Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Arlington,Texas is the Largest us city without Public Transit which is retarded thinking these days. Majority of the anti-Transit cities are in the south , some Great plain cities. Collage towns and cities are exempt for that type of thinking mostly.
Wow considering they have the stadium the Rangers play at I'm kind of shocked at that one!
Quote:
Originally Posted by imperialmog
I have seen a common thread in many areas is that areas don't want to make it where having a car is a class barrier to getting to their place. It is designed as a means to try to prevent poor people from entering by purposely not having mass transit in an area. Also never discount oftentimes the racial undertones in all of this as well. I remember a number of suburbs in St. Louis voted down service due to the idea of poor minorities being able to go to where they live and commit crimes. (many of these places exist as a result of white flight to start with)
Heck even the Georgetown neighborhood of Washington, DC rejected having a Metro line on essentially that argument.....
Wow considering they have the stadium the Rangers play at I'm kind of shocked at that one!
Heck even the Georgetown neighborhood of Washington, DC rejected having a Metro line on essentially that argument.....
The northern suburbs of Baltimore, MD around Ruxton also refused to have any light-rail stops. The office-parks even further out, in "Hunt Valley" have several rail stops all close together, then the train speeds thru the Ruxton area non-stop until it reaches the Baltimore city limits.
And this is what I'm talking about: Valley Metro | Welcome (http://www.valleymetro.org/metro_light_rail/how_to_ride/service_change_options_for_fy11 - broken link)
The city can't afford to make it run more frequently.
On top of that, the area has over 4 million people and sprawls over nearly 3000 sq miles. People here complain about expanding public transit and the local governments are more keen on sprawl than higher-density development. Back on topic, Phoenix is NOT a mass transit-oriented city.
The northern suburbs of Baltimore, MD around Ruxton also refused to have any light-rail stops. The office-parks even further out, in "Hunt Valley" have several rail stops all close together, then the train speeds thru the Ruxton area non-stop until it reaches the Baltimore city limits.
At least that makes for a faster trip to Hunt Valley. Usually light rail is too slow because of excessive stops, often several within a mile, and no express service.
Skeletal bus system and many routes run only every half hour. Some towns in the metro area don't even have bus service; i.e. Surprise, Litchfield Park and Queen Creek.
There's a 20-something mile light rail line running through Midtown/Downtown/East Phoenix, Downtown Tempe and barely into Mesa. Sounds great, but Greater Phoenix is well over 1000 sq miles and that's just a drop in the ocean.
Anyway, some suburbs don't want it, they've discussed commuter rail for years, line extension/new line construction, etc. don't seem likely to happen anytime soon. One of our many useless, all-talk politicians tried to repeal light rail while it was under construction. People complain that it doesn't immediately take them to where they want to go (because it's only one line), move at warp speed or bring money into the area (neither of which happen with any public transit system anywhere in the world) and use that as an excuse to not allow further expansion of light rail.
In sum, people in this town reject the idea of alternative forms of transit.
People in Phoenix do not reject alternative transit or they wouldn't have approved millions of dollars in bonds for LRT. You also know that LRT is in the process of being greatly expanded. It's not as though this initial line is the end of LRT development in the metro area.
There are also plans underway to create commuter rail in the Valley using existing rail. I don't know where you're getting this idea that commuter rail has been dismissed. If anything, the reason that commuter rail has been dismissed has been financial rather than people generally being unsupportive.
The Valley has very good bus service to the areas that residents need it the most. The Valley also has very good express bus service, as well. Valley Metro has a line that travels all the way out to Ajo every day (120 miles away). There aren't too many cities that have public transit systems that serve people who live 2-3 hours away. Last time I checked people in Surprise, Litchfield Park, Scottsdale, and the far east Valley were middle to high-income, not typically people who rely heavily on transit.
Location: A circle of Hell so insidious, infernal and odious, Dante dared not map it
623 posts, read 1,227,104 times
Reputation: 473
Quote:
Originally Posted by miamiman
People in Phoenix do not reject alternative transit or they wouldn't have approved millions of dollars in bonds for LRT. You also know that LRT is in the process of being greatly expanded. It's not as though this initial line is the end of LRT development in the metro area.
There are also plans underway to create commuter rail in the Valley using existing rail. I don't know where you're getting this idea that commuter rail has been dismissed. If anything, the reason that commuter rail has been dismissed has been financial rather than people generally being unsupportive.
The Valley has very good bus service to the areas that residents need it the most. The Valley also has very good express bus service, as well. Valley Metro has a line that travels all the way out to Ajo every day (120 miles away). There aren't too many cities that have public transit systems that serve people who live 2-3 hours away. Last time I checked people in Surprise, Litchfield Park, Scottsdale, and the far east Valley were middle to high-income, not typically people who rely heavily on transit.
Ugh... so tired of Arizona Avengers...
They've been discussing commuter rail for years, even when Arizona was booming. Yes, we approved light rail lines, and that's we as in residents light rail serves. Please, please, PLEASE look up what Scottsdale's opinion of light rail expansion is. And transit or not, Phoenix is notorious for ideas on the drawing board that never come to fruition: as an example, the skyline here wouldn't be nearly as pathetic if even half the buildings proposed got built. Yes, they have a lot of proposals, but they may not even get built.
People complained that light rail was an expensive project, then complained it wasn't a subway when it was finished. I never said commuter rail was dismissed, it just isn't likely to happen.
I think you're missing my point: for a city... er, super-sized suburb like this, transit is proportionately terrible. LA and Atlanta sprawl a lot, but still have better rail options. And I could name a lot of cities with public transit reaching far off locations, including Paris, Seoul and Sydney.
One other point you seem to be missing is most people in Phoenix still can't do basic errands with the sub-par transit system here.
They've been discussing commuter rail for years, even when Arizona was booming. Yes, we approved light rail lines, and that's we as in residents light rail serves. Please, please, PLEASE look up what Scottsdale's opinion of light rail expansion is. And transit or not, Phoenix is notorious for ideas on the drawing board that never come to fruition: as an example, the skyline here wouldn't be nearly as pathetic if even half the buildings proposed got built. Yes, they have a lot of proposals, but they may not even get built.
People complained that light rail was an expensive project, then complained it wasn't a subway when it was finished. I never said commuter rail was dismissed, it just isn't likely to happen.
I think you're missing my point: for a city... er, super-sized suburb like this, transit is proportionately terrible. LA and Atlanta sprawl a lot, but still have better rail options. And I could name a lot of cities with public transit reaching far off locations, including Paris, Seoul and Sydney.
One other point you seem to be missing is most people in Phoenix still can't do basic errands with the sub-par transit system here.
I think with LA and Atlanta compared to Phoenix is that there is a larger dense urban core. One factor in determining if transit going far outside the inner core is the existance of a dense pocket in the suburbs, often an edge city.
Have to remember many places in outer suburbs purposely don't want mass transit due to the idea of not making it easy for outsiders to enter their area. It is to prevent groups of people they or their parents moved away from to be able to get into their areas.
Location: A circle of Hell so insidious, infernal and odious, Dante dared not map it
623 posts, read 1,227,104 times
Reputation: 473
Quote:
Originally Posted by imperialmog
I think with LA and Atlanta compared to Phoenix is that there is a larger dense urban core. One factor in determining if transit going far outside the inner core is the existance of a dense pocket in the suburbs, often an edge city.
Have to remember many places in outer suburbs purposely don't want mass transit due to the idea of not making it easy for outsiders to enter their area. It is to prevent groups of people they or their parents moved away from to be able to get into their areas.
You know... I totally agree with you. I don't have a recent number, but I did read once that Downtown Phoenix employs a much smaller number of people than other downtown areas. That's why I feel Phoenix is a giant suburb, because people are more or less evenly distributed throughout the area. There are pockets with more density than others, sure... but in general you won't find large concentrations of people or jobs here that you would in other cities.
All in all... Phoenix is a pretty backwoods town for its size. I stand by my conviction that Arizona is about to begin a period of negative growth for its many years of mismanagement and inability to move with the rest of the world.
One great advantage of New York, Chicago, and (to a lesser degree) Los Angeles is their regional rail system allows the central business district to draw from a wide area. You don't have to live right downtown to have a tolerable commute. Phoenix's light rail line is too short for that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
