DENVER | Transportation Thread

[Octavian]

The R2C2 study was released today. For those who don't know, it was a study paid for by CDOT to look into moving the CML that runs along the front range (behind Union Station), to the Eastern Plains to make room for commuter rail service to the cities along I-25.

Executive Summary:

http://www.dot.state.co.us/railroadstudy/FinalReport/FinalReport-2009/ExecSummary-FINAL020609.pdf

Full Report:

http://www.dot.state.co.us/railroadstudy/FinalReport/FinalReport-2009/R2C2_Final_Report-full020609.pdf


Even if the through traffic is moved out east, local trains would still use the CML tracks. The reduction in trains they are discussing is from 30-31 trains per day to about 13 per day. Moving the lines would cost between $800 million and $1.2 billion.

Also on Feb 3, the Fox North site was chosen for the commuter rail maintenance facility. That means that RTD's bus facility won't have to be relocated and about $100 million in savings.

http://www.rtd-fastracks.com/media/uploads/mf/CRMF_presentation_to_Board_20090203.pdf

[1Post2]

That coal power plant near commerce city and other industries along the railroad still need those tracks...I wonder what percentage of freight trains are for local use versus simply passing through the metro area?

[Octavian]

Originally Posted by 1Post2

That coal power plant near commerce city and other industries along the railroad still need those tracks...I wonder what percentage of freight trains are for local use versus simply passing through the metro area?

I was updating my post as you wrote this. They estimate the number of freight trains would go from 30-31 per day to 13 per day.

They also report:

"Under either alternative, the UP and BNSF trains remaining on the Joint Line would operate with fewer conflicts due to delays following the heavily loaded unit coal trains and delays in sidings waiting for meets. Diversion of the through trains to either of the bypass alignments would also reduce conflicts in the Denver yard facilities for both UP and BNSF operations."

[1Post2]

Wow...better than I expected.

[Octavian]

Mayors: Limits needed for FasTracks tax fix
A tax hike could be limited in length and funds set aside for lines struggling to be built.
By Jeffrey Leib
The Denver Post
POSTED: 02/10/2009 12:30:00 AM MST

If a sales-tax increase is needed to bail out RTD's FasTracks program, some metro-area mayors want the new tax revenues to be dedicated to finishing train lines that are in danger of being truncated.

"If we want voters to pass this, it has to go into a separate bucket," Aurora Mayor Ed Tauer said at Monday's meeting of the Metro Mayors Caucus task force on FasTracks.

The article goes on to state that sales taxes have more support than property taxes among the business community, and RTD's sales tax revenues were down 1.5% last year and Fastracks had been banking on an increase.

[FrancoRey]

I didn't know where else to put this in the regional forums, but the stimulus bill that recently passed is going to be a great winner for high-speed rail. Here is the CNN article:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/13/stimulus.winners.losers/index.html

Here is the main, important excerpt:

High-speed and inner-city rail: Went from $300 million in House bill to $2.25 billion in Senate to $8 billion in final version. There also is a $6.9 billion provision for public transit.

This also doesn't even include the 1.3 billion that was allocated to AmTrak. 8 billion plus almost 7 more sounds pretty good for mass transit. I wonder how this amount compares to the budgets of other nations, such as those in Europe or Asia, for high-speed rail. Knock on wood for some of that money to go towards a Front Range Corridor. I also wonder if there are any more articles out there or information that one could dig up to find out where the funds will be allocated throughout the country.

[wong21fr]

I'll make a bold statement, and to put it crudely, Colorado ain't gettin' sh** for HSR.

[PLANSIT]

Originally Posted by FrancoRey

I didn't know where else to put this in the regional forums, but the stimulus bill that recently passed is going to be a great winner for high-speed rail. Here is the CNN article:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/13/stimulus.winners.losers/index.html

Here is the main, important excerpt:

High-speed and inner-city rail: Went from $300 million in House bill to $2.25 billion in Senate to $8 billion in final version. There also is a $6.9 billion provision for public transit.

This also doesn't even include the 1.3 billion that was allocated to AmTrak. 8 billion plus almost 7 more sounds pretty good for mass transit. I wonder how this amount compares to the budgets of other nations, such as those in Europe or Asia, for high-speed rail. Knock on wood for some of that money to go towards a Front Range Corridor. I also wonder if there are any more articles out there or information that one could dig up to find out where the funds will be allocated throughout the country.

The Front Range Corridor is not a designated HSR. No monies.

From Wiki:

On December 15, 2008, the U.S. Department of Transportation solicited proposals to design, finance, build, and maintain 11 new high-speed rail corridors around the country. The 11 corridors with the major cities served by each are:

* Northeast Corridor—Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Washington, D.C.
* California Corridor—Sacramento, San Francisco, Los Angeles, San Diego
* Empire Corridor—Buffalo, Albany
* Pacific Northwest Corridor—Eugene, Portland, Seattle, Vancouver
* South Central Corridor—Tulsa, Little Rock, Dallas, San Antonio
* Gulf Coast Corridor—Houston, New Orleans, Mobile
* Chicago Hub Corridor—Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, Kansas City, St. Louis, Louisville, Minneapolis/St. Paul
* Florida Corridor—Tampa, Orlando, Miami
* Keystone Corridor—Pittsburgh, Philadelphia
* Northern New England Corridor—Portland/Auburn, Boston, Montreal
* Southeast Corridor—Raleigh, Charlotte, Atlanta, Columbia, Jacksonville

[SnyderBock]

Are you sure this is final? I find it hard to believe that Albany to Buffalo would get HSR corridor designation over the Front Range. The population in that corridor is much less than the Front Range and economically it is one of the most disabled regions in the USA, unemployment rates in up state New York are over 20%.

[Fritzdude]

Originally Posted by SnyderBock

Are you sure this is final? I find it hard to believe that Albany to Buffalo would get HSR corridor designation over the Front Range. The population in that corridor is much less than the Front Range and economically it is one of the most disabled regions in the USA, unemployment rates in up state New York are over 20%.

I would agree; our population heading up and down the front range is surely higher than Buffalo and Albany. Plus, our population is expected to double in the next 20-30 years so it makes more sense to start investing in infrastructure now.

The rest of the population centers I can sort of agree, but not this one.

[electricron]

Surprisingly, you forgot to mention Syracuse and Rochester with Albany and Buffallo. You also forgot to mention Totonto, Boston, and New York City, which are 100 miles away.

What's within 100 miles of Denver?

[diablo234]

Colorado Springs, Greeley, Ft. Collins, Boulder, Breckenridge, yeah it probably does not warrant the need for HSR now, but it probably will in the near future
especially for the heavy population growth along the I-25 corridor and for the resort traffic on the I-70 corridor.

That HSR plan also does not show any proposals to link Houston to the rest of Texas larger cities so it is definetely flawed to a huge degree.

[Octavian]

The money was put in by Harry Reid in conference. Although it doesn't say so in the bill, a lot of it is earmarked for a maglev line between Disneyland and las vegas.

Part of the rocky mountain rail authority's job is to see if Colorado should apply for the 11th high speed corridor.

Last but not least, keep in mind that by it's very design, appropriations is a political process.

Edit: Other sources in the media report that it was the Obama Administration that fought for the HSR funds, and that they are not earmarked for any specific purpose.

[FrancoRey]

Originally Posted by Octavian

The money was put in by Harry Reid in conference. Although it doesn't say so in the bill, a lot of it is earmarked for a maglev line between Disneyland and las vegas.

Am I the only one who thinks that this is one of the most stupid, pointless places to put a maglev train in the country? They could at least do a train to LAX or a real hub of transportation, not a tourist destination. Even Vegas on the other end is pretty much just that. Mass transit is not a ride, it's supposed to be practical and a way to alleviate congestion for moving between population centers. That is one thing I can't stand about our "American Mindset", where a cutting-edge design for train transportation is used as a tourist trap and not for real utilization.

Put a maglev in a REAL transportation corridor like New York-Philly or DC-Baltimore for Cryin' out loud. LA to San D, anything more useful than Disneyland to Vegas.

[diablo234]

I think they plan on expanding the California-Las Vegas Maglev to include San Diego, and Los Angeles in the near future once the initial segment becomes more successful. The traffic on I-15 between Las Vegas and the IE can warrant the need for an alternative especially during certain holidays.

Actually when D.C. and Baltimore were campaigning to become the host city for the 2012 Olympics there was a proposal to build a maglev line with a stop in between at BWI. However the proposal was scrapped.

[glowrock]

Originally Posted by diablo234

I think they plan on expanding the California-Las Vegas Maglev to include San Diego, and Los Angeles in the near future once the initial segment becomes more successful. The traffic on I-15 between Las Vegas and the IE can warrant the need for an alternative especially during certain holidays.

Actually when D.C. and Baltimore were campaigning to become the host city for the 2012 Olympics there was a proposal to build a maglev line with a stop in between at BWI. However the proposal was scrapped.

Yes, the traffic on I-15, especially during the weekends and holidays, definitely is enough to warrant an alternative to driving. Not to mention, actually driving that route during the summer months is a potentially dangerous situation, given the extreme heat (we're talking the Mojave Desert after all!), the many grades on the highway (kind of rolls between 2000' and 4500'), the chances to have an overheated vehicle, the fact that there's nothing in between roughly Barstow and Vegas, etc... etc...

Again, would it be my first choice? Nope. Maglev? Nope. But is some sort of HSR corridor potentially needed between LA-LV? Absolutely! Connect it to a San Diego-LA-San Fran HSR corridor and I think you've got a winner!

Aaron (Glowrock)

[electricron]

Originally Posted by diablo234

I think they plan on expanding the California-Las Vegas Maglev to include San Diego, and Los Angeles in the near future once the initial segment becomes more successful. The traffic on I-15 between Las Vegas and the IE can warrant the need for an alternative especially during certain holidays.

Actually when D.C. and Baltimore were campaigning to become the host city for the 2012 Olympics there was a proposal to build a maglev line with a stop in between at BWI. However the proposal was scrapped.

California is planning to build High Speed Rail. The referendum just passed specifically stated High Speed Rail, not MegLev. Another referendum will have to be passed before any L.A. to L.V. project gets built.

The Baltimore to D.C. MegLev didn't save that much time over the existing Acela trains. The distance is 38.6 miles per Google Maps, approximately 54 minutes by car. The Acela, although capable of a top speed of 150 mph, travels much slower in this suburban country, makes the trip in less than 30 minutes. If it were able to reach 150 mph for the entire distance, which is impossible because it must accelerate and de-accelerate, could make it in 16 minutes. A MegLev at 300 mph for the entire distance, which it can't do for the same reason stated earlier, would take 8 minutes. I don't think spending $Billions to build a MegLev guideway and buy MegLev trains to save 8 minutes is worth it. It would be wiser to refurbish the existing rail line for faster capable speeds.

I feel the same way about MegLev between L.A. and L.V. California will be spending approximately $45 Billion building 800 miles of HSR lines between L.A. S.D. Sac. and S.F. Why waste the money spent on HSR tracks north of L.A. into the high desert building MegLev guideway near the same route to L.V.? It'll be cheaper to use as much of that HSR corridor as possible heading to L.V. too. They could interline trains from S.F. S.D. and Sac to L.V. if the L.A. to L.V. line was HSR. With MegLev, passengers would have to switch trains, potentially losing any time saved using the faster speed vehicles.

How much time would be saved between L.A. and L.V. using the faster MegLev vs HSR? HSR at 220 mph could travel the 278 miles in 76 minutes. MegLev at 300 mph could travel the 278 miles in 56 minutes. Is that 20 minutes saved worth twice the costs from L.A.? If you were transferring from HSR to MegLev, you'll would probably wait more than the 20 minutes saved doing so at a station.

[diablo234]

I do think high speed rail would be a much better alternative since it is more cost effective compared with Maglev in the L.A. to Las Vegas corridor. I just think it was the planners idea to eventually expand the Maglev system throughout california when the idea was being conceived.

[SnyderBock]

That's what I gather, the Rocky Mountain Rail Authority is determining whether or not to apply for the 11th HSR corridor (as we speak), so therefore it has not yet been declared. I find it hard to believe that they suddenly declared the 11th HSR corridor in October, months ahead of expectations and without any press releases for all us transit buffs to stumble across and read. The Rocky Mountain Rail Authority has made reports since October which indicate they are still planning on a possible application for the 11th corridor.

As for not mentioning New York city, Boston, etc... the corridor was listed as Albany-Buffalo. That does not even indicate a direct connection into New York City, as that would be listed as, New York-Albany-Buffalo.

[PLANSIT]

^


I still think it's going to be a hard sell, given the short distance, and lack of population nodes compared to other alignments.