This hardly classifies as news, since it’s already widely known that we have one of the nation’s poorest public transit systems.
It’s now been documented by Brookings Institution which concluded that among the 100 largest metros in the U.S., we are #69. Or put another way, we are in the bottom third.
If there’s any good news for Memphis, it’s that we’re better than any other metro in Tennessee. Chattanooga is #87, Nashville is #88, and Knoxville is an abysmal #95.
There’s no reason for celebration. Fifteen of the 20 metros for public transit are in the South. The same number of highly rated transit systems are in the West.
As we read the Brookings Institution report, we thought of the words of Memphis Mayor A C Wharton, who said: “Memphis has no margin for error.” He’s right and it’s why we have to do an awfully lot of things right at the same time. Better public transit is one of those things.
Coming Up Lacking
“Public transit is a critical part of the economic and social fabric of metropolitan areas,” the Brookings report said. “People take transit for any number of reasons, but one of the most common is to get to work. However, when it comes to the question of how effective transit connects people and jobs within and across these metropolitan areas, strikingly little is known.”
In the Memphis metro, only 26% of all jobs are reachable by transit within 90 minutes. The national average is 30%.
The average wait here for a bus in rush hour is 15.8 minutes, which is 50% higher than the average of the 100 metros. It’s about 10 minutes.
Meanwhile, 51% of the working age residents are near a transit stop. The average of the 100 metros is 69%.
Finding a Transit Leader
Cities in the top 10 are Honolulu, San Jose-Sunnyvale, Salt Lake City, Tucson, Fresno, Denver, Albuquerque, Las Vegas, Provo-Orem, and Modesto.
Cities in the bottom 10 are Knoxville, Riverside-San Bernardino, Youngstown, Augusta SC, Palm Bay/Melbourne, Poughkeepsie, Birmingham, Greenville SC, Richmond, and Atlanta.
“These trends have three broad implications for leaders at the local, regional, state, and national levels,” wrote Brookings. “Transportation leaders should make access to jobs an explicit priority in their spending and service decisions, especially given budget pressures they face. Metro leaders should coordinate strategies regarding land use, economic development, and housing with transit decisions in order to ensure that transit reaches more people and more jobs efficiently.”
The most troubling thing for us is not just the validation of what we already knew, but that we can’t think of any elected official or leader who can be identified as a “leader for transit.” As Sustainable Shelby pointed out, there’s a vital role that transit plays in shifting our community for a path that is ultimately unsustainable.
Talking the Talk
We’ve talked for years about creating a transit authority that represents the best national thinking about better ways to serve the entire community, rather than operating from the assumption that their clientele is a captive audience (read: poor people) so there’s little reason to improve the quality of the experience, the quality of the buses, or to keep pace with the improvements being made in other cities in their bus service.
We’ve talked for years about shifting the emphasis of the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) from how to build more highway lanes (thinking that delivered up abominations like Germantown Parkway) to how to provide a higher quality transit system.
We’ve talked for years about how crucial public transit is to effective economic development, but the business community remains essentially uninvolved in calls for a better bus system.
MATA is now undertaking the transit plan required by law (and our guest blogger Jonathan Flynt has written insightfully about it). In the past, that has meant largely changing the dates on the existing plan and perpetuating the same kind and quality of service. Hopefully, that will be different this time since there are MATA board members asking the kind of impertinent questions that need to be answered by the MATA staff if bus service here is ever to improve.
Jonathan Flynt blog posts:
I agree that there is much MATA can and should do to improve but let’s not start this thread by heaping all blame on them. We have a systemic failure that is greater than a transit agency.
On March 26th a roof colapsed causing a 20 foot-wide, four-story building to become unstable above Madison Avenue. The solution? Close the entire street and shut down the trolley… FOR MONTHS! In what other city would a rail system (a $100 Million Investment) be taken off-line for two full months while someone, somewhere ponders the next step? We do not value residents, tourists or transit… I think this proves it.
We have built our city purposefully to densities far below what will support transit. We have dispersed our employment centers to the point that no center exists anywhere. We have given no sign that this will change and we blame the bus driver.
I am amazed we are ranked #69. I think this may be a testament to perhaps MATA doing better than expected.
The unfortunate part of this tale is that while this has been happening, it hasn’t happened with any thought to actual Memphians. While many US households now have more cars than people, Memphis averages 1.9 cars per home. This is a contrast to Tennessee and the Country who vastly excede that. We have built a sprawling car centric city where personal vehicles are a basic necessity when a significant number of people do not have that necessity.
There will never be enough busses to cure this.
MATA is responsible for giving us a novelty trolley system instead of real public transit. I’m surprised they’re not #100. In my book, they deserve it, mainly because they say Memphis can’t afford a first class system and their customers don’t care. It’s a cavalier attitude that has been allowed too long and is part and parcel to the culture of poor public decision making that got us where we are today. If a big time city can’t get transit right, it’s not a big time city. Transit defines us more than the glitzy projects that we pretend are making us a great city.
Lousy public transit contributes directly and supports a car centric attitude for many of us.
John,
I agree with the assessment even though I think you might be as charitable in dubbing the Madison Avenue Trolley with the title “rail system” as Brookings was in placing Memphis at the 69 spot. A true catch-22 in this situation is land-use planning. While the vast majority of our streets are currently underutilized, there is a limit to the density we can achieve without an efficient transit system. Based on precedent, an improved MATA could actually boost land value and thus allow for higher density development within the existing urbanized areas. If MATA is not going to be the advocate for an improved transit system and involved in all issues that relate to such improvement (such as land use and transportation planning), then who is?
Fortunately, we still have a foundation to work from. A somewhat dependable TDOT map indicates that of the 48 employers in Memphis with 500 employees or more, 21 of these companies are located in the downtown area between I-240, I-40, and G.E. Patterson. Nowhere else in the city is there a similar concentration of large employers. The Ridgeway Center area comes in a distant 2nd with 4 such employers which increases to 6 if you include Baptist/ Humphreys Center at Walnut Grove and I-240. The city’s degree of sprawl is still relatively limited when compared to certain peer cities which makes Memphis slightly more inclined to public transportation use. A definite pattern of infill development- trending toward higher densities- has been and continues to occur despite a near vacuum of support in locations from Downtown to Germantown. It might sound dispersed, but a common element of these developments is their relative proximity to the Union-Poplar-Walnut Grove corridor. This pattern in and of itself is conducive to improved transit.
Thanks for the thoughtful reply, JF. You are making sense… a lot of it.
What changes would you recommend to get the ball rolling? Something large like a fully integrated comprehensive plan? Something small & grass roots?
I think it starts with the largely (or entirely) detached private sector. If we had a property owner that would say he’d build X if MATA would serve with Y, then maybe the City Hall crew might move?
At the risk of sounding like a fairy story, what could we do that is “just right?” Something between the expensive comprehensive plan that city/county governments seem unlikely to fund or the small, grassroots. Perhaps something that could demonstrate the need for the comprehensive plan that we need so badly. At this point, we haven’t had one in so long that no one understands its value any more. How do we show it?
heck, you can’t even get a freekin cab in Memphis either !! lousy lousy service ! airport, downtown, eaast, Germantown, ANYWHERE ! awful transit
Instead of a bike trail from Shelby Farms to midtown, MATA should have used those tracks for a trolley service that would eventually link up with the current trolley system. A wasted opportunity.
Daisy,
I have asked about that very thing and been informally told that there is enough right-of-way to do that and operate the greenline too.
Not sure if that is right (or safe) but your idea is one we need to think about. Cordova to Downtown could have been a great route.
On another note… let’s not get so enamored with the trolley/rail that we lose sight of reality. Some rail is viable with 12 residential units per acre but ideally you’d want nodes to approach 60 units an acre. Still only talking three-story flats or narrow townhouses. BUT, that really doesn’t exist in Memphis… yet.
We need short, mid and long term solutions to get us to that point. Dedicated lanes for Express Busses down Poplar, Jackson and Lamar with Small Feeder Busses going north/south to start?
hey John~
by reading some of the posts on this site you would think about 40% or more of Memphis is going to ride bikes everywhere !
Unfortunately, some of Memphis, as you put it, has already “lost sight of reality”. Memphis has a terrible transit system, and always has. Your suggestion about express or dedicated bus lanes should have been implemented in the mid-1980′s when I think it was first discussed. Memphis is just behind the times especially on the transportation (mass and otherwise) piece.
The wonderful part about bike lanes is their ability to contribute to the solution. To believe that bikes will be utilized as the sole method of transportation is as misleading as it is uninformed in regards to the role that mode of transportation plays in other cities. It represents a failure to view transportation as a series or interrelated choices, systems and modes. Bikes are an excellent way by which the “ped-shed” feeding bus routes can be expanded. While studies indicate pedestrians tolerance for walking to and from a transit stop is limited to about a 1/4 mile, that radius expands outward up to 1/2 to 2/3 of a mile when bicycles are introduced as a dependable and safe mode of transportation. In essence, it helps bridge the gap between transit and origin/ destination points. Such relationships are critical in areas where lower density inhibits transit ridership. As noted in an earlier post, the greatest return on our investment in bike lanes and transit occur by coordinating the development of both systems. This would include locating bus stops at their intersection with bike lanes, providing bike racks both at stops and on the buses themselves, and even explore the installation of rentable bike lockers at specific stops and intersections. The greatest danger is to view each aspect of transportation planning- land use, route alignment, schedules, bike lanes, sidewalks and quality of the pedestrian experience- in a vacuum.