transportation gaps analysis · crossing thresholds into the older adult segment in which they will...

Transportation Gaps Analysis:

Adams County – Older Adults

Prepared for Denver Regional Mobility & Access Council

Alexander Bergeron and Mathieu Menard

University of Colorado Denver – Planning Methods – Fall 2013

http://www.drmac-co.org/

Bergeron, Menard

Adams County- Older Adults 1

Introduction

This report will serve to act as a gaps analysis of transit options for older adults in

Adams County, CO. Following the analysis of existing gaps, recommendations to

address these gaps are provided. The analysis is organized into five sections:

Demographic Analysis, Mobility Audit, Stakeholder Interview, Gaps Analysis, and

Recommendations.

A preliminary demographic analysis is provided. The demographic analysis

includes a statistical analysis of the focus population, a geographic analysis of Adams

County, population growth trends, and the projected impact of demographic change on

Adams County.

A mobility audit of a chosen study area has been completed. In this section,

results of the audit are discussed, as are the potential impacts of the findings of the

audit on the access to transit of older adults in Adams County. This section concludes

with a critique of the methodology of the audit.

Several members of the focus group participated in an in-person interview. The

interview is summarized in the Stakeholder Interview section. This section also includes

an introduction to service providers discussed in the interview, and the setting of the

interview, as well as a brief conclusion and methodology critique.

The gaps analysis is broken into six sub-sections: trip purpose, service area,

service time, eligibility, type of service, and affordability. Each of these sub-sections

provides a discussion of gaps in transit service found relating to older adults in Adams

County. The gaps analysis uses data gathered from the mobility audit and stakeholder

interview to support its conclusions.

The Recommendations section will mirror the sub-sections in the gaps analysis,

and will address ways the gaps in coverage could be mitigated. It will also provide

suggestions on how these gaps could be closed through policy and physical changes.

Bergeron, Menard


Demographic Analysis

This section will provided a demographic analysis of the population of Adams

County, CO. Of particular interest is the demographics of the older adult populations in

Adams County and Colorado as compared to the rest of the United States.

Demographic change within the older adult cohort, and implication of this change

concludes this section.

Statistical Analysis

The population of Adams County, Colorado was 443,605 persons at the time that

the provided data was collected (all demographic data has been provided in course

materials). Of the total population, 54,688 people were over the age of 60. This

constitutes 12.4% of the population. It is worth noting that at 14.7% of the population

and 13.2%, respectively, the age groups of 35-to-44-years-old and 45-to-54-years-old

share similar proportions of the total populace with the target older adults (those 60

years and older). This information could provide valuable insight on when government

and the markets can expect to have groups of nearly evenly sized population segments

crossing thresholds into the older adult segment in which they will need additional

healthcare and relevant services, as detailed in this study. For purposes of clarity, Chart

1 depicts the proportions of the entire population composition of all Adams County

residents based on five year increments and Chart 2 shows the difference between

those 60 years of age and older and the remainder of the population.

The total population of Adams County is composed of 50.2% males and 49.8%

females. Contrasting the composition by gender of the target population of those 60

years of age or older. Here, Adams County is comprised of 54.9% females and 45.1%

males. Not only has the dynamic shifted to include more females than males in the older

population, but significantly so. This information indicates that as a population cohort

ages, females tend to outlive their male counterparts and with a widening margin. This

could have implications to specific services sought by older adults and preferences in

other areas of the market. To show plainly these differences in gender makeup, the two

Bergeron, Menard


charts below show the proportion of males to females across the total populace of

Adams County and that proportion in the older adults segment, respectively. It is

important to note that the data used to create this second chart came in part from

information provided through a data searching web application by the Colorado

Department of Local Affairs’ Demographic Web Application. This information portrayed

exact population totals, per the 2010 US Census, for adults 65 years of age and older.

That renders the information provided approximate, but comfortably so. Simple

percentage calculations were used to create a graphic depicting this information if it

were to represent the target population, or those 60 years or older.

Chart 1:

8.6

15.5

13.5

16.3

14.7

13.2

9.6

4.9

2.5

1

0 - 5 6 -14 15 - 24 25 - 34 35 - 44 45 - 54 55 - 64 65 - 74 75 - 84 > 85

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Age

Perc

ent

Composition of Population By Age

Bergeron, Menard


Chart 2, 3, 4:

87.6

12.4

Under 60 years old

60 years of age or older

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Percent

Target Population - Older Adults as a Percentage of Total Populace

50.2

49.8

Male

Female

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Percent

Gender - Percent of Total Population

45.1

54.9

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Male

Female

Percent

Gender – Percent of Total Population 60+ Years Old

Bergeron, Menard


Geographic Analysis: A Divided County

Adams County is essentially divided into two distinct geographic areas. The

western third, which is a component of the Denver metropolitan area, and the eastern

portion, which is mainly unincorporated agricultural land. The eastern border of the

western segment, separating the more populous portion of the county from that which is

sparsely populated, is for this purpose, generally defined by Interstate 76 which cuts a

northeast/ southwest diagonal through the county. This western portion also includes

the ‘finger’ in the southwest area of the county south of East 40th Avenue and west of

Picadilly Road. This western area contains the cities of Aurora, Commerce City,

Westminster, Brighton and Thornton as its major population centers. It also contains all

of the RTD bus lines in the county. The eastern expanse contains no major population

centers and is comprised mostly of farming communities.

The western area of the county contains the census block groups with the

highest percent of older adults, with concentrations as high as 90.49%. Within this

western section, older adults were spread relatively evenly. There is a pocket of

agricultural land in the northeast portion of the western section with a significant area

containing a lower percentage of older adults. The eastern portion of the county

contains no block groups with an older population above 17%. Due to this low

population, there are few census blocks in the eastern area, meaning there is little

statistical impact from the low percentage of older adults in the east.

In terms of raw data, there are 257 independent entities in Adams County, or in

this application, 257 census block groups. The minimum percent of older adults is

0.00% while the maximum is 90.47%. The mean percentage of older adults is 13.47%

with a standard deviation of 9.70%, and the median is 11.97%. Block groups near the

maximum are clear outliers, as there are only two data points within 15% of the

maximum, and they should not skew the data.

Bergeron, Menard


Figure 1: Map depicts the concentration of older adults in Adams County block groups:

Bergeron, Menard


Growth Trends: The Nation and Colorado are Aging Rapidly

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the population of Americans aged 65 and

over1 is expected to more than double in the next half century, moving from a population

of 42.1 million to a predicted 92 million by the year 2060. By this time, one in five

Americans will be in the over-65 age bracket, up from one in seven in 2012. In a 2012

press release, the U.S. Census Bureau also reported that the number of “oldest old” (85

and over) will triple during the same time period.

This dramatic shift will be even more pronounced in Colorado and its Front

Range counties. In Colorado, the number of adults 60 and older will have doubled

between 2004 and 2020 (Colorado Department of Human Services 1). According to the

State Demography Office, Colorado is aging at a higher rate than the majority of the

United States, having the fourth fastest growth rate of the over-65 population of any

state (1). Therefore the 60 plus segment will become a very sizable and significant

population for the state. Colorado currently has one of the lowest shares of population

over the age of 65 on a national scale (ranking fourth lowest overall), but the state is

poised for a large number of residents to enter into the 65-plus category by 2040,

leading to a new boom of Colorado residents in this age segment (State Demography

Office 1).

Historically, migration to Colorado is skewed towards younger adults (State

Demography Office 1, 5-6). The Baby Boomer generation, born from 1946 to 1964, who

migrated to Colorado when they were younger is now aging into the 60 and over age

brackets (State Demography Office 5). 7% of Baby Boomers (aged 55-64 in 2010) will

be aging into the 65-74 age cohort in 2010 and 2020 (State Demography Office 7). This

will contribute to a 61% growth in the 65 and over population in the same time period

(State Demography Office 7). The US population of the same age, by comparison, is

increasing at 4.2% per year (State Demography Office 7).

1 Much of the research on aging trends uses the age of 65 to begin classifying the group of “Older Americans” since 65 is the age of retirement. Understanding that for this study we are to look at 60 and older as our age sector, we sought out this specific information wherever possible. However, because this section was dealing more with macro trends, data and projections for 65 and 60 and older were both

considered equally.

Bergeron, Menard


The forecast for growth per county is dependent upon its current age structure.

The statewide trend of people entering the 60 and over segment will be particularly

pronounced in Adams County as it is one of the youngest counties; with the percentage

of older adults being 8.30% in 2010 (State Demography Office 4). Counties with a

younger trending population composition will age the fastest whereas counties with an

older population will change more slowly. This will greatly impact Adams County, since

the older age group on average “buys, works, lives and receives services differently

from other age groups” (State Demography Office 8).

Adams County: Projected Impacts

In the coming years, the rapid growth of the 60-plus segment of the population

will have a wide breadth of impacts on the state, and particularly for Adams County.

Such considerations include: jobs and income, housing and transportation, and

healthcare.

Jobs & Income

The State Demography Office predicts that many current workers will begin

retiring from the workforce in larger numbers between 2020 and 2022 (8). This

corresponds with the peak of the Baby Boomer generation aging to 65 years of age. As

Adams County ages, there will be a higher demand for skilled workers in the health care

sector, particularly as related to older adults (i.e. geriatrics), and for those who provide

other services for this age sector (State Demography Office 9). In addition, as this

cohort retires, per-household income will decrease and income and property tax

revenue from this sector will decline (State Demography Office 11-12).

Housing & Transportation

As Adams County ages, there will be a demand for a different housing stock as

this generation makes the decision to downsize or move into more accessible housing

Bergeron, Menard


in proximity to amenities and services for the elderly (State Demography Office 10). The

State Demography Office reports that location choices for those 65+ will vary by age

and disability (10). Other factors heavily influencing housing choices include proximity to

health services, costs of housing, transportation and family (State Demography Office

10). As the population ages further, there will be increased demand for safe and

accessible transportation routes and targeted service providers for elder care.

Health Care

With a rapidly aging population, demand for health care services and skilled

health care professionals, including doctors, nurses, aides, in-home service providers,

meal providers, et cetera, will most likely increase. Older Adams County residents may

require services in this sector that are easily accessible should they have health issues.

If health care providers are not located in their area, older residents may choose to

relocate to be closer to health care providers. Demand for amenities such as retirement

and assisted living communities will rise and migration to areas providing these services

will follow (State Demography Office 10-11).

Bergeron, Menard


Mobility Audit

Introduction and Methodology Overview

This mobility audit covers Adams County, Colorado, with the focus group being

older adults aged 60 and over. The first step in conducting the mobility audit was

deciding on which Denver Regional Transportation District (RTD) service route to

examine. The heavily populated portion of Adams County benefits from significant

attention from RTD. It appears that many of the major arterial roads that run through

these municipalities feature a bus route. Considering the ample variety of options before

us, we referred to our population data to identify where in the county the highest

concentrations of older adults were located. After reviewing the details of several

communities of interest, we decided on the area along Pecos Street that features the

municipal boundary between the city of Federal Heights and the city of Thornton, both

well within the limits of Adams County. The area between 92nd Avenue northward to this

boundary, located between two distinct subdivisions, was identified as a location in

Adams County with among the very highest percentages of population being those 60

years and older. This specific area hosts a community of manufactured homes,

generally referred to as Holiday Hills Village. Because of the location of this pocket of

density for our population, we chose the Route 6 line that travels north and south along

Pecos Street supposedly servicing this community and the land uses across the street

in Thornton.

Bergeron, Menard


Figure 2: The lighter, pink drawn line in this image represents the municipal boundary between Federal

Heights and Thornton. The subdivision located immediately south of this boundary and north of 92nd

Avenue is Holiday Hills Village. The darker, blue drawn line represents the path of Route 6. Base map

courtesy of Google.

Route 6 is a lengthy

service route, beginning at the

Aurora Municipal Center; it

travels eastward generally by

way of East 6th Avenue. After

following a relatively short

segment of Broadway, the line

heads northwest through

Denver’s Central Business

District, ultimately entering the

Highlands neighborhood at

about 20th Street and West

32nd Avenue. After traveling

through Denver’s northwest

neighborhoods, the line picks

up Pecos Street at West 46th

Avenue and follows it for 54

blocks to 100th Avenue before

turning westward towards its

not too distant terminus in the city of Northglenn near the intersection of West 104th

Avenue and Huron Street. The study area was the portion of Route 6 that follows Pecos

Street from West 88th Avenue to 100th Avenue and for a short distance along 100th

Avenue terminating at Ura Lane for a total route segment length of two miles.

Bergeron, Menard


Figure 3:

Bergeron, Menard


It is worth considering that for a little less than half of the entire route length, the

aforementioned political divide sits on Pecos Street. We believe that this division of

governmental management and oversight of the two sides of the street might have

some impact on the physical condition and availability of sidewalks, landing areas, bus

shelters, and amenities. This division and the resultant variation of land uses on either

side of the street may also have an impact on the frequency of ridership at either of the

two sides. For example, Holiday Hills Village, with its older population, sits in great

contrast to the Science Technology Engineering Mathematics Launch K-8 elementary

school directly across the street. It is conceivable that there could be a sharp disparity

between ridership rates at the bus stops closest to these uses. With the possibility of

any significant differences between the two sides being present, though, it was decided

that the auditing work would be split in half with one auditor taking the southerly portion

of the route, investigating both sides of the street to note differences in conditions, and

the other auditing the northern portion of the study area. Because the line dividing the

respective auditing zones, at the elementary school’s driveway, sat just a small number

of yards from the point in which the boundary between Federal Heights turns westward

and Route 6 continues northward along Pecos Street, this method of separating the

work would permit the southerly auditor to collect data on the zone featuring the

conditions of two municipal rights-of-way and the northerly auditor collecting data on

land just within Thornton, therefore allowing for meaningful comparisons between

conditions respectively witnessed.

This method of data collection was rather simple. Auditor separation would occur

at the school driveway and the recording of observational data would begin. The time at

the beginning and end of each block segment would be noted. The blocks, as

determined by street intersections (Figure 4, 10), were quite large and varied in size, so

there would be notable differences in the time it took to complete some block segments.

Marking the observations in pen on paper, auditors would note their findings for each of

the fields listed on the Denver Regional Mobility & Access Council (DRMAC)

questionnaire to be organized and recorded digitally at another time. This way, there

could be no lapse in cellular/satellite service and there could be no running out of

power, as what could be seen with tablets and other devices. However, cameras to

Bergeron, Menard


document the properties of the bus shelters, side walks and other improvements of

interest were used. Upon concluding the tours, the auditors reconvened at the start

point and discussed some of the findings.

Figure 4: Southern study area map. Base map courtesy of Google.

Southern Section

The southerly half of the study area, featured a bus

stop on every block segment. Each stop was different

from all of the rest in this sub-area due to factors such

as proximity to major intersections, building materials

and functions of sidewalk qualities. Of the eight

identified bus stops, five of them had seating and three

were effectively markers on a post where travelers

would stand and wait. For these three stops, the narrow

width (3-5’) of the adjacent sidewalks could prove

problematic depending on weather conditions and

volume of pedestrian traffic using them. Of the five

stops with seating, four of them also had shelters. The

conditions of the shelters varied widely from stop to

stop. The shelter on block segment E3 was a good

physical condition and, in contrast, that on W3 had

some deterioration (but not to the point of full restoration

or replacement). The seating material varied between

the stops. Most featured metal (porous in design), with

varying levels of paint coverage, and one had wood

seating. It is apparent that the shelters and seating

along this route were put into place at different points

over a number of years.

Bergeron, Menard


Figure 5:

Two bus stops had trash receptacles, but both needed attention. The stop on

block segment E3 had a trashcan that was nearly over-brimming with refuse (Figure 5)

on an otherwise high-integrity stop. Much of this content could be recycled and, given

the high volume of garbage, a recycling bin may be appropriate at this stop. The other

trash can sat on the ground rather than being affixed to the shelter and was heavily

abused as evidenced by the numerous, deep dents it featured (Figure 6). 50% of the

stops had street lighting nearby, but none had a light located at the stop. 50% of the

stops were located very close to intersections with crosswalks, but none had timed or

illuminated pedestrian crossing aids.

Bergeron, Menard


Figure 6:

There were some similarities shared amongst the stops. Each of the eight bus

stops identified was curbside in nature. Likely attributable to the suburban nature of the

area and the volume of high-speed traffic experienced on Pecos Street, there were no

bus bulbs or bays. Six of the eight stops appeared to be strictly residential in function

with two being stops that served commercial interests (both serving the Water World

amusement park). One stop, located in the most southerly reaches block segment E3 at

Thornton Parkway, could arguably serve both residential and commercial interests as it

is located across the street from a pizzeria which was in turn located across Pecos

Street from a small strip mall. Because the E3 stop was located in front of homes, it was

for statistical purposes filed as serving residential interests in the questionnaire

associated with this study.

There were no bus schedules posted at any of the bus stops, with the exception

of the block segment W2 stop. The presence of the schedule information is very

Bergeron, Menard


valuable for older adults, given the challenges presented by modern day technology for

some (discussed in detail in the northern section findings), and is well placed given the

presence of a residential subdivision adjacent to the stop. Considering the needs of all

RTD riders, the schedule information might be better used at the W3 stop because that

stop seemed to be heavily used – at the time of the audit there were numerous riders

waiting. The W2 and W3 stops, if not all stops, having posted schedule information would

be best. All stops did have the “MyStop” and route numbers clearly presented. None of

the stops had bike racks.

Figure 7:

Only two bus stops, on block segments E1 and E2 had what appeared to be a

landing. The material for both of these landings was concrete and each of them was

greater than five feet in length. The E1 landing area, though it featured a curb cut for

Bergeron, Menard


wheelchair access, did have some hazardous characteristics. There were some small

holes and water filled potholes present, but more troubling, there was also jagged metal

sticking out of the ground (Figure 7). While not particularly hazardous to the wheels on a

mobile chair, per their solid nature, they could inflict bodily damage in the event of a slip

or fall. This landing area also had dispersed asphalt gravel on its surface (Figure 8).

Undoubtedly, this material emanated from the same source that the abundant surface

gravel afflicting the adjacent sidewalk did. This sidewalk was rather heavily covered in

the material, particularly in areas closest to the street where gravel sat seemingly in the

place of proper landscaping. This was a peculiar block; almost rural in nature due the

lack of development on the neighboring (and sizable) parcel of land. Fortunately, only

this stretch of sidewalk presented challenges to mobility impaired persons outright.

Many blocks saw thin sidewalks and only the sidewalk on the E4 block segment was

cracked and slanted. Generally, the condition of the sidewalks was good, with the

condition of the W2 and E3 sidewalks being rated as excellent.

Figure 8:

Overall, the quality of the eight bus

stops, when considered as a cohort, was

relatively good. For some there clearly was

room for improvement, but the fact that all

block segments had a bus stop was very

encouraging – particularly so given the auto-

centric, suburban character of the area. In

conclusion, the very high concentration of

older adults at the Holiday Hills Village

community seems to have good access to

transit per the availability of locations to

board the Route 6 bus line.

Bergeron, Menard


Figure 9: Three types of bus stop in study area: sign only, with bench, and sheltered.

Bergeron, Menard


Figure 10: Northern study area map. Base map courtesy of Google.

Bergeron, Menard


Northern Section

In the northern study area, there were a total of eleven blocks, eight of which

contained one or more bus stops. Two blocks contained two bus stops, while the

remaining six contained one, equaling ten bus stops in total. As this is a residential area

all bus stops are intended to serve the local residences. All the stops were the curb type

bus stop, in every case the bus stop did not have a designated landing area, but instead

used the sidewalk as a landing area. Every bus stop in the study area was connected to

a sidewalk. The surface of the sidewalk was concrete in the entirety of the study area,

and three to five feet wide for the majority of the study area, though block W9 had a

sidewalk over five feet wide. The lack of landing area and narrowness of the sidewalks

could lead an individual in a wheelchair waiting for the bus to become a hazard by

blocking the entire sidewalk. This could force people to avoid the wheelchair by walking

on uneven or slippery ground, or in the road, both of which contain inherent risks. The

only difference in the surface is some of the sidewalks were composed of concrete

blocks while other sections were poured concrete.

Figure 11:

Blocks E5 and E8 had concrete blocks

that have heaved, creating an uneven surface

that could be treacherous for older adults and

could cause a fall or foot and ankle injuries.

The blocks were not uneven enough to stop a

wheelchair, but could be a nuisance to those

in wheelchairs. Blocks E6 and W7 were

located on a slope, which under normal

conditions would pose little hazard to

passengers but if the sidewalk were wet, or as

Colorado is a winter state, snowy or icy, could

cause falls which can be devastating to an

Bergeron, Menard


older adult both physically and psychologically (Department for Work and Pensions).

Block E6 also had shrubs encroaching upon the sidewalk which could impede an

individual in a wheelchair and certainly limits sidewalk space (Figure 11). If allowed to

continue to grow the shrubs could cause a serious mobility problem, and could make

the sidewalk inaccessible to individuals in wheelchairs, or others with personal mobility

aids (walkers, crutches, etc.). The bus stop at block E9 was located at a street light post

which was located in the middle of the sidewalk (Figure 12). The sidewalk bowed

outwards to accommodate the space the post was taking up, allowing those with

mobility problems to easily navigate around it, but the post could pose a problem for the

visually impaired. The bus stop at block W8 had a puddle of standing water, this could

be a slipping hazard, or in the winter, this puddle iced over would be extremely

dangerous and could cause severe injuries. Overall, six out of ten (60%) bus stops had

some mobility issue that could pose a safety threat to older adults.

Figure 12:

None of the bus stops in the survey area

had posted schedules. This leaves the

rider to either memorize the schedule off

the internet or pamphlet, use mobile

technology to look up the schedule on

the go, or just wait and hope. As

memory often fades as humans get

older, memorizing a bus schedule or

which routes to take could pose a

challenge for the older adult, especially if

transfers or multiple bus routes are

involved. RTD has placed a heavy

emphasis on internet applications to find

best routes to the destination and to look

Bergeron, Menard


up schedules. This in itself poses a problem for older adults as, according to the Pew

Research Center, in 2012 only 53% of adults 65 and older use the internet, with this

number dropping to 34% in the 75 and older age group (Zickuhr, Kathryn, and Madden

2). Only 39% of those 65 and older, and 21% of those 75 and older, have broadband

internet at home (Zickuhr, Kathryn, and Madden 6). The assumption of internet use and

accessibility poses challenges for older adults who not only have no access to the

internet, but, have little to no knowledge of how to use the internet. The older adult,

ironically, may have to take a bus to get to the nearest public internet source, often a

public library, to find bus routes and schedules. Once the older adult has access to the

internet they may still be at a loss on how to find bus routes and schedules due to a lack

of knowledge of the internet.

All stops in the study area clearly display route numbers and what RTD calls

“MyStop” numbers. These numbers are used to access schedules using mobile internet

enabled devices (smartphones, tablets, etc.). This again poses a problem for the older

adult as in 2012, only 10% of adults over age 65 own a smartphone, and 8% of those

65 and older own a tablet (Zickuhr, Kathryn, and Madden 8), which would enable them to

look up schedules on demand. This renders the mobile internet applications created by

RTD for looking up schedules useless to the large majority of older adults. The only

other option is for the individual to carry around the bus schedule pamphlets for every

route they will ride. This poses problems for older adults who must use their hands to

operate mobility aids and therefore could have no way carry the pamphlets comfortably.

For the visually impaired older adult, reading the pamphlet could be difficult or

impossible. The older adult would also need to make sure he/she has the most current

pamphlet as bus schedules do change. As the bus only arrives every half-hour on

weekdays and every hour on weekends, missing the intended bus causes not only a

long wait but could cause riders to miss important appointments. In the winter an older

adult sitting outside for 30 minutes in sub-freezing temperatures could lead to serious

and potentially deadly health complications.

Only two of the stops (20%), at blocks E8 and W8, had benches, and only one

had a shelter (W8). All other stops in the study area consisted solely of a sign indicating

the bus stop location, number, and route (80%). For an older adult it may be difficult to

Bergeron, Menard


stand up for extended periods of time, in this case up to an hour (assuming the bus is

on time). If the older adult cannot stand up for extended periods of time, the lack of

benches makes riding this section of the route almost impossible. The lack of shelter

leaves the older adult completely exposed to any weather. Despite Colorado’s weather

being generally pleasant it does get cold, rainy, snowy and windy. As many of the older

adults’ trips will be out of necessity and thus cannot be rescheduled due to poor

weather, having to endure rain, coldand/or low wind chills could have serious health

implications.

80% of the bus stops depended on nearby street lights for lighting, while one bus

stop (10%) at block E10 was connected to a street light, and therefore essentially had

bus stop specific lighting, and one bus stop (10%) at block E5 had no visible lighting.

Because the audit was completed during daylight hours there is no way to know how

well lit the bus stops were, but as the route was located along major roads and through

residential areas, the assumption is that the bus stops were relatively well lit. The only

concern would be shadows cast from trees growing along the streets obscuring light to

the bus stops. The uneven sidewalk blocks mentioned earlier would become a bigger

hazard at night as the blocks jutting out of the smooth surface would be even harder to

locate and avoid.

Due to the fact that Pecos Avenue and 100th Avenue are the major

thoroughfares in the study area, every bus stop located at or near a street crossing had

a stop sign at the nearest corner. All corners also contained curb cuts, and 80%

included crosswalks, and tactive warning strips (all but blocks E10 and W9). Due to the

suburban nature of the area there were no pedestrian crossing signals, which could

cause problems for the visually impaired, but overall street crossings would be safe for

older adults, including those in wheelchairs or with disabilities.

Mobility Audit Methodology Critique

The mobility audit method is fraught with inefficiencies. The direction to write out

findings in the field by hand more than doubles the amount of time the researcher must

spend performing the data collection and entry portions of the audit. Taking notes,

Bergeron, Menard


outdoors in the wind and weather, oftentimes with no place to sit leaves the researcher

to scribble messy notes. This leaves the researcher with little choice but to immediately

transpose their hand-written notes to a spreadsheet. After this is finished the data

spreadsheet must be entered into the form provided by DRMAC. If the field workers

were simply given a mobile internet enabled tablet to take into the field all this extra

work and time spent could be avoided.

As the original data is being logged onto the spreadsheet which is essentially the

backend of the form, the columns on the spreadsheet should be in the same order as

the questions as the form, but this is not the case. This greatly increases the time it

takes to enter data into the form as the data enterer must search around their notes to

find the correct data to enter into the field. Again this problem could be solved by simply

providing a mobile internet enabled device to take into the field.

Some of the categories on the form were not mutually exclusive. For example,

we are asked to enter whether there are cracks or heaves in the sidewalk of more than

1/4 of an inch, and then are asked to list any potential hazards to those with wheelchairs

or disabilities, generally a large crack or heave would be considered a hazard, leaving

the data entrant to wonder if this information should be entered twice.

There are terms used on the form that could be unfamiliar to the data enterer, or

categories that could be confusing on what to enter as being contained in the category,

with no explanation of the terms or categories. The data entry form refers to an elusive

‘study guide’ which we were not provided nor is it readily available on the internet. The

lack of a defining guide for the data being entered could lead to large amounts of bad

data.

Much of the data entered is based on subjective observations by the individual

collecting data. As different individuals were sent out to complete the different portions

of the study area this subjectivity could lead to inconsistent data, especially with no

criteria on which to judge the subjective data. For example, one data collector’s

‘excellent’ sidewalk could be another's ‘good’, or ‘fair’. Without any criteria, the

subjective ratings of the condition of various objects in the study area is pretty much

useless.

Bergeron, Menard


Stakeholder Interview

The stakeholder interview was conducted on October 15th, 2013 from

approximately 2:30 to 4:00 PM. Two members of the interest group of older adults were

present, both from Brighton. Accompanying the older adults were an outreach

coordinator for an Adams County senior center and a manager of a different Adams

County senior center. They were joined by two other interested parties, one being an

AARP driving instructor and the other a staff member of VIA, a local non-profit transit

provider. Two other members of the community arrived at approximately 3:00 PM.

All the older adults from the senior center located in Brighton depended mainly

on VIA for transportation. VIA is a door-to-door service that depends on funding from

cities, senior centers and individuals. VIA operates on a 9-5, Monday-Friday schedule.

VIA mostly serves Boulder County, but does service Brighton, which is located in

Adams County. Due to this VIA does have limited impact and locations where it travels

in Adams County. A-Lift provides a similar service in much of Adams County.

Both older adults from the senior center depended heavily on local family

members to give them rides outside of the VIA schedule. Without family members to

drive them on the weekends and after 5:00pm they would have almost no method of

leaving their home.

The interview was structured in an informal panel type setting, with most

questions and answers being conversational, but relevant to the topic at hand. There

were multiple reasons for this structure. The first reason was the reluctance of the

senior center workers to split the older adults, who visited the same senior center, into

two separate interviews. The older adults were 90 and 91 years old, and hard of

hearing, so it was decided that it would be beneficial to interview them together. The

other reason for the panel type discussion was that, due to timing of the interview, no

members of the low income focus group were present at the interview. Because the

most older adults were present, the interviewers for the low income group joined into the

older adults interview. Because of the reluctance to split groups there were six

interviewers present, as well as eight interviewees.

Bergeron, Menard


The following is a summarization of the responses given to the questions

proposed to the group of stakeholders during our October 15 interview. It is important to

consider the informal, group nature of the interview. Because it was a collaborative

effort between various teams in the class, our team was not able to ask all of the

questions we had prepared in the format that we had expected, and we received the

same recording responses to questions offered by other teams. Due to these

inconsistencies with our format and that suggested in task descriptions, the response

summaries provided here will be most complete in the presented form and with input

from perhaps multiple speakers.

Interview

1. What types of transit do you use and how do you utilize it?

Most people in the room used the ‘door-thru-door’ services such as A-Lift and VIA, both

of which serve Brighton. They picked up directly from their homes, and if necessary,

receive an escort from out of their homes to these vehicles.

2. What is your opinion on RTD services (fixed route/Access-a-Ride) and do you think

that the coverage of areas served is complete?

Older adults in Adams County find the ride services such as VIA more advantageous

than RTD services. RTD is inadequate because it doesn’t serve all of the county, and it

takes too long to use with their fixed route system. It is sometimes too tedious to apply

for RTD Access-a-Ride when other services exist and former reliance on the automobile

have left them feeling that fixed routes are undesirable as they are less convenient than

other means. As many of the older adults lived in Brighton they did not have access to

RTD lines, or RTD did not service their destination.

3. Can you speak to how difficult it is to apply/qualify for Access-a-Ride [because one

must first be approved prior to using the service]?

It can be a long process because you must qualify based on a physical or mental

disability and prove that condition by evidencing it through a health provider’s letter of

Bergeron, Menard


verification. Access-a-Ride is available to those who cannot ride fixed route due to

physical and mental limitation, and many older adults would qualify under this criteria.

You must also meet with an RTD representative in person to discuss how using the

fixed routes would not be reasonable for you based on your disability.

4. How hard is it to get around when the weather is bad?

Inclement weather can be problematic because oftentimes services, particularly A-Lift,

will cancel so that patrons don’t risk their safety shoveling out to access the services.

These services have a cancellation policy based on snow accumulation and other

weather considerations.

5. When trips are cancelled due to inclement weather, is there someone else you can

call to meet your travel needs or do you need to cancel your plans altogether?

One respondent said that yes, she has to cancel. Another said that she tries never to

cancel, but will if the forecast is particularly poor. In this case, she must provide one day

advanced notice of the cancellation.

6. How many of you who use these transportation services also own a car?

Of the older adults in the room that use transit, three of five also own cars (60%). All but

one of the remaining stakeholders (those that represent the transit companies, etc.) own

and operate motor vehicles.

7. If your family members were not able to come pick you up, would you be stranded or

would it not impact your mobility?

It would be hard, such as with shopping trips. There is no access to rides on Saturdays

and Sundays. Because of this they cannot depend on just the transit options.

Carpooling among those disadvantaged is sometimes possible.

8. How many of you take RTD’s fixed-route buses, and if you do not use them, why

don’t you?

Bergeron, Menard


None of the subject older adults use the fixed routes. The buses do not usually travel to

the locations where they are going and they would need to use transfers, which are

difficult and prolong the trips uncomfortably. Also, with the exception of frequently used

transfer points, bus schedules are not posted at the stops. If these adults were to use

the fixed routes, they would need to first travel to the library to print out the schedules

and even then these schedules are subject to change. One couple used to take the

buses all the time, in fact they moved into a home on a busy bus line, but due to the

effects of aging no longer find the buses to be convenient.

9. Do you find, based on your observations, that people are driving to the buses to use

them?

Most people are looking for convenience, so they won’t usually drive to the buses. The

exception is those that commute regularly, who take advantage of the Park-n-Ride

locations. The Park-n-Ride system is viewed as exceptionally successful for RTD.

10. Are the costs of transportation (any form) straining your budget or are the costs

reasonable?

One stakeholder (AARP driving instructor) teaches older adults about the benefits of

transit and has had his students analyze the total cost of car ownership to see if it’s

cheaper to use transit. With the results favoring transit use, most agree that the costs of

transit are fair. One respondent says that she thinks her costs for using the VIA service

are fair, though, she noted some previous resentment towards those that ride for free

based on their income level, but through experience riding VIA and comprehension of

these peoples plight, she now understands that they should ride for free if they have to

choose between food and rides.

11. Do you budget for transportation in your finances, i.e., do you plan in advance the

number of trips that you will take each month or each week?

One respondent purchases her ride tickets in bulk, in the form of passbooks, but

otherwise doesn’t budget for a certain number of rides. No other comments.

Bergeron, Menard


12. Because VIA and other donation-based transit options are such an expensive

service to sustain, is there a better way to operate in the future to lower the cost for the

service provider?

The vehicles are not all filled because riders don’t want to ride around waiting for people

to fill it. Increasing efficiency is the solution, but they do not know how. They already

have some Toyota Priuses in the VIA and A-Lift fleets, but these cannot be used very

frequently because vehicles need to be handicap accessible and have the room to carry

mobility aids.

13. Do you, the rider, find that the buses are crowded or empty and is this concerning to

you?

The buses are not uncomfortably crowded, but sometimes only have one rider.

14. Are there any places that you would like to go but can’t because there is no

transportation there?

Private residences are difficult to access. The special rides do not usually go to these

locations and RTD does not serve them well because so many are located in

subdivisions that exist as a function of suburban sprawl. Much walking would be

required as buses do not enter these subdivisions and homeowners associations.

15. What are your best and worst experiences with transit and what would you like to

see from transit providers in the future that you are not seeing now?

Senior Center Attendee: It’s a good social experience to share the rides.

AARP Driving Instructor: It takes a minimum of 45 minutes to get to downtown because

of the indirect routes that the buses take. It takes too long to use this service. Route 6 is

an example. Al wishes it would follow just the arterial routes in a linear fashion so that it

would be easier, quicker and more predictable. RTD focuses on downtown Denver as

its transportation hub, and call-n-ride is acts as community hubs for the others in that

absence.

VIA Employee: There are transportation problems associated with medical issues. If you

need a last minute appointment, that’s hard because it’s first come first serve. They

Bergeron, Menard


don’t bump anyone or prioritize (except for dialysis). First Transit, if you have Medicaid,

will get you there, but you must give 48 hours advance notice, meaning, you cannot get

sick and expect service that day.

Community Member: A-Lift taking him to exempla hospital in Denver for surgery (3 in a

day) and not getting a ride back was his worst experience. Because he had to stay

overnight, he had to cancel his ride home. You need a three day window to get the ride

back, so he took a $30 taxi. The other issues are being ‘penalized’ for cancelling without

advance notice. (Barb goes on to explain how they don’t penalize anyone, but there are

rules that need to be followed. A warning will sometimes be issued for no-call-no-

shows).

Interview Conclusions and Methodology Critique

Several overarching themes were present throughout the interview. The most

apparent theme was the inability of older adults in the outlying areas of Adams County

to use RTD services. The community members were unable to use RTD services due to

lack of bus routes (and consequently lack of Access-a-Ride due to its tethering to fixed-

route lines), lack of seats on Call-n-Ride, too many transfers to get to their destination,

excessive time to destination, and not being able to take the bus to their destination.

The only members of our interview who took the bus on a regular basis had specifically

moved where they lived to be close to a major bus route in Aurora.

The interview process was not well organized on DRMAC’s end. When we

arrived there were no signs or people informing us where to go or where we should be.

Though one individual did arrive to guide people to the interview, one person trying to

find potentially confused interviewees in a large building where the interview is in the

basement could leave people to attempt to find the room themselves. The timing was

also an issue, not as much for older adults, but it is almost impossible for low income

individuals who are employed to appear for an interview at 2:30 in the afternoon on a

work day. Finally, the location was not ideal, it would be beneficial to locate the

interview in a location central to the urbanized portion of the county, whereas

Commerce City lies in the south of the county. Commerce City is not the most

Bergeron, Menard


convenient location for people to have to travel to, especially if they are using public

transit.

Bergeron, Menard


Gaps Analysis

The following section analyses transportation gaps as they relate to older adults

in Adams County. The analysis is broken down into six sections: trip purpose, service

area, service time, eligibility, type of service, and affordability.

Non-Fixed Route Service Provider Service Analysis

Service

Providers

Trip

Purpose

Service

Area

Service

Time

Eligibility Type of

Service

Cost

(one-way)

Access-a-

Ride

Any

Tethered

to bus

routes

Tethered

to bus

schedule

Those not

capable of

riding RTD

fixed route

Door-to-

door

$4.50-

$26.00

Call-n-

Ride Any

Defined

service

zones Variable Anyone Curbside

$1.10-

$2.25

A-Lift

Any

Denver

Metro

area

6 A.M.- 6

P.M.

People 60

and over

Door-to-

door Donation

VIA

Any Brighton

7:30

A.M.- 5

P.M.

Anyone with

mobility

challenges

Door-

through-

door

$1.25-

$4.00

Trip Purpose

The only real restriction on trip purpose from any service provider in Adams

County is: A-Lift only allows older adults personal trips within five miles of their personal

residence. This is a quite substantial restriction on leisure activity transport, though A-

Lift does provide rides to senior centers and meal sites. While this allows older adults to

continue to get exercise and social interaction at senior centers it prevents them from

Bergeron, Menard


reaching their families, even if the family lives in the Denver Metropolitan Area. A-Lift is

operating on the assumption that either the family has access to a car or the older adult

or family has local access to RTD routes. Because A-Lift only operates in the Metro

Area, access to RTD routes is relatively ubiquitous, but many residences do not have

direct access to these routes. It can also be difficult for the older adult to use the bus

system, forcing their family to visit them, but never allowing the older adult to visit their

family.

Service Area

Focusing first on the county seat, as it is the home of several interviewed

stakeholders, the access to RTD is limited for those who live in Brighton. As it stands

somewhat isolated to the northeast of the major population centers in Adams County,

and is located on the northern county line. Due to its geographic location, including that

it is east of Interstate 25 and US Route 36, Brighton has limited bus service and is

generally at the end of the line. This means that the city of Brighton does not have as

comprehensive a bus coverage as many of the towns along the Interstate 25 and Route

36 corridors, limiting older adults’ access to the bus. As Access-a-Ride is tethered to the

fixed route bus lines, limited bus routes also limits access to Access-a-Ride (further

expanded upon in Type of Service section). The stakeholders completely depended on

VIA as Access-a-Ride was not accessible to them for multiple reasons.

Due to the lack of bus routes in Brighton there were also a limited number of

destinations an older adult could travel to on the bus without transferring. In any

community or region, forcing an older adult to transfer is problematic for several

reasons. First of all, transferring often adds a significant amount of time onto the trip.

Secondly, it also adds another layer of complexity to the trip, for a senior citizen may

find it difficult to keep track of which bus they need to take if they need to transfer. Many

seniors do not have access to mobile internet-enabled devices that allow them to look

up transfers on the go. Because of this it is difficult to know which stop they need to get

off and which number bus they must transfer to, especially if their memory is not as

Bergeron, Menard


sharp as it once was. As many stops do not have schedules and route maps attached to

them the senior has no help in finding the correct transfer.

For an older adult, getting on and off the bus may be the most difficult part of

riding the bus. Having to transfer exacerbates this problem by forcing the older adult to

get on and off the bus multiple times. As many bus stops do not have seating for older

adults who find standing for long periods of time difficult, transfers could be next to

impossible if they must stand to wait for the next bus. Transfers also become difficult for

the walking impaired if the bus does not drop the rider off at the exact stop the transfer

is made at.

The limited amount of bus routes also means that RTD fixed routes and Access-

a-Ride do not travel to many local destinations. While transferring will give the rider

access to the greater Denver Metro Area, it does not give riders access to local

destinations that they might need to travel to. Even if the rider is within the range for

Access-a-Ride, their destination may not be. RTD attempts to use Call-n-Ride to fill in

many of these service gaps, including in Brighton, but for reasons discussed in other

sections Call-n-Ride is not an option for many older adults.

VIA and A-Lift both have service area gaps that differ from that of RTD. A-Lift and

VIA do not suffer the same tethering of Access-a-Ride, but instead are limited either

through policy, budget or by focusing on a specific area. A-Lift only services the Denver

Metro area of Adams County. This limits A-Lift’s service area to south-western Adams

County, though it is not clear through their website or any online resource where the

bounds of their service area are. VIA is oriented towards Boulder County, and therefore

Brighton is the only town in Adams County that they service. It is notable that both A-Lift

and VIA are not able to provide trips to a location outside of their service area even if

the origin lies within the service area. This means that older adults are constrained to

the limited areas that these non-profit transit providers service. It also leaves older

adults in Brighton isolated from the contiguous Denver Metro Area if they do not have

access to RTD fixed routes.

The eastern portion of Adams County is not densely populated, and therefore

has little to no access to transportation options. These older adults must either find a

ride or hope that the destination they would like to go runs a shuttle. This is extremely

Bergeron, Menard


limiting as they will only be able to go places that are either geared towards seniors and

those with mobility problems. Running errands such as getting groceries would be

problematic without a car.

Service Time

Access-a-Ride is available at all times during the operating hours of the fixed

route to which it is tethered. On many routes this means that Access-a-Ride is available

at most times that people would want to travel. Many bus lines also run on the

weekends, which is the older adults’ only access to transit on the weekends, other than

private automobile and taxi. While Access-a-Ride is accessible much of the time, its

service area constraints limits its use for many older adults.

Neither A-Lift nor VIA run transportation options on the weekends. This leaves

the older adult stranded if he/she cannot use or does not have access to RTD fixed

routes or Access-a-Ride. Our stakeholders stated that they depend almost solely on

their family or the kindness of others with automobiles to get around on the weekends.

Being without transportation leaves older adults without family or people willing to drive

them isolated in their home.

A-Lift operates weekdays from 6:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M., while VIA operates from

7:30 A.M. to 5:00 P.M.. Again this leaves older adults potentially stranded in the

evenings. Through the scheduling of transportation, older adults in Adams County have

limited hours in which they can make trips. As necessary trips will take precedent, the

amount leisure or social trips older adults can take is limited. These hours also limit

older adults’ access to visit their family if they work standard hours, as the bus hours

only would allow the older adult to visit his/her family during working hours. This

isolation could cause some negative psychological impacts to older adults, and not

being able to visit family could cause distress in some older adults as well. Staying

active is important for older adults and if they must choose between essential trips and

leisure trips due to limited hours that their transit option offers, it could be detrimental to

their health and physical well-being.

Bergeron, Menard


The only transit option for the older adult on the weekends and after 6:00 P.M. on

the weekdays is to take a taxi which is cost prohibitive for many older adults on a fixed

income.

Another thing to note is that all these services must be scheduled in advance.

This does not allow the older adult to have a flexible schedule. While VIA only needs to

be scheduled one day in advance (two to three in the case of A-Lift), if there is a last

minute schedule change the older adult is out of luck. The older adult is precluded from

making last minute appointments as he/she will not be able to find transit to the

destination.

Eligibility

Amongst the four specialty services available in the urbanized portion of Adams

County, there are numerous service gaps created by the eligibility requirements for the

services. The most contentious set of eligibility requirements is associated with RTD’s

Access-a-Ride service. Our stakeholders noted that the process needed to adequately

prove one’s physical or mental disability, of which one must have documented, to

qualify for Access-a-Ride is very extensive and exhaustive and because of that is in

many ways discouraging to potential users. They also stated that they must make a trip

to RTD headquarters in downtown Denver to prove their disability. The difficulty of the

process is preventative to those who might otherwise use the service. This is on top of

the fact that older adults without ‘satisfactorily limiting’ disabilities may not take

advantage of this service.

Fortunately, for those in the target population, there are other services that are

less exclusive to them. A-Lift offers service to any adult greater than 60 years of age

regardless of existing disability. This makes the service inherently more desirable. In

addition, this service is offered to those with mobility challenges regardless of age.

RTD’s other applicable service, Call-n-Ride, does not come with the stringent

eligibility demands that are found with Access-a-Ride, but older adults may feel

outcompeted to use the service and therefore are less likely to use it. While this service

helps to close some geographic gaps, the potential results of this are stunted given the

Bergeron, Menard


perceived preference to school children and other users over some older adults. The

edibility requirements are based on a first-come-first-served platform (so really no gap

exists per se), but in the presence of quicker and louder voices, older adults may

choose to use the other available services (our stakeholders rejected this service based

on perceptions of exclusion from competition).

The VIA service has the most open and welcoming set of eligibility requirements.

In addition to older adults and those with disabilities, VIA offers rides to those with any

kind of mobility issue. This includes those with temporary mobility restrictions emanating

from a motor vehicle accident or some other event that renders an individual mobility

restricted for a period of time. This openness of the service could be why some of our

stakeholders so readily endorsed the service during the interviews.

Type of Service

The Access-a-Ride service is an auxiliary service intended to complement

existing fixed-route, standard bus lines. By providing those with disabilities the

opportunity to make use of declared routes who may not be able to access them

otherwise, the service helps to close gaps caused by biophysical factors. Access-a-Ride

offers curbside and door-to-door service, with driver assistance if needed. This

dedication to ensuring that this sometimes-neglected portion of the populace can get

around is impressive. However, the extent of service is limiting to many and only closes

service gaps with a defined one-and-a-half-mile area. Because it is intended to

correspond with the fixed-route nature of most of RTDs services, Access-a-Ride is only

available to those within a three-quarter-mile distance from a traditional fixed-route (on

either side). People with disabilities living outside of this range or who are otherwise

unable to reach an acceptable service point are excluded from the service. For

example, a physically handicapped woman in her 70s living a little more than a mile

from a fixed RTD route without anyone able to bring her to an adequate place of pick up

would be barred from using Access-a-Ride.

Given the service’s target population, Access-a-Ride is wheelchair friendly. This

is encouraging for those with mobility issues within the service area. More notably, the

Bergeron, Menard


Access-a-Ride service corresponds with the times posted for their fixed-route

counterparts. During our stakeholder interviews, it was noted that both services

sometimes use vehicles, such as the Toyota Prius, during times where there is not an

expected presence of wheelchairs, but remain dedicated to this necessary

accommodation and will use the appropriate vehicles as needed. Both of these services

are also door-to-door in nature at minimum. As needed, they offer door-through-door

service. This means that the drivers will physically assist passengers in getting them out

of their homes or other pickup locations and into the transit vehicles. As mentioned,

Access-a-Ride drivers will do this as well, but it is unclear (and doubted) if this personal

attention is available with RTD’s Call-n-Ride service as well as that service is geared

more toward the public at large than specifically those with physical mobility challenges

(though their vehicles are accommodating to them).

Affordability

A-Lift is easily the most affordable service for older adults in Adams County. It is

a donation-based service, which means that oftentimes rides will cost little or nothing for

those that cannot afford to pay a fare comparable to the ‘normal’ rates one might expect

with RTD fixed-route services, whether these be at full cost or at the rate discounted for

seniors. The fact that the rides often are free, the affordability gap is closed in regards to

the specific areas serviced. There is a suggested donation of $5 per ride, but there is no

expectation by the service providers that the riders will indeed make the donation. They

are understanding of the financial constraints that so frequently afflict the target

population.

The VIA and RTD Call-n-Ride services are comparably priced in general and are

the next most affordable options for our target population. Call-n-Ride trips cost the

same amount that the normal, fixed-route bus rides do as the service is an extension of

that service network. The normal cost is $2.25 each way, but our target population, or at

least those 65 years of age or older, benefit from a fare reduction to $1.10 a trip. Given

the local nature of the Call-n-Ride service, you do pay for service in a limited area,

Bergeron, Menard


whereas the same price would get you farther on fixed-route bus, but this likely does

create or contribute to any service gap.

With VIA, there is a fare structure that determines, in general, the cost of a trip.

Most rides cost $2.00 each way. It is fair to say that this cost reflects the majority of trips

because it is applicable to those traveling in urbanized areas and usually within single

cities or towns. This price is for intra-city transit. VIA also offers transit between

communities at a rate of $4.00 per ride. Similarly to A-Lift and unlike RTD, the ride

providers are accommodating to travelers with financial constraints that would be

unable to pay even these generally reasonable prices. They are dedicated to providing

service for all applicable community members and will provide rides free of charge for

those who would otherwise be immobilized due to financial constraints. During the

stakeholder interviews, the cost of VIA was deemed fair by those who use the service.

Access-a-Ride is by far the most expensive of the four services being

considered. As an RTD service, the cost is reflective of the other services in their

transportation network. Access-a-Ride costs $4.50 for a local ride, which is double the

cost of its fixed-route counterpart. This brings the to-and-from cost of any trip to a

minimum cost of $9.00. If one wishes to travel on a regional scale, the cost is $10.00

each way. For many income-restricted older adults, the cost of this is prohibitively

expensive. While understandable in a business logistics perspective, these relatively

high costs have left a bad taste in the mouths of interested stakeholders, of which none

interviewed use Access-a-Ride. These costs may affect directly gaps in transit service.

Bergeron, Menard


Recommendations

The following suggestions for closing the present gaps in transportation access

for older Adults in Adams County are the result of extensive analysis of exisitng

conditions. After analyzing several leading gaps, from geographic area served by

transportation agencies to financial burden associated with that transit, this study

concludes with recommendations, oraganized into sections by ‘gap type,’ for increasing

transportation equity in Colorado’s fifth most-populous county.

Trip Purpose

There are few gaps in the trip purpose, the only true gap being A-Lift’s restriction

on the distance of leisure trips. While it would be ideal if A-Lift provided leisure trips for

any distance within their service area, they are limited by funding and space on their

shuttles. There are several ways for funding to increase for A-Lift, including grants,

more donations, and increased funding from the municipalities they serve. Increased

funding from municipalities is the only consistent and reliable source of funding. To

increase this funding A-Lift would have to travel local political channels and push their

agenda to acquire increased funding from towns. As is quite apparent gaining increased

funding from cash strapped, and fiscally conservative Colorado municipalities is not a

simple proposition.

Service Area

Service area gaps could be closed by RTD expanding their bus service to the

underserved areas of Adams County. Through the expansion of the fixed route bus

lines, the coverage area of Access-a-Ride would also increase. This would grant older

adults more access to its service, and would allow Access-a-Ride to cover more

destinations that the older adult would need or desire to travel. Expanded service area

could potentially limit the need for multiple transfers, which could go a long way to

alleviating older adults’ concern about riding fixed route service.

Bergeron, Menard


Expanding A-Lift and VIA’s service area again depends on increasing funding

which would allow them to expand their service. As this process is explained in the prior

sub-section I will omit it here. It should be noted that VIA must be invited into a

community if they are to serve it. This arrangement most likely involves a guarantee of

funding from the community, but is one solution to expanding VIA’s area serviced in

Adams County beyond Brighton.

Service Time

For A-Lift and VIA closing gaps in service time would again require an increase

of funding, as all extra time they are running busses and every extra trip costs them

money. Once again as this topic has already been covered it has been omitted from this

sub-section.

The most effective way to close the service time gap would be to extend RTD

service. Fixed route busses have much longer hours and more comprehensive

schedules than A-Lift and VIA can provide. By expanding the service area Access-a-

Ride is expanded allowing older adults to use Access-a-Ride when VIA and A-Lift are

not providing service, be it after-hours or the weekend.

Eligibility Gap

Because this gap is created by policy, it is difficult to prescribe a clear and easy

solution. Recommended alternatives are applicable mostly to RTD and its Access-a-

Ride service. Given the lack of ridership or admiration from the stakeholders

interviewed, and presumably many other individuals like them, it might be advantageous

for RTD to ease its application requirements or lower its costs. This service is well-

positioned to close some geographic and time gaps given its breadth of service not

available with any of the other local specialty services and the fact that it operates on

weekends and holidays, just so long as the associated fixed-route lines do. Perhaps

lightening the burden of proof of disability required, or the related interview process,

could increase ridership by making the application process seem less intensive. RTD

Bergeron, Menard


could also increase its desirability to members of the target community by actually

restricting eligibility on its Call-n-Ride service. Currently, older adults in Adams County

feel outcompeted by school children. Perhaps limiting this to increase the number of

seats shared with other community groups – and publicizing this change – would result

in increased ridership from those over the age of 60. Changes in the A-Lift and VIA

services are not recommended as they are currently quite fair to the target population.

Type of Service

In general, the type of service offered by the four analyzed specialty services

seems adequate. The vehicles they use are accommodating to the physical needs of

many older adults. There is room for improvement in vehicle selection, applicable really

only to those riders without wheelchairs. For example, a minivan would save the service

a great amount of money if used to collect riders that are not confined to a wheelchair.

These financial savings could then potentially be used to increase service area or some

other beneficial function.

Affordability

While it is understandable that RTD Access-a-Ride costs double the fair of fixed

route buses, if possible, reducing the cost would make the service seem more attractive

to many people. Currently, the cost per trip is strikingly higher than any of the other

services. Reducing the cost to that of its fixed-route lines or Call-n-Ride service would

make the service seem more within reach. If the price were reduced, the negative

image caused by high fares in conjunction with a grueling application process might be

reduced and riders would consider the application process more worth their effort.

It appears that the other service providers offer fair costs to riders. As this is

sometimes free, there are currently no recommendations to change their pricing

structure. It is clear that the VIA and A-Lift services are in many ways philanthropic

given that the revue from rider payments could not possibly sustain these services.

Bergeron, Menard


Conclusion

The overarching recommendations are the expansion of the RTD fixed routes

and the accompanying Access-a-Ride service, and the increase of funding to the two

non-profit service providers. Through these two changes, along with some relatively

simple physical upgrades, the mobility of older adults in Adams County could be greatly

improved. With the ever increasing amount of older adults in Adams County, and

Colorado, the time is now to begin to plan for the increased need for transit to serve this

population. Neither of these changes are simple, and both are often met with political

resistance. Through incremental change, and the political pressure of an increasing

number of older adults residing in Adams County real improvements to the older adult’s

ability to move around the Denver Metro Area could be achieved.

Bergeron, Menard


Appendix A:

The following tags identify which of the six service gaps exist or might potentially

exist as related to the feedback obtained from the questions asked during the

stakeholder interview. The purpose of this table is to expose the issues most prevalent

to the stakeholders as made evident during the interview. Please refer to the

Stakeholder Interview section of this document to see the questions as they relate to

their associated tags. The following example may be helpful in understanding how to

utilize this chart: Question 1 asks: “What types of transit do you use and how do you

utilize it?” The relevant tag identified from the responses collected relate to the ‘type of

service’ gap. Some questions extracted answers identifying multiple gaps or concerns,

as evidence below. While the answers to, and possible gaps associated with, all 15

questions are visible in the Stakeholder Interview section, this table provides for quicker

reference.

Stakeholder Interview Response Tags

Question Number Applicable Tags

1 Type of Service

2 Service Area, Service Time, Eligibility

3 Eligibility

4 Service Time

5 Service Time

6 N/A

7 Trip Purpose, Service Time

8 Type of Service

9 Type of Service

10 Affordability

11 Affordability

12 Type of Service, Affordability

13 N/A

14 Service Area

15 Trip Purpose, Service Area, Service Time, Eligibility, Type of Service

Cover Photo: N.d. Photograph. Politico Pro. Politico, 28 Jan. 2013. Web. 1 Dec. 2013.

<http://www.politico.com//story/2013/01/senior-citizens-drive-infrastructure-spending-86780.html>.

Works Cited

"Access-a-Ride." RTD. Regional Transportation District, Denver, n.d. Web. 12 Nov.

2013. <http://www.rtd-denver.com/accessARide.shtml>. "A-Lift." A-Lift. A-Lift, n.d. Web. 10 Nov. 2013. <http://www.a-lift.org/>. "Call-n-Ride." RTD. Regional Transportation District, Denver, n.d. Web. 10 Nov. 2013.

<http://www.rtd-denver.com/callNRide.shtml>. Colorado Department of Human Services. “The Status of Older Adults in Colorado

2004.”http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite?blobcol=urldata&blobheadername1=Content-Disposition & blobheadername 2= Content - Type & blobheadervalue 1= inline %3 B + filename%3 D %22 State + Status . pdf %22& blobheadervalue 2= application%2 Fpdf & blobkey = id & blobtable = MungoBlobs & blobwhere =1251694161405& ssbinary = true. Colorado Department of Human Services. 2004. Web. 12 September 2013.

"Effects of Falls." Publications. Department for Work and Pensions, n.d. Web. 01 Dec.

2013. <http://www.dwp.gov.uk/publications/specialist-guides/medical-conditions/a-z-of-medical-conditions/falls/effects-of-falls/>.

Getting There Guide: English 2013. N.p.: Denver Regional Mobility & Access Council,

n.d. Print. Google Maps. Google, n.d. Web. <http://maps.google.com/>. New Rider Information Guide. N.p.: Via Paratransit, n.d. Web. 10 Nov. 2013.

<http://viacolorado.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Via_NRIG-Final.pdf>. RTD Bus Routes [GIS Shapefile]. (2013). Denver, CO: Regional Transportation District-

Denver. http://gis.rtd-denver.com/MapServer/datadownload.aspx [September 10, 2013].

Stakeholder Interview. 15 October 2013. State Demography Office, Colorado Department of Local Affairs. “Aging in Colorado.”

http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite?blobcol=urldata&blobheadername1=Content-Disposition&blobheadername2=ContentType&blobheadervalue1=inline%3B+ filename%3D%22Aging+in+Colorado.pdf%22&blobheadervalue2=application%2Fpdf&blobkey=id&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobwhere=1251810346699&ssbinary=true. State Demography Office, Colorado Department of Local Affairs. July 2012. Web. 12 September 2013.

http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite?blobcol=urldata&blobheadername1=Content-Disposition&blobheadername2=ContentType&blobheadervalue1=inline%3B

http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite?blobcol=urldata&blobheadername1=Content-Disposition&blobheadername2=ContentType&blobheadervalue1=inline%3B

United States Census Bureau. “U.S. Census Bureau Projections Show a Slower Growing, Older, More Diverse Nation a Half Century from Now.” https://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/population/cb12-243.html. Public Information Office, U.S. Census Bureau. 12 December. 12 September 2013.

Zickuhr, Kathryn, and Mary Madden. "Older Adults and Internet Use." Pew Internet.

Pew Research Center, 6 June 2012. Web. 1 Oct. 2013. <http://pewinternet.org/~/media/Files/Reports/2012/PIP_Older_adults_and_internet_use.pdf>.

transportation gaps analysis · crossing thresholds into the older adult segment in which they will...

Documents