Detroit Public Transportation: 2014 and beyond.

[dtowncitylover]

The solution is to build tracks on land we own. Guess where that is, on our freeways. Forget about CN and Norfolk Southern giving the RTA , Amtrak, or anybody else permission to use their tracks. I have suggested on several past topics that the solution is to put rail lines down the center of I-96/M14 to Ann Arbor, period. The freeway is wide enough to give up a lane for a commuter rail. It could work but the asshats at MDOT have to see beyond their noses.

It's also probably 1000x more expensive than just negotiating with rail companies. We really want to tear up the Jeffries after it's already been redone?

[royce]

It's also probably 1000x more expensive than just negotiating with rail companies. We really want to tear up the Jeffries after it's already been redone?

Well, look at it this way. A patient is diagnosed with cancer. The doctor says he can't get the patient into treatment for 6 months because his health insurance won't be able to cover the costs until then. The patient asks the doctor if he can pay with his own savings and start treatment right away. The doctor says sure and agrees to start treatment on the patient.

Now, the patient has to pay for treatment with his own money and it's expensive but he can begin treatment right away and probably will beat the cancer. If he waits six months the treatment is cheaper because the insurance kicks in. The only problem is that the patient may be dead from the cancer in six months waiting for the treatment.

How many years have gone by and we are still talking about getting commuter rail between Detroit and Ann Arbor? What's been the delay, exactly? Trying to get the railroad companies to give the right of way to a commuter line on their tracks. At some point an alternative has to be found. I suggested one, dtowncitylover. Sure, they just repaved I-96 and M14. However, the next time it's time to repave the freeways, maybe MDOT could add the necessary rail tracks to the freeways. Besides, the repaving project will only be about five years from now. I have a feeling the RTA, Amtrak, or whomever will still be trying to get the railroad companies to share their tracks. This patient is not willing to leave my fate in someone else's hands.

[Hermod]

How about this for the metro area?

http://www.epictimes.com/05/27/2016/...eb-tunnel-bus/

[RO_Resident]

How many years have gone by and we are still talking about getting commuter rail between Detroit and Ann Arbor? What's been the delay, exactly? Trying to get the railroad companies to give the right of way to a commuter line on their tracks. At some point an alternative has to be found. I suggested one, dtowncitylover. Sure, they just repaved I-96 and M14. However, the next time it's time to repave the freeways, maybe MDOT could add the necessary rail tracks to the freeways. Besides, the repaving project will only be about five years from now. I have a feeling the RTA, Amtrak, or whomever will still be trying to get the railroad companies to share their tracks. This patient is not willing to leave my fate in someone else's hands.

The rail cars are available.

The junction yard bypass has been completed to improve reliability.

There is an agreement with the rail owner to allow a certain number of trains on the trackage.

The high speed rail improvements are nearly done, if not finished.

The holdback for Ann Arbor to Detroit is dedicated operations funding for running the service.

Moving the rail corridor to I-96 and M-14 doesn't do a lick for the lack of funding for operations.

[dtowncitylover]

And so it begins!

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/new...gins/85178220/

[dmike76]

I'd like to see more documentation on this. Maybe I missed it, but I'm curious about how the millage works in relation to cities that are currently opted out of SMART. First, am I correct in assuming that this RTA millage is in addition to the SMART millage? If so, then how do cities that have opted out of SMART fit in? Will they have to start paying both RTA and SMART millages? I know that there isn't an opt out for RTA. I'm also curious how this airport express works. This map doesn't say how many stops would be on the airport express route for I-275.

[dmike76]

Well, here's some info.

http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/h...ic-communities

Living in Livonia, I'm not thrilled with the options. I'd prefer not to drive to Twelve Oaks mall so I can take a bus to the airport. That being said, I'm in favor of regional mass transit but I definitely need to do some more research on this plan.

[dtowncitylover]

I'd like to see more documentation on this. Maybe I missed it, but I'm curious about how the millage works in relation to cities that are currently opted out of SMART. First, am I correct in assuming that this RTA millage is in addition to the SMART millage? If so, then how do cities that have opted out of SMART fit in? Will they have to start paying both RTA and SMART millages? I know that there isn't an opt out for RTA. I'm also curious how this airport express works. This map doesn't say how many stops would be on the airport express route for I-275.

All four counties must vote YES in order for this to pass. I don't think the SMART millage would cover those areas, only the RTA millage would. Though it's a good question on what would happen to the SMART millage. Perhaps this is replacing it?

[cramerro]

All four counties must vote YES in order for this to pass. I don't think the SMART millage would cover those areas, only the RTA millage would. Though it's a good question on what would happen to the SMART millage. Perhaps this is replacing it?

Folks, the RTA millage is above and beyond underlying service and funding. This includes SMART's property tax in opt-ins, AAATA's property tax in a handful of Washtenaw communities, and the City of Detroit's general fund contribution [[derived from City taxes).

The plan includes hundreds of millions in capital investment and tens of millions annually in operating costs for BRT, airport service, express service, and select local route extensions. The plan also counts on all of that current service [[and the funding to operate it) staying in place.

Communities who don't pay anything now will get only what improvements the RTA makes in their community. Those that fund something now will continue to get what they have, plus any RTA improvements.

[Detroit]

The State of Michigan already owns the former NS track that Amtrak runs on from Kazoo to Dearborn. The 135 miles was purchased by the state in 2012 for $140 million and the state is spending tons of money over several years to get the Amtrak trains to be able to cruise at 110 mph. So the only part they really need to work on would be Dearborn to Detroit.

Unfortunately it isn't a matter of vision or political will, but something much simpler: track usage rights. The tracks are owned by the freight railways. People have been negotiating with the freight railways for years and years about this, and the sticking point is always the same thing, and always will be: the freight railways carry a lot of freight traffic over those tracks, and are only willing to make limited slots available for passenger traffic.

It's not regional rail, it's commuter rail: specifically, a way for people to get to and from work for the most part during rush hour. Given the limited availability of passenger slots, unless you are willing to cough up a few billion to build additional tracks and to buy up the land for those tracks, you have to share tracks with CN and so forth, and you take what crumbs they give you.

[Detroit500]

will there be any trains that link Detroit to DTW? Busses are DOA.

[dtowncitylover]

will there be any trains that link Detroit to DTW? Busses are DOA.

Did you look at the Master Plan?

Though I'm not the biggest fan of Bus Rapid Transit, BRT is not the 125 Fort St. It is an incredible upgrade from a regular bus service.

[mtburb]

Did you look at the Master Plan?

Though I'm not the biggest fan of Bus Rapid Transit, BRT is not the 125 Fort St. It is an incredible upgrade from a regular bus service.

In addition, with the Master Plan, you'll still get your 125 as well-just with more frequent headways with shorter waiting times and no need to transfer to DDOT 19 at Outer Drive all at any time-in fact-it'll merge with the 19.

What I was surprised at though-no 160 or 830 extension past Grange Road to at least Allen Road. Maybe they'll do that...eventually.

[Junjie]

will there be any trains that link Detroit to DTW? Busses are DOA.

Why? These are airport express buses. Pretty standard around the world. I enjoyed AirRide when I lived in Ann Arbor and the buses were plenty busy - this is the same thing, just serving other parts of the region.

Also, people vastly overestimate the importance of the airport. The average person uses the airport, what, between 0 and 4 times per year? I guess it sticks out because for people who assume they'll never use transit in general, it seems like the only thing they'd ever use personally. But five express bus lines, a BRT line, nearby commuter rail connecting to the BRT, and a new Fort connector line should be plenty of service.

[tkelly1986]

Why? These are airport express buses. Pretty standard around the world. I enjoyed AirRide when I lived in Ann Arbor and the buses were plenty busy - this is the same thing, just serving other parts of the region.

Also, people vastly overestimate the importance of the airport. The average person uses the airport, what, between 0 and 4 times per year? I guess it sticks out because for people who assume they'll never use transit in general, it seems like the only thing they'd ever use personally. But five express bus lines, a BRT line, nearby commuter rail connecting to the BRT, and a new Fort connector line should be plenty of service.

I would not downplay the importance of airport accessibility, as this is a critical factor for businesses deciding where to locate. They want to be somewhere that their employees can get to and from the airport easily. My firm, which is based in Detroit, has me travel 5-6 times a month and I can certainly say they do not like spending $60 one way on a metro car.

Some of my colleagues commute every week from another location, and thus fly in and out of DTW at least twice a week.

[Junjie]

I would not downplay the importance of airport accessibility, as this is a critical factor for businesses deciding where to locate. They want to be somewhere that their employees can get to and from the airport easily. My firm, which is based in Detroit, has me travel 5-6 times a month and I can certainly say they do not like spending $60 one way on a metro car.

Some of my colleagues commute every week from another location, and thus fly in and out of DTW at least twice a week.

Sure, and with this plan there will be 5 express buses and a BRT line serving the airport where before there was only a bus to Ann Arbor. As to your point on business location, maybe so. Do you see the new options in this plan as inadequate for those purposes? [[If it's not obvious, that's a genuine question.)

In the larger picture, my personal opinion is that serving people who make 240 work trips per year should be the first priority of a regional transit system. Even someone who travels as much as you - way, way more than is typical for most people - only generates 10-12 trips to the airport per month. On the other hand a regular employee taking the bus to work generates about 44 trips per month [[probably more when shopping, errands etc. are considered, which most airport travelers will not generate). Given that, my opinion is that adding four new express buses [[I-275, Troy, Mt. Clemens, downtown) and a new BRT line from the airport to downtown via Dearborn is plenty of service even if there's nothing running on rails - the original complaint I responded to. And given how expensive rail tends to be, sacrificing other parts of the system that are likely to get heavier use in order to build some sort of rail to the airport would probably be a misuse of limited resources.

[corktownyuppie]

And so it begins!

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/new...gins/85178220/

Hey mods...can you consider breaking off this thread into a new one regarding the RTA proposal? Just because we're at 400+ on this thread.

[MikeyinBrooklyn]

Solid, practical & reliable airport service is a real key for many, many reasons. Some of those reasons are stated above, some aren't. Here are my thoughts.

1) Convenient connections to/from the airport do encourage firms to consider all over our area as a good place to set up shop. Further, it allows our existing businesses to be more competitive in getting staff, partners & clients to and from the airport QUICKLY AND ON SCHEDULE. Time is at least as important as money for many.
2) In addition to being a place to begin or end a trip, the airport is home to thousands of jobs. Providing better transportation options makes it easier for people to get jobs and get to work [[especially lower income people, one-car family members & students), and easier for employers to hire [[more potential employees, better commuting options for those hired).
3) Using mass transit to get to the airport will be many people's first taste of public transit. If it is convenient and cost effective for them, some will be inclined to ride public transit again.
4) Many people like to not rent a car when travelling. I never do. I include to/from airport cost & convenience when planning a trip. Travelers like me, if considering Detroit, will be much more included to actually book the trip if getting from the airport to the city were assuredly not going to cost you $100+ roundtrip, and be a pain in the arse as well.

In planning the regional transit system's service[[s) to the airport several things should be kept in mind:

1) A Detroit-AA rail connection is much more relevant to potential users if it also serves the airport. Personally, I don't think the project's operating subsidies merit being spent without airport service. That service could be directly to the airport, or at the very least service to a nearby hub which would have frequent airport-wide shuttle service.
2) The airport area hub should be the place where all the airport transit services meet up, with different options to take from there [[local airport-area bus service, shuttles for travelers & staff to terminals, hotels, hangars, etc). Sort of like an off-premises version of "ground transportation" at any airport.
3) BRT & other services need to have frequency & a wide spread of hours of operation. Both travelers & airport workers do not keep 9-5 hours.
4) I also hope that if the QLine is a success, a version going out Michigan Ave on the way to Ann Arbor would one day be built, and also serve the airport [[probably more for work commuters than for travelers, although it would provide a nice redundancy in service).
5) The airport hub could serve not only as a stop on the Detroit-AA rail line, but could also be the eastern terminus of the AA local bus system, and the western terminus of Detroit centric lines. In my ideal world, of course, the RTA would take over DDOT, SMART & AA bus systems, rebrand, modernize & fully integrate them with one another.

[professorscott]

1) A Detroit-AA rail connection is much more relevant to potential users if it also serves the airport. Personally, I don't think the project's operating subsidies merit being spent without airport service. That service could be directly to the airport, or at the very least service to a nearby hub which would have frequent airport-wide shuttle service.

The plan is to serve a nearby hub with shuttles. To get tracks directly into the airport property anywhere near a terminal - otherwise you still need shuttles - while desirable from a service standpoint, would be an enormous expense.

2) The airport area hub should be the place where all the airport transit services meet up, with different options to take from there [[local airport-area bus service, shuttles for travelers & staff to terminals, hotels, hangars, etc). Sort of like an off-premises version of "ground transportation" at any airport.

That's an excellent idea. I don't know if the RTA staff and consultant have got down to that level of detail, but it would be useful to emphasize this in public meetings and other communication with the RTA.

3) BRT & other services need to have frequency & a wide spread of hours of operation. Both travelers & airport workers do not keep 9-5 hours.

That is in the plan, although I don't know if the operational details have been released. It's never been considered that BRT would be a rush-hour service like the SMART park & ride buses.

4) I also hope that if the QLine is a success, a version going out Michigan Ave on the way to Ann Arbor would one day be built, and also serve the airport [[probably more for work commuters than for travelers, although it would provide a nice redundancy in service).

It would be nice to someday see some kind of regional rail service, but in a corridor that long it probably won't look much like QLine. Streetcar-type service does not work well over long distances.

5) The airport hub could serve not only as a stop on the Detroit-AA rail line, but could also be the eastern terminus of the AA local bus system, and the western terminus of Detroit centric lines. In my ideal world, of course, the RTA would take over DDOT, SMART & AA bus systems, rebrand, modernize & fully integrate them with one another.

I doubt the RTA will take over anything existing, except QLine eventually, and I don't think it's entirely necessary. For example, the DC area has several local bus operators - at least a half-dozen - in additional to the regional bus routes served by the operator of Metro, and of course the Metro itself. I believe the AA local bus system already includes trips to DTW, does it not? But there's no need for all the AATA buses to go that far east. The more important thing to me, in regard to AATA, is the ability to move around the region more seamlessly; because of the huge opt-out holes in the SMART system, it is quite impossible to move around much of the western part of the immediate Detroit metro without a car.

Excellent points! Thanks for posting.

[royce]

My excitement for the RTA and its efforts to improve transit in Metro Detroit has subsided now that the plan has been put out there. BRT ,in particular in my opinion, is a flawed concept. I really take issue now with the dedicated lanes. These lanes are supposed to give the busses the ability to travel faster because they won't be stuck in traffic. My issue is that those lanes are needed for cars during rush hour traffic. For example, the rush our traffic along Gratiot in the evening is so heavy that there are major slow downs between Downtown Detroit and Eight Mile. It's difficult to make a left turn onto side streets on the south side of Gratiot if not done at a traffic light. Even with cars using the dedicated parking lanes along Gratiot, the traffic is very heavy. Imagine the congestion if a lane is taken out for a bus that only comes around every ten to fifteen minutes. In all honesty, the RTA should focus on express busses if they want to have "rapid transit." Again, the BRT concept is flawed. If you truly want "rapid transit," build a subway. Anything else is a "cheap imitation."

[dtowncitylover]

My excitement for the RTA and its efforts to improve transit in Metro Detroit has subsided now that the plan has been put out there. BRT ,in particular in my opinion, is a flawed concept. I really take issue now with the dedicated lanes. These lanes are supposed to give the busses the ability to travel faster because they won't be stuck in traffic. My issue is that those lanes are needed for cars during rush hour traffic. For example, the rush our traffic along Gratiot in the evening is so heavy that there are major slow downs between Downtown Detroit and Eight Mile. It's difficult to make a left turn onto side streets on the south side of Gratiot if not done at a traffic light. Even with cars using the dedicated parking lanes along Gratiot, the traffic is very heavy. Imagine the congestion if a lane is taken out for a bus that only comes around every ten to fifteen minutes. In all honesty, the RTA should focus on express busses if they want to have "rapid transit." Again, the BRT concept is flawed. If you truly want "rapid transit," build a subway. Anything else is a "cheap imitation."

Well considering the point of this is get more people to use transit ergo getting cars off the road, I'd say your point is moot.

We can either have dedicated lanes for the buses which will make them have faster service and have signal priority or we can have them mixed in with traffic which will make them slow in the heavy traffic you describe. Your pick.

How is having express buses "rapid" when they're going to be plain old buses mingling with the rest of traffic either on a major thoroughfare or on a congested freeway?

[professorscott]

We can either have dedicated lanes for the buses which will make them have faster service and have signal priority or we can have them mixed in with traffic which will make them slow in the heavy traffic you describe. Your pick.

How is having express buses "rapid" when they're going to be plain old buses mingling with the rest of traffic either on a major thoroughfare or on a congested freeway?

Just so. This sort of thing requires hard decisions, and this is one of them; we can't violate the laws of physics. If we decide we want improved transit, we either have to take space away from cars or take space away from something else.

Besides, think about this: the BRT corridors are no longer the major auto thoroughfares in their own direction. I-75 carries the bulk of the N-S traffic that once used Woodward; I-94 carries the bulk of the Gratiot and Michigan Ave traffic, and so on. The old spoke roads are relegated to the status of major collector roads - still very important, but not carrying the commuters from their downtown jobs to their houses in Royal Oak, by and large.

If there is one single thing that is going to make BRT in Detroit a success or failure, it is going to be how much R is in BRT, and the single most important factor - there are others, which I and some of you all have discussed - is separating the buses from the car traffic.

[royce]

Well considering the point of this is get more people to use transit ergo getting cars off the road, I'd say your point is moot.

We can either have dedicated lanes for the buses which will make them have faster service and have signal priority or we can have them mixed in with traffic which will make them slow in the heavy traffic you describe. Your pick.

How is having express buses "rapid" when they're going to be plain old buses mingling with the rest of traffic either on a major thoroughfare or on a congested freeway?

Well, if you can get more drivers to take the BRT, then that would lessen the traffic. I agree. Now, trying to convince those drivers to give up their cars will be the major issue that determines if BRT works or not. Also, what are the BRT stations going to do for commuters in the summer and winter. Are they going to warm up commuters in the winter and cool them down in the summer? A subway eliminates this problem and it's rapid. So, if you don't do a subway system, will a BRT system appeal to commuters?

Another issue I have with BRT deals with the dedicated lanes for BRT in the areas that have medians. Why cut through the medians with dedicated lanes when the lane closest to the median could serve as the dedicated lane? And another thing, how does the dedicated lanes for BRT accommodate left turns, especially Michigan lefts? In the renderings the dedicated lanes go right through the medians. How are cars gonna make left turns? These and many other issues remain for me when it comes to BRT. I'm not sold.

[dtowncitylover]

Well, if you can get more drivers to take the BRT, then that would lessen the traffic. I agree. Now, trying to convince those drivers to give up their cars will be the major issue that determines if BRT works or not. Also, what are the BRT stations going to do for commuters in the summer and winter. Are they going to warm up commuters in the winter and cool them down in the summer? A subway eliminates this problem and it's rapid. So, if you don't do a subway system, will a BRT system appeal to commuters?

Another issue I have with BRT deals with the dedicated lanes for BRT in the areas that have medians. Why cut through the medians with dedicated lanes when the lane closest to the median could serve as the dedicated lane? And another thing, how does the dedicated lanes for BRT accommodate left turns, especially Michigan lefts? In the renderings the dedicated lanes go right through the medians. How are cars gonna make left turns? These and many other issues remain for me when it comes to BRT. I'm not sold.

These are problems that are discussed, hashed out, talked over, then hopefully resolved by RTA leaders, civil engineers, city planners, and road commissioners.

Whether or not people are cold or hot on the station is rather pedantic. People still use Chicago's el.

[professorscott]

Whether or not people are cold or hot on the station is rather pedantic. People still use Chicago's el.

Well, it makes a big difference - if the platform is not weather-controlled in any way - how long people have to wait. If you are taking the Chicago elevated trains, you are on a platform whose only weather protection is from rain - there's a roof, but the legendary Chicago winds can render even that almost useless - but on the other hand, you don't have to wait long between trains.

It's the same with the People Mover. You can be hot, or cold, or whatever, on the platform, but whenever you get there, within 1 to 3 minutes you can see a train coming, and in another minute or two you're on board. If you had to wait fifteen or twenty minutes, your reaction to the weather, and willingness to wait outdoors, might be different.

So that, then, is another important detail to work out - what is going to be the maximum wait time? By the way, don't let them blow smoke up your ass with "average" wait times. You can drown standing up in a river that is three feet deep on average.