Light Rail Extension Brings Blight (Phoenix, Mesa: 2015, home, employment)

[JGMotorsport64]

Originally Posted by P47P47

Well, there's just no getting around the fact that any time you make travel (or anything else) easier and more convenient for law-abiding, regular people, you also make it easier and more convenient for criminals and other low-lifes.

A lot of them can come up with $4. It’s not exactly a fortune.

A lot of people use it for the a/c. Same with City buses

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by phetaroi

My question is -- after having lived in D.C. with its Metro Rail, and Bangkok with its Skytrain and subway...how is it that the truly down and out have the money in Phoenix to ride metro when that basically didn't happen elsewhere. Are there that many homeless people patronizing light rail? I'm not quite sure that seems very logical.

The number of homeless people riding light rail is greater than zero but not nearly as big as claimed by opponents of rail expansion. Some homeless people do find the money to buy a ticket, and if they do, they have every right to ride as long as they comply with basic rules of passenger behavior. If a homeless person rides the train to a shelter, social services agency, or a job interview, that's something to be encouraged. Nevertheless, in my daily commute via light rail, I've never seen a train in which a majority of passengers appeared to be homeless. It's a spectrum of people of all classes. Some people are uncomfortable with that economic diversity and focus on the negative in an attempt to find fault.

Originally Posted by WSPHXPELON

I've never been to DC or Bangkok, but take into account the here in PHX the lightrail has no turnstiles or any way to enforce payment other that security boarding and occasionally checking tickets.

Proof-of-payment systems, in which security personnel can ask to see a ticket at any time, are the norm in the majority of US cities with rail transit. It is a minority of cities that have heavy rail systems with turnstiles. There are even some heavy rail systems around the world (e.g. Berlin) that rely on proof-of-payment in lieu of hard barriers. Even when turnstiles are installed, they are not foolproof. The NYC subway and BART in San Francisco have both had their share of fare evasion because the truly motivated find ways to bypass turnstiles. Every system needs a security presence to both ensure payment of fares and to enforce rules of behavior. That presence has been greatly upgraded in Phoenix over the past year or two, and I've seen positive results from it.

[Burning Madolf]

Originally Posted by exit2lef

The number of homeless people riding light rail is greater than zerobut not nearly as big as claimed by opponents of rail expansion. Some homeless people do find the money to buy a ticket, and if they do, they have every right to ride as long as they comply with basic rules of passenger behavior. If a homeless person rides the train to a shelter, social services agency, or a job interview, that's something to be encouraged. Nevertheless, in my daily commute via light rail, I've never seen a train in which a majority of passengers appeared to be homeless. It's a spectrum of people of all classes. Some people are uncomfortable with that economic diversity and focus on the negative in an attempt to find fault.



Proof-of-payment systems, in which security personnel can ask to see a ticket at any time, are the norm in the majority of US cities with rail transit. It is a minority of cities that have heavy rail systems with turnstiles. There are even some heavy rail systems around the world (e.g. Berlin) that rely on proof-of-payment in lieu of hard barriers. Even when turnstiles are installed, they are not foolproof. The NYC subway and BART in San Francisco have both had their share of fare evasion because the truly motivated find ways to bypass turnstiles. Every system needs a security presence to both ensure payment of fares and to enforce rules of behavior. That presence has been greatly upgraded in Phoenix over the past year or two, and I've seen positive results from it.

Interesting.



You in an earlier post to the OP: "Can you please provide crime statistics or any other type of evidence beyond your own personal observations?"


You now: 'Here's a bunch of anecdotal evidence based on my personal observations.'

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by Burning Madolf

Interesting.



You in an earlier post to the OP: "Can you please provide crime statistics or any other type of evidence beyond your own personal observations?"


You now: 'Here's a bunch of anecdotal evidence based on my personal observations.'

Most successful argumentation incorporates a mix of both. The difference is that I am open about what is my personal observation. I use first-person language and words like "appear" to suggest that while I may have strong leanings, I don't operate with 100% certainty about what I've seen. The OP, however, made a strong claim in third-person language and no concession to any uncertainty in the choice of words, implying that somehow the claim was 100% objective truth. That type of claim should have data to back it up.

[Magnum Mike]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

I'm very mixed about light rail expansion, and the upcoming vote. While I despise the NIMBYs who are forcing yet another ballot proposition on something that was already decided by the voters, I can definitely understand the need for prioritizing transportation projects. Many streets in Phoenix are cracking and have potholes ... something that used to be pretty uncommon here. The last initiative involving light rail also included a provision for street improvements, but very little of that has been accomplished. So while I would like to vote NO to counter the stupid NIMBYs, I do believe it's best to not expand light rail when there are other things that should take priority.

Hi VN - The light rail in Phoenix is a design that was thought of in the late 1990s and voters approved it in 2000, but one of the problems now is that it's not and never will be sufficient to accommodate the needs of many motorists in the entire valley, and it would be a very costly plan to create a light rail system that would work for the entire valley mainly because of how large the Phoenix metro area has gotten. The number of people who ride the light rail (according to Wikipedia) is around 50,000 a day as of 2017, I think that figure is somewhat inflated. As of now, the light rail probably works for people who live near light rail facilities, like stops and stations and riders will have to either ride a bus, ride a bike, or walk to those facilities to get to their destinations. Overall, it works for some people but not the majority of commuters in the Phoenix area.

Pot holes are only one of the problems in Phoenix city streets, and honestly I have some doubts about Prop 105 being the solution to most problems Phoenix faces in transportation, but at least if it is approved, it will be a solution to some of the problems we are seeing now.

I won't go into to many details about what solutions I have in mind, but one is replacing traffic lights at many major intersections with roundabouts.

[Burning Madolf]

Originally Posted by Magnum Mike

Hi VN - The light rail in Phoenix is a design that was thought of in the late 1990s and voters approved it in 2000, but one of the problems now is that it's not and never will be sufficient to accommodate the needs of many motorists in the entire valley, and it would be a very costly plan to create a light rail system that would work for the entire valley mainly because of how large the Phoenix metro area has gotten. The number of people who ride the light rail (according to Wikipedia) is around 50,000 a day as of 2017, I think that figure is somewhat inflated. As of now, the light rail probably works for people who live near light rail facilities, like stops and stations and riders will have to either ride a bus, ride a bike, or walk to those facilities to get to their destinations. Overall, it works for some people but not the majority of commuters in the Phoenix area.

Pot holes are only one of the problems in Phoenix city streets, and honestly I have some doubts about Prop 105 being the solution to most problems Phoenix faces in transportation, but at least if it is approved, it will be a solution to some of the problems we are seeing now.

I won't go into to many details about what solutions I have in mind, but one is replacing traffic lights at many major intersections with roundabouts.

If it weren't for all the potential fatalities, that would be AWESOME entertainment!

[Magnum Mike]

As some mentioned here, one major problem with the Blight Rail are the homeless, many of whom are in the situation because of addictions to drugs and alcohol and many light rail riders stopped using it because of the problems those troubled individuals are causing.

[timothyaw]

Originally Posted by exit2lef

.... It is a minority of cities that have heavy rail systems with turnstiles. There are even some heavy rail systems around the world (e.g. Berlin) that rely on proof-of-payment in lieu of hard barriers.....

It's been a few years since I've been to Berlin, but when I was there that was what I exclusively used to get around and all the stations used barriers. S-Bahn and D-Bahn all had barriers.

[Sno0909]

Originally Posted by markeg

Voting yes will not give any more funds to road improvements. It will only take away funding from the light rail. The money for the light rail will go to another state.
If you think traffic is bad now, take away the light rail and we will have a mess.
Vote NO to 105 on August 27th.

When my car was in the shop, I decided to ride the light rail for a week. Horrible, horrible decision. The final straw was when a homeless man sat next to me, with visible urine all over his pants. Not urine stains (past tense)...actual wet sweatpants soaked in urine. Oh yeah, I almost forgot about the guy with fresh blood all over his knuckles and shirt who was touching everything...getting his blood everywhere. Wow. I'd had enough.

Now to my point. After riding for a week, I would take an educated guess of approximately 80% of people that ride the light rail have no reliable transportation themselves. The vast majority were homeless or people going to work fast food or janitorial jobs that can't afford to live where they work. And I rode this thing all they way from Dunlop/19th to the Priest station in Tempe (so my observations are not based on a small segment).

That being said, I'm not sure traffic would be a mess because most of these people don't drive anyway. Just my observations, but I think they are pretty solid.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by timothyaw

It's been a few years since I've been to Berlin, but when I was there that was what I exclusively used to get around and all the stations used barriers. S-Bahn and D-Bahn all had barriers.

I can't explain your experience, but in doing some quick reading, I see no evidence that the use of proof-of-payment systems has changed:

https://www.pri.org/stories/2014-02-...ur-subway-fare