DENVER | Transportation Thread

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by PLANSIT

The LPA is proposed as being bi-directional peak period exclusive lane. Modeling clearly shows fairly even bi-directional traffic distribution throughout the corridor during peak periods (and really, throughout the day). Aurora would be getting the same system as Denver. The $115 million price tag assumes exclusive lanes from Auraria to Anschutz.

Okay then, I stand corrected, screw Aurora.

Although I still want a 24-hour bidirectional transit facility. Your fancy pants models still can't account for psychology, and I think a dedicated facility makes a difference in more than just pure ridership. Funny, transportation planners are more than happy to live in the world of intangibles when we're talking about how a transit facility impacts development potential (people "feel more secure" about the train, blah blah). But as soon as it's butts-in-seats, it's all strictly by the book. It's almost as if you're descended from those evil traffic engineers. Oh wait, you are.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Although I still want a 24-hour bidirectional transit facility. Your fancy pants models still can't account for psychology, and I think a dedicated facility makes a difference in more than just pure ridership. Funny, transportation planners are more than happy to live in the world of intangibles when we're talking about how a transit facility impacts development potential (people "feel more secure" about the train, blah blah). But as soon as it's butts-in-seats, it's all strictly by the book. It's almost as if you're descended from those evil traffic engineers. Oh wait, you are.

I agree with this. I have a hard time believing that the projected economic development benefits are the same for a peak-only enhanced bus service versus a streetcar. While the price differential between the two options is significant (and the #1 driver), there's no way that both will net you the same economic development. 'Da bus just doesn't have the permanence of the streetcar- even with exclusive dedicated lanes, which is not what we are talking about.

I support this bus service along Colfax, especially for the price and that it's not going to cost me anything in terms of local taxes. But I want to know what else is being planned to make traveling around Denver easier, I want the promise from Brad B and the City Council that a transit master plan, including a way of financing such a plan, is coming and coming soon.

As someone who was unable to attend the public meetings, just what was Aurora's stance on this that has everyone saying screw Aurora?

[PLANSIT]

Economic Growth potential was not the same for the 3 alternatives:

Enhanced Bus: $45m - $136m
Bus Rapid Transit: $124m - $346m
Modern Streetcar: $275m - $664m
Source

"How was the potential economic impact evaluated?

A high-level economic review was conducted through an analysis of case studies from peer cities, local/national developer and private-investor interviews, as well as an inventory of development potential for all parcels along Colfax Avenue within the study area. The economic analysis provided the following key findings:

• Shallow lot depth along Colfax Avenue limits the scope and scale of new development opportunities
• Investing in transit along Colfax Avenue will improve property values
• Developers and key stakeholders indicated the quality of the transit investment (e.g., bus stop amenities, aesthetics, level of transit priority, and other improvements) was important to their future (re)development and investment considerations along Colfax Avenue."

Re: Future Vision

CPD (Brad B.) does not plan for or implement transportation related projects/studies. That duty is carried out through Public Works in coordination with all CCD departments.

"Does Bus Rapid Transit preclude streetcars in the future?

Implementing BRT along Colfax Avenue does not preclude the long-term vision of having streetcars operating along Colfax Avenue and/or in other areas. The City and County of Denver intends to undertake a transit master plan to help better define the future vision of mobility for all users within and to/from Denver, which will be conducted with extensive public involvement."

[DenverRider2]

Originally Posted by RyanD

It seems like the majority of the people there want the dedicated ROW, at least for Denver, and just don't know how to push it. This is where the voice of the people come in. The one's who oppose something will speak 30 times louder than the one's agreeing or semi-agreeing with a transit plan. That's why nothing gets done here, it's like we all have stage fright or something.

Agreed. Maybe transit advocates can learn from the bike people- be loud, obnoxious and organized. Turn out supporters at every event to drown out the haters

A few easy action steps to take-

Leave your comments here- https://trackvia-customer-documents...._JavaForm.html

Contact your city council person.

Start an online petition? 1000 people signing the petition for a protected bike lane on 15th really got DPW off their asses. Maybe 10,000 supporting fully separated BRT or streetcar would do the same here.

[RyanD]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

As someone who was unable to attend the public meetings, just what was Aurora's stance on this that has everyone saying screw Aurora?

Because Aurora flat out said it doesn't support the project, even taking a lane during peak hour. They don't like what it's going to do to the traffic and think it'll cause too much congestion. So screw Aurora, stop the BRT at Quebec or Yosemite and say, have fun A-Town! Denver needs to start playing pitcher and move on from being a catcher.

Originally Posted by DenverRider2

Agreed. Maybe transit advocates can learn from the bike people- be loud, obnoxious and organized. Turn out supporters at every event to drown out the haters

+1. I know DenverUrbanism is going to start seeing some action on this topic. If we drill it into people's heads, hopefully inter-city transit support will get some traction. We just need to be loud, obnoxious, and maybe add a little rust red propoganda to the streets

Also, as much as we want rail, it probably won't happen but we were talking about special pavement along the corridor to give riders the trust that this is a straight corridor that doesn't move off the red pavement. Like so:

[EngiNerd]

It is pretty ridiculous that Aurora would be worried about that. Colfax doesn't really get that crammed with vehicles in Aurora except immediately around Anschutz. If Denver can get it done, where Colfax is MUCH more crowded, then Aurora could easily accommodate.

They might have to take out some of their beloved raised center islands...which, you know, give East Colfax such great curb appeal.

EDIT: Is the plan to still allow street parking with the enhanced bus lanes?

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by RyanD

Because Aurora flat out said it doesn't support the project, even taking a lane during peak hour. They don't like what it's going to do to the traffic and think it'll cause too much congestion. So screw Aurora, stop the BRT at Quebec or Yosemite and say, have fun A-Town! Dever needs to start playing pitcher and move on from being a catcher.

Gotcha. Yeah, fuck Aurora.

Another facet for Aurora is probably the idea that this might siphon potential residents who work at Anschutz but really, really, really, really don't want to live in Aurora (aka about 85% of the employees). Give them another quick means to get from living in Denver to their place of employment and it's another mark against living in shit-town.

[mr1138]

Am I the only one who thinks it is screwy to have it be a peak-hour solution in the first place? I mean what exactly is the point of not just making it a permanently dedicated transit lane? Peak-hour is when the cars MOST need an extra lane; so if you're going to take it away from them during the rush, it wouldn't really have any additional affect during non-peak hours, right?

It seems like a South Broadway style peak-hour transit lane would have all the negative effects on traffic of loosing an auto-lane, without the benefits of being visually identifiable or easily understandable that Ryan is describing above. I suppose I understand (even if I disagree with) scaling back the amount of street reconstruction and parking reconfiguration that would go with a physically protected BRT lane, but I really don't understand why they would go through all the effort of reconfiguring the street, and then not claim the new lane for transit 24/7.

I feel this way even more after hearing a Denver planner on Colorado Public Radio say that "the streetcar can still be a dream..." If they are really going to try and sell the idea that this can be part of a phased solution, then why not go ahead and take a lane away from the cars NOW, before traffic increases even more and the argument to permanently take a lane away gets even harder to make? If they don't, then we will be having this same discussion about the feasibility of loosing a lane with the traffic engineers and area stakeholders all over again the next time around.

[PLANSIT]

Originally Posted by EngiNerd

EDIT: Is the plan to still allow street parking with the enhanced bus lanes?

Yes

[Brainpathology]

Originally Posted by DenverRider2

Agreed. Maybe transit advocates can learn from the bike people- be loud, obnoxious and organized. Turn out supporters at every event to drown out the haters

It's kinda hard to take out your personal trolley car, pull up your spandex, ignore each and every traffic regulation you can hope to find and block traffic until your demands are met. Not that I wouldn't pay good money to see someone pull that off.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by Octavian

Long article from the Atlantic on Denver/Union Station/Fastracks:

How Denver Is Becoming the Most Advanced Transit City in the West

I just happen to catch this earlier and while it's not breaking news it still gave me pause when I read this:

The biggest success story remains downtown, whose residential population has reached 17,500, a 142 percent increase since 2000. All told, FasTracks investment has brought seven million square feet of new office space, 5.5 million square feet of new retail, and 27,000 new residential units. Driving demand for TOD, says Sirois, is Denver's changing demographics.

In spite of any shortcomings Fastracks is truly an incredible accomplishment. It would be eye opening for any metro area let alone one of Denver's size.

[Brainpathology]

Originally Posted by RyanD

Because Aurora flat out said it doesn't support the project, even taking a lane during peak hour. They don't like what it's going to do to the traffic and think it'll cause too much congestion.

Good for Aurora. I'm all for this failing too. All it is is practically begging cars to share the road for part of the day and it doesn't solve anything except the perception that nothing is being done if this isn't. No matter what their stated reasons for being against it are - they're right.

Say this for RTD.. They at least learned from "guide the ride" that to keep the voters from rejecting a sh*tty proposal for transit - don't leave it to the voters. I would have preferred the learned the "don't come up with a sh*tty proposal for transit" but at least they show they are paying attention.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by Brainpathology

Good for Aurora....
No matter what their stated reasons for being against it are - they're right.

I can appreciate Aurora's thinking on this. They'll have good transit access to Anchutz/Fitzsimons via their new light rail line. What benefit would they get from a Colfax corridor BRT? Likely very little and would it be worth losing a lane for them? Calls into question the whole purpose of Colfax needing to be primarily a commuter corridor.


Let's make Lemonade.

A Modern Streetcar would cost from $400-$450 million for the Full Monty. If we were to build a streetcar line from Auraria to Colorado Blvd. that looks to be a little over a third of the distance to I-225. Let's estimate the cost of this streetcar distance to be $200 million. If we could get "matching Federal funds" of $75-$100 million perhaps by getting grants for both RTD and the City in some fashion then we're now looking at less that $125 million. Denver ought to be able to get $20-$25 million from DRCOG. At this point we're down to a fairly easy peasy bond request for the voters to swallow.

[TakeFive]

Speak up now or forever hold your peace.

kwgn.com

It's the SDEIS (I-70 East Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement).

CDOT said Wednesday that the agency plans to release the four-volume report on Friday, kicking off a 45-day public comment period.

“This is the last opportunity to make comments on the preferred option, or any other option, and to influence CDOT and the Federal Highway Administration on what will happen,” Don Hunt, CDOT’s executive director, said in an interview with the Denver Business Journal.

[bunt_q]

On behalf of the good people of Aurora, I cannot support this proposal including a cap over 800 feet of I-70. That has the very real potential to slow traffic to Aurora by as much as 17 seconds. We will not support this proposal until the cap is removed.

[RyanD]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

On behalf of the good people of Aurora, I cannot support this proposal including a cap over 800 feet of I-70. That has the very real potential to slow traffic to Aurora by as much as 17 seconds. We will not support this proposal until the cap is removed.

As an Aurora native (I really am...), I do not support the at-grade crossings of both the G and A line. The 45 seconds those gates are down, it will cause way too many delays in traffic and I will be late to work in my car. Humph.

[TakeFive]

^^ If the two of you would like to speak up on behalf of Aurora (you'd make a nice couple BTW) then be at Sable Elementary School, 22601 Sable Blvd, Tuesday, Sept. 23, before the presentation starts at 5:00 PM. Comments will follow at about 6:00 PM. Good Luck.

[Brainpathology]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

On behalf of the good people of Aurora, I cannot support this proposal including a cap over 800 feet of I-70. That has the very real potential to slow traffic to Aurora by as much as 17 seconds. We will not support this proposal until the cap is removed.

oh at least we're going all in for SOMETHING with this project. We're now at a place where Aurora becomes the voice of reason on transit? What does the Colfax "Make two lanes not work all that well for BOTH modes of travel used on them" plan really do for anyone? It won't be BRT (not even close) and it won't be a traffic lane during peak hours. It's a fake solution for a real problem. If only Colfax was an essential connector to the airport (could we convince Montbello/Green Valley/DIA's mayor who currently occupies the Denver mayor's office that it IS?) Denver may have pushed more for this to actually be something.

I almost wonder if the mayor's office had something to do with this being so bland. Not hard to promote Hancocktopia when there isn't any practical way to get from Downtown Denver to the health sciences center huh? At the very least I'm sure he's happy about it.... if he even noticed something was being talked about in that "old" part of Denver.

[TakeFive]

Congratulation to Kiewit Infrastructure Company and Denver Union Station.



Per rtd-fastracks.com

The Union Station Transit Center project - one of the world's most exciting new transit hubs - is being recognized by industry peers.

The Design-Build Institute of America has named the project the winner of a National Award of Merit.

Union Station won in the transportation category (other than aviation) and is a nominee for one of three National Awards of Excellence in the same category in the areas of design, process and teaming.

And a meritorious salute to RyanD for his heroic efforts to capture outstanding photos along the way.

[TakeFive]

I knew this was being looked at but according to the Denver Post it looks like things are coming together to add toll lanes to C-470.

The road widening project would cost around $230 million and construction could begin in spring 2016. CDOT is reaching out for input to the public in Arapahoe, Douglas and Jefferson counties over the next few months.

Presumably because this project is much smaller in scale and cost than the pending I-70 project (for example) a P3 (Public Private Partnership) is not being considered.

The widening project would be paid for with $102 million in federal and state funds that are already allocated. Douglas County would put in $10 million and CDOT is looking for another grant for $15 million. The remaining $103 million would come in the form of loans that would be paid back with toll revenue.