Is it crazy to [[voluntarily) live without a car in Detroit?

[j to the jeremy]

I currently live near Wayne State and can tell you it's a very walkable neighborhood. Groceries, transit to downtown and suburbs, lots of bike racks, a few good local shops, and lots of bars and restaurants are all within a 5-10 minute walk. I would say that all of Midtown is walkable, and most of Downtown and Jefferson Ave. are also very good. If a proper light rail line [[down the middle, all the way to 8 mile) is built, this will basically create a giant pedestrian commercial zone on Woodward, as well as increase the walkability of adjacent areas near stations.

I think of Detroit as 2 cities: One for cars, and one for everyone else. There are some zones of the city that are practically impossible to live in without a car- ironically lots of broke people live in those areas. The more affluent areas are frequently the most dense, walkable ones, just as in every other city in America.

For now, I am more than happy walking or busing when I need to, and yes, bumming rides as well. But even that is better than driving solo in a car for 5-minute trips everywhere. I'm sure SE Michigan has one of the worst carbon footprints in the USA.

[Bham1982]

I think of Detroit as 2 cities: One for cars, and one for everyone else. There are some zones of the city that are practically impossible to live in without a car- ironically lots of broke people live in those areas. The more affluent areas are frequently the most dense, walkable ones, just as in every other city in America.

I think you have it reversed.

The most affluent area in Detroit, by far, is Northwest Detroit, which also happens to be among the newest and most auto-oriented sections.

The poorest areas are generally the most central neighborhoods, which also happen to be among the oldest and most transit-oriented sections.

You are correct that there are a few urban/transit oriented AND prosperous neighborhoods [[a few blocks of Midtown and Downtown, Corktown and maybe East Jeff), but they seem to be the exceptions to the general rules.

[Bham1982]

I know a *lot* of folks who have lived in DC, Boston, Chicago, Philadelphia, Cleveland, Minneapolis, and San Francisco without ever owning a car, nor a desire to own a car.

This is true, and I know many of those folks too, but the Census shows that NYC is the only city where a majority of households don't own cars.

In places like SF, Chicago, and DC, transit is pretty good, but the vast majority of households own vehicles.

I think, again excepting NYC, you'll find that most of your friends in these cities without cars tend to be young and/or single. You won't find many middle class "traditional families" riding the bus around town, but you will see 23-year-old singles and poor folks.

[ghettopalmetto]

I think, again excepting NYC, you'll find that most of your friends in these cities without cars tend to be young and/or single. You won't find many middle class "traditional families" riding the bus around town, but you will see 23-year-old singles and poor folks.

...and 30-and-40-something-year-old PhDs, engineers, lawyers, artists, etc. But hey, what the hell do I know? I'm just relating my own experiences, which I have clearly invented.

Not everything needs to cater to the 25% of households that have school-age children. We already have plenty of your 1950s nostalgic hoo-ha in blandtastic suburbs all across America.

I'm not interested in preserving some idealized "idea of the future" from 60 years ago. I'm interested in things that work. If you're happy with the Leave it to Beaver Lifestyle, then fine. You've got what you want. I don't see that you have anything to complain about. But that doesn't mean you're required to force your lifestyle choice on everyone else. You don't have to like it, but then the OP shouldn't be forced to like your lifestyle either.

The problem illustrated by this thread is here we have an educated young man who wants to return home to Michigan after living in Boston [[and bring his income and tax dollars with him). In order to do that, though, we have to force him to spend thousands of dollars on a vehicle, then thousands of dollars more per year just to maintain it and keep it full of gasoline. All just so he doesn't receive disdainful, judgmental looks from the Citizens of Pleasantville.

[j to the jeremy]

I think you have it reversed.

The most affluent area in Detroit, by far, is Northwest Detroit, which also happens to be among the newest and most auto-oriented sections.

The poorest areas are generally the most central neighborhoods, which also happen to be among the oldest and most transit-oriented sections.

You are correct that there are a few urban/transit oriented AND prosperous neighborhoods [[a few blocks of Midtown and Downtown, Corktown and maybe East Jeff), but they seem to be the exceptions to the general rules.

Let me revise what I meant, I meant that higher real estate values are generally found in intensely walkable areas. For example, NW Detroit is generally better off, but the expensive condo developments and luxury apartments are usually found in denser areas like the East Riverfront. Detroit is actually a very sprawl-y city anyways, built cheaply and quick, so our region isn't as enthralled with walkable urbanism as the east coast currently is. I would agree with you that in Detroit, our exeptions are the national rules,

[English]

I currently live near Wayne State and can tell you it's a very walkable neighborhood. Groceries, transit to downtown and suburbs, lots of bike racks, a few good local shops, and lots of bars and restaurants are all within a 5-10 minute walk. I would say that all of Midtown is walkable, and most of Downtown and Jefferson Ave. are also very good. If a proper light rail line [[down the middle, all the way to 8 mile) is built, this will basically create a giant pedestrian commercial zone on Woodward, as well as increase the walkability of adjacent areas near stations.

I think of Detroit as 2 cities: One for cars, and one for everyone else. There are some zones of the city that are practically impossible to live in without a car- ironically lots of broke people live in those areas. The more affluent areas are frequently the most dense, walkable ones, just as in every other city in America.

For now, I am more than happy walking or busing when I need to, and yes, bumming rides as well. But even that is better than driving solo in a car for 5-minute trips everywhere. I'm sure SE Michigan has one of the worst carbon footprints in the USA.

I agree that we indeed have the seeds for walkable areas in Detroit. Since moving to the East Riverfront 1 month ago I have lost -- I am not kidding -- nearly 15 pounds. I'm also filling up gas once per week, if that [[mid-month, I went 2 weeks). The weight loss is simply because I'm walking the Riverwalk on a daily basis [[except in heavy rain), walk to and around Eastern Market, walk to and around the RenCen, walk to festivals, and even walked from home to the Diamond Jack Riverboat for the Preservation Wayne tour and back. There is an OK grocery store and at least 3 drugstores within walking distance on Jefferson. I can also walk to Belle Isle. As those who went to the picnic know, I plan to get a bike soon, which will give me even more car-free mobility.

I've also found that being in the CBD, I'm not only getting lots of company from friends and family in the 'burbs and A2, I don't have to move my car if we're going to the Tigers game or to catch a show at the Opera House or FOX. Since where I live is a pretty straight shot from anywhere, and there's parking if there are multiple cars in the group, I've been getting rides from people. Again, this just means my car can sit.

So I've been able to obtain food, recreation, and even some of my household goods [[bought an iron from Walgreens) without moving my car most weekends in May. The drawback is that I'm not on the Woodward Corridor, so it's less convenient to get to work at WSU, but it's something that I considered long and hard before making that choice. I'm not sure that I'd be willing to walk and bike quite as much in the wintertime, but we'll see.

In a city with light rail up Woodward, and regular bus service up and down Jefferson, I would be the perfect candidate for a ZipCar. Moving back into the city has been expensive, but if I could get rid of my car note, insurance, and maintenance, I'd have that much more cash in the account every month.

And yes, I'm over 30 and have a terminal degree, so I guess I don't count as a young hipster. I was a youngster who lived in Midtown 10 years ago, and I drove more then than I do today, but I did walk quite a few places, even in the cold [[I mean, who's going to actually walk from University Tower to the DIA?). I never went to Eastern Market to shop, either, back then... I just went to University Foods if I wasn't out in Dearborn or Livonia.

But then again, Midtown and the CBD in 2000 were *nothing* like the energy I'm finding here today. There's a long way to go, but hopefully the forward momentum will continue.

My advice is to get a cheap car that you can pay cash for, with the most reasonable insurance you can find [[that will be difficult). Then park that car most of the time and help us continue to build momentum as a more pedestrian friendly place!

[Bham1982]

...and 30-and-40-something-year-old PhDs, engineers, lawyers, artists, etc. But hey, what the hell do I know? I'm just relating my own experiences, which I have clearly invented.

I'm referencing Census-based household-level data, which shows that the vast majority of households in these cities [[again, excepting NYC) own cars and commute by car.

Of course, these cities have far more car-free households than in Michigan, but really the entire U.S. [[again, excepting NYC) is car-oriented, unless you have reason to believe the Census is wrong.

Doesn't mean we shouldn't provide good transit in these cities, though. Even if, say, 75% of Chicago households have cars, the remaining 25% should have access to quality transit. We should strive for the same in Detroit.

[ghettopalmetto]

I'm referencing Census-based household-level data, which shows that the vast majority of households in these cities [[again, excepting NYC) own cars and commute by car.

Of course, these cities have far more car-free households than in Michigan, but really the entire U.S. [[again, excepting NYC) is car-oriented, unless you have reason to believe the Census is wrong.

Doesn't mean we shouldn't provide good transit in these cities, though. Even if, say, 75% of Chicago households have cars, the remaining 25% should have access to quality transit. We should strive for the same in Detroit.

That's exactly what I'm saying. For decades, however, it has been assumed that almost everyone in Michigan is going to own a car. Transit has been designed to serve only those too poor to afford a car, and it shows.

The get-in-the-car-for-everything days are over. We're never going to see gasoline for $0.95 a gallon ever again. We're quickly running out of money to even maintain the road system we have, let alone expand it to accommodate any sort of population growth.

I'm not saying that people should be forced out of their cars by fiat--economic forces are already taking care of that. I think vehicle ownership should be a choice, and frankly, it just isn't very much of a choice in Detroit as it is in other places. I maintain that if owning a car is the only "choice" that Detroit provides, then people with the means to make choices are going to choose to live elsewhere.

[j to the jeremy]

Right, it's all about options. Healthy metros have both Troy-like sprawl AND dense, walkable, transit-served neighborhoods. Ideally, public transit would be efficient both in the dense areas and the suburbs. In Detroit, we have almost no transit, almost no walkability, and a plethora of car-oriented sprawl options. For those who wish to walk most places on a daily basis, it's either downtown Ann Arbor [[$$$$$$$) or a few select neighborhoods in Detroit and inner-ring 'burbs. Compare that to any healthy metro area and the differences are obvious.

[Jowlska]

I am a young professional who lives in Detroit without a car. I chose to live near the DDOT bus line that takes about 30 mins to work. Bus passes are about $50 per month for the city and suburb bus pass. It helps that I live with several roomates that have cars and will give me a ride once in awhile. I ride my bike to get groceries at a store about 5 mins away. In my experience the busses seem to run well in the morning but get crowded and delayed between 11am-4pm. When the busses get delayed they also get crowded and will not stop to pick you up. I have waited an hour for a bus that was supposed to come every 15 minutes, and that can be worse if it is not a major bus route. If you can find a job near where you live and avoid the bus then you will save a lot of stress. Cycling around the city is much more efficient than the bus. I would also agree that living downtown would be the most convenient place to live without a car if you choose to ride the bus. I enjoy not having a car because it gives me spending money for entertainment that I would not have otherwise.

So in short - it's doable if you are patient and resourceful.

[urbanhat]

Thanks for all the replies.

It sounds like "impractical but not crazy" sums things up pretty well. I agree that the best option is probably to have a car and not drive it every day. At least it's good to know that's possible and it's great to hear some people actually do it. I probably would end up buying a car, but I was hoping not to have to immediately.

That said, the bus system sounds nightmarish... you'd think a wealthy country like the US would be embarrassed by stories like that.

It is unfortunate, however, that owning a car is virtually a prerequisite for living in Detroit. One of the city's major draws for me, besides the fact I care more about it than anywhere else, is the low housing cost. I can get way more space than I can in Boston. But after I factor in car payments, insurance, gas, and maintenance, the combined housing+transport costs end up higher than my current costs in Boston. All my friends here assume it's cheaper to live in Detroit, but that's only if you're already paying to own a car. As has been noted, this is one of the things keeping young people away from the city...

On the point that the majority of people in SF, Boston, DC, etc. own cars:
That's true, but even in cities where the majority of people drive, there are also many people who choose not to. In my case, I prefer not to deal with the traffic, parking, shoveling after snowstorms, annoying MA drivers, etc. If I need a car, I use zipcar. A majority of my friends in Boston do own cars, but most use it only occasionally.

On Detroit needing more dense, walkable neighborhoods to compete with other cities:
This is actually an interesting issue... I definitely agree that greater density and walkability would make the city more attractive to people like me. On the other hand, Detroit is so far behind in this regard that it's hard to imagine it winning over, say, Chicago or A2. Besides, in order to have density you first need to attract people. That doesn't mean efforts to make it dense and walkable aren't a step in the right direction--I'm certain they are. But it means the real question is, why should people like me move to Detroit, despite the fact that it's sprawling and unattractive? Obviously I already have an answer. But if I weren't originally from there, it would be hard to find a reason.

[Zacha341]

NOT. With bus service and drama [[on the bus and bus stops) and the risk of being made a 'mark' out in the open. I'm not trying to do without a car. No thanks.

I just drive good used cars. No car note - manageable car insurance... and I'm good to go. I can do buses and live near a fairly good DOT line which I've used on occasion. Grew up riding buses and have done so when car is down or the short period between cars, but driving is a must in the city to get anywhere in a 'timely' manner, safely.

I save walking for the gym, home treadmill and the parks.

[Hypestyles]

urbanhat-- how widespread are the trains and buses in boston? accessible by most or all neighborhoods? what are the costs per ride?

[Autoracks]

bus people are certainly "interesting"

[jon]

I'm surprised that the taxi fleet hasn't been mentioned. Detroit must have over 100 different cab companies. From my experience [[and I use a bunch of different companies), the drivers are safe, fares reasonable and cabs clean.

I think a bike, a couple different bike trailer options and a $100/mo budget for rentals, taxis and the occasional bus is all you need to live a full life in the city, more so in the central neighborhoods. The only caveat being if I had an infant, I wouldn't want to live anywhere but midtown without a reliable car share.

[fryar]

On Detroit needing more dense, walkable neighborhoods to compete with other cities:
This is actually an interesting issue... I definitely agree that greater density and walkability would make the city more attractive to people like me. On the other hand, Detroit is so far behind in this regard that it's hard to imagine it winning over, say, Chicago or A2. Besides, in order to have density you first need to attract people. That doesn't mean efforts to make it dense and walkable aren't a step in the right direction--I'm certain they are. But it means the real question is, why should people like me move to Detroit, despite the fact that it's sprawling and unattractive? Obviously I already have an answer. But if I weren't originally from there, it would be hard to find a reason.

Huzzah, dense, walkable urban environments, which some of us like to obsess about!

A lesser goal is more within reach: making the place a little more attractive to younger versions of yourself that haven't left yet. It's actually the same conversation, in terms of what improvements are needed, say, but those people are easier to convince to stay here than non-locals are to come here, given the current state of affairs, so you can take baby steps instead of organizing expensive hail marys. Once you get X number of locals to stay, you have critical mass for things like restaurants and so on that you do start to be attractive to some outsiders. Slow and steady wins the race.

I didn't realize you were from metro Detroit when I told you your jaw might drop. You probably have a sense of how car-centric the city is, notwithstanding that it is possible to live without a car.

How long ago did you leave?

[fryar]

I'm surprised that the taxi fleet hasn't been mentioned. Detroit must have over 100 different cab companies. From my experience [[and I use a bunch of different companies), the drivers are safe, fares reasonable and cabs clean.

I think a bike, a couple different bike trailer options and a $100/mo budget for rentals, taxis and the occasional bus is all you need to live a full life in the city, more so in the central neighborhoods. The only caveat being if I had an infant, I wouldn't want to live anywhere but midtown without a reliable car share.

It would be helpful if those cab companies cooperated, so the closest licensed cab comes to pick you up, for example. They could jointly develop an iphone app that does that.

I know, I know. But I'm right, in principle.

[professorscott]

Living without a car in Detroit - which your kindly old professor has done at times, usually voluntarily - is kind of like being a vegan. It's a lifestyle choice which imposes some restrictions on a person and requires that you act more deliberately than most Americans usually do.

First of all, the benefits: it's cheaper! Cars are expensive. The payment [[or, if no payment, the constant repairs), gasoline, insurance, then parking if you work downtown, that all adds up! Second benefit: it's healthier! People without cars walk a good bit more than people with cars. [[Proven, much research.)

Now, in metro Detroit, one has to be practical. Live near a decent bus line, there are several in Detroit that run every 10-15 minutes during the day; out in the suburbs you have the SMART Woodward or Gratiot that runs pretty often. As someone else has said, don't be afraid to use taxis when the bus doesn't go exactly where you want. Plan to not travel much on weekends. Use your bicycle. Don't work in Rochester or most of Livonia [[though DDOT makes some of Livonia accessible, to the consternation of the Livonians).

It's not all that difficult. It just takes a bit more planning and forethought than a lot of people are used to. But it's "green" and pretty inexpensive. Good way to get around in the era of $4 gasoline... even around here!

Happy riding! Catch you on the Linwood.

[Hermod]

.I'm not interested in preserving some idealized "idea of the future" from 60 years ago. I'm interested in things that work. If you're happy with the Leave it to Beaver Lifestyle, then fine. You've got what you want. I don't see that you have anything to complain about. But that doesn't mean you're required to force your lifestyle choice on everyone else. You don't have to like it, but then the OP shouldn't be forced to like your lifestyle either.

What you are doing is demanding that he [[through taxes) subsidize your life style after paying for his own. The folks that want to ride transit don't want to pay the full cost of transit when they board a bus, train, or streetcar.

[Cooper]

The folks that want to ride transit don't want to pay the full cost of transit when they board a bus, train, or streetcar.

As opposed to the folks that drive cars who will gladly pay a toll for every single road they drive on and a fee for every parking space they use? No. All transit is subsidized.

[j to the jeremy]

If you think highways pay for themselves, read this.

http://www.transportmichigan.org/201...their-way.html

[southsider]

Looks like there have been a few threads about car-free incentives and such, but I want to pose the question: Is it at all possible, really, to live without a car Detroit?

I've read that roughly 20-25% of Detroiters do not have access to a car. I assume these are almost all people who are too poor to own a car and would buy one if they could.

But what about a young professional person who could otherwise afford it simply prefers to avoid the hassle and expense of owning a car?

I've lived happily car-free in Boston for the past four years, and now I'm considering moving to Detroit. The biggest downside I can see is not the lack of jobs, but the necessity of buying a car. Is it possible to get away without one? Does anyone do this? It doesn't seem easy, but maybe it's possible to make do with a combination of walking, biking, taxis, and informal car-sharing. Would that be a reasonable challenge, or just miserable?

I'm originally from MI, so I understand it's obviously far more car-centric than Boston. But is there any place for a car-free lifestyle?

No. What's crazy is voluntarily living in Detroit. Even if you have a car your capacity to keep it is questionable.

[j to the jeremy]

No. What's crazy is voluntarily living in Detroit. Even if you have a car your capacity to keep it is questionable.

[Parkguy]

I live in Rosedale Park on the NW side [[Southfield and Grand River). The closer you are to that intersection, the more walkable it is. Groceries, hardware, clothing [[some), restaurants/diners [[none rise to the level of "cafe" or "bistro") plenty of health care, salons, banks, pet supplies, drug stores, dry cleaners. Missing: bookstore, coffee house. Plenty of carry-out places. Three main bus lines at that intersection. Grand River is not pedestrian friendly, but I see plenty of people using bicycles [[well, plenty on a Detroit scale). Still, things are pretty car-centric, as is the case across the region.

[stasu1213]

You would had been able to survive in Detroit without a car back in the 60s and possibly the 70s. Detroit's transit system went on a decline beginning in the late 70s. While other cities surrounding suburbs are mostly isolated from the hustle and bustle including retail, dining, and reliable transportation; Detroit's downtown and neighborhoods themselves are isloated from these things. The MOTOR CITY had become too car dependent so it could live up to it's name. The development of shopping centers, white flight, and factories moving their operations to a more low taxed based area had caused the decline in the hustle and bustle as well as the decline in the reliabity of busses. You will need a car to even take a lady out on a date. You would not want to take her out on the DDOT with all of it's crazy people on it