DENVER | Transportation Thread

[lumos]

I read with encouragement that RTD is going to introduce a contactless payment card (as used around the world and in North Korea since 2008). I am a little concerned that this represents "skating to where the puck has just left" as people are now replacing these cards with either NFC credit cards (e.g. the Oyster card in London is being replaced with your credit or debit cards, all of which are contactless) or payment systems such as Apple Pay. Already 46% of iPhone users have set up and have used Apple Pay, with 63% of those using it on a weekly basis.

I am optimistic, however, that the readers being installed will support all the new payment methods. Studies strongly support the notion that these payment methods drive an increase in usage.

[bobg]

Originally Posted by lumos

I read with encouragement that RTD is going to introduce a contactless payment card (as used around the world and in North Korea since 2008). I am a little concerned that this represents "skating to where the puck has just left" as people are now replacing these cards with either NFC credit cards (e.g. the Oyster card in London is being replaced with your credit or debit cards, all of which are contactless) or payment systems such as Apple Pay. Already 46% of iPhone users have set up and have used Apple Pay, with 63% of those using it on a weekly basis.

I am optimistic, however, that the readers being installed will support all the new payment methods. Studies strongly support the notion that these payment methods drive an increase in usage.

The cards/readers are using the same hardware that would allow for that sort of communication. However, given how Xerox has largely botched this smartcard implementation over the past several years my guess is that the software is incompatible with NFC/EMV credit cards or cell phones, and given Xerox didn't even spec out sufficient storage for smartcard stored value data (one of the delays that cost a year) I would guess the storage space is likely still insufficient to handle additional forms of payment. Also knowing RTD they probably did not include additional forms of payment in the scope of the project. I could be wrong though, but given RTD's recent tech history I choose to be pessimistic until proven otherwise.

[mishko27]

Originally Posted by bobg

The cards/readers are using the same hardware that would allow for that sort of communication. However, given how Xerox has largely botched this smartcard implementation over the past several years my guess is that the software is incompatible with NFC/EMV credit cards or cell phones, and given Xerox didn't even spec out sufficient storage for smartcard stored value data (one of the delays that cost a year) I would guess the storage space is likely still insufficient to handle additional forms of payment. Also knowing RTD they probably did not include additional forms of payment in the scope of the project. I could be wrong though, but given RTD's recent tech history I choose to be pessimistic until proven otherwise.

Wait, is Xerox gonna do it for RTD? Why not Octopus Cards (From Hong Kong, read up on integration of Octopus into their society, it's friggin amazing. I loved it when I lived there, everyone uses it and now it's on NFC phones as well, so they have the technology)

[bobg]

Originally Posted by mishko27

Wait, is Xerox gonna do it for RTD? Why not Octopus Cards (From Hong Kong, read up on integration of Octopus into their society, it's friggin amazing. I loved it when I lived there, everyone uses it and now it's on NFC phones as well, so they have the technology)

Xerox has been working on smartcards for RTD since 2010. They got the eco/college/monthly/etc. passes going close to on schedule but ran into issues on stored valued cards that were initially supposed to be available a few years ago. There's numerous transit agencies and contractors throughout the world RTD could have looked at that have done this type of card reader without running into these exessive delays. I am not familiar with why xerox was chosen by RTD back then.

[bunt_q]

I'm less interested in why they were chosen than why their contract hasn't been terminated.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

I'm less interested in why they were chosen than why their contract hasn't been terminated.

I've wondered the same.

Just did a generic search of Xerox transit and quickly found THIS. ACS or Affiliated Computer Services which Xerox bought and eventually renamed Xerox Services was into a number of gov't payment programs from medicaid, food stamps etc. as well as transit.

RTD was willing to go with a start-up bus maker from Carolina for new mall buses but here they went with with an old guard company whose tech was lagging, glitchy and hard to implement.

This is an area where the tech has been changing rapidly but still....

[Zmapper]

I've seen Xerox advertize their involvement in "transit fares" on TV (it's this commercial). Perhaps they shouldn't be so giddy to promote their failures yet.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by Zmapper

I've seen Xerox advertize their involvement in "transit fares" on TV (it's this commercial). Perhaps they shouldn't be so giddy to promote their failures yet.

Seems like Xerox is heavily involved in processing transit fares with projects in Melbourne, Hong Kong (as a contractor offering Octopus Card readers), Adelaide, Kuala Lumpur, etc. All are contact-less pay systems at the least.

So how did the Denver roll-out get so f**ked up? RTD's scope?

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

It's a great project, they don't get a whole lot more complicated!

Just curious, do you consult or check with how other states have done their contracts. FDOT, for example, has recently started reconstruction on the I-4 in Orlando. It's virtually the same as what CDOT is proposing.


A May 7, 2015 article Posted by Michael Russell at T4America Blog discusses the clusterflub in Michigan.
"Michigan ballot measure to raise transportation & education funds goes down by a large margin"

A Michigan bill that would have raised new money and overhauled how the state pays for transportation was defeated by huge margin Tuesday with 80 percent of voters rejecting the complicated proposal.

LOL, but this proposal was not only complicated it was convoluted raising a whole smorgasbord of taxes and fees. The article goes on to state:

... it reinforces the same lesson we’ve shared here regularly: transportation-related ballot measures have the best chance of passage when they are simple, specific and transparent about the money that will be raised and exactly where and how it will be spent. Voters have proven over and over again that they’ll support transportation ballot measures — if they meet some of those basic qualifications.

At least one group in Michigan has this down. Their KISS proposal is to raise tax on grass, not gas. The theme of their proposal is "Pot for Potholes."

I had mixed feelings with U.S. 36 initially but it did enable CDOT to rebuild the highway all the way to Boulder instead of just half way so in the end it's worth it. The I-70 east rebuild is easily justifiable since it's an expensive, vital, needed project. C-470 makes sense as it's not even a Federal highway and isn't that expensive as there's not that many miles involved.

But for the rest of the Interstate Highway system I'm less than enthusiastic about tolling those. Is the state/city/county going to start tolling Main Street next?

I still believe that if rather than imposing taxes, the legislature would take a dime a gallon increase to voters with a clear road map of what it would accomplish there's a high probability that voters would approve. At the least, voters should have the right, the opportunity to decide for themselves what they want, or not.

[TakeFive]

How cool is this?

Dan McNichol and Eileen Cho with Mrs. Martin per Fastracks

Mrs. Martin paid a visit to Denver Monday, June 1. Award-winning author and journalist Dan McNichol, Ph.D. and reporter Eileen Cho are making a road trip in Mrs. Martin that began May 11 in Boston.

The pair are traveling in McNichol's 1949 Hudson Commodore 8. They're making the cross-country trip to raise awareness about the role of public works in maintaining the crumbling infrastructure in America.

LINK

[DenvertoLA]

Originally Posted by RyanD

You mean... There won't be grey in my beard before this happens? I'll believe it when I see it.

Of course... I don't really care. I have an EcoPass.

I've always wondered why RTD has such a complicated and high priced ticket system.

Don't most places have a flat fee to board? No zones or complications. The Subway in LA is $1.50 to ride and cheaper if you guy a monthly pass. Super simple.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by DenvertoLA

I've always wondered why RTD has such a complicated and high priced ticket system.

Probably because they have to pay the bills. Tax revenue is relatively fixed. After that, it's a trade-off between service levels and fares.

Originally Posted by DenvertoLA

Don't most places have a flat fee to board? No zones or complications.

Not really, no. Most places have some sort of distance-based fare, often station-specific. Flat fares, while certainly the easiest, are surely the minority.

[DownhomeDenver]

Hey bunt, I got a question for you relating to the I-70 project. You are working on that project I believe?? So are there any plans to improve 270 with this project? The last time I went to a community meeting, a rep from CDOT told me that the state would do needed improvements to 270 to meet the demand of traffic from closed lanes on I-70, etc. Do you know if that's true and what improvements would be made? Thanks!

[COtoOC]

Originally Posted by DownhomeDenver

Hey bunt, I got a question for you relating to the I-70 project. You are working on that project I believe?? So are there any plans to improve 270 with this project? The last time I went to a community meeting, a rep from CDOT told me that the state would do needed improvements to 270 to meet the demand of traffic from closed lanes on I-70, etc. Do you know if that's true and what improvements would be made? Thanks!

What I can't figure out is, how are they going to keep the freeway open while they tear down the viaduct and put it below grade? And how does the stockshow complex stay there? It doesn't look like there's enough space without tearing out part of it. Will they build a temporary freeway to the north during construction?

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by COtoOC

What I can't figure out is, how are they going to keep the freeway open while they tear down the viaduct and put it below grade? And how does the stockshow complex stay there? It doesn't look like there's enough space without tearing out part of it. Will they build a temporary freeway to the north during construction?

I-70 wouldn't go below grade until after Brighton Blvd and approaching the Union Pacific Tracks. The viaduct portion of I-70 that is by the Stock Show would remain and, I believe, is already sized for the 10-lane expansion of I-70. As for building the sub-grade portion, they might approach it like the Big Dig where they existing viaduct was kept operational until the new highway was completed.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by DownhomeDenver

Hey bunt, I got a question for you relating to the I-70 project. You are working on that project I believe?? So are there any plans to improve 270 with this project? The last time I went to a community meeting, a rep from CDOT told me that the state would do needed improvements to 270 to meet the demand of traffic from closed lanes on I-70, etc. Do you know if that's true and what improvements would be made? Thanks!

I confess I do not know the answer to this question. I am not aware of any planned improvements to 270 within the project scope, but you know as much as I do on specific mitigation measures (I do not see anything in the EIS). There aren't really supposed to be any peak hour lane closures.

Originally Posted by COtoOC

What I can't figure out is, how are they going to keep the freeway open while they tear down the viaduct and put it below grade? And how does the stockshow complex stay there? It doesn't look like there's enough space without tearing out part of it. Will they build a temporary freeway to the north during construction?

They'll build part of the new trenched freeway - not to its full cross section - first, then demo the viaduct, then build the rest of the cross section, would be my guess. Although the private teams will have a lot of discretion on that, so maybe they come up with something more creative.

Lots of changes planned at the stock show, but none of them really driven by the I-70 project.

[bcp]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Probably because they have to pay the bills. Tax revenue is relatively fixed. After that, it's a trade-off between service levels and fares.


Not really, no. Most places have some sort of distance-based fare, often station-specific. Flat fares, while certainly the easiest, are surely the minority.

there are "most" and then there are "most effective" and "most popular"....LA, NYC, Chicago, SF Muni, Vancouver, Montreal, Toronto - all flate fare.

I think DC is the outlier as a distance based system that is also effective and popular, and that's because they have such a simple ticket system (to me anyhow) and granular price changes (unlike RTD). And shouldn't we be using pricing and system design to encourage as much riding as possible?


I don't know what it is about RTD..of course they need to maximize box collections, but it *feels* like they are going for a "higher cost less riders" strategy rather than a "lower cost more riders" approach - end of the day the revenue could be the same, but could RTD handle it?

[bunt_q]

RTD's ridership has historically been constrained by parking (and commuter demand). I'm sure they've looked at demand elasticity, and I'd be shocked if lowering fares had anything but a negative impact on farebox revenues. I just don't buy that cutting fares - even dramatically - would have any significant ridership impact. Our system just doesn't serve that market.

[DownhomeDenver]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

I confess I do not know the answer to this question. I am not aware of any planned improvements to 270 within the project scope, but you know as much as I do on specific mitigation measures (I do not see anything in the EIS). There aren't really supposed to be any peak hour lane closures.

Great thanks Bunt. I wish I remembered the dudes name. I guess it's not important and since you don't see anything on the EIS, maybe he was just blowing smoke up my ass. I was cruising through those hoods recently and I noticed a bunch of homes boarded up and fenced off in areas very close to the highway or in areas where I would assume the highway/feeder lanes/service roads would cross. Perhaps ROW is already being purchased.

[COtoOC]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

I-70 wouldn't go below grade until after Brighton Blvd and approaching the Union Pacific Tracks. The viaduct portion of I-70 that is by the Stock Show would remain and, I believe, is already sized for the 10-lane expansion of I-70. As for building the sub-grade portion, they might approach it like the Big Dig where they existing viaduct was kept operational until the new highway was completed.

Thanks for the explanation! Yeah, there is a newer section that's wide on the approach to the Mousetrap.