DENVER | Transportation Thread

[Scottk]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

"A Line ridership still climbing in the face of unfavorable press"
September 13, 2016 by Megan Arellano - Denverite

Ironically, the bar graph included in the article seems to show weekday ridership down for July but apparently weekend ridership made up the difference?

Rode it home from DIA last night returning from Vegas.


Very full considering how late it was - nearly standing room only. Train was on time and ran fast the whole way home. It felt like legitimate European transit.


A vastly different experience from my previous 2 rides.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by Scottk

Rode it home from DIA last night returning from Vegas.

Very full considering how late it was - nearly standing room only. Train was on time and ran fast the whole way home. It felt like legitimate European transit.

A vastly different experience from my previous 2 rides.

That's good to hear. Very cool.

Announcement
I hereby declare 2018 as The Great Transit Year.
Plan on it; anticipate it; expect it.
More hints coming (before 2018).

[COS]

My guess (ok actually a dream) for the great transit year:

Project announcement for a magnetized rail from COS to Denver to Ft Collins. Also, COS and Ft Collins get their own light rail systems that connect to the bullet train. RTD membership will consist of every municipality from COS to Ft Collins on a pro-rated basis for funding purposes depending on the rail infrastructure present in each municipality.

[CharlesCO]

Sounds like a disaster!

[TakeFive]

With respect to the AGTS or automated guideway transit system at DIA they anticipate that with incremental improvements in headways achieved by adjusting the train control system plus the addition of a track crossover when they expanded with the hotel addition and purchase of additional train cars that peak period capacity can handle the demand associated with ultimate expansion of Concourses A, B, and C.

With that AGTS should be fine through 2030 give or take. Originally concourses D and E were to be added to the south along with new AGTS plus redundancy. Their current base line projection of about 3% growth per year would mean about 95 million passengers per year in 2030. 2016 could finish near 60 million passengers.

Then it gets a little confusing as they discuss different airport functions needing expansion at different points (including AGTS capacity) on the way to 2030... depending.

[CharlesCO]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

With respect to the AGTS or automated guideway transit system at DIA they anticipate that with incremental improvements in headways achieved by adjusting the train control system plus the addition of a track crossover when they expanded with the hotel addition and purchase of additional train cars that peak period capacity can handle the demand associated with ultimate expansion of Concourses A, B, and C.

With that AGTS should be fine through 2030 give or take. Originally concourses D and E were to be added to the south along with new AGTS plus redundancy. Their current base line projection of about 3% growth per year would mean about 95 million passengers per year in 2030. 2016 could finish near 60 million passengers.

Then it gets a little confusing as they discuss different airport functions needing expansion at different points (including AGTS capacity) on the way to 2030... depending.

I think I've said this before on here, but I just don't understand how the AGTS is now deemed unsuitable for theoretical Concourses D and E to the north of the current concourses when the original airport design accounted for those two concourses to eventually be built and mirror the existing concourses' designs. The idea of concourses or a separate terminal to the south of the current one just sounds like a mess.

[Scottk]

Late last night at Union Station bus center I saw the security guards actively kicking hobos out of the restrooms and banging on the stall doors.

I asked them if this was the policy for Union Station.

Guard replied that "This is not the official policy, but we've heard from our higher ups that we can't let this place get like Market Street Station did."




I am sure that people will have mixed reactions but I personally was thrilled to hear this.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by CharlesCO

I think I've said this before on here, but I just don't understand how the AGTS is now deemed unsuitable for theoretical Concourses D and E to the north of the current concourses when the original airport design accounted for those two concourses to eventually be built and mirror the existing concourses' designs. The idea of concourses or a separate terminal to the south of the current one just sounds like a mess.

As I understand it, Concourses D and E would require additional AGTS capacity that was known all along but was left for future Generations to figure out how to do. Of course capacity can be added but after analyzing the possibility and how much it would cost they have come up with a different game plan.

Reading from the most recent Master Plan update in 2012 and trying to understand and connect different dots this is what I believe.

Starting in 2015 through 2020 it feels like they're rebuilding the existing airport. Coolers, boilers, pipes, drains, conveyors for escalators and moving walkways, drainage and erosion correction and lots and lots of concrete replacement which is ongoing. You name it, they're doing all the nuts and bolts stuff.

Starting in 2021 through 2030 is when they're looking at expansion projects, the phasing of which will depend on this and that. Plans always anticipated adding more terminal space. Jeppesen Terminal is not considered to have adequate capacity to handle the 2030 demands.

It was always anticipated that new terminal space would be added to the south. Apparently that's still the plan but their new preferred option is NOT to build Concourses D and E but to instead build concourses East and West out from the new terminal. This way they can build a new AGTS at a much lower cost. They've redesigned the layout of the new terminal with this in mind. One advantage of this is that for unanticipated additional capacity needs can be met by just adding another terminal pod to the south again. While I'm sure they'll be nice it sounds like Jeppesen will remain the "signature" terminal.

For everything they're looking at a 6-year enabling period. Construction periods would depend on the specific projects. The new terminal will have its own separate road system, ramps and parking etc.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by Scottk

Late last night at Union Station bus center I saw the security guards actively kicking hobos out of the restrooms and banging on the stall doors.

I asked them if this was the policy for Union Station.

Guard replied that "This is not the official policy, but we've heard from our higher ups that we can't let this place get like Market Street Station did."

I am sure that people will have mixed reactions but I personally was thrilled to hear this.

They will do what they're allowed to do. It still amazes me that Denver spends upwards of $50 million a year and yet the nuisance factor persists. One of these days I'll have to figure out what Phoenix spends bcuz I don't think it's nearly that much. I did figure out that the problem down here is spread between Phoenix and Tempe. Tempe makes cleanup sweeps through certain parks a few times a year to clear out all the trash.

I see where Denver has plans to acquire a warehouse south of Sports Authority Field for a little over $4 million. They're looking at fixing it up nicer, but it will be just for sleeping; no walk-ups. they'll be bused in and in the morning they'll be bused back into the city.

BTW, with the Broncos playing tomorrow and the baseball season winding down I set aside tonight to watch the Rockies. It turned out to be a special night as young Rockies pitcher John Gray set a new Rockies and Coors Field record with 16 strikeouts and a 9 inning 8-0 shutout of the Padres.

[DUPio]

I am glad to hear they are trying to crack down. Walking from union station to riverfront park and over that pedestrian bridge at 8pm last night my girlfriend and I ran into an absurd number of homeless/transients. It felt very sketchy for a supposedly nice area of town at 8pm. This isn't the first time we've ran into something like this either. Homeless people are constantly finding their way into our apartment complex and sleeping inside. I get that if they aren't actively causing trouble they have the same right to be in public places as we do but this is the type of stuff that will make us move out to the suburbs in a hurry. I'm positive other young people who bring vibrancy and money to the area feel the same way.

It also pisses me off that the hill in riverfront park is constantly inhabited by these folks if the cops aren't there.

I'm not sure what the best solution is, but not positive throwing more money at it is the answer. Some people legitimately need a hand in helping themselves out of homelessness, while others are choosing to live that way.

[PLANSIT]

Originally Posted by bcp

Why in the hell are we busing people into and out of downtown? Can you expand on what you know on this point? Seems there are much better use of funds to help here...and where the heck are they going to drop them all off?

They are bused between daytime services (healthcare, food, etc.) and night services (sleeping). Most daytime services are located downtown (or adjacent neighborhoods).

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by PLANSIT

They are bused between daytime services (healthcare, food, etc.) and night services (sleeping). Most daytime services are located downtown (or adjacent neighborhoods).

Let's also be clear this is because the city won't add additional beds downtown so that there's a supply shortage of beds versus homeless populace in the core area where the population gathers.

It's too bad that the buses don't head straight to Parker and drop them off there.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by bcp

If our homeless population is increasing , why do we think the same old methods will work?

Which same old methods? A land war in Asia?

[hammersklavier]

Originally Posted by bcp

If our homeless population is increasing , why do we think the same old methods will work?

It isn't just you ... or Denver. Homeless populations are increasing all over. Suburban homelessness and panhandling has skyrocketed in recent years. IIRC it seems to be related to our growing opiates epidemic, you know, the one where Oxycontin is the gateway drug for good old fashioned heroin.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by DUPio

I am glad to hear they are trying to crack down. Walking from union station to riverfront park and over that pedestrian bridge at 8pm last night my girlfriend and I ran into an absurd number of homeless/transients. It felt very sketchy for a supposedly nice area of town at 8pm. This isn't the first time we've ran into something like this either. Homeless people are constantly finding their way into our apartment complex and sleeping inside. I get that if they aren't actively causing trouble they have the same right to be in public places as we do but this is the type of stuff that will make us move out to the suburbs in a hurry. I'm positive other young people who bring vibrancy and money to the area feel the same way.

It also pisses me off that the hill in riverfront park is constantly inhabited by these folks if the cops aren't there.

I suspect the demise of the suburb has been greatly exaggerated.

I think the reason it's not as much of an issue down here is that the parks they tend to hang in aren't urban parks, they're more city parks. One of the more popular ones, Margaret T. Hance Park, interestingly, is where they built a lid over I-10. They also hang under downtown overpasses but they're not in the urban core.

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Let's also be clear this is because the city won't add additional beds downtown so that there's a supply shortage of beds versus homeless populace in the core area where the population gathers.

It's too bad that the buses don't head straight to Parker and drop them off there.

Hmm, feels like there has been quite a lot built over the last decade often as transitional housing. Not the city itself, but according to Denver Infill, the Renaissance Downtown Lofts project by the Colorado Coalition for the Homeless recently broke ground on a 101 units. The previous developments by them include Off Broadway Lofts, Renaissance Riverfront Lofts, Renaissance Uptown Lofts, and Renaissance Stout Street Lofts.

Originally Posted by hammersklavier

It isn't just you ... or Denver. Homeless populations are increasing all over. Suburban homelessness and panhandling has skyrocketed in recent years. IIRC it seems to be related to our growing opiates epidemic, you know, the one where Oxycontin is the gateway drug for good old fashioned heroin.

A lot of it especially among the younger crowd does go to the growing heroin problem. Pretty amazing how the Mexican Cartel(s) have managed to reach all corners of the country.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Which same old methods? A land war in Asia?

I just wanted you to know I was thinking about you when I came across this:


Courtesy of Metrowest Development LLC via DPJ

They just started construction on 18 single-family attached townhomes with two bedrooms, two-and-a-half bathrooms, a two-car garage, and a ground-floor home office with prices starting at $399,000 in the hip, historic “SoRo” area, located south of Roosevelt Street

[Cirrus]

Originally Posted by Scottk

Late last night at Union Station bus center I saw the security guards actively kicking hobos out of the restrooms and banging on the stall doors.

I am sure that people will have mixed reactions but I personally was thrilled to hear this.

We could adopt Europe's method and charge 50 cents to use the bathroom.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

We could adopt Europe's method and charge 50 cents to use the bathroom.

Then they'll pee in the alley. Hell, I'd pee in the alley. Unless it takes credit cards.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

I just wanted you to know I was thinking about you when I came across this:

They just started construction on 18 single-family attached townhomes with two bedrooms, two-and-a-half bathrooms, a two-car garage, and a ground-floor home office with prices starting at $399,000 in the hip, historic “SoRo” area, located south of Roosevelt Street

SoRo? Am I the only one who can't help but say that in a Scooby-Doo voice?

[RyanD]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Then they'll pee in the alley. Hell, I'd pee in the alley. Unless it takes credit cards.

What happens when you need to do the other thing.... Lol.

I'm sure they could accommodate you these days.