Transit’s Identity Crisis: Social Service or Economic Engine?

Increasingly, transit investments are framed in terms of economic development, rather than public service. Cities conceive of new rail lines with the condo developer or tourist in mind, ignoring the low-income commuter who can’t afford a car and the senior who relies on transit to get to the grocery store.

A rendering of Detroit's Woodward rail line. Leaders hope this transit project will draw investment back to the central city. Image: ##http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2010/07/can_light_rail_keep_young_tale.html## Mlive.com##

Yonah Freemark at the Transport Politic writes that this tension is currently playing out in Detroit, where the private sector has seized on a plan to develop light rail in the central city. An example of new-school transit thinking, the project is aimed at catalyzing development along the Woodward Corridor. Meanwhile, budget shortfalls may force the elimination of night and weekend bus service.

Such situations raise questions about the purpose of transit, Freemark writes, in Detroit and beyond:

This produces an identity crisis for transit. For whom is it developed? Can its social mobility goals be reconciled with the interests of capitalists in the urban space?

Identifying the value of a transportation project is an essential element of the planning process, so asking these questions is essential, since there are limited resources. When it comes to transit, this seems particularly relevant, since most funds invested in bus or rail projects are provided by the public sector.

Do we invest our funds in a project to connect downtown with the airport, under the assumption that economic benefits will flow down from the top, as conservatives might suggest? Is spending government money on ensuring the efficient transportation of the elite effective because it grows the economy as a whole and eventually aids the poor? Or should public dollars be reserved for redistributive causes, focusing on the needs of those who are least able to provide for themselves?

These are big questions. What do you think?

Elsewhere on the Network today: The Overhead Wire explains how Houston’s light-rail plans are being undermined by freight right-of-way. Green City Blue Lake reports that the Akron, Ohio region has developed a land use and transportation plan with the goal of a “vibrant urban environment.” And Car Free Baltimore offers a first-hand account of the physical and mental transformation brought on by a year of car-free living.

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

Detroit Abandons Light Rail Dreams, Plans BRT Routes

|
There was a lot riding on light rail plans for the city of Detroit. Four years of planning, for one. Almost $100 million in private commitments, for another. But the most important consideration — by far — was the promise of a revitalized Woodward Avenue through the heart of the city’s up-and-coming Midtown neighborhood. Suddenly, […]

Feds Call “All Hands On Deck” For Detroit Transit

|
For the last two days, transit experts from around the country have been hunkered down in Detroit to devote their collective expertise to making the Motor City a better city for transit. The Federal Transit Administration convened the panel, which included current and former transit agency leaders from Salt lake City, Denver, Portland, Atlanta and […]

The Case for Letting States, Not Cities, Shape Development Near Transit

|
A bill circulating in the Connecticut legislature — HB 6851 — would give state officials greater control over development near transit stations. The measure has met with some resistance because it would weaken powers that have traditionally belonged to local government. But Sandy Johnston at Network blog Itinerant Urbanist says that in Connecticut’s case, that’s probably a […]

Transit Vote 2016: Atlanta May Finally Expand MARTA and Beef Up Bus Service

|
We continue our overview of what’s at stake in the big transit ballot initiatives this November with a look at Atlanta. Previous installments in this series examined Indianapolis, Seattle, and Detroit. Back in the 1970s, both Atlanta and Washington, D.C., received federal grants to build rail networks. After finishing the first wave of Metro construction, D.C. continued to invest, […]