Transportation: The “Final” Solution

     The world is changing! When my grandparents were born, they had to use the trolley or the public bus system to get around. Cars were restricted to the top wealth elite of society. When my parents were toddlers, cars became more affordable and it was common to see each family having at least one car. Today, with the United States having 0.8 of a car per person, challenges have arisen as well as the need for an efficient public transportation system to be implemented, in order to substitute, what used to be the solution, cars.(Transportation Energy)

     The main challenge to public transit is to overcome the preconceived stereotype of being inefficient and only used by the lower classes. As a result, these solutions are not easy to implement, however, the city of Detroit, once known as the “Motor City”, is leading the way in the United States with some innovative and creative answers for this problem.    

     The key assertion to this idea of mass transit being developed in Detroit is to integrate the population. The population must live in denser areas because: first, it is not efficient, time wise, to have a bus line to a neighborhood where only a few families live, and second, it costs a lot of money. Families must be reallocated to more packed neighborhoods where the same bus line might be used by hundreds of families at the same time (Blueprint America).

     Another focal and vital point that will decide if this project is going to be successful in Detroit is how to include the people living in the suburbs in this solution. For instance, the city of Miami has a public transit system that could have been extremely successful. The Metrorail connects some suburbs of Miami to a final stop inside downtown Miami. If more rail lines were added that connected other suburbs to the city and an inner-city transit system was created that linked the suburban population from this central station to other inner-city areas, this system would have been a success. This system that was partially created in Miami is what the city of Detroit is trying to implement.

     Another reason why the Metrorail is not effective in Miami is because the suburban population does not find any incentives to ride public transit. If they can ride their car, why would they take a collective transport? Well, this is the part where the government comes in. In our current tax system, there are tax exemptions from which some are related to pollution. This could be applied to reward public transit riders. If a rider chooses to take public transit daily instead of driving his car to work, he could be awarded a pollution tax exemption. This would encourage even more people to switching transportation modes.

     Lastly, one of the positives externalities that most people don’t seem to recognize from adhering to a public transit system project like the one in Detroit is that they bring many economic benefits. One of them would be the creation of thousands of jobs from the construction to the operation of these systems that would tremendously help local economies that have had its unemployment rate stagnated at 9.1% (Bloomberg). In addition, mass transit would bring more development to poorer regions of the city as has been the case throughout history.

     Conclusively, as it can be seen, the solution to the problems cars are causing us today is not easy. Even more, just like the city of Detroit, we might have to sit and watch other big American cities fail before politicians and lawmakers decide its time to act to change this scenario. However, just like the city of Detroit too, the public transit solutions are attainable and will benefit the population in the long term. The world is changing, it is up to us to "catch-up" with it, and this example of how to use public transit is one way to do it.

Work Cited

Blueprint America: Beyond the Motor City. Dir. Aaron Woolf. Prod. PBS. 2010. Film.

Willis, Bob. "U.S. Employment Stagnated in August." Bloomberg. 02 Sep 2011: n. page. Web. 21 Sep. 2011.

Stacy C. Davis, Susan W. Diegel, and Robert G. Boundy (June 2011). "Transportation Energy Data Book: Edition 30". Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, U.S. Department of Energy. Retrieved 2011-09-20.See Table 3.5, pp. 3-9

MARTA-a critique

"The MARTA has been variously envisioned as a vehicle for transforming Atlanta into a world-class city"('Transforming Atlanta: The Mode of Mobility Under Construction', Chapter 3, page 51). Allow me to critically analyze to what extent the MARTA has actually been successful in transforming Atlanta for the better.

According to Keating, the MARTA was created to add to the aesthetic value of Atlanta. It's creation was more about "appearances and less about rationalizing time and space". However, the MARTA is seen as a "blight on the city" and does little to beautify Atlanta.

The MARTA is slow, unsafe and invariably not running on time. It threatens one's "sense of security" and provides inadequate service overall. It is foolish to travel via MARTA expecting first class customer experience. Due to its limited accessibility, it fails to rationalize space and time.

So, neither does the MARTA contribute to Atlanta aesthetically nor is it seen as a reliable mode of mass transit. Does the MARTA solve any purpose effectively? NO.

Ever since its inception, the MARTA has been plagued with controversy and corruption. Numerous counties opted out of the MARTA. There was no general consensus over its creation.

What was bad soon became worse. The creation of MARTA led to the displacement of thousands of people. People began complaining that the MARTA serves the suburbs and the suburbs aren't paying for its services. One school of thought is of the opinion that the MARTA simply caters to the wealthy and ignores the needs of the poor. Thus, it ignores social mobility and fails to bridge the gap between the rich and the poor. Another school of thought is of the opinion that it provides too much service to the poor and to Black riders and challenges White privilege. Thus, due to the shortcomings of the MARTA, automobile dependency is justified.

Despite these shortcomings, the MARTA still is the 9th largest transit system in North America. It carries more than 450,000 passengers a day, using 556 buses, 338 rail cars, and 110 passenger vans, as well as 15 small buses('Transforming Atlanta: The Mode of Mobility Under Construction', Chapter 3, page 56). Thus, we see that the MARTA caters to the needs of a large section of society which is dependent on the MARTA. Moreover, the MARTA also contributes towards attaining sustainability when it comes to environmental protection. Thus, it would be ludicrous to terminate the services of MARTA.

On the other hand, Atlanta must strive towards incorporating an integrated transport system within the realms of the city. The State should fund an "integrated transportation system that can economically move anyone and anything, anywhere, anytime, on time; a transportation system without fatalities and injuries; and a transportation system that is not dependent on foreign energy and is compatible with the environment"(http://web.mit.edu/aeroastro/www/people/rjhans/docs/vision2050.pdf). Moreover, State funding is imperative if there is to be any improvement to the present day scenario.

In "Blueprint America: Beyond the Motor City", transit advocate, Lee Gaddies, speaks about an integrated transit system where you have electric buses, light rail, high speed rail all working as one integrated, seamless mode of transportation. This should be Atlanta's utopian vision! The three pictures above give us an idea of the elements of an integrated transit system.

Works Cited:

1) Konrad, Miriam. Transporting Atlanta: The Mode of Mobility Under Construction. NewYork: SUNY UP, 2010.

2) Konrad, Miriam. Lecture. ENGL 1101: Rhetoric of Mass Transportation. Georgia Institute of Technology, 16 Sept. 2011.

3) Blueprint America: Beyond the Motor City. Dir. Aaron Woolf. Prod. PBS. 2010. Film.

4) http://web.mit.edu/aeroastro/www/people/rjhans/docs/vision2050.pdf

City Leaders are Holding Back Improvement

The US is heading in the wrong direction in regards to public transportation. Public transportation systems are created for the purpose of looking good and appeasing congress. These systems do not actually help anyone and become a drain on funding and a stain on the city’s image. Transportation needs to be created to fit the need of people, not to fit the agenda of politicians.

Transportation is an area that the US is lagging far behind the rest of the world in. European and Asian countries have had high speed rail lines and other advanced forms of public transportation for decades. The US still has trouble funding any form of transportation other than roads.

Cities must stop looking for the quick fix. These problems will still be here tomorrow, next year, and in five years. City leaders need to look past what will get them reelected in a few years to what will help the city in twenty. Infrastructure for public transportation needs to be built. It will be years before transportation improve significantly. But long term goals need to be set before anything will happen.

But government programs and politicians looking to quickly improve a city’s image have stopped progress. Programs like the congressional Urban Mass Transportation Administration or UMTA have in the past pushed transportation programs for the sake of having them rather than fixing actual problems. This leads to transportation systems that do not fit the public need and become unused and a drain on funding.

The Detroit People Mover is a perfect example of this. After being pushed by UMTA to create some kind of rail system, Detroit created the People Mover. It offers a whopping three mile loop of transport (Blueprint America). On an average day, it services 7,500 people, which is about 2.5% of its maximum capacity of 288,000 people per day. What it was supposed to do for the city was look good (UMTA). But how can a system look good when it does not function well enough to be used?

This problem is not limited to Detroit. MARTA is another great example of this. It was created because politicians thought that Atlanta needed some form of light rail, despite the studies against light rail. The MARTA rail system was created for show by people who do not use it and now ironically find it a stain on Atlanta (Konrad).

Each city is unique and each city has unique problems. Just because one thing works in a certain city does not mean that it will work it another. Different cities are laid out differently and work differently. Atlanta for example has a very low population density, meaning that the people living in Atlanta are very spread out. This means that any public transportation needs to have many and frequent stops at locations of people who will use them. MARTA unfortunately does not do this.

Instead of creating new useless transportation systems, city leaders need to look at both how existing transportation systems can be improved and what new systems can be implemented over the coming years to actually improve public transportation. The needs of the people must come first, not the needs of the politicians.

Words Cited

Konrad, Miriam. Transporting Atlanta: The Mode of Mobility Under Construction. New York: SUNY UP, 2010. 

Blueprint America: Beyond the Motor City. Dir. Aaron Woolf. Prod. PBS. 2010. Film. 

"The Downtown People Mover Program." UW Faculty Web Server. University of Washington. Web. 20 Sept. 2011. < http://faculty.washington.edu/jbs/itrans/dpmhist.htm >.

MARTA's Image Problem

Atlanta’s public transit system, MARTA, was initially designed to promote economic growth, establish greater transportation equity among Atlanta’s citizens, and reduce the environmental impact associated with a car-dependent society (MARTA). These lofty goals gave MARTA a progressive image, representing Atlanta’s transition from a racist backwater of the Deep South into a world class city.

MARTA no longer has this positive image. Many in Atlanta believe “that MARTA is beyond redemption and should dismantled and be replaced by a less ‘tainted’ and ‘broken’ system.” (Konrad 57) Discussion on the future of MARTA typically focuses on preventing bankruptcy; the initial lofty goals are all but forgotten.

One of the primary reasons MARTA has proven so inept at fulfilling the region’s transportation needs is that Atlanta’s predominantly white, affluent northern suburbs have continually resisted MARTA’s development. Understanding why these suburbs so staunchly oppose MARTA and mitigating these concerns would help MARTA to more fully fulfill its economic, social, and environmental goals.

When MARTA was founded in the 1970s, race was the dominant issue dividing the city of Atlanta. Most suburban whites wanted to keep African Americans from entering their communities and their school systems. They therefore opposed MARTA and the increased mobility it would give urban African Americans.

Since the 1970s, racial prejudices in Atlanta’s suburbs have declined dramatically. Nowhere has this been more apparent than in the public school system. In the 1970s, white flight was used to resist school desegregation. Today, even in the suburbs, there are large minority populations in the schools. For example, in the Cobb County School System, white students account for only 45% of the student body, while African American students compromise 31%. (Cobb County)

Despite these declining racial prejudices, suburban support for MARTA has remained low. MARTA’s suburban image problem therefore can no longer be traced to racial prejudices. MARTA’s image problem in the suburbs results primarily from real problems that frequently arise on MARTA’s buses and trains.

Riding MARTA is almost always slower than driving. Although the buses and trains travel at about the same speed as cars, the additional time spent waiting and transferring between routes wastes the time of MARTA’s passengers. This problem is compounded by the failure of MARTA’s bus and train operators to follow consistent schedules. If the bus is late or if the trains are single tracking, the travel time can be greatly extended. Taking MARTA is both slower and less consistent than driving through traffic.

MARTA’s bus stops and train stations feel unsafe. This assessment is partially accurate: MARTA had 418 crimes committed on its premises during 2010. Most of these involved theft. One homicide occurred. Approximately 3 crimes occur for every million rides on MARTA. (MARTA)

MARTA appears less safe than it is because of the design and location of the bus stops and train stations. Many bus stops are at busy intersections with little available sidewalk to wait on. Both bus stops and train stations are poorly lit and have rough, unfinished surfaces. Many train stations are also underground. This creates an eerie atmosphere, discouraging people from taking MARTA. The empty stations then further the eerie atmosphere and further discourage ridership.

Panhandling is common on MARTA. Although panhandling is forbidden on all MARTA facilities, there are not enough MARTA police to effectively enforce this rule. This common blatant violation of MARTA policy increases the feeling of lawlessness created by the atmosphere of the stations.

Many of MARTA’s riders lack the common courtesy appropriate on public transit. Instead of quietly reading, listening to music, or talking in small groups, many MARTA riders are loud and obnoxious. Although this is a relatively minor concern and is difficult to prevent, it detracts from the experience one has riding MARTA and contributes to MARTA’s overall negative connotation.

MARTA’s suburban image problem is not primarily due to racist tendencies in the suburbs. Suburbanites have multiple, more complicated reasons, most based on personal experience, for disliking MARTA.

These problems are primarily due to poor management and could be resolved without substantial outside intervention. Fixing these problems by making buses and trains more consistently scheduled, increasing lighting around stations and bus stops, and improving police services would help remove MARTA’s negative stigma in the suburbs. Increased suburban support would provide MARTA with some much needed funding and allow it to expand to more fully serve the Greater Atlanta Area. MARTA could then begin to live up to some of its original high expectations.


Works Cited:

"About MARTA." MARTA - Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority. Web. 20 Sept. 2011. < http://www.itsmarta.com/marta-vision-mission.aspx>, .

"About The Cobb County School District." Cobb County School District. Web. 20 Sept. 2011. .

Konrad, Miriam. Transporting Atlanta: The Mode of Mobility Under Construction. New
York: SUNY UP, 2010.

Robert Bullard, director of the Environmental Justice Center at Clark Atlanta University, says, and I quote- "Transportation in Atlanta has always been mired in race and racism". Allow me to analyze the aforementioned statement with respect to Atlanta and The United States in general and come up with a definitive conclusion as to how valid the statement really is.

The name 'Rosa Parks' will remain indelibly etched in American history. It all began on the 1st of December, 1955, when Rosa Parks refused to surrender her bus seat to a white person. This led to the Montgomery Bus Boycott, a political and social protest campaign that started in 1955 in Montgomery, Alabama, USA, intended to oppose the city's policy of racial segregation on its public transit system. Thus, transportation, something we seem to be so nonchalant about, was a pivotal part of the civl rights movement. This, in my view, is pretty intriguing.

The struggle for equality with respect to public transit systems stretches far back into 1896 when a case over segregated rail cars made it to the U.S Supreme Court case. This case, Plessy v/s Ferguson, brought to light the highly debatable notion of "separate but equal".

Public transit was equated with Black and poor people and with crime and poverty. In Atlanta, the MARTA was seen as a means of travel for the African Americans who were not as affluent as their White counterparts.

In 1956, President Dwight Eisenhower signed legislation that funded the interstate highway system. This seemingly inconsequential event, had severe implications on life in the urban areas and in the suburbs.

The highway network enabled the middle-class people who could afford transportation to flee to the suburbs, mostly dominated by white people, from the urban areas, ,mostly dominated by the low income earning African Americans. This augmented the pre-existing segregation and made matters worse. Moreover, the highway project wiped out the settlements of the low-income earning African Americans, who, in turn, were provided little or no compensation for their lost property. They were never given what their houses were actually worth. Instead, as Ora Lee Patterson puts it across, they were given "nickels and dimes" for their property. And to add insult to injury, government officials were ruthless in the manner in which they decapitated neighborhoods.

One such neighborhood which had to bear the brunt of the Government's immorality was Rondo in St. Paul, Minnesota. The image on the left is indicative of the construction work ripping through the neighborhood and the one on the left gives us a picture of what the Rondo looked like after the construction work was over and after the damage had been done. Later, evidence suggested that the Government chose the route for Interstate-94 because it was in the city's low income earning black neighborhood. Thus, this decision was a political rather than an engineering one.

Thus, what I find really baffling is that the Government propagated this segregation and blatantly committed human rights violations. One may argue that the African Americans were brought into the United States as slaves and therefore, should not be level pegging with the native Americans. In my opinion, this is just a baseless argument. Thomas Jefferson once said and I quote, "All men are created equal". Thus, every man has equal rights irrespective of race, religion, color, caste, sex etc.

Thus, I feel I have provided enough substantiation to validate my claim. For long parts of American history, transportation and racial discrimination went hand in hand and some of the actions of the governing bodies simply perpetuated the pitiful plight of the African Americans.

CITATIONS:

1) “Back of the Bus: Mass Transit, Race, and Inequality.” By Andrea Bernstein and Nancy Solomon. American Radio Works. WNYC, New York. Podcast.

2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montgomery_Bus_Boycott

3) http://www.outhistory.org/wiki/Interstate_94

4) http://events.mnhs.org/Timepieces/SourceDetail.cfm?SourceID=412