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.
So one moderate Republican President (Ford) was thwarted by an ultra-conservative (Reagan). I remember Detroit had planned a V-shaped (downtown) subway-surface system extending under-then-on Woodward and Gratiot avenues about 15 miles (each) out into lower Oakland County. But I never realized Detroit was that close (with a $600M federal commitment) to making it happen. Obviously had this system been built, Detroit would today have one of America's model bus-rail transit networks and much of the current dilapidated and abandoned Detroit would not even exist today, and Detroit would likely be seen, overall, as more of an urban success story as opposed to, well...
So one moderate Republican President (Ford) was thwarted by an ultra-conservative (Reagan). I remember Detroit had planned a V-shaped (downtown) subway-surface system extending under-then-on Woodward and Gratiot avenues about 15 miles (each) out into lower Oakland County. But I never realized Detroit was that close (with a $600M federal commitment) to making it happen. Obviously had this system been built, Detroit would today have one of America's model bus-rail transit networks and much of the current dilapidated and abandoned Detroit would not even exist today, and Detroit would likely be seen, overall, as more of an urban success story as opposed to, well...
Damn shame.
People don't lose their entire industry and jobs and become unable to afford their house and still find a way to stay in a city because they built a train.
Detroit should consider itself lucky it avoided this major boondoggle, way worse than the people mover.
People don't lose their entire industry and jobs and become unable to afford their house and still find a way to stay in a city because they built a train.
Detroit should consider itself lucky it avoided this major boondoggle, way worse than the people mover.
Whether it was worth it or not at the time, it would've been an important asset that they could have built off of in the new era of migration back to cities. Detroit certainly isn't in any better shape for having NOT built it.
You know the Shaker rapid that was built right before the Great Depression was never fully paid for by the Van Sweringens, whose railroad company went bankrupt. It's still an asset to our community though.
People don't lose their entire industry and jobs and become unable to afford their house and still find a way to stay in a city because they built a train.
Detroit should consider itself lucky it avoided this major boondoggle, way worse than the people mover.
How is rapid transit system that would have connected the neighborhoods and suburbs to downtown a boondoggle?
Is Cleveland's rail system a boondoggle? Boston's?
Yes, in the early 1980's, the economy of Detroit was going through some turmoil, as I believe Chrysler was bailed out in 1981. Detroit didn't lose its entire industry. The early 1980's was not anything as catastrophic as the Great Recession of the late 2000's.
The $600 million grant was offered in 1976 by President Gerald Ford. The leaders of Metro Detroit and the State of Michigan had 5 years to create a Regional Transit Authority, and to develop a dedicated funding source for their share of the cost of construction and operations. But the divide between the suburbs and the city was so great at that time, that they squandered that opportunity.
Both are incredibly wasteful with rising costs and decreasing service standards, so yes.
I don't know anything about Boston, but what is the basis for your claim about Cuyahoga County's RTA?
With lower fuel prices, you likely would find that costs have plummeted in both systems over the past year.
I've seen nothing about decreasing service standards in Cleveland. In fact, adding just the western bus rapid transit line last year seems to suggest to me that your charge is inaccurate.
Cleveland's 24/7 Healthline bus rapid line is a massive improvement over its predecessor bus line, and helped spur much development along the Euclid Ave. corridor and certainly has contributed to the attraction of living downtown.
I don't know anything about Boston, but what is the basis for your claim about Cuyahoga County's RTA?
With lower fuel prices, you likely would find that costs have plummeted in both systems over the past year.
I've seen nothing about decreasing service standards in Cleveland. In fact, adding just the western bus rapid transit line last year seems to suggest to me that your charge is inaccurate.
Cleveland's 24/7 Healthline bus rapid line is a massive improvement over its predecessor bus line, and helped spur much development along the Euclid Ave. corridor and certainly has contributed to the attraction of living downtown.
I don't really buy the development argument that people love to bring up. So many places located right on the rapid lines in Cleveland are some really rough or flat out abandoned areas.
Boston's MBTA has tons of problems. Just in the last few months, we've had a runaway train, train filled with smoke forcing people to kick out the windows so as to not die from smoke inhalation, cancelation of late night hours with a fare increase on the rise, revelations that 30% of MBTA employees make over 6 figures, unbelievable absentee rates, the list really goes on for miles.
Like I said, not against mass transit. It's just usually incredibly badly run.
I don't really buy the development argument that people love to bring up. So many places located right on the rapid lines in Cleveland are some really rough or flat out abandoned areas.
Reading the article that you linked, the slashing of State of Ohio public transit funding seems to have been a major problem for Cleveland's RTA. Cutting service when trains and buses are very lightly used makes perfect sense to me and eliminates some of the waste which bothers you.
If developers want extraordinary service, they should subsidize the service.
It's ridiculous IMO to posit that the Healthline has not added a major impetus to the development of the Euclid Corridor in Cleveland. There have been no cuts in Healthline service as ridership has mushroomed. The development of the $500 million new medical campus west of the Cleveland Clinic will add a new layer of growth.
Having taken urban development courses, development typically follows along transit, rail and highway corridors. Cleveland's urban sprawl since 1950 is great evidence of this.
Some areas along Cleveland's rail transit will be prime areas for redevelopment given the presence of transit lines.
T.O.D. in Cleveland seems primed for take-off in the coming decade outside of the already robust activity on the Euclid Corridor BRT route. Planning underway for the Market District reinforces this perception.
Pretending like Euclid Avenue was not going to develop but for a bus line, despite hospitals, cultural gems, and case is not very accurate. How do you explain the desolation around so much of the system?
Think we're having a causation issue here.
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.
