Balanced Transportation

Although this is still a state dominated by the automobile-- dominated in the economy, in the way we sprawl, in the way we think-- several trends are popping up to hint that things may be changing. Yesterday I wrote about the HOV lanes that will appear next week on Michigan Avenue. That also includes a joint operation between SMART, DDOT, and MDOT. Amazing! And last week came the announcement that Grand Rapids has nailed down millions of dollars from the federal government for a transit "New Start" operation, which will be a bus rapid transit system that will run south from downtown Grand Rapids along Division Avenue. That will be the first new transit program in the state funded by the federal government. And, it appears that by taking this funding, it will open the doors to funding for future projects all across the state.

I continue to believe that the biggest transportation issue in Michigan, and specifically Metro Detroit, is that we don't have a balanced transportation system. The vast majority of suburban residents drive as their only means of transportation. Figures from the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG) show that in some suburbs, as many as 95 percent of residents drive to work alone. In the region as a whole, 85 percent drive alone, nine percent carpool, and two percent use public transit. Virtually no one in the region walks to work (again, only two percent), and in some areas, the number of people who use public transportation is counted in dozens rather than as a percentage. Several upscale suburbs have opted out of the SMART bus system, thinking that the added tax burden, which would amount to less than $50 per year for the average home, only supplements low-income people who use the system to come into the community. Those riders add up to about a quarter-million riders per week on SMART. The separate Detroit bus system serves many more riders--nearly 40 million riders per year--and a much larger percentage of DDOT riders rely entirely on busses for their transportation. There is no commuter rail system, even though that would serve primarily white-collar commuters. There is no rapid transit at all. In the meantime, our roads are falling apart as construction efforts are spread more and more thinly to reach the ever-expanding boundaries of what we now call the metropolitan region. The region is so spread out that using slow bus systems makes it a daunting challenge to travel from one side of the area to the other. So, it is no surprise that most people choose to use their own individual car to commute. Still, the policies put in place by the state Department of Transportation local governments have determined the growth patterns, and therefore the transit options available to us. Look at the projects outlined by MDOT, (no transit projects are listed) and look at the transportation data provided by SEMCOG, and you'll see what is important to our leaders. As of this writing, virtually all of the information was about highways, traffic counts, traffic bridges, road conditions-- and only a minor amount about transit or other transportation options. As recently as SEMCOG's latest version of the 2030 regional transportation plan, highways and automobile transportation were essentially all that got serious attention. All of this as oil hits $100 per barrel, and SEMCOG lists hot topics on their site such as the "dilemma" of transit funding, and the need to address environmental issues brought on by automobile pollution. Thank goodness that SEMCOG and DDOT are each studying transit alternatives in two projects: commuter rail to Metro Airport and Ann Arbor; and light rail on one line in Detroit and perhaps Dearborn.

Compare our situation to that in Seattle. They have a much more fully-developed bus system (even though it is operated by several different entities), bus and light rail tunnels under downtown that allow more rapid movement around the area; free bus fares within downtown; commuter rail to the north and south; two streetcar lines, one along the waterfront and a new line in the South Lake Union area just north of downtown (100,000 riders in the first six weeks); a new light rail system set to open next year between downtown and SeaTac Airport; another light rail extension that is about to begin construction toward the University District and north; and now a bus rapid transit system that will serve the West Seattle neighborhood. In addition, they have bike lane networks and have provided for pedestrian uses in many places. They also have an extensive car and pedestrian ferry system run by the state, serving spots in the city and the outlying islands communities. Not all of these elements have come without a fight--a monorail system between downtown and the Ballard neighborhood to the north was voted out of existence when costs began to spiral upward. They look at their commuter auto traffic as a real problem, and have found many ways to offer alternative transit, each of which seems to be appropriate to the neighborhood it serves. Only nine of 18 transportation projects in Seattle this year are specifically street or highway projects. The rest are trails, transit, or other kinds of projects.

Seattle and Detroit are different, with different densities, different patterns of development, different industries, and certainly different needs. But Detroit should be able to find a balance that will work for us, just as they are working to develop a balance that works for Seattle.

A report released yesterday showed that Michigan's University Research Corridor, comprised of Detroit's Wayne State University, the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, and Michigan State University in East Lansing, accounted for over 68,000 new high-tech jobs in the state last year. That's in the first year of its existence. The three member schools are the major research-level universities in the state. The Detroit Free Press wrote about it here. The URC says on the website for an upcoming conference:

A knowledge-based economy may be the best hope for long-term economic recovery by states like Michigan that were built upon manufacturing as the core industry. To realize this hope, the conference organizers believe that universities can and should play an important role in building such a knowledge-based economy.

Check another article in the Seattle Press-Intelligencer site about jobs added by Microsoft in Seattle:

Microsoft's move bodes well for the city, said Bill McSherry, economic development director of the Puget Sound Regional Council.

"If anything, it reinforces the notion that our economy is going to grow as fast as we can supply well-educated and well-trained people," McSherry said. "If there's one thing we need to continue to work on, it's more and better education" to help companies fill these kinds of jobs.

These two examples underscore the basic truth that more support for education is the best way to build a base for improved economies. The big difference between the two regions is that leaders in the Puget Sound area actually believe it. In Michigan we have the state legislature making power plays and practicing their political posturing for power at the expense of growth.

All we have to do is look at the numbers: we've lost manufacturing jobs by the truckload in Michigan, but thousands of desirable high-tech jobs have begun to replace them, diversifying the economy and building for the future. We educate outstanding scholars here in Michigan, but the status quo continues wallow in an outmoded view of the world... and that is what forces our young people to take their top-notch education to other states, where they are snapped up to build new economies. The legislature needs to support all education, including the institutions that provide basic research, and those that educate people who will work in the new economy. We know what needs to be done; now the Michigan legislature needs to follow through and fund our schools and colleges.