DENVER | Main Development Thread #6

[CherryCreek]

I didn't see this anywhere. Nice development from Mill Creek, the "Modera River North" at 2890 Brighton Blvd. There's so much going on in RINO it may need its own Topic Thread!

http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/blog/r...-apartment-community-coming-to-rino.html

[EngiNerd]

Originally Posted by patco

The average household income in downtown denver is $91,961 and the average household income for city center neighborhood households is $73,837 (according to DDP's 2015 state of downtown denver)

Thanks for posting that, and welcome to the forum!

[Scottk]

Originally Posted by Sam Hill

Why?

The single tracked segments, the ever increasing number of stops, the headway times, and the fact that the A line will be very expensive to ride relative to most other airport trains.

The Copenhagen line also serves as much more than just an airport line... It connects much of the city. For example, I used the M2 to get from Christiana to Norrenport while in Copenhagen. I have a hard time envisioning most people using the A line for anything other than getting to the airport and back.

[enjo13]

Originally Posted by Scottk

The single tracked segments, the ever increasing number of stops, the headway times, and the fact that the A line will be very expensive to ride relative to most other airport trains.

The Copenhagen line also serves as much more than just an airport line... It connects much of the city. For example, I used the M2 to get from Christiana to Norrenport while in Copenhagen. I have a hard time envisioning most people using the A line for anything other than getting to the airport and back.

It connects a major medical research center with Downtown.. that ain't nothin. Not to mention the residents in Stapleton and RiNO that have access to it. I suspect it will carry a fair amount of commuter traffic. Traffic that will increase over time.

[Mulligan]

Originally Posted by Scottk

The single tracked segments, the ever increasing number of stops, the headway times, and the fact that the A line will be very expensive to ride relative to most other airport trains.

The Copenhagen line also serves as much more than just an airport line... It connects much of the city. For example, I used the M2 to get from Christiana to Norrenport while in Copenhagen. I have a hard time envisioning most people using the A line for anything other than getting to the airport and back.

1. There's only TWO single track segments - the I-70 bridge and from Pena Station north to the other side of the Pena Bridge. These were both done to save costs and have no impact operationally as RTD can still run 15-minute headways with no problems.

2. By the ever increasing number of stops, I'm assuming you're referring to the one station that was added...that still ensures a 37 minute ride to DIA from DUS.

3. The headway times? They haven't changed. They've always been planned to be 15 minutes in peak periods.

So we suck for not having a train to the airport...and we suck for building one because, heaven forbid, RTD is going to charge just as much to get there as they do right now on SkyRide. It's a $1 billion corridor - you thought it'd be free?

I will gladly pay my $20 roundtrip to ride it out the airport and back. Go ahead and drive your car out there and let me know how much cheaper that is.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by Scottk

The single tracked segments, the ever increasing number of stops, the headway times, and the fact that the A line will be very expensive to ride relative to most other airport trains.

The Copenhagen line also serves as much more than just an airport line... It connects much of the city. For example, I used the M2 to get from Christiana to Norrenport while in Copenhagen. I have a hard time envisioning most people using the A line for anything other than getting to the airport and back.

So you're comparing a Metro Line that has an airport stop to a line that is pretty much intended to solely serve an airport? Well, let's just move DIA back to Stapleton because that's what it would take to get an apple to apple comparison. The $9 one-way fare to the airport isn't unreasonable given the distance and it's really $4.50 if you're smart and buy a day pass during your time visiting Denver. In contrast the one-way fare from Copenhagen's airport to the City Center appears to be anywhere from $3.30 to $5.30. It might be faster on the Metro, but that's because the airport isn't located in Sweden. Wait. DIA is even further than Copenhagen is from Manlo.

The A Line isn't spectacular. The headways are bothersome to me and express service would be a great addition (a complaint that can be applied to the entire RTD system), but it's good for a workhorse airport line.

[Brainpathology]

Copenhagen also has more tobacco products named after it than Denver, lets all not forget that. We can't live in blissful ignorance of that additional reason Denver sucks anymore now can we?

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

As I said, you care more about the bottom portion half of the population (who in no way can live downtown) versus the top half (the majority of who can live downtown if they choose). But this is out-of-date thinking for the current national mindset. The bottom half are freeloaders and losers who's needs and social opportunity shouldn't be considered since they are takers. It's all about the makers and President Trump gets that while the soft-hearted libruls want to destroy what makes this country great. 'merica! Hell, the HPTE is based on this mindset: to those who can afford comes the privilege of fast travel.

Touché. Ha.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by enjo13

It connects a major medical research center with Downtown.. that ain't nothin.

No, it really doesn't. It connects to a light rail line, that will have a stop, where you can catch a shuttle to a major medical research center. (Recall they pushed the 225 line north of the core of the campus because of vibrations, so it is now barely walkable, and pretty much goes around the campus.) You model that out, and you'll have almost zero ridership that boards downtown, gets off at Peoria and transfers, and then gets off at the Fitzsimmons station, and shuttles to the Anschutz campus. That's two transfers, which kills ridership on good systems...i.e. systems that are not as slow and infrequent as ours. EDIT: Adding screenshot of current station locations.



But I do agree that the A line will serve a lot other than the airport. 38th and Blake ain't nothing for sure. Nor is Stapleton... nor apparently is the AEROTROPOLIS. If you're not trying really hard right now to sing aerotropolis to the Simpson monorail jingle, you're missing out.

[Brainpathology]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

But I do agree that the A line will serve a lot other than the airport. 38th and Blake ain't nothing for sure. Nor is Stapleton... nor apparently is the AEROTROPOLIS. If you're not trying really hard right now to sing aerotropolis to the Simpson monorail jingle, you're missing out.

I imagine David Spade in a costume of Mayor Handcock in Inca royalty garb saying "Aerotropolis, complete with water slide" doot doot dodododo doot doot doo doo

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by Brainpathology

Copenhagen also has more tobacco products named after it than Denver, lets all not forget that. We can't live in blissful ignorance of that additional reason Denver sucks anymore now can we?

Hah, I count on you to catch the key points that others seem to overlook

Originally Posted by bunt_q

No, it really doesn't. It connects to a light rail line, that will have a stop, where you can catch a shuttle to a major medical research center.

Having shuttle service to your front door seems like it would be a plus.

[Brainpathology]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Why is there even a stop there? The stop on Colfax is closer to CU if you're still going to have to walk around the golf course and the gross looking north wasteland behind building 500, unless they've fixed that. And it's a great deal closer to Childrens Colorado.

That stop should really just be deleted. It serves no purpose except to make it longer to get to the stop they should be using.

[DUPio]

Originally Posted by Brainpathology

Why is there even a stop there? The stop on Colfax is closer to CU if you're still going to have to walk around the golf course and the gross looking north wasteland behind building 500, unless they've fixed that. And it's a great deal closer to Childrens Colorado.

That stop should really just be deleted. It serves no purpose except to make it longer to get to the stop they should be using.

The golf course will be built out as the "Life Science District", so that station will serve a purpose eventually but shouldn't be serviced until more development occurs. The second link is the Anschutz master plan with some cool massing renderings, the former is a conceptual plan for the life science district.

I know Aurora has a long way to go, but when this gets built out it will truly be world class and could help send Aurora in the right dirction. I'm very excited about how it'll turn out!


http://bettercities.net/images/14609/fitzsimons-life-science-district-plan

http://www.ucdenver.edu/about/department...-Campus-2012-Facilities-Master-Plan.aspx

[Brainpathology]

It's already world class. There isn't anything the medical campus needs to apologize for. They train the world's very best, bar none, pediatric neuropathologists, or at least among the world's best looking.

In all seriousness though, the institution is one of the best things Denver (Aurora) has going for it. Regardless, that stop could have been better placed by a dart through though.

[Cirrus]

You know, I admit I haven't seen direct data and could be convinced otherwise. But I flat out don't believe vibrations are a problem. These are not fast-moving trains, and there are way too many examples of trains rolling through sensitive research campuses to think Fitz is a special special snowflake.

In recent years in both Minnesota and Maryland, universities complained about how vibrations from proposed light rail lines would disrupt science, and demanded routes be moved. In both cases after extensive study, officials declared it was a non-issue and told the universities to stuff it. Leadership stepped up and overrode the parochial knee-jerk reactions of the universities.

Maybe Fitz is different, but I seriously doubt it. I suspect Fitz complained unnecessarily, and RTD folded at the first sign of complication.

[Brainpathology]

I didn't buy it either... BUT researchers can be a very OCD and paranoid lot (for good reason and they very much should be). If any of them actually believed vibrations were going to be a problem for anything it may still have kept new projects or faculty from locating there, no matter what they say about evidence based this or that. They may 100% of the time handle their own research projects with objectivity and strict scientific method, but where their lab ends their human idiosyncrasies are magnified if anything.

How recent was Minnesota's situation? Any study lead by a government overseen by the Walker administration, I would suspect, would by definition be wrong. And in that state any concern or problem brought up by academics is probably polluted by a bias that they are all just the bleatings and whinings of propeller headed pinkos. I have less suspicion where Maryland is concerned.

[DUPio]

They also claimed having the previous light rail orientation would increase risk to pedestrians and they didn't want the trains going street level through the heart of campus. FWIW.

[Brainpathology]

Originally Posted by DUPio

They also claimed having the previous light rail orientation would increase risk to pedestrians and they didn't want the trains going street level through the heart of campus. FWIW.

I'm sure all the peds scrambling across Aurora Ct between CU and Children's CO without a crosswalk appreciate their concern. I sure did when I was trying to get to frozen sections between each institution.

[Brainpathology]

If someone who is WAY more higher math savy than I am wants to see if they can gauge if CU had a legitimate worry you may want to try plugging in some numbers in this article: (and a warning... that link will directly try to download a PDF of the article)

http://www.researchgate.net/publictopics...key=b5f8726f-3213-4d6b-89ad-d6da2c3cc33c

AT least the actual existence of vibration is real. Whether these would lead to actual harm to research I don't think you can ultimately prove or disprove.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by Brainpathology

I didn't buy it either... BUT researchers can be a very OCD and paranoid lot (for good reason and they very much should be). If any of them actually believed vibrations were going to be a problem for anything it may still have kept new projects or faculty from locating there, no matter what they say about evidence based this or that. They may 100% of the time handle their own research projects with objectivity and strict scientific method, but where their lab ends their human idiosyncrasies are magnified if anything.

How recent was Minnesota's situation? Any study lead by a government overseen by the Walker administration, I would suspect, would by definition be wrong. And in that state any concern or problem brought up by academics is probably polluted by a bias that they are all just the bleatings and whinings of propeller headed pinkos. I have less suspicion where Maryland is concerned.

Wisconsin Walker? That line through the University of Minnesota just opened in 2014, so it's very recent experience.