Passenger Trains > Denver's Union Station...she'll never be the same

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_22081053/rtd-approves-developers-union-station-lease-construction-begin

All things change, and maybe it will have the bustle of a European train station rather than a place that is dead 22 hours of the day.

WHY must we ruin the transportation utility of Denver the
same way the St Louis was ruined as far as transportation ???

I fail to see a problem with this plan other than Amtrak having to use the Amshack for a number of years until Union Station is completed.

Like Sacramento, CA's station fiasco, now another one pops up. IT'S A TRAIN STATION, remember?? Hope they keep rail travelers at the forefront of their "vision."

this street is where trains use to go south out of denver.

they used to go thru the bridge on the right which was moved from the location in the street in front.

rtd, the pena administration, phillip anshutz all created this cluster.

in the distance you can see construction activity at new station.

i got a couple pics with the traffic light between cycles

north side last pic, if you look at angled building on the right (gates blg), it was to the west of the throat of south side.

rtd is selling the land that allows us to see the construction from the south side, so when the next service goes to the south it

will have to go north to go south. way to go rtd. wish they could design the next building to allow rail passage thru on the 1st

floor! not sure if that parcel has been sold. the land I am referring too was last a park, after rtd extended the 16st mall thru

union station.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/29/12 06:00 by dan.

---

---

---

I rode a UP steam special out of Denver to Pueblo in 2006, and was astonished to find that there is no longer track south from the station. We loaded with the locomotive on the south end, and backed north to a junction which allowed us to go south two or three blocks west of the station. Buildings and a street have been constructed on the former ROW, as shown in the photos posted earlier.

Why was this done? Denver, as built, was a through station. Now it has been stub-ended. So much for any hopes of commuter rail.

The only problem I see is that Amtrak was sound asleep in the back of the room as a "stakeholder" when they got themsleves relocated out of there "temporarily", and can't even serve the Cal Zeph adequately with extra cars, cut cars, PV's, and the like.

coach Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Like Sacramento, CA's station fiasco, now another
> one pops up. IT'S A TRAIN STATION, remember??
> Hope they keep rail travelers at the forefront of
> their "vision."


There's no fiasco at Sacramento. There's merely a new situation that will take awhile to adjust to, and isn't fully built out yet. Meanwhile, SAC has eliminated freight trains passing through on the passenger tracks, and there are 4 dedicated passenger tracks.

Things change; otherwise you remain stuck in the past. 20 years ago, the rails at the Sacramento station were dated "1941", the last time they were changed out.

Or, think about how certain airports were "ruined": 40 years ago, you could drive up to the Oakland airport and park right in front of the terminal at a parking meter. Now, there are 2 terminals, and it's much busier than before. Meanwhile, in Houghton, Michigan, you can still drive up and park, and there's not even a parking meter; rather, when you return, you will normally find an envelope under your windshield wiper requesting a parking fee payment to be deposited in a box.

Change is one of the costs of progress, and progress is necessary if you don't want to be a backwater.

coach Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Like Sacramento, CA's station fiasco, now another
> one pops up. IT'S A TRAIN STATION, remember??
> Hope they keep rail travelers at the forefront of
> their "vision."

I used Sacramento a couple of weeks ago and found it very nice. Where's the fiasco? How much have you used it since the change?

Very stormy weather for the next few days, and it won't be fun walking that distance in sideways driving rain. That's the fiasco. It ain't sunny and calm all the time. And the walk, compared to we had, is ridiculous. This was all changed for development, not passenger enhancement. Additional tracks could have been added at the old location (like there used to be), but AMTRAK got pushed around.

shoretower Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why was this done? Denver, as built, was a
> through station. Now it has been stub-ended. So
> much for any hopes of commuter rail.

Commuter rail is planned to to operate out of Denver Union Station, according to this website:

http://www.rtd-fastracks.com/dus_1

Hopefully the overhauled station will take into account the potential increase of either Amtrak or commuter trains. Even in the Amtrak year, the Denver Station saw the Desert Wind, Pioneer, California Zephyr and Ski Train, let alone private trains. I always thought of Denver as a point where excursion train service could radiate from (e.g. like Vancouver in British Columbia - ala the Rocky Mountaineer).

jp1822 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hopefully the overhauled station will take into
> account the potential increase of either Amtrak or
> commuter trains. Even in the Amtrak year, the
> Denver Station saw the Desert Wind, Pioneer,
> California Zephyr and Ski Train, let alone private
> trains. I always thought of Denver as a point
> where excursion train service could radiate from
> (e.g. like Vancouver in British Columbia - ala the
> Rocky Mountaineer).

Don't hold your breath. Last track plan I saw had one (1) track for Amtrak, no hotel track for PV
or excursion train parking, and no area for adding these later. RTD would just as soon Amtrak went away.
They have been told they will be kicked out of the present location (too valuable of a space). Not sure
where the ticket/waiting room will be-possibly in the Amshack in the back where they are now.

The grand hall waiting room is to be a posh hotel lobby. Don't need any of those trashy train people
hanging around there! Amtrak is just sitting it out, willing to take whatever crumbs fall their way.
It's not on the NEC like the $22M Joe Bidden station, so Amtrak really doesn't care. Know why they
named it after Joe? So he would know when to get off.

coach Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Very stormy weather for the next few days, and it
> won't be fun walking that distance in sideways
> driving rain. That's the fiasco. It ain't sunny
> and calm all the time. And the walk, compared to
> we had, is ridiculous. This was all changed for
> development, not passenger enhancement.
> Additional tracks could have been added at the old
> location (like there used to be), but AMTRAK got
> pushed around.


Amtrak didn't get "pushed around". Amtrak generally is a no-show. As Tom Downs told me in the mid-1990s, "we don't like to invest money in facilities we don't own". This means that others make the decisions.

And, the weather? Not to worry. California has the finest weather in the country. If the weather is really bad on one or two days a year, Amtrak probably won't be running anyway...it's a fair weather carrier.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/30/12 05:40 by reindeerflame.

shoretower Wrote:
>
> Why was this done? Denver, as built, was a
> through station. Now it has been stub-ended. So
> much for any hopes of commuter rail.

There will be commuter rail, but entering the station area from the north. The stub-end thing isn't an issue from the north.

From the south Denver build a couple light rail lines, which cover the area where commuter rail would be useful.