DENVER | Transportation Thread

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

It's no wonder the timelines are so far out. Those three alone are $25 billion+, and everybody thinks they should go first. And the Hickenlooper-approach to governing means you don't make anybody mad, so we have to find a way to satisfy everybody at once.

It's disingenuous to lump the US-35 and I-25 North project together with the I-70 boondoggle. Those two come in at MAYBE $4 billion, while I-70 is a $20-30 billion dollar fix as proposed. While US-36 is still a bit of a gold-plated idea (to win the Boulder liberal elite) the North I-25 idea seems to be pretty damn realistic, especially the transit in terms of getting a regional system going. For about $600 to $700 million we'd have the northern portion of the system completed. That's a pretty sweet bargain.

This IS NOT GOVERNING, what we're doing. Governing is about making choices. This is the Iraqi approach to governing - we want everything (stomp your feet), and if we can't have everything (wave your hands), we won't (thumb in face) do (shake thumb again) anything (cross arms and harumph)!

You're mistaken, the Iraqi approach is to recognize that the system doesn't work, so you treat it as a joke while taking care of the real business at night with a drill, masks, and a 9mm pistol (in the Afghanistan approach the masks and drill are abandoned). My threats and acts of violence kick the crap out of your idiotic "rule of law" because you can't do a damn thing that will effectively stop me (asides from getting your own drill, masks and 9mm pistol).

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

It's disingenuous to lump the US-35 and I-25 North project together with the I-70 boondoggle. Those two come in at MAYBE $4 billion, while I-70 is a $20-30 billion dollar fix as proposed. While US-36 is still a bit of a gold-plated idea (to win the Boulder liberal elite) the North I-25 idea seems to be pretty damn realistic, especially the transit in terms of getting a regional system going. For about $600 to $700 million we'd have the northern portion of the system completed. That's a pretty sweet bargain..

Hey, I'm all for the northern plan. (Although I was hopeful there would be a way to connect Greeley in with the rail - some alternatives had the rail running between Greeley and Ft. Collins, which almost made more sense. If we're still running a train to Longmont from DUS, there isn't really any need, I don't think, for a duplicate transfer station. Especially if you're still forcing a transfer at the North Metro end of line, which it looks like we are. (?) But this is fine too.)

I just don't know how you push that to the top - separate the cream, or whatever the old saying is - so it can actually get done. At least, as long as we're sanctioning/cranking out dream plans in other corridors. There are expectations that go along with anointing something the "preferred alternative."

[Wizened Variations]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Hey, I'm all for the northern plan. (Although I was hopeful there would be a way to connect Greeley in with the rail - some alternatives had the rail running between Greeley and Ft. Collins, which almost made more sense. If we're still running a train to Longmont from DUS, there isn't really any need, I don't think, for a duplicate transfer station. Especially if you're still forcing a transfer at the North Metro end of line, which it looks like we are. (?) But this is fine too.)

I just don't know how you push that to the top - separate the cream, or whatever the old saying is - so it can actually get done. At least, as long as we're sanctioning/cranking out dream plans in other corridors. There are expectations that go along with anointing something the "preferred alternative."

The eternal battle between politically practical, and, the dreamer...

What we really need is commuter and light rail that bypsses the urban core...But that will NOT happen.

Likewise, I-70s future fate is largely a behind the doors engineering compromise between CDOT, the Denver City Council, and, the Colorado State house. I do not believe that the citizens in the area have much say, unless there are property developers involved who are willing to sit on money for 10 years.

All will depend on how much money is available, at what cost, and, over what inflation adjusted duration. IMO, the answer, at our current economic state, is to 'repair' rather than 'move.'

[DownhomeDenver]

Originally Posted by Wizened Variations

The eternal battle between politically practical, and, the dreamer...

What we really need is commuter and light rail that bypsses the urban core...But that will NOT happen.

Likewise, I-70s future fate is largely a behind the doors engineering compromise between CDOT, the Denver City Council, and, the Colorado State house. I do not believe that the citizens in the area have much say, unless there are property developers involved who are willing to sit on money for 10 years.

All will depend on how much money is available, at what cost, and, over what inflation adjusted duration. IMO, the answer, at our current economic state, is to 'repair' rather than 'move.'

Your eloquence is grand, but not everything is a conspiracy...give me a break.

[Cirrus]

Why in god's name would we want commuter rail that bypasses the core?

If you want to build a freight bypass so we can get passengers into the core, I'm behind that, but a passenger bypass? Who would ride? DIA alone doesn't justify much of anything.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

Why in god's name would we want commuter rail that bypasses the core?

To get people to/from Pueblo as quickly as possible, of course.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by Wizened Variations

What we really need is commuter and light rail that bypsses the urban core...But that will NOT happen.

We had that, it was called the G-Line. It failed.

[DownhomeDenver]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

To get people to/from Pueblo as quickly as possible, of course.

A dancing banana? Really?

[Brainpathology]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

To get people to/from Pueblo as quickly as possible, of course.

The best way to get people from Pueblo is to have them graduate High School. The best way to get them TO Pueblo is to have them drop out of HS in any other city in CO.

[Cirrus]

^
Or stop for Taco Bell on the way to visit a relative in Cañon City!

[Brainpathology]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

^
Or stop for Taco Bell on the way to visit a relative in Cañon City!

If you stop for mexican food in Pueblo and go to Taco Bell you really don't deserve to ever leave anyway

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by DownhomeDenver

A dancing banana? Really?

Just for you.

Cirrus, you go through Pueblo to get to Canon City? Why oh why? Cut through Colorado Springs, it's so much more pleasant.

Oh riiiight. You're coming from La Junta. I forget about that part of the state sometimes.

[Cirrus]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Oh riiiight. You're coming from La Junta. I forget about that part of the state sometimes.

lol. That's exactly why.

[SnyderBock]

Ok, so back to my proposal. serve Longmont with commuter rail, but do it via the North Corridor (as CDOT as identified as the preperfed alternative) and fund it via the CDOT or a collaborative state tax passed for both CDOT and RTD, but not with FasTracks funds.

In doing so, we cut out the $1.4 billiion+ NW rail to Longmont, from the FasTracks project. But then we replace that with expanded BRT from Boulder to Longmont and perhaps a spur from Louisville to Boulder as well (Perhaps $300 million, tops, because it's not truly BRT).

Then RTD looks for ways to extend the NW Phase 1 EMU line, closer to Boulder. Perhaps with a new FasTracks tax, or perhaps with a joint CDOT/RTD state tax. But extending it only to about Table Mesa. We're talking $900 million, tops.

So that puts the NW corridor up to $1.2 billion, tops. and if you exlude the phased extensions of the NW corridor EMU rail, from FasTracks, you're only looking at the addition ~$300 million needed to expand the BRT proposal. That's a potential $1.1 billion saving off FasTracks budget. The current extimate is $1.4 billiion (or more) just for the rail.

Both options are expensive and will require additional funding. I'm just saying, if CDOT moves forward with the North corridor extension to Longmont, Loveland and Fort Collins, then why not consider just expanding the BRT from Boulder, making Boulder the hub for that BRT system. Forget the NW corridor DMU. It's already being built in Phase 1 as EMu. Maybe just extend that in phases, as EMU, as the population grows and ridership increases, over time? Forget the BNSF managed DMU corridor, that's looking pretty fail to me right now.

[bunt_q]

You still haven't said where you'd do it though. Or addressed how a very expensive EMU is superior to a BRT if you're doing it in the highway right-of-way. I am getting the impression you just have a fetish for EMU.

[bobg]

Originally Posted by SnyderBock

Ok, so back to my proposal. serve Longmont with commuter rail, but do it via the North Corridor (as CDOT as identified as the preperfed alternative) and fund it via the CDOT or a collaborative state tax passed for both CDOT and RTD, but not with FasTracks funds.

In doing so, we cut out the $1.4 billiion+ NW rail to Longmont, from the FasTracks project. But then we replace that with expanded BRT from Boulder to Longmont and perhaps a spur from Louisville to Boulder as well (Perhaps $300 million, tops, because it's not truly BRT).

Then RTD looks for ways to extend the NW Phase 1 EMU line, closer to Boulder. Perhaps with a new FasTracks tax, or perhaps with a joint CDOT/RTD state tax. But extending it only to about Table Mesa. We're talking $900 million, tops.

So that puts the NW corridor up to $1.2 billion, tops. and if you exlude the phased extensions of the NW corridor EMU rail, from FasTracks, you're only looking at the addition ~$300 million needed to expand the BRT proposal. That's a potential $1.1 billion saving off FasTracks budget. The current extimate is $1.4 billiion (or more) just for the rail.

Both options are expensive and will require additional funding. I'm just saying, if CDOT moves forward with the North corridor extension to Longmont, Loveland and Fort Collins, then why not consider just expanding the BRT from Boulder, making Boulder the hub for that BRT system. Forget the NW corridor DMU. It's already being built in Phase 1 as EMu. Maybe just extend that in phases, as EMU, as the population grows and ridership increases, over time? Forget the BNSF managed DMU corridor, that's looking pretty fail to me right now.

I like the BRT through Boulder and up to Longmont. If we are making it true BRT and removing the managed lane component as well as moving the stations to the center it could be a good long term solution.

If we keep the managed lane component than it is only a medium term solution because as congestion goes up it would be increasingly difficult to price SOV out of using it (due to politics and economics), and illegal to keep out carpoolers, motorcycles etc.

Taking out the managed lane component on construction would cut off some already secured funding sources so the price would go up beyond that 300 million (if I remember correctly 100-150 million). If we converted from managed to BRT later I am not sure on the legality of taking federal and state money to make a managed lane and then converting it, but I would guess it could be done without ruffling a few feathers if given enough time.

Also I think politically Longmont would be okay with the train later and BRT soon. I would think that's a better solution as well since Longmont gets BRT service to Boulder and eventually will get a train to Denver with an alignment that makes more sense than the one proposed. As you said the north extension also enables CDOT or whomever to extend it to Fort Collins like the North I25 plan shows.

As far as extending the train to Boulder along US 36 goes I am with bunt on this one. As long as the BRT is a viable solution having two competing modes of public transportation doing virtually the same thing and serving the same stations just doesn't make sense. If we keep the managed lanes I could see us phasing in a train later if congestion makes BRT unreliable and it is not feasible to convert managed lanes to true BRT. But in that scenario you are subtracting BRT and adding a train way off in the future so they are never competing.

[Octavian]

On this topic, NW rail corridor looking less and less viable. Latest cost estimates are $1.7 billion, and BNSF will update the cost again in 7-8 years (no doubt higher).

With costs soaring for FasTracks' NW rail line, RTD eyes no-build option

[Teshadoh]

I too will echo the argument against extending the commuter rail from Boulder to Longmont, there simply is not enough need. Expanding bus, including BRT would more than cover it. Also, Longmont should be grouped in the North Rail alignment, along with Erie / Frederick / all those other I-25 sprawl-burbs. Also, rather than trying to 'fill in' transit needs in the largely low dense / undeveloped eastern Boulder County, extend light rail out of Denver to Westminster & Broomfield & terminate the lines there. BRT & commuter rail would adequately cover Lafayette, Louisville & Superior. Also, again arguing what has already been said - make Boulder a mini-hub for rail.

Lastly, regarding the Cirrus Hook idea, why not have 2 different Boulder destinations for BRT, BRT going up along 28th to Canyon & into downtown, BRT exiting 28th around Colorado & terminating in the UC campus, & BRT splitting at Foothills covering east Boulder & extend it to Longmont. Considering traffic into Boulder is really split into 3 nearly equal destinations - east Boulder office parks, downtown & UC rather than trying to cover all in one, just run a BRT bus every 20 minutes to each node. Then US 36 has buses going to at least Table Mesa every 7 minutes or so.

[bunt_q]

Just wanted to toss in there, it's funny the assumption that Boulder needs the commuter rail more than Longmont. The EE ridership modeling had almost as many boardings in Longmont (1,150) as at the Boulder Transit Village (1,375). And arguably Downtown Longmont is a stronger station location. (edit: Broomfield barely registers in the ridership modeling; the station locations are too non-ideal, I think.)

Nevertheless, I am happy to see that sanity has entered the discussion. Linking Boulder and Longmont is easy. So if Longmont is to be part of a future regional rail system, which makes infinitely more sense (despite them being in RTD, it is really far), we're really back to only discussing the best way to link Denver and Boulder. Which is the right discussion, I think.

[Cirrus]

Originally Posted by Teshadoh

Lastly, regarding the Cirrus Hook idea, why not have 2 different Boulder destinations... just run a BRT bus every 20 minutes to each node.

Because a bus every 20 minutes is not frequent enough for people to feel comfortable hopping on and off. 15 minutes is about as much as you make people wait without forcing them to live their lives by a schedule, which dramatically reduces ridership. And even then, 15 minutes is the lowest end of what's acceptable.

Instead of one good line you have two bad ones. Getting a lot of service to Table Mesa PnR isn't the goal. The goal is penetrating that high level of service into downtown and CU, which you don't get with long headways.