DENVER | Transportation Thread

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by DenvertoLA

So it's double taxation because the government is the source of the offering, but if a private investment firm spotted the bill for an express lane it would be capitalism?

At least the government's motivation is to deliver/maintain new and existing infrastructure for everyone, not profit.

In case you missed previous discussion my reference is to metro Phoenix. It's the "people's" taxes that pay for the freeways down here - per voter approval. Paying tolls after their taxes paid to build the dang freeways (along with Federal grants ofc) is like being taxed twice.

Btw, CDOT is using both P3's as well as building their own express-toll lanes themselves. CDOT will manage and collect the tolls along C-470 for example IIRC.

[TakeFive]

TRANSPORTATION TRANSFORMATION SUMMIT ADDRESSES FUTURE OF MOBILITY IN DENVER
09.26.18 - RTD

On September 13, 2018, RTD hosted Transportation Transformation... As innovative technologies like bike-sharing, micromobility, and ride sourcing services are changing the way people get around, RTD is taking a proactive approach to participate in how these evolving trends are creating new and expanded opportunities for public transportation.

Over 125 regional transportation mobility partners attended the event to engage in a conversation about mobility trends and the current state of practice, local projects underway in Denver, and RTD’s plans to lead a regional initiative to determine how public transportation will integrate with Denver’s changing mobility landscape.

So in other words... MOAR studies ahead.

[TakeFive]

Dayum, now they're killing mayonnaise?

Behind Metro’s diving ridership: A millennial exodus
September 15 By Faiz Siddiqui/WaPo

Metro acknowledges service is a key factor driving its ridership decline. A new analysis provides insight into who is abandoning the system.

Just as a new Metro study points to poor service as the key cause of its faltering ridership, an outside analysis paints a profile of the commuters most likely to abandon the system: millennials, the generation said to be killing everything from homeownership to driving to, uh, mayonnaise.

How bad is it getting?

Metro’s dramatic ridership declines — from 750,000 average daily trips in 2009 to just 626,000 by May — are most pronounced among the segment of the population ages 18 to 29, the mobile, Uber-savvy generation that makes up the largest share of the workforce (if you expand “millennial” to include those up to age 35).

Is it any different in Denver?

[SnyderBock]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

In case you missed previous discussion my reference is to metro Phoenix. It's the "people's" taxes that pay for the freeways down here - per voter approval. Paying tolls after their taxes paid to build the dang freeways (along with Federal grants ofc) is like being taxed twice.

Btw, CDOT is using both P3's as well as building their own express-toll lanes themselves. CDOT will manage and collect the tolls along C-470 for example IIRC.

Kind of like how we pay taxes to pay for buses and trains, but then have to pay another fee to use them?

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by SnyderBock

Kind of like how we pay taxes to pay for buses and trains, but then have to pay another fee to use them?

Not comparable.
Owners of vehicles pay 100% of their own capital costs along with annual registration and insurance costs plus cost of gas, tires and all their maintenance and repairs costs. The roughly 90% of metro Denver adults who choose to own & drive a vehicle also pay (by deduction) about 90% of the capital costs of buses and trains and about 80% of their operating costs.

Those who ride transit pay only ~20% of the operating costs of transit as well as a small share of the capital costs. For those who own a vehicle and also use transit they help to pay the 20% of transit operating costs when they ride. It's hell of good deal.

While I may be a Big transit fan I wouldn't be a fan of distorting the facts.

[SnyderBock]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Not comparable.
Owners of vehicles pay 100% of their own capital costs along with annual registration and insurance costs plus cost of gas, tires and all their maintenance and repairs costs. The roughly 90% of metro Denver adults who choose to own & drive a vehicle also pay (by deduction) about 90% of the capital costs of buses and trains and about 80% of their operating costs.

Those who ride transit pay only ~20% of the operating costs of transit as well as a small share of the capital costs. For those who own a vehicle and also use transit they help to pay the 20% of transit operating costs when they ride. It's hell of good deal.

While I may be a Big transit fan I wouldn't be a fan of distorting the facts.

So us car owners pay a tax for buses and trains but then can choose to pay fare to use them. We also pay taxes on our cars and for highways, but can choose to pay another fee to use an Express lane. I sure do like having all these choices. I have chosen to use all of these modes of transit.

[spr8364]

Originally Posted by SnyderBock

So us car owners pay a tax for buses and trains but then can choose to pay fare to use them. We also pay taxes on our cars and for highways, but can choose to pay another fee to use an Express lane. I sure do like having all these choices. I have chosen to use all of these modes of transit.

As a person with no children, I pay taxes for other people's children to go to school and as such, see no direct benefit from that tax. However, I do gain by having an educated population. It's the same with roads. As a car owner, I benefit from others taking mass transit and not crowding the roads more than needed.

[SnyderBock]

Originally Posted by spr8364

As a person with no children, I pay taxes for other people's children to go to school and as such, see no direct benefit from that tax. However, I do gain by having an educated population. It's the same with roads. As a car owner, I benefit from others taking mass transit and not crowding the roads more than needed.

You also have the benefit of taking mass transit to avoid a congested commute, if for any reason at all you choose to. Just having options available to choose from, is worth all the taxes. I have lived in places where options are not available, you either drive or you walk.

[TakeFive]

Credit CBS4 Denver

Lone Tree Link Deemed A ‘Success’
October 9, 2018 - CBS4 Denver

LONE TREE, Colo. (CBS4)– Lone Tree says its free, on demand shuttle service is a big success.

The Lone Tree Link started as a pilot program last year that offers free shuttle rides anywhere in the town’s limits. Riders can call for a pickup through the Uber app by selecting the Link On Demand option. The Lone Tree Link started with service weekdays from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. but now runs later on Friday nights and through the weekend.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Lone Tree Link Deemed A ‘Success’
October 9, 2018 - CBS4 Denver

A quick passenger versus budget for this service suggests that the cost per trip is somewhere around $50.

That's a generous subsidy right there. But, it's probably less than Access-A-Ride which is probably the best comparison.

[TakeFive]

wong's Not Wrong
It is important to get more bang for the buck with bus service.

Flex V. Fixed: An Experiment in On-Demand Transit
May 15, 2018 - Transit Center

This Ridership Initiative guest post, by AC Transit Transportation Planner John Urgo is our latest from transit agency staff working to understand and respond to declining ridership in their system. AC Transit is among the growing list of transit agencies experimenting with expanded on-demand transit service.

In July 2016, the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District (AC Transit), which provides bus service to 13 cities and unincorporated areas in San Francisco’s East Bay, launched an on-demand transit pilot as part of an effort to address declining ridership, improve service quality, and redesign our network in low-density, low-demand areas.

I'll try to hit some highlights of a somewhat geeky piece.

Lower density suburbs have seen drop-offs in ridership partly due their inadequate coverage but better coverage isn't an affordable option. Ofc the problem 'anywhere' is route speed, reliability and do fixed routes take (every) rider where they want to go. The bigger frustration for most agencies is the rising cost of service on top of falling ridership.

AC Transit's goal was to increase their cost efficiency by cutting back on low performing routes but trying to better serve would-be riders by offering on-demand service to BART or other key corridor lines. The results have been a mixed-bag after one year.

On the positive side:

On-time performance improved, even though operators now drive a different route every hour. We increased frequency at the schedule point—the BART station—where two-thirds of passenger trips begin or end (thanks to the bus serving only requested trips). And, people liked it: 94 percent of riders surveyed preferred Flex over restoring the fixed route, and 70 percent said they would take AC Transit more if the service were expanded.

PLANSIT has indicated that RTD is looking at identifying and investing in a few key BRT-style corridors - copying the success that Seattle has achieved. Therefor: REGIONAL BUS RAPID TRANSIT FEASIBILITY STUDY

I've previously suggested that suburban communities need to consider assuming (more) responsibility for first- and last-mile service. In the AC Transit project they did find that:

...while service hours are the primary cost, the use of smaller buses did eke out a savings large enough to cover the added cost of the software. This was due to lower vehicle operating and maintenance costs per mile, and fewer miles driven

At the least transit agencies recognize that systems need to be more cost efficient as well as better meeting rider preferences. It may sound like an impossible task of conflicting needs and preferences but that today's challenge.

[TakeFive]

Can you shuttle me downtown from my 'hood?
Not a problem.

...
ENC bus via Rohrer

https://www.rohrerbus.com/bus-sales/...-e-z-rider-ii/

Different transportation applications require different solutions. The E-Z Rider II, with the flexibility of available front and/or center doors and ADA-compliant wheelchair ramps, offers passenger boarding flexibility available on no other low-floor bus. Does the route require clean fuel technology? The answer is E-Z.

These buses can accommodate between 30-40 passengers depending on option picked although w/2 wheelchairs the standard 30' bus seats 20 passengers.

These could provide great neighborhood circulator service for frequent service on fixed routes during peak and/or on-demand service for off-peak periods. Such a 'shuttle-style' bus could easily appeal to more choice riders from places like Highlands, RiNo, Cap Hill, even Stapleton etc.

It would be similar to something like Super Shuttle so just subcontract out the service to the private sector. Big RTD buses obviously hold a lot more passengers but if these would create a couple of hundred new choice riders per route during peak periods that's a lot better than 150 cars.

[TakeFive]

What do the two bus transit city champions (Seattle and Houston) have in common?
Good God, Y'all; What is it good for? Absolutely nothing, listen to me - Edwin Starr

Credit for this question/comparison goes to a CU - USC game that got boring/depressing in the middle. I don't even want to think about going up to the Univ of Washington next Saturday; just give mhays another reason to pound his chest.

Houston, we have a problem
So they brought in hired gun Jarrett Walker, expert transit dude (who I do have a lot of respect for).

Streetsblog's Angie Schmitt wrote about it on Jan 4, 2016

In August, Houston debuted its new bus network, reconfigured to increase frequent service, expand weekend hours, and improve access to jobs. when we last checked in on the results — two months after the changes took effect — bus ridership was down 4 percent overall but up dramatically on weekends. Now, after just two more months, METRO is reporting that bus ridership has climbed above previous levels.

In October, Walker said he would expect ridership to increase about 20 percent by two years after the redesign... We’ll see, but the returns after just a few months are promising.

Fast forward one year:

Transit Ridership Falling Everywhere — But Not in Cities With Redesigned Bus Networks
Feb 24, 2017 By Angie Schmitt

Angie provides a chart courtesy of Seattle Times that lists bus ridership changes from 2015 to 2016 in various cities. Seattle did indeed have a nice ridership bump of 4.3%; Houston was also up but only 2.3%. These do contrast with Denver which was down 1.2%.

I've previously stated that in 2017 Houston's bus ridership was flat, which admittedly is better than down. About Jarrett Walker's 20% projected increase? Oops, looks like he got the decimal point wrong. As for Streetsblog's typical agenda colored schtick... OK, at least Houston's ridership was up 2.3% over two years.

FWIW, the one notable change in Houston was that their weekend ridership numbers were up significantly so apparently people found the makeover more useful for their everyday life.

[TakeFive]

Compare and contrast:
Houston, Seattle and Denver

Population: - Using MSA info from Wikipedia

• Houston is the 5th largest MSA, right behind Dallas, with ~7 million people
• Seattle is the 15th largest MSA approaching 4 million people
• Denver is the 19th largest MSA closing in on 3 million people

Also interesting is that from 2010 through 2017 population growth in Houston has been 16.5%; Seattle has grown 12.5%; while Denver has grown 13.5%. 13% is sort of a median number with Austin popping over 23% to now over 2 million people.

Demographics: - based on Wikipedia city pages

• Houston as a good southern city is half white (mostly to the right); 37% Hispanic and a quarter Black (mosty to the left)
• Seattle is 70% pale white and don't let too many Mexicans in (6.5%) but they do like Asians (14%); blacks at 8%
• Denver is really pale white at 77%; has a healthy Hispanic crowd of 31%; a modest 11% black.

If you're curious about how the numbers add up - or don't - it's because Hispanic is not a race; brown doesn't count (apparently).

Growth and Sprawl - Oh yeah, we got sprawl

• Houston, part of the great SW where sand/dirt is cheap has sprawl in spades.
• Seattle spawls to and fro as developers have so far refused to build neighborhoods on water.
• Denver sprawls along the Eastern slope of the Rockies just as long has been predicted.

Growth in Density
Houston? nah, nobody cares but perhaps in downtown.
Seattle and Denver have likely experienced similar urban density growth since 2010, but Seattle's growth has accelerated at a faster pace of late and is more vertical than Denver's.

[SnyderBock]

Denver is 77% really pale white? I always seem to have a tan here from all the sunshine and outdoor activities. Also, does 77%+31%+11% = 100%? 😜

[TakeFive]

Meet me in Seattle?

Where was I going will all this? Oh, I remember, I was watching the CU football game when I typed in some key words. I came across a piece about Seattle in CityLab by Laura Bliss who just happens to be my favorite transit writer.

Why Seattle Is America's Bus-Lovingest Town
MAY 11, 2018 By LAURA BLISS

How did a transit-backward town become a national poster child for ridership success? Meanwhile, bus popularity is plummeting in most major cities.

So I thought I'd take another look at Seattle as well as Houston to see if I could dig up some transferable wisdom; maybe a few gems. Every time I dig a little deeper along with mhays encouragement I learn... something.

Laura includes standard transit stuff but there's a few tidbits worth highlighting. As a reminder...

we descended into the downtown transit tunnel, a 1.3-mile underground tube that opened in 1990 beneath Third Avenue to accommodate bus traffic. Nowadays, about 40 to 50 buses run in each direction during peak hours,

Obviously having a tunnel for transit helps to move buses quickly.

Laura's visit to Seattle was aided by Carol Cooper, a King County transportation planner.
This is most interesting.

“I think 85 percent of riders are ‘choice’ riders,” Cooper said, citing a 2016 survey that found only one out of 10 riders rely on Metro for all or most of their transportation needs and do not have access to a vehicle. “They don’t have to ride the bus. It’s not a transit-dependent-only system, which is what you find in a lot of places.”

So 85% of Seattle bus riders are by 'choice.' That's impressive.

another key thing a city needs to avoid a transit death spiral: money

Yes, ofc but how specifically does this get people to ride buses?

King County Metro has been systematically upgrading bus fleet and shelters: It promises a fully electric-powered fleet by 2034.

What else?

“We pay attention to cleaning our buses, to having security cameras on every bus on the fleet, to making them pleasant,” said Bill Bryant... “People expect more these days in terms of customer service. And that includes transit.”

So you've created a competitive, appealing product and service then.
What about ride-sharing?

Play offense by building a transit system that people actually want to ride.

Makes sense to me; the little things can add up to Big Appeal.

Seattle has built something remarkable, and much of it quickly: a bus system that people choose to take.

In summation then...

Borrowing a phrase from the transit consultant and writer Jarrett Walker, Watkins sums up why Seattle’s frequent, well-maintained, and funded buses are working as well as they do. “Transit has to respect me,” she said. In turn, by and large, Seattle riders are respecting it back.

The End

To be continued...

[TakeFive]

Comparing Denver to Seattle - especially downtowns

mhays has mentioned the challenge with nearby bodies of water etc. Wikipedia describes downtown Seattle as being confined:

Downtown is the central business district of Seattle, Washington. It is fairly compact compared with other city centers... because of its geographical situation. It is hemmed in on the north and east by hills, on the west by Elliott Bay, and on the south by reclaimed land that was once tidal flats.

City Populations:
Interestingly both cities have a population of about 700,000 with Denver being a little less than that while Seattle is a little higher. But there are some significant differences.

According to the Downtown Denver Partnership downtown Denver now has a workforce of 130,000 and growing. According to the Downtown Seattle Association their downtown now has a workforce approaching 300,000. With 2.3 times the number of jobs as Denver is it any wonder Seattle has a more acute need for good transit? The entire city of Seattle reports a workforce now exceeding 580,000. That's a nice tax base to draw from. Consider Amazon's influence; according to the Seattle Times:

The company now employs about 40,000 employees in Seattle, up from 5,000 in 2010. Amazon now occupies more office space than the next 40 biggest employers in the city combined.

BTW, Microsoft which is NE of downtown Seattle in Redmond also has about 40.000 employees. They have plans to add 18 new building to their 125 building campus.

Eh, this isn't about Denver trying to be like Seattle.

Afterall is there anything more beautiful than Denver with a fresh blanket of snow?


Photo credit: David Zalubowski / AP via NBC News

[mhays]

Amazon is the #2 office space renter/user in the region. Microsoft is larger, actually fitting more than 50,000 I've heard, including contract employees. I'm glad you noted MS...so many news outlets misinterpret the x40 thing.

Downtown Seattle covers an expansive area depending on what you consider "downtown." Even a fairly tight description has the main office tower cluster growing substantially northward where geography isn't in the way. A larger description is at least a few square miles including Belltown, Lower Queen Anne, South Lake Union, the denser parts of Capitol Hill, First Hill, the ID, and Pioneer Square. Just like anywhere else including Denver.

[PLANSIT]

Originally Posted by SnyderBock

Denver is 77% really pale white? I always seem to have a tan here from all the sunshine and outdoor activities. Also, does 77%+31%+11% = 100%? 😜

Hispanic is defined as an Ethnicity and not a Race. And TakeFive's assumption that Denver is 77% pale white is incorrect. Denver is 77% white based on Race. Based on Ethnicity, Denver is significantly less white.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by PLANSIT

Hispanic is defined as an Ethnicity and not a Race. And TakeFive's assumption that Denver is 77% pale white is incorrect. Denver is 77% white based on Race. Based on Ethnicity, Denver is significantly less white.

That's good clarification. Thanks

While a bit tongue-in-cheek I was only reporting what is printed. Not sure who determines demographic info although I assume it's based on census data.

Originally Posted by mhays

Amazon is the #2 office space renter/user in the region. Microsoft is larger, actually fitting more than 50,000 I've heard, including contract employees. I'm glad you noted MS...so many news outlets misinterpret the x40 thing.

Downtown Seattle covers an expansive area depending on what you consider "downtown." Even a fairly tight description has the main office tower cluster growing substantially northward where geography isn't in the way. A larger description is at least a few square miles including Belltown, Lower Queen Anne, South Lake Union, the denser parts of Capitol Hill, First Hill, the ID, and Pioneer Square. Just like anywhere else including Denver.

Good clarification; I was suspect of the rather arbitrary description of downtown in Wikipedia. I figured including So Lake Union made sense.