DENVER | Transportation Thread

[comoneymaker]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Abandoned? Considering the industrial vacancy rate in Denver is below 4% I don't think that those buildings are abandoned. Besides, it gives a bit of the grit the makes a real city with production and distribution, not those shitty non-descript buildings where the leaches of capitalism such as bankers reside.

Sorry didn't mean abandoned but just dirty icky buildings. I think a lot can probably be done by planting a lot of trees along the way ?

Also Ryan isn't that article like 10 years old ?

[seventwenty]

East-coast friend of mine came to town this weekend, and she used the busses to get from DIA to DUS and then to Boulder. Her thoughts, as best I can gather:

• The system works for locals or people who know locals. But it's not intuitive.
• It's annoying to not have easy to find kiosks at say DIA and DUS. Place the ticket kiosks by the escalators, not in the middle of the bus terminal.
• Signage at DUS is easy to follow, but there needs to be a more of it. The bus gate signs are hard to pick out, for example.
• DUS is pretty as hell, and Denver should be proud of what they (re)built.
• That said, exact change on busses is annoying. Get a Charlie card or similar, RTD.

Helping her through the system, I tend to agree.

[RyanD]

I have to tell you about my transit dream. It's so ridiculous and if you know me, it makes perfect sense.

It was a cloudy afternoon, with a little but of rain on the windows. I'm on a train, but not light-rail. As I look out the window, I notice are going fast. I'm on the A-line! That's Stapleton! As the train goes on in this Inception grade, super realistic dream, I start interacting with my surroundings. I clearly remember texting Bunt saying I won because riding the A-line is better than the VelociRFTA. Strange. So as we are approaching a stop, there's a glitch in the Matrix.

My brain stopped the dream, pulled me into some psychotic deep inner thought process and asked, 'what chime will be used before the stop is announced? Please let it not be the same as LRT.'

Dream resumed, and it was the SAME CHIME. I got disappointed and sad. My subconscious doesn't know any better.

This dream wasn't about transit, or the A-line. It was about the effing door / announcement chimes on our trains. I guess this is a good indication of how much I hate them.

EDIT: So after I wrote this post on the train, I get off and see this. I don't think I've woken up from my dream because that's a huge glitch in the Matrix. I'm scared.

[bcp]

Speaking of going fast...has anybody noticed how painfully slowwwww the C and E go now between campus and through broadway? Unreal and very frustrating to feel the brakes all through there...the CPV section has always been slow (too slow as well) but this seems like a new level of torture from RTD...while we're at it, why is the W so slow?

[Wizened Variations]

Originally Posted by bcp

Speaking of going fast...has anybody noticed how painfully slowwwww the C and E go now between campus and through broadway? Unreal and very frustrating to geel the brakes all through there...while we're at it, why is the W so slow?

By design. Not necessarily intent. There are terribly slow segments of the light rail system, the worst, by length is the DUS Light rail line from where the DUS Center Corridor segment track passes under Colfax through the Sports Authority Invesco Mile High Bronco Stadium section. Any train going to DUS from the south takes a least 3 minutes to pass. An extra track at the Auraria West station, and, significantly increasing turning radii on the approaches to Broncos Stadium could save at about 1.5 minutes.

Considering the entire area was vacant (the dorms predate the DUS line) before build out, looking at the infrastructural built without excuses, the segment design is hideous. Any train going to DUS from the south takes a least 3 minutes to pass. An extra track at the Auraria West station, and, significantly increasing turning radii could save at least a minute.

Go down and walk the area and see for yourself.

The W Line

Factors:

1. The W line, like all the rest of the light rail system, does not have any real capacity for expresses due to all stations between the Fed Center and Auraria West having only two tracks. If two or three stations had same direction passing capacity, at least 5 minutes could be reduced from the schedule.

2. The W line's segment that parallels the creek in Sanderson Gulch, for whatever reasons, has too many curves with too tight turning radii. Had this route been less accommodating to the micro topography, speeds on this line could have been increased by 5 mph (at least) for a net savings of 1 minute.

3. For whatever reasons, stations are too closely spaced between the Federal Decatur Station and Sheridan with 4 stations in about 2 miles.* Speed restrictions and time spent decelerating and accelerating that could be realized by eliminating 3 of the 4 stations, 4 minutes.

4. Adding the extra track at Auraria West also would enable shorter wait times for both the northbound traffic approaching from the south on the DUS Light line, as well as for the W west bound train. The amount of time saved would vary with the time of day. Let's give it 1 minute.

5. Providing run-through-capability at the Auraria West station and Broncos Station. This, in conjunction with other improvements mentioned, would save at least an additional minute, so I'll give it 1.5 minutes.

Add these up for the interval between the Fed Center and the DUS stations, West, and you get a net reduction of 12 minutes. Subtract 20% redundancy caused by improvement interactions and an express with improved right-of-ways could travel what takes 29 minutes in about 19 minutes.

Such a rail line would boom.

*This largely is the result of putting the an excessive number of stations digestible between the west edge of Denver at Sheridan, and, the Auraria West Station, for whatever reasons.

[bunt_q]

VelociRFTA! Stations are fan-cy (better than an RTD light rail station). Buses are buses, but they actually say "Aspen BRT" on the front, and they have a giant dinosaur on the side. Fast, fun, frequent.

Yes Denver/Boulder, your buses are getting schooled by some little mountain towns'.

[bunt_q]

Also, two hours and 15 minutes from the tunnel to C-470. July people, nobody is skiing. I think I might just take to swearing at/slapping anybody who suggests a train for this corridor. Some ideas are just too stupid to be tolerated. Widen the highway, widen it now!

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Also, two hours and 15 minutes from the tunnel to C-470. July people, nobody is skiing. I think I might just take to swearing at/slapping anybody who suggests a train for this corridor. Some ideas are just too stupid to be tolerated. Widen the highway, widen it now!

For sure, what's an appropriate toll? I'm thinking $20 to Vail. $25 to Glenwood Springs.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

For sure, what's an appropriate toll? I'm thinking $20 to Vail. $25 to Glenwood Springs.

For HOT lanes or all lanes? I'm looking at 5 hours from Glenwood to Denver today. 5 hours. $25 seems like a damn bargain.

[texcolo]

Is the commuter rail through Arvada only going to be on track? Is it going to share a track with the beer train???? Is it electric or diesel?

[Launch 12]

Originally Posted by texcolo

Is the commuter rail through Arvada only going to be on track? Is it going to share a track with the beer train???? Is it electric or diesel?

The majority of the Gold line will be double tracked, but will be single track through old town Arvada. Trains will be electric and the same that will be used on the line to the airport.

[BG918]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

For HOT lanes or all lanes? I'm looking at 5 hours from Glenwood to Denver today. 5 hours. $25 seems like a damn bargain.

I made it from Vail to Denver today in just over 2 hours with just a slight slowdown near the construction at the Twin Tunnels. You just have to leave early (we left at 10 am) or really late on Sundays. In the winter I try to avoid skiing on weekends for the same reasons. I agree though that the highway should be widened but that's a long term project.

[EngiNerd]

For those curious, here is a detailed explanation of what's going on for the new I-70 toll lane between US 40 and the Twin Tunnels.

http://www.coloradodot.info/projects...1414-final.pdf

[Stonemans_rowJ]

Originally Posted by BG918

I made it from Vail to Denver today in just over 2 hours with just a slight slowdown near the construction at the Twin Tunnels. You just have to leave early (we left at 10 am) or really late on Sundays. In the winter I try to avoid skiing on weekends for the same reasons. I agree though that the highway should be widened but that's a long term project.

Unfortunately widening I-70 would probably only induce more demand from the ever-growing metro area to drive to the mountains while not resulting in faster drive times, all at a ridiculous high economic cost (not to mention environmental cost) due to the geographic challenges of the narrow valleys. Tolls and/or congestion pricing on the weekends are in order; this will promote carpooling.

[EngiNerd]

Originally Posted by Stonemans_rowJ

Unfortunately widening I-70 would probably only induce more demand from the ever-growing metro area to drive to the mountains while not resulting in faster drive times, all at a ridiculous high economic cost (not to mention environmental cost) due to the geographic challenges of the narrow valleys. Tolls and/or congestion pricing on the weekends are in order; this will promote carpooling.

So what's the solution then, keep the status quo and the shitty weekend drive until self-driving car swarms triple the existing highway capacity because nothing we can do will improve things?

More carpooling is the answer to the congestion problems? Seriously? You know when I go up in the mountains on a weekend in the summer or winter, and look at the cars around me, I would say my unscientific visual study tells me that at least 75% if not more of the cars around me have 2 or more people in the car doing just that, carpooling. There is no way promoting more carpooling, which is already being done to great extent, would alleviate a significant amount of congestion on the busy weekends.

If congestion gets bad enough, then people will start turning away from the Colorado mountains as a ski or summer destination and start going elsewhere. Is that what we really want, to drive people away to Idaho, Montana, or *gasp* Utah for their ski trips rather than keeping those precious tourist funds here just because we don't want to talk about highway expansion because its very expensive?

I don't see how we can really have meaningful talk of helping congestion through the mountains without talking about some kind of highway expansion. Sure buses or trains might help some in the winter where there are clear destinations for most of the tourists, but what about the summer? Families loaded up with all their camping or hiking gear would NEVER consider getting on a bus, not to mention there is no feasible way for them to get to their actual camp site or favorite hike.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by Stonemans_rowJ

Unfortunately widening I-70 would probably only induce more demand from the ever-growing metro area to drive to the mountains while not resulting in faster drive times, all at a ridiculous high economic cost (not to mention environmental cost) due to the geographic challenges of the narrow valleys. Tolls and/or congestion pricing on the weekends are in order; this will promote carpooling.

Listening to planners and liberals talk about induced demand is like listening to conservatives talk about how there can't be global warming because it's winter. It must sound good coming out of their mouths, except that it makes no sense whatsoever.

Induced demand is a good thing. "Induced demand" - think about what those words mean - that means additional people taking a trip, getting to where they want to be in a timeframe that is reasonable to them. Will the highway get congested again? Sure, probably. But there will be 33% more people using it. And that is only good if you are one of those people.

Define a "ridiculously high economic cost." The highway alternatives were priced at roughly 1/3 of any transit alternatives.

Environmental costs aren't real, give me a break. The highway is there. The damage is already done. Unless the environmental cost you're referring to is "more people in the mountains" generally. In which case... too bad. That's why we live here. Ray-gun growth control doesn't work.

I think the answer is a combination of general purpose widening, HOT lanes, and improved bus transit. (Of course, an HOV lane of any sort up there would likely necessitate 3, or even 4, in a vehicle.)

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by EngiNerd

So what's the solution then, keep the status quo and the shitty weekend drive until self-driving car swarms triple the existing highway capacity because nothing we can do will improve things?

More carpooling is the answer to the congestion problems? Seriously? You know when I go up in the mountains on a weekend in the summer or winter, and look at the cars around me, I would say my unscientific visual study tells me that at least 75% if not more of the cars around me have 2 or more people in the car doing just that, carpooling. There is no way promoting more carpooling, which is already being done to great extent, would alleviate a significant amount of congestion on the busy weekends.

If congestion gets bad enough, then people will start turning away from the Colorado mountains as a ski or summer destination and start going elsewhere. Is that what we really want, to drive people away to Idaho, Montana, or *gasp* Utah for their ski trips rather than keeping those precious tourist funds here just because we don't want to talk about highway expansion because its very expensive?

I don't see how we can really have meaningful talk of helping congestion through the mountains without talking about some kind of highway expansion. Sure buses or trains might help some in the winter where there are clear destinations for most of the tourists, but what about the summer? Families loaded up with all their camping or hiking gear would NEVER consider getting on a bus, not to mention there is no feasible way for them to get to their actual camp site or favorite hike.

All accurate. These are the same folks - Wizened's generation - who said in the 70s if we don't host the Olympics, growth will stop. If we don't build a beltway, growth will stop. Those people have been proven wrong every single time. John Denver sings a good tune, but that's about it.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

I think the answer is a combination of general purpose widening, HOT lanes, and improved bus transit. (Of course, an HOV lane of any sort up there would likely necessitate 3, or even 4, in a vehicle.)

I agree, except for the HOV part. Let's stop pretending that more carpooling is the solution for I-70 because most people already carpool if they are going to the mountains (even going from 2 to 3 in a vehicle isn't going to cut it, maybe 4 occupants would do it). Instead, we need to focus on adding three lanes in the mountains: two express toll lanes that are also utilized by bus transit and a reversible lane that is also tolled. Expensive? Sure, but at least all of the additional lane capacity will end up paying for itself instead of subsidizing the cheap-asses who elect to use the general lanes.

[Wizened Variations]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

I agree, except for the HOV part. Let's stop pretending that more carpooling is the solution for I-70 because most people already carpool if they are going to the mountains (even going from 2 to 3 in a vehicle isn't going to cut it, maybe 4 occupants would do it). Instead, we need to focus on adding three lanes in the mountains: two express toll lanes that are also utilized by bus transit and a reversible lane that is also tolled. Expensive? Sure, but at least all of the additional lane capacity will end up paying for itself instead of subsidizing the cheap-asses who elect to use the general lanes.

Agreed.

Perhaps at a minimum 2 reversible lanes with few exits. The bulk of the traffic is generated in Denver, IMO, that goes through Eisenhower tunnel. Perhaps 3 or 4 exit/entrances between the Tunnel and US 6, east of Georgetown.

Between US 6 and I-25 and I-70 and Georgetown, perhaps a more humble addition of one extra lane on the uphill side of hills in the direction traffic.

I also believe that more 3 lane passing sections should be built along US 6 between I-70 and Golden.

I also agree that the two lanes should not be tolled.

[Wizened Variations]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

All accurate. These are the same folks - Wizened's generation - who said in the 70s if we don't host the Olympics, growth will stop. If we don't build a beltway, growth will stop. Those people have been proven wrong every single time. John Denver sings a good tune, but that's about it.

Your broad sweep is entertaining.

A lot of us made a ton of money on the growth. A few of us looked at social engineering via zoning changes and the like, but, OUR PARENTS ran the show until the early '90s. By that time, most of my generation was busy raising families and were worried about how good schools were, and, trying to save money for the kid's college.

Actually, a far larger percentage of your generation is against growth with the caveat that much of your generation wants 'smart growth'. 'urban infilling' and the like, which very often reflect as little planning and the process of planning awareness as my generation had at your age.

You, like many of us, have made too much money off the status quo and live too well to bite the hand the feeds you.

Most of my peers learned that after getting tired of the Rocky Mountain High BS.