General Phoenix Metro Discussion Thread

[ASU Diablo]

Originally Posted by phoenixwillrise

I think the D'Backs are already working out a deal with the Pima Tribe in Scottsdale to build a more intimate dome stadium in North Scottsdale, where the majority of their season ticket holders are from, and that they will walk out on Chase Field at the firs moment they can legally do so without getting sued.
Time will tell but I think I am correct about this.

A discussion probably more appropriate for the Stadium/Arena thread but still not sold that they’re moving to tribal land. It takes anywhere from 2-3 years to build a new ballpark, closer to 3. They can legally leave Chase Field in 2022, which means construction would’ve had to start by now. For reference, Braves announced new stadium in Nov 2013 and was ready April 2017.

[phoenixwillrise]

Originally Posted by ASU Diablo

A discussion probably more appropriate for the Stadium/Arena thread but still not sold that they’re moving to tribal land. It takes anywhere from 2-3 years to build a new ballpark, closer to 3. They can legally leave Chase Field in 2022, which means construction would’ve had to start by now. For reference, Braves announced new stadium in Nov 2013 and was ready April 2017.

Like I said Time will tell. They could announce they are leaving and stay thru whenever, what else is Maricopa County going to do with the stadium?

[ASU Diablo]

Originally Posted by phoenixwillrise

Like I said Time will tell. They could announce they are leaving and stay thru whenever, what else is Maricopa County going to do with the stadium?

And like u said, they aren’t going anywhere in 2022 (when they are first legally able to) because there is no place for them to go or anything currently under construction. If the whole tribal thing was happening, I would’ve expected some sort of announcement by now because everyone swore they had some sort of backdoor agreement and were trying to sue to leave ASAP. That doesn’t seem to be the case anymore...

[phoenixwillrise]

Originally Posted by ASU Diablo

And like u said, they aren’t going anywhere in 2022 (when they are first legally able to) because there is no place for them to go or anything currently under construction. If the whole tribal thing was happening, I would’ve expected some sort of announcement by now because everyone swore they had some sort of backdoor agreement and were trying to sue to leave ASAP. That doesn’t seem to be the case anymore...

Other then the fake grass, which helps them get more money for outside events, as it easier to deal with, and is cheaper then regular grass to maintain, they didn't do jack to improve the stadium even though they had a plethora of things they were bitching about, that they claimed needed repair, but then when it flipped to their responsibility, as part of getting out of the lease, they did jack. I would say that may be a tell, as they say in poker.

[fawd]

Originally Posted by phoenixwillrise

Other then the fake grass, which helps them get more money for outside events, as it easier to deal with, and is cheaper then regular grass to maintain, they didn't do jack to improve the stadium even though they had a plethora of things they were bitching about, that they claimed needed repair, but then when it flipped to their responsibility, as part of getting out of the lease, they did jack. I would say that may be a tell, as they say in poker.

Do you have a legitimate source or is this speculation?

[ASU Diablo]

Originally Posted by phoenixwillrise

Other then the fake grass, which helps them get more money for outside events, as it easier to deal with, and is cheaper then regular grass to maintain, they didn't do jack to improve the stadium even though they had a plethora of things they were bitching about, that they claimed needed repair, but then when it flipped to their responsibility, as part of getting out of the lease, they did jack. I would say that may be a tell, as they say in poker.

Originally Posted by fawd

Do you have a legitimate source or is this speculation?

This is all great discussion. Posting my reply in the Stadium/Arena thread!

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by ASU Diablo

This is all great discussion. Posting my reply in the Stadium/Arena thread!

I'm on my way.

[CrestedSaguaro]

So I really couldn't find an "All Arizona" discussion thread after browsing back 5 pages or so of Southwest posts, so I'll post here (mods, please move if there is a proper spot for this). But it's official! We are now a hands off state!

https://www.abc15.com/news/operation-safe-roads/arizona-outlaws-hand-held-phone-use-while-driving

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by RonnieFoos

So I really couldn't find an "All Arizona" discussion thread after browsing back 5 pages or so of Southwest posts, so I'll post here (mods, please move if there is a proper spot for this). But it's official! We are now a hands off state!

https://www.abc15.com/news/operation-safe-roads/arizona-outlaws-hand-held-phone-use-while-driving

LAME I am a dangerous phone using speeder and this makes me angry

[biggus diggus]

This isn't a ban on handheld device use like it should be, just a ban on texting and driving. You can still look at google maps. Useless.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by biggus diggus

This isn't a ban on handheld device use like it should be, just a ban on texting and driving. You can still look at google maps. Useless.

Actually, it's a ban on any cellphone use while holding the phone when the vehicle is in motion.

There's a second bill pending that would more broadly outlaw distracted driving, whether or not a mobile phone is involved. No word yet on whether Ducey will sign that one.

[CrestedSaguaro]

Originally Posted by biggus diggus

This isn't a ban on handheld device use like it should be, just a ban on texting and driving. You can still look at google maps. Useless.

No. This is a complete hands off ban unless the vehicle is stopped or parked. The media is misleading by stating "Texting Ban", but it's almost everything:

A. UNLESS A MOTOR VEHICLE IS PARKED OR STOPPED PURSUANT TO SECTION
29 28-645, SUBSECTION A, PARAGRAPH 3 OR SECTION 28-851, A PERSON MAY NOT
30 OPERATE A MOTOR VEHICLE ON A STREET OR HIGHWAY IF THE PERSON DOES EITHER
31 OF THE FOLLOWING:
32 1. PHYSICALLY HOLDS OR SUPPORTS WITH ANY PART OF THE PERSON'S BODY
33 EITHER OF THE FOLLOWING:
34 (a) A PORTABLE WIRELESS COMMUNICATION DEVICE, EXCEPT THAT A PERSON
35 MAY USE A PORTABLE WIRELESS COMMUNICATION DEVICE WITH AN EARPIECE,
36 HEADPHONE DEVICE OR DEVICE WORN ON A WRIST TO CONDUCT A VOICE-BASED
37 COMMUNICATION.
38 (b) A STAND-ALONE ELECTRONIC DEVICE.
39 2. WRITES, SENDS OR READS ANY TEXT-BASED COMMUNICATION, INCLUDING A
40 TEXT MESSAGE, INSTANT MESSAGE, E-MAIL OR INTERNET DATA, ON A PORTABLE
41 WIRELESS COMMUNICATION DEVICE OR STAND-ALONE ELECTRONIC DEVICE.

I highlighted internet data as that also would include Google Maps.

[biggus diggus]

Maybe I got bad information but I was just talking about it with one of my attorney friends who says the driver may still use "navigation related apps" while operating the vehicle. If that's true I really wish it wasn't. Either ban it all or ban none of it.

thanks for the detail ronniefool that makes a lot more sense to me.

[CrestedSaguaro]

Originally Posted by biggus diggus

Maybe I got bad information but I was just talking about it with one of my attorney friends who says the driver may still use "navigation related apps" while operating the vehicle. If that's true I really wish it wasn't. Either ban it all or ban none of it.

I would assume they may be referring to devices that are built into the vehicle. This bill only pertains to portable devices.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by RonnieFoos

I would assume they may be referring to devices that are built into the vehicle. This bill only pertains to portable devices.

Or starting a series of directions on a phone while the vehicle is stopped and then having it deliver directions via voice prompts while the vehicle is in motion. That would be okay. Holding the phone to look at a map while the vehicle is moving would not.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by RonnieFoos

No. This is a complete hands off ban unless the vehicle is stopped or parked. The media is misleading by stating "Texting Ban", but it's almost everything:

I highlighted internet data as that also would include Google Maps.

It's not possible they banned phone mount usage of navigation apps and two-way communication. I'm also curious about commercial or government use. Can you imagine Fire Departments and police reverting to stone age procedures. Not a chance. Virtually all commercial drivers that deliver anything including people depend on modern tech. I'll guess the media isn't misleading and this is directed at 'hand-held' devices only.

[CrestedSaguaro]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

It's not possible they banned phone mount usage of navigation apps and two-way communication. I'm also curious about commercial or government use. Can you imagine Fire Departments and police reverting to stone age procedures. Not a chance. Virtually all commercial drivers that deliver anything including people depend on modern tech. I'll guess the media isn't misleading and this is directed at 'hand-held' devices only.

There are exceptions such as law enforcement or emergencies. The bill specifically states handheld or devices supported by the body during use while the vehicle is in motion. So a phone on the dash would be an exception for GPS/map use, but I'm sure texting even if dash mounted would not be allowed. There are about 3 pages on the bill detailing everything enforced and not enforced.

[soled]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

It's not possible they banned phone mount usage of navigation apps and two-way communication. I'm also curious about commercial or government use. Can you imagine Fire Departments and police reverting to stone age procedures. Not a chance. Virtually all commercial drivers that deliver anything including people depend on modern tech. I'll guess the media isn't misleading and this is directed at 'hand-held' devices only.

Why are you thinking it would be going back to stone age procedures for Fire and PD if they couldn't use phones while driving?

[TJPHXskyscraperfan]

Originally Posted by biggus diggus

This isn't a ban on handheld device use like it should be, just a ban on texting and driving. You can still look at google maps. Useless.

What would u suggest Uber and Lyft drivers do if they banned using maps? Yes, they reply on it way too much and I tell my driver to go a different direction half the time but they still need it on to get to the destination with the appropriate tender. Yes texting and driving can be dangerous but I feel this just gives cops more of a reason to pull people over for no reason. How do u really prove someone is using their phone while driving? Delete the text before the cop comes to your window then what can they really say?

[exit2lef]

With all the confusion about what the new distracted driving law does and does not cover, we've missed a related issue that has come out of nowhere this week. At 2:30 today, the Phoenix City Council is set to hear a proposal from city staff to adopt the concept of "Vision Zero." Many other cities have done this, although it's often more a symbolic statement than actual policy changes.

That didn't stop my District 6 city councilman from exploiting the issue, though. He's spreading misinformation that city staff want to lower all Phoenix speed limits to 15 MPH. Of course, there's nothing in the staff proposal that says that. He's rallied his usual base on social media, but it will be interesting to see how many actually bother to come to today's meeting. Still, he's having an effect because Councilwoman Williams has already felt compelled to issue a statement saying that she doesn't support citywide lowering of speed limits.

I haven't seen anything on the pro side from the Urban Phoenix Project or other organizations that typically advocate for Vision Zero principles. Given the opportunistic opposition and the lack of advance notice, I expect the council to punt on this, sending it back to city staff for further study.