Downtown Glendale preferred Light Rail route selected, could be complete by 2026 (Phoenix: transfer, construction)

[grmi66]

So just out of curiousity why does it take so long to lay track and string the electric wires? I moved back to Phoenix 4 years ago and my apartment was near the latest section of light rail. They are just now getting ready to run the train past Christown. The way they build the light rail it will be my future grandchildren that will be able to take advantage of it.

But agree that running the rail past GCU is a good thing. GCU is doing a good job so far of revitalizing that part of Phoenix, it's not as scary as it was even 10 years ago.

[cjseliga]

Originally Posted by grmi66

So just out of curiousity why does it take so long to lay track and string the electric wires? I moved back to Phoenix 4 years ago and my apartment was near the latest section of light rail. They are just now getting ready to run the train past Christown. The way they build the light rail it will be my future grandchildren that will be able to take advantage of it.

A lot of it is due to the relocation of utilities; gas, water, sewer, telcom, etc. You don't want to have a light rail track directly above a water main, then have that main break and have to rip up the track and disrupt service for a long time. And with most of the tracks going right down the middle of a road, that is where most of the major utility lines were put in, back in the day.

[stevek64]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

HA HA! You took the words right out my mouth. By the time light rail catches up to the Westgate area, the Coyotes will be moved to another location, if not entirely out of the Phoenix area (which I hope doesn't happen, but Glendale's financial mess regarding the team is a huge cause for concern). Also, I think the Cards are pretty firmly set at UOP Stadium, but if Westgate starts to crumble (which is already showing signs of happening), don't be surprised if even the Cards will want to move somewhere more centrally located ... not to tribal land I hope!

Not sure on this aspect of it with the new outlet stores and a few new restaurants recently added that are very popular, one of them Buster and Dave's. We met some friends to go to the Yardhouse there not so long ago on a Saturday night where there were no games/events and the place was packed with people. Line out the door of Buster and Dave's and we had to wait 45 minutes for a table at the Yardhouse. Some other restaurant took over part of the closed Margaritaville but don't recall the name of it.

[sargeant79]

Originally Posted by cjseliga

A lot of it is due to the relocation of utilities; gas, water, sewer, telcom, etc. You don't want to have a light rail track directly above a water main, then have that main break and have to rip up the track and disrupt service for a long time. And with most of the tracks going right down the middle of a road, that is where most of the major utility lines were put in, back in the day.

This is the part about light rail that I don't get. It seems like it would make more sense if the track would be added either next to the road or as part of an elevated track. How much of the utility relocation would still be necessary then? Maybe someone with more engineering knowledge could enlighten me as to why Phoenix never took that approach.

[cjseliga]

Originally Posted by sargeant79

This is the part about light rail that I don't get. It seems like it would make more sense if the track would be added either next to the road or as part of an elevated track. How much of the utility relocation would still be necessary then? Maybe someone with more engineering knowledge could enlighten me as to why Phoenix never took that approach.

Putting the track next to the road can get very expense unless the land (ROW) was set aside like they did for the 101, 202, 303, etc. They would have had to buy all the homes/businesses along one side of the road, which is definitely more expensive than just relocating utilities, probably faster to build the line, but not as cost effective. As for elevating the line, that is also more expensive than just using the current road, plus utilities would still have to be relocated around the pilings that would be supporting the track, unless they put the elevated track to one side of the road and not down the middle. A lot of light rail systems, such as Salt Lake City and Denver's use old railroad right-of-ways, which is definitely cheaper, but those don't always go through the major areas/most dense/busiest. Another "relatively" cheaper place to put light rail/heavy rail is along interstates, where the utilities are already out of the way and the ROW is already owned.

[sargeant79]

Originally Posted by cjseliga

Putting the track next to the road can get very expense unless the land (ROW) was set aside like they did for the 101, 202, 303, etc. They would have had to buy all the homes/businesses along one side of the road, which is definitely more expensive than just relocating utilities, probably faster to build the line, but not as cost effective. As for elevating the line, that is also more expensive than just using the current road, plus utilities would still have to be relocated around the pilings that would be supporting the track, unless they put the elevated track to one side of the road and not down the middle. A lot of light rail systems, such as Salt Lake City and Denver's use old railroad right-of-ways, which is definitely cheaper, but those don't always go through the major areas/most dense/busiest. Another "relatively" cheaper place to put light rail/heavy rail is along interstates, where the utilities are already out of the way and the ROW is already owned.

Makes sense, thanks.

[Java Jolt]

I'm glad there are finally plans in the works to expand light rail to the west valley.

[locolife]

Originally Posted by cjseliga

Putting the track next to the road can get very expense unless the land (ROW) was set aside like they did for the 101, 202, 303, etc. They would have had to buy all the homes/businesses along one side of the road, which is definitely more expensive than just relocating utilities, probably faster to build the line, but not as cost effective. As for elevating the line, that is also more expensive than just using the current road, plus utilities would still have to be relocated around the pilings that would be supporting the track, unless they put the elevated track to one side of the road and not down the middle. A lot of light rail systems, such as Salt Lake City and Denver's use old railroad right-of-ways, which is definitely cheaper, but those don't always go through the major areas/most dense/busiest. Another "relatively" cheaper place to put light rail/heavy rail is along interstates, where the utilities are already out of the way and the ROW is already owned.

Just curious, do you have knowledge on what existing old railroad right-of-ways existing in the Phoenix area? My guess is due to the new nature of our city there's little to none of this to be utilized. Ironically, the current LRT route nearly parallels a heavy rail route all the way from the east valley right to downtown Phoenix, it even crosses town lake just a few miles a part. But it doesn't hit all the key spots you want the transit train to cover and it's also still very active. I'm not aware of any unused railways in Phoenix.

[cjseliga]

Originally Posted by locolife

Just curious, do you have knowledge on what existing old railroad right-of-ways existing in the Phoenix area? My guess is due to the new nature of our city there's little to none of this to be utilized. Ironically, the current LRT route nearly parallels a heavy rail route all the way from the east valley right to downtown Phoenix, it even crosses town lake just a few miles a part. But it doesn't hit all the key spots you want the transit train to cover and it's also still very active. I'm not aware of any unused railways in Phoenix.

I don't know of any, even going by Google Maps. I guess places like Denver and Salt Lake City, "lucked out" and were able to either utilize old rail ROW or place some of their new light rail lines along existing rail ROW, which isn't always the best of locations, but it's cheaper and makes the light rail move a lot quicker, since cars have to stop for the light rail and not the other way around. Back in PA, and I guess throughout the US, rails-to-trails is big and lots of the old rail ROW are becoming running/walking/biking/horse riding trails.

[Valley Native]

Originally Posted by cjseliga

Another "relatively" cheaper place to put light rail/heavy rail is along interstates, where the utilities are already out of the way and the ROW is already owned.

This is actually the long term plan from the Capitol to the west Valley: light rail in the I10 median, and the stations would be sporadically placed at certain major exits/overpasses. I know something similar was done in the L.A. area on one of the freeways, but I can't recall which one (seems to me it was in the Pasadena area).

I don't especially see this as being cheaper because in addition to laying the tracks & building the stations, there would be have to be elevators & escalators installed at the overpass level ... similar to the SkyTrain connection at 44th Street & Washington. You would probably be correct about the absence of utilities in the medians, however. All I know is something needs to be done with that I10 median. It's an eyesore!