Draft study: Denver-Vail rail line would cost $15B

**jrbd** · 09-02-2009, 06:03 PM

Seriously, free ski buses should be tried. For a million dollars per year, it might be enough to prevent the traffic jams on the busiest days, and they just spent that much on this study.

**FrankZappa** · 09-02-2009, 06:25 PM

Originally Posted by jmf

Not until they pave it - there is what used to be a dirt road but has since been converted to a bike trail taht runs from about the west end of 22nd st. to the back of the loveland parking lot. It's got 'frontage road' written all over it.

I suppose you think Silver Valley road is old US 6 too.

You haven't been around very long have you? Or maybe you're just a young jedi?

**Hacksaw** · 09-02-2009, 07:02 PM

Originally Posted by jrbd

Solution: a fleet of MI-8 helicopters. $5-8 mil apiece, 24 passengers, 14,500' ceiling, 140 mph. The world's most-produced helicopter, in service for almost 50 years in 50 countries.

You could buy a lot of these puppies for $15 billion.

YES!!!!!! Finally someone is thinking outside the box!!! And just think we could do a little heliskiing on the way to Vail.....

**Pablo Escobar** · 09-02-2009, 07:13 PM

the near term solution is to pool maggot money and buy the last 2 properties in the plume. one place is asked at 75k, it's a 2/1, right on water. the other is 160k and you could literally fall down the steps of the plume saloon & fall into the hot tub :fkna in the backyard.

**jmf** · 09-03-2009, 07:15 AM

Originally Posted by FrankZappa

I suppose you think Silver Valley road is old US 6 too.

You haven't been around very long have you? Or maybe you're just a young jedi?

I didn't say it was the frontage road - but sure as hell could be. But hey, have your condesending opinion - doesn't mean shit to me as I'm not stuck driving to/from Denver anyway. Getting there is half the fun, right?

**Name Redacted** · 09-03-2009, 07:41 AM

Originally Posted by Hacksaw

YES!!!!!! Finally someone is thinking outside the box!!! And just think we could do a little heliskiing on the way to Vail.....

Except that most powdays = no fly days

**smmokan** · 09-03-2009, 08:16 AM

Re: the bus solution... would you really want loads more buses on the road in addition to all the trucks when the weather gets crappy? Sure it'll take some of the cars off the road, but unless its a full-fledged bus solution (which isn't likely), it isn't going to make much of a difference.

The real solution is to just wake up earlier. I skied 55-60 days last year and I got stuck in traffic less than 5 times.

**Hacksaw** · 09-03-2009, 08:50 AM

Originally Posted by shredgnar

Except that most powdays = no fly days

So what? It just means more time for the snowpack to stabilize....

**Name Redacted** · 09-03-2009, 09:35 AM

Originally Posted by Hacksaw

So what? It just means more time for the snowpack to stabilize....

Stabilize schmabelize! Population control my friend, you know survival of the fittest and all.

**Poop~Ghost** · 09-03-2009, 10:04 AM

Originally Posted by smmokan

The real solution is to just wake up earlier. I skied 55-60 days last year and I got stuck in traffic less than 5 times.

Saturday & Sunday Weekend Warrior Schedule.

Even on the biggest snow dump days - this is true. Leave Denver by 6am - arrive at LL at 7-7.30am depending on road conditions. Eat a breakfast burrito and sip some dirty bean juice.

9am = fresh tracks.

1pm - I'm in the car on the way home.

Monday - Friday Pre-Work Backcountry Schedule
Leave house at 5am - Arrive at BP at 6:00am

As much skiing as possible until 8:50am and I make the 9:45am meeting in Denver West.

Nap in the car for lunch.

**adrenalated** · 09-03-2009, 10:19 AM

Re: truck traffic. Alternate routes won't work because no trucker in their right mind takes I-70 over I-80 or I-40 anyway unless they absolutely have to. Steep hills in a truck SUCKS and every trucker knows this. The only trucks on I-70 are the ones that are stopping somewhere along I-70.

**Angel** · 09-03-2009, 11:12 AM

As a resident of Summit County, I would personally love a train that runs these routes, although it likely won't ever affect me because a train wouldn't be built in time.

Some of the local population could use this as well. I live in Frisco, but I currently have to commute quite a bit to G'town and Eagle. I would willingly give up the ability and freedom of driving my car, to hop on a train that would take me to these destinations. I could read and work on the train, not put miles on my car, and not pollute the environment with my 8 cylinder engine. I don't care if it is a full on passenger train or Summit's idea.

So while the obvious idea is to try and find some feasible solution for the interstate traffic heading out to and from Denver, I think there are also benefits to be had for the local population when it comes to using the train. Live in Summit, work in Vail, no need for a car. Hell, live in Plume, G'town, or somewhere else on the line that is affordable and work on down the road.

**Blurred** · 09-03-2009, 11:55 AM

So have we solved these problems here on TGR?

The people who actually have invested time and money into this are anxiously awaiting our conclusions............

**Elkhound Odin** · 09-03-2009, 12:26 PM

Blurred, you know TGR has all the answers. Hell, the polyasshats solved the US of A's government problems months ago. You know this little traffic problem would only take a couple days to resolve. I'll send Ritter a link to this thread.

**geoffda** · 09-03-2009, 03:56 PM

People always talk about this problem (assuming you think that there is one) like supply and demand are static. It is most definitely not the case that building a train will remove cars from I-70. Assuming the train runs full, those ride'rs cars will simply be replaced by others who could not get on the train. So anyone who can't get a ticket will be faced with the same lousy I-70 experience that everyone is faced with today. The only difference is that now there will be even more people on the slopes and the quality of the skiing experience will be significantly diminished. The only way this would not be the case is if either supply were increased (open new terrain, develop new resorts) or if demand were artificially limited (increase pass prices enough to price some people out). Since neither of those things are likely to happen--at least not fast enough, the only thing building a train means is that "lucky" people will get to trade their time waiting in traffic with time spent waiting in lift lines (or arriving at their favorite bc stash to find it already douched). Everyone else will have the identical experience with the added joy of the I-70 commute on top of it. The train may be a cure for something, but as a cure it is far worse than the disease. Let's face it: the horror show that is I-70 is the only reason that skiing in Summit/Eagle on a weekend does not resemble the East Coast (in terms of overcrowded slopes and unhappy people).

**grskier** · 09-03-2009, 04:43 PM

Someone needs to stop equating economics with traffic engineering..

there is a tie, but not that much of one.... not even close

**jmf** · 09-03-2009, 04:52 PM

geoffda - you're presuming in that argument that the i-70 problem discourages so many people from skiing that whatever traffic were diverted to trains would be replaced by other skiers who were, until now, not skiing to avoid the traffic. However, if the traffic is not impacted, those skiers desire to ski is also not impacted. Where these graphs would intersect exactly, no one knows. But your model would require infinite demand, and a mid-equation change in the way the parameters function.

**montanaskier** · 09-03-2009, 04:52 PM

too damn crowded up here anyway, lets not make it any easier for front rangers to get to the mountains. I say make I70 a two lane dirt road.

**FrankZappa** · 09-03-2009, 05:21 PM

**smmokan** · 09-03-2009, 09:37 PM

Originally Posted by montanaskier

too damn crowded up here anyway, lets not make it any easier for front rangers to get to the mountains. I say make I70 a two lane dirt road.

Based on other threads, no one wants to come to Vail anyways.

**jrbd** · 09-03-2009, 10:37 PM

Originally Posted by smmokan

Re: the bus solution... would you really want loads more buses on the road in addition to all the trucks when the weather gets crappy? Sure it'll take some of the cars off the road, but unless its a full-fledged bus solution (which isn't likely), it isn't going to make much of a difference.

It wouldn't work unless it was done whole-hog. I think there would have to be hundreds of buses at a minimum, either very low cost or free, with convenient pickup and delivery points (assorted parking lots around Denver to lift-side at the big resorts). Removing a few thousand cars during crunch times could be enough to allow traffic to flow again. And it has the advantage of being relatively cheap and low-commitment, especially compared to the impossibly-expensive train ideas. I think it should be tried, but it's not the type of thing that appeals to politicians; nobody's name will go on it, unlike the third bore of the tunnel.