Comments on: Phoenix Light Rail Fail — Half My Light Rail Bet Settled

By: Stephen Karlson

Stephen Karlson — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 22:01:32 +0000

Light rail in Chicago and New York? Not really. The Chicago and New York rail transportation uses either heavy rail (rapid transit in trains of up to 8 cars in Chicago and longer in New York) or commuter rail (using conventional railroad cars). You’ve got very thickly settled areas and high land values leading to office tower development and expensive parking, and resistance to widening the expressways or the arterial streets. The systems work, although they are tax sinks (although perhaps not as much as the roads are.)

By: Setenta y seis

Setenta y seis — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 19:31:33 +0000

So, you could buy each rider a Prius, huh? Maybe even pay for their gas? What about paying for the additional wear and tear on roads caused by all of these extra cars? Or build the parking garages that would be necessary? What about the hidden insurance and maintenance costs that always seem to be left out of any cars-vs-rail equation?

And you say light rail hurts the working poor? Hasn’t the reorientation of our entire American society to be car-centric hurt the working poor more than anything else, by requiring them to take on the additional expense of car ownership? Light rail isn’t just about the transit itself, it’s also about allowing for more walkable urban development, where people can live, work, and play without the required burdensome costs of a car, gas, insurance, and parking.

I don’t understand people like you who are convinced that we can keep adding more and more highway lanes for the rest of time. It’s not a sustainable method of development, and the costs — both economic and societal — are very high.

By: 5chw4r7z

5chw4r7z — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 19:29:25 +0000

1 lane/mile of expressway costs $100 million so why not a mile of track?
Sure only looking at upfront costs a Prius is cheaper, never mind Toyota is selling them at a huge loss for PR.
And that roads are subsidized, so no one sees the true cost of them either, the highway fund is $7 billion in the hole.
What about all the people who don’t want a car? its not all about cars, lets start building our cities around people.
Instead of spending $400+ a month on a car, what if everyone could dump it and spend that money at a local business?
Kind of changes the dynamics there doesn’t it?

By: Neville

Neville — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 14:38:57 +0000

Light rail is best understood as the modern equivalent of the medieval cathedral. A large scale devotional object, with few practical uses and substantial operating costs, which may well be around for centuries.

By: Losers

Losers — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 01:53:37 +0000

Are you guys enjoying your little automobile-loving orgy? “2 more lanes on he freeway”…jizz! Adding two lanes to a 10 lane freeway does jack shit to reduce congestion. Maybe light rail would be used more if your dumphole of a city weren’t designed for all you car crazy morons.

By: James

James — Sat, 30 May 2009 09:09:01 +0000

a boarding is one person stepping onto a train. anyone can step onto a train fifty times a day that is fifty boardings
most people board a train twice a day. So yes there is about 18,500 riders but there is about 37,000 boardings a day.

By: SWB

SWB — Fri, 29 May 2009 00:59:24 +0000

To Gordon,

Any new ‘down-town’ high rise building, which does not include adequate parking for it’s patrons in its basement; and or, first few floors is idiotic anyways! Go figure that into to mix!

By: SteveH

SteveH — Tue, 26 May 2009 20:35:42 +0000

Some clarifications:

The $1.4B expense includes about $400M of street and infrastructure (sewer, water, electrical, gas) replacement and repair that was going to have to be done anyway. Also in that number are all the one-time start-up expenses associated with planning, design, right-of-way purchases and environmental clearances.

The useful life (GASB / FTA) of a car is typically 5 years; a city bus, 12 years; and a light train, 30 years. Ignoring operating costs, youâ€™d need 6 cars over the 30 years so that $425M is now a little over $2.5B for the cars v $1.4B for the train (which is inflated, see above).

Not to mention that of the 18,500 people who received the cars, based on deaths per passenger mile between car and rail, ~90 of those people would still be alive if theyâ€™d stayed with the rail. Not sure how to put a price on that.

The Central corridor and downtown Phoenix are the largest commercial centers in the state and the seat of many city, county and state government agencies. Iâ€™m sure a large number of government workers take the rail as it goes to where they work. Iâ€™m also sure that when Prop. 400 passed it wasnâ€™t a bunch of government workers looking for a nice ride. It was reasonable people understanding that if youâ€™re going to have a serious and attractive city, you need a comprehensive, multi-modal and forward looking transportation plan.

The rail is an investment in the future and we will thank ourselves tremendously as the city grows and congestion continues its unrelenting pace.

And I will bet on that!

By: joshv

joshv — Tue, 26 May 2009 03:37:45 +0000

Coyote, how then do you explain the continuing success of light rail in Chicago and NYC? I think the failure of light rail in places like Phoenix is more an indication of a failure to create a vital central business district. Simply put, ‘there is no there there’. One might go downtown for a game, but few people actually work there. There is no workable hub for such a system.

So please, qualify you objections, in sprawling cities that were built mostly after the advent of the car, light rail systems will probably never work. In older cities with dense central business districts, light rail works just fine.

By: larry s

larry s — Mon, 25 May 2009 21:05:26 +0000

This notion of buying a car for every commuter at the expense of light rail is getting to be old and, as usual, is still misleading. What about the cost saved on road wear & tear, car expenses, gas, human fatigue and frustration, pollution, and on and on. Why can’t people see the big picture or are our minds too little for such.