Metro Phoenix Transit/Transportation Developments

[muertecaza]

Rundown of the latest on the west light rail extension:

https://archive.is/nClHo#selection-917.23-921.50

[N830MH]

Originally Posted by muertecaza

Rundown of the latest on the west light rail extension:

https://archive.is/nClHo#selection-917.23-921.50

I won’t know for sure! I’ll believe it when I see it in the future.

[PyroD]

https://www.abc15.com/news/local-news/ph...dblocks-before-crucial-city-council-vote

Welp, city council voted to kill the capitol extension.

[muertecaza]

Originally Posted by PyroD

https://www.abc15.com/news/local-news/ph...dblocks-before-crucial-city-council-vote

Welp, city council voted to kill the capitol extension.

Must be mentioned that they did so when faced with continued opposition from non-Phoenix state legislators.

On the one hand, it's frustrating. A lot of wasted time and resources, including potentially losing $200m in already approved federal funding. And a missed opportunity for what could have been a kickstart to improving the decrepit Capitol Mall. On the other hand, from a pure people-moving perspective, a route on Indian School is likely going to be more utilized. If we ever get there, I think it could be successful.

[MiEncanto]

I'm thinking the 400 businesses who signed in opposed to the Indian School route is going to be a problem.

Businesses on Van Buren are opposed to the north on 7th Ave route.

Can we find a stretch of road where the inhabitants support?

[muertecaza]

Originally Posted by MiEncanto

I'm thinking the 400 businesses who signed in opposed to the Indian School route is going to be a problem.

Businesses on Van Buren are opposed to the north on 7th Ave route.

Can we find a stretch of road where the inhabitants support?

It has been a while since I looked, but if I remember right Thomas west of Central is the most used bus line in the City. I always felt like Thomas made more sense than an I-10 or Indian School alignment. They could split the difference. That said, there's an argument that we should not be disrupting what is already our most successful bus line.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by muertecaza

Must be mentioned that they did so when faced with continued opposition from non-Phoenix state legislators.

On the one hand, it's frustrating. A lot of wasted time and resources, including potentially losing $200m in already approved federal funding. And a missed opportunity for what could have been a kickstart to improving the decrepit Capitol Mall. On the other hand, from a pure people-moving perspective, a route on Indian School is likely going to be more utilized. If we ever get there, I think it could be successful.

It's so unfortunate that this became an all-or-nothing vote on a bundle that combined the state capitol and going farther west via I-10. The residents of the nation's largest state capital city should absolutely have access to their state capitol building via light rail, but a freeway alignment makes no sense for service to Maryvale. The best option would have been to proceed with a short spur to the state capitol while simultaneously cancelling I-10 and accelerating Indian School, but no one seemed open to that idea.

[Forrester1998]

Originally Posted by exit2lef

It's so unfortunate that this became an all-or-nothing vote on a bundle that combined the state capitol and going farther west via I-10. The residents of the nation's largest state capital city should absolutely have access to their state capitol building via light rail, but a freeway alignment makes no sense for service to Maryvale. The best option would have been to proceed with a short spur to the state capitol while simultaneously cancelling I-10 and accelerating Indian School, but no one seemed open to that idea.

This whole thing was so dumb, but more to the point as far as the city was concerned the I10 extension was not the controversial part, the Capitol extension was. And the dumb thing is that this really had nothing to do with the people who live downtown, it had everything to do with suburban state legislators who took the idea of a light rail station outside their office as a personal affront.

I am actually sort of in agreement that the Indian School line is probably a better route (revitalization is nearly as big a component of light rail as transportation and revitalization is basically not possible for a route on a highway) but so much time and effort was wasted on two separate environmental reviews (which have staggering costs) including one that took place after the passage of Prop 400. Seems like waiting until the project was ready to break ground to kill it was the worst possible move for transit momentum.

[xymox]

So - city council now wants to study an Indian School corridor? They do realize they have to bring the rail from somewhere to Indian School - then across I-17 (for which there is already a crazy bridge over a bridge project scheduled to reduce congestion) - and then there's the nutty 3-way intersection at Grand Ave. I'm sure this will be cheaper than just going down I-10. (and will go up really fast too!)

Where has revitalization occurred along 19th Ave/Dunlap? Not much going on there - especially compared to other segments. I think these areas are simply unattractive for investors as they will be expensive to develop and they won't make their money back.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by xymox

So - city council now wants to study an Indian School corridor? They do realize they have to bring the rail from somewhere to Indian School - then across I-17 (for which there is already a crazy bridge over a bridge project scheduled to reduce congestion) - and then there's the nutty 3-way intersection at Grand Ave. I'm sure this will be cheaper than just going down I-10. (and will go up really fast too!)

That has already been studied, and Indian School emerged as the "locally preferred alternative" in the parlance of the Federal Transit Administration: https://www.valleymetro.org/project/west-phoenix-high-capacity-transit-alternatives-analysis

What the City Council did last night was to vote to accelerate that project by foregoing the Capitol/1-10 extension and allowing Indian School to move to the front of the line. Unfortunately, the way it was handled also kicked a hornet's nest of opposition from business owners along that corridor, and if they form an unholy alliance with Republican legislators, there may be an effort to thwart all light rail expansion similar to what we saw back in 2019.

[MiEncanto]

All the attention seems to be paid to the "east valley" lawmakers who got the immediate Capitol area exempted but my connections in Valley Metro and MAG tell me the much bigger issue was the combination of pre-existing law that required a legislative committee to approve every single LR stop west of 7th Ave in the 'Capitol Mall Commission' that has been the law for years. And apparently it would have been a war figuring out every stop. Plus, I guess there was big pushback from other entities along the Adams and Washington path so they were seeing nothing but roadblocks.

[muertecaza]

Originally Posted by MiEncanto

All the attention seems to be paid to the "east valley" lawmakers who got the immediate Capitol area exempted but my connections in Valley Metro and MAG tell me the much bigger issue was the combination of pre-existing law that required a legislative committee to approve every single LR stop west of 7th Ave in the 'Capitol Mall Commission' that has been the law for years. And apparently it would have been a war figuring out every stop. Plus, I guess there was big pushback from other entities along the Adams and Washington path so they were seeing nothing but roadblocks.

Interesting, I did not know about the committee-approval requirement. If that has been law for a long time, it makes me wonder why the city council even got this far. I don't know how long it has been clear that a Republican-led state legislature is not going to be amenable to light rail on the Mall, but it seems like the smart move would have been to focus on fights you're more likely to win.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by MiEncanto

All the attention seems to be paid to the "east valley" lawmakers who got the immediate Capitol area exempted but my connections in Valley Metro and MAG tell me the much bigger issue was the combination of pre-existing law that required a legislative committee to approve every single LR stop west of 7th Ave in the 'Capitol Mall Commission' that has been the law for years. And apparently it would have been a war figuring out every stop. Plus, I guess there was big pushback from other entities along the Adams and Washington path so they were seeing nothing but roadblocks.

As usual, you're quoting anonymous "someone I know" sources instead of citing verifiable evidence. The only "pre-existing law" I know of is the enabling legislation for proposition 479 passed in 2023. That law, which Governor Hobbs had to sign to get 479 on the ballot, disallowed light rail stations within certain boundaries around the capitol building and required approval of the Joint Legislative Budget Committee for any stations within the Capitol Mall. Is that what you're talking about, or are you referring to some other law that came before that? If the latter, please provide a link.

[MiEncanto]

Originally Posted by exit2lef

As usual, you're quoting anonymous "someone I know" sources instead of citing verifiable evidence. The only "pre-existing law" I know of is the enabling legislation for proposition 479 passed in 2023. That law, which Governor Hobbs had to sign to get 479 on the ballot, disallowed light rail stations within certain boundaries around the capitol building and required approval of the Joint Legislative Budget Committee for any stations within the Capitol Mall. Is that what you're talking about, or are you referring to some other law that came before that? If the latter, please provide a link.

All right well let me google that for you.

In 2019, the State passed a law with that requirement. Took me 2 mins.

[combusean]

If the state makes the Capitol Mall a non starter than they should just build in the I-10 corridor from Central Avenue. Maybe use the 3rd/5th Ave couplet.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by MiEncanto

All right well let me google that for you.

In 2019, the State passed a law with that requirement. Took me 2 mins.

Thanks for the link. Since it took only two minutes, I hope you'll provide those more often in the future. In terms of the law, I was wrong in thinking it was part of the 2023 law authorizing a vote on Proposition 479. It appears to have been passed four years earlier.

Nevertheless, that law was openly discussed during the nearly 10-hour city council meeting on Tuesday. Several council members mentioned correpondence and in-person meetings between them and JLBC members over station placement. It wasn't an issue in the background.

Originally Posted by combusean

If the state makes the Capitol Mall a non starter than they should just build in the I-10 corridor from Central Avenue. Maybe use the 3rd/5th Ave couplet.

If Phoenix and Valley Metro were to try that, I would expect the state legislature to react with legislation barring light rail anywhere along the I-10 alignment. Councilwoman Stark mentioned that possibility during a subcommittee meeting in December.

If such a bill passed, I'm not sure we could count on Governor Hobbs' veto. There would be fierce opposition to such a route within the historic districts that fought for years against 1-10. A freeway alignment has never been a good route for light rail.

If there's an upside to this debacle, it's that the I-10 route has been abandoned, probably forever. What's unfortunate is that rail service to the state capitol has been sacrificed in the process and any other route to Maryvale may now face strong headwinds.

[MiEncanto]

Who's in opposition to the I-10 alignment? I've never seen public positions.

I think the I-10 portion of the LR is perhaps the easiest pathway because it doesn't involved hundreds of constituents opposing the path.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by MiEncanto

Who's in opposition to the I-10 alignment? I've never seen public positions.

I think the I-10 portion of the LR is perhaps the easiest pathway because it doesn't involved hundreds of constituents opposing the path.

Until recently, there was no organized opposition, which was a shame because I-10 has always been a bad route for light rail. It would have involved noisy, smoggy stations within walking distance of few destinations and would have done little to catalyze development along its route. It would have most likely been used primarily by suburban park-and-ride commuters during weekday business hours, leaving it underutilized nights and weekends. Freeway alignments are fine for commuter rail and express buses, but they make little sense for light rail. Often the path of least resistance is that way because it's the least desirable path to take. Fast forward to today, and now there is organized opposition, albeit for all the wrong reasons. The opposition is coming from state legislators who are ideologically opposed to rail transit. They know that they have control of state property and highways, so making that land off limits to light rail is a way for them to stymie its expansion.

[combusean]

I used to think the same but then I realized after taking light rail in San Jose that has a similar setup, that slight inconvenience is made up for with speed, especially if the bus connections are still there.

55 MPH with no stoplights is hard to argue with at the end of the day.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by combusean

I used to think the same but then I realized after taking light rail in San Jose that has a similar setup, that slight inconvenience is made up for with speed, especially if the bus connections are still there.

55 MPH with no stoplights is hard to argue with at the end of the day.

I agree about the speed, but I still see freeway routes as a better fit for commuter rail with longer trains, longer distances between stations, park-and-ride facilities, and regional and/or state funding. A light rail line funded primarily by a city sales tax should have serving city neighborhoods at its first priority. San Jose's VTA has not attained the same levels of ridership as Phoenix, largely because the routes and stations are not as well situated as Valley Metro's.

https://multimodalmcmullen.com/us-light-rail-ridership-analysis-first-half-2025/

"Freeway alignments are often used which are fast and relatively affordable yet do not allow TOD, decreasing the catchment area of the line and largely relying on park and rides or bus connections for ridership instead of nearby residents in walking distance; this problem afflicts many heavy rail lines as well and typically leads to underperforming lights."

"Systems leading the way in ridership loss include San Jose’s abysmal VTA, due to a 17 day strike that has since been resolved, but the inherent lack of utility for the system is something no $12B BART extension can fix. VTA has the worst ridership per milefor any USA light rail system after Cleveland’s legacy disasters and Norfolk’s line to nowhere, The Tide, stymied by Virginia Beach cancelling the extension that would have made the route worthwhile by connecting the two biggest cities in the MSA."