DENVER | Transportation Thread

[TakeFive]

"Want a Bike Path? Pay for It Yourself"
August 12, 2015 by Amanda Albright, Bloomberg Business

An artist's rendering of the new crowdfunded bike lane expected to open in Denver this year. Alta Planning via Bloomberg

Your friends ask you to fund their marathon training, their home renovations, even their potato salad. Why not crowdfund something you'd actually use, such as a bike path or a public park?

The Downtown Denver Partnership used Ioby to raise $36,085 for a protected bike lane expected to open this fall, says Aylene McCallum, the director of the partnership's downtown environment division. She says the project garnered significant interest and the selection, design, and construction of the project will take one year compared with three or four years for other buffered or protected bike lanes in the area.

/sigh

[DUPio]

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_28...ment-dia-train

"Welcome to the University of Colorado A Line to Union Station, You cannot reach any CU campuses from this line".

How does this make any logistical sense at all?

[bunt_q]

Well it's a good thing RTD still stupidly insists on naming their stations after intersections. Who cares what the line is called? If you can't figure out where the "40th Ave & Airport Blvd. - Gateway Park" station is, you're hopeless in any case.

[RyanD]

Originally Posted by DUPio

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_28...ment-dia-train

"Welcome to the University of Colorado A Line to Union Station, You cannot reach any CU campuses from this line".

How does this make any logistical sense at all?

The majority of people on here didn't like the corporate sponsorship idea in the first place and this is, not by any means, better. I'm sure CU could use the $1 million a year on MUCH better things.

So, when your naive visitor comes to Denver, instead of thinking we're a real city with real companies (corporate sponsorship), they're going to think we're just a giant college town (CU sponsorship). I guess that would be close enough, right?

[balugajames]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

The number of folks who can make use of a 2-mile max radius here is just much smaller. (And could also come at the expense of the other 3,000,000, including most of the City of Denver outside downtown proper, who can't afford to live in the middle and depend on that road space - rich folks who can afford center neighborhoods do not have a special claim in downtown - downtown belongs to all of the city, and maintaining road capacity to get there is non-negotiable.) Anyways, it's a rare few who will make a 5-mile bike ride, and it's a rare few here who can get where they need to in less than that. Most of those Europens you see aren't going five miles - ask them.

We have plenty of room to add bike infrastructure downtown and further out and to say we are punishing the suburbs is absurd.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fv38J7SKH_g

E-bikes could also be a piece.

Either way, we have to start now.

In other news, Westminster got its first commitment, 5 story apartments over retail, market and cinema:
http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/ne...-gets-its.html

[Brainpathology]

Denver has a great deal more than a start in terms of accommodating cyclists. Implying otherwise is absurd.

Transit is what HAS to push cars off the road first. And it has to be convenient enough to compete with an automobile. Denver doesn't have that yet and for the amount of things you can actually get done on a bike it has more than most cities in terms of making it easier.

Simply wishing away the need to accommodate the thousands upon thousands of trips from the suburbs that come into downtown is going to do about as much good as the rest of us wishing away the unreasonable militancy of certain bike advocates.

[Brainpathology]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

"Want a Bike Path? Pay for It Yourself"
August 12, 2015 by Amanda Albright, Bloomberg Business

An artist's rendering of the new crowdfunded bike lane expected to open in Denver this year. Alta Planning via Bloomberg

/sigh

Call me old fashioned but aren't taxes crowd funding?

[bunt_q]

I didn't say we are punishing the suburbs. I said we are reducing the ability of the 3 million people - including 600,000 in Denver city limits - who do not live within 2 miles of downtown to get downtown if we start taking lanes, which only advantages the people who do live within 2 miles of downtown, the vast majority of whom nowadays are wealthy and white. Once you've driven the middle class out of the core, I could argue that maintaining roadway capacity - which benefits buses too - is a social equity issue. Bike lanes are arguably anti-progressive in our cities, unless your definition of progressive is limited to a narrow environmental stance.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by Brainpathology

Call me old fashioned but aren't taxes crowd funding?

But this is voluntary. "We don't like being told what to do" is apparently a legitimate value to hold nowadays. Folks have conveniently forgotten those portions of Economics 101 that don't comport to their already-held beliefs; in this case, the free rider problem. Freeloading has become a proud conservative value (see opposition to the ACA's personal mandate), which I find.... weird. And annoying, from the supposed party of personal responsibility.

That said, I dislike bike lanes, so I am content to hold a political belief that makes no logical sense so long as it supports what I want to think. Therefore, yes, if you want a bike lane, pay for it yourself.

[balugajames]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

I didn't say we are punishing the suburbs. I said we are reducing the ability of the 3 million people - including 600,000 in Denver city limits - who do not live within 2 miles of downtown to get downtown if we start taking lanes, which only advantages the people who do live within 2 miles of downtown, the vast majority of whom nowadays are wealthy and white. Once you've driven the middle class out of the core, I could argue that maintaining roadway capacity - which benefits buses too - is a social equity issue. Bike lanes are arguably anti-progressive in our cities, unless your definition of progressive is limited to a narrow environmental stance.

Adding or wanting to invest in bike infrastructure is not mutually exclusive to better transit. I completely agree we need both and didn't realize that because I stated our bike network sucks I was implying transit is worthless.

We don't need every road to have bike infrastructure, but more 'connected' pieces and not just downtown, but everywhere around the city. Additionally I agree that we are well on our way to a great start, but that does mean we can stop and or slow our momentum...

Speaking of equitability we should stop funding solely road networks that require expensive automobiles that many feel forced to own because of our lack of good transit and connected bike paths. Its about multi-modal not anti-car.

cheers!

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by DUPio

"Welcome to the University of Colorado A Line to Union Station, You cannot reach any CU campuses from this line".

How does this make any logistical sense at all?

"Take it back..." Plus Ken would like a word; with a transfer you can easily get to HERE.

I assume CU wants to enhance their national/regional/local image. Works for me.

[bobg]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

"Take it back..." Plus Ken would like a word; with a transfer you can easily get to HERE.

I assume CU wants to enhance their national/regional/local image. Works for me.

The med school is about 2 miles from the Peoria station

[DUPio]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

"Take it back..." Plus Ken would like a word; with a transfer you can easily get to HERE.

I assume CU wants to enhance their national/regional/local image. Works for me.

"With a transfer"

Yes with a transfer you can get to Anschutz, but even then you have to walk a decent way to get to the medical school from either station. For perspective, Sports Authority is closer to Union Station than Anschutz is to Peoria Station. If it requires a transfer and/or is unwalkable, then it is confusing and misleading to imply a destination is near the line.

I go to the med school here so I'm biased. The Anschutz campus knows what it's doing so I don't question its vectors of choice to brand itself. Rtd... Not so much. It makes absolutely no sense to name the actual line "The Univ of Colorado A line". This implies to any visitor that it will stop at a CU campus, and secondly does not directly indicate it goes to the airport.

[Cirrus]

It is simply false to say that bike lanes only benefit people who live downtown. We've had this discussion before. Bike lanes in the neighborhoods can be an excellent way of solving the last-mile-to-transit problem. And in downtown they're an excellent way of solving the last-mile-from-transit problem for people arriving from further out.

Bike lanes are not everything and don't work for all people. Focusing on them to the neglect of all else would be a legitimate problem. But that's not what we're talking about right now.

Hey, I've got an idea. Let's eliminate the 16th Street Mall shuttle! After all, it's only a mile long. Only goes downtown. Useless for the 3 million "real" Coloradoans who might want to go to Denver. Oh wait that's nonsense.

[Cirrus]

PS: As you'd expect, Copenhagen has an extensive transit system, including a subway and a large EMU network.

Here is the bike parking at a SUBURBAN Copenhagen EMU station, where the surrounding density looks absolutely comparable to outer Denver. The criticisms that this cannot work in Denver are flat out untrue. We may or may not want it to, but it could.


image from google

[TakeFive]

...and don't forget that ducks need bike lanes too.

Per Tacky Raccoons

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

Bike lanes are not everything and don't work for all people. Focusing on them to the neglect of all else would be a legitimate problem. But that's not what we're talking about right now.

That's actually what it feels like. All we hear about is bike lanes, bike lanes, bike lanes when it comes to the downtown and the city center neighborhoods with pretty much zero discussion about improved transit. Yes, bike lanes are cheaper and easier to do since it takes some lane paint and some concrete. The bike lanes that are going in do correspond with the plans from Denver Moves: Enhanced Bikeway Plan. Transit improvements require a lot more planning and funding, but would also have a greater impact citywide. But transit isn't part of the equation at this point, or that's what it seems like.

Maybe this will change this fall when the transit study kicks off and we hopefully end up with a planning document like Denver Moves that sees some solid transit improvements such as bus lanes, increased line frequency, enhanced lines, etc.

[EngiNerd]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

That's actually what it feels like. All we hear about is bike lanes, bike lanes, bike lanes when it comes to the downtown and the city center neighborhoods with pretty much zero discussion about improved transit. Yes, bike lanes are cheaper and easier to do since it takes some lane paint and some concrete. The bike lanes that are going in do correspond with the plans from Denver Moves: Enhanced Bikeway Plan. Transit improvements require a lot more planning and funding, but would also have a greater impact citywide. But transit isn't part of the equation at this point, or that's what it seems like.

Maybe this will change this fall when the transit study kicks off and we hopefully end up with a planning document like Denver Moves that sees some solid transit improvements such as bus lanes, increased line frequency, enhanced lines, etc.

For the bikers on the forum who bike to work, even in a last-mile situation, is biking really a legitimate source of transportation in the winter time or when its blazing hot out?

I just could never actually see myself biking when it's snowy or hot, because I would be filthy, frozen, or sweaty by the time I got to work and would have to take a shower and change, meaning the office would have to have a shower (few do) and I would have to keep and extra set of clothes there.

Somewhere like Copenhagen where it rarely snows, and does not get that hot in the summer or cold in the winter it might be a lot easier to have more biker friendly days. In Denver there are always those insanely dedicated ones, but for but here I just can't see it for the general masses year round, even if the routes are improved. Have there been studies on utilization of biking as a means of transit during the various seasons?

I am legitimately curious.

[bobg]

Originally Posted by EngiNerd

For the bikers on the forum who bike to work, even in a last-mile situation, is biking really a legitimate source of transportation in the winter time or when its blazing hot out?

Yes

[bobg]

Originally Posted by EngiNerd

I just could never actually see myself biking when it's snowy or hot, because I would be filthy, frozen, or sweaty by the time I got to work and would have to take a shower and change, meaning the office would have to have a shower (few do) and I would have to keep and extra set of clothes there.

To work is never hot. In the summer we still have cool nights and it takes a while to warm up. When I get home in the summer I change like I would anyway.

The cold is not a problem you just wear ski clothes when it gets bad. Snow/ice can complicate things, the right tires make a difference. If I was doing distances like cap hill to fed center like I did occasionally several years ago the snow would definitely prevent me from going. Shorter distances that I am doing now aren't bad at all and I have no problem with them.

Everyone is different obviously and I am sure those weather related changes dissuade some people. To what extent in this particular city, and at what distances I am not sure .