Light Rail Funding Hits Possible Snag

[Brainiac]

Guys - think a little more abstractly here. Would you agree that we should not build an expensive, unused system?

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

No one has given me any confidence that it will get used.

What if the light rail gets built and doesn't get used? Then what?

The problem with the People Mover is that it doesn't go anywhere. Pick any two People Mover stations, odds are you'll be able to walk between them faster than you'll be able to take the People Mover. Not in any way relevant to this project.
Here and here. Also, ride the Woodward bus sometime and use your eyes.
Nice selective reading there. It's pretty clear you have no interest in a rational debate on this issue.

I did find this response useful. I followed the links and read the docs.

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

Another poster had said that the one zip code was the fastest growing in Michigan. Big deal - Michigan as a whole is on the decline. It wouldn't take a lot of growth to be the fastest growing. And for all I know, "fastest growing" could mean "least decline."

Besides, "rooftop counts" [[all those population numbers) are orthagonal to potential riders.

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.

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

The reports show no analysis of alternatives. It askes potential riders to give up the bus, give up their car, conform to the locations of the train stations, conform to the schedule of the train and go only where the train will take you.

I see no mention of public opinion research. It makes no mention of validation experiments.

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

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

But hey - like you guys have said, what the hell do I know, I have no interest in a rational debate.

[ghettopalmetto]

But hey - like you guys have said, what the hell do I know, I have no interest in a rational debate.

At least you admit it.

This is real simple:

One third of Detroit residents have no access to an automobile.

The Woodward bus is DDOT's busiest route.

Rail has a lower cost of operation than diesel buses.

People will ride.

Stop being so chickenshit. If you're going to question the validity of the study, at least be man enough to ask specific questions and challenge specific assertions. Your bogeyman routine is the same crap that people have pulled in Detroit for the past 60 years. Well, if you're happy to see every other city in the U.S. move into the 21st Century and leave Detroit 100 years behind the curve, you're well on your way.

[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]

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.

[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.