"Qline Effect"? 20-story-plus high-rise Rumored for New Center

[Junjie]

Correct that is what I am saying. If the RTA doesn't have the funding it doesn't have it. Therefore things can't get studied and built. That document is nice but it is daydreaming to think M1 Rail, as a private group, wants to build anything else. They were banking on the RTA passing like most other sane metro Detroiters.

Sorry, maybe I don't understand, but this just doesn't make sense to me.

A. If the Conservancy was counting on the RTA tax to build a QLine extension for them from regional funds, why even ask the consultants to study financing options? What would that contribute?

B. If the Conservancy folks were just assuming the RTA millage would pass, and then assuming that RTA would take over the QLine sometime after 2024, and then assuming that the QLine might get extended by the RTA despite nothing in the 2026 master plan to that effect, then why did they bother asking the consulting firm to come up with financing options and so on a decade in advance of a multi-stage hypothetical? Seems like a waste of billable hours.

Anyway, I'd still be curious to see the full report and not just the slide deck released in March regarding the East Riverfront plan, and finding out whether SOM addressed that point as required in the RFQ.

[dtowncitylover]

Sorry, maybe I don't understand, but this just doesn't make sense to me.

A. If the Conservancy was counting on the RTA tax to build a QLine extension for them from regional funds, why even ask the consultants to study financing options? What would that contribute?

B. If the Conservancy folks were just assuming the RTA millage would pass, and then assuming that RTA would take over the QLine sometime after 2024, and then assuming that the QLine might get extended by the RTA despite nothing in the 2026 master plan to that effect, then why did they bother asking the consulting firm to come up with financing options and so on a decade in advance of a multi-stage hypothetical? Seems like a waste of billable hours.

Perhaps because, since they work closely with the City, they would want to know how much it's going to cost to get it built for knowing's sake. As well so the design of the streetcar route is developed into whatever private plan the Conservatory wishes to take. There were conceptual drawings of Orleans Landing with a streetcar going through as opposed to staying on Jeff Ave.

I just can't imagine a reason why the Conservatory would want to build a streetcar system themselves but they certainly would like to have some input.

[Scottathew]

Well, if they can't abide then they'll be hit by a streetcar and suffer the consequences. If they park on tracks they can get the $500 fine. Locals and non-locals will abide because they will be forced to change their habits. Simple as that.

While there are consequences, they will cause service disruptions, which will effect the success of the service.

Hopefully they can tow offenders very quickly.

[ddaydetroit]

Curiosity question have any of you ridden the Trams in Vienna or Amsterdam I have been fortunate enough to ride both they rock! I stayed in a hotel in Vienna that had trolleys going in both directions a bus line that ran the same street and a subway a block down the street. In both cities I decided to take one of the longer lines and they go for a long way.
http://viennamap360.com/vienna-tram-map
http://www.urbanrail.net/eu/nl/ams/t...m-tram-map.htm

[K-slice]

What does the M1 rail accomplish that the normal city busses don't?
This thing already seems like a nightmare in traffic. I seen the commercial last night about how to yield to the thing. The locals are NOT going to abide by any of those rules. Can't even follow basic traffic laws. This thing cannot maneuver around obstructions like a bus can. I seen it testing over the weekend and it looks cool and all but is it really necc?
Am I missing something?

What you're missing is that no matter what reality is, ie buses being faster, more practical, etc, perception is what matters. Buses are perceived as dirty, dangerous, basically rolling homeless shelters, and complicated to use by many who don't use them. The Q-line on the other hand is new, clean, and safe. Plus since it's on rails there's no way you jump on it and end up somewhere unexpected.

I can say I am guilty of falling into this category. I have never considered riding a bus since I've lived here, yet I am excited about having the Q-Line expand my car-less entertainment, dinner, and drinking options.

[ABetterDetroit]

Maurice Cox, the city's planning director, said he has not been briefed on Grasso's plans and cautioned that he "can't count the number of speculative development projects that come on our radar and amount to nothing."

"I think we get about a dozen a week," he said.

It would be damn useful to determine how many of those "dozen a week" are legitimate potential development projects from developers with a proven track record and find out why they "amount to nothing" and make those reasons public Mr. Cox.

They came to you so why are they walking? That answer is the nut of the problem, it's not like there's something about Detroit that they did not already know about before they came to you if they were legitimate in the first place. Are they all crackpots or is there an issue that is not being addressed?

[professorscott]

Couldn't they actually have a commuter rail service running between Detroit and Oakland County's Woodward Corridor communities pretty quickly? Like in less than a year since the tracks are already there and the only hindrance is political/economical? I think would be far faster, cheaper, and logical, to do that than extend QLine to Pontiac. QLine's next priority should be on building out lines on the other avenues.

The hindrance is worse than you think: trackage rights. Private freight rail companies own the tracks, do not want any additional passenger trains on the tracks, and don't have to allow them. That is the main reason the Ann Arbor trains are still not running after all these years of effort. If the only problem was money we could fix it; it's not THAT expensive.

[Junjie]

Perhaps because, since they work closely with the City, they would want to know how much it's going to cost to get it built for knowing's sake. As well so the design of the streetcar route is developed into whatever private plan the Conservatory wishes to take. There were conceptual drawings of Orleans Landing with a streetcar going through as opposed to staying on Jeff Ave.

I just can't imagine a reason why the Conservatory would want to build a streetcar system themselves but they certainly would like to have some input.

Yeah, I suppose you're right. General planning for the future. I wasn't suggesting the Conservancy would somehow build it, but was intrigued that they asked for a study of how it might get built.

[gumby]

What you're missing is that no matter what reality is, ie buses being faster, more practical, etc, perception is what matters. Buses are perceived as dirty, dangerous, basically rolling homeless shelters, and complicated to use by many who don't use them. The Q-line on the other hand is new, clean, and safe. Plus since it's on rails there's no way you jump on it and end up somewhere unexpected.

I can say I am guilty of falling into this category. I have never considered riding a bus since I've lived here, yet I am excited about having the Q-Line expand my car-less entertainment, dinner, and drinking options.

Also Rail is perceived as more of a permanent fixture whereas bus routes can be ended at a whim. Developers are more willing to invest dollars when it appears the municipality is committed to an area with permanent infrastructure.

[Bham1982]

Apparently no one in this thread thinks there's any logical disconnect between attributing all development along Woodward to the trolley, but not attributing all development along Woodward pre-trolley to the lack of the trolley.

As is common on D-Yes, huge correlation-causation fail. If some developer builds a [[massively subsidized through your tax dollars) condo building along Woodward, it won't be because of the Q Line.

[Bham1982]

I repeat: A streetcar is not a mode of commuter suburban transit. It is a mode in urban, dense areas.

A streetcar is a low capacity transit system, analogous to buses, but without the flexibility. They can be used in urban, dense areas, but are more commonly used for secondary corridors, whether city or suburb.

[1953]

K-slice put it perfectly. I, too, am not likely to get on a city bus anytime soon, but I'll gladly ride the Qline from its first day. Its all perception.

1953

[Junjie]

Apparently no one in this thread thinks there's any logical disconnect between attributing all development along Woodward to the trolley, but not attributing all development along Woodward pre-trolley to the lack of the trolley.

As is common on D-Yes, huge correlation-causation fail. If some developer builds a [[massively subsidized through your tax dollars) condo building along Woodward, it won't be because of the Q Line.

Strange post. I don't think anyone is arguing that ALL development is due to the QLine. They're arguing that, based on the development we are seeing, and based on all the developers explicitly saying it has had an effect on their decision-making, the streetcar seems to be having a positive marginal effect. That's good news.

Are you arguing that there is no marginal effect on development from adding this kind of amenity?

emu steve posted a good article earlier in this thread from DC [[Arlington), about developments abandoning Columbia Pike once the streetcar there was cancelled. Seems pretty obvious that these things matter.

[Bham1982]

Strange post. I don't think anyone is arguing that ALL development is due to the QLine. They're arguing that, based on the development we are seeing, and based on all the developers explicitly saying it has had an effect on their decision-making, the streetcar seems to be having a positive marginal effect. That's good news.

Why is this a "strange post"? The thread is entitled "Qline Effect". Clearly people think the trolley caused the growth.

Are you arguing that there is no marginal effect on development from adding this kind of amenity?

I doubt there is any effect. In any case, there was no claim that this was a "marginal effect", this thread clearly assumes that the trolley caused the proposal [[assuming such a proposal exists, which I doubt). There was no assumption that the trolley had possible marginal effects, like a decent nearby bagel shop.

emu steve posted a good article earlier in this thread from DC [[Arlington), about developments abandoning Columbia Pike once the streetcar there was cancelled. Seems pretty obvious that these things matter.

That article was absurd. Again, horrible correlation-causation fail. It's also factually wrong, as that portion of Arlington is booming with new development [[which I'm confident no one will attribute to lack of trolley). Arlington probably has more development than all of Metro Detroit.

[Bham1982]

K-slice put it perfectly. I, too, am not likely to get on a city bus anytime soon, but I'll gladly ride the Qline from its first day. Its all perception.

1953

Why? This makes zero sense.

DYes posters have never ridden buses? Has anyone posting here actually lived in an urban area? I suspect I'm one of the few people here who has lived car-free.

[dtowncitylover]

Why? This makes zero sense.

DYes posters have never ridden buses? Has anyone posting here actually lived in an urban area? I suspect I'm one of the few people here who has lived car-free.

I've lived car-free in Chicago. It wasn't bad and my first leg of my commute was on the bus. But see that's the thing, the CTA worked. DDOT and SMART do not and are not known for being clean, safe, modern, and on time.

But yay let's rehash things that have been talked about in 20 other threads.

[Zads07]

I doubt there is any effect. In any case, there was no claim that this was a "marginal effect", this thread clearly assumes that the trolley caused the proposal [[assuming such a proposal exists, which I doubt). There was no assumption that the trolley had possible marginal effects, like a decent nearby bagel shop.

Here's an article from the Detroit News regarding The Platform Development in New Center that the company said the QLine is one of many reasons for the development.

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/bus...ment/91619304/

"Cummings said the QLine was just one of the factors behind the Platform development group. The other is simply the Motor City’s rising popularity as a place to live, he said."

To say you doubt the QLine has had any effect on development is ignoring facts from developers. I understand where you're coming from, but I think you might need to read more about development along the QLine and read what developers say. If they say the QLine is a reason for their developments, then it's clearly inciting development.

[Junjie]

Why is this a "strange post"? The thread is entitled "Qline Effect". Clearly people think the trolley caused the growth.

Well for one, it was a strange post because you led with an obvious strawman unrelated to what anyone is saying in this thread [["attributing all development along Woodward to the trolley").

I doubt there is any effect. In any case, there was no claim that this was a "marginal effect", this thread clearly assumes that the trolley caused the proposal [[assuming such a proposal exists, which I doubt). There was no assumption that the trolley had possible marginal effects, like a decent nearby bagel shop.

Why would a bagel shop be an example of the streetcar's marginal effect but a larger development not? Do you know what "marginal effect" means? If the streetcar raises rents [[or even anticipated rents) by some fraction, then some developments which may not have been feasible at a lower rate of return become feasible. Moreover, we have numerous developers attributing at least some of their developments to the QLine, and the entire point of Gilbert et al. investing their own money was the anticipated marginal effect on property values and rental rates.

That article was absurd. Again, horrible correlation-causation fail. It's also factually wrong, as that portion of Arlington is booming with new development [[which I'm confident no one will attribute to lack of trolley). Arlington probably has more development than all of Metro Detroit.

Columbia Pike is also one of the cheapest and least desirable places to live in Arlington, precisely because it lacks good transit. Do you think the streetcar would have increased, decreased, or not affected the demand to live in that part of Arlington? If demand increases, do you expect rents to rise or fall? Obviously it's going to be near-impossible to attribute any specific development directly to the streetcar [[or any unbuilt development to its absence), any more than we can attribute any single new development to a nearby good school or a major company locating in the region. But you're in the position of arguing that major amenities and the convenience of the local transportation network have no influence on rents, anticipated rents, property values, or the development decisions related to those three things. Hence "strange."

[Junjie]

Why? This makes zero sense.

DYes posters have never ridden buses? Has anyone posting here actually lived in an urban area? I suspect I'm one of the few people here who has lived car-free.

I spent two years riding Alexandria's DASH buses to connect to the DC metro, five more years commuting daily via metro alone, and often used the WMATA 30 series buses and DDOT Circulator to get to places along Wisconsin Ave. or near Dupont. Had a car but it was for trips to Shenandoah or back to Michigan. I've also lived car-free for two years while abroad. Now I walk to work in Philly.

[bust]

Why? This makes zero sense.

DYes posters have never ridden buses? Has anyone posting here actually lived in an urban area? I suspect I'm one of the few people here who has lived car-free.

I've lived car free much longer than I've owned a car. I've only ever owned a car in Detroit, once I was old enough. I'm a huge advocate of mass transit.

I fully support investing in buses if that's all that's possible and where it makes sense. But from a customer experience point of view they are the worst option. Almost anything else is better, including bike shares and pedicabs [[only half-kidding).

In New York you're never more than a couple blocks from a bus route, even in distant neighborhoods. They blanket the city. If a subway doesn't serve a location there are always buses that do. But if that's where I'm going I don't take them. I opt for a car service or taxi instead. I've lived in NYC a long time and haven't been on a NYC bus in about 10 years. Since moving here, excluding a few months when my commute crossed Central Park and a bus or a taxi was the only option, I've probably averaged less than one NYC bus ride a year. I try not to ride buses and generally don't unless I'm visiting a city where they're the only viable transit. On the other hand I probably average about two NYC subway rides a day.

Subways are almost always much faster, of course, but that's not the only reason. When I ride most buses the combination of the rattling windows, the diesel fumes, all the stopping and starting, the bouncing and swerving, and the generally unpleasant ride makes me mildly sick. On buses it can be difficult to get away from aspects you may encounter you don't want pressing against you. I feel more trapped. They're also much harder to keep clean. I don't have these problems riding a subway, a streetcar, light rail, or a train.

Someone I'm friendly with is in a long term relationship with a NYC bus driver. She said after hearing all the stories about what happens in the relative privacy of a bus seat she refuses to ride one. She takes a subway to work.

Just an anecdote, but clearly I'm not the only one who feels the way I do.

Here are the most recent NYC ridership numbers for subways and buses:

NYC subways saw 1,762,565,419 paying customers in 2015 and the trend has been increasing for years.
NYC buses saw 776,080,306 in 2015 and the numbers have been declining for years.

There were nearly a billion more subway rides.

Those numbers include express buses which are almost comparable to a subway in speed. Despite the fact that buses offer much better coverage people are clearly more happy to walk farther to take a subway. Or maybe they hire a car or decide they're better off owning one of their own. At least that's true of people like me.

Of course the NYC subway system is the most comprehensive one in the US. It was a wise investment. It serves us very well.

I support expanding bus service in Detroit. It needs better coverage, more frequent service, and more express lines or bus rapid transit.

But if you're a developer I clearly understand why you'd prefer to build near a street car or better yet a subway. Like others have said, they attract riders who avoid buses. And for many developers those are the target customers they want.

[Gistok]

Why? This makes zero sense.

DYes posters have never ridden buses? Has anyone posting here actually lived in an urban area? I suspect I'm one of the few people here who has lived car-free.

It only makes zero sense to you. Most people here HAVE ridden buses in the past... and that alone would explain why they would much prefer to ride the Q-Line in the future. Count me among them.

Is that so hard to comprehend?

[drjeff]

A streetcar is a low capacity transit system, analogous to buses, but without the flexibility. They can be used in urban, dense areas, but are more commonly used for secondary corridors, whether city or suburb.

The capacity of the Qline cars is 125 passengers "comfortably" and many more possible during a busy period. A city bus is not even close to that.

http://www.freep.com/story/news/loca...rail/90786964/

[Bham1982]

The capacity of the Qline cars is 125 passengers "comfortably" and many more possible during a busy period. A city bus is not even close to that.

http://www.freep.com/story/news/loca...rail/90786964/

Not true. Cities around the world run articulated buses on major routes, which usually have 120+ capacity.

In contrast, typical heavy rail systems usually carry 500+ [[and sometimes 1000+) passengers.

And in Detroit, the streetcars will run less than the existing bus service. However the streetcar fares, it won't match ridership on busy bus routes elsewhere.

[Bham1982]

It only makes zero sense to you. Most people here HAVE ridden buses in the past... and that alone would explain why they would much prefer to ride the Q-Line in the future. Count me among them.

Is that so hard to comprehend?

No, it isn't hard to comprehend; it's just silly and nonsensical.

The fact that you would refuse to take public transit if the vehicle has tires, but will happily take it if no tires, is completely absurd.

What if we painted buses to look like trolleys, or painted trolleys to look like buses? Maybe we can paint tracks down major arterials, and even do a "choo choo" audio for the buses. Would this appease the "we love public transit but hate the dominant public transit mode in almost every city in America" crowd?

[ekleezy]

No, it isn't hard to comprehend; it's just silly and nonsensical.

The fact that you would refuse to take public transit if the vehicle has tires, but will happily take it if no tires, is completely absurd.

What if we painted buses to look like trolleys, or painted trolleys to look like buses? Maybe we can paint tracks down major arterials, and even do a "choo choo" audio for the buses. Would this appease the "we love public transit but hate the dominant public transit mode in almost every city in America" crowd?

It seems like you're actively trying not to understand what everyone else is saying. People don't avoid buses because they have tires. I, like many people in this thread who have already commented, have gladly used buses in many other cities. It doesn't have the same perception in Detroit though. I had free bus pass cards for a month last year and people thought I was crazy for wanting to try it out. Those same people have ridden on buses with me in Chicago, Toronto, and DC though. People generally don't feel that Detroit buses would be safe, but the Qline would be much safer because it's new and would have a lot of attention.