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.
I'm afraid you keep missing my point. You're asking me to pay for something that will benefit you but not me, and asking me if I would object to using a different form of payment.
I will not be using this system. Not because I am opposed to the very idea of mass transit, but because I don't see how and when I can incorporate it into my life. It's not going to have a stop anywhere near my work or my home, and it's not going to make my daily routine any easier. I already have a SMART stop close to my house, and it's still far easier for me to drive anywhere.
And I am a pretty typical suburban resident.
There's a combination of factors that make the mass transit in Metro Detroit a far less pressing issue than in, say, NYC or Chicago of London or Paris. The population is very spread out and no matter where you put the few proposed stations, it would be too far to be convenient for most people. The roads are far from being super congested, our typical rush hour traffic on a major freeway looks like a NASCAR race compared to, say, Chicago's daily traffic. The worst congestion is actually in the farther away suburbs that grew rapidly in the past 20 years without much road development so you have all these people coming home after work using a one-lane road. These suburbs are not going to be covered under RTA plan so it doesn't do squat for them.
A fast rail to the airport ? When I drive to the airport I go straight south for 45-50 minutes going 70 mph for most of that time. There's no way a "fast rail" system will be any faster - actually it will be slower since I would have to drive out of the way, park, walk to the terminal, wait for that train, load my luggage, wait for the other passengers to load up, and then finally ride to the airport at the same 70 mph. This could only be worth it if the drive to the airport was a nightmare, but it's actually not bad. Again, this would be typical for much of the Oakland and Macomb counties. We have relatively fast traffic and long commutes over large areas, a bad combo for mass transit. It works the best where traffic is terrible yet distances are relatively short. The proposed systems may benefit only some - not all - residents of Royal Oak or Troy (depending on the terminal locations), and more residents of the City of Detroit, but will do nothing for the people in West Bloomfield, Lake Orion, Fenton, Roseville etc who are going to be paying higher taxes because of it, without using it.
This proposal isn't going to succeed because it only meets the needs of a relatively small group of people while asking everyone to pay up, and at the same time, doesn't address the urgent daily problem affecting the majority of taxpayers - our broken roads. So it doesn't matter whether it's a property tax milage or sales tax, most of the people who are being asked to pay for it won't have much use for it. So how do you expect them to vote for this proposal, when they wouldn't even approve a tax increase to pay for fixing the roads that they are using on a daily basis ?
Again, false. Again, There are a number of cities with better traffic than Detroit yet still have rail. And there are also a number of cities more spread out than metro Detroit yet still have rail. You probably don't work downtown... especially not in rush hour if you think rush hour is still going normal speed. Most people who commute downtown during rush hour beg to differ. So do most people who have to use Southfield freeway or 696 during rush hour. The state of Michigan must beg to differ as well since they already expanded 96, are currently expanding 75, and plans still in the works to expand 94. Detroit does not need to have worse traffic just to get rail.
Atlanta, btw does not have worse traffic than Detroit because it's "booming" (it's booming but it's even more spread out than metro Detroit), Atlanta has worse traffic because whoever designed Atlanta's road and freeway system were likely high as a kite to design such an awful, system. Really, for Atl to be such a car centric city, it's freeway and road system is the worst I have ever seen. No matter where you live in metro Atlanta, the only options you have to get in and out of Atlanta's CBD is I-20 if you live ANYWHERE east or west of the city or take the notorious, atrociously planned I-75/I-85 which is just one big freeway when it gets near downtown. The could have at least did like Detroit did with the Jefferies or like Chicago did with the Dan Ryan and put local and express lanes on the freeway. Those freeways are just as big as that one but way more efficient. Compare ATL with Detroit's core that has freeways going every direction (NE, N, NW, W, SW, S, and 2 ways to get to Canada) and if those freeways have delays you still have the mega surface streets that could take you all the way to the country going one direction vs Atlanta who's surface streets are borderline useless. If you combined 75/94 and 96/the lodge right before they made it to the downtown area, traffic would be just as bad but thankfully it's not. Detroit has too many freeways and alternatives to have traffic as bad as Chicago, Atlanta, and especially Manhattan which none of these cities have enough freeways at least near their core.
And Detroit is not too spread out to have mass transit. Phoenix, Atlanta, LA, Miami, Dallas, Houston, hell any sunbelt city is more spread out than Metro Detroit. Yet, mass transit works there just fine. Freeways in Detroit don't drop most people off right at their house and neither does mass transit systems in most other cities, yet people use both on the daily. If it's efficient enough, people will use it. And the Detroit region of all places have a better reason to use public transportation than traffic issues, how about CAR INSURANCE issues? Do you know how many people in Michigan are using fake addresses, driving without a license, or driving uninsured? it's ALOT more than you think... trust me. If you see out of state plates parked at job sites or somewhere else on a daily basis. They probably aren't on a vacation.
Again, false. Again, There are a number of cities with better traffic than Detroit yet still have rail. And there are also a number of cities more spread out than metro Detroit yet still have rail. You probably don't work downtown... especially not in rush hour if you think rush hour is still going normal speed. Most people who commute downtown during rush hour beg to differ. So do most people who have to use Southfield freeway or 696 during rush hour. The state of Michigan must beg to differ as well since they already expanded 96, are currently expanding 75, and plans still in the works to expand 94. Detroit does not need to have worse traffic just to get rail.
Atlanta, btw does not have worse traffic than Detroit because it's "booming" (it's booming but it's even more spread out than metro Detroit), Atlanta has worse traffic because whoever designed Atlanta's road and freeway system were likely high as a kite to design such an awful, system. Really, for Atl to be such a car centric city, it's freeway and road system is the worst I have ever seen. No matter where you live in metro Atlanta, the only options you have to get in and out of Atlanta's CBD is I-20 if you live ANYWHERE east or west of the city or take the notorious, atrociously planned I-75/I-85 which is just one big freeway when it gets near downtown. The could have at least did like Detroit did with the Jefferies or like Chicago did with the Dan Ryan and put local and express lanes on the freeway. Those freeways are just as big as that one but way more efficient. Compare ATL with Detroit's core that has freeways going every direction (NE, N, NW, W, SW, S, and 2 ways to get to Canada) and if those freeways have delays you still have the mega surface streets that could take you all the way to the country going one direction vs Atlanta who's surface streets are borderline useless. If you combined 75/94 and 96/the lodge right before they made it to the downtown area, traffic would be just as bad but thankfully it's not. Detroit has too many freeways and alternatives to have traffic as bad as Chicago, Atlanta, and especially Manhattan which none of these cities have enough freeways at least near their core.
And Detroit is not too spread out to have mass transit. Phoenix, Atlanta, LA, Miami, Dallas, Houston, hell any sunbelt city is more spread out than Metro Detroit. Yet, mass transit works there just fine. Freeways in Detroit don't drop most people off right at their house and neither does mass transit systems in most other cities, yet people use both on the daily. If it's efficient enough, people will use it. And the Detroit region of all places have a better reason to use public transportation than traffic issues, how about CAR INSURANCE issues? Do you know how many people in Michigan are using fake addresses, driving without a license, or driving uninsured? it's ALOT more than you think... trust me. If you see out of state plates parked at job sites or somewhere else on a daily basis. They probably aren't on a vacation.
You're right on, MS313. This guy has no clue about how a trunk-line, feeder-bus system works. Chicago and even New York have great rail systems, but many of their residents and close-in suburbanites reach rail heads by bus (or in limited circumstances, drive). It's ridiculous to think rapid transit must be within walking distance of every resident in order for it to be successful.
...And Detroit is not too spread out to have mass transit....
The Salt Lake City CSA has 1.9 million people living along a 100 mile corridor of endless suburbia, so... they built a light rail.
It seems that the Detroit MSA, with its 4.5 million people living in a traditional suburban sprawl fanning out about 25 miles from downtown in every direction could manage four 25 mile light rail lines (Michigan, Grand River, Woodward, Gratoit...) if only there was some proposal on the ballot this fall to do such a thing.
Again, false. Again, There are a number of cities with better traffic than Detroit yet still have rail. And there are also a number of cities more spread out than metro Detroit yet still have rail. You probably don't work downtown... especially not in rush hour if you think rush hour is still going normal speed. Most people who commute downtown during rush hour beg to differ. So do most people who have to use Southfield freeway or 696 during rush hour. The state of Michigan must beg to differ as well since they already expanded 96, are currently expanding 75, and plans still in the works to expand 94. Detroit does not need to have worse traffic just to get rail.
Atlanta, btw does not have worse traffic than Detroit because it's "booming" (it's booming but it's even more spread out than metro Detroit), Atlanta has worse traffic because whoever designed Atlanta's road and freeway system were likely high as a kite to design such an awful, system. Really, for Atl to be such a car centric city, it's freeway and road system is the worst I have ever seen. No matter where you live in metro Atlanta, the only options you have to get in and out of Atlanta's CBD is I-20 if you live ANYWHERE east or west of the city or take the notorious, atrociously planned I-75/I-85 which is just one big freeway when it gets near downtown. The could have at least did like Detroit did with the Jefferies or like Chicago did with the Dan Ryan and put local and express lanes on the freeway. Those freeways are just as big as that one but way more efficient. Compare ATL with Detroit's core that has freeways going every direction (NE, N, NW, W, SW, S, and 2 ways to get to Canada) and if those freeways have delays you still have the mega surface streets that could take you all the way to the country going one direction vs Atlanta who's surface streets are borderline useless. If you combined 75/94 and 96/the lodge right before they made it to the downtown area, traffic would be just as bad but thankfully it's not. Detroit has too many freeways and alternatives to have traffic as bad as Chicago, Atlanta, and especially Manhattan which none of these cities have enough freeways at least near their core.
And Detroit is not too spread out to have mass transit. Phoenix, Atlanta, LA, Miami, Dallas, Houston, hell any sunbelt city is more spread out than Metro Detroit. Yet, mass transit works there just fine. Freeways in Detroit don't drop most people off right at their house and neither does mass transit systems in most other cities, yet people use both on the daily. If it's efficient enough, people will use it. And the Detroit region of all places have a better reason to use public transportation than traffic issues, how about CAR INSURANCE issues? Do you know how many people in Michigan are using fake addresses, driving without a license, or driving uninsured? it's ALOT more than you think... trust me. If you see out of state plates parked at job sites or somewhere else on a daily basis. They probably aren't on a vacation.
You're just supporting my argument. Yes, indeed, I don't work downtown. Neither does the majority of the 3.6 million residents of suburbs. The proposed tax increase funded rail system that you want us all to support would solve the transportation problem for a minority of taxpayers while doing nothing to solve the transportation problem facing the majority - bad roads. But it would most definitely raise the property value for downtown investors, which is why it is getting on the ballot in the first place. This is not a solution to benefit the majority of residents, this is a selfish proposal pushed by an influential minority with financial incentives to see it passed. You and the few other vocal supporters will certainly benefit from it, but the majority of tax paying residents won't.
And don't compare Metro Detroit to Chicago or Atlanta. In Chicago, even with it's mass transit, the rush hour traffic is a nightmare everywhere. In city and in suburbs. Chicago would quite literally choke if you took away their trains and busses. Atlanta is not there yet but it's still pretty bad. This is not the case for the majority of Metro Detroit residents. Getting from say Farmington Hills to Warren or from Lake Orion to Southfield would not be any faster or more convenient if that proposal was passed.
And I am fully aware of our most expensive car insurance and people who won't pay for it. Again, the majority of them won't be using that rail because they work too far from the station, so it's not going to make them ditch their illegally driven cars.
Your commute may suck because of the lack of rail, but the majority of people you want to pay to fix your problem are facing the biggest issue when they get off the freeway and go on the streets leading to their subdivisions - the streets that are one lane in either direction and are congested. Their problem won't be solved by mass transit. It will be solved by adding more roundabouts, widening roads where possible, and fixing them to improve the flow of traffic. So it's pretty ironic when the supporters of that proposal call me and other people who don't want it to pass "selfish" and "narrow-minded" when at this point it is a classic case of special interests trying to get public funding for their narrow self serving agenda.
If the proposed transit system will indeed be in such a high demand, then make it pay for itself. Instead of asking every tax paying resident of the three counties to have their taxes raised, make a case for a bond supported by the future ticket prices. Certainly according to the supporters of this system, it is going to be heavily used by everyone and paying off the bond won't be a problem ? Dan Gilbert could even pitch in some of his ample funds and make a nice return on his investments.
Unless, of course, he knows that it would be a constant money drain, and wants the taxpayers to finance it while he's ripping the benefits of his downtown property value going up.
Last edited by Ummagumma; 08-31-2016 at 11:36 AM..
The Salt Lake City CSA has 1.9 million people living along a 100 mile corridor of endless suburbia, so... they built a light rail.
It seems that the Detroit MSA, with its 4.5 million people living in a traditional suburban sprawl fanning out about 25 miles from downtown in every direction could manage four 25 mile light rail lines (Michigan, Grand River, Woodward, Gratoit...) if only there was some proposal on the ballot this fall to do such a thing.
Yes! Not only did SLC build a (roughly) 44-mile, multi-branch LRT (including a line to the SLC airport), it also implemented an 80-mile north-south commuter rail system through its downtown. That's pretty amazing for a small-to-medium sized major metro area with light population density... and reemphasizes your point that, if they can build it, what the hell is wrong with Detroit!!!???
You're just supporting my argument. Yes, indeed, I don't work downtown. Neither does the majority of the 3.6 million residents of suburbs. The proposed tax increase funded rail system that you want us all to support would solve the transportation problem for a minority of taxpayers while doing nothing to solve the transportation problem facing the majority - bad roads. But it would most definitely raise the property value for downtown investors, which is why it is getting on the ballot in the first place. This is not a solution to benefit the majority of residents, this is a selfish proposal pushed by an influential minority with financial incentives to see it passed. You and the few other vocal supporters will certainly benefit from it, but the majority of tax paying residents won't.
And don't compare Metro Detroit to Chicago or Atlanta. In Chicago, even with it's mass transit, the rush hour traffic is a nightmare everywhere. In city and in suburbs. Chicago would quite literally choke if you took away their trains and busses. Atlanta is not there yet but it's still pretty bad. This is not the case for the majority of Metro Detroit residents. Getting from say Farmington Hills to Warren or from Lake Orion to Southfield would not be any faster or more convenient if that proposal was passed.
And I am fully aware of our most expensive car insurance and people who won't pay for it. Again, the majority of them won't be using that rail because they work too far from the station, so it's not going to make them ditch their illegally driven cars.
Your commute may suck because of the lack of rail, but the majority of people you want to pay to fix your problem are facing the biggest issue when they get off the freeway and go on the streets leading to their subdivisions - the streets that are one lane in either direction and are congested. Their problem won't be solved by mass transit. It will be solved by adding more roundabouts, widening roads where possible, and fixing them to improve the flow of traffic. So it's pretty ironic when the supporters of that proposal call me and other people who don't want it to pass "selfish" and "narrow-minded" when at this point it is a classic case of special interests trying to get public funding for their narrow self serving agenda.
If the proposed transit system will indeed be in such a high demand, then make it pay for itself. Instead of asking every tax paying resident of the three counties to have their taxes raised, make a case for a bond supported by the future ticket prices. Certainly according to the supporters of this system, it is going to be heavily used by everyone and paying off the bond won't be a problem ? Dan Gilbert could even pitch in some of his ample funds and make a nice return on his investments.
Unless, of course, he knows that it would be a constant money drain, and wants the taxpayers to finance it while he's ripping the benefits of his downtown property value going up.
Yes you CAN and SHOULD compare Detroit to Chicago and Atlanta...
... this is THE fundamental flaw to your crazy analysis: don't look at Detroit as it is now, but project what it WOULD BE once the train lines are built. Chicago wouldn't be Chicago (and very well may look more like today's Detroit) IF it hadn't built the L. The scenario reflects "Field of Dreams" now famous line: 'If you build it, they will come." In this case, 'they' includes both residents and development. The fact that there are so many sad open lots where once-teaming residential areas thrived would make it easier; not as much buying-out, tearing down needed to get started in those areas. The in-tact neighborhoods will only get stronger. With this development would come greater traffic and traffic jams, which are a good thing--its a sign of urban popularity and demand.
Also your talk about suburb-to-suburb transit is a red herring. All American cities, including New York, have grappled with this and there's an almost total lack of quality transit that connects these areas. American mass transit has stuck to the hub-spokes concept connecting city residents and suburbanites with downtown areas. The lack of cross suburban transit routing should not be an excuse not to build rapid transit in Detroit.
When it comes to a "what about this or that" argument some things are fair game to point out and some aren't in my opinion.
Roads, any roads, not fair game: simply everything you own, everything you buy, at some point got to where you acquired it on a road. A system of roads is a core function of government and our country wouldn't be what it is without roads. Just because I don't drive on I-75 doesn't mean the food I eat didn't spend time on I-75 on its way to my favorite grocery store.
Fire and Police, not fair game: core government function. Its essentially an insurance policy because you don't know if or when your house or your neighbors house might catch on fire. Add to that there is no alternative to a fire department. Same with police. Also police and fire are a matter of life and death. Again more like insurance than anything.
Public schools not fair game: core government function and essential to the fabric of our nation. Without a public school system we would be a third world country. Also as a tax think of it as a pay back system. Just because you don't have kids doesn't mean somebody else didn't pay for your 13 years of primary education. So the school tax is you paying off your 13 years of school.
Library and parks: fair game to discuss.
Mass transit: Is it a core government function? Its a fair argument and people can make a case both ways.
Yes! Not only did SLC build a (roughly) 44-mile, multi-branch LRT (including a line to the SLC airport), it also implemented an 80-mile north-south commuter rail system through its downtown. That's pretty amazing for a small-to-medium sized major metro area with light population density... and reemphasizes your point that, if they can build it, what the hell is wrong with Detroit!!!???
The sources of money for their operating expenses:
Fares: 15.8%
State: 65.5%
Federal:15.6% Local: 0.4%
sources of funds for capital expenses
Fares: 0.0%
State: 76.5%
Federal:14.7% Local: 0.0%
So to answer your head slapping smiley maybe whats wrong with Detroit is the State and Feds aren't footing the bill.
Or to put it simply SLC could do it because they didn't have to pay for it.
Edited: Its also worth noting that the federal Government chipped in a ton of cash for some of what Salt Lake City has to help them get ready for the 2002 Winter Olympics .
Last edited by craig11152; 08-31-2016 at 02:42 PM..
Yes you CAN and SHOULD compare Detroit to Chicago and Atlanta...
... this is THE fundamental flaw to your crazy analysis: don't look at Detroit as it is now, but project what it WOULD BE once the train lines are built. Chicago wouldn't be Chicago (and very well may look more like today's Detroit) IF it hadn't built the L. The scenario reflects "Field of Dreams" now famous line: 'If you build it, they will come." In this case, 'they' includes both residents and development. The fact that there are so many sad open lots where once-teaming residential areas thrived would make it easier; not as much buying-out, tearing down needed to get started in those areas. The in-tact neighborhoods will only get stronger. With this development would come greater traffic and traffic jams, which are a good thing--its a sign of urban popularity and demand.
Also your talk about suburb-to-suburb transit is a red herring. All American cities, including New York, have grappled with this and there's an almost total lack of quality transit that connects these areas. American mass transit has stuck to the hub-spokes concept connecting city residents and suburbanites with downtown areas. The lack of cross suburban transit routing should not be an excuse not to build rapid transit in Detroit.
You mean it would all of a sudden stop being the city with the second highest murder rate in the US (2015), no diversity (82% black population as of 2015), unemployment rate 2.3 times higher than US average (2016), corruption-ridden city council, and failing public schools just because of building a few rail lines that can bring in the people from the suburbs who apparently don't relocate to Detroit only because it's inconvenient ?
Neither Chicago, nor Atlanta, nor any other major metropolitan area were being destroyed to the same extend for as long as Detroit did. They had plenty of desirable neighborhoods and plenty of neighborhoods that could swing either way and this is where the transit (along with other things) helped to give these areas a push in the right direction. Detroit is simply not there yet. The time for mass transit will come, eventually, but there are far more pressing issues at hand.
Yes! Not only did SLC build a (roughly) 44-mile, multi-branch LRT (including a line to the SLC airport), it also implemented an 80-mile north-south commuter rail system through its downtown. That's pretty amazing for a small-to-medium sized major metro area with light population density... and reemphasizes your point that, if they can build it, what the hell is wrong with Detroit!!!???
Very different crime levels and socio-demographic makeup, for starters.
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.
