Transit Updates for Greater Grand Rapids

[metrogrkid]

No problem John.

Also, check out this list compiled by WOODTV of metro area projects ready for funding under an Obama Administration. The top three projects on Muskegon County's list are transit related, while there isn't even a wish in Kent County. C'mon guys! I think its imperative that local transit advocates convene quickly, right now, to push for a solid second phase project to compliment the enhanced bus and streetcar projects.

Rizz:

As I spend each weekday shuttling around downtown GR on the DASH system and combine what I see with what I know from my involvement in the planning of the Streetrail Transit (SRT) and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) projects, I have been able to compile a pretty comprehensive list of sites ripe for transit-oriented development (TOD).

I got the idea that by pulling together a new gathering of the Planning for a World-Class Downtown Committee (PWCD) we could 1] present these sites to the committee as they are today to get their input on what they could become in their highest/best use TOD states, 2] collaborate with IT students at Kendall College to generate a computer animation "SIM CITY-esque" flyover simulation of those higher/best use TOD concepts and 3] present these findings (along with examples from other successful TOD cities) in a report to the ITP/Rapid Board and Grand Rapids City Commission (as a means to "drive the conversation" about transit and TOD toward the best ideas).

The site locations are listed below:

-PRIME DEVELOPMENT SITES WITH DIRECT SRT ACCESS

*Market/Grandville/Oakes Surface Lot

*North Monroe/Icon On Bond Surface Lot

*North Monroe/Olds Manor/U.S. Post Office Site

*North Monroe/I-196 Riverfront Site

*Central Station/Grandville Avenue Area

*Public Works Island/former RiverGrand Site

-PRIME DEVELOPMENT SITES WITH DIRECT BRT ACCESS

*Michigan Street/Grand Rapids Press Site

-PRIME DEVELOPMENT SITES WITH DIRECT BRT & SRT ACCESS

*Market/Fulton Surface Lot

*Vandenberg Center/Calder Plaza

-PRIME DEVELOPMENT SITES WITH DIRECT ACCESS TO CONSIDERED SRT WESTBANK EXPANSION

*YMCA Surface Lot

*Dash West Surface Lot

*Bridge Street Entertainment/Retail District

-PRIME DEVELOPMENT SITES WITH NO PLANNED DIRECT SRT OR BRT ACCESS

*Butterworth/Front/Wealthy Grand River Westbank Area

*Ionia/Louis/Fulton Surface Lot

*South VanAndel Arena/Area 4 Surface Lot

*South VanAndel Arena/Area 5 Surface Lot

The combination of TOD and these sites would have positive impacts on downtown that would eclipse even what we have seen thus far for the downtown area. I believe that with UP-GR's PWCD Committee leading the discussion on TOD opportunities and possibilities for downtown that such options will be given the broadest possible exposure and opportunity for thoughtful consideration and possible implementation. I look forward to hearing what you think (and anyone else here at UP that may be interested).

-Metrogrkid

Edited January 16, 2009 by metrogrkid

[Rizzo]

Had the chance to review some recently passed transit legislation. I thought that the legislation passed was applicable statewide, but apparently I was wrong. Here's this little gem of legislation.

HOUSE BILL No. 6542 (Introduced by Reps. Johnson, Leland, Donigan, Clemente and Gaffney) amends Public Act 35 of 1867 to allow non-profit street railways. The new law gives a hole bunch of perks to non-profit street rail companies like TIFAs, eminent domain, an the ability to operate on state and local roads. But, to be allowed by law a non-profit street railway must operate in a "qualified city." Per the amended law, a qualified city is:

"a city in this state that contains an automated light rail system that operates on an elevated single track loop of at least 2 miles"

This bill was packaged with a battery of others -- some of which give a potential non-profit street railway companies funds through the Department of Transportation.

I wonder what this law will do for the downtown streetcar? How much time it will take to amend this law allowing Grand Rapids the ability to have a non-profit street railway? How about bridging i96 c'mon!

Edited January 23, 2009 by Rizzo

[Khorasaurus]

Had the chance to review some recently passed transit legislation. I thought that the legislation passed was applicable statewide, but apparently I was wrong. Here's this little gem of legislation.

HOUSE BILL No. 6542 (Introduced by Reps. Johnson, Leland, Donigan, Clemente and Gaffney) amends Public Act 35 of 1867 to allow non-profit street railways. The new law gives a hole bunch of perks to non-profit street rail companies like TIFAs, eminent domain, an the ability to operate on state and local roads. But, to be allowed by law a non-profit street railway must operate in a "qualified city." Per the amended law, a qualified city is:

"a city in this state that contains an automated light rail system that operates on an elevated single track loop of at least 2 miles"

This bill was packaged with a battery of others -- some of which give a potential non-profit street railway companies funds through the Department of Transportation.

I wonder what this law will do for the downtown streetcar? How much time it will take to amend this law allowing Grand Rapids the ability to have a non-profit street railway? How about bridging i96 c'mon!

What the hell? How will this effect GR's streetcar plan? What is the point of making this law only apply to Detroit?

Another thing that occured to me...doesn't this legislation basically prevent the Woodward streetcar from being extended past 8 Mile...or for that matter, through Highland Park, which is on the Phase 1 route plan?

Edited January 23, 2009 by Khorasaurus

[Timize]

I received this news update on Facebook earlier today:

If leaders at The Rapid have their way, rider-centric technology that includes a real-time arrival system and onboard wireless Internet access will be part of the Grand Rapids transit system.

The Rapid recently wrapped up a first phase of technology enhancements that include global positioning system (GPS) tracking, an automated annunciation system to assist visually impaired riders, and onboard mobile data terminals that enable communication between bus drivers and dispatchers.

Now the purchasing department and operations staff are busy putting together the specifics for Phase II of the high-tech renovation.

[Rizzo]

What the hell? How will this effect GR's streetcar plan? What is the point of making this law only apply to Detroit?

It's planned that one of the first steps for the downtown streetcar is to organize a non-profit street railway company or something of that nature. As of now that's illegal, because Grand Rapids doesn't have a people mover. My first thought is that it is exclusionary so that it passes without politics among other state reps. Suburban Republican Tom Pearce (Rockford) had a hand in one of the bills attached to this one.

Edited January 23, 2009 by Rizzo

[tamias6]

It's planned that one of the first steps for the downtown streetcar is to organize a non-profit street railway company or something of that nature. As of now that's illegal, because Grand Rapids doesn't have a people mover. My first thought is that it is exclusionary so that it passes without politics among other state reps. Suburban Republican Tom Pearce (Rockford) had a hand in one of the bills attached to this one.

So with this new law GR can't form an organization to run a streetcar line because we are required to have at least two miles of people moving rail which we don't have. Well, how is GR suppose to get its streetcar line if it can't create an organization to run it? To me this nothing more than a Detroit-centric law.

[suydam]

So with this new law GR can't form an organization to run a streetcar line because we are required to have at least two miles of people moving rail which we don't have. Well, how is GR suppose to get its streetcar line if it can't create an organization to run it? To me this nothing more than a Detroit-centric law.

You can almost envision the same people who pulled up the rails writing the law.

[blueradon]

I wouldn't be down and out that we're not receiving any funding from this money for other transit related projects - but seriously folks - not every single person is going to ride a train in town - it will not be accessible for every single person in the town and surrounding it - these things take time to develop - a lot of our roads are in really rough shape and could use a boost to get them fixed.

I'm not putting down anyone's ideas - I just don't think we should keep the focus of transportation to be so one-sided (granted it is sort of that way right now). Look at how far we have come already with the busses and the planning for the BRT - these are just the small steps - and we're only going to be able to do it right one time.

I think down the road we will see some more progress with funding rails and streetcars - but I don't think right now is the time.

Edited January 24, 2009 by blueradon

[John E]

I wouldn't be down and out that we're not receiving any funding from this money for other transit related projects - but seriously folks - not every single person is going to ride a train in town - it will not be accessible for every single person in the town and surrounding it - these things take time to develop - a lot of our roads are in really rough shape and could use a boost to get them fixed.

I'm not putting down anyone's ideas - I just don't think we should keep the focus of transportation to be so one-sided (granted it is sort of that way right now). Look at how far we have come already with the busses and the planning for the BRT - these are just the small steps - and we're only going to be able to do it right one time.

I think down the road we will see some more progress with funding rails and streetcars - but I don't think right now is the time.

I totally agree!

When I got here to Grand Rapids 11 years ago the bus system under GRATA was TOTALLY DISGUSTING! They didn't even have bus service in the evenings or on Sundays. The reason that the Rapid is gaining ridership is because they are making it usable. Vargo sure knows what he is doing. I think the Rapid will have their hands full with the BRT system and expanding it with more routes in the coming years to keep them busy. I think we should have 5 or more BRT routes going before we start working on a rail system.

~John

[GRDadof3]

I totally agree!

When I got here to Grand Rapids 11 years ago the bus system under GRATA was TOTALLY DISGUSTING! They didn't even have bus service in the evenings or on Sundays. The reason that the Rapid is gaining ridership is because they are making it usable. Vargo sure knows what he is doing. I think the Rapid will have their hands full with the BRT system and expanding it with more routes in the coming years to keep them busy. I think we should have 5 or more BRT routes going before we start working on a rail system.

~John

Cool. Then I can ride rail to the grocery store and back to the nursing home.

[blueradon]

Well consider how long it took for other cities to gain rail lines...are there any statistics out there for towns and how many years it took for them to have multiple established lines...if I'm not mistaken I think it was Denver or some other city west of us that had been doing this development for over 20 years.

BUT - I will agree that there are reasons that it takes so long for cities to get things started such as:

- Not enough government funding

- Not enough donations/support from local governments and people

- Lack of knowledge in the public about the benefits of mass transit vs. vehicle

And trust me - I for one am no advocate for the urgency that our freeways in Michigan need to have additional lanes to meet with "future growth." I think that it is unfair for the government to shove mass transit aside for those all important vehicles. Just think what it would be like if the US was not the first to be known for the automotive industry development...we would have probably kept all of our old rail lines throughout the towns and Grand Rapids would have probably been a lot like Portland, Oregon. Hopefully GR will become a mini-Portland some day, but for now we have to make do with what we have.

I think we should be very proud and pleased for the way that The Rapid has turned out over the past 5 years. They are promoting this itch that we all need to scratch for more mass transit. Hopefully in the next 4 years Obama could actually do something for us or gives us a huge push onto center stage for mass transit. But look at the current road system in America, the bridges that are failing and the roads that are in rough shape - I think it is more than fair to fix our old infrastructure first because it is a process that is long overdue and more funding should have been available for it the past 8 years, and then the focus should be strictly switched towards mass transit alone and fully funding the projects that we really need.

But all of this will be money money money - and right now - banks don't even have "money" so to speak...but that's a whole other topic

[dragt]

Yes, yes... let's just take our time. It's not like there's any reason to worry, right? No sense of urgency, things are developing just fine at the current pace of about one new bus route ever few of years...

You know, if we just take our sweet time long enough, then maybe all the young college graduates and "transit freaks" will just leave and we can go back to building and maintaining our precious roads. Because, as we all know, we'll be really REALLY glad we have

[GRDadof3]

BTW: I did some research and this whole section of HB-6542:

(E) "QUALIFIED CITY" MEANS A CITY IN THIS STATE THAT CONTAINS

14 AN AUTOMATED LIGHT RAIL SYSTEM THAT OPERATES ON AN ELEVATED SINGLE

15 TRACK LOOP OF AT LEAST 2 MILES THAT IS OPERATED AND MAINTAINED BY A

16 PUBLIC BODY CORPORATE FORMED UNDER THE URBAN COOPERATION ACT OF

17 1967, 1967 (EX SESS) PA 7, MCL 124.501 TO 124.512, FOR THE PURPOSE

18 OF ACQUIRING, OWNING, CONSTRUCTING, FURNISHING, EQUIPPING,

19 COMPLETING, OPERATING, IMPROVING, OR DISPOSING OF A CENTRAL

20 AUTOMATED TRANSIT SYSTEM.

21 (F) "QUALIFIED NONPROFIT CORPORATION

which would have only benefited Detroit, was taken out of the final passed bill:

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/20...008-PA-0481.pdf

blueradon, any mass transit system built in the last few decades has taken at least 20 years to build out. Portland started in the late 80's. Denver too I believe.

[Khorasaurus]

BTW: I did some research and this whole section of HB-6542:

(E) "QUALIFIED CITY" MEANS A CITY IN THIS STATE THAT CONTAINS

14 AN AUTOMATED LIGHT RAIL SYSTEM THAT OPERATES ON AN ELEVATED SINGLE

15 TRACK LOOP OF AT LEAST 2 MILES THAT IS OPERATED AND MAINTAINED BY A

16 PUBLIC BODY CORPORATE FORMED UNDER THE URBAN COOPERATION ACT OF

17 1967, 1967 (EX SESS) PA 7, MCL 124.501 TO 124.512, FOR THE PURPOSE

18 OF ACQUIRING, OWNING, CONSTRUCTING, FURNISHING, EQUIPPING,

19 COMPLETING, OPERATING, IMPROVING, OR DISPOSING OF A CENTRAL

20 AUTOMATED TRANSIT SYSTEM.

21 (F) "QUALIFIED NONPROFIT CORPORATION

which would have only benefited Detroit, was taken out of the final passed bill:

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/20...008-PA-0481.pdf

blueradon, any mass transit system built in the last few decades has taken at least 20 years to build out. Portland started in the late 80's. Denver too I believe.

This is a major relief. That seemed like a bizarre obstacle to have to overcome.

Also, where is the sudden opposition to the startup streetcar line coming from? It's not a choice between rail, buses and cars...we need all of them, and with the Obama administration making transit a priority, now is the time to start building our system.

[tracer1138]

Just because it seems to take such a long to implement transit projects in the US does not mean that it always has to be that way. Consider examples abroad where the time between conception and construction seems to be lot shorter. Albeit many of these examples likely occur in countries with entirely different legal precedents/structures this does not mean that we should always appeal to the lowest common denominator. Part of what makes something happen quickly and efficiently is an expectation that that is the way it should be.

[blueradon]

Thank you for the information GRDad...

And that just proves my point.

And I'm only going to say this one more time

I AM NOT AGAINST RAIL DEVELOPMENT

I am just saying that economically and feasibly it is not going to happen overnight...unless something huge in part of funding changes from the government and we shouldn't be in a huge uproar every time money is being thrown at roads.

But they understand the need like I do to fix the roads. People are still going to drive cars no matter how many rails you put on the streets. You cannot deny nor argue that. I'm personally quite thankful for all the work that was put into 131 from west river to 14 mile rd, anyone who can remember 5-6 years ago what 131 was like driving there you were literally playing cat and mouse to losing your tires!

If we can find funding for street rail...PERFECT. I wish nothing more than for streetcars in GR...but it seems like every time we don't get funding everyone goes into a big uproar. It'll probably be another 5 years before anything even starts to happen - and then another 20 to get the rail lines everyone wanted.

I'm rooting for Obama on this one - he lived in Chicago he should know how important mass transit is - and I hope he shifts his priorities - but he also understands the need that roads are also a top priority and I'm glad that he's starting to take measures to fix infrastructure as a whole.

And since when did Grand Rapids ever wait around for people to help them - GR is known for getting things started on their own.

[jbr12]

I say let the roads go to crap, force people to move urban and build transit into every avenue of daily life... This coming from someone that was born and raised in Rural Northern Michigan and understands how much driving is necessary to get around.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/23/business...3yuan.html?_r=1

In an effort to hold back the domestic effects of the global downturn, China is starting to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on new highways, railroads and other infrastructure projects.

The stimulus plan, one of the world’s largest, promises to carry the modernity of China’s coasts deep into the hinterlands, buying the kind of great leap forward it took the United States decades — and a world war — to build, and priming China for a new level of global competition.

As President Obama and Congress draft an $825 billion stimulus plan for the United States, China is already two months into its effort. And while Democrats have put aside calls for big transportation projects, with the House bill allocating less than 5 percent of spending for the construction of highways, rail lines and mass transit programs, China is furiously pouring concrete and laying rails.

. . .

The combined national, provincial and local spending for economic stimulus promises to change the face of China, giving the country a world-class infrastructure for moving goods and people quickly, cheaply and reliably across great distances.

Edited January 26, 2009 by jbr12

[Rizzo]

I say let the roads go to crap, force people to move urban and build transit into every avenue of daily life... This coming from someone that was born and raised in Rural Northern Michigan and understands how much driving is necessary to get around.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/23/business...3yuan.html?_r=1

You won't hear that from me. We need roads, trains and buses. It's not about forcing people where to live or how to move throughout the region -- its about balance and choices.

[d8alterego]

Well, if we spend only 5% of this spending bill on rebuilding or new infrastructure, we won't have too many options in the future because the compounding maintainance fiscal issues will be too overwhelming to even consider building anything new then. Think about it, if we are giving ourselves tax breaks when China is building 21 century means of transporting 1 billion people, who do you think will have the greater economic/political/military advantage in the future? We are so short sighted sometimes, it amazes me. I swear we are walking off a cliff.

[outoftowner]

blueradon, any mass transit system built in the last few decades has taken at least 20 years to build out. Portland started in the late 80's. Denver too I believe.

Really? In New Mexico (not exactly known for efficiency) the RailRunner Express (light rail service between Belen > Albuquerque > Santa Fe, NM) was built, in about 5 years. They were able to use existing track between Albuquerque and Belen, but a significant portion of the route is brand new.

http://www.nmrailrunner.com/ for anyone interested.

[GRDadof3]

Really? In New Mexico (not exactly known for efficiency) the RailRunner Express (light rail service between Belen > Albuquerque > Santa Fe, NM) was built, in about 5 years. They were able to use existing track between Albuquerque and Belen, but a significant portion of the route is brand new.

http://www.nmrailrunner.com/ for anyone interested.

Sorry, I was referring to an entire light rail system that services most of a metro area (Portland's now and Denver's in a few years).

[OneSweetWorld]

The Rapid board is set to vote tomorrow on whether or not to ask taxpayers for a .16-mil increase. Seeing how voters 'round here have been rather opening recently to millage increases for transit, I'm optimistic. Cautiously, of course.

Edited January 28, 2009 by the_grand_raggidy

[GRDadof3]

The Rapid board is set to vote tomorrow on whether or not to ask taxpayers for a .16-mil increase. Seeing how voters 'round here have been rather opening recently to millage increases for transit, I'm optimistic. Cautiously, of course.

Looks like the board will be asking for the millage increase to pay operating costs for the new BRT line. According to the article, the millage would not take effect until 2012.

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/ind...d_ask_vote.html

[fotoman311]

Looks like the board will be asking for the millage increase to pay operating costs for the new BRT line. According to the article, the millage would not take effect until 2012.

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/ind...d_ask_vote.html

I would be interested to know how the size of the millages we currently pay to the Rapid compares to other similar sized transit systems? I know that the fare is lower than many large city transit systems, but you have a lot more places you can go more often on those larger transit systems.

[John E]

Board Approves Millage Request for May 5, 2009

The 0.16 increase on the May ballot will be to support the operation of the bus rapid transit project, now formally named the Silver Line. The millage will first be collected in 2012 when the line is expected to open. At a rate of 0.16 mills, the owner of a $150,000 house would have to pay an additional $12 per year to support operation of the Silver Line.

I believe this is final stage for getting the finances for the BRT Silver Line, so they should be able to start construction soon after the election on May 5th.

What do you think of the name "Silver Line"?

~John