Metro Phoenix Transit/Transportation Developments

[CrestedSaguaro]

Originally Posted by N830MH

Good! They won't put on a ballots either. I'm so happy to keep light rail for a long time. I appreciate from the judge. We loves Light Rail very much.

I think maybe you misunderstood this post above. The judge rejected the case and it is going to the voters again in August (unless the AZ Supreme Court hears the case which I am doubting at this point). We can only hope the voters are still wanting this and approve it AGAIN for the 5th time.

Speaking of this, a co-worker of mine lives West Phoenix and yesterday we got into a conversation about light rail. He is an opponent of it apparently and stated he doesn't want light rail in his area and will vote against it when it comes up on the ballots again. When I asked him as to why when 5 of his immediate co-workers use light rail to get to work. He gave me the usual reasons I was expecting (no one rides it, it's not safe to ride, all it does is bring crime, it lowers property values, etc.). He ended with saying, "I support it. I just don't want it in my neighborhood".

My response to him was "How many incidents have you read in the past couple weeks in the news about light rail?". His reply "None.". I then asked and how many news reports have you seen just this week alone about DUI's, wrong way drivers, pedestrians and bikers getting hit or killed by vehicles, cars driving around neighborhoods looking for homes to break and packages getting stolen?". He didn't say a word after that. I'm hoping I changed his mind.

[biggus diggus]

I share his opinion. I use light rail, I support light rail, and I am supportive of expansion. Unless it were coming within a few blocks of my house. I don't think I'll ever have to worry about that but who knows.

All of my friends who live in Royal Palm have been able to prove there has been a huge uptick in petty crime at houses easily accessible from light rail. They're definitely convenience crimes, people with streets that don't connect with northern, 19th, and Dunlap are not as affected. They've shown us all what happens to nice neighborhoods, and Royal Palm isn't even that nice!

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by RonnieFoos

He ended with saying, "I support it. I just don't want it in my neighborhood".

That's an interesting and potentially widespread point of view. From 2008 until 2016, there seemed to be widespread enthusiasm and support for light rail. Of course, there were always those who were ideologically opposed, but most persuadable people seemed to see its value. The controversy seemed to heat up with the opening of additional track on 19th Avenue, which brought light rail closer to neighborhoods of single family homes. Unlike the central Phoenix historic districts in Midtown, these neighborhoods didn't grow up as streetcar suburbs, so having rail transit there was more of a shock and has been associated, rightly or wrongly, with crime.

Some of those same concerns seem to be driving the opposition to the South Central extension, although the irony is that many Phoenicians outside that area would not fear light rail bringing crime to south Phoenix, but instead light rail transplanting crime from south Phoenix to other parts of the city. Unfortunately, alliances between far left and far right elements have now produced the Building a Better Phoenix initiative, which would stop all light rail expansion, including the 1-10 West / Capitol line. Although urbanists tend not to like trains in freeway corridors, it would probably be the least controversial line simply because it would not pass near as many residential neighborhoods.

I should add that no matter what happens with the August vote, the South Central extension is still a dicey proposition. Under the Trump Administration, the FTA continues to drag its feet on transit funding. Locally, yesterday saw the inauguration of Carlos Garcia and Betty Guardado to the Phoenix City Council. Garcia helped organize the original Four-Lanes-or-No-Train movement, and Guardado has accepted large campaign contributions from the family that owns the Bill Luke auto dealership. It was lobbying by Bill Luke that killed the west Camelback extension. Even if voters reaffirm light rail in August that South Central may be delayed in favor of proceeding with the I-10 West / Capitol line.

[azsunsurfer]

I had no idea Garcia was a part of that! I may change my feelings about him....maybe him and Sal could put some of their differences aside and work to build a better Phoenix!

[PHX31]

Originally Posted by RonnieFoos

I've had to deal with a lot that you see in those pictures. I usually look at the driver and give a hand motion with both hands aligning the crosswalk. Irritates the heck out of me. Since this has been brought up, how come Phoenix only has a single white line for the crosswalk instead of thicker "Stop" line that most other cities/states have? I wonder if it's such a problem here since there are relativity few stop lines and drivers really don't have a clear spot where they really should be stopping?

Seems like Phoenix may be the only one that doesn't use stop bars. Looks like most of the rest of the metro area does.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by azsunsurfer

I had no idea Garcia was a part of that! I may change my feelings about him....maybe him and Sal could put some of their differences aside and work to build a better Phoenix!

I expect he and Sal will find themselves on the same side far more than would be expected. Where they'll remain divided is on law enforcement and immigration.

[N830MH]

Please follow the link:

https://www.azcourts.gov/Portals/0/O...-0257%20EL.pdf

[biggus diggus]

Warning to anyone who clicks that it will install a PDF on your phone.

[combusean]

It’s a really sad state of affairs when light rail is blamed for phoenix’s incapacity to deal with its crime and homeless problem.

I’m beginning to find an unanticipated additional reason for supporting the train: it helps sheltered suburbanites realize the substantialness of the issue.

[DesertRay]

Originally Posted by combusean

It’s a really sad state of affairs when light rail is blamed for phoenix’s incapacity to deal with its crime and homeless problem.

I’m beginning to find an unanticipated additional reason for supporting the train: it helps sheltered suburbanites realize the substantialness of the issue.

I live less than a block from a light rail stop, and I would absolutely say that light rail has zero to do with any crime or homelessness in my area. I would speculate that there is an uptick near any rail terminus, since the trains require folks to get off there. Anyone joy riding will find an exit at the end. If I lived near one of these terminuses, I would be on a bullhorn for expansion to get the station one mile away. Other than near the terminus, there really isn't a crime uptick. This laser focus on this very minor argument is threatening to put our city back by decades.

There is a good reason that many of the projects we are constantly chattering about on these boards are happening within a few blocks of light rail, and it's not that developers are stupid and/or sadistic. Investment follows the decision to increase transit options.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by DesertRay

I live less than a block from a light rail stop, and I would absolutely say that light rail has zero to do with any crime or homelessness in my area. I would speculate that there is an uptick near any rail terminus, since the trains require folks to get off there. Anyone joy riding will find an exit at the end. If I lived near one of these terminuses, I would be on a bullhorn for expansion to get the station one mile away. Other than near the terminus, there really isn't a crime uptick. This laser focus on this very minor argument is threatening to put our city back by decades.

There is a good reason that many of the projects we are constantly chattering about on these boards are happening within a few blocks of light rail, and it's not that developers are stupid and/or sadistic. Investment follows the decision to increase transit options.

My guess is that the residents of neighborhoods along 19th Avenue, even those who feel unfavorably about light rail, would support completion of the line to MetroCenter for that reason. Not only would a MetroCenter terminus shift some loitering away from 19th Ave / Dunlap, it would also end the line at a location that has more bus transfers available and more places to go such as the Cholla library, Cortez and Rose Mofford parks, and the mall itself. There would be more capacity there to absorb and scatter passengers disembarking at the end of the line. Unfortunately, when opponents of the South Central line joined forces with those who reflexively oppose all rail transit, they set in motion a chain of events that could prevent this from occurring, even though it makes sense regardless of one's overall opinion of light rail.

[DesertRay]

Originally Posted by exit2lef

My guess is that the residents of neighborhoods along 19th Avenue, even those who feel unfavorably about light rail, would support completion of the line to MetroCenter for that reason. Not only would a MetroCenter terminus shift some loitering away from 19th Ave / Dunlap, it would also end the line at a location that has more bus transfers available and more places to go such as the Cholla library, Cortez and Rose Mofford parks, and the mall itself. There would be more capacity there to absorb and scatter passengers disembarking at the end of the line. Unfortunately, when opponents of the South Central line joined forces with those who reflexively oppose all rail transit, they set in motion a chain of events that could prevent this from occurring, even though it makes sense regardless of one's overall opinion of light rail.

I hope the folks along Dunlap and 19th figure this out. I'm cautiously optimistic that enough people will see this as a massive overreach, and that we'll vote down this particular ballot initiative, but who knows. Spread the word.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by DesertRay

I hope the folks along Dunlap and 19th figure this out. I'm cautiously optimistic that enough people will see this as a massive overreach, and that we'll vote down this particular ballot initiative, but who knows. Spread the word.

The challenge in terms of spreading the word is that Proposition 105 is worded in a way that may be counter-intuitive to some voters. Because expanding light rail is the status quo, a majority of voters will have to vote "yes" to stop it. Many voters, however, may simply think that "yes" means more light rail, and "no" means no more trains.

There's a risk that both foes and supporters of light rail expansion could vote the opposite way they intend to if they don't read the proposition wording carefully. I've seen some chatter on Building a Better Phoenix's Facebook page about how they wish the wording could be reversed with "no" meaning "no expansion," but that won't happen.

If there's widespread confusion, it's hard to say which side will be helped more. It may depend on which group attracts more civically aware and engaged voters. I'd like to think that's light rail supporters, but I could be suffering from confirmation bias. One slight hope is that when voters are confused about any ballot proposition, they're more likely to vote "no."

[DesertRay]

You can file this under "duh," but it is good to see the direct connection between building infrastructure and lowering traffic deaths.

Cycling lanes reduce fatalities for all road users, study shows

In the most comprehensive look at bicycle and road safety to date, researchers at the University of Colorado Denver and the University of New Mexico discovered that it's not the cyclists, but the infrastructure built for them, that is making roads safer for everyone.

"Bicycling seems inherently dangerous on its own," said study co-author Wesley Marshall, PhD, PE, assistant professor in the College of Engineering, Design and Computing at CU Denver. "So it would seem that a city with a lot of bicycling is more dangerous, but the opposite is true. Building safe facilities for cyclists turned out to be one of the biggest factors in road safety for everyone."

The study published in the Journal of Transport & Health found that bike facilities act as "calming" mechanisms on traffic, slowing cars and reducing fatalities. The effect is similar to the effect of grid blocks found in cities with higher intersection density

Researchers looked through 13 years of data from 12 large U.S. cities with high-bicycling mode shares, including Denver, Dallas, Portland, Ore., and Kansas City, Mo. During those years, the United States saw a 51% increase in bicycling to work and the number of protected bike lanes double each year starting in 2009. In a longitudinal study, the researchers investigated over 17,000 fatalities and 77,000 severe injuries.

Originally, researchers believed that more bike lanes and the increase in cyclists would lead to a "safety-in-numbers" effect: the more cyclists on the road, the more likely drivers would slow down and be aware of their surroundings.

Instead, they found that safer cities aren't due to the increase in cyclists, but the infrastructure built for them -- specifically, separated and protected bike lanes. They found that bicycling infrastructure is significantly associated with fewer fatalities and better road-safety outcomes.

Portland, Ore., saw the biggest increase. Between 1990 and 2010, city's bicycle mode share increased from 1.2% to 6%; over the same period, the road fatality rate dropped by 75%. With added bike lanes, fatal crash rates dropped in Seattle (-60.6%), San Francisco (-49.3%), Denver (-40.3%) and Chicago (-38.2%), among others.

"The U.S. is killing 40,000 people a year on roads, and we treat it as the cost of doing business," Marshall said. "A lot of the existing research focuses on bicycle safety; with this study, we're interested in everyone's safety."

Eliminating fatalities is the goal of Vision Zero cities like Denver. To reduce deaths, cities need more evidence-based research to help them make better policy decisions.

"Focusing on fatalities -- not crashes -- is important," said Marshall. "Over the years, my research has found that safer cities have fewer fatalities but more fender benders."

The study co-author is Nicholas Ferenchak, PhD, assistant professor in the department of Civil, Construction and Environmental Engineering at the University of New Mexico. Ferenchak studied under Marshall and received his doctoral degree from CU Denver.

Overall, Ferenchak hopes this study simplifies the ways in which cities move forward.

"When we believed it was the old safety-in-numbers concept, that meant we had to figure out how to get more people on bicycles to make a city safer," Ferenchak said. "That's not easy. But this research has boiled it down for city planners: create cycling facilities, and you'll see the impact."

The 12 cities included in this research are Oklahoma City, Memphis, Kansas City, Mo., Dallas, Houston, Austin, Chicago, Denver, Seattle, San Francisco, Minneapolis and Portland. As this study focuses on larger cities, the results are not generalizable to smaller cities.

[CrestedSaguaro]

...and the craziness starts to come out. Hoping the voters in August see what kind of people are fighting the South Central extension.

https://www.azcentral.com/story/news...rt/1435671001/

[N830MH]

Originally Posted by RonnieFoos

...and the craziness starts to come out. Hoping the voters in August see what kind of people are fighting the South Central extension.

https://www.azcentral.com/story/news...rt/1435671001/

Just vote NO! Don't canceled the light rail. We loves light rail very much. We really like to ride on light rail.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by RonnieFoos

...and the craziness starts to come out. Hoping the voters in August see what kind of people are fighting the South Central extension.

https://www.azcentral.com/story/news...rt/1435671001/

Building a Better Phoenix is now trying to distance itself from Cecilia Contreras. It should not be forgotten, however, that the group filed its petitions the day after Ed Pastor died. They may not be invoking whatever god Contreras believes in, but they’ve shown no hesitance in undermining Ed Pastor’s legacy.

In related news, Building a Better Phoenix and Sal DiCiccio are boasting about being victorious at the Arizona Supreme Court, so I guess that means the court refused to hear the case initiated by the Association of General Contractors and we’re definitely heading towards an August election.

In her State of the City address today, Mayor Gallego certainly seemed to be talking in those terms. She issued a powerful call to defeat proposition 105, as well as the less known but equally undesirable Proposition 106. 106 is DiCiccio’s other pet project that could starve city services in an attempt to reduce pension debt.

[DesertRay]

Originally Posted by exit2lef

Building a Better Phoenix is now trying to distance itself from Cecilia Contreras. It should not be forgotten, however, that the group filed its petitions the day after Ed Pastor died. They may not be invoking whatever god Contreras believes in, but they’ve shown no hesitance in undermining Ed Pastor’s legacy.

In related news, Building a Better Phoenix and Sal DiCiccio are boasting about being victorious at the Arizona Supreme Court, so I guess that means the court refused to hear the case initiated by the Association of General Contractors and we’re definitely heading towards an August election.

In her State of the City address today, Mayor Gallego certainly seemed to be talking in those terms. She issued a powerful call to defeat proposition 105, as well as the less known but equally undesirable Proposition 106. 106 is DiCiccio’s other pet project that could starve city services in an attempt to reduce pension debt.

These are some pretty terrible people trying to con us into a huge overreach. Contreras is EXACTLY representative of those who support these kinds of ill-willed measures.

[exit2lef]

CityLab has made Governor Ducey the poster child for FOMO in transportation planning. I posted a comment at the bottom of the post that I think FOMO is only half the problem:

https://www.citylab.com/perspective/...y-tech/591745/

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by exit2lef

CityLab has made Governor Ducey the poster child for FOMO in transportation planning. I posted a comment at the bottom of the post that I think FOMO is only half the problem:

https://www.citylab.com/perspective/...y-tech/591745/

I think Ducey has been doing a fine job, The issue with transit is municipal not state.

Furthermore CityLab wrote yesterday in favor of NY's Insane rent control laws so they can go pound sand as far as I am concerned.

EDIT: After reading it they seem to think Ducey's support of Autonomous cars is a transportation play but I dont see that at all, I see it as a play for tech and automotive business and supply lines.

Autonomous vehicles provide a huge economic opportunity for high paid R&D and good pay manufacturing for sensors and optics, automotive parts and of course endless testers. Its rarely used as an example of our future transit and always as an economic development win.