HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Dec 10, 2007, 6:57 PM
VivaLFuego's Avatar
VivaLFuego VivaLFuego is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Blue Island
Posts: 6,480
^ Are the park n ride lots free?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Dec 10, 2007, 9:35 PM
glowrock's Avatar
glowrock glowrock is offline
Becoming Chicago-fied!
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Chicago (West Avondale)
Posts: 19,689
Yes, the park and ride lots are free... There have been some discussions over making people not within the RTD district pay for a sticker to use the facilities, but those discussions haven't exactly been fruitful, to say the least...

Aaron (Glowrock)
__________________
"Deeply corrupt but still semi-functional - it's the Chicago way." -- Barrelfish
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Dec 10, 2007, 10:23 PM
VivaLFuego's Avatar
VivaLFuego VivaLFuego is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Blue Island
Posts: 6,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by glowrock View Post
Yes, the park and ride lots are free... There have been some discussions over making people not within the RTD district pay for a sticker to use the facilities, but those discussions haven't exactly been fruitful, to say the least...

Aaron (Glowrock)
Yeah, the obvious followup question is whether the added revenue from charging for parking would offset the decrease in ridership. I get the sense with most of these LRT systems, however, that the goal of "congestion reduction" is paramount and the only reason the ballot measures were improved in the first place; thus, the ideal is to maximize the number of cars taken off the road, rather than maximizing efficiency/revenue etc. Count yourselves lucky that parking enforcement is lax, as it is INSANE (and an important revenue source) around these parts. Park n Ride lots are fee based, and the surrounding streets are all residential permit parking to discourage commuters parking outside the lots.

Interesting issues, all around, because of course the huge free surface lots are taking up land that would otherwise be suited to TOD; but again, if the goal is congestion mitigation, you get the cars off the clogged highway first and foremost.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Dec 10, 2007, 11:05 PM
SnyderBock's Avatar
SnyderBock SnyderBock is offline
Robotic Construction
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,833
Most park-n-Rides will be parking structures (thus to use as little land as possible). There is not any discussion about charging for parking for most people. The only discussion has been to possibly make people driving vehicles registered from outside of the transit tax district (the transit district covers 99% of the metro area), to make those people pay for parking, since they don't pay the tax to build it. This is mainly directed at one city (Castle Rock), because the residents voted to remove themselves from the transit tax district. Their main pushing point was the fact that they could not pay the tax, yet still just be a short drive from the end-off-line station, and use it an it's free parking, whenever they wanted.

This kind of upset some people. They want all the services, but don't want to pay the tax that makes it possible, which everyone else has to pay. So the question is, why allow Castle Rock residents to pack up full, the largest, end-of-line station, park-n-Ride for free? The only problem with charging them, is it appears to be against state law for the DMV to release car license information (such as where the owner lives), to anyone other than law enforcement. This is why that possibility seems to be going nowhere.
__________________
Automation Is Still the Future
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2007, 12:11 AM
glowrock's Avatar
glowrock glowrock is offline
Becoming Chicago-fied!
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Chicago (West Avondale)
Posts: 19,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnyderBock View Post
Most park-n-Rides will be parking structures (thus to use as little land as possible). There is not any discussion about charging for parking for most people. The only discussion has been to possibly make people driving vehicles registered from outside of the transit tax district (the transit district covers 99% of the metro area), to make those people pay for parking, since they don't pay the tax to build it. This is mainly directed at one city (Castle Rock), because the residents voted to remove themselves from the transit tax district. Their main pushing point was the fact that they could not pay the tax, yet still just be a short drive from the end-off-line station, and use it an it's free parking, whenever they wanted.

This kind of upset some people. They want all the services, but don't want to pay the tax that makes it possible, which everyone else has to pay. So the question is, why allow Castle Rock residents to pack up full, the largest, end-of-line station, park-n-Ride for free? The only problem with charging them, is it appears to be against state law for the DMV to release car license information (such as where the owner lives), to anyone other than law enforcement. This is why that possibility seems to be going nowhere.
As far as I'm concerned, Castle Rock voters essentially agreed to never, ever use RTD to get around, and essentially agreed never, ever be a voice in the decisions of the RTD district. Vote yourselves out of the district, don't expect to take advantage of the services.

You can't have your cake and eat it too, and I think those f'ing morons should finally discover that. I think anyone who lives outside of the RTD District should be required to purchase a parking sticker to use RTD park and rides, pure and simple.

Aaron (Glowrock)
__________________
"Deeply corrupt but still semi-functional - it's the Chicago way." -- Barrelfish
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2007, 1:41 AM
VivaLFuego's Avatar
VivaLFuego VivaLFuego is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Blue Island
Posts: 6,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by glowrock View Post
As far as I'm concerned, Castle Rock voters essentially agreed to never, ever use RTD to get around, and essentially agreed never, ever be a voice in the decisions of the RTD district. Vote yourselves out of the district, don't expect to take advantage of the services.

You can't have your cake and eat it too, and I think those f'ing morons should finally discover that. I think anyone who lives outside of the RTD District should be required to purchase a parking sticker to use RTD park and rides, pure and simple.

Aaron (Glowrock)
Ideally, they should also pay a toll on the roads they use that see less congestion as a result of RTD....and a commuter tax to support the downtown vibrancy that is only possible with the RTD....etc etc. Ah, but I dream.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2007, 2:35 AM
Halifax Hillbilly Halifax Hillbilly is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 708
Quote:
Originally Posted by VivaLFuego View Post
Interesting issues, all around, because of course the huge free surface lots are taking up land that would otherwise be suited to TOD; but again, if the goal is congestion mitigation, you get the cars off the clogged highway first and foremost.
Parking lots make great land banks. San Fransisco area has been pretty successful at turning parking lots near BART stations into transit villages.

EDIT - Sorry just read most Park and Rides will be parking structures. There goes that possibility. With that kind of infrastructure it's tough to think transit village.

I was in Denver four years ago and it did not look like a transit city in the least. This plan looks fabulous! I wish Canadian city's were thinking like this. TransitCity in Toronto is ambitious but in terms of city size I don't think it is on the same scale as what Denver is trying to achieve.

Where does most of the funding come from in these types of projects in the US?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2007, 3:17 AM
SnyderBock's Avatar
SnyderBock SnyderBock is offline
Robotic Construction
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,833
Most stations have major TOD's already being built, or being planned. The parking structures simply leaves more land for these TOD's. Surface lots would eat up extra land and make a sea of parking around the station. That's not what's going on at these Denver stations.
__________________
Automation Is Still the Future
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2007, 3:25 PM
Halifax Hillbilly Halifax Hillbilly is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 708
So they are going the TOD route. Impressive. It would be a huge missed opportunity to build such an impressive system and not put the right kind of development in.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2007, 4:16 PM
myshtern myshtern is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 806
I'm really glad we're getting these train lines but my main question is what the hell is taking so long? 5 years of planning on each line? I understand that the planning needs to be done in conjunction with every city but this does not take 5 years.

RTD could immensely reduce costs by upping it's planning staff to reduce that amount of time.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2007, 5:35 PM
Cirrus's Avatar
Cirrus Cirrus is online now
cities|transit|croissants
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,344
Quote:
Where does most of the funding come from in these types of projects in the US?
There is a federal new starts program that often contributes about 40% the cost of new transit lines, but for something the scale of FasTracks, the locals have to provide most of the money. In this case, it's coming from a special sales tax dedicated to building the system.
__________________
writing | twitter | flickr | instagram | ssp photo threads
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2007, 6:11 PM
VivaLFuego's Avatar
VivaLFuego VivaLFuego is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Blue Island
Posts: 6,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by myshtern View Post
I'm really glad we're getting these train lines but my main question is what the hell is taking so long? 5 years of planning on each line? I understand that the planning needs to be done in conjunction with every city but this does not take 5 years.

RTD could immensely reduce costs by upping it's planning staff to reduce that amount of time.
I assume 5 years is for Planning and Design/Engineering, which is pretty normal in the US since government doesn't bid out construction contracts for projects that aren't at 100% design (unlike in some countries where they just kinda figure it out as they go along....Russia, China, etc.).

Alternatives Analysis (to determine the best precise alignment and station locations) is usually a 12-18 month process. The Environmental Impact Study and Preliminary Engineering (to 30% design) is usually about a 24 month process. Final Engineering (100% design) would typically be another 12-24 months. And land acquisition (including time-consuming and costly condemnation proceedings) can't start until after the EIS, I believe; acquisition can take a very long time. Add it all up and the 5 year timeline before construction is realistic.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2007, 7:50 PM
SnyderBock's Avatar
SnyderBock SnyderBock is offline
Robotic Construction
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,833
Denver's $1.67 Billion TRex Project

Denver's $1.67 Billion TRex Project started construction in September 2001 and finished construction in September 2006 - on time and on budget. The project was a joint project directed by both the CDOT and RTD. The project widened 22 miles of highway, improved drainage, rebuilt bridges and intersections and integrated seamlessly a 19-mile light rail system.

TRex was completed after only 5 years of construction, because it used the Design-Build technique. The project also completed an EIS and was funded, 40% by federal funds and 60% by a voter approved bond issue.

This is the only precedence for any such project in US history, in which a Department of Transportation (CDOT) and Regional Transportation Agency (RTD) cooperated at this level on a project to perfectly integrate a mass transit and highway project. It is also the only precedence for a project receiving this much federal funding, to take advantage of the Design-Build technique of construction.

NOTE: The steel railroad ties used in this 19-mile light rail line, were recycled steel from the old Mile High Stadium which was replaced by Invesco Field @ Mile High.
__________________
Automation Is Still the Future
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2007, 8:44 PM
SnyderBock's Avatar
SnyderBock SnyderBock is offline
Robotic Construction
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,833
TRex Southeast Light Rail Line: $1.67 billion Design-Build

Here's what that TRex system looks like completed - Photos compliments of fellow forumers. Many of the TOD's are just underway and in the early phases still, when these photos were taken by a forumer right after this line opened:

Current Operating System Map - Including TRex - SE Corridor:

























































































That's Light Rail done right^ and cities across America are looking to Denver for planning their own lines now. Denver's Southeast Corridor is pretty substantial infrastructure for a light rail line - which often thought of as more of a modern streetcar. This project obviously shows the upper-capacity potential light rail has as a mass transit means.
__________________
Automation Is Still the Future

Last edited by SnyderBock; Dec 13, 2007 at 5:22 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2007, 11:58 PM
texcolo's Avatar
texcolo texcolo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Truth or Consequences, NM
Posts: 4,304


This cracks me up! Those are lane reflectors used down south to mark the stripes on the highway. You can't use them up here because of the snow plows. They're affectionally known as 'city titties.'
__________________
"I am literally grasping at straws." - Bob Belcher
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2007, 12:10 AM
Lord_of_Darkness Lord_of_Darkness is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 6
Hum...................
The trains look like the trains from the Monterrey City Metro.

*I wonder when will North America Build the first real bullet train.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2007, 12:23 AM
SnyderBock's Avatar
SnyderBock SnyderBock is offline
Robotic Construction
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,833
The trains are: Seimens SD-160's

RTD also uses Seimens SD-100's on the Central and Southwest Corridors. It was a Seimens SD-100 which hit that pile of coal from a derailed coal train on the Southwest Corridor this morning. But the Southeast Corridor operates the nearly identical Seimens SD-160's.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FROM Wikipedia:
The SD-100 and SD-160 are light-rail vehicles manufactured by Siemens. The SD-100 uses motors that run on direct-current electricity while the SD-160 model features newer motors that run using alternating current. Both models are suited for loading at street level and high-platform level. The two models of car are in use in San Diego (SD-100), Salt Lake City (both models), Denver (both models) and Calgary (SD-160); Edmonton has also recently placed an order for SD-160s.

The SD-160's dimensions are 24.802 m by 2.654 m by 3.811 m and can be used in trains of up to six cars. It is powered by four AC motors which provide a maximum of 580 kW and a maximum speed of 105 km/h [65Mph]. It accelerates at 1.25 m/s² and decelerates at 1.34 m/s² with faster emergency braking. It has a passenger capacity of 236 passengers (standing) with 64 seats.
__________________
Automation Is Still the Future

Last edited by SnyderBock; Dec 12, 2007 at 12:51 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2007, 2:08 AM
CPVLIVE's Avatar
CPVLIVE CPVLIVE is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 575
Nice thread SnyderBock - However, your numbers on the Southwest lines ridership are way off. RTD was touting 35,721 daily on the Southwest line pre T-Rex and something like 29,200 post. Current estimates system wide are 62,000+ daily. I can't wait until some actual construction starts next year on the West line!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2007, 2:58 AM
Justin10000 Justin10000 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 815
I love Siemens trains. There is something about the boxy look...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2007, 7:14 AM
Jaroslaw's Avatar
Jaroslaw Jaroslaw is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Seoul
Posts: 1,792
Denver: the city that works!
__________________
Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam
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 > Discussion Forums > Transportation
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 4:14 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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