That have a good chuckle. I needed that.

I was in Dallas last week, a city 5 times the size of Boise with 1.3 Million people, they had a free downtown trolley, looked like the trolley had capacity for about 30 people, and there were 2 people on the trolley. Trolley will not work in Boise right now, too small of a downtown, very walkable, inefficient route and moderate climate. Rainy Portland or Seattle we are not. Citizens, businesses and parking customers will be left with a big bill for an inefficient system that does nothing but take people who currently walk to their destinations and puts a very small percentage of them on a “free” shuttle, “free” being the biggest joke of this project. Ironic how the City tells us how valuable this shuttle will be, but if a ride costs a $1 people won’t use it so it needs to be free. By definition if a service is so non-value-add people will not pay to use the service, even a buck, it is not needed. I think there are a lot of people that would pay $1 each way, per day, for a new toll lane between Nampa and Boise. Let’s put the money into something the citizens want, not what a few select elected officials and their cheerleaders and hired consultants want us to want.

Listen, and understand! That Terminator (Bieter) is out there! It can’t be bargained with. It can’t be reasoned with. It doesn’t feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop… ever, until you are dead (have a trolley and F35 fighter jets)!

“I think there are a lot of people that would pay $1 each way, per day, for a new toll lane between Nampa and Boise. ”

But that would be serving the people. Team Dave is about social engineering.

Mayor Bieter should have taken a trip to my hometown 35 years ago, and enjoyed the trolleys there. Absolutely the worst form of public transportation. Gets you nowhere, really slowly.

Steve Rinehart. Boise State already has a shuttle between the campus and the Clearwater Building. Anyone can ride it and it runs more frequently and later than the bus service.

But it isn’t in ground so to Bieter it’s worthless.

I would likely support the trolley if it connected the airport to downtown.

The stupid trolley idea is probably something Bieter knows he will never get, but acts to show that he has a “vision” for Boise other than just becoming a sprawling replica of Los Angeles.

The Boise Transportation Action Plan (BTAP) mentions the current walkability and bikeability of the downtown core. No mention of need for ‘circulator.’ Connectivity to outside nodes and park/ride areas, such as Towne Square, is what is lacking per BTAP.

The stated “Move 1” is to focus on safety issues – I see that as Myrtle and Front auto/pedestrian circulation issues, traffic speed. When/how/why did this circulator became the priority?
I propose we simply expand the Boise Bike Bar hours downtown. Seats 14, seems about right for midday circulator, while maintaining a bike/ped vibe.

On a serious note, the MTD Downtown Waterfront Shuttle in Santa Barbara seems similar in scope to what is being pushed here. That was .25 per ride when I was last there – a mere quarter. It was separate entity from the public buses (part of same MTD), though a free transfer to the shuttle from bus was available. It was a cool little natural gas powered rig, and was decorated for each holiday (think huge bunny ears and a pom pom tail at Easter) – corporate sponsors could subsidize (Simplot? Clearwater Analytics? St. Luke’s?)

As I have posted before, I used to be for these things. But I have grown weary of them. First, not enough people are willing to pony up the necessary $$ for these big projects. Second, this circulator is confined to downtown as more of a toy than a serious transit alternative that will serve work shifts. It’s definitely a tourist attraction and they see $$ attached to that concept. I’m sure they want this to dovetail in with convention events as an attraction, I get it. But we need many more other things besides this. How many homeless people will this train house? ZERO.

Way back when we actually had a functioning trolley system in the early 1900s, it worked very well and it was a darn shame that it was pulled out of the ground by the Tire/Bus conspiracy (MSM approved narrative, mind you). If we still had it, we would be enjoying it’s benefits as we would have continued to upgrade it and integrate it with our growth, just like San Francisco did. But, that didn’t happen and trying to replicate it without a pot of gold to dip into will be very hard. I want to go after real meat and potatoes issues like jobs that pay good wages and helping people that need basic needs first. Transportation is a basic need, but this doesn’t really fix that. Our bus system needs attention first, I think.

Why not take a few buses and paint or “wrap” them to look like trolley cars, then run them on the proposed route for a few months to see if anybody will ride it?
If nobody does, forget the whole thing.
If it’s popular, build bus shelters and make it a bus route. Save $100M.

Wolf- Actually, your idea would be a good compromise. If fact, there is another transit option that utilizes a rubber tired train concept that works very well. Eugene OR has Bus Rapid Transit. It’s a very nice rubber tired “train” that serves a select route. You can adjust the route as necessary.

Here’s the City’s counter argument- they don’t like it because they think that their number one “clients” (downtown businesses) will balk at paying for it with a local investment tax, if they think the BRT can be rerouted on them. The City thinks that the businesses will feel more commitment from a in ground rail. But, they don’t want to cough up the dough as it is. A BRT might change their minds. It would be way easier to implement than in ground rail.

And then there is Cleveland’s Euclid Ave Renaissance using BRT – a world class standard for corridor revitalization and moving people.

http://www.riderta.com/healthline/about

http://www.metroplanning.org/news/6203/BRT-Case-Study-Cleveland-Ohio

https://www.ida-downtown.org/eweb/docs/2010%20Web%20Docs/Sasaki%20Associates,%20Euclid%20Avenue%20BRT%20Corridor.pdf

Easterner – If folks had to pay the “TRUE COST” of riding the bus, you’d need not only the costs column added up, but the benefits column subtracted. That’s a hard calculation, and when all considerations are tallied, subsidies for the nominal cost make sense. That’s why every large city has bus system.

I am not sure that anyone could afford to drive, it they had to pay the True Cost. Look at what auto registration fees pay for vs what ACHD collects from property owners.

Oops. I think Bieter’s trolley dreams just died with Trumps budget proposal to delete TIGER funding. You see, Bieter’s trolley dreams absolutely depend on federal money. Well that, and a vote of Boise residents unless he completely ignores the committee report, which of course is very likely. But no federal money means no Bieter trolley. Need a Kleenex Bieter?

The new Kansas City system is fun and efficient… it also is less than a year old and ridership is low in a metro area 4-5 times Boise’s. But hey, why look at what results have been, lets pay money to someone for answers we like! Not to mention the millions in federal supplemental funds KC needed for theirs. Funds which are going away and that our country can not afford to ignore as “federal dollars, not like WE have to pay ourselves”.