HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum

Since 1999, the SkyscraperPage 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. Welcome!

You are currently browsing as a guest. Register with the SkyscraperPage Forum and join this growing community of skyscraper enthusiasts. Registering has benefits such as fewer ads, the ability to post messages, private messaging and more.

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #7701  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2014, 2:22 AM
bunt_q's Avatar
bunt_q bunt_q is offline
Provincial Bumpkin
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 11,479
Umm, we're just going to demolish a 500-foot, brand new bridge? Umm...? I wish I believed none of this cost will get passed on, but that's a hell of a pill for the insurers to swallow.

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_26...lished-rebuilt
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7702  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2014, 3:06 AM
wong21fr's Avatar
wong21fr wong21fr is online now
Reluctant Hobbesian
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Denver
Posts: 10,883
^ I'm sure the insurers will fight this bitterly. But the companies' insurance brokers and attorneys will have a great time submitting multiple claims to recoup most of the cost. The professional liability claims will be huge and I'd love to see the PE's face who signed off on the bridge design package when gets hit as well.

If the entirety of construction risk was transferred to the private partners than bravo to RTD.
__________________
"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
     
     
  #7703  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2014, 6:03 AM
DenverRider2 DenverRider2 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcp View Post
look at how BRT is being done in chicago on a very colfax style street.

fun video here - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7D1uA52LG0
Quote:
We've announced a vision for providing faster, more reliable bus service on Ashland, including dedicated bus lanes and median stations.
At the Colfax Corridor meeting Ryan asked why not consider a median running BRT. The speaker answered that the economic benefit would be less because the stations would not be fronting the sidewalk. Is there any data to back this claim up? If anything, I image a dozen colfax citizens waiting for the bus outside a business could lower property values.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7704  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2014, 12:26 PM
bunt_q's Avatar
bunt_q bunt_q is offline
Provincial Bumpkin
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 11,479
That sounds like a BS answer if ever there was one. The real answer: because then we'd have to buy all new buses with doors on the other side for any route that'll use these lanes. And we are cheap. Yes, we're buying new buses anyways. But even though we tell you we'll never use regular buses for this service, you all know we are lying, and from time to time the "BRT" will be a regular old bus.

That Chicago video is pretty sweet, good for them, looks like a great plan. The difference is they care about transit as a city, we do not.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7705  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2014, 12:41 PM
jubguy3's Avatar
jubguy3 jubguy3 is offline
Bad at planning ( ͡° ͜
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: -Salt Lake City-
Posts: 442
You know you can have the buses cross over each other at grade? That makes the stations work for regular buses and its not fucking complicated.

Also you guys are getting a nice taste of careless transit. Look at the 35M MAX bus in West Valley. That said, the South Davis BRT planned will be 500 million dollars while light rail would have been 800 million. The 35M was 7 million to construct.
__________________
/r/WasatchDev! Join today
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7706  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2014, 4:53 PM
RyanD's Avatar
RyanD RyanD is offline
Fast. Fun. Frequent.
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Denver, Colorado
Posts: 1,993
Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverRider2 View Post
At the Colfax Corridor meeting Ryan asked why not consider a median running BRT. The speaker answered that the economic benefit would be less because the stations would not be fronting the sidewalk. Is there any data to back this claim up? If anything, I image a dozen colfax citizens waiting for the bus outside a business could lower property values.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bunt_q View Post
That sounds like a BS answer if ever there was one. The real answer: because then we'd have to buy all new buses with doors on the other side for any route that'll use these lanes. And we are cheap. Yes, we're buying new buses anyways. But even though we tell you we'll never use regular buses for this service, you all know we are lying, and from time to time the "BRT" will be a regular old bus.

That Chicago video is pretty sweet, good for them, looks like a great plan. The difference is they care about transit as a city, we do not.
Ugh... You know, I wouldn't ask that question if I knew it was unpractical and wouldn't work in the real world. I even gave two extreme examples where it worked: Los Angeles AND Salt Lake City. Two drastically different cities. His answer was complete and utter bullshit, excuse my language. If Chicago is doing it, then it damn well will work in Denver. That meeting made me angry. Why did you guys have to remind me?
__________________
Latest Photo Threads: Los Angeles | New Orleans | Denver: 2014 Megathread | Denver Time-Lapse Project For more photos check out: My Website and My Flickr Photostream
"That Republic Plaza, she's a big girl..."

Last edited by RyanD; Oct 29, 2014 at 6:15 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7707  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2014, 5:03 PM
Mulligan's Avatar
Mulligan Mulligan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 314
Quote:
Originally Posted by bunt_q View Post
Umm, we're just going to demolish a 500-foot, brand new bridge? Umm...? I wish I believed none of this cost will get passed on, but that's a hell of a pill for the insurers to swallow.

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_26...lished-rebuilt
That's precisely why public-private partnerships work well - make the private side have skin in the game. You can refuse to believe all you want that the cost won't get passed on, but the concessionaire agreement signed between DTP and RTD protects RTD against situations just like this. DTP's contract with RTD is a DBFOM (Design-Build-Finance-Operate-Maintain) contract. If they make a mistake in the design and construction (which they did), it's on them to fix it, not RTD.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7708  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2014, 5:19 PM
wong21fr's Avatar
wong21fr wong21fr is online now
Reluctant Hobbesian
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Denver
Posts: 10,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mulligan View Post
That's precisely why public-private partnerships work well - make the private side have skin in the game. You can refuse to believe all you want that the cost won't get passed on, but the concessionaire agreement signed between DTP and RTD protects RTD against situations just like this. DTP's contract with RTD is a DBFOM (Design-Build-Finance-Operate-Maintain) contract. If they make a mistake in the design and construction (which they did), it's on them to fix it, not RTD.
He's just used to the private entity always being able to pass the cost of failure onto the public. It's the natural capitalist thing to do, especially in areas where the public sector isn't competent enough to know any better.
__________________
"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
     
     
  #7709  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2014, 8:07 PM
bunt_q's Avatar
bunt_q bunt_q is offline
Provincial Bumpkin
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 11,479
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mulligan View Post
That's precisely why public-private partnerships work well - make the private side have skin in the game. You can refuse to believe all you want that the cost won't get passed on, but the concessionaire agreement signed between DTP and RTD protects RTD against situations just like this. DTP's contract with RTD is a DBFOM (Design-Build-Finance-Operate-Maintain) contract. If they make a mistake in the design and construction (which they did), it's on them to fix it, not RTD.
Right, because a multimillion dollar f-up never leads to litigation. Contracts are iron-clad, always. Especially those done, in particular, by RTD and the City, who are known for their contracting prowess. I stand corrected.

Way to tow the party line, strong work.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wong21fr View Post
He's just used to the private entity always being able to pass the cost of failure onto the public. It's the natural capitalist thing to do, especially in areas where the public sector isn't competent enough to know any better.
That's because that's what happens. The private sector can afford more lawyers.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7710  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2014, 10:09 PM
Mulligan's Avatar
Mulligan Mulligan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 314
Quote:
Originally Posted by bunt_q View Post
Right, because a multimillion dollar f-up never leads to litigation. Contracts are iron-clad, always. Especially those done, in particular, by RTD and the City, who are known for their contracting prowess. I stand corrected.

Way to tow the party line, strong work.



That's because that's what happens. The private sector can afford more lawyers.
Right...and just because its public v private, public will get screwed.

You're right...I stand corrected.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7711  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2014, 11:58 PM
bunt_q's Avatar
bunt_q bunt_q is offline
Provincial Bumpkin
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 11,479
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mulligan View Post
Right...and just because its public v private, public will get screwed.

You're right...I stand corrected.
Well yes, if the public pays even a penny, then the public is getting screwed. Pretty sure that happens, even if it's only in legal fees. But no, I don't think the public gets screwed inherently. Just RTD. RTD hasn't exactly demonstrated a decade of competence. There's a reason getting "railroaded" is a verb in common usage, perhaps they should've seen that one coming!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7712  
Old Posted Yesterday, 1:08 AM
LAM's Avatar
LAM LAM is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 174
Not to sound too stupid, but what is the advantage of BRT in the center of the street as opposed to the sides of the street? I personally don't like the idea of being dumped into the middle of the street when I get off a bus. I imagine I could get used to it though. I guess if they have a landscaped center median, that could be a nice feature.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7713  
Old Posted Yesterday, 1:13 AM
jubguy3's Avatar
jubguy3 jubguy3 is offline
Bad at planning ( ͡° ͜
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: -Salt Lake City-
Posts: 442
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAM View Post
Not to sound too stupid, but what is the advantage of BRT in the center of the street as opposed to the sides of the street? I personally don't like the idea of being dumped into the middle of the street when I get off a bus. I imagine I could get used to it though. I guess if they have a landscaped center median, that could be a nice feature.
Stations ae busier, no conflicts with parking and sidewalk, makes the bus more visible, smaller conflicts with turning lanes.
__________________
/r/WasatchDev! Join today
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7714  
Old Posted Yesterday, 3:32 AM
jubguy3's Avatar
jubguy3 jubguy3 is offline
Bad at planning ( ͡° ͜
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: -Salt Lake City-
Posts: 442
EDIT: my iPad is failing to iPad so I wilk have to share the link at a later time.

Off to the right you can see how a station would be set up to service regular buses... Someone maybe share this with the Colfax BRT team?

EDIT: http://www.rideuta.com/uploads/Detai...BRT4112014.pdf
__________________
/r/WasatchDev! Join today

Last edited by jubguy3; Yesterday at 3:44 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7715  
Old Posted Yesterday, 3:46 AM
Zmapper Zmapper is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 156



A median LRT line was originally planned on E. Colfax in the 1980's. I found this document in the Auraria Library a short while ago.

Last edited by Zmapper; Yesterday at 3:53 AM. Reason: Image Size
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7716  
Old Posted Yesterday, 5:20 PM
wong21fr's Avatar
wong21fr wong21fr is online now
Reluctant Hobbesian
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Denver
Posts: 10,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by jubguy3 View Post
EDIT: my iPad is failing to iPad so I wilk have to share the link at a later time.

Off to the right you can see how a station would be set up to service regular buses... Someone maybe share this with the Colfax BRT team?

EDIT: http://www.rideuta.com/uploads/Detai...BRT4112014.pdf
That looks perfectly suited for Salt Lake's giant-ass streets, not so much for Colfax. I'm beginning to see why they when with the sidewalking loading for BRT: it takes up a lot less room and since we aren't willing to take parking, or even a single general traffic lane, space maximization is the key.
__________________
"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
     
     
  #7717  
Old Posted Yesterday, 11:47 PM
DenverRider2 DenverRider2 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanD View Post
Ugh... You know, I wouldn't ask that question if I knew it was unpractical and wouldn't work in the real world. I even gave two extreme examples where it worked: Los Angeles AND Salt Lake City. Two drastically different cities. His answer was complete and utter bullshit, excuse my language.
The bizarre thing was that he even acknowledged median lanes would be a better design and solve some of the problems such as parking, but then dismissed it out of hand because it wouldn't bring as much economic benefit. Weird.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7718  
Old Posted Today, 5:04 PM
EngiNerd's Avatar
EngiNerd EngiNerd is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Englewood, CO
Posts: 1,381
Quote:
Originally Posted by bunt_q View Post
Not really. The annual report to DRCOG includes all sorts of good stuff: https://drcog.org/sites/drcog/files/...e%20Report.pdf

Including:

And yes, it looks like 62 minutes between Ridgegate and Peoria, so with the transfer, 90+ is probably correct.
Thanks! I couldn't find it on the Fas-Tracks site
__________________
"The engineer is the key figure in the material progress of the world. It is his engineering that makes a reality of the potential value of science by translating scientific knowledge into tools, resources, energy and labor to bring them into the service of man. To make contributions of this kind the engineer requires the imagination to visualize the need of society and to appreciate what is possible as well as the technological and broad social age understanding to bring his vision to reality."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7719  
Old Posted Today, 6:11 PM
TakeFive's Avatar
TakeFive TakeFive is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 840
Quote:
Originally Posted by bunt_q View Post
... And we are cheap.

That Chicago video is pretty sweet, good for them, looks like a great plan. The difference is they care about transit as a city, we do not.
1) Does RTD not have to be cheap? Or are they flush with money that I'm not aware of?

2) So far as that Chicago BRT goes that's a fricken vision. People can envision whatever their heart desires. Get back to me when it becomes reality.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wong21fr View Post
That looks perfectly suited for Salt Lake's giant-ass streets, not so much for Colfax. I'm beginning to see why they when with the sidewalking loading for BRT: it takes up a lot less room and since we aren't willing to take parking, or even a single general traffic lane, space maximization is the key.
Makes sense to me. Some of this popped into my mind as well. Whether RTD trying to be all things to all interested parties is a good idea or not, is a good question.

That and the fact that (to the best of my knowledge) RTD is having to cobble together funds to get even what they've proposed done. Whether it would be better to wait a decade to see if more funds could be found is a different question.
__________________
Cool... Denver has reached puberty.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
   
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 6:38 PM.

     

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