DENVER | Transportation Thread

[TakeFive]

Let's compare Denver with some peer cities

2017 year-end totals for passenger trips combining light and commuter rail

• Phoenix - 16.3 million - no change
• San Diego - 37.2 million million - down 2.25%
• Denver - 32.0 million - up 10.7%
• Twin Cities - 23.8 million - up 3.7%
• Portland - 39.6 million - down 2.7%
• Dallas - 31.9 million - up .75%
• Seattle - 29.9 million - up 16.8%

[TakeFive]

Finally let's compare bus ridership with various cities

2017 year-end totals for passenger trips and change

• Phoenix - 34.75 million - up 6.2%
• San Diego - 48.8 million - down 4.4%
• Denver - 65.8 million - down 6.5%
• Twin Cities - 57.3 million - down 2.75%
• Las Vegas - 63.3 million - down 2%
• Portland - 57.4 million - down 1.5%
• Dallas - 31.7 million - down 3.8%
• Houston - 66.1 million - down .7%
• Seattle - 102.1 million - up .25%

All numbers per APTA

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

But, that precludes any monies spent on BRT corridors, road repairs, pedestrian improvements, bike lanes, etc. That $46M/yr would be better spent elsewhere.

It would be better for major projects like light rail or subways to be primarily funded by or substantially shared with RTD.

Never is it hard to spend money and I'd be happy to help.

They could easily accelerate curing the backlog of deferred road repaving & maintenance (highly likely). Also, there were transportation projects that didn't make the bond priority cut and a few were only partially funded. Alameda at I-25 comes to mind. Brighton Blvd Phase 3 comes to mind assuming Phase 2 has been funded. I'd have to dig into what didn't make the cut; too lazy.

I could see Denver taking your advice to rob Peter, not from ordinary budgeting but rather from the (General Fund) Capital Improvements Program. The annual CIP typically has about $11 million (extra) to play with. They could forego spending for both Parks and Transportation if both initiatives pass. I'm sure the Mayor can think of lots of ways to spend money for the upcoming National Western Center for example.

Woot woot, despite early (10:35 am) start in Atlanta, the Rockies have swept the Braves winning today's game 4-2.

Correction: You know how you can type in a few key search words and often come up with needed info without actually clicking on a specific site? Well I originally pulled up $160 million for annual CIP spending. Didn't feel right so I went to the six-year Elevate 2020 budget projections. Turns out they have about $85 million in revenue to spend but the majority of that is already committed, primarily for ongoing maintenance programs. Available discretionary funds are only about $11 million per year through 2020.

[mhays]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Finally let's compare bus ridership with various cities

2017 year-end totals for passenger trips and change

• Phoenix - 34.75 million - up 6.2%
• San Diego - 48.8 million - down 4.4%
• Denver - 65.8 million - down 6.5%
• Twin Cities - 57.3 million - down 2.75%
• Las Vegas - 63.3 million - down 2%
• Portland - 57.4 million - down 1.5%
• Dallas - 31.7 million - down 3.8%
• Houston - 66.1 million - down .7%
• Seattle - 102.1 million - up .25%

All numbers per APTA

Seattle was 139 million....both Sound Transit (regional) and Metro (King County) run buses. Also you omitted trolley buses for Metro.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by mhays

Seattle was 139 million....both Sound Transit (regional) and Metro (King County) run buses. Also you omitted trolley buses for Metro.

Trolley buses weren't relevant as Denver has neither trolleys ie streetcars or trolley buses.

I could have recalled your previous post but I just threw this together from APTA's data and with respect to buses used the section on "LARGEST BUS AGENCIES" which listed King County but not Sound Transit. It's likely among the long, detailed section that I didn't bother with.

In any case, corrections and input always welcome.

[TakeFive]

RTD has a BIG Budget

2018 Anticipated Expenditures:
Source: http://www.rtd-denver.com/fare-review.shtml

• Bus Operations - $144.1 million
• Rail Operations - $126.5 million
• Private Carrier Operations - $104.3 million
• Access-a-Ride Operations - $47.5 million
• Other Operating Costs - $253.2 million
• New Capital - $187.8 million
• Interest - $174.6 million
• Debt - $64.7 million
• Reserves - $197.7 million
• Total = $1.3 billion

Unsurprisingly, there's no shortage of critics. A few gems: https://www.westword.com/news/rtd-is...gh-in-10564917

Says Bill:

The problem with the people running RTD in Denver is that they have forgotten that the service is supposed to be a public service, and not a lining-their-pockets service.

Adds Patrick:

I think they should complete the routes they promised before talking about raising fares. What about the businesses in Olde Town Arvada that built, remodeled or expanded based upon the fall 2016 opening of the G line?

Suggests Pam:

They need to improve things before they raise fares. I was in Minneapolis; each bus stop downtown had a screen that listed all the upcoming buses and what time they should be there. It was slightly cheaper than here, too.

then there's this from Chris:

I will never trust RTD again. Still waiting for the train up to Boulder and beyond. Busses suck. You lie and cheat. You are not serving the people. I hate RTD. Rot in hell.

Hey everybody, chill and Don't worry be Happy

[ddvmke]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

RTD has a BIG Budget

2018 Anticipated Expenditures:
Source: http://www.rtd-denver.com/fare-review.shtml

• Bus Operations - $144.1 million
• Rail Operations - $126.5 million
• Private Carrier Operations - $104.3 million
• Access-a-Ride Operations - $47.5 million
• Other Operating Costs - $253.2 million
• New Capital - $187.8 million
• Interest - $174.6 million
• Debt - $64.7 million
• Reserves - $197.7 million
• Total = $1.3 billion

Unsurprisingly, there's no shortage of critics. A few gems: https://www.westword.com/news/rtd-is...gh-in-10564917

Hey everybody, chill and Don't worry be Happy

I don't blame people from being angry. When you get into the RTD budget and aren't just looking at the debt and interest they lay out there (items within "other" and reserves), RTD is spending more on debt service and executive comp. than core bus and rail operations combined. This is even before the principal repayments on about $2.8B of debt related mostly to FastTracks has even begun (2019 earliest start). Not really a recipe for successfully improving existing service.

It seems as though this fare increase really is to cover the increased debt and interest costs (bus and rail ops costs up only 1.4% per year) associated with the capital required to build out lines all at once that will take too long to develop and bring in the revenues required. All the while failing to improve the existing bus services that carry the vast majority of the public.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by ddvmke

I don't blame people from being angry. When you get into the RTD budget and aren't just looking at the debt and interest they lay out there (items within "other" and reserves), RTD is spending more on debt service and executive comp. than core bus and rail operations combined. This is even before the principal repayments on about $2.8B of debt related mostly to FastTracks has even begun (2019 earliest start). Not really a recipe for successfully improving existing service.

Do you have a breakdown on that? It doesn't quite jive from what i'm seeing in the budget.

It seems as though this fare increase really is to cover the increased debt and interest costs (bus and rail ops costs up only 1.4% per year) associated with the capital required to build out lines all at once that will take too long to develop and bring in the revenues required. All the while failing to improve the existing bus services that carry the vast majority of the public.

I feel like this fare increase is more of a subsidy payment to the special interests who have been whining for years about transit equality (i.e. welfare) for the poor. RTD is jacking up general fares to pay for all of the subsidized goodies that are being proposed for the lower classes. In my mind this, and the recent moves for disabled access (the stroller policy and seat removal, are example of how RTD is beholden to two special interests: welfare advocates and disabled community.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by ddvmke

It seems as though this fare increase really is to cover the increased debt and interest costs (bus and rail ops costs up only 1.4% per year) associated with the capital required to build out lines all at once that will take too long to develop and bring in the revenues required. All the while failing to improve the existing bus services that carry the vast majority of the public.

Great question and concerns.

With respect to the so-called fare increases
There's a lot of confusion and misunderstanding about what is really a fare-restructuring that RTD is requiring be revenue-neutral.

Per Nora Olabi/Westword

After the Denver Post and other outlets reported last week that the Regional Transportation District is going to raise local, regional and airport fares to make up for new discount programs that support low-income and youth riders, RTD has been on the offensive to clear up what it says is a misrepresentation of a proposal.

RTD's message: The issue is a lot more nuanced.

There's been heavy lobbying and pressure to lower fares for some riders. Because RTD is insisting that any changes be revenue-neutral they have to raise rates on some riders to pay for lowering rates for other riders.

For a more indepth look, David Sachs/Streetsblog Denver has provided some great analysis. It's waay over my head.

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Do you have a breakdown on that? It doesn't quite jive from what i'm seeing in the budget.

I feel like this fare increase is more of a subsidy payment to the special interests who have been whining for years about transit equality (i.e. welfare) for the poor. RTD is jacking up general fares to pay for all of the subsidized goodies that are being proposed for the lower classes. In my mind this, and the recent moves for disabled access (the stroller policy and seat removal, are example of how RTD is beholden to two special interests: welfare advocates and disabled community.

I wouldn't disagree.

[Denveropolis]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Do you have a breakdown on that? It doesn't quite jive from what i'm seeing in the budget.



I feel like this fare increase is more of a subsidy payment to the special interests who have been whining for years about transit equality (i.e. welfare) for the poor. RTD is jacking up general fares to pay for all of the subsidized goodies that are being proposed for the lower classes. In my mind this, and the recent moves for disabled access (the stroller policy and seat removal, are example of how RTD is beholden to two special interests: welfare advocates and disabled community.

Totally Agree!!

[rct]

If they raise the A-line fare much more I might just go back to taking the super shuttle or driving to the airport. 9$ is already high. It's 3$ in Seattle from downtown to the airport. Thought the point of the train was to get people off the roads. Raise the fare and people will seek alternatives like hopping back in their cars or ubers. The trains a fixed cost as far as I know, its running regardless of how many people are aboard. A fare from a customer is better than no fare for RTD.

[TakeFive]

It will be decades before we'll see self-driving cars with passengers, right?
Don't tell that to Lyft and Aptiv in Las Vegas.


Photo courtesy Isaac Brekken for Aptiv via The Verge

Lyft and Aptiv have completed 5,000 paid trips in their self-driving taxis
Aug 21, 2018 By Andrew J. Hawkins/The Verge

Lyft and self-driving technology company Aptiv have been operating a small fleet of self-driving cars in Las Vegas since the Consumer Electronics Show last January. And today, the companies say they’ve reached a new milestone in their partnership: 5,000 paid rides.

Are they using backup drivers?

A backup driver remains behind the wheel to take control when needed. The companies wouldn’t say how many disengagements, when the vehicle forces the human driver to take the wheel, they’ve recorded over the course of the operation so far, nor would they disclose the total miles driven.

It's an interesting start though, no?

[TakeFive]

Headlines, Deadlines and Destinations


Photo: Denver International Airport via Aviation Today

DFW Joins Elite Airport Club as Destination List Reaches 200
March 7, 2013 - Airlines and Destinations

In reaching 200 destinations, DFW joins a select group of airports with that distinction. These include Frankfurt Airport (FRA), Amsterdam Airport Schiphol (AMS), Paris Charles De Gaulle Airport (CDG), Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport (ATL), Chicago O’Hare International Airport (ORD) and Munich’s Franz Josef Strauss International Airport (MUC).

Dude, that headline is over five years old. Anything more recent?
Oh, well let me check and see, Dudette.

Denver becomes one of only four U.S. airports to service 200 destinations
21 August 2018 By International Airport Review

Denver International Airport (DEN) will soon offer services to 200 destinations worldwide, topping the 200-mark for the first time in Denver aviation history. In addition to new international flights to Paris and Zurich, DEN has also experienced significant growth in domestic air service in 2018. Four airlines have added service to 17 U.S. destinations

Dude, I like this. Anything else that's interesting and noteworthy?
Well if you like that Dudette, then you should also like this.

With the most recent additions, DEN will offer service to 175 domestic destinations, just one destination behind Chicago O’Hare International Airport (ORD) and Dallas Fort Worth International Airport (DFW) which are tied as the U.S. airports with non-stop service to the most domestic destinations (176).

DEN stands alone in first place in terms of non-stop domestic destinations west of the Mississippi River with 117 markets served. DFW is second with 103, followed by Los Angeles (LAX) with 81.

Dude, that's some good sleuthing.
Thank you Dudette. Can we go home now?

[Cirrus]

All right Denver. Go give your electric-bikeshare a try. I find it *awesome*. The first time I used one of these, I rode it up and down the same big hill 3 times just to show the hill who was boss.

Originally Posted by 5280

Electric-Bike Sharing Just Landed in Denver
JUMP, the Uber-operated, pedal-assisted bike rental service, launches Friday with 250 dockless e-bikes in the Mile High City.

As of today, renting an electric bike in Denver is as easy as opening an app. JUMP, a company acquired by ride-share giant Uber last spring, launched 250 electric bikes in Denver on Friday and plans to scale up to 500 e-bikes by early 2019.

The bikes are pedal-assisted—meaning they provide an electric-assist boost with each pedal up to 20 miles-per-hour—and, because they’re “Class 1” electric vehicles, they can be ridden in bike lanes, on paths, and on city streets.

Per an agreement with the city of Denver, JUMP staff will collect its bikes at the end of each day and return them to RTD bus or light-rail stations.

However, after riding, users are required to lock the bikes (locks are included) to any public rack in the service area shown on the app’s map. The service area does not yet include Denver’s entire city limits, but the bikes will be available in the “greater downtown neighborhoods, including Highlands, RiNo, Cherry Creek, and Hilltop.”

photo by david alpert

[CharlesCO]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Dude, I like this. Anything else that's interesting and noteworthy?
Well if you like that Dudette, then you should also like this.

Dude, that's some good sleuthing.
Thank you Dudette. Can we go home now?

United's president said at a conference this week that the airline hopes to add another European destination from DEN soon. Most guesses are a second flight to FRA to complement the Lufthansa flight.

https://twitter.com/e_russell/status...51198029598721

https://twitter.com/e_russell/status...05251418812416

[seventwenty]

Bye Limebike. Bye Ofo.

https://www.thedenverchannel.com/new...r-metro-cities

[twister244]

The dockless scooter/bike programs are fun,hip, and cool, but I am completely unaware of their business model. I have only used them a couple times, but it was under unique circumstances where I didn't want to lock my bike up for the night. Otherwise, I would just take my bike. I can't use them to go to work because I work in Boulder, plus there's never a guarantee they will be in a convenient location for you to use. It's a fun alternative/option, but I haven't adopted using them on a massive scale for navigating the city. Plus, they aren't free, and there is a cost. In many circumstances, it's just more convenient to just order an Uber/Lyft when it's just a couple bucks more. Again, there are unique circumstances where this works, but I can see why it may not be a good business model.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

All right Denver. Go give your electric-bikeshare a try. I find it *awesome*. The first time I used one of these, I rode it up and down the same big hill 3 times just to show the hill who was boss.

But did you plant a flag at the top? If not, how do know it really happened?

Regardless, I found some entertaining bedtime reading for The Boss. Now it's the Seattle Madison Street BRT that's a Big Mess. Apparently New Flyer said they no longer like Seattle and won't build their buses. Seattle must have a bunch of liberal geeks trying to run their transit asylum.

Peter Johnson/Seattle Transit Blog has the story but it's the first few comments which are quite enlightening.

[Cirrus]

Fascinating.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by CharlesCO

United's president said at a conference this week that the airline hopes to add another European destination from DEN soon. Most guesses are a second flight to FRA to complement the Lufthansa flight.

https://twitter.com/e_russell/status...51198029598721

https://twitter.com/e_russell/status...05251418812416

Thanks for the heads up; that would be great. I wondered if you were still 'out there.'

You also triggered this post. I had checked a few times, then lost track. Finally, Wikipedia has updated last year's passenger air traffic results.
U.S. airports listed by total passenger traffic.

1. Atlanta International Airport........ 103,902,992 - down 0.3%
2. Los Angeles International.............. 84,557,968 - up 4.5%
3. O'Hare International Airport.......... 79,828,183 - up 2.4%
4. Dallas/Fort Worth International....... 67,092,194 - up 2.3%
5. Denver International Airport........... 61,379,396 - up 5.3%
   - - - - - -
6. JFK International Airport................ 59,392,500 - up 0.5%
7. San Francisco International........... 55,822,129 - up 5.1%
8. McCarran International Airport....... 48,566,803 - up 2.3%
9. Seattle-Tacoma International........ 46,934,194 - up 2.6%
10. Charlotte International Airport....... 45,909,899 - up 3.4%
    - - - - - -
11. Orlando International Airport......... 44,511,265 - up 6.2%
12. Miami International Airport............ 44,071,313 - down 1.2%
13. Phoenix International Airport......... 43,921,670 - up 1.2%
14. Newark International Airport.......... 43,393,499 - up 7%
15. George Bush Intercontinental........ 40,696,189 - down 2.2%

Few observations:
LAX which sneaked by O'hare in 2016 has now put some distance between the two.
Denver which came close last year, hopped ahead of JFK in 2017 to regain the 5th spot after JFK claimed it in 2015.
Chicago/O'Hare continues its prominence as the financial/commodities center of the agricultural and industrial center of the country.
Most of the busiest airports are along the coast plus Chicago, Dallas, Denver and Las Vegas/McCarran.