My Plans for Building Better Transit

RTD exists, first and foremost, to serve the transportation needs of Denver metro area residents. In exchange for funding from residents and transit riders in the form of sales tax and fares, RTD is expected to provide not just a transit network that connects residents and visitors to useful destinations, but also to create a transit experience that prioritizes the time, convenience, comfort, accessibility, and daily needs of as many current and future transit riders as possible. If the rider experience is not the agency's #1 priority, then RTD is doing a disservice to its existing riders – especially those for whom transit is a lifeline – and the agency will continue to struggle to grow ridership. Valuing the experience of our riders is one way to grow ridership - and meaningful ridership growth can make the Denver area more affordable, easier to get around, more vibrant, and more sustainable.

Sounds great in theory – but what does this mean in practice? Let's look at some examples:

• Service reliability is crucial: The agency must not commit to schedules on which it cannot follow through, whether due to staffing shortages, planned maintenance, or other foreseeable factors. We can all acknowledge that service reliability will never be perfect due to the near-infinite combinations of unforeseen circumstances that can affect travel, but the agency must do as much as practical to minimize these impacts and maintain agile, adaptable service delivery. Excellent service reliability requires inherent staffing inefficiency, as enough extra vehicles, operators, and maintainers must be ready on any given day to handle unforeseen issues and maintain state-of-good-repairTransit industry term for maintaining infrastructure and vehicles in good working condition to prevent breakdowns and service disruptions. Learn more..
• Adjust schedules for accuracy: When published schedules consistently fail to match up with reality (slow zones, detours, construction, etc.), the agency must be willing to make on-the-fly schedule changes outside of the planned service changes Service changes are typically made three times per year (January, April/May, and August/September) and include schedule adjustments, route changes, and seasonal routes. Learn about upcoming service changes. to provide information to operators and customers that is as accurate and up-to-date as possible.
• Better real-time updates: Notifications of delays and cancellations must be sent in a timely manner and widely published. This includes quickly and consistently updating displays at stations, publishing service alerts and NextRideRTD's trip-planning tool that shows when the next bus or train will arrive. Check out NextRide., and updating the GTFS-RT feedGeneral Transit Feed Specification - Real Time: A standardized data format published by transit agencies that details live updates of vehicle schedules, locations, and temporary updates. Learn more. so that third party apps such as Maps and Transit receive timely updates. If this requires infrastructure upgrades, around-the-clock customer support or dispatch staffing, and/or modernized AVLAutomatic Vehicle Location – GPS or other location tracking systems installed on buses and trains to monitor their real-time position. Learn more. hardware on vehicles, then these upgrades must be prioritized and funded. RTD cannot continue to leave customers in the dark and uninformed when delays and cancellations occur, and too often these notifications are not sent until after a cancelled trip was scheduled to run. This applies not just to fixed-route transit, but also - and especially - for Access-A-RideRTD's ADA paratransit service, which requires trip reservations at least 24 hours in advance, provides a 30-minute pickup time window, and requires a minimum wait of one hour between trip drop-off and the next pick-up. Learn more. and FlexRideAn on-demand bus service, reserved at least 10 minutes in advance, that operates within specific geographic zones, often to provide first-and-last-mile connections within areas not otherwise served by fixed routes. Learn more. trips, where customers have pre-scheduled pickup times and often a longer wait time if their trip needs to be re-scheduled.
• Hold last trips to a higher standard: The last trip of the night on each route should be held to a higher service availability standard than the network on average. Service availability is the measure of how many trips are actually run compared to how many trips are scheduled, essentially, what percentage of trips were not cancelled. The impacts of cancelling the last trip of the night have the potential to be much worse than a mid-day cancellation. As such, RTD should commit to a goal of 100% service availability for the last trip of the day on each route, independent from the average service availability goal(s) set for the entire network.
• Evaluate disruption to riders when awarding contracts: Maintenance and construction solicitations must include an evaluation of customer/service disruption. This evaluation must become a standard part of the award process, in addition to traditional criteria such as compliance with technical specifications, cost, and proposer's qualifications. If a particular proposal minimizes the impact to the schedule and the riders, RTD must be able to prioritize this aspect, weighed against cost, schedule, and expertise.
• Enforce Code of Conduct violations: RTD's current strategy for maintaining a welcoming environment on its vehicles relies heavily on fare enforcement. I believe that fare enforcement is a bit of a distraction from the real behaviors that degrade the rider experience; and while fare enforcement should not be removed, I believe we need to re-think the strategy. Anti-social behaviors such as harassment, drug use, and disruptive noise are much bigger contributors to riders' perception of transit than whether or not other customers paid their fare, and RTD should act on that. Just as importantly, RTD must make a public commitment to riders that it will be enforcing its Code of ConductOtherwise known as "Respect the Ride". Learn more., and run relevant marketing and public information campaigns.
• Update fare policies: Switch from a "fare enforcement" to a "fare collection" mindset, where fare evasion is not treated with tickets and fines, but instead staff are able to sell tickets on the spot, perhaps at a slight "convenience" markup. This allows innocent fare "evasion" or forgetfulness to be relatively unpunished, allows the agency to still collect fare revenue, and redirects any more serious enforcement resources towards maintaining a civil environment at stations and on board. Along with this, income- and hardship-based fare discountsRTD's LiVE fare program seeks to create a more equitable fare pricing structure Learn more. must have exceptionally low friction to apply for and a "free" tier, so that fare collection efforts are not wrongly targeting those who simply cannot afford it, and giving everyone an affordable option to use transit.
• Speed up transit trips: RTD won't truly deliver a great experience until it is convenient and time-efficient. Transit does have a built-in advantage in that time spent on the bus or the train (instead of driving a car) can be used by passengers as they wish; reading a book, catching up on e-mails, planning a grocery list, studying, etc. However, just because this time can be used for other purposes doesn't mean we shouldn't minimize transit travel times as much as possible. Upgrades to infrastructure such as dedicated bus lanes, signal priority, and improved rail alignments make a huge difference. Route planning changes to increase stop spacing and remove circuitous route geometry will also create improved speeds. Operational policy changes such as moving mid-route driver changes to occur only at terminal stops instead of while passengers are on the bus creates additional small improvements. I want to explore all of these options and more, no matter how seemingly minor, because truly improving transit travel times will require all of the above.

RTD faces budget challenges in the years aheadRTD's 2025-2029 financial forecast shows significant budget constraints. View the forecast (PDF)., due to deferred maintenance, vehicle replacement costs, and economic challenges that are likely to hurt sales tax revenue. This will only be further exacerbated by requests to commit substantial amounts of money to a three-trips-per-day rail service between Denver and Fort Collins. Major investment in expansion of the RTD network must come with new sources of sufficient funding, both to cover the initial upfront costs but also to account for the additional yearly operations and maintenance costs. Before investing RTD's limited revenues into network expansion, RTD must first use its funding to ensure that its most vital routes are operating reliably and efficiently. In parallel, RTD must be pursuing new and expanded sources of funding as critical steps in building a transit network that serves the Denver region as best as possible.

The State of Colorado has already created some new funding streams via SB24-184 and SB24-230Colorado state bills that provide funding for transit and passenger rail projects across the state. SB24-184 | SB24-230. Only a fraction of this money will likely go to RTD, specifically earmarked for use on expansion of the N Line and the buildout of Northwest RailPlanned commuter rail service from Denver to Boulder and Longmont. Current project plans call for a diesel locomotive pulling three passenger cars, running three round trips per day. View financial details (PDF).. Joint Service on Northwest Rail is projected to need about $40m of additional not-yet-accounted-for annual fundingPresentation showing the estimated annual operating costs for joint RTD/FRPR/CDOT service. View presentation (PDF)., most of which seems to be expected to come from RTD.

SB24-184 and SB24-230 are expected to provide an average of approximately $160m per year over the next nine years to transit and passenger rail projects across the state (including CDOT's Mountain RailCDOT's passenger rail project connecting Denver to Craig, through Winter Park, Steamboat Springs, and other communities in between. Learn more., Front Range Passenger RailProposed passenger rail service connecting Fort Collins, Denver, Pueblo and communities in between. Learn more., and other transit agencies around the state), so only a fraction of this money will go to RTD. None of the SB184 money is currently planned for RTD. 20% of the SB230 funding is dedicated to RTD's N-Line extension and Northwest Rail, accounting for about $11m in annual funding for each project. 70% of the SB230 funding is set aside for operations grants, available to all transit agencies in the state. RTD must be very aggressive at pursuing additional funding through grant applicationsOther local transit agencies in Colorado have secured around $15m so far this year from state grants. RTD should have had grant applications ready to go as soon as this money became available. See awards.. The first round of SB230 awards limits RTD to ~$9m in funding, with future year funding availability determined by evaluation of multiple factors. If RTD is diligent about pursuing this money, my operating assumption is that approximately 60-70% of the operations funding - based on the percentage of total Vehicle Revenue MilesThe total miles that transit vehicles travel while in service carrying passengers (excludes deadhead miles to/from garages). and Unlinked Passenger TripsTotal boardings counted separately - if you take a bus to the train station and then board a train, that counts as 2 unlinked trips. that RTD accounts for across the state. This would work out to ~$40m in annual operations funding. $40m in operations funding would be most efficiently used by investing in new, modern transit vehicles (and their supporting maintenance and charging infrastructure) along with expansions in bus operations (first expanding frequency and span of existing high-capacity routes, and then creating new routes). Using bus route 43RTD's Route 43 runs between Central Park Station and the Auraria campus. It is a pretty middle-of-the-road route as far as cost, ridership, and operating efficiency goes, so I believe it is a great example to use. It averages about 12 passengers per trip on weekdays. View route details. as a reference, every additional ~$5mIf this sounds expensive, consider that the annual operating cost of this bus route is approximately equivalent to re-paving ~4 miles of a two-lane road. FHWA Estimate, in 2018 Dollars (Multiply by 1.3x to approximate 2025). dedicated annually to bus operations can support an ~8 mile bus route running at 15-minute frequencies.

I believe, in the near term, RTD must focus its budget on the most efficient and most heavily used subset of its network, investing in these routes to deliver consistent, reliable, high-frequency, competitive service. Doubling down on core routes will increase trust in RTD and create positive experiences for existing – and new – customers. Building public trust in this way is crucial to set RTD up to be able to seek additional funding in the future, which can and should then be used to expand upon the core network by incrementally adding high-quality, high-frequency service.

I am skeptical of asking voters for yet more sales tax revenue until we have a very well-thought-out service expansion plan, but I believe that in the meantime, RTD can and should be partnering more closely with local governments and organizations to share the costs of expanding local-focused service. In addition, neighborhood EcoPasses, employer-sponsored EcoPassesBulk purchase programs where organizations buy unlimited-ride passes for their members/employees at discounted rates. Learn about EcoPasses., and monthly transit passesUnlimited RTD usage for $88 (or $27 LiVE fare) per month. Learn about monthly passes. should be priced in a way that encourage most casual riders to buy longer-term passes. These also must be marketed well enough that they become widespread - becoming both a useful revenue source and also an incentive to ride transit more frequently.

Planning a transit network always involves tradeoffs. The biggest tradeoff that transit agencies such as RTD typically face is how much of their resources to dedicate to routes that provide geographic coverage versus routes that prioritize generating high ridershipTransit planner Jarrett Walker explains in detail the framework for understanding this fundamental choice. Read Jarrett Walker's post.. RTD faces especially tough choices in this respect, because the agency operates a uniquely large service area of over 2,300 square miles2,342 square miles, to be exact. View Facts & Figures.. Operating bus and rail service across an area this large is difficult and expensive; in general, the further routes get from the urban cores of Denver and Boulder, the more RTD spends on service per passenger.

I believe that RTD's ability to provide cost-effective, useful service starts with prioritizing its highest-usage routes, serving high-density areas, regional connections, and major destinations. I aim to ensure that these routes receive the investment needed to make them consistent, reliable, and useful, while providing a great rider experience. In other words, I favor investing in a transit service plan that prioritizes ridership over coverage. "Coverage" routes cannot cease to exist entirely, as they still provide important access to many people. To strike the right balance, I would like to see RTD commit to a specific percentage of the operating budget that will be dedicated to providing "coverage" routes, likely in the ~10-20% range.

This goes beyond just investing in existing high-ridership routes, however. Part of prioritizing ridership means incentivizing development that is easy, and cost-efficient, to serve with high-quality transit. Dense, mixed-use developmentsTransit-Oriented Development (TOD): neighborhoods designed with a mix of residential, commercial, and office uses within walking distance of high-quality transit. Learn about TOD. are a perfect fit for any good transit network. RTD must work with local municipalities and developers to encourage zoning and building practices that allow for good transit service to be provided, and must commit to offering dedicated transit service to new and redeveloped areas that meet certain standards for density, activity, road geometry, and land use.

RTD has fallen behind many other transit agencies across the United States when it comes to modernizing its transit fleet. Two major examples stand out: RTD's light rail fleet and RTD's bus fleet.

• Light Rail Modernization: RTD still operates high-floor light rail trains
  RTD's current high-floor trains require climbing steps to board. Attribution: Xnatedawgx, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons
  , where riders ascend a set of steps to board. To provide accessibility, large rampsKnown as a "high block" or "mini-high platform". See an example in Google Street View. are installed at stations, though the ramp often only creates accessibility to one door of the train. Critically, the Federal Transit Administration no longer considers high blocks as providing a "fully accessible" solution - this is an important consideration if RTD plans to apply for an federal grants related to its light rail vehicles and stations. Upgrading RTD's light rail fleet means replacing the current high-floor trains with modern, sleek, low-floor trains
  Modern low-floor trains allow near-level boarding without steps. Attribution: IngolfBLN, CC BY-SA 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons
  . These newer trains are standard equipment for light rail and tram systems around much of the rest of the world and the US. The low-floor train cars provide nearly-level boarding, where boarding does not require climbing up steps (or hauling a bike or stroller up steps). This also removes the need for a dedicated ramp at stations, which frees up space at station platforms, allows stations to better integrate into the downtown streetscape, and creates accessible boarding at all doors instead of only the front door of the train. Many commercially available low-floor trains run on the same power supply and track infrastructure as our current trains, and use similar maintenance facilities and equipment, making it very feasible to run a pilot program where a small number of used low-floor vehicles are run in the current system to learn about their operational nuances and generate passenger feedback. I would like to see RTD commit to very quickly purchasing a small number of used low-floor trains, running them on the current light rail network, gathering feedback from passengers, operators, and mechanics, and then rapidly implementing this feedback into a full fleet transition plan; but let's start quickly, with a small initial commitment, instead of creating endless studies.
• Bus Fleet Electrification: RTD's entire bus fleet, other than the MallRide (or FreeRide if you've somehow already adapted to the new naming)RTD's free shuttle service along 16th Street in downtown Denver, recently rebranded to FreeRide. Learn more. is diesel-powered. It is time for RTD to follow through on its fleet transition and sustainability commitments, and begin replacing its diesel buses with battery-electric buses, and diesel-electric hybrids for longer routes. Four years after placing an order for electric buses which was later cancelledIn 2021, RTD placed an order for 17 battery-electric buses, but later cancelled the order in 2023 due to a lack of maintenance, storage, and charging infrastructure. Learn more., RTD has not made meaningful progress in building out any new electric bus infrastructure, and has produced an under-whelming fleet transition plan that is focused primarily on hybrid-electric busesLearn more about the Facilities and Fleet Transition Plan.. RTD's inaction has caused it to miss potentially tens of millions of dollars of state and federal grant money dedicated to electrifying buses, and we can wait no longer. Transitioning RTD's bus fleet from diesel to electric is a significant investment, but one that I believe will pay off for bus riders and Denver residents. It is about much more than emissions; electric buses provide a much smoother, quieter rider experience, and also benefit everyone outside of the bus with less noise, zero emissions, and faster acceleration away from stops (which creates faster overall trip times). In addition, electric buses tend to be easier and cheaper to maintain compared to diesel and diesel-hybrids. To start this fleet upgrade, RTD will not only need to invest in new buses (there are already many old buses in the system in need of replacement as it is), but must also add charging and maintenance capabilities to the fleet garages. RTD has a fleet of more than 900 buses - each of which are expected to operate for at least 12 years or 500,000 miles - so I recognize that a full fleet transition is more than a decade away. I believe, right now, in order to show that the agency is truly committed to a more sustainable future where rider experience takes precedence, RTD must make aggressive plans to electrify one of its core routes - either Colfax BRT or Route 0 would be my choice. Both of these benefit from proximity to locations that could be quickly upgraded with on-route fast charging infrastructureFast chargers for buses typically consist of an overhead retractable-pantograph unit which makes contact with a terminal on top of the bus and charges at 300 to 450kW, keeping bus batteries topped up with only minutes of charging in between trips. See an example from another transit agency's project. (East Metro garage for Colfax BRT and Englewood Station for Route 0).
  Colfax BRTBus Rapid Transit project under construction along East Colfax Avenue, one of Denver's busiest corridors. View project details. provides an excellent opportunity to introduce battery electric buses, since the originally-planned diesel hybrid buses are no longer offered for sale. Installation of 450kW on-route chargers at the East Metro garage would provide the capability of keeping the bus batteries topped off with less than 6 minutes of charging time after each round trip. Due to driver break requirements, it is very likely that buses will have at least 10 minutes of stationary time available in between trips. Dedication and outfitting of existing or new space at the East Metro facility will be needed to safely maintain and store electric buses, but given the proximity of this facility to the Colfax BRT route, it is a prime candidate for a rapid upgrade project specifically intended to support Colfax BRT.
  Route 0 is operated out of the Platte garage, though unlike Colfax BRT, the garage is not located directly at the start/end point of the route. The advantage of quickly electrifying Route 0 is that it could operate the same buses as Colfax BRT, allowing RTD to gain experience with 60-foot articulated battery-electric buses prior to implementing them on Colfax, if Colfax is initially run with diesel buses. The Platte garage (which already operates the electric MallRide fleet) is planned for upgrades to its electric bus maintenance and charging infrastructure in RTD's existing facilities transition plan, which means that some of this work could potentially be accelerated to support an earlier implementation of an all-electric Route 0.
  Overall, I believe that a much more aggressive and ambitious fleet transition plan is needed, and implementation should begin to support electrification of one route as soon as possible.

Trip times on RTD buses have to be shortened if transit is going to become a more competitive mode of travel. The most effective way to do this is to make infrastructure improvements on the corridors where major bus routes operate. One version of this implementation is to invest hundreds of millions of dollars into a years-long construction project to build Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)High-quality bus service with dedicated lanes, level boarding, off-board fare payment, and frequent service - combining the speed of rail with the flexibility of buses. Learn about BRT. – but this is not the only way, nor is it my first choice. RTD must work closely with local municipalities to identify opportunities for and implement transit signal priority (TSP)Technology that detects approaching buses/trains and extends green lights or shortens red lights to reduce delays at intersections. How TSP works., dedicated bus lanes, and queue jump lanesSpecial lanes that allow buses to bypass lines of stopped traffic at intersections, often combined with signal priority. Learn more. where advantageous.

• Transit Signal Priority (TSP): Transit signal priorityTSP systems use sensors or GPS to detect transit vehicles and adjust traffic signals to reduce delays. Technical overview. uses technology installed at intersections to detect approaching transit vehicles (can work for buses or trains) and give green lights to the direction the vehicle is traveling. For routes that travel through lots of intersections, TSP speeds up travel times and makes schedules much more reliableOverall time savings of up to 18% have been seen in practice, with time savings generally increasing for routes with more traffic signals, such as the densely-spaced signals in downtown Denver. Learn more.. Combining this with bus stops located on the far side of the intersection (instead of the near side) reduces the number of times a bus must stop and reduces how long buses are stopped throughout their route. This is generally a very cost-effective solutionHardware costs can be as low as $2,500 per intersection, which is miniscule compared to the ~$500,000 price tag of a traffic light. See examples of project costs. to increase transit speed and reliability.
• Dedicated Bus Lanes: Dedicated bus lanes provide dedicated street space for buses that frees them from traffic congestion. This makes a huge difference on highly congested streets, and drastically improves the speed and reliability of buses. High-ridership bus routes, running on streets with little or no on-street parking (such as Federal Blvd or Colorado BlvdTwo of Denver's major north-south arterials that carry high bus ridership but suffer from traffic congestion.) that are considered for BRT should first be given dedicated lanes – as quickly as possible – as this requires minimal up-front investment; often just paint and some signs. The argument for using street space for dedicated bus lanes is that it provides excellent capacity due to the high number of people that can fit on a bus. With reasonably full, frequent enoughOn the order of a bus every 5-10 minutes, depending on bus size. buses, a bus lane can provide more total travel capacity than if it were just a car lane. It also creates the additional benefit of not slowing down traffic whenever the bus stops to let passengers on or off. More bus lanes are needed throughout the network in order to provide reasonably efficient travel times by bus, especially on our region's most congested roads. To ensure our bus lanes operate as effectively as possible, they must be kept clear from parked cars and other obstructions – buses and traffic signals should be equipped with automated detection systems to identify and ticket vehicles that block the bus lane, which slow down buses and overall traffic.

RTD's rail network provides generally good regional access to and from Denver, and creates a great option for RTD's suburban customers to drive or bike to a train station in order to use transit to get to Denver or across our region. Trains generally provide higher capacity than buses, and when well-designed can provide faster travel times. However, like any transit route, frequency and reliability often have the biggest impact on how useful the route is to potential customers.

The two highest ridership commuter rail trains, the ARTD's A Line provides service between Union Station and Denver International Airport. View A Line info. and NRTD's N Line connects downtown Denver with Thornton, Northglenn, and other northern communities. View N Line info. lines, both have major sections of single-trackTrains going both directions must share a section of track, and only one train can travel at a time.. This limits how frequently these routes can run, and it also means that if problems occur on this section of track, the train cannot run at all because there is not a second track to detour trains onto.

• A Line Double-Tracking: The A Line is a critical link between downtown Denver and the airport, and carries over 14,500 passengers on an average weekday. Despite this, it never runs more frequently than every 15 minutes and only runs every 30 minutes after 7pmView A Line schedule.. Investing in this route by upgrading the single-track sections to double-track would improve the frequency and reliability of the A – making 10-minute frequency possible and allowing the train to run at higher frequencies such as every 10 or 15 minutes much later into the evening, along with making this route less sensitive to problems or maintenance on a section of track. The bonus here is that the bulk of the A Line's single track exists on the property of DEN(or DIA for those of us that aren't sticklers about ICAO codes and therefore fun at parties), which means that the opportunity exists for RTD to partner with the airport to share the costs of upgrading this infrastructure. Previously published FAA memos and policy allow for the airport to use revenueAirport revenue, especially Airport Improvement Program (AIP) grants and Passenger Facility Charges (PFCs), is typically restricted and can only be spent on airport-related projects. However, spending on transit access to/from airports is allowed in many cases, and Denver meets the typical criteria. View FAA policy. to contribute to this project. Call me a cynic, but when the airport makes nearly a quarter of a billion dollars per year on parking feesDEN parking revenue provides significant funding that could support transit improvements. View airport financials (PDF, page 28)., I'm thinking we're going to have to work extra hard at RTD to get the airport's help building out this project – but I am committed to building the case for this project and bringing the airport to the table.
• N Line Improvements: The N Line is an important connection between the northern suburbs, which are growing rapidly, and downtown. Its frequency is limited to every 30 minutes due to extensive single track sections, and despite strong growth in ridership the N has not been able to be upgraded to more frequent service. This is a significantly trickier project than double-tracking the A due to a large section of elevated single track. Travel times between the stations on either end of the single-track Skyway BridgeThe nearly 2-mile-long elevated bridge that is a major infrastructure constraint limiting N Line frequency. are approximately seven minutes in each direction, meaning that even if the rest of the line is double-tracked, this section would not allow reliable 15-minute frequency. Double tracking key portions of the rest of the line, however, could bring the N line to its originally-promised 20-minute frequency at peak timesN Line Facts and Figures., and create a system slightly more resilient to maintenance and other disruptions. RTD should pursue a study and a preliminary design to allow 20-minute service on the N line.

Other Rail Improvements: Beyond these two major upgrades of existing rail infrastructure, there are many other minor opportunities to increase speed an reliability of train travel in RTD's network.

• Give trains priority through road crossings at signalized intersections by implementing transit signal priority (TSP)Some examples of intersections where trains would move faster and more reliably with TSP: D & H lines crossing Kalamath and Speer. | R line crossing E 33rd..
• Fix crossings where crossing gates or other safety infrastructure are insufficientOne example of this is where the B/G line track crosses under I-25. See Location., removing the need for trains to stop prior to crossing a road.
• Work with the Public Utilities Commission (PUC)Colorado state agency that regulates rail safety, including speed limits at crossings and stations. Learn about the PUC. to allow light rail trains to immediately accelerate as they leave station platforms (next time you are taking the train, compare the light rail trains with how quickly the commuter rail trains accelerate out of the stations).
• Upgrade signal and switch infrastructure to better handle bi-directional travel on each track, reducing the need for speed restrictions during disruptions that require routing rail operations onto one track.

RTD has invested a significant amount of money into its rail transit, but to make the most of the infrastructure that exists today, I believe we need to make these additional investments in the system to increase the capability and the performance of the existing network. I believe that this is a more cost-effective, quicker solution for increasing ridership and useability compared to building out new rail extensions. I'm not against expansions of the rail network - but we should optimize what we already have, first.