To see the May 18, 2009 filing, click here

COLORAIL CONCERNS WITH THE CURRENT DENVER UNION STATION PLAN

May 15, 2009

Capacity:
• The greater the number of people accommodated at DUS, the greater the success of the Union Station neighborhood, Denver, and the region.
• As the plan now stands, DUS will open largely at capacity, unable to handle additional rail services and even some existing ones (excursion, special event trains and private rail cars, e.g.).
• The addition of regional and statewide rail services are actively under discussion and Amtrak is poised for growth with solid federal support at the executive and legislative levels.
• The superior fuel efficiency of rail, its greater productivity, and the public's preference for it indicate a need for expansion in the short and long term.
• The taxpayers purchased the DUS site in 2001, prior to the passage of FasTracks, for transportation purposes. Large portions of that property are now under contract to be sold for OTHER purposes that will permanently constrict the site’s rail capacity.
• The original DUS Vision Statement called for addressing FUTURE transportation which this plan clearly does not do.
• A proposed remote satellite station for expansion is inadequate, inconvenient, inefficient, and uncertain.

Connectivity:
• The ability for transit users to accomplish convenient, timely connections between transit modes is essential in attracting riders, including those destined for downtown Denver.
• The relocation of the existing light rail nearly a quarter mile west of the station will have a significant adverse impact on inter-modal travellers, requiring additional time and inconvenience.
• The current plan attempts to address these issues by including the addition of:
o Extended shuttle services between the station and the relocated light rail line, without consideration of the impact on rush hour passengers attempting to board east of the station.
o Underground moving walkways between the station and the light rail platform which will not solve the problem.

Union Station:
• The Vision Statement calls for the “activation” of the historic station yet the current plan places light rail and bus connections some three blocks away from the building.
• Proposed shuttles will divert most passengers away from the building, diminishing the market for businesses inside the building.
Through-Station Versus Stub-End:
• A through-station can be at least twice as efficient as the current stub-end configuration. That helps address the capacity issue as well as offering the potential of the one-seat-ride by negating the inconvenience of changing trains for some travel markets.
• Allowing for future extentions of both commuter rail and light rail should be a top priority and should include retention of the existing tail tracks.
Underground Bus Bays:
• This underground structure will be located in the lowest lying area of Denver, (36 feet below the water table) making flooding inevitable and requiring constant preventative pumping.
• An underground structure accomodating diesel and other fossil fuel vehicles will require costly ventilation and lighting systems to be maintained in perpertuity.
• Underground structures requiring round-the-clock pumping, ventilation, and lighting systems are also environmentally costly and do not meet the sustainability requirements of the project plan.
• The planned bays do not accomodate interstate bus operations (i.e. Trailways or Greyhound) denying passengers full transportation services as promised in earlier planning documents.
Historic Preservation and Community Space:
• Removal of the historic tunnel is unnecessary and diminishes the historic facility.
• The “bookend” buildings that are planned to border the north and south ends of the station significantly limit community open space and views.
• Buildings designed for the sites that would be set back further to the west of Wynkoop would detract less from the historic station and would accomodate more public space in the core of lower downtown.

Cost:
• The current plan significantly increases costs for the taxpayer, increased construction time and neighborhood disruption, without an increase in the level of passenger service.
• Adapting existing, functioning infrastructure for new uses makes sense environmentally and financially.
• The construction costs of building a finite number of underground bus bays is astronomically higher than an above ground, expandable structure.
• The current plan does not identify the long-term financial impacts of adding additional shuttle services, maintenance of underground systems, and moving walkways that are incompatible with alternate passenger-friendly, transportation focused, and truly environmentally sustainable redevelopment.
• Lower cost, higher- function alternative plans are available and have been studied. While the work necessary to thoroughly study the alternatives is not insignificant and may slow the start of construction somewhat, the resulting change of direction will better serve us for generations to come.

Click here for President's Letter on Denver Union Station.