Transportation

Daily Travel, Traffic, Getting Around Safely, Alternate Transportation

User Login

Vision Statement:

1. We embrace a culture of a highly-mobile community through viable alternative transportation options (e.g., buses, light rail, shuttles, bicycles) to reduce road congestion and automobile-generated pollution.

2. The Pikes Peak region has a comprehensive, integrated, reliable, and prolific multi-modal transportation infrastructure (e.g., bus, light rail, auto, bicycle) that enables universal rider (including disabled, youth, seniors) access to all points within and beyond the city, including access to/from the Colorado Springs airport and statewide access.

3. Commerce, leisure, and commuting along the Front Range from Albuquerque to Cheyenne are significantly improved by a state-of-the-art green rapid transit system.

4. We have a top-quality, robust, and highly integrated biking infrastructure (e.g., trails, facilities, loaner bikes, maps) that encourages cycling-based transportation for functional and recreational purposes.

5. A walkable-city concept is created through the designation of automobile-restricted zones throughout the city as well as a marquee element of a downtown pedestrian and transit mall (e.g., Tejon)

6. Safety of all people should be paramount.

7. Alternate forms of transportation should be made more viable by making them more affordable.

8. The Pikes Peak regional planning commission applies cutting edge urban and suburban planning design to achieve sustainable, multi-modal communities. Transportation is an integral part of all planning and zoning decisions.

9. Our transportation infrastructure must be maintained and expanded to meet the needs of our community. Maintenance must be supported with sufficient funding.

Comments (2)
  • erwinddd

    Front Range Rail: FASTRACKS TO NOWHERE

    Every year nationally we waste billions of gallons sitting in traffic going nowhere. Meanwhile, billions of dollars of needed transportation funds are diverted to transit which handles less than 2% of all trips. These funds could address congestion by expanding capacity, but are instead hijacked in the hopes a few will jump on board. Meanwhile, everyone else sits in traffic, belching out a toxic blend of fumes going nowhere. The problem is especially acute in Colorado where Denver and Colorado Springs consistently rank among the worse cities their size for congestion. This costs Colorado commuters well over a billion annually when our economy is sinking into the abyss.

    For rail transit, there are two inescapable inconvenient truths: 1. Front Range passenger rail service ended decades ago for a very good reason. Lack of demand. Throwing billions at the expense of our highways will not change this. People traveling between cities do n...

  • erwinddd  - Front Range Rail: FASTRACKS TO NOWHERE (cont.)

    Throwing billions at the expense of our highways will not change this. People traveling between cities do not want to catch a train, then wait for a bus, then a transfer, and finally walk to there destination. Then, do it all over again to get home. Time is too valuable. 2. You cannot solve congestion by expanding capacity for a non-congested mode. Santa Fe Ave. is still congested even after light rail and HOV lanes were added. When a light rail line is proposed, the question always is, “Will it be used?” But, when a new freeway, or freeway widening (with general purpose lanes) is proposed, the question almost always is, “Will it be enough?” Says something highway demand doesn‘t it? If demand for Front Range rail really exists, why doesn’t Amtrack service the route?

    Raising taxes or increasing transit dollars to fund more VEBs (virtually empty buses) will not reduce congestion, pollution, or our dependence on foreign oil. The average gas mileage of these taxpayer funded beh...

Only registered users can write comments!
 
Joomla 1.5 Templates by Joomlashack