DENVER | Transportation Thread - Page 408

soonermeteor · #**8141** Posted **Feb 24, 2015, 4:32 AM**

I've been following the discussion about the 'through-ness', for lack of a better term, of the new RTD system and had a question. Is it more about not having lines that go through downtown and continue elsewhere or that Union Station has a several block division between the commuter rail and light rail lines? I understand there were issues behind choosing both commuter and light rail but let's say RTD found a way to connect the east and west rail lines, southeast and north line, etc.. If you live in Lakewood and would like to go to DIA, you're set. However, if you live in Lakewood and work in the Tech Center, you'll still have to transfer. If the lines were connected it could have saved some transfers but it doesn't eliminate them.

TakeFive · #**8142** Posted **Feb 24, 2015, 4:33 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stonemans_rowJ

Seems like it would be more cost effective to move it to the north, using 270 and 76, which are existing roads with room on the sides to potentially expand, going mostly through industrial area. I know that plan was proposed. This argument is even stronger if we assume that the main purpose of the road is for interstate commerce and not local commuters. If you're moving goods across many states, what's a few extra miles?

Well it's not an either/or black/white proposition relative to purpose. I'm happy to give you the same link that bobg was nice enough to give to me HERE and you can read through the EIS or perhaps somebody else could give you the short answer.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scottk

This reminded me of something I was thinking about the other day.

What is CDOT going to do once I25 needs to be expanded? It seems like expansion through the tech center would be impossible, given the light rail on one side and numerous office buildings directly fronting the highway on the other side. That section that cuts through the highlands will also be extremely difficult to expand

At the time of TREX, CDOT stated that would be it for any expansion of I-25 in that stretch. The only other option would be to do a double-decker which I assume will never happen. Whether they'd consider creating tolled lanes from the existing lanes I wouldn't venture a guess.

Scottk · #**8143** Posted **Feb 24, 2015, 5:06 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BG918

A toll like what they have on NW Parkway could lower congestion and help pay for an expansion of the tunnel. Cheapskates could take Loveland Pass.

People already take Loveland pass to avoid the clusterfuck that the tunnel has become with the metering. Ends up creating a huge traffic jam that passes Loveland and up the hill, and further congests I-70 with everyone merging onto the highway

Scottk · #**8144** Posted **Feb 24, 2015, 5:09 AM**

http://www.dailycamera.com/boulder/ci_27...-transit-plan-along-u?source=most_viewed

just read this article about how Boulder residents are pissed at RTD. not much in there I didn't already know, but was surprised to find out that RTD is cutting direct service from Boulder to the airport. Passengers will be expected to exit the bus and take the East Line to the airport.

Really, RTD??

bobg · #**8145** Posted **Feb 24, 2015, 3:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scottk

http://www.dailycamera.com/boulder/ci_27...-transit-plan-along-u?source=most_viewed

just read this article about how Boulder residents are pissed at RTD. not much in there I didn't already know, but was surprised to find out that RTD is cutting direct service from Boulder to the airport. Passengers will be expected to exit the bus and take the East Line to the airport.

Really, RTD??

Where are you seeing that in the article?

From the link zmapper provided on the proposed US 36 service changes (http://rtd.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=1&ID=2220&Inline=True:

Quote:

5.3.3.1 Route AB Boulder/Denver International Airport
Route AB will become SkyRide service from Boulder/Louisville/Superior directly to Denver
International Airport and not a US 36 BRT route. The route will operate via US 36 to US
36 & Flatiron Center Park-n-Ride East, NW Parkway/E-470, Pena Blvd to Denver
International Airport (DIA). The ABA is discontinued—Stapleton and Airport/40th will be
served by the A-Line when opened in 2016. Weekday frequency will be increased to halfhourly
in the AM and PM peaks, alternating west-end trip terminals between Boulder
Transit Center and Boulder Junction at Depot Square. This would result in hourly peak
headways to both of these locations (peak CU demand will be accommodated as now with
supplemental trips).

wong21fr · #**8146** Posted **Feb 24, 2015, 4:33 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scottk

http://www.dailycamera.com/boulder/ci_27...-transit-plan-along-u?source=most_viewed

just read this article about how Boulder residents are pissed at RTD. not much in there I didn't already know, but was surprised to find out that RTD is cutting direct service from Boulder to the airport. Passengers will be expected to exit the bus and take the East Line to the airport.

Really, RTD??

Doesn't look like RTD is cutting the airport route, but is does look as if Boulder want TWO routes, one from the Transit Center and one from Boulder Junction, going to the airport. Because, well, it's Boulder.

mr1138 · #**8147** Posted **Feb 24, 2015, 4:33 PM**

I can see how one could make that mistake from that article, but it is actually the east Boulder airport line that is getting cut. Basically it is the routes that go to Boulder Junction (formerly known as the Boulder Transit Village) that are getting shorted here.

I would stay tuned though. With the Northwest Area Mobility Study there is a very real possibility of a network of BRT routes in Boulder County long before a train ever arrives. Boulder is currently preparing for arterial BRT on Arapahoe (SH7), and combined with BRT on 287, routes to East Boulder would almost certainly begin running again.

wong21fr · #**8148** Posted **Feb 24, 2015, 4:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mr1138

I can see how one could make that mistake from that article, but it is actually the east Boulder airport line that is getting cut. Basically it is the routes that go to Boulder Junction (formerly known as the Boulder Transit Village) that are getting shorted here.

I would stay tuned though. With the Northwest Area Mobility Study there is a very real possibility of a network of BRT routes in Boulder County long before a train ever arrives. Boulder is currently preparing for arterial BRT on Arapahoe (SH7), and combined with BRT on 287, routes to East Boulder would almost certainly begin running again.

Is Longmont going to get a SkyRide from it's Transit Center? It seems that should be a concession that is given so that the citizens of Longmont don't have to suffer traveling to Boulder to get to the airport.

Stonemans_rowJ · #**8149** Posted **Feb 24, 2015, 4:54 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Well it's not an either/or black/white proposition relative to purpose. I'm happy to give you the same link that bobg was nice enough to give to me HERE and you can read through the EIS or perhaps somebody else could give you the short answer.

Rerouting I-70 on I-270 and I-76 requires more than 12 miles of major highway
widening, which would cost an estimated $3.5 to $4 billion—twice the estimated
cost of the Partial Cover Lowered Alternative, which is the preliminarily
identified preferred alternative for the I-70 East Project.

http://www.i-70east.com/alternatives/CDOTnotReRoutingI-70_PreceptionsRealities_10-29-13.pdf

Seems like "fuzzy numbers." How widening an existing interstate corridor is twice as much as demoing a viaduct, excavating, covering, etc. a brand new 10 lane road is mind boggling.

wong21fr · #**8150** Posted **Feb 24, 2015, 5:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stonemans_rowJ

Rerouting I-70 on I-270 and I-76 requires more than 12 miles of major highway
widening, which would cost an estimated $3.5 to $4 billion—twice the estimated
cost of the Partial Cover Lowered Alternative, which is the preliminarily
identified preferred alternative for the I-70 East Project.

http://www.i-70east.com/alternatives/CDOTnotReRoutingI-70_PreceptionsRealities_10-29-13.pdf

Seems like "fuzzy numbers." How widening an existing interstate corridor is twice as much as demoing a viaduct, excavating, covering, etc. a brand new 10 lane road is mind boggling.

Consider the number of bridges that I-76/270 has and the number of interchanges with other highways. Some of those bridges are over waterways and railroads which is a bit more difficult to build over than an overpass. You're not just widening a highway, you're building a brand-new 12-mile highway. There's also the cost of demoing and rebuilding I-70 as a "Grand Boulevard", though I'm sure we could make it cheaper by moving I-70 and just leaving the existing viaduct in place as an abandoned roadway.

mr1138 · #**8151** Posted **Feb 24, 2015, 5:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Is Longmont going to get a SkyRide from it's Transit Center? It seems that should be a concession that is given so that the citizens of Longmont don't have to suffer traveling to Boulder to get to the airport.

I don't know many details of the plan, other than that the network of BRT routes shown on the NAMS website are being offered as a "consolation prize" of sorts to Boulder County because of the NW Rail fiasco. The various agency partners believe that they can implement the plan using existing funding streams and get the whole system built before the target 2040-something date of the train.

I would assume that, once implemented, BRT routes will replace many of the existing regional routes that run along those corridors. The L bus from Longmont, down 287 to 36 and on to Denver would likely become some Longmont version of the "Flatiron Flyer." The discussion in Boulder is that the "Jump" would likely continue as local service on Arapahoe, with a new regional route using the BRT lanes. But that discussion is still in its earliest stages, and it isn't even known yet what kind of physical infrastructure "Arterial BRT" would mean in this case, or where it would terminate (would it turn up Flatirons Pkwy to Boulder Junction, or continue on to 30th, 28th or even Folsom?).

I would assume that some version of the East Boulder airport and Denver routes could use the SH7 BRT infrastructure, and then turn down the 287 lanes, and eventually onto US36, but I suppose time will tell. Other routes that would logically use these new lanes would be a SH7 route out to Brighton, and perhaps a Longmont route that would turn north at Lafayette to go to Longmont.

EngiNerd · #**8152** Posted **Feb 24, 2015, 5:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Consider the number of bridges that I-76/270 has and the number of interchanges with other highways. Some of those bridges are over waterways and railroads which is a bit more difficult to build over than an overpass. You're not just widening a highway, you're building a brand-new 12-mile highway. There's also the cost of demoing and rebuilding I-70 as a "Grand Boulevard", though I'm sure we could make it cheaper by moving I-70 and just leaving the existing viaduct in place as an abandoned roadway.

Except you get kind of two widenings in one, because at some point in the near future I-270 has to be widened and the bridges/interchanges rebuilt anyway. I-270 is pretty much in a constant state of gridlock these days. So while yes 12 miles needs to be widened, you are widening a road that already needs it regardless.

Interzen · #**8153** Posted **Feb 24, 2015, 5:26 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Consider the number of bridges that I-76/270 has and the number of interchanges with other highways. Some of those bridges are over waterways and railroads which is a bit more difficult to build over than an overpass. You're not just widening a highway, you're building a brand-new 12-mile highway. There's also the cost of demoing and rebuilding I-70 as a "Grand Boulevard", though I'm sure we could make it cheaper by moving I-70 and just leaving the existing viaduct in place as an abandoned roadway.

Also, 270 is already over capacity at peek periods. You would need to include an additional 4 or 6 lanes just to handle the existing load in that area, on top of the 10 lanes needed for the I70 load.

EDIT: Damn, EngiNerd beat me

Do you think 16 lanes is a good idea????

bobg · #**8154** Posted **Feb 24, 2015, 6:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mr1138

I can see how one could make that mistake from that article, but it is actually the east Boulder airport line that is getting cut. Basically it is the routes that go to Boulder Junction (formerly known as the Boulder Transit Village) that are getting shorted here.

There's an east boulder airport line? I know there's the S line which is east boulder to DT Denver that is getting cut. I wasn't aware of anything that served Boulder other than AB/ABA and went to the airport.

My interpretation of the article was what Wong stated in that they wanted a new airport line (or the existing line) to serve the transit village and go to the airport. But I could be wrong, and am forgetting a bus route.

mr1138 · #**8155** Posted **Feb 24, 2015, 6:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobg

There's an east boulder airport line? I know there's the S line which is east boulder to DT Denver that is getting cut. I wasn't aware of anything that served Boulder other than AB/ABA and went to the airport.

My interpretation of the article was what Wong stated in that they wanted a new airport line (or the existing line) to serve the transit village and go to the airport. But I could be wrong, and am forgetting a bus route.

Ah yes, you're right. Turns out I read the article wrong as well. Route "S" is East Boulder-Union Station, and I think maybe some of us were confusing this with the "Skyride" to the airport (which, on a second skimming of the article, isn't even mentioned; so I still assume nothing is changing with that route). The Boulder Junction to DIA route is something that is simply desired by planners.

Which brings me back to my original point about NAMS. Enhanced service to East Boulder really would make more sense once the details of that plan are clearer, and once a couple hundred thousand more square feet of office and residential space are constructed in Boulder Junction making it a more important destination (watch the Boulder NIMBYs' heads explode on that one... one lady recently said at a public meeting that the 5-story buildings at Boulder Junction make her cry when she looks at them).

EngiNerd · #**8156** Posted **Feb 24, 2015, 8:19 PM**

How did they screw up this interchange design so badly that it already needs to be redone to the tune of $68 million only 9 short years after TREX was completed?

I-25 and Arapahoe Road Bridge Replacement
https://www.codot.gov/projects/I25-Arapahoe

(Moved from other thread since I put it in wrong place)

TakeFive · #**8157** Posted **Feb 24, 2015, 8:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by EngiNerd

How did they screw up this interchange design so badly that it already needs to be redone to the tune of $68 million only 9 short years after TREX was completed?

I-25 and Arapahoe Road Bridge Replacement
https://www.codot.gov/projects/I25-Arapahoe

(Moved from other thread since I put it in wrong place)

That was the brainchild of - exact name escapes me but something like - SE Metro Improvement District back in the 1980's(?). It was NOT a part of TREX.

EngiNerd · #**8158** Posted **Feb 24, 2015, 9:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by TakeFive

That was the brainchild of - exact name escapes me but something like - SE Metro Improvement District back in the 1980's(?). It was NOT a part of TREX.

Hmm, the Arapahoe road/I-25 bridge was reconstructed and widened during TREX though.

TakeFive · #**8159** Posted **Feb 24, 2015, 9:33 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by EngiNerd

Hmm, the Arapahoe road/I-25 bridge was reconstructed and widened during TREX though.

The total mess is underneath the bridge. The improvement dist. did work on Arapahoe Road under there along with building the Yosemite St. overpass.

EngiNerd · #**8160** Posted **Feb 24, 2015, 9:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by TakeFive

The total mess is underneath the bridge. The improvement dist. did work on Arapahoe Road under there along with building the Yosemite St. overpass.

Ok, so they widened the I-25 bridge, but didn't change the configuration of the bridge below, got it. Still seems silly they didn't just take care of that issue when they did TREX.