U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado > Denver
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
 
Unread 12-16-2011, 10:28 AM
 
4,100 posts, read 2,355,796 times
Reputation: 3083
Quote:
Originally Posted by hammertime33 View Post
. They picked the better option of the two.
This was not the better of the two. This is a disaster of epic proportions in the making.

This article pretty much sums it up.

That's why we propose to return Union Station to its past glory and meet the needs of 21st century commuters and travelers. We offer a new, vibrant social setting, including a nationally prominent gourmet marketplace that will dramatically enhance the fabric of the neighborhood.

That is what is needed at Union Station. It's what the facts dictate and what the market will bear.

In contrast, others have suggested the speculative development of a hotel, despite that fact that hotels have been proposed near there in recent years and not built because the market wasn't there. While train stations have been transformed into other uses in cities where the station is obsolete, this is not the case in Denver. And once Union Station is a hotel, there's no going back, even if the hotel fails and hotels have been shown to have the largest default rate of any property type.


Read more: NO: Return Union Station to its past glory - The Denver Post NO: Return Union Station to its past glory - The Denver Post

 
Unread 12-16-2011, 10:45 AM
 
4,100 posts, read 2,355,796 times
Reputation: 3083
Quote:
Originally Posted by wong21fr View Post
Hey, the RTD Board deals in facts, you're dealing in nostalgia. Considering how misinformed the public is (for some weird reason everyone is envisioning the Grand Central Market or Redding Terminal Market in a space the size of a 7/11), I think that the RTD Board was smart to choose the option that has some promise of higher revenues and a lesser chance of having to be subsidized in the future even though it's rather silly to think that either proposal is accurate in their 60-yr revenue projections.

Really, they are the exact same proposal for the main level and the basement, it's the next two floors where the difference is and a hotel ensures some level of pedestrian traffic.
They are not even close to the same, and a hotel does not ensure any level of pedestrian traffic. Anyone who has ever stayed at even a large hotel, knows that it gets busy at peek time, when people are checking in or checking out. Midday and late night, hotels get pretty dead. A lot more dead then a train station. And 24 hrs, forget it. In the middle of the night there wont be a person is sight. Even the front desk clerk will be in the back folding laundry, or in the office doing paperwork.
 
Unread 12-16-2011, 11:38 AM
 
396 posts, read 195,915 times
Reputation: 475
What a load:

Quote:
Originally Posted by KaaBoom View Post
This was not the better of the two. This is a disaster of epic proportions in the making.

This article pretty much sums it up.
That you are quoting the opinion piece by the Union Station Neighborhood Company, in support of their losing proposal, doesn't exactly lend any support to your argument.

Quote:
That's why we propose to return Union Station to its past glory and meet the needs of 21st century commuters and travelers. We offer a new, vibrant social setting, including a nationally prominent gourmet marketplace that will dramatically enhance the fabric of the neighborhood.

A nationally prominent marketplace is something like the Grand Central Market, Redding Terminal, Pikes Place Market, etc. It IS NOT a 5,000 sq ft upscale 7-11 crammed into a wing of a relatively small train station. This is the first of USN's many misleading presentations. They have constantly emphasized this "market", and drawn correlations to far bigger proper urban markets, because they know that this idea is attractive to the public. But, USN's market is nothing like the examples that have been given. A proper example is Cook's Market on the 16th St. Mall, which is essentially an upscale 7-11.

This is the first of several of USN's deliberate misdirections.

Quote:
That is what is needed at Union Station. It's what the facts dictate and what the market will bear.

In contrast, others have suggested the speculative development of a hotel, despite that fact that hotels have been proposed near there in recent years and not built because the market wasn't there. While train stations have been transformed into other uses in cities where the station is obsolete, this is not the case in Denver. And once Union Station is a hotel, there's no going back, even if the hotel fails and hotels have been shown to have the largest default rate of any property type.
So, the hotels that the USN have proposed on parcels directly next to Union Station obviously aren't feasible either? Why should we listen to a developer who is obviously so inept that they are proposing multiple hotels when the "market wasn't there"? They are proposing the exact same use on their parcels, but don't want the public to know about that.

USN deliberately ignored Union Station from the first day that they won the competition to redevelop Union Station. Their proposal for the transit elements was designed to de-emphasize Union Station as the transit center.
This is because USN's profit will come from developing the parcel's surrounding Union Station and everything they have done is designed to maximize the value of these parcels while ignoring the historic station.

Let's look at
USN's development program and phasing plan:


Now, the timeline is no longer applicable, but do you notice how there is no development portion for the historic building? The Union Station Project Authority repeatedly asked USN what their plans were for Union Station and were repeatedly rebuffed. This is because USN intended to ignore the station asides from the mandated safety and life systems upgrades that RTD had budgeted for because it was not in their interest to put anything worthwhile in Union Station; there wasn't any profit in doing so and retail or other use would compete with their other parcels.. This is why the Authority decided to hold a competition to renovate the station: USN had no interest in doing anything to the station because it was not going to be financially beneficial to them.

The argument about 100,000 people passing through Union Station and the hotel infrining upon these travelers is also a misleading one. While there will be tens of thousand of people debarking and embarking on trains and buses at the commuter rail station and bus station, only a small percentage of these will pass through the historic station. Most of these transit users are going to head directly to the Mall Shuttles and the planned DT Circulator. The transportation infrastructure is designed to ensure that these users NEVER have to set foot inside the historic station.

Here is the Pedestrian Flow Diagram for Union Station:


See blue lines heading to the Mall Shuttles? That is the majority of your 100,000 transit users per day... people who will never have to walk through the historic station building. It's is intellectually dishonest for USN to design the entire transit program to de-emphasize the historic building and to then use the same numbers to imply that 100,000 people will actually walk through the building.

Your entire idea of what Union Station will become is based on the idyllic fantasy that the whole program was intended to make maximum use of the historic building while the truth could be nothing further from this. There is a reason why USN calls this area the Transit District: everything has been designed to ensure that the historic station was ignored, except as a pretty facade, and the parcels that USN won the right to develop were emphasized in terms of pedestrian exposure in order to maximize their potential profit.

You sir, are entirely wrong.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/7684412@N07/6521711437/ (broken link)
 
Unread 12-16-2011, 11:42 AM
 
396 posts, read 195,915 times
Reputation: 475
Quote:
Originally Posted by KaaBoom View Post
They are not even close to the same, and a hotel does not ensure any level of pedestrian traffic. Anyone who has ever stayed at even a large hotel, knows that it gets busy at peek time, when people are checking in or checking out. Midday and late night, hotels get pretty dead. A lot more dead then a train station. And 24 hrs, forget it. In the middle of the night there wont be a person is sight. Even the front desk clerk will be in the back folding laundry, or in the office doing paperwork.
It does provide more consistent pedestrian traffic than office space does. As for it being more dead than a train station... that's an irrelevant point. The main floor of Union Station will continue to be a train station while the upper two floors will contain the hotel. You get both uses. Or you could have had the main floor being a train station and the upper floors being office space. Same end game except there would be less pedestrian flow.

The hotel will at least ensure some additional liveliness in a building that has been set up to be ignored by the transit users who will be running around just outside of it. This is the point that you seem to have missed.

Last edited by wong21fr; 12-16-2011 at 01:08 PM..
 
Unread 12-16-2011, 08:53 PM
 
Location: 25 sq. miles surrounded by reality
206 posts, read 191,342 times
Reputation: 282
This is one of those threads is the perfect example of what's wrong with message boards, internet chat rooms and blogs. The whole premise is entirely negative and designed to elicit a strong, emotional response. This generates an unfortunate yet guaranteed byproduct which is attention to the OP.

Personally, I think that RTD does have a fiduciary responsibility to consider the future revenue steam of any proposal that will utilize one of their assets. There is absolutely nothing wrong with proposing a boutique hotel for the second and third floors of Union Station. It is a much more public use of a commercial space than office space and "upgraded mechanicals". It also offers a much better chance of having people going in and out of the building during the evening hours than office space whose "occupants" can't wait to get out of Dodge at 5:00.

The only open question in my mind is that if someone drops a bomb in a thread and no one posts, does it still go KaaBoom?

Ignore. Life is too short.
 
Unread 12-18-2011, 09:12 AM
 
4,100 posts, read 2,355,796 times
Reputation: 3083
Quote:
Originally Posted by LisaBoulder View Post
This is one of those threads is the perfect example of what's wrong with message boards, internet chat rooms and blogs. The whole premise is entirely negative and designed to elicit a strong, emotional response.
So what you would like to see is a happy, happy forum. Where no one ever disagrees, and everybody can talk about how much they love Denver, and how it's the greatest city in the world. With the best weather, where the snow always melts within 24 hrs. (even though weather records say otherwise). With the greatest transit system in the world (even though RTD is decades behind much smaller cities, and one of the most expensive to use).
 
Unread 12-18-2011, 10:07 AM
 
4,100 posts, read 2,355,796 times
Reputation: 3083
Quote:
Originally Posted by wong21fr View Post
It does provide more consistent pedestrian traffic than office space does. As for it being more dead than a train station... that's an irrelevant point. The main floor of Union Station will continue to be a train station while the upper two floors will contain the hotel. You get both uses. Or you could have had the main floor being a train station and the upper floors being office space. Same end game except there would be less pedestrian flow.

The hotel will at least ensure some additional liveliness in a building that has been set up to be ignored by the transit users who will be running around just outside of it. This is the point that you seem to have missed.
I have missed no points. But the point you missed is, what happens if no one wants to stay at this train station hotel, and it fails?
 
Unread 12-18-2011, 10:35 AM
 
7,578 posts, read 13,740,348 times
Reputation: 7332
The whole redevelopment of the area around Union Station in Denver will come to be remembered one of the stupidest, most irresponsible projects undertaken in any major city--but not for the reasons that people think. Denver, like the rest of the US, is going to desperately need a viable intercity rail transportation network to economically survive what lies ahead for this country, and the redevelopment around Union Station has effectively killed that opportunity. The death blow came a few years ago, when the through rail access to Union Station was cut off to the south by redevelopment. The track configuration that remains to access Union Station is horribly inefficient, and can barely accommodate the twice-daily Amtrak California Zephyr trains that call there. It would be like building an airport far out of town that is very inconvenient for travelers to use--wait a minute, Denver did that, too. There can be no question that Colorado's transportation "leaders"--from the city level to the state--have to be the most clueless, corrupt, idiotic morons that have ever walked the earth. They only know how to build roads and sprawl--and a good part of the time they can't even do that right.

Beautiful as Union Station could be, and historically significant as it is, the redevelopment that has already occurred around it essentially makes it functionally useless for a transportation hub--just as the whole Denver metro area is going to become functionally useless when it comes to transportation when we no longer can afford to be the automobile/truck/airplane-centered society that we are today. When that day comes--and it is going to come--Colorado and its metro areas are not going to be worth a s*** economically. I'm sure glad I'm not invested in the metro area--it's not going to be worth much.
 
Unread 12-18-2011, 02:22 PM
 
4,100 posts, read 2,355,796 times
Reputation: 3083
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzlover View Post
The whole redevelopment of the area around Union Station in Denver will come to be remembered one of the stupidest, most irresponsible projects undertaken in any major city--but not for the reasons that people think. Denver, like the rest of the US, is going to desperately need a viable intercity rail transportation network to economically survive what lies ahead for this country, and the redevelopment around Union Station has effectively killed that opportunity. The death blow came a few years ago, when the through rail access to Union Station was cut off to the south by redevelopment.
Exactly, the Union Station redevelopment has killed any chance of ever having any type of passenger rail service along the Front Range. Commuter rail or even intercity Amtrak trains. RTD has made it impossible to run any type of trains south of Union Station.

I have to disagree with your comments about the location of the airport though. The redevelopment of Union Station severely limits the future of rail travel in Denver. RTD has landlocked the station with development. There will be no where for Union Station to expand. DIA OTOH, was build with the future in mind, and endless room to expand.

Union Station = the old Stapleton airport. Obsolete, landlocked and no where to expand, even before it opens.
 
Unread 12-18-2011, 04:47 PM
 
4,100 posts, read 2,355,796 times
Reputation: 3083
Quote:
Originally Posted by wong21fr View Post
Here is the Pedestrian Flow Diagram for Union Station:

See blue lines heading to the Mall Shuttles? That is the majority of your 100,000 transit users per day... people who will never have to walk through the historic station building. It's is intellectually dishonest for USN to design the entire transit program to de-emphasize the historic building and to then use the same numbers to imply that 100,000 people will actually walk through the building.
Of course most transit users will never walk through the historic building. The developers have done everything possible to make sure that transit riders are as far away from the station as possible.

That diagram shows everything that is wrong with this plain.

The first mistake was tuning Union Station from a through station, into a stub terminal. Meaning that in it's heyday southbound trains would pull into the station, unload passengers, board more passengers, and continue south. Northbound would pulling stop, drop off, pick up more passengers and continue north. This is the type of service that would be needed again, if the Front Range is every to be connected with a decent network of commuter trains.

Next look at where the light rail station is. It's three freakin blocks away from Union Station. If a light rail rider wants to go inside the station, they will have to ride the mall shuttle bus up there. The bus station is two block from the station. Transfers are going to be hell. Especially in the middle of winter.

Greedy developers have been trying to get their hands on Union Station for 20 years. Ever since former Mayor Pena and his cohorts tried unsuccessfully to get Amtrak out of the station, so they could tear most of it down to build the Convention Center there. Now RTD has just handed it over to them to do what they please.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 

Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2011 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $74,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado > Denver
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top