HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #10141  
Old Posted Yesterday, 5:01 PM
gopokes21 gopokes21 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2021
Posts: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Launch 12 View Post
Did I misread the fine print on this blog that you had to be anti-Boulder, conservative to contribute? Every time I check this blog which is more and more rare it's some anti-Boulder bullsh*t. Boulder deserves the same level of transit service as other areas of the metro-area, but I know most of you won't agree. Feel free to remove me from this blog. Sick of it.
I mean you're entitled to your opinion, leave or go, but at least characterize people correctly. We aint conservative lol... unless it comes to Denver paying for Boulder's useless/redundant train.

Boulder has better bus and BRT service than anywhere else in the metro. It also happens to be 35 miles away and surrounded by a buffalo preserve of their own creation for the literal express purpose of keeping a barrier between them and Denver. Then you accuse people who oppose a $2 billion train that duplicates service that already exists of "being conservative," when Denver has NEVER voted against a tax increase and would likely tax itself again to have actual transit that serves Denver. The State of CO and RTD just keep rewarding cities that ARE conservative and DO vote down every tax proposal because they know they can just get the state or Denver to pay for everything.

Boulder is conservative and unwelcoming, all the limousine liberal virtue signaling BS aside. Denver is progressive and welcoming to all. Let's get that one thing straight. Why should the progressive metro pay for the conservative city's sh**?

Last edited by gopokes21; Yesterday at 5:14 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10142  
Old Posted Yesterday, 5:26 PM
bulldurhamer bulldurhamer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
Boulder has better transit service than any other place of comparable population in Colorado.

The problem with the train is it goes to the wrong places. It misses the actual places people use transit to reach: Downtown and CU.

Boulder does not need a every expensive train that doesn't serve useful stops and very few people to ride, just to have the status symbol of getting a train instead of a bus. That wouldn't be getting its fair share. That would be prioritizing Boulder's status over its actual transit service, which, um, no.

If Boulder wanted to change its zoning to allow 50,000 or so more people to live by 30th Street station, then there might be a case for the train being worth it. But Boulder would rather push that growth out to the plains.
if we aren't willing to value the cultural impact boulder provides the state/country/world properly, then we deserve nothing. this isn't monopoly and boulder isn't just another average title in our hold. boulder is a magnificent cultural center of learning and more. world renowned for what is provides all of us in so many ways. we should celebrate the jewel that boulder is and help it in any way we can. this isn't a zero zum world, right? throwing resources toward progress in every way is critical, especially now in a time when free thought and truth is under attack.

i say build boulder a train or a gondola or a giant drone transport system or whatever else would be awesome that help shine a light on progress, learning, truth, and the american dream.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10143  
Old Posted Yesterday, 6:21 PM
The Dirt's Avatar
The Dirt The Dirt is offline
Ground Scraper
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 3,094
Quote:
Originally Posted by TakeFive View Post
Even close by Aurora as been the object of scorn since it's a place where people can affordably live.
Yeah, that's not at all why people here hate Aurora and you know it.
__________________
"That emoticon is the most foolish thing you have posted in this whole thread full of foolish statements." - Cirrus
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10144  
Old Posted Yesterday, 8:54 PM
jhwk jhwk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr1138 View Post
I'm not entirely sure how these track constraints would affect Amtrak. I suppose technologically it would be possible to run a traditional Amtrak train (certainly nothing new like Acela) on this line with minimal modifications since Amtrak just runs on old-fashioned freight tracks almost everywhere it goes.
A significant amount of planning has already been done on the FRPR. Hopefully Amtrak will just fork over some cash for the state’s effort and we will run it, because the 35mph avg speed service they just tweeted about is the same 19th century thinking that has turned Amtrak into a money pit with no resulting useful service outside of the Northeast.

The alternatives analysis published in December envisions a dedicated double track line for the FRPR. They are currently using a federal grant to create a freight traffic model for the lines to determine if costs can be reduced by using the existing freight line. I think there are a lot of good options there - coal traffic is disappearing and BNSF will never get a better price.

If you look at Appendix H of the Alternatives analysis, HDR has recommended studying a US36 alignment instead of using the freight line. This would have the advantage of being much faster for FRPR. For RTD it would potentially allow re-using the park & ride infrastructure. The two problems are that it will require significant viaducts to cross US36 and to run on Foothills Parkway. It also has challenging grades near Marshall Rd.

https://e29d6cbe-aafd-4873-8a58-cd67...2959706a37.pdf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10145  
Old Posted Yesterday, 10:42 PM
TakeFive's Avatar
TakeFive TakeFive is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,192
Wait... Wut... You want me to be more blunt?
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dirt View Post
Yeah, that's not at all why people here hate Aurora and you know it.
Some of it was 'provincial' but mostly it was a class thing.

For the record
I had moved from SE Denver (U-Hills) to the eastern edge of the tech center. After several years, in thinking about 'following' the growth I picked between moving across the pond into Aurora or moving to Highlands Ranch. I chose Aurora to stay close to Cherry Creek Reservoir and within Cherry Creek School Dist. I also picked Aurora b/c I like to be busy; I like working with a diverse product and the people that come with it.

Between 1990 and 2005...

Aurora was criticized for "All That Density"; all those (crappy) condos and neighborhoods of attached housing from Town Homes to duplexes, fourplexes etc. All that density, after all, invited more diversity and affordability. During that time nobody had ever heard of the 'missing middle' or considered it a good thing. I was lucky in that I chose a career where early, often and continually we were instructed to not discriminate in any form or fashion.

That's not to say I didn't hear every kind of prejudice from my clients. For example, those who lived in CCSD looked down on those who lived in Aurora School Dist or Littleton School Dist or (God Forbid) Denver School Dist. Peoples individual preferences and prejudices came with the territory.

For the most part I'm unbothered by people's prejudices. It's just an ongoing part of the landscape.
__________________
Cool... Denver has reached puberty.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10146  
Old Posted Yesterday, 11:28 PM
gopokes21 gopokes21 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2021
Posts: 67
No, TakeFive, Aurora is not too dense and nobody has ever suggested that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10147  
Old Posted Today, 2:06 PM
Launch 12 Launch 12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by gopokes21 View Post
I mean you're entitled to your opinion, leave or go, but at least characterize people correctly. We aint conservative lol... unless it comes to Denver paying for Boulder's useless/redundant train.

Boulder has better bus and BRT service than anywhere else in the metro. It also happens to be 35 miles away and surrounded by a buffalo preserve of their own creation for the literal express purpose of keeping a barrier between them and Denver. Then you accuse people who oppose a $2 billion train that duplicates service that already exists of "being conservative," when Denver has NEVER voted against a tax increase and would likely tax itself again to have actual transit that serves Denver. The State of CO and RTD just keep rewarding cities that ARE conservative and DO vote down every tax proposal because they know they can just get the state or Denver to pay for everything.

Boulder is conservative and unwelcoming, all the limousine liberal virtue signaling BS aside. Denver is progressive and welcoming to all. Let's get that one thing straight. Why should the progressive metro pay for the conservative city's sh**?
The argument you present is bullsh*t and one sided and is the theme of this blog, so this may be my last post. Boulder is barely farther than other parts of the Denver metro area that are served by train. It is an intuitive destination in the train network and should be logically connected to the whole network. I don't understand the whole Denver vs. Boulder perspective of this blog. Boulder is part of the Denver metro area the same way Pasadena is part of the LA metro area, or Berkeley or San Jose is part of the SF metro area, or Cambridge part of the Boston metro area etc. And the repeating comments that we have BRT service equivalent to a train service is also bullsh*t. It's an express bus that only resembles BRT by the design of the stations....that's it. So, it is unfair that Boulder doesn't have the same level of service as other parts of the metro area and just because you have negative perceptions of the people that live in Boulder doesn't mean it does not deserve the service it voted for. Taxes from Boulder have contributed to the construction of lines in other areas. The whole us vs. them mentality of the blog is depressing to me. Good bye.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10148  
Old Posted Today, 3:18 PM
Cirrus's Avatar
Cirrus Cirrus is offline
cities|transit|croissants
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,208
The train would not give Boulder an equal level of service. It would come less often and not go to the right place. It's not better than the BRT. This is why we say you just want prestige.

If that seems unfair, tell us what you really want.

Otherwise... bye.
__________________
BeyondDC: blog | twitter | flickr | instagram | Exploring urbanism and transportation in the Washington, DC area.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10149  
Old Posted Today, 4:46 PM
Agent Orange Agent Orange is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,762
Quote:
Originally Posted by bulldurhamer View Post
if we aren't willing to value the cultural impact boulder provides the state/country/world properly, then we deserve nothing. this isn't monopoly and boulder isn't just another average title in our hold. boulder is a magnificent cultural center of learning and more. world renowned for what is provides all of us in so many ways. we should celebrate the jewel that boulder is and help it in any way we can. this isn't a zero zum world, right? throwing resources toward progress in every way is critical, especially now in a time when free thought and truth is under attack.

i say build boulder a train or a gondola or a giant drone transport system or whatever else would be awesome that help shine a light on progress, learning, truth, and the american dream.
Brilliant. And who said satire was dead?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10150  
Old Posted Today, 5:01 PM
bunt_q's Avatar
bunt_q bunt_q is online now
Provincial Bumpkin
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 12,835
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
The train would not give Boulder an equal level of service. It would come less often and not go to the right place. It's not better than the BRT. This is why we say you just want prestige.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Launch 12 View Post
So, it is unfair that Boulder doesn't have the same level of service as other parts of the metro area
To which it must be added:
- the Flatiron Flyer (call it whatever you want, BRT or not) is already a better level of service than is enjoyed by other parts of the metro area;
- the core bus service in Boulder is already a better level of service than is enjoyed by other parts of the metro area; and
- the B line extension is not the only bit of Fastracks that is unfinished.

All are facts that have to be addressed by any argument in favor of the B line extension that focuses on equity and taxes. (Because the transportation argument for investing a billion dollars to move 800 people will never exist.)

Forget Boulder vs. Denver. Why should Boulder get its extension when Highlands Ranch - same population - gets much worse service from RTD on all fronts. Shouldn't the SW extension come first?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10151  
Old Posted Today, 5:24 PM
TakeFive's Avatar
TakeFive TakeFive is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,192
Quote:
Originally Posted by laniroj View Post
As I have suggested in the past, ANY infrastructure spending coming from the state or federal government should have yuuge strings attached and reward communities/states which effectively force changes to local zoning laws. All federal spending should have these strings IMO. Trump proposed a working group that came to this conclusion with Ben Carson leading and the media reaction was quite different, as you may imagine. Nonetheless, this opinion piece from NYT perfectly summarizes the connection between transit and development, for anyone wanting to parlay this back into a development forum.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/12/o...re-zoning.html
Sorry, I couldn't get a free pass past their paywall. The best way I access the NYT is via Yahoo News for those pieces that are printed there.

But I can one-up you by pointing to Katy O'Donnell's piece in Politico entitled "How Biden hopes to fix the thorniest problem in housing"

Katy does a nice job explaining the 'political' positions from the right, the left and the center. Unfortunately the result is two to one against your pet position. The center position including Dem Mayors don't want to be dictated to from above. It's sort of the nature of we humans to want to decide our own fate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gopokes21 View Post
No, TakeFive, Aurora is not too dense and nobody has ever suggested that.
Isn't beauty in the eye of the beholder?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Launch 12 View Post
So, it is unfair that Boulder doesn't have the same level of service as other parts of the metro area and just because you have negative perceptions of the people that live in Boulder doesn't mean it does not deserve the service it voted for. Taxes from Boulder have contributed to the construction of lines in other areas. The whole us vs. them mentality of the blog is depressing to me. Good bye.
Yes, I quite agree that in one sense it is not fair. I'll go along to get along on one condition.

If the Honorable Governor can come up with the funding for the train to Boulder then fine. For RTD's part they would have trouble keeping the lights on were it not for all the pandemic helicopter money.

BTW, as nice as Boulder may be it is only 3% of the metro population. Boulder County however is a little over 10%.


Well Played
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agent Orange View Post
Brilliant. And who said satire was dead?
__________________
Cool... Denver has reached puberty.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10152  
Old Posted Today, 5:41 PM
SirLucasTheGreat SirLucasTheGreat is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 476
Quote:
Originally Posted by bunt_q View Post

Forget Boulder vs. Denver. Why should Boulder get its extension when Highlands Ranch - same population - gets much worse service from RTD on all fronts. Shouldn't the SW extension come first?
I'd love to see the SW extension but Mineral Station is a 5-10 drive for much of Highlands Ranch. If you live in Highlands Ranch and cannot drive to Mineral in 10 minutes, then you are probably 10 to 15 minutes away from one of Lone Tree's 5 stations. But the SW corridor is a great corridor. 30 minutes to downtown and an extension into Highlands Ranch would probably be pretty well utilized.
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 5:55 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.