Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Private developers pitch billion-dollar I‑70 ‘Mountain Express’ rail concept to Grand County commissioners
Summary
SDE Holdings presented a conceptual, privately funded I‑70 corridor transit plan combining hydrogen‑powered rail and elevated SkyTrain technology supported by large-scale solar generation and a plan to place solar and battery systems on many homes to finance operations; commissioners asked technical questions and requested updates but took no action.
Private developers from SDE Holdings presented an ambitious, multi‑phase concept they call the I‑70 Mountain Express, describing a roughly $680 billion (presenters corrected that figure to $680 billion during Q&A) multi‑phase network that could eventually link Golden to Breckenridge and branch to Winter Park/Fraser using a combination of elevated SkyTrain technology, a single‑bore Bertha Pass tunnel, and hydrogen‑powered rail vehicles.
Presenters Dave Bridal and Dr. Paul Williamson said the concept pairs elevated/grade‑separated guideway and hydrail vehicles with large solar canopy installations that would generate revenue to pay operating costs and debt service. Their business model relies on selling electricity to customers (including homeowners who would host panels and battery systems) and using that revenue to fund the rail project; they described a target of tens or hundreds of thousands of residential customers signing power‑purchase commitments to reach critical mass.
The board treated the session as a workshop: commissioners and staff asked a range of technical and governance questions, including the project cost (presenters clarified the number as a billion‑scale project), timeline (presenters said roughly 10 years to build given residential sign‑ups and staged design), alignment and right‑of‑way issues along I‑70 and US‑40, hydrogen production and water needs for electrolysis, and coordination with CDOT and Union Pacific for segments near existing track. Commissioners also raised concerns about developability, water, local impacts and the novelty of the financing model.
Presenters asked only for the board to consider supporting the project concept (a non‑binding resolution) and to appoint a county representative to a multi‑county steering committee if the board wished to stay informed; commissioners said they would remain open to further information but did not promise action or funding. The board requested that staff be kept informed and that presenters return with more refined financials, engineering details and potential local impacts before the board would consider any resolution or formal support.
