Q Line "Constructive Criticism"

[emu steve]

And a quick pivot to HQ2, I think we can see how Detroit was NOT a good candidate for HQ2 which wants a good mass transit system and how Detroit is not a good candidate to have at least light rail [[or heavier).

One could run a light or heavy rail system down Woodward from 8 mile to the river and the ridership activity from [[inside) 8 mile to New Center would be minimal.

The only way it would work if they built parking garages say at the fair grounds site and folks from OC drove there and dropped off their vehicles and railed to downtown.

Some time I might look at Seattle and maybe a few other similar cities [[ignoring the northeast cities which have had heavy rail for many, many years or decades) any see what kind of ridership numbers they put up.

As discussed many times, there is potential for QLine down E. Jefferson and up Michigan Ave [[assuming everything there happens in Corktown) but those areas, like Midtown and New Center are extensions of downtown.

[Canadian Visitor]

There are many fair criticisms for Q Line. They range from design to service level to extent/size of system.

What is not fair the idea that [[gasp) the system does not recover costs.

Putting aside that public transit never does in the U.S. [[or even Canada with only Toronto's GO Transit commuter rail coming close, recovering about 90% of its operating cost via the fare box). Toronto's TTC [[subway/bus/streetcar) recovers around 70%, everything else, everywhere else considerably less.

Let's not just lay this on public transit. The roads and highways don't cover their costs either. Even toll roads or bridges rarely do, at most they recover 'direct' costs without considering things like accident response by emergency services, costs related to pollution/health or incidental traffic to local roads. Regardless the bulk of the road/highway network in North America is toll free. To ask transit to out compete free is a bit much.

Private developers/stores also subsidize cars whenever they offer free parking or parking which isn't sold at a cost plus normal mark-up.

Consider what highway travel would cost if it were privately owned, for profit, like Toronto's Highway 407.

https://www.407etr.com/en/tolls/rate...-complete.html

In rush hour w/no transponder, about $9 one-way.

That's without paying for parking.

A reasonable ask for Q Line, as is, in year one is about 20% revenue recovery, which is not far off what's happening.

With more frequent and reliable service and expanded hours, 30-40% is realistic.

More than that will not only require a larger network, and better service from other public transit providers, it will require higher parking and driving costs.

Back to the Toronto comparison, dense downtown, extensive frequent service, downtown parking averaging over $25 per day, lots of traffic and gas at $1.30 per litre [[closing in on $5 per gallon) and still the TTC recovers only 70% of its costs through the fare box; and that doesn't include major cap-x.

Keep the critiques fair.

[MicrosoftFan]

Metro Detroit's population density is fair enough to support LRT. Dallas currently has a system with 5 lines, 2 streetcars, and a commuter rail that span over 150 miles in total-and with less density than Metro Detroit. In addition, Dallas isn't exactly known for having a centralized employment center. Office parks span the suburbs and have more jobs than Downtown, just like Detroit.

Now, Dallas' system also has an abysmal riders-per-mile, but that's not the point. The point is that you don't necessarily need a dense metro area to support light rail. Sure, you do need to have some dense areas, usually destination spots [[downtown), but the point of origin can be at a park-and-ride in the suburbs.

It's time to catch up to the rest of America, even cities that are our peers in density and development [[St. Louis, Cleveland, Minneapolis).

[detmsp]

Dallas currently has a system with 5 lines, 2 streetcars, and a commuter rail that span over 150 miles in total-and with less density than Metro Detroit. In addition, Dallas isn't exactly known for having a centralized employment center. Office parks span the suburbs and have more jobs than Downtown, just like Detroit.

Now, Dallas' system also has an abysmal riders-per-mile, but that's not the point. The point is that you don't necessarily need a dense metro area to support light rail.

What? I know nothing about Dallas's lightrail lines, but what I'm hearing from you is "Dallas has one with similar density. It doesn't get much use, but the fact that they have it proves that it was a good decision."

You could similarly look at someone who is fairly poor, but blows their money on a fancy car and say "see? You don't need to have money for it to be a good decision to lease an Escalade"

[MicrosoftFan]

What? I know nothing about Dallas's lightrail lines, but what I'm hearing from you is "Dallas has one with similar density. It doesn't get much use, but the fact that they have it proves that it was a good decision."

It is actually utilized fairly well, with around 90,000 riders per day and increasing to 100,000. However, for a system of its size [[~90 miles) it should be getting 200-250k a day. In Detroit, we could expect a system of this size to get around 175k, as the areas our lines would serve would be more dense than Metro Dallas.

Not that a 90 mile LRT system is coming to Detroit anytime soon.

[Bham1982]

What? I know nothing about Dallas's lightrail lines, but what I'm hearing from you is "Dallas has one with similar density. It doesn't get much use, but the fact that they have it proves that it was a good decision."

You could similarly look at someone who is fairly poor, but blows their money on a fancy car and say "see? You don't need to have money for it to be a good decision to lease an Escalade"

I was thinking the same. Dallas is Exhibit A in light rail failures. They spent megabillions, have one of the largest systems in North America, and ridership is pathetic and lower than when they just had buses [[and when Dallas metro population was less than it is today).

[Junjie]

I was thinking the same. Dallas is Exhibit A in light rail failures. They spent megabillions, have one of the largest systems in North America, and ridership is pathetic and lower than when they just had buses [[and when Dallas metro population was less than it is today).

The mindset that cities should [[or even can) build transit which will instantly generate huge ridership really has it backwards. In places that did not grow up around transit and haven't maintained transit-friendly density and land use [[e.g. everywhere except the east coast and Chicago), high-quality transit will only pay off on decades-long timespans. It is literally impossible for the Dallas suburbs - or the Detroit metro area - to generate high transit ridership, even if you were able to build 150 miles of subway overnight and run the trains every 2 minutes. The land use patterns, commuting patterns, and behavioral patterns take a long time to shift.

When I-75 opened in 1970, it carried half the traffic in Oakland County that it carries today. But we've spent the last 45 years orienting around the freeways, and now traffic on it has doubled despite no growth in the regional population. People spent those 45 years making different decisions about where to live, where to locate a business, where to work, and where to shop based on the existence of the freeway. The oldest line in the Dallas system was finished in 2002 and the newest only opened in 2012. Its "pathetic" ridership [[100,000+ daily) is already greater than the entire ridership of the DDOT bus system. Check back in 2047 if you want to evaluate its success on a comparable time scale.

The QLine cannot and will not generate high ridership as built, because it is slow, infrequent, and serves a tiny area with a small total population. It's really too bad that it was built on the curb, and the service level needs to be improved - trains every 10 minutes, reliably. But as people continue to move into downtown, Brush Park, midtown, and New Center, ridership will grow. As new buildings are built specifically to take advantage of locations near stops, ridership will grow. And in my view center-running extensions and additional lines would still be worthy investment, if the goal is to re-develop a transit oriented city core over the next 25-50 years.

[emu steve]

I read all the comments and have this question:

Would you favor or not favor a light rail [[or heavy, though, very unlikely) with its terminus at the fair grounds and downtown running along Woodward?

What this would do, in my opinion, is mostly serve OC residents who work [[or attend sporting events) downtown.

How would residents of the city of Detroit feel about it?

Would enough Detroiters get on at 7 mile, 6 mile, etc. and take it to their destination in New Center, Midtown or downtown???

[MicrosoftFan]

I read all the comments and have this question:

Would you favor or not favor a light rail [[or heavy, though, very unlikely) with its terminus at the fair grounds and downtown running along Woodward?

What this would do, in my opinion, is mostly serve OC residents who work [[or attend sporting events) downtown.

How would residents of the city of Detroit feel about it?

Would enough Detroiters get on at 7 mile, 6 mile, etc. and take it to their destination in New Center, Midtown or downtown???

It would have to go further than State Fair. If someone who lives in Troy, Birmingham drives to State Fair, what's stopping them from going the rest of the way in their car to downtown? I think Downtown Royal Oak is a better ending point, + an Amtrak Connection. Possibly to Somerset or Big Beaver/I-75 after that.

[Jason]

The problem with extending it to 8 mile or to anywhere else is that it takes over 20 minutes to get through the current line alone. If it took another half hour to get to 8 mile, and if you wait 10 minutes [[which isn't bad at all for light rail) for the next train, a 15-20 minute car ride has become an hour long light rail ride. I really don't see how it'd be possible to make it competitive with anything else.

There's also the very serious issue that labor costs are most of the operating costs. The current slow speeds and low ridership are happening with pretty frequent trains at peak times. What happens when they reduce frequency or hours in order to save money?


The People Mover is 3 miles and takes 17 minutes to do 13 stations. Replicating the Q-Line route would be about the same length but only 9 stations. Each People Mover station adds about 1 minute directly, and adds more time indirectly by preventing the train from reaching full speed [[60 mph). The current loop is also curved which also slows it down. The People Mover would do the route in 10 minutes or less, which matches normal driving and beats rush hour driving. There are enough People Mover trains for a max frequency of about 4.5 minutes [[2.25 minutes if you unpaired the cars) for an expanded system, at no additional labor cost. People Mover would have been so much faster that forcing Woodward bus passengers to transfer would be faster than letting them finish their trip on the bus. I blab a lot about the People Mover but this was seriously such a massive lost opportunity.

[313WX]

Why would anyone do this when the tracks to run a commuter rail service to the airport and Ann Arbor already exists? All they need to do is build the stations and buy/lease the trains.

I don't know how active the line is, but part of the issue may be that the commuter raik will be competing with freight traffic, depending on how frequently it runs.

And then there's the issue of possible cost overruns. If enough people don't use the line frequently, the ticket prices will have to be extremely expensive in order for it to pay for itself [[depending on the speed).

[iheartthed]

I don't know how active the line is, but part of the issue may be that the commuter raik will be competing with freight traffic, depending on how frequently it runs.

This is something that every commuter rail system in the country has to deal with. Even the Long Island Railroad, which is the busiest commuter rail system in the country, has to share tracks with freight trains.

[emu steve]

BTW, if folks are interested in a new light rail system, 21 stations, 16.2 miles, etc. is over 2.5B.

A heavy rail system with underground stations would be... like super, super expensive. I doubt Austin would go underground.

[[BTW, one of the great things about having underground line/stations is that customer are not outside exposed to the elements.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.199042425357

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purple_Line_[[Maryland)

[Lowell]

The Qline has been such a flawed idea from the start. It's as if no one learned from the People Mover that unless it is connected to or a part of an effective larger system it is doomed to being a long-running massive liability.

Anything less than a Detroit to Pontiac subway should be not be considered.

Meanwhile, a fleet of super-cushioned suspension buses with comfortable seating and things like wi-fi, favored right of way and stop light timing could work for a fraction of the cost.

[EGrant]

Meanwhile, a fleet of super-cushioned suspension buses with comfortable seating and things like wi-fi, favored right of way and stop light timing could work for a fraction of the cost.

Pair that with a real, comprehensive marketing campaign and you have a recipe for success. Busses are cheaper, more flexible and more reliable, but there is a stigma associated with them, especially here. Even using buses in a dedicated lane [[separated by a curb) would be far cheaper than 3 miles of QLine.

[emu steve]

The Qline has been such a flawed idea from the start. It's as if no one learned from the People Mover that unless it is connected to or a part of an effective larger system it is doomed to being a long-running massive liability.

Anything less than a Detroit to Pontiac subway should be not be considered.

Meanwhile, a fleet of super-cushioned suspension buses with comfortable seating and things like wi-fi, favored right of way and stop light timing could work for a fraction of the cost.

Curious what would be the proposed route?

As I suggested above, this concept is used in the D.C. area and the buses are 'express buses', that is, they will pick up passengers at a few stops and then not have any pickup/discharges until near the final destinations.

E.g., does 75 have HOV [[carpool, bus, etc.) lanes? Could buses run on 75 and then exit at 94 and then make stops along Woodward every mile to downtown?

[Lowell]

I say start with a Pontiac to Downtown Detroit Route with stops equivalent to a subway's allowing free transfers to other buses, or the Qline and People Mover, for any distances in between. Mix in an hourly express bus that leap frogs some lesser stops or runs routes expressway routes as you suggest. Research results and adjust. Embark on a bus de-stigmatization marketing campaign.

Curious what would be the proposed route?

As I suggested above, this concept is used in the D.C. area and the buses are 'express buses', that is, they will pick up passengers at a few stops and then not have any pickup/discharges until near the final destinations.

E.g., does 75 have HOV [[carpool, bus, etc.) lanes? Could buses run on 75 and then exit at 94 and then make stops along Woodward every mile to downtown?

[emu steve]

I say start with a Pontiac to Downtown Detroit Route with stops equivalent to a subway's allowing free transfers to other buses, or the Qline and People Mover, for any distances in between. Mix in an hourly express bus that leap frogs some lesser stops or runs routes expressway routes as you suggest. Research results and adjust. Embark on a bus de-stigmatization marketing campaign.

Is your proposed route all Woodward or is it 75 and then exiting and joining Woodward?

In NoVa [[a good case study for this kind of thing), there are multiple bus lines which pick up passengers at the Pentagon subway station and takes the EXPRESS lanes of 395 before becomes essentially a LOCAL bus with stops after exiting the EXPRESS lanes.

My proposal is EXPRESS from OC via 75 to Woodward/94 and then local with stops say every 1/2 mile along Woodward going toward downtown. E.g., 94, Warren, MLK/Mack, Montcalm, etc.

This line would be designed to move passengers [[mostly downtown workers) to and from Oakland Co. as quickly as possible. It would run during 'rush hours' during the work week, etc.

[313WX]

This is something that every commuter rail system in the country has to deal with. Even the Long Island Railroad, which is the busiest commuter rail system in the country, has to share tracks with freight trains.

I'm curious to know how mucb freight traffic travels to/from Long Island versus Detroit [[an industrial / logistics hub).

Here in Atlanta, part of the reason commuter rails have failed to get off the ground [[despite having existing tracks in place) is because CSX and Norfolk Southern have made it clear they don't want to give up any of their capacity.

[Bham1982]

I'm curious to know how mucb freight traffic travels to/from Long Island versus Detroit [[an industrial / logistics hub).

I doubt there's much freight traffic on the LIRR. For one, all the main lines are subway-style third rail, with 24/7 passenger service. For another, there's only one way off LI for freight [[and that's an extremely busy Amtrak-owned bridge). And there's basically no industry or logistics on LI.

If there's freight service, it must be at night or at odd times. I've ridden two of the main lines countless times, and don't ever recall seeing freight service. Oh, and the MTA owns all the lines.

[emu steve]

I want to get back to what I call the MLine [[Michigan Ave.), possible QLine's new sibling.

I posted elsewhere about 1,100 new federal employees who would move to 985 Michigan Ave.

Ford would lead a bunch of commercial activity along Michigan Ave. between Rosa Park and MCS.

When will there be enough demand for a short haul service from downtown to MCS??

Does the MLine attempt to get ahead of it and hope that further commercial activity and housing locate along the line [[forward looking instead of building the transportation line where commercial activity and housing already exist).

[iheartthed]

I want to get back to what I call the MLine [[Michigan Ave.), possible QLine's new sibling.

I posted elsewhere about 1,100 new federal employees who would move to 985 Michigan Ave.

Ford would lead a bunch of commercial activity along Michigan Ave. between Rosa Park and MCS.

When will there be enough demand for a short haul service from downtown to MCS??

Does the MLine attempt to get ahead of it and hope that further commercial activity and housing locate along the line [[forward looking instead of building the transportation line where commercial activity and housing already exist).

Is the "MLine" a development that is actually being considered? Or is this just a thought exercise?

[emu steve]

Is the "MLine" a development that is actually being considered? Or is this just a thought exercise?

Thought exercise.

I [[and others, I guess) are thinking what could happen along Michigan Ave. as thinks start to perk there.

I'm thinking Corktown becomes the new "Midtown."

One think I believe is that in Detroit things radiate from downtown and large scale commercial activity are likely to be along an artery connected to downtown.

I'm not surprised Ford picked Corktown and not somewhere like say Southfield and 8 Mile [[just pulled that out of my head.).

[K-slice]

Is the "MLine" a development that is actually being considered? Or is this just a thought exercise?

Unfortunately, no rail extension was included in the most recent RTA proposal, so at this point I would say "thought exercise" for sure. Ford entering the picture or a possible change in DC back towards grants for these types of things could change that I would think.

IMO, activating MCS is the key to getting civic and business leaders serious about some kind of real transit down Michigan, especially with two big projects already underway [[The Corner and Elton Park).

[EGrant]

The very early results of the QLine are not great, so I suspect the region [[both private and taxpayer funding) has a smaller appetite for these projects at this point.

However, I think there is a difference between connecting a ton of Ford employees to downtown and connecting downtown to Midtown. The MLine seems to fit more of a "need" where the QLine was built in hopes that it would spur more development.