Detroit Abandons Light Rail Dreams, Plans BRT Routes

There was a lot riding on light rail plans for the city of Detroit.

Four years of planning, for one. Almost $100 million in private commitments, for another. But the most important consideration — by far — was the promise of a revitalized Woodward Avenue through the heart of the city’s up-and-coming Midtown neighborhood.

Detroit is trading light rail plans for bus-rapid-transit. Photo: ##|breaking|text|FRONTPAGE## Free Press##

Suddenly, yesterday, everything changed. Officials announced that despite all that — plus $25 million promised by USDOT — the city was abandoning light rail plans for a system of bus rapid transit.

According to a report by the Detroit Free Press, USDOT officials met with Mayor Dave Bing recently and outlined concerns that the city, which is in danger of being handed over to an emergency fiscal manager, would have trouble providing the operating funding for the nine-mile line.

This comes amid drastic service cuts at both Detroit’s urban and suburban transit systems — cuts that have led to reports of bus riders stranded at stops waiting three hours for a bus. The Free Press article also noted that among Detroit residents who depend on the bus to get to work, almost 60 percent travel to jobs in the suburbs, a symptom of crippling job sprawl.

News reports yesterday did not have details on BRT plans, except to say that buses would have a dedicated lanes from downtown to and through the suburbs possibly along Gratiot, Woodward and Michigan avenues and M-59.

Reactions to the announcement were mixed. Geralyn Lasher, a spokeswoman for Michigan Governor Rick Snyder, told the Free Press that light rail was “out of our lane … We’ve always been more in the line of the rapid bus.”

Meanwhile, the project’s private and philanthropic investors, known as the M1 coalition, told US Transportation Secretary Ray Lahood, Snyder and Bing that they were disappointed in the decision. Still, the Free Press reported, they were optimistic that a 3.2 mile section of light rail could be built.

There was no such silver lining for Megan Owens, director of Detroit’s Transit Riders United. “We’re basically throwing away a $3 billion economic development investment,” Owens said. “I’m outraged Mayor Bing would let this happen on his watch.”

The primary goal of the Woodward light rail was to spur development in a city that has suffered — probably more than any other city in the country — from white flight and disinvestment. Urban development is an urgent need.

But equity concerns have always been entwined with this project. The question was raised in March with respect to whether the train would be faster center-running service, or curb-running, as investors preferred to maximize development potential.

Ultimately, the city’s financial woes — and transit failures, it appears — were too much to overcome.

The Detroit News announced just today that escrow funds, originally slated for maintenance, would be used to keep Detroit’s People Mover system running despite city budget shortfalls. That’s one less transit cut, due to one more desperate grab for a way to keep things running despite fiscal paralysis.

It’s heartbreaking to see a centerpiece of Detroit’s revitalization plans downgraded. But perhaps all is not lost, even from a development standpoint. Cleveland has had a lot of success attracting development around its $500 million BRT system, connecting downtown to the Cleveland Clinic. If Cleveland can do it, so can Detroit.

  • before, the plan for Detroit was rail instead of bikes. now, it will be buses instead of bikes. not sure that’s really a _new_ tragedy.

    the work of the car/brt people is off to a good start. to prevent biking for the next generation at least, brt should be built, but ideally it will ride adjacent to the curbs — this will prevent any debate at all about the possibility of allowing bikes on this important thoroughfare.

    i’m hoping SF and SJ prevent biking in the same ways.

  • Anonymous

    “Mayor Dave Bing recently outlined concerns that the city…would have trouble providing the operating funding for the nine-mile line.”

    If that was a concern, wouldn’t light rail have been the better option since it has lower operating costs? And since the hope for economic development was one of the main driving forces for Woodward LRT, the lack of economic development that BRT brings to the table will be a major drawback.

    Peter, reading your comment history, I’m having trouble telling whether you’re being sarcastic or not.

  • Anonymous

    Forever slaves to the internal combustion engine.

  • J. Huffman

    BRT is better than rail because it’s cheaper.


Today’s Headlines

More Zany Ideas for Protecting Pedestrians from Self-Driving Cars (City Observatory) The 10 Deadliest States for Pedestrians (790 KABC) Slate: Uber and Lyft Could Have the Biggest Impact in the South Enormous Mixed-Use Development Promises to Make Miami More Walkable (WLRN) Fresno to Begin Construction on Bus Rapid Transit System This Month (Fresno Bee) London […]

Today’s Headlines

Donald Trump Will Be the Next President (NYT); Meanwhile… Indianapolis Approves Major Bus Service Expansion (Indy Star) Raleigh Votes for Transit, Commuter Rail Expansion (WRAL) Seattle’s $54 Billion Light Rail Package Appears Headed for Passage (Seattle Times) Los Angeles’ $100 Billion Transit Measure Ahead in Returns (L.A. Times) Detroit Regional Transit Expansion Measure Too Close to Call (Detroit […]