HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Mountain West


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #441  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2008, 4:41 AM
Strange Meat's Avatar
Strange Meat Strange Meat is offline
I like this much better
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: 5280
Posts: 8,614
MHM

Mile High Metro.

They could do an iconic logo with that, too.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #442  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2008, 6:12 AM
The Dirt The Dirt is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,215
I like the idea of using the Denver flag since it already has a big M looking thing on it. Add a face-on tunnel and a lightrail car coming out and there you go. Like this:

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #443  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2008, 6:23 AM
Cirrus's Avatar
Cirrus Cirrus is offline
cities|transit|croissants
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,718
lol. We had the branding thread a couple of years ago, too.

Personally, I think the FasTracks name will stick. It's as good as any other; why not?

But when we did this a couple of years ago, I liked the name "Rapid". I felt (and still do) that it's more unique than the now-becoming ubiquitous "Metro", which a lot of people favored.

Here are some of my Rapid concepts:


__________________
writing | twitter | bluesky | flickr | instagram | ssp photo threads
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #444  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2008, 7:00 AM
bunt_q's Avatar
bunt_q bunt_q is offline
Provincial Bumpkin
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 13,203
Quote:
Originally Posted by diablo234 View Post
I mean if a person in Lakewood is taking the light rail to downtown, he or she has to make at least 2 to 3 transfers just to get to 16th & Stout.
Last time I checked, Union Station is downtown. They can take the train downtown, and walk 10 blocks (or since we put our station way out in the valley, make that 13 blocks, or hop on the shuttle for 5 minutes)...

there's not enough capacity on the downtown loop to add in trains from the west corridor, and the inconvenience of an extra stop that an extremely low percentage of riders would use just wasn't worth it. We're not talking a lot of people, and union station (not 16th & stout) is supposed to be the hub. in a few years we're going to have a whole lot of riders coming into downtown who can't get to 16th/stout directly... that's what the streetcar/shuttle/subway discussion is all about!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #445  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2008, 7:05 AM
FrancoRey's Avatar
FrancoRey FrancoRey is offline
Stay Thirsty.
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 2,831
Lawl. Look what I've started with all the logos. I like dirt's; maybe I'll work on a sick hybrid of his & mine's later.
__________________
Denver's getting infill like it's 1999...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #446  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2008, 7:25 AM
SnyderBock's Avatar
SnyderBock SnyderBock is offline
Robotic Construction
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,833
I absorbed your comments about being too far out of the way to share the gold line up to 38th Street (in order to save costs in river and highway crossings).

I came up with an alternative which would still be able to use the Light Rail terminal along the CML. I like this route into Union Station, because it shares the same technology as in light rail technology--the streetcar can be single or double train light rail cars. This route also turns the Light Rail Terminal into a through line, opening the door for future light rail extensions northward (if that would ever be necessary).

So here is my new idea...

1.) Trains would pull out of the Union Station Light Rail terminal to the north along the CML and continue to 20th Street.

2.) At 20th Street, the train turns parallel to 20th Street and elevates over the CML.

3.) After the line crosses the River, while still elevated on the bridge, it would swing back southwestward over 19th Street and down onto Platte Street.

4.) The streetcar would run down Platte Street (either single or double track, depending on which would be best) to 15th Street.

5.) At 15th Street, the streetcar would cross under I-25 and on up to 29th Ave.

6.) The streetcar would then run down 29th Ave to Federal and that would be the end of the first phase of this streetcar line.

7.) An extension of this streetcar could go down Federal Blvd and an end-of-line transfer station at the West Corridor light rail line just south of Colfax on Federal (with a couple of stops along the way, including one right in front of Invesco Field @ Mile High).

8.) A second possible extension could be considered at the triangle intersection at 29th, Speer and Federal Blvd. It could branch off 29th onto Speer taking it into the intersection at 32nd and Federal. It could either go west on 32nd, or continue northward to 38th, then go west on 38th.


P.S. I moved this to this page in case it wasn't visible enough at the end of page 22
__________________
Automation Is Still the Future
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #447  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2008, 5:27 PM
Ilsaz's Avatar
Ilsaz Ilsaz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 265
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
You have to be on Colfax because Colfax is where the rider destinations are, and where there's the most potential for upzoned TOD.

You always put transit closest to the mixed-use neighborhood center.

With a streetcar, you can turn Colfax from a commercial strip into a bona fide urban boulevard.

This...


... Becomes this:
Where in Denver does East Colfax look like that ugly disaster parking lot area? Nowhere. To be sure, I want it improved and to be even more pedestrian friendly. And I want better transit moving people east and west. Just not on Colfax.

I realize a lot of this thread is "let's have fun and play make pretend with light rail options," and I am here to play too. But I am going to insist that Colfax, from Broadway to Colorado Blvd. and even east into Aurora is fine.

The 15 bus does an excellent job moving people along the corridor and East Colfax is easily one of Denver's signature nightlife areas. The Odgen Theater, the Fillmore, The Bluebird, not to mention other cultural institutions like Twist and Shout and the Tattered Cover.

I certainly realize there is a need for better transit between Downtown and the east Metro area. Hence my suggestion for utilizing a parallel corridor rather than demolishing one that is working fine. Has the Light Rail using Santa Fe kept South Broadway from blossoming? Nope. And I don't think moving a Light Rail line a block or two to the north or south of Colfax will trouble anyone.

I think the gist my my complaints is that all of you are seeing Colfax as a medium for transporting people. I see Colfax as the destination itself.

Not to mention that in the era of diminishing tax returns to fund such a project, there are currently problematic transit corridors that need so much more attention than East Colfax.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #448  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2008, 6:09 PM
Cirrus's Avatar
Cirrus Cirrus is offline
cities|transit|croissants
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,718
Those graphics weren't made specifically for Colfax. They're general. You know what they mean.

And no, Colfax is not fine. Colfax is drastically underused. It is the sort of place that under any regional Smart Growth plan should be a catchment area for much, much higher density. Such densities can be supported far more efficiently (and livably) with transit on Colfax.

Transit isn't like driving. It's not just as good to get nearby and then take a surface street. It's far more important for transit lines to go where the people are than for highways.
__________________
writing | twitter | bluesky | flickr | instagram | ssp photo threads
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #449  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2008, 6:24 PM
Ilsaz's Avatar
Ilsaz Ilsaz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 265
I'm on your side, Cirrus. I want Colfax and Denver to be better. But the thrust of this thread is light rail and other transit options, and every map proposal here blots out Colfax. I really think the combination of buses on Colfax, traffic on 14th and 13th and bikes on 12th and 16th works well enough.

To be sure, a subway running under east Colfax might not be a bad thing if it could be built with minimum disruptions (quite possible with 13th and 14th and 17 and 18th couplets). I even like the idea of street cars and moving more auto traffic away from Colfax so it could be an even grander urban corridor.

But when I think of what I want for an urban neighborhood, Colfax is pretty damn spot on, at least from Broadway to Colorado. To be sure, there are plenty of problem spots and surface lots. But I thought this was already being taken care of with new streetfront zoning regs for new construction.

What is wrong with how Colfax is now? What is underutilized about it? E. Colfax is a great street with plenty of urban charm. West Colfax, between Speer and Federal on the other hand? That's another story. That is an underutilized corridor. But try riding the 15 any time of day and tell me Colfax is underutilized.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #450  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2008, 6:42 PM
Cirrus's Avatar
Cirrus Cirrus is offline
cities|transit|croissants
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,718
It's the land use, not the buses, that are underutilized. Even at its densest Colfax is pretty sparse. It seems dense in comparison to the rest of Denver, and it is, but Denver is a pretty low-density city.

The buses are about as good as they can get given what's there, but that's one of the reasons why we need rail in the corridor. At higher ridership levels, rail performs better (more efficiently, cheaper) than buses. Ridership on Colfax is right at the tipping point between where service can be provided more efficiently via bus or rail, so if we're ever going to have more riders there, it will make sense to serve them via trains instead of buses.

You're saying Colfax doesn't need trains because Colfax is already sorta dense and already has sorta good transit. We're saying the fact that Colfax already has those things makes its ceiling much higher than other corridors. We can accomplish more there than we can in other parts of the city.
__________________
writing | twitter | bluesky | flickr | instagram | ssp photo threads
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #451  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2008, 6:44 PM
bunt_q's Avatar
bunt_q bunt_q is offline
Provincial Bumpkin
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 13,203
hmm... it sounded at first like you were viewing Colfax as a transportation corridor and Cirrus viewed it as a destination. You can never have too many people in a place. How would a streetcar take away from Colfax? I just don't see it... and absolutely it's underutilized... it has charm, yes, but it could be much, much better. Exactly because the 15 is full is why we need better transit... buses are limited. You take your best bus routes, and you make them better (rail)... you don't keep the good ones and upgrade mediocre ones in the vain hope to draw people to the other corridor as well. You go where the people are, and where they want to be. Putting transit a few blocks off of Colfax - where people want to be - completely defeats the purpose of providing the transit.

The main street zoning will help, but it'll also have its limits... and eventually a day will come when cars alone won't suffice for that corridor. Not to mention, if you buy that transit drives development (and numerous cities have great examples... the Pearl District in Portland being the obvious one), you need the streetcar to speed up Colfax development. It may take a generation or more to see any real redevelopment along East Colfax with conditions as they are today. The streetcar adds a new dimension nobody builds around a bus route... maybe BRT, and I think that might be worth discussing for colfax... but that's still not saying that things are good enough as they are). Not to mention... and this is anything but PC... but normal people don't ride the 15. The 15 is an experience, but not one that choice riders want...

West Colfax is a whole different animal... it's more like and Evans or a Hampden than east Colfax... it has a long ways to go before it can realize any sort of urban potential. Not even worth discussing rail there (and with the west corridor coming close, but not quite close enough, it's too late... Good comparison though, do you think the west corridor along 13th is going to be a good vehicle for improving west colfax? Because that's exactly what it would be like if you put a streetcar/light rail down a corridor parallel to east colfax. it'd be worthless for addin to the vitality of the place).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #452  
Old Posted Nov 14, 2008, 11:58 PM
SnyderBock's Avatar
SnyderBock SnyderBock is offline
Robotic Construction
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,833
Here is some great news from Kevin Flynn, Rocky Mountain news!

Quote:
Light-rail signs soon could display arrival info
By Kevin Flynn, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)
Published November 14, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.

RTD expects its information signs at light-rail stations, which have been stuck on little else except "Welcome to RTD" for two years, to soon start displaying the train-arrival information they were meant to show.

The static welcome message on the red LED signs has been displayed almost nonstop since the Southeast Corridor, built as part of the T-REX project, opened two years ago. The signs are supposed to inform waiting passengers how long it will be until the next train arrives.

Rick Clarke, T-REX project manager, told RTD board members Thursday night that the system has been tested and is mostly working. General Electric, subcontractor to T-REX builder Southeast Corridor Constructors, is now reprogramming signs at five downtown stations.

When operational, the system is supposed to start announcing arrivals when trains are three minutes out.

After T-REX construction was under way, RTD got a federal grant to expand the system to some downtown and Littleton line stations, including Broadway, Alameda, Englewood, Littleton and Mineral. But because of problems with receivers along the tracks, the system has had difficulty picking up data from the moving trains and transmitting it to the signs.

As a result, RTD has simply posted the phrase "Welcome to RTD" on the signs. RTD has withheld payment of $5 million of the $22 million communications portion of the T-REX contract until the problem is fixed.

Clarke said the signs at the downtown stations at the Colorado Convention Center, 16th and California streets, 18th and California, 16th and Stout and 18th and Stout are being modified so that instead of giving an arrival countdown, they will display the destination of the next arriving train. RTD had found that downtown traffic and signals often delayed trains so the countdown wasn't reliable.

RTD board members also gave preliminary approval to a $1.35 billion budget for 2009 that ramps up spending on the FasTracks program to $792 million. This year's FasTracks spending was $181 million.

Click here to go to full article on Rocky Mountain News Site
__________________
Automation Is Still the Future
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #453  
Old Posted Nov 15, 2008, 1:01 AM
Cirrus's Avatar
Cirrus Cirrus is offline
cities|transit|croissants
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,718
Quote:
problems with receivers along the tracks, the system has had difficulty picking up data from the moving trains
Oh for goodness sake, why are we trying to reinvent the wheel here?

NextBus's GPS system works just fine. Use that.
__________________
writing | twitter | bluesky | flickr | instagram | ssp photo threads
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #454  
Old Posted Nov 15, 2008, 1:34 AM
SnyderBock's Avatar
SnyderBock SnyderBock is offline
Robotic Construction
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,833
General Electric won the bid for their system and it has already been built and RTD has already paid $15 million of the $20 million price tag. Anyway, they have it working now, so it seems fine to me.
__________________
Automation Is Still the Future
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #455  
Old Posted Nov 15, 2008, 3:10 AM
bunt_q's Avatar
bunt_q bunt_q is offline
Provincial Bumpkin
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 13,203
There was no such thing as GPS when they bid that sucker out the better part of a *decade* ago... sigh...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #456  
Old Posted Nov 19, 2008, 6:00 PM
Fritzdude Fritzdude is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,006
FYI: on the RTD sponsored forums - I got this reponse back on bike access on the upcoming commuter rail lines:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dave,
Do you foresee any accomodations that will be made for bikers in the future? The current Light-Rail trains make it very inconvenient for riders to bring aboard their bikes, but it would be nice to see a car that had space alloted for riders, which would encourage people to bring them on board. Any insight into that possibility?

Dave S
Global Moderator
Full Member

This is certainly a topic we have heard about from the public at our meetings, and we will take bike access to our stations and trains very seriously. Currently, we have requirements included in our vehicle specifications that say that locations will be provided for bicycles on our trains. It’s a little too early to know exactly what that will look like. However, since our vehicles will have level boarding (rather than going up the stairs), it should be more convenient for bicyclists.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #457  
Old Posted Nov 19, 2008, 7:24 PM
Strange Meat's Avatar
Strange Meat Strange Meat is offline
I like this much better
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: 5280
Posts: 8,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnyderBock View Post
Here is some great news from Kevin Flynn, Rocky Mountain news!
I saw them installing/testing that system at the Colfax/Auraria station a few months back. It'll be good to see that up and running.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #458  
Old Posted Nov 19, 2008, 9:35 PM
FrancoRey's Avatar
FrancoRey FrancoRey is offline
Stay Thirsty.
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 2,831
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fritzdude View Post
It’s a little too early to know exactly what that will look like. However, since our vehicles will have level boarding (rather than going up the stairs), it should be more convenient for bicyclists.

Woah. Level boarding? When is this supposed to take place? Are they re-doing all the platforms and cutting the stairs out of the trains? Or are they buying new cars? I need to know more.
__________________
Denver's getting infill like it's 1999...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #459  
Old Posted Nov 19, 2008, 10:03 PM
bcp's Avatar
bcp bcp is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 5,143
LRT seems set for the long run to remain 'high-block'....but these trains will be at the second staton rather than DUS.

DMU and EMU can certainly be boarded at grade, certainly would be a nice change.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #460  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2008, 4:35 AM
1Post2's Avatar
1Post2 1Post2 is offline
going there, no direction
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: the road to nowhere
Posts: 1,212
The level boarding will be on the DMU/EMU commuter trains, which will operate on tracks two or three feet below grade at stations so that the train floor is flush with the platform.
__________________
I'm in a music video.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Mountain West
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:25 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.