BACKGROUND
The Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) is studying Colorado Boulevard for Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), a project that will help transform this deadly street with high bus ridership into a truly people-friendly main street. Colorado Boulevard is in the High-Injury Network of streets that, because of their design, lead to higher rates of serious injuries and deaths than most other streets. It’s also home to many historically marginalized neighborhoods, major destinations and cultural institutions, and local businesses that make it important to prioritize moving folks through and on the street more safely and conveniently. The proposed BRT route will span Colorado Blvd from I-70 to Evans Avenue.
This project is facing watering down from CDOT leadership, which seems to be trying to bias the public against alternatives with a bus-only lane, which is the critical piece to high-quality transit on the corridor. They seem to have decided on the design where the bus still moves in–and gets stuck in–traffic, and they’re working to create a narrative that the public doesn’t want the bus to move in its own lane. However, we know that’s not the case!
We and many others want to see a dedicated bus lane the entire length of the corridor, without widening the roadway. The full benefits of BRT won’t be completely realized if the bus doesn’t have its own lane for the length of the corridor. This is crucial to keeping the buses from being stuck in traffic and able to keep to the every-ten-minutes-or-less schedule that will make transit service frequent and reliable enough to entice new riders. Attend the open house and share your support for bus-only lanes!
WHY BRT
BRT along Colorado Blvd will make this street better for everyone who travels, lives, works, or plays along the street in several ways:
-
- Transit travel times will decrease significantly because, with BRT;
-
- The bus travels in its own lane and doesn’t get stuck in traffic (this is critical!)
- People pay before boarding, which also minimizes confrontations with operators.
- Folks using mobility devices and toting other heavy rolling items can board more easily because the bus is the same level as the sidewalk, which also makes transit more accessible to everyone.
-
- Bus stops will become “station-like,” with more amenities than traditional stops; many Colorado Boulevard bus stops are currently in poor condition and feature little to no amenities.
- With fewer general traffic lanes, pedestrians will be safer crossing at intersections. Fewer lanes will also discourage speeding, making the street safer for everyone and reducing the number of serious crashes that result in injury or fatality.
- As it becomes more convenient to take the bus, fewer people will choose to drive, meaning less air and noise pollution along the corridor.
- Transit travel times will decrease significantly because, with BRT;
ADVOCATE AT THE OPEN HOUSE
-
- Wednesday, May 13
- Anytime between 5-7 p.m.
- Clayton Early Learning Center (3801 MLK Jr Blvd)
-
- Use this link to add a hold to our calendar to get reminders!
-
HOW TO ADVOCATE AT THE OPEN HOUSE
-
- Ask staff the pointed questions below. These point out the bias in the presentation materials so the project team can report back that people aren’t buying the anti-bus-lane story CDOT is trying to tell.
- Share the sample comment directly with project team members, or adapt to make it your own!
TAKE THE ONLINE SURVEY
-
- Whether you are able to attend the Open House or not, take CDOT’s online survey, and let them know a bus-only lane is essential for the success of BRT.
- Use the tips/sample responses below to fill in the survey.
POINTED QUESTIONS
Community engagement & “Lead Agency Support”:
-
- What does it mean that “Lead Agency Support” is “very poor” for ‘Center-running’?
- How do the other agencies working on this project (RTD, DRCOG, the Denver Department of Transportation and Infrastructure) score the alternatives, and why isn’t that information available?
- Why has CDOT seemingly made a determination for ‘Mixed Flow’ before hearing from the public during its own public engagement opportunity?
- How can agency support even be determined at this point, when there hasn’t been any analysis of Greenhouse gas (GHG) impacts, a critical consideration for both CDOT and DRCOG (the region’s metropolitan planning organization)?
“Construction Impacts”
-
- Why are “Construction Impacts” being factored in at this point? Wouldn’t meaningful analysis of that occur at a later stage, when there’s more of an understanding about the design?
- Does this take into consideration any mitigation strategies that could help support businesses during construction?
“Pedestrian comfort” and “Biking Connectivity”
-
- Has the project team analyzed the pedestrian and safety impacts in equal measure with the traffic impacts, or has more analysis been done on how this project would affect drivers?
- What improvements are being made for people walking and biking that qualify ‘Mixed Flow’ as scoring “good” in that category? Since all three alternatives score “good” for “Bike Connectivity,” are the improvements the same for all three designs?
-
- Aren’t there supposed to be considerably fewer improvements to the pedestrian environment than the Colfax BRT?
- How would the ‘Mixed Flow’ alternative reinforce safe speeds on the corridor, or shorten pedestrian crossing distances?
-
“Cost” & “Ridership”
-
- What is the cost difference between each alternative?
- How is cost figured in as part of the scoring? Is it cost as it compares to an increase in ridership, or some other goal?
- Why is ‘Side-running’ scored as a “moderate” cost, the same as ‘Mixed Flow’? If they are comparable in cost, doesn’t the increase in ridership make the ‘Side-running’ alternative the better choice?
- What kind of analysis has been done on the possible ridership gains from each alternative? What does that analysis include? How detailed has this analysis been compared to analysis of potential impacts on drivers?
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
-
- How does Mixed Flow help meet Colorado’s new Greenhouse Gas Emission rule?
SAMPLE COMMENT
Use this sample comment to provide input at the open house.
I’m excited that CDOT is redesigning Colorado Boulevard to improve transit service and safety! To make the most of this opportunity, CDOT must include a continuous, dedicated bus lane for the length of the corridor, without widening the roadway. A dedicated bus lane will significantly increase bus speed and reliability, which is what transit needs to be convenient for more people to take it. It will also improve access to work and educational opportunities, and to essential services like healthcare.
Bus-only lanes, along with wider multi-use paths for people walking, rolling, and biking, are what we need to see real safety improvements. Fewer lanes make it safer for people crossing the intersection by reducing the number of interactions with cars, and research shows just the presence of a bus lane slows drivers down. With 18 people dying or seriously injured each year on Colorado Blvd, it is critical we make Colorado Boulevard a corridor for moving many people safely, not just cars quickly.
[ADD YOUR PERSONAL EXPERIENCE AND OPINIONS. Do you ride transit, especially along Colorado Boulevard? Have you had the experience of your bus getting stuck in traffic, or had an unsafe experience? What has been your experience crossing Colorado Boulevard?]
I urge you to select one of the design alternatives that gives the bus its own lane.
Thank you.
SURVEY GUIDE
Use the tips/sample responses below to fill in the official survey. Considering that the survey forces you to choose between equally important outcomes (like ‘Improved bus travel time’ vs ‘Better corridor safety’), it’s critical to use the open-answer text boxes to critique these false choices. We can have a Colorado Blvd that is useful for all users and safe, for example. Let them know you reject this forced choice!
Question 4
We believe that Alternative 3, featuring center- and side-running bus lanes, is the best choice. Of all the options, it improves safety and transit travel time the most. Additionally, we believe that by advocating for the center-running option, side-running becomes the compromise we’re willing to accept—NOT ‘Mixed Flow’.
Question 4.e.
Here’s a sample response:
My top choice is Alternative 3 (center- and side- running) because it will increase safety for everyone the most. Fewer lanes make it safer for people crossing the intersection by reducing the number of interactions with cars, and research shows just the presence of a bus lane slows drivers down. With 18 people dying or seriously injured each year on Colorado Blvd, it is critical we make Colorado Boulevard a corridor for moving many people safely, not just cars quickly.
Additionally, this alternative improves bus speed and reliability the most, which is what transit needs to be convenient for more people to take it. It will also improve access to work and educational opportunities, and to essential services like healthcare.
Bus-only lanes, along with wider multi-use paths for people walking, rolling, and biking, are what we need to see real safety improvements.
Question 10
This is a great opportunity to critique the forced choices above and to share all of what you want to see on Colorado Blvd. Here’s a sample response:
I want to share my disappointment with the structure of some of these questions. For example, I support more than three of the outcomes listed in question 3. I believe we can have improved bus travel time, higher transit ridership, enhanced pedestrian and bicycle connectivity AND better corridor safety. It is disingenuous to pit these outcomes against each other, when research shows they go hand-in-hand (improved bus travel time leading to higher ridership, for example). Additionally, it is unclear to me what ‘Low environmental impacts (historic properties, parks)’ means, and why ‘Improved Environmental impacts’ like decreased greenhouse gas emissions and cleaner air—actual environmental impacts that make a real difference in mitigating climate change—are NOT on the list.
Question 5 is similarly unfair. All of the amenities listed are part of providing dignified, useful service for a high-quality Bus Rapid Transit project. This project ought to have all of them. Again, it’s unacceptable to pit ‘Safety and security’ against other essential amenities like ‘Protection from weather.’
I strongly support Alternative 3 of this project, with high-quality bus service where buses move in their own lanes, and with the useful and dignified amenities that are an expected part of Bus Rapid Transit. The true choice here is NOT safety vs dignity, or improved bus travel time vs higher transit ridership, or even ‘Enhanced pedestrian and bicycle connectivity’ vs ‘Improved bus travel time’. The choice is do we focus this project on moving people, or moving vehicles? I choose people.