Having an alternate route around the congestion would help greatly.
Highway 285 parallels I-70 from about Indian Hills to Grant, all from
a great distance though. At Grant though, Highway 285 heads directly
towards Frisco. If it were possible to build a road from Grant on
Highway 285 to Frisco on I-70, then an alternative route would be
available for traffic.
Also, a tunnel under Mosquito Pass between Leadville and Fairplay
would be quite expensive, but it too would provide an alternate road.
While I may not agree with some of Chris' ideas, I applaud him in
pushing the idea of fixing the traffic problem on I-70. Denver has
always been horrible in being proactive in regards to traffic and
highway systems. We do things 20 years too late. Let's fix the I-70
problem now before it gets so bad that commercial traffic diverts
around Colorado because of it, losing millions of dollars in revenue
for Colorado.
We certainly need something to ease the traffic. Charging $12 will
not fix this issue. Whats $12 when a cheap day of skiing is over $100
per person. If this charge would help pay for a massive highway
expansion project or a high-speed rail system which would be less eye-
soreish-this 20+ day skier would settle. However with as much money
as we bring in to our state from tourists, we should be able to fund a
rail project that could expand Denver's tourism as well.
I don't care for these ideas at all. However, I am curious, should
this bill be implemented, if locals to the ski resort towns are going
to be fined as well if they happen to be traveling between Denver and
home and get caught in ski traffic. When you live in the mountains,
you travel to and from Denver rather frequently to use the luxuries of
the city (doctors, clothing stores, Sam's Club, etc.) and the times at
which you travel rely heavily on the schedules of your intentions in
Denver. Often those times overlap with ski traffic. Would you really
consider charging someone for driving to the doctors during rush
hour?
And we pay for the maintenance and opportunity to use these highways
anyway through tax dollars. We should NOT have to pay when we
actually chose (or have to) use them.
I would like to know why you don't relieve traffic from north of
Denver by creating a highway through Nederland and then improve on
Moffat Tunnel so that we can get to Granby, the Winter Park area,
Steamboat Springs, a shortcut to Utah, etc. You've got roads in the
area, a tunnel, why don't you just improve on them and relieve a
percentage of the traffic on I-70? My husband and family have been
asking this of each other for years. Thanks for the forum to finally
ask the question to someone who might know the answer.
Rather than trying to make a name for yourself politically by coming
up with a 'quick fix' to a complex problem, why not use your pull to
support, fund, and speed up the efforts that are ongoing? This should
be about Colorado and solutions rather than your ego. Real politicians
work for the right solution, and not just the quick or cheap
solution.
I can barely, as a life long Colorado resident, afford to go skiing as
it is. Lift tickets are expensive, parking at the resorts is
expensive, gas is expensive...I think it is an AWFUL idea to charge
people to drive up during "peak" times when that IS the best time to
get up there to get your money's worth. Why does the government have
to control that anyway?? Is it just another way to make some money?
Sure people complain about traffic but at least it's free traffic. It
would be worse to sit in traffic that you paid for!! If people don't
want to deal with it then they'll choose on their own accord different
times to go, not because of an impending fee. GRRRR...
We need a highway and tunnel from Boulder to WinterPark, Tabernash,
Granby, Steamboat Springs, etc. This would allow all of the Northern
Front Range traffic to avoid using I-70 to get to the destinations I
mentioned above. This would save alot of fuel and miles and most of
all relieve I-70 congestion. The Moffit tunnel has been in use for
years and works great for a shortcut through the mountains.
The fundamental issues is that people who oppose Romer's proposal do
not understand economics. Specific charges during peak times totally
changed traffic in London for the better. Traffic there was basically
futile gridlock before they started upcharging during certain times of
the day.
The fee gives people the choice . . is their time worth more than
their money? Right now everyone has to err on the side of time. Well
guess what, my time is worth a hell of a lot more than yours, so much
that I am willing to pay you to encourage you to stay home and stay
off I-70 when I want to use it. My guess is that you will happily
accept this proposal once you see green.
There is no I-70 problem. If you don't like traffic, "get the hell
outta bed!" Hit the interstate at 6:00 am when there is no traffic.
Lack of traffic should be its own incentive. I think the real problem
is that YOU don't want to sit in traffic and YOU don't want to get up
early. Well, YOU can't have it both ways. YOU can't just tax others
so you'll have free reign. In major cities the world over people that
REALLY don't like traffic, don't drive when there is traffic. They go
to work early and go home early, or late. I did it in San Francisco,
I did it in Los Angeles, I did it in Houston, I do it in Denver. I
found a friend and we haul tail up the HOV. If you don't want to get
up early and you don't like traffic, ski on Wednesday! Tuesday!
Thursday! Split the work week up. Take your vacation days to ski
with no traffic and no lift lines. WHY IS SATURDAY SOMEHOW SACRED?
Traffic is lighter on Sunday. (except the drive home of course) SO
STAY THE NIGHT! Drive home Monday. The ski resorts will love you.
That's where they make the real money anyway. Real Estate. Options,
Options, Options.
