DENVER | Transportation Thread

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by SnyderBock

I'm only talking about using it to bore the tunnels of which the same Denver International Airport Automated Guideway Transit System would be installedand operated. They would include emergency escape shafts and have connection tunnels which tie into the existing tunnels. At $40-$50 million a mile, they could build this out much cheaper than cut and cover. Run it around the ends of the concourses and Terminal in a loop. At this price, they might even look at extending it out to the rental car complex similar to Atlanta. Maybe even that stretch would just be elevated, unless $40 million a mile tunnels are cheaper than elevated structures. Last I checked, elevated transit would run $100 million a mile. So you see the price is exceptional.

TBC can’t do a tunnel large enough to accommodate the AGS.

They also can’t do connection tunnels.

Just going to leave this here: https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-mu...ic-11669658396

[mr1138]

Originally Posted by DenvertoLA

As they should! They have been paying for the commitment of a train connection for more than a decade. Getting a bus rout when you ordered a train is like getting served a burger when you payed for a filet.

Again - I think my point here is that calling the B-line a "filet" may be overselling it a bit. It might be more appropriate to call it Flank Steak - or Chuck Roast.

But to bunt_q's point, they weren't served the burger without asking for it - they ordered that too, and the bus also had a project cost attached. I bet one could make an argument that the funds Boulder County has contributed since 2004 really only pays for the bus and wouldn't even come close to paying for the train. They're asking for the rest of the metro area to foot that part of the bill for them.

And to continue the analogy - they aren't even going to eat it, it will just be left on the table to waste. Just look at the predicted ridership numbers.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Except they ordered both the burger and the filet because they viewed themselves as the most important customer in the restaurant and decided they'd just take both. The kitchen sent the burger out first. And then the place got busy and, since the Boulder table had already eaten, the restaurant never got to the filet. Logical choice given that table had already gotten the first half of their order. So the Boulder table started screaming and making a scene, and the rest of the restaurant is sitting there thinking... didn't you already get the burger you ordered? And the Highlands Ranch table is sitting there thinking, well hell, ours never came at all.

And to top it off, the restaurant knew the Boulder table had sort of read the menu wrong the whole time. The filet they ordered was a mutton filet. The fancy plate they are carrying on about was never on the menu in the first place.

----------------------------

I can't speak specifically to boring Musk style

Originally Posted by SnyderBock

I'm only talking about using it to bore the tunnels of which the same Denver International Airport Automated Guideway Transit System would be installedand operated. They would include emergency escape shafts and have connection tunnels which tie into the existing tunnels. At $40-$50 million a mile, they could build this out much cheaper than cut and cover. Run it around the ends of the concourses and Terminal in a loop. At this price, they might even look at extending it out to the rental car complex similar to Atlanta. Maybe even that stretch would just be elevated, unless $40 million a mile tunnels are cheaper than elevated structures. Last I checked, elevated transit would run $100 million a mile. So you see the price is exceptional.

but I know Seattle has gotten good at doing tunnels depending on the challenge and circumstances. Tunnels have been needed for some of their new light rail lines. Musk is more about marketing than an engineer on how to bore tunnels but I believe Seattle has been using more of a boring process.

Chances are mhays could enlighten us.
-------------------------------

Originally Posted by mr1138

And to continue the analogy - they aren't even going to eat it, it will just be left on the table to waste. Just look at the predicted ridership numbers.

Agree because the Flatiron Flyer is nicer than the train will/would be. When I took Bustang up to Frisco it was really nice with high quality seats, WiFi etc.

[mhays]

Yes Seattle has a lot of tunnels. Most are bored.

Link Light Rail uses a Downtown tunnel that's a combo of bored and cut-and-cover with big CaC box stations (three lanes wide because it was for buses originally). There are five additional tunnel segments on the system, two not yet open, including one that repurposes part of a freeway tunnel. Another new tunnel through Downtown is in EIS and site-selection phase.

A century ago a mile-long heavy rail tunnel was built deep under Downtown. That was mined.

We've built bored freeway tunnels at I-90 and SR-99. The latter is 2+2 lanes stacked. The TBM got stuck due to a metal pipe which delayed things two years, but the tunnel opened in 2020 or so. I-90 includes a tunnel through Mt. Baker that opened 30 years ago (stacked levels for bikes, 3 lanes, and 2 lanes, the latter now being converted to rail) plus twin bored tunnels from the 1940s. We also lid some segments 70-style.

[DenvertoLA]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Except they ordered both the burger and the filet because they viewed themselves as the most important customer in the restaurant and decided they'd just take both. The kitchen sent the burger out first. And then the place got busy and, since the Boulder table had already eaten, the restaurant never got to the filet. Logical choice given that table had already gotten the first half of their order. So the Boulder table started screaming and making a scene, and the rest of the restaurant is sitting there thinking... didn't you already get the burger you ordered? And the Highlands Ranch table is sitting there thinking, well hell, ours never came at all.

And to top it off, the restaurant knew the Boulder table had sort of read the menu wrong the whole time. The filet they ordered was a mutton filet. The fancy plate they are carrying on about was never on the menu in the first place.

From my memory the bus was a place holder to tame everyone in Boulder since South Denver suburbs were being prioritized.

Turning around and saying, 'hey we gave you the bus, be happy' is disingenuous. Of course they would ask for it, cause otherwise they would be paying a tax for a decade with no benefit.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by DenvertoLA

From my memory the bus was a place holder to tame everyone in Boulder since South Denver suburbs were being prioritized.

Turning around and saying, 'hey we gave you the bus, be happy' is disingenuous. Of course they would ask for it, cause otherwise they would be paying a tax for a decade with no benefit.

You weren't around pre-Fastracks, were you? That is just incorrect. That is not how it went down.

[TakeFive]

Thanks

Originally Posted by mhays

Yes Seattle has a lot of tunnels. Most are bored.

Link Light Rail uses a Downtown tunnel that's a combo of bored and cut-and-cover with big CaC box stations (three lanes wide because it was for buses originally). There are five additional tunnel segments on the system, two not yet open, including one that repurposes part of a freeway tunnel. Another new tunnel through Downtown is in EIS and site-selection phase.

I see where Washington State has ideas on making roads safer? Top of the list is is lowering the alcohol content from .08 to .05. Sounds like the typical liberal approach of looking for a magic fix. Accidents where alcohol is seen as a likely contributor are more likely to be 2X to 3X the existing legal limit. There's many more obvious 'distracted driving' reasons than just alcohol.

[lostknight]

Originally Posted by DenvertoLA

As they should! They have been paying for the commitment of a train connection for more than a decade. Getting a bus rout when you ordered a train is like getting served a burger when you payed for a filet.

You clearly haven't read this forum for any length of time.

The best way to summarize the reaction to this very simple fact is to basically state:

"Ah! Those evil rich people in Boulder. We can't afford it, they don't really want it anyways, and how dare they demand the the system they were promised by RTD! Why, they don't even live in Denver!"

[TakeFive]

Are you aware that BNSF owns the tracks?

Originally Posted by lostknight

You clearly haven't read this forum for any length of time.

The best way to summarize the reaction to this very simple fact is to basically state:

"Ah! Those evil rich people in Boulder. We can't afford it, they don't really want it anyways, and how dare they demand the the system they were promised by RTD! Why, they don't even live in Denver!"

Are you familiar with the lengthy negotiations with BNSF? Let me provide some background just in case you've forgotten.

https://www.cpr.org/2022/03/01/rtd-f...er-rail-buses/

RTD had initially estimated that leasing the track from Burlington Northern Sante Fe would cost $66 million. But in 2011, the track owner, BNSF Railway, told RTD it would actually cost $535 million.

There just wasn’t enough space for both RTD’s and BNSF’s trains on the existing single track. Service every 15 minutes would have required two additional tracks and other infrastructure upgrades that were even more expensive than the $535 million estimate BNSF provided for 30-minute service, according to an RTD memo from 2011.

Has Boulder/Boulder Country gotten their money's worth?

Taxpayers in Boulder County have paid about $270 million in FasTracks taxes since 2005, according to RTD. RTD has spent $174 million on the Flatiron Flyer express bus project and will spend another $209 million on interest payments.

It's also a fact that RTD sponsored additional bus service over the years. Other than Denver County, Boulder County has received every penny they've put in and then some while other counties haven't fared nearly as well.

[mr1138]

Personally, I find the Boulder vs. Denver debate to be extremely tiring and unproductive, and part of me wishes I hadn't invoked the word "entitled" (even if it is kind of true). I would argue that the average Boulderite has no idea what was actually included in the 2004 Fastracks package, and doesn't actually understand what they are supposed to be angry about. I think the comment above about the Flatiron Flyer being a "place holder to tame everyone" illustrates my point - this is an uninformed statement, but one that I have seen repeated countless times on social media. Thank you TakeFive for pulling the actual stats - the bus has indeed consumed all of the revenue produced by Boulder County. It simply is not true to say that Boulder County has subsidised other community's trains, or that they haven't benefited from their own tax contributions.

There's really no sense getting all worked up over a group of citizens who have been misled about what they were actually promised. It's not as though the citizens got together in some sort of giant community meeting and said "We want both a bus and a train!" This idea came from elected officials and professional staff, and this was never effectively communicated to the public. Most Boulderites thought they were voting from something like the A-line. It certainly doesn't help that the media keeps amplifying voices who call the Northwest rail "sexy" and speak of "what the voters were promised" without actually articulating what was promised.

It seems to me that it would be far more productive to acknowledge that this project has become shrouded in misinformation and actually discuss solutions. But everyone's heels are so dug in that now that they've cemented in place and nobody seems to have any interest in getting out. By all means - keep screaming at each other. RTD will remain in deadlock, and Boulder will still wait until the 2040s to get a train everyone will inevitably be disappointed in.

It seems to me that any advocate for Boulder who actually has real dreams of a train (like myself - I may have mentioned before that Boulder is my hometown) needs to calm down and be willing to have a real discussion about the facts. Screaming and yelling about a magical fantasy train that was never actually promised doesn't get Boulder anywhere closer to a solution. Also - Boulderites should probably recognize that it was their OWN GOVERNMENT that helped craft this disastrous plan, and that some of the blame needs to be placed there as well. RTD absolutely deserves blame for moving forward to the ballot with the 2004 Northwest Rail proposal. But Boulder officials deserve blame as well for endorsing that plan. The citizens don't deserve blame - they deserve better information from their elected officials and from the media.

[TakeFive]

^^
This may have had some beneficial effect?

At a rare public meeting on RTD’s long-delayed Boulder train, residents find a glimmer of hope
By Nathaniel Minor - CPR News

Nearly 19 years ago, Boulder resident Gary Sprung voted to increase his taxes to bring passenger rail service to his city by 2014. That still hasn’t happened, as many area residents are keenly aware.

But Sprung was in fine spirits Tuesday evening as he perused info boards and milled about during a public meeting on the long-awaited Northwest Rail line hosted by the Regional Transportation District. It was the first such meeting in the region since 2014, RTD officials said.

“It’s good to see RTD making progress,” Sprung said at the meeting, held just a few minutes' walk from the line’s track on the city’s northeastern fringe. “Ten years ago I was really worried that RTD was doing nothing. Now, they’re doing something.”

How they could possibly come up with $1.5 billion is a question for later I'd assume.

[mr1138]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

^^
This may have had some beneficial effect?

At a rare public meeting on RTD’s long-delayed Boulder train, residents find a glimmer of hope
By Nathaniel Minor - CPR News

Well gosh - Nathaniel Minor got a little closer with this line "That last fact is an important one. RTD owns the land and tracks on which the rest of its sprawling rail network operates. But the Northwest Rail line is different. RTD plans to lease track time from its owner, BNSF Railway, rather than buying it outright."

But hmmm... something still seems like it's missing... Like maybe the fact that the trains that are planned to be used are a completely different technology than all the other trains in Denver? Again - the Denver news media seems to have some aversion to explaining this to people in a clear way. Maybe the truth is the reporters don't even know the difference (afterall, they called the A-line "light rail" for over a decade until it opened).

I personally agree with Longmont's mayor in that article - the best possible outcome is that the B-line gets merged into the Front Range Passenger Rail project. But that will take compromise and a willingness to let go of past grievances. The worst possible outcome is that politicians and Boulder County locals keep pounding their fists on the table demanding EXACTLY what was in the 2004 plan, it takes 20 more years, and in the end we still end up with a slow train that is then 40 years more-out-of-date than it was when it was pitched in 2004.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by mr1138

the best possible outcome is that the B-line gets merged into the Front Range Passenger Rail project. But that will take compromise and a willingness to let go of past grievances.

This is what is actually happening. I just don't generally talk about it on here because folks on here want their precious B line.

The Front Range rail legislation specifically required it to incorporate the northwest line. The mayor of Longmont is on the board.

[bobg]

Originally Posted by mr1138

But hmmm... something still seems like it's missing... Like maybe the fact that the trains that are planned to be used are a completely different technology than all the other trains in Denver? Again - the Denver news media seems to have some aversion to explaining this to people in a clear way. Maybe the truth is the reporters don't even know the difference (afterall, they called the A-line "light rail" for over a decade until it opened).

It's kind of hard to differentiate things when it's still being decided. Us on this forum and other transpo nerds will know it's certain to not be Silverliner V EMUs , and RTD almost certainly missed the window on the DMU silverliner variant that was part of the first rail EE for the NW.

I think the A Line from light rail to commuter realization for the public was a positive experience because RTD talked up the higher top speeds, level boarding, and more seating the A Line had.

This seems to be heading in the direction of sharing rolling stock and maintenance facilities with the Front Range rail. The commuter to a more regional rail experience can be a positive if they play up what is almost certain to be a more comfortable seating arrangement for what will be the longest line in RTDs system.

But nothing is final so the media and RTD have nothing really to hone in on, as to what is different.

[mr1138]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

This is what is actually happening. I just don't generally talk about it on here because folks on here want their precious B line.

The Front Range rail legislation specifically required it to incorporate the northwest line. The mayor of Longmont is on the board.

Well that's good to hear. Though I wouldn't necessarily agree that the majority of folks on here "want their precious B line." Based on my experiences with this forum, there are a select few on here with that point of view, but this certainly doesn't represent the majority (it may represent the majority in Boulder, but not on this forum). If anything, I would say "most folks on here" are of the "screw Boulder" point of view and talk as if they would pull the plug on the project if they could.

This forum, by and large, is the only place I have ever actually seen reasonable discussions about the topic. And this is where I, as a recently graduated high school student from Boulder, learned the truth about the B-line (note the year I joined).

[bunt_q]

That makes me feel old. Although my join date was after losing my original profile (1999 or 2000, can’t remember exactly, when I was a baby engineer at RTD.)

[mishko27]

Originally Posted by mr1138

Well that's good to hear. Though I wouldn't necessarily agree that the majority of folks on here "want their precious B line." Based on my experiences with this forum, there are a select few on here with that point of view, but this certainly doesn't represent the majority (it may represent the majority in Boulder, but not on this forum). If anything, I would say "most folks on here" are of the "screw Boulder" point of view and talk as if they would pull the plug on the project if they could.

This forum, by and large, is the only place I have ever actually seen reasonable discussions about the topic. And this is where I, as a recently graduated high school student from Boulder, learned the truth about the B-line (note the year I joined).

I would argue that most people on this forum are much more nuanced on the discussion of the B Line than "screw Boulder". I think pretty universally, we want more rail infrastructure. But we want good quality rail that makes sense, and considering all the challenges that the B Line has faces, as well as the projected ridership, I don't think there's many fans.

[mr1138]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

That makes me feel old. Although my join date was after losing my original profile (1999 or 2000, can’t remember exactly, when I was a baby engineer at RTD.)

The time really does fly - in 2004, 2023 seemed like a lifetime away. Though I do remember thinking at the time that 20 years might be the earliest that the region could think about making a pivot away from this collapsed plan. Are we ready to leave it behind and discuss alternatives? I'm not sure - but I do wish we could at least start having that conversation instead of just re-hashing the past.

Originally Posted by mishko27

I would argue that most people on this forum are much more nuanced on the discussion of the B Line than "screw Boulder". I think pretty universally, we want more rail infrastructure. But we want good quality rail that makes sense, and considering all the challenges that the B Line has faces, as well as the projected ridership, I don't think there's many fans.

I agree with you. I was mostly trying to say that I think the majority of forumers are either from, or represent the interests of Denver, not Boulder. I also agree with you that the discussions on this forum are far more nuanced than what I have seen anywhere else. This forum has historically been quite different than the social media "comment sections" found across the internet.

Many forumers, however, ARE guilty of engaging in unproductive Denver vs. Boulder behavior (just see the past two pages - there are childish jabs on both sides). Even some who I know to hold nuanced opinions sometimes choose, instead, to just take a cheap shot at Boulder and add nothing of value. Usually this just shuts down a conversation as opposed to actually fostering one.

The tone of this forum has definitely changed over the years as some frequent commenters have left and others have joined. It also seems that all of us can't help but be affected by the toxic commentary we see about these same topics on other corners of the internet. And sometimes that toxic social media style infiltrates its way into here (see above comment about childish jabs).

But there's a reason I keep coming back, and why I posed my question about the media not reporting on DMU technology here. This is the only place on the internet I can think to raise the topic where reasonable, informed people might actually want to engage in a conversation about it.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by mr1138

I'm not sure - but I do wish we could at least start having that conversation instead of just re-hashing the past.

I think the Northwest Rail is the reason we can't have that conversation. Once it goes away - whatever that means - only then can the clock re-start.

Originally Posted by mr1138

Many forumers, however, ARE guilty of engaging in unproductive Denver vs. Boulder behavior (just see the past two pages - there are childish jabs on both sides). Even some who I know to hold nuanced opinions sometimes choose, instead, to just take a cheap shot at Boulder and add nothing of value. Usually this just shuts down a conversation as opposed to actually fostering one.

The tone of this forum has definitely changed over the years as some frequent commenters have left and others have joined. It also seems that all of us can't help but be affected by the toxic commentary we see about these same topics on other corners of the internet. And sometimes that toxic social media style infiltrates its way into here (see above comment about childish jabs).

I guess I would argue this for a couple reasons.

First, I do not think the Boulder jabs are unproductive. I think they are critically important to make sure that other parts of Colorado do not repeat the self-centered, hypocritical, and elitist choices that Boulder has been making since the 1970s. We paint Boulder as the bad guy because Boulder has been the bad guy; for decades. The only thing worse than anti-urban sprawl is a white-hat-wearing self-proclaimed environmentalist that causes all of the same anti-urban sprawl consequences (or perhaps more, when you factor in affordability concerns) while purporting to be doing the right thing.

If you say that our merciless treatment of Boulder "adds nothing of value," then that just tells me how young you are. Denver's problems could be much worse than they are. The boogeyman of Boulder has probably done as much to keep us from being even more San Francisco as possibly anything else.

Second, I would argue the tone of the forum has changed over the years also in part because the environment in which we are having these conversations has changed. In 2003, Colorado was a moderate "all of the above" sort of place, where people on the forum would still say things like, "I am not anti-car, I am pro-transit." I was more willing to have patience with mediocre transit solutions - a few billion for a few hundred riders - when we weren't living in a state that had fully embraced some rabid far-left transportation policies. I think it is fair to have higher standards if we are actually buying into the notion of ending driving through strangling roadways; that is a fundamental difference between the world that voted for the Northwest rail and the world we live in today.

If CDOT is allowed to change its mind about cars, I am allowed to change my mind about trains. And instead argue for $2 billion in BRT for actual transit riders, over a useless commuter train for 800 white collar people who are probably all working from home now anyways.

[mr1138]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

We paint Boulder as the bad guy because Boulder has been the bad guy; for decades.

I'm kind of surprised this needs to be said, but Boulder is not a "guy." It is a community of over 100,000 people, each of whom hold their own individual points of view.

I don't know if I've mentioned this but I'm from Boulder (at least I used to be) and I would actually like to have the conversation about making the Northwest Rail project go away.

It IS ridiculous to treat an entire small city as if they speak with one singular voice, or as if everyone who lives there is unreasonable. And no - taking cheap shots at Boulder is not the least bit productive. Exactly whose mind has this rhetoric changed? Nobody's. All this does is to shut down the real conversations that should be happening and puts the most unreasonable of Boulder's supporters on the defensive. It's toxic, and it's unbecoming of people who claim to be professionals.