Grand Rapids Airport (GRR) News and Developments

[d8alterego]

6 hours ago, GR8scott said:

$100 million / mile seems like it would be if there was no existing infrastructure? In this case utilizing existing and not heavily used lines could be much more cost effective? Its too bad its mostly lined with industrial and lower density residential as if it went through commercial and higher density areas to the north such eastown, egr, calvin, woodland ect seems like a no brainer for light rail even at a higher cost where as this seems more like a commuter rail kind of service which might not be a bad idea to pair with another commuter line envisioned to the west through Grandville-Jenison-Hudsonville-Zeeland-Holland? Commuter rail would have less stops but more park and ride type stations, maybe something like this? With stations at Division, Burton, and E. Beltline? 

I agree that there are large industrial areas now but I can see a lot of redevelopment into residential and commercial uses in future decades. The moment a station on an airport light rail line opens, developers take notice. I can see the line having anywhere between 5-7 stops total which should make it attractive to ride and quick enough to get from city center to the airport.  

[MJLO]

I would love to see GR get some form of rail.  I have my doubts about them dropping $1bill on rail infrastructure when they won't spend the much cheaper $ for true BRT though.  Especially if it's a "build it and they will come" scenario. 

[Khorasaurus1]

I'm pretty positive that using the existing rail corridor would be a lot cheaper than $100 million per mile. But since it's a freight rail corridor, it does come with its own set of difficulties in constructing and operating passenger rail.  I also agree with the comments that that line, while convenient for the airport and downtown, doesn't hit a lot of major destinations in between. 

I think we're more likely to see the airport as the terminus of the third BRT line in the system, though it won't be very "rapid" on corridors like Lake Drive.  But an upgraded express bus line with these stations would be pretty useful:

• Rapid Central Station
• Monroe/Louis (existing)
• DeVos Place (existing)
• Medical Mile (existing)
• GRCC/Spectrum (existing)
• Fulton Street (existing)
• Heritage Hill (Fulton/College)
• Eastern Avenue
• East Hills (Lake/Diamond)
• Eastown (Lake/Atlas)
• Blodgett Hospital (Lake/Plymouth)
• Gaslight Village (Lake/Bagley)
• Hall Street
• Breton Village (Breton/Burton)
• Calvin University (Burton/Raybrook)
• Woodland Mall
• Centerpointe Mall
• East Paris Avenue
• Waterfall Shoppes
• Cascade Meijer
• 36th Street
• Ford Airport

[cstonesparty]

49 minutes ago, Khorasaurus1 said:

I think we're more likely to see the airport as the terminus of the third BRT line in the system, though it won't be very "rapid" on corridors like Lake Drive. 

I think chances of this are very slim with the Rapid hiding ridership numbers and its record of transparency bringing conservatives out of the woodwork whenever investment in the system is discussed...  

I live on Laker Line and see huge variation in ridership from day to day there.  ROI is going to be a gigantic question before any more investment in BRT is brought forward.  I think the hype over silverline development and ridership has fueled cynicism and will prove to be a significant barrier...

[Khorasaurus1]

12 minutes ago, cstonesparty said:

I think chances of this are very slim with the Rapid hiding ridership numbers and its record of transparency bringing conservatives out of the woodwork whenever investment in the system is discussed...  

I live on Laker Line and see huge variation in ridership from day to day there.  ROI is going to be a gigantic question before any more investment in BRT is brought forward.  I think the hype over silverline development and ridership has fueled cynicism and will prove to be a significant barrier...

Is the Rapid hiding ridership numbers?  I know partner communities have had no trouble getting them...and putting them in public meeting packets. Their numbers are at about 75% of pre-covid, from what I can tell. 

They made significant changes in Fall 2021 in an effort to focus on their core riders - which mean increasing service along Division, Kalamazoo, Alpine, and Eastern, and cutting in EGR, the Northeast side, and the West side. Which I think was admirable, though improved airport service doesn't fit that model. 

I do think an express line that I described could be done fairly cheaply. Just build stations and re-paint some rolling stock. Don't claim it will be transformative - just a better experience for people riding existing Routes 6 and 27. 

The Rapid is starting up a planning process, which is supposed to conclude in 2024, so we'll see what happens there. 

[arcturus]

I suspect 90% of passengers don't even live in GR.  The airport is a  W Michigan waypoint.  Expand that radius to include Lowell, Caledonia, Gaines Township, Holland, Muskegon, Walker, Big Rapids, Rockford, plus Ada and that should capture most., both inbound and outbound.

 

 

[joeDowntown]

Sorry to burst bubbles, but I neither see it happening, nor see where the state would have an appetite to even think about fund anything like it. The Q-Line in Detroit would be brought up in the same breath the second anyone pitched it: $145M to build / $85M in subsidies to help support it for the next 17 years. Daily ridership: 2500. 

I just don't see this happening, even though people get excited about it year after year. 

I'd be interested to see if any see of comparable size (or larger) has successfully added this type of transit in the last 10-15 years, and had success (success to me is self-sustaining from a budget standpoint, with high ridership that has significantly changed people's transportation habits). If anyone knows of an article/case study, I'd love to see it.

Joe

[MJLO]

1 hour ago, joeDowntown said:

Sorry to burst bubbles, but I neither see it happening, nor see where the state would have an appetite to even think about fund anything like it. The Q-Line in Detroit would be brought up in the same breath the second anyone pitched it: $145M to build / $85M in subsidies to help support it for the next 17 years. Daily ridership: 2500. 

Joe

Well I think the Q-Line is more of a gimmick to be fair.  It is also a street car and not LRT(if that matters).   It basically shuttles folks between midtown and downtown.  It's route is perhaps more practical than the people mover, but it still only serves a touristy stretch of Woodward.  I think rail if done right in GR could actually be more functional and less of a novelty.  But to your point, ridership likely wouldn't be anywhere near the cost justification.  

[d8alterego]

2 hours ago, joeDowntown said:

Sorry to burst bubbles, but I neither see it happening, nor see where the state would have an appetite to even think about fund anything like it. The Q-Line in Detroit would be brought up in the same breath the second anyone pitched it: $145M to build / $85M in subsidies to help support it for the next 17 years. Daily ridership: 2500. 

I just don't see this happening, even though people get excited about it year after year. 

I'd be interested to see if any see of comparable size (or larger) has successfully added this type of transit in the last 10-15 years, and had success (success to me is self-sustaining from a budget standpoint, with high ridership that has significantly changed people's transportation habits). If anyone knows of an article/case study, I'd love to see it.

Joe

You make a good point regarding the ridership of the Q line, but the Q line does not terminate at the airport nor would this airport line interact with street traffic. I can see locals and flying travelers using this line more frequently.  

Also, has any transit line in America been self sustaining? High ridership successes? Yes. Cost effective? I don't believe any are. Return on investment? Depends on studies and planning. 

Edited February 22, 2023 by d8alterego

[Khorasaurus1]

22 minutes ago, MJLO said:

Well I think the Q-Line is more of a gimmick to be fair.  It is also a street car and not LRT(if that matters).   It basically shuttles folks between midtown and downtown.  It's route is perhaps more practical than the people mover, but it still only serves a touristy stretch of Woodward.  I think rail if done right in GR could actually be more functional and less of a novelty.  But to your point, ridership likely wouldn't be anywhere near the cost justification.  

I agree with you the QLine is a poor comparison (GR equivalent would be the North Monroe Streetcar that got floated a while back), and I don't think the current leadership in Lansing will fall into that trap. BUT if they are going to fund transit to an airport, it's going to be DTW, not GRR.  The shelved Detroit-Ann Arbor rail line would have a stop about a mile from DTW, with an accompanying shuttle to the terminals. If anything happens, it will be that coming back to life. 

Incidentally, that rail line would also juice QLine ridership, because it would terminate in New Center, not Downtown Detroit...but there would be a QLine station right off the commuter line platform. 

[d8alterego]

3 hours ago, Khorasaurus1 said:

I'm pretty positive that using the existing rail corridor would be a lot cheaper than $100 million per mile. But since it's a freight rail corridor, it does come with its own set of difficulties in constructing and operating passenger rail.  I also agree with the comments that that line, while convenient for the airport and downtown, doesn't hit a lot of major destinations in between. 

I think we're more likely to see the airport as the terminus of the third BRT line in the system, though it won't be very "rapid" on corridors like Lake Drive.  But an upgraded express bus line with these stations would be pretty useful:

• Rapid Central Station
• Monroe/Louis (existing)
• DeVos Place (existing)
• Medical Mile (existing)
• GRCC/Spectrum (existing)
• Fulton Street (existing)
• Heritage Hill (Fulton/College)
• Eastern Avenue
• East Hills (Lake/Diamond)
• Eastown (Lake/Atlas)
• Blodgett Hospital (Lake/Plymouth)
• Gaslight Village (Lake/Bagley)
• Hall Street
• Breton Village (Breton/Burton)
• Calvin University (Burton/Raybrook)
• Woodland Mall
• Centerpointe Mall
• East Paris Avenue
• Waterfall Shoppes
• Cascade Meijer
• 36th Street
• Ford Airport

A BRT line with that many station stops and traffic signals (even if given signal priority) would probably not entice the flying public who want an express mode of transit to and from the airport (Rail = 5 or 7 stops to BRT = 22 stops).

[cstonesparty]

2 hours ago, Khorasaurus1 said:

Is the Rapid hiding ridership numbers?  I know partner communities have had no trouble getting them...and putting them in public meeting packets. Their numbers are at about 75% of pre-covid, from what I can tell. 

reporting on their web site is incomplete and out of date, a google search for ridership information is unproductive.  Where does the public go to learn about effectiveness of the system?  I have family members who use the Rapid regularly and I support it.  But the difficulty for me in locating information is a big flag.  People from taxpayer activist groups and anti-transit groups have grouse for many years about the Rapid and poor transparency.  And I can see why.  If you can point to this kind of data, I'd be really pleased to learn more...

Edited February 22, 2023 by cstonesparty

[Allison Slater]

Wouldn't a BRT line (or light rail), if it happened, end up being funded by the airport and not by the rapid, like how the Laker Line (afaik) is funded by GVSU and not the Rapid? Like, is it the Rapid going "hey let's improve access to the airport" or the airport commissioning the Rapid to operate a line that the airport would want?

Edited February 22, 2023 by Allison Slater

[Cookin_peacocks]

Hear me out....

 

 

Edited February 22, 2023 by Cookin_peacocks

[d8alterego]

13 minutes ago, Khorasaurus1 said:

I agree with you the QLine is a poor comparison (GR equivalent would be the North Monroe Streetcar that got floated a while back), and I don't think the current leadership in Lansing will fall into that trap. BUT if they are going to fund transit to an airport, it's going to be DTW, not GRR.  The shelved Detroit-Ann Arbor rail line would have a stop about a mile from DTW, with an accompanying shuttle to the terminals. If anything happens, it will be that coming back to life. 

Incidentally, that rail line would also juice QLine ridership, because it would terminate in New Center, not Downtown Detroit...but there would be a QLine station right off the commuter line platform. 

That's why I believe such a "downtown GR to airport" line could work. 

A new rail line that travels through undeveloped land serves no one once it is opened (ie the Denver airport line). The difference is that this line would travel through existing neighborhoods along an existing rail line. Feeder bus routes could collect riders and drop them off at stations along the route adding more local riders besides flying travelers. GR has never had that level of transit interconnectivity with rail and bus systems. Plus high density redevelopment potential is there in warehouse and commercial districts toward the airport. Can we imagine a 28th street corridor with 5 over 1 residential structures (or greater density) and walkable neighborhoods? While future ridership and development projections should of course be studied, I've seen the success of transit oriented development first hand. 

Also, I believe this would be a 10 mile rail line compared to a 18+ mile line from Detroit to DTW. Thus I would think it would be cheaper and more attractive for Lansing to support it.

[Khorasaurus1]

1 hour ago, d8alterego said:

A BRT line with that many station stops and traffic signals (even if given signal priority) would probably not entice the flying public who want an express mode of transit to and from the airport (Rail = 5 or 7 stops to BRT = 22 stops).

I'd like to see a rail line, too. But I think we romanticize people arriving at GRR and then needing transit downtown. While that population does exist, it's dwarfed by people going to other parts of the metro area or wider West Michigan region. The route I proposed would serve air travelers going downtown, but also take them to other destinations (28th Street hotels, Calvin/Aquinas, hospitals), as well as thousands of other local trips. It would serve the airport, but also a huge swath of the east side. 

Edited February 22, 2023 by Khorasaurus1

[destijl]

As much as I would love to see a rail route, the Rapid could certainly be more useful to airport travelers if:

• they had a route that traveled continuously from downtown to the airport. The current situation of having to transfer at Woodland Mall is a pain.
• said route also operated in line with the times that flights depart and arrive, including weekends.

So many people are forced to taxi/uber/lyft etc. because the bus can't get them to the airport when they need to be there..

[jonrapley]

Is there even a demand for a direct bus to the airport, let alone rail? Sure it would be nice to have as a city but I think the downtown density isn't there to demand it. I live in midtown and I'd still Uber or Lyft over taking a bus downtown, transferring and then taking another bus. I can't imagine people who live further away from the downtown central station would want to do that either, let alone people who live in the surrounding towns. 

I have to imagine most business travelers coming into the city aren't necessarily going downtown, and if they are, their company probably partners with Uber or Lyft.

[RiversideGR]

10 hours ago, jonrapley said:

Is there even a demand for a direct bus to the airport, let alone rail? Sure it would be nice to have as a city but I think the downtown density isn't there to demand it. I live in midtown and I'd still Uber or Lyft over taking a bus downtown, transferring and then taking another bus. I can't imagine people who live further away from the downtown central station would want to do that either, let alone people who live in the surrounding towns. 

I have to imagine most business travelers coming into the city aren't necessarily going downtown, and if they are, their company probably partners with Uber or Lyft.

Even if they are going downtown, a lot of business travelers aren't going to sit around for 30 minutes at the airport to wait for the next bus or train. People who travel frequently for work prioritize convenience, and they can typically just expense the uber.

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see better public transit in GR... I just don't see the demand for the light rail to the airport. 

[Pattmost20]

This isn't anything new, but I pulled up the Master Plan update from 2019 and it shows some of their 10-20 year plans. Looks like a Concourse C is in the plans for the future. Current construction is supposed to wrap up in 2028, so that would put it in line to be a part of the next rounds of renovation/expansion.

Also noticed that they show a very large plane at the end of concourse A which makes me hopeful that there is a long haul route in our future.

[Cookin_peacocks]

On 3/4/2023 at 7:12 PM, Pattmost20 said:

This isn't anything new, but I pulled up the Master Plan update from 2019 and it shows some of their 10-20 year plans. Looks like a Concourse C is in the plans for the future. Current construction is supposed to wrap up in 2028, so that would put it in line to be a part of the next rounds of renovation/expansion.

Also noticed that they show a very large plane at the end of concourse A which makes me hopeful that there is a long haul route in our future.

Is there any goals for more long haul flights?

I mean I'm not expecting A380s or anything, but the largest commercial flights that come in are 737s for the most part

[RiversideGR]

GRR ranked "one of the best airports in north america for guest experience"

Quote

Airports Council International World, the trade association of the world’s airports, announced the recipients of its 2022 Airport Service Quality awards. The Gerald R. Ford International Airport earned multiple awards in the following categories:

• Best Airport of 2 to 5 Million Passengers in North-America
• Airport with the Most Dedicated Staff in North-America
• Easiest Airport Journey in North-America
• Cleanest Airport in North-America

Ford International Airport Ranked One of the Best Airports in North America for Guest Experience (ampproject.org)

[Pattmost20]

2 hours ago, RiversideGR said:

Easiest Airport Journey in North-America

I can attest to that. From drop off to gate in 6 minutes last time I flew. 

[joeDowntown]

4 hours ago, Pattmost20 said:

I can attest to that. From drop off to gate in 6 minutes last time I flew. 

Yep. I’m thankful for GRR every time I fly in. So easy to get in and out of. We flew back from a trip last night and it was so busy, all flights full. First time I had to park in one of the outer lots because the ramp was completely full. 

Joe

[arcturus]

On 2/21/2023 at 12:49 PM, MJLO said:

Traffic up 16.35% in January 2023 vs. 2022  to 261k passengers.  If growth stays at that pace 2023 will end over 4 million passengers.    I remember heading into 2020 airport traffic was up double digits in Jan/Feb compared to record breaking 2019.  Feb 2020 had over 300k passengers(which was huge for a winter month).   It'll be interesting to see how this month ends, whether it's close to that 2020 number or not.  I've not been home in a few months but it seems like you guys keep getting hit with snow storms so that will probably slow some of that traffic. 

February traffic up 4.3% from the year previous, up 9.8% YTD.   I'm starting to think January's big jump from the year earlier was an aberration brought on partially by bad weather over the Christmas holidays which pushed traffic into January.  SW Air had some major issues.

https://www.grr.org/hubfs/02-2023 Aviation Activity Report.pdf?hsLang=en