DENVER | Transportation Thread - Page 49

Eliyah78 · #**961** Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 3:42 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by AFPhoto Wolf

well i live about 2 blocks up from Garrison and 1 over from 13th.... we have crews working on moving lines underground but they have been doing that for about a year now.... I cant wait to have this job start. being in the Military i ride for free!!! and only have to walk a few blocks to get to a station!!!!

RTD will begin laying in rail sometime around December 2009. The grade work is scheduled to start sometime this summer.

E

SnyderBock · #**962** Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 6:19 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eliyah78

Snyder, you can't discount the bottom line which is that far too many design elements were left out of the plan. It is likely that within 2 years the Amtrack's Pioneer will again provide regular service between Denver and Seattle. Also, a service study is underway for the Southwest Chief, which is another likely scenario. And how about the Rail Runner? Recently the state of NM purchased ROW property from Santa Fe all the way north to the Colorado border for proposed commuter rail service from Albuquerque to Denver. How about the room needed for commuter bus service?

You ask these questions as though you are oblivious to the Union Station plan. AmTrak is being served at Union Station with a nice long platform and refueling depot. Any future AmTrak service would share that platform. Trains would obviously be scheduled at different times.

Furthermore, the SkiTrain is gone. This nice long platform right next to the AmTrak platform will now be available to future service.

In addition, there is another unused platform being incorporated into the Train Room for FUTURE SERVICE.

In addition to this, RTD is securing ROW for an additional future Light Rail platform by the CML and ROW for another future platform for HSR.

And as for your question about commuter bus service? The master plan called for 15 bus bays and the current Union Station plan now has 22 bus bays. This includes a couple bus bay for shuttle buses to shuttle passenger to the Greyhound station (and other commuter bus stations). Grey Hound was asked if they wanted to be integrated into Union Station, and they said "No Thanks."

glowrock · #**963** Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 6:53 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SnyderBock

You ask these questions as though you are oblivious to the Union Station plan. AmTrak is being served at Union Station with a nice long platform and refueling depot. Any future AmTrak service would share that platform. Trains would obviously be scheduled at different times.

Furthermore, the SkiTrain is gone. This nice long platform right next to the AmTrak platform will now be available to future service.

In addition, there is another unused platform being incorporated into the Train Room for FUTURE SERVICE.

In addition to this, RTD is securing ROW for an additional future Light Rail platform by the CML and ROW for another future platform for HSR.

And as for your question about commuter bus service? The master plan called for 15 bus bays and the current Union Station plan now has 22 bus bays. This includes a couple bus bay for shuttle buses to shuttle passenger to the Greyhound station (and other commuter bus stations). Grey Hound was asked if they wanted to be integrated into Union Station, and they said "No Thanks."

I can't necessarily blame Greyhound from not wanting to move their station to Union Station. It would have been a very expensive proposition, and Greyhound operates on a pretty lean budget. Many of their stations are in various states of disrepair, or are operational yet god-awfully UGLY. At least the main Denver station is in good working order, is clean (or pretty clean at least), and is very, very convenient to get in and out of. Yes, Greyhound moving would open an entire city block for redevelopment, but I honestly think they're better off staying where they are for now. Maybe eventually they can redevelop the whole block by having the station as the base of a high rise development. Who knows?

Aaron (Glowrock)

Octavian · #**964** Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 6:54 AM**

In the big scheme of things, Amtrak service is irrelevant to Denver. The California Zephyr has 329,000 annual riders (for the entire route from San Francisco to Chicago). To put that number into perspective, more passengers fly through DIA every 3 days. Union Station itself will see an estimated 200,000 passengers per day. If Amtrak left Denver, the numbers say almost no one would notice. A train to Seattle wouldn't fare any better. Over those distances, the service Amtrak offers is simply not competitive. Moreover, Amtrak's long trains cause congestion at the Union Station throat. If a better use for the Amtrak platform is found in the future, Denver shouldn't be afraid to take it.

cadetwhite · #**965** Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 8:53 AM**

Amtrak plans to improve its service in the coming years. The government passed a bill giving Amtrak more funds and requiring them to develop new lines and upgrade old ones. I'm not sure when all of this is supposed to start but I hope it accompanies a new era of American rail travel.

Octavian · #**966** Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 5:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by cadetwhite

Amtrak plans to improve its service in the coming years. The government passed a bill giving Amtrak more funds and requiring them to develop new lines and upgrade old ones. I'm not sure when all of this is supposed to start but I hope it accompanies a new era of American rail travel.

They don't own their track and Denver is too isolated. It's one thing to be in the NE. It's quite another to be out here.

SnyderBock · #**967** Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 6:31 PM**

It's not like there will be an AmTrak train leaving Union Station each hour. They can expand service at Union Station if they want. One platform can handle much, much more AmTrak service, so long as the stagger their service in and out of Union Station. No reason they wouldn't do this anyway. They could add a new NW line and AmTrak still wouldn't have a train leaving Union Station every 4 hours.

I wonder what the SkiTrain platform will be used for now. This will mean two empty platforms in the main train room and space for two more future platforms out by the CML/Light Rail. It will be a long time before those free spaces are used up. By that time (30 years from now), new service will have to explore subway or elevated options (which is a good thing). If we leave Union Station as open land with space for new service 100 years into the future, it's likely Denver will never become urban enough to need that new service and it will make it too easy to never build a subway/inner core system. If it's developed up densely and brings people in from all over, Denver will need better inner-core service and because everything is built up, a subway may be the only option. That's a good thing; subway operate efficiently in highly dense areas without surface transportation disruptions. This Union Station plan puts Denver on that path; in that dirrection.

Cirrus · #**968** Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 6:44 PM**

The future of intercity passenger rail in Colorado (be it Amtrak or something else) is in connecting the cities of the Front Range to each other, not in long-haul routes to LA and Chicago.

SnyderBock · #**969** Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 7:15 PM**

Exactly, and with two empty platforms in the train room and the protected ROW for a third regional "through line" platform next to the light rail platform... Do you think the Union Station plan is being designed adequately within the funding constraints, to accommodate this future service?

I mean honestly, the main complaint is no through line for the main train room. That was effectively taken out forever when they built the Pepsi Center. I think the Union Station plan is about the best it's going to get, within it's design and financial constraints. And in no way, do I see it preventing future service expansions in the form of elevated or subway platforms--well into the future.

EngiNerd · #**970** Posted **Jun 19, 2009, 8:29 PM**

Officially Official

Quote:

West Corridor light-rail project moves ahead

It’s on to full construction mode for the West Corridor light-rail segment, which is part of the FasTracks transit expansion program.

The Regional Transportation District announced Friday that it’s signed a construction agreement with Denver Transit Construction Group, which serves as notice for the contractor to move into major construction.

The West Corridor, a 12.1-mile light-rail project, is the first FasTracks corridor to start construction. Early work on the project began in mid-2008.

Major operations will begin along West 6th Avenue.

The West Corridor line will run between Denver Union Station and the Jefferson County Government Center in Golden. It‘s scheduled to open in 2013.

The overall FasTracks program is scheduled for completion in 2017.

Major subcontractors on the project include Edward Kraemer & Sons, Meza Construction, YEH and Associates, Inc. and American West Construction.

http://denver.bizjournals.com/denver/stories/2009/06/15/daily70.html?surround=lfn&ana=test

AFPhoto Wolf · #**971** Posted **Jun 20, 2009, 4:30 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by EngiNerd

Officially Official

http://denver.bizjournals.com/denver/stories/2009/06/15/daily70.html?surround=lfn&ana=test

This is what I was looking for!!! THANKS!!!

Eliyah78 · #**972** Posted **Jun 21, 2009, 12:31 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SnyderBock

Grey Hound was asked if they wanted to be integrated into Union Station, and they said "No Thanks."

When was this?

Eliyah78 · #**973** Posted **Jun 21, 2009, 12:42 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SnyderBock

Exactly, and with two empty platforms in the train room and the protected ROW for a third regional "through line" platform next to the light rail platform... Do you think the Union Station plan is being designed adequately within the funding constraints, to accommodate this future service?

I mean honestly, the main complaint is no through line for the main train room. That was effectively taken out forever when they built the Pepsi Center. I think the Union Station plan is about the best it's going to get, within it's design and financial constraints. And in no way, do I see it preventing future service expansions in the form of elevated or subway platforms--well into the future.

Snyder, there is far too little room to accomodate more than one Amtrack train. Passenger rail is America's emerging travel mode for the future. There are many advantages in choosing rail over air travel.

Strange Meat · #**974** Posted **Jun 21, 2009, 2:23 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cirrus

The future of intercity passenger rail in Colorado (be it Amtrak or something else) is in connecting the cities of the Front Range to each other, not in long-haul routes to LA and Chicago.

I can't see it being Amtrak, then. Most of the connections in CO would be a N-S alignment. That doesn't exactly match with the E-W travel that you'd want on a x-country type of trip through this state. I don't see much demand for, say, a New Mexico to Montana line, ya know?

SnyderBock · #**975** Posted **Jun 21, 2009, 10:12 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eliyah78

Snyder, there is far too little room to accomodate more than one Amtrack train. Passenger rail is America's emerging travel mode for the future. There are many advantages in choosing rail over air travel.

How is there not going to be enough room for more than one AmTrak train? Sure, there will only be enough for one in the station at a time. What about new AmTrak service using Union Station at different times from the existing AmTrak service? Are you telling me that an EMU platform can handle a train every 10 minutes, but an AmTrack platform can only handle a couple trains a day? There is no room for service expansion, using that platform? I don't believe this is true. Can you prove this? How many more daily AmTrak trains are you expecting?

As Cirrus said, the future of Union Station lies in regional rail, not AmTrak, that's where there will be a significant increase in service.

glowrock · #**976** Posted **Jun 21, 2009, 4:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eliyah78

Snyder, there is far too little room to accomodate more than one Amtrack train. Passenger rail is America's emerging travel mode for the future. There are many advantages in choosing rail over air travel.

Without true HSR, I dare you to come up with real advantages to train over rail right now, at least for distances of more than about 400-500 miles. I can understand rail over air for short distances, but anything more than 6-8 hours by normal-speed train is inconvenient compared to air right now.

Aaron (Glowrock)

1Post2 · #**977** Posted **Jun 22, 2009, 12:12 AM**

A few shots of west corridor construction in Lakewood Gulch near Sheridan:

SnyderBock · #**978** Posted **Jun 22, 2009, 1:21 AM**

Thanks 1post2! very nice shots.

Lorax3000 · #**979** Posted **Jun 22, 2009, 2:17 AM**

I dont understand why they are starting to build this line, I thought they would build the rout to DIA or the north West rail first. They just seem higher in priority to me.

wong21fr · #**980** Posted **Jun 22, 2009, 3:21 AM**

^The EIS was done on the West Corridor first. There were far fewer issues, such as no railroad ROW's to deal with, on the West Corridor and planning was far more advanced.