[MrCoffee]

rbdetsport, on May 29 2005, 05:28 PM, said:

So are you asking for heavy or light rail?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Light rail, like they are starting in Minneapolis. Believe or not, there was a lot of opposition to light rail by the taxpayer's league and their cronies. However, the transit advocates managed to ramrod it through the system in spite of folks like Krinkie (a stupid senator who supports parking lots) trying to stop it. Of course, federal transportation subsidies helped pay for it. Without light rail, those funds would have been wasted. So now, there is a direct link from Minneapolis to the airport and the Mall of America, and the area along the rails is developing like there's no tomorrow. As for krinkie? He can kiss my.....

MrCoffee

Detroit: You should really consider getting the vote out. I think light rail can do a city some good...

[wolverine]

Oh how I wish for a light rail line linking Ann Arbor to Detroit. This would do a lot of good for both cities, plus it can also connect up to Detroit Metro Airport. Minneapolis already has an LRT system linked to their airport.

[MrCoffee]

wolverine, on May 29 2005, 10:21 PM, said:

Oh how I wish for a light rail line linking Ann Arbor to Detroit.  This would do a lot of good for both cities, plus it can also connect up to Detroit Metro Airport.  Minneapolis already has an LRT system linked to their airport.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I stand corrected. Yes, the LRT in Minneapolis links the Mall of America to the airport, and also the downtown Minneapolis area. Also, the funding is being worked on for the North Star Commuter Rail, that will link Minneapolis with St. Cloud, which is an 85 mile stretch.

On the LRT, I was hoping to imply that it's the first leg of a light rail system for Minneapolis and St. Paul. There is hope of a line from downtown Minneapolis to St. Paul, but I'm not sure when that will start if ever. It would be good to have LRT form a triangle between Bloomington, St. Paul, and Minneapolis.

As for Detroit: Linking it with Flint and Ann Arbor would be a good thing if it could be made to work. It would certainly take a lot of building, and would cost a considerable amount. But, I think it would certainly be worth it.

MrCoffee

[wolverine]

Haha, oops, didn't see that you already mentioned the airport-city connection.

[dnast]

What happened with the plan to use existing rail lines for commuter rail between Detroit and Ann Arbor? It sounded very feasible and could be an eye opener for the whole metro.

[wolverine]

I think that's still in the works, we just haven't heard anything yet.

[MrCoffee]

Believe it or not, there was commuter rail between Detroit and Ann Arbor. However, I believe that was shut down back in 1983. Who knows, there might still be enough infrastructure to get it going again. I guess we can hope anyway. It would be a definite plus if the commuter rail could form a triangle between Ann Arbor, Flint, and Detroit.

MrCoffee

[dnast]

Michigan has enough medium to small, but still significant-in-population cities that a rail network could easily connect you to most of Michigan's larger city centers and effectively and efficiently mobilze at least the southern half of the LP. It's a shame that sprawl, automobile-oriented development, and segregation are so prominent here...

[baldy]

Great thread! I'm looking forward to learning more.

[kgourlay]

Obviously this is a little different from commuter rail, but just for the record Amtrak does provide service from Detroit to Ann Arbor. You can also travel from Pontiac through Detroit to Ann Arbor, but if you're in Flint you can only get to Detroit by way of Battle Creek.

In any case, a ride from Detroit to Ann Arbor right now looks like it'd take about an hour and cost $9 - $12. Is it any wonder they're struggling? That's about the same time and cost as driving a large van... In my car I can do it quite faster and cheaper, not to mention the convenience.

MrCoffee, on May 30 2005, 01:04 AM, said:

Believe it or not, there was commuter rail between Detroit and Ann Arbor.  However, I believe that was shut down back in 1983.  Who knows, there might still be enough infrastructure to get it going again.  I guess we can hope anyway.  It would be a definite plus if the commuter rail could form a triangle between Ann Arbor, Flint, and Detroit.

MrCoffee

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[wolverine]

Forget that, I'll drive it, and get there much faster.

[SNWEB]

Not to mention Ken uses premium fuel lol

[dnast]

Geez! I know they can do better than that. Even Greyhound beats that (seriously).

[wolverine]

And the fact that a one way ticket to Chicago on those same Amtrak lines costs only $20, and $9 to Detroit for a "commute?" hell no! Somehow I think Ann Arbor is going to link it's surrounding towns with light rail before Detroit even gets to the drawing board. That maglev thing that's supposed to go down Woodward doesn't coun either!

[MrCoffee]

Actually, the train would be a lot smoother and quieter than a bus. I've been on too many busses, they are noisy and ride like a logging wagon (compared to rail anyway). Yes, gas would cost a lot less and it would be faster with a car. But if you don't have a car, Amtrak would do nicely until something else more reasonable comes along.

MrCoffee

And you're right Wolverine, the so-called "People Mover" doesn't count.

[Zissou]

I think Wolverine is speaking about Ferndales proposed light rail down Woodward. They would sort of do it as a test run and if it worked well they are hoping more communities along Woodward would pick it up.

[dnast]

True, rail would be more enjoyable. It's just that at $12 each way if you can't afford a car, you can't afford this train. Riding 5 days a week will put you in the $500/month range. $9 each way will put the cost around $400/month.

I believe Wolverine is talking about the demonstration line that's proposed for Woodward. I can't believe I completely forgot about that thing.

Edit: I didn't see Zissou's post. That's what I get for posting at work.

This post has been edited by dnast: 31 May 2005 - 08:33 AM

[MrCoffee]

dnast, on May 31 2005, 08:32 AM, said:

True, rail would be more enjoyable. It's just that at $12 each way if you can't afford a car, you can't afford this train. Riding 5 days a week will put you in the $500/month range. $9 each way will put the cost around $400/month.

I believe Wolverine is talking about the demonstration line that's proposed for Woodward. I can't believe I completely forgot about that thing.

Edit: I didn't see Zissou's post. That's what I get for posting at work.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I can see where it wouldn't make much sense for commuting. Generally, people who have jobs in Detroit but live in Ann Arbor have cars anyway. The train would be good occasionally, if you don't use it very often. I actually do like the price going into Chicago, though. I wouldn't have to worry about finding a place to park, and it would give me time to learn Chicago's public transportation system. Hopefully, Amtrak will keep going through Ann Arbor.

MrCoffee

[wolverine]

Good and bad news was announced recently reguarding Michigan Central Station.

The good news is, the station cannot be torn down. The construction of the building is too solid to destroy with explosives and wrecking cranes. The only alternative is manual demolition. However, it would take years to dismantle the structure, and the costs of getting rid of it would soon outweigh the costs of renovating it. Therefore, if something is to be done with the structure, the only feasible alternative is renovation

Here's the bad news: Although you probably already know...
There is currently no solid proposals for the building. in an article by the associated press, Kwame Kilpatrick said he was "frustrated" that his police station plan wasn't working for the station. I think we could have told him that a long time ago. Anyway, although there are probably dozens of people wilth plans to turn it into something, someone has to come forward with the dough to renovate it. The city is currently awaiting results of an engineering study done on the building to find what practical uses the building could serve as structurally and spacially.

I'm still not sure exactly why costs are so high. I think it might because this may be the price tag for putting the station back to the way it was. Although, I could care less if they use drywall over marble in the hallways of the tower. Just as long as the lower levels look something grand like they used to. But comparing it to other buildings downtown, many portions of the building should be easy since so many areas are stripped to the brick. I'm looking forward to seeing some factual results reguarding renovation costs.

I'll try to post the article later.

[Allan]

Here is the link to the article. After insisting that the M-L be demolished, KK now says that MCS can't be demolished. I guess he's turned into a preservationist.

http://www.wxyz.com/...s/art...3821729,00.html