|

I-70 Highway Expansion Fatal Flaws
A six lane I-70 is just as
vulnerable to bad weather, poor driver behavior, accidents and highway
construction, as a four lane I-70 and will provide no option to these
events, but to sit in traffic and wait with everyone else.
A highway expansion ONLY
solution for the I-70 mountain corridor (as proposed by CDOT Region 1
as the "Preferred" alternative in the Draft PEIS) means that Colorado
residents and visitors have as their only option for travel in the
corridor; personal vehicle, van shuttle or bus driving to resort
destinations (even in blinding snow storms and treacherous icy road
conditions). These unpleasant and
dangerous experiences ignore traveler safety, discourage future Colorado visits and limit Front Range access to the major
mountain resorts; instead of facilitating safety and access, and
providing an option to driving in bad weather.
When it
snows at 1 to 2 inches per hour or more (which is common in the
Mountain Corridor, especially from Silver Plume to the EJMT, Straight
Creek and Vail Pass), there is no way CDOT can keep up with snow
removal operations on four lanes, let alone six lanes.
All a six lane I-70 will
do is allow more unprepared motorists to crash and be injured, allow
more trucks to jack-knife and wreck, allow more horrific traffic
backups and strand more motorists throughout the corridor when the
inevitable highway closure occurs. This is
not rocket science. Colorado needs an option to
driving in the corridor in winter weather conditions, which is when
many Front Range Residents and Visitors want to get to the Resorts!
A six lane
I-70 will not only jeopardize the safety of more motorists, but will
place additional burdens on the corridor communities for Law
Enforcement, Emergency Management, Fire Protection Service, Ambulance
Service and the Care and Sheltering of stranded motorists.
A highway expansion
alternative is the most destructive solution (environmentally,
economically and socially) to the I-70 Corridor
Communities, Corridor Resorts and Colorado in general.
Transportation is not an end
in itself; its purpose is to serve common community aspirations for a
better quality of life. Unfortunately, transportation is increasingly
becoming a threat to quality of life in Colorado, not
its handmaiden. Unless forceful action is taken now to reverse
this trend, our quality of life will deteriorate.
Transportation is too
important an issue to leave solely to transportation planners.
Effective transportation solutions require partnerships – across
agencies, across jurisdictions, and in collaboration with private and
non-profit organizations. Every citizen of the state is a partner
in this effort.
Today, many
transportation agencies at every level (federal, state, county and
municipal – except for CDOT Region 1) are looking to other ways of
dealing with congestion. Instead of focusing on how fast cars can move
through a particular place (mobility), DOTs are thinking about how easy
it is to reach destinations (access) – by car, as well as by transit,
bike or foot.
Click here
to learn about NJDOT's approach
CDOT under the Owens/Norton
Regime wants to return to
traditional planning practices that favor automobile travel and ignore
other planning objectives. They advocate highway expansion to reduce
congestion. Their analysis tends to:
- Exaggerate highway expansion congestion reduction impacts and
economic benefits.
- Ignore or understate generated traffic and induced travel effects.
- Overlook many economic, social and environmental costs of wider
highways, increased vehicle traffic and sprawled land use.
- Underestimate the true costs of expanding major
urban highways.
- Fail to compare highway expansion with other transportation
improvement
options.
Some officials want Colorado's voting public to assume
that the only way to avoid economic disaster is to spend countless
billions of dollars on highway infrastructure. The truth is
that massive highway
expansion is a certain path to economic and environmental
disaster.
Their plan ignores the most
harmful impacts of highway expansion such as continuing the cycle of
auto-dependent, auto-oriented sprawl, our addiction to foreign
oil, increased greenhouse gas emissions, continued water quality
degradation by the use of more and more chemical deicers and salted
traction sand, continued air quality and regional haze degradation and
related health problems, increasing vehicle - animal collisions,
increasing vehicle accidents and fatalities, increasing energy
costs and increasing global warming.
Not only will future oil
shortages drive skyrocketing liquid fuel costs, but the oil for asphalt
overlays and other highway repairs will become increasingly more
expensive and drive highway maintenance and repair costs sky
high as well.
Highway Expansion does not
represent a sustainable solution for Colorado. Instead it
represents a self serving works program for the highway contractors,
oil industry and car and truck manufacturers that only benefits them
and the ill-fated legacy of the Owens / Norton Regime and
the pro-oil position of the Bush / Cheney Administration.
Mountain highway lanes are rarely at full capacity due to
rain, hail, fog, snow, wind, ice, flooding, sun glare, breakdowns,
construction, accidents, police activity, wildlife on the roadway,
rockfalls, snow slides, slow moving vehicles, unfamiliar, bad or slow
drivers and any adjacent activity to the highway that provides an
opportunity for motorists to slow down and look. Any
of these activities can impact motor vehicle travel, regardless of the
number of lanes in a specific direction.
In addition, there is a known interaction between vehicular
traffic in adjacent highway lanes. Due to
this interaction, adding a general purpose lane does not necessarily
double the vehicle capacity of the adjacent lane. Typical throughput of
the additional lane will be 20 to 30 percent less than the
adjacent lane.
Once a road becomes sufficiently crowded, then it becomes
harder for drivers to coordinate with each other. Each
driver has to anticipate what other drivers will do, and because
information is transmitted between cars only via brake lights and turn
signals which are crude devices at best (and turn signals aren’t always
used), anticipation often turns into over-reaction. A single driver
who’s too ready to hit the brakes can slow down an entire highway. And because drivers have no bigger picture of
what traffic looks like, their decisions (whether to get off at this
exit or trudge onward, whether to move out of this lane or stay in it)
are haphazard at best.
During periods of any volume, it takes very little to create
a traffic jam. A sudden lane change, hard breaking or a sudden
entrance from an on ramp and a huge ripple of braking is created that
can bring traffic to a stop and go condition for miles. Instead
of the elegant, patterned movements of birds, drivers produce the
stop-and-go disorganization of a traffic jam.
A mountain highway is an extremely variable
transportation mechanism and only as good as the quality and
consistency of vehicles and drivers using it.
For most I-70 Mountain Corridor motorists, the most lengthy
traffic delays they have or will experience are a result of highway
construction, accidents and/or bad weather that cause substantial
traffic interruption and even complete closures. Often
the traffic ripple effect of an accident or construction activity can
last for hours, well beyond the actual clearing of the vehicles or
clearing of the construction equipment involved. Passing
motorists may never actually see the accident or construction activity,
but can experience the delays they caused for several hours.
A Six Lane I-70 in the Mountain
Corridor will create more problems than it will solve!
An I-70 Highway
Expansion alternative will increase:
The
number of Vehicles on the Highway in all Weather Conditions
Vehicle
Miles Traveled and Congestion
Highway
Travel Times
Road Rage Incidents
Accidents
Vehicle
- Animal Collisions
Road
Maintenance and Resurfacing Costs
Our Reliance on the
automobile for mobility regardless of the escalating cost of
vehicle fuel, maintenance, ownership and operation
Inefficient
Energy Consumption
Pressure
to Escalate Oil and Gas Extraction in Colorado and
increase the Environmental Degradation that comes with it
Overuse
of our Public Lands
Noise,
Air, Water and Visual Pollution
Greenhouse
Gas Emissions
Impacts
on corridor Historical Properties
Our Dependency
on Foreign Oil
Our
Ignorance of World Peak Oil production, (Natural Resource Depletion)
Our Ignorance
of the State's increasing Senior Population
Our
Ignorance of Global Climate Change
Construction
Economic Impacts
Back
Country Sprawl
The
Elimination of any Safe Travel Mode Choice in the Corridor
The
Violation of the Principles of Environmental Justice
I-70
highway expansion will just bring more vehicles, more accidents, more
asphalt, more traffic, more construction, more congestion, more noise,
more back country sprawl, more road rage and more pollution to the
beautiful Colorado High Country. Highway
expansion also fails to provide Colorado’s residents and visitors with any other
option than sitting in traffic.
Most
traffic jams on I-70 relate to construction activities, maintenance
activities, accidents caused by careless or reckless drivers, bad
weather conditions and natural hazards such as rock, snow or mudslides. Additional highway capacity isn’t going to
solve these problems.
Expanding highway capacity
may not generate a significantly lower level of peak period
congestion.
Traffic studies from all over the country point out that once
additional highway capacity is made available in a previously congested
corridor, many motorists simply change their travel behavior.
We all know that there is greater peak period travel demand
in the I-70 corridor than can be accommodated by the current I-70
facility. When the cost in terms of travel
time (congestion), cost in terms of vehicle operation,
(vehicle cost, insurance, fuel, maintenance, tolls, taxes, user fees),
cost in terms of the travel experience (accidents, natural hazards and
dangerous driving conditions) or cost in terms of
the destination experience (resort overcrowding, overuse of public
lands, environmental degradation, long waiting lines), reaches our
personal threshold, we stop making peak period corridor
trips, but do not necessarily stop making trips altogether.
When the cost of peak period travel becomes too great, we
move our trips to non-peak periods. This can be observed today by
the increase in corridor travel on Mondays, Thursdays, Fridays and
throughout the entire day on Saturdays and Sundays. We may
also choose closer corridor destinations during peak periods that
require a shorter trip, but still provide a valuable recreational
experience and produce corridor revenue.
With I-70 highway
expansion, a significant number of those motorists that had been
avoiding the corridor during peak periods by taking an alternate
route or by using public transportation, simply switch back to driving
in the expanded highway corridor until it very quickly reaches the same
congestion level as it had before the expansion. The
alternate routes and public transportation will likely see a decrease
in use as more motorists use the primary highway corridor, until the
highway corridor reaches previous congestion levels. The I-25 TREX
expansion is following this pattern. This pattern facilitates a
form of peak period traffic congestion equilibrium that suggests
that traffic congestion in high demand corridors is
relatively permanent even when capacity is increased.
For the I-70 Corridor, expanding capacity in terms of highway
expansion will most certainly allow more travel during peak
periods. It may also
provide for less travel during non-peak periods, since a larger portion
of overall trips are being satisfied by peak period capacity. Of
course, resort crowding, public land overuse, long lines at
resorts, restaurants and other attractions or other overcrowding
that diminishes the destination or wilderness experience, will
again force corridor visitors to go back to non peak period trips or
visit other states.
How crowded are resort communities already
during peak periods and how much greater capacity do they wish to
accommodate?
How many more cars do the resort towns want on
weekends and where will they put them?
Will I-70
highway expansion create gridlock in Vail, Breckenridge, Silverthorne,
Frisco, Winter Park, Fraser, Tabernash and Granby?
How about the residents of these same resort
communities -
has anyone asked them how they
feel about additional peak period visits and more cars and SUVs in
their communities?
Many reasonable questions can be asked about increasing
development pressure in the High Country by adding highway capacity.
- Where will the development occur and how
will it be regulated?
- Where will the water come from to
support this development?
- Are local mountain jurisdictions
prepared to regulate extended growth and development to minimize local
impacts?
- Is the development appropriate based on
local land use codes and public infrastructure?
- Will the development pay for itself?
- Is there a water supply and both water
and sewer infrastructure to support additional development and if not,
who will pay for it?
- What are the environmental consequences
associated with the additional development?
- Is this extended mountain development
consistent with your community’s Master Plan and Vision?
- Is this extended automobile dependent
mountain development consistent with Colorado Resident’s Vision for the
State?
- Does this extended
automobile dependent development protect Colorado’s
spectacular mountain environment for future generations to enjoy?
How do we get from here:
Current Conditions
from Exit 244 (US6/Kermitt's) to Georgetown

and
from here:
Current Conditions in
Idaho Springs, Lawson, Silver Plume
and Georgetown Hill

To here:
Six Lanes – No Mitigation

and here:
Six Lanes with Context Sensitive Design
(Glenwood Canyon Style Design)

without enormous
disturbance to highway travel during
the 10 year plus construction period
Wouldn't there be
much less disturbance to highway travel for the construction of the Advanced Guideway System adjacent
to the highway?

or the
construction of Elevated Rail (EMU) adjacent to the highway?

Highway Expansion
is the WRONG answer!


Instead of designing our future
to accommodate people, our political leaders are designing our
future to accommodate more cars. In
essence, cars have become more important than people in our planning
process.
How can such
political behavior from both sides of the aisle be considered
leadership?
Highway
expansion results in the irretrievable consumption,
exploitation and destruction of our natural resources and environment. Unanticipated consequences of highway expansion such as Global
Warming, worldwide terrorism incidents and escalating political
conflicts fueled by shrinking oil supplies, will not only eliminate
personal freedoms for future generations, but possibly jeopardize
the future of the Human Race.
What does your 21st
Century Transportation Vision look like?

What does this mean to you?

Trains Not Lanes
is the right answer!
The
US dependency on highways as our primary transportation mode is
contributing to greenhouse gas emissions, global climate change,
shrinking world oil reserves, US dependency on unstable foreign oil
supplies, continued political conflicts and wars over oil,
increasing water pollution from highway runoff, increasing air
pollution from vehicle emissions and entrained dust from vehicle
travel, increasing highway congestion and increasing
highway impacts to communities, including health problems.
Our
highway investment has accomplished its purpose, but now is the time to
invest in other modes of travel and end our gross dependence on highway
travel and foreign oil. Continued highway expansion today brings
little benefit in terms of economic productivity and congestion
relief. All of the easy highways have been built.
Adding highway capacity today is in difficult urbanized areas
where the construction costs and community impacts will
be enormous and horrendous.
Our
transportation investment in the 21st Century must
prioritize energy efficient public transit development along
with compact, infill and transit oriented development incentives
in order to even approach some level of transportation
sustainability.
CDOT
transportation professionals need to give transit alternatives the
priority that highway alternatives have been given over the past eight
years in order to keep Colorado
competitive in the 21st Century global economy.
Peak
Oil, Global Climate Change, Federal Haze requirements, our aging
population and our Winter Tourism Economy should motivate the State's
transportation planners to pursue energy efficient and low
greenhouse gas emitting transit solutions over continued highway
expansion and continued auto-oriented land use and sprawl.
Sinking
endless billions of dollars into highway infrastructure that simply
increases Vehicle Miles Traveled and encourages more auto-dependent
sprawling development, only results in more traffic, more congestion
and more dollars needed for highway maintenance and more dollars needed
for additional highway capacity.
This
irresponsible behavior places tremendous burden on future
generations (our children and grandchildren) to pay for the enormous
debt we are creating to sustain our oil dependent lifestyles. We
are also burdening our future generations with the cost
of mitigation for the huge environmental impacts we are
creating, including climate change.
Highway
expansion is a short-sighted vision that benefits big
oil, highway contractors, car and truck
manufacturers, foreign oil interests, global terrorists and
the Bush/Cheney Administration while dumping our current problems on
future generations to solve.
Could
we behave in a more irresponsible manner?
Highway Expansion Proponents Creed of Ignorance
Assumed by the
CDOT/BBC/FHU Economics Benefits of Transportation Investment
Study and the Denver Metro Chamber and Metro Denver EDC I-70
Congestion Study
Let's ignore the fact that because
of our oil addiction, we are at War in Iraq
to gain access to Iraq's
oil reserves.
Let's ignore the immense cost of
funding our military presence in the Middle East to insure the flow of oil to the US.
Let's ignore the cost of
our foreign oil purchases which indirectly fund the enemies that we are
fighting not only in the Middle East, but throughout the world.
Let's
ignore the fact that we are determining a transportation solution for
the I-70 mountain corridor that will take between 10 and 20 years to
implement (if not longer if the funds cannot be made available).
Let's
ignore the fact that the I-70 mountain corridor solution will be
implemented in the 2020 to 2025 timeframe, not tomorrow.
Let's
design our future to accommodate more cars and trucks instead
of designing our future to accommodate more people.
Let's
focus our transportation efforts on moving cars and trucks instead of
moving people.
Let's
make cars and trucks more important than people in our land use
and transportation planning processes.
Let's
prioritize car and truck facilities over over bicycle, public
transportation and pedestrian facilities that comprise "Complete
Street" programs.
Let's
ignore mountain corridor resort overcrowding and congestion that
occurs today during peak periods and invite even more vehicles through
I-70 highway expansion.
Let's
ignore the residents of mountain communities that do not want any
more vehicles in their towns during peak periods.
Let's
ignore the overuse of Colorado's public lands and the environmental
degradation that comes with it.
Let's
design a highway widening solution that envisions automobile
travel behavior in the year 2025 to be identicial or greater
than today without regard for climate change, peak oil, rising
fuels cost, tolling, VMT fees, geopolitical instability in the Middle
East, our changing demographics and lack of highway maintenance funds.
Let’s
ignore the fact that we cannot afford to even maintain the highway
infrastructure that we already have, let alone maintain any new highway
infrastructure that we might create.
Let's dump the enormous maintenance
debt of taking care of our existing roads and bridges on our children
and grandchildren while at the same time prioritizing spending for
highway expansion projects that will create even more maintenance debt.
Let's
allow the same 1950's/1960's interstate highway era transportation
philosophy and those who support this philosophy (CDOT Region 1, Move
Colorado, highway contractors, highway engineers, oil companies,
automobile manufacturers, automobile dependent development interests
and all politicians with a vested interest in keeping the status quo of
highway expansion as our primary transportation solution) to dominate
the transportation planning and funding discussion for the 21st Century.
Let's
expect that the same 1950's/1960's interstate highway era
transportation philosophy that created the congestion and
transportation infrastructure mess that we have today, to
provide our transportation solutions for the 21st Century.
Let's
ignore the sustainable transportation and land use vision of the
Environmental and Smart Growth organizations because
they don't support the empowered financial interests vested
in continued highway expansion, continued auto-dependent
development, continued US reliance on foreign oil
and continued US military presence in the Middle East.
Let's
ignore the fact that our transportation planning and funding
process is not about making the best decisions and selecting
the best transportation and land use alternatives, but rewarding a
select and very powerful group of special interest groups regardless of
the national and international political and environmental consequences
of these decisions.
Let’s ignore worldwide rising fuels
costs.
Let’s ignore the cost of our
national energy security.
Let's ignore the fact that energy
insecurity equals geopolitical instability.
Let’s ignore the cost of maintaining
a constant military presence in the Middle
East to insure the flow of oil to the US.
Let’s ignore the US contribution to
the funding of global terrorism through the purchase of foreign oil.
Let’s ignore the worldwide political
instability that decreasing oil supplies and increasing oil demand is
creating.
Let’s ignore the looming global
liquid fuels crisis as we reach worldwide peak oil production and see
oil production begin to decline (most experts agree this will occur
between 2010 and 2014).
Let’s
ignore the fact that all the easy and inexpensive highways have already
been built.
Let's
ignore the fact that very little economic benefit occurs by expanding
existing highways.
Let’s
ignore the costly and intrusive private property acquisition necessary
to expand highways in developed areas.
Let’s
ignore the incredible expense of highway construction today, but at the
same time continue to stigmatize energy efficient public transportation
solutions as too costly.
Let’s
ignore the increased accidents, injuries and fatalities associated
with highway expansion and increased motor vehicle travel.
Let’s
ignore the air quality degradation as a direct result of vehicle
emissions and fugitive dust associated with highway expansion and
increased motor vehicle travel.
Let’s
ignore the water quality degradation associated with highway expansion
and increased motor vehicle travel.
Let's
ignore the increased use of traction sand and Mag Chloride that occurs
with highway expansion and increased motor vehicle travel along
with the air and water pollution that results.
Let’s
ignore the ridiculous noise level associated with the current I-70
highway and its impact to the mountain corridor communities.
Let's
ignore the noise associated with highway expansion and increased
motor vehicle travel.
Let’s
ignore the health and community impacts associated with highway
expansion and increased motor vehicle travel.
Let’s
ignore the obesity problems associated with auto-dependent and
auto-priority development fueled by highway expansion and at the same
time discourage pedestrian, bicycle and public transportation
facilities.
Let’s
ignore the increased demand for State Patrol Resources, Incident
Management, Emergency Communications, Law Enforcement, Fire Protection
and Ambulance, Emergency Medical and Trauma Care services
associated with highway expansion and increased motor vehicle travel.
Let’s
ignore the increased greenhouse gas emissions associated with highway
expansion and increased motor vehicle travel.
Let’s
ignore the US
transportation’s automobile and truck dependency and its contribution
to global climate change.
Let’s
ignore the induced travel impacts of highway expansion that encourage
vehicle miles traveled and even more congestion.
Let’s
ignore the fact that highway expansion breeds auto-dependent sprawl,
increased vehicle miles traveled and more congestion.
Let’s
ignore the cost of government service delivery to the dispersed
auto-dependent development and sprawl that highway expansion fuels.
Let’s
ignore the needs of our increasing senior population for pedestrian
friendly and livable communities.
Let’s
ignore the fact that as Baby-boomers retire in massive
numbers, they will be driving less.
Let’s
exaggerate the economic benefits of highway expansion by not taking
into account the harmful economic impacts of highway construction,
increased foreign fuel consumption and US
agricultural land consumption for auto-dependent development and sprawl.
Let’s
ignore big business and economic development association’s GREED for
more customers and more profits regardless of the environmental and
community impacts and consequences to future generations.
Let's
ignore the fact that increasing fuel prices, fuel taxes, Vehicle Miles Traveled
taxes and tolls will literally drive the middle class away from discretionary
travel.
Let’s
ignore the legacy of highway maintenance funding deficits we are
passing on to our children and grandchildren.
Let's ignore the legacy of
environmental, energy and political problems we are passing on to
our future generations by our selfish demand for highway expansion
and our selfish demand for the right to drive when and where we want
to, regardless of cost or impacts.
Let's
ignore the fact that highways and independent private motor vehicles as
the United State's primary means of transportation are NOT
sustainable.

|