Jump to content

Transit Updates for Greater Grand Rapids


GRDadof3

Recommended Posts

196 could be twenty lanes wide. But one would still find it congested. Adding lanes only puts more cars on the road thus nullifing any benefits one would get from the additional lanes. Therefore, it would do no good. Mass transit options are the way to go because a good mass transit system is very effective at taking cars of the road. That's what is really needed. Take the cars off the road and--Presto!--- no congestion without the expense of adding more and more lanes.

Edited by tamias6
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Define busy and congested. While I don't think we have a real traffic problem in this city, 196 certainly is congested during rush hour. I used to work just off East Beltline and the drive back home to downtown at 5 was just awful. There isn't enough room to safely merge at speed on Fuller and College so traffic slows down to 30MPH with frequent stops every day. Eventually I just started taking Michigan all the way downtown because it was just as fast and less frustrating.

The rest of the day, no, it isn't too bad. It definitely does need to be rebuilt, however, and it might as well be built with the future in mind. I do wish the future included rail as well, but the two options are not mutually exclusive.

-nb

I don't know whether traffic engineers have a definition, but I would define the two like this:

Busy - (without any construction work going on) during peak hours, traffic slows below the speed limit for extended distances. In other words, there is a lot of traffic, but you're still moving. Adds maybe 10% - 20% to a normal non-peak travel time.

Congested - (without any construction work going on) during peak hours, traffic grinds to a halt, with prolonged periods of >10mph or frequent stopping. Adds maybe 50% - 100% to a non-peak travel time

It's interesting that you brought up Michigan. When construction was going on this Summer on I-196, I often took Michigan or Leonard to downtown, and found it to be a decent trip. Especially with Ottawa closed, I found it took about the same amount of time to get downtown. Sometimes faster, and definitely less irritating.

tamias has it right: as freeways are expanded, they become the corridor of choice for more and more people, hence dramatically increasing congestion. With highways, "if you build it, they will come" is guaranteed. Then in 20 years, I-196 becomes one big canyon like much of I-696. :sick:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can bare bones a try-out system for 20-30 million for upgrades and additional track to Muskegon, maybe even substantially less as some current rail is light weight and easier to upgrade. I'm told that MDOT owns the ROW from the end of Coopersville Marne Railway to the beginning of the rail line entering Muskegon Heights and Muskegon City.

Non-profit to take funds to control operation and logistics between lines and I can get us a hook up on refurbished locos and passenger cars. Who knows, the wheels might be already in motion for it.

I can see a test system offering service between Holland or Muskegon...

Edited by Rizzo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I was driving it daily there was no construction. This was about 4 years ago.

The road needs to be rebuilt anyway, they might as well put some extra lanes on while they're at it. It's an urban highway and it's only 4 lanes. Even with public transit options the highway still won't have enough capacity.

Supposing we build a dense city with trains everywhere, like Chicago. I'm sure a lot of people would use public transit, but with that level of density you still more cars to deal with. Rails aren't going to eliminate or likely even reduce our highway use. They will just slow the increase. At least as long as gas is cheap.

-nb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Feds these days have two programs for funding fixed rail transit in this country. New Starts and Small Starts. Some details:

[*]New Starts are for systems that cost more than $250M and more than $75M is requested from the Feds.

[*]Small Starts are for smaller systems that cost less than $250M and less than $75M is being requested from the Feds. The Small Starts evaluation process is less stingent.

[*]There is no such thing as matching funds from the Feds. Instead, any amount up to 80% can be requested but the more that is requested, the more difficult it is to get the system funded.

[*]The Feds will specify the total amount that can be spent on the project. Localities are not allowed to go over this amount without being subject to a congressional review and possible withdrawal of the federal funding.

Excellent info and thank you! When was this enacted? Did the "big dig" fall under these guidelines or were the guidelines born out of the Boston taxpayer massacre?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excellent info and thank you! When was this enacted? Did the "big dig" fall under these guidelines or were the guidelines born out of the Boston taxpayer massacre?

The Big Dig was a highway project and was not funded by these FTA transit programs as they are specific to fixed guideway transit..., mainly light rail, commuter rail, bus rapid transit, and heavy rail. They also cover other assorted technologies such as monorail, trolleys, people movers, but these almost never get any funds because they usually don't meet the standards for cost effectiveness.

New Starts has been around for the last 5 years or so, maybe longer. Small Starts is a new program which will have its first funding round in the 2008 budget year. The deadline for applying for 2008 consideration has already passed.

Of course localities are free to build their own transit systems without going the federal route, and it greatly simplifies the process. The downside is that significant sources of local funding have to be generated before this can happen. Houston, for example, built its LRT with local money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I was driving it daily there was no construction. This was about 4 years ago.

The road needs to be rebuilt anyway, they might as well put some extra lanes on while they're at it. It's an urban highway and it's only 4 lanes. Even with public transit options the highway still won't have enough capacity.

Supposing we build a dense city with trains everywhere, like Chicago. I'm sure a lot of people would use public transit, but with that level of density you still more cars to deal with. Rails aren't going to eliminate or likely even reduce our highway use. They will just slow the increase. At least as long as gas is cheap.

-nb

I totally agree APK that I-196 needs to be rebuilt and some of the weave/merge lanes need to be lengthened, but adding that extra lane for the entire 4 or 5 mile stretch will add $100 - $150 Million to the bill, not including having to increase the maintenance budget for that stretch by at least 33%. I think especially in Michigan where highways have an extremely short lifespan due to our freeze/thaw cycles, we should set aside more of our transportation dollars toward other forms of transportation. I understand that some people believe that super-highways make a city look more "grown up", and there probably is some merit to that.

I think we are the only State in the top ten populous States with absolutely no rapid transit system though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I belileve that we would be naive to think that mass transit will take over the automobile 100% if we build something, but we are just as naive to think that expanding the number of lanes on a highway will serve our city decades into the future. The automobile is here to stay and we must accomodate it, but we must also see that as we grow, we have to consider other modes of transportation as well. You simply can't keep building more lanes, at some point you have to get people out of their cars. I think that as the city grows and more people move here from larger cities with public transportation, they will not only be accostomed to riding a train to work, they will be expecting to. What will they do when they find out we don't have that to offer them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, most people don't realize the level of rail transit in California, but many of their cities have light rail, trolleys, and commuter rail. Los Angeles also has a heavy rail line, one of the last to be built in the USA.

Keep in mind these systems are not cheap. The Charlotte LRT that you posted a link above for is costing $468M for line that is just short of 10 miles. It has gotten very controversial because it was originally projected to cost about $250M. This system is being paid for in part, by a local 1/2 cent sales tax on all retail purchases made in the county. This tax has to be applied to non-highway transit projects and was approved in 1998 by referendum by 58% of the people who voted.

The proposed extension to this line, which would add another 10 miles is currently projected to cost $600M which means it might be $1B by the time it is finally complete about a decade from now. (if it is approved). There is also a proposal to build a streetcar system down a 10 mile stretch of city owned streets. The projected cost of that is $265M. There is also a 35 mile commuter rail line proposed which is a relative bargain at $250M. This line will be built without going to New or Small starts.

The Republican party in Mecklenburg county (Charlotte) is currently attempting to get a repeal of the transit tax put on the ballot next year which will effectively end any of these new projects. They believe the money should be spent on more highway building but are not telling the people that repealing the tax will not increase road funding which is completely controlled by the NCDOT. Fortunately they don't have the support at this time to pull this off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course localities are free to build their own transit systems without going the federal route, and it greatly simplifies the process. The downside is that significant sources of local funding have to be generated before this can happen. Houston, for example, built its LRT with local money.

So would it be possible to use MDOT's $400 million they have set aside for highway widening and use it for a fixed route transit system? I think the $400 million comes from MDOT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alas, my experiences with MDOT have been so disappointing or frustrating that I'm disinclined to give them a voice at the table for any reason. Spiritually, it is just plain more likely that a decent outcome would result if they were left out of the picture. Part of me doesn't care how much money they might have to offer - they'd be a big huge incompetent pain in the neck if they had any vested interest whatsoever. Like many other things here in West Michigan - ideally we'll find a way to accomplish light rail through a partnership of private and public energies that keep people who lack a local perspective out of the room. Just my .02.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alas, my experiences with MDOT have been so disappointing or frustrating that I'm disinclined to give them a voice at the table for any reason. Spiritually, it is just plain more likely that a decent outcome would result if they were left out of the picture. Part of me doesn't care how much money they might have to offer - they'd be a big huge incompetent pain in the neck if they had any vested interest whatsoever. Like many other things here in West Michigan - ideally we'll find a way to accomplish light rail through a partnership of private and public energies that keep people who lack a local perspective out of the room. Just my .02.

To quote the Aerosmith song....

"ja ja ja jaaaaded..."

But I think you are right on in your assessment FilmMaker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since these threads seem to running parallel topics, I'll provide a link here to some comments I made in reply to an idea GRDad has regarding light rail and park-and-ride possibilities. They're simply offered here as food for thought.

http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/index.ph...st&p=574521

One additional point I'll make here is that I firmly believe the thousands of people who are likely to become employed in/near Health Hill are much more likely to be former residents of large urban or university environments, and as such will be people who embrace mass transit much more than the residents who have lived here for decades. Hence I believe mass transit of some sort is a very worthwhile notion in addressing growing traffic concerns along Michigan and I196.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, that was my fault. They're now combined.

I wonder if metro Grand Rapids residents would support a sales tax or added gas tax to fund mass transit? Even if it meant that the initial phases may not necessarily serve their area? I think the RAPID has shown themselves to be excellent stewards of the resources they have been given, and I believe Peter Varga has worked in larger markets that have rapid mass transit systems.

You're also right FM in that many of the new employees of Healthcare Hill will most likely be from larger cities (or most likely from another country), since the U.S. continues to lag in educating young people in math and sciences. And they may not have time to wait around for Grand Rapids transportatoin system to catch up to the rest of the world, and that GR is not a place that they would want to settle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alas, my experiences with MDOT have been so disappointing or frustrating that I'm disinclined to give them a voice at the table for any reason. Spiritually, it is just plain more likely that a decent outcome would result if they were left out of the picture. Part of me doesn't care how much money they might have to offer - they'd be a big huge incompetent pain in the neck if they had any vested interest whatsoever. Like many other things here in West Michigan - ideally we'll find a way to accomplish light rail through a partnership of private and public energies that keep people who lack a local perspective out of the room. Just my .02.

Thanks an interesting idea FilmMaker. I recall reading somewhere that some of the original freeways built were partly financed by donations from wealthy individuals; why not do the same thing? How do you go about organizing such an effort?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks an interesting idea FilmMaker. I recall reading somewhere that some of the original freeways built were partly financed by donations from wealthy individuals; why not do the same thing? How do you go about organizing such an effort?

I'm not what I would call an expert on public/private partnerships but one thought comes to mind at first blush - namely that the folks designing Health Hill ought to be designing their plans in advance to accommodate mass transit of some sort. If a "destination" or "stop-along-the-route" (in this case, Health Hill) were to design and ultimately build (pay for) one of the terminals on the line that would seem a pretty good notion of "mutually beneficial" investment on the part of a private sector party. It could leave the public to focus mostly on the "line" and right-of-ways, etc. At the very least they ought to be designing open spaces into their plans so that there is actually room for mass transit to be inserted later.

Going back to my elaboration on GRDad's idea, this notion could also work (although perhaps with smaller pocketbooks to fund it) at WhiteCaps stadium. And if we ran in all the way to Allendale or established a station at GVSU downtown, those institutions could possibly design/fund/apply for separate grants to build their terminals in exchange for the benefit they would receive.

Again, just some thoughts...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not what I would call an expert on public/private partnerships but one thought comes to mind at first blush - namely that the folks designing Health Hill ought to be designing their plans in advance to accommodate mass transit of some sort. If a "destination" or "stop-along-the-route" (in this case, Health Hill) were to design and ultimately build (pay for) one of the terminals on the line that would seem a pretty good notion of "mutually beneficial" investment on the part of a private sector party. It could leave the public to focus mostly on the "line" and right-of-ways, etc. At the very least they ought to be designing open spaces into their plans so that there is actually room for mass transit to be inserted later.

Going back to my elaboration on GRDad's idea, this notion could also work (although perhaps with smaller pocketbooks to fund it) at WhiteCaps stadium. And if we ran in all the way to Allendale or established a station at GVSU downtown, those institutions could possibly design/fund/apply for separate grants to build their terminals in exchange for the benefit they would receive.

Again, just some thoughts...

Another caveat to insert into this possibility is that you have to be able to show that a line will get about 5000 riders/day to make it worthwile (and to get any kind of federal help).

I think any line along 131 would be doable, since it gets over 100,000 vehicles/day. The Allendale to downtown could very well hit those numbers. I don't know what kind of ridership GVSU's bus from downtown to Allendale gets. Anyone know?

That's also why I don't think a GR > Holland or GR > Muskegon line would NOT garner enough ridership at this point to make it viable.

It would be great if the Health Hill designers could leave a blank slate that could be filled in the future, but until a thorough study is done of that corridor as to what option would work the best (light rail, bus rapid transit, etc.) it's hard to know where to leave the receiving station. Do they put it on the 196 side, or in the middle of Michigan, or inserted into the new parking deck? Oyy. It's too bad someone in power wasn't thinking of this a long time ago.

I know members of the RAPID's GT2 study did talk to the airport about designing in a future transit station for their new mammoth parking garage, and they got shot down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The lengthy post I made recently elaborating on GRDad's park-and-ride ideas has been percolating in my brain now for a few days. A few additional thoughts:

First, I suggested a line running to the former landfill area near the gypsum mine by Market street on the near west side. What if that line could also run through the Millennium Park on its way ultimately to Allendale and the lakeshore? Holy cow!! We'd have yet another way for people from all over the near metro to get to this huge recreational area without using a car!!! It would not be unlike the past where people rode a train out to Reeds Lake to enjoy the old theme park that once stood there.

Another thought: the line I suggested running to Whitecaps stadium should ideally connect with the White Pine Trail bike trail system (which runs right around the stadium). Imagine the commuters of Comstock Park, Belmont, Rockford and Northview riding their bikes to the rail station for the short trip into the core. As the challenge of crossing the Grand River from the north becomes more and more difficult in the future, this would provide a great alternative and encourage environmentally friendly means of commuting. Goodness knows this is working in many other areas of the country.

Bottom line? light rail park-and-ride terminals should be strategically placed convenient to not only major roadways/parking but also to recreational areas and bike paths.

Again, just continuing to run with an idea... anyone else care to run with this as well?

Edited by FilmMaker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The lengthy post I made recently elaborating on GRDad's park-and-ride ideas has been percolating in my brain now for a few days. A few additional thoughts:

First, I suggested a line running to the former landfill area near the gypsum mine by Market street on the near west side. What if that line could also run through the Millennium Park on its way ultimately to Allendale and the lakeshore? Holy cow!! We'd have yet another way for people from all over the near metro to get to this huge recreational area without using a car!!! It would not be unlike the past where people rode a train out to Reeds Lake to enjoy the old theme park that once stood there.

Another thought: the line I suggested running to Whitecaps stadium should ideally connect with the White Pine Trail bike trail system (which runs right around the stadium). Imagine the commuters of Comstock Park, Belmont, Rockford and Northview riding their bikes to the rail station for the short trip into the core. As the challenge of crossing the Grand River from the north becomes more and more difficult in the future, this would provide a great alternative and encourage environmentally friendly means of commuting. Goodness knows this is working in many other areas of the country.

Bottom line? light rail park-and-ride terminals should be strategically placed convenient to not only parking but also to recreational areas and bike paths.

Again, just continuing to run with an idea... anyone else care to run with this as well?

That is interesting, and since you have a vested interest in Plainfield Twp and Rockford, what do you think of a light rail line sharing the ROW with the White Pine Trail? I know that people who live in Rockford (especially East Rockford) just hate the commute to Grand Rapids. 10 Mile Rd is a nightmare and going to get worse, and Northland Drive is just as bad. If there was a light rail line that terminated in downtown Rockford, or maybe even in Belmont, that could definitely alleviate a lot of the traffic going to Grand Rapids.

Or people in Grand Rapids could load up their bikes and ride the train up to Rockford for a day of biking and shopping. :dontknow:

At this link, you can see a bus rapid transit line sharing a bike trail:

http://www.nc3d.com/gallery/ltdbrt/123_03_24?full=1

Just a thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not what I would call an expert on public/private partnerships but one thought comes to mind at first blush - namely that the folks designing Health Hill ought to be designing their plans in advance to accommodate mass transit of some sort. If a "destination" or "stop-along-the-route" (in this case, Health Hill) were to design and ultimately build (pay for) one of the terminals on the line that would seem a pretty good notion of "mutually beneficial" investment on the part of a private sector party. It could leave the public to focus mostly on the "line" and right-of-ways, etc. At the very least they ought to be designing open spaces into their plans so that there is actually room for mass transit to be inserted later.....

This is an approach that is being used in some cases in other states. When I mentioned the Charlotte situation above, I pointed out the North line which is being built without Federal funding. The reason for this is it simply would not qualify under today's standards.

So they are working on a couple of alternatives to financing. One of them is to get the developers that want to build new development around the stations to pay for part of the line or pay to build the station on their property. This is having a lot of success as the developers consider access to transit a positive to building their communities. North Carolina also has a development mechanism called a TIFF. Basically this allows a municipality or a county to borrow money for a project to be paid back by the increase in property taxes that occur once the project is built. In this case the property value increase of building transit over not building it, is significant enough where they believe they can generate enough tax revenue to build this line.

These would be possibilities for GR if the state laws there allow for it, or there may be other alternatives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know what kind of ridership GVSU's bus from downtown to Allendale gets. Anyone know?

I used to ride it daily. With the expansion of the downtown campus the popularity of the line really took off as well. At peak hours they had to bring in a second bus directly behind the first one. They increased the frequency of busses as well. It used to be hourly, then every half hour, and last I knew there was a bus every 20 minutes. Often the busses are full and having standing room only. This was 4 years ago while I was still a student at GVSU.

I think this line was successful for a couple reasons. GVSU paid for it, so students could ride for free. Students usually don't have a lot of extra cash so saving money on gas is a big plus. And lastly, why drive and have to pay for parking downtown when you can ride and maybe get some homework or reading done on the way?

-nb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is interesting, and since you have a vested interest in Plainfield Twp and Rockford, what do you think of a light rail line sharing the ROW with the White Pine Trail? I know that people who live in Rockford (especially East Rockford) just hate the commute to Grand Rapids. 10 Mile Rd is a nightmare and going to get worse, and Northland Drive is just as bad. If there was a light rail line that terminated in downtown Rockford, or maybe even in Belmont, that could definitely alleviate a lot of the traffic going to Grand Rapids.

Or people in Grand Rapids could load up their bikes and ride the train up to Rockford for a day of biking and shopping. :dontknow:

At this link, you can see a bus rapid transit line sharing a bike trail:

http://www.nc3d.com/gallery/ltdbrt/123_03_24?full=1

Just a thought.

I don't think anyone is more painfully aware of the challenge we here in Plainfield face regarding the absence of more ways to cross the river going north through our township. We're stuck in the middle of it and everyone north of us often seems to be waiting for us to fix their (and our) problem. I don't mean to swerve off track here, but MDOT and the KCRC haven't been what I call visionary when it comes to discussing and addressing these issues either. MDOT wanted nothing to do with expanding Northland bridge to more lanes and we had to fight tooth and nail (and had to go find the money ourselves) to get MDOT to install a bike lane during the Northland bridge re-build. It's why I'm moving my office to Rockford. In a classic example of "think global, act local", at least I can take my own car off the road. And quite frankly, the outcome for me is pretty delightful as a result.

I'd be game for light rail all the way to Rockford but can't see how we'd ever fund the construction of the line along the White Pine Trail itself (even though it is an old railbed). It's pretty challenging terrain in many places - and its natural beauty is much of its charm. That being said, 10 Mile is scheduled for major re-work soon (we're all hoping for a boulevard from 131 to downtown Rockford). That boulevard could accommodate light rail or bike paths (or even a small Rockford mini-bus transit service?) that could connect with a light rail terminal at the 131/10 Mile interchange (a location not unlike East Belt Line/I96 and a straight shot north from the stadium). Running a line up the 131 boulevard would probably be a whole lot easier to build and also send it in a perhaps more desirable long-term general direction north. Although, again, agreeing with you, I don't think there is going to be enough demand to justify a line going very far north for decades to come. That starts to smell like inter-urban versus park-and-ride. I love the idea but the pragmatist in me keeps saying "take baby steps and simply plan wisely to accommodate the long term potential".

Great observation about people traveling the opposite direction! I was so focused on diminishing commuter agony that I totally overlooked the opportunity traveling the other way! Rockford could be just like Millenium Park - a destination for core residents.

Bear with me as I brainstorm some more: currently Plainfield Township is working on ways to secure or preserve flood plain areas along the Grand River from Whitecaps stadium to Northland Drive. Please don't inflate this idea beyond its very early stages as we don't need speculators getting in the way, but in an ideal world we envision large areas of the river front becoming open space and recreational areas, especially as they adjoin the White Pine Trail. It could be that light rail could fit into this picture long term, although, again I worry that it would be a line to no where long term (again thinking pragmatically about how short runs could become long runs over decades). Goodness knows though that this would become merely one more reason for people to ride light rail to a Stadium terminal. If they could find their way further to Rockford that would be great - I just think the 131 boulevard is probably the cheapest, easiest and most long term plausible route.

Than again, I'm simply hoping that all this discussion will help spur more ideas and ultimately some sort of action.

I think this line was successful for a couple reasons. GVSU paid for it, so students could ride for free. Students usually don't have a lot of extra cash so saving money on gas is a big plus. And lastly, why drive and have to pay for parking downtown when you can ride and maybe get some homework or reading done on the way?

-nb

To quote Paul Reiser from the old TV show "Mad About You": This is what I'm saying!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.