Transit Updates for Greater Grand Rapids

[GRDadof3]

I was looking at how many plausible routes into the city from the south there is. You have two obvious routes, but of course both have advantages and disadvantages:

1. The Norfolk Southern route running along side US 131. This is route was deemed too and low ridership (due to the industrial/warehouses that align this route) as a consequence it was quickly discontinued of further discussion.
   
   
2. Division Ave. This route would be perfect, expect the streetcar must share the road with existing traffic. At the cost of remaining purely a street vehicle the consequence is conforming to traffic laws and congestion.
   

I can't believe this hasn't been discussed, but here goes.

By chance I was reviewing maps of Kent County and also paging over a historical book of Grand Rapids. I remember the Interurban! This once railed route is now a grassy tract of land running through the heart of Southside for a good eight miles (to about 68th st). Upon investigating, the ownership of this tract appears to be Consumers' Power. It looks to be primarily used for the transmission of electricity.

This has got to be the most obvious route we should put energy into investigating. The route is cleared, mostly continuous, and best of all runs through the heart of the urban and suburban area. I can't help, but think this route is the best of choice for making any chance of transit in GR as 'Rapid.' This route is a dedicated, electrified, and easily accessible by just being a block or so away from busy thoroughfares.

One point that could hinge its viability is the cost/task of securing a small portion of this land. Seeing how there is already a paved route in some lengths lends me to believe municipalities along the route may have relationships established with Consumers'.

Has anyone every considered this route?

Rizzo, do you have a map or sat image that shows the Interurban you're referring to? I'm not familiar with it.

[winjer]

Most all of Division south of downtown is at least 4 lanes wide (two lanes of traffic each direction)and 5 in some places. What if the City were to dedicate one lane in each direction for tansit (LTR or BRT)? Wouldn't it be possible for the City to "curb" off this transit lane so drivers could not jump lanes? This would create a dedicated ROW for a tranist system. There are additional services that Cities have put on BRT to "adjust or change" stop lights on cross streets to make the transit lane more effient and on time by not having to stop at each and every light. Of course the major down side to this plan would be the adjustment required by drivers to have one lane in each direction instead of two. Another option in some areas where street side parking is available is to loose the parking lane verses the driving lane. Maybe the frustration of driving on only one lane would encourage additional users of the transit system? or maybe it would encourage them not to go downtown?

Division would be a great choice. As far as having only 1 driving lane...the city has already been doing this to several other major roads. Four lanes are converted into bike lanes+regular lanes+center turn lane. this has happened on Fulton east of Carlton and Plainfield north of Creston neighborhood. It's a traffic calming measure!

[Rizzo]

Rizzo, do you have a map or sat image that shows the Interurban you're referring to? I'm not familiar with it.

I'm trying to work on a map for you, but you can explore the southern portion of this line near 68th St. on the southside. Check this link out for a map. http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/showflat.php/Ca...0/page/0#759947 If you have Google Earth available, you can click the "View in Google Earth" link and it will bring up the program with the location. If you don't have Google Earth, I believe you can click an opposite link to Google Maps.

Just follow this north, in some places it looks like a road, beaten path, etc... I'll work on plotting the path out on sat imagery.

Edited January 17, 2007 by Rizzo

[Rizzo]

I don't have a continuous map, but I have a few separate areas. Follow the dots

The start of a possible line:

Here's a point where you can run the rail on street. I guess we could either run it on Buchanan or Division Ave. I ran it on Buchanan just for simplicity as ITP station is closer.

Arrive at Central Station:

[tamias6]

^^I followed the dots on Google Earth and found the route logical. The ROW avoids taking away lanes on Division while Buchanan dose not see no where near the traffic level as Divsion and thus could give up driveing lanes to a LRT/BRT line without too much disturbances to traffic patterns. Being that rout passes though residentual areas I would Opt. for an electric powered LRT like the one in Portland OR. as this system seems very quiet.

Edited January 18, 2007 by tamias6

[DwntwnGeo]

Looking for some additional information on the internet, I came across this site on MDOT for public input:

"MI Transportation Plan

MI Transportation Plan, also known as the State Long-Range Plan, is a 25-year plan for transforming Michigan's transportation system. With input from stakeholders and the public, MDOT is developing a vision for our future transportation system. The draft plan will be released in late spring 2007. "

There are a couple links to some current MDOT visions and goals. There is also a link for public comment. This is our time to let the State of Michigan know how we feel about transit issues in our State.

The MDOT link is here:

http://www.michigan.gov/mdot/1,1607,7-151-...4809---,00.html

[DwntwnGeo]

From an article posted in the news section of The Rapid website:

"WASHINGTON, DC - Today, the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) released a groundbreaking new study finding that public transportation use saves 1.4 billion gallons of gasoline every year, and can reduce household expenses by $6,200 - more than the average household pays for food in a year."

"Public transportation usage reduces U.S. gasoline consumption by 1.4 billion gallons each year - or the equivalent of 108 million cars filling up, almost 300,000 each day. These savings result from the efficiency of carrying multiple passengers in each vehicle; the reduction in traffic congestion from fewer automobiles on the roads; and the varied sources of energy for public transportation. If twice as many Americans had the choice of taking public transportation, these gasoline savings would at least double to 2.8 billion gallons each year."

The complete article published 1-10-07 can be read here:

http://www.apta.com/media/releases/070109_energy_report.cfm

Edited January 18, 2007 by DwntwnGeo

[Allison Slater]

I had no idea the route was still preserved all the way up to Central Station, I had thought it terminated near the railyards. Good find Rizzo. And as I had already mentioned about this route, it could easilly be extended into a commuter rail to Kalamazoo through Wayland and Moline (I believe it passes through Plainwell as well, and runs near Bradley). The ROW in Wayland is still preserved quite well, and has served as an unofficial street for a long time. (In fact the Wayland Skate Park fronts this street.) The sections around Moline would have to be re-worked completely, though, due to the horrible condition. In fact one portion in Moline actually is a city street now, I believe. Very low traffic street.

If any route has to be created by laying down new rail, this would most likely be one of the best options, IMHO. It was part of the former system, so various development actually grew around it, city infrastructure was designed for it.. it would be a very high choice to consider.

[Rizzo]

The problem for this route is that Consumers owns this and operates high power lines through this ROW. I don't know if this is accurate (someone can check for us) but Consumers doesn't like development under its power lines... Again, I don't know if that is an official statement, but it would be great if someone in that field could relay some information.

This route would be beautiful. Its surrounded by residential and only at the most 2 or three small blocks away from Division Ave. There must be a good reason why ITP didn't poke around this route as a option for a Rapid Line. Cost???

Tslater -- I don't have my grand father at my side, he worked these lines and would know it the back of his hand, but I believe the route terminates at the rail yard as you suspected. What I did was routed a imaginary line onto Buchanan Ave and crossed Norfolk Southern rail and up to the ITP.

[Raildudes dad]

The problem for this route is that Consumers owns this and operates high power lines through this

Tslater -- I don't have my grand father at my side, he worked these lines and would know it the back of his hand, but I believe the route terminates at the rail yard as you suspected. What I did was routed a imaginary line onto Buchanan Ave and crossed Norfolk Southern rail and up to the ITP.

I don't have time right now to answer all the questions / comments that have come up recently in this thread but I have to respond to the above quote. Follow the high tension lines north of 28th Street along the NS. They cross over the freeway and go behind the old Kelvinator plant and eventually to the river (Market Street) south of Godfrey. The bridge over Market & then the river is the old interuban bridge Consumers owns the right of way and the power lines. Their predecessor company bought the ROW from the defunct interurbans (not just this route only).

[DwntwnGeo]

Not certain yet, but I hope to attend the Jan 17 mtg.

FilmMaker, were you able to attend the meeting on Wednesday? I got my days/dates mixed up and drove to The Rapid today (1-18) for yesterday's meeting

[dragt]

FilmMaker, were you able to attend the meeting on Wednesday? I got my days/dates mixed up and drove to The Rapid today (1-18) for yesterday's meeting

I did go to meeting... and it was a pretty frustrating experience. I choose to depend on the Rapid for my daily transportation. we have two cars but I choose to utilize public transport for about 90% of my personal getting around town.

To have to sit through this meeting and listen to a bunch of people who have rarely (if ever) even ridden the bus talk about the future of transit was crazy. The gentleman from East Grand Rapids was especially offensive. The results of the GT2 were presented including a recommendation for BRT along the division corridor. Mr. Rick Morris (of EGR) had an opinion about everything (mostly argumentative) and thus started in on the wisdom of investing in the division corridor. He seemed to want to suggest that Division was far to... umm... distasteful for the likes of a 25 year resident of EGR to be supportive of investing dollars (in the form of a federal grant...). He suggested that the division corridor (and by extension, the 'kind of folks' that live around it) is already served just fine by bus.

Mr. Morris went on to basically dismiss the idea of a downtown steetcar as rediculous and useless. He seemed to think that DT has seen plenty of development with out it (perhaps too much...).

I had to leave early in order to catch my bus home. If this is the strategic planning commitee, I'm really suprised the rapid has come as far as it has... The full Board will meet next week, and they will (I believe) make a decision on the regarding the GT2 study recommendation. Perhaps you'd like to email Mr. Morris before the board meeting (maybe we could offer to buy him a ride along the division route ):

RICK MORRIS, EGR Third Ward commisioner: [email protected]

Next Meeting Date: January 24, 2007

The January Board agenda will be posted as soon as it is available.

Place: The Rapid's Administrative Headquarters

300 Ellsworth Avenue SW (next to Rapid Central Station)

[DwntwnGeo]

Next Meeting Date: January 24, 2007

The January Board agenda will be posted as soon as it is available.

Place: The Rapid's Administrative Headquarters

300 Ellsworth Avenue SW (next to Rapid Central Station)

Thanks dragt for the updates on the meeting. When I stopped by on Thursday, it was mentioned that attending the Board Meeting on 1-24-07 would be a good idea. As you mentioned there is suppose to be a vote in regards to the "next" transit step. If approved by the board on 1-24-07, there woudl be some additional information would be made available to the public.

[Rizzo]

I did go to meeting... and it was a pretty frustrating experience. I choose to depend on the Rapid for my daily transportation. we have two cars but I choose to utilize public transport for about 90% of my personal getting around town.

To have to sit through this meeting and listen to a bunch of people who have rarely (if ever) even ridden the bus talk about the future of transit was crazy. The gentleman from East Grand Rapids was especially offensive. The results of the GT2 were presented including a recommendation for BRT along the division corridor. Mr. Rick Morris (of EGR) had an opinion about everything (mostly argumentative) and thus started in on the wisdom of investing in the division corridor. He seemed to want to suggest that Division was far to... umm... distasteful for the likes of a 25 year resident of EGR to be supportive of investing dollars (in the form of a federal grant...). He suggested that the division corridor (and by extension, the 'kind of folks' that live around it) is already served just fine by bus.

Mr. Morris went on to basically dismiss the idea of a downtown steetcar as rediculous and useless. He seemed to think that DT has seen plenty of development with out it (perhaps too much...).

I had to leave early in order to catch my bus home. If this is the strategic planning commitee, I'm really suprised the rapid has come as far as it has... The full Board will meet next week, and they will (I believe) make a decision on the regarding the GT2 study recommendation. Perhaps you'd like to email Mr. Morris before the board meeting (maybe we could offer to buy him a ride along the division route ):

RICK MORRIS, EGR Third Ward commisioner: [email protected]

Next Meeting Date: January 24, 2007

The January Board agenda will be posted as soon as it is available.

Place: The Rapid's Administrative Headquarters

300 Ellsworth Avenue SW (next to Rapid Central Station)

Who mentioned the idea of a downtown Streetcar? I'm not going to email him unless there are minutes available...

[DwntwnGeo]

Who mentioned the idea of a downtown Streetcar? I'm not going to email him unless there are minutes available...

When I stopped by yesterday, I asked for the minutes and they were not available yet..... If/When I find them Rizzo, I will let you know.

[Rizzo]

When I stopped by yesterday, I asked for the minutes and they were not available yet..... If/When I find them Rizzo, I will let you know.

Thank you sir.

[GRDadof3]

I did go to meeting... and it was a pretty frustrating experience. I choose to depend on the Rapid for my daily transportation. we have two cars but I choose to utilize public transport for about 90% of my personal getting around town.

To have to sit through this meeting and listen to a bunch of people who have rarely (if ever) even ridden the bus talk about the future of transit was crazy. The gentleman from East Grand Rapids was especially offensive. The results of the GT2 were presented including a recommendation for BRT along the division corridor. Mr. Rick Morris (of EGR) had an opinion about everything (mostly argumentative) and thus started in on the wisdom of investing in the division corridor. He seemed to want to suggest that Division was far to... umm... distasteful for the likes of a 25 year resident of EGR to be supportive of investing dollars (in the form of a federal grant...). He suggested that the division corridor (and by extension, the 'kind of folks' that live around it) is already served just fine by bus.

Mr. Morris went on to basically dismiss the idea of a downtown steetcar as rediculous and useless. He seemed to think that DT has seen plenty of development with out it (perhaps too much...).

I had to leave early in order to catch my bus home. If this is the strategic planning commitee, I'm really suprised the rapid has come as far as it has... The full Board will meet next week, and they will (I believe) make a decision on the regarding the GT2 study recommendation. Perhaps you'd like to email Mr. Morris before the board meeting (maybe we could offer to buy him a ride along the division route ):

RICK MORRIS, EGR Third Ward commisioner: [email protected]

Next Meeting Date: January 24, 2007

The January Board agenda will be posted as soon as it is available.

Place: The Rapid's Administrative Headquarters

300 Ellsworth Avenue SW (next to Rapid Central Station)

I have to agree that a streetcar downtown done improperly would be a useless and a waste of money. If it is just put in to loop around downtown for tourist rides, then I really hope that's not the direction they are going. There are parking, traffic and people movement issues downtown that are going to get dramatically worse over the next decade that could be addressed with a streetcar/lightrail system strategically linked to key growth areas (Healthcare Hill, GVSU, city center, Heartside).

As far as the BRT route down Division, I'm torn on that one. I'm not saying it's necessarily a bad idea, but what great improvement would it provide over the current buses along that route? Would it increase ridership enough to offset the tremendous cost? Would it spur any redevelopment?

I'm in the process of putting together a report to submit to the RAPID with many of the ideas we've outlined in this thread.

[dragt]

Who mentioned the idea of a downtown Streetcar? I'm not going to email him unless there are minutes available...

As far as I could tell (they did not hand out packets to public), the recommendation of the GT2 study task force is to go after federal and state dollars (akin to road infrastructure improvement) for the BRT down Division corridor. Another recommendation was that there was sufficient need to justify further study of the possibility of streetcar downtown. Yes, minutes will be very helpful as I had to leave a little before the meeting came to a close.

As far as the BRT route down Division, I'm torn on that one. I'm not saying it's necessarily a bad idea, but what great improvement would it provide over the current buses along that route? Would it increase ridership enough to offset the tremendous cost? Would it spur any redevelopment?

I'm in the process of putting together a report to submit to the RAPID with many of the ideas we've outlined in this thread.

Have you ever ridden the Division route? Do you know the ridership numbers? I don't know the stats but I can say that I've ridden division at a wide variety of times and it is always a packed bus (especially as it gets to downtown). as far as I can tell, some advantages of BRT is that it can be faster and more frequent/reliable than regular rolling stock. no, this is not as sexy for commuters as light rail with dedicated ROW, but it is the only corridor in GR that has the numbers and conditions to meet federal requirements to go after funding for the next step in improving transport (they were calling a "locally preferred alternative" and "very small start" program). Add a few park and ride and assuming at least every 15min frequency and I should think this would be an attractive way to get downtown and not worry about what to do with your car... Not to mention the soon to be realized Kroc center along this route...

[GRDadof3]

As far as I could tell (they did not hand out packets to public), the recommendation of the GT2 study task force is to go after federal and state dollars (akin to road infrastructure improvement) for the BRT down Division corridor. Another recommendation was that there was sufficient need to justify further study of the possibility of streetcar downtown. Yes, minutes will be very helpful as I had to leave a little before the meeting came to a close.

Have you ever ridden the Division route? Do you know the ridership numbers? I don't know the stats but I can say that I've ridden division at a wide variety of times and it is always a packed bus (especially as it gets to downtown). as far as I can tell, some advantages of BRT is that it can be faster and more frequent/reliable than regular rolling stock. no, this is not as sexy for commuters as light rail with dedicated ROW, but it is the only corridor in GR that has the numbers and conditions to meet federal requirements to go after funding for the next step in improving transport (they were calling a "locally preferred alternative" and "very small start" program). Add a few park and ride and assuming at least every 15min frequency and I should think this would be an attractive way to get downtown and not worry about what to do with your car... Not to mention the soon to be realized Kroc center along this route...

No, I haven't ridden it and don't know the ridership numbers for that route, but according to the schedule, it looks like there is a bus every 12 - 18 minutes during most of the day. Like I said, I didn't say it was a bad idea. BRT vehicles are usually much larger, and if they can work in a fixed guideway and time the traffic signals, that certainly would be able to accommodate more riders in a faster manner.

I wonder if commuters would use it with a park-n-ride system?

[Rizzo]

It amazes me that our growth must be regulated by state and federal dollars. I keep hearing this and get disappointed of our future, especially when there's mention of BRT. If we keep relying on the feds to help us we're just letting them determine our growth.

I don't buy this, "because we can upgrade it later" attitude. I'd rather spend the extra money to have a system that doesn't need to 'upgrade' to an entirely whole other mode and system that will not work on Division.

Our community is no stranger to public and private partnerships hitting the hundreds of millions of dollars... If your going to run the race -- go for the gold.

Maybe I just need to be put in my place?

Edited January 19, 2007 by Rizzo

[DwntwnGeo]

No, I haven't ridden it and don't know the ridership numbers for that route, but according to the schedule, it looks like there is a bus every 12 - 18 minutes during most of the day. Like I said, I didn't say it was a bad idea. BRT vehicles are usually much larger, and if they can work in a fixed guideway and time the traffic signals, that certainly would be able to accommodate more riders in a faster manner.

I wonder if commuters would use it with a park-n-ride system?

We also should understand, and many of use do, is that sometimes we have to take smaller steps forward than what we would like to. In talking with a Rapid Manager yesterday, he would also like to go right to Light Rail, but he also says that there would be no Federal Funding and you cannot expect all the Money for LTR to come from locals and Millages. So if you can take small steps forward, to establish the ROW, and the best route now so you can plan for your ultimate design in the next decade or two. So BRT may not be the ultimate goal we want, but if we can use it as a tool to increase support and ridership, start laying a foundation for future steps towards getting more Federal dollars for our ultimate transit plan, than isn't it worth it? Look at downtown, it isn't what it is today because of just one project, it took many small and large projects over the course of a couple of decades to make it what is it is today.

[Rizzo]

That's my problem though, how do we know Division Ave. will be a viable ROW for LRT in the future? You must contend with traffic, speed limit, etc... I think we are making a mistake by trying to predict the future. If the goal is to replace bus with cool buses, I'm for it. If our goal is to establish a rapid link to downtown (via Division) then we are in trouble.

Edited January 19, 2007 by Rizzo

[DwntwnGeo]

It amazes me that our growth must be regulated by state and federal dollars. I keep hearing this and get disappointed of our future, especially when there's mention of BRT. If we keep relying on the feds to help us we're just letting them determine our growth.

I don't buy this, "because we can upgrade it later" attitude. I'd rather spend the extra money to have a system that doesn't need to 'upgrade' to an entirely whole other mode and system that will not work on Division.

Our community is no stranger to public and private partnerships hitting the hundreds of millions of dollars... If your going to run the race -- go for the gold.

Maybe I just need to be put in my place?

Rizzo, I see what you are saying and if locals can put up the money that is good too. But you need a people base to use the product..... From your example, than buildings downtown should all be 600+ feet because someday someone will fill the floor space, because we don't want to tear down or add to an existing building to make it taller when the need is there. You cannot get funding from banks/local partners without having a certain percentage of spaced called for. Wouldn't it be simular to how funding for a transit system would work? What bank/businessman is going to contribute money to something that might be overbuilt? If you are going to have close to the same ridership on either type of system, than why spend more money on one than the other?

[DwntwnGeo]

That's my problem though, how do we know Division Ave. will be a viable ROW for LRT in the future? You must contend with traffic, speed limit, etc... I think we are making a mistake by trying to predict the future. If the goal is to replace bus with cool buses, I'm for it. If our goal is to establish a rapid link to downtown (via Division) then we are in trouble.

This is where I have issues. (maybe there are my own and no one elses). If you want a FAST (like LTR) direct or low number of service stops into downtown than you should not use Division Ave. Use should try and use the freight lines along US131 or the Frieght/Amtrak lines over to Holland etc. To me these would be more considered "commuter" lines and would come from Holland/Kalamazoo/Muskegon/Lansing etc.

If you want a "local" mass transit to system with multiple stops (like every few blocks) to support retail and business locations than I think Division would be a good location. It is the largest route current in use (outside of students for GVSU-Allendale). The infrastructure is mostly set up along Division etc and there are existing buildings with businesses/retail.

I do not think that we as a Metro area can support a system that would combine both the Commuter and Local transit systems like they do in larger cities of NYC and Chicago. However I do feel we can support each type of system in their own ways in seperate areas. This is just my $.02 and I could very well be wrong.

Edited January 19, 2007 by DwntwnGeo

[dragt]

I agree with DTGeo, we must take the small steps available to us. We just don't seem to have the proven demand for large scale private investment. I ride everyday and with very few exceptions the rapid is used by those who have no choice. The "if you build it they will come" theory has been used in plenty of other cities and some succeed and are veiwed as brilliant and visionary. BUT, more seem to fail and are expensive embarrasements for those who chose to dream...

Don't get me wrong Rizzo, I would upload video of me doing a crazy happy dance for you all to make fun of if public and private forces conspired to bless the city with transit way ahead the current projections!