Detroit & Michigan: Go-Town Transportation Lowdown

[waltlantz]

Originally Posted by Hayward

I actually studied BRT systems in South America in the context of SE Michigan. It's deja vu seeing this topic come up lol. Keep in mind, different culture and mindsets when it comes to buses in other countries. Plus we are talking apples and oranges in relationship to the physical and spatial characteristics of these cities.

I did point out that BRT could do well as far as getting people from one place to another. If it gets implemented, it will be effective. I just don't believe it can create the type of density and growth you would see with LRT.

But every city is different. We can look at case studies from Portland to Minneapolis, but that doesn't mean you'll see the same benefits.

As others have pointed out, I think it's a huge shame that we spent all this money, time, and discussion on planning on a system that was at the very least green lighted to begin construction.... only to fall apart in a matter of days. When you step back and look at it, the planning process was a sunk cost justifying this expensive investment....if you even want to consider it expensive.

Hmm good point. Have to agree that weither or not people thought this would be as good as advertised to get THIS far with all that WORK and not DO ANYTHING if anything seems like a waste of money like some argued it would turn out to be.

Well from an outsider's view. It is freaking bullshit that they got THIS far and then pull the cost crap. I'm sure that given just the right amount of investment it could have provided some tangible benefits.

And yet I recall talking on forums at City Data about this. Even many proponents of a new system were quick to point out how Detroit is questionable as an unbridled center of activity, even considering all the improvement it made (and I'm up to speed on that). They said that places like Southfield and Troy and else where have really stolen the cities thunder economic wise. What's more even if you consider the proportion of Downtown to Suburban activity (which matches many metros) the sheer depths of the economic mess of the city, (in there eyes) precluded it from being worthy of something as fancy as a light rail system. I mean Light Rail has done great things for cities it's been put in in terms of investment, but a lot of those cities, (Dallas/STL even Pheonix) don't have the same scope as economic distress as Detroit does.

Add to that the difficulty on getting more general things done.

I know Bing wanted to make a downsizing of the city in order to consolidate population, save services money and put people at ease in terms of safety.........Haven't heard ANY progress on that. You add to it the shambles that DDOT and SMART seem to be in and I thought frankly that it was MIRACULOUS that Snyder, Bing and City public and private officials actually made it THIS FAR. (I mean people in the Michigan Legisature were probably like, "THESE JOKERS CANT EVEN KEEP BUSES RUNNING AND THEY WANT TRAAINS?!!")

At least the Midwest HSR seems to be moving.

[fishrose]

Originally Posted by waltlantz

And yet I recall talking on forums at City Data about this. Even many proponents of a new system were quick to point out how Detroit is questionable as an unbridled center of activity, even considering all the improvement it made (and I'm up to speed on that). They said that places like Southfield and Troy and else where have really stolen the cities thunder economic wise.

Southfield and Troy stole the city's thunder back in the '80s and '90s. Today, those cities are hemorrhaging office jobs and commercial sector growth downtown is higher than it's been in over 15 years.

[Dan78]

Originally Posted by J. Will

If they build a proper BRT system with physically-separated lanes like VIVA is currently building in Toronto and it's northern suburbs it could be useful

It won't be a proper BRT system like Curitiba. More than likely it will be some gas-powered buses on existing streets, maybe with some new lanes painted and some sad-looking signage indicating stops.

Not a slam on Detroit, just an observation on how "BRT" in the U.S. generally means "We'll runs some buses through here now and then". BRT typically is just used as a bid-down from HRT/LRT (which in turn is usually bid-down to "enhanced bus" or just "more buses" or whatnot). It's hard to take it seriously, outside of a few cases of actual BRT being realized (L.A., Pittsburgh, Boston's Silver Line). Even these have buses mixing with street traffic.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Dan78

It's hard to take it seriously, outside of a few cases of actual BRT being realized (L.A., Pittsburgh, Boston's Silver Line). Even these have buses mixing with street traffic.

I don't know why a BRT system needs to be fully separated. That's the main advantage, actually... in dense business districts you can avoid a ton of expense and disruption by striping lanes or running in mixed traffic and then achieve a ton of time savings on the rest of the route in a busway or physically-separated lanes.

[M II A II R II K]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000..._WSJ_US_News_5

[LMich]

Looks like the private investors still want to build their original system. It was a system I was never crazy about, and surprisingly, it was only because of DDOT's entry into the project that we got the plan for center, dedicated-lane running LRT, but it's good to hear them say that the way this was handled by the mayor and governor was terrible and deceptive:

Woodward light rail investors say they'll press ahead

By Matt Helms|Detroit Free Press

December 16, 2011

The leader of the largest private-sector investor in the abortive attempt to build a light rail line on Woodward Avenue in Detroit said Friday that he would press ahead with plans to build a train-based connection between downtown and the New Center despite Mayor Dave Bing and Gov. Rick Snyder putting their support instead behind a modernized system of bus-based rapid transit.

Rip Rapson, president and CEO of the Troy-based Kresge Foundation, said the M-1 group of private investors who initially wanted to build a 3.4-mile rail line between downtown and Grand Boulevard do not agree with the decision to kill off the rail line, which was later planned to extend north to 8 Mile Road.

Bing and Snyder pulled the plug on the rail plan in an agreement with U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. They now say they’ll focus instead on a wider regional system of sleek new rapid-transit buses spanning the city and suburbs along Woodward, Gratiot, Michigan Avenue and M-59.

...

“Whether or not we are correct, we owe it to the residents of Detroit, and the region, to explore the question of feasibility and affordability with discipline and thoroughness,” Rapson said in a detailed response to the decision, making it clear the M-1 group will pursue a shorter rail line but not addressing concerns about how its long-term operation would be funded.

“This is not about either bus rapid transit or light rail, but instead about how one can nest within the other," Rapson said. "The Woodward light rail project was designed to complement a regional bus rapid transit by supporting a revitalized, livable, walkable, vibrant downtown. The question is whether we can build, operate, and financially support a light rail system in a way that strengthens the regional system envisioned by the governor.”

...

More...

Bing fires back at business leaders, defends expanded bus transit

By Darren Nichols|Detroit News

December 16, 2011

...

Bing's comments were in response to letter released Friday by The Downtown Detroit Partnership, a group representing more than 100 local businesses. The group protested that it wasn't included in a decision to scrap a proposed $500 million light rail project along Woodward Avenue in favor of a rapid-transit regional bus system.

It's "unacceptable" that business leaders were not involved, said Cindy Pasky, chairwoman of the partnership's board of directors.

Given the time and effort that city businesses and leaders committed to the project, they were owed a discussion before the announcement was made, she said in the letter.

"What is wrong is that the leaders of Detroit's business community were not part of the discussion," wrote Pasky, president and CEO of Strategic Staffing Solutions. "They should have been at the table. The fact that they were not is completely unacceptable."

Pasky's letter said light rail is among the initiatives Detroit needs to move forward and become a "world-class city again."

"One of those things (needed) is to create affordable, reliable mass transportation that will spur economic development downtown, encourage our young talent to stay in Detroit and connect people to their jobs," the letter said.

...

This is basically a trolly for tourists, though, it'll be marginally better than the People Mover in that it'll move people through the entire greater downtown core (downtown to New Center). It's pretty shocking to see how bad Bing has bungled in office. He lost the people over the past few years, and now he's managed to alienate the last community that had his back: the business community, a community that whom you almost can't peel off a Detroit mayor. Hell, most of them literally stayed with Kilpatrick up until the day he was convicted. lol He goes on in the News article to repeat over and over again that he was elected by "the people" as if he still has the people on his side, and as if they agree with him on this backroom deal. Ha!

This man is a rank amateur.

[mousquet]

Originally Posted by LMich

This is basically a trolly for tourists, though, it'll be marginally better than the People Mover in that it'll move people through the entire greater downtown core (downtown to New Center).

You might still be moody, LMich. Correct me if I'm wrong, the light rail would be more flexible and have a much better impact on the streetscape than the People Mover hanged up in the air only to make way to cars. The original 3.4-mile plan would still be a good start, wouldn't it?
Detroiters themselves should like a lot. Hope they stand firm against the politicians being annoying.
And tourists are obviously a blessing, which you know.

[Rizzo]

Originally Posted by ardecila

I don't know why a BRT system needs to be fully separated. That's the main advantage, actually... in dense business districts you can avoid a ton of expense and disruption by striping lanes or running in mixed traffic and then achieve a ton of time savings on the rest of the route in a busway or physically-separated lanes.

Ardecila, you should know this in Chicago!!!

When you are down in the loop, look at the dedicated bus lanes. It's terrible. Everyone parks, drives and turns into them during service days. Maybe its because all that red paint has worn off, but without separation the lanes are ineffective.

[J. Will]

Originally Posted by Dan78

It won't be a proper BRT system like Curitiba. More than likely it will be some gas-powered buses on existing streets, maybe with some new lanes painted and some sad-looking signage indicating stops.

That's what I anticipate as well, but maybe they will surprise us. The VIVA I cited only launched a few years ago, but they are already constructing physically separated "rapidways" along a number of routes (as the link talks about) to speed up service. And VIVA only serves low-density suruban areas. It does not serve the core of any major city.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Hayward

Ardecila, you should know this in Chicago!!!

When you are down in the loop, look at the dedicated bus lanes. It's terrible. Everyone parks, drives and turns into them during service days. Maybe its because all that red paint has worn off, but without separation the lanes are ineffective.

I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing. A downtown circulator, especially in a dense bustling downtown like Chicago's, needs dedicated lanes. This requires a large commitment of road space, since the demands placed on the street network by a downtown are much higher than in an outlying neighborhood.

A long-haul arterial bus route leading into downtown will derive the vast majority of its time savings from bus lanes and other speed improvements outside of downtown. In downtown itself, it may be cheaper and more expedient to run those same buses in mixed traffic.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by LMich

Looks like the private investors still want to build their original system. It was a system I was never crazy about, and surprisingly, it was only because of DDOT's entry into the project that we got the plan for center, dedicated-lane running LRT, but it's good to hear them say that the way this was handled by the mayor and governor was terrible and deceptive:



More...



This is basically a trolly for tourists, though, it'll be marginally better than the People Mover in that it'll move people through the entire greater downtown core (downtown to New Center). It's pretty shocking to see how bad Bing has bungled in office. He lost the people over the past few years, and now he's managed to alienate the last community that had his back: the business community, a community that whom you almost can't peel off a Detroit mayor. Hell, most of them literally stayed with Kilpatrick up until the day he was convicted. lol He goes on in the News article to repeat over and over again that he was elected by "the people" as if he still has the people on his side, and as if they agree with him on this backroom deal. Ha!

This man is a rank amateur.

Bing is way in over his head. I stayed with him for a while, but the way he handled this was just proof positive that he's the wrong guy. Detroit politics can be very brutal, but the post-Kilpatrick era has been the least volatile era of political bickering that region has seen in a couple generations. If he couldn't get anything done during that period of time then he really was not up to snuff.

[LMich]

M1 Rail back where it started

By Daniel Duggan and Nancy Kaffer

December 18, 2011

What started as a small, privately funded rail system took three years to morph into a regional, federally funded bus system.

In between are a number of decisions that, in hindsight, the private backers of the M1 light rail project in Detroit -- who remain committed to the concept -- say could have been made differently.

As the corporate donors and leaders of the rail project regroup for another run at Woodward light rail, they say they've learned from the experience. And, they say, those lessons will inform the second life of M1 Rail.

"There must have been 20 critical decision points that at the time seemed reasonable and necessary to follow," said Rip Rapson, president of the Troy-based Kresge Foundation,
one of the groups backing the rail plan in Detroit.

Rapson was one of close to 20 corporate and nonprofit leaders on a conference call Wednesday in which it was decided to press on with the plan.

"We had an informal call yesterday of the M1 membership, almost two dozen people," Rapson said Thursday. "And the clear sense coming from that is that there is every reason to press forward."

Timing of the project is contingent on government approvals, but construction could start 12 months after getting a green light.

...

News stories last week presented the shift from light rail to rapid-transit buses as a sudden development, an abrupt course change. But the sequence of events that led to last week's announcements actually started early this year.

As the M1 plan was being touted in Detroit, Gov. Rick Snyder was considering a regional bus plan, said the source with knowledge of the plans.

Snyder and his staff were drawn to the idea of rapid-transit buses, and brought the plan to U.S. Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood, who also liked the plan.

...

That's a top talking point in the information distributed by the DDP, and one that's been adopted by M1's corporate backers: Do both light rail and buses.

...

http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article...ere-it-started

The only problem, now, is that the public leaders have divided the plan, and the public and private groups are all now competing for the same pot of money, seperately. Now that it's pretty clear that Snyder was tied up with LaHood to displace the promised funding for Woodward Avenue LRT, I wonder if M1-Rail even has a legitimate shot at competing for future government capital funding?

You know, you get the regional transity authority through the legislature, and the entire regional plan becomes exponentially easier, because operating cost funds can be nailed down by a regional tax. But, that would mean first getting a regional transit authority through the tea party legislature, which has all but offered a disinterested view on this, and then passing a tax by the voters of Oakland, Wayne and Macomb counties.

What a Christmas present, this was.

[Dan78]

Originally Posted by ardecila

I don't know why a BRT system needs to be fully separated. That's the main advantage, actually... in dense business districts you can avoid a ton of expense and disruption by striping lanes or running in mixed traffic and then achieve a ton of time savings on the rest of the route in a busway or physically-separated lanes.

I'm hesitant to endorse any system of BRT where new, purpose-built or otherwise physically separated lanes interface with "normal" streets, because this setup is too conducive to being "de-BRTed" by some politician repurposing the lanes as normal traffic lanes. BRT should be fully separate from the normal road system to discourage such practices.

If Detroit wants BRT, that's all well and good, but it shouldn't be allowed to cut corners (since downgrading to BRT was already a cost-cutting measure).

[Michi]

Originally Posted by LMich

You know, you get the regional transity authority through the legislature, and the entire regional plan becomes exponentially easier, because operating cost funds can be nailed down by a regional tax.

Bingo! Bingo! Bingo!......BingoBingoBingoBingoBingoBingoBingo!

This is what I'm hung up on. The whole existence of this project is the classic case of putting the cart before the horse. It's literally impossible for a LRT line to exist on Woodward Avenue if there is no regional authority in place to properly "govern" it.

Bing is right. Detroit can't afford it. Never could, never will. Detroit can't afford the People Mover. Never could, never will. Detroit can't afford the one house standing in the middle of the urban prairie with the occupants who refuse to leave. Yes, Detroit is a different kind of city, but where Woodward is involved, it's a regional grab from the get-go; just like Cobo Convention Center.

My point is more society-focused. Why are we as a society, particularly the leaders in this transit scope, refusing to embark on this long-range planning process in the correct way? SEMCOG knows it's wrong, county and local governments know it's wrong, private and philanthropic doners know it's the improper way, so why invest? If the RTA (Regional Transit Authority) is not properly established and in place, LRT...won't...happen...period. And if it somehow, magically did, we'd end up with a hodgepodge like SMART, DDOT, Detroit People Mover, etc, further setting us up for greater failures and divisions in the future.

RTA must come first. My way or the highway.

[mousquet]

Sounds like a good point. Of course liberal folks like the idea of the RTA thing, hope the good Republicans agree with them, it would definitely generate much more wealth than it would cost in subsidies. Please, make the Tea Party understand that taxes are sometimes smart and productive even though trains and buses seem pretty far from their way of life

[Michi]

I don't think mass transit is a partisan thing necessarily. Look at the success of transit in conservative stronghold places such as Salt Lake City, Dallas and Houston. (Houston's improving exponentially)

[Lakelander]

Why not cover the annual operational costs through a special tax district covering the area the shorter line would serve? $100 million is more than enough to get a privately funded 3.4 mile starter constructed. The key is to make sure it's a no frills system. This means just spend money on getting the basic system in and not on double tracking the entire corridor or expensive streetscapes and landscaping.

[Centropolis]

Originally Posted by Michi

I don't think mass transit is a partisan thing necessarily. Look at the success of transit in conservative stronghold places such as Salt Lake City, Dallas and Houston. (Houston's improving exponentially)

Depends on what ideas you consider conservative. I've come across many Democrats who I would consider highly conservative in that they fear their power becoming eroded and resist change, and I see this repeated all across the urban midwest/rustbelt. I say this as a registered Democrat. However, it is interesting that all the mayors of SLC, Dallas, and Houston are Democrats, and I don't really view those places as conservative "strongholds," per say. Perhaps they have more extreme suburban areas than average.

I can't believe that Detroit doesn't have a regional transit body, and would of been skeptical of this from the start had I realized this. There is no way to get anything done on an appreciable scale without such a thing.

[Michi]

Conservative in terms of large cities. The 3 I named are considerably conservative by large city standards. Large cities are diverse, therefore having liberal characteristics. In fact, despite Detroit being a union town and historically progressive, it has a lot of conservative bones. A large city of historically single family homes, middle class American family values have always been sown into the fabric of Detroit.

Having said that, I woulnd't call the Detroit Region conservative like I would many in the south and interior west. However, it's my view that the diverse metropolitan areas in those parts of the country are much more progressive than Rust Belt metro areas. When jobs come back, maybe that will start to change.

[LMich]

Something I keep seeing brought up in the media is "Detroit can't afford to run this." While that is really kind of indisputable for the long-term, I do not buy that a department with a $160 million could spare to run Woodward LRT for $10 million for a few interim years while the regional transit authority is organized. This is particularly the case when you realize that Woodward LRT replaces a DDOT bus line, so it wouldn't even need to be a full $10 million given that you're replacing multiple buses and drivers on that line.

For even as crippled as DDOT has become, if push came to shove, there is no reason why operating costs should be the death knell of Woodward LRT. It's a cop-out excuse. I'd much prefer that and RTA be in place to catch the LRT as soon as it hit the ground running, but I don't think it's absolutely necessary in the immediate short-term, and it certainly shouldn't have stopped the project from putting shovels in the ground.

...

On a totally seperate issue, I heard that the Woodward Avenue communities in Oakland County who'd formally begun to study extending the line into the county are still very much moving ahead on that particular study in defiance of Snyder throwing out Detroit proper's plan. LaHood presented the communities of Ferndale, Huntington Woods, Pleasant Ridge, Royal Oak, Berkley and Birmingham with a $2 million federal grant literally back in October, and it's good to see that they aren't losing focus in the face of the new odds.