DENVER | Main Development Thread #7

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by SirLucasTheGreat

I'm interested to see how the Boring project turns out in Las Vegas. Maybe that might help catalyze underground transportation in Denver. I'm quite ignorant on the economics and engineering of underground tunnels systems. I've always just assumed that it would be impossibly expensive unless our city center had triple its current residential density

Going from memory, partly....

Few years ago Seattle built a new tunnel; it cost ~$650 million per mile. Per Wikipedia:

The University Link tunnel is a 3.15-mile (5.07 km) light rail tunnel in Seattle, Washington. The twin-bore tunnel carries Link Light Rail service on the University Link Extension of Central Link (now Line 1), running from the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel to University of Washington station via Capitol Hill station.

In this case it was totally worth it as within a year or so their ridership on the line (extended) virtually doubled.

As a baseline RTD has built 113 miles of light & commuter rail; the FasTracks projects cost ~$70 million per mile. The current 5-mile extension in Phoenix will be ~$182 million per mile which is likely the best case. IIRC Austin is estimating about $225 million per mile for their light rail. FasTracks cost ~$5.7 billion; it you were to start out today at $210 million per mile, it would cost 3X as much or over $17 billion - just for the FasTracks projects.

In 1990 Seattle opened a below grade bus hub station not unlike the bus terminal at DUS. It essentially served commuter routes from wherever as does the DUS terminal. Afiak, the buses have now been kicked out of this hub as they will use this for their ongoing light rail projects.

IIRC, Austin has projected and allocated $2 billion for a 1 to 1.5 mile subway segment downtown.

Note: Per mile costs are an imperfect comparison but the best I've found. Costs will vary depending on the degree of difficulty (obviously).

Subways aren't necessarily faster; it takes time to go from street level to the subway station and back up. Their biggest benefit is they don't conflict with street-level traffic etc so there is some time saving en-route.

[mhays]

Well...

Seattle built a five-station bus tunnel through Downtown in 1990. That was converted to dual bus/rail use in 2009, and became rail-only in 2019, with four stations retained (the 5th site is UC as NA's most vertically-stacked convention center). My dates are IIRC. The point was single-seat rides, a different concept from Denver's single node. This tunnel was especially disruptive to build because the stations each have two platforms and three lanes, which meant digging under the entire ROW.

Our rail is really expensive, particularly the tunnel parts. But there are multiple types of tunnel, and I suspect some of our cost was the type. The line from Downtown to Husky Stadium went under a major hill then under a navigable waterway. The two stations are both pretty deep.

Now we're looking at a third rail tunnel through Downtown, which will be interesting. The first, btw, was a hand-mined tunnel a century ago that handles Amtrak, commuter rail, and freight.

[jhwk]

Originally Posted by SirLucasTheGreat

I'm interested to see how the Boring project turns out in Las Vegas. Maybe that might help catalyze underground transportation in Denver. I'm quite ignorant on the economics and engineering of underground tunnels systems. I've always just assumed that it would be impossibly expensive unless our city center had triple its current residential density

Here is a great blog by a researcher on transit costs: https://pedestrianobservations.com/

TL;DR: for various reasons, tunneling costs in the US are significantly higher than elsewhere in the world. If we could get costs under control, even in line with the highest-cost European countries, tunnel projects would be far more viable.

I happen to think that even with the high costs a 4-track trunk tunnel from I-25 & Broadway to Civic Center, then from Civic Center to Union Station would be worth building and could be built for a second Fastracks price. Except for the Union Station end, the entire thing could be built with cut & cover if Denver was willing to put up with a few years of street disruption. That would allow the suburban rail system to be converted to a true thru-running S-Bahn system.

Also - the Boring Project tunnel is a useless publicity stunt. Elon Musk bought a used sewer tunnel boring machine and then put a string of Tesla cars in a tiny tunnel. It wouldn’t scale to the level of mass transit.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by rds70

I think the site is an “L” around the 955 Bannock building.

Thanks for that clarification. I think I might see that from the rendering now.

[SirLucasTheGreat]

That's very informative. I think that I-25 and Broadway connection to Civic Center Station would be huge given the transfers and future development at the Gates District

[gopokes21]

Originally Posted by SirLucasTheGreat

I'm interested to see how the Boring project turns out in Las Vegas. Maybe that might help catalyze underground transportation in Denver. I'm quite ignorant on the economics and engineering of underground tunnels systems. I've always just assumed that it would be impossibly expensive unless our city center had triple its current residential density

"Greater Downtown Denver" if you will (Downtown + Five Points + Cap Hill) has 88,000 residents. Cap Hill especially is denser than most lifelong locals would ever imagine. Denver isn't a small or even medium-sized city anymore. 88,000 in Greater Downtown is like 2/3 the population of the Chicago Loop + Near North. I actually can't think of many other city cores that ARE as densely populated as Denver. One of the surest signs that we've become a thoroughly urban market are all of the downtown grocery stores - Underground King Soopers, Nice King Soopers, Whole Foods, Target, Trader Joe's, that local market 16th/Glenarm, among others.

We have to get over this cowtown mentality that allows people to pretend it's still the same city when in fact no place has changed as much as Denver over the last decade.

https://www.downtowndenver.com/newsr...ving-downtown/

The reality about pussyfooting around the edges of infrastructure planning with another LRT or BRT is that we already have a dozen such lines and another won't change anything. We can spend $500 million on another glorified streetscape or double up our money and really change things.

The ironic thing about Denver is that our street grid is too good at moving traffic around central Denver. We really don't have traffic problems, but we do have a parking crisis in most central neighborhoods and one of the nation's ONLY worsening smog crises. You can't even see the mountains 12 miles away on any given work day. In fact, cars crammed everywhere and double-parked is probably the defining architectural feature of Denver rather than mission-style or post-modernism or whatever.

Part of the fatally-flawed institutional design of RTD includes gerrymander-style cracking and packing. All of Denver's dense eastside hoods are packed into District A which consolidates (thus minimizing) political will to serve these neighborhoods, while ensuring suburban control of RTD. We may just have to get rid of RTD to be quite honest, but it's also probably a good thing that RTD never even attempted to touch Cap Hill (unless you count the forever-forthcoming Colfax BRT, which will be a useless and expensive boondoggle). Can you imagine if something as clunky and inefficient as the Welton Line (L Line) was inserted into Cap Hill? So on the bright side, there is still an opportunity to get that right instead of just forcing whatever mode FTA really likes at the time.

Originally Posted by jhwk

Here is a great blog by a researcher on transit costs: https://pedestrianobservations.com/

TL;DR: for various reasons, tunneling costs in the US are significantly higher than elsewhere in the world. If we could get costs under control, even in line with the highest-cost European countries, tunnel projects would be far more viable.

I happen to think that even with the high costs a 4-track trunk tunnel from I-25 & Broadway to Civic Center, then from Civic Center to Union Station would be worth building and could be built for a second Fastracks price. Except for the Union Station end, the entire thing could be built with cut & cover if Denver was willing to put up with a few years of street disruption. That would allow the suburban rail system to be converted to a true thru-running S-Bahn system.

Also - the Boring Project tunnel is a useless publicity stunt. Elon Musk bought a used sewer tunnel boring machine and then put a string of Tesla cars in a tiny tunnel. It wouldn’t scale to the level of mass transit.

Great post, but I really think a subway line should compliment our existing network rather than duplicating it. Baker, Lincoln Park, and Auraria are already well-served by RTD rail. That's why I would shift a little to the east and directly serve Glendale, Cherry Creek, Cheesman, and Cap Hill en route between Colorado/25 and Civic Center. FastTracks built a world-class transit system for outer suburbs and industrial zoned areas of Denver, and that's fine in terms of economic development, but we really need to serve people where they are. There's also no way it would cost as much as FastTracks (6? 7 billion?) but maybe it could be bundled with the Boulder commuter rail and whatever else the suburbs are going to hold us hostage over.

[jhwk]

Originally Posted by gopokes21

Great post, but I really think a subway line should compliment our existing network rather than duplicating it. Baker, Lincoln Park, and Auraria are already well-served by RTD rail. That's why I would shift a little to the east and directly serve Glendale, Cherry Creek, Cheesman, and Cap Hill en route between Colorado/25 and Civic Center. FastTracks built a world-class transit system for outer suburbs and industrial zoned areas of Denver, and that's fine in terms of economic development, but we really need to serve people where they are. There's also no way it would cost as much as FastTracks (6? 7 billion?) but maybe it could be bundled with the Boulder commuter rail and whatever else the suburbs are going to hold us hostage over.

I do not agree that the suburban rail is world-class. The northern half works well as an S-Bahn (despite having too much single track and too many grade crossings) but the southern half is pretty poor. The street running dictates a poor level of service for the entire LRT system, but without it the rail wouldn’t effectively serve the CBD. The stub ends at Union Station, the split between the LRT and Commuter Rail, and the miserably slow routing just south of downtown could all be significantly improved. The LRT stations in the Baker/Lincoln Park are on the edge of an industrial area and only serve half-circle areas.

The existing ROW could be used for the Front Range Regional Rail - and a tunnel will sorely be needed for that due to the Union Station stub but it could be short if the existing freight-adjacent route is used.

My “phase 2” plan after the trunk subway would be four Denver-specific U-Bahn lines:
- Colfax to replace the 15/15L/16 busses
- Broadway replacing the 0 sharing the trunk tunnel but continuing on Broadway south of I-25
- Federal south of 6th, crossing Downtown to the northeast, then going east on Bruce Randolph
- A northwest/southeast line going from Tennyson to Highlands to Union Station to Civic Center to Cap Hill to Cherry Creek to Broadway I-25 (this would need to be a bored tunnel)

The line on Welton would be converted to a modern streetcar and extended into Auraria rather than the clunky light rail. The city has stated they want to do this anyway in several studies, but they don’t have money and RTD doesn’t want a third rail vehicle type.

[SirLucasTheGreat]

Interesting points about how much density is in Cap Hill and other downtown neighborhoods. Considering how much housing is being built in Golden Triangle, Arapahoe Square, RiNo, and eventually River Mile, I wonder what mobility around the urban neighborhoods will eventually look like. I know that ride-sharing and scooters go a long way but it seems that we are really not prepared for how many more people will live within 2-3 miles of the city center. I would love subways but RTD's bus system could be greatly improved in the meantime with real-time GPS monitors at bus stops like in San Francisco.

[Agent Orange]

Originally Posted by jhwk

I do not agree that the suburban rail is world-class. The northern half works well as an S-Bahn (despite having too much single track and too many grade crossings) but the southern half is pretty poor. The street running dictates a poor level of service for the entire LRT system, but without it the rail wouldn’t effectively serve the CBD. The stub ends at Union Station, the split between the LRT and Commuter Rail, and the miserably slow routing just south of downtown could all be significantly improved. The LRT stations in the Baker/Lincoln Park are on the edge of an industrial area and only serve half-circle areas.

Wish we had done EMU for the southern lines to begin with. We'd have a faster and more spaced out system, which would be more appropriate for the commuter purpose Fastracks was intended for. And we could have single seat rides instead of the laughable multi-block transfer made all the worse by our long headways. We could overlay that with a tram-train system (like many German cities' Stadtbahns) which could serve the city of Denver and go underground where needed. Tunnel between CC and US is necessary, at the very least.

I think the NW to SE line is the most important and the corridor I've long championed. One reality that I don't see Denver ever accepting is that adding real transit with underground sections to core city neighborhoods is really only justifiable with big upzoning. I don't see that going over well with this constituency, not to mention the present Council.

We should have built the proposed, perpendicular subway lines through downtown that were floated in the 1970s. Big missed opportunity.

[SirLucasTheGreat]

One major obstacle to an underground tunnel connecting Union Station to Civic Center Station is that Denver gets a substantial amount of its sales tax revenue from the 16th Street Mall. I feel like I've heard the mayor or someone else say that an underground system would risk taking a lot people off 16th street mall and would have a negative economic impact. My preference would be to have a subway connecting US and CC with a stop at 16th and California for LRT transfers. Then, get rid of the mall ride and make 16th 100% pedestrian.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by mhays

Seattle built a five-station bus tunnel through Downtown in 1990. That was converted to dual bus/rail use in 2009, and became rail-only in 2019, with four stations retained.

Thanks for the clarification in general and especially with this part; I (obviously) wasn't familiar with this one.

Originally Posted by jhwk

TL;DR: for various reasons, tunneling costs in the US are significantly higher than elsewhere in the world. If we could get costs under control, even in line with the highest-cost European countries, tunnel projects would be far more viable.

I lol when I read this stuff.

The biggest factor is that every special interest has insisted that analysis be done to address their concerns for this, that and everything under the sun. This can cause projects to be delayed a decade (not unusual). If costs go up 3.5% to 4% per year that's an additional 40% in costs. In addition, the raw costs for all the (un)necessary work and analysis adds another ~25%.

The comparable projects in that article started construction in the 1980's; you can't compare costs for such disparate time periods. Just follow the inflation for light rail. In 2001 the light rail portion of T-REX was $42 million per mile. FasTracks costs were $70 million per mile. Today costs are now 3X what FasTracks cost. It called the time value of money.

Originally Posted by gopokes21

and one of the nation's ONLY worsening smog crises. You can't even see the mountains 12 miles away on any given work day.

Denver is built in a Valley; many cities are; that's why I-25 was originally called the Valley Highway. Particulates gravitate to the valley from surrounding areas (kinda like how gravity works). Denver is hardly alone or even the worst case.

Originally Posted by gopokes21

(unless you count the forever-forthcoming Colfax BRT, which will be a useless and expensive boondoggle).

For decades East Colfax has been Denver's busiest bus corridor (not counting the 16th street mall) by a country mile. Haven't read all but I've read a lot of the analysis that has gone into planning the East Colfax BRT. It will move significantly more people through the corridor and makes eminent sense.

[TakeFive]

Now Renting



Images courtesy of Bespoke Uptown.com

Southern Land Company’s Bespoke Uptown Community Welcoming Residents
January 13, 2021 - Mile High CRE

Bespoke Uptown community at 17th and Pearl Streets in Denver, is now open to residents. Blending modern conveniences with historic neighborhood preservation, the development features 316 upscale apartments spread over 10 floors with over 12,000 square feet of ground-level commercial space.

Southern Land Company worked with Historic Denver to preserve two historic early-20th-century commercial structures that anchor the development on 17th Avenue and will continue to serve as retail space. Maintaining these structures lends pedestrian scale to the project on 17th Avenue. The project also replaces a surface parking lot, better activating the space.

This has been one of my favorite projects ever since Southern Land agreed to preserve the historical buildings along 17th Ave.

[mr1138]

Originally Posted by gopokes21

Great post, but I really think a subway line should compliment our existing network rather than duplicating it. Baker, Lincoln Park, and Auraria are already well-served by RTD rail. That's why I would shift a little to the east and directly serve Glendale, Cherry Creek, Cheesman, and Cap Hill en route between Colorado/25 and Civic Center.

Thanks for starting the discussion - I, for one, completely agree with many of your main points here. Central Denver IS a lot denser than people give it credit for and it seems that financing realities (as opposed to ridership viability) is really what is holding this kind of local discussion back.

I must say though that anybody who claims that Baker is well-served by light rail must never have had to walk from anywhere in its core residential area to a light rail station. The gap between 10th/Osage and Alameda is about 1.75 miles, so it puts most of Baker well beyond a half-mile walk of a station. While we're all stating our transit wish list - what would be really useful on this line would be to add a new station somewhere near where it crosses Santa Fe, and then get rid of the ridiculous "Sports Authority Field [not actually] at Mile High" station that became redundant when the W-line station at Decatur/Federal was built. All this station in the back of the Pepsi Center parking lot seems to do is add unnecessary dwell-time for Union Station-bound trains.

Originally Posted by SirLucasTheGreat

One major obstacle to an underground tunnel connecting Union Station to Civic Center Station is that Denver gets a substantial amount of its sales tax revenue from the 16th Street Mall. I feel like I've heard the mayor or someone else say that an underground system would risk taking a lot people off 16th street mall and would have a negative economic impact. My preference would be to have a subway connecting US and CC with a stop at 16th and California for LRT transfers. Then, get rid of the mall ride and make 16th 100% pedestrian.

This gets thrown around a lot, but I'd like to see a real analysis about this sometime. As somebody who is on the mall somewhat regularly, the retail there doesn't really strike me as being mall-shuttle supported anymore. I feel like 16th street is really emblematic of how Downtown has changed over the past decade. What I see instead are people who live and work downtown patronizing the restaurants and other businesses on their lunch hour because that is where the main critical mass of retail exists. Some of the nicer restaurants may attract weekend/evening visitors - but even that is changing with the closure of longtime restaurants like Rialto, Paramount, or Marlowes, and the opening of many new ones closer to Union Station.

I don't deny that the Mall Shuttle played a major role in launching the 16th Street Mall in the 80s, but I have never really observed it playing this role anymore. Shuttles today are usually jam-packed not with tourists, but with locals using it to escape the cold or avoid walking all the way across town. The changes to retail at the Tabor Center seem particularly reflective of this - gone is the indoor mall, replaced with fast-casual lunch offerings and upstairs office uses and an athletic club. Granted I have never read an actual professional analysis of where every mall patron comes from - this is just based on my own personal observations. But I think the idea that retail on 16th Street would collapse without the Mall Shuttle is a very stuck-in-1994 kind of attitude that ignores how much more vibrant and urban all of downtown has become since the mall first opened.

I completely agree with you that something like a subway that could quickly whisk people from DUS to Civic Center, with a stop in the middle, would be a complete game-changer for Denver. Even a light-rail with dedicated guideway and minimal stops could help with this (put it on 15th, 16th, 17th, or 18th - I don't think that detail matters much). The current plans for 16th can still move forward because the new shuttle-lanes could just be reserved for emergency vehicles and bicycles (who regularly use them anyway) in the future.

[SirLucasTheGreat]

If I'm not mistaken, the 16th Street Mall redesign will eliminate the curbs separating the bus lane from the sidewalk, which would allow the entire strip or blocks of it to be readily convertible to pedestrian-only.

One of the main issues that I see, and I could well be wrong, is that our relatively large rail system is 1). primarily design for suburban commuters and 2). anchored at Union Station (which is often 1-2 miles away from the CBD where most suburban commuters work. The mall ride and the metro ride can help but they add enough time to the process where it really doesn't make sense for many people that don't simply prefer commuting via rail. If commuting downtown via car was less attractive (congestion pricing, bus only lanes, less parking) and there was a high frequency and quick connection between US, 16th and California, and CC, that might be a game-changer.

[mr1138]

Originally Posted by SirLucasTheGreat

If I'm not mistaken, the 16th Street Mall redesign will eliminate the curbs separating the bus lane from the sidewalk, which would allow the entire strip or blocks of it to be readily convertible to pedestrian-only.

One of the main issues that I see, and I could well be wrong, is that our relatively large rail system is 1). primarily design for suburban commuters and 2). anchored at Union Station (which is often 1-2 miles away from the CBD where most suburban commuters work. The mall ride and the metro ride can help but they add enough time to the process where it really doesn't make sense for many people that don't simply prefer commuting via rail. If commuting downtown via car was less attractive (congestion pricing, bus only lanes, less parking) and there was a high frequency and quick connection between US, 16th and California, and CC, that might be a game-changer.

Well look at that - I didn't realize the new mall configuration was going curb-free, but you're right! That's great.

And yes, I pretty much agree with the rest of what you are saying. All travel mode comparisons seem to end up being about time competitiveness. It is not crazy to design a transit system around a hub - plenty of systems do this. But the transfers provided need to be fast, frequent, and useful. A cross-town service should get riders from Union Station to Broadway in closer to 3-5 minutes and run all times of day. If it takes 10-mins or more to traverse this distance then forget it - it would be more logical to simply take your car to your final destination at that point and skip the transfer through Union Station. Splitting this same basic route (DUS to CC) into at least 3 different services doesn't help either.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by mr1138

As somebody who is on the mall somewhat regularly, the retail there doesn't really strike me as being mall-shuttle supported anymore. I feel like 16th street is really emblematic of how Downtown has changed over the past decade. What I see instead are people who live and work downtown patronizing the restaurants and other businesses on their lunch hour because that is where the main critical mass of retail exists. Some of the nicer restaurants may attract weekend/evening visitors - but even that is changing with the closure of longtime restaurants like Rialto, Paramount, or Marlowes, and the opening of many new ones closer to Union Station.

I don't deny that the Mall Shuttle played a major role in launching the 16th Street Mall in the 80s, but I have never really observed it playing this role anymore. Shuttles today are usually jam-packed not with tourists, but with locals using it to escape the cold or avoid walking all the way across town.

Interesting comments re: 16th Street Mall. I always enjoy anecdotal feedback and observations. Couple of points.

• During normal times, the 16th Street Mall remains the Number One destination for tourists, largely driven by the immense convention and meeting business. I feel terrible for that stretch during these COVID times.
• The growing role for internet shopping only compounds the difficulty. Still, as the biggest shopping and people corridor I assume the 16th Street Mall will ultimately gain market share and thrive.

While not as interesting nor as much fun...

• For those interested in the 'current state' of RTD, there's a dandy easy-to-scroll through power-point pdf which reviews last year along with proposed changes.
  
• There's also a listing of the actual route changes made - scroll waay down to see the light rail changes.

Originally Posted by SirLucasTheGreat

One of the main issues that I see, and I could well be wrong, is that our relatively large rail system is 1). primarily design for suburban commuters and 2). anchored at Union Station (which is often 1-2 miles away from the CBD where most suburban commuters work. The mall ride and the metro ride can help but they add enough time to the process where it really doesn't make sense for many people that don't simply prefer commuting via rail.

The importance of DUS has really been as a hub for the A Line - train to the planes. Afaik, the B Line carries few riders and the W Line isn't a lot better. But with the additions of the G Line and the N Line, presumably DUS will grow in importance and ridership over time.

During COVID times

• The SW Corridor light rail has 'reverted' to the D Line only serving the heart of downtown - by popular demand.
• The SE Corridor now ONLY goes to DUS via the E Line.
• However, the popular H line which originates in Aurora still goes via the SE Corridor into the heart of downtown.

[SirLucasTheGreat]

Interesting comments, TakeFive. I didn't know about those service reductions. Imagine how much better the system would work if the south corridors went underground at I-25 and Broadway and went straight North with stops at Broadway and Alameda, Broadway & 6th, Denver Art Museum/Denver Public Library, Civic Center Station, 16th and Stout/Convention Center, 16th and Market, and then Denver Union Station. Fun to retrospectively envision those possibilities but we have to work around the system that we have.

To RTD's credit, the current rail system does serve Empower Field, Pepsi Center, and the Aurarian Campus pretty well.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by SirLucasTheGreat

Interesting comments, TakeFive. I didn't know about those service reductions. Imagine how much better the system would work if the south corridors went underground at I-25 and Broadway and went straight North with stops at Broadway and Alameda, Broadway & 6th, Denver Art Museum/Denver Public Library, Civic Center Station, 16th and Stout/Convention Center, 16th and Market, and then Denver Union Station. Fun to retrospectively envision those possibilities but we have to work around the system that we have.

To RTD's credit, the current rail system does serve Empower Field, Pepsi Center, and the Aurarian Campus pretty well.

If you want a fun fact RTD did look at tying into the CBD with LRT down Broadway in the early 2000's. You would have rail from I-25 & Broadway going past the Capitol, Civic Center Station, and tying into the existing downtown loop. There were concerns about wires disrupting the view of the Capitol from Civic Center Park, along with other issues, and RTD ultimately went with additional trackage in the CPV.

There's a few things that RTD could do to improve train frequency downtown for relatively cheap; but, given the total resource allocation to FasTracks asides from O&M, nothing is likely to happen.

[bulldurhamer]

Originally Posted by SirLucasTheGreat

If I'm not mistaken, the 16th Street Mall redesign will eliminate the curbs separating the bus lane from the sidewalk, which would allow the entire strip or blocks of it to be readily convertible to pedestrian-only.

One of the main issues that I see, and I could well be wrong, is that our relatively large rail system is 1). primarily design for suburban commuters and 2). anchored at Union Station (which is often 1-2 miles away from the CBD where most suburban commuters work. The mall ride and the metro ride can help but they add enough time to the process where it really doesn't make sense for many people that don't simply prefer commuting via rail. If commuting downtown via car was less attractive (congestion pricing, bus only lanes, less parking) and there was a high frequency and quick connection between US, 16th and California, and CC, that might be a game-changer.

as long as we allow uber and lyft to operate at these obscenely low costs, you can forget about all of it.

when going to the airport, i can walk a mile to the station and take close to $20 ride to the airport or take an uber and get door to door service for $30. if i'm traveling with somebody, it becomes significantly cheaper to uber.

the same choices are being made coming into and moving around the city. if it costs $7 to get across town and you can do it quickly, the notion of hiking to a station, waiting, then waiting some more with a bunch of people only to get not exactly where you're going for a couple bucks less is an unlikely proposition.

thus my original take on this. if we aren't going to stop uber, we may as well embrace the future of solar powered cars conveniently and safely taking us from one place to the next.

remember when streetcars were everywhere? well, neither do i, but they were here. then somebody realized busses could go to more places than just where the rails go. that's coming with trains as well. as automated clean cars come, they'll be efficient and safe and we'll laugh about crowding on trains. that and germs. there's some thought that we'll be stuck wearing face masks forever. riding on crowded germ filled trains vs taking a solo car ride is another no brainer.

[bulldurhamer]

https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0519191641.htm
"Driverless cars working together can speed up traffic by 35 percent"

i've seen one of the concerns with diverless cars is that when people will go in places, they'll send their cars driving in circles rather than paying to park, thus crowding the streets..

this is easily solved with a little regulation and some big parking decks scattered about.

the end result is a clean car that gets you safely and efficiently where you want to go. you'll still be able to walk and scooter and bicycle until all you want, but traffic will move more smoothly.

it's coming.