Comments on: City Railroads Trolley Plans

By: Bieterbot

Bieterbot — Sat, 18 Mar 2017 21:12:10 +0000

Declining bus ridership will be solved when the next economic crisis hits and many cars are repossessed, and many are reduced to grinding poverty, and that time has nearly arrived. The Oligarchs will need to move the slaves around efficiently. The happy motoring utopia is about over.

By: Interested208

Interested208 — Fri, 17 Mar 2017 18:04:34 +0000

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”.

By: Clancy Anderson

Clancy Anderson — Thu, 16 Mar 2017 15:17:42 +0000

Well if Trump is still around, there may be no federal monies available for new transit project. http://usa.streetsblog.org/2017/03/16/trumps-budget-takes-an-axe-to-transit/

By: Bieter Begone

Bieter Begone — Thu, 16 Mar 2017 13:18:22 +0000

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?

By: JDB

JDB — Thu, 16 Mar 2017 05:26:38 +0000

Each time someone stepped onto a Valley Ride bus in 2015 (latest data available) the cost for each passenger was $ 6.02. That’s up from $ 5.81 in 2014. Fares covered only 10.4% of the 2015 cost. Source: National Transit Database (https://www.transit.dot.gov/node/57136).

Bottom line, local and Federal taxpayer subsidy was about $ 5.40 for each boarding passenger in 2015. That nearly 90% subsidy is very high compared to those large city bus systems. And ridership continues to drop according to VRT Annual Reports – despite service increases.

High cost, few benefits. “Nominal” cost making sense? Don’t think so. Just saying.

By: Clancy Anderson

Clancy Anderson — Wed, 15 Mar 2017 15:17:44 +0000

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.

By: Clancy Anderson

Clancy Anderson — Wed, 15 Mar 2017 15:10:38 +0000

Easterner, The Columbus case had the business owners come together to create this program via their local improvement district. They realized parking was going to be a problem and looked for solutions to solve it by getting people into downtown without their cars. And many employers already reimburse for commuter cost, including transit, under under IRS Section 132(f).

Boise on the other hand wants people to drive downtown, park and ride around in circles. You can look at both as tax if you want, but I see Columbus as a better solution to the problem.

By: Bieterbot

Bieterbot — Tue, 14 Mar 2017 22:10:41 +0000

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.

By: Easterner

Easterner — Tue, 14 Mar 2017 17:06:45 +0000

Clancy,
What’s the difference of a downtown owners being TAXED more to pay for bus passes for the few to to use the bus (and passing the cost on to employees with less pay, or customers with highers prices) vs the employees just paying for their own darn pass?

Let the user pay their true cost, don’t ya think?

By: JDB

JDB — Tue, 14 Mar 2017 05:01:03 +0000

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