Q Line "Constructive Criticism"

[Bham1982]

I disagree with the idea that suburbanites, unless parking is $50 or it takes 3 hours to get downtown, would not take transit. Parking downtown is hard these days and a lot of people would like to be free from the hassle of finding a spot.

I think parking downtown is pretty cheap and easy. You don't have to pay a cent if you're willing to walk. And the Hudsons garage, which couldn't be more central, is still pretty cheap.

IMO it's unrealistic to think that typical visitors [[say a family with two kids) would find it cheaper and easier to drive to some transit point, buy four round-trip tickets, walk to venue, and then return, as opposed to just driving downtown. And if you're honestly too lazy to drive, Uber is cheap/easy.

And this is putting aside the fact that the region has no transit culture and that most suburbanites think public transit is a carnival toy ride or ghetto mover for the poors.

[dtowncitylover]

I think parking downtown is pretty cheap and easy. You don't have to pay a cent if you're willing to walk. And the Hudsons garage, which couldn't be more central, is still pretty cheap.

Pssst...I'm pretty sure that garage is closed because a major development is be being built on it. But I know what you're saying.

Until the peppers that be make hard for suburbanites' to drive downtown the most of them aren't going to take public transit downtown. Maybe suburbanites who work downtown but not everyone.

RTA, whenever funded, need to work on city transit, Detroit-Airport-Ann Arbor rail connection, new fleets, railroad negotiating, making DDOT and SMART have cohesive systems with scheduling, routes, and universal fares. Mass transit is nice but can only be heavily used when the city stops pandering to suburbanite driving and parking habits.

[dtowncitylover]

Also Uber is a stupid alternative. A family from Rochester Hills isn't going to take Uber when there's surcharges during peak times, so $40+ one way. Not going to happen when a dad knows his favorite lot for $20 [[or a Greektown member) or they have a regional transit pass [[which hopefully one day will be widespread and useful).

[Atticus]

Until the powers that be make it harder for suburbanites to drive and park in the city then it's good to be hard for suburbanites to take FAST to events and going downtown to shop without their car. I could see downtown workers taking the buses but not everyone.

This whole "make it harder for suburbanites" argument is short sighted and wrong. You sound like Chris Christie's bridge patrol. It is one thing to not spend tax dollars on freeway widening [[to make it easier to get downtown), but it is wasteful to spend tax dollars to make it harder to get in as well. It's also bad politics and divisive, and would make it further difficult to pass regional ticket items with suburban voters in the future.

RTA, whenever funded, needs to focus on city transit, Detroit-Airport-Ann Arbor rail connection, newer bus fleets, and making DDOT and SMART to have contemplating systems with a universal fare system. BRT/mass transit is nice but again can only be used heavily by the region when Detroit stops pandering to suburbanites' driving and parking habits.

I completely agree about the downtown-DTW airport transit connection. To me, that is the single best transit project to improve the region's optics. Forcing business travelers and tourists to pay $60 for MetroCab, $45 for Uber, or do a Car Rental is huge turn off. I can't stress that enough. The FAST bus is a start, but it should be called the FRUGAL bus because it saves the traveler money, but is still much, much slower than taking MetroCab/Uber.



The Ann Arbor - Detroit commuter rail.... I am not very optimistic. I actually fear it will be a big flop, and this flop will cloud future regional transit votes. First, if you are going to call it commuter rail, you need to cater to commuters. Dropping someone off in New Center [[or MCS) doesn't work, plain and simple as it is too far from the employment centers in the CBD. Riders would then have to take a bus or Q-Line from there.

Point being, the whole process of waiting for a train in Ann Arbor, riding a 60mph train that has to stop at Ypsi?, DTW, and Dearborn before finally getting to Detroit, and then having to take Qline/Bus... it is too time consuming to do everyday for work. I-94 is going to be musch quicker, even if it is congested. People who can afford it are still going to just drive. The time savings alone will easily cover the extra cost for most of the population.

The only commuters who would take this commuter rail are those who can't afford a car and don't have a choice. And even then, there aren't many people who can't afford a car actually living in Ann Arbor.. and given the gentrification around New Center/Midtown, there may not be many on the Detroit side in the future either.

The Detroit Ann-Arbor commuter line just doesn't make any sense logistically. I do take the train to Chicago a few times a year, but that is when I am not rushing to make it to work on time [[big difference when time is not a major issue). But taking a commuter rail line each day that is slow and time consuming, people aren't going to do it. I would love Detroit to say it has commuter rail, but the logistical side of me can't justify it.

[MicrosoftFan]

A commuter rail line only makes sense under a few conditions:

1) A Downtown Station. The path is there- on top of parking lots north of Lafayette in West Side Industrial which connect just outside the CP tunnel portal at Rosa Parks will get you to a terminal at 2nd and Lafayette. You could jog up a block and dig up Howard Street [[Its closed off anyway) and that would get you a block south of Rosa Parks TTC.

2) Frequent trains. During rush hours needs to be 15-30 minutes and every hour off peak. Late trains that run to 12am weekdays and 2am weekends. Trains measured in every x minutes, not x trains per day.

3. A few more stations. Perhaps a Park N Ride at I-275 and a stop out to Jackson in Rush Hours?

4. Please, please better trains. Use the trains used in Austin in Marin County CA which have faster acceleration. And look more modern.

I’m still not convinced suburbanites won’t take Transit to downtown. First of all, not all of the suburbanites lived through Detroit’s divisive ages and simply don’t have the stereotypes that their parents do. Second, pretty much every city with some kind of rail system to downtown have a core park and ride constituency of commuters who trek downtown every day, no matter what. Think Atlanta and SF. Third, if you want to head downtown for dinner or lunch, you can either pay $15 or $20 if it’s a weekday or drive around for an hour trying to find a meter.

Also, the #1 reason I’ve observed that suburbanites won’t Ride SMART? They don’t know how to ride the bus. They don’t know how to put stuff in the fare box or how much the fare is. They don’t know where the stops are or how to flag the bus down. They don’t know how to tell they driver they need to get off, or what door to get out of. What metro Detroit needs is some transit education.

[Jason]

My personal support for expanding the People Mover is because I think the People Mover provides much much higher quality service than other forms of transit. And I think it's so much better, that it changes the way people along the route use transit.

For light rail and buses if you want to use it you need to look up the schedule. Then you need to wait on a platform for who knows how long. And then maybe the train or bus is late. Driving yourself is convenient except for parking, which uber solves. But parking and uber can get expensive. To start using the bus or even light rail you have to willfully integrate it with your lifestyle but with the People Mover you don't.

With the People Mover, the frequency is so high that you don't have to think about schedules or anything. You just walk up the escalators to the platform, and in a few minutes you get whisked away to your destination.


A route from the airport to downtown would be great. There's a variety of different destinations, and a few businesses who could use their clout to make things easier politically, and maybe even contribute some money.

The airport would obviously love to be connected to downtown and also connect its terminals and parking. And it might make the project "for visitors" to some degree but that would also make it easier to have a tourist tax help pay for it.

The line could then go along I-94, where it would be relatively cheap to build.

Dearborn has a lot of destinations. Ford is investing a lot in its campus. They currently have 12,000 employees there and plan on consolidating offices into the two campuses up to 30,000 people. They would probably feel that good transit would help them attract talent. A stop at the Henry Ford Museum would serve a popular tourist destination and would provide access to the north part of their campus. Another stop or two within their campus as well as the Glass House would connect everything. Dearborn also has U of M Dearborn, which would be helpful politically, a hospital, Fairlane, a few other good development opportunities, and a little downtown.

Onto Michigan Avenue through Dearborn and Detroit there's a relative density of people and likely transit riders, a lot of longterm densification potential, and some DDOT and SMART bus routes that could be replaced.

I also think that the downtown and midtown interests would be supportive of an airport connection.


There's an argument that the People Mover can't be expanded because the curves are too sharp and the platforms are too short for the current model of train that Bombardier makes, but tracks are a lot more expensive than the train cars and they could just be custom ordered to be shorter.

But either way, a 25 mile line to the airport would cost billions of dollars. Now, it would be a one-time build, to have something high quality, with low operating costs, into perpetuity. And we spend just as much money on other things which aren't as beneficial. But still, I'm not holding my breath that we'll ever manage to commit that much money to anything.

[Gistok]

I updated my estimate to factor for the currency change and my horribly incorrect math [[1.4 M / 6.8 rather than 1.4 B / 6.8). $160 M a mile probably but since it’s the US probably double that and 10 years.

I bet you gave those "uneducated people from Roseville" a good chuckle....

[MicrosoftFan]

I bet you gave those "uneducated people from Roseville" a good chuckle....

I think it’s because I ran out of digits on my iPhone calculator. But yeah, a little ironic.

[MicrosoftFan]

My personal support for expanding the People Mover is because I think the People Mover provides much much higher quality service than other forms of transit. And I think it's so much better, that it changes the way people along the route use transit.

For light rail and buses if you want to use it you need to look up the schedule. Then you need to wait on a platform for who knows how long. And then maybe the train or bus is late. Driving yourself is convenient except for parking, which uber solves. But parking and uber can get expensive. To start using the bus or even light rail you have to willfully integrate it with your lifestyle but with the People Mover you don't.

With the People Mover, the frequency is so high that you don't have to think about schedules or anything. You just walk up the escalators to the platform, and in a few minutes you get whisked away to your destination.


A route from the airport to downtown would be great. There's a variety of different destinations, and a few businesses who could use their clout to make things easier politically, and maybe even contribute some money.

The airport would obviously love to be connected to downtown and also connect its terminals and parking. And it might make the project "for visitors" to some degree but that would also make it easier to have a tourist tax help pay for it.

The line could then go along I-94, where it would be relatively cheap to build.

Dearborn has a lot of destinations. Ford is investing a lot in its campus. They currently have 12,000 employees there and plan on consolidating offices into the two campuses up to 30,000 people. They would probably feel that good transit would help them attract talent. A stop at the Henry Ford Museum would serve a popular tourist destination and would provide access to the north part of their campus. Another stop or two within their campus as well as the Glass House would connect everything. Dearborn also has U of M Dearborn, which would be helpful politically, a hospital, Fairlane, a few other good development opportunities, and a little downtown.

Onto Michigan Avenue through Dearborn and Detroit there's a relative density of people and likely transit riders, a lot of longterm densification potential, and some DDOT and SMART bus routes that could be replaced.

I also think that the downtown and midtown interests would be supportive of an airport connection.


There's an argument that the People Mover can't be expanded because the curves are too sharp and the platforms are too short for the current model of train that Bombardier makes, but tracks are a lot more expensive than the train cars and they could just be custom ordered to be shorter.

But either way, a 25 mile line to the airport would cost billions of dollars. Now, it would be a one-time build, to have something high quality, with low operating costs, into perpetuity. And we spend just as much money on other things which aren't as beneficial. But still, I'm not holding my breath that we'll ever manage to commit that much money to anything.

My preferred alignment would be a ramp from Times Square into a subway under Bagley and Michigan through corktown, then turning down Vernor at MCS through Southwest, jogging onto dix and then rising onto an elevated in South Dearborn, before turning North along Miller past the Rouge plant, then turning West onto the CN tracks all the way through downtown dearborn to Telegraph, heading on an elevated down Telegraph before heading west onto I-94 straight to the airport terminals.

Platforms would have to be extended and I can imagine that Millender Center station would have to go. Perhaps Michigan Ave and Times Square close down and reopen as a Rosa Parks TTC station.

[dtowncitylover]

This whole "make it harder for suburbanites" argument is short sighted and wrong. You sound like Chris Christie's bridge patrol. It is one thing to not spend tax dollars on freeway widening [[to make it easier to get downtown), but it is wasteful to spend tax dollars to make it harder to get in as well. It's also bad politics and divisive, and would make it further difficult to pass regional ticket items with suburban voters in the future.

Sorry, perhaps "making it harder" is too strong a statement. As I said further, we need to stop pandering to the car. When the RTA receives the funding it so rightly deserves, I say a moratorium on construction of parking decks. Police tailgaters on Opening Day. More bike lanes, transit lanes, and pedestrian friendly crossings. Suburbanites can come into the city all they want, of course, but don't expect it to be Hall Rd. or Telegraph or get off running red lights and trashing parking lots on Opening Day.

[professorscott]

A commuter rail line only makes sense under a few conditions:
1) A Downtown Station.
2) Frequent trains.
3. A few more stations.
4. Please, please better trains.

Also, the #1 reason I’ve observed that suburbanites won’t Ride SMART?

Hi MF,

Your thoughts in regard to commuter rail are on point, but unfortunately the plan doesn't provide for any of these. Of them, "more stations" is possible but unlikely. There's no money to connect tracks so the trains can get downtown, and since the freight rail companies own the tracks, it is absolutely impossible to get frequent service; they won't allow it and they don't have to. We won't get better trains for the same reason we won't get more stations: there's no money available. Any major revision to the plan would be unlikely to gain any traction in government right now. If there ever is a well-funded RTA, then maybe it can start to try to address some of these things.

Incidentally, the original reason for the QLine is based on the idea that [[1) the AA-D commuter rail would be running, but [[2) could not get people all the way to downtown. It's morphed from that, but that was the reason we started planning that, ten or twelve years ago, in the first place.

I think in regard to SMART buses there is a much more important reason why the ridership is low: there aren't enough buses, they don't run often enough and they don't come anywhere near where most people live. I hope Royal Oak does decide to put in some kind of local transit system; then we will be able to see what happens to ridership when we do give people decent connections that come near their homes and grocery stores and so on.

[Atticus]

Hi MF,

Your thoughts in regard to commuter rail are on point, but unfortunately the plan doesn't provide for any of these. Of them, "more stations" is possible but unlikely. There's no money to connect tracks so the trains can get downtown, and since the freight rail companies own the tracks, it is absolutely impossible to get frequent service; they won't allow it and they don't have to. We won't get better trains for the same reason we won't get more stations: there's no money available. Any major revision to the plan would be unlikely to gain any traction in government right now. If there ever is a well-funded RTA, then maybe it can start to try to address some of these things.

Incidentally, the original reason for the QLine is based on the idea that [[1) the AA-D commuter rail would be running, but [[2) could not get people all the way to downtown. It's morphed from that, but that was the reason we started planning that, ten or twelve years ago, in the first place.

I think in regard to SMART buses there is a much more important reason why the ridership is low: there aren't enough buses, they don't run often enough and they don't come anywhere near where most people live. I hope Royal Oak does decide to put in some kind of local transit system; then we will be able to see what happens to ridership when we do give people decent connections that come near their homes and grocery stores and so on.

There are too many people in the planning world who want commuter rail just for the sake of saying “Detroit has commuter rail!”.

Either build a commuter line that makes sense, or don’t build one at all. I will say it: I am really worried RTA is going to push through a commuter line proposal that people won’t use. A ton of money will get wasted on it, and the failure will kill the ability for the region to pass any [[useful) future transit measure for the next 20 years.

1. A downtown station is an absolute necessity for a successful commuter rail. Period. If you want to skydive, but getting a parachute wasn’t logistically or financially possible, you don’t still jump out of the plane. But that is what RTA is pushing through in having a commuter line but no downtown station.

2. Riding the RTA commuter line as proposed is going to take much more time than driving I-94, even if the freeway is congested. Also trainfrequency is low, which makes it only more inconvenient. Thus the only people who could have a regular use for it are those who can’t afford a car. And the people who can’t afford a car [[and who would be commuting into Detroit) dont live in Ann Arbor.

It is one thing to want commuter rail, but where is the need? Who is going to actually use it day in and day out, and why would they take rail over driving? Honest questions.

[Atticus]

Sorry, perhaps "making it harder" is too strong a statement. As I said further, we need to stop pandering to the car. When the RTA receives the funding it so rightly deserves, I say a moratorium on construction of parking decks. Police tailgaters on Opening Day. More bike lanes, transit lanes, and pedestrian friendly crossings. Suburbanites can come into the city all they want, of course, but don't expect it to be Hall Rd. or Telegraph or get off running red lights and trashing parking lots on Opening Day.

This concept of not pandering to the car sounds great in theory, but look at the places where transit is regularly used by people who are not low income. In every case, that region will have truly bad traffic, and/or outrageous parking costs. Detroit fits in neither category.

The point is, either your transit serves 1) folks who can’t afford or aren’t able to car commute, or 2) it serves everyone because car commuting doesn’t make sense.

The point is, if you are going to design transit that only will serve low income people, then design a system that goes to where low income people live. More frequent buses down Gratiot, Michigan, Grand River, etc. does that. A commuter line to Ann Arbor does not.

[MicrosoftFan]

Hi MF,

Your thoughts in regard to commuter rail are on point, but unfortunately the plan doesn't provide for any of these. Of them, "more stations" is possible but unlikely. There's no money to connect tracks so the trains can get downtown, and since the freight rail companies own the tracks, it is absolutely impossible to get frequent service; they won't allow it and they don't have to. We won't get better trains for the same reason we won't get more stations: there's no money available. Any major revision to the plan would be unlikely to gain any traction in government right now. If there ever is a well-funded RTA, then maybe it can start to try to address some of these things.

Incidentally, the original reason for the QLine is based on the idea that [[1) the AA-D commuter rail would be running, but [[2) could not get people all the way to downtown. It's morphed from that, but that was the reason we started planning that, ten or twelve years ago, in the first place.

I think in regard to SMART buses there is a much more important reason why the ridership is low: there aren't enough buses, they don't run often enough and they don't come anywhere near where most people live. I hope Royal Oak does decide to put in some kind of local transit system; then we will be able to see what happens to ridership when we do give people decent connections that come near their homes and grocery stores and so on.

On a good day the current RTA plan for CR will get ~1000 riders per day. Sure, it’s great if you want go from Eastern to Wayne State every day, but for any downtown commuters it’s a hassle to get on a streetcars that might get delayed, not to mention they have to drive to a station 10 miles from their house every day. Not to mention that past Dearborn, the population density drops until Ypsilanti and nobody is getting on/off there.

If they’re going to build a commuter rail line I hope it runs to Pontiac instead. A much denser corridor.

A path to a downtown station is also feasibly possible, as I outlined in a previous post. While it would be extremely inefficient to Pontiac passengers, it would work well for Dearborn Ann Arbor passengers.

Another route which I have not outlined to a downtown station would be NS boat line to Rosa Parks Blvd—-> cut and cover tunnel under Jefferson [[needs to be repaved anyway) —> Station on Joe Louis site.

[professorscott]

There are too many people in the planning world who want commuter rail just for the sake of saying “Detroit has commuter rail!”.

Either build a commuter line that makes sense, or don’t build one at all. I will say it: I am really worried RTA is going to push through a commuter line proposal that people won’t use. A ton of money will get wasted on it, and the failure will kill the ability for the region to pass any [[useful) future transit measure for the next 20 years.

1. A downtown station is an absolute necessity for a successful commuter rail. Period. If you want to skydive, but getting a parachute wasn’t logistically or financially possible, you don’t still jump out of the plane. But that is what RTA is pushing through in having a commuter line but no downtown station.

2. Riding the RTA commuter line as proposed is going to take much more time than driving I-94, even if the freeway is congested. Also trainfrequency is low, which makes it only more inconvenient. Thus the only people who could have a regular use for it are those who can’t afford a car. And the people who can’t afford a car [[and who would be commuting into Detroit) dont live in Ann Arbor.

It is one thing to want commuter rail, but where is the need? Who is going to actually use it day in and day out, and why would they take rail over driving? Honest questions.

Atticus,

Just to be clear, I agree almost entirely with your points; I am just telling everyone what is possible and what is not, and why. If there was some sort of proper funding and a way to purchase the tracks from the freight rail companies we could do a lot of things, but in the absence of that, we can't.

The relevant studies indicate commuter rail can work, even under the less-than-optimal situation in which it could be implemented. But of course either we'll see, or we won't, as there is no certainty that it will ever be implemented.

[Atticus]

Atticus,

Just to be clear, I agree almost entirely with your points; I am just telling everyone what is possible and what is not, and why. If there was some sort of proper funding and a way to purchase the tracks from the freight rail companies we could do a lot of things, but in the absence of that, we can't.

The relevant studies indicate commuter rail can work, even under the less-than-optimal situation in which it could be implemented. But of course either we'll see, or we won't, as there is no certainty that it will ever be implemented.

Prof Scott-
I appreciate the information, I do. I appreciate and fully understand the reason ideal conditions won't happen. But as my earlier posts suggest, I don't buy the argument that commuter rail can still work with the less than ideal conditions. Truthfully, I am still skeptical commuter work could work in Detroit even if ideal conditions were possible.

If the earlier studies suggest that it could still work, then these studies must have identified what groups of people would still use it. I am curious who these people would be. In almost any scenario I can think of, driving from Ann Arbor to a cheap Olympia lot and walking a half mile to work in Gilbertown is at least 30 minutes shorter time wise than commuter rail from a house in Ann Arbor would be. Thus if a person is making that same trip on a daily basis, is someone really going to give up 30+ minutes of their day and be stuck on a set train schedule that may or may not align with their work schedule because transit is there? Assuming they can afford to and are able to drive, I don't see who would say yes.

So what social-economic group of people would regularly use a commuter line from a station in downtown Ann Arbor to a station in New Center? And WHY would they use it on a daily basis over driving? And if the answer is low income who can't afford to drive, is Ann Arbor really the place to find these low income people? Again, I am really curious what type of people the study believes that the proposed passengers would be. I am not trying to call anyone out, but if these studies exist, they just seem flawed.

Sorry to keep ranting on this, but I feel like the commuter line is a Hallmark of the RTA proposal... and I can't figure out why. Its almost as if "Oh, we had a bad idea 10 years ago... but because this bad idea was in the plan we have to build it, even if we know now it was a bad idea."

[detroitbob]

I think parking downtown is pretty cheap and easy. You don't have to pay a cent if you're willing to walk. And the Hudsons garage, which couldn't be more central, is still pretty cheap.

The Hudson garage is now history as construction has commenced on the block. That is going to tighten thing up. DG bought the Buhl Bldg and Garage so that covers his need to shift people from one lot to the available Buhl garage. Parking is cheaper than Chicago's LOOP but not by a lot in the core CBD.

[Atticus]

The Hudson garage is now history as construction has commenced on the block. That is going to tighten thing up. DG bought the Buhl Bldg and Garage so that covers his need to shift people from one lot to the available Buhl garage. Parking is cheaper than Chicago's LOOP but not by a lot in the core CBD.

I agree, and as more of Gilbert’s developments come online parking will be in even shorter supply south of Grand Circus Park.

That being said, Olympia owns a whole sea of parking north of Grand Circus, which truly isn’t that far of a walk away. And I don’t doubt for a second that if CBD parking supply went down and prices went up, people would start using the Olympia lots more for daytime work use, as Olympia would have no problem taking the money.

It just means there will still be plenty of supply for parking. And simple economics dictate that if supply is high, prices will stay down.

[Bham1982]

The Hudson garage is now history as construction has commenced on the block. That is going to tighten thing up.

They are permanently closing the Hudsons garage? What was the point of building it? It's like 15 years old, max. Around 1,000 spaces.

I thought the garage was supposed to stay provided the site is ever developed. Given the site proposal don't even have financing yet, seems bizarre to shut the garage. And, if something is built, the garage should still be there.

Also, it's a city-owned garage. Are there any adults in charge downtown anymore, or has the whole city been given away to Gilbert and Illitch?

[dtowncitylover]

They are permanently closing the Hudsons garage? What was the point of building it? It's like 15 years old, max. Around 1,000 spaces.

I thought the garage was supposed to stay provided the site is ever developed. Given the site proposal don't even have financing yet, seems bizarre to shut the garage. And, if something is built, the garage should still be there.

Also, it's a city-owned garage. Are there any adults in charge downtown anymore, or has the whole city been given away to Gilbert and Illitch?

Do you read the news at all? Or go downtown? The garage was sold to Gilbert. And site development has already started.

And yes, a new underground parking structure will be built.

[drjeff]

On a good day the current RTA plan for CR will get ~1000 riders per day. Sure, it’s great if you want go from Eastern to Wayne State every day, but for any downtown commuters it’s a hassle to get on a streetcars that might get delayed, not to mention they have to drive to a station 10 miles from their house every day. Not to mention that past Dearborn, the population density drops until Ypsilanti and nobody is getting on/off there.

I live in Ypsi and work in midtown. I'm not the only one. Do you realize how freaking far it is between Dearborn and Ann Arbor? Without the Ypsi station you would be eliminating a huge number of potential users who don't want to drive 15+ miles out of the way to take a train. Not to mention, nobody in their right mind would battle Ann Arbor traffic every morning [[which is usually more congested between US 23 and State Street than anything I normally see commuting to Detroit) to get on a train.

[Honky Tonk]

I live in Ypsi and work in midtown. I'm not the only one. Do you realize how freaking far it is between Dearborn and Ann Arbor? Without the Ypsi station you would be eliminating a huge number of potential users who don't want to drive 15+ miles out of the way to take a train. Not to mention, nobody in their right mind would battle Ann Arbor traffic every morning [[which is usually more congested between US 23 and State Street than anything I normally see commuting to Detroit) to get on a train.

I'm not trying to be a smart-ass here, but there are no commuter trains from the Baltimore Ave. station to A2 or Ypsi?

[ndavies]

I'm not trying to be a smart-ass here, but there are no commuter trains from the Baltimore Ave. station to A2 or Ypsi?

There are currently no commuter trains in southeast Michigan. The only trains in southeast MI are Amtrak, the Qline and the people mover. The handful of daily Amtrak trains are the only service between Midtown and A2. They are definitely not commuter class. They are the trains that run to Chicago and back.

[dtowncitylover]

I agree, and as more of Gilbert’s developments come online parking will be in even shorter supply south of Grand Circus Park.

That being said, Olympia owns a whole sea of parking north of Grand Circus, which truly isn’t that far of a walk away. And I don’t doubt for a second that if CBD parking supply went down and prices went up, people would start using the Olympia lots more for daytime work use, as Olympia would have no problem taking the money.

It just means there will still be plenty of supply for parking. And simple economics dictate that if supply is high, prices will stay down.

Why are you betting that everyone can and will park in those lots? There's not an unlimited supply of parking there and the rise of downtown and employees along the Woodward corridor from the Boulevard on down would also mean the increase in commuters and right now, yes cars.

But right now, some of us are simply talking in the NOW. Right NOW it doesn't make sense for "non-poor people" to take transit because the overwhelmingly majority of Metro Detroit's working and middle class have cars. Agreed. But as the city center is developing, businesses and corporations want to see diverse transportation options. Conventioneers shouldn't have to drive everywhere. Visitors/tourists shouldn't have to drive everywhere. More workers will be downtown. Freeways and roads will start to be more congested [[and roads will have more wear). And if we start to curb the supply of parking lots and stand alone garages in the downtown/midtown core, which are antithetical to any urban life, transit, and not just buses but rail too, must be implemented.

[Honky Tonk]

There are currently no commuter trains in southeast Michigan. The only trains in southeast MI are Amtrak, the Qline and the people mover. The handful of daily Amtrak trains are the only service between Midtown and A2. They are definitely not commuter class. They are the trains that run to Chicago and back.

Ok, Thanx. Years ago, I remember taking Amtrack from the old Dearborn station to downtown A2. Seems like it would be a good opportunity for them.