AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules to ensure post quality. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: I-70 in Colorado: Mountain Corridor Upgrades  (Read 18535 times)

r-dub

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 58
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Colorado Springs, CO
  • Last Login: December 17, 2022, 01:28:12 AM
Re: I-70 in Colorado: Mountain Corridor Upgrades
« Reply #25 on: December 22, 2015, 11:51:09 PM »

What about I-25 north to Fort Collins or I-25 south to Colorado Springs? Or are there any plans to widen those with general purpose lanes?

For north of Denver check out https://www.codot.gov/projects/NorthI-25. It looks like CDOT is planning on tolled lanes from SH 66 (where 25 currently loses its third lane) north to at least Fort Collins. However, CDOT is planning a 2075(!) completion for all the projects, so I wouldn't hold my breath...

As for south of Denver, I-25 is only two lanes in each direction from Monument to Castle Rock. I jokingly call that stretch the 90 mile per hour free-for-all, but it doesn't take much to go from 90 to 0 in a matter of feet. Out of the last six or seven times I've taken that stretch, I've been in a complete stop all but once. It could definitely use a third lane, but as far as I can tell, no funding or EIS's have been done on that stretch yet.
Logged
Ryan "r-dub"
Roadgeekin' Colorado Style

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3220
  • Location: Los Angeles/OKC
  • Last Login: Today at 10:15:37 PM
Re: I-70 in Colorado: Mountain Corridor Upgrades
« Reply #26 on: March 07, 2022, 10:30:43 AM »

Some of this is likely to get underway soon:

Quote
A 4 foot wide block of road surface broke away from the deck of a Interstate 70 overpass in the foothills Wednesday, creating a hole which damaged several vehicles and required more than a full day to repair.

It also created an opportunity for the state agency in charge of highways to stress the need to approve funding for replacing a stretch of roadway that includes the overpass.

https://denver.cbslocal.com/2022/03/05/cdot-interstate-70-i70-floyd-hill-overpass-hole-repair-project/



As a reminder here is the project website: https://www.codot.gov/projects/i70floydhill

I hope these projects can be expedited with the infrastructure bill funds. This entire corridor expansion canít come soon enough.
Logged

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3220
  • Location: Los Angeles/OKC
  • Last Login: Today at 10:15:37 PM
Logged

Mark68

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 506
  • Location: Sparks, NV
  • Last Login: March 27, 2023, 07:38:06 PM
    • My Travels over the years
Re: I-70 in Colorado: Mountain Corridor Upgrades
« Reply #28 on: March 14, 2022, 06:30:49 PM »

I hope this project eliminates the left (WB) entrance and (EB) exit from I-70 to US 6...
Logged
"When you come to a fork in the road, take it."~Yogi Berra

DenverBrian

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 191
  • Location: Las Vegas
  • Last Login: Today at 10:10:27 PM
Re: I-70 in Colorado: Mountain Corridor Upgrades
« Reply #29 on: March 14, 2022, 06:32:17 PM »

I'll bet this is now closer to a $10B project than the original $3.5B estimate...
Logged

zachary_amaryllis

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1047
  • Stop pouring stuff on my town.

  • Age: 52
  • Location: colorado
  • Last Login: Today at 06:49:16 AM
    • Blog of random weirdness
Re: I-70 in Colorado: Mountain Corridor Upgrades
« Reply #30 on: March 14, 2022, 08:29:02 PM »

I hope this project eliminates the left (WB) entrance and (EB) exit from I-70 to US 6...

me too. that exit is just downright sketchy.
Logged
clinched:
I-64, I-80, I-76 (west), *64s in hampton roads, 225,270,180 (co, wy)

Elm

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 98
  • Last Login: March 01, 2023, 09:25:13 PM
Re: I-70 in Colorado: Mountain Corridor Upgrades
« Reply #31 on: March 14, 2022, 08:51:39 PM »

[...]As a reminder here is the project website: https://www.codot.gov/projects/i70floydhill

I hope these projects can be expedited with the infrastructure bill funds. This entire corridor expansion canít come soon enough.
That may depend on what you have in mind by "these projects"; the $3.5 billion plan the original post referred to was an unsolicited proposal that CDOT didn't pick up, although there is some inspiration from it in I-70 Mountain Corridor plans. Corridor-wide, the hypothetical "maximum program of improvements" features "six-lane capacity" from the twin tunnels to the Eisenhower Tunnel (see Figure ES-6), but the 2020 reassessment notes that "capacity" there refers to carrying ability, not necessarily lanes.

For near-term Floyd Hill, it sounds federal funding might allow for doing the larger parts of the project at once rather than in phases, although CDOT doesn't expect to finish their funding plan until September (referring to this January memo). Otherwise, they're thinking early projects starting this year, eastbound project construction over 2023-2027, westbound TBD (groupings listed here).

Federal funding is also expected to help with maintenance on the Eisenhower Tunnel (like this).

I hope this project eliminates the left (WB) entrance and (EB) exit from I-70 to US 6...

me too. that exit is just downright sketchy.

The Floyd Hill project would do this eventuallyóUS 6 would be extended west from the current interchange as a frontage road to the Central City Pkwy interchange. Eastbound-to-eastbound access would be at the Central City Pkwy interchange, and westbound-to-westbound access would be a right-side entrance near the current location. Here's the visualization from the virtual public meeting site. [If that site goes down, there's a big PDF of all the exhibits on CDOT's site here.]

Logged

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3220
  • Location: Los Angeles/OKC
  • Last Login: Today at 10:15:37 PM
Re: I-70 in Colorado: Mountain Corridor Upgrades
« Reply #32 on: March 16, 2022, 11:51:55 AM »

[...]As a reminder here is the project website: https://www.codot.gov/projects/i70floydhill

I hope these projects can be expedited with the infrastructure bill funds. This entire corridor expansion canít come soon enough.
That may depend on what you have in mind by "these projects"; the $3.5 billion plan the original post referred to was an unsolicited proposal that CDOT didn't pick up, although there is some inspiration from it in I-70 Mountain Corridor plans. Corridor-wide, the hypothetical "maximum program of improvements" features "six-lane capacity" from the twin tunnels to the Eisenhower Tunnel (see Figure ES-6), but the 2020 reassessment notes that "capacity" there refers to carrying ability, not necessarily lanes.

For near-term Floyd Hill, it sounds federal funding might allow for doing the larger parts of the project at once rather than in phases, although CDOT doesn't expect to finish their funding plan until September (referring to this January memo). Otherwise, they're thinking early projects starting this year, eastbound project construction over 2023-2027, westbound TBD (groupings listed here).

Federal funding is also expected to help with maintenance on the Eisenhower Tunnel (like this).
So what is the project shown in the video? I was under the assumption that was the 700 million dollar project but I guess Iím completely wrong if itís the 3.5 billion dollar one. What will the 700 million dollars be? Some wildlife underpasses and roundabouts!? Or that deals with the rehabilitation of the tunnels as well? CDOTs website confuses the heck out of me sometimes.

If so thatís a real bummer because I use this stretch of freeway fairly often and Iíve been dreaming of improvements for a long time. 
Logged

thenetwork

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3092
  • Age: 2019
  • Location: Grand Junction, Colorado
  • Last Login: Today at 08:51:19 AM
Re: I-70 in Colorado: Mountain Corridor Upgrades
« Reply #33 on: March 16, 2022, 06:59:09 PM »

[...]As a reminder here is the project website: https://www.codot.gov/projects/i70floydhill

I hope these projects can be expedited with the infrastructure bill funds. This entire corridor expansion can’t come soon enough.
That may depend on what you have in mind by "these projects"; the $3.5 billion plan the original post referred to was an unsolicited proposal that CDOT didn't pick up, although there is some inspiration from it in I-70 Mountain Corridor plans. Corridor-wide, the hypothetical "maximum program of improvements" features "six-lane capacity" from the twin tunnels to the Eisenhower Tunnel (see Figure ES-6), but the 2020 reassessment notes that "capacity" there refers to carrying ability, not necessarily lanes.

For near-term Floyd Hill, it sounds federal funding might allow for doing the larger parts of the project at once rather than in phases, although CDOT doesn't expect to finish their funding plan until September (referring to this January memo). Otherwise, they're thinking early projects starting this year, eastbound project construction over 2023-2027, westbound TBD (groupings listed here).

Federal funding is also expected to help with maintenance on the Eisenhower Tunnel (like this).
So what is the project shown in the video? I was under the assumption that was the 700 million dollar project but I guess I’m completely wrong if it’s the 3.5 billion dollar one. What will the 700 million dollars be? Some wildlife underpasses and roundabouts!? Or that deals with the rehabilitation of the tunnels as well? CDOTs website confuses the heck out of me sometimes.

If so that’s a real bummer because I use this stretch of freeway fairly often and I’ve been dreaming of improvements for a long time. 

They just rebuilt the tunnels by Idaho Springs, widening them to 3 lanes in each direction + shoulder space, so I don't what existing tunnels in/near the Floyd Hill project you are referring to regarding rehabs.

However, it looks like the idea of a new westbound I-70 tunnel at he bottom of the hill at US-6 (to make the curve toward Idaho Springs less sharp) is dead, no???
Logged

Elm

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 98
  • Last Login: March 01, 2023, 09:25:13 PM
Re: I-70 in Colorado: Mountain Corridor Upgrades
« Reply #34 on: March 16, 2022, 07:18:43 PM »

So what is the project shown in the video? I was under the assumption that was the 700 million dollar project but I guess Iím completely wrong if itís the 3.5 billion dollar one. What will the 700 million dollars be? Some wildlife underpasses and roundabouts!? Or that deals with the rehabilitation of the tunnels as well? CDOTs website confuses the heck out of me sometimes.

If so thatís a real bummer because I use this stretch of freeway fairly often and Iíve been dreaming of improvements for a long time. 
They just rebuilt the tunnels by Idaho Springs, widening them to 3 lanes in each direction + shoulder space, so I don't what existing tunnels in/near the Floyd Hill project you are referring to regarding rehabs.
Sorry, I probably confused things more (although I agree the CDOT website can be dodgy). The $700 million project in the news now is the whole set of Floyd Hill area things, including the early action projects and I-70 rebuild+expansion.

The early action projects alone were estimated at $31 million, and I meant to distinguish the Floyd Hill projects from other locations in the corridor, like the Eisenhower Tunnel, which are separate projects that may also receive federal funding.


[...]However, it looks like the idea of a new westbound I-70 tunnel at he bottom of the hill at US-6 (to make the curve toward Idaho Springs less sharp) is dead, no???
It looks that way. The way the EA reads (excerpt below), it sounds like they tweaked the tunnel alternative to limit excavation, and stakeholders didn't like the result, which put more south of the creek than before.
Quote
3.7. How well do the action alternatives fit the Project context and support core values?

[Ö]The Canyon Viaduct Alternative is supported by the PLT [Project Leadership Team] as the Preferred Alternative. The Canyon Viaduct Alternative also has support among TT [Technical Team] members. Aspects of the Canyon Viaduct Alternative that are supported include its ability to fit into the canyon with less blasting and rock excavation, reduced roadway infrastructure next to the creek and Greenway, and less complicated operations compared to the Tunnel Alternative. The Tunnel Alternative North Frontage Road Option was initially considered as the Proposed Action for the Project and is also supported by the TT. Features of the Tunnel Alternative North Frontage Road Option that were supported by the TT included the north alignment of the frontage road that avoids impacts to Hidden Valley Open Space on the south side of Clear Creek Canyon, the reduced roadway footprint and visual impact of the highway through the canyon by putting westbound I-70 in a tunnel, the ability to construct the tunnel offline, and a general support and interest in tunnels. The Tunnel Alternative South Frontage Road Option was developed to reduce rock excavation and heights of rock cuts. While it has this advantage compared to the Tunnel Alternative North Frontage Road Option, it is not supported by the PLT, TT, Clear Creek County, Idaho Springs, or the Floyd Hill neighborhood because it introduces roadway infrastructure on the south side of Clear Creek, disrupts wildlife movement along the creek, and diminishes the recreational experience of the Greenway, an important community resource.

[Ö]

3.10. What happens to the Tunnel Alternative?
The Tunnel Alternative is feasible and could be implemented. While it is not preferred based on currently available information and level of design, it is not eliminated. The CMGC may come up with innovations that reduce impacts or increase benefits for the Tunnel Alternative and, if this happens, CDOT would consider the new information, reevaluate the revised design or design concepts, and seek public input for the new design. The PLT and TT would also be involved in evaluating any revised design concepts.
Logged

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3220
  • Location: Los Angeles/OKC
  • Last Login: Today at 10:15:37 PM
Re: I-70 in Colorado: Mountain Corridor Upgrades
« Reply #35 on: March 16, 2022, 08:53:12 PM »

So what is the project shown in the video? I was under the assumption that was the 700 million dollar project but I guess Iím completely wrong if itís the 3.5 billion dollar one. What will the 700 million dollars be? Some wildlife underpasses and roundabouts!? Or that deals with the rehabilitation of the tunnels as well? CDOTs website confuses the heck out of me sometimes.

If so thatís a real bummer because I use this stretch of freeway fairly often and Iíve been dreaming of improvements for a long time. 
They just rebuilt the tunnels by Idaho Springs, widening them to 3 lanes in each direction + shoulder space, so I don't what existing tunnels in/near the Floyd Hill project you are referring to regarding rehabs.
Sorry, I probably confused things more (although I agree the CDOT website can be dodgy). The $700 million project in the news now is the whole set of Floyd Hill area things, including the early action projects and I-70 rebuild+expansion.

The early action projects alone were estimated at $31 million, and I meant to distinguish the Floyd Hill projects from other locations in the corridor, like the Eisenhower Tunnel, which are separate projects that may also receive federal funding.


[...]However, it looks like the idea of a new westbound I-70 tunnel at he bottom of the hill at US-6 (to make the curve toward Idaho Springs less sharp) is dead, no???
It looks that way. The way the EA reads (excerpt below), it sounds like they tweaked the tunnel alternative to limit excavation, and stakeholders didn't like the result, which put more south of the creek than before.
Quote
3.7. How well do the action alternatives fit the Project context and support core values?

[Ö]The Canyon Viaduct Alternative is supported by the PLT [Project Leadership Team] as the Preferred Alternative. The Canyon Viaduct Alternative also has support among TT [Technical Team] members. Aspects of the Canyon Viaduct Alternative that are supported include its ability to fit into the canyon with less blasting and rock excavation, reduced roadway infrastructure next to the creek and Greenway, and less complicated operations compared to the Tunnel Alternative. The Tunnel Alternative North Frontage Road Option was initially considered as the Proposed Action for the Project and is also supported by the TT. Features of the Tunnel Alternative North Frontage Road Option that were supported by the TT included the north alignment of the frontage road that avoids impacts to Hidden Valley Open Space on the south side of Clear Creek Canyon, the reduced roadway footprint and visual impact of the highway through the canyon by putting westbound I-70 in a tunnel, the ability to construct the tunnel offline, and a general support and interest in tunnels. The Tunnel Alternative South Frontage Road Option was developed to reduce rock excavation and heights of rock cuts. While it has this advantage compared to the Tunnel Alternative North Frontage Road Option, it is not supported by the PLT, TT, Clear Creek County, Idaho Springs, or the Floyd Hill neighborhood because it introduces roadway infrastructure on the south side of Clear Creek, disrupts wildlife movement along the creek, and diminishes the recreational experience of the Greenway, an important community resource.

[Ö]

3.10. What happens to the Tunnel Alternative?
The Tunnel Alternative is feasible and could be implemented. While it is not preferred based on currently available information and level of design, it is not eliminated. The CMGC may come up with innovations that reduce impacts or increase benefits for the Tunnel Alternative and, if this happens, CDOT would consider the new information, reevaluate the revised design or design concepts, and seek public input for the new design. The PLT and TT would also be involved in evaluating any revised design concepts.
Okay thanks for the information. So in its current proposal the entire I-70 mountain corridor projects include this project, the Eisenhower tunnels, and the early action projects. All that combined currently estimated at 3.5 billion. Do I have that correct?

Now is the the Eisenhower third bore tunnel included with the I-70 mountain corridor? And are the projects around Vail included as well or are those completely separate? Sorry for the 21 questions Iím just curious and excited as I travel this area fairly regularly and will probably do much more of that in the future.
Logged

Elm

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 98
  • Last Login: March 01, 2023, 09:25:13 PM
Re: I-70 in Colorado: Mountain Corridor Upgrades
« Reply #36 on: March 16, 2022, 10:16:41 PM »

So what is the project shown in the video? I was under the assumption that was the 700 million dollar project but I guess Iím completely wrong if itís the 3.5 billion dollar one. What will the 700 million dollars be? Some wildlife underpasses and roundabouts!? Or that deals with the rehabilitation of the tunnels as well? CDOTs website confuses the heck out of me sometimes.

If so thatís a real bummer because I use this stretch of freeway fairly often and Iíve been dreaming of improvements for a long time. 
They just rebuilt the tunnels by Idaho Springs, widening them to 3 lanes in each direction + shoulder space, so I don't what existing tunnels in/near the Floyd Hill project you are referring to regarding rehabs.
Sorry, I probably confused things more (although I agree the CDOT website can be dodgy). The $700 million project in the news now is the whole set of Floyd Hill area things, including the early action projects and I-70 rebuild+expansion.

The early action projects alone were estimated at $31 million, and I meant to distinguish the Floyd Hill projects from other locations in the corridor, like the Eisenhower Tunnel, which are separate projects that may also receive federal funding.
[...]
Okay thanks for the information. So in its current proposal the entire I-70 mountain corridor projects include this project, the Eisenhower tunnels, and the early action projects. All that combined currently estimated at 3.5 billion. Do I have that correct?

Now is the the Eisenhower third bore tunnel included with the I-70 mountain corridor? And are the projects around Vail included as well or are those completely separate? Sorry for the 21 questions Iím just curious and excited as I travel this area fairly regularly and will probably do much more of that in the future.

For study purposes, "I-70 Mountain Corridor" covers a lot, C-470 to Glenwood Springs; if you start from this CDOT webpage, you can see some of the relatively recent/active things at the top, and there are more links to the labyrinth of related studies and projects. I believe all the projects you mentioned fall under that umbrella, however, CDOT isn't necessarily trying to advance any particular corridor project. The 10-Year Vision Plan lists what they're actively trying to work on; it groups by region and highway corridor, so you could look up I-70 in there.

I don't know if CDOT has a go-to estimate for the whole corridor now, but in 2010/2011, they had a rough, low-end estimate of $11.2 billion for the full "maximum program of improvements" ($20.2 billion in then-estimated 2025 dollars), referring to "I-70 Mountain Corridor PEIS Cost Estimating Technical Report". The "minimum program" was estimated at $9.2ish billion ($16.5 estimated 2025), but the estimates were all subject to change and escalation over time and further study, so you can't really connect them directly to the projects happening now.

You can see the overview of the preferred alternatives and what the programs of improvement include here (Figure ES-6); they do include a third Eisenhower Tunnel (EJMT) bore, as well as an "advanced guideway system." The $3.5 billion in this topic, I think, refers to an unsolicited proposal for a different plan that a particular company came up with. It wasn't a CDOT project or number.

Speaking more concretely, there aren't active plans to construct a third EJMT bore; the maintenance backlog on the existing tunnels is the main concern. The 2020 ROD reevaluation mentions this:
Quote
The CE wanted to clarify whether the EJMT third bore is part of the Minimum or Maximum Program of Improvements because the PEIS does not specifically classify the EJMT third bore in either program or as a separate improvement project. After discussion, the CE concluded that the EJMT expansion should be classified in the Minimum Program. This conclusion was based on the relationship of the EJMT improvements to other parts of the Preferred Alternative that are clearly outlined in the Minimum Program, such as the Vail Pass auxiliary lanes and the AGS bore through the Continental Divide. Further, expanding the EJMT would not trigger the Maximum Program and classifying the EJMT expansion in the Minimum Program provides more flexibility to advance this discrete but complex action, such as if tolling could fund its expansion.

Maybe as a counterpoint, though, this 2021 article briefly mentions that CDOT isn't going to pursue the third bore.

---

To try to recap what I think to be the numbers:
$3.5 billion: private estimate for a privately-conceived project in ~2011-13; today's corridor plan doesn't include the envisioned project, which featured a "reversible express tollway"
$11.2 billion: CDOT rough estimate for I-70 Mountain Corridor preferred alternative minimum program of improvements in 2010 dollars (high-cost components include EJMT third bore and advanced guideway transit)
$0.7 billion: total estimated 2020s Floyd Hill area project cost (including $0.031 billion early projects and "canyon viaduct" overall alternative)
Logged

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3220
  • Location: Los Angeles/OKC
  • Last Login: Today at 10:15:37 PM
Re: I-70 in Colorado: Mountain Corridor Upgrades
« Reply #37 on: March 17, 2022, 09:00:29 AM »

^^^^ Good deal. I appreciate the information. Are or have you worked for CDOT? You have an awful lot of knowledge about this I spent an hour scouring their website and found some of this info but not all of it.
Logged

Elm

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 98
  • Last Login: March 01, 2023, 09:25:13 PM
Re: I-70 in Colorado: Mountain Corridor Upgrades
« Reply #38 on: March 18, 2022, 09:08:05 PM »

^^^^ Good deal. I appreciate the information. Are or have you worked for CDOT? You have an awful lot of knowledge about this I spent an hour scouring their website and found some of this info but not all of it.
I don't have any CDOT affiliation; it could be that after looking at their website a while, a good amount of the time I've seen some piece of information before or have an idea of where it might be. It doesn't always work, though; for example, with the I-70 mountain corridor, I know there's a spreadsheet that CDOT updates occasionally listing the status of work toward the EA plan. There's a version of it linked on the I-70 Mountain Corridor section of the site, but it's not very recently updated. I thought I'd seen a newer one, but I couldn't find it .

--

Separately, starting in August, CDOT will issue fines based on the license plate readers to people that use the part-time shoulder lanes on I-70 when they're closed:

On the "why do they close anyway," the shoulder lanes are considered an interim solution and have a bunch of rules about when and how long they can be open (for example, limits on days and hours per year, which are different for each direction). Also to the "interim" point, they're supposed to be closed or superseded by 2035: "The Toll Facility shall cease operation by the year 2035 unless modified by a different project, which may or may not be a part of the Corridor's long term solution." (One copy of the MOU is here--not sure if it's the latest.)

Logged

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3220
  • Location: Los Angeles/OKC
  • Last Login: Today at 10:15:37 PM
Re: I-70 in Colorado: Mountain Corridor Upgrades
« Reply #39 on: May 19, 2022, 10:19:15 AM »

Logged

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3220
  • Location: Los Angeles/OKC
  • Last Login: Today at 10:15:37 PM
Re: I-70 in Colorado: Mountain Corridor Upgrades
« Reply #40 on: May 31, 2022, 09:13:57 PM »

Logged

DenverBrian

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 191
  • Location: Las Vegas
  • Last Login: Today at 10:10:27 PM
Re: I-70 in Colorado: Mountain Corridor Upgrades
« Reply #41 on: June 01, 2022, 07:48:40 AM »

Projected cost to be 800 million instead of 700.

https://www.denverpost.com/2022/05/30/i-70-floyd-hill-project-cost-inflation-shortages/
Looks like they'll try for infrastructure bill money and look at other aspects to stay on budget.
Logged

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3220
  • Location: Los Angeles/OKC
  • Last Login: Today at 10:15:37 PM
Re: I-70 in Colorado: Mountain Corridor Upgrades
« Reply #42 on: September 06, 2022, 12:07:47 PM »

Logged

mgk920

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4831
  • Location: Appleton, WI USA
  • Last Login: Today at 12:48:45 PM
Re: I-70 in Colorado: Mountain Corridor Upgrades
« Reply #43 on: September 06, 2022, 01:19:05 PM »

Too bed this wont include a twin tube six lane base tunnel to bypass the Johnson-Eisenhower tunnels and a resurrected twin tube six lane Red-Buffalo tunnel to bypass the substandard grades on Vail Pass.

 :no:

Oh well.... ( :-D )

Mike
Logged

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3220
  • Location: Los Angeles/OKC
  • Last Login: Today at 10:15:37 PM
Re: I-70 in Colorado: Mountain Corridor Upgrades
« Reply #44 on: September 06, 2022, 02:19:42 PM »

Too bed this wont include a twin tube six lane base tunnel to bypass the Johnson-Eisenhower tunnels and a resurrected twin tube six lane Red-Buffalo tunnel to bypass the substandard grades on Vail Pass.

 :no:

Oh well.... ( :-D )

Mike
If they really wanted to fix traffic this is what would be done but alas mega projects like that just donít seem very doable in the states anymore.
Logged

DenverBrian

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 191
  • Location: Las Vegas
  • Last Login: Today at 10:10:27 PM
Re: I-70 in Colorado: Mountain Corridor Upgrades
« Reply #45 on: September 06, 2022, 03:50:50 PM »

Too bed this wont include a twin tube six lane base tunnel to bypass the Johnson-Eisenhower tunnels and a resurrected twin tube six lane Red-Buffalo tunnel to bypass the substandard grades on Vail Pass.

 :no:

Oh well.... ( :-D )

Mike
You've got four lanes of tunnel existing at Eisenhower/Johnson right now. A single additional four-lane bore would take care of everything - and at far less cost than TWO three-lane tunnels.
Logged

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3220
  • Location: Los Angeles/OKC
  • Last Login: Today at 10:15:37 PM
Re: I-70 in Colorado: Mountain Corridor Upgrades
« Reply #46 on: September 13, 2022, 12:23:03 PM »

This project will get 100 million in federal grant money.

https://www.coloradopolitics.com/quick-hits/colorado-s-i-70-floyd-hill-project-awarded-100-million-in-federal-grant/article_48929688-32b7-11ed-a641-bfed404233a6.html

PS, anyway we can the thread title to change now?  :bigass:
Logged

skluth

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3040
  • Age: 66
  • Location: Palm Springs, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 05:39:02 PM
Re: I-70 in Colorado: Mountain Corridor Upgrades
« Reply #47 on: October 15, 2022, 03:34:54 PM »

This project will get 100 million in federal grant money.

https://www.coloradopolitics.com/quick-hits/colorado-s-i-70-floyd-hill-project-awarded-100-million-in-federal-grant/article_48929688-32b7-11ed-a641-bfed404233a6.html

PS, anyway we can the thread title to change now?  :bigass:

The thread "Denver's I-70 may be rebuilt below surface" hasn't been renamed and that project is almost done.   :sombrero:
Logged

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3220
  • Location: Los Angeles/OKC
  • Last Login: Today at 10:15:37 PM
Re: I-70 in Colorado: Mountain Corridor Upgrades
« Reply #48 on: October 15, 2022, 06:33:18 PM »

This project will get 100 million in federal grant money.

https://www.coloradopolitics.com/quick-hits/colorado-s-i-70-floyd-hill-project-awarded-100-million-in-federal-grant/article_48929688-32b7-11ed-a641-bfed404233a6.html

PS, anyway we can the thread title to change now?  :bigass:

The thread "Denver's I-70 may be rebuilt below surface" hasn't been renamed and that project is almost done.   :sombrero:
Lol yeah a new name would be appropriate for this one as well :p
Logged

andy3175

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1491
  • Location: San Diego, California, USA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:37:46 PM
    • AARoads
Re: I-70 in Colorado: Mountain Corridor Upgrades
« Reply #49 on: October 17, 2022, 11:38:55 AM »

This project will get 100 million in federal grant money.

https://www.coloradopolitics.com/quick-hits/colorado-s-i-70-floyd-hill-project-awarded-100-million-in-federal-grant/article_48929688-32b7-11ed-a641-bfed404233a6.html

PS, anyway we can the thread title to change now?  :bigass:

Sure.  I just changed the title to this: I-70 in Colorado: Mountain Corridor Upgrades.
Logged
Regards,
Andy

www.aaroads.com

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.