FastTracks backtrack
It's time to face the hard choices
Rocky Mountain News
Published July 23, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.
The elected board of the Regional Transportation District will face some difficult choices over the next couple of years as it tries to keep the FasTracks rail expansion, as RTD said in May 2007, "within the general scope" of the project promised taxpayers in 2004.
As construction costs have surged - the state's Construction Cost Index soared by 52 percent in 2005 alone - RTD has looked at a series of cost-cutting moves to keep the buildout on schedule for completion in 2018 without having to ask voters for more money or shorten one or more rail lines.
The board remains committed to full buildout. Even so, fiscal realities appear poised to force it to consider unpleasant options. Such as: Postpone the completion of FasTracks; shorten low-ridership corridors; abandon one or more of the corridors; or seek a tax hike.
The fourth alternative should be off the table entirely. Metro area voters have already approved higher sales taxes for FasTracks - to the point that mass transit consumes a heavily disproportionate share of total transportation funding in the metro area. This week, however, the mayors of Arvada, Aurora, Denver, Lakewood and Longmont stated they would oppose the first three options. (They said they weren't crazy about a tax increase, either, although they didn't rule it out.)
So what to do? Maybe there's a fifth option. If the board wants to keep faith with the public, it could more aggressively pursue shifting the design and construction of the transit expansion to private contractors - a process RTD and the Colorado Department of Transportation used with great success in the T-REX project. Studies suggest successful deployment of these public-private partnerships could cut construction costs by as much as a third in the corridors they're used.
Such public-private partnerships are already under discussion for two of FasTracks' four commuter-rail lines. They should also be considered for the two other commuter lines, as well as the Interstate 225 light rail and the U.S. 36 Bus Rapid Transit corridors.
The board should also investigate the potential savings of fully leasing corridors to private operators, even if that means renegotiating contracts with union light-rail and bus drivers.
Postponing the full buildout of the corridors that are projected to have lower ridership, or that may duplicate other transit services, should be on the table as well. Portions of FasTracks that will get the heaviest use and relieve commuter congestion should be the priority.
We see several lines that could be delayed so the core of the FasTracks network isn't compromised:
* The Northwest Corridor basically parallels the U.S. 36 Bus Rapid Transit Corridor from Union Station to Boulder. And the most heavily subsidized segment of FasTracks by far will be the final stretch of the northwest line, from Boulder to Longmont.
* The portion of the East Corridor from I-225 to Denver International Airport will largely handle airport traffic. Connecting the east line with the I-225 Corridor should be the priority.
* The Gold Line to Ward Road in Arvada.
As costs escalate, it will become increasingly unrealistic for RTD to pretend it can be all things to all people - unless of course it has a couple of miracles up its sleeve. Otherwise, it's time for the RTD board to face the hard choices - and then to make some.
Post your comment
Registration is required. Click here to create your free user account, or login below.
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
Featured
-
Rocky Multimedia
The news comes alive in our videos and slide shows. Catch up on what's happening today.
-
Holiday Lights
Is your house the jolliest on the block? Submit your holiday lights display.
-
Holiday Gift Guide
Looking to get a jump-start on the holiday shopping season?
-
Mount Crushmore
Which four Broncos greats should be immortalized on Mount Crushmore? Vote here.
-
Bronco Dean's rant
Listen to Bronco Dean's midweek rant on the Chiefs.
-
Broncos Video
Get the latest from Dove Valley as the Broncos prepare for Sunday's matchup.
-
Calendar wallpaper
Download this month's desktop wallpaper calendar
-
Sam Adams' Open Mic
Open Mic: Stirrin' the Soup with Matt Iseman
-
The Rocky @ 150 Years
Read the Rocky's coverage of Colorado's cannibal, Alfred Packer, in 1886.
July 23, 2008
7:01 a.m.
Suggest removal
jacka writes:
Back to the TAXPAYERS and VOTERS for more billions.
July 23, 2008
7:46 a.m.
Suggest removal
VVVV writes:
Escalation is only going to get worse. Postponing just means more money out of the taxpayers pockets. They need to cut back on the crap. Light rail stations don't need art, pointless roofs that don't protect anyone from weather, architectural accents, glass dividers, yellow bumpy pads (anyone know what these are for?), crap that nobody receives any benefit for, but cost us all money. In every light rail station there is something that money was spent on that doesn't need to be there.
We are being told we are going to pay for this mismanagement of funds, whether we like it or not. I know how they can save money. Fire half the management and tell the other half they have 6 months to prove their worth before they are likewise replaced.
That, and start checking fares at every station of every person. People riding free are their biggest lost revenue, and also the only topic they never seem to address. After all, if they finally had enough money, they couldn't have grounds for asking for more.
July 23, 2008
8:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
robertzimmerman writes:
"yellow bumpy pads (anyone know what these are for?)"
Blind and/or partially-sighted people.
July 23, 2008
8:28 a.m.
Suggest removal
warrengfunk7 writes:
Great article and a perfect solution; PPP's.
Also, the rail to Boulder along with the BRT was a compromise FOR BOULDER. Lets wake up and realize that Boulder doesn't actually need both options. With fuel prices so high, why run BRT buses which burn diesel to Boulder and also run DMU trains which burn diesel to Boulder as well?
How about we run an Electric Commuter Rail (EMU) line up teh Medium of US-36 (the proposed BRT line) to Boulder and then stop the line in Boulder instead of going up to Longmont. Hey, run BRT from Boulder to Longmont, so Longmont isn't left out of the deal. use a public-private-partnership to design, build and operate this line.
Reconsider Light rail over DMU for the North Metro line, or at very least EMU (electric commuter rail). Right rail may be te best solution, if a PPP is used for this corridor as well. Extend the light rail from 40th/40th street downtown, north into the planned north corridor. At 40th/40th street station, have a branch go along the South Platte, past Coors Field and into the planned light rail station at Union Station - along the Consolidated Mainline.
July 23, 2008
8:46 a.m.
Suggest removal
Citizen21 writes:
The Board needs to take control back from the staff. The staff made some major mistakes: right of ways not negotiated or solidified prior to route plans being made public; and using eminent domain with private partnerships - cannot legally use eminent domain to take land if developing anything commercial on it - can only use the land for transit or parking garages. Further, the Eco Pass program is way too cheap – and because they are locked into those rates, they want to pass the additional costs on to those purchasing daily or monthly rides.
Do NOT tax a community which supported a much needed transit system – we are already paying for it. Make better business decisions. And, yes – get rid of the “extras” – art is not needed. That can be added or donated at a later date. Security – that is needed!
July 23, 2008
9:01 a.m.
Suggest removal
woodwose writes:
First of all, the East Corridor line all the way to DIA should not be scaled back in any way, shape or form. Having a light rail link to the airport is tremendously important. The area around DIA is a prime location for business parks and other commercial growth, and having the light rail link from the airport to downtown will provide a synergy for those two areas that is not easily duplicated on any other line. Very few cities in this country have such a link from their airports to their mass transit system, and if Denver has such a link it gives it an advantage. Plus the demand for that line will always be strong, especially if RTD links all their sky ride routes to that rail link wherever possible.
The only US cities that I know of off-hand that have a direct rail link to their airports are Washington DC (Metro station at Reagan National), NYC (special rail link from JFK to NYCMTA subway) and Cleveland (which has a red line rail station at Hopkins airport).
There is a reason for this, and it's mainly that a lot of people, namely taxi, shuttle, parking and car rental companies, have a vested interest in making in difficult for airline passengers to take public transport to and from the airport.
Let's not miss the opportunity to fix this problem here in Denver.
July 23, 2008
10:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
rpmcmurphy writes:
Cutting the line that connects Denver International to the rest of the system would be a major mistake.
July 23, 2008
11:45 a.m.
Suggest removal
openmind writes:
We need to start be cleaning house of the RTD Board of Directors. You see NOBODY I mean NOBODY at RTD will take responsibility for the budget problems, the abusive of eminent domain etc.
I'd say there are a few people on the board who are concerned with Fiscal Responsibility and serving the people as they were elected to do. Neil Quinlan being one of them. He's the only guy I've really heard stand up to Cal Marsella. The rest of the board simply does as Cal desires and that makes them equally responsible for the mess CashTracks and us citizens of Colorado are now in.
http://www.rtd-denver.com/TheBoard/in...
Here is the contact information for YOUR elected officials of the RTD board. I keep posting it because not enough people show up the board meetings when they set policy. It's partially ALL OUR FAULT that we've let these people run wild with our tax dollars without being accountable. They've given themselves raises, bonuses and squandered our money and have barely even turned dirt on the West Corridor while the billions ad up.
RTDevelopment Co needs to get back on track and focus on TRANSIT instead of cashing in on Transit Oriented Development.
Did you know that Cal Marsella is the highest paid government employee in the state? Maybe we should start cutting some budget problems with a salary decrease and maybe get rid of his HUGE bonuses he loves so much.
Mr. Marsella assured us land owners that we would be treated with respect and fairness. Instead it's been nothing but lies and quite honestly illegal activity thus far.
Cal I will see you in court along with the rest of the RTD board members who have something to say about what is really going on.
July 23, 2008
12:37 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cwillyrun1 writes:
The problem with ridership from Longmont is how much of a demand there would be for it. It's also not having the impact of easing congestion as, say, the north metro line. If you ever drive I-25 north of Denver city limits during rush hour, it's the worst part of any highway in the metro area. ricky, nobody gets anything for the Coors Field and Mile High tax except for the owners of the teams. I'm sure there's people in Longmont that have used both facilities though so those people are getting the same as someone living withing walking distance of those stadiums. Thinking about what you said, the largest percentage of people live in the Denver area, but the state sales tax pays for projects across the state. Why should something be taken care of, say, in Gunnison, when the overwhelming majority of people paying for it live in the Denver area and will never use it?
July 23, 2008
1:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
toast2042 writes:
warrengfunk7 has it right. Why are there two different paths to get to Boulder? Ditch the BRT and put the light rail down the median instead. Saves money on ROW and soon-to-be derided busses.
Definitely finish the DIA link soonest. That corridor should be a priority. When people start taking the train to the airport and say to themselves, "Wow, this is much better than Pena Boulevard, snow, cops, parking and hours of lead-time! I should take the train more places", the whole system will get a boost.
And would it kill us to get a transit project completed before people's unborn children graudate elementary school?
July 23, 2008
4:08 p.m.
Suggest removal
BSquared writes:
THis used to be said about Politicians, which its becoming clear that is all the RTD board is anyway.
"RTD Board members are like diapers, they need to be changed"
How long has Cal been running this gig?? TIme for a change starting at the top. I tried really hard to rely on RTD. Sold my car, moved near bus and light rail lines. I cant do it, it takes me over an hour to get to work, and its not economical anymore. So I bought a car and I will spite RTD until they get their ducks straight. RTD = "Reason to Drive" how true it is.
July 23, 2008
4:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
The_Punnisher writes:
Uh, BART serves SFO directly too.
The VTA ( a SFBA version of RTD ) still hasn't got it's act together and the link to SJC wasn't built ( they can only hope )
BART like service to DIA ( 60/100MPH trains [ I saw the train going thru the transbay tube hit 105 once ] with no level crossings ) would really do the job.
That is, the the RTD directors WERE DOING THEIR JOBS!!
FIRE THEM!!
July 23, 2008
9:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
Mike846 writes:
I have a radical idea: why not bid out the job to private industry (with NO input from Board Members or other politicians as to who gets the contract)and see what its going to cost and how soon it can be finished. If you can avoid the political boondogles that plagued (and still plague) DIA, my guess is you'll have a tight time-line and less dollars. As to the sales tax funding, they've already got that in their hands. Make them live with it, one way or another. Just like a business that bids a job. Simplistic? Sure. Workable? Maybe. Who knows? One thing is for sure, having a political board in charge of this mess is a sure way to have the taxpayers all up and down the Front Range get hosed. As the folks of Boston about the "Big Dig". Just a thought.....
July 23, 2008
11 p.m.
Suggest removal
SteveM writes:
Three important points:
(a) The longer you wait to build, the more expensive it becomes not the other way around.
(b) Why on earth are they waiting around? RTD get moving. Build these things. You got approval, you got money, and you are wasting time and money analyzing what to cut and how to stay in budget. Get building. You stand to lose federal money and annoy and anger local voters by waiting around and playing games. Just get working. If you ask me, I'd have to begin to wonder if this project is just too big for RTD to complete on its own. This is, after all, a gigantic project. Maybe, unfortunately, we need to bring in some people who know how to execute a project this massive and get it done, on time, and under budget. The newest line opened nearly two years ago. During that time, one new line should be finished and a new one half way done. RTD wonders why the costs are going up. Duh! And the longer they fancy pants around waiting for the moon to change colors, the more expensive everything is going to be.
(c) The DIA line should be moved to the head of the list followed by the connection of the I-225 line to the DIA line. There is no more important line and artery that absolutely needs to be made the highest priority. Others have said it, and they are darn right. Actually BOTH of Chicago's airports, Atlanta's, Dallas's, and St. Louis's airports are also all connected to the transit grid. It's stupefying that this line isn't the number one line to be built. Thousands of airport employee cars off the road every day? It's an absolute no brainer. Tourist and convention access to down town? Again, no brainer.
July 24, 2008
9:32 a.m.
Suggest removal
OLB writes:
I know Minneapolis has a lightrail that runs from their airport to downtown Minneapolis (which includes stops at the Metrodome). I've taken it once when I flew into Minneapolis for a convention. It was pretty nice to take a train instead of paying an arm and a leg for a cab. In fact, you can also take the Minneapolis lightrail from the airport to the giant mall.
I also think that Salt Lake City is planning to extend their lightrail line east from downtown to their airport. I'm not sure how far along they are with this project, or if it is even going to happen, but I know there was some serious talk of it happening.
July 24, 2008
12:24 p.m.
Suggest removal
rg writes:
Eliminate the free 16th St. Mall buses that are very popular because they are free with kids riding them for a block or two. They cost $millions to maintain and break down continuously. They injure pedestrians and pollute. One board member claims they are popular: Of course they are popular: Anything that is free is popular. Bicycle pedi cabs could easily provide transportation for those who can't walk. Pedi cabs could charge 25 cents a block adding ten cents for each additional passenger. For long hauls they could charge less. Have you ever had a bus bear down on you and blast his horn? Sometimes they do it just to see people jump when if they'd waited another 3 seconds they'd be out of the way. Those $millions squandered on free transportation mount to $billions: One board member says people will drive if you take away the free mall bus: Right! They are going to drive downtown just to drive a few blocks on the Mall! Give me a break. Complainant, Richard Grimes.