Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Cleveland was the first, and only city to build a new rapid transit system in the 1950s. (IIRC the new system opened prior to that was the Newark, NJ subway in the mid-1930s). The 1950s was about junking transit and building freeways for the new cars that were exploding on the roadways with the burgening middle class following WWII. Cleveland bucked the trend -- and actually, the Red Line, itself, was really an outgrowth of the LRT system (the Shaker Rapid, now the Blue and Green Lines) built during the WWII era in the 19-teens; the bulk of the Red Line's ROW was built in the late 20s by the Van Sweringen brothers (Google them) who built the suburb of Shaker Heights and connected it to downtown with the Rapid, whose service was revolutionary at the time. Unfortunately the oncoming Great Depression stopped them from opening the Red Line in 1930 as planned.
The next rapid transit system in the USA developed after Cleveland's CTS Rapid (now the Red Line), was Philly's 1969 PATCO line to NJ (which, like Cleveland's Red Line was the outgrowth of a pre-existing legacy rapid line). Then came BART, the DC METRO and MARTA which all came in the 1970s, so no, your history is way off in terms rapid transit development.
Yes, Detroit probably should have developed rapid transit decades, maybe even a century earlier, but so what? Are we giving out penalty cards now? Does that mean they should never consider it now?
Ridiculous.
Well, Chicago's State Street Subway opened in 1943 and its Dearborn Street Subway opened in 1951; the Congress Blue Line opened in 1958 and the 1969 PATCO was an expansion of the existing service formerly known as the Bridge Line, opened in 1936.
Chicago's Dan Ryan L was built and opened in the '60s as well; the Kennedy Blue Line initial extension to Irving Park opened in 1970.
Transit planning in the '50s and '60s saw BART, DC Metro, and Chicago CTA under construction for service beginning in 1972 and 1976 respectively as was the case in Chicago.
Wouldn't say my history is ''way off'' but someone else's certainly is if the thinking is that rapid transit development was dead post-WW II through the '70s, and, yes, Detroit should not consider a rapid transit system now.
Cleveland has a rapid transit system, complete with direct service into and under its airport terminal, yet its ridership has plummeted the past 40 or so years. Like Detroit, Cleveland has hollowed-out, Detroit even more so. Both cities have growing cores yet no one really uses Cleveland's rapid transit so why would it work in Detroit? And please don't go with the people will use it to visit and party in the city and then take it home late night to far-flung destinations. See Cleveland's Waterfront Line extension. People will Uber late night like they're doing in legacy transit cities.
Downtown Detroit has been essentially empty since we returned to work on May 6. You get some activity when the nightly protests break up, but for the most part it is 2008 all over again right now. Many of the condo dwellers have moved out of the city as well (hopefully only temporarily), their parking lots are mostly empty and there is no evening crowd, which is good since almost nothing is open. Many of the cars that are still there have not moved in months. It is not clear when/if things are going to come back to normal. I thought it would have returned to more normal levels by now. The fact that it hasn't has me concerned.
The recent protesters are not helping things. They are fewer in number now, but meaner and more aggressive. The majority appear to be young white hipsters. They walk around yelling "F You" at the rare people in the streets (after fist demanding they join the protest in some cases). This is not going to encourage people to come back and hang out in the city.
I think the Beach is open though. that is a good thing. No Friday night bands though : (
I mean a 2-track route heading north from Grand Circus. ie, a train heading south from RO, Ferndale, MS Fairgrounds, etc, would travel down Woodward and when it reaches the PM Loop... exactly as it is, today, trains would switch into the PM loop (turning right, West) heading Counterclockwise. Trains would make all station stops along the (current, single-track PM loop), traversing completely around the Loop until returning back to Grand Circus where they would switch back out (turning right/North) and onto the 2-track Woodward line to reach the northern terminal, wherever that may be.
[/quote]
With only one track from Ferndale to Downtown, the trains will be unable to pass each other. I do not see how you could even have two trains, unless one sits at the end of the loop waiting for the other to clear the tracks. it only takes a few minutes to complete the existing loop, but a train running from Ferndale (with stops) wold take half an hour or more. Thus, train 2, would complete the loop and just sit at the end for 20 plus minutes waiting for train 1 to enter the loop.
The only way that could work would be to have stations with space for trains to pull over and allow another train to pass. the timing would have to be perfect 100% of the time. The problem is there are very few practical places to build large stations like that and if you could find locations, it would massively increase the cost. Any delay to any train at an station would require the entire system to pause.
hte only Chicago feeder line i am much familiar with is the Airport and they have double tracks (one northbound, one southbound). Come to think of it the train the went out to where my friend lives from downtown also had double tracks.
With only one track from Ferndale to Downtown, the trains will be unable to pass each other. I do not see how you could even have two trains, unless one sits at the end of the loop waiting for the other to clear the tracks. it only takes a few minutes to complete the existing loop, but a train running from Ferndale (with stops) wold take half an hour or more. Thus, train 2, would complete the loop and just sit at the end for 20 plus minutes waiting for train 1 to enter the loop.
The only way that could work would be to have stations with space for trains to pull over and allow another train to pass. the timing would have to be perfect 100% of the time. The problem is there are very few practical places to build large stations like that and if you could find locations, it would massively increase the cost. Any delay to any train at an station would require the entire system to pause.
hte only Chicago feeder line i am much familiar with is the Airport and they have double tracks (one northbound, one southbound). Come to think of it the train the went out to where my friend lives from downtown also had double tracks.
Your not getting what I'm saying which is, the route up Woodward, to-from its northern terminus would be a 2-track railroad, largely elevated over/down the center of Woodward Ave. The only 1-track, 1-way aspect is in the existing PM loop itself where trains would enter the PM on one side, traverse the loop and exit/head back north, on the other side. I'm not understanding why you keep saying trains will back up and need a passing siding -- which, btw, I believe exists and a couple PM stations already. If trains are spaced at, let's say 10 minutes a part and stick close to their schedules, why should they be backed up in the PM loop?
OK, then Detroit should have built its rapid transit system when it was a good time to do so. Chicago built its subways in the '40s and '50s and Cleveland built its version of a heavy rail system in the '50s so it's not like the '50s was as transit dismal as you describe. Even BART was formed and planned in the '50s, built in the '60s as was DC's Metro system.
Both the pandemic and the current insecurity being felt in many cities due to the current city-wide unrest in many cities are not good signs for certain cities in the short-to-long term. There are serious security issues related to many cities now; even worse than a foreign virus is the feeling of not feeling safe living in cities.
Not so sure if these new rapid transit systems are thriving though. I'm sure you know there is a difference between rapid transit and light-rail, both of which are struggling to maintain or increase ridership.
Chicago extended its existing system into the subways. They didn't create a new system, which Cleveland did. That BART may have had rudimentary plans in the 50s is irrelevant. Many cities had plans -- Buffalo had a plan for an HRT; Detroit has had numerous rapid transit plans. What's relevant is whether those plans ever came of the planning board and sprung into reality. BART opened in 1972.
Well, Chicago's State Street Subway opened in 1943 and its Dearborn Street Subway opened in 1951; the Congress Blue Line opened in 1958 and the 1969 PATCO was an expansion of the existing service formerly known as the Bridge Line, opened in 1936.
Chicago's Dan Ryan L was built and opened in the '60s as well; the Kennedy Blue Line initial extension to Irving Park opened in 1970.
Transit planning in the '50s and '60s saw BART, DC Metro, and Chicago CTA under construction for service beginning in 1972 and 1976 respectively as was the case in Chicago.
Wouldn't say my history is ''way off'' but someone else's certainly is if the thinking is that rapid transit development was dead post-WW II through the '70s, and, yes, Detroit should not consider a rapid transit system now.
Cleveland has a rapid transit system, complete with direct service into and under its airport terminal, yet its ridership has plummeted the past 40 or so years. Like Detroit, Cleveland has hollowed-out, Detroit even more so. Both cities have growing cores yet no one really uses Cleveland's rapid transit so why would it work in Detroit? And please don't go with the people will use it to visit and party in the city and then take it home late night to far-flung destinations. See Cleveland's Waterfront Line extension. People will Uber late night like they're doing in legacy transit cities.
What is with all of this hyperbole about $100 billions of dollars to build a rapid transit system? Nobody is talking about HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS. An elevated Woodward line from downtown to Royal Oak at $150-$200 million per mile is $2.1 to $2.8 Billion.
Low-density cities like Charlotte, Salt Lake City, Houston, Dallas, San Jose, Norfolk, Denver, etc have built rapid transit lines in the past 5-25 years. St. Louis has suffered similar population decline percentage as Detroit, yet has built 2 light rail lines and is currently planning to extend one of the lines. Detroit Metro has millions more people than several of those metros. Why are you only focusing on city populations?
This pandemic is temporary. The protests are temporary. In addition, a ton of protests are occurring in the suburbs as well. So why are you only talking about fear of cities? And the protests that are going on in the city, are largely composed of people from the suburbs.
And you anti-city people need to COOL IT with this mass-hysteria about urban living and the pandemic. Plenty of dense cities worldwide didn't get jacked up by this virus, but low-density Texas is getting 2,000 infections a day. If you are predicting this isolation-social distancing thing is going to be a permanent way of life, than stop worrying about urban living, and realize that many of the greatest aspects of culture will largely disappear from society, like festivals, weddings, live-music joints, concerts, plays, college campuses, bowling, skating rinks, family reunions, religious gatherings, dance clubs, pro sports stadiums, etc, etc, etc.
What is with all of this hyperbole about $100 billions of dollars to build a rapid transit system? Nobody is talking about HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS. An elevated Woodward line from downtown to Royal Oak at $150-$200 million per mile is $2.1 to $2.8 Billion.
Low-density cities like Charlotte, Salt Lake City, Houston, Dallas, San Jose, Norfolk, Denver, etc have built rapid transit lines in the past 5-25 years. St. Louis has suffered similar population decline percentage as Detroit, yet has built 2 light rail lines and is currently planning to extend one of the lines. Detroit Metro has millions more people than several of those metros. Why are you only focusing on city populations?
This pandemic is temporary. The protests are temporary. In addition, a ton of protests are occurring in the suburbs as well. So why are you only talking about fear of cities? And the protests that are going on in the city, are largely composed of people from the suburbs.
And you anti-city people need to COOL IT with this mass-hysteria about urban living and the pandemic. Plenty of dense cities worldwide didn't get jacked up by this virus, but low-density Texas is getting 2,000 infections a day. If you are predicting this isolation-social distancing thing is going to be a permanent way of life, than stop worrying about urban living, and realize that many of the greatest aspects of culture will largely disappear from society, like festivals, weddings, live-music joints, concerts, plays, college campuses, bowling, skating rinks, family reunions, religious gatherings, dance clubs, pro sports stadiums, etc, etc, etc.
Agree 100%.
Sometimes folks become so irrational and hysterical in their reasons not to build, it's almost as if mass transit is some kind of threat to them or whatever interest or cause they may support.
Downtown Detroit has been essentially empty since we returned to work on May 6. You get some activity when the nightly protests break up, but for the most part it is 2008 all over again right now. Many of the condo dwellers have moved out of the city as well (hopefully only temporarily), their parking lots are mostly empty and there is no evening crowd, which is good since almost nothing is open. Many of the cars that are still there have not moved in months. It is not clear when/if things are going to come back to normal. I thought it would have returned to more normal levels by now. The fact that it hasn't has me concerned.
The recent protesters are not helping things. They are fewer in number now, but meaner and more aggressive. The majority appear to be young white hipsters. They walk around yelling "F You" at the rare people in the streets (after fist demanding they join the protest in some cases). This is not going to encourage people to come back and hang out in the city.
I think the Beach is open though. that is a good thing. No Friday night bands though : (
Very disappointing. It will take time for the city to overcome the effects of the virus. Let's hope for no second wave. But it WILL all end, and businesses will flourish again.
The part about the the aggressive protesters is disgusting. They aren't helping the cause at all...isn't it supposed to be about police brutality? Sounds like this has become a form of entertainment and way to release general frustration.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
