Transit Updates for Greater Grand Rapids

[Raildudes dad]

Libertarian, in response to your "laying new rail" would cost more, I think even if you use existing freight rail, it would all have to be torn out and replaced because it's not suitable now for passenger travel. They're proposing to replace all the rail on the Whitmore Lake to Ann Arbor line to bring it up to code.

Wrong - Westlin type info again!!!!!!! Track speed is determined by it's "smoothness". The Whitmore Lake - AA line needs to be "smoothed" ie a track tamper run over it to take out the irregularities, ie low joints, cross level et, It DOES NOT need new rail. BTW, all track eventually needs tamping to maintain it's "smoothness" just like highways eventually need "smoothing".

[Libertarian]

...BTW Libertarian, a fellow Libertarian wrote into this blog regarding downtown streetcars...

Can’t say that I am active at all in the libertarian party, the name is more of a statement or rally cry against all the garbage in D.C. right now. Or even our own state capital. I do agree with stopping the drug war or having all costs of society being transparent and accounted for. I am tired, as I have said, of subsidizing metro Detroiters in their commute to work. Think about L.A. and their miles and miles of freeways that are all paid for by you and me. We will never use them. Freeways are not free, but many people use them everyday at an astronomically low cost compared to what the government gives them to make them work. Or what about the hundred million $ plus bridge to nowhere in Alaska that was the result of pork barrel spending? It is pretty gross.

This isn’t a thread for this and I apologize, but I just wanted you to know I don’t take any responsibility for what Erwin says in that post. Interesting read though, gotta love subjective accounts that we all know are probably wrong

[GRDadof3]

Wrong - Westlin type info again!!!!!!! Track speed is determined by it's "smoothness". The Whitmore Lake - AA line needs to be "smoothed" ie a track tamper run over it to take out the irregularities, ie low joints, cross level et, It DOES NOT need new rail. BTW, all track eventually needs tamping to maintain it's "smoothness" just like highways eventually need "smoothing".

Sorry RDD. I thought that's what I read in the article that new track would be laid. Correction noted.

My idea would be a general retail sales tax for the county. .75% or 1.00% on everything from clothes to furniture to Home Depot to other durable goods. Services excluded. Food and prescription medicines would be excluded. It amounts to about $60/year per capita, which is dirt cheap. If planned right, we may even be able to provide streetcar service for free (but we'll have to investigate that). Fareless Square Portland.

Kent County lists retail sales for the county at $8.4 Billion, but about $.7 Billion of that would be exempt. That's still $50 - $75 Million a year, enough to handle capital costs and operational costs for several rail lines and the proposed streetcar system, FTA FREE! I'm also thinking that the local philanthropists involved like Wege Foundation might help with engineering and environmental studies to help get the ball rolling.

You just have to be careful that an impression is not made that this is targeting anyone in particular, or penalizing anyone. We're all in this together to form a better metro area: urbanites, suburbanites, exurbanites. No language inferring that the "automobile or SUV's are evil" or that "suburbanites are killing this country". Like you said, a consistent and inspiring message that most people would love to be a part of. Keep your political views in check and be inclusive.

[Rizzo]

From the beginning I was really interested in community involvement outside of UP-GR...

It's the point of finding a venue and running the show that would be intensive. For that I figured just an informal community together where people can openly 'grab the mic,' and express their: wants, wishes, interests, questions, concerns, etc... That's why I've been getting as educated as possible on the logistics, technology, etc... I heard the speaking fees for the professionals are through the roof.

[Raildudes dad]

Howell to AA, actually 8 Mile to Plymouth Road. $2.4 million operating costs (not sure of that's 1 construction season or 2) plus about $700,000 to "smooth" the tracks. The current speed limit is 30 mph, after smoothing speed limit will be raised to 40.

There have been numerous references to "subsidized highways". In Michigan, the freeways (I-routes) have been constucted and rebuilt using Federal Highway trust funds generated by the Federal fuel tax. Michigan state highways are constructed & maintained by Act 51 the fuel & weight taxes. The I routes are also maintained using these funds. County & city roads are funded the same way (Act 51) although counties and townships can levy road milages if approved by the voters. (None curently in Kent County). Cities can spend general fund money on streets and most do. There are no Michigan general fund tax dollars in the Transportation budget - check it out if you don't believe me. In fact, I can make an argument that the transit monies (federal & state) are being siphoned off monies raised by the fuel & weight taxes which should really go to road funding.

Lest you think I don't know what I'm talking about, my resume' includes CEO, COO, and Chief Engineer (civil, not locomotive although I done that too ) of a small railroad (doesn't matter if you own 14 miles or 14,000, most of the same rules & regs apply ) as well as a upper level manager of a $50 million per year highway authority.

PS: Rizzo re: your last post - my consulting fees are really cheap - free so far

[GRDadof3]

Howell to AA, actually 8 Mile to Plymouth Road. $2.4 million operating costs (not sure of that's 1 construction season or 2) plus about $700,000 to "smooth" the tracks. The current speed limit is 30 mph, after smoothing speed limit will be raised to 40.

There have been numerous references to "subsidized highways". In Michigan, the freeways (I-routes) have been constucted and rebuilt using Federal Highway trust funds generated by the Federal fuel tax. Michigan state highways are constructed & maintained by Act 51 the fuel & weight taxes. The I routes are also maintained using these funds. County & city roads are funded the same way (Act 51) although counties and townships can levy road milages if approved by the voters. (None curently in Kent County). Cities can spend general fund money on streets and most do. There are no Michigan general fund tax dollars in the Transportation budget - check it out if you don't believe me. In fact, I can make an argument that the transit monies (federal & state) are being siphoned off monies raised by the fuel & weight taxes which should really go to road funding.

Lest you think I don't know what I'm talking about, my resume' includes CEO, COO, and Chief Engineer (civil, not locomotive although I done that too ) of a small railroad (doesn't matter if you own 14 miles or 14,000, most of the same rules & regs apply ) as well as a upper level manager of a $50 million per year highway authority.

PS: Rizzo re: your last post - my consulting fees are really cheap - free so far

Yer hired! I just don't have any money to pay you. I personally really appreciate your contributions. I'm donating my time to this, although my resume' doesn't read as nicely as yours.

Your explanation is all the more reason why a local transit retail sales tax would be the way to go as opposed to using FTA funds. As Libertarian noted though, you'd have a lot of complaints out of the car dealerships, which generate about $2.0 Billion of that $8.4 for Kent County. But some cities I've read about fund transit through vehicle sales alone. At least my proposal is more equitable.

We'll have to set up another transit meetup again soon.

[Rizzo]

Free is good. I'm glad I got you to UP I think we'll take you up on that... I think I can also get consulting from a family member at the Kentucky Railway Museum.

[Explorer55]

Howell to AA, actually 8 Mile to Plymouth Road. $2.4 million operating costs (not sure of that's 1 construction season or 2) plus about $700,000 to "smooth" the tracks. The current speed limit is 30 mph, after smoothing speed limit will be raised to 40.

There have been numerous references to "subsidized highways". In Michigan, the freeways (I-routes) have been constucted and rebuilt using Federal Highway trust funds generated by the Federal fuel tax. Michigan state highways are constructed & maintained by Act 51 the fuel & weight taxes. The I routes are also maintained using these funds. County & city roads are funded the same way (Act 51) although counties and townships can levy road milages if approved by the voters. (None curently in Kent County). Cities can spend general fund money on streets and most do. There are no Michigan general fund tax dollars in the Transportation budget - check it out if you don't believe me. In fact, I can make an argument that the transit monies (federal & state) are being siphoned off monies raised by the fuel & weight taxes which should really go to road funding.

Lest you think I don't know what I'm talking about, my resume' includes CEO, COO, and Chief Engineer (civil, not locomotive although I done that too ) of a small railroad (doesn't matter if you own 14 miles or 14,000, most of the same rules & regs apply ) as well as a upper level manager of a $50 million per year highway authority.

PS: Rizzo re: your last post - my consulting fees are really cheap - free so far

I won't say much (although I could), but I will say this: Parking. The fact that for most of us it's "free" means the use of the SOV is highly subsidized. If you can, find the book "The High Cost of Free Parking" by Donald Shoup. Take a look at it. Btw, I've been in the highway "business" for over 26 years, and one of my specialities has been understanding how we pay (or don't) for roads....

[GRDadof3]

My letter to the editor is in today's GRPress (bottom of the page).

Make sure to read the amusing letter after mine about hampster tubes throughout all of downtown by a guy from Newaygo.

[GRDadof3]

A nice summary of changes to New Starts and Small Starts FTA requirements by a fellow UPer:

http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/index.ph...mp;#entry699376

[GRDadof3]

Stay tuned for a transit meetup this coming week or next. All interested, say "Aye".

Forewarning, you may be asked to do some work.

[Rizzo]

I won't be able to make it, but I can probably do a teleconference if someone brings a communication device. If so, Aye.

Edited February 18, 2007 by Rizzo

[Allison Slater]

I'll be up for it as long as I have 1 week's notice prior to the scheduled date. I just upgraded my phone to a Sidekick 3 as well, so I can provide quick internet access if nobody has a laptop. Elbow grease won't be a problem. =]

AYE!

[Veloise]

Stay tuned for a transit meetup this coming week or next. All interested, say "Aye".

Forewarning, you may be asked to do some work.

Can't make it Tuesday either.

[Explorer55]

If you want to get the latest scoop on the federal transportation planning requirements and processes (which must be followed to receive federal transportation program/project funding), you can read the newly issued planning regulations here (in the Federal Register of Feb. 14):

http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2007/07-493.htm or http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2007/pdf/07-493.pdf

These regulations are based on "SAFETEA-LU", the current transportation program authorization bill passed in 2005.

Have fun!

[GRDadof3]

If you want to get the latest scoop on the federal transportation planning requirements and processes (which must be followed to receive federal transportation program/project funding), you can read the newly issued planning regulations here (in the Federal Register of Feb. 14):

http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2007/07-493.htm or http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2007/pdf/07-493.pdf

These regulations are based on "SAFETEA-LU", the current transportation program authorization bill passed in 2005.

Have fun!

Yeah, from what I've read, there's now a 20 year backlog of funding requests in the pipeline at the federal level.

[GRDadof3]

Come one, come all! The Grand Rapids Press is selling Bus Rapid Transit:

http://www.mlive.com/news/grpress/index.ss....xml&coll=6

They've been apparently fed the "Bus Rapid Transit is just as good as light rail manifest" and have eaten it up. BTW GR Press, no BRT line has been converted to light rail, ever, anywhere, period. So that benefit can be thrown out. No developers have invested in property because a BRT line was coming, so they do nothing to build density along the corridors (which streetcars and light rail do). And I don't believe any land use policies have changed or parking requirements have been reduced in any city in the country because a BRT line was coming to town.

Why does the Press keep bringing up a silly trolley bus that ran downtown in the 80's?

Yes, if people won't ride that, there's no way they'd ride a modern light rail vehicle:

[Rizzo]

For one thing I remember what downtown was in the 80s... I think many here can agree that the landscape has change considerably. I would also like to mention that The Press is mistaken when it compares these two modes -- apples and oranges here's why:

• One is a railroad vehicle the other isn't
  
• One runs on electricity and electric traction, a known inducer of easy going -- pleasurable riding
  
• One vehicle has no exhaust
  
• One has very little lateral or vertical force movement
  
• One is more efficient
  
• One operates on known and easily determined path -- I can walk closer to it knowing its not going to swerve and hit me.
  

If the Press can't get that One straight... Thank goodness the local streetcar proponents of this know the difference....

Edited February 21, 2007 by Rizzo

[GRDadof3]

Thanks Rizzo. Here's another comparison for the Press to try. I've been thinking about an Indoor Waterpark Resort for downtown, but maybe we should try one of these in Rosa Parks Circle first to see if it would be a success. I mean, why invest millions when we'll know our answer with a cool $5000 investment.

[winjer]

Knape has an interesting point to make on his blog:

Here's something people seem to be keeping a secret about downtown: Grand Rapids already has a free streetcar system of sorts -- the DASH bus.

If you're not a commuter who parks in one of the city's DASH lots, you might not know that those little purplish buses scooting around downtown offer free transportation in three fixed circular routes. You don't need to show a parking pass to take the ride, just hop on.

The unadvertised potential of DASH is its ability to go beyond being a mere parking shuttle. You actually can use the things to get around town -- say, from Grand Valley's DeVos campus to Happy Hour at Bite (soon to be the Ottawa Tavern) at Lyon and Ottawa.

Today I took it from the Press (actually, a stop in front of the Ford Federal Building) to the downtown YMCA and back. Press writer and spinning expert Ted Roelofs touted this as a way to cut his "carbon footprint." Like me, I think he was just sick of dealing with the ridiculous YMCA parking lot at lunchtime.

You might want to see if the DASH buses would work as means for you to reduce the need to get around downtown during the day. Here's a link to the route map.

Now I know, GrDad is right and buses aren't streetcars (the bit about the motion of buses is spot on), but it is interesting that we have this actual operating program that approximates a 3-line system--a completely free system, no less--and we don't even realize it or advertise it as such. Or does that actually show how right GrDad is?

Edited February 21, 2007 by winjer

[Rizzo]

I think its unfair to characterize the DASH bus as a streetcar, even if it is a "sort of" streetcar, which it isn't.

He raises a good point, but I can't tell if maybe he is making the connection that the DASH provides the need why screw with it. DASH provides an excellent and needed service, no doubt.

Edited February 21, 2007 by Rizzo

[GRDadof3]

Knape has an interesting point to make on his blog:

Now I know, GrDad is right and buses aren't streetcars (the bit about the motion of buses is spot on), but it is interesting that we have this actual operating program that approximates a 3-line system--a completely free system, no less--and we don't even realize it or advertise it as such. Or does that actually show how right GrDad is?

DASH is being used, A LOT. I think I read the DASH system is at an all time high for users right now. But honestly, I didn't know that you could just jump on and ride anytime if you didn't pay to park in DASH lots. That might be Chris's point to let people know that DASH is free and available for anyone to use just to get around downtown.

But the goal should be to eventually disband the DASH system of lots on the outskirts of downtown and fill in those lots with residential and commercial development, and put the "DASH" lots out in the suburbs where people would then board light rail or commuter rail bound for downtown.

[Explorer55]

Yeah, from what I've read, there's now a 20 year backlog of funding requests in the pipeline at the federal level.

There's never enough money for all of the transportation demand at any level of government, but federal funds, both FHWA and FTA are available now through the SAFETEA-LU authorizations and the agency that it must go through in the GR metro area is the Grand Valley Metro Council, including any transit discretionary grants the ITP might consider. The planning rules I refer to above are affecting transportation decision-making as we speak. If you want to understand how federal money becomes available to transportation agencies and how it is distributed within GR, as well as the rest of Michigan, you should read those regs or at least become more familiar with the workings of the Metro Council. Did you know that there is a great deal of flexibility in the federal transportation funding programs, at least for capital projects (hint: so-called highway funds can be used for transit and vice versa)?

[Rizzo]

How was that bypass in Ottawa County going to be funded?

[FilmMaker]

But the goal should be to eventually disband the DASH system of lots on the outskirts of downtown and fill in those lots with residential and commercial development, and put the "DASH" lots out in the suburbs where people would then board light rail or commuter rail bound for downtown.

Alas, we've finally brought the blatantly obvious need for "Park-and-Ride" back into this thread! Consider this little post to be my "voice in the wilderness" once again crying out for Park-and-Ride to remain an urgent and core factor in whatever type of transit system we consider.

If we don't solve the tremendous problem of parking in the core, any and all manners of "rapid transit" are going to be nothing more than a novelty.