Metro Phoenix Transit/Transportation Developments

[pbenjamin]

Originally Posted by Sunsfan87

https://azdot.gov/planning/transport...oop-202-santan

I’m hoping they see how much traffic congestion the south mountain freeway alleviates before making a final decision on this.

Agreed. Despite its flaws, the South Mountain Freeway has to be good for something.

[biggus diggus]

I cannot think of a scenario when I personally would use the new 202, but I'm rather excited for its opening because it will decrease congestion in the city. If even 10% of the traffic downtown that's just passing through were able to bypass that would make a huge dent in traffic.

[pbenjamin]

Originally Posted by biggus diggus

I cannot think of a scenario when I personally would use the new 202, but I'm rather excited for its opening because it will decrease congestion in the city. If even 10% of the traffic downtown that's just passing through were able to bypass that would make a huge dent in traffic.

Exactly. Truck traffic in particular should use the bypass. That could have been accomplished more cheaply though by upgrading SR85 between the 10 and Gila Bend to a freeway, which wouldn't have had the negative byproduct of producing more sprawl.

[xymox]

Originally Posted by pbenjamin

Exactly. Truck traffic in particular should use the bypass. That could have been accomplished more cheaply though by upgrading SR85 between the 10 and Gila Bend to a freeway, which wouldn't have had the negative byproduct of producing more sprawl.

Why would you say that? This goes through the heart of Buckeye which is growing like mad.

Yes, the plans are to convert SR-85 to a freeway connecting I-8 and I-10 - you can really see how they'd pre-planned and set a lot of it up that way heading south on it from I-10.

The ultimate truck route/bypass will be I-11. But who knows when that will start - still going through route approvals. L202 is the first truck route/bypass until then. Though I really question if it will have a big impact considering where it goes and the amount of growth we've had and continue to have. It won't relieve for long.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by pbenjamin

Exactly. Truck traffic in particular should use the bypass. That could have been accomplished more cheaply though by upgrading SR85 between the 10 and Gila Bend to a freeway, which wouldn't have had the negative byproduct of producing more sprawl.

How could the loop 202 possibly produce more sprawl?

North of the 202 Ahwatukee is already built out with almost no open land left to build on.

South is the reservation and will never house anything besides cotton.

Once you get around the mountain you are in leveen, areas only a few miles from downtown that shockingly still have operating farm fields but already is hopscotched with suburban development.

This highway did not push out the city limits and creates a new southern east-west route from Chandler to the west valley.

Now people can live/work and commute in half the time between the SE valley and the West valley. not to mention it is a way to bypass the city center for heavy trucking.

Of all the highways to be built this one was absolutely a good thing.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by Obadno

How could the loop 202 possibly produce more sprawl?

North of the 202 Ahwatukee is already built out with almost no open land left to build on.

South is the reservation and will never house anything besides cotton.

Once you get around the mountain you are in leveen, areas only a few miles from downtown that shockingly still have operating farm fields but already is hopscotched with suburban development.

This highway did not push out the city limits and creates a new southern east-west route from Chandler to the west valley.

Now people can live/work and commute in half the time between the SE valley and the West valley. not to mention it is a way to bypass the city center for heavy trucking.

Of all the highways to be built this one was absolutely a good thing.

By enabling these long commutes and even longer ones that people are currently unwilling to tolerate. Right now, there are without a doubt some people who commute between, say, Chandler and Avondale. The South Mountain 202 will make their drives better. There are probably some other people who have rejected the prospect of such a commute based on the time and distance. If it becomes easier, then buying that house 10 miles more in the opposite direction of work suddenly becomes a more palatable choice. Even worse, there may be even longer commutes such as Queen Creek to/from Buckeye, that almost no one would find acceptable today. With the new freeway open, those commutes might be within the realm of what some would accept. As a result, more people move farther away from work and drive more miles every day. Sprawl doesn't necessarily mean a new wave of development farther out, although that could very well happen. Instead, it can take the form of job sprawl, with more employers deciding to locate farther out and more employees deciding that a commute of 25 miles or more is now acceptable because of a faster freeway connection. ADOT has claimed that the South Mountain Freeway is necessary to accommodate existing levels of traffic. Maybe they're right, but never underestimate the power of induced demand to fill a vacuum with new traffic.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by exit2lef

By enabling these long commutes and even longer ones that people are currently unwilling to tolerate. Right now, there are without a doubt some people who commute between, say, Chandler and Avondale. The South Mountain 202 will make their drives better. There are probably some other people who have rejected the prospect of such a commute based on the time and distance. If it becomes easier, then buying that house 10 miles more in the opposite direction of work suddenly becomes a more palatable choice. Even worse, there may be even longer commutes such as Queen Creek to/from Buckeye, that almost no one would find acceptable today. With the new freeway open, those commutes might be within the realm of what some would accept. As a result, more people move farther away from work and drive more miles every day. Sprawl doesn't necessarily mean a new wave of development farther out, although that could very well happen. Instead, it can take the form of job sprawl, with more employers deciding to locate farther out and more employees deciding that a commute of 25 miles or more is now acceptable because of a faster freeway connection. ADOT has claimed that the South Mountain Freeway is necessary to accommodate existing levels of traffic. Maybe they're right, but never underestimate the power of induced demand to fill a vacuum with new traffic.

There is nothing wrong with moving people and goods more efficiently across the region. This is a good thing, whatever sprawl i might encourage is already mostly there.

[combusean]

I hate how the 202 rips up the mountain but an alternative to the 10 needs to be finished. West Valley distribution centers need access to the Southeast Valley without going through downtown. Chandler and Gilbert are also becoming office destinations and people need relief from higher housing costs besides the crummy exurbs of Casa Grande and Apache Junction. Anything they build on those farm fields is more or less infill--it doesn't sprawl out the area. In fact, it could condense it.

The only thing they should do with the 10 is build a rail line in the corridor to connect it to places like Arizona Mills and Chandler Boulevard, maybe even out to Mesa Gateway. UPRR's Kyrene branch is under-utilized and if there's space to widen the 10, they can widen it for rail.

[xymox]

Originally Posted by combusean

I hate how the 202 rips up the mountain but an alternative to the 10 needs to be finished. West Valley distribution centers need access to the Southeast Valley without going through downtown. Chandler and Gilbert are also becoming office destinations and people need relief from higher housing costs besides the crummy exurbs of Casa Grande and Apache Junction. Anything they build on those farm fields is more or less infill--it doesn't sprawl out the area. In fact, it could condense it.

The only thing they should do with the 10 is build a rail line in the corridor to connect it to places like Arizona Mills and Chandler Boulevard, maybe even out to Mesa Gateway. UPRR's Kyrene branch is under-utilized and if there's space to widen the 10, they can widen it for rail.

Read:

https://azdot.gov/planning/transport...tucson-phoenix

Some of what you've proposed is covered here in alternatives. Just need to start pushing this and get it funded. Everyone I speak to wants commuter rail and the high speed line to Tucson - seems like it'd be easy win if on the ballot.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by Obadno

There is nothing wrong with moving people and goods more efficiently across the region. This is a good thing, whatever sprawl i might encourage is already mostly there.

If that's what actually happens, then it is good. I'm just skeptical of that outcome. I see a far more likely scenario of temporary relief, followed by additional traffic filling the vacuum that has been created, additional sprawl occurring far beyond the freeway's footprint but still enabled by it, resulting in congestion as bad as what came before, if not worse.

[combusean]

^ The area is going to sprawl regardless of what freeways are built if that's what the market wants. Phoenicians suffered terrible congestion after the freeway revolts because they loathed the idea of becoming another LA. It happened anyways.

Thinking not building will mean they won't come is a fool's gambit--growth happened here and in Austin. People will endure downright awful commutes for economic opportunity (i did 2 hrs one way before I moved), and it's pay now or pay much more later.

The problem is we don't build transit to where it needs to go, and the passenger rail study is totally unfunded. Everyone is balking at the price tag and the negotiations with UP will drag on.

I'm hoping this shift to infill on established transit corridors is permanent or at least generational anyways. The suckage of suburbia is realized by broke, distraught Millennials who are eschewing having kids anyways.

[xymox]

Originally Posted by combusean

I'm hoping this shift to infill on established transit corridors is permanent or at least generational anyways. The suckage of suburbia is realized by broke, distraught Millennials who are eschewing having kids anyways.

The trend seems to be flipping on millennials living in urban areas, this is just one of many articles/news videos I've noticed over the past year on the subject:

https://www.cnbc.com/video/2019/07/0...t-keep-up.html

As they have families, they realize urban life is not quite as affordable/practical in a lot of cases.

[xymox]

Originally Posted by exit2lef

If that's what actually happens, then it is good. I'm just skeptical of that outcome. I see a far more likely scenario of temporary relief, followed by additional traffic filling the vacuum that has been created, additional sprawl occurring far beyond the freeway's footprint but still enabled by it, resulting in congestion as bad as what came before, if not worse.

I think MAG is doing more or less reasonable planning for county build out. All the newly proposed freeways are in areas where they are projecting the growth will go. If the county is going to double its population over the next 30 years (again) - then these need to be built as the growth will already be there.

It was a nasty growing pain during the 90s when a freeway structure had to be overlaid on the valley - costing a lot more money than it should have had they been built when originally needed. At least this time they have serious (but unfunded) plans for 'real' rail.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by xymox

The trend seems to be flipping on millennials living in urban areas, this is just one of many articles/news videos I've noticed over the past year on the subject:

https://www.cnbc.com/video/2019/07/0...t-keep-up.html

As they have families, they realize urban life is not quite as affordable/practical in a lot of cases.

I wouldnt call it flipping on Urban areas I would call it the natural progression through life.

Although I still think they are far less likely to mass flee to far exurban areas like Boomers and Xr's were. Millennials are much more likely to have a smaller updated house in an established first rign suburb than just drive out 45 minutes to a mcmansion.

[combusean]

Originally Posted by xymox

The trend seems to be flipping on millennials living in urban areas, this is just one of many articles/news videos I've noticed over the past year on the subject:

https://www.cnbc.com/video/2019/07/0...t-keep-up.html

As they have families, they realize urban life is not quite as affordable/practical in a lot of cases.

The long term trend has been less kids per household for a really long time. Millennials are the first generation in American history to be worse off than their parents and the birth rate has dropped to its lowest level in a generation--it's below the replacement rate and population growth in America is now fully dependent on immigration.

I don't doubt that the Millennials who are having kids aren't finding trendy, expensive urban cores to be working out for them. I think there's an overall housing shortage more than anything else--I don't follow SFH in Phoenix but I can't imagine it's sprawling anywhere near the rate it has historically.

[muertecaza]

Originally Posted by combusean

The long term trend has been less kids per household for a really long time. Millennials are the first generation in American history to be worse off than their parents and the birth rate has dropped to its lowest level in a generation--it's below the replacement rate and population growth in America is now fully dependent on immigration.

I don't doubt that the Millennials who are having kids aren't finding trendy, expensive urban cores to be working out for them. I think there's an overall housing shortage more than anything else--I don't follow SFH in Phoenix but I can't imagine it's sprawling anywhere near the rate it has historically.

Yeah, these are just total numbers, so they don't take into account location, but SFH building permits in metro Phoenix are about 1/3 to 1/2 of what they were in the mid-2000s peak in a given month:

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PHOE004BP1FH

[N830MH]

Originally Posted by xymox

Read:

https://azdot.gov/planning/transport...tucson-phoenix

Some of what you've proposed is covered here in alternatives. Just need to start pushing this and get it funded. Everyone I speak to wants commuter rail and the high speed line to Tucson - seems like it'd be easy win if on the ballot.

And Phoenix to Las Vegas, as well as Los Angeles. I hoping if they have high speed rail from Phoenix to Las Vegas. No need take a flight or bus.

[N830MH]

Originally Posted by exit2lef

An update on the light rail extension to MetroCenter. As I think I've said before, I really like this elevated design with bus bays under rail platforms. No need for passengers to cross busy streets when transferring.

https://kjzz.org/content/1209366/pho...-interstate-17

Yes! I can see light rail go over the elevated bridge. They won't have go on busy streets anymore. Because too much traffic out there. I'm pretty sure about this. Too many car accidents out there. That's the problem.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by xymox

Read:

https://azdot.gov/planning/transport...tucson-phoenix

Some of what you've proposed is covered here in alternatives. Just need to start pushing this and get it funded. Everyone I speak to wants commuter rail and the high speed line to Tucson - seems like it'd be easy win if on the ballot.

The challenge would be getting it on the ballot in the first place. Our current governor has made it clear that his transportation policy is based on Uber, Lyft, and Waymo, along with a few freeway projects. Current majorities in both houses of the legislature are suspicious of transit, and trains in particular. It would take either victories by people who support commuter rail or a well-funded initiative effort backed by business interests to make this happen. Local support wouldn't be enough. With tracks passing through three counties, state-level advocacy would be essential, and it's just not there now.

[exit2lef]

The city has scheduled a public meeting regarding the west Roosevelt bike lanes:

October 28, 2019 at 7 PM – 8:30 PM

Burton Barr Central Library

https://www.phoenix.gov/streets/bikelanes