AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Colorado  (Read 47100 times)

mightyace

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3235
  • Age: 57
  • Last Login: October 04, 2012, 01:36:29 PM
    • My Flickr Photos
Colorado
« on: March 04, 2009, 01:20:28 PM »

« Last Edit: February 04, 2010, 06:23:46 PM by mightyace »
Logged
My Flickr Photos: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mightyace

I'm out of this F***KING PLACE!

V'Ger

  • Unperson
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 0
  • Location: Banville
  • Last Login: May 22, 2009, 11:02:39 PM
Re: Colorado
« Reply #1 on: March 06, 2009, 09:59:07 PM »

By same mission do you mean the 470 tollway?
Logged

brad2971

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 242
  • Native Roadgeeking Son of the Great Plains

  • Age: 50
  • Location: Denver, CO
  • Last Login: Today at 04:58:57 PM
Re: Colorado
« Reply #2 on: March 06, 2009, 10:48:56 PM »

No, the HPTE is charged with authorizing, and potentially operating, toll roads OTHER than E-470 and the NW Parkway. Right now, other than possible managed lanes in the middle of C-470 from US85 to I-25 (sorry Douglas Co, it's the only way you're going to get a widened C-470), there are no other plans for toll facilities in CO. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if the HPTE ends up taking over the NW Parkway if Brisa/CCR ends up bailing in two years.
Logged

mightyace

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3235
  • Age: 57
  • Last Login: October 04, 2012, 01:36:29 PM
    • My Flickr Photos
Re: Colorado
« Reply #3 on: July 01, 2009, 08:31:56 PM »

E470 tolling will be all electronic as of July 4th.

Bush Turnpike in Dallas, E470 Denver go all-electronic this week
Logged
My Flickr Photos: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mightyace

I'm out of this F***KING PLACE!

andy3175

  • *
  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 1444
  • Location: San Diego, California, USA
  • Last Login: Today at 09:17:43 PM
    • AARoads
Re: Colorado
« Reply #4 on: January 17, 2017, 12:05:59 AM »

Resurrecting this thread for general Colorado highway items ...

Found an interesting-looking book on the bridges of Eagle County. I've photographed many of these over the years and have noticed bridge removals as well. I'm glad someone took on this project to document these old bridges. I may try to locate a copy myself.

http://www.vaildaily.com/news/announcements/local-history-book-wins-state-historical-society-award/

Quote
“The Bridges of Eagle County,” by local historian Kathy Heicher in conjunction with the Colorado Department of Transportation, is the 2016 Caroline Bancroft History Project award winner. The award is made annually to individuals and organizations that have made a significant contribution to the advancement of Colorado History.

The unique project came about because of a federal law, the National Historic Preservation Act, requiring mitigation of adverse impacts on historically significant structures.

CDOT has been gradually replacing historic bridges in Eagle County with structures that meet current standards. Mitigation for the some of those structures involved the placement of interpretive signs. When preparing to replace the Dotsero Bridge in 2011, CDOT historian Lisa Schoch proposed that mitigation take the form of a book that would tell the stories not only of the Dotsero Bridge, but also a string of historic bridges throughout the Eagle Valley.

CDOT officials approached Heicher, a historical society activist and the author of several local history books, about the project.

The structures featured in “The Bridges of Eagle County” range from the first primitive timber structure spanning the Grand (Colorado) River in 1883 to the magnificent steel arch bridge at Red Cliff, constructed near the end of the Great Depression.

The book includes dozens of historic photos, maps, postcard images and anecdotes about the pioneers who built the bridges. Sales of the book benefit the Eagle County Historical Society.
Logged
Regards,
Andy

www.aaroads.com

thenetwork

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2736
  • Age: 2017
  • Location: Grand Junction, Colorado
  • Last Login: Today at 10:07:17 AM
Re: Colorado
« Reply #5 on: April 04, 2017, 10:11:52 PM »

Just a few musings on my weekend trip to/around Denver this past weekend...

1) I have noticed that CDOT is phasing out travel times on their VMS's in both directions of I-70 between Vail & Denver.  On both days, the roads were fine, but the VMS's were displaying safety messages, if anything.    IIRC, a couple of years ago the Travel Times were one of two screens that would alternately appear on some single VMSs.  When I saw them on my first trip along I-70 about 12 years ago, there were a lot more displaying just travel times only.

2) Looks like CDOT is also slowly removing the overhead lighting for BGS's.  I saw some areas on I-70 and I-25 where the lighting (which were mounted above the signs was removed.

3) Finally, it was odd to see that THIS gantry...

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.7103599,-104.997491,3a,75y,133.99h,83.66t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sxvusxtRGFku5s4B3o9ZoBQ!2e0!5s20141001T000000!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

was still standing as of this past weekend, since SB Santa Fe Drive has been relocated where the concrete sewer pipes are in the above photo.

What's odd is that the relocated SB Santa Fe Avenue has been around since April of 2015 (per GSV): 

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.7111121,-104.9984633,3a,75y,161.08h,89.24t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sPvFcqLPceV-odeBot0nddg!2e0!5s20150401T000000!7i13312!8i6656


and the old gantry now spans a dead end "frontage road" stub to access Denny's and Diamond Shamrock as seen in this last photo.
« Last Edit: April 04, 2017, 10:19:13 PM by thenetwork »
Logged

andy3175

  • *
  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 1444
  • Location: San Diego, California, USA
  • Last Login: Today at 09:17:43 PM
    • AARoads
Re: Colorado
« Reply #6 on: May 06, 2017, 12:55:17 AM »

http://www.denverpost.com/2017/04/21/i-25-gap-coalition-highway-expansion-monument-castle-rock/

Quote
Months after the Colorado Department of Transportation said it would accelerate its process to widen Interstate 25 between Colorado Springs and Denver, a group of Douglas and El Paso county officials are advocating for expediency when it comes to improving a particularly narrow stretch of the highway.

The I-25 Gap Coalition is focused mainly on a roughly 17-mile stretch of the interstate between Castle Rock and Monument, known as “the gap,” where the highway is four-lanes wide. It’s a dangerous segment of highway where two Colorado State Patrol troopers were stuck and killed by passing drivers while responding to calls in the area within 13 months of each other.

“What the goal is to create a parallel, proactive advocacy group that goes alongside CDOT to accelerate the improvements to this stretch of the state highway,” Douglas County commissioner Roger Partridge said during coalition’s launch event Wednesday. “(We’re) really identifying three things to begin with: we are going to speak with one voice to have a desired, similar outcome; we are going to identify and leverage the (funding) sources; and then we’re going to lobby these efforts.”

The coalition includes representatives from the both highway-crossed counties, Castle Rock, Colorado Springs and other cities, towns and economic development groups from up and down the transportation corridor.
Logged
Regards,
Andy

www.aaroads.com

Alex

  • Webmaster
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5001
  • Location: Tampa, FL
  • Last Login: December 02, 2021, 11:40:37 PM
    • AARoads
Re: Colorado
« Reply #7 on: May 06, 2017, 10:35:12 AM »

http://www.denverpost.com/2017/04/21/i-25-gap-coalition-highway-expansion-monument-castle-rock/

Quote
Months after the Colorado Department of Transportation said it would accelerate its process to widen Interstate 25 between Colorado Springs and Denver, a group of Douglas and El Paso county officials are advocating for expediency when it comes to improving a particularly narrow stretch of the highway.

The I-25 Gap Coalition is focused mainly on a roughly 17-mile stretch of the interstate between Castle Rock and Monument, known as “the gap,” where the highway is four-lanes wide. It’s a dangerous segment of highway where two Colorado State Patrol troopers were stuck and killed by passing drivers while responding to calls in the area within 13 months of each other.

There was a ridiculous amount of traffic on that four-lane stretch. Was surprised to still see it that narrow. Plus the off-ramp for Greenland Road (Exit 167) is quite substandard and there are shuttered rest areas in both directions (though the southbound area can be used as a chain station).

sandwalk

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 210
  • Northern Ohio Native

  • Age: 36
  • Location: Colorado
  • Last Login: December 02, 2021, 05:53:19 PM
Re: Colorado
« Reply #8 on: May 07, 2017, 11:41:29 AM »

People drive way too fast on that highway. Personally, I feel the 75mph speed limit is too high for such a stretch of substandard road with the volume of traffic it sees.
Logged

Gulol

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 64
  • Age: 51
  • Location: Denver, CO
  • Last Login: December 03, 2021, 06:47:36 PM
Re: Colorado
« Reply #9 on: May 21, 2017, 04:45:14 PM »

People drive way too fast on that highway. Personally, I feel the 75mph speed limit is too high for such a stretch of substandard road with the volume of traffic it sees.

Couldn't agree more!  Added traffic plus trucks climbing up and over Monument Hill had led to an awful lot of road rage.  Thankfully there's still some sanity taking Hwy 83 down to the Springs and with traffic often lousy on I-25 south, it tends to be quicker.

I have wondered if a reduced speed limit would actually improve things on I-25 ... wonder if we'll see any change on that front.
Logged

dvferyance

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1416
  • Location: New Berlin WI
  • Last Login: November 25, 2021, 04:01:46 PM
Re: Colorado
« Reply #10 on: July 14, 2017, 02:52:57 PM »

The E 470 is a ripoff. You pay like $25 to drive a road that is like 45 miles long. It cost like $9 to drive the Tri State in Illinois which is 77 miles long and $18 to drive the entire Ohio Turnpike that is 240 miles long. If your going to the airport from the south or vise versa it's better just to take I-225 it may be a little longer but certainly worth avoiding the tolls.
Logged

rte66man

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1511
  • Location: Warr Acres, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 09:06:41 PM
Re: Colorado
« Reply #11 on: July 17, 2017, 12:11:48 PM »

The E 470 is a ripoff. You pay like $25 to drive a road that is like 45 miles long. It cost like $9 to drive the Tri State in Illinois which is 77 miles long and $18 to drive the entire Ohio Turnpike that is 240 miles long. If your going to the airport from the south or vise versa it's better just to take I-225 it may be a little longer but certainly worth avoiding the tolls.

According to their website:
https://www.expresstoll.com/Documents/2017%20Toll%20Rate%20Tables.pdf

It costs $14.50 for the entire length if you have an ExpressPass and $18.20 for non-Pass holders. 
Logged
When you come to a fork in the road... TAKE IT.

                                                               -Yogi Berra

dvferyance

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1416
  • Location: New Berlin WI
  • Last Login: November 25, 2021, 04:01:46 PM
Re: Colorado
« Reply #12 on: July 17, 2017, 06:52:19 PM »

The E 470 is a ripoff. You pay like $25 to drive a road that is like 45 miles long. It cost like $9 to drive the Tri State in Illinois which is 77 miles long and $18 to drive the entire Ohio Turnpike that is 240 miles long. If your going to the airport from the south or vise versa it's better just to take I-225 it may be a little longer but certainly worth avoiding the tolls.

According to their website:
https://www.expresstoll.com/Documents/2017%20Toll%20Rate%20Tables.pdf

It costs $14.50 for the entire length if you have an ExpressPass and $18.20 for non-Pass holders.
Does that count the NW parkway segment or not? None then less it cost $8.80 drive Illinois tri state which is longer and about the same $18.25 to drive the entire Ohio Turnpike which is like 5 times longer. I will never drive it unless the tolls are one day removed.
« Last Edit: July 17, 2017, 07:02:30 PM by dvferyance »
Logged

rte66man

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1511
  • Location: Warr Acres, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 09:06:41 PM
Re: Colorado
« Reply #13 on: July 18, 2017, 01:49:06 PM »

The E 470 is a ripoff. You pay like $25 to drive a road that is like 45 miles long. It cost like $9 to drive the Tri State in Illinois which is 77 miles long and $18 to drive the entire Ohio Turnpike that is 240 miles long. If your going to the airport from the south or vise versa it's better just to take I-225 it may be a little longer but certainly worth avoiding the tolls.

According to their website:
https://www.expresstoll.com/Documents/2017%20Toll%20Rate%20Tables.pdf

It costs $14.50 for the entire length if you have an ExpressPass and $18.20 for non-Pass holders.
Does that count the NW parkway segment or not? None then less it cost $8.80 drive Illinois tri state which is longer and about the same $18.25 to drive the entire Ohio Turnpike which is like 5 times longer. I will never drive it unless the tolls are one day removed.

Apples and oranges.  Like when was the Ohio Turnpike built?  Like is it mostly urban or rural?  Like State run or like private entity? 

That's why America is such a great country.  You are free to shunpike to your heart's content.
Logged
When you come to a fork in the road... TAKE IT.

                                                               -Yogi Berra

dvferyance

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1416
  • Location: New Berlin WI
  • Last Login: November 25, 2021, 04:01:46 PM
Re: Colorado
« Reply #14 on: July 20, 2017, 01:58:58 PM »

The E 470 is a ripoff. You pay like $25 to drive a road that is like 45 miles long. It cost like $9 to drive the Tri State in Illinois which is 77 miles long and $18 to drive the entire Ohio Turnpike that is 240 miles long. If your going to the airport from the south or vise versa it's better just to take I-225 it may be a little longer but certainly worth avoiding the tolls.

According to their website:
https://www.expresstoll.com/Documents/2017%20Toll%20Rate%20Tables.pdf

It costs $14.50 for the entire length if you have an ExpressPass and $18.20 for non-Pass holders.
Does that count the NW parkway segment or not? None then less it cost $8.80 drive Illinois tri state which is longer and about the same $18.25 to drive the entire Ohio Turnpike which is like 5 times longer. I will never drive it unless the tolls are one day removed.

Apples and oranges.  Like when was the Ohio Turnpike built?  Like is it mostly urban or rural?  Like State run or like private entity? 

That's why America is such a great country.  You are free to shunpike to your heart's content.
Not sure about Ohio but I do know that the Indiana toll road is now private.
Logged

Gulol

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 64
  • Age: 51
  • Location: Denver, CO
  • Last Login: December 03, 2021, 06:47:36 PM
Re: Colorado
« Reply #15 on: July 23, 2017, 12:24:58 PM »

It's an easy choice:  you don't have to drive it because it's not the only option to get from Point A to Point B as it is in other states with toll roads and/or bridges.  No doubt it's one of the priciest toll roads out there and there will continue to be annual increases from (I think) .10 to .25 each year for many years to come (30ish maybe?).  For me, this is what I like about it ... for the cost of a latte, I can get to the airport in 30 minutes from where I live consistently which I do frequently for work.  Without the toll road, it could take me anywhere from 45 minutes with no traffic to well over 90 minutes with traffic.  Supply and demand:  if E470 was free, it would be 45-90 minutes and that pricing to keep my drive time at 30 minutes is well worth it to me.
Logged

andy3175

  • *
  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 1444
  • Location: San Diego, California, USA
  • Last Login: Today at 09:17:43 PM
    • AARoads
Colorado
« Reply #16 on: March 16, 2018, 11:54:54 PM »

http://www.coloradoindependent.com/168732/sales-tax-transportation-ballot

Proposed sales tax increase could boost funding for transportation projects: The proposal comes as lawmakers remain deadlocked on funding for transportation projects considered long overdue
by John Herrick - February 22, 2018

Quote
Proposed sales tax increase could boost funding for transportation projects

The proposal comes as lawmakers remain deadlocked on funding for transportation projects considered long overdue
John Herrick
February 22, 2018 Just In No Comments FacebookTwitterEmail
Proposed sales tax increase could boost funding for transportation projects

A coalition of local leaders backed by the Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce wants voters to approve a sales tax increase on the November ballot to pay for projects like the widening of Interstate 25 and the buildout of bike lanes.

The group filed four ballot measures with the Secretary of State on Thursday that would raise between $500 million and $1 billion for transportation projects, according to the chamber, and allow that money to be used to pay for bonds, which would generate even more upfront cash. 

A booming population across the Front Range has created traffic snarls on critical corridors like Interstate 25 as commuters drive to work and Interstate 70 as skiers head to the resorts. According to a 2016 report by Denver Regional Council of Governments, or DRCOG, commuters spend 40 hours per year sitting in traffic. And the U.S. Department of Transportation estimates that drivers spend $287 per year on vehicle repairs and operating costs due to driving on roads that should be fixed.

“Our failure to invest in infrastructure is costing us real money,” said Kelly Brough, president and CEO of the Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce. “Drivers in the Denver metro area are paying more than $2,000 a year because of traffic congestion delays, damage to vehicles, accidents and lost gas efficiency.”

The state doesn’t have enough money to address the issue. The Department of Transportation estimates a 10-year funding backlog of about $9 billion, and about a $25 billion funding gap over the next 25 years, according to its 2016 annual report. And the state’s gas tax, which helps fund transportation projects, has not increased since 1991.

The group is seeking a sales tax increase of 0.5 percent, 0.62 percent or 1 percent. The highest increase equals 10 cents on a $10 purchase. Another proposal would increase the sales tax by 0.5 percent and require that $150 million is transferred from the General Fund each year to pay for state and local transportation projects.

The ballot initiatives would direct 45 percent of revenue for interstate and state roads, 40 percent for cities and counties and 15 percent for multimodal projects, like bike lanes and bus routes, according to the chamber. ...

A report by Colorado Public Interest Research Group, a consumer advocacy group, found that the state needs to spend an additional $1.05 billion dollars per year on transit, biking and walking over the next 25 years. This would ensure, the report states, that Colorado’s transportation system is safe, accessible, affordable, and enhances the quality of life.

The report points out road-widening projects often ease congestion in the short term, but have uncertain long-term effects. Following the $1.67 billion Transportation Expansion (T-REX) project in 2006, pre-construction congestion levels returned within five years.

Logged
Regards,
Andy

www.aaroads.com

andy3175

  • *
  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 1444
  • Location: San Diego, California, USA
  • Last Login: Today at 09:17:43 PM
    • AARoads
Re: Colorado
« Reply #17 on: March 16, 2018, 11:58:09 PM »

http://www.westword.com/news/variable-speed-limits-in-glenwood-canyon-other-colorado-highways-9524481

Why That Speed Limit Sign You Just Saw May Be Changing
Michael Roberts | February 20, 2018 | 6:11am

Quote
Although the Colorado Department of Transportation has its eyes on the future, as seen in its advocacy of the Rocky Mountain Hyperloop project that recently won a global challenge, the agency is also trying to innovate when it comes to current highways. Hence the planned installation of variable speed limit signs in Glenwood Canyon that can either speed up or slow down traffic in response to weather and traffic conditions. VSL has already gotten a tryout near Boulder, and if the system works in Glenwood, among the trickiest sections along the Interstate 70 corridor, after installation set to begin during the coming months, it could be expanded to more roadways across the state. ...

Winter often causes significant problems in Glenwood Canyon. In December 2015, for example, we reported about a seven-car crash that involved actor James Woods; afterward, he praised responders via Twitter before adding, "Sorry, I'm rambling. Little concussion." And the following February, we told you about rock slides that caused commuting headaches involving the canyon for well over a week.

In the meantime, CDOT placed some variable speed limit signage along U.S. 36 between Boulder and Interstate 25. "If you watch, you can see new speed limits pop up," Ford points out. "The idea is that we slow traffic down or speed it up depending on the roadway conditions in front of drivers. It's designed to make the roadway safer."

The concept is being expanded considerably in Glenwood Canyon over a fourteen-mile stretch of eastbound I-70 and fifteen miles of westbound I-70, including the Hanging Lake Tunnel area. In addition to seventeen new variable speed limit signs, CDOT crews plant to replace 38 static (meaning unchanging) signs with 73 new ones. And that's not to mention three weather stations for live weather-condition monitoring and reporting, nine closed-circuit cameras and what a department release calls "other surface and subsurface conduit, and related improvements to guide the display of the variable speed limits." ...

The project is expected to be put out for bid next month, with construction scheduled to get underway in June and continue (after a winter break) through the fall of 2019. Once all the signage is in place, "we need people to work with us," Ford stresses. "If the speed limit says forty miles per hour, we highly encourage you to drive forty miles per hour."
Logged
Regards,
Andy

www.aaroads.com

triplemultiplex

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2758
  • "You read it; you can't unread it!"

  • Location: inside the beltline
  • Last Login: December 03, 2021, 04:15:05 PM
Re: Colorado
« Reply #18 on: July 10, 2018, 09:28:35 AM »

I shunpiked E470 coming into Denver on I-76 with my destination in the southeast suburbs.  Never again.  That was an arduous crawl through traffic lights and urban sprawl.  I'll gladly shell out 15 bucks or whatever it is next time to avoid that aggravation.
Logged
"That's just like... your opinion, man."

wriddle082

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 602
  • Give 'em the BIDNESS!

  • Age: 46
  • Location: Anymetro, Carolinas
  • Last Login: Today at 08:44:21 PM
Re: Colorado
« Reply #19 on: July 10, 2018, 02:27:39 PM »

I shunpiked E470 coming into Denver on I-76 with my destination in the southeast suburbs.  Never again.  That was an arduous crawl through traffic lights and urban sprawl.  I'll gladly shell out 15 bucks or whatever it is next time to avoid that aggravation.

Can I-270 east be accessed from I-76 west?  Might be worth backtracking a little bit to use 270, 70, and 225 (an “inner bypass” of sorts).  Depending on timing it may not flow too smoothly along 270 since I experienced backups on it several times (needs an extra lane each direction in a big way), but during non- peak times I’m sure it’s worth it, especially since they fixed the southern terminus of 225 recently via a simple restriping.
Logged

US 89

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 4446
  • 189 to Evanston!

  • Location: Salt Lake City/Atlanta
  • Last Login: Today at 09:19:20 PM
    • Utah Highways
Re: Colorado
« Reply #20 on: July 10, 2018, 03:06:38 PM »

I shunpiked E470 coming into Denver on I-76 with my destination in the southeast suburbs.  Never again.  That was an arduous crawl through traffic lights and urban sprawl.  I'll gladly shell out 15 bucks or whatever it is next time to avoid that aggravation.

Can I-270 east be accessed from I-76 west?  Might be worth backtracking a little bit to use 270, 70, and 225 (an “inner bypass” of sorts).  Depending on timing it may not flow too smoothly along 270 since I experienced backups on it several times (needs an extra lane each direction in a big way), but during non- peak times I’m sure it’s worth it, especially since they fixed the southern terminus of 225 recently via a simple restriping.

There isn't a ramp from westbound 76 to eastbound 270. The easiest way to make that connection would be Vasquez Blvd (US 6/85) which is an expressway with a few lights on it. Still not a bad idea, unless Vasquez gets congested easily.

Also, are there any plans to upgrade CO 83 to a freeway up to 225? That would probably help with some of the I-25 traffic in the southern Denver suburbs.

Mark68

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 484
  • Location: Parker, CO
  • Last Login: December 03, 2021, 07:28:03 PM
    • My Travels over the years
Re: Colorado
« Reply #21 on: July 10, 2018, 07:03:31 PM »

I shunpiked E470 coming into Denver on I-76 with my destination in the southeast suburbs.  Never again.  That was an arduous crawl through traffic lights and urban sprawl.  I'll gladly shell out 15 bucks or whatever it is next time to avoid that aggravation.

Can I-270 east be accessed from I-76 west?  Might be worth backtracking a little bit to use 270, 70, and 225 (an “inner bypass” of sorts).  Depending on timing it may not flow too smoothly along 270 since I experienced backups on it several times (needs an extra lane each direction in a big way), but during non- peak times I’m sure it’s worth it, especially since they fixed the southern terminus of 225 recently via a simple restriping.

There isn't a ramp from westbound 76 to eastbound 270. The easiest way to make that connection would be Vasquez Blvd (US 6/85) which is an expressway with a few lights on it. Still not a bad idea, unless Vasquez gets congested easily.

Also, are there any plans to upgrade CO 83 to a freeway up to 225? That would probably help with some of the I-25 traffic in the southern Denver suburbs.

As far as I can tell, there are no plans to upgrade Parker Rd (CO 83) to a freeway. It would be very cost prohibitive, as there is development on both sides of Parker Rd as far south as Arapahoe Rd (CO 88). I think the Arapahoe County 2035 Transportation Plan is very ambitious as far as the improvements on the highway are concerned, as they propose two interchanges at Quincy Ave & Orchard Rd (which would be very expensive in terms of ROW purchases for interchanges--but much-needed--especially at Quincy).

Here is a copy of their plan (I believe it was conceived in 2010): http://www.arapahoegov.com/DocumentCenter/View/1347/2035-Transportation-Plan_Sept-11_with-Appendices?bidId=
Logged
"When you come to a fork in the road, take it."~Yogi Berra

skluth

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1506
  • Age: 65
  • Location: Palm Springs, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 04:08:48 PM
Re: Colorado
« Reply #22 on: July 14, 2018, 11:26:30 PM »


As far as I can tell, there are no plans to upgrade Parker Rd (CO 83) to a freeway. It would be very cost prohibitive, as there is development on both sides of Parker Rd as far south as Arapahoe Rd (CO 88). I think the Arapahoe County 2035 Transportation Plan is very ambitious as far as the improvements on the highway are concerned, as they propose two interchanges at Quincy Ave & Orchard Rd (which would be very expensive in terms of ROW purchases for interchanges--but much-needed--especially at Quincy).

Here is a copy of their plan (I believe it was conceived in 2010): http://www.arapahoegov.com/DocumentCenter/View/1347/2035-Transportation-Plan_Sept-11_with-Appendices?bidId=

Upgrading Parker Road at Quincy Road to a tight diamond interchange wouldn't be that difficult. The businesses west of Parker Road don't look to be all that valuable as they include a storage facility and what appears to be an auto junkyard. Parker could be shifted slightly west with the northbound on/off ramps using the current northbound lanes. It would involve a normally difficult land swap with the state park to the west, but I'm sure they'd be happy to do so as it removes an unsightly junkyard away currently adjacent to the park and the park may even gain a bit of acreage.
Logged

usends

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 702
  • usends.com

  • Location: Headwaters Hill, CO
  • Last Login: Today at 06:52:35 PM
    • US highway endpoints, photos, maps, and history
Re: Colorado
« Reply #23 on: July 15, 2018, 10:50:48 AM »

Upgrading Parker Road at Quincy Road to a tight diamond interchange wouldn't be that difficult...
In my opinion, it would be pointless to build a grade separation at Quincy without first addressing the at-grade signalized intersection at Lehigh (which also serves as one of the entrances to the state park).
Logged
usends.com - US highway endpoints, photos, maps, and history

Mark68

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 484
  • Location: Parker, CO
  • Last Login: December 03, 2021, 07:28:03 PM
    • My Travels over the years
Re: Colorado
« Reply #24 on: July 20, 2018, 02:42:28 PM »


As far as I can tell, there are no plans to upgrade Parker Rd (CO 83) to a freeway. It would be very cost prohibitive, as there is development on both sides of Parker Rd as far south as Arapahoe Rd (CO 88). I think the Arapahoe County 2035 Transportation Plan is very ambitious as far as the improvements on the highway are concerned, as they propose two interchanges at Quincy Ave & Orchard Rd (which would be very expensive in terms of ROW purchases for interchanges--but much-needed--especially at Quincy).

Here is a copy of their plan (I believe it was conceived in 2010): http://www.arapahoegov.com/DocumentCenter/View/1347/2035-Transportation-Plan_Sept-11_with-Appendices?bidId=

Upgrading Parker Road at Quincy Road to a tight diamond interchange wouldn't be that difficult. The businesses west of Parker Road don't look to be all that valuable as they include a storage facility and what appears to be an auto junkyard. Parker could be shifted slightly west with the northbound on/off ramps using the current northbound lanes. It would involve a normally difficult land swap with the state park to the west, but I'm sure they'd be happy to do so as it removes an unsightly junkyard away currently adjacent to the park and the park may even gain a bit of acreage.
Upgrading Parker Road at Quincy Road to a tight diamond interchange wouldn't be that difficult...
In my opinion, it would be pointless to build a grade separation at Quincy without first addressing the at-grade signalized intersection at Lehigh (which also serves as one of the entrances to the state park).

Maybe this whole problem can be solved with realigning Parker a little to the west (into Cherry Creek SP) and adding frontage roads from Hampden to Quincy. Just have the exit for Dam Rd & Hampden also serve Lehigh, with separate slip ramps for Quincy. At least this way, you can have nearly freeway-grade travel on Parker between I-225 & Quincy.
« Last Edit: July 20, 2018, 02:45:33 PM by Mark68 »
Logged
"When you come to a fork in the road, take it."~Yogi Berra

 


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.