HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #11241  
Old Posted Mar 26, 2018, 4:57 PM
CastleScott CastleScott is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Sacramento Ca/formerly CastleRock Co
Posts: 1,055
^ Yup here's some info on that Federal Bill:
https://www.progressiverailroading.c...ingboost-under
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11242  
Old Posted Mar 26, 2018, 6:58 PM
TakeFive's Avatar
TakeFive TakeFive is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,556
Quote:
Originally Posted by CastleScott View Post
^ Yup here's some info on that Federal Bill:
https://www.progressiverailroading.c...ingboost-under
Thanks; that's a more specific breakout of the various funding programs.
This link should work better though: https://www.progressiverailroading.c...us-bill--54263


Oh Boy.... ready in time for the Rockies

http://denver.cbslocal.com/2018/03/2...tion-benefits/
Quote:
Service returned to a normal schedule at the Lincoln and County Line Stations at 3 a.m. on Monday. The goal was to get the work finished before the Colorado Rockies home opener on April 4.
What'd you do down there?
Quote:
Crews removed about 1,600 feet of existing track and railing among other components which created a “completely reconfigured track.” It includes a third track to be used for storing extra train cars.

“I live in Parker, so depends on where the line ends up, but it’ll probably be helpful,” said one passenger. “I understand what they’re trying to do to improve the line and add that station down to the south which will actually be beneficial to me. I live south, so it’ll shorten my commute to the station,” said another passenger.
It won't be long before there will be a steady line of cars coming up from Castle Rock and over from Parker to the new SE light rail stations and just hoping there's still a parking spot left when they get there.
__________________
Cool... Denver has reached puberty.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11243  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2018, 1:48 AM
CastleScott CastleScott is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Sacramento Ca/formerly CastleRock Co
Posts: 1,055
^ Thanks for the adjustment TakeFive.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11244  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2018, 5:50 PM
TakeFive's Avatar
TakeFive TakeFive is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,556
It may only seem like roads are going to pot but...


Source

In Denver pot is going into roads:
An Extra $1M In Pot Tax Revenue Going To Paving Denver’s Streets

This is fun:
Records Detail Blown Stops, Speeding And Other Issues On RTD's Commuter Rail Lines
__________________
Cool... Denver has reached puberty.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11245  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2018, 5:51 PM
TakeFive's Avatar
TakeFive TakeFive is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,556

Image courtesy RTD

ATTEND A TELEPHONE TOWN HALL TO LEARN ABOUT CURRENT PROJECTS
Posted on 03.12.18
Quote:
RTD will be holding a series of Telephone Town Halls to keep the community informed about current operations, status of projects and programs as well
as upcoming plans for the district. There will be 15 telephone town hall events, one for each RTD district, as well as a Spanish language session.
__________________
Cool... Denver has reached puberty.

Last edited by TakeFive; Mar 27, 2018 at 9:42 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11246  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2018, 7:55 PM
EngiNerd's Avatar
EngiNerd EngiNerd is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Englewood, CO
Posts: 1,998
Quote:
Originally Posted by TakeFive View Post
It may only seem like roads are going to pot but...


Source

In Denver pot is going into roads:
An Extra $1M In Pot Tax Revenue Going To Paving Denver’s Streets
Filling potholes with pot money!
__________________
"The engineer is the key figure in the material progress of the world. It is his engineering that makes a reality of the potential value of science by translating scientific knowledge into tools, resources, energy and labor to bring them into the service of man. To make contributions of this kind the engineer requires the imagination to visualize the need of society and to appreciate what is possible as well as the technological and broad social age understanding to bring his vision to reality."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11247  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2018, 8:53 PM
TakeFive's Avatar
TakeFive TakeFive is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,556
Quote:
Originally Posted by EngiNerd View Post
Filling potholes with pot money!
well done.


You can't make this **it up

RTD Train Drives Over Person Lying On Tracks; Person Not Hurt
__________________
Cool... Denver has reached puberty.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11248  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2018, 1:30 PM
LooksLikeForever LooksLikeForever is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 55
Some pretty damning statistics about RTD's commuter rail lines in a recent CPR report: https://www.cpr.org/news/story/safet...ter-rail-lines

"Certified locomotive engineers that operate the Regional Transportation District’s A Line to Denver International Airport and B Line to Westminster have made dozens of serious mistakes in the last two years, some of which have endangered the public.

Incidents include speeding, blown red signals and even a few derailments in the maintenance yard, according to internal disciplinary records obtained by CPR News. The documents don’t indicate whether anyone was injured. In each case, the engineer was decertified — meaning they were suspended without pay for at least 15 days, or in some cases, fired."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11249  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2018, 3:49 PM
Cirrus's Avatar
Cirrus Cirrus is offline
cities|transit|croissants
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,344
Quote:
Originally Posted by bunt_q
For fun comparison:
Shockingly when you spend 70 years designing everything around cars, building large mostly free-to-use road and parking networks, and adopting land use regulations that result in virtually everyone living in places where it's impractical to get around via any other means, yes highways do get a lot more users.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TakeFive
It puts to shame your theory that lines that run along freeways or freight corridors are 'bad' and lines that go through neighborhoods are 'good.'
Oh jesus.

Everything revolves around land use. Those stations are getting decent ridership because they hit a sweet spot where there is 1) supportive land use and demographics within their catchment area, and 2) for some, their catchment area (ie the area they draw riders from) is very large, so there are many people for whom these are the most convenient stations.

They are not getting ridership *because* they're along the highway. They're getting ridership for other, unrelated reasons, that are strong enough ridership generators to overcome the inherent weaknessess of having a circumferential line along a highway.

Generally speaking the reason to not put stations along highways is that you get better land use fundamentals. That's not currently true for the middle-of-an-empty-field Aurora Metro Center station, but it's typically true.

It's OK for stations like Nine Mile, that draw from many miles away, to be park-and-ride oriented. This goes to what I've said before: Large park-and-ride stations are fine, it's the small ones that draw from a small area but are still car-oriented that are really lost opportunities.

Meanwhile, a line that had the same land use fundamentals but was 1) more integrated with that land use, and 2) went directly to downtown rather than going on a long loop around south, would surely have higher ridership than this current line. The fact that this is not the lowest ridership line does not mean it's as high as it could be given the land use. Of course this current line was easy to build, which matters too.

It's not that it's "bad." It's that in a perfect world you could do a lot better.

We have had this discussion before.
__________________
writing | twitter | flickr | instagram | ssp photo threads
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11250  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2018, 6:17 PM
bunt_q's Avatar
bunt_q bunt_q is offline
Provincial Bumpkin
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 13,201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
and adopting land use regulations that result in virtually everyone living in places where it's impractical to get around via any other means, yes highways do get a lot more users.

Everything revolves around land use. Those stations are getting decent ridership because they hit a sweet spot where there is 1) supportive land use and demographics within their catchment area, and 2) for some, their catchment area (ie the area they draw riders from) is very large, so there are many people for whom these are the most convenient stations.

They are not getting ridership *because* they're along the highway. They're getting ridership for other, unrelated reasons, that are strong enough ridership generators to overcome the inherent weaknessess of having a circumferential line along a highway.

Generally speaking the reason to not put stations along highways is that you get better land use fundamentals. That's not currently true for the middle-of-an-empty-field Aurora Metro Center station, but it's typically true.

It's OK for stations like Nine Mile, that draw from many miles away, to be park-and-ride oriented. This goes to what I've said before: Large park-and-ride stations are fine, it's the small ones that draw from a small area but are still car-oriented that are really lost opportunities.

Meanwhile, a line that had the same land use fundamentals but was 1) more integrated with that land use, and 2) went directly to downtown rather than going on a long loop around south, would surely have higher ridership than this current line. The fact that this is not the lowest ridership line does not mean it's as high as it could be given the land use. Of course this current line was easy to build, which matters too.
Yes. But we haven't changed the land use. Which we regulate 110%. This isn't a chicken and egg problem. Until we have the political will to change the land use, investing more in transportation solutions that do not work for a widely dispersed built environment does not make sense. Frankly, RTD already gets too much money relative to CDOT for what it delivers.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11251  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2018, 7:00 PM
Cirrus's Avatar
Cirrus Cirrus is offline
cities|transit|croissants
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,344
You're right. Most of America's willingness to change the land use, including Denver/Colorado's, has been disappointingly weak. Part of the deal is supposed to be that building the rail line gives you political cover to meaningfully upzone, and that is not happening enough.

It doesn't help that we're building a bunch of lines where south Aurora counts as "relatively supportive land use," and where we're calling a line that carries 60% of the Colfax bus a high-ridership location. This is what TakeFive, in his insistence that it's a great success, is getting wrong. His bar is looooow.

All that being said, you're still not making an honest comparison. CDOT's budget over the last 20 years isn't why there are 200,000 cars at I-25 & Colorado. It cost hundreds of billions over decades to build the supporting infrastructure (and land use) that made that happen. The amount we've spent on FasTracks is a pittance compared to the entire historic road network feeding I-25.
__________________
writing | twitter | flickr | instagram | ssp photo threads
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11252  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2018, 8:30 PM
TakeFive's Avatar
TakeFive TakeFive is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,556
Quote:
Originally Posted by bunt_q View Post
Yes. But we haven't changed the land use. Which we regulate 110%. This isn't a chicken and egg problem. Until we have the political will to change the land use, investing more in transportation solutions that do not work for a widely dispersed built environment does not make sense. Frankly, RTD already gets too much money relative to CDOT for what it delivers.
Very fair point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
All that being said, you're still not making an honest comparison. CDOT's budget over the last 20 years isn't why there are 200,000 cars at I-25 & Colorado. It cost hundreds of billions over decades to build the supporting infrastructure (and land use) that made that happen. The amount we've spent on FasTracks is a pittance compared to the entire historic road network feeding I-25.
Exactly true and while I can appreciate that perspective...

I've gotten nauseated-tired of the constant whining over what our market-driven economy created over the decades. It's done, it's already baked into the cake, it's ancient history. It's pointless to bemoan what did or didn't happen just as Nashville would waste time if they bemoaned what transit they didn't build 10, 20 years ago at a much lower cost. (Btw, I've always got Streetsblog noise in my ear when I make these comments)

The relevant, poignant question is: "Where do we go from here?"
__________________
Cool... Denver has reached puberty.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11253  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2018, 8:55 PM
TakeFive's Avatar
TakeFive TakeFive is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
It doesn't help that we're building a bunch of lines where south Aurora counts as "relatively supportive land use," and where we're calling a line that carries 60% of the Colfax bus a high-ridership location. This is what TakeFive, in his insistence that it's a great success, is getting wrong. His bar is looooow.
I really did a good chuckle out of that. What's interesting to me is not that we disagree but why we have different ideas.

Odd but fun Story
I assume by now everyone is familiar with the idiom "Farm-to-Market" or even "Farm-to-Table." For those that are familiar with the agricultural economy then you know that crops end up in Big Trucks, Big Silos, Big Freight Train cars, etc.

I swear... I have to wonder if most Steetsblogger's that buy all those little boxes or bags of peas, carrots and beans, not to mention the daily bread they buy at Whole Foods, if they don't think all those little boxes and bags shouldn't just be shipped by the farmer like that on an articulated bus?

Point being: our perspectives on FasTracks (for example) are from different books. Everything depends on definitions, expectations and how they are defined or perhaps marketed by the Big Bad Industrial Complex.
__________________
Cool... Denver has reached puberty.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11254  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2018, 9:19 PM
TakeFive's Avatar
TakeFive TakeFive is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
Oh jesus.
Yes, how can I help?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
We have had this discussion before.
Srsly? It must be my aging memory loss. (hehe)
I do enjoy poking you in the ribs on occasion though.
Admittedly, your answers are (almost) always, top notch.
I might disagree some on relevance and context though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
It's not that it's "bad." It's that in a perfect world you could do a lot better.
Oh... Okay.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bunt_q View Post
Frankly, RTD already gets too much money relative to CDOT for what it delivers.
I almost forgot; today is a Big Day in court, eh?
__________________
Cool... Denver has reached puberty.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11255  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2018, 10:11 PM
Cirrus's Avatar
Cirrus Cirrus is offline
cities|transit|croissants
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,344


Quote:
Originally Posted by TakeFive
The relevant, poignant question is: "Where do we go from here?"
Agreed. And so the question is not whether FasTracks has delivered as much ridership as I-25. The question is whether the growth pattern of funneling everything around I-25 is what we want going forward. If it's not, then we have to find ways to make our preferred alternatives work. That's what FasTracks is all about, shifting to a different alternative, which even under the best possible circumstances would take decades. And I think we all agree about that. I also think we all agree that the land use component will ultimately determine FasTrack's success or failure. Where I'm not sure we all agree is whether we think the land use component is on track to ultimately succeed, and how much the trade-offs that went into FasTracks' layout will hinder its ultimate success.
__________________
writing | twitter | flickr | instagram | ssp photo threads
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11256  
Old Posted Mar 29, 2018, 1:04 AM
TakeFive's Avatar
TakeFive TakeFive is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
If it's not, then we have to find ways to make our preferred alternatives work. That's what FasTracks is all about, shifting to a different alternative, which even under the best possible circumstances would take decades. And I think we all agree about that. I also think we all agree that the land use component will ultimately determine FasTrack's success or failure. Where I'm not sure we all agree is whether we think the land use component is on track to ultimately succeed, and how much the trade-offs that went into FasTracks' layout will hinder its ultimate success.
Well said but let me add context.

Not something we haven't talked about before but Denver - the city and its inner ring of suburbs... none of it has any particular density. I debated recently with planner-in-progress and he doesn't see Speer Blvd or even So Broadway as having the requisite density for light rail and bemoaned NIMBY resistance. My answer was that you can't just plop down density; it takes decades even in a booming economy. So yes, it all will take time to fulfill it's potential - virtually anywhere in Denver you might prefer.

The 2nd issue is that I've taken a step up on the ladder to look around. You want density sooner or later to be the (only) answer and I contend it's as much of a 'first and last mile' issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
It's OK for stations like Nine Mile, that draw from many miles away, to be park-and-ride oriented. This goes to what I've said before: Large park-and-ride stations are fine, it's the small ones that draw from a small area but are still car-oriented that are really lost opportunities.
It was only recently that I learned that Nine Mile has TEN buses feeding into it. Common sense suggests that parking provides roughly a third of the current ridership while the other two-thirds comes via bus. Bingo; first and last mile access solved. I would say that RTD knew well what they were doing.

I think Nine Mile can double their ridership over the next decade which would put it up their where I-25/Broadway station is - today. The redevelopment of the shopping center which will include apartments and additional RTD parking with a bridge to be added over Parker Rd is only part of the reasons.

The SE Corridor stations through the tech center are mostly a destination so while ideal mixed use might be nice, generally the people who would live there wouldn't ride light rail to work because the already (likely) live where they work. I could make other excuses; point being that context is everything.

Ultimately, I'm still interested in and think that the first and last mile access issues can be solved so that having the prototypical station with high density may not be the yuge obstacle the 'planners' insist on making it.

Lastly; I like that gif and bookmarked it - although I had to find it on Google images to do so.
__________________
Cool... Denver has reached puberty.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11257  
Old Posted Mar 29, 2018, 7:01 PM
TakeFive's Avatar
TakeFive TakeFive is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,556
A Big Fat Curve Ball

The Chess game continues...

Sooo, a couple of days ago the Colorado Senate passed a hard-earned transportation compromise (extracted from the Republicans) by a vote of 35-0. So what did the House do when SB1 arrived? They found a stick of dynamite and blew it to smithereens.

https://www.bizjournals.com/denver/n...-new-road.html
Quote:
House Speaker Crisanta Duran, D-Denver, resisted calls from some in her caucus to move some or all of the transportation-funding money to education, but she insisted it be divided between the state, local governments and a fund for transit to bike lane projects. An amendment added by Duran and Rep. Faith Winter, D-Westminster, divides the allotted $495 million 35 percent to the state, 25 percent to cities, 25 percent to counties and 15 percent to the multi-modal project fund.
A rather cunning move which I didn't see coming.

With an extra $1.3 billion in next year's budget Gov Hickenlooper had recommended a one-time infusion of $500 million for CDOT. Certainly the Senate unanimously thought this was a good idea. But the Dem controlled House had a different idea. They suggest CDOT should receive only 35% of that $500 million... LOL.

Stroke of genius? What I see is a clear message to the Republicans that if you want CDOT to receive the money they need then you need to join with Dems and support a voter initiative for increased taxes and revenue for CDOT. Works for me.

Go Rockies!!!!!!
__________________
Cool... Denver has reached puberty.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11258  
Old Posted Mar 30, 2018, 1:35 PM
LooksLikeForever LooksLikeForever is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 55
It looks like flaggers along the A-Line are ready to be dismissed, and the G-line gets conditional approval: http://www.9news.com/article/news/lo...s/73-532876436
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11259  
Old Posted Mar 30, 2018, 7:28 PM
TakeFive's Avatar
TakeFive TakeFive is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,556
Quote:
Originally Posted by LooksLikeForever View Post
It looks like flaggers along the A-Line are ready to be dismissed, and the G-line gets conditional approval: http://www.9news.com/article/news/lo...s/73-532876436
Slowly I turned. step by step, inch by inch...
Looks like finally, finally the light at the end of what has been a deep, dark tunnel is in sight.


It's now official
DIA moves back into the top 5 busiest U.S. airports

According FlyDenver:
Quote:
DENVER – March 27, 2018 – After serving nearly 61.4 million passengers in 2017, Denver International Airport
(DEN) has reclaimed the spot for the fifth busiest airport in the United States. This distinction comes on the heels of being voted the “Best Regional Airport: North America” by travelers, according to the prestigious 2018 Skytrax World Airport Awards. Through Skytrax, DEN received several other honors, including:
  • Top-ranked airport in the U.S.
  • No. 5 World’s Best Regional Airport
  • No. 2 Best Airport Staff in North America
Video Link
__________________
Cool... Denver has reached puberty.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11260  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2018, 10:05 PM
TakeFive's Avatar
TakeFive TakeFive is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,556

Source

Falling transit ridership poses an ‘emergency’ for cities, experts fear
March 24, 2018 By Faiz Siddiqui/WaPo
Quote:
Transit ridership fell in 31 of 35 major metropolitan areas in the United States last year, including the seven cities that serve the majority of riders, with losses largely stemming from buses but punctuated by reliability issues on systems such as Metro, according to an annual overview of public transit usage.
The rationalizations are a bit 'old hat' at this point but not the data.
Quote:
The data also showed 2017 was the lowest year of overall transit ridership since 2005, and bus ridership alone fell 5 percent.
I can appreciate Jarrett Walker.
Quote:
“I think it needs to be considered an emergency,” said Jarrett Walker, a transit planner... “When we don’t share space efficiently, we get in each other’s way. And that is a problem for the livelihood, the viability, the livability and the economy of a city . . . . It means more traffic, more congestion.”
Bus ridership in Denver fell (again) 4.4% last year so it is experiencing the same misery as most places. RTD is likely in better shape than most places, especially when you consider funding meaning at least it's still growing. Still, the challenges/solutions are confounding but neither inexpensive or easy.

I'm looking forward, actually counting on Denveright to provide not only a vision but a basis for determining priorities.
__________________
Cool... Denver has reached puberty.
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


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:24 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.