Bus Rapid Transit officials meeting and hoping to move forward

[SpartanDawg]

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...5/1410/METRO01

Let's see how this goes

[Detroitnerd]

DETROIT, Jan. 13. 2029: Detroit's delay-plagued bus system is being handed over to a new authority today, after officials declared the project a failure.
Launched in 2014 with great fanfare, the bus system, then touted as "Bus Rapid Transit," was supposed to be like light rail without the rails and overhead electrical system. But budget cuts, funding problems and right-of-way issues chipped away at the plan, leaving the bus system increasingly embattled. In the end, federal officials declared that the system didn't even qualify to be called "Bus Rapid Transit," and that it was, in fact, simply a normal bus system, subject to all the typical problems of bus lines, including running in traffic, delays in boarding, behind-schedule performance and a host of other problems.
But metropolitan Detroit officials remain hopeful. "When we started this system, we had a rapid transit authority, but no way to collect revenue to fund our system," said RTA head Brett Pollyanna. "But we've passed legislation that allows us to collect 1 mil on every dollar spent on alternative fuels, which now collects as much as $25,000 a week, at least as long as all three county executives sign off on it. With this growing funding source, we may be entering an era when we can guarantee rapid transit service for all."
The first step, Pollyanna said, is doing a round of studies, conducting to a plan, which could take several years and cost as much as $67 million to go from meetings to drawing boards.
The buses, which were prone to breakdowns, are now being prepared to be shipped to Mexico City, where they will be part of that city's mass transit system. ...

[313WX]

DETROIT, Jan. 13. 2029: Detroit's delay-plagued bus system is being handed over to a new authority today, after officials declared the project a failure.
Launched in 2014 with great fanfare, the bus system, then touted as "Bus Rapid Transit," was supposed to be like light rail without the rails and overhead electrical system. But budget cuts, funding problems and right-of-way issues chipped away at the plan, leaving the bus system increasingly embattled. In the end, federal officials declared that the system didn't even qualify to be called "Bus Rapid Transit," and that it was, in fact, simply a normal bus system, subject to all the typical problems of bus lines, including running in traffic, delays in boarding, behind-schedule performance and a host of other problems.
But metropolitan Detroit officials remain hopeful. "When we started this system, we had a rapid transit authority, but no way to collect revenue to fund our system," said RTA head Brett Pollyanna. "But we've passed legislation that allows us to collect 1 mil on every dollar spent on alternative fuels, which now collects as much as $25,000 a week, at least as long as all three county executives sign off on it. With this growing funding source, we may be entering an era when we can guarantee rapid transit service for all."
The first step, Pollyanna said, is doing a round of studies, conducting to a plan, which could take several years and cost as much as $67 million to go from meetings to drawing boards.
The buses, which were prone to breakdowns, are now being prepared to be shipped to Mexico City, where they will be part of that city's mass transit system. ...

No quotes from suburban resident Frank Rizzo in that article?

[Detroitnerd]

No quotes from suburban resident Frank Rizzo in that article?

"Suburban gadfly Frank Rizzo could not be reached for comment."

[That Great Guy]

In my opinion, bus service reductions along with higher transit taxes and late buses is not Moving Forward.

Yet, I'm in favor of supporting mass transit with my tax dollars. Why?

[MikeyinBrooklyn]

Pessimists, pessimists. I think we'll have much better transit in just a few years. I think the RTA, the state, and the Mayor will make improvements in the following areas: newer equipment, more reliability in service, and better integration of systems. M1 rail will be up and running, and I think BRT will be underway [[although I think it will be some years before it is done completely). I think Detroit-Ann Arbor rail will not come to fruition, mostly as not being cost effective with limited resources. But I think a BRT system hitting most of the same stops [[and the actual airport, not a mile away) will be a fine replacement. Additionally, with more people living, working and visiting downtown, I think the RPTC will be an even busier hub, both for local and intercity buses. Lastly, the PM will also benefit from the influx of people, connections to M1 Rail and BRT lines, and the "new" station at GCP and, I have a hunch, a new and improved Greektown Station. Call me Pollyana, but I think most of the right pieces are in place.

[ghettopalmetto]

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...5/1410/METRO01

Let's see how this goes

I really hate to be a buzzkill, as any talk of transit improvements in Southeast Michigan is cause for a parade. But who do these people think they're fooling?

Even according to SEMCOG's questionable previous plan, Woodward was going to be a light rail line. Now it's Sexybus? All they're doing is taking Cleveland's 7-mile idea, and adding 20 miles to it. Does anyone in their right mind think that a 27-mile bus route is even remotely cost-effective? Operating at 35 mph, it's going to take over an hour-and-a-half to go from Pontiac to Detroit. Commuter rail is a far, far better [[and more cost-effective) idea for the corridor. This article makes me wonder if the PB engineers were even allowed to consider rail as an option, because those guys know damn well that commuter rail would cost 5-10% the amount of money to construct as Bus [[rapid) Transit, and has a higher farebox recovery rate.

But hey, let's have a bunch of meetings over the next several years to decide on stop locations and Sexybus paint colors. Then maybe, just maybe, in 2016, there will be a proposed operating fund mechanism on the ballot. Followed by an FTA application, years of alternatives analysis and EIS studies...by the time 2030 rolls around, Detroit just may have a bus route costing hundreds of millions of dollars that travels at an average speed of 15 miles per hour.

Color me unimpressed.

[nain rouge]

I just don't get exactly how BRT requires some major change. Isn't the secret to successful BRT more buses, smarter routes, and timed lights? And, perhaps, better bus stops.

Couldn't we achieve that by properly investing in our current bus system? Or am I just a moron?

[MikeyinBrooklyn]

Ghettopalmetto, one of the drawbacks to commuter rail [[using the existing tracks; acquiring land and laying new tracks of course blows the budget for rail out of the water) is that the existing rail lines don't [[mostly) lay where they would get great use. They don't run on the avenue corridors where businesses, destinations, and bus-fed stops are. Yes, some people would use them for a park and ride commute to work, but no one else would. A BRT system can run right up Woodward, Gratiot & Grand River, hitting major destinations from downtown to the burbs. And new lines can be set up to fit other traffic patterns [[thus the talk of an M59 route). No, it is not super speedy. But I don't think it's anticipated most users would ride from end to end. People in Pontiac would ride to their job in Birmingham. Detroit Moms could tale their kids to the zoo. People in Warren could take it in for a game, where they intend to have a few drinks. Rail doesn't accommodate those trips. The system would benefit some work commutes, but it would also make for a faster, more pervasive bus system for all day use. And it would be easy to tie into other transit options [[PM, M1 Rail, city and suburban buses) and destinations [[airport, Amtrak stations, RPTC, Greyhound stations).

[That Great Guy]

Sans safe, reliable and cost effective bus services, we can all forget about any kind of a transportation or mass transit improvements in Detroit and inner suburbs. There are many facts that prove this.

Next August 2014, we have a choice whether we want cap local funding or not. There will be no funding cuts for community transit or essential bus service.

[iheartthed]

Ghettopalmetto, one of the drawbacks to commuter rail [[using the existing tracks; acquiring land and laying new tracks of course blows the budget for rail out of the water) is that the existing rail lines don't [[mostly) lay where they would get great use. They don't run on the avenue corridors where businesses, destinations, and bus-fed stops are. Yes, some people would use them for a park and ride commute to work, but no one else would.

Hence, the purpose of COMMUTER rail.

[Hypestyles]

... and now Hertel has quit the RTA? Expect more delays.

[casscorridor]

Surface/street-running light-rail was "considered" for Woodward North but quickly eliminated without proper study. Commuter rail was not even considered because the line is a mile removed from Woodward Ave.

It's a shame because the proper option would be a combination of all three. Light-rail in the form of an extended M1 rail all the way to Royal Oak and commuter rail and enhanced bus service to Pontiac. One mode can't fulfill the multitude of transportation needs within the extremely long corridor so the solution must be multimodal.

Although the talking heads are saying BRT right now, it will surely be dumbed down and nothing like the Cleveland Health line which was pleauged by high costs and significantly shorter. Rather, it will be more like the select buses in New York or some of the enhanced bus lines in LA which, while significant improvements over current buses, can not be properly called BRT or RRT or whatever flashy title politicos want to slap on it.

Breakdown of what makes BRT--

Signaling prority
Stations, not stops, with fareboxes before boarding
Exclusive ROW or dedicated lanes.

Notice: it has nothing to do with bus length or paint color. Even if one of these aspects is eliminated, which will likely happen, the system will be severely limited in its ability to deliver anything resembling "rapid transit."

Oh and one last thing. Hall Rd BRT is a couplete joke and should not happen. And BRT to airport from Downtown could be a decent idea but to Ann Arbor is completely unreasonable. With Dearborn's new rail station almost complete and the rolling stock bought, commuter rail to Ann Arbor is very close to reality.

Polemic over.

[ghettopalmetto]

For what it's worth, the existing 450 SMART bus is scheduled to make the 27 mile trip from Pontiac to downtown Detroit in 75 minutes [[+/-) during the morning rush. That's an average speed of 21.6 mph, which is pretty good for a bus, and about 50% faster than Cleveland's Health Line.

So it begs the question of:

1. What is being proposed to make this route "rapider"?
2. Are the service improvements going to be sufficient to justify the capital investment?
3. Will the service improvements result in new, i.e. "choice" riders?

If the RTA is planning to go full-out "Cleveland-style", with new stations, dedicated lanes, fare prepayment and new vehicles with multiple boarding doors, then you're looking at about $1.1 billion. For a diesel-powered bus route [[A commuter rail line, with stations served by local buses, would cost less than $100 million). If you go with fewer amenities, then it's just a gussied-up bus. There's probably a reason that no other city in the U.S. has a 27-mile-long Bus [[rapid) Transit route, no?

And then, of course, there's the whole issue of investment adjacent to stations. Cleveland likes to claim "over $4 billion of new development due to the Health Line", but the vast majority of that was already taking place adjacent to the Cleveland Clinic, adjacent to Cleveland State University, and in downtown. You can get off the Health Line at E 66th and feel like you survived the End of Days.

[nain rouge]

BRT just isn't fast enough, anyway. In the time it'll take me to ride the BRT from Detroit to Pontiac, I could take public transportation from a New Jersey suburb to the heart of Manhattan. Plus, my rent would only be slightly higher in New Jersey than it is here, if higher at all. Some competitive advantage it would give us. And most of those New Jersey cities are sadly more happening than 99% of Metro Detroit.

Signaling prority
Stations, not stops, with fareboxes before boarding
Exclusive ROW or dedicated lanes.

I still don't get why we can't do this with our current bus systems? It just reads like a list of logical improvements. Only the exclusive ROW sounds particularly tricky, considering how large and congested Woodward already is in cities like Ferndale and Royal Oak.

I also wonder how fareboxes would work in such a sprawled out area. Nothing like having to walk an extra 1/2 mile in the winter so I can get to a farebox, when the old system had stops all over the place. It would probably eat up most of the time you saved, too.

[bailey]

For what it's worth, the existing 450 SMART bus is scheduled to make the 27 mile trip from Pontiac to downtown Detroit in 75 minutes [[+/-) during the morning rush. That's an average speed of 21.6 mph, which is pretty good for a bus, and about 50% faster than Cleveland's Health Line.

So it begs the question of:

1. What is being proposed to make this route "rapider"?
2. Are the service improvements going to be sufficient to justify the capital investment?
3. Will the service improvements result in new, i.e. "choice" riders?

If the RTA is planning to go full-out "Cleveland-style", with new stations, dedicated lanes, fare prepayment and new vehicles with multiple boarding doors, then you're looking at about $1.1 billion. For a diesel-powered bus route [[A commuter rail line, with stations served by local buses, would cost less than $100 million). If you go with fewer amenities, then it's just a gussied-up bus. There's probably a reason that no other city in the U.S. has a 27-mile-long Bus [[rapid) Transit route, no?

And then, of course, there's the whole issue of investment adjacent to stations. Cleveland likes to claim "over $4 billion of new development due to the Health Line", but the vast majority of that was already taking place adjacent to the Cleveland Clinic, adjacent to Cleveland State University, and in downtown. You can get off the Health Line at E 66th and feel like you survived the End of Days.

100 million for commuter rail? how do you get to that number? Isn't the 2.5 miles of M1 costing 150 mill before they've even broken ground [[by that I mean...before they over run the cost estimates as every project does)?

[MikeyinBrooklyn]

GP, I understand the definition of commuter rail. Serving a very limited geographic area for limited pool of users for a couple of hours in the morning and evening does not seem like a good investment of transit money. A more pervasive, frequently running BRT system that stops directly at many different locations and easily connects with local buses along its routes will get far more use.

It should also be understood that a successful commuter rail model depends on the old model of workers live in suburbs & travel into the city to work. Now, people live and work everywhere. This is not NYC where more than a million people travel into Manhattan for their 9-5 jobs on Metro North, LIRR, and Jersey Transit. Most people here do not live near a would-be commuter rail line, and most people- even with downtown's growth- will not be working downtown.

BRT will go more places and run more frequently than commuter rail. It's a better fit into the lives and commutes of more people. I don't oppose commuter rail; when I get my magic wand I will make it suddenly appear. Until then, it's limited utility is not the best use of our limited resources.

As for the questions you asked:
1. What is being proposed to make this route "rapider"?
BRT systems connect with lights to allow them move more frequently than regular traffic including buses; they also generally run as express buses not making every local stop.
2. Are the service improvements going to be sufficient to justify the capital investment? That can only be measured by the users of the system. We won't know whether the public thinks any system is "worth it" until it's open and running for some time. Swifter, more modern buses that run through busy places- as opposed to parallel to them some distance away- seem like they might have some appeal to the riding public.
3. Will the service improvements result in new, i.e. "choice" riders? The transit system will and should help those without cars get to their jobs. But it should also appeal to some people who don't want to use their cars on every trip. That is a group not currently using our transit system much. Heavy rail commuter systems don't stop at enough places or operate with enough frequency to be very attractive to optional users.

[ghettopalmetto]

BRT will go more places and run more frequently than commuter rail. It's a better fit into the lives and commutes of more people. I don't oppose commuter rail; when I get my magic wand I will make it suddenly appear. Until then, it's limited utility is not the best use of our limited resources.

The two modes are not competitive with each other. They each serve a different purpose. Whether bus, light rail, Sexybus, subway, monorail, maglev, magical unicorn...27-miles would be one of the longest non-commuter-rail transit routes in the nation. Why not run Express Rickshaw Service or tuk-tuks along the corridor? It makes just about as much sense.

Let's put this another way: SEMCOG has glommed onto the Sexybus idea for some reason known only to God, and won't support any other mode. That is the ONLY reason the RTA is proposing Bus [[rapid) Transit along this very long corridor.

As for the questions you asked:
1. What is being proposed to make this route "rapider"?
BRT systems connect with lights to allow them move more frequently than regular traffic including buses; they also generally run as express buses not making every local stop.

I hear this a lot. Yet I don't know of a single Bus [[rapid) Transit system that uses this technology. You're selling a product that don't exist.

Given that map of proposed stations, local bus service will still be needed to service the very VERY long remaining gaps.

2. Are the service improvements going to be sufficient to justify the capital investment? That can only be measured by the users of the system. We won't know whether the public thinks any system is "worth it" until it's open and running for some time. Swifter, more modern buses that run through busy places- as opposed to parallel to them some distance away- seem like they might have some appeal to the riding public.
3. Will the service improvements result in new, i.e. "choice" riders? The transit system will and should help those without cars get to their jobs. But it should also appeal to some people who don't want to use their cars on every trip. That is a group not currently using our transit system much. Heavy rail commuter systems don't stop at enough places or operate with enough frequency to be very attractive to optional users.

Sure. Let's just throw a Billion dollars into the air and see what happens. Just like the I-75 and I-94 projects. I mean, Michigan is just so flush with cash these days, what's the point of dickering around?

[ghettopalmetto]

100 million for commuter rail? how do you get to that number? Isn't the 2.5 miles of M1 costing 150 mill before they've even broken ground [[by that I mean...before they over run the cost estimates as every project does)?

You're confusing transit modes.

[bailey]

You're confusing transit modes.

I understand they're different. I assume what you're envisioning is running trains [[and building periodic stations) up and down the Wolverine line from pontiac to Detroit. Wouldn't it need it's own track and its own rolling stock?

[iheartthed]

GP, I understand the definition of commuter rail. Serving a very limited geographic area for limited pool of users for a couple of hours in the morning and evening does not seem like a good investment of transit money. A more pervasive, frequently running BRT system that stops directly at many different locations and easily connects with local buses along its routes will get far more use.

First, you said commuter rail wasn't a good idea because the tracks don't run where you think they should run. Then you say commuter rail isn't a good idea because you don't agree with the very concept of commuter rail. Just say that you would be against whatever type of rail anyone proposed period and be done with it. Pick an argument and stick with it.

It should also be understood that a successful commuter rail model depends on the old model of workers live in suburbs & travel into the city to work. Now, people live and work everywhere. This is not NYC where more than a million people travel into Manhattan for their 9-5 jobs on Metro North, LIRR, and Jersey Transit. Most people here do not live near a would-be commuter rail line, and most people- even with downtown's growth- will not be working downtown.

New York City is not the only place on earth with commuter rail. But even using New York as the example, most people in the New York area don't work in Manhattan. So again, what is your point? Everything won't serve every single person all the time. That's not how you design transportation systems.

BRT will go more places and run more frequently than commuter rail. It's a better fit into the lives and commutes of more people.

You should think this statement through a bit more. BRT will serve a fraction of the people that a commuter rail line would. Do the math. Depending on the train and configuration, a single train is able to carry more than 1,000 passengers on a single trip. Good luck finding a bus that will even carry 60 people at once.

I don't oppose commuter rail;

Yes, you do. Stop lying.

[iheartthed]

I understand they're different. I assume what you're envisioning is running trains [[and building periodic stations) up and down the Wolverine line from pontiac to Detroit. Wouldn't it need it's own track and its own rolling stock?

It wouldn't need it's own tracks. Many commuter rail systems in the US share the same tracks that Amtrak uses. The Northeast Corridor [[busiest train line in the country) is owned by Amtrak, yet New Jersey Transit operates its busiest route on it [[alongside Amtrak's schedule).

[ghettopalmetto]

I understand they're different. I assume what you're envisioning is running trains [[and building periodic stations) up and down the Wolverine line from pontiac to Detroit. Wouldn't it need it's own track and its own rolling stock?

Commuter rail rolling stock must meet FRA guidelines for crash resistance. Aside from the Amtrak-owned Northeast Corridor trackage, very few commuter rail services operate on their own tracks. Most share track with freight trains.

You might be confusing commuter rail with heavy rail and light rail, which are not FRA-approved rolling stock.

[bailey]

It wouldn't need it's own tracks. Many commuter rail systems in the US share the same tracks that Amtrak uses. The Northeast Corridor [[busiest train line in the country) is owned by Amtrak, yet New Jersey Transit operates its busiest route on it [[alongside Amtrak's schedule).

Ah. i didn't realize they operated on shared track like that.

[nain rouge]

It should also be understood that a successful commuter rail model depends on the old model of workers live in suburbs & travel into the city to work. Now, people live and work everywhere. This is not NYC where more than a million people travel into Manhattan for their 9-5 jobs on Metro North, LIRR, and Jersey Transit. Most people here do not live near a would-be commuter rail line, and most people- even with downtown's growth- will not be working downtown.

Maybe Detroit WOULD be a little more like New York City if we'd invest in proper transit. Of course, if you refuse to invest in transit and hand out money for freeways like candy, then the result you get is a sprawled out mess. But it didn't have to be that way. We could've built out smartly instead of as quick as possible.

BRT will go more places and run more frequently than commuter rail. It's a better fit into the lives and commutes of more people. I don't oppose commuter rail; when I get my magic wand I will make it suddenly appear. Until then, it's limited utility is not the best use of our limited resources.

The last thing we need is to waste money on a new bus system on Woodward. What transit users want right now are buses that arrive frequently throughout the metro area, and the best way to do that is to leverage what we already have.

As it stands, when the buses come on roads like Woodward and Gratiot every 10-15 minutes during peak travel times, it's a very functional system that many people use. But outside of peak travel times, or off of the main avenues, wait times are horrific. And that's the real bottleneck. I want to be able to travel to Southfield Road or Van Dyke or on a mile road without waiting an hour or more.

We need buses. For the love of God, we just need buses. The real problem I see is that we have people that don't use the mass transit in this region planning the mass transit. YOU HAVE NO CLUE!