2618 replies to this topic

[GRDadof3]

Governor, legislative leaders agree on transportation package...

...Two bills allowing the funding to go forward for the local roads projects were passed Thursday by the Senate and are headed to the House.

The agreement between Granholm, GOP House Speaker Craig DeRoche of Novi and GOP Senate Majority Leader Ken Sikkema of Wyoming also affects mass transit.

It allows communities to ask voters to approve taxes that would raise money to match federal mass transit funds. Federal money already has been set aside for engineering work on a Detroit-to-Ann Arbor light rail system and a study on the need for a rail system in Grand Rapids, but the work can't continue without the match from local governments.


http://www.mlive.com...st=newsmichigan


Here was the previous discussion thread: http://www.urbanplan...showtopic=14924

[DwntwnGeo]

Good to hear that everyone came to an agreement and projects are moving forward. Maybe we can plan/start a Mass Transit/Light Rail system  

Thanks for the update Dad  

[dtown]

thats good news GRdad, maybe someday they will start to plan a GR light rail line, that would be great!!!

[GaryP]

GRDadof3, on Apr 20 2006, 08:02 PM, said:

Governor, legislative leaders agree on transportation package...

...Two bills allowing the funding to go forward for the local roads projects were passed Thursday by the Senate and are headed to the House.

The agreement between Granholm, GOP House Speaker Craig DeRoche of Novi and GOP Senate Majority Leader Ken Sikkema of Wyoming also affects mass transit.

It allows communities to ask voters to approve taxes that would raise money to match federal mass transit funds. Federal money already has been set aside for engineering work on a Detroit-to-Ann Arbor light rail system and a study on the need for a rail system in Grand Rapids, but the work can't continue without the match from local governments.


http://www.mlive.com...st=newsmichigan
Here was the previous discussion thread: http://www.urbanplan...showtopic=14924

Granholm and the legislature compromise for the benefit of the state  
First time for everything I guess.

[MJLO]

yay for impending election year!

[grrwymg]

MJLO, on Apr 21 2006, 12:09 AM, said:

yay for impending election year!

<wipes Diet-Pepsi off the monitor>

Thank you for that.   Ahh Friday.

Yes - this is great news.  Benefit to the citizens.

[Picture Michigan]

It's my understanding that part of this deal includes a line from DT GR to the airport and extending US-131 to Indiana.

If something actually does happen on US-131 south of Portage, something will need to be done with the US-131/I-94 interchange.

And that goes without mentioning three lanes of I-94 between US-131 and I-69. Oops, I just mentioned it. But perhaps an extended US-131 would offset the need of an I-94 widening.

Light rail between GRR and downtown? A good start! Make it a system between GRR and Grand Haven, through downtown GR and Allendale, and we have a great start!

[DwntwnGeo]

Picture Michigan, on Apr 21 2006, 10:55 AM, said:

Light rail between GRR and downtown? A good start! Make it a system between GRR and Grand Haven, through downtown GR and Allendale, and we have a great start!

I would like to see additional lines added also. We must learn to crawl before walking and running. From reading this article from Wood TV8, it sounds like the first two lines woud be 1) Downtown GR to the airport and 2)Downtown to Cutlerville via Division Ave. This could be a good thing for the new Kroc Center off of Division between Alger and 28th St.  

Article Link

Edited by GRDadof3, 21 April 2006 - 01:29 PM.

[GaryP]

Here is the Chamber's press release:

Chamber Wins on U.S. 131

Grand Rapids Transit Legislation Gets Green Light

GRAND RAPIDS— The Grand Rapids Area Chamber Commerce, on behalf of its 2,800 members, is delighted some of its key transportation priorities will become a reality thanks to an agreement by lawmakers
and the governor’s office.

The agreement includes a $31 million project for U.S. 131 infrastructure improvements and a deal on previously vetoed legislation to allow The Rapid to continue its study of a fixed guideway system for greater Grand Rapids and access $14 million in federal New Starts funds.

“The Chamber has long been advocating for the extension of U.S. 131 to the Indiana border. After the Department of Transportation announced a “No Build” position on the extension, we stepped up our efforts and have been communicating our position to legislators, the governor, the Department of Transportation and the Michigan State Transportation Commission. We are happy to see these efforts have paid off for our members,” said Jeanne Englehart, President of the Grand Rapids Area Chamber of Commerce. “This project is an essential component to economic growth and development. It will begin to improve the only major northsouth corridor in West Michigan, which is currently plagued by congestion due to a host of impediments, including stop lights, railroad crossings, “Main Street” traffic volumes, seasonal tourism traffic and the overall growth of the area.”

“As the planned improvements to U.S. 131 become a reality, local businesses will be able to get products from their suppliers faster and trucking companies can spend less time on the road,” said Jared Rodriguez, Vice President of Public Policy & Government Affairs for the Grand Rapids Area Chamber of Commerce. “When businesses are looking to expand or locate to our area, a variety of different components factor into their decision: taxes, environment, skilled workers, and the ability to get their products to market. As the area’s leading business advocate, we are glad to see that our message has been heard.”

The agreement also clears the way for House Bill 5560 which will allow The Rapid to pursue its study of a fixed guideway system for greater Grand Rapids and access $14 million in federal New Starts funds earmarked for the project. Federal law requires that candidates for these grants demonstrate the ability to supply appropriate matching funds and this legislation will allow transit authorities such as The Rapid to seek the local support necessary to move forward. “The Chamber has strongly supported this effort in Lansing and we truly appreciate Representative Jerry Kooiman’s hard work in crafting a compromise,” commented Rodriguez. The fixed guideway system will help improve traffic flow and public transportation in the area and Representative Kooiman has indicated the bill will be approved in the coming weeks.

The demographic and economic growth in West Michigan has increased travel and commerce tremendously. “Our region is projected to grow faster than the rest of the state and we cannot continue to allow our citizens and businesses to struggle with a transportation system we have outgrown. Both of these projects
will help us advance into the future,” added Englehart.

The Grand Rapids Area Chamber of Commerce fully supports continued positive economic development throughout our region and will continue to advocate for West Michigan on future projects impacting our region.

[francishsu]

I like both those proposed routes to start of with; they both seem to be very logical choices.

[metrogrkid]

At the turn of the millennium (and the century), MBEI's Transportation Study Committee created a vision for what they said would " . . . . enable the majority of the people to access the majority of the metropolitan landscape with maximum independence and minimal personal cost . . . . ".  At this time in our metro development when there is definitely a developmental quickening occurring that is surpassing the small expectations of some of our transit planning officials (i.e. - ITP), it is my hope that many of you will press these same officials to re-assess some of the more high-capacity AND grade-seperated (READ: REMOVED FROM STREET LEVEL WITH GRIDLOCK TRAFFIC) fixed-guideway options that were removed from consideration early on (due soley upon perceived expense and what was being proposed for regional development at that time).  

That vision document is copied below for all those who missed its placement elsewhere within the UP-GR forums and is based upon a heavy-rail elevated system like Metrorail in DC, MARTA in Atlanta or Skytrain in Vancouver (with three underground stations at GVSU Main Campus Little Mac Bridge ravine, under Medical Hill adjacent to the Medical Hill underground ramp and under Davenport University at Fulton):

LIGHT-RAIL TRANSIT: A Tool for Abating Urban Sprawl in Metro Grand Rapids
by MBEI Transportation Study Committee
March 1, 2000 (Revised May 29, 2000)

Fortune Magazine, in its 1998 listing of America’s "Top Ten Boom Towns for Business", placed Metro Grand Rapids and its 1,024,000 residents as the #10 region in the U.S. - behind #9 Denver and #8 Atlanta. This confirmed what the "vocal status-quo minority" has been dreading for years; the dread that their private burg was becoming a high-profile and world-class community. This was simultaneously great news for the "silent progress-minded majority" since it portended an end to small-townish thinking, homogeneity and BLANDNESS. However, all this fantastic growth and change must now be focused and shepherded by land-use planning that caters to mass-transit (READ: Urban Sprawl Abater) instead of a continued catering to the single occupant automobile (READ: Urban Sprawl Accelerator). Without such a paradigm shift, this metro area (that already consists of a triangle that connects Grand Rapids, Muskegon and Holland) will spread further to encroach upon Kalamazoo, Lansing and Cadillac. We doubt such a scenario would be beneficial to anyone.

Consider that several months ago urban planning and transit expert, Mr. Robert Cervaro, came to Grand Rapids to underscore how public transit was a strong tool to guide regional planning and development away from sprawl and its destruction of greenlands beyond the suburban fringe. In his monologue, Cervaro influenced many to believe that Light-Rail transit (dedicated public-transit rail corridors in elevated, street-level or subway formats) would not work in the Grand Rapids area. He explained that this was due to this region’s lack of sufficient population density and office space square-footage in downtown Grand Rapids and major adjacent suburbs. What Cervaro failed to acknowledge was that by adhering to his views, we would be contributing to accelerated urban sprawl by waiting passively for the densities he sees as necessary for light-rail. Cervaro also failed to realize that Grand Rapids was now in a unique position with its historic growth and relative lack of development density to actually use a thoughtfully placed new light-rail corridor as a generator of the very population and commercial densities that would strengthen the urbanized area and abate sprawl.

Such an idea is predicated upon the synergy and interconnectedness of linking the area’s super-regional destinations (locations that attract large amounts of people from distant points) with light-rail service and reconfiguring the current line-haul bus system to become transit feeders that tie into this rail corridor like ribs into a central spine. Each destination point, now a station for rail/bus access, would be set aside as special zones with incentives for the development of high-density mixed-use retail, office, housing and institutional uses that would be directly integrated into each station. Each of these stations, aligned in an east/west corridor, would correspond to 1) Gerald R. Ford Int’l Airport, 2) Aerotech Business Park, 3) Woodland Shopping Center, 4) Calvin College, 5) Eastown, 6) Aquinas College, 7) Davenport University, 8) the combined GRCC/Spectrum Health/VanAndel Institute campus (and now soon to include MSU Medical School), 9) the eventual Downtown Surface Transportation Center (now known as Central Station), 10) GVSU-Robert Pew campus, 11) John Ball Park Zoo, 12) the Standale Retail District at Wilson and Lake Michigan Drive and finally 13) GVSU-Main campus.

This alignment, focusing new development only around the stations, contributes to compact development while making it possible for over 30,000 college students on six campuses to fully access the urban hub of Metro Grand Rapids without a car, for thousands of business travelers, convention delegates and medical forum visitors to land at Ford Int’l and be shuttled directly to downtown Grand Rapids and for developers to have 13 good reasons to develop along the rail corridor instead of in the virgin exurban lands that we wish to protect. This vision, that could have a one-time implementational cost in the area of $10 billion, has the potential to generate upwards of $11 billion dollars annually in revenue from 500,000 square feet of mixed-use development at each station. Significant ongoing dollars and preserved greenspace - what are we waiting for?

-presented courtesy of MBEI DataCommand / www.mbei.org

Run with this.  Central Metro GR (Kent County) will only have one opportunity and one option for a fixed guideway system.  For it to succeed it MUST link the best possible majority of super-regional uses together into a single, cost-effective allignment.  The commuter rail lines out to Muskegon and Holland from the Central Station ground hub will come later.  Talk this up INTENSELY and to your elected officials.  The time is now.  PROJECTS are making this both doable AND imperitive.

-Metrogrkid

Edited by metrogrkid, 21 April 2006 - 11:45 AM.

[GRDadof3]

Nice to hear from you again metrogrkid!  

Although today's news was definitely good news, there is still a long journey and a lot of work to do.  Upward and onward!!

[Rizzo]

I think I remember Mr. Robert Cervaro pushing for BRT or Trolley. I'm curious to know, was Mr. Cervaro the only transit expert to be in GR pushing for these transit modes?

Edited by Rizzo, 21 April 2006 - 12:14 PM.

[metrogrkid]

Rizzo, on Apr 21 2006, 12:13 PM, said:

I think I remember Mr. Robert Cervaro pushing for BRT or Trolley. I'm curious to know, was Mr. Cervaro the only transit expert to be in GR pushing for these transit modes?

  YES      Conveniently not having anyone else in underscoring the virtues of heavy-rail or some other proven, much more high-capacity/major-scale than trolley or BRT.

[Rizzo]

I kinda felt that he was adamant on pushing BRT.  Maybe a possible study through Kent County can shed a light on the other possibilities?

Edited by Rizzo, 21 April 2006 - 06:54 PM.

[grcitydog]

No, no, no!!   Not a BRT system or "enhanced bus" system of any kind.  The Rapid busses have their necessary place, but Grand Rapids will need a Light Rail System.  Maybe right now the density won't support it, but now is the time to build it BEFORE the density makes it too expensive.  A BRT system just will not have the psychological effect of a true light rail system.  The fact that there are rail lines and rail stations which are immovable cause compact development around them.  Any system using the existing roadways is not seen a permanent and people won't build near them necessarily because the line can always be moved around to another area.  I think that if GR moves forward with a BRT system instead of  true light rail, in a couple of decades we will be revisiting it again and putting in a light rail system anyways at the cost of millions or billions more.

[Rizzo]

If you're going to play the game, you better go for the gold. I think Dad said that it would be better for a LRT/rail system in the SE corridor because that seems to be the most dense/populated area. If LRT were to work there, it would really boaster the community perception for possible expansions.

Edited by Rizzo, 22 April 2006 - 09:36 AM.

[heartsideguy]

grcitydog, on Apr 22 2006, 09:54 AM, said:

No, no, no!!   Not a BRT system or "enhanced bus" system of any kind.  The Rapid busses have their necessary place, but Grand Rapids will need a Light Rail System.  Maybe right now the density won't support it, but now is the time to build it BEFORE the density makes it too expensive.  A BRT system just will not have the psychological effect of a true light rail system.  The fact that there are rail lines and rail stations which are immovable cause compact development around them.  Any system using the existing roadways is not seen a permanent and people won't build near them necessarily because the line can always be moved around to another area.  I think that if GR moves forward with a BRT system instead of  true light rail, in a couple of decades we will be revisiting it again and putting in a light rail system anyways at the cost of millions or billions more.

Right on!  As good as a BRT system may look on paper,  I just don't see many in this community using it.  Lets face it, Michigan is an automotive based society.  The industry, the culture, the infrastructure.....We love our cars.  Theres nothing cool or fun about taking the bus to work.  Thats the intangible factor that light rail has that noone ever takes into account.  Its fun to take a train.  People just think its cool.  After a LRT system is installed, Transit oriented development occurs around the line, and people even try to find housing closer to the line.  Have you ever heard of someone moving to be closer to the bus stop?

[Picture Michigan]

heartsideguy, on Apr 25 2006, 09:02 PM, said:

Right on!  As good as a BRT system may look on paper,  I just don't see many in this community using it.  Lets face it, Michigan is an automotive based society.  The industry, the culture, the infrastructure.....We love our cars.  Theres nothing cool or fun about taking the bus to work.  Thats the intangible factor that light rail has that noone ever takes into account.  Its fun to take a train.  People just think its cool.  After a LRT system is installed, Transit oriented development occurs around the line, and people even try to find housing closer to the line.  Have you ever heard of someone moving to be closer to the bus stop?

I think you're putting a little too much romance in commuting and trains. Like Risky Business?

If I'm with Rebecca DeMornay, then I don't know if I would take the stairs or an elevator.

Even light rail in GR will not be as nice as we want it. Trains will not run every 10 to 15 minutes like in Chicago or NYC.

And I mostly cannot see anything fun about commuting, no matter what conduit.

[DwntwnGeo]

Why wouldn't they run @ 15 or 20 minute intervals?

The current weekday Rapid Schedule (during commute hours) runs at 15min intervals on major routes or 30 mins on non-major routes. I don't know why a light rail wouldn't run at the same intervals as the buses?

I do like being able to come and go from work when I please by having my own vehicle, but I don't think it would be an issue (for me) to plan a little ahead to use a Mass transit system. For around $40 a month, I can have a unlimited Rapid Bus pass which is around one week (two at the most) of gas money.

- My two cents

Picture Michigan, on Apr 25 2006, 11:02 PM, said:

I think you're putting a little too much romance in commuting and trains. Like Risky Business?

If I'm with Rebecca DeMornay, then I don't know if I would take the stairs or an elevator.

Even light rail in GR will not be as nice as we want it. Trains will not run every 10 to 15 minutes like in Chicago or NYC.

And I mostly cannot see anything fun about commuting, no matter what conduit.