HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum.

Since 1999, SkyscraperPage.com's forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web.  The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics.  SkyscraperPage.com also features unique skyscraper diagrams, a database of construction activity, and publishes popular skyscraper posters.

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Mountain West

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #6561  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2014, 3:18 PM
bunt_q's Avatar
bunt_q bunt_q is offline
Provincial Bumpkin
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 10,987
I will add, your generation's casual disregard for budgets and inability to comprehend the parallel notions of compromise and sacrifice, are exactly what has our government in the deficit position it's in. The boomers could rightfully be called the "have our cake and eat it too" generation.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6562  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2014, 5:30 PM
DenverRider2 DenverRider2 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by bunt_q View Post
I will add, your generation's casual disregard for budgets and inability to comprehend the parallel notions of compromise and sacrifice
When CDOT can spend $100 million to widen a handful of bridges along 6 but RTD has only 700 million to build an entire light rail line from scratch, it is no wonder that transit remains so unappealing. We can talk about budgets and compromise, but our transportation system needs to realign its priorities.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6563  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2014, 5:49 PM
seventwenty's Avatar
seventwenty seventwenty is offline
Cars man... WHY...
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: A bit too far from home
Posts: 776
Quote:
Originally Posted by bunt_q View Post
Give me an example of how a light rail travels through a downtown, in a way that we could've done for comparable cost, that we should have modeled ourselves after. Give me an example. Remember, that was built as a starter system on a bare-bones budget. So give me something apples to apples that we could've done better, north of Colfax.

Don't get me wrong, I love how Honolulu is doing it. But they're building one line for the cost of Fastracks.
I'm ignorant about Denver's light rail beginnings, so this is an honest open ended question: How do our light rail beginnings compare to Portland's?
__________________
The happy & obtuse bro.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6564  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2014, 5:50 PM
wong21fr's Avatar
wong21fr wong21fr is offline
Reluctant Hobbesian
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Denver
Posts: 10,508
Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverRider2 View Post
When CDOT can spend $100 million to widen a handful of bridges along 6 but RTD has only 700 million to build an entire light rail line from scratch, it is no wonder that transit remains so unappealing. We can talk about budgets and compromise, but our transportation system needs to realign its priorities.
CDOT has a budget of roughly $1 billion per year to service the intrastate road system. RTD has a budget of $900 million. Mind you, there's another large amount of funding that goes towards roads from the counties and municipalities, but it's not as hugely out of whack as it may seem.

It seems as if we are getting a lot closer to funding parity in Colorado thanks to the draconian restrictions of TABOR and the lack of revenue increases for road infrastructure in CO.
__________________
"You don't strike, you just go to work everyday and do your job real half-ass. That's the American way!" -Homer Simpson

All of us who are concerned for peace and triumph of reason and justice must be keenly aware how small an influence reason and honest good will exert upon events in the political field. ~Albert Einstein

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6565  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2014, 6:49 PM
bunt_q's Avatar
bunt_q bunt_q is offline
Provincial Bumpkin
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 10,987
Quote:
Originally Posted by wong21fr View Post
CDOT has a budget of roughly $1 billion per year to service the intrastate road system. RTD has a budget of $900 million. Mind you, there's another large amount of funding that goes towards roads from the counties and municipalities, but it's not as hugely out of whack as it may seem.

It seems as if we are getting a lot closer to funding parity in Colorado thanks to the draconian restrictions of TABOR and the lack of revenue increases for road infrastructure in CO.
Exactly. We're quickly approaching parity, when nearly 100% of statewide trips are still by auto. Frankly, transit is running out of time to prove itself. Which of course, it won't be able to. And not because of disparities in funding, but because of land use. We don't really mean to reduce auto-dependence. Our goal, rather, is to provide cheap commuter parking for downtown workers and special events. Which is a great goal if your parallel is to create an urban playground for the limited numbers of folks who can afford the lifestyle.

Don't kid yourselves, we're not at all interested in building a "real city" in the sense of a dense, diverse metropolis, where transit becomes tightly ingrained in and integrated into day to day life. That's not even on our radar, let alone likely in our future. I don't even think that's a stated goal for all but the most devout urbanists among us.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6566  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2014, 6:53 PM
Mulligan's Avatar
Mulligan Mulligan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by wong21fr View Post
CDOT has a budget of roughly $1 billion per year to service the intrastate road system. RTD has a budget of $900 million. Mind you, there's another large amount of funding that goes towards roads from the counties and municipalities, but it's not as hugely out of whack as it may seem.

It seems as if we are getting a lot closer to funding parity in Colorado thanks to the draconian restrictions of TABOR and the lack of revenue increases for road infrastructure in CO.
I'm sure RTD would LOVE to have a $900 million budget. In 2013, their budget was $434.6 million. (http://www.rtd-denver.com/factsAndFigures.shtml)

Where did you find $900 million?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6567  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2014, 6:58 PM
wong21fr's Avatar
wong21fr wong21fr is offline
Reluctant Hobbesian
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Denver
Posts: 10,508
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mulligan View Post
I'm sure RTD would LOVE to have a $900 million budget. In 2013, their budget was $434.6 million. (http://www.rtd-denver.com/factsAndFigures.shtml)

Where did you find $900 million?
Operating plus capital. The financial figure that RTD puts on it's website is for operations alone.
__________________
"You don't strike, you just go to work everyday and do your job real half-ass. That's the American way!" -Homer Simpson

All of us who are concerned for peace and triumph of reason and justice must be keenly aware how small an influence reason and honest good will exert upon events in the political field. ~Albert Einstein

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6568  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2014, 7:02 PM
bunt_q's Avatar
bunt_q bunt_q is offline
Provincial Bumpkin
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 10,987
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mulligan View Post
I'm sure RTD would LOVE to have a $900 million budget. In 2013, their budget was $434.6 million. (http://www.rtd-denver.com/factsAndFigures.shtml)

Where did you find $900 million?
Probably from the actual budget: http://www.rtd-denver.com/PDF_Files/...opted_2013.pdf

Total operating budget: $536.5 million
Total capital budget: $2,034.2 million
Total appropriation: $2,822.6 million
Unrestricted fund balance: $30.9 million

EDIT: Another blurb:

Total revenues (both Base System and FasTracks) of $934.2 million are expected to increase $10.9 million in 2013 from projected year-end 2012. The increase is composed primarily of increases in fare revenue and sales/use tax revenue, offset by decreases in grant revenue.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6569  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2014, 7:05 PM
wong21fr's Avatar
wong21fr wong21fr is offline
Reluctant Hobbesian
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Denver
Posts: 10,508
Quote:
Originally Posted by bunt_q View Post
Exactly. We're quickly approaching parity, when nearly 100% of statewide trips are still by auto. Frankly, transit is running out of time to prove itself. Which of course, it won't be able to. And not because of disparities in funding, but because of land use. We don't really mean to reduce auto-dependence. Our goal, rather, is to provide cheap commuter parking for downtown workers and special events. Which is a great goal if your parallel is to create an urban playground for the limited numbers of folks who can afford the lifestyle.
Depends on which areas you are talking about Bunt. The City of Denver is probably one tax increase, aka Boulder, away from having a pretty decent inter-city transit network that will be utilized by the wealthier people in Denver while there cars sit parked at their residences for the weekend trips to the mountains. But the suburbs are well and truly fucked, not to mention the massive turmoil they will experience from water shortages when those schmucks in Highlands Ranch discover what is meant by senior water rights. Which is too bad for the poor, who are going to end up enslaved to their car and very, very thirsty.
__________________
"You don't strike, you just go to work everyday and do your job real half-ass. That's the American way!" -Homer Simpson

All of us who are concerned for peace and triumph of reason and justice must be keenly aware how small an influence reason and honest good will exert upon events in the political field. ~Albert Einstein

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6570  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2014, 7:12 PM
bunt_q's Avatar
bunt_q bunt_q is offline
Provincial Bumpkin
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 10,987
Quote:
Originally Posted by wong21fr View Post
Depends on which areas you are talking about Bunt. The City of Denver is probably one tax increase, aka Boulder, away from having a pretty decent inter-city transit network that will be utilized by the wealthier people in Denver while there cars sit parked at their residences for the weekend trips to the mountains. But the suburbs are well and truly fucked, not to mention the massive turmoil they will experience from water shortages when those schmucks in Highlands Ranch discover what is meant by senior water rights. Which is too bad for the poor, who are going to end up enslaved to their car and very, very thirsty.
Yeah, but Denver is 20% of the metro population, 12% of the state population, and those numbers aren't climbing. (To say nothing of the fact that half of Denver's population is every bit as suburban as the suburbs.) And if we're comparing RTD vs. CDOT, those percentages are relevant.

But sure, obviously I think Denver can and should fund it's own little transit network. That's part of the playground - every playground needs rides. That system is also my bar napkin dream.

But if we're going to have great existential debates about car/transit parity, that's a whole different discussion, and not one transit can even remotely compete on in a state where 90%+ of the population doesn't have a prayer of ever really embracing auto-independence.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6571  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2014, 10:41 PM
jimluk jimluk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wizened Variations View Post

Much of our light rail system is a "hooterville trolley" created as a after thought for other financial purposes.
That sounds fun, but I only ride transit for the chicken wings.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6572  
Old Posted Mar 7, 2014, 2:36 AM
Cirrus's Avatar
Cirrus Cirrus is offline
Coastal elitist
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 16,069
Lookie what RTD posted to its flickr page









__________________
BeyondDC: blog | twitter | flickr | instagram | Exploring urbanism and transportation in the Washington, DC area.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6573  
Old Posted Mar 7, 2014, 5:25 AM
bunt_q's Avatar
bunt_q bunt_q is offline
Provincial Bumpkin
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 10,987
Good for them, it's a shame that will never ever be operating at a time when I will be downtown. Sorry, 9 to 5, Monday through Friday transit service doesn't interest me, no matter how sexy the bus.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6574  
Old Posted Mar 7, 2014, 4:35 PM
seventwenty's Avatar
seventwenty seventwenty is offline
Cars man... WHY...
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: A bit too far from home
Posts: 776
Just have your partners move the firm downtown.
__________________
The happy & obtuse bro.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6575  
Old Posted Mar 7, 2014, 5:14 PM
bunt_q's Avatar
bunt_q bunt_q is offline
Provincial Bumpkin
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 10,987
All of the work is in the burbs though - contrary to popular belief, most new construction is not in the core. Clients prefer a more accessible location. (Centrality is surprisingly unimportant.)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6576  
Old Posted Mar 7, 2014, 5:36 PM
wong21fr's Avatar
wong21fr wong21fr is offline
Reluctant Hobbesian
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Denver
Posts: 10,508
Quote:
Originally Posted by bunt_q View Post
All of the work is in the burbs though - contrary to popular belief, most new construction is not in the core. Clients prefer a more accessible location. (Centrality is surprisingly unimportant.)
I never thought of the Streets at Southglenn as being accessible. For the DougCo and Centennial crowds, sure, but not for the fastest growing suburban areas towards the east and the north.

I still want to see what happens to the fast-growth areas when a 5-plus year drought rips through the state. The potential for human misery and economic disaster brought on by poor planning, land-use, and ignoring the consequences of junior water rights will be fascinating to watch.
__________________
"You don't strike, you just go to work everyday and do your job real half-ass. That's the American way!" -Homer Simpson

All of us who are concerned for peace and triumph of reason and justice must be keenly aware how small an influence reason and honest good will exert upon events in the political field. ~Albert Einstein

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6577  
Old Posted Mar 7, 2014, 9:52 PM
bunt_q's Avatar
bunt_q bunt_q is offline
Provincial Bumpkin
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 10,987
Quote:
Originally Posted by wong21fr View Post
I never thought of the Streets at Southglenn as being accessible. For the DougCo and Centennial crowds, sure, but not for the fastest growing suburban areas towards the east and the north.
East is E-470, which is very accessible. Fastest growing is still south/southeast too.

Weld County is an issue, true. Although most of the money building those sprawl-burbs still lives down south. Many people will take E-470 clear around.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wong21fr View Post
I still want to see what happens to the fast-growth areas when a 5-plus year drought rips through the state. The potential for human misery and economic disaster brought on by poor planning, land-use, and ignoring the consequences of junior water rights will be fascinating to watch.
They'll be fine. I am not worried about water at all. I think "water conservation" is just masking anti-growth sentiment - there's no real basis for it. 90% of our water use is still for ag. And ag will always sell to urban interests. Delivery may be an issue, but we'll build our way out of that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6578  
Old Posted Mar 9, 2014, 7:24 PM
Wizened Variations's Avatar
Wizened Variations Wizened Variations is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,214
Quote:
Originally Posted by bunt_q View Post
Good for them, it's a shame that will never ever be operating at a time when I will be downtown. Sorry, 9 to 5, Monday through Friday transit service doesn't interest me, no matter how sexy the bus.
The issue boils down to the infrastructure that is built. If the infrastructure is built for high average speeds system wide, for ease of entry and exit from vehicles, and, interconnects a significant portion of where users want to go, the transit system operating on the infrastructure works.

And, regrettably, the problems accumulate around infrastructural deficiencies like layers of ice grow atop one another in hail stones.

The downtown transit problem simply is that the light rail as built does not have the capacity to move more people via both of it's approaches. Had RTD had the foresight and the money to bury the Stout and/or California approaches into downtown from Colfax as a subway, then all the traffic generated by the W,C,D,E,F,and H lines could be handed via a 1 loop.

DUS simply compounds the problem, and, if the economy declines further and people are FORCED to use transit into and/or through downtown then DUS will become a rat warren, with ridership over expectations cramming the Mall Shuttle and these cute new buses.

Fortunately, or unfortunately, the new train shed at Union Station will be underutilized for years as the real crowd problems will involve the Underground bus station and capacity problems at the light rail Station.

Problems outside of suburb to downtown connections simply have not been addressed.
__________________
Copy the best, and, create the rest.

The whole concept of "Green" is just a fuzzy friendly way of showcasing possible alternatives to radical market driven cost increases

Last edited by Wizened Variations; Mar 9, 2014 at 7:46 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6579  
Old Posted Mar 9, 2014, 8:56 PM
bunt_q's Avatar
bunt_q bunt_q is offline
Provincial Bumpkin
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 10,987
Are we back on the decline of the American economy kick? I'm not sure what economy you're living in, but the one I see is doing reasonsbly well now. At least, it's not doing "imminent decline" badly.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6580  
Old Posted Mar 10, 2014, 3:48 AM
jimluk jimluk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 116
From the new DenverUrbanism post


RE:Stapleton

"It is home to what will expand as the second largest transportation hub within RTD’s network"

Can anyone source or qualify this in any way, bigger than Civic Center, Broadway, Boulder Transit Center, Alameda, Colorado, DIA itself, etc. I don't buy this at all.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Mountain West
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:42 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.