Light Rail Funding Hits Possible Snag

[Brainiac]

thanks for the link to the empty shopping mall in China for why you are oppossed to light rail in Detroit.

this youtube video of a house's architecture in Argentina sums up why I am for the light rail in Detroit.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYaG9V9hLhE

The point was to open minds to the possibility of failure by presenting an extreme.

The LR advocates don't seem to care about articles like this:

http://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=311

[ghettopalmetto]

The point was to open minds to the possibility of failure by presenting an extreme.

The LR advocates don't seem to care about articles like this:

http://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=311

You mean an "article" written by a partisan, biased hack who considers these "experts" among his allies?

Faithful Allies

• American Dream Coalition
• California Chaparral Institute
• Cato Institute
• Debunking Portland
• Demographia
• EcoWorld
• Metropolis on a Hill
• Prepare-Stay-Defend
• Public Purpose
• Reason Foundation
• Save Portland
• Seconds Count
• The Mighty Wizard

[Brainiac]

Stop being so chickenshit.

I appologize if you took my comments as a personal attack.

To recap, I was trying to persuade that

Spending priorities are out of order.
I've not seen proper justification for Light Rail demand.
Powerful people on a mission to build at all costs pose a great risk.

[Bearinabox]

Is it at all possible that those in power will build such a system irrespective of demand?

No. The people in power in this state are more anti-transit than you are.

The articles, while interesting, still don't present data on need. They were created by the ones wanting to build the system, not exactly the most objective data. And they're full of blatent bias. Look at this one line:

"Current projections for population and employment in the Southeast Michigan Region show that the region will grow substantially through 2030"


What nonsense. Detroit is in steep decline and is showing no signs to the contrary.

The projections are from SEMCOG, not DDOT. SEMCOG is not biased in favor of this project.

The People Mover wasn't justified based on need, and it isn't in the right place or go where people need it to go.

Right. The People Mover, like the rest of our current public transportation network, is inadequate and ineffective. This is why we need to improve it.

A couple full bus anequdotes do not justify a multi-million dollar construction project with millions of cost overruns and millions of ongoing maintenance commitments.

This is why they did a study instead of just rushing ahead and building it. They studied a variety of modes and a variety of potential corridors, and arrived at the conclusion [[based partly on public input) that a light rail line down Woodward was the best way to go. If you read the stuff I linked, you already know this.

I expect public busses be full. A full bus is not equal to light rail demand.

It isn't just that they're full. The schedule gets all out of whack because you can't efficiently serve a corridor like Woodward using only buses. The trip downtown from the Fairgrounds takes a lot longer than it should, and the buses have a hard time staying on schedule and staying evenly-spaced instead of bunching.

The reports show no analysis of alternatives.

Then you didn't read them.

It askes potential riders to give up the bus,

Not true.

give up their car,

Not true.

conform to the locations of the train stations,

Huh? This is how transportation works. Right now you have to "conform" to the locations of the bus stops. If you drive down I-75, you have to "conform" to the locations of freeway exits and parking lots. That argument makes no sense whatsoever.

conform to the schedule of the train and go only where the train will take you.

Well, if people like you don't keep standing in the way, maybe someday we will have trains that go everywhere you want to go as often as you want to go there. It works pretty well in other cities.

I see no mention of public opinion research.

There is a lot of material there, and I don't expect you to have waded through all of it, but just because you didn't see something doesn't mean it isn't there. I know for a fact they solicited public input at every stage of the process, and as far as I know they're continuing to do so. You could even shoot them an email and tell them how much their project sucks!

But boy look at all the detail when it comes to how the system will be built and how the money will be spent.

This is important when you're applying for federal funds.

Meanwhile, I'd rather see light rail dollars go toward reducing crime and improving education.

For the hundredth time: It. Does. Not. Work. Like. That. I explained to you over and over and over that this money CANNOT be used to reduce crime or improve education or ANYTHING apart from building light rail on Woodward. For some reason, you chose to twist that into something about "if it's free money, we have to build it" and thus dismiss it. This is what I mean by having no interest in a rational debate.

[Brainiac]

You mean an "article" written by a partisan, biased hack who considers these "experts" among his allies?

Faithful Allies

• American Dream Coalition
• California Chaparral Institute
• Cato Institute
• Debunking Portland
• Demographia
• EcoWorld
• Metropolis on a Hill
• Prepare-Stay-Defend
• Public Purpose
• Reason Foundation
• Save Portland
• Seconds Count
• The Mighty Wizard

I will admit I'm no LR expert. I do know Seattle's mess very well, but that's about it.

I generally oppose LR because of spending priorities. Detroit has bigger fish to fry.

But let me ask you then. Did the Dallas project go over budget or not? What's the financial health of Dallas, before and after the project? When will they recover their investment?

I mean this sincerely, to understand. Do you have references to better facts than the hack?

What's the story with the alleged high number of LR-related accidents in Houston?

[Brainiac]

For the hundredth time: It. Does. Not. Work. Like. That. I explained to you over and over and over that this money CANNOT be used to reduce crime or improve education or ANYTHING apart from building light rail on Woodward. For some reason, you chose to twist that into something about "if it's free money, we have to build it" and thus dismiss it. This is what I mean by having no interest in a rational debate.

I'm rather amused that I continue to respond as I am clearly contrary to the group. I will agree with you that public money streams have unfortunate constraints.

That said, if it doesn't work like it should, let's identify how to address that problem - so that money can be put toward the best use.

But something tells me that light rail dollars will come from the same source that other services come from. I am not convinced that light rail construction and ongoing maintenance is fully isolated and won't force us to spend critical and sparse local dollars.

[Brainiac]

You could even shoot them an email and tell them how much their project sucks!

I think I would describe it more as deficient. The very first thing in their report should be a detailed justification with hard data of demonstrated demand. NOT hard data arguing for potential demand based on population statistics.

It is not my goal to help the Light Rail project go forward. If we have dollars for LR, I would love to figure out how to redirect them toward the more important needs.

[ghettopalmetto]

First, you have to understand who Randal O'Toole is, the author of your carefully-selected "article". The guy is a professional shill for the petroleum and rubber-tired industries. He would like you to think he conducts objective and impartial "research", when in fact, he has pursued an aggressive anti-rail, anti-New Urbanist agenda.

The following is from the website of Dallas Area Rapid Transit. If you want to be concerned about money, be VERY concerned about the billions of dollars in development that Detroit isn't seeing because its transportation system would embarrass a Third World city.

http://www.dart.org/about/economicimpact.asp

DART ECONOMIC IMPACT


July 24, 2009
DART Rail expansion arriving with billions on board

The 45-mile Green, Orange and Blue Line DART Rail expansion is projected to generate more than $4 billion in economic activity between 2009 and 2014, according to a new study by economists at the University of North Texas. Including prior Green Line expenditures, the total economic activity is more than $5.6 billion.

The study, conducted for DART by Drs. Terry Clower and Bernard Weinstein of the UNT Center for Economic Development and Research, also determined the expansion will create 32,095 job-years of employment [or - an average of 6,400 jobs each year for the next five years]. Separately, ongoing operations of the multimodal transit agency will generate $663 million in annual economic activity and more than 5,300 jobs.

To address your point regarding Houston, they experienced a series of automobile crashes during the first year of operation of their light rail line, due to drivers not obeying the signaling and signage installed as part of the light rail system.

[dtowncitylover]

I think I would describe it more as deficient. The very first thing in their report should be a detailed justification with hard data of demonstrated demand. NOT hard data arguing for potential demand based on population statistics.

It is not my goal to help the Light Rail project go forward. If we have dollars for LR, I would love to figure out how to redirect them toward the more important needs.

It sounds like someone hasn't done all his research. There is already public demand for a light rail system down Woodward, there doesn't need to be a study. Ask anyone living along the Woodward corridor from Pontiac to Detroit and most would agree that there should be some sort of transportation other than a bus, i.e. LR or subway [[who likes paying $10-20 for downtown parking?). There are not more important needs in Detroit than education, crime, and PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION. Throwing money towards education and crime doesn't solve their problems, however "wasting" money towards studies to bring LR and "wasting" money to build it does. It brings in a whole lot more money than it does to build it. Yes, in the larger spectrum of things, education and crime are alot more important, but Detroit is decades behind her sister American cities on public transportation and it's time that we start "wasting" some money.

[hudkina]

Brainiac, how can you not see the demand for LRT on the Woodward corridor? And while the money could probably be used to slightly reduce crime or slightly improve schools, how does that help in the long run? Do you really think the money would be better served as a temporary band-aid for the city's social ills?

At least LRT is an investment for the future. It's a fact that building LRT, streetcars, subways, BRT and other forms of "advanced" transit systems has a positive effect on the areas they serve. They bring billions of dollars in private investments to the surrounding neighborhoods and millions of dollars in extra tax revenue for city coffers.

[bailey]

It sounds like someone hasn't done all his research. There is already public demand for a light rail system down Woodward, there doesn't need to be a study. Ask anyone living along the Woodward corridor from Pontiac to Detroit and most would agree that there should be some sort of transportation other than a bus, i.e. LR or subway [[who likes paying $10-20 for downtown parking?).

But the hitch in all that logic is no plan is talking about the "woodward corridor" as a whole. even the most grandiose of the plans that have any chance of reality [[ps. shouldnt they be laying track already?) do not leave the city limits of detroit. SO, not gonna save anyone new any parking fee that isnt already served by bus or expand serrvice in ANY way. So, what is the point? Leg One goes from Downtown to New Center [[someday) ...then, at some undefined and unknown future time, it MIGHT be expanded to go WAAAAY out to 8 mile. Are they even going to TRY and have a transfer to the people mover? I would put my money on "no" as the Detroit way would be to make them as difficult to interact with as possible. But yeah, stand back and just wait for the billions in investment to roll in woo hoo...we gonna be RICH! It'll be a solid street wall from GCP to Grand Blvd again!

At least LRT is an investment for the future. It's a fact that building LRT, streetcars, subways, BRT and other forms of "advanced" transit systems has a positive effect on the areas they serve. They bring billions of dollars in private investments to the surrounding neighborhoods and millions of dollars in extra tax revenue for city coffers.

LRT is an investment alright, so was the people mover. As proposed LRT is just it's another blown opportunity to do something right. you've just sunk billions into a sytem that serves no new riders as it is simply replacing buses along a minute portion of the Woodward corridor. You're not getting anyone out of their cars, you're not making the transport system any stronger....well I suppose you could move the few buses that will be replaces to other lines, none of those that rely on public transport will be going anywhere any easier. What is proposed is just another half measure joke of system that will cost 3x what it should, put the people mover to shame in its $/mile operating costs because the end result will be a primary use as a parking shuttle for suburbanites on game days and autoshow time.

The following is from the website of Dallas Area Rapid Transit. If you want to be concerned about money, be VERY concerned about the billions of dollars in development that Detroit isn't seeing because its transportation system would embarrass a Third World city.

You just compared detroit's 3.5 mile [[maybe...someday) loop with Dallas' FORTY FIVE mile expansion of it's already pretty darn big system? You;re right Detroit and SeM ARE missing out. But this pissant little choo choo isn't going fix the problem.

[ghettopalmetto]

You just compared detroit's 3.5 mile [[maybe...someday) loop with Dallas' FORTY FIVE mile expansion of it's already pretty darn big system? You;re right Detroit and SeM ARE missing out. But this pissant little choo choo isn't going fix the problem.

You have to start somewhere.

[bailey]

You have to start somewhere.

We "started" with the people mover. how'd that work out?

Dallas started it's plans at 170 miles? eventually getting support and money for about 100 miles of rail. As you note--its starting on the 45 miles that will complete that. Detroit-- 3 miles.

[ghettopalmetto]

We "started" with the people mover. how'd that work out?

Dallas started it's plans at 170 miles? eventually getting support and money for 100 miles of rail. Detroit-- 3 miles.

There are schematic plans for regional rapid transit in Detroit. They're on the SEMCOG website [[4 MB file): http://www.semcog.org/uploadedFiles/...%2021%2008.pdf

Don't make the mistake that the Woodward Light Rail line is being planned in isolation.

[bailey]

There are schematic plans for regional rapid transit in Detroit. They're on the SEMCOG website [[4 MB file): http://www.semcog.org/uploadedFiles/...%2021%2008.pdf

Don't make the mistake that the Woodward Light Rail line is being planned in isolation.

It may not be planed in isolation, but don't make the mistake that it isnt going to be the result. The only "redline" on that proposal during the next 25 years is woodward. Oh yea... and some commuter rail that isnt even being talked about yet...but will magically be up and running in 2013.

I've seen that plan. Pretty similar to the one that came out a few years before that...and the one around 2001/02. So , this 'new' plan for 2026-2035 completion is how far along exactly? Oh yeah, still waiting on that public/private 3ish mile track to start[[which, per the plan, is to be up and running in '12)

Even on that plan, Woodward is the only definitive LRT line [[which is what the thread is about right?) . the others are LRT/BRT... and we all know that means whatever turns out to be cheaper. slapping some caterpillar buses together, having fewer stops and timing the lights---will always be cheaper.

So, even by THAT plan ...in SIXTEEN YEARS [[ or 16 years from whenever it actually get's started?) we MIGHT have LRT that goes from downtown to 12 mile road. Stand up and Tell them you're from DEEEETroit!

Since Dallas is the city you want to compare detroit to... Dallas opened 20 miles of track in 96...breaking ground in what? 90? They are closing in on their 100 miles of track by the 20-teens. Where will detroit's woodward line be 20 years after it breaks ground? Ferndale?

[professorscott]

Couple things. First, to the posters who think we need a study: Pick one; there have been dozens of studies over the last 90 years. All of them reach the conclusion that metro Detroit needs a real transit system; no government in all that time has chosen to do anything with the information except to sit on it and let it gather dust.

Second thing: For my friends who favor improving conditions in the Detroit area, and who believe [[as I do) that a real transit system is a fundamental component of any real fix, I must say it is impossible to convince the naysayers. You will always have people out there who will come up with any excuse why we don't have to, or ought not to, build a real transit system: nobody will use it; you are forcing people to abandon their cars at the side of the road; transit causes the H1N1 virus and AIDS; whatever.

I forget who said this, but it's relevant: if you set out to hit a dog, it's very easy to find a stick.

[bailey]

Couple things. First, to the posters who think we need a study: Pick one; there have been dozens of studies over the last 90 years. All of them reach the conclusion that metro Detroit needs a real transit system; no government in all that time has chosen to do anything with the information except to sit on it and let it gather dust.

Second thing: For my friends who favor improving conditions in the Detroit area, and who believe [[as I do) that a real transit system is a fundamental component of any real fix, I must say it is impossible to convince the naysayers. You will always have people out there who will come up with any excuse why we don't have to, or ought not to, build a real transit system: nobody will use it; you are forcing people to abandon their cars at the side of the road; transit causes the H1N1 virus and AIDS; whatever.

I forget who said this, but it's relevant: if you set out to hit a dog, it's very easy to find a stick.

My only complaint is that what is being proposed is not a "real" transit system. It's a novelty train and newer buses. And surely what is proposed should not take 30 years to implement.

I guess my point is that it is ridiculous that our 30 year 'grand plan' is little more than what most cities would call a foundational requirement.

[ghettopalmetto]

My only complaint is that what is being proposed is not a "real" transit system. It's a novelty train and newer buses. And surely what is proposed should not take 30 years to implement.

It seems like your complaint is that the proposed network is not ambitious enough--and therefore should be scrapped in its entirety.

Unfortunately, I think a region-wide system *will* take 30 years or so to implement, but it will pay off in the long run. The Washington Metro took about 30 years to construct, and started with a single 5-station, 4-1/2 mile line. The system now carries 750,000 people per day.

In my opinion, many of those lines that SEMCOG has designated as "BRT" are going to become LRT or Commuter Rail in due time. As it stands, SEMCOG just isn't familiar with rail transit, so they shy away from it in favor of what they do know, which is rubber-tired transportation. Once they start conducting ridership analyses between different modes and the necessary public meetings, they'll find that rail will be a much preferred alternative. It will help once the Woodward Line is constructed, so they can see how it operates and how ridership increases over the DDOT 53 bus.

As I understood, the Ann Arbor-Detroit commuter rail line was awaiting federal funding to construct a "demonstration" project. I'm not sure whatever happened to this. You may want to contact your elected officials in DC.

Thirty years is a long time to construct a regional transit system, but I think it's better to plan well and proceed slowly at first, rather than rush into a series of bad--and permanent--ideas like the People Mover.

[iheartthed]

Couple things. First, to the posters who think we need a study: Pick one; there have been dozens of studies over the last 90 years. All of them reach the conclusion that metro Detroit needs a real transit system; no government in all that time has chosen to do anything with the information except to sit on it and let it gather dust.

Second thing: For my friends who favor improving conditions in the Detroit area, and who believe [[as I do) that a real transit system is a fundamental component of any real fix, I must say it is impossible to convince the naysayers. You will always have people out there who will come up with any excuse why we don't have to, or ought not to, build a real transit system: nobody will use it; you are forcing people to abandon their cars at the side of the road; transit causes the H1N1 virus and AIDS; whatever.

I forget who said this, but it's relevant: if you set out to hit a dog, it's very easy to find a stick.

True story.

[Tig3rzhark]

The Secretary of Transportation made it clear that we as a region need to come together in order for true public transportation to happen around here.

Now I must look to my own city as an obstacle. After the service cuts in public transportation, thanks to Mayor Dave Bing, it seems that things are looking bleak.

It is clear that Detroit alone cannot provide the needs of public transportation. DDOT continues to rely on the city's general fund, which is completely in the red.

Someone would think that Bing would be happy with the formation of a regional authority to decrease the amount of money it takes from the general fund.

However, according to this:
Detroit Mayor Dave Bing was interviewed by the Free Press and had some interesting things to say about transit:

Q: Negotiations between Detroit and Wayne, Oakland and Macomb counties on a Regional Transit Authority have reportedly been bumpy. Will the Big Four be able to resolve their differences this year?

A: We are on board. There has been some push back, yes. A lot of that has to do with trust, which historically has been a problem. You have to trust the people at the table. I think, with the relationships and credibility I bring to the table, there should be less mistrust. But we have to be careful. The city subsidizes its transit system to the tune of $80 million a year. We have the largest ridership. We want to make sure we're not going to be disadvantaged.

Q: How so?

A: We want to make sure that the federal funds we get will continue to come our way, even under the new authority. As you know, now there's a 65-35 split [[of federal funds to the city and suburban bus systems). Going forward, we want to make sure we still get our 65% share of federal funding. We're close enough that I feel we're going to come to an agreement.

Q: Now, there are two separate plans for running light-rail on Woodward, north of New Center. The city's plan would take rail to just south of 8 Mile. The regional plan extends it into Oakland County, all the way to 11 Mile or even 13 Mile. Would the city be willing to fold its plan for light-rail on Woodward into the regional plan?

A: I'm not opposed to that. The question becomes whether Oakland County wants light-rail. I believe, with the Woodward corridor, it makes sense to go into Oakland County. We've just got to get Oakland County to say they are in agreement with that.




It doesn't seem that way. He says he's in agreement, but with the service cuts made in public transportation in September, he doesn't seem very sincere.

There is little news on the status of that legislation on the establishment of a regional transit authority since state rep Bert Johnson mentioned it in Crain's Detroit Business.

This is not good.

[bailey]

It seems like your complaint is that the proposed network is not ambitious enough--and therefore should be scrapped in its entirety.

Well, yes and no. I just think that this 30 year plan should be Phase I and get the damn thing going already.

Unfortunately, I think a region-wide system *will* take 30 years or so to implement, but it will pay off in the long run. The Washington Metro took about 30 years to construct, and started with a single 5-station, 4-1/2 mile line. The system now carries 750,000 people per day.

We're not building anything underground or using anything that inst a current right of way right or multi-lane artery road. Why in the heck should anything currently proposed take anything more than 10 years? IF the proposal was something like the Metro, I'd agree, but we're not proposing anything near that scope or complexity.

In my opinion, many of those lines that SEMCOG has designated as "BRT" are going to become LRT or Commuter Rail in due time. As it stands, SEMCOG just isn't familiar with rail transit, so they shy away from it in favor of what they do know, which is rubber-tired transportation. Once they start conducting ridership analyses between different modes and the necessary public meetings, they'll find that rail will be a much preferred alternative. It will help once the Woodward Line is constructed, so they can see how it operates and how ridership increases over the DDOT 53 bus.

But the problem I see is that Semcog...for the reasons you noted... will initially invest in the BRT and THEN figure out that LRT was the right way to go all along--- but, we've already gone for snazzy new buses so...maybe next century.

As I understood, the Ann Arbor-Detroit commuter rail line was awaiting federal funding to construct a "demonstration" project. I'm not sure whatever happened to this. You may want to contact your elected officials in DC.

Yeah, I'll get Dingle, Levin and Conyers on the line. their combined 100 years in office really shows their dedication to mass transit.

Thirty years is a long time to construct a regional transit system, but I think it's better to plan well and proceed slowly at first, rather than rush into a series of bad--and permanent--ideas like the People Mover

This plan has been on the drawing board since the early nineties in most of its current form. There is slow and steady and then there is stopped. We have one chance to get this right, and half measures are not going to cut it.

[esp1986]

The Secretary of Transportation made it clear that we as a region need to come together in order for true public transportation to happen around here.

Now I must look to my own city as an obstacle. After the service cuts in public transportation, thanks to Mayor Dave Bing, it seems that things are looking bleak.

It is clear that Detroit alone cannot provide the needs of public transportation. DDOT continues to rely on the city's general fund, which is completely in the red.

Someone would think that Bing would be happy with the formation of a regional authority to decrease the amount of money it takes from the general fund.

However, according to this:
Detroit Mayor Dave Bing was interviewed by the Free Press and had some interesting things to say about transit:

Q: Negotiations between Detroit and Wayne, Oakland and Macomb counties on a Regional Transit Authority have reportedly been bumpy. Will the Big Four be able to resolve their differences this year?

A: We are on board. There has been some push back, yes. A lot of that has to do with trust, which historically has been a problem. You have to trust the people at the table. I think, with the relationships and credibility I bring to the table, there should be less mistrust. But we have to be careful. The city subsidizes its transit system to the tune of $80 million a year. We have the largest ridership. We want to make sure we're not going to be disadvantaged.

Q: How so?

A: We want to make sure that the federal funds we get will continue to come our way, even under the new authority. As you know, now there's a 65-35 split [[of federal funds to the city and suburban bus systems). Going forward, we want to make sure we still get our 65% share of federal funding. We're close enough that I feel we're going to come to an agreement.

Q: Now, there are two separate plans for running light-rail on Woodward, north of New Center. The city's plan would take rail to just south of 8 Mile. The regional plan extends it into Oakland County, all the way to 11 Mile or even 13 Mile. Would the city be willing to fold its plan for light-rail on Woodward into the regional plan?

A: I'm not opposed to that. The question becomes whether Oakland County wants light-rail. I believe, with the Woodward corridor, it makes sense to go into Oakland County. We've just got to get Oakland County to say they are in agreement with that.




It doesn't seem that way. He says he's in agreement, but with the service cuts made in public transportation in September, he doesn't seem very sincere.

There is little news on the status of that legislation on the establishment of a regional transit authority since state rep Bert Johnson mentioned it in Crain's Detroit Business.

This is not good.

With a regionalized plan, and more federal funding, these cuts won't be necessary... the larger the system gets, the more ridership, and with a regional authority, likely overseeing both bus systems, there would be a lot of waste cut out between the two, provided they are working together... the cuts in Detroit will have little impact of the regional plan down the road, just in the city now.

[Tig3rzhark]

With a regionalized plan, and more federal funding, these cuts won't be necessary... the larger the system gets, the more ridership, and with a regional authority, likely overseeing both bus systems, there would be a lot of waste cut out between the two, provided they are working together... the cuts in Detroit will have little impact of the regional plan down the road, just in the city now.

I'm a realist, and after living in Detroit all my life, regional cooperation hasn't been very promising around here.

Until I hear L. Brooks Patterson change the way he is on regional transportation or leave his office. Until I see bike racks on all DDOT buses. Until I hear that a regional transit authority has been established to handle all mass transit needs of SE Michigan, I'll have little reason to be optimistic.

[esp1986]

Sorry to be contrary, but there are so many things to improve, ... a TRAIN??

This is what happens when government spends money. There is no requirement of broad, voluntarily demonstration of need. All that's needed is for some politicians to make it their pet project. And it ends up being a burden and continued political mess.

If Detroit needed light rail, there should be signs such as never-ending traffic nightmeres, like LA or Seattle. I-94 barely has a rush hour in its most dense area.

Part of the reason, not a big part, of why there is nothing downtown these days, relative to the 50s, is the fact that there is no mass transit. In the 60s, almost every major city was at least thinking of implementing a system, but everytime it was brought up in Detroit, it was shot down, a couple of times by the automakers. There is little question as to whether the regions needs a mass transit system. The question instead is could it ever be built. It is no coincidence that people continue to leave the area.

Younger people want to live in the cities and with no viable transit system, no buses are not really an alternative to young people, people continue to leave the area. If there was a transit system, people could more easily get to and from the city, as not many people want to drive an hour to and from work downtown everyday.

Detroit has needed mass transit for a long time now, and just because you don't see it downtown everyday, doesn't mean there isn't a need for it.

[dtowncitylover]

Does anyone around here read? Back in January Brooks, Ficano, Cockrel, and the Macomb County rep all signed an accord to establish a Regional Transportation Authority. While it was originally supposed to happen, like most things around here, back in June, they plan to have it by the 4th quarter next year. After 40 years of dis-harmony between the city and suburbs, THESE THINGS WILL TAKE ALOT OF TIME!!!!

A poster recently told us that SEMCOG has BOUGHT the locomotives and passenger cars for the commuter rail between Detroit-Ann Arbor. They plan to do demonstrations by the end of next year. Negotiations between Norfolk and CN are coming along, but we have to remember that commercial comes before passenger, unfortunately.

Dallas' system grew so quickly because they had the money!! We don't have the money, NOW, for what they had. When we build the LRT between downtown and 8 Mile, then yes, we will most definitely have the money to expand.