DENVER | Transportation Thread - Page 27

DenverCrow · #**521** Posted **Dec 27, 2008, 4:17 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DenverTrans

Converting the 16th St. Mall to rail would solve numerous problems at once:

- pavers could be retained as is, because without the buses, they wouldn't shift.

- Capacity would be increased greatly over buses

- Quiet, electric, low-maintenance, low operating cost (compared to buses).

Specific technology:

-Direct fixation rails in concrete trenches in the existing street base. A fairly cost effective solution. You could use low-profile rails only a few inches tall. There would be little need to change the existing pavers.

- Trams on pedestrian streets ("malls") exist throughout the world, especially in Europe. It doesn't mess up the streetscape, it enhances it.

Actually I think the buses are a hybrid type that uses both electric and gas. They're also fairly quiet, IMO.

Strange Meat · #**522** Posted **Dec 27, 2008, 5:15 AM**

Yeah, the Mall Ride is fairly quiet. It's certainly more quiet than a typical RTD bus.

blm3034L!fe · #**523** Posted **Dec 30, 2008, 2:53 AM**

^ What about Trolleys for 16th Street?

SnyderBock · #**524** Posted **Dec 30, 2008, 3:29 AM**

Single car LRT vehicles, streetcars, trolleys... Whatever. They all do teh same thing for close to the same cost. I woudl suggest a streetcar line which uses single LRT vehicles, for maximum inter-connectivity with the existing LRT system and maintenance facility.

Anyway, I noticed Denver's Mayor Wish List in the bill before congress has a request for funds to reconstruct the 16th Street Mall. total requested funds for this project are only $16,000,000. Hardly enough to do much more than correct the problem with the pavers.

In fact, Denver's total request only totals $341,850,000 and doesn't include any relief for FasTracks. In comparison, there are cities with under 1 million people in their metro area requesting in excess of half a billion dollars.

Denver requested: $341,850,000
Dallas requested: $1,222,823,842
Fort Worth requested: $772,880,040
Detroit requested: $832,746,813
Dayton requested: $232,100,000
Eugene requested: $256,522,000
Thornton, CO requested: $487,717,675
San Diego requested: $350,968,704
San Francisco requested: $2,195,422,000

Anyway, I guess Denver wasn't too greedy (which is good) and truly requested funds for the most important projects in Denver City/County.

The Dirt · #**525** Posted **Dec 30, 2008, 5:40 AM**

Bad Thornton, bad! I wonder what they need that money for?

1Post2 · #**526** Posted **Dec 30, 2008, 4:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SnyderBock

In fact, Denver's total request only totals $341,850,000 and doesn't include any relief for FasTracks.

It includes $88 million for Union Station, which is the only piece of Fastracks that is entirely within Denver and doesn't span municipal borders. RTD is lobbying on behalf of the East Corridor, and probably other corridors as well.

The Dirt · #**527** Posted **Dec 30, 2008, 4:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by blm3034L!fe

^ What about Trolleys for 16th Street?

Trolleys are pretty big in eastern Europe. Basically, they just have a bus with power lines above instead of an internal engine. It may be a good idea in terms of no exhaust pollution, less noise pollution, but on the flip side, you're going to have a bunch of wires overhead that may ruin the view.

alexjon · #**528** Posted **Dec 30, 2008, 6:45 PM**

Make sure the streetcars/trolleys used have removable skirts in case capacity increases beyond a level that can be managed by frequency.

That's a mistake systems make.

mgmAZCO · #**529** Posted **Dec 30, 2008, 8:48 PM**

removable skirts aren't always a good thing...just ask Bristol Palin

wong21fr · #**530** Posted **Dec 31, 2008, 3:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Dirt

Trolleys are pretty big in eastern Europe. Basically, they just have a bus with power lines above instead of an internal engine. It may be a good idea in terms of no exhaust pollution, less noise pollution, but on the flip side, you're going to have a bunch of wires overhead that may ruin the view.

It doesn't ruin the view in Seattle.

electricron · #**531** Posted **Dec 31, 2008, 3:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SnyderBock

Single car LRT vehicles, streetcars, trolleys... Whatever. They all do teh same thing for close to the same cost. I woudl suggest a streetcar line which uses single LRT vehicles, for maximum inter-connectivity with the existing LRT system and maintenance facility.
In fact, Denver's total request only totals $341,850,000 and doesn't include any relief for FasTracks. In comparison, there are cities with under 1 million people in their metro area requesting in excess of half a billion dollars.
Denver requested: $341,850,000
Dallas requested: $1,222,823,842
Fort Worth requested: $772,880,040
Detroit requested: $832,746,813
Dayton requested: $232,100,000
Eugene requested: $256,522,000
Thornton, CO requested: $487,717,675
San Diego requested: $350,968,704
San Francisco requested: $2,195,422,000

Anyway, I guess Denver wasn't too greedy (which is good) and truly requested funds for the most important projects in Denver City/County.

30 Largest Metropolitan Statistical Areas by Population
Source: US Census Bureau Rank 2007 Population Metropolitan Statistical Area
1 18,818,536 New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJPA
2 12,875,587 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA
3 9,524,673 Chicago-Naperville-Joliet, IL-IN-WI
4 6,145,037 Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX
5 5,827,962 Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD
6 5,628,101 Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, TX
7 5,413,212 Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Miami Beach, FL
8 5,306,565 Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV
9 5,278,904 Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA
10 4,482,857 Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH
11 4,467,592 Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI
12 4,203,898 San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA
13 4,179,427 Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ
14 4,081,371 Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA
15 3,309,347 Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA
16 3,208,212 Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI
17 2,974,859 San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA
18 2,803,707 St. Louis, MO-IL
19 2,723,949 Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL
20 2,668,056 Baltimore-Towson, MD
21 2,464,866 Denver-Aurora, CO
22 2,355,712 Pittsburgh, PA
23 2,175,113 Portland-Vancouver-Beaverton, OR-WA
24 2,133,678 Cincinnati-Middletown, OH-KY-IN
25 2,096,471 Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH
26 2,091,120 Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-Roseville, CA
27 2,032,496 Orlando-Kissimmee, FL
28 1,990,675 San Antonio, TX
29 1,985,429 Kansas City, MO-KS
30 1,836,333 Las Vegas-Paradise, NV

I noticed a few cities metro areas had far more than than 1,000,000 population.

The Dirt · #**532** Posted **Dec 31, 2008, 4:53 PM**

I really think that Boulder should be included in the Denver-Aurora MSA. Who reviews and decided MSA boundaries?

blm3034L!fe · #**533** Posted **Dec 31, 2008, 6:03 PM**

^ I thought the Denver area was near 3M? WTF? Even the Census put an est for 2007 for the Denver area at 2,960,000???? 2.4 is where the Denver area was like 2-3 years ago. What no one is being born or moving to the area any more? BULLSHIT!

DenverInfill · #**534** Posted **Dec 31, 2008, 6:17 PM**

Those are MSA population figures, which exclude Boulder and Weld Counties, I believe. Denver's CMSA numbers are just shy of 3 million.

electricron · #**535** Posted **Jan 1, 2009, 4:45 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Dirt

I really think that Boulder should be included in the Denver-Aurora MSA. Who reviews and decided MSA boundaries?

Local county and city governments decide the MSA boundaries.

Teshadoh · #**536** Posted **Jan 1, 2009, 5:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by electricron

Local county and city governments decide the MSA boundaries.

As well as commuting patterns & urbanized areas. But I wouldn't be surprised if Boulder is included in the MSA, due to Boulder's antigrowth stragety, Boulder County is becoming more & more east-oriented.

The Dirt · #**537** Posted **Jan 1, 2009, 5:47 PM**

Lafayette, Louisville, Erie, and Superior are BoCo (lol) cities that are practically all Denver suburbs now.

blm3034L!fe · #**538** Posted **Jan 1, 2009, 6:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Dirt

Lafayette, Louisville, Erie, and Superior are BoCo (lol) cities that are practically all Denver suburbs now.

Broomfield, Lafayette and Superior are Definately now part of the North Metro Denver area, I live up North and it is all connected, there is like a 1 - 1/12 Mile stretch along highway 36 that excludes Boulder from entirely connecting to Denver. However out east of Boulder the Northern suburbs are already grow North parallel to Boulder.

In a sense Boulder is pretty much now "SURROUNDED" by Denver's growth, and regardless of how much they want to remain thier own little area, those days are done!!!

DenverInfill · #**539** Posted **Jan 1, 2009, 6:49 PM**

To help with the MSA/CSA question, here are two maps from the US Census.

Metropolitan Statistical Areas (dark green) and Micropolitan Statistical Areas (light green):

Combined Statistical Areas (there's only one in Colorado, the Denver-Aurora-Boulder CSA):

July 1, 2007 US Census Estimates:

Denver-Aurora MSA:

Denver-Aurora-Boulder CSA:

These numbers are for July 1, 2007. The census bureau recently released their July 1, 2008 estimates for the states. Applying the 2.0% annual growth rate the entire state of Colorado experienced over the past year to the numbers above would give us these estimates for July 1, 2008:

Denver-Aurora MSA: 2,514,163
Denver-Aurora-Boulder CSA: 3,058,856

OK, I know I'm getting a little off topic, but I'm a census geek and I can't help it. I've edited my tables above to include the July 2008 estimates from the Colorado State Demographers office, as well as their 2009 and 2010 projections:

Since the State Demographers Office's estimates are probably more accurate than the Census Bureau's, then in 2010, the Denver-Aurora MSA, as it is presently defined, would have a population of 2.63 million. If Boulder County is added in 2010 as part of the Denver-Aurora MSA (which they would probably rename as the Denver-Aurora-Boulder MSA), then it would have a population of 2.93 million. At that point, I would think they would have to rename the CSA as the Denver-Aurora-Boulder-Greeley CSA. That's a mouthfull.

The Dirt · #**540** Posted **Jan 1, 2009, 11:09 PM**

Gilpin, Clear Creek, Park, and Elbert counties part of the CSA? I had no idea, nor see why they should be part of the CSA, while contiguous population centers in Boulder Co. and Weld Co. are not counted. I really wish Weld would get a north/south split, as I see no reason why Greeley should be county center of a county with considerable growth in what now would be considered part of north Denver metro. In any case, this is very enlightening, Ken! Thanks!