Tempe streetcar project is underway. (Phoenix: schools, taxes, costs)

[Java Jolt]

Originally Posted by Ponderosa

New freeway corridors do a lot more to spur economic growth than light rail lines will ever do. I'll buy your argument when they decide to open a new mall because it is served by a nearby light rail line. About the only development that light rail is going to bring is a restaurant or two, a bar, a pot dispensary, and a t-shirt shop.

I won't argue at all about the benefits of freeways and the growth they help generate.

But a large metropolitan area like this needs expansion of freeways and alternative transportation modes like more bus routes, light rail, trolleys, and even commuter trains.

The combination of all that makes a good effective mass transit system.

[shiphead]

a 7 lane freeway is not an answer to congestion

[cab591]

The Tempe Streetcar is going to be primarily used by students. I think, in the next few decades, what you'll find are new apartment complexes built on the Mill Ave corridor, shuttling students to and from ASU and the Mill Ave district.

[HX_Guy]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

While I generally favor these kind of mass transit projects, I have a hard time believing that they spur urban growth & development. How many projects have actually broken ground along the light rail line in the last four years??? Very few, if any. Vacant buildings and dilapidated structures still dot the landscape along West Camelback. The Washington/Jefferson corridor is basically a slum area with really no sign of improvement. There have been proposals to build some condo towers on Central Avenue, and enhance after hours activity in the uptown/midtown areas ... but still nothing much happening despite the reports about the economy being in "recovery".

Are you serious?

There have been a ton of projects that have broken ground or have already been completed in the last 4 years and I don't doubt that for many, if not all, the proximity of light rail was one of the reasons they are there.

ASU Downtown, 44 Monroe, Cityscape, One Central Park East just to name a few...there are many many more.

[miamiman]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

That's typical of city government, or any type of government (state & federal included). They use money that they don't have to fund these projects, hoping they will pay for themselves later on. The thing about transit systems is they are not meant to be profitable ... in fact, their primary goal is to serve the public, even if that means taking a loss.

That's why I would prefer services like mass transit be mostly privatized. They would still serve the public good, but free enterprise would allow competition for a well managed firm to charge a user fee, maintain all the costs, and run the system more efficiently. Monorail systems at the Disney theme parks and in Las Vegas were funded with private revenue, and have done quite well.

I actually like the idea of a streetcar trolley running in Tempe, but I just wish the businesses around there could have chipped in & paid for the project. Either way, the traffic around there will be more of a challenge during the period of construction. I hope it will encourage more business along & near Mill Avenue ... and most of all, I hope something worthwile will finally be built on that that ugly vacant lot on the corner of Ash & Univeristy!

I am against this trolley and I disagree with all of your points.

First of all, it makes sense that if local government expects to eventually have the funds to build a project that they plan it out first. It doesn't make sense from a government standpoint to plan a transportation project that won't ever get built. It is good to get as far in the planning stages as possible, so when that funding is available, construction can start right away. There is no money for the South Mountain Freeway, but ADOT is still working to figure out an alignment so that freeway can get built once there is a funding source.

Transit does not need to be privatized. The private sector would leverage any price they wanted on riders and would have absolutely no obligation to provide service. You cite competition, but there are many private industries that hold a monopoly over specific industries, and I have no doubt that would happen here. At least with PUBLIC transportation, there is some accountability.

All that said, this trolley is non-sensical. They need to just put in some free circulator bus routes in that area and move on. There is no need to spend millions of dollars for some outdated technology.

[pbenjamin]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

Vacant buildings and dilapidated structures still dot the landscape along West Camelback.

For what it's worth, Changing Hands book store is moving into the old Beefeaters' location and a gym (LA Fitness?) is taking over the former Target location at 7th Ave/Camelback.

[Valley Native]

Originally Posted by HX_Guy

Are you serious?

There have been a ton of projects that have broken ground or have already been completed in the last 4 years and I don't doubt that for many, if not all, the proximity of light rail was one of the reasons they are there.

ASU Downtown, 44 Monroe, Cityscape, One Central Park East just to name a few...there are many many more.

And ... what else? How about the vacant corners of Camelback & Central, McDowell & Central, and the parcels along Central in the midtown area which had plans for highrises before the light rail came to fruition, but the land continues to sit there vacant?

The projects you mentioned were on the books before the light rail opened anyway, and were under construction during the mid 2000s when the economy was in that fake boom period. Light rail had very little (or nothing) to do with new development. And even if it did in the slightest, why is the West Camelback corridor, and the Washington/Jefferson corridor east of downtown still in a slump?

Originally Posted by miamiman

There is no money for the South Mountain Freeway, but ADOT is still working to figure out an alignment so that freeway can get built once there is a funding source.

The South Mountain Freeway was approved TWICE by voters: once in 1985 and again in 2004. Sales taxes were increased by a half cent so that more freeways could be built ... so in reality, money WAS available for this particular freeway. But guess what? ADOT squandered the funds to the point where the original plans had to be scaled back. We never got the original 231 miles of freeways we were promised back in '85 thanks to ADOT and their mis management. This is another good argument for privatization!

Originally Posted by miamiman

Transit does not need to be privatized. The private sector would leverage any price they wanted on riders and would have absolutely no obligation to provide service. You cite competition, but there are many private industries that hold a monopoly over specific industries, and I have no doubt that would happen here. At least with PUBLIC transportation, there is some accountability.

I cite Las Vegas as a good example with their Monorail. It was entirely paid for by the hotel/casino circuit ... not a dime of taxpayer money went into the project. It has done quite well from what I understand, and there are plans to extend it. Why couldn't transit systems here be paid for by businesses (or at least in part)? The Tempe streetcar is close to a few very large corporate offices, so they can chip in, and a good part of the remaining cost could be picked up by the riders themselves in the form of user fees.

[stephen431]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

I cite Las Vegas as a good example with their Monorail. It was entirely paid for by the hotel/casino circuit ... not a dime of taxpayer money went into the project. It has done quite well from what I understand, and there are plans to extend it.

The Vegas Monorail is operating in Chapter 11 bankruptcy and is begging for federal transportation grant money to stay afloat.

If you want a good example of a profitable monorail, then that would be the Seattle Monorail (or maybe that weird one around West Virginia University).

[HX_Guy]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

And ... what else? How about the vacant corners of Camelback & Central, McDowell & Central, and the parcels along Central in the midtown area which had plans for highrises before the light rail came to fruition, but the land continues to sit there vacant?

The projects you mentioned were on the books before the light rail opened anyway, and were under construction during the mid 2000s when the economy was in that fake boom period. Light rail had very little (or nothing) to do with new development. And even if it did in the slightest, why is the West Camelback corridor, and the Washington/Jefferson corridor east of downtown still in a slump?

What else? There are many more smaller project that are within walking distance of the light rail and though there is no real way to prove either way if the light rail was a deciding factor, I have heard it cited many times.

Yes a lot of these projects were planned before light rail opened but they knew light rail was going to open so how is that a good argument? They could use light rail as a selling point even if it wasn't built yet.

Obviously not every parcel, or even close to every parcel, was going to get built on and especially not in that short period of time and especially even more now that the economy went south. You'd have to look back in probably 20-25 years and see the real effect that the light rail had on the neighborhoods around it.

Our ideas of what public transit should be are obviously different and we're not going to agree on this. I don't think public transit should make a profit, it's there for the public to use if they need to and it's for the greater good of the city. It's like public parks...do you expect those to make some sort of profit? Or museums (which I think should have no entrance fee).

[Java Jolt]

Originally Posted by miamiman

I am against this trolley and I disagree with all of your points.

First of all, it makes sense that if local government expects to eventually have the funds to build a project that they plan it out first. It doesn't make sense from a government standpoint to plan a transportation project that won't ever get built. It is good to get as far in the planning stages as possible, so when that funding is available, construction can start right away. There is no money for the South Mountain Freeway, but ADOT is still working to figure out an alignment so that freeway can get built once there is a funding source.

Transit does not need to be privatized. The private sector would leverage any price they wanted on riders and would have absolutely no obligation to provide service. You cite competition, but there are many private industries that hold a monopoly over specific industries, and I have no doubt that would happen here. At least with PUBLIC transportation, there is some accountability.

All that said, this trolley is non-sensical. They need to just put in some free circulator bus routes in that area and move on. There is no need to spend millions of dollars for some outdated technology.

How are rail lines and streetcars outdated?

They use electricity instead of gas or diesel so they are non-polluting, another in the many ways of going green.

Bus routes are only one part of the whole picture. A solid mass transit system includes a wide variety of choices for the commuter, including freeways, bus routes, and rail.