POLL: The future of Albuquerque (Rio Rancho: high school, college, taxes)

[nmnita]

Originally Posted by mrgoodwx

I hate to say this...but rybert's post of the photos seems consistent with this week's report that 46 percent of the Albuquerque public school students in the cohort class of 2008 managed to graduate, compared to a national average of 70 percent. If that's accurate, it doesn't bode well for Albuquerque's future.

It is accurate or appears to be. We were in ABQ last week when the report came out. No one denied it, several gave excuses as to why, but no one actually said the figures were wrong.

I still think ABQ will continue to grow and hopefully attract families that encourage their kids to stay in school.

Nita

[abqsunport]

Casden, no one is arguing that we need a strong and diverse public transportation system. The argument is that a light rail street car down one street isn't going to accomplish that. Personally, I am in favor for high speed rail--taking a lesson from the Japanese. I wouldn't feel the need to drive if I new I could get from point a to point b in the same amount of time as it would take me drive. However, a street car down central does little for me in the far north east heights. However, the Zoidberg line, (or in my opinion, scrap the airport and got Old Town, Downtown, Nob Hill, Uptown, Hoffmantown) would provide better service to more people. You, Mortimer, most of Albuquerque, and I are all rooting for a similar outcome (less sprawl, more urban development, better public transport), its just the path to get there we have a hard time unifying on.

[EnjoyEP]

Originally Posted by abqsunport

Green only matters to people when it doesn't affect the green in their pocket.

Righton,righton,righton,righton!!!!

Someone ask the good folks of Buffalo, NY just how beneficial their "light rail" thing was in terms of dollars spent v. value earned.

[mortimer]

Originally Posted by casden

Dense corridor????

Not quite that dense, but I lived in San Francisco and now live in Chicago.

Are we getting into a d|ck-size war?

I've lived in Tokyo and Taipei. My idea if "dense" is bigger than yours.

Originally Posted by casden

Have I missed something? What high-speed light rail?

Yes you have. You're in favor of spending money on a useless rail project that has not been built.
I'm in favor of a project that would yield a benefit. Neither have been built or started.
There. Now you know.

Originally Posted by casden

Isn't the money initially coming from the stimulus funds?

It's NOT free money. Building a rail transport corridor down central burdens the city with a far more expensive transportation option from an operating cost standpoint.

The burden lasts FOREVER. It would be for NOTHING.

A trolley would NOT be an improvement over the Rapid Ride.

Originally Posted by casden

OK - so build more and wider roads and highways, then you'll really see no density on Central or anywhere else in ABQ, leading to the demise of that cities soul.

The argument is not about that. It is strictly about putting in a useless Trolley.

Oh, and YES. DO spend more money on wider roads and highways. Most people drive and they are paying for that with their gasoline tax dollars and are entitled to those improvements.

Originally Posted by casden

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but the plan is for a "Modern Streetcar" which is an entirely different thing from a "trolley"

OK. You're wrong. It's a rail system down Central Avenue.

I don't care what you call it. I'm using "Trolley" because that's the term that's been bounced around.

If I call a piece of dog crap a turd or a poop or a log or a land mine, does that make a difference?

Originally Posted by casden

I've done the same, and I've used them in SF and Chicago ... so I would like to think that I know what I'm talking about also.

I can't speak for Chicago, but the street-level urban rail system in San Francisco left me totally unimpressed. It doesn't do anything that a bus could not do.

Originally Posted by casden

So it sounds like you think the METRA (not a high-speed rail) in San Francisco is "wasting money"?

Oh, you're right: It uses quite a bit more money than a bus would use to accomplish the same thing.

Originally Posted by casden

In all the years I lived in San Francisco, the METRA Streetcar lines I rode were almost always filled to the gills, ...

Irrelevant. If they were buses, they'd be full also.

Originally Posted by casden

... and I wasn't aware that they were losing money by running them at lower speeds than BART (high-speed rail).

Both buses and light rail lose money. Light rail lose money at a higher rate than buses because they are rail vehicles and NOT because of the speed they run.

Originally Posted by casden

Depending on who you talk to this project is just as worthwhile as the one's you think are worthwhile - especially in the eyes of many of the people who actually study urban environments and plan for the infrastructure of growing cities.

Oh, now you're pulling out the "you don't have a PhD in Urban Studies, so you're not qualified to argue about this" argument.

Originally Posted by casden

Many think that without proper infrastracture cities wither and lose valuable economic dollars and creative people.

[... Jumping up and down ...] "Oh ME!" "Me!" I think that too!

Originally Posted by casden

Buses can only do so much in alleviating a densley populated area. Granted ABQ is only semi-densley populated, but there will be a time when ABQ will have more densely populated areas, and something more than a lower capacity bus every 20 minutes will be needed.

The Rapid Ride runs every 10 minutes.

Originally Posted by casden

Some people just believe in investing wisely in a cities future, ... would be a much wiser and greener investment than more highways ....

Albuquerque needs more investment in highways too.

Originally Posted by bradly

It could, Newer more uban like buildings would go up. We actually were talking about this in a meeting today.

Newer "urban-like" buildings are already going up along Central Avenue.

The bottom line is that if you spend money for rail on Central that's money that won't be available for transportation options that actually do some good.

[casden]

Hey Mort,

We're not getting in any kind of war. I simply stated a fact about what I saw on the website that Bradly added to his post and I gave my opinion, then you gave your opinion of what you thought about a "trolley" on Central.

But then all this inflammatory talk about a size war, and the qualifications of someone to state their opinion suddenly appeared. Everybody's got their perspective. I can't and don't intend to change your mind, just as you can't change mine.

...but I do recognize a bait-n'-switch when I see one. So I'm not going to take the bait - let's just understand that we disagree on this issue about Albuquerque and leave at that - ok?

[abqsunport]

Well the beauty of spirited debate is that we do get hear all perspectives. I look forward to seeing casdens as much as mortimer's as much as enjoy ep's as much as abqconvicts as much as everyone else opinion. Sometimes more importantly than looking at it as a way to "change peoples minds" is to look at the entire ins and outs of a solution and decide whether it would be a good investment or not.

[mortimer]

Originally Posted by casden

... let's just understand that we disagree on this issue about Albuquerque and leave at that - ok?

OK.

You're going to get your way anyway.
The Trolley will get built and bradly will be happy.

I'm just going to argue against it anytime someone (*) posts
that building such a thing would be good for the city.

(*) even bradly

[bradly]

Well if this city was smart they would have started it along time ago, with or without the public's input. This city cares too much on what new-comers think. I'm sorry but born and raised here, if I was in charge i'd build a monorail from downtown to the airport. This would be one of the best things that could have happened.. even light rail along the cities most busiest areas... but we are failing and falling..

[karmathecat]

"This city cares too much on what new-comers think."

It's many of the "new-comers" who move here and see how badly things operate that drive the changes that you see happening. Left to its own devices, ABQ would continue to be rather backwards, corrupt and lacking the positive changes other cities have made.

Why would a monorail from downtown to the airport or light rail along the cities "most busiest" areas ( where are those ?!? ) be practical and/or popular? There is transportation to/from the airport already and the downtown area does employ a large number of people but not the majority.

[mortimer]

Originally Posted by karmathecat

It's many of the "new-comers" ... drive the changes .../QUOTE]

I agree there.

That's the great thing about living anywhere in the US. There isn't
a real concept of "outsiders" and "newcomers" except in inbred
small towns. There is just "citizens" and that's how it should be.

Originally Posted by karmathecat

Why would a monorail from downtown to the airport or light rail ... be practical and/or popular?

Because that's where the transportation center is.

It's where the Railrunner and ALL the buses stop.

It's where the airport and isotopes stop should be.

Mass transit only works when there is a minimum of stops.

Once you start putting "convenience" stops all along a route,
then mass transit just becomes the "loser cruiser" and a big
waste of time.

Hint: Time is money.

A monorail is attractive in Albuquerque because of the stunning
views. Even riding the express bus through the Big-I is a treat
for the eyes on most days.

Another benefit of a monorail is that the track has to be very
well maintained and engineered so that a train can be run
relatively fast.

Normally, I like to pick on bradley, well, because it's so much
fun, but I'm with him on the downtown connection and monorail.
(I'm not on the "outsiders" thing.)