DENVER | Transportation Thread

[Pizzuti]

oops... I forgot Perlmutter's district, which has a PVI of +4. So if you average them together the 4 districts (which include some very conservative areas outside the Metro area that aren't in the RTD district) have a PVI of +7.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by Pizzuti

oops... I forgot Perlmutter's district, which has a PVI of +4. So if you average them together the 4 districts (which include some very conservative areas outside the Metro area that aren't in the RTD district) have a PVI of +7.

I think you forget that, at the time, it was somewhat unexpected that Fastracks passed as easily as it did. But RTD was on a roll, coming off a couple wins with the SW and the great TREX compromise. Plus there was the Hickenlooper/regional honeymoon period. Most importantly, growth was still a problem on many peoples' minds. We forget, much of the reason RTD was so cautious with Fastracks was because the time before rail got trounced at the polls (Guide the Ride).

I also don't think transit votes party line or liberal/conservative quite as neatly as you assume.

It would be foolish to assume RTD will win this. The we-vote-yes-on-everything period of Denver's (and the metro's) voting history is a relatively recent phenomenon, and a blip overall. It's going to be a fight. RTD has still lost more of these than it's won.

[Cirrus]

Yeah, RTD has problems they didn't have for the FasTracks vote. This one will be harder.

But that having been said, for goodness sake don't make the same mistake twice. Joe Voter doesn't know or care about the abstract difference between .2 and .4 any more than he knows or cares about the difference between $4 billion and $6 billion.

People will vote for or against this depending on whether they want FasTracks, and whether they think RTD can deliver results, not whether .4 is too much more than .2. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the larger tax got MORE support, because it would be more clear that RTD could actually succeed with it. The larger tax is less risky.

Ask for what you need. No more lowballing.

[trubador]

for the people recommending that that Louisville, Boulder and Longmont get cut out of the NW corridor, do you feel that there should be some sort of incentive for them since they have been paying the tax since this passed and may never get the benefit they were promised.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by trubador

for the people recommending that that Louisville, Boulder and Longmont get cut out of the NW corridor, do you feel that there should be some sort of incentive for them since they have been paying the tax since this passed and may never get the benefit they were promised.

No. That corridor is still seeing a ton of investment under Fastracks. What about the parts of the District that were never going to get any new investment under Fastracks (apart from fancier bus stops)?

How about most of the southwest metro/Jefferson County? The mountain communities - should they get to opt out? What about Brighton? They're really getting the shaft.

It doesn't work that way. I've never called the fire department, yet I pay for it. Most folks have never been to a Broncos game, yet they paid for the stadium too.

[Pizzuti]

First off, there was already a Boulder-Denver bus route before FasTracks. I used to take it in college before the 2004 election. It was not substantially faster than the current route. They expanded some of the stops on HWY 36 but that's hardly relevant to Boulderites who skip those stops to get to Market Street Station. FasTracks has not added substantial services to the corridor. There were some upgrades but nothing on the scale of what the project promises with a train to Denver.

If a BRT corridor were a welcome replacement for rail, why not turn all of FasTracks into bus corridors like the Independence Institute wanted? The fact is that bus routes are not a replacement for rail.

Unlike Mountain Jeffco, people in Boulder actually want light rail... it's one of the most pro-transit subcommunities in the Metro area, they use the transit they have at very high rates, they are a major base of voters who are willing to pay higher taxes for it, and they are already planning the transit village, which the community is engaged in. In fact, if you launched a ballot initiative in only part of the RTD district, Boulder, I am almost certain they would raise the taxes to get a rail connection to Denver. Based on my experiences in different parts of the Metro Area, Boulder is one of the places were the rail connection is most highly anticipated and talked about.

A high percentage of people in Boulder do not own cars, probably the highest percentage in the Metro area besides Denver. Also unlike Mountain Jeffco, the NW corridor actually sweeps across very densely-populated areas in which transit is feasible and practical. People in Nederland still get to use the corridor if they come to Boulder, but if you scrap the whole section... then what?

Boulder also has a campus of tens of thousands of students, many of whom, again, do not have cars. Bicycle usage is through the roof there and a train would have more room to bring a bicycle than a bus does. This is a chance to get a huge base of riders to start going Downtown more often. Most college students have cars by the time they graduate. This is a chance to keep them as transit users for a long time, and really encourage them to start their adult and working lives without vehicles.

Besides, not only would you scrap Boulder from the plan, you'd lose Westminster, Broomfield, Superior and Lafayette. They are all expecting the rail. It would be REALLY tragic if the planned rail TOD of the re-developed Westminster Mall were sacrificed by scrapping the NW corridor. Or the TOD planned near the Westminster Promenade, another highly pedestrian-activated area where people would be eager to start using transit. Westminster is the 7th biggest municipality in the state and it currently has ZERO light rail passing through it without the NW corridor. Flatirons Crossing is perhaps the last big shopping mall center in Denver and putting transit there would also transition it into something more sustainable than a commercial-only mall, in which case it will become blighted over time and be re-developed into... what? Without transit there are few options, and it is not easily transit-accessible now with a long and awkward walk to the bus stop.

You're talking about shaving billions off of FasTracks to cancel the route to Boulder, but in reality it would be unlikely that every stop on the way would be canceled; most likely you'd have a route that stops somewhere in Westminster, because, like I said, Westminster is a large population area that is as dense and as in need of transit as any other corridor. So you're still paying half the price (since stops are more expensive than track) and just not getting to the most advantageous destinations where high numbers of people anticipate the project.

The Boulder-Longmont section is probably less useful than any other part of the route. But then again, Longmont has a lot of working-class communities and high potential for transit usage. Boulder-Longmont is your launching pad for a Front Range Corridor to Fort Collins, and I highly doubt that the voter base in Longmont would stand for being cut from the corridor as one of the more conservative parts of the district, more apprehensive about supporting something they don't directly benefit from.

[Pizzuti]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

No. That corridor is still seeing a ton of investment under Fastracks. What about the parts of the District that were never going to get any new investment under Fastracks (apart from fancier bus stops)?

How about most of the southwest metro/Jefferson County? The mountain communities - should they get to opt out? What about Brighton? They're really getting the shaft.

It doesn't work that way. I've never called the fire department, yet I pay for it. Most folks have never been to a Broncos game, yet they paid for the stadium too.

Yes, maybe mountain Jeffco SHOULD opt out of RTD. I don't know what services there are now but it's not as though the tax base is huge and if they're not benefiting from it, then yes, maybe they should not be part of RTD, which is a metropolitan, not rural, transportation system.

[SnyderBock]

RTD is not considering canceling the NW rail corridor, under any of the scenarios, not even the worst case scenario. Even in the worst case scenario, Boulder get rail service by like 2038 and Longmont by 2042. If ANY additional funding is found for FasTracks over the next few years, this all gets accelerated. I think it will prove highly unlikely that both Boulder and Longmont will be without rail service after 2027 (Boulder by 2024 and Longmont by 2027). It is certainly possible they will have it sooner than this. It is not likely they will never get this rail corridor. So really, this current debate is pointless.

[Cirrus]

No one disagrees that Boulder is a good transit destination or that lots of people will use transit between Boulder and Denver.

The problem is that the plan to send a train to Boulder absolutely sucks, because it doesn't go to either of Boulder's big transit-trip generators: downtown or the university. It has one piddling stop out in the suburbs, which is basically useless.

On the other hand, the BRT option actually sends the transit where the riders are. It sends buses right to the university and downtown.

While everyone agrees that trains are generally better than buses, it's even more important for your transit line to actually reach its riders, and in the NW corridor only the BRT does that.

The train is there exclusively for emotional reasons. It's there so RTD can say they are giving Boulder a train, but it won't be useful. The BRT is what people will use, because it goes where people want to go.

[Denver Dweller]

Denver Business Journal - by Cathy Proctor
Date: Tuesday, February 8, 2011, 10:44am MST

Cathy Proctor
Reporter
Email: [email protected]

The Colorado Public Utilities Commission is seeking public comment on whether to silence warning bells and horns along RTD’s proposed West Corridor light rail line.

The Regional Transportation District in October 2010 asked the PUC for permission to build “quiet crossings” at 11 intersections along the West Corridor light rail line. The line will run from Denver’s downtown area to the Jefferson County administration building in Golden.

RTD plans to have gates, equipped with flashing lights, at the crossings that would come down and stop cars. But neighborhood groups have expressed concerns about noise from warning bells on the gates and horns on the trains, said Kathy Berumen, a spokeswoman for the Denver Transit Construction Group (DTCG). DTCG is the contractor that’s building the line.

When the line is finished in 2013, there will be 294 trains per day going through the intersections between downtown and the Federal Center in Lakewood, and 168 between the Federal Center and the Jefferson County administration building, she said.

“Neighbors are concerned about the noise,” Berumen said.

The PUC oversees the intersection of public roads and rail lines in Colorado. In December, the PUC granted RTD’s request to build light rail tracks through the intersections, but referred the question of “quiet crossings” to an administrative law judge.

Given that the proposed crossings were near neighborhoods and at least one school, the judge decided to hold a public comment meeting on the issue. The judge also will look at the timing operations of the gates and how the gates will impact traffic on nearby streets, according to the PUC.

The judge will take public comment on the issue Feb. 17 at 4 p.m. at the PUC’s offices at 1560 Broadway, Suite 250, Denver.

The intersections suggested for “quiet crossings” are where the light rail line crosses these streets: Carr, Estes, Garrison, Harlan, Independence, Lamar, Oak, Perry, Pierce, Teller and Knox Court.

The PUC expects RTD will file more than 150 applications regarding the intersection of FasTracks rail lines and Denver area streets.

[Brainpathology]

Gotta love the neighbors...I recall in an ER rotation the noises from traumatic amputations are pretty unpleasant too. Though the kind of people running through gates or trying to beat the lights and gates aren't the creme de la creme of society either. I'm sure I can have fun cynically teasing whatever side wins this ... so it's a win win I guess.

[Pizzuti]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

No one disagrees that Boulder is a good transit destination or that lots of people will use transit between Boulder and Denver.

The problem is that the plan to send a train to Boulder absolutely sucks, because it doesn't go to either of Boulder's big transit-trip generators: downtown or the university. It has one piddling stop out in the suburbs, which is basically useless.

On the other hand, the BRT option actually sends the transit where the riders are. It sends buses right to the university and downtown.

While everyone agrees that trains are generally better than buses, it's even more important for your transit line to actually reach its riders, and in the NW corridor only the BRT does that.

The train is there exclusively for emotional reasons. It's there so RTD can say they are giving Boulder a train, but it won't be useful. The BRT is what people will use, because it goes where people want to go.

But local bus routes can be easily made to transfer to rail in Boulder. The Transit Village stop is on Pearl, to the East. I could easily see Boulder starting a shuttle or circulator that runs down Pearl and when it approaches the Mall it would hop over to Spruce/Walnut, each being a 1-way street, cross over with a major stop on Broadway. In addition to being a retail magnet, that is a very densely populated neighborhood.

The Transit Village itself also has potential of being a densely-populated area. Boulder's significant growth restrictions are probably the most controversial aspect of the town - they don't want to increase Boulder's footprint, or block views of the mountains with vertical development. But a large amount of the future growth will probably take place with re-development of the warehouse district, which surrounds the Transit Village site. There are already big housing developments popping up behind the Target, which I'm assuming is in anticipation of the area becoming much denser.

Louisville is also a major residential area for CU students who can't afford to live in Boulder, and the line connects through Louisville.

I agree that the plan misses the most crucial parts of town but I still think people will shift to using rail. It is the kind of community that makes very intentional decisions about its long-term plans.

[wong21fr]

^Hey if Boulder to DT Denver commuters are dumb enough to add another 15-20 minutes to their commute just so they can feel good about themselves because they take the train than more power to them.

Some transit patterns in Boulder will change, but I just don't see people opting to take the transit option that is significantly longer time-wise just because it's a train.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by Pizzuti

But local bus routes can be easily made to transfer to rail in Boulder. The Transit Village stop is on Pearl, to the East. I could easily see Boulder starting a shuttle or circulator that runs down Pearl and when it approaches the Mall it would hop over to Spruce/Walnut, each being a 1-way street, cross over with a major stop on Broadway. In addition to being a retail magnet, that is a very densely populated neighborhood.

The Transit Village itself also has potential of being a densely-populated area. Boulder's significant growth restrictions are probably the most controversial aspect of the town - they don't want to increase Boulder's footprint, or block views of the mountains with vertical development. But a large amount of the future growth will probably take place with re-development of the warehouse district, which surrounds the Transit Village site. There are already big housing developments popping up behind the Target, which I'm assuming is in anticipation of the area becoming much denser.

Louisville is also a major residential area for CU students who can't afford to live in Boulder, and the line connects through Louisville.

I agree that the plan misses the most crucial parts of town but I still think people will shift to using rail. It is the kind of community that makes very intentional decisions about its long-term plans.

It will still take longer. I did that commute from Louisville to Boulder. And I would not have used this train. Have you even looked at the plan? Yes, the area will densify and fill in, sure. And yes, there will be a circulator. But circulator's take time. If I had had to take the Hop from old Crossroads Mall to CU after coming into Boulder, it would have literally doubled my commute. This will be the same way. A circulator is going to take 20 minutes minimum to move folks from the Transit Village to CU. 30 average probably with transfer wait time. That's not bad. But there's no way that'll beat the existing bus network or the BRT. And the modeling shows this. Bus-to-rail transfers (and vice versa) are expected to be close to nil. That station is a walking (for those who happen to be close enough) and park-n-ride station, PERIOD.

What are you basing your belief on that people will shift to rail? The bus will be better. Are you that anti-BRT, that you would add time to your daily commute? You seem to be on some sort of crusade here, denying stuff that is plainly in the EIS, almost Eeyore-like. I don't get it. We're all transit supporters. This is just a dumb plan. (And if you had been part of the process early on, you would know it was done for political reasons, not because it was the best transit solution. In fact, the reason it was so strong of a compromise politically was because leaders in the corridor expected people to react to the prospect of rail exactly like you are - ooh, yummy - without putting an ounce of thought or research into it. Your reaction, and the reactions of people like you, is to blame, and is exactly why we got two half corridors instead of one good one. Score is US 36 Area Politicians 1, Technocrats 0.)

[Pizzuti]

Wow, get a little more froth in your mouth and make yourself a cappuccino.

I don't even live in Boulder. But the idea of equity in tax-funded investment is not political hackery - it a goal of a democratic system. I bet the feds could get more ridership per dollar putting the money they poured into FasTracks into U.S. North Eastern projects, but they don't, Colorado deserves some transit investment, and it's for moral reasons as much as political reasons. Transit itself costs more in tax dollars per ride than roads do, but again, equity is important - people who do not drive cars, who are elderly or have disabilities or who are too poor to own vehicles, need to get around, and transit is also an investment in the future. I am quite influenced utilitarian ideas when it comes to spending on transit but the fact is that the NW corridor would represent a gaping hole in the metro area rail system if it was eliminated, affecting far more than just Boulder. Westminster, Broomfield, Longmont, Louisville and Boulder have a combined population of almost 400K.

Rail isn't the whole transit system, it's the spine that other routes - bus, shuttle, streetcar, whatever you want to envision - connect to. Rail has a higher capacity than bus, and more opportunity for upgrades in capacity than bus. The NW Corridor isn't the endpoint for transit in the area, just as FasTracks isn't the endpoint of transit in the Metro area. The NW Corridor It connects to other routes. It connects to future developments. It runs through Longmont, which can later connect to Fort Collins, by bus or rail. It can be upgraded for faster trains. And it aligned to be accessible to distances that are not directly accessible by bus; the Louisville does not follow HWY-36 exactly.

I understand and can respect arguments on both sides of the NW rail corridor argument, but I side with principles of fairness when it comes to investment, I do not have to work hard to come up with ideas for why it is positive as far as transit accessibility, and beyond that, politics do matter when you need public support for a system. That is not a despicable position as you make it out to be. I am also quite friendly to the argument that rural areas of Jefferson and Boulder county do not belong in RTD if they don't gain anything from it - I'm not sure what sort of access is there but I'd believe it isn't a fair deal, and it's not something that RTD gains significantly from anyway. RTD DOES, however, gain significantly from the Northwest Metro area, Boulder, and Longmont.

[Cirrus]

the fact is that the NW corridor would represent a gaping hole in the metro area rail system if it was eliminated

But see, that's just not true. It just isn't. Assuming you are still talking only about the rail aspect of the plan, it is patently and completely false that eliminating NW rail eliminates those communities from the plan.

The BRT project is a $500 million project, including the highway elements. It's a half-billion dollar project that will move thousands of transit riders a day, and you're pretending it doesn't exist just because it's not a train.

You may as well be telling us that 2+2=7, because what you're saying is factually wrong, no ifs ands or buts about it.

[bcp]

i was interpreting that as "if we lost boulder to longmont" the world would not end...that could EASILY be a less expensive BRT extension rather than a very, very long rail segment....its not like HSR is going to happen soon and we would still have the right of way. if so many other lines have been phased / capped at around 20-25 miles, why not this one? from DT to longmont must be what...40 miles?

[bunt_q]

Once this thing is up an running, RTD will find itself forced to continue running buses from Longmont to Denver anyways, just like happened with the P bus. That'll be embarrassing for the train.

I am confused about all of this talk that pops up every now and then about extending the Longmont line to Fort Collins. No, absolutely not. They are not part of RTD. (And they never will be, nor should they be.) Not part of RTD means they do not get to piggyback on RTD-voters' capital investments. The Board will never allow it, nor should they. If we're doing Front Range rail, it has to be a state thing, or a new district. And if they want the RTD ROW to use, they're going to have to reimburse RTD for it, plain and simple. Or RTD could just sell it to them - then we'll be mighty happy we have the BRT for our metro transit back-up.

My how times have changed though. I never thought I would hear anybody defend the equities of Fastracks w.r.t. the NW corridor - the only corridor in the metro that got TWO lines.

[Cirrus]

I am confused about all of this talk that pops up every now and then about extending the Longmont line to Fort Collins. No, absolutely not. They are not part of RTD. (And they never will be, nor should they be.) Not part of RTD means they do not get to piggyback on RTD-voters' capital investments. The Board will never allow it, nor should they. If we're doing Front Range rail, it has to be a state thing, or a new district. And if they want the RTD ROW to use, they're going to have to reimburse RTD for it, plain and simple.

Good point, but I'm not sure I agree. If we do a separate agency or tax district for Front Range rail then most of the population for it will still be within RTD, so what's the difference if RTD picks up some of capital costs that fall within its boundaries? Considering that construction costs are lower now than they're likely to be in the future, it would save Denver-area taxpayers money to do it now. If the same people are going to be paying to build the same thing anyway, then do it now for less cost and headache.

When it comes to extending it out of the District and to operating the trains, then yeah you absolutely need a new agency. But I can't say I have a problem with Front Range rail running on tracks south of Longmont built by RTD any more than I have a problem with RTD buses running on streets built by CDOT.

... 'Couse, that having been said, I still think we should cancel the NW rail line in order to fund better stuff elsewhere. I just don't think your particular argument there is the reason.

[trubador]

gotta agree with the people about the transit village in boulder. Right now the buses stop right by the university and end downtown so it is very convenient and would be much less so if they go with a village east of town.

Image if instead of stopping at union station they decide that have a transit station at colfax and federal made more sense, do you think ridership would decrease?

that being said, it is a problem that boulder created for themselves. By now allowing any expansion, they are so densely developed (not vertically) in town, there is no were to put a rail unless it goes underground.