Detroit Public Transportation: 2014 and beyond.

[MSUguy]

So tooling around the RTA site I found things committe pages for Gratiot and Michigan. The Gratiot line heading down Randolph and using Congress and Larned up Washington to the transit center. With stations at the Congress/Randolph, Congress/Washington, Larned/Randolph and Larned/Washington. The other interesting were potential alignments with protected bike lanes along the length of it.

http://www.rtamichigan.org/wp-conten...esentation.pdf

The Michigan Ave stuff isn't as detailed, but it does mention they could "mix and match" BRT and rail. So it looks potentially looking BRT service along parts Michigan and rail service that was talked about above.


http://www.rtamichigan.org/wp-conten...1-18-15-v3.pdf

http://www.rtamichigan.org/wp-conten...5-12-09-v3.pdf

[casscorridor]

the funny thing is New York and Chicago systems are horribly dilapidated and antiquated. The management can barely keep up with maintaining the crumbling infrastructure. But you can't blame them, because there is only so much a local or regional authority can do. This is a federal problem. We should be looking abroad to Europe and Asia and see what they are doing.

[canuck]

the funny thing is New York and Chicago systems are horribly dilapidated and antiquated. The management can barely keep up with maintaining the crumbling infrastructure. But you can't blame them, because there is only so much a local or regional authority can do. This is a federal problem. We should be looking abroad to Europe and Asia and see what they are doing.

Sure New York's system looks battered because it is heavily used but the Transit Authority deserves praise for running a system that moves people 23 hrs a day 365 days a year. Even Paris and London don't do that. They also have much more temperate climates than New York so that you don't experience the architecture in those cities the way we do in our Eastern and Midwestern NorthAmerican climes. I mean, I was in Paris recently and noticed how there was no rust anywhere. I saw enormous blocks of social housing built in the twenties that didn't look dated with Art Deco wrought iron balconies that looked new. They just don't have to salt the roads like we do and the upkeep is therefore limited compared to us.

In Montreal for instance, rust is everywhere, it is part and parcel of experiencing extreme climate changes, extremely hot and humid in high summer and supercold these days. Our freeways are bursting at the seams literally from iron rods rusting inside the concrete berths and pushing out. There are cracks everywhere.

I think New York's system has faults but it is by far the most impressive and well run on the continent. It has become better, not worse, and it delivers on its promises.

[canuck]

Funny article in Canada's National Post about the recent addition of a transit line;

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-co...ases-emissions

[dtowncitylover]

When the RTA takes over the complete oversight of SMART, I wonder when the opt out will end and introduction of new routes and stops [[ie 450 Woodward through Bloomfield Hills) begin. It would be beneficial to see a new route from Royal Oak to Rochester [[was there ever a bus route after the interurban was taken out?) and the 756 extend from OU into downtown Rochester as well. Plus Livonia!

[professorscott]

When the RTA takes over the complete oversight of SMART, I wonder when the opt out will end and introduction of new routes and stops [[ie 450 Woodward through Bloomfield Hills) begin. It would be beneficial to see a new route from Royal Oak to Rochester [[was there ever a bus route after the interurban was taken out?) and the 756 extend from OU into downtown Rochester as well. Plus Livonia!

If and when the RTA is in a position that it funds and operates local bus systems, either directly or indirectly, the day that happens is the day that opt-out ends. There is absolutely no provision in the state laws that created the RTA for any municipal-level decision as to whether to participate.

So the first step is to give the RTA money and teeth, so it can put this into effect.

Your bus route extension ideas are excellent, and just the beginning. I would envision an entire restructuring of all the routes, based on regional needs and not the current parochialism [[Detroit vs. everybody else) and trick-routing around the huge opt-out holes [[Livonia, Rochester) in the system.

[ABetterDetroit]

If and when the RTA is in a position that it funds and operates local bus systems, either directly or indirectly, the day that happens is the day that opt-out ends. There is absolutely no provision in the state laws that created the RTA for any municipal-level decision as to whether to participate.

So the first step is to give the RTA money and teeth, so it can put this into effect.

Your bus route extension ideas are excellent, and just the beginning. I would envision an entire restructuring of all the routes, based on regional needs and not the current parochialism [[Detroit vs. everybody else) and trick-routing around the huge opt-out holes [[Livonia, Rochester) in the system.

Ok prof I am all in. I will ask again how do you fund this good stuff? For a while now it has been long on needs short on how. What's your best off the cuff plan for funding?

[casscorridor]

Sure New York's system looks battered because it is heavily used but the Transit Authority deserves praise for running a system that moves people 23 hrs a day 365 days a year. Even Paris and London don't do that. They also have much more temperate climates than New York so that you don't experience the architecture in those cities the way we do in our Eastern and Midwestern NorthAmerican climes. I mean, I was in Paris recently and noticed how there was no rust anywhere. I saw enormous blocks of social housing built in the twenties that didn't look dated with Art Deco wrought iron balconies that looked new. They just don't have to salt the roads like we do and the upkeep is therefore limited compared to us.

In Montreal for instance, rust is everywhere, it is part and parcel of experiencing extreme climate changes, extremely hot and humid in high summer and supercold these days. Our freeways are bursting at the seams literally from iron rods rusting inside the concrete berths and pushing out. There are cracks everywhere.

I think New York's system has faults but it is by far the most impressive and well run on the continent. It has become better, not worse, and it delivers on its promises.

Okay, good point on the climate in relation to maintaining what is there. And yes, it's impressive how the system runs 24hrs every day. However, the system is still antiquated. NYC subway is 20 years behind other systems, such the London Underground, in providing "next train" displays. The reason is because the signalling system is 100 years old. And the Metro North and LIRL are horribly outdated, still running on diesel trains! Meanwhile in most of the world outside N America, commuter trains have been electrified for decades if not the better part of a century, and run similar service to a metro system [[ex- London Overground, London Thameslink, RER in Paris or S Bhans in German cities).

[tkelly1986]

Okay, good point on the climate in relation to maintaining what is there. And yes, it's impressive how the system runs 24hrs every day. However, the system is still antiquated. NYC subway is 20 years behind other systems, such the London Underground, in providing "next train" displays. The reason is because the signalling system is 100 years old. And the Metro North and LIRL are horribly outdated, still running on diesel trains! Meanwhile in most of the world outside N America, commuter trains have been electrified for decades if not the better part of a century, and run similar service to a metro system [[ex- London Overground, London Thameslink, RER in Paris or S Bhans in German cities).

I think the point is, even though these are antiquated systems, and NYC Is 20 years behind London ect....All these systems are still 100 years ahead of Detroit. Globally there are some great examples of smaller cities with adequate transit. Zurich, Switzerland, where I am today has a fantastic tram/streetcar network at around 350,000 people.

I get that European examples are bad, because those countries actually invest in transit while we triple down on highways, but many of these places are an urban planners dream...And there really is no reason Detroit could not be the American example of a European model.

[Khorasaurus]

Ok prof I am all in. I will ask again how do you fund this good stuff? For a while now it has been long on needs short on how. What's your best off the cuff plan for funding?

The RTA is going to put something on the ballot this fall [[millage, auto registration hike, or something else). Vote yes and there's your funding.

[[Although I completely understand wanting to wait until you actually see how much the funding will cost before you decide how to vote).

[Bham1982]

I get that European examples are bad, because those countries actually invest in transit while we triple down on highways, but many of these places are an urban planners dream...And there really is no reason Detroit could not be the American example of a European model.

There's a great reason why Detroit will never be the "American example of a European model": people don't want this.

Americans travel to Europe and report back "Oh, how quaint; the people are traveling in streetcars and living in little apartments". In the real world, Europeans live like this because they can't afford to live like Americans. Incomes are lower, housing costs are higher, vehicle costs are higher. But Americans on vacation treat European lifestyles as if they're viewing monkeys at the zoo. "How charming!"

Europeans aren't taking transit and living in tiny homes because they think it's "quaint" or "sustainable" or "an urban planners dream", it's because that's all they can afford. Zurich is horrendously expensive. The average Metro Detroiter lives much better than the average Zurich resident.

As someone who actually has family in Europe, I can tell you that Europeans love nice cars and big homes as much as Americans, but the high costs and low salaries on the continent make such purchases impossible. That's the main difference. It isn't like Germans or French think "I would much rather live in a 5th floor apartment walk-up than a 3,000 square foot McMansion, because I want to live sustainably", it's that a 3,000 square foot new construction house costs northwards of 1.5 million USD in any Western European metro area.

[Bham1982]

NYC subway is 20 years behind other systems, such the London Underground, in providing "next train" displays. The reason is because the signalling system is 100 years old. And the Metro North and LIRL are horribly outdated, still running on diesel trains! Meanwhile in most of the world outside N America, commuter trains have been electrified for decades if not the better part of a century, and run similar service to a metro system [[ex- London Overground, London Thameslink, RER in Paris or S Bhans in German cities).

This is pretty much all wrong. LIRR and Metro North are almost entirely electric [[in fact they're almost entirely subway-style third rail, which is comparatively rare in European suburban rail systems). All the suburban lines heading into NYC use subway-style third rail.

The only suburban rail system in Europe that is third-rail oriented like LIRR and Metro North is the Paris RER. All the major systems in France, Germany, Spain, Italy use overhead catenary or are diesel.

And the NYC subway does have the countdown clocks [[as do buses). Not on every route yet, but on many routes. I suspect you haven't ridden transit in NYC in quite some time.

[dtowncitylover]

The average Metro Detroiter lives much better than the average Zurich resident.

Despite the fact we're an obese nation [[Michigan's the 17th most obese state), with poor diets, and a culture of "give me more, for cheap". Ask a Zurcher whether they would prefer living in Zuirch or metro Detroit.

"Hey, now you have to drive...EVERYWHERE. There's no good transit, there's barely any walkability outside of the greater downtown and some inner suburbs, our diet is shit, there's one train...to Chicago, there's no fluid border, the nearest good slopes are 5 hours away, the nearest mountains are a 4 hour flight to Denver. So do you want to move from an Alpha- World City that has been ranked one of the best cities in the world in which to live to one of the worst cities which is getting out of bankruptcy, has a public safety/public school crisis, which has had racial tension for the past 80 years, and is just now reconstructing is public transit system?"

Metro Detroiters have been literally brainwashed by the Big 3 into believing the car is the almighty. It has been a mixed blessing for Detroit, it has built a middle class, though now in decline, it has provided a good economy in the best of times, and then because of it's nature we had to build roads, freeways, and sprawl to create a car-centered region. Most cities in North America have both poured money into transit and road/freeway infrastructure and have seen growth. We in Detroit put in the entire lot into road infrastructure and gotten 45 years of a stagnant population and economy.

I've never understood the purely Detroit [[almost Michigan) mentality of "We are the best. We do everything right, people should be like us!" No one wants to be like us.

[Bham1982]

Despite the fact we're an obese nation [[Michigan's the 17th most obese state), with poor diets, and a culture of "give me more, for cheap". Ask a Zurcher whether they would prefer living in Zuirch or metro Detroit.

The fact is that the U.S. is a wealthier, more desirable country than Switzerland. We don't have Swiss lifestyles because most people don't want such lifestyles.

I have no idea what some "fatness index" has to do with anything, or whether or not Zurchers are lining up to immigrate has to do with anything. Western Europe has severe obesity problems too, and most people aren't itching to immigrate to another country, regardless of their countries relative shortcomings.

"Hey, now you have to drive...EVERYWHERE. There's no good transit, there's barely any walkability outside of the greater downtown and some inner suburbs, our diet is shit, there's one train...to Chicago, there's no fluid border, the nearest good slopes are 5 hours away, the nearest mountains are a 4 hour flight to Denver. So do you want to move from an Alpha- World City that has been ranked one of the best cities in the world in which to live to one of the worst cities which is getting out of bankruptcy, has a public safety/public school crisis, which has had racial tension for the past 80 years, and is just now reconstructing is public transit system?"

Zurich is one of the most expensive cities on earth, butt-ugly, boring as hell, very unfriendly, all kinds of restrictions on behavior. Everything closed on Sundays, everyone into your business, huge bias against foreigners, noise curfews, pet restrictions, even laundry and lawnmowing restrictions. Germany is like a everything-goes party zone compared to Switzerland, and that's saying something.

Oh, and the country bases its prosperity on hiding the wealth of Nazis and the most odious outlaws of the world.

I know lots of Western Europeans working locally, and yeah, they most definitely prefer living in this part of the world.

Here they have a mini-mansion for 400k-500k, better shopping and restaurants, sunnier, stronger economy, superior local services, everything much cheaper, superior public education [[yes, the Birminghams and UofMs are better than their Swiss equivalents), superior healthcare, fewer restrictions, lower taxes, safer [[yes, the U.S. actually has lower overall crime than Western Europe), better meat and produce, quieter, and much friendlier locals.

Metro Detroiters have been literally brainwashed by the Big 3 into believing the car is the almighty.

The car is almighty globally. Has nothing to do with Metro Detroit. Germans, if anything, are more car-crazy than Americans. Not sure about the Swiss. They just don't have the disposable income to afford the same types of vehicles. They don't fetishize taking the bus like the armchair urban planners at D-Yes who think they understand cities because they've been to Europe once or twice.

The good thing is that this is a big world with wildly different lifestyles. If you prefer paying $20 for a mediocre sandwich and 800k for a modest apartment in essentially a housing project, if you prefer neighbors who have nothing but contempt for you, if you prefer living somewhere where it is illegal to flush a toilet after a certain time at night, if you prefer paying $12 for a streetcar ride, then grey, stifling, boring Zurich awaits. At least you're close to spectacular mountains and scenery.

[dtowncitylover]

I have no idea what some "fatness index" has to do with anything, or whether or not Zurchers are lining up to immigrate has to do with anything. Western Europe has severe obesity problems too, and most people aren't itching to immigrate to another country, regardless of their countries relative shortcomings.

Health and taking transit over cars has great health benefits. There's a reason why a auto-centric nation like ours is an obese one. It's like taking the stairs over the elevator.

Perhaps Zurich was a bad example, I'm not interested in living there for one because I've never been. But there's plenty of other cities in the US, Canada, and Europe that have done things far better than Detroit. Nothing we have done over the past half century has made us a competitive region in which to live.

[Bham1982]

Health and taking transit over cars has great health benefits. There's a reason why a auto-centric nation like ours is an obese one. It's like taking the stairs over the elevator.

The U.S. is too fat but that's neither here nor there. The fact that people eat crap and refuse to exercise is a lifestyle choice and a cultural difference, and won't be solved by adding buses to the region. I doubt your typical bus rider on 8 Mile is thinner or healthier than someone walking their dog on Maple Rd.

Perhaps Zurich was a bad example, I'm not interested in living there for one because I've never been. But there's plenty of other cities in the US, Canada, and Europe that have done things far better than Detroit. Nothing we have done over the past half century has made us a competitive region in which to live.

I am hardly positive on this region, and, yeah, transit here completely sucks. But your typical European expat working at some automotive firm doesn't care. Switzerland does have fantastic transit, but honestly they need it because cars are extremely expensive.

This area will never be built for transit, so if that's an important lifestyle consideration, why not look to other metros? There are some American metros with decent transit [[and one with European-level service). To me, that seems more fruitful than wishing that people in West Bloomfield and Shelby Twp. would start taking the bus. We screwed up building the region in the postwar era, and I don't think the region can be rebuilt with any sort of walkable, transit-oriented framework [[outside of a few nodes like downtown).

[tkelly1986]

There's a great reason why Detroit will never be the "American example of a European model": people don't want this.

As someone who actually has family in Europe, I can tell you that Europeans love nice cars and big homes as much as Americans, but the high costs and low salaries on the continent make such purchases impossible. That's the main difference. It isn't like Germans or French think "I would much rather live in a 5th floor apartment walk-up than a 3,000 square foot McMansion, because I want to live sustainably", it's that a 3,000 square foot new construction house costs northwards of 1.5 million USD in any Western European metro area.

As someone who lived in Europe for a number of years, this comment is laughable. Your family is in the minority, as the majority of Europeans detest our pro-sprawl, highways rule mentality. There is a reason why England has green zones, even though demand suggests the need to sprawl from towns like Oxford or Bath. But, the Europeans realize that this charm, and not having to drive 45 min on I-75 between meetings actually improves quality of life.

[tkelly1986]

Zurich is one of the most expensive cities on earth, butt-ugly, boring as hell, very unfriendly, all kinds of restrictions on behavior. Everything closed on Sundays, everyone into your business, huge bias against foreigners, noise curfews, pet restrictions, even laundry and lawnmowing restrictions. Germany is like a everything-goes party zone compared to Switzerland, and that's saying something.

The car is almighty globally. Has nothing to do with Metro Detroit. Germans, if anything, are more car-crazy than Americans. Not sure about the Swiss. They just don't have the disposable income to afford the same types of vehicles. They don't fetishize taking the bus like the armchair urban planners at D-Yes who think they understand cities because they've been to Europe once or twice.

The good thing is that this is a big world with wildly different lifestyles. If you prefer paying $20 for a mediocre sandwich and 800k for a modest apartment in essentially a housing project, if you prefer neighbors who have nothing but contempt for you, if you prefer living somewhere where it is illegal to flush a toilet after a certain time at night, if you prefer paying $12 for a streetcar ride, then grey, stifling, boring Zurich awaits. At least you're close to spectacular mountains and scenery.

You are either joking or do not have a passport. What a clown comment. If you poll 100 people and ask them where they would want to live, Zurich, or Birmingham, Michigan, all would choose Zurich. Birmingham, Southfield, Troy, Farmington Hills have as much charm as linoleum floor. There is a reason why Europeans are not flocking to Birmingham on vacation, and then returning to Zurich to rave about the wonders of Old Woodward!

If Oakland County was the great mecca that so many believe, then why does the region continue to stagnate with population. Should it not be a draw? A great magnet that young, entrepreneurial people from around the world flock too? These European cities you think so poorly of however continue to explode in population. Why is it so expensive in Zurich? Demand...the same reason why it is so expensive in New York, San Fran ect..people want to live there and transit is a big reason why. Shelby Township? Pass...

[Bham1982]

You are either joking or do not have a passport. What a clown comment. If you poll 100 people and ask them where they would want to live, Zurich, or Birmingham, Michigan, all would choose Zurich.

All completely wrong.

I work for a foreign firm, most of my coworkers are expats and I have lived part of my life in Europe. Expats generally want the same things as everyone else- big paycheck, big house, nice cars, quiet life.

Europeans generally love living in Metro Detroit, and there are thousands of families from Germany, Austria, France, UK and Italy in the region. They love the new homes, big yards, great schools, reliable services. They love the lakes, and golf courses and Somerset. And I'm speaking as someone who doesn't even like this region very much, and who will eventually leave.

Birmingham, Southfield, Troy, Farmington Hills have as much charm as linoleum floor. There is a reason why Europeans are not flocking to Birmingham on vacation, and then returning to Zurich to rave about the wonders of Old Woodward!

This is an absurd comment. We aren't talking about tourism. Far more people visit Jamaica and Mexico and Dominican Republic on vacation than Switzerland, so I guess dirt-poor, homicide capital Jamaica has a higher quality of life than Switzerland?

Expat preferences have zero to do with whether or not a place is a popular vacation destination [[and Zurich is a business town, not a tourist town, though it was already pretty evident you've never been there).

And expats aren't looking for "charm". Crumbling Italian hill towns are giving away homes for $1 while soulless concrete housing projects in Zurich have million-dollar homes. Why is that?

If Oakland County was the great mecca that so many believe, then why does the region continue to stagnate with population.

I never claimed that "Oakland County was the great mecca"; whatever that means. And why would population growth be a proxy for whether or not it's appealing to expats? Fastest population growth in the world is Afghanistan, while Germany has some of the slowest, so according to you expats all want to be in Kabul and not Frankfurt?

Should it not be a draw? A great magnet that young, entrepreneurial people from around the world flock too? These European cities you think so poorly of however continue to explode in population.

European growth rates are much lower than that of the U.S. Europe is dying, not "exploding in population". Europe also has far less entrepreneurship than in the U.S.

Why is it so expensive in Zurich? Demand...the same reason why it is so expensive in New York, San Fran ect..people want to live there and transit is a big reason why. Shelby Township? Pass...

Oh dear, now you're truly embarrassing yourself. I guess, according to you, the favelas of Brazil are more in demand than the mansions of Beverly Hills or the penthouses in Manhattan, because consumer goods cost much more in Brazil than in the U.S.

All of Switzerland is ultra-expensive, and it has zero to do with demand. CH is on the Swiss Franc, which is artificially inflated, and CH has massive consumption taxes.

All Swiss consumer goods are super expensive and doesn't have a damn thing to do with whether or not they have streetcars or whether or not it feels like NYC [[which it quite clearly doesn't). CH is a gorgeous country [[Swiss Alps make the Rockies look like a bore) but unbelievably expensive, and its economic base morally questionable.

Visit CH [[hell, visit anywhere in Europe, for once) and report back to us.

[dtowncitylover]

All completely wrong.

I work for a foreign firm, most of my coworkers are expats and I have lived part of my life in Europe. Expats generally want the same things as everyone else- big paycheck, big house, nice cars, quiet life.

Europeans generally love living in Metro Detroit, and there are thousands of families from Germany, Austria, France, UK and Italy in the region. They love the new homes, big yards, great schools, reliable services. They love the lakes, and golf courses and Somerset. And I'm speaking as someone who doesn't even like this region very much, and who will eventually leave.

I would be interested in knowing how many expats eventually move back to Europe either after a contract expires, the job requires it, or they just get sick and tired of living here.

I never claimed that "Oakland County was the great mecca"; whatever that means. And why would population growth be a proxy for whether or not it's appealing to expats? Fastest population growth in the world is Afghanistan, while Germany has some of the slowest, so according to you expats all want to be in Kabul and not Frankfurt?

European growth rates are much lower than that of the U.S. Europe is dying, not "exploding in population". Europe also has far less entrepreneurship than in the U.S.

I don't think tkelly is talking about birth rates, which is low in most of the Western world. But it's nice to be living in a metro area that isn't aging [[both in population and infrastructure) but that is constantly growing in population and moving along with the times. Detroit has never really been that except for when the car came out 100 years ago.

Oh dear, now you're truly embarrassing yourself. I guess, according to you, the favelas of Brazil are more in demand than the mansions of Beverly Hills or the penthouses in Manhattan, because consumer goods cost much more in Brazil than in the U.S.

All of Switzerland is ultra-expensive, and it has zero to do with demand. CH is on the Swiss Franc, which is artificially inflated, and CH has massive consumption taxes.

All Swiss consumer goods are super expensive and doesn't have a damn thing to do with whether or not they have streetcars or whether or not it feels like NYC [[which it quite clearly doesn't). CH is a gorgeous country [[Swiss Alps make the Rockies look like a bore) but unbelievably expensive, and its economic base morally questionable.

Visit CH [[hell, visit anywhere in Europe, for once) and report back to us.

Been there, done that. We, the US, Michigan, and Detroit, have a lot to learn from Europe if we want to know how to create a 21st century transit network. The standard of living is raised when a population has choices in transportation modes. Every major and most secondary cities in Europe have these options and that affords them a better standard of living. They don't need a car to go on vacation, trains work just as well. They don't need a car to get to work, trams and the metros work just as well.

I'm not saying we need to turn ourselves into Zurich, but we need to stop thinking we in Detroit are doing everything right when it's just not true.

[tkelly1986]

All completely wrong.

I work for a foreign firm, most of my coworkers are expats and I have lived part of my life in Europe. Expats generally want the same things as everyone else- big paycheck, big house, nice cars, quiet life.

Europeans generally love living in Metro Detroit, and there are thousands of families from Germany, Austria, France, UK and Italy in the region. They love the new homes, big yards, great schools, reliable services. They love the lakes, and golf courses and Somerset. And I'm speaking as someone who doesn't even like this region very much, and who will eventually leave.

This is an absurd comment. We aren't talking about tourism. Far more people visit Jamaica and Mexico and Dominican Republic on vacation than Switzerland, so I guess dirt-poor, homicide capital Jamaica has a higher quality of life than Switzerland?

Expat preferences have zero to do with whether or not a place is a popular vacation destination [[and Zurich is a business town, not a tourist town, though it was already pretty evident you've never been there).

And expats aren't looking for "charm". Crumbling Italian hill towns are giving away homes for $1 while soulless concrete housing projects in Zurich have million-dollar homes. Why is that?



I never claimed that "Oakland County was the great mecca"; whatever that means. And why would population growth be a proxy for whether or not it's appealing to expats? Fastest population growth in the world is Afghanistan, while Germany has some of the slowest, so according to you expats all want to be in Kabul and not Frankfurt?


European growth rates are much lower than that of the U.S. Europe is dying, not "exploding in population". Europe also has far less entrepreneurship than in the U.S.



Oh dear, now you're truly embarrassing yourself. I guess, according to you, the favelas of Brazil are more in demand than the mansions of Beverly Hills or the penthouses in Manhattan, because consumer goods cost much more in Brazil than in the U.S.

All of Switzerland is ultra-expensive, and it has zero to do with demand. CH is on the Swiss Franc, which is artificially inflated, and CH has massive consumption taxes.

All Swiss consumer goods are super expensive and doesn't have a damn thing to do with whether or not they have streetcars or whether or not it feels like NYC [[which it quite clearly doesn't). CH is a gorgeous country [[Swiss Alps make the Rockies look like a bore) but unbelievably expensive, and its economic base morally questionable.

Visit CH [[hell, visit anywhere in Europe, for once) and report back to us.

Responding to your always arrogant comments, I am in Zurich right now, as I write this. If all these ex-pats love the sprawl of suburban Detroit, they just might be a self selecting group, but certainly does not represent the "majority" sentiment in Europe.

Your over generalization of people wanting McMansions, cars, sprawl may reflects this lack of European diversity in your social circle. Even so, if you ask those ex-pats about the things they miss from their home countries, many would say transit [[intercity rail ect), and some will eventually go back once the sprawl gets a bit tiresome and the "luster" of strip-malls on Big Beaver wear off.

If you dislike Metro Detroit so much, then leave. You seem to have all the answers, and someone with that kind of credential should not have a hard time finding a job.

Suburban Dallas or Houston may suit you well. Plenty of sprawl there. Once you start posting on Phoenix, Dallas, Houston or Northern Virginia YES.com, you'll join the chorus of people who want cars, and not waste money on transit!...Oh wait, all of those regions, know widely as champions for sprawl, have actually built light rail over the past decade and have plans to expand their systems.....so, if everyone wanted that McMansion, huge yard and to drive everywhere, these plans would not have occurred, let alone be expanded upon.

This conversation did not begin as Switzerland vs. McMansions, it is about where the creative class are flocking, and how smaller cities could provide transit. However, your assessment of Zurich is sad - boring? Please, that's too much. No TGI Fridays or Outback Stake House, so it might not be your style, but no need to trash a city that many find a gem.

As for population growth, showing that these European cities are growing even when the county as a whole has a low birth rate just proves this point further. Otherwise they would be de-populating at the same rate as rural villages, where people can have the biggest yard they want.

[Bham1982]

Responding to your always arrogant comments, I am in Zurich right now, as I write this. If all these ex-pats love the sprawl of suburban Detroit, they just might be a self selecting group, but certainly does not represent the "majority" sentiment in Europe.

And how would you possibly know this? Do you work with European expats? And you just "happen" to be posting from Zurich?

Your over generalization of people wanting McMansions, cars, sprawl may reflects this lack of European diversity in your social circle. Even so, if you ask those ex-pats about the things they miss from their home countries, many would say transit [[intercity rail ect), and some will eventually go back once the sprawl gets a bit tiresome and the "luster" of strip-malls on Big Beaver wear off.

Again, how do you know this? Is there some study you can point to that indicates Europeans prefer living in small, crappy apartments and making lower salaries, and riding the bus?

If you dislike Metro Detroit so much, then leave. You seem to have all the answers, and someone with that kind of credential should not have a hard time finding a job.

I have family reasons for staying.

Suburban Dallas or Houston may suit you well. Plenty of sprawl there. Once you start posting on Phoenix, Dallas, Houston or Northern Virginia YES.com, you'll join the chorus of people who want cars, and not waste money on transit!...Oh wait, all of those regions, know widely as champions for sprawl, have actually built light rail over the past decade and have plans to expand their systems.....so, if everyone wanted that McMansion, huge yard and to drive everywhere, these plans would not have occurred, let alone be expanded upon.

There's essentially no lifestyle difference between all these areas, so, like the rest of your posts, I have no idea what in the hell you're talking about. Moving to Plano, TX isn't going to offer anything different than Oakland County.

This conversation did not begin as Switzerland vs. McMansions, it is about where the creative class are flocking, and how smaller cities could provide transit.

The creative class isn't flocking to Michigan, or Switzerland, or, necessarily, places with transit, so no idea what any of this means. People are attracted to job centers, like Silicon Valley, regardless of whether there's good bus service. Silicon Valley is sprawl hell.

However, your assessment of Zurich is sad - boring? Please, that's too much. No TGI Fridays or Outback Stake House, so it might not be your style,

You're not in Zurich. Zurich is chain store heaven, and is very boring and generic.
Tons of McDonalds, Burger King, Subway, even Hooters. Also lots of European crap chains like Nordsee and Marche. There's something crazy like four Burger King in Zurich's central station.

I think you have an image of Switzerland in your head [[happy cows with bells, snow-capped mountains, Heidi making fondue in the alpine lodge, etc.) and you're conflating it with Zurich, which is a staid banking city filled with foreigners in basically the least scenic part of CH.

As for population growth, showing that these European cities are growing even when the county as a whole has a low birth rate just proves this point further. Otherwise they would be de-populating at the same rate as rural villages, where people can have the biggest yard they want.

I have no idea what any of this means. Urban areas are growing faster than rural areas worldwide [[this is true in Europe, U.S., everywhere, even Michigan), so, according to you, this proves that people don't want to have yards or nice homes? LOL.

[Junjie]

And if bus was the preferred option, then why is the CTA's long-term master plan so rail focused? [[extending lines ect..). Why is DC building more lines, and not doing BRT instead?[[see Silver and Purple Lines). Why is Minneapolis building more LRT, same as Dallas, Seattle, Denver and Phoenix. Why are these cities not scrapping LRT in favor of LRT?

I agree LRT has certain advantages [[mainly capacity and thus incentive to focus development) but just want to point out that the DC area is currently building BRT too: the Metroway service between Potomac Yards and Pentagon City in Alexandria/Arlington. I haven't ridden it yet but it has dedicated lanes or even a dedicated road for much of the route. And Montgomery County north of DC is currently planning a full-on BRT network serving the county and feeding into the Red Line metro stations.

I am a transportation planning consultant in the City of Atlanta with hopes of one day returning to the City of Detroit to work on transit projects. I agree wholeheartedly with most of what you all are saying; however, it is important to note that "these people" are the RTA running the show. The consultants, while my firm's competitors, know transit and have worked on projects around the country including concurrently the well-done Minneapolis LRT system. The RTA is running the show here and are leaving out LRT. It is unfortunate and as a citizen, I wish I knew the way to throw away this idea that LRT or Heavy Rail could never happen in Metro Detroit. I truly believe that we have the density and roadway network to make a rail system useful.

I attended the public meeting for the Michigan Avenue BRT and I only ever saw options for exclusive right-of-way. I had no idea they were considering shared lanes.. If that is the case, why are they doing this massive Alternatives Analysis effort at all.. Just realign SMART and DDOT routes to work the same way. I also asked the question of comparing the Commuter Rail to Ann Arbor with the BRT and I got the answer that they were not competing. I didn't believe that answer. I talked to the consultant specifically about why they were showing BRT all the way to Ann Arbor [[which makes it look like they are competing projects) and he acknowledged how unrealistic that was and that it would likely be Commuter Rail to AA and BRT to the airport. Now this was mentioned to me, the fellow consultant, and not to the public.

If that's the case [[exclusive right of way, BRT to airport with separate commuter rail) I'll retract my earlier complaints. I don't really care about rail or bus as long as the thing has dedicated lanes. If they built the equivalent of LA's Orange Line here that'd be a massive improvement. But a lot of the language in the alternatives analyses has me worried that the standards are so low that supporters will not buy in and/or that even if it is built, the service won't be good enough to make it a success. If this effort is seen as a failure it will be a huge setback.

[dtowncitylover]

And how would you possibly know this? Do you work with European expats? And you just "happen" to be posting from Zurich?

Well, we got talking about Zurich because tkelly mentioned s/he was in Zurich, so yeah tkelly happens to be in Zurich. I don't think they would just choose Zurich to make an easy point that diversity in transportation choices betters a society.

And tkelly, you might as well drop it. Bham will think he's right until he is actually proven wrong then he will shut up and disappear. Unfortunately, the topic at hand [[standard of living is in the eye of beholder) is very subjective so he will continue to talk.

[MSUguy]

Hopefully more 24hr routes are coming in the future.


The addition of 24-hour bus service on some routes is among the changes coming to public transportation in Detroit beginning next week.

They include new schedule times, additional destinations and the introduction of 24-hour service on No. 53 Woodward, No. 34 Gratiot and No. 21 Grand River, according to the Detroit Department of Transportation.

"These service changes come directly from our customers and employees," DDOT Director Dan Dirks said in a news release. "We received countless requests for better night service, frequent peak-hour service and more reliable schedules."

http://www.freep.com/story/news/loca...vice/78800534/