Actually, ADOT was seeking public comment on the study as recently as last year, so the concept is fresh on their minds.

I'm sure if you utilize wiki you can find all your answers.

For me, until Arizona fully turns from a Red to Blue state and hires a Democratic governor, we can't start talking about ROW, property acquisitions and a final cost. For the time being the final studies required by the state aren't going anywhere. (The Tier 1 study was done with the help of the Obama administration).

The dems flipped one senate seat last year which was a surprise. It will be interesting to see what happens in the next few elections. The area needs a few more Californian's sent their way. :)

Currently the republicans (Koch sponsored crap) are doing their best to gut the voter approved metro extension plan; I'm just hoping Phoenix survives this assault in August. If that passes I think the progressives can then start pushing the Phoenix-Tucson line again.


BOB2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Les,
>
> These are interesting documents from ADOT, thank
> for that.
>
> This is some pretty good basic work that I have
> not seen. Although, some of the cost assumptions
> seem a wee bit "optimistic", as UP would likely
> require a complete separate parallel track, at
> least on the Yuma Tucson main (as they have
> indicated they would want for any service in their
> ROW from Colton to Indio with the Indio-Palm
> Springs-Beaumont Pass services).
>
> The number and comparison with the WashDot
> corridor seems reasonable for PHX to Tucson, a lot
> like the work Dr. Ron at UNMLC did many years ago,
> using basic gravity modeling.
>
> How does $4.5 billion to carry your estimate of
> 19,000 daily riders compare in the FTA funding
> project "cost effectiveness" index scale?
>
> I ask because the LA Metro UP-West Santa Ana
> branch LRT project at $3 billion for around 90,000
> daily passenger trips came in some where around
> 50th (which was "fairly" good, and way better than
> anything in Salt Lake and the front range, with
> its special Senatorial political support, ever
> had) compared to other such projects potentially
> seeking FTA funding.
>
> The other cost factor is this as an alternative to
> the cost of adding capacity to the I-10 corridor
> to carry 19,000 daily trips?
>
> I ask this, because, this is one of the best
> arguments I have for RCTC to look at funding the
> Coachella RCTC "LOSSAN" ML service extension
> project. The potential freeway widening and
> disruption costs are getting so high in that
> corridor, that the estimated of the $1 to $1.5
> billion rail line starts looking like a very cost
> effective and competitive alternative investment
> for that corridor.
>
> So, how much progress has been made in finding
> funding for the PHX-Tucson rail corridor project
> since 2013? And/or what efforts have there been
> to acquire and preserve potential things like this
> station, and the existing ROW's, to keep those
> intact for future develop of this plan?
>
> I've seen much worse analysis of projects, and
> poorer potential performance, that still got
> funded with enough political support.
>
> But, as I told some of my old clients...when they
> got that look of "sticker shock" from the real
> costs of doing these things...the big choo-choo's
> are an expensive business.