Denver Union Station Master Plan

[bcp]

man...this blows.

i'm not a huge auto guy, but losign that 18th st. connection is pretty awful for north downtown, lodo and for prospect. at the very least, we need a ped bridge in that location (mainly because it is hard for ME to get to Fado's from Highland)

finally, i dont see any mention of E/W sharing in the rise in costs by increasing their (very low) cost of land at 29.5MM. why not?

[Giovoni]

I'm not sure how many people said this is the proposal and it's cool and we have to live with it. Several people have expressed outrage from the beginning. When it was down to two... I remember saying that a proposal is the BEST we could hope for and that's why the "meh" that E/W was feeding us was terrible.

I think I may have said this then...

Ask for a herd of horses and you will probably get a horse.....ask for a horse and you will probably get horseshit... guess which one Denver asked for?

[navyweaxguy]

Ok breaking my self imposed silence for this one... I've said it from the beginning. E/W should never have bene in charge of this. No matter what happens with the trcks and the transit, it will NOT effect thier development plans for the CPV/LoDo. Having one developer rule such a large area is not good for the project or for the city.

[twellsie]

This whole thing is an outrage at this point. Our government officials are simply not doing their job. Last December, I was busy just complaining about people having to cross Wewatta Street (http://wellsaholic.blogspot.com/), now I don't even know where to start. I sent my article (complaint) to the entire RTD Union Station Committee, the Union Station Executive Committee, Friends of Union Station, media, and others, but that didn't exactly accomplish much now did it. I thought it was at least well written. Nobody wrote back to me other than maybe one confirmation it was received. Nada. Nobody is interested in hearing your commentary, complaints, outrage, or feelings of betrayal. They complain about costs, cite overruns of between 30 and 300 million (wtf?), then have a partner from Hogan & Hartson explain to us how Amtrak can't go underground. I wonder how much Hogan & Hartson is charging RTD and how much that partner is going to charge RTD for his brilliant commentary to us about the Federal Railroad Administration. $500 an hour for that bit of legal wizardry? Why is a partner for one of the most expensive law firms in Denver opening his mouth to tell us this when we are told they can't afford to dig a ditch now?

[bcp]

lol...well put.

time for a referendum?

[SnyderBock]

I have come up with a solution.

In my solution, I bring the Ski Train and AmTrak into the Light Rail Terminal (between the light rail tracks and the consolidated mainline). This eliminates the issue associated with bringing AmTrak in to Union Station underground and also keeps the Ski Train at-grade as well (saving costs).

One thing this accomplishes, is the fact that only the East Corridor, North Corridor, Boulder and Gold Lines come in at Union Station underground. So the underground facility will only be built to accommodate four tracks, thus reducing cost. Furthermore, these four tracks may be trenched and covered with a road-like deck - saving more cost.

I also have one Light Rail line come down the existing 16th Street line from the Millennium Bridge into Union Station. This line would stop right in front of Union Station, then continue on to Coors Field and onward in a loop around Downtown. This would operate as a streetcar line and can be seen on the map in red.

In closing, the rest of the financial gap will be covered by NOT building the BRT to Boulder but ONLY building the commuter rail line. More funds can also be made available by leasing the operation of at least one or two of the commuter rail lines.



See, I have solved all the problems associated with Union Station. Now all RTD needs to do, is hire me so I can make it happen

[bunt_q]

Ok, so really, what are our options? I heard referendum... I don't know if blogging (even from the mighty Ken) changes anything now. Going to a few board meetings? Writing a few letters to the editor? I don't know. Shall we brainstorm viable options for influencing this thing? Dear god, with a hundred person committee, you'd think somebody would have a clue...

[Paulopolis]

^ Haha! We'd hope someone would have a clue.

Would we want to stop any work that may begin at Union Station before having a referendum or whatever other alternative the citizenry might come up with?

[1Post2]

Yeah...we're obviously not going to get something we're not gonna pay for; the amazing denver voter should have been asked to increase the budget.

What are we getting? an underground bus station, which we already have between market and blake, and a realignment of the LRT tracks, which are actually going to be moved away from union station.

• I'd say just forget the new bus station. Keep Market St Station, and Greyhound will have to stay in its hole on 19th st.
• Don't realign the LRT tracks.
• Keep the current heavy rail alignment for amtrak and the ski train
• Use the current shuttle turnaround area to add tracks for the new commuter lines, plus an additional LRT track or two.
• implement a pedestrian tunnel underneath the tracks behind union station, with escalators going up to each track. The tunnel would only have to extend from the station to wewatta, making the current ped tunnel more than viable, with improvements. All the train lines now connect directly to the station.
• We don't need E/W. The land between the station & wewatta will be occupied by tracks; the land to the sides of the station can be sold on the open market.

We'd still have terrible connectivity into the CPV; but maybe with all the money saved from not building another bus station, we can put the tracks in a trench and extend 18th over them. The final issue would be where to put the shuttle turnaround.

edit: maybe we should have a forumer meet to discuss possible courses of action. I'd say our best bet would be to argue for a pluralistic planning process that mandates that multiple alternatives for this project be considered, including those presented by people who aren't on the board, like us. the post article mentioned that the new plan will have to restart the public process because it has changed so much...we should focus as much energy as possible into introducing alternatives.

[ski82]

An organized effort would be nice and could pick up some steam, I think.

One group of people that would probably be supportive (and would be considered well off, which never hurts) would be the loft owners in buildings around the station. Owners of units at Glass House, Ice House, etc. will probably be impacted by the noise of more surface level rail as well as the reduced connectivity between Lodo and CPV. Just a thought.

[CoVol]

Originally Posted by escodu05

Post confirms:

http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_7501540


Transit team revises Union Station plans
All rail lines will now be above ground, and a regional bus facility will be underground.
By Margaret Jackson
The Denver Post
Article Last Updated: 11/18/2007 11:59:08 PM MST


A year after being selected to redevelop Denver's historic Union Station and the surrounding property into a mixed-use transit hub, Union Station Neighborhood Co. has drastically altered its plan.

The biggest changes include building the commuter- and heavy-rail tracks above ground and realigning the connection at 18th Street into the underground regional bus facility.

Reasons for the changes go far beyond the financial, officials said.

For one, technology for the FasTracks system's Gold Line changed from light to commuter rail, making it necessary to add more tracks to that portion of the plan. Additionally, the Federal Railroad Administration indicated it would be unlikely to approve putting Amtrak tracks underground.

Union Station is the hub for FasTracks, the region's $4.7 billion transportation-expansion plan approved by voters in 2004.

"Obviously, when you rework a plan, you're looking at all the factors, and cost is one of the factors," said Cole Finegan, a partner at Hogan & Hartson who is representing the Regional Transportation District in negotiations with the developers. "The FRA is a factor. It's a significant factor, but it's not a predominant factor."

Finegan declined to discuss the specific cost of the modified project because the plan is still in the works.

The original plan was expected to cost $420 million, but the number has likely increased because of rising construction costs. People familiar with the new plan have said it also will cost more than $420 million.

About $280 million in funding had been identified for the original plan. It included $213 million from FasTracks funding, $16 million in state money and $50 million in federal highway funding. At the time, Union Station Neighborhood Co. said it would pay $29 million for the right to develop the 19.5 acres around the station into shops, restaurants, hotels, offices and residences.

While it deviates from the proposal the developers unveiled to the public more than a year ago, the new plan gives the transit components more capacity - eight tracks instead of six - and the ability to expand.

"We can build what we need now, but we've built in the flexibility to expand that we didn't have before," said Mike Reininger, managing partner at Union Station Neighborhood Co., which beat out a development team that included Cherokee Denver LLC and Trammell Crow Co. for the right to develop the station.

The other team's plan would have cost more than the $420 million Union Station Neighborhood Co. bid but would have put all the tracks underground.

By not putting all the tracks underground, the 19.5 acres surrounding the station can be developed at the same time as construction of the transit portion, rather than when it's finished. It also will be easier, faster and cheaper to build the transit portion of the project, officials said.

"It's still expensive, but it's leaner," said Peter Park, the city's community planning and development manager. "It's a better solution in terms of transit functioning and connections."

An extension of 18th Street from Wynkoop Street to Wewatta Street envisioned in the original plan has been eliminated to accommodate buses coming into the station from 20th Street. They'll cross 18th Street and descend into a tunnel where the regional bus facility will be located.

The new plan extends an underground pedestrian plaza, including a moving sidewalk, from the station to the light-rail platform about 500 feet away. The old version stopped the tunnel at Wewatta.

The 18th Street circulator shuttle bus and the 16th Street Mall Ride will deliver passengers directly to the commuter and light-rail platforms, features not included in the original plan.

The new plan also opens 16th Street to traffic between Wynkoop and Chestnut.

Because it deviates from the master plan conceived by the 100-member citizen group known as the Union Station Advisory Committee, the new plan must go through another public process before construction can begin. It also still needs an approved environmental-impact statement, expected to be finalized next summer.

"The master plan as it came down is one that was our best wishes or best shot for what would be a really good combined transportation and development package," said Jim Graebner, co-chairman of the advisory committee. "Since that time, an awful lot has happened. The funding is not there to make it happen, and I think the team is looking at ways to cut the cost to fit the project."

Construction could start by next summer. The initial plan called for the depot to be renovated and the light rail built by 2009.

Okay, pulled the article over here. I also bolded the section that mentions that is has to go through a "public process".

Just as a refresher, here's the text of the ballot question from 2004 (bolding is mine):

Referendum 4A
SHALL REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT TAXES BE INCREASED $158.34 MILLION ANNUALLY AND BY WHATEVER ADDITIONAL AMOUNTS ARE RAISED ANNUALLY THEREAFTER BY INCREASING THE RATE OF SALES TAX LEVIED BY THE DISTRICT BY FOUR-TENTHS OF ONE PERCENT, FROM THE CURRENT SIX-TENTHS OF ONE PERCENT TO ONE PERCENT COMMENCING JANUARY 1, 2005 AND, IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, SHALL REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT DEBT BE INCREASED $3.477 BILLION, WITH A REPAYMENT COST OF $7.129 BILLION WITH ALL PROCEEDS OF DEBT AND TAXES TO BE USED AND SPENT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A FIXED GUIDE WAY MASS TRANSIT SYSTEM, THE CONSTRUCTION OF ADDITIONAL PARK-N-RIDE LOTS, THE EXPANSION AND IMPROVEMENT OF EXISTING PARK-N-RIDE LOTS, AND INCREASED BUS SERVICE, INCLUDING THE USE OF SMALLER BUSES AND VANS AND ALTERNATIVE FUEL VEHICLES AS APPROPRIATE, AS SPECIFIED IN THE TRANSIT EXPANSION PLAN ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE DISTRICT ON OR BEFORE APRIL 22, 2004 AND SHALL DEBT BE EVIDENCED BY BONDS, NOTES, OR OTHER MULTIPLE-FISCAL YEAR OBLIGATIONS INCLUDING REFUNDING BONDS THAT MAY BE ISSUED AS A LOWER OR HIGHER RATE OF INTEREST AND INCLUDING DEBT THAT MAY HAVE A REDEMPTION PRIOR TO MATURITY WITH OR WITHOUT PAYMENT OF A PREMIUM, PAYABLE FROM ALL REVENUES GENERATED BY SAID TAX INCREASE, FEDERAL FUNDS, INVESTMENT INCOME, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE CONTRIBUTIONS, AND OTHER REVENUES AS THE BOARD MAY DETERMINE, AND WITH SUCH REVENUES RAISED BY THE SALES TAX RATE INCREASE AND THE PROCEEDS OF DEBT OBLIGATIONS AND ANY INVESTMENT INCOME ON SUCH REVENUES AND PROCEEDS BEING EXEMPT FROM THE REVENUE AND SPENDING RESTRICTIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 20 0F ARTICLE X OF THE COLORADO CONSTITUTION UNTIL SUCH TIME AS ALL DEBT IS REPAID WHEN THE RATE OF TAX WILL BE DECREASED TO THAT AMOUNT NECESSARY FOR THE CONTINUED OPERATION OF THE SYSTEM BUT NOT LESS THAN SIX-TENTHS OF ONE PERCENT?

Now here's what the 04/22/04 transit plan says about budget and cost overrun as well as the plan for US. I think the part in bold/italic is what gives them the power to change the plan and still fall within the approved referendum. (Click the images for a larger readable image):

Should the District be faced with a significant economic recession, or find project costs are substantially higher than are currently estimated, and that such costs exceed the contingency budget, the District has several options to address this situation. These include delaying projects, modifying the scope of certain projects, seeking additional Federal or local funding or seeking additional voter approved funding options. Prior to taking any of these actions, the Board will hold full and complete public hearings and provide sufficient notice to the stakeholders in the region.

The full plan is at the following two links:

http://www.rtd-fastracks.com/media/u...acks_PlanA.pdf
http://www.rtd-fastracks.com/media/u...acks_PlanB.pdf

[CoVol]

The RMN has some more detailed info on the FRA action:
-------------------------------------------------------------
FasTracks redesign keeps Union Station on the level
By Kevin Flynn, Rocky Mountain News
Originally published 06:54 p.m., November 19, 2007
Updated 10:06 p.m., November 19, 2007

Facing a veto from federal railroad safety officials on the longtime plan for below-grade FasTracks access to Denver Union Station, RTD and its partners now say they will leave the trains at ground level.

The 11th-hour switch also saves money — how much hasn't yet been calculated — for the over-budget Union Station rework, which would allow more than 150 trains a day to get in and out when FasTracks is operating.

Originally expected to cost $420 million, the work around the historic train station doesn't yet have a final price tag but has escalated along with other FasTracks projects. The FasTracks share of the Union Station work is about $268 million.

Approved by voters at $4.7 billion, the overall cost of FasTracks has climbed to $6.1 billion.

The new Union Station design will bring commuter rail tracks in where the current tracks exist, coming from the east along the north side of the station.

Instead of climbing in and out of a trench to 25 feet below ground level, however, the tracks will stay at ground level. They will fan out to eight boarding platforms. Currently, there are four.

Some transit advocates, who for more than a year had criticized RTD for proposing the tracks below ground level, greeted the move with enthusiasm.

The previous design would make it all but impossible to extend rail service south from the station at some future date and, critics said, ending the tracks in a down sloping trench would create a safety hazard if a train's brakes failed.

"I am very happy and pleased that they've come to their senses on this issue," said Jon Esty, president of the Colorado Rail Passenger Association. "Operationally, it didn't make any sense but they just didn't want to talk about it."

The major impetus for the design change came last month. The Federal Railroad Administration told RTD it would consider issuing an emergency order prohibiting trains from using Union Station if RTD built a steep track that ended at a wall.

The letter caught RTD off guard because FRA had been involved in the study and work that led to selecting the below-grade design, but it only heard the objections last month. FRA Administrator Joseph Boardman wrote there was no regulation against RTD's proposed design, but only because no railroad had proposed such a design because of the inherent safety problems.

"To the best of our knowledge, no one had ever suggested converting a through-station like this in the United States to a stub-end station located at the bottom of a steep downgrade, before this proposal was brought to our attention," Boardman said.

The redesign will block one key desire of Denver officials to extend 18th Street from downtown into the valley behind the station. Instead, the street will become an access for a new 18th Street circulator shuttle to add people-moving capacity throughout downtown with the 16th Street Mall shuttle network.

Frank Cannon of Union Station Neighborhood Company, the selected developer for the project, said other factors went into the reconfiguration including the timing of the construction and the reduction in complexity for weaving commuter trains, buses and light rail together on the site.

[SnyderBock]

They better build a roof over the station then. Maybe something out of glass or even a DIA-like roofing structure. That's not too much to ask for in exchange for not having them below-grade, is it?

Also, is it not feasible to extend 18th Street anyway? They will have the shuttle buses travel down, under the tracks along 18th Street, so why can't a couple of lanes of traffic go under the tracks as well? Is that considered more dangerous than the road traveling over the tracks? Wouldn't a passenger on a shuttle bus carrying a bomb be just as dangerous as a passenger in a private car with a bomb?

[navyweaxguy]

I wonder why no one has brought up lawsuits for breaking the written agreements that were voted on and paid for by the citizens in the metro area? They aren't following the plan they sold. Bait and Switch.

[Paulopolis]

An unfortunate consequence of all of this is that it has the potential to damage the chances of passing future large mass transit projects. With E/W's inability to stick to the spirit of the master plan and RTD's seeming complicity in E/W's inability or unwillingness to do what was promised to the voters, future elections on mass transit projects will be a tougher sell. (Front Ranger Commuter Rail ballot initiative 2008, anyone?) The enemies of FasTracks and mass transit in general must be licking their chops, ready to use this as a means to shoot down future possible projects/elections.

[Giovoni]

They've been licking their chops since E/W was chosen.. the plan was NEVER close to what was sold to voters. Chosing them is going to help anti transit just as much as Doug Bruce in the statehouse is going to help Democrats.

[blm3034L!fe]

YOU KNOW THIS WHOLE UNION STATION E/W THING IS REALLY FACKING DEPRESSING ME!!! SERIOUSLY, WTF? WHY IS IT THAT DENVER HAS TO BE BENT OVER AND SCREWED UP THE ASS!?!?!?!?!?! WHY? WHY? WHY?

ISN'T E/W A LOCAL DEVELOPER TOO? WHY WOULD THEY DO THIS? THEY DON'T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT THE ACTUAL STATION IMO IT WAS ALWAYS ABOUT THIER OWN AGENDA PERIOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[bukden]

does that mean the 18th street bridge that was supposed to connect to Riverfront Park will also be scratched??

[FrancoRey]

Whatever...I'm already pissed beyond any words I could possibly say on here. And since I can't even do anything about it, I'll just sit back and slowly watch as this project, like any other ambitious mass transit plan in the US, fall pathetically apart in not so quiet defeat.

[Top Of The Park]

....seem to be buying the new plan "hook, line and sinker" according to what I could gather on their site http://www.friendsofunionstation.org/news.htm

However, they have an open to the public meeting on Dec. 5th, 530pm 4th floor Wellington Webb Building, 201 west Colfax, Room 4f6/462. Anyone interesting in attending? I would come up from COS.

Stan