SMART's "unwritten policies and other pet-peeves.

[Tig3rzhark]

I would like to address some unwritten policies that aren't addressed publicly, yet when a passenger gets on a SMART bus in Detroit it is addressed by the SMART bus drivers.

SMART, when driving toward the city of Detroit, would only drop off passengers and drive away. When heading back toward the suburbs, they would gladly pick up in the city but, the first drop-off point would be the first stop outside of Detroit city limits.

This isn't posted on their website, or written down on a document. However, the word is passed on to the passengers by the bus drivers.

I feel that this policy in public transportation makes no sense....do you?

[professorscott]

I couldn't find this policy on SMART's web site either, and they ought to put it there, but this has been the policy for years. SMART and DDOT have worked it out this way such that DDOT serves passengers within the City and SMART serves passengers traveling into our out of Detroit.

There are exceptions. After 6 p.m. and on weekends, SMART will pick up or drop off at any stop in Detroit, and on some routes the buses will make local stops in some parts of Detroit, mainly where DDOT has no service along the same street.

It seems a bit odd to a new rider but you get used to it. One more reason it would make more sense to have a regional authority.

[Tig3rzhark]

I couldn't find this policy on SMART's web site either, and they ought to put it there, but this has been the policy for years. SMART and DDOT have worked it out this way such that DDOT serves passengers within the City and SMART serves passengers traveling into our out of Detroit.

There are exceptions. After 6 p.m. and on weekends, SMART will pick up or drop off at any stop in Detroit, and on some routes the buses will make local stops in some parts of Detroit, mainly where DDOT has no service along the same street.

It seems a bit odd to a new rider but you get used to it. One more reason it would make more sense to have a regional authority.

I would have to agree. However, as for the regional transit authority, is there a chance that LBP would be kicked, voted out of office, or resign in order for that to ever happen?

[313WX]

I would have to agree. However, as for the regional transit authority, is there a chance that LBJ would be kicked, voted out of office, or resign in order for that to ever happen?

Do you mean LBP? LBJ's been dead for nearly 40 years.

[professorscott]

I would have to agree. However, as for the regional transit authority, is there a chance that LBP would be kicked, voted out of office, or resign in order for that to ever happen?

That isn't necessary. When the legislature proposed an RTA in 2009 Mr. Patterson's deputy Jerry Poisson wrote a detailed letter giving his [[and therefore, presumably, Mr. Patterson's) objections to specific details of the proposal; however, his letter did not express opposition to the notion of an RTA.

I think if Mayor Bing and the three County Executives got together they could hammer out a framework for a workable solution which the state legislature might then be able to pass. But if you script the details in such a way that one of the counties involved isn't in favor, you're dead before you even get going.

So I think, in the current environment, an RTA is possible, we just have to see if anyone involved is willing to make the first move.

[dtowncitylover]

This is not true. On several of the route maps I have from the Royal Oak Transit Center, the rule of drop off/pick up is made very clear.

[Proslack]

i think you misunderstand the policies. There policy is to not compete for the same passengers as ddot. They will pick up passengers headed to the burbs, ddot does not go there. Headed the opposite direction in to the city, they will not pick u up in the city to carry you further into the city [[this is based on time of day and is the job of ddot). Weekends you can get on and off the bus whenever u want. They have an agreement with ddot not to compete for incity travelers during rush hour.
This policy has been in place for ages and is generally fully understood by anyone, such as myself, that catches both systems. I know when and where I can catch either system with no confusion on my part about the policies.

[Augustiner]

i think you misunderstand the policies. There policy is to not compete for the same passengers as ddot. They will pick up passengers headed to the burbs, ddot does not go there. Headed the opposite direction in to the city, they will not pick u up in the city to carry you further into the city [[this is based on time of day and is the job of ddot). Weekends you can get on and off the bus whenever u want. They have an agreement with ddot not to compete for incity travelers during rush hour.
This policy has been in place for ages and is generally fully understood by anyone, such as myself, that catches both systems. I know when and where I can catch either system with no confusion on my part about the policies.

I think we all understand the rationale for the policy, and it's true that the rule isn't particularly inconvenient or problematic for people who ride both systems regularly and understand how they work. The point is, for riders who are unfamiliar with the system, it's just one more weird, arcane rule that they will most likely have to learn about the hard way.

Transit in Detroit is significantly less user-friendly than in most other places I've been, in that people who ride the system are expected to already know how to ride it, and that creates a barrier to entry that prevents both DDOT and SMART from attracting new riders. If what we want is a system that is only used by people who absolutely have no other choice, then maybe that isn't a problem, but I don't think we'd be investing in things like light rail on Woodward if that were the case.

[laphoque]

I'm not trying to defend SMART's terrible website, but I think the reason they don't state that more prominently is because Detroit is technically not part of the SMART system. We're an opt-out community. So as it's really a Detroit-specific policy they only list it on the relevant bus schedules. If you look at the actual printed schedule the policy is on there.

On the other hand because they don't provide digital copies of the printed bus schedules, in effect, there is no online record of the policy.

[CLAUDE G]

I guess the SMART bus aint so smart

[bc_n_dtown]

I'm not trying to defend SMART's terrible website, but I think the reason they don't state that more prominently is because Detroit is technically not part of the SMART system. We're an opt-out community.

Actually, Detroit is not an "opt-out" in regards to SMART, it was never included in the SEMTA reorganization legislation that created SMART back in January 1989.

The policy in discussion originates from a City of Detroit ordinance which forbids transit operations by other agencies other than the city's own transportation department....unless pre-approved by the city. It's basically been on the books as far back as the 1920s.

The policy was tested during the late 1920s after the city tried to outlaw nearly 1,000 jitneys from its streets, which were then the DSR's biggest competitor. In 1927, the state supreme court basically ruled the city had the [[home-rule) right to restrict the use of its thoroughfares for profit-making ventures. Since 1932 the city's transit department has had sole public transit rights within the city after the last remaining private company's license to operate in the city was revoked. Meanwhile, all suburban based companies had to follow the same policy that SMART has to follow today.

During the Archer administration that policy was relaxed somewhat to encourage regional cooperation and joint-route operation. But that cooperative effort fell apart after SMART decided in 1995 to seek a three-county property tax from 'only' suburban residents, leaving Detroit out. The inclusion of Detroit [[which Archer wanted) would have increased the levy and probably would have lessened the chance for approval. As a result, Detroit taxpayers do not contribute to the SMART system.

Although it might not make sense to the bus rider but territorial rights still exist. Not only would it be financially foolish for the city to allow another agency to fully operate in competition with its buses, but it would also be financially foolish for SMART to provide service to residents [[i.e., Detroiters) who do not financially support their operation. Since bus fares play a small role in the equation, it boils down to where you receive your largest tax subsidies. Only a regionalized system would rectify this situation.

[DetroitPlanner]

I never had an issue with the 260 or 265. I would get on those buses in Warrendale and take them to Downtown.

[laphoque]

@bc_n_dtwn What you say seems plausible. I think I agree with you more than myself before having read your post.

I never had an issue with the 260 or 265. I would get on those buses in Warrendale and take them to Downtown.

I used to take the 125 on Fort Street to Taylor and back a few times a week and it depended on the bus driver if they let you off in the city or not. Even though the bus only comes once every 45 min to an hour they still would sometimes refuse to let people off in the city without arguing for a few minutes. Other bus drivers were cooler.

[Proslack]

I think we all understand the rationale for the policy, and it's true that the rule isn't particularly inconvenient or problematic for people who ride both systems regularly and understand how they work. The point is, for riders who are unfamiliar with the system, it's just one more weird, arcane rule that they will most likely have to learn about the hard way.

Transit in Detroit is significantly less user-friendly than in most other places I've been, in that people who ride the system are expected to already know how to ride it, and that creates a barrier to entry that prevents both DDOT and SMART from attracting new riders. If what we want is a system that is only used by people who absolutely have no other choice, then maybe that isn't a problem, but I don't think we'd be investing in things like light rail on Woodward if that were the case.

My suggestion is to take a moment of your time to research how the bus system works before catching it, it's not rocket science and it's not particularly difficult. The city of Cleveland has one bus system, you pay upon your departure from the bus based on the distance traveled. Doing a bunch of math and looking at maps to measure distance is far more inconvenient that figuring out where buses stop.

[Proslack]

I think we all understand the rationale for the policy, and it's true that the rule isn't particularly inconvenient or problematic for people who ride both systems regularly and understand how they work. The point is, for riders who are unfamiliar with the system, it's just one more weird, arcane rule that they will most likely have to learn about the hard way.

Transit in Detroit is significantly less user-friendly than in most other places I've been, in that people who ride the system are expected to already know how to ride it, and that creates a barrier to entry that prevents both DDOT and SMART from attracting new riders. If what we want is a system that is only used by people who absolutely have no other choice, then maybe that isn't a problem, but I don't think we'd be investing in things like light rail on Woodward if that were the case.

The policy is listed on bus schedules, my suggestion is to read it. So many problems could be solved by reading. Reading is fundamental

[Proslack]

Actually, Detroit is not an "opt-out" in regards to SMART, it was never included in the SEMTA reorganization legislation that created SMART back in January 1989.

The policy in discussion originates from a City of Detroit ordinance which forbids transit operations by other agencies other than the city's own transportation department....unless pre-approved by the city. It's basically been on the books as far back as the 1920s.

The policy was tested during the late 1920s after the city tried to outlaw nearly 1,000 jitneys from its streets, which were then the DSR's biggest competitor. In 1927, the state supreme court basically ruled the city had the [[home-rule) right to restrict the use of its thoroughfares for profit-making ventures. Since 1932 the city's transit department has had sole public transit rights within the city after the last remaining private company's license to operate in the city was revoked. Meanwhile, all suburban based companies had to follow the same policy that SMART has to follow today.

During the Archer administration that policy was relaxed somewhat to encourage regional cooperation and joint-route operation. But that cooperative effort fell apart after SMART decided in 1995 to seek a three-county property tax from 'only' suburban residents, leaving Detroit out. The inclusion of Detroit [[which Archer wanted) would have increased the levy and probably would have lessened the chance for approval. As a result, Detroit taxpayers do not contribute to the SMART system.

Although it might not make sense to the bus rider but territorial rights still exist. Not only would it be financially foolish for the city to allow another agency to fully operate in competition with its buses, but it would also be financially foolish for SMART to provide service to residents [[i.e., Detroiters) who do not financially support their operation. Since bus fares play a small role in the equation, it boils down to where you receive your largest tax subsidies. Only a regionalized system would rectify this situation.

thank you for fully explaining this sir. The policy is on the schedule, also you may notice that certain bus stops do not have stop times listed, this is because they do not stop there at those times. It's quite simple to understand. I would assume tourists and visitors pick up schedules before venturing off on a strange cities bus system

[trotwood]

I was just on a Smart bus and was told about an 'unwritten' policy by the driver. Sometimes I drive to the market. Sometimes I take Smart[[or DDOT if I need to go into the city). Whether in the car or on the bus I take one of those portable grocery carts,or as a friend dubbed them "The Granny Grocery Getter". Having the cart makes it convienant when I'm taking packages into the house. If I have the car,all I need do is load the cart once and take my things upstairs. This saves me from making multiple trips up or leaving things in the car. If I'm on the bus the cart saves my arms from giving out while trying to carry them to the bus stop. It's also very handy for chores around the house. Anyway,today I get on the Smart @10&Van Dyke with the cart[[as I've done numerous times since Nov '11). I say hello to the driver. Instead of a "hello" he told me,rather gruffly that Smart has changed it's policy regarding carts like mine. He says the carts have to be able to fold during the ride and cannot block the aisle or door. Valid points that I can understand. I asked him where on the bus was that policy posted or where on the website could I find it. He said it wasn't posted on the buses or the website. He then went on to warn me that on busier routes than the 10mile a driver might refuse a person transport if they had a cart with groceries,or other items,that prevent the cart from folding flat.
Now I can see the reasoning behind the policy but two things bother me about it.
First,it should be clearly posted[[I pointed that out to the driver btw) both on the Smart website and on the coaches for riders to see. Secondly if I or anyone else has one of these GGGs and can move to the rear of the coach or angle it in such a way that it's not an obstacle to other riders what's the big deal? What will those who don't have cars[[or family&friends to catch rides with)do for transport to the market or other errands?
Sorry I went on&on but that's it. That's my contribution to the "Unwritten policy" thread.

[Augustiner]

The policy is listed on bus schedules, my suggestion is to read it. So many problems could be solved by reading. Reading is fundamental

I already know how to ride the bus, but thanks for the suggestion all the same.

[thecarl]

The policy is listed on bus schedules, my suggestion is to read it. So many problems could be solved by reading. Reading is fundamental

That's pretty funny, since the thread author is referring to "unwritten policies."

I have never seen any driver implement the "unwritten policies" as described in the original post, but for one exception: the 445/475 Limited [[express) routes on Woodward. The 450/460 routes also service the same stretch of Woodward, and are local routes. The buses stop everywhere, for anyone. However, the 445/475 routes are specifically designated as limited routes, and operate as [[basically described) in the original post. Reducing the number of stops expedites the long trip up Woodward, especially to some of the further-north Park-N-Ride stations, which are quite popular. Riders should not be inconvenienced by this though, since the 450/460 lines cover the same routes and are heavily serviced.

[edited to amend 440/450 to 450/460. I feel like Mr. Mom now.]