[bouldercouncilhotline] Hotline: Important RTD update

[cmosupport at bouldercolorado.gov]

Sender: Appelbaum, Matt

   
Colleagues – As you may know, after being rather successful in collaborating with RTD on their recently announced bus and rail fare changes, we then began to work on concerns we had with RTD’s proposed schedules for the new Flatiron Flyer BRT service along US36 and implications for other related services.  A few weeks ago at the RTD Board meeting, Clint Folsom, Mayor of Superior, spoke to this issue on behalf of the US36 MCC, I followed with some thoughts regarding bus and rail service and costs, and Elise Jones, Boulder County Commissioner provided concluding comments.  I think the simplest way to inform you of our concerns is to include the comments of Mayor Folsom and Commissioner Jones, and provide a summary of my remarks.
 
Here are the MCC comments that were delivered by Mayor Folsom:
 

We greatly appreciate RTD adding most of the S trips back into the opening day operations plan. This is a valuable investment to connect the new Boulder Junction at Depot Square station to Union Station, and to provide service to the University of Colorado at Boulder’s east campus.
 

We also appreciate RTD adding the Flatiron Station to the stops for the BJCC route, as well as Church Ranch as a station served for the DWB service. 

 

We are eager to work with RTD staff to determine a path forward so we can all proudly state the US 36 BRT service plan provides net new service to the corridor.  To achieve this significant compromise, here are the top three priorities for our corridor we wish to discuss further investment:

- Restore the remaining S trips to the current level of service.

- Restore mid-day express service on Broadway to maximize the use of the capital investment in the US 36 Express Lanes.

- We would like to see additional service to connect Boulder Junction at Depot Square to the region, including service to Union Station.

Currently, Boulder County and corridor communities contribute over $20 million per year to RTD. Proposed service level represents approximately 5% annual return to the corridor, our request is that this is increased to 15% of our annual contribution to FasTracks, and this additional funding be used to restore existing service and add new BRT service along the US 36 corridor.


We would like to work cooperatively with RTD staff to identify specific strategies and timeline for RTD to monitor and add service.


We would also like to work with RTD to develop partnership opportunities to pilot new services to establish and build new transit markets.
 
Here is a summary of my remarks;
·        I thanked RTD and the Board for their decision on the new fare structure and their willingness to incorporate some of the schedule changes we requested.
·        While noting that no simple set of data can fully reflect the complexities of operating a large system such as RTD’s, we felt that some basic information might be helpful to
the Board in better understanding our concerns:

o  Although US36 BRT is a FasTracks route (and the only one we’re likely to get for many decades to come), its FasTracks O&M funding is planned to be ~$1.2M/year in 2019 (plus it gets funding from the base RTD tax).  The West and I-225 lines in 2019 will get ~$16M/year and the North line ~$12M/year.  I suggested we’d happily take the FasTracks funding offered to those other routes.

o  Subsidy per boarding for rail is currently $6.20 and for the B/BV route it is $2.32.  If we had a subsidy similar to that of rail we could clearly and greatly increase the number of scheduled buses on US36.

o  Subsidy per boarding for the AB to DIA is $1.92.  For the other DIA routes, the subsidy ranges from almost $3 in one case to $5 - $8 in the others.  The AB is generally mostly
to completely full, and anecdotally at least (and I’ve sure taken this bus a lot this year!) often has people standing for the entire trip, and sometimes leaves people waiting an hour for the next bus.  It is thus remarkable that we cannot get half-hour service, with direct service from Boulder Junction.

o  And the above analyses very likely overestimates the costs for our corridor’s routes since RTD apparently allocates all Eco Pass revenue across the entire system, instead of applying it to those routes where the passes are actually used.

o  Finally, while it is true that service levels can be changed fairly easily over time (unlike fare structures), those changes will occur only if a need can be demonstrated.  However, that need is very difficult to establish if the service in question doesn’t yet exist.  For example, people will take mid-day all-stop service along US36 if that is all that runs; RTD will not be able to determine how many of those riders would have much preferred to have taken an express.  Regarding the AB, it seems very clear that half-hour service would entice many new riders, as would direct service from Boulder Junction, but there is no way to “prove” that when no such service exists.
·        I ended by noting that it was essential that RTD continues to work with us on these concerns and that together we should be able to find an approach that meets Boulder’s needs.

 
Finally, here are the remarks given by Commissioner Jones:
 
Boulder County appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on RTD's proposed U.S. 36 Bus Rapid Transit service plan.  We support adoption of this plan and
appreciate RTD's efforts to collaborate with us on it.
 
US 36 BRT is critical to our community and represents the primary return on investment that our residents will receive through the FasTracks program until the future completion of the entire NW rail corridor. 
 
It is critical to ensure that the roll-out of US 36 BRT service is an overwhelming success, both for Boulder County voters and because it represents RTD's first BRT route, and will provide the template for future BRT service. 
 
We are supportive of many elements of the latest service plan, however, there are outstanding issues that we believe still need to be addressed in the near future through continued discussions between RTD and the corridor.  
 
*          The plan does not provide the US 36 corridor with any significant net new investment in improved service comparable to that provided to other FasTracks corridors; rather, it largely re-allocates the funding already programmed to the corridor. Increased FasTracks funding should be allocated by the RTD Board in order to provide more robust service throughout the US 36 corridor.
 
*          We believe that no one should experience worse service or pay more than they do today as a result of FasTracks. The latest service plan still has several areas of reduced service; most notably the elimination of mid-day express service between Boulder and Denver.

 
*          Further, the proposed plan does not adequately account for areas experiencing significant growth and increasing demand for transit service, such as the Boulder Junction/Google Campus area, the new Boulder Community Hospital complex, and the CU East Campus.
 
While the Flatiron Flyer will have a considerable level of service when it opens, the vast majority of that service is already in place through the existing RTD .6% sales tax. US 36 communities contribute well over $25 million in tax revenues from the .4% sales tax to the FasTracks system each year, however, we are only receiving $900,000 in new transit service beyond what we currently have in place today - less than 5% of what the corridor is contributing to FasTracks. RTD should provide more funding for US 36 BRT commensurate with our investment in FasTracks.
 
The NW Corridor is a team player and we have supported the buildout of the entire FasTracks transit system, including recent routes such as the SE extension, which we continue to support. But we need the team to reciprocate and support equitable investment into our piece of the FasTracks pie.
 
The adoption of this plan and start of US 36 BRT service is a major milestone for the region. Our work is not done, however. RTD needs to continue to work with the corridor to continue enhancing the service, as outlined by Mayor Folsom. 

 
With continued discussions, we are confident we can build the US 36 BRT network our corridor needs and deserves. We look forward to continued collaboration with RTD and a successful roll-out of the Flatiron Flyer system.
 
 
 
What’s next? Obviously we need to continue to work with RTD staff and the Board on these critical issues, and RTD Board Chair Chuck Sisk assured us that would be the case.  The basic data all three of us provided rather clearly demonstrates the considerable inequities in the system – not just regarding expenditures, but, more importantly I think, in providing mobility to our residents and employees.  We have also just received a draft proposal regarding new pricing for Eco Passes that we are very quickly responding to and I will provide more information about this as it becomes available.  I would encourage my council colleagues and our residents, employees, and employers to consider contacting RTD with their concerns about all of these issues given how critical they are to the success of our local and regional transportation plans.
 
--Matt