DENVER | Transportation Thread

[Wizened Variations]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Great, that still leaves $10 billion. We aren't going to spend $10 billion on a highway, nor are we going to spend $10 billion on rail. Can we please 🞵🞵🞵🞵-can this absurd HSR proposal and not talk about it as anything more than a fantasy?

We will spend $1 billion on commuter rail along existing tracks. That's where we need to start. Plus it has the benefit of being a lot less of a sprawl generator since it's closer to existing population centers.

The near future, IMO. Agreed.

[seventwenty]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Great, that still leaves $10 billion. We aren't going to spend $10 billion on a highway, nor are we going to spend $10 billion on rail. Can we please 🞵🞵🞵🞵-can this absurd HSR proposal and not talk about it as anything more than a fantasy?

We will spend $1 billion on commuter rail along existing tracks. That's where we need to start. Plus it has the benefit of being a lot less of a sprawl generator since it's closer to existing population centers.

How much is it to move the freight trains, esp the coal trains out to that yet to be built bypass? I'm not saying I don't agree with you, but it is a cost that should be considered.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by seventwenty

How much is it to move the freight trains, esp the coal trains out to that yet to be built bypass? I'm not saying I don't agree with you, but it is a cost that should be considered.

Oh, that's another $1 billion or so, but who says we need to move them initially? To get up from Colorado Springs would require it, but you can run commuter trains from up north into Denver using existing freight lines and a tie-in to the North Corridor.

[seventwenty]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Oh, that's another $1 billion or so, but who says we need to move them initially? To get up from Colorado Springs would require it, but you can run commuter trains from up north into Denver using existing freight lines and a tie-in to the North Corridor.

Looks to be between $750 million and $1.2 billion, depending on the route taken.

http://www.coloradodot.info/projects/railroadstudy/documents/execsummary-final020609.pdf/view

[Interzen]

^^^ Thanks for that link. I wondered how far that had been studied.

I always assumed the railroads would resist, so it is encouraging to see they were not only actively participating in the discussion but driving it at times.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by Interzen

I always assumed the railroads would resist, so it is encouraging to see they were not only actively participating in the discussion but driving it at times.

They would get approximately $1 billion in capital improvements that they wouldn't have to pay for in the entirety which would drastically increase their operating efficiency. This is one thing that UP and BNSF are drooling over.

Gotta love some free money.

[Interzen]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

They would get approximately $1 billion in capital improvements that they wouldn't have to pay for in the entirety which would drastically increase their operating efficiency. This is one thing that UP and BNSF are drooling over.

Gotta love some free money.

So the question then becomes how to best monetize the acquired ROWs while still achieving the best public transportation results. I bet some of the yards could be worth some ching.

[Wizened Variations]

Originally Posted by Interzen

So the question then becomes how to best monetize the acquired ROWs while still achieving the best public transportation results. I bet some of the yards could be worth some ching.

Don't suspect for a moment that the railroads aren't working the "numbers."*

The key, as I have said so often that more than a few of the readers here, grown, is right-of-way. Available right-of-way- not just a available path as seen on Google Maps- but right-of-way still owned by a "railroad" is exquisitely valuable in the US because railroad property operates under it's own unique set of rules which "grandfather clause" just about all local and state property law.

Besides, the cost of "reconditioning and upgrading track" is many times less than purchasing property, tearing down infrastructure on that property, assuming responsibility for keeping existing sewage and water lines functioning, earth moving topographic obstacles to a 2 or 3% maximum grade, dealing with crossings (new railroad right-of-way is NOT grandfathered in to CDOT, etc), laying track, etc.

The relation between the value of scrap metal and the cost of new rail line along new right-of-way, IMO, is far greater than 1:100. Using existing bridges, tunnels, leveled right-of-way is phenomenally cheaper than building from scratch.

And the railroads are very well aware of this, having almost butchered themselves shedding track during the 1970s, 80s, and, early 90s.

*Two famous people who truly understand this are Phil Anschutz and Warren Buffet

[Wizened Variations]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Oh, that's another $1 billion or so, but who says we need to move them initially? To get up from Colorado Springs would require it, but you can run commuter trains from up north into Denver using existing freight lines and a tie-in to the North Corridor.

You could even start simpler: Run from Castle Rock to Broadway Station to start, where a commuter could transfer either to Lodo or the Tech Center. Triple track a few more spots between each terminal end, and, add a fourth track somewhere between Broadway and the Pepsi Center, and, a third track south of Castle Rock a couple of miles to park waiting coal trains. Total cost- under $150 million, I bet.

Work then to improve light rail times to DUS and Uptown by providing express service in conjunction with the arrival and departure of Castle Rock trains. Maybe build a passing track at Alameda for starters. Triple track the Auraria West Station (as it was originally intended). Straighten the alignment up around Sports Authority Invesco at Mile High Station and put a passing track there for express service to DUS. (If one can't travel fast enough, make it appear damned efficient.) Total cost $25 million.

For $175 million, a commuter line from Castle Rock to Broadway Station, and, a South Station that connects 4 different lines as well as buses. In addition, the connections between the W line and the Pepsi Center get cleaned up.

[The Dirt]

Crappy cell phone photo of the DIA hotel from a couple of hours ago:

[bunt_q]

Unless RTD does something really, exceptionally stupid with its operating hours, fare structure, or parking rules at outlying stations, I'll never drive to DIA again after that line opens. Very exciting.

[Wizened Variations]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Unless RTD does something really, exceptionally stupid with its operating hours, fare structure, or parking rules at outlying stations, I'll never drive to DIA again after that line opens. Very exciting.

Over the longer term, the line will change one aspect of going to the airport- the car component. Many will get their spouse, a child or a friend to take them to a light rail station by car, and, then have that or another party pick them up at the light rail station.

I know this sounds trite, but, this change in attitude is significant and will have ripple affects as far as flight scheduling (and cost)- more people will want flight departure and arrival times that, when combined with public transportation scheduling, might be less of a burden upon those asked to drop off or pick up one up at the light rail.

The taxi business, too, will adjust for this type of shuttle service to rail stations, as users discover the their unique time-value-cost-of money and pick favorite stations to be dropped off and picked up at. As more people make such decisions based upon their experience, the stations that they choose will start having parking problems, etc., which, in turn, will affect other users making their own decisions.

East Line Stations, particularly, Peoria (please RTD make this station very user friendly and put in a couple of extra light rail and heavy commuter rail sidings) will get the brunt of this business. For those that live in east Denver and those that live in Aurora, having someone pick them up and drop them off at any of the East Line stations makes cents.

All the other lines, besides the I-225 Rail line and the northern part of the Central C and D lines, have complex transfer and timing issues which make their stations less attractive alternative drop off and pickup up points. The time required to get through DUS from south via light rail is just too long and time consuming to warrant much airport commuter use, except for the (northern part of) I-225 line.

Just getting off the light rail or bus and walking to the DUS Heavy Rail tracks takes time. Likewise, waiting for the next scheduled DIA train takes another chunk of time. This additional time, affects all lines except reduced times for heavy rail lines such as Metro North, which might provide platform to platform transfers.

This also is reflected in increased physical effort recorded to carry (pull etc) luggage) on and off of the light rail or bus, between modes of transportation, and, boarding the DIA train. This may not seem like extra time and effort, but, definitely can be, during times of very hot, wet, or snowy weather.

This time/effort problem becomes worse the further away from DUS a user must take a bus or light rail.

Of course, those living along the C and D line north of the 16th Street mall and near DUS will have superb connects to DIA, and, will not need anyone (except after 8 or 9 pm) to drop them off or pick them up.

If the parking lots fill up with cars parked over 24 hours, I am sure they will be ticketed. RTD should never permit any station to become a free parking facility for DIA users

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by Wizened Variations

All the other lines, besides the I-225 Rail line and the northern part of the Central C and D lines, have complex transfer and timing issues which make their stations less attractive alternative drop off and pickup up points. The time required to get through DUS from south via light rail is just too long and time consuming to warrant much airport commuter use, except for the (northern part of) I-225 line.

That's not true. My station of choice is Englewood, and it'll still work better for me. The reality is that there is no fast way to get to the airport from the southwest. A shuttle from a parking lot already takes 30 minutes at DIA, so airport trips are probably the one type of trip where a transfer at Union Station will make sense. A daily commute, on the other hand, is a completely different story. Probably no way I'd train to a job at Fitz from here, or even Stapleton, for example. But airport trips are different (and for most people, must less frequent).

[CharlesCO]

Originally Posted by Wizened Variations

Over the longer term, the line will change one aspect of going to the airport- the car component. Many will get their spouse, a child or a friend to take them to a light rail station by car, and, then have that or another party pick them up at the light rail station.

I know this sounds trite, but, this change in attitude is significant and will have ripple affects as far as flight scheduling (and cost)- more people will want flight departure and arrival times that, when combined with public transportation scheduling, might be less of a burden upon those asked to drop off or pick up one up at the light rail.

...


If the parking lots fill up with cars parked over 24 hours, I am sure they will be ticketed. RTD should never permit any station to become a free parking facility for DIA users

This is very true for BART's line to SFO Airport. Most people would rather take it than drive due to the horrendous freeways, and it's very convenient. I think RTD might have even more success because from what I can tell, the East Line platforms will be even closer to the security lines than the ones at SFO.

As for parking, it shouldn't be too much of a problem. BART actually offers airport parking for $5/day at all their stations with parking lots. You buy it online beforehand for however many days your car will be there, print out a confirmation page, and place it on your dashboard for the meter maids to see. I've never done it because I always have someplace better to park, but I've always thought that it's a smart idea.

[bunt_q]

Eesh, at $5/day, I'd still drive to DIA. Unless the train is free...

[seventwenty]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Eesh, at $5/day, I'd still drive to DIA. Unless the train is free...

I'd imagine RTD will do something like have DIA specific parking rates. They already have overnight rates, after all. Otherwise, some stations might be 50% full of DIA cars, leaving less spots for day to day commuters.

[CharlesCO]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Eesh, at $5/day, I'd still drive to DIA. Unless the train is free...

I also forgot to mention that all parking is free on weekends and holidays, and $5/day is still a better deal than parking at SFO, where the cheapest long term parking is $18/day (plus a Bay Bridge toll). The economy lots at DIA are $12/day, so I think $3/day for airport parking wouldn't be a bad deal. Even if not, let's hope RTD alters the bus schedules for easy timed transfers at all the stations.

[bcp]

Originally Posted by seventwenty

I'd imagine RTD will do something like have DIA specific parking rates. They already have overnight rates, after all. Otherwise, some stations might be 50% full of DIA cars, leaving less spots for day to day commuters.

destination-specific parking rates really sounds like an unnecessary layer of complexity and regulation. if they have overnight rates, it should just be applied equally...unless they want to deter people from using the rail line. parking is first-come first-serve..there really should be no difference if somebody stays overnight for 3 nights due to a flight or due to getting hammered downtown and leaving your car a few days?

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by CharlesCO

The economy lots at DIA are $12/day, so I think $3/day for airport parking wouldn't be a bad deal. Even if not, let's hope RTD alters the bus schedules for easy timed transfers at all the stations.

The Pikes Peak lot is $8/day. I'd say that's what RTD will be competing against. (And then when you get into longer trips, the $99 hotel rooms that come with up to 14 days of free parking start to look mighty nice as well.)

Originally Posted by bcp

destination-specific parking rates really sounds like an unnecessary layer of complexity and regulation. if they have overnight rates, it should just be applied equally...unless they want to deter people from using the rail line. parking is first-come first-serve..there really should be no difference if somebody stays overnight for 3 nights due to a flight or due to getting hammered downtown and leaving your car a few days?

I agree. Not mention the complexity with knowing where folks are going (do you get a little ticket from the machine confirming your destination is the airport, and then walk back to put it into your window?) Or you assume anybody staying longer than a couple nights is going to the airport. Or you physically segregate airport parking, but that's a nightmare. Not worth it.

Also, you must lead a much more interesting life than I do. A few days?

[Cirrus]

RTD parking lots are still free, right? So charging for airport riders would be pretty easy. Just make the lots free during the day, but charge for overnight parking. Any cars there during hours when RTD isn't running trains must have a pay stub on the dashboard.

A lot of transit agencies just flat out don't allow overnight parking.