Active Transportation

This news story popped up today:

New research illustrates the health benefits of regular biking, walking or taking public transportation to work, school or shopping. Researchers found a link between "active transportation" and less obesity in 17 industrialized countries across Europe, North America and Australia. "Countries with the highest levels of active transportation generally had the lowest obesity rates," authors David Bassett of the University of Tennessee and John Pucher of Rutgers University conclude. Americans, with the highest rate of obesity, were the least likely to walk, cycle or take mass transit, according to the study in a recent issue of the Journal of Physical Activity and Health. The study relied on each country's own travel and health data.

Only 12% use active transportation in the United States — 9% walk, 1% ride a bike and 2% take a bus or train — while a quarter to a third are obese, the study said.

By comparison, 67% of commuters in Latvia, 62% in Sweden and 52% in the Netherlands either walk, bike or use mass transit. Latvia's obesity rate is 14%, the Netherlands' is 11% and Sweden's is 9%.

This seems to be common sense... but someone has to "prove" every little fact when it is used to create policy, or the opposition will cry, "not true!"

Mystery solved! I always wondered what the deal was with that strange interchange on I-94 (Ford Freeway) at Woodward in Detroit. Eastbound, for instance, you go under Woodward, then shoot off on a bit of a siding, which continues east, but to exit, you go onto John R Street and circle back to Woodward. What were they thinking when they built that?

Well, this article and picture answer the question. There were originally stairs leading down from Woodward to the freeway, where pedestrians could link to a planned rapid bus system that was supposed to run on the expressways. Check it out here.

So the idea was that the rapid busses would pull off of the freeway onto the siding, pick up passengers, then re-enter the highway. That would make too much sense. It never happened. Somewhere along the way the stairs disappeared, and we were just left with a crazy interchange. That sounds like the downtown People Mover, which was designed to be the end section of a rapid rail system that ran out the spoke avenues from downtown. The rail system was never built, so the PM is left to circle endlessly, shuttling people around downtown in its counter-clockwise circuit. I'm beginning to see a pattern here.

Transit again

In a recent podcast of the Smart City radio program, a researcher from the National Housing Institute, Alan Mallach, discussed a new report he recently published on the factors that help revitalize neighborhoods. The way it is done, he says, is to increase the demand for housing, and that is accomplished by adding or changing neighborhood features that make it desirable. The number one factor: adding a light rail station. This feature will change a neighborhood more quickly than anything else. He cited two examples, such as the increase in development that has happened in East Los Angeles after they announced a new light rail line to the area. Transit is part of neighborhood amenities, one of six factors that affect the housing market. The entire report is available in .pdf format here.

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 Couple of Museums

During the holiday break my wife and I decided to finally visit the newly-remodeled Detroit Institute of Arts on January 2. We are members of the Founders' Society, so we have free entry, but it turned out to be a poor choice of dates. Midtown was packed! There was absolutely no place to park-- anywhere. Even the parking structure at Wayne State two blocks away was full, since classes had apparently started again, and there wasn't an on-street spot anywhere. The Science Center was jammed with the Bodies exhibit (held over for the last eight months, at least). It was a nice problem to find, I guess, but frustrating, none the less. We ended up driving to Dearborn and visiting the Arab American Museum, which we had never visited before, so the day wasn't a loss. Actually, the Arab American Museum is actually a little gem of a place on Michigan Avenue in east Dearborn, right across from Dearborn City Hall. They have a really interesting collection of silver jewelry from around the Arab world, and a multimedia display that chronicles the history of Arab immigration to the United States. That part of the museum just reinforced in my mind the senselessness of the anti-immigration sentiment we see so often these days. The pattern is the same one the US has witnessed for centuries: hard-working people immigrate to our country, and their children work hard, study, are successful, and become significant contributors to our society. Why would we want to keep them out? Everyone is enriched by their contributions and by the energy they inject into our communities.

We ended up trying the DIA again on Saturday. It was, again, extremely busy in that part of town, but we decided to use the valet parking so finding a spot wasn't an issue. The museum was great. The art is presented in a totally different way, thematically rather than chronologically or by artist (with some exceptions). So, for instance, modern art isn't divided by decade, but abstract expressionism is together, installations are together, and themes are developed as you walk through. Decorative art and furniture are included with the artwork to give a sense of how these themes played out in other art forms. Landscapes are presented together, and a flow of how they changed over decades is pointed out. The new, larger gallery space allowed them to put out lots of works that weren't displayed before. There was much more African and Native American art, which was really interesting, and plenty more. I saw a Stuart portrait of George Washington that I don't recall seeing before, and there were several American Impressionist paintings that seemed new to me. I highly recommend a visit, or two. We just did a quick run-through, which is not how I like to visit, so I'm sure we'll be going back soon for another look.

As we left, and we waited for the overworked valet to literally run to get our car, we noticed that a line of at least 200 people were lined up outside of the Science Center to see the Bodies exhibit. Knowing what the inside of the building is like, I'd guess at least that many more were in line. All of the surface lots and street parking appeared to be full again.

I felt really guilty about giving up on finding a parking spot on our first try. I hate to think of myself as someone who is so dependent on my car that if I can't find a parking spot, I bail out. But, face it, that is not that far from the truth. I don't have a problem walking for a few blocks to park, but the problem is that everyone else who came to the area that day did the same thing. By the time we gave up looking for a space to park, the museum only had a couple of hours left on their schedule for the day. We wasted an hour on our quest for parking. And, there was no option. There's no rail we could take downtown with a transfer to a Woodward line to get to the DIA. Instead, we had to join a hundred thousand other people who all wanted to spend a day in midtown, all looking for someplace to park their car. Our bus system is a joke, so that was out. All of that needs to change. Then I wouldn't have to feel so guilty when I want to visit a museum for the afternoon.

Detroit Transit Meeting in Dearborn

[This is an edited and corrected version of some posts I make on the DetroitYES! discussion board last weekend.Here is my take on Saturday's transit study meeting in Dearborn. ]

After the DARTA fiasco, DDOT moved to begin the process of setting up a "new system" under a special federal funding category. This has to be done by an official oversight body (DDOT, in the absence of a true regional oversight body). DDOT's official service area includes Detroit, Dearborn, Highland Park, and Hamtramck. Thus, any plan they come up with will have to stay inside those boundaries.

There are several existing transit plans: Detroit's, SEMCOG's, the state's, and the Regional Transit Coordinating Committee (RTCC). The SEMCOG plan, and to a certain extent the state plan, incorporate Detroit's transit plan almost exactly. According to the project people answering questions today, all of the proposed rapid transit corridors in this project will mesh with the regional plans when the time comes to expand into Oakland, Macomb, and the rest of Wayne Counties.

[NOTE, not entirely from the meeting: RTCC existed before DARTA, and has primarily existed to funnel federal funds to individual transit groups, like DDOT or SMART. Now that DARTA is shot down, RTCC will become the oversight body for regional transit. They have restructured over the last few months, and are now moving toward that goal.] This is the second stage in the design process. The first stage identified several transit corridors for study, and this stage has narrowed it to three from which to select the first line to be built. The three are: Woodward from Downtown to Eight Mile, Michigan Avenue from downtown to West Dearborn plus Woodward up to New Center, and Gratiot Avenue from downtown to Eight Mile plus Woodward up to New Center. So, all three include lower Woodward.

The options for service type: (1) nothing beyond what we have now; (2) an enhanced version of what we have now; (3) Bus Rapid Transit (train-like busses in dedicated lanes or busways, stopping only at stations, priority at intersections); (4) streetcars; (5) light rail. The comment period for this stage of the study ends Aug. 29. A choice for corridor and type of service will come as early as November, then design work will begin. The timeline for construction to begin is 2010.

One of the displays at the meeting compared Detroit to other cities regarding population, density, miles of built transit lines (three miles in D!), miles of expressway, transit ridership, etc. The Detroit region has much higher density, population, and ridership than nearly all of the other cities in the display. It really makes me doubt the density arguments against a transit system for Detroit.

To me, and as much as I'd like to see a line on Grand River, Woodward Avenue should get the first line. Comparing Michigan Avenue and Gratiot Avenue: Michigan Avenue has many more institutions and business areas, including the mostly-undeveloped Clark Street business park, UM-Dearborn/HF Community College, shopping, along with the need to develop the Detroit-Metro-Ann Arbor corridor. Gratiot has Eastern Market area, City Airport, and a community college campus. On that one I'm going by the printed materials. I'm much less familiar with the east side. Frankly, it is too bad that only one can be chosen. We need a full blown system yesterday, and all of the major "spoke" streets should be developed, along with Eight Mile, Telegraph, Southfield, Greenfield, and 12 Mile.

One of the URS representatives said that their presentation graphics should be posted online soon. URS is an international engineering company that has done many streetcar, light rail, and bus rapid transit projects. Here's a link to a list of recent projects, including Boston BRT, Portland streetcar and light rail, London Underground, Minneapolis Hiawatha line. http://www.urscorp.com/URS_Division/projectsListing.php?service=95&section=0602

The citizens who made comments today were very thoughtful and enthusiastic for the project, and all expressed frustration with the current state of transit in the region.