Quote Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch View Post
Thanks for the discussion.

I view transit as a means of enabling commerce [[jobs) for the City and Metro Detroit, rather than a development strategy for the Cass Corridor [[aka Midtown).

Thus, I'm more in favor of volume over style.
Exactly, but some kinds of transit bring investment-- meaning construction, jobs, relocating businesses to a denser area, and so on-- and some kinds don't bring those advantages. Light rail brings the most investment, BRT brings some, and standard bus lines bring virtually none. One of the problems we have now is that residential development has sprawled, but industrial, retail, and services followed. That isn't an accident-- those things have all been done by policy. A study that Wm. Whyte talked about in his book <i>City</i> back in the '70s showed that regardless of the reasons companies gave for moving from New York City to suburban areas, the fact was that they virtually all relocated to within a short distance of the CEO's residence. People move to far suburbs, their businesses soon follow, and then we have to run BRT lines 50 miles out so that people can get to work. It will still take them hours to get there.

I guess my point is that we have to start somewhere, and Woodward Avenue is the obvious choice. We have to build a system that will begin the long process of re-densification of the region. Build a system that will virtually assure that dense development will follow. People who don't like the system don't have to use it. And, they can rest assured that the costs of maintaining their car-centric lifestyle will be shifted to the folks who move to the new dense developments. BRT is better than the dysfunctional system we have now, and will give a lot of people an opportunity to find work in places they can't even get to now. So, I see BRT, LRT, an improved bus system, bike lanes, and safe pedestrian infrastructure as parts of a balanced system that will be the real answer.