
How Denver Is Becoming the Most Advanced Transit City in the West - andrewfong
http://www.citylab.com/commute/2014/06/how-denver-is-becoming-the-most-advanced-transit-city-in-the-west/373222/
======
bri3d
The Northwest suburbs (Boulder, Louisville, Lafayette, Broomfield, Longmont)
got quite screwed over in this deal - we approved and paid into the 0.4% sales
tax in 2004, but ended up with only years of disruptive highway construction
leading to a privatized tollway and fake Bus Rapid Transit. We didn't even get
real BRT as the buses run in the private toll lanes rather than their own
grade and the buses board and deboard just like a normal bus (supposedly the
"train style" buses couldn't make it up a hill on the highway).

The Denver area really does have good mass transit, though - the Southwest
suburbs are now well-served by light rail, the airport will have rail service
soon, and the bus system is reasonable (as bus systems go), albeit with
extremely high fares.

~~~
kposehn
The Northwest line is already under construction to Arvada, correct? I believe
they are working westward right now.

As for the line up to Boulder, blame the expense of building a completely
separate right-of-way along the BNSF Brush Subdivision, a very busy funnel for
coal trains :-/

~~~
bri3d
"South Westminster" \- basically, 72nd and Federal.

They weren't trying to build separate right-of-way - they were trying to lease
the existing BNSF tracks:

[http://www.denverpost.com/ci_20782125/rtd-stunned-by-
bnsfs-c...](http://www.denverpost.com/ci_20782125/rtd-stunned-by-bnsfs-charge-
use-northwest-rail)

You're right that the busy freight corridor is a lot of the problem, though.

------
jseliger
_Will metro residents give up their cars?_

I wonder if the rise of Uber will affect this.

When I lived in Seattle, I noticed that a lot of people didn't commute to work
via car but had one anyway, usually for one or two trips per week. Public
transportation (buses and later light rail) were pretty good from about 8 a.m.
to 7 p.m. or so during weekdays but were horrible the rest of the time. Bikes
could be used intermittently.

Uber does an amazing job of filling in the gap. Last time I visited Seattle, I
was struck by how some of my friends had given up cars, despite rising
incomes, largely due to Uber. Uber may play a key role in getting rid of a lot
of cars that are only marginally utilized, since it appears far more reliable
and friendly than taxis—virtually all Seattlites who have to use Seattle taxis
hate them. This has environmental and other implications.

~~~
abduhl
The mountain states are car states. Denver is not a city like New York where
people go without getting their license until they are in their mid-20s.

Having Uber or great public transportation will not change the fact that much
of the draw of Colorado is that you can drive two hours and end up in the
mountains or on the plains. Colorado self-selects for cars and they will not
be going away any time soon.

~~~
kissickas
Let me offer a concurring opinion - Uber seems incredible expensive for two or
three trips a week, from my experience. It works best when you're with a group
of friends/family members and you are all drinking or don't feel like dealing
with driving and parking. I would never consider it as an option like a normal
cab for when I just need to do the week's grocery shopping or run out to get
something at midnight, when the light rail might have shut down for the day.
The only city where I ever used it was Denver, actually. Is this different
from others' experiences?

As a side note - can't you drive two hours to a mountain from most East Coast
cities? The Catskills are only 2.5 hours from NYC. I thought mountains were
much more accessible in Denver than a two-hour car ride.

~~~
narrowrail
The mtns in CO are certainly closer to Denver than 2 hrs, but most people are
going deeper into the mtns (e.g. Summit county/Vail/etc.). You can get up to
8500ft in 25min from Denver if you want. IMO, the further one gets from
Denver, the nicer it is (I live about 8hrs from Denver in the mtns of CO, and
have lived in the state for 20 yrs.).

------
chadmaughan
Salt Lake City (also "in the West") already has ~45 miles of light rail track
[1], 88 miles of commuter rail track [2], ~3 streetcar track miles [3], and 69
transit stations. It was named as one of the top transit systems in north
america for 2014 [4].

This was approved in 2008 by voters in Salt Lake County [5]. Already under
works are plans to expand the commuter rail beyond Ogden to Provo (from 88 to
135 miles) and expand the streetcar concept. Additional lines are also
currently being studied [6].

Of course, when Fastracks is done, it may have more "track miles" but that
will be mostly due to the airport being so, so far away from the city center
(~23 driving miles from Denver to DEN compared to ~6 from Salt Lake to SLC).

I'm excited for Fastracks. Can't wait to never have to fill my rental car out
at that single, lonely Conoco gas station by DEN again.

1 -
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRAX_(light_rail)](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRAX_\(light_rail\))

2 -
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FrontRunner](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FrontRunner)

3 -
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S_Line_(UTA)](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S_Line_\(UTA\))

4 - [http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865605797/UTA-named-
one-o...](http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865605797/UTA-named-one-of-the-
top-transit-systems-in-North-America.html?pg=all)

5 - [http://www.rideuta.com/mc/?page=Projects-
Frontlines2015](http://www.rideuta.com/mc/?page=Projects-Frontlines2015)

6 -
[http://www.rideuta.com/mc/?page=UTAProjects](http://www.rideuta.com/mc/?page=UTAProjects)

~~~
saosebastiao
To me, SLC is the ultimate counterpoint to the whole "Republicans are
destroying transit!!" hysteria. SLC's core is definitely left-leaning, but
just a few miles outside the city center it is pure Republican territory. And
despite the heavily skewed demographics, they are voting in massive numbers to
_extend_ rail transit to their cities. It is quite amazing what will happen to
voting trends on transit investment when you consistently demonstrate fiscal
responsibility, fast construction, and high ridership.

~~~
aaron-lebo
Do you have any idea why this is the case? Some aspect of Mormonism?

~~~
akgerber
There's a huge racial aspect in anti-mass-transit politics in many American
cities that's missing in SLC. Transit is fundamentally urban, and in a lot of
the country 'urban' is code for black.

~~~
AnimalMuppet
Hmm. Transit in SLC isn't "fundamentally urban". Also, SLC doesn't have a very
large black population.

------
Xorlev
Unfortunately, the satellite train tracks as they are now still require you to
drive & park at an RTD garage, then wait for a train, and ride it with all the
stops. For example, I used to take the W line from Federal Center station to
Union Station. Without counting transit time to the station, it's about 40-45
minutes to Union Station. Car? 25-30 minutes. At that time, I still took the
train.

I recently moved a little more south east, now it's a 5-10 minute drive to the
Sheridan station (with lights) + parking + waiting, ends up being still 40-ish
minutes. Only takes 20 minutes to drive, and I don't have people practically
sitting on my lap.

And that's a good scenario. Denver lacks the simplicity I found in Portland's
light rail and rail car system. It was quite clear how to get from place to
place. Denver relies very heavily on buses.

Lots of transport? Sure. Most advanced? Don't think so.

------
timr
Awesome. I went to college in Denver back when the first light rail initiative
tanked, and it was a nightmare to get around the city without a car. I've been
back a few times since, and the transformation has been remarkable: almost
everywhere I went back then is accessible by train now.

Now, if only San Francisco could follow suit and invest in greater transit --
instead of trying to increase the density of already-dense neighborhoods -- we
might have a prayer of battling housing costs here. Housing density
_automatically_ happens when people can get from cheaper places to more
expensive places quickly and reliably.

(Or maybe people will just leave the ridiculous bubble of the bay area, and go
to places like Denver instead. Even better.)

~~~
lotharbot
> _" the transformation has been remarkable"_

It's been great for my dad. He used to have to schedule the Access-a-ride to
pick him up in his wheelchair. It was a huge pain, and he tried to avoid it as
much as possible. Now he's got a light rail station a block away. He has an
ease of mobility he's never had before.

------
overgard
What I've always wanted in colorado is a japanese style bullet train across
the front range. It makes so much sense since most of the population in
colorado lies in a pretty narrow north-south axis, and there is more than
enough open space.

------
bfwi
It seems no article can positively describe a city, without mentioning that
it's also a tech cluster. Is there a city that doesn't claim to be a tech
cluster? We need to recalibrate that term.

~~~
EvanPlaice
They're not exaggerating. Over the course of a decade.

DTC (Denver Tech Center) and Centennial Airport sprawled for miles around with
tech companies and their employees who migrated from Southern California.

In the North West (Broomfield) around the Front Range Airport (or whatever
they call it these days) tech companies and R&D centers started popping up all
around Interlocken including Sun Microsystems.

Boulder is home to a number of smaller tech startups including SparkFun
Electronics, and a Google facility downtown.

In the South West Lockheed Martin has a number of facilities that work on
space systems (ie rockets, satellites).

Downtown Denver doesn't have much in terms of tech but the city is going
through an urban revival and the light rail system is supposed to connect it
all together (if they ever build the northwest rail line).

High wages and increased standard of living are a win/win.

------
roycehaynes
Downtown Denver resident here. I have to attest that the light-rail has been a
tremendous win for Denver and surrounding area residents. Along with the bus
system, Uber, and Car2Go, I started using light rail last December and never
looked back. Even though there are hopeful plans to expand commuter rail to
Boulder, I still think the FastTrack Program is a good decision. Boulder's
been a stiffed by the new development but I can't imagine no commuter rail
being implemented sooner than later.

~~~
roycehaynes
I have to counter some of the comments regarding buses and light rail being
empty. This is completely untrue. People are using the light rail and buses in
large sums. It has its off peaks but certainly before and after working hours
is extremely busy. Most people who say their empty are likely the same folks
not using public transportation. I had the same consensus before trying out
RTD.

~~~
akgerber
Transit riders see mostly see full busses & trains because they're riding the
heavy-ridership routes through dense neighborhoods. People driving in spread-
out neighborhoods mostly see empty busses & trains because they see the busses
mandated to serve sprawling neighborhoods to serve people who can't drive or
to provide service to all of the transit system's tax base, even if those
neighborhoods aren't built in such a way anyone would ride transit by choice.

Here's a paper & a couple excellent blog articles on the topic:
[http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0966692308...](http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0966692308000586)
[http://usa.streetsblog.org/2013/08/14/jarrett-walker-
empty-b...](http://usa.streetsblog.org/2013/08/14/jarrett-walker-empty-buses-
serve-a-purpose/) [http://www.humantransit.org/2009/12/yet-another-transit-
isnt...](http://www.humantransit.org/2009/12/yet-another-transit-isnt-green-
because-of-empty-buses-story.html)

From the paper's abstract: "Public transport faces an increasingly intense
conflict between patronage goals and coverage goals. Broadly speaking,
patronage goals seek to maximize patronage of all types, while coverage goals
lead to the provision of service despite low patronage – to achieve social
inclusion objectives for example."

------
PhantomGremlin
I've never been there, but from afar the Moscow Metro is a thing of beauty.
[http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2c/Moscow_me...](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2c/Moscow_metro_map_en_sb.svg)
In particular one thing Moscow has that the Denver map doesn't have much of is
a ring line connecting the spokes.

A ring means that arbitrary trips don't need to go thru downtown. Not having a
ring means that the transit system models the 19th century layout of having
"farm roads" connecting into the "market" in the middle of the city.

Perhaps Denver uses buses to form a ring?

------
davemel37
All I know is that this car problem is growing rapidly in Colorado. As a
Denver native, living in NY for the last decade I finally moved back to get
away from the traffic. Unfortunately there are way more cars on the roads (and
what feels like worse drivers) than I recall from a decade ago.

I won't even go up to the mountains during the weekend because I can get stuck
in traffic on I-70 for 3-4 hours heading back to Denver on a Sunday
afternoon/evening. It should take half that time.

I'm glad Colorado is investing in Infrastructure and passing laws to
accommodate Uber, etc...

------
RobotCaleb
Looking forward to being able to get to DEN via train.

------
smuss77
My question is when cars can drive themselves why will the non-impoverished
population need public mass-transportation. I envision a grid of cars
(belonging to competing private companies) that have no drivers and can take a
person from A to B, for a set fee -- much lower than when you need a driver.
Light-rail, why? We already have the infrastructure for cars. Give it 20
years.

------
bignaj
Funny how Seattle was left out of the comparison to other PNW cities. I'm not
surprised... Seattle's transportation situation is abysmal.

~~~
seanmcdirmid
Metro/ST isn't that bad, I take it rather than rent a car when in Seattle, but
I don't venture out of the West Seattle-Seattle-Bellevue core where service is
pretty good.

~~~
bignaj
Yeah, but you don't have to deal with it every single day. Metro offers pretty
horrendous bus service especially considering their cost per passenger one of
the highest in the country. Recently voters thwacked a measure seeking more
funding for Metro and one of the main reasons I think (among others like
aversion to car tab expenses) was anger at mismanagement.

~~~
ghaff
My experience is that everybody (where everybody is defined as a significant
majority but not everyone) tends to be at least fairly negative about public
transportation that they're forced to use day in and day out. I could name a
number of cities that I consider to have pretty good transit if you're going
from the right point A to the right point B where I could still imagine it
being pretty tiresome using it all the time for a variety of reasons.

~~~
akgerber
NYC has by-far the best transit in the US, and people still constantly
complain about it. I don't think there's any method of commuting people
actually like, other than maybe bikes.

------
bnolsen
denver isnt a downtown oriented city, its very spread out. also the trains are
empty whenever i see them running. just another expensive sinkhole from what i
can tell.

~~~
jbail
Lived in Denver 5 years. Never driven to work, a pro sports game or a bar.
Trains and busses have never been empty any of the times I've ridden
them...which is daily

