General Phoenix Metro Discussion Thread

[soled]

Originally Posted by TJPHXskyscraperfan

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?

I don't have the luxury of only hearing about the occasional person who gets injured or dies due to folks driving and texting. For me it's a real thing. It's common, and the issue is growing by the day.

So, I'm excited about this new law.

As far as proving someone is using their phones-officers can site someone for the use of their phone just as they can site or arrest someone if they witness them committing any infraction or crime. They're going to site you because they saw you. It's pretty easy to see someone when they're on their phone.

[CrestedSaguaro]

Originally Posted by TJPHXskyscraperfan

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?

They have to see you with phone in hand. They can't just pull you over (unless you are weaving in which case, they have every right to pull you over). Also, on a personal note, my dad was hit last year on his bike in Tennessee from a texting driver doing around 45 miles per hour. You can clearly see the phone in front of her face on his rear facing cycling cam which was used as evidence in court. My dad was not able to ride again for 3 months because of this driver. Criminal charges have since been brought up on the driver due to negligence and distracted driving. When you say, "for no reason", I feel yes...there is a reason and I could care less for drivers that are pulled over for texting. My dad could have been killed had she been going just a little faster.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by 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.

Good to hear. True that it's impact is inspirational as opposed to a mandate but it has become a good tool for Urbanists. The goal is for a more pedestrian and bike-friendly ie safe city.

[exit2lef]

Just watched the city council meeting on Vision Zero. Citizen comments were mixed, pro and con. There was the usual victim-blaming and some debate about the relationship of speed to safety. Most people speaking, however, showed some appreciation for the nuances of the situation. Among the disciples of DiCiccio, I heard only one extremist who unabashedly echoed the councilman's duplicitous message about this being a nefarious plot to force people out of cars.

Speaking of Sal, he was champing at the bit the whole time. When he finally got his chance to talk, he tried to shift the discussion to his pet themes of street repairs and public safety, making it seem as if every injury or fatality can be blamed on potholes and an overworked police force. Most disappointing of all was his claim that his district doesn't support Vision Zero. I live in District 6 and many of my neighbors do not agree with our councilman's conspiracy theories.

Jim Waring then chimed in with his incessant carping about light rail and how neglected he thinks his district is in terms of city dollars. Laura Pastor finally introduced a motion worded in broad terms to authorize city staff to study the matter further and propose a "framework" with associated costs. At first, it appeared the motion passed on a voice vote, then DiCiccio asked for a roll call. With that, the vote was split 4-4 and the motion therefore failed. DiCiccio and Waring voted no as expected. Nowakowski and Mendoza cited incomprehensible, rambling, and wishy-washy reasons for their no votes. I didn't hear a vote from Williams, so maybe she was absent.

I expect this to come up again, perhaps not with the name "Vision Zero," which seems to have become bait for conspiracy theorists in the same way as Agenda 21.

[CrestedSaguaro]

This city is not going to go anywhere with DiCiccio and Waring on the council. Those 2 clowns really need to go.

[soled]

Originally Posted by soled

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?

This wasn't answered, so I'll just say that scenario is not a reflection of how Police and Fire communicate.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by RonnieFoos

This city is not going to go anywhere with DiCiccio and Waring on the council. Those 2 clowns really need to go.

Those two never fail to disappoint me, but this time I felt even more let down by Nowakowski and Mendoza. They both represent portions of downtown, as well as low income areas which have disproportionate shares of pedestrian deaths, yet they both seemed confused by the motion and came up with some sort of incoherent word salad to justify their no votes.

[TJPHXskyscraperfan]

Originally Posted by soled

I don't have the luxury of only hearing about the occasional person who gets injured or dies due to folks driving and texting. For me it's a real thing. It's common, and the issue is growing by the day.

So, I'm excited about this new law.

As far as proving someone is using their phones-officers can site someone for the use of their phone just as they can site or arrest someone if they witness them committing any infraction or crime. They're going to site you because they saw you. It's pretty easy to see someone when they're on their phone.

Maybe if the cop is beside you but I don’t see how they could see if u if they are behind you. Plus, so manny things distract us while we are driving. Are you gonna ban billboards? I’ve literally turned my head around for a billboard before, kids in a car, babies? I’m not completely against it but where do we draw the line?

[TakeFive]

I didn't realize that Tempe became a Vision Zero city but it makes sense. You can see a map of Vision Zero cities right here.

I'm not aware of Vision Zero actually having much real impact but it's importance is that it gets a city and its residents talking about, thinking about how to create a more pedestrian friendly and safe city. Not surprisingly those cities which have adopted Vision Zero are generally liberal and/or more urban than Phoenix.

There's opportunity to create a great grass roots effort. Vision Zero should easily appeal to Average Joe and Juanita and anybody with children if they understood it. Srsly, who would be against creating a safer city? And obviously that's the best way to sell it.

[soled]

Originally Posted by TJPHXskyscraperfan

Maybe if the cop is beside you but I don’t see how they could see if u if they are behind you. Plus, so manny things distract us while we are driving. Are you gonna ban billboards? I’ve literally turned my head around for a billboard before, kids in a car, babies? I’m not completely against it but where do we draw the line?

I've never been on a call involving someone who got in an accident because of a billboard. I've been on so many calls due to people texting I've lost count long ago.

I think sometimes people let the fear of this so-called slippery slope get in the way of common sense(not saying that's you). The distinction with cells phones is clear. The grey stuff falls well beyond phones.

And sure, the cop will pull up alongside and easily see you. And because texting drivers are so engrossed in their phones it'll be a walk in the park.

And I know this because we pull up next to texting drivers in a loud ass firetruck daily and texters still have no clue we're there.

We pulled up next to a lady on the freeway a few weeks ago who was weaving all over her lane and she literally had both hands on her phone texting. She was half ass steering with her knees. She almost hit us, so I hit the(loud ass fire truck) horn to warn her. She still never took her hands off, nor looked up from her phone. It'll be so much easier for a cop in a relatively quiet cruiser to nab these people.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

I didn't realize that Tempe became a Vision Zero city but it makes sense. You can see a map of Vision Zero cities right here.

I'm not aware of Vision Zero actually having much real impact but it's importance is that it gets a city and its residents talking about, thinking about how to create a more pedestrian friendly and safe city. Not surprisingly those cities which have adopted Vision Zero are generally liberal and/or more urban than Phoenix.

There's opportunity to create a great grass roots effort. Vision Zero should easily appeal to Average Joe and Juanita and anybody with children if they understood it. Srsly, who would be against creating a safer city? And obviously that's the best way to sell it.

What may have undermined this in part was the way it came out of nowhere, allowing Sal to amplify his conspiracy theories about this being a stealth effort to force people out of cars. For years, city staff have dragged their feet on these issues, and then all of a sudden a Vision Zero proposal shows up on the agenda for a city council policy session. Perhaps this was at the behest of new Mayor Kate Gallego. The disappointment in her voice was noticeable as she announced that the vote was no.

If so, it's unfortunate that DiCiccio was able to react quickly and kill this. He was a thorn in Stanton's side for years but was generally unable to muster the votes to accomplish anything. Since the power vacuum emerged at city hall after Stanton's resignation, Sal has found all sorts of underhanded ways to advance his agenda. At moments like this I have to remind myself this won't last forever. Mendoza is serving only on an interim basis; DiCiccio and Nowakowski are in their final terms.

[DesertRay]

Originally Posted by exit2lef

What may have undermined this in part was the way it came out of nowhere, allowing Sal to amplify his conspiracy theories about this being a stealth effort to force people out of cars. For years, city staff have dragged their feet on these issues, and then all of a sudden a Vision Zero proposal shows up on the agenda for a city council policy session. Perhaps this was at the behest of new Mayor Kate Gallego. The disappointment in her voice was noticeable as she announced that the vote was no.

If so, it's unfortunate that DiCiccio was able to react quickly and kill this. He was a thorn in Stanton's side for years but was generally unable to muster the votes to accomplish anything. Since the power vacuum emerged at city hall after Stanton's resignation, Sal has found all sorts of underhanded ways to advance his agenda. At moments like this I have to remind myself this won't last forever. Mendoza is serving only on an interim basis; DiCiccio and Nowakowski are in their final terms.

In addition to the extra deaths being laid at their feet, the anti clean transportation folks, and ashphalt-only cheerleaders are to blame for this dirty air as well:

Phoenix ranked 7th for most ozone pollution in the nation, receives 'F' on new report

Ozone pollution in Maricopa County has declined over the past two decades, but not enough to escape an "F" rating from the American Lung Association, which tracks air quality across the nation.

The health organization released its 20th annual "State of the Air" report Wednesday and ranked Phoenix as the 7th most ozone-polluted metropolitan area in the country. That's one spot worse than last year's 8th place ranking.

"A lot has to do with climate change," said JoAnna Strother, the Lung Association's director of advocacy for the Southwest region. "That and Phoenix has 1.6 million people and a big chunk of them live in the metro area where a lot of people are driving and sitting in standstill traffic. All of that contributes to ozone." Ozone is a colorless, odorless gas that, in high levels, can be extremely hazardous for lungs, Strother said.

The toxic gas forms when nitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) react in the sunlight. Combine a high volume of vehicle emissions — cars make up the biggest source of NOx and VOCs in Phoenix — with the Arizona desert's plentiful sunshine and the result is a recipe for ozone.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by exit2lef

What may have undermined this in part was the way it came out of nowhere, allowing Sal to amplify his conspiracy theories about this being a stealth effort to force people out of cars. For years, city staff have dragged their feet on these issues, and then all of a sudden a Vision Zero proposal shows up on the agenda for a city council policy session. Perhaps this was at the behest of new Mayor Kate Gallego. The disappointment in her voice was noticeable as she announced that the vote was no.

Denver just finished what turned out to be a 3-year process of redefining visions and goals through 2040. Two things: at their pace of urbanization the problems and intensity of concerns are more glaring. 2nd is that Denver has become a liberal mecca which is both good and bad.

The process was called Denveright and while it was sponsored & coordinated by the city it was mostly a grass roots driven process. Neighborhood and citizen representation was impressive; over 25,000 specific responses or feedback were assessed. The five different committees involved 20 to 30 people each. It was mostly their involvement that was important, made it relevant. Consultants were involved to some degree as well.

When they first started this process my eyes glazed over (what a waste of time and money) but in hindsight the results are impressive for their depth and breadth. Adopting Vision Zero was a no-brainer with everything else that was happening. While City Council just approved two of the plans, they are in reality more a guide than a mandate. No question though that these planning efforts will be key going forward (Equity/affordability were a focal point).

Not sure how one gets the ball rolling in Phoenix but sooner or later I would expect to see similar efforts. It's merely a matter of getting people interested and involved in what would be of obvious concern. "What do you want your city to be and look like in 20 years?"

[DesertRay]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

When they first started this process my eyes glazed over (what a waste of time and money) but in hindsight the results are impressive for their depth and breadth. Adopting Vision Zero was a no-brainer with everything else that was happening. While City Council just approved two of the plans, they are in reality more a guide than a mandate. No question though that these planning efforts will be key going forward (Equity/affordability were a focal point).

Not sure how one gets the ball rolling in Phoenix but sooner or later I would expect to see similar efforts. It's merely a matter of getting people interested and involved in what would be of obvious concern. "What do you want your city to be and look like in 20 years?"

I would love to see this. I've been involved in two of these kinds of efforts in other cities, and have seen mixed results. The more people show up, the better it is. I'm hoping that now that the Phoenix core is starting to fill in, that Phoenix does something like what you are describing. I think that it helps more when the city hasn't become as cosmopolitan (what you are calling "liberal" sometimes is just urban common sense--see Portland, Boulder, and Berkeley for the quintessential liberal bastions). People from all political perspectives can reason out what they want. Sometimes it looks like liberal solutions, and often it isn't.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Denver just finished what turned out to be a 3-year process of redefining visions and goals through 2040. Two things: at their pace of urbanization the problems and intensity of concerns are more glaring. 2nd is that Denver has become a liberal mecca which is both good and bad.

The process was called Denveright and while it was sponsored & coordinated by the city it was mostly a grass roots driven process. Neighborhood and citizen representation was impressive; over 25,000 specific responses or feedback were assessed. The five different committees involved 20 to 30 people each. It was mostly their involvement that was important, made it relevant. Consultants were involved to some degree as well.

When they first started this process my eyes glazed over (what a waste of time and money) but in hindsight the results are impressive for their depth and breadth. Adopting Vision Zero was a no-brainer with everything else that was happening. While City Council just approved two of the plans, they are in reality more a guide than a mandate. No question though that these planning efforts will be key going forward (Equity/affordability were a focal point).

Not sure how one gets the ball rolling in Phoenix but sooner or later I would expect to see similar efforts. It's merely a matter of getting people interested and involved in what would be of obvious concern. "What do you want your city to be and look like in 20 years?"

Phoenix has had plenty of initiatives like this, from the Phoenix Futures Forum way back in the late '80s to Reinvent Phoenix just five years ago. These processes always produce lofty plans, but implementation is typically slow and incomplete. Part of the problem is Phoenix's weak mayor system of government. Since the mayor can't hire and fire department heads, the city bureaucracy becomes a big ship that is hard to turn in any direction. When it does try to pivot quickly, as with yesterday's vote, it often does so awkwardly and unsuccessfully. In the meantime, Angie at Streetsblog has plenty to say about yesterday's fiasco:

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2019/04/24/p...ue-letting-people-to-die-in-the-streets/

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by exit2lef

Phoenix has had plenty of initiatives like this, from the Phoenix Futures Forum way back in the late '80s to Reinvent Phoenix just five years ago. These processes always produce lofty plans, but implementation is typically slow and incomplete. Part of the problem is Phoenix's weak mayor system of government. Since the mayor can't hire and fire department heads, the city bureaucracy becomes a big ship that is hard to turn in any direction. When it does try to pivot quickly, as with yesterday's vote, it often does so awkwardly and unsuccessfully. In the meantime, Angie at Streetsblog has plenty to say about yesterday's fiasco:

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2019/04/24/p...ue-letting-people-to-die-in-the-streets/

That Streetsblog piece (which I hadn't yet seen) was well done. It would be nice if Phoenix could get their own Streetsblog since the odds of local impact would be magnified. I've come to understand that Streetsblog Denver exists due to local donations which was obvious but now I know more who the players are. They have a new writer they recruited from San Francisco but he didn't come because the money was great; must have wanted to escape the Bay Area.

Things always pivot around politics. Councilors will equivocate when they don't know which way the wind is blowing and want to play it safe. DiCiccio (and Waring) is and is not the problem. It's the lack of a groundswell support in other districts. DiCiccio is a huge pain because he's good at what he does. The other side of the table isn't yet clear what it even wants or where it should start.

Denver, its mayor and council majority are merely (now) responding to what the citizenry is screaming about and there is some intense passion due to the intense change that's occurring. Between gentrification, NIMBY-ism and traffic, people are often at cross currents and don't know what to do? But they're clearly pissed at everything they feel they have no control over (damn developers).

I've come to understand that many Phoenix residents, ones that surprised me like restaurant workers, are Trump fans. But if you keep local politics local, people will consider what makes sense for their own community.

[Obadno]

Looks like google maps has some updated satellite imagery for the Phoenix area.

Looks like they date back a couple of months maybe Jan/Feb

[TakeFive]

I vaguely recall some discussion here around Opportunity Zones.

Apparently Portland is ground zero for how wildly successful they can in fact be.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

I vaguely recall some discussion here around Opportunity Zones.

Apparently Portland is ground zero for how wildly successful they can in fact be.

https://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/news...e-rules-are-here-but-what-does-that.html

At long last, the IRS has come out with what are possibly final regulations on investing in multi-asset real estate funds, as well as startups in opportunity zones. And after the April 17 release of those rules, it’s safe to say the IRS has far exceeded expectations.

Long overdue, these regulations finally provide a sense of clarity and finality that have been missing and are imperative for investors to feel they can safely invest, and in turn enable the program to succeed.

Written into the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the opportunity zone program is aimed at stimulating economic revitalization in distressed communities across the country while allowing investors to defer, reduce and eliminate capital gains tax.

But vagueness in the initial guidelines that came out in October 2018, left opportunity funds' investors feeling confused. For investors, confusion equaled risk, which meant a lot of people waited on the sidelines to see what was going to happen next.

Now that the IRS has acted, here are the clarifications expected to have the most impact:

Language that allows investment in businesses in a qualified opportunity zone. This is a complete game-changer for the program. These new regulations have the potential to create a positive ripple effect across the country.
Multi-asset complexities get a whole lot simpler. Previously, in order to be a successful multi-asset opportunity fund, funds had to become a REIT (real estate investment trust). This was basically a complicated workaround to get funds from point A to B so qualified opportunity funds could give the fund’s profits to customers tax-free after 10 years. Getting rid of the need for this extra complexity makes it much easier for multi-asset funds to comply without all the red tape, making it less complicated to provide tax-free profits to investors and significantly increasing funds’ ability to raise money.
Funds can refinance assets and distribute the profits, tax free. It appears that the guidelines make it easier for qualified opportunity funds to return money to investors quickly — and with the huge benefit of being tax free. It also allows for the possibility of a fund providing profits to investors multiple times over the lifespan of the fund instead of only at the end of 10 years.
Funds can sell assets before the 10-year mark. That is, as long as they reinvest profits from the sales into an opportunity zone within 12 months. This opens the door to possibilities that previously were not even an option.
With these new rules, it has become abundantly clear that opportunity zones are a way for investors to enjoy tax benefits on capital gains while being part of positive social impact in their community.

Going forward, it won’t be shocking to see large and small investors ready to make moves in the market. At the accelerated pace we now expect to see, odds are most 2019 qualified opportunity zone funds will cap out early. Which means we won’t have to wait long to see the positive impact this legislation can have in the community and beyond.

Erik Hayden is the president of Urban Catalyst LLC, a San Jose, California-based fund set up for opportunity zone investments.

This is going to be a big deal, I bet we can thank several of our upcoming towers to this new tax break and for revival of things like Derby and Ballpark Apartments.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by Obadno

https://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/news...e-rules-are-here-but-what-does-that.html

This is going to be a big deal, I bet we can thank several of our upcoming towers to this new tax break and for revival of things like Derby and Ballpark Apartments.

Dayum, those regs are amazingly generous and easy to work with.