  Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 3449 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: Maybe because our nation subsidizes the hell out of driving? | ||
Citylover Member Username: Citylover Post Number: 2680 Registered: 07-2004 |
There probably was a time in Detroit that one could walk to more than one grocery or mid sized super market_ not now though. Just as there was a time that one could walk to a theater but can not now cus there aint none to walk to. The main reason being crime.Crime has caused no only residents to leave their homes but businesses to leave as well. Meanwhile here in A2 I can walk to a grocery store(kroger) a coffee shop, two dry cleaners, a high end specialty shop (wine, food etc) a video store, a coiple of restaurants etc, etc. I also have a bus stop nearby but I do love my car. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 10432 Registered: 10-2003 |
CL - I have many more options where I live in the city for walking than the part of AA you speak of. If my assumption is true you are near the Georgetown Plaza area. The two strip malls and few stores isn't necessarily a plethora of walking options. I'm not saying it is not a very nice area but I wouldn't brag about the walkability of it. Walking to Big Ten Burrito or the overpriced but great cheese store isn't the lap of convenience. AATA however is a great system that is run very efficiently. | ||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 1825 Registered: 04-2006 |
Meanwhile here in A2 I can walk to a grocery store(kroger) a coffee shop, two dry cleaners, a high end specialty shop (wine, food etc) a video store, a coiple of restaurants etc, etc. Those strip malls at the intersection of Plymouth and Nixon? That is not what we mean when we say walkable... Btw, I have walked to the movie theater (Norwest, before they razed it) and grocery stores plenty of times in Detroit and never once got robbed or shot at. I did this during times when crime in Detroit was a lot worse than it is now, IMO. | ||
Upinottawa Member Username: Upinottawa Post Number: 978 Registered: 09-2005 |
With respect to living in transit oriented area (Europe) vs. living in an auto dependant area (North America) I guess the grass is always greener. That being said, North Americans are a lot fatter than those Europeans. A side note: this debate (i.e. the debate between always taking transit and always driving) again misses the obvious, non-fringe argument that people like having choices including transportation choices. I would assume a lot of people would like to live in an area where they could take the car, or walk, or bike, or take transit to work, shopping, entertainment, airports, the homes of friends and family, etc. I'll take a neighborhood and a community that offers me those options. | ||
Professorscott Member Username: Professorscott Post Number: 857 Registered: 12-2006 |
Even in cities with great transit, there are plenty of people who prefer to drive, for reasons such as those given by Perfectgentleman. I think there are many in Europe who envy our car-friendly national philosophy, just as there are many in America who marvel at the idea you can get all over Europe by train. Part of this is the "grass is always greener" syndrome. I agree with those here who say the important thing is that people ought to have a choice of how to get around. That, I think, would go a long way toward making our region more competitive and attractive to different kinds of people. | ||
Track75 Member Username: Track75 Post Number: 2631 Registered: 10-2003 |
Get outside the central cities in much of northern Europe and you'll find car-oriented development very similar to what we have here. You'll also find what you'd consider "sprawl" in the more affluent parts of Europe. Like it or not, with affluence comes cars and sprawl. There's a good book that touches on car/sprawl/Europe/US issues. http://www.amazon.com/Sprawl-Compact-History-Robert-Bruegmann/dp/0226076903  | ||
Citylover Member Username: Citylover Post Number: 2681 Registered: 07-2004 |
Wrong I heart_(not surprised at that) in an old established neighborhood.Btw there is plenty of walkability at plymouth and nixon and one need not worry about the shit they would worry about in Detroit. And thanks for making my point_ you ONCE could walk to groceries in Detroit_ and the movies...........I distinctly remember the manager of the Norwest citing crime as the main reason for closing_ they had to buzz patrons in | ||
Detroitnerd Member Username: Detroitnerd Post Number: 1497 Registered: 07-2004 |
Boy, I wish the costs incurred by driving were reflected in the price of gas and automobiles. I wonder how many of you would then "love" your car. | ||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 1827 Registered: 04-2006 |
I distinctly remember the manager of the Norwest citing crime as the main reason for closing_ they had to buzz patrons in That would be a little impossible? The Norwest closed because the theater was bought and razed for a fast food restaurant. In terms of availability, there are just as many businesses in the vicinity where the Norwest used to stand, as there are at Plymouth and Nixon... And the neighborhood looks better. You really need to stop with the crime rhetoric. It makes people not take you seriously. | ||
Citylover Member Username: Citylover Post Number: 2682 Registered: 07-2004 |
Are you fucking high????????????????? I may have gotten the name of the theater wrong but the important and relevant point is that the last(at the time a few years ago) movie theater in a fucking city of over half a million closed because of crime.................it was in the goddamned newspapers for christ sakes ....the manager or owner said directly that their patrons were afraid and nad to be buzzed in......... I am truly sorry that the city you love is so fucked up But posting bullshit on a forum aint fooling anyone_ all one need do is look and it is easy to see how fucked up detroit is And there should be MORE businesses in Detroit there are a lot more people. | ||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 1828 Registered: 04-2006 |
Between you and me we already know which one of us has the history of substance abuse... http://cinematreasures.org/news/11840_0_1_0_C/ (Message edited by iheartthed on October 09, 2007) | ||
Detroitnerd Member Username: Detroitnerd Post Number: 1498 Registered: 07-2004 |
Don't you understand, Iheart? When the facts don't fit the myth, you just change the facts. Then you just move on to the next abomination. | ||
Jjw Member Username: Jjw Post Number: 468 Registered: 10-2005 |
Treelock:"Anyone else find driving to be a sometimes draining experience?" Well, after just spending three weeks in the Detroit area, I can safely say YES!! My God, I had to drive everywhere for anything and it drove me nuts. I got home last Wednesday and haven't gone near an automobile and my life is so much easier now. I really don't know how you guys do it? More power to ya but wow, what a headache everyday. | ||
Oakmangirl Member Username: Oakmangirl Post Number: 500 Registered: 08-2007 |
Anyone else find driving to be a sometimes draining experience? Yes, the color drained from my face this morning when a semi ran me off onto the expressway shoulder. After having lived in Europe, I'll take mass transit and walking over driving any day. However, I think because it's such a void here, we idealize. What do people do when transit workers strike and trains close down as happens with little provocation in Paris? Does it seem enjoyable to walk 7 blocks in the driving rain? Fact is, at times in Europe, it's nice to have a car. The difference is that here it is a necessary evil; in Europe, a car is considered a luxury...you have to pay to park it, deal with major traffic congestion, etc. Ironically, the people there stranded by strikes can least afford a car. We're not going to give up our cars here; too many people identify with them- it's also about ego and mindless consumerism. Why then don't we look to CA in passing stronger environmental laws, car pool lanes, etc.? For our near future, while not ideal, it seems to be more likely to happen here than mass transit. People still identify too closely with their gaseous cocoons to give them up. The region isn't ready and frankly, with all the sprawl, I can't imagine a full service transit system ever taking hold. | ||
Rocket_city Member Username: Rocket_city Post Number: 431 Registered: 04-2006 |
Also, not everyone has access to owning a car. Another fault with the transportation discussion is that it is often dictated by the middle class for the middle class. | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 1354 Registered: 02-2006 |
Interesting factoid: 70% of CTA riders here in Chicago are choice riders. | ||
Parkguy Member Username: Parkguy Post Number: 124 Registered: 04-2007 |
Higgs1534 said: "That is why mass transit will never work here. 50 years of sprawl have made a coherent system impossible without a massive structural realignment." The same was said in many other places, and once the transit was built, the migration began. Washington, DC and Dallas are good examples. It is happening in early stages in LA, a region that was specifically and intentionally planned around the automobile. It may take 50 years to turn it around, and the same would be true here. Detroit and LA have a lot in common in this regard. I'm all for good transit, but I won't sell all of my cars when we finally get a system. Yes, I said "all of them." I'd sure like to get down to one car. I live in the city, but the transportation system is useless for me. It is useless for 350,000 riders, but they HAVE to use it on a daily basis. Let's see... stand in a snow bank or mud hole for a half-hour for a late bus that you have to flag down even though you are standing under a bus stop sign... then the bus may or may not stop for you... and you can be certain that particular line (if you can even tell which line passes your corner because the routes aren't posted) does NOT go where you need to go, so you need to transfer to another mystery line to wait a half-hour for a bus that may or may not stop for you after you flag it down... vs. A bus every ten minutes, waiting in a shelter or a local station where you can be out of the elements, maybe get a coffee... maybe even get on a rapid transit line that will take you someplace that you actually need to go... with signage and information kiosks and news stands... I'd actually use a system like that. Then, if I need to go out to Brighton or six miles west of Monroe, or want to take a nice ride out to a metropark, I can use my single car. I'd just like to have a balanced system for my own needs, and a decent, humane, and useful system for those who have to depend on public transit for their everyday needs. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 3451 Registered: 10-2003 |
And let's reiterate that no one is trying to force everyone onto transit, or to take away anyone's car. If a family can get down to one car, though (as many here in the DC area are), the money you would have spent on another car can be put into housing, stocks, or other investments that will actually appreciate in value over time. That's not trivial. I just don't believe that through some grace of God, Detroit is the only region where transit isn't a necessary public service. | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 1356 Registered: 02-2006 |
That's a good point, a few times in this thread it's been mentioned that "I don't want to have to plan my life around a bus schedule." Well, when you have decent transit, you don't. On my commute to work, a train comes every 3-5 minutes. Off-peak weekdays are around 7-8, I think, and even Sunday night service is every 10 minutes until midnight, when it goes to every 15 until 2:15am. I don't plan my life around anything. I leave when I feel like it, secure in the knowledge that there will be a train coming by within a reasonable time. All 5 bus routes within 4 blocks of my door also run every 15 minutes or less midday. They are much more frequent in neighborhoods without nearby rail access. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 3452 Registered: 10-2003 |
I don't know about you folks who live in other cities with good transit (Chicago, New York, etc), but most subway trips here take less time than it would to drive and park. For example, as part of our ongoing saga of whether or not to implement meters in cabs, a cabbie complained that because of bad traffic one day last week, it took him 45 minutes to go from the Capitol to the White House--16 blocks. The same trip on the subway is less than a 10 minute ride. I know Detroit is a different paradigm at present, but if the City wants to be able to support a broad array of businesses (which by rights, a population of 800,000+ SHOULD), it needs to densify. The only proven way to be able to accommodate the necessary density is to have a reliable transit system. What are your experiences like? (Message edited by DaninDC on October 09, 2007) | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 1357 Registered: 02-2006 |
(Chicago) If I'm going downtown during the week, it takes me the same amount of time to drive as it does to take the train. A monthly pass costs me $75, vs. $300ish for parking, plus gas, plus aggravation while I drive 6 miles in 35 minutes. Off peak, it's faster to drive, but I take the train anyway, due to the aforementioned parking issue. | ||
Krhn313 Member Username: Krhn313 Post Number: 8 Registered: 07-2007 |
I love Hamtramck for being so walkable. Several forms of entertainment, various stores and markets all within a few minutes walk from my house. Granted, I drive to Plymouth for work every day, but I all but refuse to drive if I'm traveling anywhere in Hamtramck to another destination in Hamtramck. If I could get a job at American Axle, I'd almost never have to drive. I'd love some kind of mass transit other than a bus to get downtown, SW, midtown, new center, etc. | ||
Patrick Member Username: Patrick Post Number: 5036 Registered: 10-2003 |
So, how does a city like Detroit densify first? | ||
Oakmangirl Member Username: Oakmangirl Post Number: 503 Registered: 08-2007 |
Stop opening casinos, for starters. | ||
Classico Member Username: Classico Post Number: 69 Registered: 12-2005 |
So Track. You support Higher Land Use usage when there is population loss? Because in a nutshell, that is what Sprawl is. I always find it funny that the "Sprawl is a sign of prosperity and growth" crowd still does not have the slightest clue as to what sprawl is and why it is not beneficial to us and the earth. All you did was confirm that ignorant throw-away consumerism thrives in Europe as well as the States. Very well then. As for the transit debacle, ProfessorScott couldn't have said it any better. Driving around this Metro is taxing as hell and I would very much love the option to jump on a bus or rail maybe once or twice a week. Its all about options people. It's beyond embarrassing that this area does not have them. Here's another thing about automobles...in some ways they are the biggest scam known to man. At least purchasing a brand new one. They are the biggest money draining objects around. From insurance premiums to maintenance. The biggest disinvestment one can make. I would bet most people if they had to rid themselves of how much it cost to own and maintain a car during its lifespan with them, would make one's life much easier if anything. In fact there as a study done on this, if only I could find it. | ||
Citylover Member Username: Citylover Post Number: 2683 Registered: 07-2004 |
So walkability is only valid if it fits the agenda? What bullshit. I was simply pointing out that I have the option of walking to several places and easy bus access and use of my car. I could be describing any number of A2 neighorhoods because A2 is essentially a town of neighborhoods. But apparently "walkability" only couints if it fits the detroityes agenda. I do feel for you Iheart.I would probably be more spiteful, hostile and defensive than you if the city I had great affection for was a mere shell of itself. http://www.detroitblog.org/?p= 145 So just to be clear walkability does not mean one can walk to various places from their home i.e. to stores and parks and theaters and all that..................it means something else here............ what that is is unclear to me. | ||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 1831 Registered: 04-2006 |
So, how does a city like Detroit densify first? Housing planned around efficient transit routes. If that Woodward line ever gets built, I would bet that everything around it will become extremely dense within 5 years. Look at what happened in Arlington, Va. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 10436 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: CL - You tend to be pretty spiteful and hostile whenever anyone questions your opinion. Are you the pot or the kettle? Since you are claiming others define walkability incorrectly please let us know. While the area you live in is nice and makes for a pleasant walk you are lying to yourself if you think you have walkable access to a plethora of options. | ||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 1832 Registered: 04-2006 |
Here in New York, taking the subway into/around midtown or lower Manhattan is almost always quicker than driving. Especially true when you factor in parking because there is no where to park, unless you're willing to fork out $20-$30 an hour on a parking garage. In fact, you can't even park on the street in or near Midtown Manhattan before 7pm unless you have a commercial vehicle tag on your car. If you work in an outer borough, the driving situation is a little more attractive. The closer you get to Manhattan, the longer you can expect for your commute. The trade-off is generally how far you have to travel, and whether you have to travel there from or through Manhattan. I know someone who works pretty far out in Brooklyn who prefers to take the train just so that he can take a nap on the way to work, even though it would probably be faster for him to drive. |
