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.
Mass transit ridership is down across the country. The MTA loses billions every year. Silicon Valley and traditional automakers are in a race to transform transportation as we know it via autonomous vehicles that could render mass transportation obsolete.
Explain to me again why we want to take on billions in public debt and liabilities to construct 19th century technology that most people don't want (and will likely be obsolete in a decade or two)?
That was a nationwide poll so I guess your suggesting there isn't an efficient system anywhere.
Maybe the problem isn't inefficient mass transit its too many people trying to live too far from where they work.
I knew it was nationwide. As you (or someone else) said, only NYC really has a good transit system. The rest rely heavily on busing, which is not going to attract anyone. Crowded, smelly, dirty, and slower than driving. Who wants that?
Some cities have so-so options. The L goes out pretty far for Chicago. You can at least avoid the heaviest of traffic if you want to park and ride. But, for the majority of the country, there aren't real viable options.
Oh my gosh, this is hilarious. Of all the things to be embarrassed about Detroit, lack of regional transit? Wow, I'm not even going to touch that one.
The cost of car insurance has nothing to do with transit. It has everything to do with the fact that we are a no-fault state and still have unlimited payout for PIP. Insurance companies are not required to report to the state how much they profit, and they are permitted to use credit scores for rating premiums. The latter is legalized discrimination. (If you have a ton of student loans, your auto insurance premiums are higher.) These are things that need to change in Lansing. People riding mass transit isn't going to solve the problem.
Another reason mass transit isn't going to pick up any time soon is that southeast Michigan (and maybe Michigan in general) has, for better or for worse, a "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" approach to things. Overall, mass transit is not the 1st choice for commuters who spend their day designing and manufacturing vehicles. I don't blame them.
Yes that is one of the main things to be embarrassed about. Because it isn't just something isolated to inner city neighborhoods. It effects the entire region.
And I know all about the car insurance cost reasons. I never said anything about mass transit solving the problem for high car insurance. But it WILL solve the problem for people who can barely afford car insurance but need to drive anyway or people who are forced to drive illegally in order to keep their job, get around, ect. I know tons of people personally that don't live close to their job and have to do this. I even know tons of people that couldn't accept good jobs because they didn't have a car and didn't have any efficient transit options to get there and back other then Uber or Lyft or Taxi which would not be cost effective.
So yes there are plenty of people who would be more than happy to ditch their cars and car insurance and have a more disposable income. Even people on CD said they would do this if they're commute times were about the same.
The state of Michigan gets 38 cents from every gallon of gas pumped. Not to mention the fees collected for vehicle registrations. The state isn't interested in mass transit.
If my commute times were the same (or even only 25% greater) I'd use public transit. The problem is that even with a functional system my commute times would probably be 100% greater, or more. In Salt Lake City my commute was 15 minutes by car or 65 minutes walking/bus. I think I calculated that it was actually faster to just walk, and not use the bus at all, though I never did either. I then moved to West Valley City where it was 20 minutes by car or 35 minutes by bus/light rail (this was appealing, and got me to use transit sometimes, but I still owned my car). I then changed jobs where my commute was 10 minutes by car or 55 minutes by walking/bus. It was a 20 minute bike ride. I never once used transit here.
Granted there were a number of people (mostly exurbanites near "hubs" who worked downtown or at the university) who greatly benefited from similar or even decreased commute times, but cities without existing, integrated mass transit will never develop systems like NYC, Boston, or DC.
Naturally that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to attain Salt Lake City levels of transit, but it should be understood that unless you work in Downtown, or another "hub" it won't be a useful system. How do you get people to vote to pay for that? Well, that's the problem. That's why RTA failed. Too much "me" and not enough "community", but that's being realistic. That's what regional transit is up against and it's tough to design a system that accommodates workers in Detroit, as well as Troy, Southfield, Warren, Ann Arbor, and Livonia - especially when we live well, all over, but tougher to sell one to voters that only accommodates Detroit.
If my commute times were the same (or even only 25% greater) I'd use public transit. The problem is that even with a functional system my commute times would probably be 100% greater, or more. In Salt Lake City my commute was 15 minutes by car or 65 minutes walking/bus. I think I calculated that it was actually faster to just walk, and not use the bus at all, though I never did either. I then moved to West Valley City where it was 20 minutes by car or 35 minutes by bus/light rail (this was appealing, and got me to use transit sometimes, but I still owned my car). I then changed jobs where my commute was 10 minutes by car or 55 minutes by walking/bus. It was a 20 minute bike ride. I never once used transit here.
Granted there were a number of people (mostly exurbanites near "hubs" who worked downtown or at the university) who greatly benefited from similar or even decreased commute times, but cities without existing, integrated mass transit will never develop systems like NYC, Boston, or DC.
Naturally that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to attain Salt Lake City levels of transit, but it should be understood that unless you work in Downtown, or another "hub" it won't be a useful system. How do you get people to vote to pay for that? Well, that's the problem. That's why RTA failed. Too much "me" and not enough "community", but that's being realistic. That's what regional transit is up against and it's tough to design a system that accommodates workers in Detroit, as well as Troy, Southfield, Warren, Ann Arbor, and Livonia - especially when we live well, all over, but tougher to sell one to voters that only accommodates Detroit.
This is true. But your also basing that off of where you live and work right now. But let's go back to the time where you moved to Detroit for the first time and looking at places to live, idk where you work but let's just say your job is in Midtown somewhere and there is a commuter rail along woodward going all the way to Pontiac that is fast, clean, and efficient. Would you have considered living near the woodward ave commuter rail that is almost a straight shot to your job? You would probably get there almost as fast as you would by car.
That's basically how it goes in most cities. People who want to use transit to get around will try to live near transit lines. Which is why development is usually pretty high in neighborhoods that have good access to mass transit. I personally like driving and would still drive even if Detroit had transit like it's peer cities overseas. BUT, I am all for offering options in Metro Detroit for all types of people, not just me. And I would use it from time to time myself just like I use the PM and Q Line from time to time.
That's a very good point MS313, and if I worked in Midtown today and there was a light rail line up to Pontiac, I'd have no problem walking to Woodward and riding the rail into town, so you're absolutely right. The problem is that I work in one of the other 5 major commuter destinations in the region, but on the flip side of things, if I were in the market for new work (and let's be realistic, I'm always in the market if an opportunity presents itself) a commuter rail line down Woodward would really draw my attention to applying for jobs along Woodward. As it stands now it's just a big avenue, so where my only commute option is a car finding work along 696 is typically going to be a better commute.
So yes, an extended "M1 Rail" would help every community from Detroit to Pontiac, but unless private investment comes through again those communities would need it to be partially subsidized by tax payers in Chesterfield and Canton, and realistically that's just not going to happen. It's why RTA failed. I'm not saying I want RTA to fail, I voted for it and we both debated the pros of that with other posters on here to the state line and back, but based on where I live, I would've greatly benefited from a Woodward BRT line. I assume the same goes for you. If we step back, it's easy to see why the voter in Shelby Township or Northville wasn't terribly excited about it.
Yes, I have driven in southern Ontario, and as a teenager even rode my bicycle on hundreds of miles of their beautiful roads. You miss the point. I am not saying that public transportation will necessarily hurt the auto industry...in fact the thought never crossed my mind until I read your post. The point is that people CHOOSE to drive their personal vehicles. Don't expect them to pay taxes on something optional that they won't use.
Also part of the equation is that fact that the US auto industries and their labor unions originated here, not Ontario. You're comparing apples and oranges. The pride runs deep.
Personally, I have zero interest in sharing a germ infested mode of public transportation sitting on hard seats riding sideways in no climate control while people's bags and backpacks are are hitting me in the legs and face. Been there, done that. No thanks. You're welcome to it, but don't expect me to pay for it.
No, I didn't miss your point. I knew you were talking more about culture in Detroit than an economic fear for the auto industry. Having lived in Metro Detroit for more than a decade, I know very well that culture you talk about. It's evident in some of the posts in this thread.
I mention roads and the auto industry, because my point is that, even with all these modes of public transit, there's still plenty of traffic. There are still lots of people who choose to buy and drive their own vehicles. My point is that a good transit system likely wouldn't encroach on that ruggedly individualistic desire (we'll call it that) to travel without the hassles that public transit MIGHT include (though GOOD transit systems minimize those).
And, yes, a secondary thought is that a public transportation system doesn't hurt the auto industry, either. That might not be something you thought about, by I think the Michigan auto industry does.
By the way, public transportation also doesn't have to be dingy, dirty, "germ infested, potentially dangerous ways to travel. It doesn't have to be like riding on a subway or a bus in NYC (of the 70s).
No, I didn't miss your point. I knew you were talking more about culture in Detroit than an economic fear for the auto industry. Having lived in Metro Detroit for more than a decade, I know very well that culture you talk about. It's evident in some of the posts in this thread.
I mention roads and the auto industry, because my point is that, even with all these modes of public transit, there's still plenty of traffic. There are still lots of people who choose to buy and drive their own vehicles. My point is that a good transit system likely wouldn't encroach on that ruggedly individualistic desire (we'll call it that) to travel without the hassles that public transit MIGHT include (though GOOD transit systems minimize those).
And, yes, a secondary thought is that a public transportation system doesn't hurt the auto industry, either. That might not be something you thought about, by I think the Michigan auto industry does.
By the way, public transportation also doesn't have to be dingy, dirty, "germ infested, potentially dangerous ways to travel. It doesn't have to be like riding on a subway or a bus in NYC (of the 70s).
Dumping billions of dollars into a 19th centruy mode of transportation when major disruption in mobility is just around to corner would be insanity. Millennials are already showing a preference for ride sharing over mass transit, and when autonomous vehicle sharing gets going virtually no one will want the inconvenience and added commute time of taking a train to work. Building a mass transit system that won't be online for at least a decade would guarantee a fiscal disaster.
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.
