaps 800,000 people. Meanwhile, Livingston County —with a population of less than 200,000 people — was given four delegates.

DC Streetsblog reported, "Discrepancies like this can be especially insidious for people of color. For example, at the time of the lawsuit, Detroit was more than 80 percent African-American. Meanwhile Livingston County, on the opposite extreme, is less than one percent African-American, according to a court deposition.

"In a symbol of regional failure, Detroit is unique among large metros for operating separate transit systems for its central city and the surrounding suburbs — a byproduct of the Motor City’s stark racial segregation. That creates a logistical nightmare for transit riders. ..."

Myron Orfield, author of “American Metropolitics, says of SEMCOG, “It is really probably the worst in the country. Detroit builds massive highways into cornfields and doesn’t reinvest in the existing infrastructure or build transit. Detroit is a catastrophe.”


With organizations like this, we're never going to have regional planning that really understands cities, transit, urban development, etc.

For the DC Streetsblog article, see here: http://dc.streetsblog.org/2011/07/21...ny-u-s-cities/

Great post.

Interesting that Snyder has already floated more transit ideas than Granholm ever did...

[Detroitnerd]

Great post.

Interesting that Snyder has already floated more transit ideas than Granholm ever did...

Well, this one is really dusted off and tabled. Which leads me to think it's another unworkable plan whose real goal is to stall actual rapid transit in metro Detroit for another 10 years...