Toni Griffin says the Detroit area needs to rethink transportation

**iheartthed** · November-12-10, 12:28 PM

Rethink Transportation

Detroit is the only metro region in the U.S. without a metro transportation authority. If we begin to think about the role of transportation in the region differently, how we move from place to place becomes a crucial question. Efficiency — and the idea that we shouldn't have to rely on a car so much — becomes part of the question. I like to think of Detroit not just as the home of automobile innovation. It's the home of transportation innovation.

— Toni Griffin, urban-planning consultant for the city of Detroit

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...#ixzz155d6YUxU

As I've said before, proposal to save Detroit is a non-starter unless transportation policy is central to the discussion. She's the person hired specifically with the task of restructuring the city into a sustainable form, and she has named transportation as the most pressing issue. If they cannot do that then they will not save Detroit. End of story. Good luck.

**d'oh** · November-12-10, 12:43 PM

Great!! An actual smart person talking...

**R8RBOB** · November-12-10, 03:10 PM

Not everyone uses a car to get around. Some people like to ride a bike or take a train or perhaps they use one of these to get around but in the minds of some they believe everyone has a car so why need public transportation?

The truth is people from outside the region come here and they have a cultural shock seeing that the only way other than waiting for the bus is to have a car. The cabs are a joke. I was in Birmingham and I caught a cab to Roseville. Final cost: 50.00. What a joke. [[at least in Detroit, the cabs are charging .20, this cab was charging .36) Metro Detroit should have a choice if they want to drive or take the train like they do in New York and Chicago. .

**Danny** · November-12-10, 03:27 PM

Detroit is called the Motor City where we mass produce the automobile. Without it Detroit would be just a stove making, Canadian foriegn and Great Lakes trading and music making city with a slow growing population of 450,000. The city proposed a subway system but's its dead. DARTA was proposed and its DEAD! Now a light rail system is proposed on Woodward Ave. and its still in the bureuacratic desk. We used to interurban railways, then it became dead when people start driving the automobile. So it could take 100 years and Detroit still and will NOT have a decent metropolitan transit system.

**Planner3357** · November-12-10, 03:48 PM

Transit is key to the future of the city. Lets get the LRT going and go from there.

**Meddle** · November-12-10, 04:01 PM

Kinda like Back To The Future isn't it? If rail and busses were so beneficial, why did the streetcars fail all over the country with the exception of SF where they're more of a tourist attraction than mass transit?

It's been done. It didn't work.

**Planner3357** · November-12-10, 04:05 PM

They didn't fail, they were replaced by people wanting to use their own modes of transportation. And, the automotive companies bought up the streetcar companies and shut them all down to benefit themselves.

Bearinabox · November-12-10, 04:09 PM

Originally Posted by Meddle

Kinda like Back To The Future isn't it? If rail and busses were so beneficial, why did the streetcars fail all over the country with the exception of SF where they're more of a tourist attraction than mass transit?

It's been done. It didn't work.

What do you mean, "fail?" They were eliminated as part of a series of public policy decisions to redesign our cities to accommodate more cars. What Toni Griffin and others are suggesting is that we start making public policy decisions that will redesign our cities to make them more habitable for humans, as they were prior to the auto-centric redesigns of the postwar era.

**DetroitPlanner** · November-12-10, 04:30 PM

A transit authority is far more than just light rail or streetcars. It will mean a better coordinated system. Right now we have two systems competing against each other along the major routes. This is nonsensical regardless of mode. Streetcars ended over 50 years ago, we are a very different city with different needs today. The fact of the matter is that streetcars were inefficient then or they would never have gone away. Gas was cheap, buses provided more flexibility, people did not fight the loss of streetcars.

We need to use this as an opportunity to build a coordinated system that moves people efficiently regardless of what mode may be used on what road. If not, shame on us.

**iheartthed** · November-12-10, 04:37 PM

Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner

Gas was cheap, buses provided more flexibility, people did not fight the loss of streetcars.

From what I read, streetcars were eliminated under the guise of construction improvements... Once the construction was done the city decided not to bring the streetcars back.

**DetroitPlanner** · November-12-10, 06:38 PM

Originally Posted by iheartthed

From what I read, streetcars were eliminated under the guise of construction improvements... Once the construction was done the city decided not to bring the streetcars back.

Can you cite this? I have never heard that arguement I am interested in learning more.

**Dougla** · November-12-10, 06:43 PM

Even a broken clock reads 6PM twice a day.

**detroitbob** · November-12-10, 11:39 PM

Apparently some folks are criticizing Toni Griffin, urban-planning consultant for the city of Detroit, because she is a "outsider"...the age old problem here, no one from outside the area can tell "us" what to do...sadly no one in charge knows "what to do". See comments in the Time mag finale of Assignment Detroit. Talk about a circular firing squad. Quick, move those deck chairs to the other side...that'll right the ship! Opps, water now over the decks...

**Meddle** · November-13-10, 12:20 AM

Originally Posted by Planner3357

They didn't fail, they were replaced by people wanting to use their own modes of transportation.

Which means they failed. People drove their own cars cutting ridership of the public systems. No riders, no money to operate.

That mentality hasn't changed. How many people ride buses today? Not enough to support the system which is why so many routes have been cut. How many people even carpool? Some, for sure, but no doubt less than 30% or so of commuters. SEMTA used to have Park & Ride lots in some suburbs. The lots I passed were never more than half full.

In my days there, I couldn't use them. They didn't go where I needed to go. In addition, my work hours and locations varied and I might have to travel out of town during the day for work. Absolutely needed my car.

Bearinabox · November-13-10, 01:07 AM

Originally Posted by Meddle

Which means they failed. People drove their own cars cutting ridership of the public systems. No riders, no money to operate.

That mentality hasn't changed. How many people ride buses today? Not enough to support the system which is why so many routes have been cut.

I don't think you understand how this works. Farebox revenue is something like 14% of DDOT's operations budget. Most of the operating revenue comes out of the City's general fund, much like funding for police, fire, public lighting, or any other city department. As you may have heard, the general fund is not exactly flush with cash right now, and the folks at city hall are under pressure to balance the budget. One of the ways they do this is to reduce the amount of money each department gets from the general fund. When DPD's budget gets cut, they lay off officers or close police stations. When DDOT's budget gets cut, they reduce service or eliminate routes.

If ridership increases, as it did in '08 when gas was $5 a gallon and the economy was going to shit, that just increases demand and puts pressure on the system. Politically, that might make it harder for city hall to cut the Transportation budget that year, but if the general fund is insolvent something still has to give. Of course, cutting bus service is an unpopular proposition no matter what--the public meetings on the last round of cuts were absolutely jammed. Maybe you don't ride the system, and maybe nobody you know rides it, but it's like the "nobody shops at Northland" thing.

**professorscott** · November-13-10, 09:08 AM

I'm always amused by the logical fallacy that appears on these threads from time to time, of the form "I don't use X and my friends don't use X either, therefore society ought not to pay for X".

Hey, all of you deep thinkers out there subjecting us to such nonsense, I have an idea! One of the HUGE expenses of the region is maintenance of roads. If we had fewer roads to maintain, we would have a lot of money to spend on other things. Now, let's say you live on Bayberry Street, just to make up a name. Now, I don't ever drive on Bayberry Street, and neither do any of my friends. In fact, I would guess that way less than 1/10 of 1% of the region's population has EVER driven on Bayberry Street. So let's tear out Bayberry Street and plant grass and trees there; clearly the region doesn't need that road.

**stasu1213** · November-13-10, 09:42 AM

I still say that the Oil, Rubber, and Automobile Companies still have there hands in the back pockets or these elected officials in Detroit. Find out what entitiy is funding a candidate's campaign when that candidate runs for office. If it any of the companies above then you know who that candidate is going to cater to. The politician will get into office saying that he/she is going to help get the ball rolling for light rail and mass transit but go behind the scenes to do everything in his/her's power to sabatoge the development of it. Ground was suppose to be broken last year for the light rail up Woodward from Jefferson to New Center. No signs of any ground breaking in late 2010. The sabatoge; Light Rail that would go from Hart Plaza to Eight Mile Rd by way of Woodward. Study after study will keep the light rail idea on the back burner for years until the idea is tossed due to some budget issue or something. The people mover could had went up to the New Center area and back. The was too much for the corporate entity who controlled their puppet politician at that time.

**professorscott** · November-13-10, 10:41 AM

The Woodward light rail snag is simpler, and no cynicism is required. Matt Cullen put it best, and I'm paraphrasing: We thought we could do the first 3.4 miles with private money without going through the Federal approval process... but we can't.

So what was at one point called M1 Rail has joined forces with the City to get Federal approval for the whole process, which requires some time consuming steps during which no work appears to be getting done. Right now they are preparing the Environmental Impact Statement, and they can't break down until that is finished and accepted.

The essential, overarching answer to the question "why does our transit suck" has nothing to do with the car companies anymore. Arguably they accelerated the decommissioning of the light rail we once had, but that happened all over North America. What separates us from the pack is that since the mid 1980s, every other big city has built regional transit and we haven't. That's just because we don't have a region, just a bunch of communities each acting parochially and without the region's interest at heart. Home rule is what's killing us.

**canuck** · November-13-10, 12:22 PM

Originally Posted by professorscott

The essential, overarching answer to the question "why does our transit suck" has nothing to do with the car companies anymore. Arguably they accelerated the decommissioning of the light rail we once had, but that happened all over North America. What separates us from the pack is that since the mid 1980s, every other big city has built regional transit and we haven't. That's just because we don't have a region, just a bunch of communities each acting parochially and without the region's interest at heart. Home rule is what's killing us.

The advantage in getting a solid team leading a metro transit commission is that it would act as only one of the agencies responsible for transit in the region. By that I mean the oversight and the friction necessary to implement a comprehensive system is necessary between a number of players/deciders. I can imagine a regional effort to tender contracts for locomotive and rolling stock to be built in Michigan. General Motors was a major purveyor of locomotives not long ago, and Budd of Troy which is now owned by Thyssen-Krupp of Germany could supply coaches...
Even international purveyors have to deal with american content and the multi billion dollar reach plus the availability of an experienced workforce makes this all the more feasible.

lilpup · November-13-10, 04:34 PM

Just an FYI relevant to the subject - the price of a discounted MTA [[subway & bus) pass in NYC is being raised to over $100 per month.

**stasu1213** · November-13-10, 05:02 PM

Still, another reason why Detroit doesn't have light rail or any type of transit. The regions cant get together on this. There are many who are in different regions want light rail to happen. You also have "paid agitators" in different regions who spout the us against them philosophy causing money to go back to the government as it was in the 70s. Bing and others are spewing the downsizing of Detroit which might not cause for light rail in any part of the smaller downsized city.

**canuck** · November-13-10, 05:18 PM

Originally Posted by lilpup

Just an FYI relevant to the subject - the price of a discounted MTA [[subway & bus) pass in NYC is being raised to over $100 per month.

That is dirt cheap. When you think some people buy million dollar parking spaces in condo buildings in New York City. These folks dont use the subway much maybe but I know that Bloomberg uses the system frequently.

lilpup · November-13-10, 05:23 PM

That might work in NYC, canuck, but it will never work here.

**canuck** · November-13-10, 06:30 PM

Depends how much you spend on your jalopy in a month, Lilpup. If you dont count your time and change your oil or winter tires by yourself then you might think its expensive to spew a hundred bucks on a bus and subway pass. I dont. I rarely use public transit by the way, I'm in a suburb too and the type of work I do requires a car so I can haul my tools and every day is a different destination. But if you work in an office downtown and can be transported by suburban rail, [[I have a station down my street); then it is worth avoiding the traffic hassle into the city. Parking in Detroit maybe cheap but here its 3 bucks an hour and the parking meters are digital so that if someone leaves before their time is up; you cant take advantage of it because the parking police can detect where the spot was vacated. The cost of parking lots are also outrageous, so its all a matter of priorities, the city is still too crowded with cars, and the more people use transit like in NewYork
then the service will grow with demand. New Yorkers walk more, are trimmer than in any other city in the US. A hundred bucks is dirt cheap for a system with 500 subway stations and bus transfer thrown in. Unbeatable. That's like buying a GMC Suburban and a Lincoln Navigator for a dime. Except you will probably get home sooner by rail than in your car and you can read a couple of novels a week and still be ahead a few bucks.

**canuck** · November-13-10, 06:49 PM

Originally Posted by Meddle

Kinda like Back To The Future isn't it? If rail and busses were so beneficial, why did the streetcars fail all over the country with the exception of SF where they're more of a tourist attraction than mass transit?

It's been done. It didn't work.

Toronto's streetcars were never pulled from service and they were sturdier and less touristy than SF's. Toronto is pretty flat apart from the ravines like Don Valley. San Francisco's system is subject to the hilly terrain and is more of a touring service as opposed to citizen commuter service. You can argue that all major cities got rid of their streetrail because buses were more supple than a fixed rail system. It made sense to everybody then, but there are a lot of reasons to provide that service again because technological advances make it more attractive. I visited a railway museum in a suburb on the south shore of Montreal [[St Constant) a coupla months ago. I checked out old Montreal and Toronto tramways from the early 1900's to the 40's. The older ones were made of wood and had wicker seats...

No transit solution is without its problems. You can be sitting in a bus and it can break down, the same for subways and commuter rail. I would rather get stuck in a deficient bus and know another one is on its way, than be stuck in my car on a freeway.