Commentary on the I-70 Congestion Issue

One of the serious problems faced by anyone living on the I-70 corridor in Colorado is the increased congestion.  The problem has been addressed by the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) - late, and to the dismay of many, ineffectively.  The CDOT plan is simply to widen the highway by adding two more lanes at a cost that CDOT also says is far above any future proposed budget.  A combined task force made up of every special interest we could imagine, including the governmental bodies of every community in the mountains who felt they might be affected has urged alternatives, and has pointed out the extreme environmental damage that would be caused by more pavement.  The following is must reading for anyone interested. 

The Denver POST OpEd Tackling I-70 Congestion, reprinted below, needs to be followed up with Letters to Editor (LTE) from supporters of I-70 environmental quality.   The LTEs in Sunday’s POST (Sunday 7/23) illustrate the problem: Jon Esty of Colorado Rail Passenger Association was the only accurate one and the only one from people who understand the problem.  I-70 brings out a lot of the people who have their own theories to solve the problem, but who probably have not been through the 15-plus pounds of paper of the Draft PEIS, let alone the citizen meetings on this matter.    

We need primarily to make sure that newspaper readers know, contrary to what they hear from CDOT and the I-70 Coalition in the mountains, some specifics.  These include:

(1) There is a new transportation system that CDOT did not examine, using the Swiss Stadler Fast Light Rail 100-mph train introduced in 2004, or an equivalent, with the elevated guideway originally designed for a future possibly-feasible monorail under an Federal Transit Administration funded study.

(2) This Fast Light Rail rail system can be built immediately and there is no need to wait for some feasible future technology, as the CDOT and paving proponents say.

(3) It can be built within the funding constraints established by CDOT.

(4) It is cheaper than adding highway lanes if CDOT does their proposed "Context Sensitive Design" similar to Glenwood in order to avoid unacceptable environmental impacts and - importantly - violation of related environmental laws.  (Glenwood Canyon would cost $80 Million or so per mile today.) Canyon

(5) Elevated rail will avoid most of the adverse environmental and economic impacts that added lanes will create, including violation of laws on historic/cultural/recreation resources and water quality.   "Mitigation" will be unnecessary.

(6) It will have a 50-year economic life rather than the 20-year economic life of the added highway lanes (let's protect Colorado taxpayers).

(7) The rail can carry more people than four or more added highway lanes.

(8) Funding is feasible.

(9) Rail transit - electricity powered with regenerative braking and energy from wind farms - meets Sustainability concerns; highways and cars contribute to global warming greenhouse gases and depletion of global oil resources.

(10 ) CDOT is violating the letter and spirit of the National Environmental Policy Act, the Nation's Environmental Bill of Rights.

The reason it is important to get this information out soon is that citizens seem to believe the CDOT position of "highways now, transit some time in the distant future" (CDOT's official budget document says 2020.)  That is misleading.   Everyone needs to be made aware that the positions taken earlier by CDOT are no longer defensible.  Citizens need to tell CDOT and official to comply with NEPA, and to adopt the new rail system that is now available and is best for economics and the environment.

LTE’s needs to be made much more specific on the items above and the need for revised thinking.  Writers can now go to the "Mountains to Plains Transportation Solutions"  (MPTS) website at www.i70mountaintransit.org to find more materials and specifics for LTEs, including the list of 24 members of MPTS.  The POST OpEd was written some weeks ago and did not have information on completed studies on the rail system that was first released to DRCOG.  It did not have some of the specific facts we available.  Otherwise, it is excellent in making the general points, thanks to Gregg Cassarini of Colorado Environmental Coalition. 

In environmental PR issues, every organization gets members to write LTE’s and this is important now for the I-70 issues.  If you support environmental quality, sustainable transportation and Keeping Colorado Beautiful, can every one please get some efforts underway in public information?  This environmental and economic future may depend on it. 

Thanks in advance.   This is a personal opinion and plea:  I've been involved in protecting I-70  environmental quality for 40 years and the designs of Vail Pass, Glenwood Canyon and the Hogback cut would not be as they are without this involvement. 

"The problems we face today cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them" - - Albert Einstein.

__________________________________________

Want to buy or sell a SnowHome in Summit County?  Please visit our website.  All the property listings are there.  When you live or visit here, you will know "Snow Place Like Home".