DENVER | Transportation Thread

[EngiNerd]

edit: nevermind

[taylor23]

Originally Posted by The Dirt

Can someone tell my why the North line and the East line aren't using the same ROW between DUS and I-70? As far as I can tell from the RTD maps, these are the ROWs that the lines will be using:

Red - East line to DIA
Blue - North line to Thornton
Purple - Northwest line to Westminster
Green - Gold line spur to Arvada

Why wouldn't the North line use the same alignment as the East line to about 40th and then split north, through the heart of Elyria Swansea (dashed teal line). First, RTD would be able to save money by sharing the ROW for over 1 mile. Second, this alignment would better serve residential neighborhoods in Elyria Swansea, rather than cutting through 2-3 miles of industrial land.

Good question. It might be to serve the Coliseum and avoid the Sand Creek junction area. I can see the advantage of having more convention space connected to downtown via rail.

[The Dirt]

I can also see the argument that this would allow for faster travel times from the suburbs into downtown, since the industrial properties will not need any stops. However, it appears that the current North alignment would allow for a TOD around 48th and Brighton Blvd.

[taylor23]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

^Boulder ridership numbers for the NW corridor are so low that it would be nice if you could just cut Boulder out completely and head straight up to Longmont.

Maybe then the NW corridor could be billed as the initial leg of a Front Range rail line.

It is interesting you brought this up. Page 4-86 of the EIS mentions a future commuter rail extension to Ft. Collins. Not till 2055-2075 though.

Also looks like it would connect to the NW rail end of line. At least they are thinking about the future.

http://www.rtd-fastracks.com/media/uploads/nm/FEIS_Chapter_4_Transportation.pdf

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by SnyderBock

The freight rail company, BNSF, has said they would not approve their freight trains for operating under EMU catenary electrical lines. Beyond the Westminster station, the EMU's will actually share and run on freight tracks. So to extend the EMU's farther, either BNSF would have to reconsider and choose to allow that (which there really isn't a good reason for them not to), or RTD would have to acquire additional ROW and build all new track.

I vaguely recalled something to that affect.

Given the previous discussion of ridership from Boulder, let alone from Longmont.......

Assuming passage of an additional tax, but given the realities of the marketplace going forward ie. prices of commodities etc, I'm making the assumption that build-out may indeed exceed $8 billion.

I'm suggesting that for the purposes of "fastracks" funding they give up the idea of running trains beyond Broomfield.

Under that scenario, I would prefer they secure the needed ROW and extend the line to Broomfield using EMU's.

With the unpredictability of actual costs, RTD needs some sense of priorities. The idea of giving everybody at least something has been the most popular with the area's mayors (as apposed to maybe getting nothing).

[SnyderBock]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

^
Those aren't the only two options. There is such a thing as a diesel passenger train.

Here are some nice examples.

That's fine, but Diesel passenger trains were eliminated in the EIS process. To lower maintenance costs, it was determined that one model of train should be used on all the commuter rail corridors, but have both an EMU and DMU variant available, so each corridor could use which one was best for it's needs and to allow for interchangeability, service flexibility, less costly maintanence and future electrification of initially un-electrified segments.

Or as in with the NW Corridor, a combination will be used. The EMU's will run to Westminster and eventually the DMU's will run to Westminster (providing the most frequent service for this inner segment which will require more frequent service), but then continue on farther down the un-electrified line to additional stations in Boulder and Longmont on the lower headways.

The North Corridor may eventually do something similar. It will be possible for DMU's to eventually run past the electrified portions of the North Corridor, to say, such a destination, as Greeley. It will also be possible to interlace DMU's service onto the East and Gold corridor EMU lines, if ever needed. This could allow RTD to provide nonstop service from Golden to DIA and from Longmont-Boulder to DIA. And of course, well into the future, any DMU tracks could be upgraded to EMU, as needed. There will be great system flexibility and simplicity in maintenance by using Silverliner V, EMU's & DMU's.

[TakeFive]

Another thing being over-looked or ignored, is there is no assurances of how much additional funding support will be forthcoming from the Feds, given the changing political "climate" and budgetary issues.


RTD, is only going to get (hopefully) one more bight at the apple. They should think BOLD..... They should ask for an additional tax of 0.5% for five years, 0.4% for four years, 0.3% for three years, and 0.2% thereafter.

Arizona/Phoenix Metro reflexively elects anti-tax politicians. HOWEVER, when given the opportunity to vote on $'s designated for IDENTIFIED purposes, voters have three times in recent months SHOCKED the politicians by approving tax/expenditures.

Last May the voters EASILY approved a full ONE PERCENT increase in the sales tax. I now pay 9.3% +/-. The purpose for the increase (???)... the (soft) promise not to slash education/health care budgets. The one caveat here, is that the sales tax increase was limited to a "stop-gap" period of three years.

But given how easily it passed, and knowing how discriminating Denver area voters can be, I fear the RTD may not be bold enough and end up falling short, again, for the necessary $'s to complete Fastracks.

RTD, etal needs to rally, fund, and build the damn choo choo's

[SnyderBock]

Originally Posted by The Dirt

Can someone tell my why the North line and the East line aren't using the same ROW between DUS and I-70? As far as I can tell from the RTD maps, these are the ROWs that the lines will be using:

...
Red - East line to DIA
Blue - North line to Thornton
Purple - Northwest line to Westminster
Green - Gold line spur to Arvada

Why wouldn't the North line use the same alignment as the East line to about 40th and then split north, through the heart of Elyria Swansea (dashed teal line). First, RTD would be able to save money by sharing the ROW for over 1 mile. Second, this alignment would better serve residential neighborhoods in Elyria Swansea, rather than cutting through 2-3 miles of industrial land.

The reason they use separate ROW's for the East and North Corridor, is not because RTD wanted to. It's because it was actually cheaper. The reason it was cheaper, is because that little railroad segment from the East Corridor, through Swansea neighborhood to the North corridor is owned by Union Pacific (UP) railroad company.

UP told RTD, they would agree to negotiate and sell this ROW to RTD for FasTracks. However, when it came time to sit down at the table, UP requested about three times more for this small stretch of railroad, than appraisers said it was worth, but also demanded RTD purchase land in Fort Morgan to relocate the rail yard that lies on this land between the east and north corridors. And then UP said RTD would have to pay for the construction of this new rail yard and that it needed to be a state of the art, modern rail yard costing nearly $1 billion which would make it the most technologically advanced rail yard in North America. All total, UP wanted RTD to float well over $1 billion to acquire this small segment of railroad from them.

So RTD said no and instead acquired the new ROW for the north corridor which you see planned now (RTD bought this ROW from BNSF for like 10-15% of the cost UP was going to charge for their ROW). Then RTD touted that this new ROW will loose the transfer station with the east and central corridors at the 38th/38th street station, but would gain a station at the Denver Coliseum and Stock Show & Rodeo grounds.

[TakeFive]

That there is some darn good information. I sorta remembered there were some shenanigans, but couldn't remember who tried to to what to whom.... so to speak.

It's neat when one has such great insight and shares it, right here on the forum.

[The Dirt]

Thanks, Snyder! I had no idea this was related to to the UP ROW purchase.

[Cirrus]

Originally Posted by SnyderBock

That's fine, but Diesel passenger trains were eliminated in the EIS process. To lower maintenance costs, it was determined that one model of train should be used on all the commuter rail corridors, but have both an EMU and DMU variant available... with the NW Corridor, a combination will be used. The EMU's will run to Westminster and eventually the DMU's will run to Westminster

I'm confused by your post. DMUs are diesel passenger trains. The D stands for diesel.

If RTD is already buying a DMU model, that means RTD is already buying a train that can reach Fort Collins with no additional investment other than track usage rights and fuel. It means you could extend the Longmont train to Fort Collins the day after the Boulder train opened, as long as you had a few million dollars per year in operating funds.

[SnyderBock]

Cirrus, I thought you were referring to Diesel Locomotive (push/pull) units, with full passenger (un-powered) cars between the locomotive units. When you said, "those aren't the only two options," I thought the "two options" we were referring to were EMU and DMU. So when you said the other option in addition to those two was Diesel passenger train, I thought you meant in addition to EMU and DMU, there was also Diesel Passenger train. So I then assumed you meant locomotive units, instead of multiple units.

[Cirrus]

Oh. No, I meant that catenary EMUs and building new tracks aren't the only options. Diesel (whether traditional or DMU) lets you use the existing freight tracks.

[The Dirt]

This just got interesting. The metro area mayors caucus is recommending the .4 cent sales tax increase.

http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/news/2011/02/03/mayors-recommend-fastracks-tax.html

[bunt_q]

Interesting indeed. Maybe they're right... RTD (staff especially) has been overly cautious from the beginning, which is part of what got us here. Maybe the mayors are right. Mayors (politicians) are, by their nature, more politically savvy than RTD, right? Voters vote yes or no. I'm not sure there are that many voters who'd say yes to 0.2%, but not to 0.4%. Not sure voters really grasp the scale either way, or care. Maybe seeing progress in our lifetimes is more important to voters than an extra 2 cents on a $10 purchase.

I'd like to see some polling on that specific question.

[SnyderBock]

Could RTD shoot for the 0.4% increase and if it fails, come back in a year or two and try the more conservative 0.2% approach?

[bcp]

i know there is a principal at work here of RTD "keeping their promises" etc within budget...but damn, lets just get this done. does anybody EVER "feel" the current tax? seriously, its miniscule...i vote for 0.5% tax and lets make an even better system with the extra money (i.e. broadway, colfax, federal, speer...)

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Interesting indeed. Maybe they're right... RTD (staff especially) has been overly cautious from the beginning, which is part of what got us here. Maybe the mayors are right. Mayors (politicians) are, by their nature, more politically savvy than RTD, right? Voters vote yes or no. I'm not sure there are that many voters who'd say yes to 0.2%, but not to 0.4%. Not sure voters really grasp the scale either way, or care. Maybe seeing progress in our lifetimes is more important to voters than an extra 2 cents on a $10 purchase.

I'd like to see some polling on that specific question.

The timing seems to be the key portion to voters support. 0.4% polled quite a bit higher (58% to 51%) over the 0.2% I think because it included the completion times. People really seem to be of the mindset that they want the system done, and they want it done NOW.

I do hope that RTD does figure out some way to keep at least the initial 0.4% increase. I'd rather have some funding in the pipeline than nothing at all when the time comes to expand it again.

[The Dirt]

I think that people would feel more compelled to pay more for a shorter amount of time to get something quickly rather than pay less for a longer amount of time to get something way down the road.

[Pizzuti]

I think we often think of the metro area as being more conservative than it really is. Colorado as a whole is basically a swing state, but the 3 congressional districts that constitute the Denver area (and some surrounding rural areas) have a PVI of: D+21 (Denver - DeGette), D+11 (Boulder/North Metro/Foothills - Polis), and R+8 (South Metro/Castle Rock/Near Plains - Coffman).

Those average together to D+8. By comparison, the congressional district that Dennis Kucinich represents is D+8. So the Metro area/RTD district would feasibly elect Dennis Kucinich.