DENVER | Transportation Thread

[wong21fr]

^You know, if Boulder and Longmont want the train, how about cutting out the BRT to save on costs? Every other line has seen the elimination of express lines once rail comes online, do the same with Boulder and Longmont and kill the regional and express buses. It would also increase the rail ridership by forcing all of the bus users onto rail. It may dramatically increase their commute times, but who the f**k cares? They'll get their rail and they better be damn happy.

[bunt_q]

Louisville has the only station on the line that actually goes near the center of their town, of course they want to keep it.

Here's what's going to happen. RTD won't get agreement from anybody on a reduced scope. So we'll wait until 2040 for the whole package, whatever the cost. RTD will ask for an increase to speed things up. And voters will kill it. And in 5 years, we'll be exactly where are today.

I think it would be great if the North Metro could qualify for federal funding (US 36 never will), leaving only the northwest plus a few extensions unfunded and waiting...and waiting...and waiting. Fortunately, since there's no growth in Boulder, or really around many of the commuter rail stations, it won't much matter that it waits until 2040. Growth will continue to cluster around the highway, someday CDOT will find money for the road improvements, and the bus service will get incrementally better, with or without Fastracks, with or without BRT.

[Cirrus]

Originally Posted by wong

if Boulder and Longmont want the train, how about cutting out the BRT to save on costs? It may dramatically increase their commute times, but who the f**k cares? They'll get their rail and they better be damn happy.

Because at the end of the day we're all a bunch of bleeding heart liberals who really do want to make the world a better place, and the damn train isn't effective.

Originally Posted by bunt

RTD won't get agreement from anybody on a reduced scope. So we'll wait until 2040 for the whole package, whatever the cost. RTD will ask for an increase to speed things up. And voters will kill it. And in 5 years, we'll be exactly where are today.

Maybe, but I think it's worth it to fight for the right answer at least once. If we're nowhere 5 years from now, then we can talk about floating wong's suggestion to kill the BRT and put all the money into rail.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

Maybe, but I think it's worth it to fight for the right answer at least once. If we're nowhere 5 years from now, then we can talk about floating wong's suggestion to kill the BRT and put all the money into rail.

I certainly agree. But if the process is the same consensus-driven, don't make anybody mad/satisfy everybody affair that the original US 36 process was... well, then we won't be fighting long. (And now we add in the "deserve" argument to complicate matters further.) I could be wrong, but given how RTD has responded to public outcry in the past, I think they'll give it one look, maybe two, and if a solution doesn't present itself quickly, they'll back off. (And save their political capital for the election. It's the American way, after all... the easiest answer to forcing only some people to stomach cuts is to ask for more money all around, so everybody is satisfied, and nobody gets cut.)

Killing the BRT won't be anymore acceptable than killing the rail. Superior/Broomfield get as much out of the bus as the rail.

No, I think it'll go exactly as I described. I hope I'm wrong, of course.

[Cirrus]

I am curious what this sort of package would cost, what the ridership effects would be, and how people would respond.

Cirrus' Package #4:

• Keep the rail to Longmont.
• Eliminate the BRT and all associated bus capital improvements, but increase frequencies on the B bus to average every 15 minutes.
• Build a streetcar from 30th Street to downtown, then south along Broadway to either Baseline or Table Mesa PnR.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

I am curious what this sort of package would cost, what the ridership effects would be, and how people would respond.

Cirrus' Package #4:

• Keep the rail to Longmont.
• Eliminate the BRT and all associated bus capital improvements, but increase frequencies on the B bus to average every 15 minutes.
• Build a streetcar from 30th Street to downtown, then south along Broadway to either Baseline or Table Mesa PnR.

That's the status quo. Nearly all of the planned Fastracks bus improvements (unless there's a real BRT option later) are complete. It's the train alone bankrupting Fastracks now. The B/BF/BMX/BV/BX headways are already less than 15 minutes now at peak, I believe (less off-peak, but that's not the problem).

So...

Train: $1.7 billion
Bus frequencies: n/a to a couple million
Streetcar (say, 4-5 miles, plus maintenance facility?): $200 million

That doesn't save any money. We're trying to get back down to the funded $894 million, not increase it further.

I think Wong was saying get rid of the B bus to save money, if they want the train so badly. That would certainly help with the ongoing operational costs...

[The Dirt]

I think the idea of the BRT (or branch of) going down Interlocken/96th/Hwy 42 really needs to be sold hard to Louisville. That's really the best non-rail alternative out there. Highway 42 is only 2-3 blocks east of the current tracks that are adjacent to downtown Louisville. The BRT down US-36 is adjacent to the suburban downtown of Louisville so, they would have a pretty big win on their hands. They just need better pedestrian/bike connectivity over the tracks and they'll have better access than the folks along US-36... who will be PnR users anyway.

Better yet, RTD needs to leverage Lafayette. They would benefit from the above BRT as long as it cuts east along S. Boulder Rd then north along Hwy 287. They're in the RTD zone and they contribute just as much as Louisville, but with original rail and BRT plans, they essentially had no access. Going up 287 also hits Erie and a few employment and shopping centers. This should get the Erie folks on board, too.

[Cirrus]

Originally Posted by bunt

Nearly all of the planned Fastracks bus improvements are complete.

Really? What got built?

[SnyderBock]

How about this...

Option 5:
-Two DMU train departures from Louisville to DUS in the morning
-Two DMU train departures from DUS to Louisville in the afternoon
-BRT from Boulder to Louisville train depot
-BRT enhancements along US36 with feeder busses to US36 BRT stations and NW Rail Stations, from various places along the corridor.
-BRT or near-BRT service between DUS and Longmont, via 287, also serving Erie and Lafayette
-BRT from Boulder to Longmont via Diagnal Highway
-With the future option to extend the NW Rail DMU service, if/when feasible and funded to Boulder and Longmont
-Plus also a long-term plan to coordinate with the CDOT on eventually extending the North corridor service to Longmont, Loveland and Fort Collins.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

Really? What got built?

Mostly ramp, stop, park-n-ride improvements, little stuff. The big one was the new Broomfield park-n-ride with US 36 slip ramps for the buses. Here's the list: http://www.rtd-fastracks.com/media/uploads/us36/Phase_I_fact_sheet_2010.pdf

I think that's everything that was envisioned as part of Fastracks I. CDOT is working on extending the HOV lanes as far as Flatirons, but that's barely on RTD's radar from the sound of it.

Not really what we envisioned for Boulder BRT back in '03, is it?

[mr1138]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Mostly ramp, stop, park-n-ride improvements, little stuff. The big one was the new Broomfield park-n-ride with US 36 slip ramps for the buses. Here's the list: http://www.rtd-fastracks.com/media/uploads/us36/Phase_I_fact_sheet_2010.pdf

I think that's everything that was envisioned as part of Fastracks I. CDOT is working on extending the HOV lanes as far as Flatirons, but that's barely on RTD's radar from the sound of it.

Not really what we envisioned for Boulder BRT back in '03, is it?

I always thought the major part was still yet to come, with new Wadsworth and Sheridan interchanges with US-36 and highway widening as far as McCaslin. I think that is the "Join US36 project, partially funded by FasTracks" mentioned in the fact sheet you posted. I seem to remember heated debates a few years back between Boulder and Louisville about whether or not to bring a 6-lane highway into Boulder (Boulder seems to think that it will bring "more cars" into town in spite of the fact that the city is barely growing, and Louisville didn't understand why you would drop from 6 to 4 lanes at McCaslin when the majority of commuters are on their way to Boulder). Am I mistaken that highway widening (and I believe a bike path as well) was always/still is part of the plan?

[bunt_q]

It's part of a plan, yes. But an unfunded (like everything around here) CDOT plan. I don't know off-hand how much Fastracks money is slated to be contributed, but from CDOT's perspective I am sure it is small and insignificant. But RTD has done what RTD is going to do (pending the outcome of these new discussions on the train).

[glowrock]

Soo....

Has anyone seen the article in today's Post describing the upcoming $300+ million Phase I of the Boulder Turnpike reconstruction project that's starting up shortly, followed by a Phase II to begin early next year? Seems like the HOV/Bus/HOT lane extend all the way to past McCaslin, and shortly all the way to Table Mesa. I'd say that makes it really easy to claim BRT, especially if you have some dedicated ramps for bus use only.

Aaron (Glowrock)

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

It's part of a plan, yes. But an unfunded (like everything around here) CDOT plan. I don't know off-hand how much Fastracks money is slated to be contributed, but from CDOT's perspective I am sure it is small and insignificant. But RTD has done what RTD is going to do (pending the outcome of these new discussions on the train).

RTD is proving $120 million for the first phase of the US-36 expansion, up to Table Mesa I believe, and has another $100 million slated for the second phase.

Providing a third of the funding for the project is not an insignificant portion IMO.

[bunt_q]

That's pretty good I suppose, but is that part of the Fastracks money that exists, or part of the "someday" money I wonder (Phase 2, I mean.)? I'll have to do some reading later.

I should have said partially funded. Somebody should post the map from today's paper. Ph. 1 is the portion to Interlocken that was referenced in the RTD fact sheet.

I still view this as primarily a highway project. Not that I'm complaining, but so long as buses have to weave all over the place, the help it provides the bus is marginal. Sure will help driving time though.

EDIT: And frankly, the bus has always been pretty good, so until the bigger Fastracks picture is figured out, I for one am happy with the highway upgrades.

[SandSailor]

Is it possible to pressure the railroad? Like "hey guys for the good of the metro, strike a good/fair deal?" Seems like a major holdup is the greedy damn rr! Call them out as greedy in all the papers and TV!

[Launch 12]

"No growth in Boulder"? RTD is building a new bus station and hotel and hundreds of units are in the pipeline for around the rail stop area. Don't let your false perceptions of Boulder drive your comments of whether to build the rail or not.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by Launch 12

"No growth in Boulder"? RTD is building a new bus station and hotel and hundreds of units are in the pipeline for around the rail stop area. Don't let your false perceptions of Boulder drive your comments of whether to build the rail or not.

Yes, one development. In a metro area that's slated to add a million people by 2030, that's less than insignificant. My perceptions are neither false, nor even perceptions. Before you get too feisty, let's look at the facts. Boulder has a legal cap on residential growth (1%, unless it's been changed recently). Boulder County has an iron clad comprehensive plan that is equally limiting. Boulder's recent plans have even discussed "build out" of the city, some as early as 2020. Boulder is one of the most anti-growth communities in the country, and has a long proud history of it. That's not perception, that's fact. Who else combines physical growth limits, height limits, rate of growth/permit limits, AND infrastructure limits?

The only thing more annoying than Boulder's policies is people who are in denial about them. I hate to parrot everyone's favorite line this political cycle, but you are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.

Also, from the State Demography Office... population projections to 2040. Landlocked Denver County is slated to add ~210,000 people. Arapahoe County, 280,000. Adams, 300,000. Douglas, also a shade over 220,000.

And Boulder County... 90,000. About the same as Pueblo. And including Longmont, the real growth heavyweight in Boulder County. So if we are talking about building infrastructure to accommodate tomorrow's population, the facts are very clearly on my side. (Of course, that's not exactly what I said... but I still think it's a valid point.)

EDIT: Even outside the metro, Larimer County will add 186,000, Weld 316,000, El Paso County 371,000... in a world of tight budgets, Boulder's transportation needs are frankly unimportant, and becoming less important every year, as the rest of the state grows in population and infrastructure backlogs. I actually look forward to 2040 when Boulder County is projected to make up a whopping 1.2% of the state's population. Rich or not, at some point, the political clout will start to vanish when it's not backed up by any votes.

[Cirrus]

And the really damning thing about Boulder's growth controls are that they don't stop growth; they just send it somewhere else. And the form it takes somewhere else is always less environmentally friendly than it would have been if it had happened in Boulder, so the end result is more environmental destruction than is necessary.

The rest of us are pissed off about Boulder because Boulder's policies are blatantly hypocritical. They are destroying the environment as rapidly as they can, but they don't care as long the environment being destroyed is on the other side of the greenbelt.

If Boulder had accepted more growth, Boulder could have guaranteed its own future political clout and made sure more growth happened in a sustainable manner. Instead they shot themselves in the foot and gave the middle finger to the environment.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

If Boulder had accepted more growth, Boulder could have guaranteed its own future political clout and made sure more growth happened in a sustainable manner. Instead they shot themselves in the foot and gave the middle finger to the environment.

BUT, property owners in Boulder (at least, those who owned property already in the time of Danish) made a killing. Greed is a powerful motivator. If I had paid $80,000 for a p.o.s. ranch in Martin Acres and could, with one vote, ensure that it'd be worth $580,000 within a few decades, I could probably sleep just fine at night, hypocrisy or not. The difference is, I personally wouldn't deny what I had done and pretend there were no consequences.