Is an underground subway more appropriate for Woodward than an aboveground rail.

**Newdetroit** · October-01-10, 03:13 AM

I think that the light rail proposal is great for Detroit. However, it would have been better if we had an underground Subway as opposed to a light rail running up and down Woodward. Obviouslly it would be much more expensive, but I would be curious if there was a cost analysis as to the difference in cost. Anyone know?? It would be great to have an underground subway especially in the Winter..People can wait for trains or make connections if future lines are put in while being warmed. Also, trains would not be mingling with traffic and crossing intersections. Lastly, I heard that there are underground tunnels beneath Detroit and Midtown. Maybe these could be converted to underground rail. I know..I know....my proposals sound so crazy to people......

**hudkina** · October-01-10, 03:32 AM

I think a 120 ft wide, nine lane right of way can easily handle the streetcars, especially with the level of traffic seen on Woodward. A subway would be redundant. The only stretch where I think a subway would be even remotely viable is along Vernor Hwy in Southwest Detroit.

**Magnatomicflux** · October-01-10, 04:02 AM

Originally Posted by Meddle

Good grief, not you again.

LOL!

I thought a subway, was by definition underground. hmmm...
The only thing a subway in Detroit is going to do is attract the "homeless" to the warmth in the winter, as well as a casual place for most people to pee. There just isn't enough people. Start with LRV. If for some reason the population explodes and the LRV's are a menace to traffic, THEN you sink the line in the ground.
I think streetcars, LRV, whatever you want to call'em, would ultimatly be better for Downtown anyways. In a subway you're going to miss all the shops along the way. Having a buisness on a streetcar route means 1000's of eyeballs are rolling past your storefront everyday. Plus a stretcar can make more stops. A subway will be clear out of downtown in 3 or 4 stops.

**Trumpeteer** · October-01-10, 06:55 AM

Originally Posted by Magnatomicflux

LOL!
I thought a subway, was by definition underground. hmmm...

Actually many of the Subways I frequent ARE above ground and serve a great sandwich

I wish you all would quit picking on NewDetroit and his/her incredible ideas, 17 now I believe? I for one would never want an aboveground subway as then you'd have to build an aboveground tunnel to cover it. HOWEVER, besides a place for the homeless, a subway would make a great movie set for all those scary movies and cops n robbers.

Now it's time for milk and cookies and a nap so NewDetroit can focus on other incredible thoughts to save the city

**iheartthed** · October-01-10, 07:39 AM

Yes, it is.

**Detroitnerd** · October-01-10, 09:24 AM

If I remember correctly, there were at least two plans to build a subway under Woodward. The 1919 plan could have succeeded, but the city used its bonding authority to buy the Detroit portion of the Detroit United Railway in the early 1920s, incorporating it as the Department of Street Railways we know now as DDOT. I believe at that point they couldn't issue enough bonds to build the subway, so it died. Do recall seeing some midcentury plans for a subway station under Campus Martius.

At some point, light rail could attract enough dense development to where a subway would make sense. Which, in turn, would attract even denser development.

I call BS on this fear of trains mingling with traffic. Not only should light rail have right-of-way it can rely on, one of the reasons Detroit is so f*cked right now is because everybody is terrified of impeding vehicular traffic. Remember, EVERYBODY is traffic, not just motorists.

**EastsideAl** · October-01-10, 11:06 AM

When I lived in the NYC borough of Queens, the nearest 'subway' line to my apartment actually ran above the street for pretty much its entire length outside of Manhattan. This is actually quite common in the so-called outer boroughs of NYC.

No, Chicagoans and former Chicagoans, no one in NYC calls these lines "the el" like they do in Chicago. They are always called "the subway" there, since they're part of the subway system. Real old-time NYers will recall for you that NYC did once have a separate system of 'els', a system that was older than the subways [[built in the late 1800s) with trains running above-ground over several Manhattan avenues and out into the boroughs. But the last of these was torn down in the 1950s.

**EastsideAl** · October-01-10, 11:24 AM

Originally Posted by Detroitnerd

If I remember correctly, there were at least two plans to build a subway under Woodward. The 1919 plan could have succeeded, but the city used its bonding authority to buy the Detroit portion of the Detroit United Railway in the early 1920s, incorporating it as the Department of Street Railways we know now as DDOT. I believe at that point they couldn't issue enough bonds to build the subway, so it died. Do recall seeing some midcentury plans for a subway station under Campus Martius.

Detroit voters also approved the building of a subway in a 1933 referendum, but the state refused to fund it or to submit it to the feds to be funded.

There was a lot of talk, and a bond issue for a study and public hearings, in the '60s and early '70s about a subway on Woodward that might have used the Grand Trunk rail alignment north of the city through Oakland County. The federal and state funding may have been there then to do it, but there was little local will and a lot of the all-too-familiar fears and animosities.

Subways are great, but incredibly expensive to build and maintain. In addition to commitment from higher levels of government to provide the necessary building and operating subsidies, they really require a significant population density to be useful and effective. We don't have that here, and won't for the foreseeable future. I think an expandable light rail system is really the way to go in Detroit.

The worries about traffic are really a red herring, since streetcars once operated on the streets here, and continue to operate elsewhere, in reasonable safety surrounded by much higher volumes of traffic than we currently see on Detroit streets.

Bearinabox · October-01-10, 09:45 AM

Originally Posted by Magnatomicflux

I thought a subway, was by definition underground. hmmm...

Vienna has a subway line that's elevated for most of its length. I'm not sure what makes it a subway except that they call it one, but there it is.

**rhythmc** · October-01-10, 09:32 AM

From what I understand, putting a local commuter train system is always much more expensive. As to the concern that the homeless will use it for warmth, this is always a concern, but that has not been a problem in the DC system. The appropriate procedures need to be implemented to verify that no one remains in the system after it closes [[if it closes). As for the people urinating, that's disgusting and needs to be dealt with in the design to ensure that the possibility for this does not exist.

The advantages of the above ground system are that people get the chance to see businesses and attractions that they travel past and may decide to visit later. It also helps to connect the commuters to the community.

**Detroitnerd** · October-01-10, 09:48 AM

Several subway lines in New York are underground in the densely developed areas and run on elevated track through others. Very expensive to put the whole thing underground. Boston, Philly and Chicago also have systems that are surface or elevated and go underground as they enter the center city.

**Trumpeteer** · October-01-10, 10:44 AM

Just for "grins" from Answers.com

What is a subway?

In: Inventions, Trains [Edit categories]

An underground series of tunnels with trains running through them. They are used as a form of mass transit allowing pedestrians to get across big cities generally quicker than by car.

**Trumpeteer** · October-01-10, 10:48 AM

With respect to comingling above ground rail transportation with cars, trucks, etc. Zurich has a rail trolley system that runs down the center of streets just like the old pictures of Woodward show from the early 1900's. also, while not widespread, how about the San Fransisco Cablecar system? Seems to work well with little/no problem.

**Hermod** · October-01-10, 03:20 PM

Originally Posted by Trumpeteer

With respect to comingling above ground rail transportation with cars, trucks, etc. Zurich has a rail trolley system that runs down the center of streets just like the old pictures of Woodward show from the early 1900's. also, while not widespread, how about the San Fransisco Cablecar system? Seems to work well with little/no problem.

The Zurich trolley doesn't move with much speed. Neither do the cable cars.

**professorscott** · October-01-10, 05:16 PM

Light rail is typically $40 to $50 million per mile; to construct a subway nowadays runs about $2 billion per mile. That's why nobody is talking about it. You could run light rail to Flint for what it would cost to run a couple miles of subway downtown.

I love subways, don't get me wrong, but money is extremely finite around here. Detroit is going through the wringer just to come up with a couple hundred million to buile a single light rail line almost entirely inside the city [[it goes through Highland Park as well); what do you think the odds are that anybody would be willing to fund something 40 to 50 times as expensive? My guess would be, zero.

**iheartthed** · October-01-10, 10:53 AM

Originally Posted by Trumpeteer

Just for "grins" from Answers.com

What is a subway?

In: Inventions, Trains [Edit categories]

An underground series of tunnels with trains running through them. They are used as a form of mass transit allowing pedestrians to get across big cities generally quicker than by car.

In London "subway" refers to underground walkways.

**tetsua** · October-01-10, 11:49 AM

Originally Posted by iheartthed

In London "subway" refers to underground walkways.

They're called "Pedways" here though. The Brits have it wrong again.

**iheartthed** · October-01-10, 11:51 AM

Originally Posted by tetsua

They're called "Pedways" here though. The Brits have it wrong again.

Actually, according to some old heads on this board, that was once what subways were in Detroit too.

**fryar** · October-01-10, 11:51 AM

Yes, subways would be prefereable, but everybody's broke. Impeding traffic is not a problem, you just give the trolley/bus/tram/light rail priority, which is not some pie-in-the-sky theoretical concept, but a tested system. Other cities have systems that automatically manipulate the stop lights appropriately for emergency services, for example. You just use transponders, basically like those you have at a parking garage, or maybe a device attached to the lights that identifies the flashing lights that accompany sirens, or possibly something different, there may be other solutions out there. Anyways, that issue is pretty old hat, aside from a breakdown of civility that may have people double-parking.

Newdetroit, your suggestions are too "macro," IMO. They require billion dollar bond issues, massive federal funds, or some other bonanza. So they're basically academic, IMO. Wouldn't it be great if man could fly?

IMO, try "Should there be a blog that covers musical acts in SE Mich to foster regional integration and promote local music scene as brand Detroit?" so you or somebody else can start that blog.

**douglasm** · October-01-10, 12:34 PM

I remember hearing somewhere that there would be a terrific infrastructure problem with a subway under Woodward. Right?

**Detroitnerd** · October-01-10, 12:37 PM

Originally Posted by douglasm

I remember hearing somewhere that there would be a terrific infrastructure problem with a subway under Woodward. Right?

Totally. Much better that we just lay concrete over it perfectly and it never crumbles.

**Russix** · October-01-10, 02:47 PM

Originally Posted by Newdetroit

I think that the light rail proposal is great for Detroit. However, it would have been better if we had an underground Subway as opposed to a light rail running up and down Woodward. Obviouslly it would be much more expensive, but I would be curious if there was a cost analysis as to the difference in cost. Anyone know?? It would be great to have an underground subway especially in the Winter..People can wait for trains or make connections if future lines are put in while being warmed. Also, trains would not be mingling with traffic and crossing intersections. Lastly, I heard that there are underground tunnels beneath Detroit and Midtown. Maybe these could be converted to underground rail. I know..I know....my proposals sound so crazy to people......

9 miles of subway? No. A half mile tunnel for light rail to service downtown? Yes.

**Hypestyles** · October-01-10, 02:59 PM

I'd support selective subway development.. too bad that John Hertel killed all that talk in his pitch meetings..

**leady106** · October-01-10, 06:07 PM

I agree that if the Woodward line ran underground from Grand Circus to Jefferson it would best maintain traffic flow downtown since Woodward narrows after GCP [[consider the effect on the Parade route). You could have a stop above ground near the stadiums then go underground until Jefferson. The underground stop[[s) could connect to existing buildings and prehaps to a Graitot or Michigan Ave or Grand River line. The Woodward line should go to the RenCen with an above ground stop in the Median on Jefferson place between the Millender and RenCen people mover stations. This will reinforce the intended use of the people mover and provide a begining for a possible LRT on East Jefferson.

**Newdetroit** · October-01-10, 07:05 PM

Actually, I didn't mean for an underground subway for the entire city, by rather from downtown to the New Center. Why can't we then use all of our existing rail lines that exist. The entire region would be connected. There is a line that goes from novi down to northville, plymouth, and crosses the ann arbor-detroit line and goes down close to metro airport. This would be a great commuter line for 2 reasons. First people on the detroit-ann arbor line could connect to this line and go directly to the airport terminal. As of now, I believe the envisione airport stop on the detroit-ann arbor line will be outside the airport and will require a transfer buse. The second reason why this line would be good is that u can connect the westside to both detroit and ann arbor. I am unsure if a commuter metro system could share all of these lines with amtrak. If so, We would only need to create the woodward line from downtown to new center. Gratiot is a good idea but there is already a line up grossbeck