Raise the Hammer

adrian >> they're waiting for government to build it because they don't have hundreds of millions of dollars in existing capital

Then do what every other business does and raise PRIVATE financing. Wouldn't private investors want to invest in a sure thing like LRT?

>> they don't have the right to tear up city streets and replace them with a private transportation network.

I was working off the assumption that the city would green light the building, if not financing of the LRT. The only risk of this would be having to cover over the tracks if the service failed.

>> if you believe private companies have the time, inclination, and money to attempt to negotiate lease agreements with purchasing options for every piece of property along the proposed LRT line, you have no idea how business works.

If doing so would make them money, why wouldn't they. Investors buy land leases for oil, minerals, etc, PLUS make capital infrastructure investments, so why not for LRT? The only reason has to be that they don't believe property values would increase enough to justify the investment. If that's the case, then LRT is likely MORE risky than any of the investments I just cited.

>> you've just gone from claiming that private interests should build the LRT and now switched over to private interests should lease or purchase all of the land next to the proposed LRT line even though there is no formal government commitment to build it.

I was proposing that investors could build LRT and buy options on the land that Ryan has said will enjoy increased consumer demand. As long as LRT lives up top the promises given by supporters, they should make money.

This is one option. The other is for property owners along the route to form a corporation dedicated to building and funding an LRT, similar to the one in Las Vegas...

http://www.lvmonorail.com/about/history/

This would do away with the need for buying options on the land, so the only risk would be the line itself.

I ask you, if LRT has such great potential to increase the value of property owners along Main/King, why are they not raising money to build it/lobby for street access? If, as you say, LRT will create more demand than it costs, property owners are losing every day it isn't built.

Why would they choose to lose money on a sure thing investment such as LRT? The only logical explanation is that they don't believe LRT is a sure thing investment, in contrast to LRT supporters and many taxpayers. Can you address this concern?