Death of Public Transportation

[XDetroitr]

The simple answer is population density. Mass transit just doesn't work without it. Look at all of the world and US cities with effective mass transit. They all have multi-family housing, lots of it. The Detroit area is mainly single-family homes with abundant parking. If the Woodward corridor continues to develop more high-density housing, the Q-line might have a chance of succeeding. But a comprehensive Detroit public transit system is just a fantasy at this point.

[Danny]

Speaking of the suburbs https://twitter.com/kayleighrenel/st...O6cZ-8F6xw5ubA

That Livonia's rep. to keep too many undesirables out of their peaceful less crime pleasantville.

[GPCharles]

I have no idea if they have lots of riders.

I rode the 8:07 a.m. Jefferson
bus from the city limits to downtown for a week while my wife's car was in the sharp. Never more than 12-15 riders on the bus. As a senior citizen I was able to go RT for $2 per day.

[stasu1213]

The simple answer is population density. Mass transit just doesn't work without it. Look at all of the world and US cities with effective mass transit. They all have multi-family housing, lots of it. The Detroit area is mainly single-family homes with abundant parking. If the Woodward corridor continues to develop more high-density housing, the Q-line might have a chance of succeeding. But a comprehensive Detroit public transit system is just a fantasy at this point.

Detroit need to build up the density of its neighborhoods providing the residents living in those neighborhoods dependable mass transit systems to travel to downtown Detroit so that they won't have to use their cars. Detroiters will then support any retail downtown. Many cities that have great mass transit systems have highly dense neighborhoods that uses public transportation to get to their downtown areas.

[Rocket]

$1600 car? Where? We purchase used cars regularly [avoiding the car note scene] and find little out there worth driving under 3K.

Though with the dealerships over-stocked perhaps they'll make a deal......

Dealerships mark cars up a lot, and dispose of all the maintenance history. Try Craigslist or AutoTrader.

Focus $1,800 [asking]
https://detroit.craigslist.org/okl/c...627250034.html

Sebring $1,800
https://detroit.craigslist.org/wyn/c...624559559.html

Caravan $1,550
https://detroit.craigslist.org/mcb/c...621136137.html

Tahoe $1,500
https://detroit.craigslist.org/wyn/c...620164047.html

[royce]

Detroit need to build up the density of its neighborhoods providing the residents living in those neighborhoods dependable mass transit systems to travel to downtown Detroit so that they won't have to use their cars. Detroiters will then support any retail downtown. Many cities that have great mass transit systems have highly dense neighborhoods that uses public transportation to get to their downtown areas.

Well, stasu1213, you are stating the obvious. Detroit does need to build up the density of its neighborhoods. The problem is you can't just wave a magic wand and the people are going to be there. So obviously you build in areas where there is abandonment. The logical progression is to build outward from downtown, but start with downtown. It's sad that the Illitches can't see the potential of what their properties could be if they'd just put some residential on all of those parking lots.

The thing is they wouldn't have to lose the parking spaces. Build apartments along the street wall and put a parking garage behind/in the middle of the apartment development. If any positive memory of Skulker [[RIP) that I have is that he introduced to this forum the concept of the "Texas Donut." It's a residential development with a parking deck attached in the middle of the development. I don't know why we don't build those in Michigan [[ I did see one in East Lansing for MSU students but that's the only one I have ever seen here).

Two near-downtown areas that should be developed with intense residential density include the area south of Mack, west of Woodward, north of the Fisher Freeway and east of the Lodge Freeway [[yeah, old Cass Corridor). The other is east of Brush Park[[former Brewster-Douglass projects). I was in Boston a few weeks ago and I was amazed at the Brownstones they had that were four, five, and even six stories high. That's what we need in both of these areas. I know Dan Gilbert has plans for Brewster-Douglass so hopefully that can get started soon.

After those areas, the residential development focus should be to build apartments with ground floor retail and townhouses along the major arterial roads. Then focus on building housing along the first block that intersects these roads. Grand River from downtown to Livernois could really use some residential development. With I-96 being right behind Grand River on the Southwest side, and there not being a lot of room for large apartments, townhouses/rowhouses might be ideal with bodegas at the corners of these developments. Gratiot, Michigan, and Jefferson Avenues could benefit with having more apartments like those built along Gratiot near McClellan.

After all that, you might just want to focus on bringing light rail to the arterial streets [[going beyond the city limits is still 50 years away). I rode the Gratiot bus to downtown for the Grand Prix and it was quick and convenient but the ride was bumpy as all get up. I was so glad to only be on the bus for less than ten minutes. Light-rail would make that trip more enjoyable. Well, sorry for going on a tangent since this thread is about mass transit, but you got to start some where.

[Jimaz]

Here's a 13-year-old thread on that: Visual Preference Survey, Texas Donut.

[royce]

Now, that was a trip back down memory lane. Thanks for sharing, Jimaz.

[Rocket]

Well, stasu1213, you are stating the obvious. Detroit does need to build up the density of its neighborhoods. The problem is you can't just wave a magic wand and the people are going to be there.

After all that, you might just want to focus on bringing light rail to the arterial streets ................Light-rail would make that trip more enjoyable. Well, sorry for going on a tangent since this thread is about mass transit, but you got to start some where.

The thing is [as far as I can tell], the people who ride public transit are not the same people as "build", nor pay market rates for housing that allow others to build / rebuild.

They are the economic class that needs constant financial support.

Rebuilding a city and providing busing are opposites, not synergies. [This wasn't the case before cars became common, but certainly since 1950]

Even the low income housing you keep hearing about [<50% AMI etc] only exists because we taxpayers are subsidizing the projects.

But if we have to subsidize their rent, and their utilities, and their phones, and their police, Fire etc [because they don't pay much if anything in taxes], and their healthcare, and their food [bridge card], and their transportation, then what's the point? Why bother building anything?

We need to get people to move into Detroit that build things, or at least fix things up and maintain them, and who start businesses, and have cars.

[Jason]

The thing is [as far as I can tell], the people who ride public transit are not the same people as "build", nor pay market rates for housing that allow others to build / rebuild.

They are the economic class that needs constant financial support.

Rebuilding a city and providing busing are opposites, not synergies. [This wasn't the case before cars became common, but certainly since 1950]

Even the low income housing you keep hearing about [<50% AMI etc] only exists because we taxpayers are subsidizing the projects.

But if we have to subsidize their rent, and their utilities, and their phones, and their police, Fire etc [because they don't pay much if anything in taxes], and their healthcare, and their food [bridge card], and their transportation, then what's the point? Why bother building anything?

We need to get people to move into Detroit that build things, or at least fix things up and maintain them, and who start businesses, and have cars.

That's only the case here because our public transportation is so bad that the only people who use it are either the people who have no choice or the small number of people that the routes serve reasonably well [[for example, people who live in Ferndale and work downtown). Everywhere else in the developed world, people of all backgrounds ride public transportation. And even people here, when they go to college or they go on vacation or go on business trips they ride public transit without any problem.

Public transit is just basic transportation infrastructure, and equating it with welfare is backwards. It's like someone from some African city without a water system saying that building one would be a waste of money because any respectable person has their water delivered to their house in jugs.

[Danny]

Detroit need to build up the density of its neighborhoods providing the residents living in those neighborhoods dependable mass transit systems to travel to downtown Detroit so that they won't have to use their cars. Detroiters will then support any retail downtown. Many cities that have great mass transit systems have highly dense neighborhoods that uses public transportation to get to their downtown areas.

There is an answer for the problem... Amalgamation of Detroit and suburbs.

And if The City of Detroit's population kept on reducing, Amalgamation.

[kuuma]

The thing is [as far as I can tell], the people who ride public transit
...
are the economic class that needs constant financial support.

I'm with Jason on this one. the culture here – and much of the USA outside the cherished few rail cities – is that "only poor people ride buses". that's what happens through decades of lobbying and incentivizing spread-out infrastructure development designed to force requirement of cars. an entire round of segregation took place through building in areas only accessible by car owners, not to mention the redlining.

any city with a well developed transit system sees all walks of life riding. in NYC, where the wealth inequality is far wider than here, the subway is sometimes referred to colloquially as a "great equalizer", where the entire economic and racial spectrums ride shoulder to shoulder.

[stasu1213]

That's only the case here because our public transportation is so bad that the only people who use it are either the people who have no choice or the small number of people that the routes serve reasonably well [[for example, people who live in Ferndale and work downtown). Everywhere else in the developed world, people of all backgrounds ride public transportation. And even people here, when they go to college or they go on vacation or go on business trips they ride public transit without any problem.

Public transit is just basic transportation infrastructure, and equating it with welfare is backwards. It's like someone from some African city without a water system saying that building one would be a waste of money because any respectable person has their water delivered to their house in jugs.

For years Detroiters were conditioned to look down in public transportation for Detroit was coined " The Motor Capital of the World " and only poor people uses public transportation. I remembered a bus driver had gotten into an argument with a passenger with a carribeabn accent or somewhat. The passenger quipped "At least I don't drive a bus" the bus driver answered "Well at least I don't ride one" which drew in laughter and roars from the other passengers. The mindset of Detroiters have to change about public transportation. Metro Detroiters had continued to commute to and from their Detroit jobs on SEMTA and later SMART for years since the 50s til present time. Many, whom were middle to upper middle class, found it convenient and cost efficient to use public transportation than to had driven their cars downtown and increasing wear and tear on their vehicles, using more gas a week, paying high parking cost, and dealing with rush hour traffic. Detroiters especially the middle income one looked at "catching the bus" is a step backwards and is for the misfortunate. Some planners and elected officials had and still have that mindset toward public transportation.

[Jason]

The simple answer is population density. Mass transit just doesn't work without it. Look at all of the world and US cities with effective mass transit. They all have multi-family housing, lots of it. The Detroit area is mainly single-family homes with abundant parking. If the Woodward corridor continues to develop more high-density housing, the Q-line might have a chance of succeeding. But a comprehensive Detroit public transit system is just a fantasy at this point.

The more you look at transit the more you see that places with good transit have good transit everywhere, regardless of density. In the rest of the developed world, even small cities have frequent and reliable bus systems that get you where you need to go.

Brecia, Italy has a metro. Their population is 200,000, the city is 35 square miles, and has a density of 5,700 people per square mile, which is less than Harper Woods, Eastpointe, Berkley, Oak Park, Hamtramck, and Lincoln Park. Greater downtown Detroit is 10,000-20,000 depending on the census tract. Brescia's central business district looks like a typical dense European city, but it's small and right around it is a bunch of industrial land, vacant land, railyards, a cemetry, and a fort, which dilutes the density. The rest of the city is patches of single family houses, and modernist housing developments, with parks and rural land in between. 7 of the 17 stations are directly adjacent to rural land.

But it's reliable, frequent, comfortable, fast, easy to get to and use, and the line goes where people want to go, so people ride it.

[Zacha341]

Thanks, we use those [Craigs and AT - not dealers]. I'd not buy a Focus or Sebring [neither are strong runners and the Ford Focus is uncomfortably small the way its interior clam-shells you].

Dodge Caravan's are often plagued with problems at the core-build and suspension level. But good to see prices are dropping!

These same cars were $2500+ private owner at the mid-point of COVID.

15+ Year old Toyota Camry's were going for 8K+ private owner sale if the miles were low! It was a mad-house.

Dealerships mark cars up a lot, and dispose of all the maintenance history. Try Craigslist or AutoTrader.

Focus $1,800 [asking]
https://detroit.craigslist.org/okl/c...627250034.html

Sebring $1,800
https://detroit.craigslist.org/wyn/c...624559559.html

Caravan $1,550
https://detroit.craigslist.org/mcb/c...621136137.html

Tahoe $1,500
https://detroit.craigslist.org/wyn/c...620164047.html

[Zacha341]

I think well thru the 70s, 80s onward many Detroiter's just like to DRIVE!

NYC has a more varied rider for their public transo options... that's for sure.

I grew up riding busses all about the city but once I got behind a wheel driving I rarely took busses. With civility heading ever-downward and crime and being older I don't want to be captive-audience to public transpo now. Uber and Lyft have impacted ridership as well. I've used those options a few times. Both [Uber and Lyft] have also reduced the percentage of younger people driving. Especially in other states. We really do love our cars in the D!

...Detroiters especially the middle income one looked at "catching the bus" is a step backwards and is for the misfortunate. Some planners and elected officials had and still have that mindset toward public transportation.

[Zacha341]

For sure New York pub-transpo ridership is eh-uh quite varied and well-heeled 'invigorating' to quote Al Pacino... who makes ridership a habit here - staying close to the pulse of the people as it were......

For years Detroiters were conditioned to look down in public transportation for Detroit was coined " The Motor Capital of the World " and only poor people uses public transportation...

[Zacha341]

Course we may indeed see a rise in public transpo use as auto-repos increase. Some purchased cars with insane finance charges of $700+ monthly due to high-pricing at the dealerships during COVID. Now with undeniable inflation settling-in, impacting food, utilities, mortgages, rent payments, gas prices and the car insurance too: repos are up, UP!

[Rocket]

I'm with Jason on this one. the culture here – and much of the USA outside the cherished few rail cities – is that "only poor people ride buses". that's what happens through decades of lobbying and incentivizing spread-out infrastructure development designed to force requirement of cars. an entire round of segregation took place through building in areas only accessible by car owners, not to mention the redlining.

any city with a well developed transit system sees all walks of life riding. in NYC, where the wealth inequality is far wider than here, the subway is sometimes referred to colloquially as a "great equalizer", where the entire economic and racial spectrums ride shoulder to shoulder.

Sure, sure, and I agree.

But with our lack of housing density [that we once had], mass transit will never be more than a last resort of the very poor here. NYC and a few others have much higher density, AND much higher home prices. So dense in fact that only the VERY rich can afford a real parking spot. So you'll find people living in $3 million penthouses that have never owned a car.

But even there, those people aren't the builders. The people building high-rises and re'habing old buildings are being chauffeured around in Range Rovers or helicopters.

Of course in any city there is a need for low income employees. They keep things working in the background. But they aren't who you should be designing a city around.

Having lots of mass transit to make things easier for the poor isn't going to do anything bring Detroit back.


Big crime reduction [greatly increased prison sentences], will make more people be willing to live in the city and make more businesses feel like opening here.

Then if and when you get enough of that, you'll have both the demand and the money to start lots of bus routes. Maybe you'll even have so many hundreds of millions left over and no poor left that we go bananas and do some light rail.

Fixing crime and schools comes first.

Most people and most businesses won't move in until those things are taken care of.

[casscorridor]

Buses simply aren't a comfortable or convenient way to get around a big metropolitan area. They are best for short trips in your local area. Regional rail is vastly superior as it's faster, more comfortable and stops are further apart.

Detroit never built a proper regional rail system, so getting across the city with public transit [[i.e. bus) is not a compelling option when it's much easier to drive.

Not to mention, the region is extremely sprawling with destinations scattered about rather than concentrated in a few area. And compared with the coasts, traffic is not a major problem. Driving from east side to west side is a breeze. A bus would be torturous. In dense cities with lots of traffic, trains are extremely convenient. Not so in Detroit.

The general view in the US is that public transit is a welfare program for those who can't drive rather than a mode of transport that must compete with other modes. The only exceptions are in a few coastal cities where transit actually does compete with driving for choice riders.

This all makes the prospects for public transit in Detroit very poor.

[stasu1213]

Governor Snyder and Mayor Bing had decided to contribute to the funding of the QLine development so that it could travel to 8 mile rd. The Governor decided to pull out State funding at the last minute putting a stop to the whole project. The People Mover was to travel northbound on Woodward to 8 mile but federal money were not being used and sat on for years until it was force to be used on a rail line that just go around in circles. This was during a time when the population Detroit was at 1000,000 with a work population in downtown/midtown Detroit. This current Governor is more concern about fixing the damn roads that are still under construction than having a mass transit system for not only metro Detroit but for the entire Southeastern Michigan region. The topic of mass transit wasn't even discussed during the gubernatorial debate last year. These elected officials are not serious of having good mass transit system in Detroit nor Michigan itself.

[pumphandle]

The general view in the US is that public transit is a welfare program for those who can't drive rather than a mode of transport that must compete with other modes. The only exceptions are in a few coastal cities where transit actually does compete with driving for choice riders.

That may have been mostly the case 30 years ago [[if we disregard Chicago, which is hardly a coastal city), but since that time, places like Salt Lake City, Minneapolis and Denver -- all successful inland metros -- have done significant construction of rail transit systems, along with bike infrastructure. Are they at European levels yet? No, but it's enough that many young, upwardly mobile people in those cities choose not to saddle themselves with cars.

And employers are starting to take notice when making location choices. One of the main reasons Amazon cited for not considering Detroit for its thousands of HQ2 jobs was the city's complete lack of meaningful rail transit.

If Michigan wants to reverse its economic misfortunes, it's going to have to invest heavily in rail infrastructure in its two largest metros. Period. Otherwise, people and jobs will keep leaving, and those in other states who have never dealt with the Michigan auto industry will keep wondering why the more gullible members of Michigan's aging population have allowed themselves to be duped by that industry's apologists into thinking that basic infrastructure is somehow a "welfare program," rather than a necessity like water pipes or working electricity.

[Rocket]

That may have been mostly the case 30 years ago........... Are they at European levels yet? No, but it's enough that many young, upwardly mobile people in those cities choose not to saddle themselves with cars.

Well, it would help if everybody stopped owning and maintaining houses. If we all move into concrete high-rise apartments, we'll have the housing density we need to make light-rail work, and at the same time we won't need cars to get to our homes, nor to maintain them and our yards. We could be like the Chinese and others, existing in a concrete box, without any handyman skills, and commuting every day by rail-car to our dead-end cubicle job working for the government.

If Michigan wants to reverse its economic misfortunes, it's going to have to invest heavily in rail infrastructure in its two largest metros. Period.

So you're saying that the MOST expensive, yet LEAST flexible means of transportation is the only cure for our financial woes?

Has that worked anywhere?

[kuuma]

but we have to lead with reasons for people to be here, not just hope for the still-hypothetical population rebound that might one day make the city dense enough. what sounds like a more successful long term plan for growing the city?

1. proactively building infrastructure – both transit and of course education – as part of appeal campaign that makes the case that it's worth living here

2. hoping that we somehow claw our way back to 1M people with our current trajectory of leaving it to the private sector do the heavy lifting of creating quid-pro-quo-laden measures like the Qline as an amenity for its own planned [affluent] developments like LCA and City Modern, and hope that the majority class of Detroiters who don't live in Corktown or Brush Park will eventually come up with some reason to ride said amenity in numbers so great that we can get the ridership data that might eventually convince you to build more for everyone else?

i just think its backwards to lead with "not enough people to justify this", then throw it to Uber to figure it out for us. idk what the heck anyone thinks they're gonna do besides sell us expensive taxi rides from an increasingly automated fleet.

[pumphandle]

Well, it would help if everybody stopped owning and maintaining houses. If we all move into concrete high-rise apartments, we'll have the housing density we need to make light-rail work, and at the same time we won't need cars to get to our homes, nor to maintain them and our yards. We could be like the Chinese and others, existing in a concrete box, without any handyman skills, and commuting every day by rail-car to our dead-end cubicle job working for the government.

Nobody is arguing that we should all live in concrete boxes and lose our skills, though I certainly haven't minded my time living in apartments. Places like Chicago and Boston have plenty of homes of all sizes. They even exist in Berlin, which Time Out Magazine says has the best transit in the world.

All I'm arguing for here is something that many parts of the world consider basic infrastructure. Imagine trying to convince Jeff Bezos to move his headquarters to a city without reliable electric power or a sewer system. That is what the state is currently up against, from the perspective of a lot of employers. If you like losing population, as Michigan did last year, by all means, keep the state's culture firmly centered on the auto industry at the expense of everything else. If not, then it might not be a good idea to keep doing the same thing and expecting different results.

I say this as a Michigander by birth who loves just about everything else about the state. Hopefully someday I can visit again without having to rent a car. Heck, if Detroit were to get shovels in the ground for even a single subway line that went outside of city limits, I would be looking at jobs in the city right away!