Transit Updates for Greater Grand Rapids

[Rizzo]

Depending on the type of vehicle used, you could have it as low as 29 inches in platform height. If I remember correctly, that is what NJ Transit got away with on their Stadler Models. For the sake of simplicity and cost, design continuation might be the best direction. It seems like it will be more helpful for riders that all stations followed a simple and uniform design concept. Like the first photo posted by Dad, this is what will probably work the best in our situation. Elegance in the simplicity of it.

[tamias6]

Simple solutions are often the best ones.

Depending on the type of vehicle used, you could have it as low as 29 inches in platform height. If I remember correctly, that is what NJ Transit got away with on their Stadler Models. For the sake of simplicity and cost, design continuation might be the best direction. It seems like it will be more helpful for riders that all stations followed a simple and uniform design concept. Like the first photo posted by Dad, this is what will probably work the best in our situation. Elegance in the simplicity of it.

[Raildudes dad]

Yeah, but they weren't that wide. 18' from center seems excessive. The Bombardier Talent is 12.14 feet wide, so you'd need a 13' retractable "gang-plank" to span the difference. The wings we saw were only 15".

This MDOT document says clearance is 9' from the center:

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/rcbook_55515_7.pdf

I agree there's no need to have a shelter roof that extends over the top of the transit cars.

I was suggesting 18 feet for the supporting walls or columns for the shelters. Everyone is focusing on the platform. The platform will be much closer but the space above floor level needs to be wider. If only I could do CAD and post the .dwg. Once you see a clearance diagram, it will become clear The MDOT 9' is a minimum, not necessarily the railroads requirement. Don't forget RR property is private property, not public property. Transit will the there as a tenent. You need to do what the landlord will allow.

[GRDadof3]

I'm quoting myself so I don't have to repost the photos (lazy)

I see what you're saying RDD, and these shelters in these two examples probably fit the bill (as far as clearance goes)?

[Raildudes dad]

I'm quoting myself so I don't have to repost the photos (lazy)

I see what you're saying RDD, and these shelters in these two examples probably fit the bill (as far as clearance goes)?

BINGO The light poles and railing need to be 15' (bit I would suggest 18' for planning puposes) from the center of track and any roof has to be no lower than 23' (but I would suggest 25 for planning purposes).

[Rizzo]

In that case, the platforms I sketched are correct except the rails are to close and the canopy is too low. When you factor in hte minimum width from center the support structures are outside the minimum envelope. The Central Station is additional track for Transit use only so they were sketched to that standard.

Edited March 23, 2007 by Rizzo

[Veloise]

Not all of NS or CSX routes can handle all high / wides. Transit is going to be a tennant on theses lines so what the RR's "require" is negotiable. They certainly are not going to compromise their ability to move the highest & widest they can now. The clearance is more important above the floor level of a drop deck car. I was more concerned you guys (and gals) didn't design a roof level just above the top of a transit car There's no reason to have support posts real close either. Plus GRD3 & I found cars with "wings" at the doors to fill the "gap" required at floor level

Hey, many on-grade RR XINGS already have gap-filling flanges installed. These allow skinny-tired road users to not fall into the gap. I believe the brand name is Parco (next time I ride over some tracks I will look down).

Products exist. Might make sense to have them be stationary rather than rolling down the rails.

HTH

ETA: there's some of this along the track by the Bicycle Factory. Brand name is Omni.

[cell tower building: still uggggly]

Edited March 25, 2007 by Veloise

[Rizzo]

Raildudes Dad, here's a quick graphic. If you have any thing to add just send a private message so I can work this out.

Edited March 23, 2007 by Rizzo

[Raildudes dad]

Raildudes Dad, here's a quick graphic. If you have any thing to add just send a private message so I can work this out.

23' 0" and you got it

[tamias6]

Now that I see this graphic, it making sense. Looks Like I've got some more revisions to make my central station.

23' 0" and you got it

[Rizzo]

Remember that its from top of rail, not ground level. That's why it reads, (22' 6") not as it should (23' 0") :oops:

Edited March 23, 2007 by Rizzo

[Raildudes dad]

Remember that its from top of rail, not ground level. That's why it reads, (22' 6") not as it should (23' 0") :oops:

Clearance is measured from top of rail - not all rail is the same height. (many different sizes out there)

[Raildudes dad]

Hey, many on-grade RR XINGS already have gap-filling flanges installed. These allow skinny-tired road users to not fall into the gap. I believe the brand name is Parco (next time I ride over some tracks I will look down).

Products exist. Might make sense to have them be stationary rather than rolling down the rails.

HTH

The gap is between the side of the car and the platform, not the gap next to the rail. Stationary ones need to be folded up out of the way for freight service. One "oh sh**, I forgot to put it up", a freight crew not paying attention and there will be a lot of grinding metal and a station out of service in the morning.

Edited March 24, 2007 by Raildudes dad

[Rizzo]

The NS line is full of relay and others. After the line changed a few times in different sections it was converted to other types, I can only assume the wieght of the rail varries from 115 to higher, but the height is probably contiunous -- atleast I'm assuming. You're bound to run into different rail on that line, no doubt.

Back home I got a yard of 115RE and some others laying around the Grandfather's house from this line (something like a tradition to give the grandson a piece of rail.) After he retired he grabed about a ton of relay for his gardens. Makes great for weighing down tarps, edging, support for platforms, stakes, etc... or a backyard railway. :thumbs:

Edited March 24, 2007 by Rizzo

[Raildudes dad]

The NS line is full of relay and others. After the line changed a few times in different sections it was converted to other types, I can only assume the wieght of the rail varries from 115 to higher, but the height is probably contiunous -- atleast I'm assuming. You're bound to run into different rail on that line, no doubt.

Back home I got a yard of 115RE and some others laying around the Grandfather's house from this line (something like a tradition to give the grandson a piece of rail.) After he retired he grabed about a ton of relay for his gardens. Makes great for weighing down tarps, edging, support for platforms, stakes, etc... or a backyard railway. :thumbs:

Relay refers to the fact the rail was used when it was installed. Like I said before rail, rarely wears out unless it's on curves or a very high tonnage line. I can guarantee most of the rail where we are considering is ok.

Rail can vary from 90 lbs to 138, I think there's something in the 140's (can't find my reference book right at the moment ) They vary in height and shape. Their tie plates are different too. A couple types off the top of my head are the RE, ASCE, and Dudley. This was from the days of the wild west (and east) when RR's were competing to get to places. RR's had their own size & shape so it couldn't be "borrowed" by a competitor. The different sizes are can be used together today joined by "comp bars". Since they are expensive and it's less desirable than all one size & shape, their use is minimized.

Edited March 24, 2007 by Raildudes dad

[GRDadof3]

South Division "visionaries" hope Bus Rapid Transit will save South Division:

http://www.grbj.com/GRBJ/ArticleArchive/20...es+Together.htm

[tamias6]

GR Dad if possible can you find and link to an article covering this story on a non subscription site?

Thanks

South Division "visionaries" hope Bus Rapid Transit will save South Division:

http://www.grbj.com/GRBJ/ArticleArchive/20...es+Together.htm

[tamias6]

Thanks for the PM, GRdad.

I do think that it would be a good thing to see Kentwood and Wyoming to work together with ITP to gets some ped friendly developements that would take advantage of the proposed BRT line for S.Division.

I know that Wyoming is trying to make the stretch of 28th streetby its city hall into it's "Downtown". Personally that vision would have been better suited for S.Division as street grid wise it is dense enough to easily be converted from 50's inner ring 'burb to urban. Maybe this collaboration between Kentwood, Wyoming, and ITP will still do somthing about that.

[Rizzo]

Raildudes Dad, do you remember about a year or so ago CSX tried to unload its subs here in Metro GR? I think they were trying to sell the rail and lease the ROW almost something of 200 miles worth -- a good chunk of their Michigan inventory. Do you know more about this? I'm not sure what happened with that one.

I ask this because if they run in feasible corridors that might be something to look at.

Edited April 2, 2007 by Rizzo

[Raildudes dad]

Raildudes Dad, do you remember about a year or so ago CSX tried to unload its subs here in Metro GR? I think they were trying to sell the rail and lease the ROW almost something of 200 miles worth -- a good chunk of their Michigan inventory. Do you know more about this? I'm not sure what happened with that one.

I ask this because if they run in feasible corridors that might be something to look at.

Grand Rapids to Ludington/Manistee was leased to and is operated by Marquette Rail. West Olive north to Muskegon was bought by RailAmerica and is operated by Mid-Michigan. Flint north was leased by Lake State Railway and is operated by a new LS subsidiary, Saginaw Bay Southern. Plymouth to Porter was / is rumored to be on the block (again for the ???? time). They just put on a Flint/GRR/Chi train each direction and western coal to eastern MI thru GR plus there's more western coal going to Port Sheldon so a lease / sale would surprise me at this time.

[DwntwnGeo]

I saw this on WZZM website today:

"State Reps. Hoon-Yung Hopgood, D-Taylor, and Craig DeRoche, R-Novi, have scheduled a news conference this afternoon to launch the proposal that would, among other things, raise the state's gas tax by 9 cents over three years. The current state tax is 19 cents per gallon."

"The lawmakers will be joined by business leaders and representatives of unions and local government who have been urging action to raise more revenue for road construction, bridge repair and

mass transit

."

It is probably nothing, but the article mentions "mass transit" I wonder if this was written in the story to gain support for the proposed bill, or if the State is starting to look at alternate forms of transit. Of course things could remain the same and the State continues to provide $1 to mass transit for every $1000 to roads.

The complete story can be read here on WZZM's website:

http://www.wzzm13.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=73414

[Raildudes dad]

It is probably nothing, but the article mentions "mass transit" I wonder if this was written in the story to gain support for the proposed bill, or if the State is starting to look at alternate forms of transit. Of course things could remain the same and the State continues to provide $1 to mass transit for every $1000 to roads.

The tax increase will be included in the revenue for Act 51. Act 51 revenue is distibuted according to "the formula" which includes a specific set aside for mass transit (and has for a number of years). (You'll have to read the Act for specific numbers - too much fine print for me today

[tracer1138]

I saw this on WZZM website today:

"State Reps. Hoon-Yung Hopgood, D-Taylor, and Craig DeRoche, R-Novi, have scheduled a news conference this afternoon to launch the proposal that would, among other things, raise the state's gas tax by 9 cents over three years. The current state tax is 19 cents per gallon."

"The lawmakers will be joined by business leaders and representatives of unions and local government who have been urging action to raise more revenue for road construction, bridge repair and

mass transit

."

It is probably nothing, but the article mentions "mass transit" I wonder if this was written in the story to gain support for the proposed bill, or if the State is starting to look at alternate forms of transit. Of course things could remain the same and the State continues to provide $1 to mass transit for every $1000 to roads.

The complete story can be read here on WZZM's website:

http://www.wzzm13.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=73414

I briefly perused the State's Long-Range Transportation plan available here

http://www.michigan.gov/mdot/1,1607,7-151-...4809---,00.html

and overall, while they like to use words like integrated and coordinated it doesn't look like they're too interested in transit. If they do make innovative moves, my guess is that they will just add highway traffic expediting measure that have been in place in other states for years. Besides, given the fact that the proponents are from Taylor and Novi, my guess is that they're just interested in have more roads and wider roads off of which they can build more strip malls and more subdivisions full of more people who will be ardently against more funding for mass transit.

Edited April 3, 2007 by tracer1138

[GRDadof3]

Now that I've learned how to embed videos, I wanted to post this one:

This is the Stadler Arrive GTW that will be used on the Austin Metro Rail system, a 32 mile light rail/commuter rail system coming in at just $90 Million (including rolling stock), or about $2 Million/mile for capital costs including stations, park-n-rides and maintenance infrastructure.

[tracer1138]

This is the Stadler Arrive GTW that will be used on the Austin Metro Rail system, a 32 mile light rail/commuter rail system coming in at just $90 Million (including rolling stock), or about $2 Million/mile for capital costs including stations, park-n-rides and maintenance infrastructure.

The day just wouldn't be complete without GRDad posting something about Diesel Multiple Units

Edited April 3, 2007 by tracer1138