OFFICIAL I70 BITCH THREAD....

[The SnowShow]

Agree smokkan

[wolfelot]

I would propose to make I70 two levels, four lanes each. During storms, the lower level would be used for peak flow, as it would be shielded from snow. If the upper had to shut down, you still have the lower as an option and vice versa. There would be no need for widening anything. The top could even be heated to avoid icing.

A great idea that sounds mega expensive.

[summit]

KEEP YOUR CARS AND FORGET EXTRA LANES! THIS IS THE SOLUTION:

The answer is a roll-on roll-off heavy electric rail system. You could have a 5000-7500ft train (shorter than the average freight train) that carried 50 semis/buses, 300 passenger vehicles, and 500 additional passengers. You run two per hour each direction. 6 stations between Denver and Eagle.

1. You can do this with only one more tunnel bore. (depending on station frequency and train speed, you can do this with single track most of the way and only a few side tracks)
2. Increases capacity by more than 50%.
3. Reduces slowdowns by more than half by removing semis.
4. Reduces road closures by far more than half by removing semis and tourist drivers.
5. Cuts roadwear by far more than half by removing semis.
6. Tourists and weekenders will use this because they can keep their vehicles for local freedom.
7. Semis will use this because all the time they spend on the train is time moving cargo but not counted against their driving hour limits, plus it saves time and effort and no chains. Commercial fees can be the primary ongoing funding source!

In Europe, they have these types of trains already.

This is better than bus lanes. This is better than car lanes. Mass transit AND people keep their cars AND it gets the semis off the road. This is the ultimate I-70 solution.

[FatChance]

My ultimate I-70 solution was to move to SW Colorado 15 years ago...

The thing missing in all the grandiose train, tunnel, double deck plans, of course, is figuring out who would pay for it and how. No matter what some may think, this is only a problem for a very, very small minority of the Front Range population. The appetite of the rest of the state, region or country to pay additional taxes to help this problem any time soon is pretty much nonexistent given other priorities.

[montanaskier]

Have you ever driven that route? It would take 4-5 hours to get to Vail on a dry summer day. Look at a map. Only way to shorten it would be a tunnel through the Mosquitos, which I'm sure would be pretty cheap.

I would propose to make I70 two levels, four lanes each. During storms, the lower level would be used for peak flow, as it would be shielded from snow. If the upper had to shut down, you still have the lower as an option and vice versa. There would be no need for widening anything. The top could even be heated to avoid icing.

I drive that route....a lot as part of my travels back and forth to the 303. It doesn't take 4-5 hours.

[concretejungle]

left where?

Um, my house.

Summits idea is the best. Too bad it'll get overlooked yet again.

[Danno]

Wait I though the Twin Tunnel project would solve everything!

It does, if you define everything in the right way.

[Danno]

and yes, I agree that a train that carries cars is the best solution, for a reason that Summit doesn't mention, but is the biggest obstacle to a "simple" train: summer. While this is a ski forum and we like to bitch about ski traffic, volume is actually higher in summer. And the infrastructure needed for the winter train (eg lots of buses in summit county) doesn't work for summer traffic, because the masses aren't all going to a handful of places, they're going everywhere. And any solution that only solves less than half the problem isn't a viable solution. People need their cars in the summer, so a train that carries cars is really the only possible rail solution.

[summit]

Great point

[hatchgreenchile]

IMO, bus rapid transit is still the best option. In the grand scheme of things, pretty cheap too...
There is no way you will build a fixed rail line through the mountains that get people there quickly and efficiently (COST).
Multiple transit centers, including Union Station, throughout the metro that each go direct to the resort. Eventually, build an 4+ HOV and bus lane in each direction. It doesn't answer the summer volume question, but I think it could put a major dent in the number of cars in the road during winter.

Or tunnel 2 reversible lanes from Morrison to Keystone for $30 billion, call it the Summit Express (SEX) and move the hordes effectively.

[char]

Question: Is there not a reliable, timely express bus service for skiers? Or do you have to stop 5 times to get to Vail?

Edit: Cold smoken answered that...

So why isn't this being done? Seems like a no brainer if people are regularly spending 4 hours driving that a reliable express bus service leaving and arriving direct to ski areas from metro areas would be attractive. Even if the bus is stuck in traffic you have a place to take a piss, watch a movie, read a book, etc.

[The SnowShow]

and yes, I agree that a train that carries cars is the best solution, for a reason that Summit doesn't mention, but is the biggest obstacle to a "simple" train: summer. While this is a ski forum and we like to bitch about ski traffic, volume is actually higher in summer. And the infrastructure needed for the winter train (eg lots of buses in summit county) doesn't work for summer traffic, because the masses aren't all going to a handful of places, they're going everywhere. And any solution that only solves less than half the problem isn't a viable solution. People need their cars in the summer, so a train that carries cars is really the only possible rail solution.

Yes, and that's why I think it's imperative to provide more options for how to get to and from these areas, ie. expansion of 285 or something else, away from I70. Like smokkan said, the alternate route may not make sense on a normal travel day but during times like the holiday where people are stuck for hours between Silverthorne and Idaho Springs, then a slightly longer route distance-wise might help alleviate the jam.

[Vegetable Lasagna]

Yes, and that's why I think it's imperative to provide more options for how to get to and from these areas, ie. expansion of 285 or something else, away from I70. Like smokkan said, the alternate route may not make sense on a normal travel day but during times like the holiday where people are stuck for hours between Silverthorne and Idaho Springs, then a slightly longer route distance-wise might help alleviate the jam.

But with that mentality, the jam would have to be in place before people decided to use the alternate route, which means it would not be alleviated. It may avoid the REALLY bad days, but the commute on 70 would have to be 4+ hours to make the alternative seem like a good idea. And by the time that is reported to the people, it will be too late and most will still be stuck on 70. (Kind of a confusing, I know)

[Name Redacted]

But with that mentality, the jam would have to be in place before people decided to use the alternate route, which means it would not be alleviated. It may avoid the REALLY bad days, but the commute on 70 would have to be 4+ hours to make the alternative seem like a good idea. And by the time that is reported to the people, it will be too late and most will still be stuck on 70. (Kind of a confusing, I know)

Yup. It's not always a 4 hour drive on I-70, even on weekends, it's usually worth chancing it. But you ain't getting from Vail to Denver in under 3.5 hours on 285, even if you drive like Alabamontanaskier.

[The SnowShow]

Yup. It's not always a 4 hour drive on I-70, even on weekends, it's usually worth chancing it. But you ain't getting from Vail to Denver in under 3.5 hours on 285, even if you drive like Alabamontanaskier.

Maybe you can if 285 is a real hwy the whole way

I would proactively take an alternate route on those big powder days where the tunnel is a mess and LL Pass is closed.

Looks like the ride back wasn't bad tonight? Guess everyone "changed their peak time" and came back down last night?

[Danno]

IMO, bus rapid transit is still the best option. In the grand scheme of things, pretty cheap too...
There is no way you will build a fixed rail line through the mountains that get people there quickly and efficiently (COST).
Multiple transit centers, including Union Station, throughout the metro that each go direct to the resort. Eventually, build an 4+ HOV and bus lane in each direction. It doesn't answer the summer volume question, but I think it could put a major dent in the number of cars in the road during winter.

I do agree that BRT/HOV could put a viable dent in the problem (and could still be used extensively in the summer, especially if the buses could carry a lot of bikes), because it's ultimately about a) adding lanes and b) getting more cars off the road. I just don't see building a train as any solution until it carries cars.

[fastfred]

the idea that coloradans will ride the bus or a train is a joke, people move here and buy a big suv so they can sit in traffic comfortably and drive safely in the mountains once a month thats the mind set as a kid I rode buses all over the place it was easy and cheap but ask anyone in this state when the last time they road a bus they wouldn't know public transportation is for poor dirt bags not wealthy skiers

fixing i70 in the mtns is laughable seeing as how the average car count a day is 5-10k cars. while I70 east of 25 sees over 100k cars a day and they can't seem to fix that. until people who live here want to add a 25 cents to the gas tax we'll continue to bs our way through road construction.

this problem isn't anything special to colorado goto the east coast and maginfy the traffic by 10 northway on the weekend ski 93? ... 95 north out of boston on a summer weekend? there actually isn't a problem with traffic on i70 its just a white rich persons issue. the highway could easily be improved and built to 21st century standards but no one wants to pay for it were happier selling off our assets to forgein companies and toll lanes than doing things the right way

[hatchgreenchile]

the idea that coloradans will ride the bus or a train is a joke, people move here and buy a big suv so they can sit in traffic comfortably and drive safely in the mountains once a month thats the mind set as a kid I rode buses all over the place it was easy and cheap but ask anyone in this state when the last time they road a bus they wouldn't know public transportation is for poor dirt bags not wealthy skiers

fixing i70 in the mtns is laughable seeing as how the average car count a day is 5-10k cars. while I70 east of 25 sees over 100k cars a day and they can't seem to fix that. until people who live here want to add a 25 cents to the gas tax we'll continue to bs our way through road construction.

this problem isn't anything special to colorado goto the east coast and maginfy the traffic by 10 northway on the weekend ski 93? ... 95 north out of boston on a summer weekend? there actually isn't a problem with traffic on i70 its just a white rich persons issue. the highway could easily be improved and built to 21st century standards but no one wants to pay for it were happier selling off our assets to forgein companies and toll lanes than doing things the right way

Well, I disagree. The I70 mountain corridor is a very unique scenario. Between Georgetown and Vail, you have the two highest mountain passes in the country, each getting ~400"+ of snow a season with long, steep grades on both sides. This corridor is how the 4+ million people in the Front Range and high country efficiently travel up and down.

What I like most about a bus line is that it is a cheap program to sample. Get 75-100 high end posh motorcoaches and split them between the Wooly Mammoth lots, Union Station, Boulder and Highland Ranch to go direct to the resorts. I think you’ll be sending up full busses one after another.

[smmokan]

And then next year at this time, we'll be bitching about all of the buses stuck on Vail Pass because they didn't have chains.

[Shredhead]

fixing i70 in the mtns is laughable seeing as how the average car count a day is 5-10k cars. while I70 east of 25 sees over 100k cars a day and they can't seem to fix that.

Speaking of which:
I frequently catch a 6pm flight out of DEN and always hit the brakes right after I-25 around 4:30 . The stop and go adds a good 25-30 minutes. Is it any faster to take I-76 to I-270 or E-470?

[Name Redacted]

All trains and busses will do is concentrate people in certain areas of the high country and leave them trapped. Winter already kinda has this because of the resorts, but summer, people are much more spread out. How are you going to get to the XYZ trailhead five miles out of town? Uber? It'll also take an entire generation of intense marketing to convince people to take a bus instead of just bringing their car, even if they can drive their car onto a train.

[montanaskier]

Americans love their cars.

[montanaskier]

Speaking of which:
I frequently catch a 6pm flight out of DEN and always hit the brakes right after I-25 around 4:30 . The stop and go adds a good 25-30 minutes. Is it any faster to take I-76 to I-270 or E-470?

It's 4:30...go earlier.

[hatchgreenchile]

A bus line wouldn’t dent summer traffic much, but I don’t think it would be intended to…

The point is that for a cool ~$100 million, you could put a pretty nice bus route together and put a good dent into winter traffic. I don’t think it takes the 3+ occupant vehicles off the road, but if the price is right and the line is efficient, the 1s and 2s will ride it all day.

[Name Redacted]

Did you guys know that you can take Greyhound from Denver to Frisco? Then take Summit stage to the resort? I challenge every one of you to take the bus at least once this season to prove it's viability.

There's also a pretty good amount of shuttles available (CME) and while they are expensive, they do serve their purpose.

Having these already in place, why do you think they have not taken off in this free-market economy? Are you asking that the State of CO/CDOT provide busses, and subsidize rates to encourage travel? If it was a viable option, it would have been done by now, but my guess is that it just isn't that profitable unless you charge rates that are cost prohibitive to travelers who already own a car.