HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #10901  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2017, 2:27 PM
Cirrus's Avatar
Cirrus Cirrus is online now
cities|transit|croissants
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,085
Quote:
Originally Posted by That article
Such a project would almost certainly not amount to a secession from RTD — though some City Council members did recently request information on that path’s feasibility — but rather the establishment of a complementary transit network, likely benefitting some combination of cities along the U.S. 36 corridor and in other parts of Boulder County.
In other words, sort of like what Denver is also doing with its internal transit plan.

Common story all over the US: The individual cities that want really good transit aren't getting it from the behemoth regional entities that are subservient to suburban voters, and are supplementing. The details are different (just as they appear different between Denver & Boulder), but the trend is happening everywhere.
__________________
BeyondDC: blog | twitter | flickr | instagram | Exploring urbanism and transportation in the Washington, DC area.

Last edited by Cirrus; Nov 1, 2017 at 2:48 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10902  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2017, 5:13 PM
TakeFive's Avatar
TakeFive TakeFive is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,185
Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
Common story all over the US:
Ofc I enjoy complicating things. It turns out that what was common 'conventional wisdom' in the Great American Petrie Dish is changing.

Renowned urbanist and author of the 2002 book "The Rise of the Creative Class," Richard Florida, has recently recanted his trend-driving concepts of the last decade. In fact I can recall then Mayor Hickenlooper heralding the title's concepts as many did. But as described by Noah Smith in his Bloomberg piece Rise of the Creative Class Worked a Little Too Well.
Quote:
It’s the rare public intellectual who admits to making big mistakes. Usually, the rule is to defend everything you’ve ever said, in an attempt to maintain a reputation for wisdom. Richard Florida, the noted urbanist and professor at the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto, is among the select few to go back and reevaluate his big ideas.
So Florida wrote a new, follow-up book.
Quote:
In a new book titled “The New Urban Crisis,” Florida reverses much of his earlier optimism about the potential of knowledge-hub cities. These metropolises, he contends, have now become engines of inequality and exclusion.
Speaking of "equity," transit needs and strategies including city v suburbs, Richard Florida isn't the only person making observations.

Study points to inefficiencies in Dallas mass transit
October 24, 2017 Provided by: University of Texas at Arlington
Quote:
"The city of Dallas could experience an even higher concentration of poverty if transportation practices remain the same," said Hamidi, who also is a UTA urban planning assistant professor in the College of Architecture, Planning and Public Affairs. "From the planning perspective, these trends would cause the city to be more spatially segregated, especially in economic terms, and consequently the city could experience even more isolation of areas with poverty concentration."
Turns out that a majority of Dallas jobs are in the suburbs. Not a big surprise for Dallas but what about urban poster child Portland?

TriMet: Ridership down because riders changing
October 05, 2017 by Jim Redden - Portland Tribune
Quote:
New demographics show need for transit from inner to outer areas as regional transit agency plans for the future

Put simply, the newest residents in Portland's inner neighborhoods don't ride buses as often as the former residents who have been displaced to East Portland, Gresham, and parts of Clackamas County. And the creation of self-sufficient walkable neighborhoods has reduced the need for bus trips even more.
What about Denver peer city Minneapolis?
Low-wage jobs are moving to distant suburbs. How will workers get there?
OCTOBER 30, 2017 By Eric Roper - Star Tribune
Quote:
The Amazon bus arrives before dawn each day in the Cedar-Riverside area of Minneapolis, delivering workers from a night of packing orders at the company’s Shakopee warehouse. Around the corner, day-shift employees climb aboard another coach headed south.
While Amazon can afford to do this what about the rest?
Quote:
At the same time, an increasing number of blue-collar jobs are moving outward to burgeoning job centers near the metro’s edge, upending a downtown-centric transit system that once reliably served factories in Minneapolis and St. Paul.
__________________
Cool... Denver has reached puberty.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10903  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2017, 6:50 PM
TakeFive's Avatar
TakeFive TakeFive is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,185

Rendering courtesy DIRC Homes

Transit-oriented development West Line Village begins construction
October 20, 2017 by Megan Arellano - Denverite
Quote:
A new set of for-sale housing less than 10 minutes walk from the W Line’s Sheridan Station has begun construction.

And by spring 2018, some of the 176 rowhomes and duplexes of West Line Village will be ready for occupancy, says builder DIRC Homes. The homes at W. 10th Avenue and Depew Street range in size from 788 to 1,750 square feet, and include studio, one-bedroom, two-bedroom and three-bedroom layouts. All include some type of garage and outdoor space, according to the team behind the development, which includes Trailbreak Partners and T.O.D. Properties.
__________________
Cool... Denver has reached puberty.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10904  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2017, 8:12 PM
Cirrus's Avatar
Cirrus Cirrus is online now
cities|transit|croissants
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,085
What are you complicating, exactly? That suburbs have increasing transit needs?

That's conventional wisdom too, because it's also conventional wisdom that low-wage service jobs are an increasing proportion of the economy, and that as cities become wealthier the poor will move to suburbs.

It doesn't really change what I said. If you want to quibble maybe I should've said "The individual jurisdictions that want..." It's also a common story all over the US that suburbs build, operate, and are rapidly improving their own transit networks. Metropolitan Denver, with its single unified behemoth that does everything for everyone, is actually a bit of an oddity. Most metro areas already have more than one transit operator.

But I tell you want. If you want to see an example of learning on this very subject, read this, then after you're done read this.
__________________
BeyondDC: blog | twitter | flickr | instagram | Exploring urbanism and transportation in the Washington, DC area.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10905  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2017, 10:23 PM
TakeFive's Avatar
TakeFive TakeFive is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,185
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
What are you complicating, exactly? That suburbs have increasing transit needs?

That's conventional wisdom too, because it's also conventional wisdom that low-wage service jobs are an increasing proportion of the economy, and that as cities become wealthier the poor will move to suburbs.

It doesn't really change what I said.
Well heh, my apologies for not clarifying that I wasn't trying to 'enlighten' you; the comment was intended generally and I just used your post as a jumping off spot. In fact if you think about it, my post is actually compatible with yours - Not conflicting. But so far as conventional wisdom goes I gotta say it seems to be a new revelation to the places noted. Portland, for example, claims to have just figured all this out recently.

As for Boulder more power to whatever they wish to do. I would point out that after a decade of trying to set up their own utility they now have a better understanding out how tricky it can be to go it alone.

With respect to Denver that is a discussion for tomorrow.
__________________
Cool... Denver has reached puberty.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10906  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2017, 3:11 PM
mr1138 mr1138 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 912
As someone with a bit of knowledge about what's going on in Boulder right now, I can add a little to the discussion that might not have been mentioned yet. It's about a lot more than the B-line, and lack of clarity on funding for future regional routes like a State Highway 7 BRT line.

A lot of this is coming from RTD's attempts to chip away at Boulder's Community Transit Network (the branded buses like the Skip, Jump, etc.). Last year they attempted to do away with the branded buses altogether, and instead use generic white livery or simply the RTD branded buses. After negotiating for over a year about this issue, and the matter of putting bus ads on the branded buses, Boulder finally succeeded in getting them to agree to put new vehicles into service with newly designed bus wraps - only to then turn around and run the wrong vehicles on the wrong routes as if the branding is just some silly thing that doesn't matter (Skip buses on the Jump route, FF buses on the Longmont route, Stampede buses on the Skip route, etc.), with no recourse for the city, which puts in its own city money to both purchase vehicles and more service. They have also been cutting buses and frequency from many routes in a way to shave off operating costs - in spite of the fact that branded buses and high frequency lead to very high ridership in Boulder, and the fact that Boulder "buys up" more service frequency. The Skip currently runs on 7.5 minute peak hour frequency, and this is now slipping backward because of cost cutting measures, even though the city's "buy-up" remains the same.

Add to this the fact that they CAN take money from bus service (essentially their regular operating budget) to supplement Fastracks overruns, but they cannot by law take Fastracks money to use for standard bus service, and what we see is that this trend of cutting service is likely to continue. Their new rail lines are physical real estate assets, and the buses are not. Plus their revenues don't keep pace with inflation, and it is hard to imagine Denver area voters increasing their taxes to make up for this any time soon. Unless something happens to give RTD a financial windfall, this trend of cutting bus service to prop up rail service is likely to continue.

Communities like Boulder that want to see routes like the Skip continue to have success or add new service may have to go it alone - Boulder already contracts with a different operator - Via Mobility Services - to run our original branded route, The HOP, which is about to be split into 4 routes with service extended into new parts of town. A new RTA doesn't necessarily mean seceding from RTD altogether (I'm not even sure how that would work since RTD is a legal district with taxing authority independent of the city government), and they would likely continue to run regional routes to Denver like the FF. But I'm really starting to agree that a layered approach of transit agencies like we see in many other larger urban areas makes sense, with regional authorities serving niche markets like the Boulder CTN routes, or perhaps Denver's future inner-city ambitions.

Last edited by mr1138; Nov 2, 2017 at 3:27 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10907  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2017, 3:19 PM
ddvmke ddvmke is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
In other words, sort of like what Denver is also doing with its internal transit plan.

Common story all over the US: The individual cities that want really good transit aren't getting it from the behemoth regional entities that are subservient to suburban voters, and are supplementing. The details are different (just as they appear different between Denver & Boulder), but the trend is happening everywhere.
I think it's also compounded by the fact that regions/cities are going with the most politically easy and cheap option by using freight right-of-ways and not rocking the boat shaking up decades old bus routes that no longer align with the density/employment and entertainment centers of a city, rather than actually looking at what the right option might be. I'd hope Denver's plan would focus on people that WANT to use public transport, as well as connecting areas where it will be most used to start to build that culture before expanding and using it as an economic development tool which RTD seems content to do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TakeFive View Post
Such a good looking project for that area. Would love to see more of this scale for sale and pedestrian focused around our closer in stations (i.e. you could put up dozens of them this size around Lamar, Alameda, 41st, Westminster, and Englewood stations while we wait for these decades long master plans to materialize)
__________________
-----------------------

Denver - City by the bay!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10908  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2017, 4:07 PM
twister244 twister244 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 492
Interesting insight on Boulder.....

I would hope that some of the more regional bus routes (like FF) don't suffer as a result of this. Although it's possible Boulder grow it's own agency to keep things seamless.

More info on the DIA expansion.... with more specifics in the slides contained within the article.

http://www.denverpost.com/2017/11/01...-ceo-comments/

Between this, the Great Hall renovation, I-70 expansion, and NWC work, the next couple of years will see no shortage of infrastructure construction in the metro area....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10909  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2017, 4:55 PM
wong21fr's Avatar
wong21fr wong21fr is online now
Reluctant Hobbesian
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Denver
Posts: 12,527
Quote:
Originally Posted by twister244 View Post
Interesting insight on Boulder.....

I would hope that some of the more regional bus routes (like FF) don't suffer as a result of this. Although it's possible Boulder grow it's own agency to keep things seamless.

It's apparent to me that the push for local versus a regional transit agency in Boulder and Denver is about the intra-city routes, not the inter-city ones. This transit push in Boulder isn't going to see a BRT route to Longmont established, or anything outside that little kingdom of Boulder. But it will make getting around the city easier.
__________________
"You don't strike, you just go to work everyday and do your job real half-ass. That's the American way!" -Homer Simpson

All of us who are concerned for peace and triumph of reason and justice must be keenly aware how small an influence reason and honest good will exert upon events in the political field. ~Albert Einstein

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10910  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2017, 5:01 PM
wong21fr's Avatar
wong21fr wong21fr is online now
Reluctant Hobbesian
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Denver
Posts: 12,527
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr1138 View Post
A lot of this is coming from RTD's attempts to chip away at Boulder's Community Transit Network (the branded buses like the Skip, Jump, etc.). Last year they attempted to do away with the branded buses altogether, and instead use generic white livery or simply the RTD branded buses. After negotiating for over a year about this issue, and the matter of putting bus ads on the branded buses, Boulder finally succeeded in getting them to agree to put new vehicles into service with newly designed bus wraps - only to then turn around and run the wrong vehicles on the wrong routes as if the branding is just some silly thing that doesn't matter (Skip buses on the Jump route, FF buses on the Longmont route, Stampede buses on the Skip route, etc.), with no recourse for the city, which puts in its own city money to both purchase vehicles and more service. They have also been cutting buses and frequency from many routes in a way to shave off operating costs - in spite of the fact that branded buses and high frequency lead to very high ridership in Boulder, and the fact that Boulder "buys up" more service frequency. The Skip currently runs on 7.5 minute peak hour frequency, and this is now slipping backward because of cost cutting measures, even though the city's "buy-up" remains the same.
Isn't the buy-up a fixed annual amount? So as operational costs increase, and outpace the growth in RTD's revenue, I'd expect that service would get reduced as the purchasing power of the buy-up decreases. Not saying that it's right, I do think that cities like Boulder and Denver should take a very strong look at how to provide further local transit service either through separate assets or by changing how the buy-up work with RTD, but I do understand the choice RTD is making, i.e. focusing on the regional part of transit.
__________________
"You don't strike, you just go to work everyday and do your job real half-ass. That's the American way!" -Homer Simpson

All of us who are concerned for peace and triumph of reason and justice must be keenly aware how small an influence reason and honest good will exert upon events in the political field. ~Albert Einstein

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10911  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2017, 6:01 PM
TakeFive's Avatar
TakeFive TakeFive is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,185
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr1138 View Post
Add to this the fact that they CAN take money from bus service (essentially their regular operating budget) to supplement Fastracks overruns, but they cannot by law take Fastracks money to use for standard bus service, and what we see is that this trend of cutting service is likely to continue.
My guess is that you're conflating issues here. It's not unusual that capital and operating budgets can not be commingled. Not an expert on all the details but my assumption is the four-tenths percent tax passed by voters for FasTracks is strictly a capital account. Once the rail route is completed then it becomes a part of the operating budget to run. I'm not aware that they have any ability to take operating funds to cover FasTracks capital costs. Now, how they manage to allocate operating funds among both rail and buses is a legitimate question.
__________________
Cool... Denver has reached puberty.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10912  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2017, 6:49 PM
BG918's Avatar
BG918 BG918 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,020
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10913  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2017, 6:52 PM
Cirrus's Avatar
Cirrus Cirrus is online now
cities|transit|croissants
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,085
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr1138 View Post
A lot of this is coming from RTD's attempts to chip away at Boulder's Community Transit Network (the branded buses like the Skip, Jump, etc.). Last year they attempted to do away with the branded buses altogether, and instead use generic white livery or simply the RTD branded buses... They have also been cutting buses and frequency from many routes in a way to shave off operating costs
Wow. Boulder's CTN is one of the most successful small city bus networks in America, and a huge national model. That's insane. Boulder's right to see it as a possible deal-breaker.
__________________
BeyondDC: blog | twitter | flickr | instagram | Exploring urbanism and transportation in the Washington, DC area.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10914  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2017, 7:54 PM
Scottk's Avatar
Scottk Scottk is offline
Denver
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 600
Regarding The Hop: The Hop has had nextride for years now, and the drivers are always way more friendly than the RTD drivers. AND they run a drunk bus at 2 in the morning that goes from pearl street up to the hill / campus for when the bars let out.

Now that is service !!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10915  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2017, 8:09 PM
TakeFive's Avatar
TakeFive TakeFive is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,185
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr1138 View Post
Boulder finally succeeded in getting them to agree to put new vehicles into service with newly designed bus wraps - only to then turn around and run the wrong vehicles on the wrong routes as if the branding is just some silly thing that doesn't matter...

But I'm really starting to agree that a layered approach of transit agencies like we see in many other larger urban areas makes sense, with regional authorities serving niche markets like the Boulder CTN routes, or perhaps Denver's future inner-city ambitions.
As is typical wong cuts to the chase in specifying intracity service. It also goes to what Cirrus brought up yesterday (but not today).

Boulder would seem to be the poster child for intracity specific routes that they should assume responsibility for. Perhaps Boulder could even receive a base subsidy from RTD or in effect a tax rebate?

You mention negotiations with respect to purchasing a whole new fleet of buses. That's a one-time event and yuge capital outlay. Was there FTA grant money available? I have no idea today's cost for a base bus for these intracity routes nor would I know how much in upgrades from the base that Boulder wanted to make.

As to branded buses being on the wrong routes that's hard to speak to w/o knowing the circumstances. Buses do break down; perhaps there were scheduling issues due to a driver shortage. Who knows? As to frequency I assume that's an efficiency question?

In any case as RTD grows ever bigger with more complex challenges and budgets, there's a lot to be said for Boulder taking over its intracity route service. If I were RTD I'd be delighted to let Boulder handle all the intracity bus routes and everything that entails. Appears to be a win-win proposition to me.
__________________
Cool... Denver has reached puberty.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10916  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2017, 8:51 PM
TakeFive's Avatar
TakeFive TakeFive is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,185
Quote:
Originally Posted by ddvmke View Post
Such a good looking project for that area. Would love to see more of this scale for sale and pedestrian focused around our closer in stations (i.e. you could put up dozens of them this size around Lamar, Alameda, 41st, Westminster, and Englewood stations while we wait for these decades long master plans to materialize)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ddvmke View Post
I think it's also compounded by the fact that regions/cities are going with the most politically easy and cheap option by using freight right-of-ways and not rocking the boat shaking up decades old bus routes that no longer align with the density/employment and entertainment centers of a city, rather than actually looking at what the right option might be.
Not sure I totally understand but I'd say definitely to a degree. What I can say is that the more I learn about transit the more I appreciate how overwhelming all the challenges are. From political/special interests to cost considerations and budgets and what will meet voter approval it's quite the quagmire.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ddvmke View Post
I'd hope Denver's plan would focus on people that WANT to use public transport, as well as connecting areas where it will be most used to start to build that culture before expanding and using it as an economic development tool which RTD seems content to do.
Certainly FasTracks was significantly touted as a development tool and rightly so but your point is well taken. Except it gets complicated real fast when you speak of those who WANT to ride.

For example East Colfax is a bit of a no-brainer although it's part local route combined with a commuter route. The challenge is to figure out how best to serve both constituencies which means more expedient service for those would-be riders that don't want to make 40 stops to get to where they're going.

King County (Seattle) seems to have substantially met the challenge when they redesigned routes and created their Rapid Ride service. On these routes those who want to ride includes many new 'choice' riders based on the quality and efficiency of the routes. Personally, I think a lot their success goes to perception. King County paid ALL the money for high-quality enhanced service which people are much more likely to enjoy regardless of specific time to their destination. The routes do NOT make 40 stops so that is important too.

Lastly, every route has its uniqueness and unique ridership.
__________________
Cool... Denver has reached puberty.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10917  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2017, 9:13 PM
seventwenty's Avatar
seventwenty seventwenty is offline
I took a bus pic, CIRRUS
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Soon to be banned
Posts: 1,681
Quote:
Originally Posted by BG918 View Post
Everything but the Concourse A RJ hub makes sense. I don't get why A needs an RJ hub, as Frontier hasn't used smaller planes since Lynx. The non-hubbing carriers that use A have a mix of bigger planes and RJs. I guess the EAS airlines like Boutique Air don't use big planes, but even then the ramp area is all you need for a turboprop.
__________________
The happy & obtuse bro.

"Of course you're right." Cirrus
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10918  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2017, 11:48 PM
mr1138 mr1138 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 912
^ In response to all of the above... TakeFive rightly points out that I was simplifying the economics - there isn't a one to one switchover of bus funding to rail, simply that RTD's overall budget is requiring cuts anywhere they can find them. I don't claim to know where all of their budget shortfalls are coming from, but RTD has been very clear that they are extremely strapped for cash. My personal perception is that they will likely continue to focus in on their rail lines, because those are permanent physical assets with better real estate assets attached to them than commuter bus Park-n-Rides. In theory, this is one of the advantages of rail over buses (the more permanent investment), but in fairness they have also cut service on the W and R lines.

Wong is definitely correct that this all means that Boulder's buy-in doesn't go as far. Boulder can afford to increase this, but I think there are politics at play for sure - it's hard to ask Boulder citizens to increase the buy-in when all they see from RTD is service cuts and no B-line. And with a board of directors that includes diverse competing interests from all around the metro area, and a staff that seems focused on maximizing the efficiency of a hub-based system at Downtown Denver, one does start to wonder if something like Boulder's CTN could be better handled by a locally based agency.

In terms of the full scope of what that agency could do - I suppose it's anyone's guess how ambitious City Council or neighboring communities would like to be. I'm not sure it's out of the question that BRT lines to Louisville, Lafayette, and Longmont could be part of the conversation if those towns were interested in bringing their own funding to the table - their workforce is more linked to Boulder's employment hub in a lot of ways than it is to Denver.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10919  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2017, 3:33 AM
Zmapper Zmapper is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventwenty View Post
Everything but the Concourse A RJ hub makes sense. I don't get why A needs an RJ hub, as Frontier hasn't used smaller planes since Lynx. The non-hubbing carriers that use A have a mix of bigger planes and RJs. I guess the EAS airlines like Boutique Air don't use big planes, but even then the ramp area is all you need for a turboprop.
Is that an RJ hub? Looking very closely at the image, I don't see jetbridges. The pictured airplanes are about the same size as the other 737/320 sized plane shown on the A concourse. While this is just a conceptual drawing, my guess would be that the extension will contain cheap, ground-level, stair-only gates for Spirit or Frontier.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10920  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2017, 4:40 AM
seventwenty's Avatar
seventwenty seventwenty is offline
I took a bus pic, CIRRUS
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Soon to be banned
Posts: 1,681
You're may be right. I guess we'll see once the designs become more finalized. Conc. A east is only temporary anyway.
__________________
The happy & obtuse bro.

"Of course you're right." Cirrus
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 9:41 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.