Discussion on buses

[chadmck...@hotmail.com]

Busses are an affordable way to relive traffic on I-70. If you can
keep the cost under $20 round trip it should prove to popular. I would
love not to drive in that traffic and weather.

[woo...@ritsema-lyon.com]

Could you consider negotiating with the ski areas regarding running
busses such as the casinos do? Maybe even get them to give a discount
of some kind at the ski resorts to help defray the cost of the bus
ride? I ride the bus to the casinos in Blackhawk and find them very
convenient, as well as safer than driving - I certainly believe the
ski resorts could afford to do the same thing.

[et...@hotmail.com]

The average number of people per car durring peak periods is already
well over 3. It would take over a thousand busses to reduce the number
of cars on a peak day by even 10%. Imagine those 1000 busses trying to
get up Georgetown hill in the snow, and the resulting traffic slowdown.

[J.Alleg...@gmail.com]

I wholeheartedly agree with this option: It can't be just one thing
(i.e., just a toll or just buses). Instituting a toll without other
options doesn't help anyone. In order to actually reduce the volume,
there has to be something in place besides a fee. If just buses were
available, there's no guarantee that people would use them if driving
was more convenient and doesn't include a fee. So, there would have to
be both things in place to make either the fee or the mass transit
options work.

[junkema...@yahoo.com]

I like the elevated bus transport that is being considered. It solves
a lot of problems and is pretty flexible. It is a good halfway point
betwen the monorail and the current congestion.

Here's an example of the bus system:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O-Bahn_Busway

Something like that makes a lot of sense. If you can go to a park/ride
and then board a bus that goes directly to where you are going - say
Keystone. You get on at the Park and Ride and board your bus....it
drives onto an elevated track where it stays there until a certain
point and then becomes a regular bus again delivering you to your
destination.

It would all be based on that Denver - Glenwood stretch of I-70, but
it could help Springs, Denver and Ft. Collins folks alike.

[Timot...@gmail.com]

Ultimately, I think we can all agree that rail is the long-term
answer. However, in the short-term, we need solutions. Lanes or
Trains are a multi-decade project, only buses could be deployed to
help out now. The amazing thing is that there is no bus service right
now! I also think that the ski areas should bear some responsibility
of solutions in the short-term, since the ski areas are driving much
of this traffic in the wintertime. I think each resort should be
encouraged to set up buses that leave at frequent intervals from
Denver. The "dinosaur" park and rides and some of the RTD park and
rides would be a great candidate. The state should, of course, help
incentivize the process by having both a carrot and stick approach.

As to the argument that it would take a 1000 buses -- I don't think
that's true in that there's no need to remove every car from the road,
just enough to help unclog the system. With each resort to provide,
say, four buses per hour, assuming a 6 hour round trip, that's just 24
buses per resort. Very doable for each resort, with some state
incentives and a reasonable fare to fund it.

[Rex]

A few weeks ago, I was listening to KOA's "Ride Home" with Dave Logan
and Lois Melkonian. They were discussing Senator Romer's proposal to
tax travelers who don't conform to government's wishes and
redistribute the revenue to those who do. Since the Senator was
willing to "brainstorm" in public, I thought I would offer an
alternative that employs government to leverage free market forces
rather than dictate behaviors. As a result, the alternative should
have greater appeal to taxpayers, skiers and ski area operators.

What's needed is an affordable solution that alleviates the congestion
and addresses both the morning commute and the evening trips home (a
shortcoming of Sen. Romer's proposal). While this idea needs much
further study, the market incentives would seem to be in place to make
it work.

The idea has three elements:
(a) The state appropriates funds to capitalize a fleet of vans and a
parking facility near Morrison. Something like 400 vans (15
passenger) and parking for 6000 cars would make a significant impact,
costing the taxpayers maybe $20M.
(b) Round trip fares for each rider on the order of $25 would be used
to cover operating expenses. The vans would offer non-stop service to
each of six I-70 ski areas: Winter Park, Keystone, A-Basin,
Breckenridge, Copper Mountain, Vail / Beaver Creek.
(c) Each ski area would offer riders full fare credit that can be used
be used for food, drink, skiwear, etc. To avoid a backlog of credit
obligations, ski areas could make credit valid only on date of
purchase. At any time, they would be free to offer incentives by
giving credits in excess of the full fare.

It would seem that everyone wins.
The state promotes the ski industry, alleviates congestion for locals
and partially offsets taxpayer's capital investment by enhancing the
sales and income tax base.
The ski areas get more skier-days by offering a more enjoyable
experience at a small marginal cost to the ski area and no increase in
cost to the skier.
The skiers can enjoy the entire day, including the "ride home", at no
net cost increase.
Fewer drivers are on the road, especially after a day of skiing and
partying.

Hopefully this idea adds constructively to the public debate.
Respectfully,
Rex

[michele...@gmail.com]

I think the bus idea is a good one- however we need to create a "bus"
lane for it to be feasable. If there is any way to add just one lane
(up in the AM's, down in the afternoons) for buses only- the drivers
would watch the buses zoom by as they sit in car traffic.

[bik...@gmail.com]

CDOT's own study shows ave. # of people per car is 2, not well over 3.
About 10 buses per hour (not 1000!) in peak travel times would take
300 two-person cars off the road per/hr in peak travel times. 300 cars
an hour off the road is expected to have a significant reduction in
perceived congestion.

[bik...@gmail.com]

This is a good idea, but buses need to be cheaper. At $25 a person, or
$50 a couple, lots of people wouldn't choose the bus, even with
discounts.
This is a great idea:
www.freeskibus.org

[Pia...@gmail.com]

Since the state can't realize that a train is necessary. Buses are the
best thing next to trains. Why is it that The USA can't figure out
what all the other foreign countries have figured out. "LOTS OF
PEOPLE = NEED FOR MASS TRANSPORTATION" I have lived in colorado for 4
years and all our government officials do is talk about what to do.
Why don't they do something?. Pull the trigger and get some buses.
Start laying down the Train Tracks.

[melo...@gmail.com]

I think a bus option is the best short-term solution to congestion,
while a rail option should be considered for the long-term. If the bus
solution doesn't work, the buses can be used elsewhere in the city or
sold to other bus companies, while tollways can't be used for anything
other than taking tolls.

However, I don't think these buses should be free. A $10 or $15 fare
is reasonable and is on the same order of magnitude as how much a
person would pay for gas + parking. It's similar to the airport
Skyride RTD runs and could use the same style buses, storing the skis
and snowboards in the cargo compartment underneath. RTD already has a
Ski Ride to Eldora, we should probably investigate how heavily it is
used. It doesn't make much sense to have a ski bus running on an
hourly schedule given how long it takes to get to the ski areas and
back. A couple morning departure times and a couple late afternoon
return times should be sufficient. Have several buses ready in the
morning and fill each to capacity, or require people to book a
reservation 24 hours in advance so you know how many people to expect.
If you assume each bus can hold 30 people, that takes 8 to 30 cars off
the road, depending on carpool rate. Assuming 15 cars saved per bus
(for an average and because buses are bigger), 6 buses would reduce
traffic by about 100 cars.

The ski areas serviced by the buses would contribute to the initial
funding (buying top notch buses that can handle the mountains) and
provide free ski passes to the drivers as an incentive to get the very
best drivers on those routes. These buses could even be fancy enough
to have video monitors in the back of every seat, providing extra
incentives for people to use them. If the ski areas get in on the bus
solution, they could include free bus rides along with their ski pass
packages, encouraging regular skiers to use the bus. And, of course,
environmentally friendly natural-gas powered or hybrid buses would be
preferred, if they can handle the mountains.

[h2opolo...@yahoo.com]

I love, love, love the bus idea. I think mass transit would really
solve so much of the conjestion to the mountains.

[jimse...@mac.com]

Buses are the answer. They can build a nice customer base that could
be used to justify much more expensive trains.

[bren...@juno.com]

As a short term solution, I believe buses are the way to go. As
already mentioned, they need to be reliable, able to handle bad roads,
and affordable. I would also advocate installing HOV/Bus lanes in the
always-jammed sections of I-70, the highest priority being Floyd Hill
to US40 (Winter Park exit). This would help guarantee the buses a
smoother transit to the mountains, and an extra incentive for the
riders as they would bypass the other lanes of stop & go traffic. As
others have noted, even a 10% reduction in the number of cars on the
road will have a huge benefit to traffic flow, and a moderate number
of buses is part of the solution.

[c_jer...@hotmail.com]

As others have suggested, I think that rail is the ultimate long term
solution - we simply cannot continue to "add more lanes". It seems
that practically everyone says "rail" or "train" - but we are
repeatedly told that it is too expensive, etc. - meanwhile our
federal, state and local governments continue to spend money on things
that we don't want and are too expensive. As far as I am concerned,
rail to the ski areas should be part of a bigger transportation
solution - I would put rail from DIA to Grand Junction and from Pueblo
to Cheyenne.

Obviously, rail would be many years away, so we would need to do
something to bridge the gap. Buses would do the trick - and perhaps
even a variety of buses ranging from the basic - spartan school bus,
to "swank" buses with food and "adult beverages".

Even if it did take "thousands of buses" it would be a much better
alternative than tens of thousands of cars and trucks.

Honestly, I do not have much faith in the ability of the state govt.
to get things done. We moved to Colorado in August of '91, and on our
first outing we took a Sunday drive in the mountains, returning in the
evening on I-70, where we spent more than an hour going < 10 MPH
between Georgetown and Idaho Springs. Now, nearly 20 years later - we
have the same problem.

[paulan...@gmail.com]

It seems like a logical solution to create several state run bus
routes from various Metro Denver locations that will link to the
Summit Stage. There is no need to worry about Winter Park, since it
already has the train. Advertise the train more, if they get more
volume they will be able to lower the price. I would pay at least
$20.00 for a bus ride up to Summit County.

[berrye...@yahoo.com]

The following web site has some ideas that are very good, but I don't
see why the buses need to be free. Even if they were $10/person each
way that would be a bargain compared to the cost of operating a car.
http://www.freeskibus.org/

I can't believe there isn't already some bus company doing this but I
have searched on the web and can't find any.

There should be one lane reserved for buses. Everyone else has to sit
in the traffic. That would give people plenty of incentive to take
the bus.

[carolKIN]

I agree with the bus HOV lanes to ensure that the buses can run on a
schedule. But I would limit this to 2 hours Saturday morning and 2
hours Sunday evening.

[logan...@gmail.com]

Yes, buses would help. I really do not want a fee to drive on the
road. The fee will not help the traffic and it will make an already
very expensive sport even more expensive. To some of us even a small
fee could feel like a lot of extra money and its not fair. Buses are
the cheapest, quickest and most environmentally friendly option I can
think of that will help the problem.

[del....@gmail.com]

If the busses ran every half hour direct to the ski areas they would
be packed. Put in HOV lanes for the buses and cars that have at least
three people in them. There would be far less conjestion and more
people would want to ski. I have had a season pass for years, but I
think this is my last year. Too much traffic.

[jeff.laf...@googlemail.com]

A few random thoughts:

1) First, thanks for the opportunity to constructively discuss this
issue. One way or the other, the time for solutions is now, not a
decade from now (or more).

2) A short-term solution must be generated before any decisions about
long-term infrastructure improvements can be had. Mirroring some of
the ideas already presented (especially by Rex), here are a few
points:

a) Buses (RTD coaches) should replace cars. To do this, the financial
incentive to use the buses must be greater than using one's own car. A
combination of peak-time road tolls, higher ski area parking fees, and
lift ticket / food discounts to bus users should be offered.
b) For peak-time tolling, I strongly believe that tolls should only be
charged to skiers and that a massive traffic-jam-causing toolbooth on
the freeway should be avoided. Instead, I propose the use of
electronic pay-passes such as are used on the I-25 HOV. Cars exiting
at Empire, Loveland, Dillon, Frisco, Copper, and Vail are charged a
toll between 7am and 11am, and a toll is charged to enter at these
location between 2pm and 7pm (weekends and holidays). Through-traffic
is not tolled. No cash is accepted, so no backups on ramps will occur.
Local residents (within a Summit County or Eagle County zip code) are
given a pass that is scanned without toll so that they don't get
penalized. Pay-passes are sold at area grocery stores, etc. Round-trip
tolls should be equal to the cost of riding the bus.
c) Slow-moving semis must be removed from I-70 during peak travel
times. This alone will greatly improve existing highway capacity. I
would prohibit trucks during the same period tolling is in effect. The
relatively limited closure window should not greatly affect the
ability of companys to transport their goods.
d) Buses should be provided from central collection points (light rail
accessible as well as Morrison/Golden P&Rs) and should go direct to
ski areas. For example, there could be buses from the Broadway/I-25,
Lincoln, Union Station, etc stations that each go directly to one of
the ski areas. A person should be able to board a light rail train,
and make one transfer directly onto a bus to the ski area of their
choice.
e) Buses should be subsidized via toll revenue. Riders should pay a
fee to use the buses, but that fee should not be as high as the actual
operation cost. Say the actual operation cost is $20 per passenger.
Charge the passenger $10, then charge car drivers via toll $15, and
use $10 of that toll to subsidize the rider. If by some miracle we end
up with more riders than drivers, we've just saved $10 billion or so
and can subsidize buses with that!

3) Eventually, a high speed rail system needs to be built. However, do
not limit routing options to just the I-70 corridor. A route might be
more feasible that roughly follows US-285 to the base of Kenosha Pass,
with a tunnel under Webster Pass (a tunnel under the Divide will be
required somewhere anyway). A rail line from downtown Denver to
Keystone via Conifer/Webster Pass would be about 5-10 miles longer
than a route via I-70, but the gentler terrain south of Mt. Evans
might actually make construction less expensive. That is for the
engineers to decide, but is worth considering.

Again, thanks.

[mark]

My editorial promoting buses was in the Rocky Mountain News yesterday.
I previously had sent this information to Chris Romer.
I stated the ski industry is a cause of the issue and we need a ski
industry type solution. Since Excel energy is required to have a
percentage of energy by renewables, we should so require the ski
industry to have a percentage of their guests travel by mass transit.
Increase the percentage over the years, just like Excel is required to
do. You could charge more for a lift ticket by car and have a refund/
rebate for those who take a bus. But the solution details could be
left to the ski industry and then have a penalty they pay if they
don't meet the goals. A rail solution is unproven at these altitudes
(does anybody remember the state of the art DIA baggage handling
system and what happened to it)? When I returned to skiing a couple of
years ago I could not find a bus. I almost exclusively used the
Rockies bus for baseball games. I checked out the train from Denver to
Winter Park, but it was too expensive and then you add parking costs
downtown.

[Eric Bogin]

Physically separated buys lanes are desperately needed. The state
need not run the buses, they can simply charge a per-passenger fee to
vehicles of 10 or more (i.e. CME and anything with more people than
that) and let the private sector fill in with convenient bus service
to any of the destinations served by the bus lanes, which I think
should go from Golden all the way to Vail, if not Glenwood Springs.

[corey....@gmail.com]

Adding any kind of lane to the highway would create even more
congestion for the years required to build it (don't forget summer
traffic). A train would be a great long-term solution, but I doubt
that the state can afford it.

I think a fleet of busses would be the most realistic solution. If
they leave from certain Park n' Rides, no additional infrastructure
would have to be built except for expansion of said Park n' Rides.
Just need to make sure they're affordable enough and run with enough
frequency that people have incentive to use them.

My question is why aren't more private companies getting on this?

[l_me...@yahoo.com]

A fleet of buses is a realistic and fair solution. A $12 fee would
kill the local ski industry. Why should we pay a toll for a highway
we have already paid for with our tax money??? I would think twice
about purchasing a ski pass if I was financially penalized for using
the highway. A winter season bus pass running from the various park
'n rides that financially REWARDS people who chose to leave their car
at home (i.e., a reasonable price for a pass) seems the only
reasonable solution.

[l_me...@yahoo.com]

A bus running from the different park 'n rides is the only fair
solution. I would have to think twice about purchasing a ski pass if
I had to pay $12 every time I drove up to the mountains (on top of the
cost of gas, parking, etc.). A season bus pass that would financially
REWARD people (i.e., cheaper than gas of individual cars) seems the
only reasonable solution to getting people off the road.

[moniqu...@gmail.com]

I've seen research on Maryland's public transport bus system. On thing
that worked well from their research is that people will wait LONGER
for the bus if they know exactly when it's coming. (Think the London
tube signs that display..the next train is in 2 minutes.)

As our population grows 100,000 people a year, public transport is the
only viable long term solution. I realize trains are expensive to
install, so what about some alternatives until it makes economic
sense.

As Hick noted, rich white people don't take the bus, but they do take
the train. However, bus solutions are cheaper. There are a few ways to
counter act that issue. First, develop bus stations that look more
like light rail stations. Incorporate development: coffee shops,
breakfast places, dinner, pubs, etc. My biggest problem with RTD is on
certain routes (like the one to Boulder) the pick up location changes,
or it's not physically identified enough. A simple sign doesn't cut
it. Second, add a marketing element. People use the Boulder circulator
buses. Why? Their names are easy to remember, fun and are brightly
painted and they're frequent. THird, The Boulder buses are also vans
not buses. It's harder to get motion sick on them. They're also
cheaper and can be run more frequently. Think CMT (Colorado Mountain
Transport.)

Encourage better pricing and marketing. The Anshultz group runs the
ski train. My first year here, I planned on taking the train up
everyone of my 25 ski days per year. HAVE YOU SEEN THE PRICES? It's
$40 a ride. Are they insane? They have the ability to add two more
cars. Why isnt' there a 'locals season pass" for $250 to ride the
train all season? I would GLADLY play $10/trip as that's what I spend
in gas. If the government is willing to fun an inital venture to
create that additional pricing, a friend and I will start up a company
to get it off the ground. Anshultz also needs to add one or two more
trips each way and negotitate with the freight trains that during rush
hour, the passenger train gets priority, NOT the freight train. That
way, the hour and 10 min. it takes to get to Winter Park in a car,
doesn't take three hours in a train.

[jfast...@aol.com]

In my view Buses are an easy, affordable and quick fix to the I 70
congestion issue. I think one of the keys to making buses work is
to make them affordable and convenient. For example, if you can drive
your car to Vail from Morrison for $24 in gas for a round trip and it
takes 90 minutes a bus should cost less and get you there in the same
amount of time. Because drop off and pick up could be destination
specific it could easily be more convenient. I would also be
interested in investigating the pros and cons of a park and ride/
transfer station in the Morrison area.

[jimc...@comcast.net]

Run shuttles from a ski park and ride somewhere on the front range all
morning and evening. If you used the Coors Field parking until the
Broncos are done and then use Invesco parking mid January thru the end
of the ski season. DO NOT charge for parking! Invesco and Coors field
can give a little to protect our states greatest tourist draw. If you
had a shuttle that was only $10 round trip direct to Copper mountain
that left every hour on the hour from 6am-9am and left the ski area
from 3pm-6pm for the return I would be on it. It would require at
least 4 busses running to each ski area. If the cost was greater than
the $10 round trip the ski area would pay the difference. Why would
you try to charge the skiers a toll when they are already paying $86
for a lift ticket. Lets charge the resort to deliver skiers to them! I
am sure that a great shuttle system could be developed and that would
take many drivers off the road. Extend the hours, add busses when
needed. If it was not a hassle for front range skiers I know many
would use the service. If each bus took 20 cars off the road and you
had 4 busses going to Winter Park, Breck, Copper, Loveland, A-Basin,
and Keystone that amounts to 480 cars off the road, and that is just a
start. I know that I am using $20 in gas to drive the 120 miles to
Summit County and back not to mention a new windshield every year and
wear and tear on my vehicle. This is the quickest fix until we can
figure out that we need a third lane on I-70 or a monorail. Think
about it. Please!!

[bail...@yahoo.com]

I moved to Col Springs last spring, I was very surprised to learn
there's not some type of busing system leading to the slopes. I
thought something like that would have been in place long ago either
set up by state or the resorts, it only seems natural. The long drive
from Col Springs can be stressful & with a bus you can relax & ride at
your leisure. Ever taken the Ski Train? It's very nice to be able to
hop on & go. I'll be very upset if we have to pay tolls to use I70.
People have to take more responsibility for their own actions, if they
don't like the traffic then get out of bed & go earlier & leave the
mountain & different times.

[ru...@chasonconsulting.com]

First, my apologies for some of those fools who commented on the Mike
Rosen show.

It seems to me that the only practical short term fix is to establish
a bus system coupled with a user fee during the high traffic hours.
The fees would pay for the buses. Also, the idea of taking large
trucks off the road for a few hours would not only help the situation,
but would only minimally change truck delivery times. After all,
sitting in traffic for 3 hours is compensated for by leaving at a
different time.

[jimbo]

Long-term, some sort of rail (light, heavy?) will be needed, but a
rather quick and cheap start would be with buses. Several years ago
there was bus service to many ski resorts; what happened? With
Greyhound discontinuing service in many areas (Grand and Routt
Counties), the other alternatives are Amtrak and DIA shuttles, neither
of which is affordable or convenient. Please also remember those of us
who commute from the mountains to the Front Range.

[j.s...@comcast.net]

Someone PLEEEEEEEZE provide us with bus service!
J

[Happy2Drive]

I would ride a bus, if it didn't cost more than driving, and the
schedule didn't require too much compromise. It would be important
for me to have an option to ride up at several possible times. It
seems like it would be pretty easy to run a bus route up I70 with
stops at Loveland, Copper, Vail and Beaver Creek. Those resorts would
see an increase in business and should have to help pay for it.

[wanograham]

Buses, vans, and carpools are the best and cheapest way to move more
people along the existing I-70 corridor. In the late 1990's buses
were operated to several ski areas. I rode these a few times. It was
inexpensive and convenient. I am not aware of any current scheduled
bus service to ski areas. I attended the Winter Olympics in Torino,
Italy. Roads to the mountain venues (similar in capacity, width, and
sinuosity to the road from Bergen Park to Echo Lake) were resticted to
special vehicles and buses. It was incredible how many people were
able to reach the venues by bus. Use tolls between Idaho Springs and
Georgetown and apply only during rush periods, in the rush direction,
and only to vehicles carry few people. Use this to subsidize bus
service. With buses mixed into the vehicle stream, it may be possible
to move more people than if vehicle passenger counts remain as is
andif an additional lane is added in each direction

[tjdo...@hotmail.com]

I think low price, if not free, bus mass transit direct to the various
ski areas could provide an effective and immediate solution to I70
congestion, as opposed to highway widening and rail, which would
require long term construction and adversely affect the communities in
Clear Creek county. I would much rather ride a bus from a park & ride
lot than waste gas stuck in Saturday or Sunday I70 gridlock in my car,
especially if the bus dropped me off right at the base of the ski
area. The following link makes a compelling case for a bus solution:
http://www.freeskibus.org/

In conjunction with convenient low cost bus service, car pooling
facilitated through sites like Skicarpool.org should be supported and
publicized to encourage ride sharing and eliminate single or double
occupant vehicles as much as possible. I think the emphasis has to be
on getting cars off of the road at peak periods, not on widening the
highway to accomodate more cars. Any improvement from widening or
rail construction will likely be short lived due to the projected
population increase over the coming years, not to mention the expense
and engineering challenges.

I also think these options should be encouraged through incentives
aimed at the target audience (skiers and snowboarders) and not by
imposing a toll on others who have may not have an alternative to
using the road at peak periods. The ski areas could offer discounts
on food, lift tickets, etc. to people who either ride a bus or
carpool. It is in their interest to ensure that their customers are
able to reach their destination with the least amount of trouble.

[Dee]

I am a weekly communter from the Westminster PnR to downtown and a
volunteer ski patroller on the weekends at Loveland and we all carpool
to the area. Since patrollers have to get to the area before 8 am,
the morning traffic is not an issue. It's in the late afternoon/
evening traffic that's the problem.

My idea: Submit a proposal to the Feds for grant money to subsidize
RTD Coach busses to run the I-70 corridor to each specific ski area.
Create a ski area specific "eco/ski pass", or combination. RTD
already has service to Eldora from the Boulder Transportation Center
and has for years. So there already is a model. As you know, Fast
Traks was awarded Fed grant money for the Golden rail line. So why not
for busses?

[wendy...@hotmail.com]

Bus usage would greatly reduce the pollution caused by many other
vehicles used by commuting skiers. This, of course, would cost a lot
of money for commuters, but it will definitely pay off in the future.

Maybe a train or a tram system up to the mountains would reduce costs
and pollution as well. With gas prices now, this would be a great way
for people to stay away from pulling money out of their pockets.

[Bard]

MY I70 ideas (or just see Ed Quillen's)
Please forget high tech mumbo jumbo. Forget goring the other guy's ox.
Simpy have RTD or FREX run buses up to the ski areas.

Greyhound does a terrible job and ought to be investigated by the
state. They
do not sell tickets onsite. You have to buy them from a surly driver
who can't make change who shows up when he does. It runs very seldom
(3:00 and 7:30p.m) The clients seem to have a frighteningly high
incidence of TB. Buying a ticket online doubles the (~15$) cost. To
take the wonderful free SummitStage to Frisco, the only
bus station, takes an hour from Keystone, Minimum (tho not bad,
especially from Breck). To reach a 3:00 bus you'd miss a lot of
skiing. The Vail bustation is real nice
and helpful.
When I tried to send my son down after a day of skiing the bus left at
7:45 p.m.
from Frisco. OK. It arrived at 9:30. Kinda late.
If 2 people rode it would be 2 x 15$ x 2= 60$. I can drive my ol' 4
cylinder clunker up
and back for 33$, carrying 5 people and all their stuff.

Big government incentives/punishments/inducements
will leave SEVERE impact to the less affluent who should be able to
ski too!

In addition to regular reliable RTD or FREX buses cleverly scheduled
for 1 and 2 way trips and flexibility we must:
1) Ticket the fat rear-ended SUV's that slowly cell-phonedly hog the
left lane and wreck a lot since they spent so much money on their
bohemoth vehicles in the mistaken view that it was safer and therefore
didn't buy studded snow tires since they had already spent so much.
Their numerous wrecks slow traffic.
2) Ban interstate trucks. Period.
If they want to drive through Wyoming, we have won.
Read Ed Quillen. The guy is THE primary reseource on I70 cures.
Anecdotes: I ski 60 days a year and always safely reached my
destination, not once in a 4 wheel drive. TWICE while driving down I70
I was confronted by a semi driving AT ME in MY LANE. I swerved! He
kept going!
Once they blocked Vail Pass because they were told to stay in the
right lane during a storm. They are not benign as they were when we
were kids. They seem meth-ed
out wild eyed frantic, and "not from around here".

[lbda...@hotmail.com]

Using buses would be the quickest solution to this issue. I think a
parking lot like the one on 470 before I-70 would be a great place for
people to park and then ride the buses to a central location where
people can then take a specific mountain bus. The only problem I see
is all the equip. people bring. I personally bring extra clothes and
a cooler each day I ski. People would need a secure location to store
their supplies while in the mountains.

[Starr...@gmail.com]

Buses are the only "NOW" solution! Express buses - large enough to
have a restroom - destined for individual resorts and picking up at
RTD lots around Denver, would be effective.
I70 traffic starts by 6 AM. It is bad starting at 2 PM on the return.
We backcountry skiers have to cut our trips short to try to avoid the
worse of the return traffic.

[jumbo...@gmail.com]

Ban the Buddy Pass, barring that Bus the Masses

The congestion got worse when the Buddy Pass started. Busses should be
subsidized by the ski areas that are causing the traffic problems.
Skiers would be more likely to spend money at the mountain and
villages if they didn't have to pay for gas and parking.

Validate the bus costs if riders spent X dollars at an on-mountain
restaurant or village dining.

A full service truck stop before Vail - i.e. Wolcott or Eagle, would
give truckers a place to wait out traffic (variable message signs with
drive times posted), wait out chain laws or closures and buy proper
equipment for conditions.

Eric
Silverthorne, CO

[vfk...@msn.com]

Using buses that run on natural gas or solar technology would be an
interim solution until a full, high speed, affordable rail system down
the center of I-70 from Denver to Grand Junction could be put into
place. A vote by the populace ~ NOT after a 'consensus' by the RTD
Board, whose sights seem quite limited in responding to the tremendous
population growth & overwhelming interest in mass transit on the Front
Range ~ would determine the public's response to this possible
solution. The RTD Board's lack of vision on the Light Rail system has
provided a DISMAL number of parking spaces for the Light Rail
Ridership !! How 'amazing' that the ridership predictions on every
new line has 'tremendously' exceeded the RTD's ridership
'expectations'. The working/traveling public is weary of spending so
many hours crawling along the highway while commuting to work.....and/
or to recreational pursuits in our beautiful mountain areas. The
gaming industry has done a great job (albeit limited in scope) in
placing 'Park N' Ride" type locations to bus casino visitors to
multiple destinations. The charge for I-70 bus ridership along I-70
should be reasonable and much less than the actual cost of traveling
by car..While the rail system along I-70 is being constructed, there
could be an HOV Lane along I-70 in both directions (free to buses/
vans, and a toll for single cars slightly higher than, or at least
equal to the cost of the single vehicle's gas to & from their
destination. Hopefully this would encourage increased bus ridership
for a faster 'commute', and the fees could help subsidize the buses..
There can be Express buses or buses that have multiple pick-up sites,
much like the existing RTD bus system, with a slight fee differential
for Express. In the short term, this could be accomplished by simply
purchasing more buses (hybrid/natural gas) & adding more routes to the
existing bus scheduling system. These buses into the mountains should
run continuously all day every Friday, Saturday, Sunday and Monday.The
number of weekday trips could be adjusted according to demand. The
mountain communities & their Chambers of Commerce can/should beef up
their free shuttles during those times to & from these bus/future
train stops to many destinations/attractions (not only ski lifts)
within their own communities...like the 16th St Mall in Denver & many
luxury resorts throughout the world. Perhaps some of the mountain
communities who benefit from the influx of visitors could be expected
to contribute to the future rail system that will bring tourists to
their towns. European countries seem to have a handle on public
transportation.. Adding to our existing RTD bus schedule & adding more
natural gas/solar/electric buses would be a starting poing. A study
of the cost of building a rail line down the center of I-70 from
Denver to Grand Junction seems to be a logical 2nd step. Traditional
rail could be limited by weather constraints..but a check with The Ski
Train to Winter Park could offer valuable statistics. Electric or
electromagnetic seems to have a more reliable potential.... I hope
that, within my lifetime we will see some relief for the travelers and
visitors to our incredible part of the world.