FasTracks promises to lift city (create 6200 jobs)

Rocky Mountain News ^ | September 8, 2004 | James Paton

[Willie Green]

A $4.7 billion plan to build high-speed rail lines and expand bus service in the Denver area would add about 6,200 jobs a year and give a lift to the local economy, a new study showed.

Over a 12-year development period for the project, known as FasTracks, about 2,400 construction jobs would be created annually, and 3,800 positions would be added indirectly, according to a report requested by the Metro Denver Economic Development Corp.

As construction companies spend money on everything from concrete to computers, even more jobs would arise, creating an economic ripple that could inject $2.9 billion in wages and salaries into the local economy, the study said.

[Willie Green]

High-speed rail as an alternative mode of transportation in the U.S. is long overdue. We are reaching the point of diminishing returns as we expand our 4-lane interstates to 6, 8 or (gasp!!!) 10 lanes. And even costly airport expansions make little sense when (prior to 9/11) the air corridors themselves are over-congested.

High-speed rail and maglev offer the perfect alternative to augment & supplement our highway and air transportation infrastructure. For regional trips between 100 and 450 miles, it is faster than automobile and not that much slower than air. Yet offers the potential to alleviate both congested highways and air corridors!

In light of current economic conditions, construction of this vital transportation infrastructure should be accelerated.

[pikachu]

For the same cost, your could give each of the 6,200 people who would get the 'jobs' $750,000 and still have money left over. Which would you take if given the option?

[taxcontrol]

I'm a conservative who supports this public transportation effort. I do not support all such public works as often I find the cost to benefit ratio very poor.

In Denver's case, light rail has been a resounding success. This is in large part due to the fact that the community is willing to use light rail. The most common complaint with the light rail stations are that there is not enough parking for all of the commuters who drive a short distance to the light rail station to take the train to downtown.

Granted, there are lots of areas to shoot at - cost, estimated reduction in traffic, etc. But I have studied this proposal and my estimation is that it will help considerably during rush hour.

Now if we can only get RDT to lower the toll on C-435 to say a dollar to get on rather than the $8 plus to drive from end to end. And we need to get them to accept debit / credit cards.

[JTHomes]

Hmmm, maybe, but I am still not convinced. The longer regional trips are usually free from congestion, and I don't see how these regional lines will help me run my local errands faster. Plus my Expedition has a kickin' stereo system. On the road again for me.

[PeterPrinciple]

"You can never justify a project like this strictly on a basis of dollars and cents," Adams said.

"The great cities of the 21st century have to have certain things," and a mass transportation system is one of them, she said.


When I was in the Ivory Coast, the president had made improvments to his home village by building 6 lane hiways out into the bush for several miles......if you build it they will come.

On the other hand when they designed Washington DC in the swamp, who would have guessed what would have resulted from that..............

[narby]

A $4.7 billion plan to build high-speed rail lines and expand bus service in the Denver area would add about 6,200 jobs a year and give a lift to the local economy, a new study showed.

Willie, you're just a commie. Want to take my money and create another high density city so the existing property owners can see more returns without having to spend their own money.

Highways are far more efficient. You can't run UPS trucks on your high speed rail. I can't listen to the radio station I want to on the train, and have to sit next to smelly people. Can't even run the AC at the temp I want. Have to either wait in the heat/cold/rain/snow for the damn thing to show up, and walk to the station at one or both ends.

No thanks Willie. Trains are for museums. They're 19th century technology.

Go forward Willie, forward.

[Willie Green]

Well I know that you'd prefer that kind of direct welfare handout,
But by constructing transportation infrastructure, people have to actually perform WORK to EARN the money that they receive. And in return, the public acquires a tangible, long term benefit. Something that they can actually use every day for decades to come. Additionally, a good transportation network promotes commerce and produces a beneficial "ripple effect" throughout the entire local economy.

[Bella_Bru]

Light Rail in Sacramento is a success too. I miss having decent public trans. L.A.'s stinks.

[narby]

But I have studied this proposal and my estimation is that it will help considerably during rush hour.

You need to study a bit more. Roads, dollar for dollar, are many times more efficient at getting people and goods (which can't even go on light rail) from place to place.

Virtually all mass transit must be subsidized by taxpayers, so forget reducing the fare unless you want to face the taxpayers.

Here in Phoenix, we subsidize bus riders an average of something like $22 a ride. I litterally would be less money to pay for a cab.

Stupid.

[Garuda82]

Light rail is a major boondoggle.

[Willie Green]

Go forward Willie, forward.

What you "progressive" types call "forward", narby, is actually economic stagnation.
It's not surprising that poverty pimps are opposed to such infrastructure improvements.

[narby]

What you "progressive" types call "forward", narby, is actually economic stagnation.

The term "progressive" is code for leftist, which I certianly am not.

Phoenix is certianly not the center of economic stagnation, and we only recently got saddled with this giant leap into the future called "trains".

The Phoenix economy rode the back of perhaps a hundred or more miles great, new, gleaming, smooth highways. I can go right from my front door, right to the door of my office. I don't have to wait in the 115 degree heat for even one minute. And since my car is under shade, it's not even that hot to get into.

Any rational way to measure rail for people travel, it's a failure. It only works when the city is engineered in such a way that it's the only viable option. And if they do it like Southern Californa engineered the fiasco of the 91 freeway where they forced people into toll lanes by deliberatly gorking up the "free"way, then it's corrupt as well.

The only reason cities are building such back-to-the-future things is that the feds (meaning you and I) are offering the money. And that is because people like you can't get it out of your head the emotional idea rail is wonderful.

[taxcontrol]

"Virtually all mass transit must be subsidized by taxpayers"

Yes - Including Roads
The thing about Roads - specific to Denver - is that

1) we do not currently have enough "bandwidth". There is only one high speed north - south corridor in Denver, I-25. Putting in more highways will also cost billions of dollars.

2) Roads do not work too well with snow and ice. Unless we get a MAJOR (like a yard or more) blizzard then light rail will continue to operate and do so more safely than car transportation.

3) In Denver, the major corporate centers are located in Downtown, DTC (both along I-25), and recently Interlocken (along I-36 which feeds into I-25). This puts excessive rush hour traffic pressures. This concentration of jobs also creates a concentration of commuters which works against roads but in the favor of light rail.
Is light rail a cure all - no. Neither are more roads. It is however a decent compromise - at least for Denver.

[blues-train]

Portland Oregon voted down light rail numerous times, but to no avail. It was thrust upon us with the same blather about infrastructure and its inclusion in the list of requirement to be a great city. It went over budget in construction, over budget in operation, increased crime in EVERY district its stations are sited, and there is no end to the additional extensions lines being added. After light rail introduction, the existing bus routes were all modified to force use of light rail for a trip of any length, plus the ridership numbers were falsified by counting a single trip (involving both bus and train) as two trips. Even with these falsified numbers, ridership has never met expectations. Yet, Portland continues to be a poster child for light rail. Amazing what passes for facts when you get a group of city planners/officials together!

[LowCountryJoe]

Narby,
Willie is not a commie, rather he's been promised the position of Jobs Czar in an unlikely Kerry Administration...he'll be the token "conservative" (loosely speaking of course).

[q_an_a]

In Dallas they can't build the rail lines fast enough. Every train station has New Development including retail and Condos or Apt housing.

The not often talked about benefit is that if two people working at a medical center take the train instead of a car you save PARKING. The construction and land cost of parking spots is high. Better to build a hospital than parking.