DENVER | Transportation Thread

[Zmapper]

Fun fact: RTD was actually one of the first agencies in the country to have a Nextbus system accessible to the public on their website. The problem was that early-aughts GPS units were not very reliable and produced wierd outputs like buses in buildings or rivers or the like; a dispatcher with daily work experience would be able to translate "if a bus shows up in the Quest building, that means it is actually at 17th and Stout," but customers tended to freak out and inundate RTD with calls.

Look through early-aughts archived versions of RTD schedules to see proof: http://web.archive.org/web/*/rtd-denver.com

[Cirrus]

Boulder's HOP has NextBus (link). Why we can manage NextBus on only the HOP, but nothing else (not even the SKIP), I would not even hazard to guess.

[Cirrus]

PS: WTF is up with those half hour headways I see on the HOP, looking at it on NextBus? What happened to 15 minute headways?

[mr1138]

According to Boulder's website, the Hop is actually operated by Via Mobility Services rather than RTD. Might this make the difference?

I'm not sure what's up with those headways... though the counter-clockwise route appears to still be on 15 minute headways. Maybe just a time-of-the-day thing?

[Cirrus]

Yes, if Boulder contracts out operations of the HOP then that would make a difference. And I'm not surprised in the least that they do. But I am surprised, if they're contracting out the HOP, that they wouldn't also be contracting out the SKIP, JUMP, etc.

[mr1138]

I could ask around a bit and find out exactly why this is. I know that The Hop was the prototype for the other local shuttles and has its funding approved separately. At city council meetings recently there has been discussion about how it is about time to replace the Hop fleet. One council member keeps asking if the city could "buy out the fare box" and make it a free service. Others want more "trolly-like" buses. I'm not sure how feasible any of that is, but it definitely makes it sound like that service is treated differently from the other branded buses in town.

[bunt_q]

The HOP has been contracted separately forever, even going back to our days.

Not sure about headways though. I'm still mad that 29th Street is such a garbage project. My love for the HOP went down with Crossroads.

[Cirrus]

Originally Posted by mr1138

Others want more "trolly-like" buses.

Please god no.

If you want little children to think of transit as a ride, to use when they want to have fun but not when they want to actually get anywhere, then use faux trolleys. If you want college students and adults to ride a bus for actual transportation purposes, give them something with a little more dignity.

They're no different from these:

dan mills on flickr


OTOH, if they mean trolleybuses like in Seattle then I could get on board with that. But something tells me overhead wires is not what Boulder has in mind.

[mr1138]

Yeah, a little Googling reveals that Via Mobility Services (a separate non-profit, formerly "Special Transit") actually owns the fleet. It could be that the success of the Hop spurred RTD to want to participate with the other commuter shuttles that followed. I was in elementary school when the Hop debuted, so I don't exactly remember how it all went down. The first one that really caught my attention was the Skip.

I remember when Crossroads was the northeastern terminus for the Hop. I'd imagine they may be planning change this to be at the new Boulder Junction station. I think most everyone in Boulder agrees with you that Twenty-Ninth is a garbage project too!!

Edit:

Originally Posted by Cirrus

Please god no.

I totally agree! If Boulder wants a "trolly" then it should start talking about an actual modern streetcar (not going to happen right now though). I definitely think this idea is cheesy!! Just reporting what has been coming out of the council chamber recently though!

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by mr1138

I was in elementary school when the Hop debuted, so I don't exactly remember how it all went down.

Feeling old now Cirrus?

[Cirrus]

That was 1994. You and I were in middle school.

I mean, yes, but not because of that. I feel old because Home Alone and Back to the Future Part 3 were 25 years ago.

[mr1138]

Judging by when you guys have mentioned you were at CU I didn't think you were THAT far ahead of me. Glad to know I'm not that much of a baby. lol. I've been following this forum for over 10 years now myself! ;-) Hell... it's even making me feel old that Home Alone is 25yo.

I was in middle school myself when the Skip started running and I remember it was pretty big news around Boulder. Our neighborhood organized ecopasses as a result. I thought it was pretty cool for about 3-4 years until I started driving and realized how much faster that was. Apparently headways have increased since then though. 15mins off peak rather than the 30 that I remember.

[CharlesCO]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

OTOH, if they mean trolleybuses like in Seattle then I could get on board with that. But something tells me overhead wires is not what Boulder has in mind.

I love riding those here and don't even find the wires obtrusive, though I don't think there would be any reason any bus in a mostly flat part of Colorado would switch to a trolleybus, unless if whoever's running them gets the electricity for free like Muni does.

[Cirrus]

I like overhead wires because they provide some of that sense of permanence and added "specialness" that you get with rail. Not all of it, but some.

Of course, no new BRT line anywhere in America has thus far used wires, because nobody really means it when they say "rail-like."

[seventwenty]

nvm wrong forum

[seventwenty]

DBJ reporting that's both the Democratic and Republican road funding bills are dead. And that's the session folks.

Can't link to the story b/c link is timing out.

[Cirrus]

RTD via flickr


RTD via flickr

[TakeFive]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
i.imgur.com


Go Get em Gov.

"Hickenlooper vows to continue fighting for hospital-fee road-funding plan"
May 7, 2017 by Ed Sealover, Denver Business Journal

If the amounts of those refunds exceed 3 percent of the state’s $10.25 billion general-fund budget, that will stop some $210 million a year from being transferred from the general fund to the Highway Users Trust Fund

Taking my case to the people.

...he hopes to pitch a wider swath of Coloradans on the need for it at town-hall meetings this summer and fall.

And just 90 minutes after explaining his plan to members of the media on Thursday, the governor made his first pitch — to about 525 people gathered at the Hyatt Regency Denver at Colorado Convention Center for the Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce’s annual State of the State event.

While the Dems own the anti-growth construction defects silliness the Republicans own the anti-growth vital road construction funding silliness.

[bunt_q]

It wouldn't have made any difference in the road construction funding this year - it wasn't intended to increase 228 funding until next fiscal year. So theoretically, it could be done in the next legislative session with no impact.

That said - a solution (pushing hospital provider fees to an enterprise) that would likely eliminate TABOR refunds for the next 30 years is never going to get traction with the Republicans. There are other ways to adjust revenues to not trigger the 228 reductions that would be far less permanent.

That said, those hospital fee revenues should be in an enterprise, the bill should pass. But it won't. It was a HUGE oversight in the original bill; if an enterprise had been established then it would've even have been controversial. But now you've got a huge pot of revenue counting against the TABOR limits - basically, a permanent and growing contribution to the revenue cap that'll squeeze spending. Why would Republicans give that up? A more likely solution - and one that I am fine with - is reduction in the hospital provider fee. It's a pre-Obamacare program, and frankly, we give enough damn money to hospitals as it is, for Medicaid or otherwise. Eliminate that and we'd have our road money. The governor knew that would never pass, it was just an end of session hail mary.

Just my personal opinions, of course.

[TakeFive]

For the purpose of public consumption, Kelly Brough, president and CEO of the Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce, was the one who floated the "enterprise fund" concept.

The hospital provider fee is a gimmick but it's the best thing since sliced bread. Per the DBJ.

That fee brings in roughly $600 million per year that is counted against the TABOR cap and uses it to secure a 2-to-1 match in federal funding that provides another $1.2 billion for the state that doesn’t count against the cap.

In essence hospitals pay/invest $1 and get $3 back. Cumulatively there's $600 million in provider fees for which the state gets $1.2 billion from the Feds per year. The $1.8 billion then goes back to hospitals etc. for services rendered. It's wonderful support of the medical system for care that would be given anyway.

Understand that medicaid patients get nothing; the money goes for services rendered to providers.

States like Texas and Florida eschew this because they get $billions via an "uninsured fund" from the Feds. As their contracts expire, like Florida's, they are being 'threatened' with less uninsured dollars as encouragement to expand their Medicaid systems.

In theory at least, the out-of-control growth in medical costs can be better controlled if everyone is a part of the system for economies of scale and other efficiencies. Sending states a big blank check with no accountability has not been the best solution.