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.
IMO what we have is what we're going to get more of in the future, minor tweaks to the roads, precious little more rail transit due to costs.
Fifty years ago they started tunneling under DC for the their metro system; it took decades and cost a fortune. I loved my stop under the Pentagon. Tunneling under miles of Denver sprawl is a financial non-starter in this day and age, we aren't the economic powerhouse with money to burn the way we were back then, not to mention TABOR's chokehold.
Best solution I can see is to have the "region" buy several thousand buses, yes, thousands, and run free, yes free, bus service along major arterials and some large side connecting streets.
Build the cost into everyone's property tax. It's a viable way to avoid the massive cost of tunneling, it puts service into play within months of regional agreement, it eliminates all the nonsense of collecting and accounting for fares, it gets people out of their cars since much of our society goes gaga over 'free' stuff, and the buses have a lot of flexibility to adjust routes that rails can't do.
A regional bus solution helps to level the playing field for housing prices as it somewhat ameliorates the price spikes along the few rail lines we have; good free bus service from non-rail parts of the metro area makes those areas more desirable and reduces the feeding frenzy for housing near rail lines.
Some would never use it and complain about paying for something they don't use. My wife and I have paid a lot of property taxes over the years for schools we've never used (no kids) and for libraries we've hardly ever used, but everyone pays for these things now whether they use them or not; it's a sunk cost for a first world society that works and succeeds. People would save a lot of money on gas, parking, and other auto costs. Those who'd still drive would have much easier commutes as a consolation prize.
Makes too much sense; will never happen.
__________________
- Please follow our TOS.
- Any Questions about City-Data? See the FAQ list.
- Want some detailed instructions on using the site? See The Guide for plain english explanation.
- Realtors are welcome here but do see our Realtor Advice to avoid infractions.
- Thank you and enjoy City-Data.
I'm hoping that in the not-too-distant future, they can add a line that runs east to west (perhaps along Alameda) from the 225 lines and merge with the lines that run along 25. I don't know if they have the real estate for it, but I'd be satisfied with that. Nine Mile Station and the future Florida station are just very inefficient routes getting downtown, where I currently work.
There's been discussions and studies for BRT along Colfax from downtown to 225 and enhanced bus service along Leetsdale and Parker Rd. That's probably the closet that you'd get to this idea. The Colfax BRT seems to be a great solution (especially for the price), but Aurora seems very skeptical about taking away a lane of traffic to do this.
You could always take 18th ave into downtown and 17th back east. We went that way when we lived in Aurora and needed to get downtown. No matter what route you take there will be a bottleneck near Colorado Blvd.
IMO what we have is what we're going to get more of in the future, minor tweaks to the roads, precious little more rail transit due to costs.
Fifty years ago they started tunneling under DC for the their metro system; it took decades and cost a fortune. I loved my stop under the Pentagon.
Tunneling under miles of Denver sprawl is a financial non-starter in this day and age, we aren't the economic powerhouse with money to burn the way we were back then, not to mention TABOR's chokehold.
Best solution I can see is to have the "region" buy several thousand buses, yes, thousands, and run free, yes free, bus service along major arterials and some large side connecting streets.
Build the cost into everyone's property tax. It's a viable way to avoid the massive cost of tunneling, it puts service into play within months of regional agreement, it eliminates all the nonsense of collecting and accounting for fares, it gets people out of their cars since much of our society goes gaga over 'free' stuff, and the buses have a lot of flexibility to adjust routes that rails can't do.
Some would never use it and complain about paying for something they don't use. My wife and I have paid a lot of property taxes over the years for schools we've never used (no kids) and for libraries we've hardly ever used, but everyone pays for these things now whether they use them or not; it's a sunk cost for a first world society that works and succeeds. People would save a lot of money on gas, parking, and other auto costs. Those who'd still drive would have much easier commutes as a consolation prize.
Makes too much sense; will never happen.
RTD did try that experiment many years ago--I think about 50 years ago and made the system totally free. It was not sucessful. Why? If I can remember the discussion, it caused many transients just to keep riding the buses and it did not increase demand sufficiently.
But let us get back to the present. RTD did not give up on free transit. RTD is now testing free bus service in Longmont. It commence on July 1, 2014 and the funding for the project will end on June 30, 2016. It is currently being evaluated as to the impact.
From what I have heard in discussions, free public transit does not have the impact to increase ridership as much as you would think. It does work in some limited areas, for example, the free 16th Mall and Metro Ride Shuttle downtown.
I think it can work in limited areas and limited routes where density would make public transit reasonable. However, would it bring in new riders or just give a free ride to those who already use public transit.
If you recall, Castle Rock and their ill advised move to withdraw from RTD did implement a free bus system but that failed. It was anticipated to fail because the area has sprawling suburbs with residents whose lives revolve around their car.
As such, I do not think it will work in these far flung developments around Denver other than giving the commuters their 8-5 white collar jobs a ride free which they would normally pay. Yet, many already have free and subsidized passes. I do not think it will encourage ridership from the hardcore drivers.
In addition, there are many free and subsidized pass programs offered by companies and colleges: Ecopass, College Pass, FlexPass, Neighborhood Ecopass. It has been found that many do not desire such and do not utilize them.
This is even interesting. As you know, I always am encouraging public transit. I am disabled and work hard in this community to get them the benefits that they are eligible. One is the the Access-a-Ride so they can get around because they cannot easy access public transit. Amazingly, many will not apply because they always driven and will always drive. Yet, the Access-a-Ride also gives one a free transit pass.
Using the Access-a-Ride vans cost the users twice the local bus rate. However, running these vans are a big expense for RTD and sometimes the disabled can use public transit, depending on their changing disability and destination. As such, the disable are given a free transit pass on all buses and trains. When I explain that, many do not care to ride free--they will never use public transit.
Livecontent
Last edited by livecontent; 11-10-2015 at 04:31 PM..
You do realize that RTD will be shut down sometime before 2080?
Autonomous cars will change everything.
That is not what is envision.
An autonomous car does not take something away from that which already occupies a place in time and space. Whether we have a car driven by a computer or a person, it is still 2-3 tons of vehicle occupying the same limited space on the highway. So, each rider still takes more space than necessary. Public transit, buses and trains, put more riders in that specific place in time and space--a more efficient, economical and ecological movement of an individual person.
In addition, we already have autonomous vehicles for many years that pickup passengers; drive to a destination; drop off and drive to pickup other passengers--it is called a taxi. Again it matters not in implementation whether it is driven by a robot or a man--it runs the same way.
I suggest you go to Manhattan and see the stream of yellow taxis running up an down. clogging the streets. They are autonomous cars that pickup and deliver passengers. I have not seen the public transit system of trains and buses in NYC disappear. Many times these taxis are the cause of traffic jams with yellow as far as you can see. The same will happen if we think that autonomous cars are the answer.
The big issue it may solve is parking as long as autonomous cars remain in motion. That is one of the big reasons for the many autonomous yellow taxis roaming Manhattan because a parking spot is very rare. In fact, many residents who own cars, fear to move their car because if they drive to where they want to go, they will not find a parking spot and they will loose the one they had--so they take a taxi or a bus or the subway. Why then do they own a car?
Autonomous cars initially in the near future will most probably be very small vehicles that will not take you not to the final destination but to mass transit points--as we have Call-n-Rides. At those points, there may be single occupancy vehicles or multiple occupancy (like we have today) but will run on a fixed guide way which may be rail or something equivalent.
Livecontent
Last edited by livecontent; 11-10-2015 at 05:14 PM..
I've always thought it would be a good idea to have a direct Littleton to DTC line, though probably not feasible.
Start it at the Fun City (Kipling/Coal Mine). It's a dump anyway, replacing it with a rail station park-n-ride would be a blessing.
Head up to Southwest Plaza, then move it along Hampden with stops at Sheridan, Federal, Englewood Station, Broadway, University, until you hit Southmoor. At which point you either hop off to grab a northbound train or take it south through the Tech Center.
It would not help southeast Aurora much. I'm not sure what would, TBH.
How pleasant of you to make assumptions about my commuting tendencies. As a matter of fact, I use public transit almost daily, as I was provided an Eco-Pass by my employer which is located in the heart of downtown. My point in the OP is that commuting from East Denver and East Metro Denver is particularly a nuisance in comparison to the rest of the metro region, particularly the west. Not only do they have better highway systems on the west side, but they have a far more efficient method of public transit by way of light rail. My commute by bus in the morning takes approximately 1 hr, if I leave before 6:30am. And my commute by bus in the evening is closer to 1.5 hours. Light rail is the most efficient method of travel, taking approximately 50 minutes both ways regardless of time.
I was simply asking if anybody else has noticed this lack of transit systems in East Denver and what their hypothetical solutions would be. I simply provided my hypothetical solutions to this hypothetical situation. My proposed hypothetical solution would be an east/west connection line, either via highway/expanded avenue/light rail somewhere between I-70 and Hampden. Preferably, I would think the Alameda corridor would be the best placement of this given it's central location.
If you would also like to partake in this discussion of hypothetical solutions, please feel free to add your input.
Thank You for taking public transit. Then you know many of the issues and you are taking part in a solution.
I have agreed with all you have said with the lack of public transit in Aurora. I especially do agree that a cross town faster public transit modality is needed and I have noted that it has been discussed in public transit meetings. As I said, I believe it will be implemented in the future as all the experts see that as a need for Denver public transit. I believe it will be part of the next big buildout. However, as I said, it will not happen for a very long time.
As far as it existing on Alameda, I think that can be a possibility but it has not yet been studied. At present, we are not dealing with the hypothetical but with current problems and issues of the implementation of all the new rail and buses in 2016. It is an exciting time in public transit and will be as great as the impact as the opening of DIA.
Now to your assertion of that there is better rail on the west than the east side has a very simple answer. Most rail is and has been built along the rail corridors because of the ease and less cost of accessing a right of way. In addition, it lessens the need and cost of taking property under eminent domain:
The southwest line follows the rail line.
The east rail follows the Lakewood Gulch and the long abandoned land of the interuban rail corridor to Golden.
The Gold Line to Arvada follows the Union Pacific/Burlington Northern Rail as it leaves Utah Junction, then it follows the Burlington Northern Spur to Golden.
The Northwest Rail to Boulder that will only now be completed to old part of Westminster follows the commercial rail lines.
The East Rail Line to the Airport follows the Rail which runs east to west in the northern part of Denver.
The North Rail line follows the commercial rail through Thornton. I think this will become the most important heavy public transit line in the region. It can only go now to the RTD boundary at 160th but is only now being built to 124th, The potential is enormous as this line can be extended and meet a future heavy rail line that can be built by the public transit districts in Northern Colorado. We will then can have the front range passenger public transit as we are all have been hoping for years.
The Southeast Rail Line does not follow a Rail Corridor because it was built on right of way of I-25 when we expanded the highway with T-Rex.
The extension of the light rail through Aurora is built partially on the right of way along I-225.
The answer is that there is more public transit rail on the West Side than the East side of the city as more commercial rail corridors exist on the West side than the East side.
I am not saying this is an ideal solution of placing public transit rail and I think some rail stations are not in the best location. However, that is the way it is done.
What really is interesting is residential housing near commercial rail has often been considered less desired. Now some residents have found the value of their property increased in value because of they now live close to a rail station. I am one of the lucky ones as I live about a 1/3 mile from a new rail station.
In addition, some of these vacant properties near the future rail station were not consider ideal for office or apartment locations but perhaps as a commercial property that needed a rail spur if zoning permitted. Now, those properties are highly sought out by developers.
Who would have know that living on the wrong side of the tracks became the best side.
Livecontent
Last edited by livecontent; 11-10-2015 at 07:11 PM..
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.
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.
