Wednesday, May 30, 2007

City's alleged '$50M to LRT' just ain't so

Several people recently have posted comments akin to this one (look deep into the lengthy comments thread):

Yes Mary...please get with Ms. Burgess immediately and ask about the $50 MM that city council funded to LTR [light rail transit] to the detriment of public safety (ie: police officers).Oh, and ask about that bald face lie they told to the general public that the 2006 increase was necessary to FUND additional police officers. They would have plenty if not for the $50 MM funded to LTR, so really it was an LTR tax.

I asked Susan Burgess. I asked Deputy City Manager Curt Walton. I asked Budget Director Ruffin Hall. They all said the same. The city budget doesn't allocate any money to the transit system -- not for operations, not for building the rails or stations. It never has. All the LRT money comes completely from within CATS' separate budget. (See technical note below.)

Best we can figure -- I mean Hall, Burgess, Walton and I -- people who are talking about the $50 million are referring to a $50 million street and sidewalk infrastructure package known at City Hall as SCIP, the South Corridor Infrastructure Program. That project is building much- needed sidewalks and improving intersections, as well as solving decades-old drainage and sewage problems, along South Boulevard near the light rail line.

The city decided to speed up some of that work so that people would have sidewalks on which to walk to transit stops and so streets and intersections on the South Boulevard corridor would function more smoothly once the light rail operations start. Those needs have lingered for years, decades even and many of them predate any notion of light rail. The city decided it would be more efficient and effective to do the work all at once, rather than tear up the street for an intersection improvement, then tear it up a few years later for storm drainage, and then later still to add sidewalks and bike trails.

SCIP is being paid for through bond issues that voters passed -- let me repeat that, VOTERS PASSED -- in 2002 and 2004. The City Council's decision to raise property taxes came in 2006. In other words, those decisions were not linked, and the voters approved the SCIP projects. Whatever Susan Burgess may have said on the radio (she told me she couldn't remember saying anything like that) she was either misunderstood or bumbled what she was trying to say.

People who are spreading this alleged fact are either:
A. Confused and/or misinformed.
B. Getting their "facts" from news sources that are confused, misinformed or don't understand the city budget.
C. Deliberately spreading misinformation.

I'm going to assume most people are A. City finances are tricky and boring to understand. Most people whose jobs don't require them to attend City Council meetings or interview city officials don't have the time or interest to fathom things such as the difference between capital budgets and operating budgets.

But here's a quick lesson. The $50 million capital improvement project SCIP comes from the capital budget -- i.e. one-time expenditures, such as when you get a new roof for your house. Debt service on city bonds also comes from the capital budget.

Police officers' pay comes from the operating budget -- i.e. continuing expenses, such as paying the light bills. In other words, you can't just take money allocated to repay bonds and convert it easily into police officer positions. (See the other technical note below.)

(Technical note: For bond-issuing reasons, the CATS budget is housed within the
city's budget, because there's no official government entity that runs CATS, as there would be if the Metropolitan Transit Commission were an authority. But the CATS budget and the city's budget remain separate.)

(Other technical note: Yes, city officials have to balance how much revenue to put into their capital budget and how much into their operating budget. So yes, there is a relationship between those budgets. But the city has been issuing street and sidewalk improvement bonds for years and years, long predating CATS and the light rail plans. Most council members see those improvement projects as basic, continuing city services.)

76 comments:

Anonymous said...

So let me get this straight. The money came from my left pocket and not my right.

Thanks for the clarification.

Thad

Anonymous said...

Mary, what is the current amount of tax subsidies associated with LRT on South Blvd?

When the city purchases several pieces of land for a "showcase transit stop" then sells the land at a discount to developer, where did that lost money come from?

When property tax breaks or credits (or whatever) are given in order to make a certain number of affordable housing units happen along South Blvd close to a transit stop, where does that money come from?

These are all subsidized costs that need to be linked to light rail. These are not magical freebies. Someone has to pay the freight. It is the taxpayers of Charlotte and it is basically coming from local property taxes outside of the CATS budget.

Anonymous said...

WHAAA WHAA WHAAA GOO GOO GAA GAA cry me a river

Anonymous said...

Mary,

Thanks for the clarification.

It's your job as a reporter to give people accurate and complete information.

Please continue. It's a refreshing change.

Your testiness wouldn't have to do with the fact that the BOE verified today that there are enough sinatures to get the transit tax repeal on the ballot this year would it?

Anonymous said...

Yeah rick, and how many times did you sign it?

Anonymous said...

This was nothing but a petition that was "bought onto the ballot". Everyone knows the tax won't be repealed.

Anonymous said...

Yes, Mary, thanks for the clarification.

I was one of those who was uncertain as to the context of what Susan Burgess may have said in a radio interview.

The CATS website clearly details the neighborhood improvements. If that is the money in question, then this is all a lesson in a great many things; not least of all a politician should be very clear when giving an interview, a listener should understand what was said and in what context and detailed expenditures should be made available.

Then, we all know what the $ are before a rumor gets twisted into several blogs.

Anonymous said...

Mary, whomever told you CATS has NEVER received any city money for transit either lied to you or is playing games.

Richard Rubin saw thru the ruse last July.

==================================
Charlotte Observer, The (NC)
July 9, 2006
Section: METRO
Edition: ONE-THREE
Page: 2B
Column:Dr. Traffic


TRANSIT LOCKBOX MAY NOT BE SECURE AFTER ALL
NEW CAR-RENTAL TAX WOULD FREE MONEY FOR NON-TRANSIT NEEDS
RICHARD RUBIN, Staff Writer

For years, the three-sentence party line from city government has been this:

1. Transit money is transit money, locked away by state law from the rest of the budget.
2. Road money is road money, generated from property and sales taxes and constantly squeezed by the need for firefighters and police officers.

3. The two can't be mingled.

But it turns out that the transit lockbox isn't so secure after all. Charlotte is preparing to crack it open, pluck out some money for uptown museums, and then replenish the transit fund from another pocket.

What? Is that possible?

Many readers probably think all the money for the Charlotte Area Transit System comes from the half-cent sales tax that voters approved in 1998. Not true. That tax will generate $62.7 million in 2006-07, but that's less than 60 percent of the CATS budget.

A sizable chunk - $18.4 million per year - comes from general city funds. State law requires the city to make a "maintenance of effort" payment, essentially to keep spending as much on transit as it did before CATS was created.

Those sources total more than $80 million per year, all inside the lockbox. So how is it getting pried open?

Enter the arts. For years now, city officials and the Arts & Science Council have been trying to figure out how to pay for about $150 million in new and improved buildings - a renovated Discovery Place, a new Mint Museum, a new modern-art museum, a performing-arts theater and a new Afro-American Cultural Center.

Even with other sources of money - including property-tax proceeds from the Wachovia tower now being built - the city still needed more cash.

The City Council turned to the idea of raising the rental-car tax to pay for the museums, and the state Senate recently passed a bill to increase the tax. But the bill is not simply a new tax for new projects.

It gives Charlotte an additional rental-car tax that goes directly into the transit fund.

Then, the bill lets Charlotte reduce the amount of general tax money it puts into transit, up to $7.5 million per year. Even though the city plans to spend that freed-up money on arts, the bill allows it to be used for anything.

Republican City councilman John Lassiter said the city's pitch to legislators was based on the benefits of the arts projects, including state tax revenue and high-paying bank jobs.

"We wouldn't go through this exercise unless you knew where you needed to apply it," he said.

But still, after years of clamoring for an unrestricted "alternative revenue source," the city could soon have one.

"Where there's a will, there's a way," said state Sen. Robert Pittenger, R-Mecklenburg, who voted no. "It was something that was important for the business leadership in Charlotte, and I think the legislative leadership found a way to help make it happen."

State Sen. Dan Clodfelter, D-Mecklenburg, helped get the bill approved for the city.

"We should give them authority to manage things as much as we can, and they answer to the people who elect them for how they use that authority," he said.

The bill would let the rental-car tax go from 11 percent to 16 percent, pending approval by the state House and county commissioners. That would raise enough to fill the gap in the arts funding, maintain the new buildings and leave money left over.

Let's stipulate that the Wachovia project brings Charlotte some benefits. And let's set aside questions about whether Charlotte should raise the rental-car tax, or whether that tax is appropriate for arts projects.

Instead, let's look forward, at the implications of the idea that restricted money isn't always restricted forever.

Mayor Pro Tem Susan Burgess has been one of the strongest supporters of the arts projects, but the transit-funding switcheroo got her attention. If Charlotte can't get approval for another rail corridor soon, she asked, should some transit money be shifted to roads?

That's quite a question. Did Charlotte just open Pandora's lockbox?

================================

Oh, and the Wachovia Arts Tower General Fund subsidy is what mandated the tax hike -- not more police officers.

Anonymous said...

Jeff's got you there, Mary.

I appreciate the attempt at clarification, but it really does seem to boil down to "We've pushed up the SCIP priority and its $50M in spending because it'll help out the LRT project. Pay no attention to the fact that the money comes from supposedly 'separate' budgets. It's all tax money, no matter how you look at it."

It doesn't help when you see transit money being wasted to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars on stuff like benches, sculpture, and unused designs.

Anonymous said...

Mary, you just got severely hoodwinked by CATS. Jeff (JAT) just cleaned your clock on the facts. Or maybe you let your emotions dictate the story that you wanted to believe from CATS.

Anonymous said...

Is there a detailed budget anywhere to look at so we can see for ourselves and have to take the word of those who might benefit from covering up?

Anonymous said...

This is a classic example of what is wrong with the Charlotte Observer. Their reporters (and editors) just blindly accept whatever local government feeds them without doing any fact checking or serious inquiries. If it fits with their POV, it is accepted and reported as fact without any reference to support it.

Perhaps it is laziness. Perhaps it is bias. Perhaps it is incompetence. Perhaps it is a combination of all of the above.

Mary, where did you go so wrong? When did you sellout your journalistic integrity for the truth merely to support the lies of government? Whatever happened to the fourth estate? It appears to be dead at the Charlotte Observer.

Anonymous said...

I love it. In 1998 the transit tax was supposed to fund th 2025 transite plan, i.e., light rail.

Now in 2007 if the tax is repealed, apparently the entire transite system will screech to a halt.

ALL politicians are liars, but Helms, Syfert, McCrory and company elevate it to a whole new art form.

I still have the ultimate solution for light rail.

Simply charge what it costs and break even. That way critics who don't use it are silenced and people who do want it will still get to use it.

A round trip on the South Blvd light rail will only cost about $22. Simply charge the $22 and see how many people erally want it.

Anonymous said...

Either Mary is lying or she is ignorant. For anyone who covers light rail and transit issues like she does, it is beyond belief that she could actually believe those statements on LRT funding.

We need a poll. Is Mary lying? Or is Mary just not that smart and got snookered?

Anonymous said...

Mary laid it out there guys whether you like it or not. If I have to choose who's the bigger liar in this town, it's not the Observer, but WBT and their agenda driven hosts. Fox News and Rhino Time are just as full of the BS. It just makes me laugh how much some of you are bound and determined to keep this city in a baskwater way of thinking. The majority have spokent time and again that they want a more metroploitan Charlotte. That includes public transportation, the arts, various street and sidewalk improvements, and a whole lot of other things. They will make their point just as clear this November as well. Get over it folks. The old south is dying fast in this town. Roll withn it or get out of the way.

Danimal

Anonymous said...

Why would we believe the Observer on this?

Now, in the face of repeal of the tax, we hear tales of impending doom and gloom, should the repeal take effect.

Unfortunately, I have heard many statements and promises from politicians and Light Rail promoters that turned out to be unfounded, or less than truthful.

When it comes to making predictions and statements of fact, the Observer and the other Light Rail advocates have used up their credibility. It has become obvious to this taxpayer that the nothing short of “pulling the plug” will get the attention of the powers that be in Uptown Charlotte.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

So let me get this right. Mary gives you info. Then Jat gives you info. You blast her for not checking her facts but NONE OF YOU have checked to see if Jats rant is legit.

Simpletons, all of you. This is why you wont win in November.

Anonymous said...

Some of you need to get out of Charlotte and see that metropolitan areas that have a high quality of life also have "working" mass transit. Someone has to pay for it at some point. If you don't want to pay for it go live in one of those mega-cities without a good mass transportation system and see how you like it. Expand you mind and envision a future where 20% of your income doesn't have to be spent on a car and gas.

Anonymous said...

JAT's post was from a Richard Rubin article. Read it again.

Whether we take Mary's or Susan Burgess' or a budget director's word for it is up to the individual.

Why not publish an itemized report of all expenditures and where the money came from?

If you believe Mary's clarification based on Burgess' lack of memory then compare that to the Rubin article written last year. See what adds up.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Does it make sense for the taxpayers to subsidize every round trip on light rail for $22 per day, every day, FOR EVERY RIDER ?

Anonymous said...

When was the 1/2 cent tax implemented, how much money to date has it generated and is that the pot where the $50 MM came from?

Anonymous said...

The new budget calls for a property tax increase and the sales tax is not yet repealed. So what is the excuse for the current increase? In addition, bus fares will go up on July 1. Again, the tax has not been repealed. They will use any excuse to pick our pockets - left, right, front and back.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Mary - your emotions are showing in this blog post. If you want to keep what little credibility you have may I suggest checking your emoptions at the door. You are the journalist who is not suppossed to have a bias...but yours is clear to see.

Also - you got your tail handed to you in this latest series. Care to comment?

tarhoosier said...

The egregious comments at this blog are beneath childish. These digital graffiti demean those who wish to think and read, and draws this forum into an insulting morass. As a participant I protest. As a citizen and as an adult I accuse you of libel. Desist!

Pathmaker said...

Couple of fact checks:
1) The $50M for South Corridor infrastructure is bond (loan) funds, approved by city voters, to be paid back over 20 or 30 years by general fund (property and sales tax -- not transit tax) dollars.
2)No city property tax increase has been recommended or discussed this year. Mecklenburg County is considering a 2 cent property tax increase -- mostly to fund schools.
3) Transit fares increase almost annually as do the cost of most goods and services that are subject to inflationary pressures.
4) As part of the 1998 1/2 cent sales tax referendum (approved by voters), the city was obligated to continue paying $18.4M a year in maintenance of effort -- an amount equal to the funding provided by the city prior to the 1/2 cent sales tax. The switch in Rubin's article dealt with how the city chooses to pay that maintenance of effort bill -- using property tax money or rental car tax money. It has nothing to do with the transit sales tax money.

Anonymous said...

The Charlotte City Council takes $16 to $18 million (approx) from property tax revenues and transfers it to CATS and the MTC. City taxpayers have ALWAYS subsidized light rail or bus transit through property taxes since the day it was passed. It isn't talked about much but the amount transfered each year was fixed at the time the transit tax passed and was based on the then 'subsidy' that Charlotte taxpayers paid to the Charlotte Bus system which was incorporated into CATS/MTC. Since CATS and MTC was formed, 68% of the new 1/2 cent 'transit tax' has been spent on City bus services and not on light-rail or on suburban towns. This is why the current 'transit plna' will NEVER EVER work. CATS and the MTC have no money left to build the remaining lines because 68% of the money is already dedicated to buses even before the South Corridor light rail line is open. When it opens, little of the 1/2 cent tax will be left and the other lines will require a tax increase to fund (something the City leaders and CATS don't want to discuss)>

Pathmaker said...

For those who care to investigate facts, the CATS budget can be examined easily on the charmeck.org web site. Look under the city column, click budget, click operating budget, click Charlotte Area Transit Plan. Or you can follow a similar path to examine the capital budget. It's all there and easily read by those who care to know the facts.

Mary Newsom said...

Response to Rebecca's post -- and thanks, Rebecca, for your continuing civility in your comments -- the tax increase proposed is for county taxes, not city taxes. It's easy to get them confused, and if you live in the city you need to pay attention to both city budget and county budget. But the $50M at issue doesn't have anything to do with the county bjt.

And the Rich Rubin column that Jeff alluded to refers to a provision in state law that requires the city to keep putting into its transit service the same $18M it was spending on its city bus system. That amount hasn't changed since 1998, although bus service, obviously, has improved.

The arts funding "switcheroo" as Rubin calls is is certainly worth keeping your eye on. It's misleading to say that's what caused the tax hike for police. Without the arts building projects, the revenue stream wouldn't exist and thus, couldn't be used for police.

It's a whole other question, of course, whether the cultural arts building projects should have been undertaken, or funded as they were, with the rental car tax.
I come down on the side of yes, those were the right things to do. Plenty of others disagree, obviously.

And it's a whole other question whether adding police is important enough that the city should have done it long before now. I say, yes, even if it meant a small tax increase.

Anonymous said...

"And it's a whole other question whether adding police is important enough that the city should have done it long before now. I say, yes, even if it meant a small tax increase."

I say "yes", too, but I disagree that a small tax increase would be necessary. Seems like we get could get at least some of the money we'd need by trimming wasteful spending from other programs.

Here's an idea: Let's double CATS fares ($1.20 and $1.65 would now be $2.40 and $3.30) and use some of that money to fund more police and DAs. (The rest would be used to defray CATS' massively out-of-kilter budget.)

Anonymous said...

Mary refers to herself, Susan Burgess, Deputy City Manager Curt Walton, and Budget Director Ruffin Hall as "WE".

If anyone ever had any doubts that Mary was just a water carrier for the uptown crowd and the government thieves, she just confirmed it for all of us.

The only way the light rail line will contribute to Charlotte is if Syfert, McCrory, Tober, and the Observer editorial staff are tied to the tracks when it finally makes its first run.

Anonymous said...

Clayj,
I agree on the "more police" thing too. But not at a cost to the transit.
How about taxing the parents who use the public schools a seperate tax that is actually more in line with what it costs to operate them ?

Why is it always transit on the chopping block or an arena ?

Why do the parents of all these kids get a deduction per child on top of me paying taxes for their kids schooling as well ?
Oh yeah, if they are married they pay even less taxesthan me on top ofit.

I was not one to ever complain about it until people want to start taking away things I use.......like transit and the arena.

Lets just play fair for once.

Anonymous said...

clayj,
"I agree on the "more police" thing too. But not at a cost to the transit."

I find this statement very scarry. Trains are more important than safety? I hope I'm just misinterpreting what you mean.

Also, arenas and transit as important as schools? Again, another statement that seems to have some priorities mixed up.

My two cents,

Thad

Anonymous said...

Anon @ 4:20: I didn't suggest taking away from transit in order to better fund the police... what I suggested was increasing fares and then using part of THAT money to fund the police. CATS would get more money, from the people who use the buses and trains, and the police would get more money, too.

Put simply: 1 + 1 - 0.5 = 1.5

Still, it wouldn't hurt my feelings if CATS did lose funding in order to better fund the police. CATS' primary source of funding should be fares, not taxpayer subsidies.

tecki said...

At this late in the day, I doubt anyone is still reading this as I am, but I thought I'd put in my two cents about something.

Lots of anti-tax folks like to say things like how people who want to ride the light rail should have to pay $22 per trip, so it won't have to be subsidised.

Okay, fine. But only if we cut all public funding for the most heavily subsidised transportation system in the city: Cars. Our cars would be worth nothing if not for the publicly built roads and highways in this region.

Remember, those paved roads and six lane highways we use every day weren't just sitting around waiting for the car to be invented. 100 or so years ago when the first cars started rolling around, drivers had to contend with dirt roads and no interstate system whatsoever. In fact, the only paved roads existed inside major cities, and even those were rough cobblestone, not smooth asfault. Who put all of those things in place? We, the taxpayers.

Maybe a per-use fee would be the way to go for both systems. I pay the full cost of each light-rail trip if you pay the full cost of each car trip. Now, I don't have a government spreadsheet in front of me, but I'm guessing that won't be cheap, especially with the price of gas creeping back up.

Or, you can have your subsidy and we get to keep ours. Everybody's happy.

Anonymous said...

Tecki, it is true that roads and light rail are both subsidized with taxpayer money.

However, most road construction money comes from gas taxes... which are paid by people who drive cars and trucks and motorcycles. So, roads are paid for by the people who use them... every time you fill your tank, you are contributing toward the construction of new roads and the upkeep of existing roads. The pay-as-you-go, per-use aspect is already in place.

The transit tax, on the other hand, is paid by EVERYONE in Mecklenbugh County, whether they ride the buses (and soon, the train) or not.

So, your fundamental statement "Or, you can have your subsidy and we get to keep ours. Everybody's happy." is invalid on its face. Roads are subsidized only by those who use them; transit is not.

Anonymous said...

Misspelled "Mecklenburg" there...

Anonymous said...

Clayj and friends, roads are subsidized much more than your gas taxes provide. Every time you get on an interstate, you are getting a subsidy many times as high as anyone who rides a train or bus. You can continue tio give me the moving of goods and services BS, etc., but all you anti-goevrnment types are getting many more subsidies than you care to admit. may I also note that public transit give independence to the poor, elderly, children, handicapped and countless others while giving the average working person a choice. Any progressive and forward thinking city knows this.

Danimal

Anonymous said...

This light rail line, all 9 or 11 miles of it, will do nothing to alleviate traffic congestion.
How will it stop the congestion on Providence? Park Rd? 77 north?

The top 10 most congested ( and most polluted ) cities all have rail lines.

The argument over subsidies boils down to good subsidies and bad ones ( depending on your point of view ).

I think this rail issue all comes down to trusting our local officials to handle projects such as this. If the South Corridor line was built on time and under budget, what would our debate be?

It would be interesting to see if the rail lines could be made into dedicated bus lanes. That would keep busses off South Blvd. and add more of them on the lanes next to the existing train tracks. Less energy to run them, easier to maintain, easier to transition from rush hour to slow times and less cost to the taxpayer.

Anonymous said...

Danimal, there you go using that word progressive. Remember, it's the progressives who give true liberals a bad name.

Anonymous said...

Light Rail: Boon or Boondoggle

Great article by Molly Castelazo and Thomas Garrett.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/
mi_qa3678/is200407/ai_n9427241

I typed the link instead of pasting.
Or just search by the article title.

From the article:

"Conclusion
Proponents of light rail argue that it will create jobs, foster economic development and boost property values. While there is some academic evidence of these benefits, it is important to realize that they are not free to society-light rail is kept afloat by taxpayer-funded subsidies that amount to hundreds of millions of dollars each year.
Concentrated benefits and dispersed costs are one economic reason for the existence of inefficient public projects. The many who stand to lose will lose only a little, whereas the few who stand to gain will gain a lot. Of course, if other public projects exist where overall costs outweigh benefits, then $6 a year per project could add up to quite a hefty boondoggler's bill.

Anonymous said...

more from the article:

"Light Rail: Concentrated Benefits and Dispersed Costs
If light rail is not cost-efficient, nor an effective way to reduce pollution and traffic congestion, nor the least costly means of providing transportation to the poor, why do voters continue to approve new taxes for the construction and expansion of light-rail systems?
One economic reason is that the benefits of light rail are highly concentrated, while the costs are widely dispersed. The direct benefits of a light-rail project can be quite large for a relatively small group of people, such as elected officials, environmental groups, labor organizations, engineering and architectural firms, developers and regional businesses, which often campaign vigorously for the passage of light-rail funding. These groups would benefit from light rail, not from the subsidization of cars and money to all potential riders of light rail.
The costs of light rail, while large in aggregate, are often small when spread over the tax-paying population. (The cost of light rail in St. Louis totals about $6 per taxpayer annually). A large group of taxpayers facing relatively minimal costs can be persuaded to vote for light rail based on benefits shaped by the interested minority, such as helping the poor, reducing congestion and pollution, and fostering development. Even if these benefits are exaggerated and the taxpayer realizes the cost-ineffectiveness of light rail, it is probably not worth the $6 for that person to spend significant time lobbying against light rail."

Anonymous said...

Take a lesson from Texas
May. 26, 2007 12:00 AM
Here we are, a little more than a year before light rail opens.

Tempe has several redevelopment projects under way near the rail and more streaming through the review process.

Mesa has one proposed, but its height, location and parking ratios are getting resistance from some residents and planning commissioners.

Tempe's transit-oriented development ordinance, which sets development standards for projects near light rail, has been completed for quite some time.

Mesa has yet to enact one.

More and more, Mesa's and Tempe's experiences with light rail are mirroring those of two Dallas suburbs. Which is good news for Tempe and not so good news for Mesa.

Plano, Texas, was progressive with its light-rail leg.

It had a mixed-use condo project up and running before the line opened. That project spurred other investments in the city's ailing downtown, and it wasn't long before folks started traveling the rail to eat or shop in a vibrant, pedestrian-friendly gathering spot.

On the other hand, Garland, Texas, hemmed and hawed about light rail.

It built an adjacent arts center facing away from the light-rail stop and didn't get any mixed-use projects under way before rail opened, so there are no new residents and nothing to woo customers a few blocks to the town square. Not surprisingly, the place still looks like a ghost town.



If history repeats itself, and you know it often does, Tempe is on track to be Plano, revitalizing Apache Boulevard as Plano revitalized its downtown.

And Mesa will end up like Garland, dooming itself to an endless game of catch-up.

Anonymous said...

From Phoenix:
Bonuses for Metro scrutinized
Merchants on rail line say they're facing losses
Casey Newton
The Arizona Republic
Jun. 1, 2007 12:00 AM
Protesting steep losses to their businesses, a group of merchants along Phoenix's light-rail line is working to block bonuses for contractors when they are awarded this month.

Some members of Metro's five citizen advisory boards will ask fellow board members to withhold hundreds of thousands of dollars from the companies building the 20-mile line. The boards control $2.5 million in incentives, which are awarded quarterly depending on how quickly and effectively contractors resolve complaints.

To date, the boards have given out between 80 and 100 percent of the available bonuses, angering merchants who say construction woes have driven them to the brink of closing.

"It doesn't seem just for Metro to pay the contractors up to $2.5 million just for doing what they're supposed to be doing in the first place," said Dan Abrams, a board member who owns Dan Abrams Realty on Camelback Road. "The longer I've been on this committee, the more I've become disillusioned. This is just not right."

Abrams has organized a group of more than a dozen fellow business owners and board members frustrated with a lack of customers along the construction route, particularly around the intersection of Central Avenue and Camelback.

They want the bonus money to be redirected to marketing efforts and other incentives that would lure customers back to their restaurants, flower shops and jewelry stores.

The merchants who want to end the bonus system acknowledge they are in the minority. But they hoped their protest would spur Phoenix and Metro officials to develop more effective methods of promoting businesses along the line.

"That money could be used to help compensate the merchants for their loss of business," said Angelo DeNicola, co-owner of Arizona Laser hair removal at 5702 N. 19th Ave. "My business is down 20 to 25 percent, directly attributable to my lack of walk-in traffic. I figure light rail is costing me about $100,000 a year. This is the unspoken cost of light rail."

Construction managers say the bonuses give them added incentive to solve the problems that arise from construction, even problems they didn't cause. For example, they have resolved issues created by the utility work that is happening concurrently with rail construction.

Erik Yingling, project manager for Sundt/Stacy & Witbeck, said the program "forces us to go that extra mile for the businesses and the residents."

"I think it's a win-win for everybody," said Yingling, whose company is building the middle two sections of the line.

Metro borrowed the idea for a bonus system from Salt Lake City, which used it in one of its light-rail construction projects. Diane Scherer, an advisory board member for the northernmost line segment, pushed for an incentive system after visiting Salt Lake City. She said the bonuses have made contractors more responsive to her when she has issues at her real estate business on 19th Avenue.

"A lot of these contractors are going above and beyond," said Scherer, CEO of the Phoenix Association of Realtors. "They are stepping up to the plate and assuming the responsibility, a lot of times when it isn't their responsibility."

But Charles Jones, who said construction has left him unable to lease one of his properties since January 2006, said the bonus system was unfair.

"Business owners see these millions of dollars going to the contractors in bonuses while they're dying on the vine," said Jones, owner of Corridor Living, LLC. "There's an inequity there."

Anonymous said...

update in Phoenix from June 2nd:

Light-rail officials may help businesses
Casey Newton
The Arizona Republic
Jun. 2, 2007 12:00 AM
Merchants have brainstormed several ideas for bringing business back along the light-rail line, and now Metro officials say they will work to put them into action.

Business owners who gathered at the Red Roof Inn on Camelback Road last week asked Metro for more promotion in newspapers and in radio and television ads.

They also asked Metro to divert some funds set aside for rewarding contractors who clean up their messes in a timely fashion to promoting and preserving existing businesses along the line.





Dan Abrams, a commercial real estate agent who organized the Wednesday meeting, said contractors should not be rewarded for simply responding to customer complaints.

"This is just not right," said Abrams, who sits on a Metro community advisory board that awards the incentives. "They could have used this money much more effectively to give it to the merchants to help their financial struggle. I think it's a great idea to stop giving this money to the contractors."

A chorus of merchants spoke out Wednesday about the devastating impact of construction on their business.

Peter Netzband owns Langert-Netzband Jewelers, 1526 W. Camelback, which has been in Phoenix since 1946. He said he didn't make a single jewelry sale Monday or Tuesday. He told his fellow merchants that he had lost $700,000 in sales since construction began in 2005.

John Crallie, co-owner of Panino, said business was down 60 percent at the restaurant at 5202 N. Central. Crallie said he had sought marketing assistance from Metro but was denied for unspecified reasons.

Councilman Tom Simplot, who chairs the Metro board, said a legal team from the city would meet to determine whether the contractor incentives could be diverted.

He said Metro also had a $500,000 contingency fund that officials could tap to aid businesses.

Jumper said...

People should remember how subsidized the roads are and how freight-hauling businesses co-opt the asphalt on tax monies private citizens pay. Truck taxes do NOT pay their full share for all roads and highways. The tire loads of semis tear up the asphalt continuously.

It is ironic that America moved so much of its freight onto the asphalt that people have to open up rail lines as an option. I would prefer it the other way around.

Anonymous said...

jumper, light rail vs roads is not the issue.

Roads are mandatory. Our society would cease to exist without them. Even if you never drive on a road, just about every item that you consume is transported to you via a road or highway or commercial rail.

Light rail is an optional luxury. It is the most expensive and least flexible form of mass transit. Of all of the forms of mass transit (bus, brt, rail) it moves the fewest number of people at the highest cost per rider.

Local governments have several key functions to perform. Public safety, education, trash pickup, etc. Only after those are being fully met, should we consider funding other projects.

Light rail is a disaster is slow motion.

Anonymous said...

Thad,
I didn't mean police were less important than the transit. They are both equal in a metropolitan area. A growing city cannot survive without either one.

As far as schools go I was simply making the point that not all of us live the Leave it to Beaver lifestyle. I am married, no kids, enjoy the city life. I personally get more out of arenas and transit. But I also understand the importance of good schools for the future of our youth.
All I was trying to get across is that I don't bitch and protests and get petitions signed against the stuff I don't "personally"use so why should you ?
We should both understand that it's give and take. Especially in a city. I think some of the old school Charlotte locals are having a hard time adapting to their changing surroundings. That may be where all the anger stems from.

"priorities mixed up" as you so say just further proves your arrogance and small mindedness.

If people don't agree with you or live just like you then they are "mixed up".

That's what kills me about people like you on this post. You constantly attack Liberals but you have no tollerance for anyone different than yourself.


You would fit in just fine with our current administration.

Anonymous said...

To Anon:
Don't pull out two words and try to fit it into your views.

I never said people were "mixed up" but their priorities.

I don't think I ever mentioned liberals (guilty conscience?). You seem to assume a lot.


You said
"All I was trying to get across is that I don't bitch and protests and get petitions signed against the stuff I don't "personally"use so why should you ?

I have never used personally the Fire Department, Animal control, Bobcats arena, city bus, public schools (until my children entered), Arts museum, Cultural museum, Nascar museum. So you see, I don't get petitions signed for everything (I'm too busy working and spending time with the family) but when I see what I deem as a terrible waste of money, as an American, I deal with it legally (which it seems people have done with LRT).
You have a problem with that?

Thad

Anonymous said...

Yeah, I do Thad. I big God Damned problem with it.
We already voted. The majority have spoken. All you have done is wasted more tax payer dollars having all of these petitions counted.
Nothing will change. November will bring the same result.

Anonymous said...

By the way, seems your kids are on their way to becoming culturally deprived just like their dad.

Anonymous said...

to anon:
So by your logic-
Roe vs. Wade should never had been made law?

Thad

Anonymous said...

Yeah, sure , that's what I'm talking about. You got me pegged to a T.

Discussing anything with you Bozo's on this post is like going to a BBQ with Rush Limbaugh.

Nothing but fat covered in sauce.

Enjoy your life Bud.

Anonymous said...

to anon:
Using your logic-
I guess slavery, women's right to vote and Roe vs. Wade should never been made law?

Thad

Anonymous said...

to anon:
The way I see it- You get upset when simple logic show how ridiculous your statements are. You are not consistent with your arguements. You are too emotional and you let feelings get in the way of making a sound logical statement.
Thanks but I don't need you to tell me to enjoy my life. I already do, just trying to make it better.

Thad

Anonymous said...

The light rail freaks really seem upset at the concept of a re-vote on the tax. They seem almost offended that anyone could possibly have a different POV on where our limited resources should be directed.

Try not to take this so personally. It is just a sales tax and it is a just a silly train. Nobody is going to die over this thing. Trains are a nice thing to have. But they are not critical to the function of Charlotte.

You will still have your South Blvd train to play with regardless of how the tax repeal vote goes. Nobody is talking about taking your train away from you. You can still practice on that one.

The tax repeal vote is almost meaningless to the future of light rail in Mecklenburg. Transit experts doubt that University or the North line to Davidson will ever happen.

The lack of federal funds for University will likely kill that $750 million line.

The TIF financing plan for the north line to Davidson is very shaky and everyone agress that no federal funds will happen there. Even Rob Tober is privately saying that the North Line to Davidson is dead. They are just going through the motions to make certain town mayors happy.

Anonymous said...

Honestly, I hope the last anon is correct.

It would be better for everyone if the repeal failed and the lines weren't built anyway because they actually don't make fiscal sense.

Then who would the Uptown elite have to blame?

If fiscal sanity had been part of the equation from the very start, the petition wouldn't have been needed in the first place.

Anonymous said...

"We already voted."

SFW?

"The majority have spoken."

Yes, they did. But things have changed. You want stuff carved in stone, I suggest you take a trip to Egypt.

"All you have done is wasted more tax payer dollars having all of these petitions counted."

Oh, come ON. The amount of money spent counting petition signatures and putting this on the ballot won't even be 1/1000th the cost of the LRT (that's 0.1%).

"Nothing will change. November will bring the same result."

We shall see.

Anonymous said...

You know, in a perverted way, if CATS would just scrap their dillusional Northeast and North LTR plans(...like previous anon alluded to...), the 1/2 cent sales tax might actually stay on and everyone can keep their shorts on.

If CATS keeps up this dillusional effort to sink billions into operating a 3 corridor LTR system, they will get what they deserve: the 1/2 cent sales tax repeal.

Anonymous said...

read tarhoosier's comment and suggest if he wishes to think etc, to read elsewhere

Nawdry said...

...

Hmmm... Now, here's an interesting article that seems relevant to this discussion...


http://www.lightrailnow.org/myths/m_mythlog001.htm#STL_20070531

Light Rail Now! MythBusters Weblog
31 May 2007

"Free" buses vs. "expensive" rail?

Produced by the Light Rail Now! Publication Team

Myth:

There seems to be a widely held notion among the public – including
many politicians, journalists, etc. – that rail transit systems, such as light rail transit (LRT), are weighted down with substantial heavy capital expense, while buses are more or less "free". Rail transit critics exploit this misconception by emphasizing the relatively high installation costs of new rail systems ("BILLION$$$ for rail") vs. the relatively lower costs of simply operating buses on city streets and freeways. "Why build expensive rail? Buses can do the same thing cheaper" is a familiar refrain
in local debates over proposed new rail transit starts.

Reality:

Bus systems incur sizable capital expenses, too, as well as rail, with typically much higher operating and maintenance (O&M) costs; often, when you add up all these costs and account for the relative life of all the infrastructure and rolling stock, plus the work performed (measured in passenger-mileage or passenger-km), you may find that rail actually gives amazing "bang for the buck".

To demonstrate this, the Light Rail Now Project team carried out an analysis of transit performance data from St. Louis Metro, comparing the total operating and maintenance (O&M) plus capital costs of both Metro's bus transit and MetroLink light rail transit (LRT) systems for the period
1996-2005, using National Transit Database Agency Profile data
gathered by the Federal Transit Administration.

The table below presents total costs (capital fixed facilities and rolling stock, and O&M) for each mode over the ten-year period (millions of US dollars), and the total passenger-mileage (millions) carried by each mode over that period:


St. Louis Metro – Total Costs & Passenger Mileage, 1996-2005

Capital Costs:
Fixed Facilities Capital Costs:
Rolling Stock O&M Cost Total Cost Passenger-Mileage
Bus $64.0 $131.3 $1,045.5 $1,240.8 1,389.5
LRT $844.4 $124.2 $262.2 $1,231.2 1,047.7
[Source: Federal Transit Administration, National Transit Database, 1996-2005]

It is particularly interesting to note that, even with its heavy capital costs, when operational costs are considered, St. Louis Metro's LRT in this period exhibits total costs slightly less than the agency's bus operations.
However, higher total passenger-mileage was carried on the bus system, so a more complete analysis would require taking into consideration the differing life-cycle costs for each mode (e.g., railcars last considerably longer than motor buses) by annualizing capital costs.

To obtain a total annualized cost figure for each mode, capital costs were annualized using common economic analysis (see discussion below). Annual operating costs were averaged for the 10-year period, as was annual passenger-mileage for each mode – reflecting the advantages of the longer lives of both LRT infrastructure and rolling stock.

For bus, average annual O&M costs were $104.6 million, and average
passenger-mileage was 139.0 million. For LRT, average annual O&M costs were $26.2 million, and average passenger-mileage was 104.8
million.

Via this "averaging" method, with annualized capital costs, the total cost per passenger-mile for each mode was calculated as follows:

• Bus – $0.88
• LRT – $0.74

This suggests that, with total capital and operational costs considered, St. Louis's "capital-intensive" LRT ends up costing approximately 16% less per passenger mile than the agency's supposedly "cheap" bus system.

This analysis was corroborated by a slightly different methodology –
calculating the cost per passenger-mile for the final year, 2005, only. In this case, the annualized capital costs for each mode were added to the O&M cost for 2005, and then divided by the passenger-mileage for each mode in 2005 to obtain a total cost per passenger-mile figure for that year:

• Bus – $0.97
• LRT – $0.82

Through this method (which adjusts somewhat for more recent inflationary increases), LRT still comes out about 15% less than bus service in terms of work performed (i.e., passenger-miles carried).

The assumptions used for annualizing capital costs depart significantly from those required by FTA (after all, this is a form of benefit-cost analysis, not an exercise in meeting FTA's New Start project qualification
benchmarks). Thus, an annualization (discount) factor of 5% was used, rather than the 7% mandated by FTA – given today's interest and inflation rates, it is difficult to justify anything above about 5% for a public works
investment.

In this assessment, a 50-year life is assumed to be reasonable for LRT
infrastructure because this includes right-of-way (ROW), to which even FTA assigns a 100-year life. FTA's mandatory life expectancy for railcars is 25 years, which seems unreasonably low compared with industry
experience. Various sources report a 30 to 35-year economic life for rail rolling stock; this analysis has used 30 years.

The FTA's average life for a bus of 12 years, on the other hand, does seem reasonable in light of widespread industry experience, and this is corroborated by reliable documentary evidence. For the economic life of bus fixed facilities, 45 years has been used for several reasons: (1) Buses
run mainly on public streets, so there's very little need for ROW
acquisition and cost. (2) Many bus facilities, such as sidewalk signage, benches, etc., are much less durable than comparable items on rail stop or station platforms. (3) Bus pavement has a shorter life than rail track infrastructure, and their salvage value is basically nil.

Bottom Line of this analysis: At least in the case of St. Louis Metro's bus and rail operations, examination of actual total capital and O&M costs over a ten-year period suggest that investment in LRT has lowered the
total unit cost of providing public transport mobility. And this simply accounts for direct agency costs, without consideration of the array of significant additional benefits of rail service for passengers and the community.

Nawdry said...

...

Clayj posted ...


>>
most road construction money comes from gas taxes... which are paid
by people who drive cars and trucks and motorcycles. So, roads are paid for by
the people who use them... every time you fill your tank, you are contributing
toward the construction of new roads and the upkeep of existing roads. The pay-
as-you-go, per-use aspect is already in place.
The transit tax, on the other hand, is paid by EVERYONE in Mecklenbugh
County, whether they ride the buses (and soon, the train) or not.
[...] Roads are subsidized only
by those who use them; transit is not.
<<

This is utter baloney.

First, SOME roads are paid for by highway-industry-based sales taxes (and occasionally other fees, such as license fees). The public dedication of taxes of a specific industry EXCLUSIVELY to promote the fortunes of that industry is itself a subsidy.

Second, motorists elsewhere are riding on roads I am paying for through my taxes but on which I will never ride. These roads are NOT being "paid for by the people who use them". They're paid for by the cross-allocation of specially dedicated sales taxes (already identified as a subsidy, above). This means that taxpayers in every other state - and other towns, cities, and counties in North Carolina - are all subsidizing highway users in Charlotte and Mecklenburg County.

Third, there are plenty of roadways in Charlotte and Meck. County that are NOT paid for with these specially allocated sales taxes, but rather through GENERAL FUND allocations that all taxpayers - even those that never buy a drop of gasoline or a pound of rubber - pay for.

That stupid "road users pay their way" claim belongs in the septic tank.

ALL transportation is, one way or another, subsidized. But so what? The basic issue is - which mode is best for a given situation? Which mode can provide the best mobility at the least cost?

For many travel corridors and needs, public transit does it best and at lowest cost. And rail often does it best of all. And the ENTIRE community benefits.

LH

Anonymous said...

Normally I don't say stuff like this, because even if I disagree with people, I still respect their right to express their opinion, but I will now make an exception.

Nawdry, SHUT UP.

You don't even live in Charlotte or Mecklenburg County or even North Carolina. We all know that you're a shill for the light rail industry down in Austin TX. You coming here and preaching about the wonders of light rail is akin to Jim Jones preaching the wonders of Kool-Aid.

Why do you even care if Charlotte gets light rail? Do you stand to make money off of it? Or does it just give you a warm feeling inside to preach to other communities about how light rail is soooooo superior to all other (cheaper) forms of transportation? Come on, tell us what your interest is in whether Charlotte gets light rail.

Anonymous said...

Is Nawdry back? I suspect it is the only being on the blog, except Mary, who gets paid to comment.

Other - earlier in the blog the arguments were about operational and capital budgets. Mary had commented as if only reporters and a few others were capable of understanding. Personally I haven't noticed reporters who understand much of anything except how to pick a sound bite or something similar. Richard Rubin and Tara Servatius are exceptions.

Anyway - look up the word fungible. In the city budget and the county, various funding sources are allowed to fund only certain things. However, those things occassionally cross over from one area to another, allowing city and county staff to fund say arts and crafts with a specific tax source taking it out of the general budget. The games played with these type shell games are unending. Witness the proposed ball field.

However, as these shell games are played the proponents always tell the taxpayers we can't do this with that or that with this, as if they are truly restricted in what they do.

Baloney. They do what they please constantly making excuses as to why whatever is necessary.

Their cheerleading section, those who benefit or are just plain ignorant of facts, are the ones who don't understand. Taxes are fungible - spending my money on a ball field for professionals, or a train line for developers, or the arts for the well off, is not something I approve of, and takes away from the ability of the city to provide and FOCUS on basic services. And here we should not leave out CMS. Basic in today's world, continually pouring money down that black hole is ignoring the truth.

Anonymous said...

Nawdry,
You just convinced me we should get rid of BOTH train and buses. Thanks for the clarity.

Thad

Anonymous said...

50 years in the future, Thad will be on here complaining about how inadequate the mass transit system is, and blaming Charlotte's massive congestion and sprawl problems on local officials.

Anonymous said...

No. 50 years in the future we will be about 45 year after Peak Oil has started and civilization will be back on the path to an agrarian society. All of the cities, includes those with light rail, will be decaying because of the lack of energy to support western lifestyles.

You nuts argue over light rail or roads. The lack of oil in the future will not support any of these options. Light rail uses more BTUs of energy per passenger mile than a car does.

After Peak Oil there won't be enough energy to support any of this. Stop your silly arguing and start learning how to grow your own garden. You are going to need it.

Anonymous said...

My personal opinion is that Nawdry is a paid cheerleader for LTR. I would be very disappointed if he is being funded via CATS or the Observer to sway opinion in this blog. But, in today's reality nothing seems to be out of bounds anymore. Marketing/lobbyist types are using every vehicle to get their message out today, including co-opting local blogs. It's just a matter of how honest lobbyist are in disclosing who pays them.

However, I am willing to cut Nawdry a little slack. Maybe, just maybe, Nawdry has a vested interest in the Char-Meck area.

Nawdry...if you're an upstanding guy, you would have no problem disclosing:

1. What is your vested interest in Charlotte / Mecklenburg (business, real estate)?

2. Please disclose the amount of property taxes you pay annually to Charlotte / Mecklenburg on a yearly basis for your vested interest. (For all you whiners, taxes are publicly available information...)

I think the answers to 1 and 2 will provide all the information you need to know about Nawdry and how to value his opinions.

Anonymous said...

Anyone who thinks we will run out of oil doesn't know anything about tar sands or oil shale. Point being there are enough hydrocarbons in the ground to last 500 or more years. So not to worry.

The problem will be the kneejerks worried about global warming who will try to restrict this and that. Ed Williams, a hero in his own mind, being one. He argues against doing anything to save the commercialized beaches as they are but then says we should do anything we can to save the Outer Banks. Which one is it Ed.

Anonymous said...

light rail is still only about developers profits, tax revenue for the city and city officials kickbacks...not about choice of transportation.

If it was about choice of transportation, why the need for condos and retail?

Anonymous said...

cool, a pro-transit article from the Wall Street Journal. I'll guess in advance that the WSJ is not conservative enough for some of the posters here.

THE JOURNAL REPORT: ECONOMIC ROUNDUP

The Little Engine That Could
In many cities, the hottest development is taking place along the train lines
By KEMBA J. DUNHAM
June 11, 2007; Page R3

In cities across the country, mass-transit lines are the new frontier in urban development.

In dozens of cities -- from Charlotte, N.C., to Denver to Portland, Ore. -- the hottest redevelopment project is happening next to the local train station. Aging transit hubs and stops along new and expanded train lines are being transformed into multi-use developments that offer housing, retailing, restaurants and offices.
WSJ.com's Paul Lin reports from Naugatuck, Conn., where city officials hope a giant new development based around a unique transit system will breathe life into the economy.

This transit-oriented development, as it's known, is being promoted by local officials and developers as a way to counter sprawl, reduce traffic on the roads and revitalize struggling urban neighborhoods. By some estimates, there are about 100 such developments in the U.S., with 100 more in the pipeline. Reconnecting America, a national nonprofit group that works to spur development around transit stops, forecasts that by 2030 the number of households near transit stations will rise to 16 million, from six million today.

Demographic and lifestyle shifts are among the primary reasons many cities and developers are willing to bet on transit-oriented development. A growing number of households include singles and retiring baby boomers who are opting to live in smaller homes in urban areas.

"I think we have a collision of things going on -- a desire to revitalize our cities connecting with the growth of smaller households that are desiring denser and more-convenient living choices," says William Millar, president of the American Public Transportation Association, a nonprofit advocacy group in Washington, D.C. "This isn't to say that the traditional suburb is going away," he says, but there will be more housing built "for this demographic who desire walkable communities with easy access to transportation."
THE JOURNAL REPORT

[See the complete report]1
As more states look to win2 the economic jackpot with casinos, evidence suggests they are playing a losing hand. Plus, getting college students to come to a school3 is one thing. Getting them to stay after graduation is something else.
• See the complete Economic Roundup4 report.


Most successful transit-oriented developments are public-private partnerships. Local governments build or refurbish rail lines and surrounding infrastructure like roads and parking facilities. Private developers then build in the surrounding areas. "There's a lot of research that shows that if the public sector puts money into a transit system, they can expect three to five times that amount in private money" for adjacent development, says Marilee Utter, president of Citiventure Associates LLC, a Denver firm that has worked with a number of cities on development around light-rail systems.

These developments can pay off for cities in several ways. Research shows that the value of commercial and residential properties close to transit stations often rises -- and that translates into higher real-estate tax revenues in that area. Economists from the University of North Texas, for instance, found that between 1997 and 2001, office properties near suburban Dallas Area Rapid Transit stations increased in value 53% more than comparable properties not served by rail. Values of residential properties rose 39% more than a control group not served by rail.

In addition, cities can extract fees from these developments, including levies on the developers, sales taxes from retailers and fees for business licenses and parking. Those funds can be reinvested in the transit system or in the development, or anywhere else in the city.

Plans for Naugatuck

One developer is betting that transit-oriented development can help revive Naugatuck, Conn. Naugatuck, a town of 30,000 people located 70 miles northeast of New York City, was once a thriving industrial center, home to rubber, chemical and candy manufacturers. But over the past 30 years, the town has languished as its biggest industries have moved to other states or offshore. One of the final nails in the coffin was Hershey Co.'s April announcement that it would close its Peter Paul plant, where it churned out Almond Joy and Mounds candy bars.
[Image]
REVIVAL PLAN Artist's rendering of Naugatuck project.

Now, developer Alex Conroy is planning a $700 million transit-oriented development that will include housing, offices, retailing, hotels and entertainment on 60 acres in downtown Naugatuck. The Conroy Development Co. plans call for rubber-tire trolleys, jitneys and buses to provide connections to the Naugatuck stop on the commuter rail line that runs into New York, so that cars won't be necessary for those working, living and shopping in the development.

Towns like Naugatuck can take some encouragement from the Washington, D.C., suburb of Arlington County, Va., which has transformed its economic base through transit-oriented development. During the 1970s, Arlington was in decline, like many of the suburbs nearest to major cities. In response, the county planned five closely spaced metro stations along its aging commercial corridor, stretching from Rosslyn to Ballston. The plan was for these stations to anchor medium- to high-density, mixed-use development, generally within a quarter mile of each stop.

The project has spurred approximately 40 million square feet of development so far, and the area around each station has an urban feel. From 2002 to 2006, land values in the Rosslyn-Ballston Corridor grew 84%, to $4 billion from $2.18 billion, says Dennis Leach, Arlington County's director of transportation. Although the corridor is only two square miles in area -- less than 8% of the county's land area -- it is the source of more than 30% of Arlington's real-estate taxes, he says.

"Arlington's approach to focusing transit-oriented development around its Metrorail stations has been central to the county's economic health," says Mr. Leach. "This approach has allowed Arlington to continue to expand its tax base, expand local services and invest in the conservation of existing neighborhoods."

Challenges Loom

For all their promise, transit-oriented developments can be tough to get off the ground. For one thing, public funding for transit systems and the surrounding infrastructure often is severely limited. Land is more expensive for projects in established communities than it is in low-density areas. The involvement of city governments and transit agencies and sometimes state and even federal officials, as well as representatives of the communities where developments are planned, can make reaching agreements on details difficult and time-consuming.

"It's not that these challenges are insurmountable, but for some places, this is new and takes a more focused effort to really see this idea come to be," says Shelley Poticha, president of Reconnecting America.

Others suggest that some cities clamoring to build extensive development around transit may be misinformed about the potential economic rewards. Ms. Utter of Citiventure says that a lot of cities that are mainly funded by sales taxes are desperate for transit-oriented development because they are betting on a windfall resulting from the retail component. "But there is a great misunderstanding that transit attracts a lot more retail than it actually does," she says. "On the other hand, things like cinema, museums and ballparks really attract riders and generate economic activity."

And in some cities, proponents may have to confront opponents who worry that transit-oriented projects are a recipe for deterioration rather than development. "In many parts of the country, it's the poor, people of color and the young and old" that take public transportation, says Robert Cervero, an urban-planning professor at the University of California at Berkeley. In some places, he says, mass transit carries a stigma that "reflects a deeper racial and class divide that continues to plague American cities."

A few years ago, Mr. Cervero heard an owner of a mixed-use project say that he didn't want tenants who specifically wanted to be located near transit because those tenants tend to attract an undesirable element. This owner not only believed that these patrons would drag down rents, but he also expressed concerns about having to absorb higher costs for security and cleaning the buildings, recalls Mr. Cervero.

"In his mind, transit-oriented development was a deterrent to economic development," he says. "This obviously doesn't hold in global cities like New York where people of all walks of life -- from the Wall Street exec to the cleaning lady -- patronize transit." But it does hold, he says, in some smaller cities "where most well-off folks drive."

Anonymous said...

From previous article:
Others suggest that some cities clamoring to build extensive development around transit may be misinformed about the potential economic rewards. Ms. Utter of Citiventure says that a lot of cities that are mainly funded by sales taxes are desperate for transit-oriented development because they are betting on a windfall resulting from the retail component. "But there is a great misunderstanding that transit attracts a lot more retail than it actually does," she says. "On the other hand, things like cinema, museums and ballparks really attract riders and generate economic activity."

So the train is really to get people to the new ballpark downtown ? Or do you have to take a bus from the downtown train station to the ballpark? Would you walk? It can't be that far...

Anonymous said...

If the ballpark ends up on 3rd Ward land (and it looks like it will), it will be an easy walk from the nearest train stop... maybe 5 or 6 blocks? It would be ridiculous to try and take a bus there because of its proximity, but maybe a taxi or pedicab would work if you're feeling lazy.

Anonymous said...

40 inch plus -
all reality pass -
all sites access -
ass parade -
ball honeys -
bangbros network -
big mouthfuls -
big tit patrol -
big tits round asses -
brandi belle -
busty adventures -
cam crush -
horny spanish flies -
i spy cameltoe -
lesbian teen hunter -
mega cock cravers -
mike in brazil -
milf next door -
monsters of cock -
mr big dicks hot chicks -
mr cameltoe -
mr chews asian beaver -
ox pass -
panties and fannies -
please bang my wife -
real orgasms -
round and brown -
team squirt -
teeny bopper club -
vip crew -

round and brown -
see her squirt -
seehersquirt -
street blowjobs -
streetblowjobs -
taylor bow -
taylorbow -
teeny bopper club -
big cock addiction -
big cock teen addiction -
the big swallow -
thebigswallow -
bikini contest porn -
blind date bangers -
college teens book bang -
dangerous dongs -
euro sex parties -
tinys black adventures -
tinysblackadventures -
tongues and toys -
tranny surprise -
trannysurprise -
tug jobs -
tugjobs -
vip crew -
vipcrew -
we live together -
welivetogether -
xxx proposal -
xxxproposal -

all star porn girls -
allstarporngirls -
big cock teen addiction -
bigcockteenaddiction -
big league facials -
bigleaguefacials -
big tit patrol -
bigtitpatrol -
casting couch teens -
castingcouchteens -
college teens book bang -
collegeteensbookbang -
giants black meat white treat -
giantsblackmeatwhitetreat -
horny spanish flies -
hornyspanishflies -
i spy camel toe -
ispycameltoe -
pimp my black teen -
pimpmyblackteen -
please bang my wife -
pleasebangmywife -
reality pass plus -
realitypassplus -
see her squirt -
seehersquirt -
teeny bopper club -
teenybopperclub -
the big swallow -
thebigswallow -
8th street latinas -
8thstreetlatinas -
all reality pass -
allrealitypass -
bare foot maniacs -
barefootmaniacs -
bikini contest porn -
bikinicontestporn -
blind date bangers -
blinddatebangers -
bus stop whores -
busstopwhores -
captain stabbin -
captainstabbin -
coeds need cash -
coedsneedcash -
mikes apartment -
mikesapartment -
milf hunter -
milfhunter -
milf next door -
milfnextdoor -
mr chews asian beaver -
mrchewsasianbeaver -
pump that ass -
pumpthatass -
tinys black adventures -
tinysblackadventures -
xxx proposal -
xxxproposal -

40 inch plus -
40inchplus -
big naturals -
bignaturals -
boys first time -
boysfirsttime -
cum fiesta -
cumfiesta -
cum girls -
cumgirls -
dangerous dongs -
dangerousdongs -
euro sex parties -
eurosexparties -
first time auditions -
firsttimeauditions -
in the vip -
inthevip -
mike in brazil -
mikeinbrazil -
round and brown -
roundandbrown -
street blowjobs -
streetblowjobs -
tranny surprise -
trannysurprise -
vip crew -
vipcrew -
we live together -
welivetogether -
all sites access -
allsitesaccess -
ass parade -
assparade -
ball honeys -
ballhoneys -
bangbros network -
bangbrosnetwork -
big ass adventure -
bigassadventure -
big mouthfuls -
bigmouthfuls -
big tits round asses -
bigtitsroundasses -
busty adventures -
bustyadventures -
cam crush -
camcrush -
milf lessons -
milflessons -
monsters of cock -
monstersofcock -
mr cameltoe -
mrcameltoe -
public invasion -
publicinvasion -
taylor bow -
taylorbow -
tug jobs -
tugjobs -



anal lick fest -
ass like that -
bang bus -
black attack gangbang -
cream filled babes -
deep in her -
double diper -
fucked tits -
fucking machines -
gagging whores -
gag sluts -
hog tied -
men in pain -
mother daughter fuck -
my favorite creampies -
my wifes friends -
naughty best friends -
pervert paradise -
pigtails round asses -
pop porno -
pvc and latex -
real big racks -
sapphic erotica -
spanked and abused -
stink fillers -
tease it out -
tranny rach -
ultimate surrender -
water bondage -
will she gag -
wired pussy -
young ripe and ready -
2 chicks 1 dick -
big sausage pizza -
cheerleader auditions -
eat my black meat -
euro bride tryouts -
girls hunting girls -
hardcore partying -
milf cruiser -
teen hitchhikers -
anal lick fest -
ass like that -
bang bus -
black attack gangbang -
cream filled babes -
deep in her -
double diper -
fucked tits -
fucking machines -
gagging whores -
gag sluts -
hog tied -
men in pain -
mother daughter fuck -
my favorite creampies -
my wifes friends -
naughty best friends -
pervert paradise -
pigtails round asses -
pop porno -
pvc and latex -
real big racks -
sapphic erotica -
spanked and abused -
stink fillers -
tease it out -
tranny ranch -
ultimate surrender -
water bondage -
will she gag -
wired pussy -
young ripe and ready -
2 chicks 1 dick -
big sausage pizza -
cheerleader auditions -
eat my black meat -
euro bride tryouts -
girls hunting girls -
hardcore partying -
milf cruiser -
teen hitchhikers -
anal lick fest -
ass like that -
bang bus -
black attack gangbang -
cream filled babes -
deep in her -
drool my load -
fucked tits -
fucking machines -
gagging whores -
gag sluts -
hog tied -
men in pain -
mother daughter fuck -
my favourite creampies -
naughty best friends -
no cum dodging allowed -
pigtails round asses -
pimp juice xxx -
pop porno -
pvc and latex -
real big racks -
sapphic erotica -
spanked and abused -
stink fillers -
tease it out -
tranny ranch -
ultimate surrender -
water bondage -
will she gag -
wired pussy -
young ripe and ready -
2 chicks 1 dick -
big sausage pizza -
cheerleader auditions -
eat my black meat -
euro bride tryouts -
girls hunting girls -
hardcore partying -
milf cruiser -
teen hitchhikers -
anal lick fest -
ass like that -
bang bus -
black attack gangbang -
cream filled babes -
deep in her -
drool my load -
fucked tits -
fucking machines -
gagging whores -
gag sluts -
hog tied -
men in pain -
mother daughter fuck -
my favorite creampies -
naughty best friends -
no cum dodging allowed -
pigtails round asses -
pimp juice xxx -
pop porno -
pvc and latex -
real big racks -
sapphic erotica -
spanked and abused -
stink fillers -
tease it out -
tranny ranch -
ultimate surrender -
water bondage -
will she gag -
wired pussy -
young ripe and ready -
2 chicks 1 dick -
big sausage pizza -
cheerleader auditions -
eat my black meat -
euro bride tryouts -
girls hunting girls -
hardcore partying -
milf cruiser -
teen hitchhikers -
anal lick fest -
ass like that -
bang bus -
black attack gangbang -
cream filled babes -
deep in her -
drool my load -
fucked tits -
fucking machines -
gagging whores -
gag sluts -
hog tied -
men in pain -
mother daughter fuck -
my favourite creampies -
naughty best friends -
no cum dodging allowed -
pigtails round asses -
pimp juice xxx -
pop porno -
pvc and latex -
real big racks -
sapphic erotica -
spanked and abused -
stink fillers -
teen slam -
tranny ranch -
ultimate surrender -
water bondage -
will she gag -
wired pussy -
young ripe and ready -
2 chicks 1 dick -
big sausage pizza -
cheerleader auditions -
eat my black meat -
euro bride tryouts -
girls hunting girls -
hardcore partying -
milf cruiser -
teen hitchhikers -
anal lick fest -
ass like that -
bang bus -
black attack gangbang -
cream filled babes -
deep in her -
drool my load -
fucked tits -
fucking machines -
gagging whores -
gag sluts -
hog tied -
men in pain -
mother daughter fuck -
my favorite creampies -
naughty best friends -
no cum dodging allowed -
pigtails round asses -
pimp juice xxx -
pop porno -
pvc and latex -
real big racks -
sapphic erotica -
spanked and abused -
stink fillers -
teen slam -
tranny ranch -
ultimate surrender -
water bondage -
will she gag -
wired pussy -
young ripe and ready -
2 chicks 1 dick -
big sausage pizza -
cheerleader auditions -
eat my black meat -
euro bride tryouts -
girls hunting girls -
hardcore partying -
milf cruiser -
teen hitchhikers -
anarchy archives -
ass like that -
bang bus -
black attack gangbang -
creamed cornholes -
creamed feet -
deep in her -
drool my load -
fucked tits -
fucking machines -
gag sluts -
hell fire sex -
hog tied -
men in pain -
mother daughter fuck -
my favourite creampies -
naughty best friends -
no cum dodging allowed -
pigtails round asses -
pimp juice xxx -
pop porno -
pvc and latex -
real big racks -
sapphic erotica -
spanked and abused -
stink fillers -
teen slam -
tranny ranch -
ultimate surrender -
whipped ass -
will she gag -
wired pussy -
2 chicks 1 dick -
big sausage pizza -
cheerleader auditions -
eat my black meat -
euro bride tryouts -
girls hunting girls -
hardcore partying -
milf cruiser -
teen hitchhikers -
anarchy archives -
ass like that -
bang bus -
black attack gangbang -
creamed cornholes -
creamed feet -
deep in her -
drool my load -
fucked tits -
fucking machines -
gag sluts -
hell fire sex -
hog tied -
men in pain -
mother daughter fuck -
my favorite creampies -
naughty best friends -
no cum dodging allowed -
pigtails round asses -
pimp juice xxx -
pop porno -
pvc and latex -
real big racks -
sapphic erotica -
spanked and abused -
stink fillers -
teen slam -
tranny ranch -
ultimate surrender -
whipped ass -
will she gag -
wired pussy -
2 chicks 1 dick -
big sausage pizza -
cheerleader auditions -
eat my black meat -
euro bride tryouts -
girls hunting girls -
hardcore partying -
milf cruiser -
teen hitchhikers -
anarchy archives -
ass like that -
bang bus -
blowjob quickies -
creamed cornholes -
creamed feet -
deep in her -
drool my load -
fucked tits -
fucking machines -
gag sluts -
hell fire sex -
hog tied -
men in pain -
mother daughter fuck -
my favorite creampies -
naughty best friends -
nut in her mouth -
pigtails round asses -
pop porno -
porn jackass -
real big racks -
sapphic erotica -
sleep assault -
stink fillers -
teen slam -
tranny ranch -
ultimate surrender -
use my daughter -
whipped ass -
will she gag -
wired pussy -
2 chicks 1 dick -
big sausage pizza -
cheerleader auditions -
eat my black meat -
euro bride tryouts -
girls hunting girls -
hardcore partying -
milf cruiser -
teen hitchhikers -
anarchy archives -
ass like that -
bang bus -
blowjob quickies -
creamed cornholes -
creamed feet -
deep in her -
drool my load -
fucked tits -
fucking machines -
gag sluts -
hell fire sex -
hog tied -
men in pain -
mother daughter fuck -
my favorite creampies -
naughty best friends -
nut in her mouth -
pigtails round asses -
porn jackass -
real big racks -
sapphic erotica -
sleep assault -
stink fillers -
teen slam -
tranny ranch -
ultimate surrender -
use my daughter -
whipped ass -
will she gag -
wired pussy -
2 chicks 1 dick -
big sausage pizza -
cheerleader auditions -
eat my black meat -
euro bride tryouts -
girls hunting girls -
hardcore partying -
milf cruiser -
teen hitchhikers -
ass 2 mouth sluts -
bang bus -
blowjob quickies -
creamed feet -
cum farters -
facial cum targets -
fucked tits -
fucking machines -
hell fire sex -
hog tied -
men in pain -
mother daughter fuck -
nut in her mouth -
porn jackass -
sapphic erotica -
sleep assault -
top notch bitches -
ultimate surrender -
use my daughter -
whipped ass -
wired pussy -
2 chicks 1 dick -
big sausage pizza -
cheerleader auditions -
eat my black meat -
euro bride tryouts -
girls hunting girls -
hardcore partying -
milf cruiser -
teen hitchhikers -
ass 2 mouth sluts -
bang bus -
blowjob quickies -
creamed feet -
cum farters -
facial cum targets -
fucked tits -
fucking machines -
hell fire sex -
hog tied -
men in pain -
mother daughter fuck -
nut in her mouth -
porn jackass -
sapphic erotica -
sleep assault -
top notch bitches -
ultimate surrender -
use my daughter -
whipped ass -
wired pussy -
2 chicks 1 dick -
big sausage pizza -
cheerleader auditions -
eat my black meat -
euro bride tryouts -
girls hunting girls -
hardcore partying -
milf cruiser -
teen hitchhikers -
altered assholes -
ass 2 mouth sluts -
bang bus -
blowjob quickies -
creamed feet -
cum farters -
facial cum targets -
fucked tits -
fucking machines -
hell fire sex -
hog tied -
men in pain -
mother daughter fuck -
nut in her mouth -
pov pervert -
sapphic erotica -
sleep assault -
top notch bitches -
ultimate surrender -
use my daughter -
whipped ass -
2 chicks 1 dick -
big sausage pizza -
cheerleader auditions -
eat my black meat -
euro bride tryouts -
girls hunting girls -
hardcore partying -
milf cruiser -
teen hitchhikers -
altered assholes -
ass 2 mouth sluts -
bang bus -
blowjob quickies -
creamed feet -
cum farters -
facial cum targets -
fucked tits -
fucking machines -
hell fire sex -
hog tied -
men in pain -
mother daughter fuck -
nut in her mouth -
pov pervert -
sapphic erotica -
sleep assault -
top notch bitches -
ultimate surrender -
use my daughter -
whipped ass -
2 chicks 1 dick -
big sausage pizza -
cheerleader auditions -
eat my black meat -
euro bride tryouts -
girls hunting girls -
hardcore partying -
milf cruiser -
teen hitchhikers -
adult dating friends -
adult love line -
adult singles zone -
altered assholes -
amateur match -
asian amateur match -
asian love line -
ass 2 mouth sluts -
bang bus -
cam club -
chix in the mix -
college party dates -
creamed feet -
cum farters -
ebony love line -
facial cum targets -
fucked tits -
fucking machines -
gay amateur match -
hog tied -
i want u -
latin love line -
lonely wifes dating club -
man hookups -
meat members -
nuts on sluts -
penetration tease -
pov pervert -
sapphic erotica -
sex and submission -
sex search -
sleep assault -
spread 4 u -
top notch bitches -
ultimate surrender -
use my daughter -
whipped ass -
wild hot dates -
adult dating friends -
adult love line -
adult singles zone -
altered assholes -
amateur match -
asian amateur match -
asian love line -
ass 2 mouth sluts -
bang bus -
cam club -
chix in the mix -
college party dates -
creamed feet -
cum farters -
ebony love line -
facial cum targets -
fucked tits -
fucking machines -
gay amateur match -
hog tied -
i want u -
latin love line -
lonely wifes dating club -
man hookups -
meat members -
nuts on sluts -
penetration tease -
pov pervert -
sapphic erotica -
sex and submission -
sex search -
sleep assault -
spread 4 u -
top notch bitches -
ultimate surrender -
use my daughter -