U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado > Denver
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-28-2010, 10:25 PM
 
Location: Lakeland, Florida
6,975 posts, read 12,504,449 times
Reputation: 8742

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Willy702 View Post
Costs are very similar to other areas with light rail, I don't think they are bad at all. Biggest issue is always going to be how close to work you can get on it. When all the new lines are up and running it will be make it significantly better for commutes, but that is still years away.

No they are not similiar to many areas with light rail. From what I read on here Denver's are very high and very unreasonable. I don't know the distance traveled that would warrant $7 and $9 for a RT ticket. That sounds more in line with the Commuter Rail tickets such as in Boston. Systems where one is traveling 25 or 30 miles outside the city. Those type systems are not Light Rail and are heavy rail double decker trains.

Light Rail fares are usually in the $2 to $3 range each way. Here in Portland our longest line the Blue Line runs about 30 miles and would be $4.60 for a RT ticket.

I would think many would not be able to afford such a fare in Denver, especially lower income people. Im also guessing many have opted to drive because of the high train fare. The monthly pass if there is one must be a very high cost with fares that high.

Im sorry the fares are so high there. Portland doesn't do a very good job of collecting fares on our trains at all, and like many systems is having problems. I hope our fares never reach the fares in Denver or I'll return to driving.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-28-2010, 11:15 PM
 
556 posts, read 1,039,001 times
Reputation: 550
Monthly passes are actually very reasonable if your workplace participates in the eco pass program. $27 for unlimited local and regional bus and light rail.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-28-2010, 11:41 PM
 
Location: The North
5,084 posts, read 9,106,541 times
Reputation: 4061
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimrob1 View Post
No they are not similiar to many areas with light rail. From what I read on here Denver's are very high and very unreasonable. I don't know the distance traveled that would warrant $7 and $9 for a RT ticket. That sounds more in line with the Commuter Rail tickets such as in Boston. Systems where one is traveling 25 or 30 miles outside the city. Those type systems are not Light Rail and are heavy rail double decker trains.

Light Rail fares are usually in the $2 to $3 range each way. Here in Portland our longest line the Blue Line runs about 30 miles and would be $4.60 for a RT ticket.

I would think many would not be able to afford such a fare in Denver, especially lower income people. Im also guessing many have opted to drive because of the high train fare. The monthly pass if there is one must be a very high cost with fares that high.

Im sorry the fares are so high there. Portland doesn't do a very good job of collecting fares on our trains at all, and like many systems is having problems. I hope our fares never reach the fares in Denver or I'll return to driving.
Relatively few lower income people live out where the $7 and $9 fares originate. Most of the rush hour commuters using the light rail seem relatively well off and just don't want to deal with traffic and parking. During non-commute/non-sporting event times the trains are fairly empty and I have to wonder if that is part of the problem causing the high fares. Most of the daytime riders who have passes might still opt to take a car during non-rush hours. I suspect lower prices would only slightly increase ridership, but would greatly reduce revenues. I agree with the other poster, the best way to increase ridership positively is for partnerships with employers in high-density areas along the routes to reduce pass prices.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2010, 01:57 AM
 
Location: Coos Bay, Oregon
7,142 posts, read 8,894,162 times
Reputation: 7732
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willy702 View Post
Relatively few lower income people live out where the $7 and $9 fares originate. Most of the rush hour commuters using the light rail seem relatively well off and just don't want to deal with traffic and parking. During non-commute/non-sporting event times the trains are fairly empty and I have to wonder if that is part of the problem causing the high fares.
I think that would be a good bet. It looks like it is totally designed to get well of people downtown in the rush hour. Looking at the fair brochure it doesn't make any sense to me. For example: Why would someone ride the light rail from Nine Mile to Downtown, when they could take a limited bus for half the fare, and probably get there almost as fast? Unless they just like trains. Another good one I see. Oxford to I-25 & Broadway, three zones, $3.50 for about a three and a half mile trip. Thats like $1 a mile. If two people were making that trip, they could probably save money if they just shared a taxicab. Thats pretty bad when train fare cost more then a taxi ride. It doesn't surprise me that trains would be pretty empty in off-peak hours.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2010, 02:01 AM
 
5,090 posts, read 13,558,822 times
Reputation: 6928
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimrob1 View Post
No they are not similiar to many areas with light rail. From what I read on here Denver's are very high and very unreasonable. I don't know the distance traveled that would warrant $7 and $9 for a RT ticket. That sounds more in line with the Commuter Rail tickets such as in Boston. Systems where one is traveling 25 or 30 miles outside the city. Those type systems are not Light Rail and are heavy rail double decker trains.

Light Rail fares are usually in the $2 to $3 range each way. Here in Portland our longest line the Blue Line runs about 30 miles and would be $4.60 for a RT ticket.

I would think many would not be able to afford such a fare in Denver, especially lower income people. Im also guessing many have opted to drive because of the high train fare. The monthly pass if there is one must be a very high cost with fares that high.

Im sorry the fares are so high there. Portland doesn't do a very good job of collecting fares on our trains at all, and like many systems is having problems. I hope our fares never reach the fares in Denver or I'll return to driving.
I just posted this information on another thread to a statement that the fares are over $6, one way:

"That is incorrect. The most you will pay is $4.50, one way, if you travel through 4 zones on light rail. However, most people who commute buy discount passes, ticket books and many employers subsidize or provide free Eco Pass pass on the public transit.

$4.50 is the most you will pay on a Regional bus trip, one way.

The highest fare is going to the airport on the express Sky Ride Bus which ranges from $4.00 to $12.00, with discounts for round trip.

Again, there are multiple discounts available on all types of transit routes. So, frequent users do not pay the full rate. There is discounts for children, seniors, students, and the disabled.

Compared to buying, driving, owning, maintaining, parking, insuring, fueling a personal vehicle--paying fares on public transit is really a bargain."

Livecontent
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2010, 03:49 AM
 
Location: Denver, CO
1,627 posts, read 3,721,972 times
Reputation: 1778
Default RTD: Nomenclature Issues

Seemed appropriate to just tack this on to this thread, so...

I've been doing a lot of transit riding lately. The buses seem to make quite a bit of sense, but I'm a little perplexed as to what committee came up with the naming scheme for the system. It's possible that I'm just ignorant of the reasons and this all makes perfect sense, but I was wondering if anyone could shed some light on a few things.

* I understand the "G" line (formerly running from Nine Mile to Lincoln) is now defunct, but what ever happened to the "A" and "B" lines?

* Knowing that the zone system would be "A", "B", "C" and "D" (to indicate how many zones one would pass through on a given trip for fare purposes), why did they then name the lines with letters instead of, say, colors...or maybe some descriptive aspect of a given line? I understand that there is quite a bit of overlap in the current system (and likely to be more once the new corridors are established), but wouldn't it be more effective to have a "Nine Mile" line, a "Lincoln" line and maybe in the future an "Airport" line? Or perhaps lines named after the general destination..."Littleton" line, "JeffCo" line? There may even be a more efficient way that I just haven't considered. (New Yorkers will no doubt think I'm just being lazy and that the nomenclature is not at all difficult to navigate.)

* Why couldn't "Invesco Field at Mile High" station have simply been "Mile High" station? What happens if sponsorship of the stadium changes? The same with "Pepsi Center / Elitch Gardens." Granted, new materials will have to be issued periodically as new stations and lines are added to the system, but is it worth potential confusion in the long term? Since I doubt RTD is receiving any direct financial benefit from these companies, is it appropriate to be advertising them in station names? Or is it more important that people be able to find exactly the stop they are looking for on a map? (Frankly, I have no respect for any Denverite who calls the "new" Mile High "Invesco Field", but that's personal bias )

* Not so much a question as a concern about station signage (and I'm sure some will think I'm nitpicking.) How hard would it be to have unified and highly consistent station signage that *clearly* indicated direction of travel (in some cases the "<S COLORADO N>" is not as immediately obvious as it seems) as well as the names of the lines? The information IS there, certainly, but there's no reason for it not to be intuitive to the transit user...particularly those that may be in a hurry.

Mind you, these are not make or break issues with the system, but I think can certainly create confusion for people unfamiliar with the system (and frankly I usually have to think more about where the end of the line is rather than the actual line I'm trying to board...and even that only works because I've familiarized myself with the system) Am I wrong in thinking this to be the case? Or wrong in thinking that there is likely a better way to name things in the system and simplify getting around town?

Food for thought...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2010, 06:29 AM
 
Location: Golden, CO
2,181 posts, read 5,641,689 times
Reputation: 2073
Quote:
Originally Posted by zenkonami View Post
* Why couldn't "Invesco Field at Mile High" station have simply been "Mile High" station? What happens if sponsorship of the stadium changes? The same with "Pepsi Center / Elitch Gardens." Granted, new materials will have to be issued periodically as new stations and lines are added to the system, but is it worth potential confusion in the long term? Since I doubt RTD is receiving any direct financial benefit from these companies, is it appropriate to be advertising them in station names? Or is it more important that people be able to find exactly the stop they are looking for on a map? (Frankly, I have no respect for any Denverite who calls the "new" Mile High "Invesco Field", but that's personal bias )
I agree that some of the station names are a bit odd and RTD could definitely take some steps to improve the simplicity/usability of the system. With that said, I think the answer to the above question is that they would change the name of the station if a change in sponsorship occurs. If I remember correctly, the "Pepsi Center/Elitch Gardens" station was called "Six Flags Elitch Gardens" at one time but was changed when Six Flags sold Elitch Gardens to someone else.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2010, 08:38 PM
 
Location: Denver, CO
1,627 posts, read 3,721,972 times
Reputation: 1778
Quote:
Originally Posted by cowboyxjon View Post
I agree that some of the station names are a bit odd and RTD could definitely take some steps to improve the simplicity/usability of the system. With that said, I think the answer to the above question is that they would change the name of the station if a change in sponsorship occurs. If I remember correctly, the "Pepsi Center/Elitch Gardens" station was called "Six Flags Elitch Gardens" at one time but was changed when Six Flags sold Elitch Gardens to someone else.
Good point.

It also occurred to me that the ticket kiosks could be made a little more intuitive to use (again, it's not hard if you know the system since it only really cares about zones, but if you don't know it could cause some concern.) I suspect that is simply an issue of insufficient funds. It would seem the best solution would be to use all touch screens and have a map, and then to select your destination on the map. Again, since the system is zone based, the touch system wouldn't even have to be that accurate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2010, 09:28 PM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
3,113 posts, read 4,913,380 times
Reputation: 5434
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willy702 View Post
Relatively few lower income people live out where the $7 and $9 fares originate. Most of the rush hour commuters using the light rail seem relatively well off and just don't want to deal with traffic and parking. During non-commute/non-sporting event times the trains are fairly empty and I have to wonder if that is part of the problem causing the high fares. Most of the daytime riders who have passes might still opt to take a car during non-rush hours. I suspect lower prices would only slightly increase ridership, but would greatly reduce revenues. I agree with the other poster, the best way to increase ridership positively is for partnerships with employers in high-density areas along the routes to reduce pass prices.
High fares lead to one-way ridership. The wealthy passengers ride from the suburbs in the morning to downtown, and return home in evening. If prices were lowered for the reverse commute folks, maybe ridership would increase. People who live near the core, and earn $10/hr working as laborers in the DTC, Park Meadows/Inverness, and Meridian would ride the train as well. This could help alleviate the empty trains from DT to Lincoln in the morning.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2010, 09:41 PM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
3,113 posts, read 4,913,380 times
Reputation: 5434
Responding to the original question:

My biggest problem is the hub and spoke design of the trains. There is no viable option for LR other than traveling downtown.

There are no good east-west or north-south lines (existing or planned) between suburbs. I believe that Hampden Ave would be a prime route for a line from Wadsworth to I-25. Same goes for C470. A line from Park Meadows to Kipling (or even all the way to Golden) would be useful. A north-south Broadway or Colorado Blvd line would be nice. Even a circular spur in the west that would connect all the lines before going downtown would be good.

Alternately, the lines could be extended so that people do not have to transfer. Why couldn't some of the Gold Line, West Line trains continue past downtown and go to the tech center?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado > Denver
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:02 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top