Mass Transit (Milwaukee, Franklin, Mequon: home, transfer, income)

[mke91]

In response to the huge quarrel over mass transit recently, I would like to gauge the general opinion about Milwaukee's transit crisis right now.

First of all, does anyone even want improved mass transit? According to journalists like Kevin Fischer, who appears on the PBS panel discussion, Interchange, and who also blogs for the Journal Sentinel's Franklin affiliate, additional investment in mass transit would waste money, since nobody would use it. Therefore, spending money on any improvement towards mass transit, including the existing system, would contrast with people's needs. I wonder what anyone has to say about his opinion.

I'll ask additional questions later, so that this thread can focus on one thing at a time.

[karfar]

Originally Posted by mke91

In response to the huge quarrel over mass transit recently, I would like to gauge the general opinion about Milwaukee's transit crisis right now.

First of all, does anyone even want improved mass transit? According to journalists like Kevin Fischer, who appears on the PBS panel discussion, Interchange, and who also blogs for the Journal Sentinel's Franklin affiliate, additional investment in mass transit would waste money, since nobody would use it. Therefore, spending money on any improvement towards mass transit, including the existing system, would contrast with people's needs. I wonder what anyone has to say about his opinion.

I'll ask additional questions later, so that this thread can focus on one thing at a time.

Uh, yeah, I for one approve of mass transit. Our bus system sucks & certain people have cut routes...what w/this gas price increase charade, that's a pretty stupid action. I don't enjoy using my car every day, it's a waste of money, gas & it's certainly not healthy in terms of exercise & the environment. People just need to stop having such a love affair w/their cars. Mass transit would cut down on those problems & once people get used to the idea, car usage would go down.

[wanderlusting]

Originally Posted by karfar

Uh, yeah, I for one approve of mass transit. Our bus system sucks & certain people have cut routes...what w/this gas price increase charade, that's a pretty stupid action. I don't enjoy using my car every day, it's a waste of money, gas & it's certainly not healthy in terms of exercise & the environment. People just need to stop having such a love affair w/their cars. Mass transit would cut down on those problems & once people get used to the idea, car usage would go down.

Bus routes are cut for various reasons. #1, because they're not profitable. I would hate to see taxpayers money wasted just to keep a few bus drivers employed. That's just spewing more junk into the atmosphere. #2, budget shortfalls. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Money doesn't grow on trees. If buses aren't cut then parks will be. Come to think of it, that's an area where we could look at some savings too.

The reality is you need a car for just about almost everything you need to do. The bus might work out on occasion but it's not practical to use the bus for everything you do, such as work, shopping, leisure, and other necessary business tasks.

[ffknight918]

Sure, cars sound fine now, but look at gas. It just rose all the way to $4.19. By the end of 2008 its estimated at $6.00. If I had a rail to take me everywhere, I wouldn't even think of getting in my car unless needed.

[karfar]

Originally Posted by wanderlusting

Bus routes are cut for various reasons. #1, because they're not profitable. I would hate to see taxpayers money wasted just to keep a few bus drivers employed. That's just spewing more junk into the atmosphere. #2, budget shortfalls. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Money doesn't grow on trees. If buses aren't cut then parks will be. Come to think of it, that's an area where we could look at some savings too.

The reality is you need a car for just about almost everything you need to do. The bus might work out on occasion but it's not practical to use the bus for everything you do, such as work, shopping, leisure, and other necessary business tasks.

Actually, if we had a better transit system, cars would not need to be used for everything.

[Empidonax]

I would love to take mass transit more than I currently do. Three or four times per work week I drive a mile from my home in Mequon to a Park-n-Ride in River Hills, and take an express commuter bus (49U) to and from work. Unfortunately, the bus only runs for part of the year, so I'm on my own during summers, holidays, and weekends.

There are a couple of logistical problems that I've found with bus service in my area. First of all, hardly any buses connect Ozaukee with Milwaukee County--just a couple of commuter buses. It would make sense to extend the bus line along Port Washington Road into Mequon, but now it only runs a little beyond Brown Deer Road, then turns around and heads back to the city. Southeastern Mequon is a rather densely populated area that could support some bus service, but for now, I and others have to rely on driving (including to Park-n-Rides).

Another logistical problem in my area is bus nodes and transfer points. The 49U and another commuter bus (for downtown) stop at the River Hills Park-n-Ride, to the west of I-43. The Port Wash Rd. bus (#68, I think) only goes along PWR, on the east side of I-43. Would it really be so awful to designate a common node so that passengers can move between these two bus lines (and also possibly the bus line that goes down BRD)? An interconnection between the lines might people move around better within the North Shore, not just between downtown Mke and the North Shore.

A similar oddity exists with the buses that go by UWM--there is not a single stop that serves as a multi-purpose transfer point for the several buses passing through the area. Maybe the planners think that bus line fragmentation is more efficient, but greater line integration would move people around faster and might encourage transverse ridership.

But yeah, I know, nothing will happen. As long as moving around in cars is seen as quicker than dealing with the bus, we'll be stuck with the same system we have--or worse.

[mke91]

Ok, so it sounds like you guys would really like to see some improved mass transit options, but the problem obstructing such a vision is that cars just seem more convenient. How can we convince more people that they aren't (because I don't think they are), and that they should support mass transit over driving their automobiles?

[karfar]

Originally Posted by mke91

Ok, so it sounds like you guys would really like to see some improved mass transit options, but the problem obstructing such a vision is that cars just seem more convenient. How can we convince more people that they aren't (because I don't think they are), and that they should support mass transit over driving their automobiles?

I think this gas crisis should be the only convincing they need.

[EnjoyEP]

Originally Posted by karfar

I think this gas crisis should be the only convincing they need.

Karfar -

Let me first just state that honestly, looking at your posts and mine through the months, we can probably agree that we are on the complete opposite ends of the political spectrum, and moreover, just how we think society should function or *work*. To be blunt: you and I couldn't probably disagree more on things like mass transit.

HAVING SAID THAT...you seem like a very good-intentioned, nice person, who cares deeply about this city/region and frankly, has well-grounded reasons for your feelings. And you know what? While I disagree with most of them strongly, I respect the heck out of folks like you that can state their opinions in a constructive, reasonable matter.

Usually I don't like to *personalize* my CD forum threads / posts, however, I just wanted to say it here, as I think usually you'll find on topics like this I vehemently disagree with you, but I still think as long as reasonable people have reasonable disagreements, they can still be very amicable!

Having said that, I disagree with you here - respectfully.

Sure, current gas prices hurt - they do. I hate paying $4.20 - believe me. I am on a single income for a family of 4 (and not a huge one at that), so to quote one of our recent presidents, "I feel your pain"...surely I do, constantly in my wallet.

However, what REALLY drives mass transit typically is more a need in terms of population, congestion, etc.

If cities are jam-packed with metros of 2.5, 3, 4, 5 million, and the roadways to main economic hubs (say Denver in Downtown Denver or the DTC area) are just jam, jam, jam packed, the public will YEARN for heightened mass transit - things yes, like light rail. They won't want to drive, because frankly, driving will be (to and from their jobs) a major pain in the rear end. Classic case-in-point would be Washington DC - just a traffic, jam-packed metro, or places like Chicago, where likely a commute could quickly turn into a 3-hour white-knuckle pain in the backside affair.

Places like Milwaukee - as much as entities like the Milwaukee Journal Sentinal or Tom Barrett would like to *will* it to be - just don't have that demand. Sure, gas is expensive as heck, however, I can still get pretty much anywhere in the metro area pretty easily and painlessly in 20 minutes.

Mass tranist - like ALL FACETS OF ECONOMICS - does not escape that basic principle of American economics - supply and demand. If you have the *demand*, then the supply needs to (and shall) come. If you don't have the demand, if you then try to *force* the supply, it'll fall flat on its face because its economic base won't be there.

It just baffles me how often that basic form of supply and demand is lost as it relates to public service / public services. It is as though people just don't recognize that producing that supply costs *them* a ton of money.

What difference does it make if you build a multi-billion dollar transit system and then can save a miniscule amount weekly / monthly on your gas bill by paying to ride the train rather than driving, but then paying on the "other end" through the nose in your taxes? It is still *your money*, and at least you know what you are paying for when you fill up your tank. When you start to build a massive (and you have to build it to be massive if it is going to really benefit more than a select few) transit system, your costs will come rushing via taxes, and they will add up much quicker.

I am for public transit options, [i]if[/] a) they make sense in terms of supply and demand, and b) they won't be pricier via taxpayer dollars (meaning all of us) than simply filling up your gas tank is.

Guys like Barrett think that the reason more companies aren't coming to Milwaukee is because we don't have big, shiny choo-choos. I overall actually *like* Mayor Barrett as a person and think he is a guy that cares about Milwaukee; I disagree with him severely though. Companies don't come to Milwaukee is that we have a ridiculously high tax burden for a city that isn't huge / filled with highly educated workforce. Let's make things economically viable for a city the size of Milwaukee's, then let's talk more big scale transit plans.

[mke91]

I agree with your very well-thought-out response, EnjoyEP, and I would like to thank you for putting in the time for your response, as well as your civility.

ANWYAYS, I see that people are going to drive their cars before they take public transportation, if they can and if it's more convenient, which it is in this metro area. But I would like to know:

1) What do people do if they can't access a car? Are they being served adequately by our mass transit system? If not, what options do we have to help them?
2) It is becoming increasingly more difficult to drive a car, with rising gas prices, environmental complaints, and more. Why then, is there widespread support for the expansion of expressways and freeways, like the I-94 expansion, when there is no traffic congestion in this Metro area?