I really believe the anti-BRT crowd would be against a light-rail too. As I have said before these people can not deal with a more urban style of transit that makes it easier for folks with no cars to get there.
People who don't own a car are suspect [i.e. poor] people who ride mass transit are poor. Why should "we" pay for something that makes it easier for "them" and more difficult [left turns in median instead of a middle lane] for "us". I am sure that more than a few people out there would say that this is the reason they moved there, to get away from people "like that" Of course they code their concern with what about my business concerns, when what I think will happen is that they will get more business, not less. Bikes paths and rails can be tricky but lots of people manage to do it in Amsterdam and cross the light rails without whipping out. I would also like to see a light-rail system but that is not being considered fro Greater Lansing.
I heard it on the radio Verg. was saying that they will not shove anything down another town's throat,[was that what we were doing?] if they don't want the BRT we will do something else. I think I saw him on WNLS too.
So in the past week metro Detroit's transit future was put on hold for likely another 10 years+ by two anti-transit counties, and now Lansing has their transit plans put on hold by anti-transit Meridian Township people. And legislators wonder why people leave Michigan?
Reading the book "Street Fight" by NYC's former transportation commissioner, I was struck by the fact that she didn't spend a lot of time holding charrettes and trying to satisfy every member of the public ahead of time - an impossible task, as she said. Instead, they figured out what the data said was best and just did it - and after the fact, people loved it. Most of the changes they made would have never happened if they were required to get public consensus ahead of time, the status-quo bias itself is a huge force (but it works on your side after the changes are made).
Wait, they aren't talking about scrapping the whole plan are they? The obvious solution would simply be to truncate the line at Hagadorn if Meridian Township doesn't want it. The leg out to the mall wasn't the most crucial part of the line, anyway. It'd be silly to scrap the whole thing because a small end of the line doesn't want it. I'm waiting to see the media reports before I panic.
As for Detroit, I believe they will be calling a special meeting to give it one more go. It seems that people are feeling that they could still get this done this year. Even if they don't, this doesn't set it back 10+ years. This is a millage. It can be held during any general election, I believe. This is all a result, though, of anti-transit folks creating transit policy. Under the guise of consensus, a vote to send a millage to the voters from the Southeast Michigan RTA requires not just a majority, but at least one vote from each county's two-member delegation. In practice given the history of the region, it essentially gives Oakland County a veto. I have to say I was kind of surprised given that both county execs in Macomb and Oakland had at least signaled they were behind the millage months ago. At least nominally, neither is saying they oppose the millage outright, rather they want some assurances written down before they'd allow their representatives on the board vote to send it to the voters. This shows me that they can still be gotten.
I'd imagine the lack of a left turn lane east of Brookfield is their main concern and it's a legitimate one. The simplest solution is probably to just continue the same 5 lane pattern they show between Durand and Hagadorn with the BRT sharing lanes with cars. I think to appease Meridian Township they're going to have to maintain two lanes of traffic in each direction and allow for more or less unrestricted left turns, if they want to do that with dedicated BRT lanes they're going to need more right-of-way which I don't see happening. Having the BRT share lanes with cars isn't preferable and negates a lot its benefits, but if that's what it takes to get it done then so be it.
While the left turn lane is a legitimate concern and yes they could put the buses in the traffic lanes. I think however as I have said these concerns were inflated by people who have a different agenda, and who are using this as a reason to stop something they personally don't want and will not use. Efficient mass transit is an urban issue and they do not want to be thought of as urban. They have blinded themselves to any possible benefit, They shout down anyone opposed, and are lead by a Judge who while he has a perfect right to do so, I think his position influenced people's thinking. Think they are masking a political agenda with inflated business worries. I personally think this all quite offensive.
Comments
People who don't own a car are suspect [i.e. poor] people who ride mass transit are poor. Why should "we" pay for something that makes it easier for "them" and more difficult [left turns in median instead of a middle lane] for "us". I am sure that more than a few people out there would say that this is the reason they moved there, to get away from people "like that" Of course they code their concern with what about my business concerns, when what I think will happen is that they will get more business, not less. Bikes paths and rails can be tricky but lots of people manage to do it in Amsterdam and cross the light rails without whipping out. I would also like to see a light-rail system but that is not being considered fro Greater Lansing.
As for Detroit, I believe they will be calling a special meeting to give it one more go. It seems that people are feeling that they could still get this done this year. Even if they don't, this doesn't set it back 10+ years. This is a millage. It can be held during any general election, I believe. This is all a result, though, of anti-transit folks creating transit policy. Under the guise of consensus, a vote to send a millage to the voters from the Southeast Michigan RTA requires not just a majority, but at least one vote from each county's two-member delegation. In practice given the history of the region, it essentially gives Oakland County a veto. I have to say I was kind of surprised given that both county execs in Macomb and Oakland had at least signaled they were behind the millage months ago. At least nominally, neither is saying they oppose the millage outright, rather they want some assurances written down before they'd allow their representatives on the board vote to send it to the voters. This shows me that they can still be gotten.