Colorado

[Plutonic Panda]

Something I am vocally opposed to but nonetheless seems to be the future, Colorado is expanding automated enforcement with speeding cameras issuing fines. Article says it will fine the RO regardless of the driver. Is that even legal? That isn't the only interesting part of this, they will operate via a pair of cameras that determine the average speed. I've only heard about this in Sydney, Australia. Is there anywhere else in the states that use this technique?

https://www.cpr.org/2025/08/31/cdot-cameras-monitor-speeding-highway-119/

[mrose]

Melbourne is worse than Sydney. They will fine you for exceeding the limit by 3 km/hr, but it is more like 6 as they build in a 3 km/hr margin of error. Still, 6 km/hr is IMO a fairly petty amount for a ~$250 AUD fine and it tends to make the general motoring public cynical about "safety".

They have them for red light running, and I actually don't have an issue with those.

But it is very easy for a driver to get to 6ks over if they are downhill, or the speed limit is ambiguous (which is often is).

Melbourne though has some of the most aggressive drivers in the world and it is not uncommon for P (probationary) plate holders to drive souped up vehicles.

I hate to see my former home state adopt this practice but I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

[Icyhot1111]

When a state 'turns back' a highway, to a city or county, can the state 'reclaim' it?

The question's specific to my area. Harmony Road, in Fort Collins, was, up until [some recent time] CO 68. My understanding, is that it got turned back to Fort Collins, when its entire length was in city limits.

Yesterday, I drove out to Windsor, by taking Harmony (aka CR 38/CR 74) all the way to CO 257. It's 4-laned to within a mile or so of 257 now. It really seems to me like the state should take it back, since this thorofare now extends into two counties, and (as best as I can tell) is maintained by the City of Fort Collins, City of Timnath, and Weld County.

The artificial 45 mph speed limit... that's another thread.

How does that work, or does that even happen?

Sorry to quote an older post.  But, the road swaps are kinda fun to think about.

I don't think we'll ever see Harmony Rd. turned back into a state road.  In Northern Colorado, the cities and counties clearly have more money to throw at road construction and maintenance than CDOT does. 

Road swaps I think have a chance:
CO-402.  It's gotta be widened, but theirs not enough ROW to do it.  Does City of Loveland want it?
CO-14 (East Mulberry).  If the City of FC annexes this area, does the City want to maintain it?
CO-1.  Does Larimer County want it?
Owl Canyon Rd.  Does Larimer County want it to be a state road?  Lots of upgrades in recent years.
CO-392.  Between US 287 and CO 257, does it really need to be a state road?  I would assume City of FC, Town of Windsor, and Larimer County can upgrade it better than CDOT can.

[Elm]

CDOT had a public meeting for "I-25 (US 36 to 104th Avenue)" NEPA study in late October, which is an interesting project in that they're coming back to the area they left in an interim state with the first express lane project, and even proposing general purpose lanes.

Here are the display boards, and here is the main project page.

These are the mainline changes being proposed:

• bring corridor to standard, including 12ft wide express lane, 10ft shoulders and 4ft express lane buffer
• "ramp spacing modifications" for "US 36/I-76 on-ramp and I-270 on-ramp"
• add northbound climbing lane I-76 to 104th Ave
• add northbound auxiliary lane from I-270 to 84th Ave
• NB and SB auxiliary lanes between 84th Ave and Thornton Pkwy, removing bus slip ramps in between
• add southbound general purpose lane from 104th Ave to a bit south of 84th Ave

They had initially considered a freeway median bus station at the Thornton Park-n-Ride between 84th & Thornton Pkwy, but decided against it because of the cost to serve the one bus route that accesses it from I-25, with low ridership (120X, express from downtown Denver to I-25 & 120th Ave).

They also didn't carry forward C-D lanes from I-270 to 84th, in favor of the auxiliary lane.


Unrelated, DIA has a survey out for Peña Blvd NEPA: project page / survey.

[thenetwork]

Good that they are looking at that trainwreck section of I-25 around the Northglenn/Thornton area.  Don't know how they can really solve the problem in that corridor, but anything helps.

In the rare times I have to go through there there is at least one time I have to slam on the brakes due to some stupid driver forcing themselves into another lane.

I live west of the Divide, where the driving on I-70 is usually easy going.  But once you come down the hill into Metro Denver, it's one big NASCAR track!

[Elm]

The US 285 and Kings Valley interchange is back on hold due to lack of funding, pausing at 60% design. Here's this week's article (with a rendering) and one from 2021.

Here's the intersection in Google Maps.

Historically, this interchange project comes from a 2004 EA, which got an FHWA case study. I haven't seen the US 285 study itself, though.

[Plutonic Panda]

The largest wildlife bridge in North America(for now) has opened over I-25:

https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/largest-wildlife-overpass-in-north-america-opens-across-six-lane-interstate/1845813

[pderocco]

The largest wildlife bridge in North America(for now) has opened over I-25:

https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/largest-wildlife-overpass-in-north-america-opens-across-six-lane-interstate/1845813

I wonder if predators learn that there's a higher concentration of prey at these crossing, and just stake them out.

[roadman65]

Is US 84 in Colorado signed with directional tabs on its shields?

I read that CDOT dont sign it in either directions due to its N-S alignment and the fact even numbered US routes must conform to eat- west signing.

I remember that IDOT never gave directions to former US 66 in Illinois for this same hypothetical.  I was wondering if that was the case, if its the case herd.

[kphoger]

Is US 84 in Colorado signed with directional tabs on its shields?

I read that CDOT dont sign it in either directions due to its N-S alignment and the fact even numbered US routes must conform to eat- west signing.

I remember that IDOT never gave directions to former US 66 in Illinois for this same hypothetical.  I was wondering if that was the case, if its the case herd.

I can only find one reassurance shield in GSV, at the state line, and it is directionless.

[JayhawkCO]

The mileage markers run from the NM border to Pagosa, so that infers that CO deems it a N/S route.

[thenetwork]

The mileage markers run from the NM border to Pagosa, so that infers that CO deems it a N/S route.

US-84 is kne of Colorado's red-headed stepchild:

Even at it's western terminus in Pagosa Springs, they sign it like "Oh, BTW, here is 84."

[JayhawkCO]

The mileage markers run from the NM border to Pagosa, so that infers that CO deems it a N/S route.

US-84 is kne of Colorado's red-headed stepchild:

Even at it's western terminus in Pagosa Springs, they sign it like "Oh, BTW, here is 84."

For sure. It's actually a really nice little drive while it's still in CO too (also in north-central NM).

[thenetwork]

The mileage markers run from the NM border to Pagosa, so that infers that CO deems it a N/S route.

US-84 is kne of Colorado's red-headed stepchild:

Even at it's western terminus in Pagosa Springs, they sign it like "Oh, BTW, here is 84."

For sure. It's actually a really nice little drive while it's still in CO too (also in north-central NM).

It's been a while since I've traveled it (many times), but I don't think US-84 mile markers starting at zero in New Mexico when you leave Colorado.

[kphoger]

It's been a while since I've traveled it (many times), but I don't think US-84 mile markers starting at zero in New Mexico when you leave Colorado.

That would make sense, as it's signed N-S in New Mexico there.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/Np7M73kMsCg3FsoXA

[roadman65]

It's been a while since I've traveled it (many times), but I don't think US-84 mile markers starting at zero in New Mexico when you leave Colorado.

That would make sense, as it's signed N-S in New Mexico there.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/Np7M73kMsCg3FsoXA

It's signed N-S except where it concurs with US 60 between Fort Sumner and Texico.

US 54 even changes signing as north of I-40 is E-W and south of I-40 its N-S including Texas into El Paso.

However both routes have a WB shield in Santa Rosa at NM 91.  US 84 is signed N-S from Santa Rosa to Fort Sumner and again north of I-40 Exit 256 all the way to Colorado.

[kphoger]

It's been a while since I've traveled it (many times), but I don't think US-84 mile markers starting at zero in New Mexico when you leave Colorado.

That would make sense, as it's signed N-S in New Mexico there.

It's signed N-S except where it concurs with US 60 between Fort Sumner and Texico.

Hence, I specified "there".

[The High Plains Traveler]

It's been a while since I've traveled it (many times), but I don't think US-84 mile markers starting at zero in New Mexico when you leave Colorado.

That would make sense, as it's signed N-S in New Mexico there.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/Np7M73kMsCg3FsoXA

It's signed N-S except where it concurs with US 60 between Fort Sumner and Texico.

US 54 even changes signing as north of I-40 is E-W and south of I-40 its N-S including Texas into El Paso.

However both routes have a WB shield in Santa Rosa at NM 91.  US 84 is signed N-S from Santa Rosa to Fort Sumner and again north of I-40 Exit 256 all the way to Colorado.

The junction of U.S. 60 is mile point 0 for U.S. 84 in New Mexico. The concurrent segment with U.S. 60 and 70 doesn't enter into the route distance calculations, and NMDOT considers it a "subordinate" route.

[Plutonic Panda]

Well, this is a good start. Funding coming from people who drive cars and pay taxes for roads should stay for roads funding. We don't need to become like some fucking city like New York City, where drivers are paying extremely high prices to drive to help fund mass transit.

https://www.coloradopolitics.com/2026/05/04/road-funding-amendment-divides-colorado-over-539m-general-fund-shift/

[pderocco]

Well, this is a good start. Funding coming from people who drive cars and pay taxes for roads should stay for roads funding. We don't need to become like some fucking city like New York City, where drivers are paying extremely high prices to drive to help fund mass transit.

https://www.coloradopolitics.com/2026/05/04/road-funding-amendment-divides-colorado-over-539m-general-fund-shift/

That pic showing a decrepit bit of US-6 is on my bucket list for this summer. I hope they get it fixed in time.

Actually, it seems they're more interested in spending road fees on Medicaid and education than mass transit. But those are things that should come out of general revenue anyway.

[JayhawkCO]

That pic showing a decrepit bit of US-6 is on my bucket list for this summer. I hope they get it fixed in time.

Any road in eastern Colorado on someone's bucket list makes me sad. 

[Elm]

Well, this is a good start. Funding coming from people who drive cars and pay taxes for roads should stay for roads funding. We don't need to become like some fucking city like New York City, where drivers are paying extremely high prices to drive to help fund mass transit.

https://www.coloradopolitics.com/2026/05/04/road-funding-amendment-divides-colorado-over-539m-general-fund-shift/

One way or another, that's probably not going to take practical effect. HB26-1430 was introduced last week and had its first hearing today; if it and the ballot measure pass, it'd reduce transportation taxes and fees to counteract the ballot measure.

Colorado Politics: "Colorado legislature enters final 10 days with hundreds of bills still unresolved"
Colorado Newsline: "Colorado bill would neutralize proposed constitutional amendment requiring road funding"

[H26-1430] would effectively offset state spending under Initiative 175 if it passes by lowering that state's road usage fee, gas tax, special fuel excise tax and some vehicle registration fees. That reduced revenue would create more general fund spending space under the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights, which caps how much the state can spend before returning money to taxpayers.

[kphoger]

Any road in eastern Colorado on someone's bucket list makes me sad. 

Even if I was suffering from the afternoon yawns at the time, I enjoyed the scenery of US-160 when I drove it between Springfield and Trinidad a few years ago.



I also enjoyed the barren scenery—if not the pavement or signage quality—just across the state line in New Mexico too.



Not beautiful to some, I suppose, but I liked it.

[pderocco]

That pic showing a decrepit bit of US-6 is on my bucket list for this summer. I hope they get it fixed in time.

Any road in eastern Colorado on someone's bucket list makes me sad. 

I have a personal attachment to US-6, since I was on it so often on Cape Cod throughout my life. I lived about a third of a mile from it for ten years. I've driven it from Bishop almost to Denver, and from P'town to the Hudson River. And while I'll never drive all of it, I have some ambition to drive all the US routes in the western 11 continental states.

[thenetwork]

Well, this is a good start. Funding coming from people who drive cars and pay taxes for roads should stay for roads funding. We don't need to become like some fucking city like New York City, where drivers are paying extremely high prices to drive to help fund mass transit.

https://www.coloradopolitics.com/2026/05/04/road-funding-amendment-divides-colorado-over-539m-general-fund-shift/

That pic showing a decrepit bit of US-6 is on my bucket list for this summer. I hope they get it fixed in time.

Actually, it seems they're more interested in spending road fees on Medicaid and education than mass transit. But those are things that should come out of general revenue anyway.

One thing to consider: At least in Western Colorado, CDOT does a good job of maintaining state and US highways outside of municipal jurisdictions.  Within the city/town limits, state/US highways are usually the municipality's responsibility.

The rougher stretches are more commonly found inside the cities than on the open highway.  If that is indeed US-6 WITHIN Sterling, that may not be a good representative of actual CDOT-maintained highways.