Comments on: Boise Mayors and Trains Page Two

By: Gordon

Gordon — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 23:10:59 +0000

Ryan said, “The downtown is the most dense area in the state. ”

I have to disagree. I think the mayor’s office is the most dense area.

By: cyclops

cyclops — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 00:50:51 +0000

Boise Cynic, I guess the short story here is that you favor spending 4 million bucks, of someone elses money, so that the people using the “wildly popuar greenbelt” can watch the fewer than 100 kayakers playing in the “wading pool”. It sounds like a bunch of trained seals performing at Marine World. Will there be scheduled performances or just catch as catch can performances?
But more to the point. I fail to see how you could possibly argue that the water park equates to the greenbelt. Something that directly benefits the entire population does not compare with something that directly benefits so few.
It is just too expensive of a project in today’s economic situation. And just a word of caution for future discussion. Unless phase 2 of this project is to line the river with 25-30 casinos, I wouldn’t make a comparison with Reno. Not quite “apples for apples”!

By: Bob

Bob — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 15:57:57 +0000

One could make an argument that a better transit system is needed in what is commonly referred to as the downtown core. However, a trolley? Mayor Bieter, if you want to play with electric trains, keep them in your garage or basement, don’t ask the taxpayers to foot what will burgeon into a $20 million plus dollar project to serve a very small area. There are a plethora of better ways to handle this with far less impact both dollar and infrastructure-wise.

Unless everyone complains, and loudly, to the Mayors office and City Council, this WILL be pushed through. Sick!

By: JIMV

JIMV — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 20:53:50 +0000

“Besides, the cost of a lightrail system for Treasure Valley would exceed its value (Dave is right. The same cost could fund an extremely effective bus service…”

I have never seen a bus service worth a darn and busses are fuel and money gobblers of enormous size for the entire time they run. A trolly system runs on electricity and the cost is far less when the routes are established. Ask New Yorkers if they would trade the subway for busses.

How about a single route down park center, through the city center and then on out down Fairview with a spur to the Mall. Someone said it well. The rail has to go from where folk live to where they shop or work to make money

By: Bob Blurton

Bob Blurton — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 12:27:39 +0000

If you are awake and paying attention to the energy news coming out of the Wall St Journal and other investor publications, you will notice that they have declared the “Peak Oil” people were /are right.

Once you find out what Peak Oil means, then you need to look at the implications.

Thousands of experts from around the world have been writing on this subject for a lot of years and have come to many shared conclusions published in books and papers.

The main conclusions as applies to Boise are that:

1. There is no future for cars & airplanes. Even if we developed a 1000mpg wonder car, the roads are quickly going to break up due to ACHD being unable to provide even the barest minimum of maintainance.
2. Food will cease to be imported in any meaningful quantity in the near future due to the roads being unuseable for timely delivery. We will therefore need to grow the majority of our food locally, or starve.
3. Commuting will not be an issue, people will mostly be involved in food production and farmers do not commute, never have.

It is time to stop worrying about the price of gas, commuting, & transit, and start thinking about how to keep the food coming.

Reading List:
1. Powerdown by Richard Heinberg
2. The Long Emergency by James Kunstler
3. The Party’s Over by Richard Heinberg
4. Twilight in the Desert, by Matt Simmons
5. High Noon For Natural Gas, by Julian Darley
6. Beyond Oil: The View from Hubbert’s Peak by Kenneth Deffeyes
7. Half Gone by Jeremy Leggett
8. The End of Oil by Paul Roberts
9. The Coming Oil Crisis by Colin Campbell
10. Out of Gas: The End of the Age of Oil by David Goodstein
11. The Oil Factor by Stephen Leeb, PHD
12. The Coming Economic Collapse by Stephen Leeb, PHD
13. http://www.energybulletin.net/

Below is a brief page detailing the problem.
http://www.energybulletin.net/primer.php

By: boisecynic

boisecynic — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 12:27:26 +0000

Cyclops:

I will make a rational argument rather than forceful, regarding the reconstruction of the near 100 year old decrepit diversions at Thurman Mill and Farmer’s Union. Frankly, I think the 2 canal operators should have to pay for it but monkeys will fly before that happens.

Back to the rational argument, in a word, history. The greenbelt has proven to be wildly popular and has attracted higher and better uses to river front property. I don’t need to reinvent the wheel, just have a look at the video made by Bill Onweiler in 1970. This forum is not the place to post all the stuff written by Mr. Onweiler and others, but I suggest you spend some time at the Library, Idaho History Archives and Boise City Historian’s office.

Bill Onweiler’s 1970 Greenbelt promo:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dskPRdi2k9I

Yeah, that video is pretty bad, but it’s his words that are important.

Just as today, with respect to the River Park, in the 60s there were people who railed against the geenbelt and used the same “why are we wasting money on this.” How about we try returning all that greenbelt land to the adjoining property owners? The outcry would make the foothills dog leash broohaha look like a sunday school class.

The greenbelt is nearly done in Boise, the River Park is a logical adjunct to the greenbelt.

One of the functions of government is to do for the people that which they cannot do for themselves. Since the Boise River is public property, how could a private developer of a River Park get repaid for use of it?

Last, let’s look at what other cities have done, Reno for example. News reports from Reno have noted that their River Park is not only popular, with thousands of people, not just a 100 as you put it, and their River Park has attracted new business to the area.

Cyclops, I will give you 12 cents a year for the rest of your life if you change your mind. This is double the price of your forced contribution to the River Rec Park.

By: Clancy

Clancy — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 12:26:28 +0000

A BUS update from a coworker that rides a couple of times a week. The #10 bus coming downtown on State was full this morning, people were even standing.

Why don’t they look at which routes are being used and enhance service.

By: Cyclops

Cyclops — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 00:57:13 +0000

Guardian, please indulge me for just a minute while I respond to Boisecynic.
Cynic, you just don’t understand! I don’t care if the whitewater fiasco costs 1/000% and it worked out to be $0.06 per citizen per year. It is a waste of vital taxpayer monies that could be better used keeping roots from eating up the greenbelt, some actual grass for the 100 acres of parks that the baboon brags about acquiring, new play ground equipment , ballfields, soccer fields, or any other of the numerous ways that the city could enhance the lives of the people that live here. Just as you and I disagree about the whitewater park, there is usually more than one opinion on an issue. For you to want to ban any opposition to your precious little “wading pool” is truly sad. I would hope you could make a more forceful arguement for your position.

By: Rod in SE Boise

Rod in SE Boise — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 23:45:59 +0000

Fifty Million Dollars!!

That is the only number you need to consider. Portland is a big city, as are Chicago, New York, San Francisco, and Seattle, to name a few. Boise is NOT. Not even close. Probably never will be. Humans will go extinct about the same time the world population gets so big that Boise can be called a big city. Anything more extravagant than our present bus system is unthinkable. Yes, I said unthinkable!

Not one dollar of my taxes, ever.

By: sam the sham

sam the sham — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 02:30:37 +0000

Before I address the train, may I please ask the mayor to find someone to keep the Depot clock running on time? When the power goes out, the clock stops and it takes weeks for anyone in the parks department to put the time right. Bad show! Now if it were in the North End someone would be on it as soon as the power was restored.
The inner kid in me loves trains. The adult sees the value of a train that has some use to it. I loved riding the train in Tokyo… let me call it mass transit. It had purpose other than a tourist attraction. It took people from one area of Tokyo to work or to a distant town or to a distant mountain. Portland also has that kind of train…. mass transit. It appears that you are wanting a train for the fun of it, not for the value of a working mass transit system. Is it federal dollars you are after or a working system for people to use (instead of their CARS) to help clean the air in this valley.
Mayor, let’s also look at logistics. Most people who will use the train will need to park their car, prior to getting onto the train… because there is no bus for them to ride from home to where ever there is a train.
IF were were in Japan we may need a parking lot to park our bikes or we may actually walk from our home to the train, but we are not in Japan, we are in Boise where most people feel that they would rather drive around the block 12 times looking for someone leaving a parking spot than to park (and walk) two blocks. Don’t get me wrong, we love our exercise just as long as it’s fun… treadmill =ok, walking two miles to get to a train = not ok.
So what land it the city going to buy to create a parking lot for this train idea? Then where is the train going and how would it fit into a larger picture – or is this just a small one track train idea.