A while back, Livingston County Commissioners released a report claiming that a proposed commuter train between Livingston County and Ann Arbor needed to average 60 mph to attract riders. The report recommends spending $32.5 million before getting the train, nicknamed WALLY, up and running.
Apparently, the authors of the report (summarized here) written well before gas spiked to $4 a gallon, were under the delusion that speeds on U.S. 23 average 60 mph.
On my way to Ann Arbor at 7:20 a.m. on Thursday (Sept. 11, 2008), I decided to test the assumption that speeds on U.S. 23 average 60 mph.
As I came up the entrance ramp, things looked good and I managed to get my car up to 70 mph ever so briefly. In less than a mile, I was at a complete stop. This was cutting seriously into any 60 mph average. For the next mile, I crept along at less than 5 mph. Progress, but still a long ways from 60 mph.
Within two miles, I was whizzing along at 45 mph, which felt really fast after what I had just been through. But after reaching my exit, I calculated I had gone 9 miles in 18 minutes. Is that 60 mph? Don't think so.
But of course, I wasn't even in Ann Arbor yet, just on the exit ramp, waiting my turn at the light -- for almost five minutes.
And that doesn't count the 15 minutes it took me to get to the freeway from my home, which is only about a mile or two from the proposed commuter line.
So if Wally can get me to downtown Ann Arbor at anything greater than 30 mph, that would be a big plus.
The all-Republican Livingston County Commission seems to think that Michigan residents are so wedded to their cars that they'll keep paying ever larger shares of their disposable income on gasoline so they can sit in traffic on U.S. 23.
Maybe it's time for new leadership on the commission.
5 comments:
We need to work on educating the public about WALLY. This would be good for our businesses and our people.
True, if you're traveling at off-peak times, you could get an average of 60 mph. But the vast bulk of commuters travel during morning and afternoon rush hours, since their work schedules require it, and their experience is more like the one you describe.
Very true. If I leave for Ann Arbor any later then 6:45 a.m. it is bumper to bumper averaging 20-30 mph. I have actually sat in traffic with my car in 'park' while skimming the newspaper waiting for the traffic snarl to unsnarl.
What a sham, using the speed limit as the deal breaker excuse. What about the overcrowded parking lots in Ann Arbor hindering commuters even if they do cruise along on a lucky morning at 60 mph and arrive on time? I'm still late after looking for a parking space 10 miles away from my office and hiking by foot.
And finally fewer cars will help in the effort to reduce carbon emissions. But we know where the Republican Party stands on global warming and living green. Green is good for them if its in the form of greenbacks.
What's stopping some of these businesses and individuals from funding WALLY, or as I call it, the Train to Nowhere, if they want this so bad? Those that profit from sprouting up near their properties........ Why should the county pay for something that does not go to most of our county, and that will not even come close to paying for itself as this county still has much of its rural character with homes spread out. Even where I'd live, it's take me longer to use the train than it would to drive the 13 miles.
I live in Green Oak. I can get to Ann Arbor in 20 minutes (sometimes less) during Rush Hour in decent weather. 30 minutes if it is icy. I've often left at 7:40 when I'm running late, and got there in time for 8AM. It's probably about 5 more minutes if I'm going to North Campus.
Kudos for our county board for being McCain Republicans and not Bush Republicans on this fiscal issue.
This so-called rational defense of WALLY shows why I so distrust supporters of mass transit...they literally refuse to do any critical thinking.
First, the report didn't say that cars on US-23 average 60 mph; it said that the train had to average 60 to be attractive to commuters. Why? Because:
1. The train doesn't travel non-stop. It has to stop at the currently non-existent train stations to pick up the handful of passengers waiting there...unless you think they'll leap on as the train chugs by.
2. The train will not drop you at your destination (as will happen when you drive). Instead, you'll be east of Ann Arbor and have to wait for some other non-developed bus or ground transportation to take you downtown, or to the hospital or wherever.
3. Many train users will have to drive in the opposite direction of their destination to reach a train station, further lengthening their trip.
So, even at 60 mph, the train ride will take longer than a car ride..even during traffic jams. At 60, the report authors predict, potential customers will accept the longer commute because of other advantages..cost, no parking fee, able to read/sleep during commute, saving gas, etc. It's a dubious argument at that, but at least that's what the report said.
But this blog's author is so sure that a train must be the right answer that she totally ignores reality.
So, let's use her rationale. The report is wrong and the authors must be wrongheaded. Great. They also said with a $32 million infusion of federal funds, WALLY is feasible. Since the report is flawed, that conclustion must also be discarded.
Right? (I already know the answer, unfortunately. For folks like the author, any argument in favor of a commuter train is unquestionably true; any argument against one is false (and probably the result of a Republican plot.) For train fanatics, there is no room for thinking and honest analysis. Such a shame.
Post a Comment