DENVER | Transportation Thread

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by bcp

i was always impressed with the jchurch / cirrus plan and find it ambitious and the graphics are amazing. however, i think it's much too complicated and too many modes of transit...simple simple simple so that people know the system without thinking too much, and we can keep some costs contained.

i've been tinkering with the below plan...

- 4 simple through lines
- i say yank out some driving lanes and have dedictaed modern streetcars
- time the stop lights
- space the stations every 7 blocks or so
- 1 free shuttle buse loop in the center using 16th and 20th primarily (18th is WAY too redundant and won't encourage growth of the center)
- options for transferring / crosstown lines
- numerous intersections with Fastracks (large circles)

thoughts? anybody want to make this look pretty?

I think if we can afford to run it up federal to i-76 (where there is *nothing*), we can certainly afford to run it down leetsdale/parker all the way to nine mile. that parker/illiff area is a sea of apartments - one of the higher density areas in the metro. connecting it to downtown would be invaluable.

If not to nine mile, then to i-225 along mississippi or alameda. or maybe a combination. surora or not, there's a boatload of people out there... makes the west/northwest metro (toward arvada) look downright sparsely populated... let's go where the people are for a change.

[Strange Meat]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

I think if we can afford to run it up federal to i-76 (where there is *nothing*), we can certainly afford to run it down leetsdale/parker all the way to nine mile. that parker/illiff area is a sea of apartments - one of the higher density areas in the metro. connecting it to downtown would be invaluable.

If not to nine mile, then to i-225 along mississippi or alameda. or maybe a combination. surora or not, there's a boatload of people out there... makes the west/northwest metro (toward arvada) look downright sparsely populated... let's go where the people are for a change.

Indeed. That (parker/leetsdale to speer) is a nightmare drive, with really few options...

I love the 270/76/70 triangle. It's like our very own slice of Jersey, right here in Colorado!

[bunt_q]

Actually, come to think of it, I think, bcp, you're biased in favor of northwest Denver. I'd find a way to drop the whole Federal line north of 38th or so, and add a line down Federal the other direction, as far as Evans maybe... South Federal is where the action is.

[bcp]

ok - it's cold outside so i will tinker with this...thanks for the good input.

my only concern with parker/ leets is (if it runs all the way to 9-mile) then isn't it replicating the LRT service too much at that point?

bryan

[glowrock]

Originally Posted by bcp

ok - it's cold outside so i will tinker with this...thanks for the good input.

my only concern with parker/ leets is (if it runs all the way to 9-mile) then isn't it replicating the LRT service too much at that point?

bryan

No, not really, Bryan. Parker/Leetsdale is very, very densely populated along much of it, and it's definitely the major way from Aurora to Cherry Creek/Downtown. The traffic is a nightmare along it, and rail would be incredibly convenient and useful there!

Aaron (Glowrock)

[The Dirt]

I'd have to agree about Leetsdale/Parker. It pretty bad, but what it's got going for it, is that it's an urban corridor with plenty of mid-rise office buildings, apartments of every size, churches, schools, unique shopping areas (Russian/E. European neighborhood, old Jewish neighborbood, and Korean in some places). Where Parker meets I-225 is pretty dense as well. I think it would be smart to connect Downtown to Cherry Creek to the Aurora part of the Tech Center.

[Octavian]

What about going down Alameda from Cherry Creek? Living in Aurora, the 2 ways you tend to drive are Leetsdale Parker or Alameda. Alameda has empty space along side of it for a good chunk along Lowry. An Alameda line could stop at Lowry and terminate at the Aurora City Center.

Also, on what I think is the MLK line (or Montview?), why not run it to the Peoria station so you could connect there to both East Line and I-225.

[The Dirt]

Alameda's good, but at this point it's a bit patchy with suburban housing and a giant empty field. I know how busy it gets, but nothing compared to the others. MLK would benefit, but again, it's not as dense as some other through-ways. Montview has too many schools, stops, and it's too narrow. I'd say that Alameda and MLK are a good idea, but they're on the second tier of priorities. I'd put Colfax, Leets/Parker, and Federal before them.

[bcp]

ok..how about this? i'm not real familiar with the density along the SW area of this map...

bcp

[FrancoRey]

Sweet. I approve. Now who's got 10 billion bones liyin' around willing to donate for a Denver Underground?

[bcp]

no subways! way too expensive to keep anything viable...and speaking of viable, a smaller starter system serving mainly the core might look something like this (and be much more affordable).

[Cirrus]

It might be an interesting exercise to do this while constrained to a theoretical budget.

For example, if we assume a streetcar costs $25 million / mile, and we have (say) $500 million to work with, where would we build? What 20 miles are the most important?

I would think you'd go down Colfax at least as far west as Colorado as the first priority, and probably to Cherry Creek as the second, but what then? Together those two segments are about 6.5 miles (from Colfax/Broadway), so you'd still have a bit to work with.

[bcp]

red green blue? that might be more like 25 miles?

i'm liking that black line less and less...but think that park ave / university would be important to serve (just needs a better terminus)

[Octavian]

If you're determined to go down Parker, turn off of Alameda on Quebec instead of Monaco (I know Monaco is bigger) so you can have a stop closer to the front of Lowry on your Parker line.

I agree it might be replicating the existing light rail too much, on the other hand its really busy. I guess its an empirical question. I can't say.

Alameda's good, but at this point it's a bit patchy with suburban housing and a giant empty field. I know how busy it gets, but nothing compared to the others. MLK would benefit, but again, it's not as dense as some other through-ways. Montview has too many schools, stops, and it's too narrow. I'd say that Alameda and MLK are a good idea, but they're on the second tier of priorities. I'd put Colfax, Leets/Parker, and Federal before them.

I was just going off of what he already had on his map on the MLK route (I think that's MLK at least).

If on your dark line along Parker (on the more developed system) is light rail, you can have the route be a continuous loop by running it on the I-225 line track from Nine Mile to Peoria (if you extend the MLK line to Peoria). That lets you take it to Aurora City Center and Fitz.

[Ilsaz]

This is all fascinating, but why build right down Colfax?

I know it is the urban core street for East Denver coming out of Downtown, but that is exactly why it is a problem. East Colfax is fine how it is: a densely populated commercial strip. The 15 is fine for moving people. 14th and 13th are fine options for moving motor traffic, and I like 12th for bicycle commuting.

I agree that there needs to be a Light Rail line, streetcar or subway coming out of Denver heading east, but make it parallel to Colfax, not on top of it.

A line along 11th Ave. would be nice. The right-of-ways would be cheaper and it would be far less disruptive to business.

[Cirrus]

You have to be on Colfax because Colfax is where the rider destinations are, and where there's the most potential for upzoned TOD.

You always put transit closest to the mixed-use neighborhood center.

With a streetcar, you can turn Colfax from a commercial strip into a bona fide urban boulevard.

This...


... Becomes this:

[Cirrus]

Anyway, here's a quick take, trying to get maximum coverage for minimum mileage. Streetcars only, all on the surface.

COLOR	PHASE	MILES	COST
Black	1	7.3	$182
Red	2	6.2	$155
Blue	3	3.7*	$93
Pink	4	2.0	$50

		19.2	$480

* Dotted line indicates existing LRT tracks, which the streetcar would use (not included in mileage or cost).

[SnyderBock]

I like it Cirrus, because you take my basic concept of combining the Colfax and Cherry Creek lines into a single line. It saves a lot of mileage by branching off the Colfax line south down York to Cherry Creek, instead of running an entirely separate, parallel line down Speer.

[bunt_q]

I would make MLK a much, much lower priority. You have a hostile (at least, they historically opposed rail), low density neighborhood, plus it is redundant (whether we like it or not - i don't - they added a whole bunch of intermediate stops on the airport line).

You need to pull that line off of santa fe and put it back on broadway, otherwise your york spur is too far east of governor's park and all that south broadway density that we need to connect in. When you guys did your original route to cherry creek (that weaved through the neighborhoods), hadn't you also considered the politics of the whole thing? I know it's not as straight and convenient (bcp's priority), but i found it a more realistic route. you will never ever ever get a rail line from colfax to cherry creek on york. you have a wealthy, organized neighborhood there, not a whole lot of density, the botanical gardens... political nightmare. your other route is better. (note: speer isn't better - it's probably worse, politically... but i think you had actually minimized your time on speer by going through gov's park, on 6th or something, no?)

edit: dan - add some trees to your parking lots up there, it's only fair

[SnyderBock]

I think just drop everything but the Black and Red phases and put the black phases subway while in the CBD and as far out Colfax as needed. Make anything on Colfax east of Colorado, the Red Phase.

That's what I woudl do.