Troy debates sending back $8.5 million in U.S. aid for transit center

[canuck]

Nice one Cinderpath times two.

I also wonder how some folks relate to transit on this thread and am seeing a pattern of cluelessness. What is the big deal with installing a rail station and a bus node at or near a shopping mall? I guess it has to do with the habits of people in Detroit metro who havent had to use transit ever. I mean, it is a common thing to have a station or terminus or turnabout near a large commercial outlet. This is what a transit system is able to solve; bus routes radiating from the rail station is standard issue, nothing to write home about for christmas.

On the other hand, I also hear that this station would be in the middle of nowhere, not near industrial jobs in the area. This indicates that people who use cars wont use transit because nothing will ever be close enough to please them. It is a lot like driving for half an hour round the parking lot until you find a spot near enough the entrance to the mall.

[canuck]

This from the city of Troy website;


Where can you find the best city to live in Michigan that is also one of the safest in the nation and second most ethnically diverse in the state? What city offers affordable housing, A+ rated schools, quality public services, and a solid bond rating? Where can families and businesses prosper in a place that offers the finest high-end office space in the Midwest, world class shopping and dining, and over 900 acres of parklands? The City of Troy!
While Troy maintains its hometown charm, the City is a vibrant business and technology center and a community recognized for its civic spirit and quality of life. Located in the busy northern Detroit suburbs, Troy is home to more than 81,000 residents and approximately 6,100 thriving businesses that employ 125,000 people. With seven million square feet in retail space, 18 million square feet of office and 20 million square feet of manufacturing/engineering space, Troy is one of a few AAA rated cities in Michigan and a prime location for new and expanding businesses located in Oakland County.


A city with that much going for it can't afford to say yes to 8.5 million dollars subsidy for a transit station.

[mwilbert]

I have no interest in defending the Mayor of Troy, who doesn't sound like a rational person, but it isn't obvious to me that Troy needs a transit center. The town is obviously horrible to get around in without a car. Bicycling in any of the commercial areas would be both dangerous and nerve-racking. I wouldn't even want to walk from a bus stop to anyplace else, although no doubt some people have to. It is inconceivable that I would ever live there except possibly in a witness protection program.

On the other hand, lots of people live in Troy, almost all could live someplace else, and so presumably most of them think it is OK. But it is OK without the transit center and I don't think there is much reason to pretend that any mode of transportation other than private car is viable there. It seems sensible to me not to commit to maintaining something you don't think you need.

[Novine]

"But it is OK without the transit center and I don't think there is much reason to pretend that any mode of transportation other than private car is viable there."

Then why do 3 different SMART lines use Maple Road just north of the site?

[mwilbert]

I assume because buses need to travel down Maple to get people where they want to go. I didn't claim no one rides the bus to Troy. I am claiming that nothing could make that a desirable thing to do, including a transit center, because Troy has been developed so as to be fundamentally inimical to non-automotive transit.

[Novine]

I would agree that much of Troy isn't conducive to transit usage. But that area of Troy and Birmingham is more conducive to transit than other areas of the city.

[mwilbert]

But that area of Troy and Birmingham is more conducive to transit than other areas of the city.

Maybe I am mis-remembering it. I'll probably have a chance to take a look sometime in the next day or two and I'll check and see if that is the case, or if we simply disagree about what constitutes an area which is even minimally conducive to transit.

[j to the jeremy]

Whether or not Troy is planned for transit [[it's not at all) is beside the point. The fact is people ride SMART in Troy, and people take the bus from Detroit to Birmingham to work. There are already people riding transit in SE Michigan, the question is, do we want to make it less of a hell for them and more of an option for everyone else?

[ghettopalmetto]

Imagine if, decades ago, someone said:

"Well, most people in Detroit walk or ride horses, so I'm not really sure paved streets are necessary."

That's how ridiculous the anti-transit people are. Welcome to the 20th, er, 21st Century, folks!

[canuck]

Whether or not Troy is planned for transit [[it's not at all) is beside the point. The fact is people ride SMART in Troy, and people take the bus from Detroit to Birmingham to work. There are already people riding transit in SE Michigan, the question is, do we want to make it less of a hell for them and more of an option for everyone else?

Both you and ghettopalmetto have put your finger on it by pointing out the origin of any development. The idea is that a ton of friendly infrastructure was designed and built in many suburbs and the more inimical to transit the better. Meanness is a form of punishment. It is not a neutral series of events. The decision to say no to a transit station cannot be just aquaetion of bucks since it was funded by the federal government. If Troy sells itself as an AAA rated city with the best of civic amenities while dismissing the need for better transit infrastructure in this day and age, there has to be a hatred of said transit and the lifestyle it conjures up in the council's collective mind.

If this is the way the issue of transit is dealt with in da Troy, then there is a good chance any attempt at more conservative land use measures are a long way off.

[mwilbert]

That may be the question, but I don't think it is. The question is why should the transiit-indifferent or -hostile people of Troy fund its operation, and why should the federal government spend transit dollars in an unsuitable place like Troy?

Just because it would be good to improve bus riders' experiences in general [[and it would and I would be happy to see more money spent on that) doesn't mean that it makes sense to spend that money in Troy, nor that the taxpayers [[or officials representing them) have any particular reason to take on that cost themselves. It seems to me the cost of a service provided to people across a region makes sense to be funded on a regional basis, if it worth doing.

[canuck]

That may be the question, but I don't think it is. The question is why should the transiit-indifferent or -hostile people of Troy fund its operation, and why should the federal government spend transit dollars in an unsuitable place like Troy?

These monies are allocated on a case by case I guess.

Just because it would be good to improve bus riders' experiences in general [[and it would and I would be happy to see more money spent on that) doesn't mean that it makes sense to spend that money in Troy, nor that the taxpayers [[or officials representing them) have any particular reason to take on that cost themselves. It seems to me the cost of a service provided to people across a region makes sense to be funded on a regional basis, if it worth doing.

Well, if a SEMCOG or other transit planning council can administer from regional funding, this is what would happen. Besides the cost, there is the issue of making the urban grid more amenable to rapid transit maybe, but that is a problem even in the more pro transit environments. Also, not unlike the issue of completes streets and bike paths, punctual bike rental, and urban planning in general; the needs are progressive and the process is ongoing.
And cities need to do this whether they are funded by the state, provincial or federal governments.