9/21/05

Public Transit: The federal government is giving southeast Michigan officials $100 million to design a light-rail line between Ann Arbor and Detroit. And a number of communities from Grand Rapids to Sault Ste Marie are putting money into their public transportation system. The question is if a community builds a public transportation system, will you actually use it? What would it take to get you to forget the car? Do you want public transit? How would it change things for you or your community? We’ll talk about when public transit makes sense and when it doesn’t.

Jack talks with Bob Prud'homme, President of Transporation Riders United; Carmine Palombo, Transportation Director for SEMCOG; Michigan Senator Alan Cropsey; and Joe Grengs a Professor of Urban Planning.

Listen to the mp3  or  Real Audio

Comments

[Sonia Schmerl]

It seems to me completely irresponsible to continue to ignore the need for public transportation between population and job centers. Until we invest in safe and convenient transit, our destructive land use patterns will not change, and we will pay a much greater cost in the future. It is disingenuous to decry the cost of rail transit construction when we conceal the hidden costs of road construction and automobile dependence.

[Erick Erickson]

Here's a URL for the Bus Rapid Transit system being put in place in Mexico City for $30MM. The idea is to buy lots of buses, have them run frequently (I think 5 minute intervals). Here's a quote...

"The Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system is designed to offer the low price of a bus -- 33 cents a ride in Mexico City -- and the speed of a light rail system"

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/08/07/MNGJDE4AEF1.DTL

Is this sort of system being investigated or are we jumping to conclusions that "light rail is best"?

Also, the key according to another article I remember reading to getting the people with cars (i.e. middle class and up) to use mass transit was to make it convenient and regular. In the BRT system, this is accomplished by making the busses run frequently and dedicating bus lanes to their use.

I think that too frequently we equate "mass transit" with providing folks who don't have a car a way to get around, no matter how inconvenient. It's no wonder that it's hard to get people with cars to use mass transit when driving is usually so much more convenient.

To make mass transit work, we need to either make driving so painful that people are willing to use the mass transit (this happens when traffic becomes unbearable) or make the mass transit more convenient than driving.

[Chester Kiertanis]

The rail system between Ann Arbor and Detroit already exists. The Amtrak rails are there all that is needed are more trains on the tracks, say every 20 minor so, properly done that Amtrak could still use the rails between Detroit and Chicago. As far as the street cars that did run in Detroit, the information that I have heard states that the street cars were purchased by General Motors and moved to Mexico and South America so they could sell buses..

[Edwina]

My only comment is that I hope everyone remembers that bus/mass transit systems benefits everyone. Not just the poor, middle-class, or rich.
It is truly disconcerting to hear people suggest that "poor people don't use the buses, and rich people don't need them--so therefore get rid of it." That is ridiculous.
And comments like, "I see the buses and they are empty" fall along the same line. My mother rides the bus every morning at 6:20 AM. So what if there is only one person, or 50 people on a bus...that does not change the need.

[Gil White]

Today's show on public transit touched on some of the problems associated with being a home rule state with over 1800 units of government. We have decided we do not like sprawl type land use policies yet do little to encourage change. Why, for instance, do we tolerate a "sprawl" type of approach to our economic development. Why do state revenue sharing funds not insist that home rule start taking a more macro world view as to how they fit into a county or region instead of the parochial micro managingfocus that is the norm. The economic implications, in terms of inefficient use of infrastructure investment and duplication of services, involve hundreds of millions of dollars a year. Lost economic development opportunities are also large in dollar terms. Is it possible for the state, by tweaking the existing rules that govern its revenue sharing programs, to encourage home rule to start taking a more "macro" world view?
Rewarding certain behaviors-paricipation in joint planning, zoning at densites which support infrastructure investment, participating in continuing "smart growth" education for appointed and elected officials, sharing services with neighboring jurisdictions, allowing for mixed use development,etc-are just some of the behaviors that state revenue sharing could encourage. Politically we cannot get rid of home rule however we do not need to contnue subsidizing a business as usual approach to both our land use and economic development policies. I would suggest this as a future topic for the show-home rule, change and the role that state revenue sharing could play in such an effort.

[Gary Anglebrandt]

A Woodward line makes more sense than an Ann Arbor one. The comment about using the Amway track that already exists between Ann Arbor and Detroit is a great point. Besides that, the commuter relationship between Oakland County and Detroit is much stronger than that of Ann Arbor and Detroit. I have lived in five counties throughout Metro Detroit, and Oakland feels much more like the Detroit suburbs than Ann Arbor, which has a culture centered more around U of M than Detroit.
High-density areas of Oakland are closer to Detroit and more likely to provide a job for a low-income worker than Ann Arbor. I have been in situations of living in both Wayne and Oakland searching for a job. Looking in Ann Arbor didn't make sense because it's too far away and many of the entry-level, low-paying jobs are filled by college students. The study that is prompting this discussion should ask people who live in Detroit when they last drove up Woodward, I-75 or the Lodge. Then ask them when they last took I-94 to Ann Arbor.
Conversely, the study should look at people who commute to work from Ann Arbor to Detroit, people I suspect are usually well-paid professionals--such as auto engineers--with nice cars to drive.
And let's not forget night life and culture. The Detroit night life circuit is mainly Pontiac, Royal Oak, Ferndale and downtown Detroit. A lot more potential drunk drivers would use a Woodward line instead of an Ann Arbor one.

[sandra seaton]

In response to your 9/21/05 program on public transportation in Michigan, I believe Michigan universities and colleges could be a valuable testing ground for a state-wide transportation network be it buses, trains, or vans. Our universities would benefit from increased contact through the sharing of facilities and students. Because Michigan is such a large state, if we could work out a public transportation model that connected our vast state university system, it could set a valuable example for the rest of the country.

I live in East Lansing, Michigan. For a number of years I taught creative writing at a fine institution, Central Michigan University in Mt. Pleasant. There is no public transportation from CMU to East Lansing, not even a Greyhound Bus. CMU on more than one occasion has recruited non-traditional minority students to come to Mt. Pleasant to do graduate work. CMU rightly saw the need to bring diversity to campus, to enrich the Mt. Pleasant campus, share the experiences of those from another area of Michigan with the student body at CMU, and bring about a win-win situation for all. The students are offered handsome fellowships; the issue for many of the students in completing their program of study is the difficulty of transporting themselves from Detroit to Mt. Pleasant for the two year program. These are students who often have full-time jobs, some of them single parents with children to care for. Even if the students can get as far as East Lansing on public transportation, there is nothing that will take them to Mt. Pleasant.

There is a similar problem with international students brought to campus. After settling into Mt. Pleasant, if students need to travel out of the area, say to Lansing Airport, there is no transportation. Such things as limo services are just not within the budget of most of these students.

A number of CMU faculty and CMU employees live in the East Lansing area. Over the years, although there have been attempts to work out some kind of group transportation, no commercial transportation has ever been made available. Aside from the students who live in East Lansing and commute to CMU, there are those who live in East Lansing and would like to take courses at CMU. Do I think that faculty, staff and students would use this kind of service? Yes, I do. More than anything else, it comes down to an issue of quality of life. People do want to spend more time doing things besides commuting and working. If faculty or students could grade papers, read textbooks and prepare for classes while traveling to and from work, this would add valuable time to their lives. MSU has drafted a plan to move some of their medical services to the Grand Rapids area. A physician friend who teaches at MSU’s College of Human Medicine told me the main reason he was against the Grand Rapids move: he didn’t want to spend half his life driving back and forth between Grand Rapids and East Lansing. Some kind of transportation system would undoubtedly make the proposed set-up much more attractive. And why not have others, including students and staff who were going that way, be a part of the transport?

Discussions about a state wide public transportation system should be brought to the table. The recent devastation and loss of life in New Orleans pointed out a problem that a country our size will have to face. In case of a large-scale emergency, how do we reach each other with the help we need? Because we’re such a large country, getting in touch with each other quickly is a challenge. We have been taught to rely on a system of individual ownership of cars. Of course, there’s no way to give up our basic need for the automobile, but communities all over Michigan, from Detroit to the UP, have to be better connected. The American way of life that we so value places great emphasis on the individual, but it’s also about community. The only decent bus transportation to Mt. Pleasant, for example, is provided by Soaring Eagle Casino. This just isn’t enough.

[Ali Ali]

In order for a light rail mass transit system to be build. More people need to use the buses. The existing bus system is not dependable and not frequent enough. The 100 million need to be spent on improving the existing bus transit system. Even if the initial capital costs for the light rail system were covered, the operation and maintainance costs for such a system will require an increase in taxes.

[Judy Kay]

I agree with the observation that Detroit area has terrible mass transit; if you live in the city you can't get to work Downriver or on N. side in less than 2-3 hours. Not to mention that the roads have been so disrupted by constant re-repair of old repairs and bridge reconstruction that driving isn't always that much better. I also agree with the comments regarding utter uselessness of spending money on a *study* about a Detroit-A2 link; Greyhound has such a route, and could readily increase frequency if called for.