DENVER | Transportation Thread

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by trubador

I'm not sure what the holdup on the R line has been. The track has been complete for at least 3 or 4 months and they are doing the final touches on all the stations, but I am still not seeing the test trains run end to end.

According to the DBJ article that Agent Orange linked to by Cathy Proctor on 11/18:

Tobiassen said a computer circuit board on the R Line’s electronic systems didn’t work properly. A replacement has to come from Switzerland, be installed and tested.

“The testing between RTD, Kiewit and Aurora is critical,” he said “They haven’t turned the system over to RTD yet and RTD needs a minimum of 45 days to work it in.”

RTD is now thinking the R Line may be opened in mid-January, Tobiassen said.

[Denver Dweller]

http://www.denverpost.com/2016/11/22/judge-hears-arguments-highlands-ranch-halt-c-470-expansion/

[EngiNerd]

I love that the people who live on the highway are choosing now to complain about the highway noise just so they can get themselves a sound barrier built on everyone else's dime.

"“It gets really loud,” Brian Gates said outside the courthouse in downtown Denver. “I sometimes have to close the windows and turn on the air-conditioning in the summer so I can hear my TV.”"

No sh*t! You bought a house on the highway!!!! I lived near I-25 when I was downtown, and yes it was loud...you just learn to shut your windows at night, but I knew exactly what I was getting into. They should write their president elect, I hear he is sympathetic to building walls.

[TakeFive]

Image courtesy of In Motion Kite Surfing/Camera & Edit: Koen van Herk

Comment: The City/County of Denver simply has too much on its plate to accomplish the much needed transit that many envision.
Presumably there will be a variety of transportation projects in the 2017 GO Bond Proposal to voters including the East Colfax Enhanced Buses. But beyond this Denver will need to go back to the region and RTD District to accomplish anything more serious and ambitious.

The Big Picture
Using the recent examples of transportation/transit proposals in November's election PLUS last year's Phoenix voter approved proposal I've come up with...

The Metro Denver Plan
Utilizing both sales and property tax increases The Plan's goal is to raise approximately $20 Billion over roughly 25 years. While Seattle used 100% leverage and Phoenix 90% leverage in their publicity projections, a 60% leverage factor seems much more realistic (and conservative). That would mean a total of about $32 Billion of investments and spending over the next 25 years. Obviously the idea is to accelerate projects to benefit from near term dollar costs and appeal of quicker availability to resident voters.

Saleability:
Obviously the best and sexiest plan isn't worth a tinker's damn if you can't win voter approval. The Metro Denver Plan is designed to engage and excite the vast majority of (metro) residents and voters.

It's Magic:
The Metro Denver Plan incorporates magic and is designed to achieve magical results.

More (exciting) details coming soon...

[PLANSIT]

^ The City is working on strategies to fund transportation beyond GO2017. There is a recognition that per capita, Denver (city) is not spending as much as cities we are often compared to. Some cities spend 2-3x what we do (per capita). We are falling behind.

[TakeFive]

^ I'm aware... and that's a good thing. When you refer to city per capita spending are you thinking of just the city proper or the MSA? Seattle's Sound Transit 3, for example, is a regional effort. Also, what cities are you comparing Denver to?

[PLANSIT]

Denver's peers include Seattle, Portland, Austin, Minny, etc.

Per capita is for city, not region or metro.

Sound Transit 3 is just one of several initiatives in the Seattle region. Seattle proper has a levy increase just for transportation. While Denver region continues to strategize State and Metro transportation efforts, Denver (city of) is looking to partner in those opportunities as well find solutions internally.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by PLANSIT

Denver's peers include Seattle, Portland, Austin, Minny, etc.

Per capita is for city, not region or metro.

Sound Transit 3 is just one of several initiatives in the Seattle region. Seattle proper has a levy increase just for transportation. While Denver region continues to strategize State and Metro transportation efforts, Denver (city of) is looking to partner in those opportunities as well find solutions internally.

Move Seattle is similar in scope to GO2017 except it's transportation specific and more flexible while GO2017 will presumably be about half transportation and project specific. Portland ofc has the distinct advantage of being a fiefdom where most cities need voter approval. The Twin Cities has (in the past) received a lot of state direct support for their transit projects.

The Metro Denver Plan will go a long ways in Denver taking that next step. It is designed for maximum flexibility while including some specificity. Hint: based on a $32 billion total, Denver will receive its pro rata share of about $19.2 billion as one part of the plan - and that's before incorporating any magic.

EDIT: change $19.2 billion to $17.6 Billion (I forgot my plan's specifics)

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

=The Metro Denver Plan will go a long ways in Denver taking that next step. It is designed for maximum flexibility while including some specificity. Hint: based on a $32 billion total, Denver will receive its pro rata share of about $19.2 billion as one part of the plan - and that's before incorporating any magic.

EDIT: change $19.2 billion to $17.6 Billion (I forgot my plan's specifics)

Sounds like Guide the Ride and the lesson learned from that one (which might no longer be relevant) is that open ended plans tax plans are doomed in Colorado.

I'm interested to see what Denver itself comes up with trying for a Denver Metro plan. GO2017 isn't going to do much for transit or transportation infrastructure in general in terms of expansion, so I want to see what is envisioned with Denver Moves. That way there's a fallback when the Metro Denver Plan (name isn't catchy enough IMO) fails spectacularly.

[CPVLIVE]

Don't hold your breath wong. No one in this admin is all that concerned with transit. It's far down the list of "priorities". They are more than willing to defer to the state or RTD.

[TakeFive]

I just spent enough time on Denver Moves/Denveright links that I fell asleep twice and got two headaches. At the risk of my doing that to others I've decided to jump ahead and put some meat out there. I have all the respect for professionals as they do the gritty detail work that's needed but.... Good Lord. Problem is I'm a Big Picture Guy.

Let's look at the transit piece of The Plan
With projected tax revenue of $20 billion, RTD will receive about 45% of that amount or $9 billion. Chances are these funds can be leveraged by maybe 75% for an additional $6.75 billion for a total of $15.75 billion.

For now I want to set aside approximately 40% of that for Matching Funds (to be explained later) leaving roughly $9.5 billion. Let's go spend some of that.

Phase One Priorities - Part One

Line B

• Funding for ROW acquisition up to Flatiron
• Extension of B Line to a new station at Westminster's New Downtown

N Line

• N Line extension to the next station at York/144th

A Line

• Additional A Line double tracking if needed

R Line

• We're going to fix this clustermess by running a new segment along I-225 with a new Park N Ride Station at Alameda. (yes there are good reasons)

SW Rail extension

[rct]

Is there any chance for Amtrak train service between fort collins/denver/co springs?

[TakeFive]

Phase One Priorities - Part Two

Urban Signature Project

A new light rail line to run from Civic Center Station down Broadway and then along the Speer Blvd./Leetsdale Corridor to some point past Monaco Parkway PLUS an additional extension along Broadway to the I-25/Broadway Station.

Back in 2005, Senors Boland & Malouff estimated a cost of $50 million per mile for this type of line. Weeell, times have changed and I'll estimate $125 million per mile (at a minimum). I'm guestimating the distance for all this as 8 miles which suggests a cost in the neighborhood of $1 billion. I do recommend nice new rolling stock.

Leetsdale Drive presumably will need a substantial rebuild. Since it's a state highway/83 (or in any case) I suggest that DRCOG cover 75% of the cost from their new pot of transportation funds while RTD covers the other 25% and also pays for any needed ROW acquisition. Denver can pay the cost to bridge Monaco Pkwy over Leetsdale from their new pot of transportation funds.

Personally I think this route/corridor is EXTREMELY attractive for light rail. Subsequent phases could extend this line all the way to I-225 at either Nine Mile Station or at Iliff Station. Costs for this should be less, maybe quite a bit less per mile than for this First Phase segment. My costs presume grade separation at University and Colorado in addition to Monaco at a minimum.

Anyone have other ideas how RTD can spend some money for new transit?

[CastleScott]

Anyone have other ideas how RTD can spend some money for new transit?

Sure! How about some BRT on Federal, Colorado Bvld and maybe Wadsworth on the westside. I'll come up with some more later..

Is there any chance for Amtrak train service between fort collins/denver/co springs?

Sure-CDOT could team up with Amtrak and local cities and run an Amtrak Colorado service-similar in scope to Amtrak California (which CalTrans teams with them and local cities/counties). This could be done with say 950mil to 1.5 billion for faster service..

Just my 2 cents here..

[seventwenty]

Originally Posted by CastleScott

This could be done with say 950mil to 1.5 billion for faster service..

Closer to $6 billion when the idea was studied. I guess $3 billion if you wanted just to upgrade the freight lines to higher speed rail.

[COS]

While high speed rail is desperately needed, I fear using the freight lines would never work, they're so busy with coal alone between Denver and COS. Even if it was half the cost, it would be a waste of $3B because of how the freight service would limit the passenger schedules. And building more double line sections to park freight to let passenger lines pass would be even more expensive and limit commerce.

I think it'll be interesting to see how to utilize the investment. Do you build the rail on the eastern half of both COS and Denver metros? COS airport, have a station somewhere on/near Founders Pkwy in Castle Rock, tie into the light rail once in the southeast suburbs, hit DIA, and tie into light rail in north suburbs. Then up north do you run along the west to hit Longmont/Loveland/FoCo, and split at the top to run a line out to Greeley?

I think the real question is whether people in CO will vote on transit infrastructure like this, or will they want to keep spending money on having 8+ lane freeways everywhere. I have a feeling the population will keep growing to the point that I-25 will always feel undersized, especially since Denver will always be the business center of the Front Range.

[seventwenty]

Much of this stuff has been studied, bruhs. I-25 north has an EIS out.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by COS

While high speed rail is desperately needed, I fear using the freight lines would never work, they're so busy with coal alone between Denver and COS. Even if it was half the cost, it would be a waste of $3B because of how the freight service would limit the passenger schedules. And building more double line sections to park freight to let passenger lines pass would be even more expensive and limit commerce.

This is correct, there is no excess capacity on the existing freight line over Monument Hill.

[Cirrus]

Specifics aside, these are common general problems that other parts of the country have solved.Has anyone ever studied just tacking on another track or two to the side of the freight line? That would be an order of magnitude less cost than high speed rail. It's about $7 million/mile when we do that here. If you publicly fund it, your MOU with the freight companies includes provisions guaranteeing adequate passenger access.

[CastleScott]

I guess $3 billion if you wanted just to upgrade the freight lines to higher speed rail.

Ok I'm sure the 6bil is quite close to the high-speed estimate. As for the 3 Billion- example: the Chicago-St Louis corridor has run almost 3.3bil to slap down concrete ties, heavier class 5 rail, up-grade the signal system and do a handfull of grade separations-with Union Pacific still running 15-18 friegths a day. So therefore the Obama Admin did seem to miscue on this one (although this is a good example of what higher-speed can do).

Back in the mid 90s I was on CDOT"s Rail Advisory Committee.