DENVER | Main Development Thread #7

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by mojiferous

I totally agree with that - I only fear that all the newbies and people from states that make all their income from speeding tickets (I'm looking at you Texans who insist on driving 10 under everywhere you go) will foil that idea.

And I realize that people need efficient ways to get into and out of the city - it's just frustrating that RTD caters to the exburbs and our ever-more-inequal center neighborhoods fight growth and change tooth and nail.

RTD isn’t really catering to anybody. They’re broke. They screw the exurbs and the city alike. The decisions baked into the fastracks system were made 20 years ago when, frankly, not many of us had a desperate need for inner city transit on our radars. It was something that was fun to draw on the map, but circa-2000 Denver wasn’t exactly in the same position as 2020-Denver. For crying out loud, when we voted on fastracks, our chief complaint on this forum had just moved on from lamenting that we hadn’t gotten a tall building in 20 years.

[Robert.hampton]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

RTD isn’t really catering to anybody. They’re broke. They screw the exurbs and the city alike. The decisions baked into the fastracks system were made 20 years ago when, frankly, not many of us had a desperate need for inner city transit on our radars. It was something that was fun to draw on the map, but circa-2000 Denver wasn’t exactly in the same position as 2020-Denver. For crying out loud, when we voted on fastracks, our chief complaint on this forum had just moved on from lamenting that we hadn’t gotten a tall building in 20 years.

Why is RTD in such dire straights? Mismanagement or something else?

I still can't fathom why the A line is over $10 now.....for a pretty mediocre service, and it doesn't matter where on the A-line you are going. Going from 38th and Blake to Union Station costs $10!!!!!!!!!! There have been 15+ times in the last year I have thought about taking the A-line from par hill but decided to uber instead because it was half the prices.

[Robert.hampton]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

RTD isn’t really catering to anybody. They’re broke. They screw the exurbs and the city alike. The decisions baked into the fastracks system were made 20 years ago when, frankly, not many of us had a desperate need for inner city transit on our radars. It was something that was fun to draw on the map, but circa-2000 Denver wasn’t exactly in the same position as 2020-Denver. For crying out loud, when we voted on fastracks, our chief complaint on this forum had just moved on from lamenting that we hadn’t gotten a tall building in 20 years.

Why is RTD in such dire straights? Mismanagement or something else?

I still can't fathom why the A line is over $10 now.....for a pretty mediocre service, and it doesn't matter where on the A-line you are going. Going from 38th and Blake to Union Station costs $10!!!!!!!!!! There have been 15+ times in the last year I have thought about taking the A-line from park hill to RiNO or Union Station but decided to uber instead because it was half the price.

[Agent Orange]

Originally Posted by Robert.hampton

Why is RTD in such dire straights? Mismanagement or something else?

I still can't fathom why the A line is over $10 now.....for a pretty mediocre service, and it doesn't matter where on the A-line you are going. Going from 38th and Blake to Union Station costs $10!!!!!!!!!! There have been 15+ times in the last year I have thought about taking the A-line from par hill but decided to uber instead because it was half the prices.

Unless something changed recently, I believe you are mistaken. It’s only $10.50 if you’re going to/from the airport. Union to 38th/Blake is a local ride at $3.00, Union to 61st and Pena is regional so it’s $5.25. Going from 61st and Pena to DIA, however, would be $10.50.

Nonetheless, I do agree that RTD's pricing, especially for the airport, is unfortunate if we’re trying to encourage car alternatives. If you are going to/from the airport with more than one person,it begins to make more sense to take Uber/Lyft. $21 A-line ride on RTD’s schedule (waiting upwards of 30 minutes for the train in the evening) plus the time and cost of getting to the nearest A-line stop (a $7 Lyft for me). Or I can use a rideshare app and go directly from my home/office to the airport in one ride for $35. With just me, it’s tempting. With two it’s almost a no brainer, with three it’s actually cheaper to take Uber.

Compare to cities like Chicago, Seattle and Atlanta where you can go from the airport to the city center for less than $5.

[Robert.hampton]

Originally Posted by Agent Orange

Unless something changed recently, I believe you are mistaken. It’s only $10.50 if you’re going to/from the airport. Union to 38th/Blake is a local ride at $3.00, Union to 61st and Pena is regional so it’s $5.25. Going from 61st and Pena to DIA, however, would be $10.50.

Egads you're right! I'm going to start taking the A Line more often!

[BG918]

Originally Posted by Agent Orange

Unless something changed recently, I believe you are mistaken. It’s only $10.50 if you’re going to/from the airport. Union to 38th/Blake is a local ride at $3.00, Union to 61st and Pena is regional so it’s $5.25. Going from 61st and Pena to DIA, however, would be $10.50.

I often ride the A Line from Central Park to Union Station and it's $6 R/T. They have a new 3 hour pass that's $3 so if you're just going down to an event it can work as a round trip.

[bulldurhamer]

Originally Posted by Sam Hill

I guess since I work in Commerce City, I need to move to that hell-hole instead of living where I want.

you could also just ride your bike in the 100 degree heat!

lol, cars are never going away. so much dreaming going on.

speaking of cars going away though, what's this talk about larimer going car free i'm hearing?

[bulldurhamer]

the option of taking uber to the airport being cheaper is a disgrace. not really for rtd, $10.50 to go to the airport isn't horrible considering you're about to spend god knows how much on trip and all the rest.

it's horrible that uber can still get away with pricing like that. at $.60 a mile or whatever it is the irs says is costs to drive, those drivers aren't getting paid squat to fill up our roads and divert traffic from our own transportation system that always needs more riders. if denver was truly serious about reducing cars, uber and lyft should be the first place they look. force them to pay a real wage like they do in new york and you'll have to pricing changes that would be more fair for everybody. as it is now, the poor sap driving about in his own car for uber is taking it on the chin for everybody while rtd languishes.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by bulldurhamer

the option of taking uber to the airport being cheaper is a disgrace. not really for rtd, $10.50 to go to the airport isn't horrible considering you're about to spend god knows how much on trip and all the rest.

it's horrible that uber can still get away with pricing like that. at $.60 a mile or whatever it is the irs says is costs to drive, those drivers aren't getting paid squat to fill up our roads and divert traffic from our own transportation system that always needs more riders. if denver was truly serious about reducing cars, uber and lyft should be the first place they look. force them to pay a real wage like they do in new york and you'll have to pricing changes that would be more fair for everybody. as it is now, the poor sap driving about in his own car for uber is taking it on the chin for everybody while rtd languishes.

Nah. Tax the f**k out of rideshares and use the revenue to build out the local transit infrastructure per DenverMoves:Transit. You'd see far more impact on transit and also would internalize the impact that ridershare has on congestion and roadways. And why do rideshares pay half the fee that taxis do to access DEN? That needs to be corrected as well.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Nah. Tax the f**k out of rideshares and use the revenue to build out the local transit infrastructure per DenverMoves:Transit. You'd see far more impact on transit and also would internalize the impact that ridershare has on congestion and roadways. And why do rideshares pay half the fee that taxis do to access DEN? That needs to be corrected as well.

I suspect you're unfamiliar with the rideshare business.

The majority of drivers work 10-20 hours a week. A lot of teachers drive to supplement their modest incomes. College students drive to help pay the bills. Other drivers are just trying to scratch out a living.

It used to be if you lived in the suburbs calling a taxi was a joke. Maybe they'd get there who knows when? For Uber/Lyft drivers who work (the nice) AP trips they are out as early as 4:00 a.m. Huge business; now if someone lives in the suburbs the chances are good an Uber/Lyft driver will arrive within ten minutes of a trip request.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

I suspect you're unfamiliar with the rideshare business.

The majority of drivers work 10-20 hours a week. A lot of teachers drive to supplement their modest incomes. College students drive to help pay the bills. Other drivers are just trying to scratch out a living.

It used to be if you lived in the suburbs calling a taxi was a joke. Maybe they'd get there who knows when? For Uber/Lyft drivers who work (the nice) AP trips they are out as early as 4:00 a.m. Huge business; now if someone lives in the suburbs the chances are good an Uber/Lyft driver will arrive within ten minutes of a trip request.

And any of this matters how?

The hours worked of the aggregate labor units doesn't matter in regards to how they impact congestion and the additional deterioration on public assets. That's assessed in the aggregate and a funding means of internalizing this social cost would be some sort of impact fee or zonal tax. It's not about hurting the poor cogs in the machine, but about compensating for the negative effects and subsidized market disruption.

[rds70]

A new proposal for the old Sports Castle site on Broadway, this one by Alliance Residential:

Concept - A proposed mixed-use development located on two separate parcels near 10th and Broadway. The project will consist of one 13-story mixed use residential building with above grade parking and retail at grade at 1050 Broadway. It will include approx. 220,000 sf of residential units and 81,000 gsf of parking. A second building will be a 13-story Senior Living development at 1001 Lincoln. The building will include 159,760 gsf of residential uses and 2 levels of below grade parking.

[CherryCreek]

Some good news/bad news on the Job relocation front.

First the bad news: Denver will not be the new headquarters of the BLM.

The good news? It will be Grand Junction!

https://www.denverpost.com/2019/07/1...rand-junction/

This would have been a really nice win for Denver, but is potentially life changing for GJ.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

And any of this matters how?

The hours worked of the aggregate labor units doesn't matter in regards to how they impact congestion and the additional deterioration on public assets. That's assessed in the aggregate and a funding means of internalizing this social cost would be some sort of impact fee or zonal tax. It's not about hurting the poor cogs in the machine, but about compensating for the negative effects and subsidized market disruption.

Generally if an Uber driver does ten trips he's substituting for ten owner car trips so at the least they save parking space. Why do you find this such a burden?

If a women prefers the comfort and security of an Uber ride over the harassment on a bus (and more convenient than driving), this bothers you because... If gentrified residents want to pay for an Uber ride instead of bothering with their own car, this bothers you because... If an elderly person wants a ride to her doctor or clinic this bothers you because... if an addict gets a sponsored ride to the methadone clinic this bothers you because...
...of some undefined social cost?

Many who want to party will utilize ride-share. You'd prefer they drive instead? For business people who fly into Denver you'd prefer they rent a car (for appointments etc) rather than just utilizing Uber/Lyft? I have personally helped to load the back of my CRV with groceries many times for those who either have no car or at least one that is working. They consider Uber/Lyft a life line. I'm happy to help.

I fail to understand all these "negative effects?"

Edit: No shortage of drama on Inauguration Day. I can enjoy Sach's sense of humor in pieces like this.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by rds70

A new proposal for the old Sports Castle site on Broadway, this one by Alliance Residential:

IIRC that was a proposed Wood Partners project. I had wondered about that. Alliance Res has the chops to get this done so this is Good News.

[twister244]

Originally Posted by CherryCreek

Some good news/bad news on the Job relocation front.

First the bad news: Denver will not be the new headquarters of the BLM.

The good news? It will be Grand Junction!

https://www.denverpost.com/2019/07/1...rand-junction/

This would have been a really nice win for Denver, but is potentially life changing for GJ.

Meh.... I have a sour taste in my mouth when it comes to these kinds of political moves.....

These kinds of moves are dangerous if the majority of the people in the existing BLM office don't want to move. The USDA is going through this exercise right now with the KC situation. How many of these folks in DC are going to want to live in GJ?..... I'm sure it's a great place (I personally haven't been there), but that's quite a change of pace. If it's a situation where no one is forced to move, that's fine. But.... if there is a forceful move of people against their will, count me out as supporting this.

[mhays]

It sounds like a political move to get those college grads out of the BLM with more ranchers in their place.

My dad worked for the BLM long ago. It was pretty bad in the 80s too according to him. The new regime is probably even worse.

[bulldurhamer]

Can we all agree that the "induced demand" argument against highway expansion is utter bullshit?

There's a giant logical hole that seems to assume traffic would not appear without the road expansion.

The induced demanders should drive I-70 though through the mountains and tell me about how traffic never increases unless more lanes are added. This is the biggest bunch of crock I'm seeing being repeated on the regular.

[bulldurhamer]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Generally if an Uber driver does ten trips he's substituting for ten owner car trips so at the least they save parking space. Why do you find this such a burden?

If a women prefers the comfort and security of an Uber ride over the harassment on a bus (and more convenient than driving), this bothers you because... If gentrified residents want to pay for an Uber ride instead of bothering with their own car, this bothers you because... If an elderly person wants a ride to her doctor or clinic this bothers you because... if an addict gets a sponsored ride to the methadone clinic this bothers you because...
...of some undefined social cost?

Many who want to party will utilize ride-share. You'd prefer they drive instead? For business people who fly into Denver you'd prefer they rent a car (for appointments etc) rather than just utilizing Uber/Lyft? I have personally helped to load the back of my CRV with groceries many times for those who either have no car or at least one that is working. They consider Uber/Lyft a life line. I'm happy to help.

I fail to understand all these "negative effects?"

Edit: No shortage of drama on Inauguration Day. I can enjoy Sach's sense of humor in pieces like this.

There are many negative effects. We all desire better public transportation, but that's going to be problematic when all of these scenarios you describe lead to people not using public transport.

All things being equal, that's fine. However it's not equal. It's a lot like Chinese factories paying pennies on the dollar for labor. Uber and Lyft have artificially low prices, manipulating the system in their favor. They do have a huge lobbying presence everywhere, after all.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...fares-increase

Uber and Lyft are part of this new economy that apparently means we won't have to pay our workers a living wage anymore. All I read from the great genius urbanists here is about how the housing struggle is real and we need to look after the poor people to make Denver great again. Never do I read anywhere about how we should actually pay our workers a living wage. To me it's astounding the main campaign issues are gentrification and homelessness while ensuring a minimum wage is met is totally ignored.

The fact is, Uber and Lyft drivers are making less than minimum wage on the backs of their vehicles they'll never be able to replace once they die after Uber eats them up and chews them out. The worst part is many of these people have no idea they are making so little. No benefits. Nothing to protect them from the risk of driving. No guaranteed anything other than enormous mileage and barely enough cash to cover gas and expenses.

Not only are the workers themselves getting screwed, but any hope of having a great intracity transportation network is taking a huge hit as Uber stretches its tentacles out even more. https://www.denverpost.com/2019/07/0...ransit-denver/ (beware of the wolf dressed up as a sheep) duh.

[Cirrus]

Originally Posted by CherryCreek

First the bad news: Denver will not be the new headquarters of the BLM.

The good news? It will be Grand Junction!

The main unstated reason for moving agencies out of DC is to make conservative rural areas wealthier.

BLM was never going to come to Denver.