Light rail in Cincinnati and Detroit

[renf]

This link is to a story about light rail in Cincinnati. The
issues are somewhat similar to those here in Detroit.
Many Rust Belt cities share the same problems - a
few areas neat downtown and medical centers that are
now prospering and attracting residents including those
who renovate architecturally interesting neighborhood
once in decline. But in these cities there are very many
more neighborhoods with low income populations and
bleak future. And that have unrealistically high obligations
for pensions and medical coverage for retired municipal
workers.

I hope that Cincinnati and Detroit get their light rail
systems. Cleveland not only retained its light rail link
to its eastern suburbs but, back in the 1950s, used federal
funds to build a heavy rail system that effectively links
the airport with downtown and the east side medical
center.l

[Novine]

Killing off these projects doesn't free up dollars for pensions or police or firefighters. The transportation dollars go elsewhere and the lack of investment in transit means that the tax base of these urban centers continues to decline. But at least there's always money for freeways!

[DetroitPlanner]

Cleveland had a couple of Heavy Rail lines operating for quite sometime.

A light rail line opened in the early 1990's that linked the Terminal Tower with the Lakefront [[Museums and Football). Cleveland also used highway dollars [[ a federal program named CMAQ) for a pedestrian link between Terminal Tower and the new Gund/Jacobs Field complex around the same time that the light rail line was opened.

The Silver Line is a BRT [[Bus Rapid Transit) which opened up a few years ago that links terminal tower with the Cleveland Clinic and beyond.

The only light rail that is currently planned for in Detroit is the link from New Center to Downtown via a trolley. Detroit's trolley is different in that it is in a sense being funded mostly through private interests. This of course does not preclude planning from changing in the future. Ways to expand this system would be to show that it is successful enough to find ways to provide a public source of funding, which has been one of Metro Detroit's largest challenges to operating a system.

[wilderness]

In 1965 or 66 I took a train from Detroit's Old Union Depot to Atlanta. There was quite a long switch over in Cinci and that station was really large. Detroit hasn't had anything similar since the Old NY Central Station closed, whatever year that was. Attempting to put all the structure back in place and considering the present state of the rail industry seems a bit far-fetched.

[professorscott]

Ways to expand this system would be to show that it is successful enough to find ways to provide a public source of funding, which has been one of Metro Detroit's largest challenges to operating a system.

It's simply a lack of will on the part of the political class. The voters of metro Detroit have never been asked formally, by referendum, whether they are willing to pay for a real transit system. I don't consider that a challenge, just a failure to act. Here is why I think of it this way: I played organized baseball as a kid.

In baseball, if you are playing, say, second base, the ball is hit right toward you, and you simply stand there chewing gum while the ball sails by, you aren't charged with an error. In order to be charged with an error, you have to attempt to make a play.

[Hypestyles]

It's simply a lack of will on the part of the political class. The voters of metro Detroit have never been asked formally, by referendum, whether they are willing to pay for a real transit system. I don't consider that a challenge, just a failure to act. Here is why I think of it this way: I played organized baseball as a kid.

In baseball, if you are playing, say, second base, the ball is hit right toward you, and you simply stand there chewing gum while the ball sails by, you aren't charged with an error. In order to be charged with an error, you have to attempt to make a play.

fire everyone in public office.

[Wesley Mouch]

fire everyone in public office.

Except that they keep getting re-elected. People get the government they deserve, as someone said. Anyone know who?

[Novine]

Thinking of Mencken?

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."

[professorscott]

Except that they keep getting re-elected. People get the government they deserve, as someone said. Anyone know who?

I like Mencken better, but the quote you're referring to is commonly attributed to Will Rogers, though I can't find any truly reliable source for it.

[Wesley Mouch]

I like Mencken better, but the quote you're referring to is commonly attributed to Will Rogers, though I can't find any truly reliable source for it.

Thanks, gents.

Mencken or Rogers -- says more about Detroit government than a thousand forum posts by us little folks.

At least today I see the beginnings of willingness to ignore demagogues and elect people for better reasons.

But back to this thread... the discussion of how to move goods and services [[that includes people) around our cities isn't unique to Detroit. What is unique is that Detroit is like those African villages who can make the leap from no phone service right to smartphones. No reason to install landlines. Hey, how about peer-to-peer phones that network automatically?

Detroit can go right to next-generation public transit.

Rail on Woodward? Rather early 20th century. But a spine there won't stop us from doing much more modern on 3rd & Chene, or Lafayette & Davison.

[Detroitnerd]

Oh, yeah. We're not going to adopt this standard, tried-and-true mode because we're actually saving up for the next-generation mode. So despite generations of hostility to mass transit, cutting and fragmenting the agencies that deliver it, all while investing billions in roads we cannot afford to maintain, that was all just a clever ruse to ensure we'd have the money for levitating trains and now-perfected PRT ...

What preposterous nonsense ...

[Wesley Mouch]

Nerd, I didn't suggest waiting. But if you don't see that mass transit is becoming public transit, you can't see the difference between NYC's subway and Vancouver's Skytrain. The trend is towards lighter and more distributed.

I don't think PRT is the solution -- but we'll should be thinking smaller, driverless trains without much regard for wheels vs. rail. The right-of-way needs to be flexible. I'm starting to see rail and bus cohabit again. Downtown Seattle's underground stations allow both.

Let's not wait -- but let's not building the best system of the 1970s either.

[Detroitnerd]

I just think that your remarks represent a spurious proposition. I'm all for looking for silver linings, but I am not going to do the mental gymnastics required to think not having the basics of 1900 -- including electrified, rail-based transit -- is somehow forward-thinking.

What else you got?

[Bham1982]

This is fascinating to have both Cincy and Detroit simultaneously attempt these very similar projects, with similar conditions, layout, and base of corporate support. We shall see.

[casscorridor]

Nerd, I didn't suggest waiting. But if you don't see that mass transit is becoming public transit, you can't see the difference between NYC's subway and Vancouver's Skytrain. The trend is towards lighter and more distributed.

Not feeling you on this one. How is Skytrain more distributed? If anything NYC Subway is, as it is the most extensive in North America. As for lighter, sure, but that is only because it is a People Mover vs true heavy-rail, although the two are still very similar [[electrified 3rd rail, dedicated ROW, high-speed, high-capacity, etc). And difference between "mass" and "public" transit seems little more than semantics, sorry to say. Or maybe I am not understanding you?

[canuck]

Well for one thing, Gretaer Vancouver is something like 2 million, so sure; it makes more sense to develop a lighter scheme. NYC's 18 million people need a more robust system.

[canuck]

Detroit needs something very creative in the area of transit development because it has little left of the great systems it once had.

The opportunity to develop something new for the problems it faces are very interesting.

Think of the possibility of developing an organic system along statistical growth of population and development.

In a country like China, with mushrooming cities, it is part of contemporary solutions to demographic growth patterns, but in Detroit; that sort of possibility lies in a fallow field for some reason.

With all the computing ability we now have at our disposal, with the incredible wealth of them there United States, it all comes to nought. Why?

[That Great Guy]

Cinci has County Sales taxes. I'm in favor of this for the Motor City if it is fare. For example, it should be the same in all 83 counties for the same purpose and I think the pensions should be taken care of and I think mass transit should get the full 10 percent of the State fuel tax. These are my opinions and I'm interested to know what all your thoughts on this and how they compare to what I think about this?

The reason, I'm posting this is because without connecting the bus lines to the rail lines, the ridership might be too low to justify the costs? So, it appears maybe countywide taxes might be a good idea? Or, maybe the issues will get confused with facts?

For sure though, we need many funding sources and we know the fare box is not enough in many cases. So, what do we do? The taxpayers pay for my SMART bus but what if everyone rode SMART? Who would pay? Maybe if everyone paid the penny tax? or 5 cent tax? Some answers are job growth and removing cars from roads and many other logistics and intermodal concepts all working together.

[DetroitPlanner]

In a country like China, with mushrooming cities, it is part of contemporary solutions to demographic growth patterns, but in Detroit; that sort of possibility lies in a fallow field for some reason.

With all the computing ability we now have at our disposal, with the incredible wealth of them there United States, it all comes to nought. Why?

China is a horrible model to use.
- China is building a freeway system that is supposed to make our interstate system look modest.
- The country has set governors on population growth and actually endorses abortion. It is because it has a negative population growth policy. This means that a city's growth is due mainly to population shifts where younger people are leaving the older relatives in farm communities to toil and eventually die off while they work 80 hours a week to afford 150-300 square foot apartments.
- There is nothing like the EPA, NEPA, or the Clean Air Act to ensure the air and water is kept clean and that people have a say in planning.
- Building is seen as a way to keep the economy going. Therefore places like South China Mall [[world's largest mall) is empty and surrounded by tens of thousands of condos that are also empty.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvoztWletHc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=970kmt8txw0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zPkm2SU1DM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ksps_1Zwg5o

The last thing this country needs is anything that moves more people into cities. It needs to scale back and to start putting in emission controls in factories and all non-point sources [[Cars, Buses, Trucks, Trains, Mopeds).

Negative Population Growth + Sprawl Policies = One giant economic bubble the likes we have never seen. It will make 2008 in Detroit look like a cakewalk.

Yes China loves transit, but they need to question if they are making lives better or just sucking people out of rural provinces to end up in low paying jobs in overpopulated polluted cities. Here transit is seen as a way to jam more people into an expanding sprawling mess.

[mwilbert]

I'm in favor of public transit, LRT, heavy rail, buses, whatever. But despite the fact that I favor them, I recognize that these are clearly last-century solutions. The problem is that the 21st century urban transit solution, which I expect will be some kind of autonomous electric vehicle, isn't ready to be deployed yet.

If we knew it would be available in five years, it would be stupid to build a last-generation solution now. However, there is no way to know when it will actually exist, so the decision whether to wait isn't so clearcut.

[mwilbert]

Yes China loves transit, but they need to question if they are making lives better or just sucking people out of rural provinces to end up in low paying jobs in overpopulated polluted cities.

Well the reason they are able to suck people out of the rural provinces is that life there is pretty unpleasant too. Clearly the people there think they are better off moving to the overpopulated polluted cities, which isn't to say that they wouldn't be even better off if the cities were less overpopulated and less polluted, or if Chinese rural life was less awful.

[DetroitPlanner]

Well the reason they are able to suck people out of the rural provinces is that life there is pretty unpleasant too. Clearly the people there think they are better off moving to the overpopulated polluted cities, which isn't to say that they wouldn't be even better off if the cities were less overpopulated and less polluted, or if Chinese rural life was less awful.

I agree the economy is a mess. I can only imagine what wages are like in the dying parts of that country.

[Novine]

"I'm in favor of public transit, LRT, heavy rail, buses, whatever. But despite the fact that I favor them, I recognize that these are clearly last-century solutions."

I'll put a light-rail system up against your Google cars any day. Whether it drives itself or not, it's still a car sucking up space and in an urban environment, it's unworkable to move large numbers of people.

[DetroitPlanner]

I'll put a light-rail system up against your Google cars any day. Whether it drives itself or not, it's still a car sucking up space and in an urban environment, it's unworkable to move large numbers of people.

A google car will be able to ride on the ass end of the car ahead of it. This will allow even more single occupancy vehicles on the road!

The big issue here however is energy consumption. If you are going to create long links of cars with the same destination, you might as well use that technology to figure out how to get all of those folks into a bus or some other mass conveyance.

I enjoy driving. I don't think I would be able to trust a computer to do it for me.

[professorscott]

I enjoy driving. I don't think I would be able to trust a computer to do it for me.

I don't enjoy driving, but I have deep knowledge of computer software, and I absolutely wouldn't trust a computer to do it for me. Computers rely on sensors for knowledge of their environment, and sensors are things which fail. Google "red line crash DC 2009" for an example of what computers can do to people when relying on faulty sensors.

Actually, it always astonishes me when a computer does anything useful, correctly. There are so many parts one would think it statistically impossible, yet it happens. I guess in a universe which can produce Sarah Palin and various Kardashians and make them famous, anything truly is possible.