  Drdetroit Member Username: Drdetroit Post Number: 37 Registered: 04-2006 Posted From: 69.219.20.60 |
Why doe's the media let L Brooks Patterson think he is GOD on this issue? Why cant we vote on mass transit? I believe the federal govt would subsidize over 50% of start up cost if the region would just say yes. With all of the money that we blow on un-needed items ( cigarettes, casino, beer, etc.... would you vote for a 2 cents raise in sales tax to fund mass transit? Gas prices are starting to kick my butt!!! | ||
Lowell Board Administrator Username: Lowell Post Number: 2492 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 66.167.210.27 |
I can understand your frustration, but what do you mean by mass transit? Some will argue we have it, even if lame, with SMART / DDOT. If you put it to a vote, it would probably get killed. If you offer it without defining it, it would not even get to a vote. You will find reams of discussion about this in the forum archives. Today I heard that the state handed out $40 to GM to keep this or that autmomotive facility here. [yawn] That kind of money gets passed out like peanuts and the public accepts it like the sun rising and setting. "Oh that's to save / keep jobs," many will say. But how many jobs woudl $40 million into a mass transit program save or create? Regrettably little will happen until metropolitan consensus is achieved and with obstructionist like L. Brooks Patterson, the prospects remain bleak. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 438 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42 |
"Why doe's the media let L Brooks Patterson think he is GOD on this issue? Why cant we vote on mass transit? I believe the federal govt would subsidize over 50% of start up cost if the region would just say yes. With all of the money that we blow on un-needed items ( cigarettes, casino, beer, etc.... would you vote for a 2 cents raise in sales tax to fund mass transit? Gas prices are starting to kick my butt!!!" Yeah! Why doe's he? Why cant we rid ourselves of un-needed hyphens, too? And OK on all that "free" federal govt money for start-up costs. Amen! Just my two cent... (Message edited by LivernoisYard on April 19, 2006) | ||
Jsmyers Member Username: Jsmyers Post Number: 1624 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 209.131.7.68 |
It depends on the question being voted on, but I doubt that. From what I've seen and read, a majority of citizens in this region know we need better transit. There isn't as much agreement on what that means nor how to get there however. | ||
Ltorivia485 Member Username: Ltorivia485 Post Number: 2547 Registered: 08-2004 Posted From: 199.74.87.98 |
Don't dare get light rail. They need diesel fuel to run too. The gas prices are through the roof. Monorail will be cheaper to run. | ||
Eric_c Member Username: Eric_c Post Number: 703 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 68.76.202.10 |
Electric Streetcars. | ||
Jsmyers Member Username: Jsmyers Post Number: 1625 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 209.131.7.68 |
Wrong. The vast majority of LRT systems run on electricity just like most monorails.
Lets see what the planners and engineers come up with when they run the numbers. | ||
Eric_c Member Username: Eric_c Post Number: 704 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 68.76.202.10 |
Electric Streetcars. Start there. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 7206 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.159.18 |
Jet packs for all!! | ||
Tetsua Member Username: Tetsua Post Number: 573 Registered: 01-2004 Posted From: 68.42.76.157 |
Jet packs use gas too.  | ||
Wazootyman Member Username: Wazootyman Post Number: 42 Registered: 02-2006 Posted From: 68.75.220.9 |
As if the rates for electricity aren't rising as well... Personally I know that unless a transit system were to run within a few blocks of my house and within reasonable walking distance of my job (in a business park set back a great distance from the main road), I wouldn't ride it. I suspect a majority of the people in the area would have the same issue. We're too spread out. | ||
Marcnbyr Member Username: Marcnbyr Post Number: 650 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 68.43.13.13 |
"Jet packs use gas too" Not if they're solar powered.... | ||
Jsmyers Member Username: Jsmyers Post Number: 1626 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 209.131.7.68 |
One of the major purposes of transit is to reduce this trend over time. That said, we actually aren't that spread out. There are some huge concentrations of employment in areas right next to or on possilbe transit corridors. For example Downtown Detroit New Center Detroit WSU Med Center UofM and Hospital EMU ST. Joe's Hospital Dearborn/Fairlane Edge City Big Beaver/I-75 Edge City Southfield Edge City Pontiac Van Dyke Industrial Corridor (including GM Tech Center) There are also a lot of people living close by these corridors, but people move more often than jobs, so over time, many people will move into new housing construction spurred by transit investments. | ||
Upinottawa Member Username: Upinottawa Post Number: 302 Registered: 09-2005 Posted From: 198.103.184.76 |
Transit spurs development: just ask Toronto and Portland. Ottawa is building a huge light rail line to augment its bus rapid transit system. Check it out: http://www.ottawa.ca/residents /lrt/index_en.shtml | ||
Rocket_city Member Username: Rocket_city Post Number: 1 Registered: 04-2006 Posted From: 141.217.214.203 |
re: the quote that "we're too spread out." This is probably the largest misconception when it comes to regional mass transit in any region. If anyone is ever faced with this argument, here's my advice as a rebuttal: The city of Atlanta, Georgia and the city of Detroit, Michigan are approximately the same size geographically (132 vs 139 sq miles) respectively. But Detroit's population density (persons per square mile) is about 6,400 while Atlanta is roughly half that at 3,200. The numbers would start to fluctuate as you compare metropolitan numbers. Now, if Atlanta and MARTA can support HEAVY rail through an urban core 1/2 as dense as Detroit, I think we have quite an advantage in countering the argument that we are too spread out here. And look at how central Atlanta is booming with economic development on every corner. On the flip side, Detroit's economic development is punctuated by the next largest parking garage to accomodate a small, quaint loft rehab. Which is great and all, but I think it's time to up the standards...a lot! The thing I've always advocated for first and foremost for SE MICH to take transportation here seriously is the formulation of ONE authority, ie SEMTA or DARTA. There's no need for two, which is why our efforts fail every time. Once this is done, then we can confidently proceed...to succeed. We don't need heavy subway rail like Atlanta has, but we do need efficient, environmentally-friendly rail that will take passengers through focal corridors. Not only will this effort rebuild and sustain commerce in Transit-Oriented Nodal Development, it will repopulate surrounding areas by injecting design standards that are highly desirable to live in and that can only be found near public transit lines (bus included). So, mystery solved: You can build transit where we spread out. So long as you have a long-range plan to build INTO the system in order to maximize its efficiency, sustainability, and usage. A prime example to research is that of Greater Denver. Denver's suburbs (that traditionally have sprawled) are becoming among the densest, yet highly desirable to live in in America. We have to start selling the idea of "density" as not necessarily meaning people living on top of one another, but rather close enough to allow for efficiency of living conditions and future cohesion rather than future death by way of economically depressed sprawl. | ||
Eric_c Member Username: Eric_c Post Number: 708 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 68.76.202.10 |
Thank-you Rocket, and welcome. I completely agree with your angle. I've posted my thoughts on this subject several times now and never get any bites. Here's what I posted a few months ago: I believe that practical, efficient mass transit throughout Metro-Detroit would enhance the current state of the region, PROVIDED the system's right-of-ways are conceived from the onset as development engines for new urban commuter corridors. A Detroit-area rapid transit system, with few exceptions, would not necessarily do well to try to mimic current auto routes. Instead, residents and community leaders would be wise to view the development of such a system as a way to promote brand-new economic development in underutilized areas throughout the region. Public investment in a properly planned and executed network of transit AND appropriate zoning could credibly enhance Southeastern Michigan's economy by creating opportunities for private investment in areas where there are currently, seemingly few. I see the return of streetcars to Woodward Avenue as the initial step toward the realization of a true regional transit system and the development of urban commuter corridors. Woodward stands out as the most logical place to institute such a line as it lends itself almost immediately to transits' highest and best use. At once, the urban density of the corridor combined with the current level of disinvestment indicates that a strategy of public commitment to attract private capital to the area would yield the greatest potential return. In the form of a dedicated streetcar line, even if initially limited to between Campus Martius and the Boulevard, this public commitment would increase the value of property throughout the corridor. A transit line would promote in-fill and spin-off developments, increase the desireabilty of the route as a place to live and conduct business, as well as provide a practical means of commuting (even if only initially) between Downtown, Midtown and New Center. It is my contention that traditional streetcars are the mode of transportation best suited to Woodward Avenue and the other radials, particularly in the CBD. Streetcars would be ideal along these routes because the overall scale of the street allows for their efficient function. I wouldn't advocate "station stops" or fifty-mile-per-hour vehicles - especially between Downtown and New Center. By the same token, I wouldn't consider old-fashioned streetcars on Big Beaver or Wayne Roads, either! Streetcars offer affordable, comfortable, quiet transportation along a permanent route. Stops do not need to be elaborate structures, and wheelchair access is not a problem on modern vehicles. The metro area will have some type of improved transit sooner or later, but I also believe that the area has sprawled out too far from the core to make any ONE model practical on a regional level. Regardless, we would be best served by building a permanent system that keeps as it's purpose the stabilization of existing areas and the sensible pioneering of new growth in previously-undeveloped or less-desireable sections of the metro. A Woodward streetcar line, as an example, would do both. | ||
Naturalsister Member Username: Naturalsister Post Number: 597 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 68.255.236.166 |
I have two words to say and two words only: Rocket City. later - naturalsister | ||
Rocket_city Member Username: Rocket_city Post Number: 6 Registered: 04-2006 Posted From: 141.217.214.203 |
I hope that's a good thing. Thank you both. | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 3993 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 141.217.174.235 |
DARTA IS DEAD!! Thus sayeth Freeman Hendrix. | ||
Drdetroit Member Username: Drdetroit Post Number: 43 Registered: 04-2006 Posted From: 69.246.2.240 |
Danny - Hendrix said kwayme was dead. | ||
Ltorivia485 Member Username: Ltorivia485 Post Number: 2574 Registered: 08-2004 Posted From: 129.105.104.173 |
I am against electric streetcars if there are wires hanging in the air AND it blocks the right of way of street corners. I can already imagine the accidents where storms knock out power lines or it involves oversized vehicles, such as semi-trucks. Mass transit should not be on the same grade level as regular traffic. That's why NYC and Chicago is so efficient (and sometimes quicker). (Message edited by ltorivia485 on April 20, 2006) |
