AATA committee picks comprehensive $465 million master transit plan designed to spur development
Editor's note: This story has been corrected to reflect that the vote Tuesday was a committee vote.
The Ann Arbor Transportation Authority Planning and Development Committee has recommended the agency move forward with the most comprehensive and most expensive of three master transit proposals it has been considering for the last few weeks.
The committee Tuesday recommended the “smart growth” option, which was one of three scenarios developed to serve as the framework for a proposed 30-year master plan for Washtenaw County. The plan is designed to promote growth around transit lines and greatly enhance transportation service and accessibility over the next 30 years.
Riders board an Ann Arbor Transportation Authority bus in this file photo.
AATA officials spent the last 45 days soliciting public input on the three proposals and found the most support for the smart growth option. The other two options were a basic “lifeline plus” plan that focused on improving existing service lines and access to the system for seniors and disabled people and an “accessible county” plan that would have added hubs in Saline, Manchester, Milan and Whitmore Lake.
The smart growth scenario seeks to create a “backbone of transportation” along the area's busier corridors, which officials say will significantly increase compact development there. One of its main components is the creation of high frequency service along the busiest corridors, which would require rapid bus transit, trams or street cars.
The AATA would also partner with planned regional rail lines — such as WALLY or the Ann Arbor-to-Detroit commuter rail line — to help with creating corridors of dense development. By promoting strong development, officials say, residents could expect up to a $3.20 return on every $1 invested.
The plans were presented to residents at 25 meetings, and those who attended were asked to choose what they considered the best option. Residents could also select their preferred option on the AATA’s website.
Of the 338 people who voted at the forums and online, 228, or 67 percent, chose the smart growth option. Officials also presented to the board data from an AnnArbor.com poll in which 77 percent of respondents chose the smart growth option.
Additionally, officials determined that the smart growth option was the one that would best meet riders’ needs and provide the services residents want.
The new park-and-ride lot on Plymouth Road at US-23 has seen heavy use since it opened. It offers 260 spaces of free parking.
“That information, along with our outreach, our discussions, what people have indicated to us, and, also, what’s going to be a very viable to way to provide transportation service throughout the county — it all came up smart growth,” AATA Chief Executive Officer Michael Ford said.
The smart growth plan calls for five- to 10-minute ride frequency on core routes during peak hours and 20-minute ride frequency on non-core routes during peak periods. The hours of operation would be expanded, and an investment in bus stop improvements would mean more sheltered stops and real-time status updates at busier stops.
The AATA would create transit hubs serving as “high quality” access points to public transportation in Dexter, Chelsea, Saline, Manchester, Milan and Whitmore Lake. The express service currently available for riders in Chelsea and Canton would be expanded to include cities with the transit hubs.
Additionally, Dexter, Saline and Chelsea residents would have local circulators connecting transportation points throughout their respective cities, and a new service similar to the discontinued Link program would connect “key destinations” in downtown Ann Arbor.
The plan would provide several services to connect everyone in the county to major transportation lines. Door-to-door service would be expanded for disabled and elderly riders. Officials also want to partner with other organizations to further develop a countywide flex-ride program, which picks up individuals at their homes and takes them to a transit line for an extra cost.
Also included in the plan are five new park-and-ride lots on the edges of Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti; a significant expansion of community and employer led car/van pool programs, which are now largely connected with the University of Michigan; and 20 miles of new bike paths countywide.
As for cost, AATA officials said they're still determining funding sources and are exploring private funding options, among other things.
Of the $465 million in capital costs, the high-capacity transit service would account for $282 million, and the proposed airport shuttle and commuter rail represent an additional $132 million. Roughly $30.5 million is earmarked for providing more routes, $5 million for transit hubs and $15 million for cycling costs.
But AATA officials said those figures represent a high-end estimate and some of the cost of rail service would be shared between counties.
Board member Anya Dale said the AATA needs to ensure people understand the project would require some local funding and wouldn’t be paid for entirely out of the AATA’s pocketbook.
Board member Rich Robben said he was concerned residents weren’t fully informed on capital costs and how the project would be funded. Ford said the scenarios’ expenses were provided, but financing still has yet to be determined. He said there would be more public input as the AATA moves forward.
“It’s one thing to talk about the costs, it’s another to say how do we pay for the costs,” he said. “There will be a set of options on financing, but the final decisions for that will be part of a broader community dialogue.”
Comments
a2baggagehandler
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 1:46 p.m.
20 miles of bike paths? Could they manage a golf course as well?
outdoor6709
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 1:25 p.m.
Anyone who thinks there will be state/federal money for these projects is dreaming. Both the state and federal government are broke and running unstainable deficits. People in Washtenaw county are losing their homes, yet the progressives of Ann Arbor, who do not use the current AATA system, think this is a great idea. Will reality set in or better yet an honest acessment of the financials on this project ever be shown to the taxpayers ?????
shepard145
Fri, Mar 11, 2011 : 4:26 a.m.
Get a grip dude. Government is broke today but that should never preclude planning for the future. If Obama's plan to cripple the worlds greatest economy is crushed by better people, a recovery will happen eventually and when that happens, funding opportunities will return. Michigan's problem is not dreaming, it's that we FAILED TO DREAM, FAILED TO HAVE CONFIDENCE IN OUR OWN FUTURES AND FAILED FUTURE GENERATIONS OF THIS STATE.
DonBee
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 6:32 a.m.
What planet do these folks live on?
Rob T
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 6:30 a.m.
I'm a big supporter of dense development and transit, but agree that there is not currently demand for the breadth and volume of service proposed by this plan. Transit is only efficient if it operates at relatively high capacity, and right now there aren't people to fill buses that run every ten minutes on most routes. I hope that AATA smartly grows into the smart growth plan over the course of the 30-year investment, because moving too fast on transit growth without creating demand carries a high price in political capital.
Kai Petainen
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 4:38 a.m.
"He said there would be more public input as the AATA moves forward." That's how it should be done. Be willing to listen to the public, even if you disagree. Compare that repsonse to this other response, when the public was hoping to speak at a different meeting on another topic: "Wieder said he was objecting to the fact that residents in attendance weren't allowed to speak at the meeting to voice their concerns. "The public would like to participate," he said. "I've told you what the rules are we have been following and I'm going to proceed with the agenda," Rapundalo said. <a href="http://www.annarbor.com/news/library-lot-committee-recommends-proceeding-with-downtown-ann-arbor-conference-center-proposal/">http://www.annarbor.com/news/library-lot-committee-recommends-proceeding-with-downtown-ann-arbor-conference-center-proposal/</a>
sbbuilder
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 3:23 a.m.
shepard145 See ya at the voting booth. I bet this doesn't get 1/4 approval. But, got ahead if it makes you feel better. Can't you guys understand one simple thing: Taxpayers are done with the 'let's fund one more shiny project' idea. When your neighbor or your friend is losing their home, the last stinking thing on their mind is paying for someone else to ride the bus.
shepard145
Fri, Mar 11, 2011 : 4:21 a.m.
This is not about buses. This is about permanent light rail that will be here and expanded for generations to enjoy. Most old folks don't get the present or planning for the future or the economics of both. They live in fear of the unknown and the financial risks associated with change whether valid or not, with the assumption that stagnation will "save money" in the long and short run. Well with a few qualifications, they're wrong on every count. Southeast Michigan is one of the largest metropolitan areas in the country without mass transit TODAY so your plan of "do nothing" has been in place and functioning for decades as other regions have invested billions in mass transit and living the benefits. How's it working out for ya? Do you think the "do nothing" Michigan economy is booming as a result? Some folks will always lose their houses in good and bad times but whether or not we have transit will have nothing to do with that…other then potentially improve demand.
shepard145
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 3:07 a.m.
In some cities, if people don't understand something they ask questions. Not here - the land of thick know-it-all arrogance mixed with sophomoric understanding of how public support is evaluated (we need "scientific survey"# 345 to know what to do). Many writing here seem to think the key to Ann Arbor's future will be investing as little as possible in transit, resulting in the ultra low taxes we now enjoy (smirk), thereby attracting frugal businesses from around the world! They imagine these companies must scour the nation searching for Cities lacking meaningful high performing, modern, permanent transit as a stepping stone for their corporate future!! LOL Others will seemingly never understand that permanent light rail is an "amenity" that costs a lot of money from diverse sources while attracting tax paying businesses and residents with impressive ROI, compensating for the transit funding. As much as it seems to baffle the locals, permanent rail transit is not new or rocket science. AATA and others try to combat flawed attitudes with meetings, reports and public surveys as we've done in Michigan for DECADES. The answer has always been the same – WE WANT IT! The response has always been the same – silence, followed by a new cycle of "studies" 2 years later. But some day, real LEADERSHIP will be required to make it happen. The "holding hands" mode needs to transition to "this is what we're going to do, we have public support and all are welcome to join us". Transit in Michigan has never enjoyed meaningful leadership for reasons I don't understand, but it's time and AATA has the experience people to make it happen. No more asking! It's time to educate, get people excited about a future that is both competitive and viable.
aa_reality
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 2:18 a.m.
This area is too cold for public tranportation to really take off. You would freeze waiting for the bus in the blustery wind that is always blowing. Too often there is a cold wind driven rain that an umbrella won't stand up to. Too many people don't shovel their sidewalk and it turns to ice. If you have kids or are elderly or just want to look halfway decent when you arrive at the destination you have to drive. It's nice to have the bus system as an option but don't overinvest.
aa_reality
Fri, Mar 11, 2011 : 3:30 a.m.
Having millions of people and more than a few miles to ride the bus, makes a bus system self sustaining. Ann Arbor has neither and driving is a viable option especially in the crappy weather. This would be a waste of a half billion dollars.
ToddAustin
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 3:14 p.m.
Gosh, I guess the millions of people who ride public transportation daily in major (and cold) cities like Moscow should demand that their local leaders shut down their systems then, right?
UMBirder
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 2:08 a.m.
Thank you AATA! I will look forward to being able to take a train to Metro Airport.
David Cahill
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 12:41 a.m.
Let me see if I have this straight. We taxpayers are being asked to pay nearly half a billion dollars to foment development and turn the Ann Arbor area into something like Chicago? Sorry, but this plan will sink without a trace. One thing that should be fun to watch: State law forbids public bodies from spending money to campaign for tax increases. We can look forward to an expensive campaign that is, patronizingly, supposed to "educate" us on the benefits of new taxes. Will this campaign violate the law? Stay tuned.
Stephen Landes
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 4:08 a.m.
and another time we are in agreement!
Stephen Landes
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 12:39 a.m.
I had no doubt what the outcome of this "process" would be: pick the biggest plan as the best one for us. It sure is easy to vote for this monstrosity when the question about how it will be funded and who will pay the costs isn't part of the discussion. Would the same people who voted for "smart growth" have voted the same way if the price tag for the option and its impact on their purse or wallet was included? I doubt they would. This seems like a "process" designed to achieve the objective that everyone in such a business desires -- BIGGER! More toys to play with!
average joe
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 11:55 p.m.
Interesting that the AATA brass seemed uninterested in someone elses view point on fuel costs, like it wouldn't have an effect on viability. "...they indicated that they took an average price per barrel for the last 30 years as their baseline for future fuel costs." So is the average price of fuel even right now the average of what it was over the last 30 years? I must be missing something here.
ToddAustin
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 3:16 p.m.
Yes, the statement is inaccurate. They took the current price and inflated it going forward at the rate of price increase that has been true in recent years. Of course, as fossil fuels become more scarce and demand from growing economies increase, this is likely to drive up prices at an accelerating rate. Higher fuel prices will translate into more riders on public transit, as we saw a couple of years ago when prices peaked.
Dog Guy
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 11:49 p.m.
The only development which this uber-boondoggle will spur is to raise several AATA managers' pay over a million dollars a year. Higher taxes never spur any productive development, they impede it. I know that tax parasites such as myself are supposed to support any and all tax increases, but AATA is already an air-polluting, traffic clogging, tax rathole. Taxes are forcing out of their homes the few Ann Arborites who don't suck on government teat.
ToddAustin
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 3:18 p.m.
Your thesis is fundamentally wrong. Tax monies spent in ways that stimulate the economy make us all more wealthy and provide for a better quality of life. The taxes we paid during WWII and the resultant spending are what finally dragged the US economy out of the Great Depression.
CynicA2
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 11:22 p.m.
It is highly unlikely (thankfully) that this colossal boondoggle will ever get funded. Voters (read taxpayers) will never approve a millage for this, and with all the changes in Congress, it is highly likely that non-essential "urban planner" pipe dreams, such as this, will never see the light of day. Ann Arbor is not Chicago, or New York - never has been, never will be, and most importantly, doesn't wanna be!
Thinktanker
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 10:46 p.m.
With a price tag like that I am sure their plan includes China as a destination...after all, that's where all the jobs are now anyway.
sbbuilder
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 10:40 p.m.
AATA, go ahead, make my day. You knuckleheads put this before the voters, we'll give you a lickin you ain't seen the likes of. I feel the stirrings of a 60's activist coming on.......
Jay Thomas
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 10:30 p.m.
The AATA is not the Washtenaw County Transit Authority. This is just a huge power grab at the expense of Ann Arborites. When Anya Dale says it will require more LOCAL TAXES she's not kidding. So let us vote on it directly. "Of the 338 people who voted at the forums and online, 228, or 67 percent, chose the smart growth option. Officials also presented to the board data from an AnnArbor.com poll in which 77 percent of respondents chose the smart growth option." An online poll of 300 odd people should not be used as justification for something of this financial magnitude (I could get 300 people to vote if it was that important to ME... sheesh). Put it on a ballot. Wally is another fantasy that there is no money for.
Angela Barbash
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 10:42 p.m.
As stated in an earlier post, they are not expecting to levy taxes on local municipalities without the people having a direct say in it through the function of a regional authority. I don't believe anyone in the county (except perhaps Ann Arborites) would allow themselves to be taxed without a proper ballot vote.
Angela Barbash
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 10:24 p.m.
I attended one of those public forums and voted for which plan I would like to see -- AATA is also coming to break down the plan at West Willow's meeting next Monday night. During the presentation, Michael Benham and company made it very clear that they first wanted to ascertain what the community wanted, and then would figure out how to pay for it. I of course voted for the most comprehensive plan, who wouldn't. I've spent considerable time in New York, Chicago and St. Louis where public transit is the backbone of development. I could spend an hour just talking about the quality of life and economic development benefits that came as a result of transit systems in those cities. When I and others prodded further into the obvious funding issues, they indicated that what would probably emerge is a Regional Authority so that all communities are represented. I'm guessing that any tax obligations would be put to a vote, as would perhaps the entire creation of the Authority. They are also very hopeful that this comprehensive plan would attract private money. I can understand that they wanted to find out what people wanted first (although I agree that a more scientific and complete study should have been conducted) -- my major problem with the funding question is oil prices. My colleagues and I study the energy markets on a daily basis, and we see major storm clouds on the horizon. When I asked Michael and company about their projections for fuel costs, they indicated that they took an average price per barrel for the last 30 years as their baseline for future fuel costs. Wrong. Dead Wrong. That one assumption right there throws their projected future costs right out the window. We offered the AATA brass the opportunity to become more educated about our current and future energy scenario in America -- we were politely turned down on the offer. Unfortunate for them, and for us. I'd like to see them succeed, but this is not a good way to start.
Stephen Landes
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 12:44 a.m.
Angela, I think you got the "thanks, but no thanks" response because this process was designed to give AATA exactly what it got -- a perception that they had a mandate to go ahead with the biggest plan they could devise. That you wanted to help them with valuable information is only a distraction for them.
Angela Barbash
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 10:39 p.m.
You do have a very valid point here Todd. I would have liked to see (and hope to see) a more comprehensive break down of different fuel scenarios though. This should include their transition of their buses to biofuels as well as different fuel options for the trains. I don't think it's wise to just assume that higher fuel prices will lead to higher ridership which will offset the costs of the higher prices. This is such a critical (arguably the most critical) variable in their future cost projections, that it deserves an immense amount of time, research and planning. Our concern is that there was no indication that this had been done.
ToddAustin
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 10:31 p.m.
Angela, higher fuel prices have two important effects on a plan such as this. As you say, it certainly increases operating costs. However, it also very significantly increases ridership. As we saw during the higher fuel prices of a couple of years ago, AATA ridership went up dramatically. Running a service with a higher density of riders would seem to significantly, if not completely, offset the costs incurred by higher fuel prices.
Kai Petainen
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 10:23 p.m.
how does this relate to the Fuller Road parking garage? (transit center)
ToddAustin
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 10:12 p.m.
The level of angry ignorance in these comments is rather breathtaking. For those of you who are so eager that the people have input, you clearly haven't been paying attention to the fact that the AATA has held not one, but two series of public meetings in dozens of locations around the county over the last few months. Many of us attended meetings in both series. Let's address some of the concerns expressed here. First, the capital cost. If you had attended any of the meetings, you would know that much of the cost would be born not only by grants from other levels of government, which support such smart infrastructure improvement, but by the local businesses that would benefit from a transportation infrastructure that would make it easier for both their customers and their employees to reach their establishments. They are eager to invest. Second, the payoff. The AATA has quoted back a return on investment of $3.20 for each dollar spent. The loud voices on this page clearly haven't done their homework on this. This figure is very very conservative. The AATA has been very careful to not claim more than they can be absolutely sure will come to pass. The reality is that the figure used by urban planners for the payoff from such an investment in public transit is in the $7-9 range. That provides a boost to the local economy of $3.3 - 4.2 BILLION dollars in new business. When routine taxes are paid on that new part of the economy, any locally-incurred costs from setting up the system will be more than completely offset. Third, AATA as county dictator. The AATA has been carefully, consistently, and thoughtfully working with not only all the communities in our county, but also with existing commercial transit providers. All of these groups have had input into the planning and all are on board. All will benefit, including the existing businesses and organizations, as their services will be integrated into this plan. Please inform yourself before spouting off.
average joe
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 10:55 p.m.
First- Federal, state, etc grants are in fact taxpayer money, it isn't free money. Second, if "local businesses" are eager to invest, then start passing the hat & see how much eagerness is out there.
Angela Barbash
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 10:29 p.m.
I'm glad to see someone else who actually attended the meetings here on the boards. I am still concerned about the viability of the project, but I do support a move to comprehensive public transit.
JoeNuke
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 9:44 p.m.
If you ask people which option they want and don't tell them they have to pay for it, why would you expect them to choose anything other than the most comprehensive plan? As I understand it, every current ride is subsidized by an average of about 75 cents on the dollar. The federal government is coping with trillion dollar deficits and is finally talking about restraint. We should not count on our federal tax dollars (or our grandchildren's) for this effort. Similarly, the state is dealing with a billion dollar deficit and is cutting everything it can; so none of our state tax dollars. The city of Ann Arbor is also trying to close a million dollar shortfall (worse, when there are more cuts of state support), so no money there. Are we thinking we could lay off more public safety personnel? Absurd! People assert that ridership will increase and riders will save more given rising gasoline prices. To me this means riders could increase their share of the costs. However, even with a significant increase in fares, this plan would require a large increase in the ongoing taxpayer subsidy, not to mention the initial capital outlay. This does not seem even remotely credible.
Blanch DuBois
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 9:36 p.m.
Yeah we don't need no stinking mass transit here in S.E. Michigan. We just need to widen the existing roads to 10 or 12 lanes and build more highways leading to evermore distant communities. Oh...and more parking structures!
Michael
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 9:30 p.m.
Since many people here appear unfamiliar with the term "smart growth," I would like to clarify that it is a form of urban planning, often denoting restricted development occurring in defined areas, with only predefined forms of development (typically high density, low-sprawl) being permitted. Further reading: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_growth" rel='nofollow'>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_growth</a> If you dislike smart growth, I suggest you contact your local governments and representatives. It is the pre-eminent urban development strategy for Washtenaw County. From rural townships to our largest cities, smart growth is the basis of their urban planning.
Macabre Sunset
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 10:47 p.m.
I wish I were better at staying out of the morass.
Michael
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 10:22 p.m.
That is actually a common criticism. As for my personal opinion - I'm just providing information as it appears to be needed. I'd much prefer to stay out of the comment morass. I will campaign neither for nor against items on internet forums.
Macabre Sunset
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 9:42 p.m.
"Smart Growth" being the new euphemism for "Social Engineering," of course. All I see here is eugenics for developers.
thinker
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 9:09 p.m.
How is this going to be funded? The government? Oh, you mean by us, the tax payers. I thought our governments -city, federal, state-were deeply in debt!
BobbyJohn
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 9 p.m.
Just the fact that the gold plated plan was called the "smart plan" told everyone before there was even any discussion, what the result would be. How can it be any more biased than this. This is a totally unrealistic proposal backed by two hundred people in hearings. This needs to be brought to a vote for funding a massive project like this. If voters approve it, then so be it. However, until then, I hope people contacts AATA board members to give them more peoples opinions
Macabre Sunset
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 8:41 p.m.
I read this story and kept waiting for the laugh track at the end. Perhaps I've watched too much 2 1/2 Men over the years.
Technojunkie
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 8:27 p.m.
If I believed that dense development would happen in the designated corridors, maybe. But given city council's hostility to development and the state of the economy I have a hard time picturing it happening.
James Edwards
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 7:53 p.m.
I have some questions about the AATAs County comprehensive $465 million dollar master transit plan. The major question is how much of the cost of the AATA County comprehensive $465 million dollar master transit plan will be being born by the outline communities? Have the outline communities been surveyed to determine their support for this plan? Where will the $465 million dollars come from? The federal government, the liberal financial winds in Washington may soon be blowing in a different direction. Besides federal money is not free money. The 338 surveyed people out of 114,000+is hardly close to being a good representative sample of this community.
GB
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 7:43 p.m.
I vote no. Mass transit of this size in Ann Arbor is a joke... Private money should jump at this project if the return on every one dollar is $3.00 or more. More smoke and mirrors.
Rob T
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 6:25 a.m.
Presumably the 300% ROI is the return for the overall Ann Arbor economy relative to the transit investment. There's no question that the transit service itself won't see this kind of return or else funding wouldn't even be a question.
Mike
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 9:15 p.m.
You're absolutely correct, if this was such a great ROI there would be private money all over this.
friend12
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 7:12 p.m.
One more thing. City council is looking for areas to cut. It sounds like AATA needs to be a big contributor to those cuts. Based on the proposal they are obviously overfunded.
friend12
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 7:06 p.m.
Waste of money. Waste of money. Waste of money. Get my point. $465 million in these harsh times for something that may never pay for itself? WALLY will never happen because it is a monster waste of money that most of the Livingston county residence will never use and they are using that as an example. WALLY is dead so should this.
JSA
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 5:22 p.m.
Why is AATA developing a county wide plan? They do not represent citizens outside of Ann Arbor. Their survey process is a farce and a fraud into purporting to say there is wide spread support that they cannot prove and no notion of how to fund their proposal. Any proposal by any process needs to but put to a vote in a Presidential election in order to provide maximum turnout. Something Ann Arbor bureaucrats and politicians seem to loathe for some reason. By the way, get rid of Wally for all time. The only people that want it appear to be those planning to make money by developing property along the proposed route.
Eric
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 4:59 p.m.
I'm stuck in Michigan since this is where my relatives live, although I do like "up north" and all the lakes. Being stuck here in Michigan my hands down choice for a city to live in was Ann Arbor because its the only place in Michigan that even comes close to dense development, ie. easy access to all the community has to offer, and I believe that in part the community has a lot to offer because of the dense development. I moved here because I didn't have to hop in my car to do everything. Living and/or working in St. Clair Shores, Troy, Warren, Millford, Livonia, Westland, Plymouth, or even a small town like Fremont, MI burns up life driving, and is pretty wasteful. I've cut back on time in the car by 50% versus living any of these other areas. I vote for more dense developoment along mass transit and bikeable routes.
Mike
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 9:14 p.m.
How's that bike work for you in the bad weather and winter?
EyeHeartA2
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 4:47 p.m.
"smart growth" Yep, I picked that option. I looked for the "dumb growth" option, but it wasn't available. Plus, I would have felt, well, somehow "dumb" picking that option. Who can argue with something called smart. That's all I know. Anyway, at least the study wasn't biased in any manner.
braggslaw
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 4:34 p.m.
If AATA wants to burn money, I have a wood stove in my cabin. At least the money will serve a purpose. There will be few people using these bus routes.
Marshall Applewhite
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 12:40 a.m.
@Dos Fair enough, but did you still arrive at your desired location? We don't need $400M in capital expenditures in order to give people a more comfortable ride. Especially in financially strapped times.
Dos
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 12:20 a.m.
If you ride the number 4, Washtenaw Ave between Ypsilanti and Ann Arbor during the hours of 6 am to 9 am and 4 pm to 6 pm you will see US crammed, standing room only,
Alan Goldsmith
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 4:22 p.m.
"Board member Anya Dale said the AATA needs to ensure people understand the project would require some local funding and wouldn't be paid for entirely out of the AATA's pocketbook". We can see why this new member was appointed to tbe AATA Board--she must think the money is left by little elves and taxpayers won't have to pick up the tab. And it's not AATA's pocket book'--it's OUR pocket book.
djm12652
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 4:46 p.m.
Alan, this is A2....we don't have elves...haven't you seen the numerous fairy doors? Duh...elves...sheesh...
Top Cat
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 4:15 p.m.
"By promoting strong development, officials say, residents could expect up to a $3.20 return on every $1 invested." I will believe in the Loch Ness Monster and the Tooth Fairy before I believe that statement. And if they expect for one moment that a county wide millage is a funding option for their pipe dreams, they can pound salt.
Leslie Morris
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 4:13 p.m.
I agree with Tom Whitaker. The next step must be a scientific survey. And the survey should include information about the capital and operating costs of the three proposed options. The option chosen by this tiny handful of people is vastly more expensive than the other two options. I notice that the capital cost for new routes (which I assume is the estimated cost of new busses) is less than 7% of the total capital costs for this option. The other 93% is for fixed rail lines of some kind, train or trolley cars to run on the fixed lines, and new stations. I do not see any sign from our current state and federal governments that they are even remotely willing to pick up such costs for Ann Arbor, Michigan through grants.
Mike
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 9:13 p.m.
Save the cost of the survey for when there is money available. otherwise you're just throwing money at a consultant to study something you can't afford. If we don't get government spending under control there isn't going to be any money.
Woman in Ypsilanti
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 4:07 p.m.
I am so happy that people in our community support good public transportation. This is going to make our community such a nice place to live.
Marshall Applewhite
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 12:38 a.m.
Says the woman who wants the residents of Ann Arbor to pay for her transportation from Ypsilanti every day........
dotdash
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 4:04 p.m.
If you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail. In this case, a BIGGGGGG nail. Where will all the muscle power (tax dollars) come from to wield that hammer? How can the AATA "move forward" while they are still "determining funding sources"? Seems premature. I also agree whole-heartedly with Tom Whitaker re the degree of public input here.
Mick52
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 4:04 p.m.
Expansion of mass transit is critical. Gas prices are going to go up and they are not going to drop. Many people will save money by using mass transit or biking to work. Too bad they haven't figured out how to pay for it. That's a biggy.
Gnat
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 1:32 a.m.
Unfortunatley, they have figured out how to pay for it. Gov't subsidies.
Mike
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 9:11 p.m.
The state and country is broke, we don't exploit our own energy resources such as coal, nuclear, and numerous fossil fuel resources protected by the environmentalists and the only answer seems to be mass transit? How to pay for it.....raise taxes and gasoline prices high enough that no one will be able to afford a car. Then we can travel around like we live in a third world country and throws rocks and sticks when we go to war when China stops loaning money to us.
Matt
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 4:03 p.m.
I think this is a wonderful choice and clearly reflets the transit options the majority of people want. Many of the findings are very sensible and match what transit-focused cities already implement: weekend coverage (instead of the busses stopping at 6pm), frequent rush-hour runs (so you know you can get to work on time) and the ability to travel without planning your schedule around the bus. Of course, it will be nearly impossible to raise the needed funds outside of a massive transit-focused Federal spend, but I appreciate the AATA articulating a clear vision.
outdoor6709
Thu, Mar 10, 2011 : 1:17 p.m.
so how often do you/will you use AATA?
Mike
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 9:07 p.m.
The majority of the people want this?????? Do you work for AATA?
blahblahblah
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 4:01 p.m.
Without the financing backing up these proposals this plan has nowhere to go. At least the library board was smart enough to realize a major expansion during the current economic downturn would not win voter approval. The AATA folks on the otherhand seem overly optimistic in this regard. We will be lucky enough to keep the Broadway Bridge federal grants let alone receive more federal money for local buses and trains.
Tom Whitaker
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 3:35 p.m.
"Of the 338 people who voted at the forums and online, 228, or 67 percent, chose the smart growth option. Officials also presented to the board data from an AnnArbor.com poll in which 77 percent of respondents chose the smart growth option." If this plan is going to cost us $465 million, one would think they could scrape up $20K for a properly designed, scientific survey. Surveying people with a predetermined interest or stake in transit, or using a blog poll--something easily manipulated by either side of a question--should not constitute the basis for moving forward with such an incredibly expensive plan. 338 people out of 114,000+ is not even remotely close to being a good representative sample, and these were people who took the time to go online or attend a meeting, not randomly chosen individuals. Whether it is local, regional, State or Federal money, it is still all our money. Call me cynical, but I had little doubt going in to all this, what the AATA conclusion would ultimately be. How about you?
DonBee
Sat, Mar 12, 2011 : 3:38 a.m.
Michael - For a national survey, sure. For a local survey, no way. I am sure the folks at ISR would be happy to sit down with the folks at AATA and help them design a survey. They might even assign a couple of undergraduates to run the survey. I just finished a survey for $23,000 run by a major university. Statistical accuracy according the professor in charge was +/- 2 percent, which was close enough for our purposes. The result is the project will not proceed.
Michael
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 9:20 p.m.
As someone with experience doing the type of study you're proposing, I want to point out something you apparently do not realize. The cost of performing a legitimate survey is not $20,000. The cost is often close to $1,000,000.
Alan Goldsmith
Wed, Mar 9, 2011 : 4:18 p.m.
Tom, look no further than AnnArbor.com's 'best coffee house' online 'vote' for how meaningless this process is. These polls mean nothing and for a Government body to use one to justify a $465 Million spend plan is silly. But if some local political hacks want a train every ten minutes to Howell or Manchester then it's going to get a whole lot more silly over the next few months as this plan moves forward in the discussion stage.