DENVER | Transportation Thread - Page 387

denconyny · #**7721** Posted **Oct 31, 2014, 7:35 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by TakeFive

1)

Whether RTD trying to be all things to all interested parties is a good idea or not, is a good question.

That and the fact that (to the best of my knowledge) RTD is having to cobble together funds to get even what they've proposed done. Whether it would be better to wait a decade to see if more funds could be found is a different question.

When the question is Denver (or in this case, Denver and Aurora), maybe it would be best that Denver have it's own RTD (or something of an inner city transportation department) and this governmental body would be able to make decisions best for The City and County of Denver (or whoever else would want to cooperate with them, as the above case it would be Aurora)?

Of course, if Repugs are elected, then no chance for this as they would claim it duplicitous and a waste of taxpayer dollars and another government agency - ya-di-da-di-da..... but the best way I think for Denver to get public transportation within the city proper would be it's own agency, with its own agenda, planning and funding, and maybe some neat things could start to happen.

As of now, RTD (REGIONAL Transportation District) is just that and has to be concerned with just that, the REGION. And within Denver City and County proper, this itself is certainly not the REGION.

RyanD · #**7722** Posted **Oct 31, 2014, 7:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DenverRider2

The bizarre thing was that he even acknowledged median lanes would be a better design and solve some of the problems such as parking, but then dismissed it out of hand because it wouldn't bring as much economic benefit. Weird.

Was there a median alternative in the original study? I don't remember.

TakeFive · #**7723** Posted **Oct 31, 2014, 9:43 PM**

I never cease to be amazed over politics: either the silliness or the deception and yes it can come from either side.

To be upfront I am a center/left guy but I would also say that that I'm socially tolerant but lean to being fiscally conservative. I say lean because to be fair being fiscally conservative can mean and be defined differently by different people. I sometimes look at an issue and think the "parties" seem to have flipped the script on this one.

The DBJ is carrying the arguments from each side on the transportation debate. Tom Norton takes the Republican argument HERE while Don Hunt relates the Dem view HERE. Many pages ago I offered up a realistic and legitimate idea (IMO) that I suggested should be decide by the voters.

The Republican argument seems long on hope and assumptions that what was the case 15 years ago should necessarily be the case today despite dramatically different circumstances. The Dem case come across (to me) as credible and realistic. Nowhere in the Republican view are the Dem points even addressed or refuted. Reading Don Hunt's position certainly gave me a lot of insight that I didn't previously have.

Personally I believe being candid and upfront with voters is to be fiscally conservative. Smoke and mirrors? Forgetaboutit.

wong21fr · #**7724** Posted **Oct 31, 2014, 10:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by TakeFive

[SIZE="3"]The Republican argument seems long on hope and assumptions that what was the case 15 years ago should necessarily be the case today despite dramatically different circumstances. The Dem case come across (to me) as credible and realistic. Nowhere in the Republican view are the Dem points even addressed or refuted. Reading Don Hunt's position certainly gave me a lot of insight that I didn't previously have.

Shhhhh, don't question the business acumen of a candidate who made his millions by selling the family farm instead of creating something new. Beauprez's idea to refinance transportation bonds didn't seem to make a lot of sense previously, and the more I read about the proposal the less sense it makes. Colorado would get a quick infusion of cash for capital improvements at the expense of the transportation maintenance budget that's already been severely compromised over the last six years and cannot meet certain obligations. Instead of making the hard decision on reallocating revenues to transportation from schools (already horribly underfunded, especially higher education) or prisons, or seeking new revenues, Beauprez is proposing kicking the can down the road for another few years while our structural financing crisis grows worse.

Leadership at it's finest and what I've come to expect from today's GOP when it comes to being fiscally conservative: you can have increased funding w/o paying for it because, well, magic!

DenverRider2 · #**7725** Posted **Nov 1, 2014, 10:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by RyanD

Was there a median alternative in the original study? I don't remember.

I found this slide- http://www.denvergov.org/Portals/736...ss-Section.pdf

But I couldn't find any analysis comparing median to side lanes.

DenverRider2 · #**7726** Posted **Nov 2, 2014, 10:50 PM**

I don't think this has been discussed here- http://bike5280.org/2014/10/enhanced-bikeways/

Have at it, haters

bunt_q · #**7727** Posted **Nov 3, 2014, 12:24 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DenverRider2

I don't think this has been discussed here- http://bike5280.org/2014/10/enhanced-bikeways/

Have at it, haters

Well at least we're widening I-70...

TakeFive · #**7728** Posted **Nov 3, 2014, 11:50 PM**

Whoa... What a turnout

"400 Participate in Business Networking Event On I-70 East, C-470 Projects"
held at the Colorado Convention Center October 22nd per connect2DOT

Quote:

“We were surprised at the enthusiasm the business community showed for these projects, even though they’re still in the early stages of development,” said CDOT Executive Director Don Hunt. “Participants recognized that the improvements planned for C-470 and I-70 East will change the face of transportation in the Denver metro area – and that they are excellent opportunities for both large and small businesses.”

The Denver Metro area will be in decent freeway shape by the time CDOT completes the I-70 rebuild through Denver, the addition of toll lanes to C-470 on top of the ongoing US 6/Federal/I-25 improvements and the US 36 rebuild and Express Lanes project.

Cirrus · #**7729** Posted **Nov 4, 2014, 7:41 PM**

photo from RTD via Flickr

RyanD · #**7730** Posted **Nov 4, 2014, 7:50 PM**

Mmmmmm I love me some real trains. They better have real door chimes on them or else....

Scottk · #**7731** Posted **Nov 4, 2014, 8:19 PM**

it would be nice if RTD doesnt plaster these trains with shitty advertisements like they have done with the light rail

bcp · #**7732** Posted **Nov 4, 2014, 8:42 PM**

would you like higher fares, or the pain of looking at (or not looking at) advertising?

bunt_q · #**7733** Posted **Nov 4, 2014, 10:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bcp

would you like higher fares, or the pain of looking at (or not looking at) advertising?

I would like higher taxes, personally.

wong21fr · #**7734** Posted **Nov 4, 2014, 10:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bunt_q

I would like higher taxes, personally.

Instead, you get tax refunds and the promise of a future tax cut. Gotta love Colorado's "fiscal conservatism".

bunt_q · #**7735** Posted **Nov 5, 2014, 1:09 AM**

That's why I'm not particularly wedded to the Colorado Democratic Party. They are Democrats on social issues, whereas I would like to see more fiscal populism. I couldn't care less about social issues, to the issues I care about, there's not a whole lot of difference between Hick and Bob.

bcp · #**7736** Posted **Nov 5, 2014, 5:43 AM**

fiscal populism is the scariest thing i've heard in a long, long time

bunt_q · #**7737** Posted **Nov 5, 2014, 3:47 PM**

Oh come on, you like your government "stuff" just as much as the next good American, you're just on the side that doesn't think they should have to pay for it.

TakeFive · #**7738** Posted **Nov 5, 2014, 4:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Oh come on, you like your government "stuff" just as much as the next good American, you're just on the side that doesn't think they should have to pay for it.

Tired Talking Point.

So you're saying one side doesn't "think they should have to pay" but the other side thinks they should (and you say that with a straight face)?

wong21fr · #**7739** Posted **Nov 5, 2014, 5:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Oh come on, you like your government "stuff" just as much as the next good American, you're just on the side that doesn't think they should have to pay for it.

Isn't that fiscal populism? Promising the moon and not having to pay for it?

BTW, if the control of both of the State Chambers flips what's the first thing that they'll do? Tax cuts for all or full repeal of the new gun laws?

bcp · #**7740** Posted **Nov 5, 2014, 5:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Oh come on, you like your government "stuff" just as much as the next good American, you're just on the side that doesn't think they should have to pay for it.

I can read through the lines / smiley that it's mostly in jest ...that said, aboslutely i like gov 'stuff' ...just not the tax rates, waste, debt and abuse of the word "fair"