Millionaires fund Detroit light rail project

**innercitydoc** · February-15-10, 08:04 AM

From CNN money: http://money.cnn.com/2010/02/15/smal...rail/index.htm

**DetroitPlanner** · February-15-10, 08:19 AM

"I just don't know how significant the impact would be, because most of our foot traffic drives and wouldn't take mass transit anyway," says Kevin Prihod, CEO of the Detroit Science Center.

Reminds me of my first trip to the science center in the early 1970's. Back then it was down a side street across Woodward from Vernors. How did I get there? Mom took her kids there on the DDOT!

**Russix** · February-15-10, 09:45 AM

Parking is big business in this town. It's nice to see some investment to help this industry grow.

**stasu1213** · February-15-10, 10:24 AM

The residents or Detroit and the citizens of Michigan had been conditioned to jump in a private car to take them where they want to go. People who visits from other parts of the country will utilize the transit system more than residents who are privlege to have and drive their cars

**Detroitnerd** · February-15-10, 10:27 AM

Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner

"I just don't know how significant the impact would be, because most of our foot traffic drives and wouldn't take mass transit anyway," says Kevin Prihod, CEO of the Detroit Science Center.

"Most of our foot traffic drives?" That doesn't even make any sense!

**tkelly1986** · February-15-10, 10:29 AM

Like so many others, I am eager about this project but have a few questions: Is the M1 project at grade or separated in any way from traffic flow? I know there was debate over center lane vs. the M1 configuration, but this seems to be less of a point if M1 is still separated [[thus creating more traditional rapid transit). If it is not, then I question the time-value benefits to this plan over rapid bus transportation.

Second, for those who watched the Blue Print America documentary, there was talk about an overhaul of Woodward that includes LED lights ect…Does that still happen with the M1project or would that wait for the DDOT extension?

**stasu1213** · February-15-10, 10:32 AM

Originally Posted by Detroitnerd

"Most of our foot traffic drives?" That doesn't even make any sense!

I had heard many residents say that they wouldnt get on a mass transit for they have their car to take them where they want to go. Many had said they refuses to wait on a bus when they could just jump in their car and go. Why do you think Detroit and her surrounding suburbs have more strip malls with huge parking lots in front of the stores. Encourage driving. Discourage catching bus

**Russix** · February-15-10, 10:44 AM

Originally Posted by tkelly1986

Like so many others, I am eager about this project but have a few questions: Is the M1 project at grade or separated in any way from traffic flow? I know there was debate over center lane vs. the M1 configuration, but this seems to be less of a point if M1 is still separated [[thus creating more traditional rapid transit). If it is not, then I question the time-value benefits to this plan over rapid bus transportation.
...

According to BShea the plans for this can change at anytime and probably won't be made public until actual construction begins. M1 Rail Inc has publicly announced that they envision a 12-station 3.4 mile system that will connect various destinations/attractions along Woodward running one curb out from the parking lane utilizing a pull-cord system for riders to signal for a stop with some form of traffic signal priority. M1 Rail Inc is putting up the money for the initial construction with the City of Detroit being ultimately responsible for the operational costs.

**PeachLaser** · February-15-10, 10:52 AM

Detroit probably has the manufacturing capacity [[if retooled) to build its own mass transit system. Connect the tracks coming out of the factories to the rail lines. Use it for prototyping products that Detroit can build for the world. Start improving the tracks coming out of Detroit and improve the rail system to connect better with the other rail centers and customer bases for mass transit systems.

This would probably put more people to work in the U.S. than has been seen in a long time.

**tkelly1986** · February-15-10, 10:59 AM

I understand the curbside feature, my question is whether that curbside delivery will have a dedicated right-of-way or can cars technically still drive over the track? This will greatly increase speed if it is dedicated. I understand that at cross streets there will be no dedicated right-of-way [[much like the Boston Green Line), but this does not mean the rest of the track has to be within the roadbed.

**Russix** · February-15-10, 11:15 AM

Although there have been some examples of curbside right of ways [[think Trolley Line along Jefferson Ave) M1 does not interfere with existing curbside parking nor reduces the number of vehicular travel lanes, so no dedicated right of way. The Portland Streetcar has been cited frequently as the model for M1 Rail Inc.: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xL7QEQuRqq0

**mikeg19** · February-15-10, 11:23 AM

I live in Shelby Twp near Stoney Creek Park, and obviously a light rail line will not extend far enough to reach me. But if there was eventually a line that made it up Mound or Van Dyke to say 23 Mile or Hall Road, I would definitely use the train. Why would I waste my gas and put a 50 something mile trip on my car when I could simply take the train? It might not make sense for a person who goes downtown twice a year but I go downtown a half dozen times a month. Plus I go to Lawrence Tech, so if there was a rail line that extended there I would more than certainly use it. I guess the point I'm trying to make is that there are plenty of people who would use the rail line that own cars.

**PeachLaser** · February-15-10, 11:33 AM

I depended upon the BLT #10 tram around Basel, Switzerland a few weeks ago. It is a Siemans-based system that winds its way through the city streets, local villages and countryside. Very dependable and efficient.

Swiss BLT #10 Tram: http://tinyurl.com/yjumjjn

**English** · February-15-10, 12:10 PM

Originally Posted by mikeg19

I live in Shelby Twp near Stoney Creek Park, and obviously a light rail line will not extend far enough to reach me. But if there was eventually a line that made it up Mound or Van Dyke to say 23 Mile or Hall Road, I would definitely use the train. Why would I waste my gas and put a 50 something mile trip on my car when I could simply take the train? It might not make sense for a person who goes downtown twice a year but I go downtown a half dozen times a month. Plus I go to Lawrence Tech, so if there was a rail line that extended there I would more than certainly use it. I guess the point I'm trying to make is that there are plenty of people who would use the rail line that own cars.

Exactly, Mike. For me, it's a no-brainer. Anyone who thinks fuel prices will remain the same forever is really optimistic.

I'm hoping that within the next 3 years, we can have the M1 light rail project as a done deal... and that the planned commuter train from Ann Arbor to the D [[that could just be done by adding a few more Amtrak routes besides the Wolverine interstate) *and* the "Golden Triangle" would also come into fruition. In one fell swoop, you would be able to connect four of the counties in SE Michigan.

Maybe established folks who are middle or upper class and live in the ritzier 'burbs would shun it. So would people whose jobs and homes aren't convenient to a line. But you're going to have a TON of folks taking this thing. Several of my buddies who live in Western Wayne and Washtenaw counties work in Detroit or in the inner-ring suburbs; they've told me about the car pools. Other friends who live in the Woodward corridor *do* ride SMART to go back and forth to work. Clean, reliable, and efficient public transportation can't be beat when it comes to stress levels or safety, especially for work commutes. I say, "Bring it on!"

**tkelly1986** · February-15-10, 12:32 PM

Just food for though, but if this M1/DDOT plan comes to fruition, could it be in the best interest of Detroit to contract out the operation of the system to a private firm? It seems that much of the cost overruns in Chicago are linked to bloated staff expenses and the inflexibility trim staff when demand changes [[an inherent problem in government). A private firm would have far more flexibility; however, like Steve Goldsmith did in Indianapolis with many city services, unions could bid for the contracts as well [[though they would not get preferential treatment).

**ghettopalmetto** · February-15-10, 12:46 PM

Originally Posted by tkelly1986

Just food for though, but if this M1/DDOT plan comes to fruition, could it be in the best interest of Detroit to contract out the operation of the system to a private firm? It seems that much of the cost overruns in Chicago are linked to bloated staff expenses and the inflexibility trim staff when demand changes [[an inherent problem in government). A private firm would have far more flexibility; however, like Steve Goldsmith did in Indianapolis with many city services, unions could bid for the contracts as well [[though they would not get preferential treatment).

What private firm is qualified to operate an urban transit system?

And if there were any qualified private sector firms, how can we be sure they're operating the system in the public interest, and not motivated purely by profit?

**Russix** · February-15-10, 12:53 PM

^but obviously their qualified enough enough to build one or else we would not be having this discussion.

**ghettopalmetto** · February-15-10, 12:56 PM

Originally Posted by Russix

^but obviously their qualified enough enough to build one or else we would not be having this discussion.

Yes, because Roger Penske is going to be out there installing rail ties, right after Mike Ilitch finishes pouring concrete.

**tkelly1986** · February-15-10, 12:59 PM

The private firm would be operating to gain a profit and thus bring their costs under control. However, when they are competing for the contracts, it is in their best interest to meet the guidelines that the public agency has established. Moreover, funds that were set aside to operate the system in the first place can be used to subsidies the private firm to offer lower fairs or extended services. Nevertheless, this subsidy would be less than what it costs to operate a purely public system [[assuming competition existing in the contracting process); thus saving taxpayers money and setting funds aside for addition capital costs.

**Russix** · February-15-10, 01:07 PM

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

Yes, because Roger Penske is going to be out there installing rail ties, right after Mike Ilitch finishes pouring concrete.

I'm not sure about Roger, but crushed rock ballast is more Ilitch's style. So now when they put up the new hockey stadium downtown, they accommodate for the lost parking space more northward in Midtown and New Center.

**Detroitnerd** · February-15-10, 01:11 PM

Originally Posted by tkelly1986

The private firm would be operating to gain a profit and thus bring their costs under control. However, when they are competing for the contracts, it is in their best interest to meet the guidelines that the public agency has established. Moreover, funds that were set aside to operate the system in the first place can be used to subsidies the private firm to offer lower fairs or extended services. Nevertheless, this subsidy would be less than what it costs to operate a purely public system [[assuming competition existing in the contracting process); thus saving taxpayers money and setting funds aside for addition capital costs.

How can you privatize something that's privately funded?

**ghettopalmetto** · February-15-10, 01:11 PM

Originally Posted by tkelly1986

The private firm would be operating to gain a profit and thus bring their costs under control. However, when they are competing for the contracts, it is in their best interest to meet the guidelines that the public agency has established. Moreover, funds that were set aside to operate the system in the first place can be used to subsidies the private firm to offer lower fairs or extended services. Nevertheless, this subsidy would be less than what it costs to operate a purely public system [[assuming competition existing in the contracting process); thus saving taxpayers money and setting funds aside for addition capital costs.

So let me get this straight. You're advocating that public money be funneled to profit a private sector company? It begs the question, why not just cut out that profit, and reduce overall costs to taxpayers who have to fund the system?

Never mind that there isn't a single private sector company in the United States who can operate an urban rail transit system.

Welcome to Detroit: Where the Wheel is Reinvented on a Daily Basis.

**Detroitnerd** · February-15-10, 01:15 PM

Hey, let's build a monorail on Woodward. And let's use really cool buses. And let's privatize it, so it'll be faster and cheaper! Yay!

**ghettopalmetto** · February-15-10, 01:18 PM

Originally Posted by Detroitnerd

Hey, let's build a monorail on Woodward. And let's use really cool buses. And let's privatize it, so it'll be faster and cheaper! Yay!

What? You got something against Maglev? What about that Interstate Traveler project? That thing looked pretty badass!

**bailey** · February-15-10, 01:24 PM

So let me get this straight. You're advocating that public money be funneled to profit a private sector company? It begs the question, why not just cut out that profit, and reduce overall costs to taxpayers who have to fund the system?

I guess I missed the day that Northwest paid for Metro Airport. I know it's not apples to apples, but c'mon, public money get's funneled to private companies directly or indirectly every day. Should Delta make a profit, does it need to lower fares because every single airport it flys into was built with taxpayer money?

Never mind that there isn't a single private sector company in the United States who can operate an urban rail transit system.

Is that because none are qualified or because they are such money losers they must be run by a government subsidized behemoth?

Welcome to Detroit: Where the Wheel is Reinvented on a Daily Basis.

How about simply trying something new? is a public/private partnership really THAT radical of an idea?