Light Rail Extension Brings Blight (Phoenix, Mesa: living, price, mall)

[yukon]

Originally Posted by grega94

I don't live in Phoenix, nor have I ever visited, but all I can say is learn from the mistakes of Seattle. Seattle had the opportunity to build a heavy rail subway system back in 1968 and 1970, and 2/3rds of it funded by the federal government, and accounting for inflation would've cost $7 billion, however it was voted down both times, and the funding instead went to Atlanta. Now 50 years later we are building a light rail system for $54 billion with about 13% being covered by federal funding that can hardly be built fast enough to keep up with our demographic growth.

How Seattle blew its chance at a subway system

Maybe for now Phoenix can deal with out rail transit, but will that be the case 50 years from now? It's best to be proactive rather then reactive.

The original proposition voters voted on in Dallas was for subways. It lost by a huge margin. Many speculated that those in the pricier suburbs didn't want "undesireables" that a subway would bring. A research firm in TX did a major survey and discovered that wasn't the reason for the no vote at all - residents didn't want to be underground. Many move to the SW and western states for the "wide open spaces". If they'd wanted underground, they'd have moved to the NE. DART regrouped and presented a light rail, above ground plan (with the one exception underground at 75/Mockingbird) and the tax measure passed. Subsequent measures to expand the system also passed.

Moral of the story? Sometimes it's not about mass transit, but the specific method that's being presented and the demographics of the city to be serviced. I'd be very surprised if voters here voted for underground subways - I'd think they'd be against them for the same reason Dallas voters were 20 years ago.

[markeg]

https://investinphx.org/

[jnojr]

Originally Posted by Minntoaz

Secondly, the light rail is not causing the “junkies” to come out. They’ve always been around. It’s only recently that Phoenix has noticed them (I.e. homelessness downtown etc. It’s fun to pretend you don’t have a problem until it blows up. Contrary to popular belief we are all paying for these homeless folks (ER visits which happen to average out at $30-40,000 per homeless person annually, welfare, jail time... so on) so we may as well try a different approach eh?

Bus 'em to California. California loves bums.

[AndyDwyer480]

I don't make it a habit to clog my phones memory with photos of Blight on my commute.
Don't believe me? Come by and see for yourselves anytime. Preferably in the early am. Just this morning on the intersection of main and Gilbert (at the McDonald's)I had to defend myself against an obviously tweaked out lunatic. Not even 6 am.

I'm done caring why they're there ( illness, family etc) **** I'm mentally ill. I have no family outside of my wife and kid. I've slept on the street. And I got SICK OF IT!

Eventually I got my crap together and am now living the dream. I work two jobs and have a paid hobby at home. I'll never go back. Not if I can help it. My child depends on me and I refuse to let him down!

But In the meantime it would also be nice to get on the train, take the kid to the comic book store and have a good time without being accosted by people who are high on meth.

I don't want to see homeless people harassed, hurt, locked up or anything like that. But crazy tweakers who ruin your day ? **** em. Why do we even have jails if we can't agree VIOLENT PEOPLE deserve to be in them? Huh?

[grega94]

Originally Posted by yukon

The original proposition voters voted on in Dallas was for subways. It lost by a huge margin. Many speculated that those in the pricier suburbs didn't want "undesireables" that a subway would bring. A research firm in TX did a major survey and discovered that wasn't the reason for the no vote at all - residents didn't want to be underground. Many move to the SW and western states for the "wide open spaces". If they'd wanted underground, they'd have moved to the NE. DART regrouped and presented a light rail, above ground plan (with the one exception underground at 75/Mockingbird) and the tax measure passed. Subsequent measures to expand the system also passed.

Moral of the story? Sometimes it's not about mass transit, but the specific method that's being presented and the demographics of the city to be serviced. I'd be very surprised if voters here voted for underground subways - I'd think they'd be against them for the same reason Dallas voters were 20 years ago.

well from what I understand it was supposed to be similar to San Francisco's BART so it would've been mostly above ground. but in any case I think both times a majority voted yes, but it needed to be a super majority to pass, and the second one coincided with huge layoff from Boeing, so people thought that Seattle was going to decay, and couldn't fathom that Seattle would ever boom again.

[grega94]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

I'm voting NO on this upcoming proposition, which would allow light rail expansion to continue as the majority of voters previously approved this. However, the light rail expansion does need an overhaul. It would be absolutely stupid for additional lines to shopping malls as was originally proposed. Sadly, most of the indoor malls are being vacated due to the changing methods available for shopping, so it would make more sense to have light rail concentrated to centralized areas, and commuter rail could be an option from downtown to the suburbs.

I think making stops at dead super malls could make a lot of sense if the property is redesigned for transit oriented development, with residential, office and retail space similar to what is happening to Seattle's Northgate mall.

[kttam186290]

Originally Posted by jnojr

Bus 'em to California.

You've already done that -- and got caught ! -- I might add.

We've got people living in the Santa Ana River who state they originally came from Phoenix. And this situation is being thoroughly investigated by the State of California as I type this.


So, I wouldn't make a habit of doing that, if I were you.

Ask Nevada about that. A state psychiatric facility in Las Vegas got caught bussing patients to San Francisco and dropping them off there. The State of California caught wind of it and sued the sh-- out of the State of Nevada for it. Lots of heads rolled over that one! Trust me!

It will happen to Arizona too.

[Magnum Mike]

Originally Posted by phlinak

MM is right, roundabouts are actually safer than traffic lights.

Roundabouts don't cause the traffic backups at major intersections because they keep the traffic moving in all directions.

Roundabouts could also be very useful in instances where a major street intersects with a less-traveled neighborhood street. Example is Dunlap & 15th Ave, which is a t-intersection and often times the lights for traffic on Dunlap turn red just to allow one vehicle on 15th Ave to turn left, then the light stays red for longer than needed. This is stupid, instead of a light, there should be roundabout.

Another example is 29th Ave & Peoria, and further down on Peoria at 31st Ave. This is where roundabouts are needed because there's no reason to stop traffic on a busy major street for the traffic on the two less traveled streets. Also drive on Thunderbird or Bell Roads, especially in the vicinity of I-17, during the day and you'll see the same examples repeated.

Roundabouts are also cheaper and more cost-effective.

[Magnum Mike]

Originally Posted by timtemtym

They are not paying to ride the trains.

Originally Posted by pbenjamin

And you know this how?

You clearly don't understand light rail. It goes way too slow for those sorts of distances. That's a job for commuter/heavy rail that doesn't have to interact with traffic.

If they are paying to ride the light rail it's the cash they get from people who hand them money.

I have a friend who lives in Mesa and doesn't have a car so she rides the light rail to downtown Phoenix then the bus to her work location around 75th Ave & McDowell. It takes her 3 hours to commute each way.

[Magnum Mike]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

I'm voting NO on this upcoming proposition, which would allow light rail expansion to continue as the majority of voters previously approved this. However, the light rail expansion does need an overhaul. It would be absolutely stupid for additional lines to shopping malls as was originally proposed. Sadly, most of the indoor malls are being vacated due to the changing methods available for shopping, so it would make more sense to have light rail concentrated to centralized areas, and commuter rail could be an option from downtown to the suburbs.

There are actually 2 propositions, 105 & 106 and I will vote yes on 105, and I'll have to read the details on Prop 106. Light rail is too expansive and it's not cost-effective. The Phoenix area is not a light rail city mainly because of how vast the entire metro area is, most of the people drive automobiles and an expansion of the light rail system is not going to help the majority of day-to-day commuters. On the other hand, a commuter express system along the I-10 corridor west of downtown Phoenix would certainly help, but that's not in the plans, and the issue with that is there's no place for it other than the median on I-10, which is owned by ADOT and I don't think any city governments have a say in how it should be used. Also there is no median on the 10 east of 35th Ave so if any sort of commuter rail were to be built on that portion of the 10, it would have to be on existing lanes of the freeway going into downtown.

Overall, I think focusing on fixing the problems with the streets should take precedence over expansion of the light rail.