728 x 90
728 x 90
728 x 90
728 x 90
728 x 90

  • Did SW Light Rail Reduce Santa Fe Traffic?0

    • June 24, 2004

    Denver’s Southwest Corridor light-rail line cost far more to build than the cost of adding two new lanes onto Santa Fe Drive, which parallels the rail line. Yet it took, at most, one-third of a lane’s worth of rush hour traffic off of Santa Fe.

  • Ten Reasons to Oppose FasTracks0

    • March 19, 2004

    1. It won’t relieve traffi c congestion
    2. It won’t relieve rush-hour congestion
    3. It’s far too expensive
    4. It isn’t fast
    5. It won’t relieve air pollution—and may make ozone worse
    6. Most people will rarely or never use it
    7. We can relieve congestion without a tax increase
    8. We can have far better transit service without a tax increase
    9. It forecloses options
    10. Congestion will get far worse if it is built

  • Rail Transit Reduces Urban Livability0

    • February 15, 2004

    A Rail Livability Index shows that rail transit has reduced the livability of every urban area that has it. The index assesses the impact of rail transit on transit ridership, congestion, taxpayers, safety, energy consumption, and other measures of urban livability. The results show that urban areas that are building rail transit would be better off spending their limited transportation funds on road improvements and bus-rapid transit.

  • The Mobility Plan for Denver0

    • February 1, 2004

    DRCOG’s 2025 transportation plan would increase the amount of time the average metro-area commuter wastes in traffi c from 50 hours a year in 2001 to 87 hours by 2025. Even with FasTracks, the time wasted per commuter would increase to 83 hours. As an alternative, the Center for the American Dream proposes a Mobility Plan for Denver that would reduce annual delay to less than 45 hours per commuter. Without increasing taxes, the plan would also reduce air pollution, increase transportation safety, and provide greater mobility for low-income and transit-dependent people.

  • The False Panacea of Renewable Energy0

    • January 15, 2004

    Scribd file: IB-2004-B By  The Center for the American Dream Renewable energy- wind, solar, hydro, and biomass – is advertised as superior to coal, gas, and other non-renewables. But renewable energy comes at a high environmental and economic cost. Moreover, government subsidies to renewables may actually stifle innovation. Market forces will do a better job

  • Why Slow Tracks Won’t Help Denver0

    • January 9, 2004

    RTD’s so-called “FasTracks” plan will cost billions and do nothing to relieve congestion or increase mobility.