Denver Union Station & FasTracks

[ardecila]

COOL. Every time I look at this, I'm struck by how well-planned it is.

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by zilfondel

^ I would recommend resizing pics in the future. Those are impossible to view on a smartphone.

Use a computer.

[Cirrus]

Originally Posted by ardecila

COOL. Every time I look at this, I'm struck by how well-planned it is.

It has a really major problem: The light rail platforms are two blocks away from the regional rail platforms (making transfers unnecessarily difficult), and the historic depot building is basically left unused.

I totally agree that it looks great. That train shed is going to be totally unique in the US, and will be an instant icon. But the consensus is that the plan has major flaws. Better than nothing of course, but flawed.

[Nexis4Jersey]

I think the old station will be converted into Hotel space...

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

It has a really major problem: The light rail platforms are two blocks away from the regional rail platforms (making transfers unnecessarily difficult), and the historic depot building is basically left unused.

Here's a bad panorama I shot yesterday on the iPhone that shows what Cirrus is describing. The complex is I-shaped.

On the left you can see the new light rail station (serving lines to the south). Next to it is the new loop for the 16th Street Mall shuttles (buses waiting).

Perpendicular to the light rail runs the underground bus terminal. The entrance is on the left, next to the light rail station (by the two big blue things, which are for the ventilation system). It runs the length of the new 17th Street to the back of the historic station. Above grade, there will be landscaped gardens, street level retail with buildings flanking both sides, etc. You can see the bus station skylights already in place. There is a big hole immediately behind the historic station where they are constructing the second half of the bus station.

Finally, behind the historic station on the right of the photo is where the train shed will be, including all of the lines to the north and east (airport). The lines will run perpendicular to the underground bus terminal, parallel to the light rail. Construction on those will begin once the underground work is completed.

The historic station lobby will be for transit uses. The bottom levels of both wings will be retail/restaurants. Upper levels will be converted into a 150-room hotel.

You can see, though, it's a walk from one end of the transit facility (the light rail) to the commuter lines and historic station.



2011-01-29 Union Station iPhone Pano by bbutzin, on Flickr

Not pano'd, maybe you can see more:

[mr1138]

I'm still not convinced that the 3-block distance between the light rail platforms and Union Station is really THAT big of a deal breaker... it certainly isn't ideal, but if treated as three separate, but linked, transit stations, it really isn't that different from many transit stations in other cities.

One that comes to mind off the top of my head is the new Fulton St. transit center in Lower Manhattan, which when connected to the WTC PATH station will connect around 6 separate subway stops together with the PATH and potentially even a future Long Island Railroad extension. Though it has quite a few more transit platforms than Union Station, from end to end it is nearly twice as long as the distance between Union Station and the light rail platforms. Subway stations often have block (or more) long connecting tunnels to other stations, and the disorienting nature of being underground and not having to cross traffic I feel can make such distances feel much shorter. Again, it's not an ideal arrangement, but it is not entirely unprecedented either, and I suspect many users will never even notice the distance if they remain in the underground concourse.

[bunt_q]

I generally agree with you - not ideal, not a deal breaker.

But nobody will use the underground concourse unless they're arriving by bus. People don't go down and come back up without a reason. And you're right that subway connections feel shorter than they are. This will feel like two blocks because it is two blocks.

That said, I don't care about transfers. They are such a small percentage of overall trips it's irrelevant. What I don't particularly like is the additional distance between the light rail and downtown (especially with the west corridor being our first Union Station-only line). That could amount to a real hit in ridership. I'm not yet convinced that the downtown circulator will be effective. The success of the 16th Mall Shuttle is more the exception than the rule. I am not sure if that is easily replicated over longer distances on regular city streets (18th/19th).

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

It has a really major problem: The light rail platforms are two blocks away from the regional rail platforms (making transfers unnecessarily difficult), and the historic depot building is basically left unused.

I totally agree that it looks great. That train shed is going to be totally unique in the US, and will be an instant icon. But the consensus is that the plan has major flaws. Better than nothing of course, but flawed.

Maybe it's my American sense of lowered expectations, but I just came back from several months in Europe, and I think the station is well-planned. There is strong developer interest in this area, and the decision to plan for mid-rises will ensure that the neighborhood fills up quickly like the rest of LoDo. That in turn will make the station experience fairly pleasant compared to the no-mans-land that exists around other "new" commuter terminals in other cities.

Within a few years of the station's opening, the ground level will offer a pleasant, well-activated transit connection in a grassy median. In bad weather, or for people in a rush, the underground concourse offers a direct connection, which will also be open and spacious, and unlike most subway connectors, filled with people due to the bus gates.

The main station building will be a pass-thru to the platforms, like it always was. Arrival functions will move to the west end of the station because from there you can walk to any platform at-grade.

Plus, as I mentioned before, the Central Corridor will eventually offer a direct transfer from heavy to light rail at 38th/Blake for downtown-bound passengers.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Plus, as I mentioned before, the Central Corridor will eventually offer a direct transfer from heavy to light rail at 38th/Blake for downtown-bound passengers.

Maybe... there's still a pretty big push to convert the segment from 20th to 38th to streetcar.

(Even then, only for riders on the airport line. None of the others will have that transfer available.)

[ardecila]

^^ Yea, I wish they would consider a second extension of the Central Corridor to meet the North Corridor near the Western Stock Show. Hopefully the I-70 widening doesn't rule out a light-rail crossing to get up there.

[PLANSIT]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

I generally agree with you - not ideal, not a deal breaker.

But nobody will use the underground concourse unless they're arriving by bus. People don't go down and come back up without a reason. And you're right that subway connections feel shorter than they are. This will feel like two blocks because it is two blocks.

I agree that the plan is not ideal. It's a good plan for what it is.

If you are transferring, don't you HAVE to go down or up to get to/from the regional/commuter platforms? If you do transfer, it's cold out, and it's not your first rodeo, then I would imagine passengers to use the concourse most of the time.

But like you said, it will be a relatively small number.

[mr1138]

We may have to just wait and see when it opens to see what peoples behavior is, I would merely be guessing if I said I knew what people will do... but I can definitely see it going both ways. Just thinking about my own behavior, I think going down and coming back up is only something people would avoid if they felt like they were "backtracking." The way that the escalators are angled though eliminates this and creates a continuous line from one platform to the other. Going underground also eliminates the need to stop at the Chestnut and Wewatta crosswalks. Factor in the weather as PLANSIT points out, and I think the underground concourse may get more use than some give it credit for.

[bunt_q]

Why would you have to go down to get to the commuter platforms? Not sure I'm understanding.

You walk on 17th, crossing Chestnut and Wewetta. The intuitive path will be on the street. (Not to mention, only in the worst of weather will people choose to walk through a relatively narrow bus terminal over a surface street.) That, plus the less-natural down-up movement, will be enough to keep most peds on the surface. Especially once it's built out with engaging street level retail; then we want the people on the street.

Once you're across Wewatta, I suppose you could go down-and-back-up to get to an inner platform, or of you're going into the historic station. I'd bet just as many people will just swing around the end of the tracks to get to their platform. Again, it's more intuitive than going underground, since the trains will be at grade and on eye level. Signage can make a difference, but once people familiarize themselves with the station, most won't go underground if you don't have to (it'll depend on the ease of that movement which path most peds take from Wewatta to the station/platforms.

If they're getting off a bus, I doubt many at all will go through the station. Natural movement is to surface as quickly as possible, and from there, the walk around the ends of the platforms (in the direction of 16th - on the left of the master plan photo below) should be the busiest.



EDIT: rm and I posted at the same time. People movements are relatively predictable. The default is not to change level unless there's a reason. I think you guys are imagining a DIA concourse, when you should be imagining Market Street Station. There has to be a reason to go down, or people won't. (Crossing a street like Chestnut isn't really a reason, and is more than balanced by a nice pedestrian environment on 17th).

Don't get me wrong, I don't care that the walk is above ground. The weather thing is overrated. Two blocks is two blocks - its not going to be any shorter if you're in a bus station than at street level.

[wong21fr]

^I'll defer to those with a planning degree and courses on human movement patterns. But, I do feel that a good chunk of the relatively few LRT to commuter rail transfers will take the path through the bus terminal initially due to the wayfinding signage and the relative desolate feeling of 17th. There's only going to be two projects under construction along the west side of 17th when the station opens and the east side will be completely open. This is definitely going to be a psychological barrier that can be circumvented by heading underground until the development catches up.

[bunt_q]

The gardens and whatnot should be done, though. Not sure how it'll work initially, should be fun to see.

No basis for this, but my gut also tell me that people prefer not to hang out in bus stations when they have a choice. Especially underground ones. Skylights and bright white decor might help enough, guess we'll see how it feels.

Not that it matters... <5% of trips are between LRT and commuter rail. (and <10% of trips bound for the bus terminal transfer, so in all, <15% of trips will even need the concourse).

[Rational Plan3]

Sorry for a brand new terminal, it's just stupid. There is no excuse for it they had a brand new space. It is not as if it is a constrained site or any changes would have required expensive tunneling, and why an expensive underground bus terminal?

It's not as if they wanted to leave space for a larger rail station, or god forbid a through station. It should have been a tram stop next to the station then taxi ranks and a bus station. The money saved on an underground bus terminal could have gone on a bigger rail station.

I know they put they bus station underground so future office tenants could not be put off by a bus station (and the poors within). But they could have still kept the light rail station next to the rail station.

This would have been my idea.





There is a long pick up and drop off zone in the centre with bus stands on the outside.
The light rail platforms are next to the. All you need is some wide pedestrian crossings, no need for any complicated changes in levels.

That took my 15 minutes. You could tweak the design for the desired building plots. But I think the principle holds up.

[SnyderBock]

Wow, in 5 minutes, you developed a better plan than it took a team of professionals, months even years to develop! Not. No offense, I don't like your plan at all rationalplan. It just kind of clusterfrecks everything at-grade. Not to mention, it would make the devita World headquarters building which is underconstruction, impossible.

The plan they are building, extends the 16th Street Mall to the LRT.

[Cirrus]

Originally Posted by SnyderBock

Wow, in 5 minutes, you developed a better plan than it took a team of professionals, months even years to develop!

Actually, the Denver plan deviates considerably from the plan that was developed over months/years by the city. Here is the original plan (pdf), which actually is pretty similar to RationalPlan's.

The original plan was not followed because the project is being built by the developer of the surrounding properties, who benefits from pulling most of the activity back away from the historic depot and towards the buildings they are developing.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

The original plan was not followed because the project is being built by the developer of the surrounding properties, who benefits from pulling most of the activity back away from the historic depot and towards the buildings they are developing.

You fail to mention that another tiny factor was that the cost of the original plan hit the $1 billion mark and there was no political will to find a way to pay for it. Instead, this $450 million solution was devised.

While land interests are a factor, the constrained funding for the project was the ultimate reason for the changes to the master plan.

[Rational Plan3]

Originally Posted by SnyderBock

Wow, in 5 minutes, you developed a better plan than it took a team of professionals, months even years to develop! Not. No offense, I don't like your plan at all rationalplan. It just kind of clusterfrecks everything at-grade. Not to mention, it would make the devita World headquarters building which is underconstruction, impossible.

The plan they are building, extends the 16th Street Mall to the LRT.

Sorry, unless you have a really good reason, everything should be at grade, if you want busy city streets. Changes in grade are inconvenient for pedestrians and pedestrians go the shortest route. A percentage of pedestrians will cross via the shortest route whether it is safe or not.

Obviously it's too late now to change it. But that office building could have been built in a slightly different position.