OFFICIAL I70 BITCH THREAD....

**The SnowShow** · 10-01-2017, 07:24 PM

Per usual: I70 closed at tunnel and Idaho Springs due to multiple accidents because there's a tenth on an inch of snow on the roadway!! [emoji33][emoji33]
It never ceases to amaze.

**smmokan** · 10-01-2017, 08:19 PM

285 was backed up for 3 miles thanks to all the leaf peepers in Kenosha Pass. Stupid fucks were running across the road in front of traffic. Seriously, WTF?

**montanaskier** · 10-01-2017, 08:35 PM

EB and WB closed over VP.....it is time once again!

**The SnowShow** · 10-01-2017, 08:39 PM

Originally Posted by smmokan

285 was backed up for 3 miles thanks to all the leaf peepers in Kenosha Pass. Stupid fucks were running across the road in front of traffic. Seriously, WTF?

Kenosha is so overrated but I love it sucks in all the clueless tourons into one spot. Didn't it peak like two weeks ago?

**fastfred** · 10-01-2017, 08:42 PM

Originally Posted by The SnowShow

Kenosha is so overrated but I love it sucks in all the clueless tourons into one spot. Didn't it peak like two weeks ago?

It peeked two weeks ago. There's a few leaves hanging on though. when your living in parker or highlands ranch well that explains why your there this weekend

Sent from my SCH-I435 using Tapatalk

**The SnowShow** · 10-01-2017, 08:45 PM

Originally Posted by fastfred

It peeked two weeks ago. There's a few leaves hanging on though. when your living in parker or highlands ranch well that explains why your there this weekend

Sent from my SCH-I435 using Tapatalk

[emoji23]

**The SnowShow** · 10-02-2017, 07:40 AM

Multiple LONG closures, trucks slid off Loveland Pass, tunnels are closed due to power outages. Gonna be a long year.

**Kevo** · 10-02-2017, 09:37 AM

Just wanted to post a friendly seasonal reminder that the I70 corridor was designed and built in the 1960s for the expected population of Colorado in the early 1980s. We now have 2x the population that we had in 1980 (5.6 million compared to 2.8 million), but we still have the same shitty infrastructure.

Nothing will fix this except for massive investment in expanding the highway to include another tunnel bore at Eisenhower and 3 lanes both directions from Denver to Eagle, which isn't likely to happen in our lifetime.

**Name Redacted** · 10-02-2017, 09:58 AM

Just drove over Vail Pass with a 26' trailer after spending the night in Eagle on our way back from Moab. Vail Pass was just wet, not really even icy. I'm sure it was icy as fuck last night so it was probably a good call to close it.

**The SnowShow** · 10-02-2017, 02:39 PM

Originally Posted by Kevo

Just wanted to post a friendly seasonal reminder that the I70 corridor was designed and built in the 1960s for the expected population of Colorado in the early 1980s. We now have 2x the population that we had in 1980 (5.6 million compared to 2.8 million), but we still have the same shitty infrastructure.

Nothing will fix this except for massive investment in expanding the highway to include another tunnel bore at Eisenhower and 3 lanes both directions from Denver to Eagle, which isn't likely to happen in our lifetime.

Better highways = more people/crowding at the resorts/towns themselves.

**SkiBall** · 10-02-2017, 05:18 PM

Build it and they will come. At least fear of traffic scares off 4 or 5 cars every day.

**The SnowShow** · 10-02-2017, 05:30 PM

Originally Posted by SkiBall

Build it and they will come. At least fear of traffic scares off 4 or 5 cars every day.

I regularly hear people in Denver these days say they've given up going up on weekends. Build a faster infrastructure would be great but with it comes more and more to the mountains.

Maybe a massive cold winter here would send people packing and bring the population back down to reasonable levels? I can dream?

**Kevo** · 10-02-2017, 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by The SnowShow

Better highways = more people/crowding at the resorts/towns themselves.

Not the case in park city

Sent from my Pixel using TGR Forums mobile app

**galibier_numero_un** · 10-02-2017, 06:21 PM

Originally Posted by Kevo

Not the case in park city

Sent from my Pixel using TGR Forums mobile app

This seems consistent with most of what I've read on the topic.

https://www.citylab.com/transportati...raffic/415245/

... Thom

**Kevo** · 10-02-2017, 06:26 PM

It consistently takes less than 45 minutes to get to Park City from SLC because they have 3 lanes both directions.

Not saying latent demand or induced demand isn't a thing, but in mountainous terrain having more than two lanes greatly reduces congestion and travel times.

Why is it that traffic from Geneva to Chamonix is reasonable or SLC to Park City is reasonable?

Could it be that infrastructure can make travel easier? What a concept that would be...

Sent from my Pixel using TGR Forums mobile app

**The SnowShow** · 10-02-2017, 07:12 PM

Originally Posted by Kevo

It consistently takes less than 45 minutes to get to Park City from SLC because they have 3 lanes both directions.

Not saying latent demand or induced demand isn't a thing, but in mountainous terrain having more than two lanes greatly reduces congestion and travel times.

Why is it that traffic from Geneva to Chamonix is reasonable or SLC to Park City is reasonable?

Could it be that infrastructure can make travel easier? What a concept that would be...

Sent from my Pixel using TGR Forums mobile app

SLC is a tiny city compared to Denver. If the number of skiers/riders there were the same as here, Park City would certainly be jammed like Summit is.

Agree about three lanes though...it's fucking stupid they haven't widened the Georgetown Hill or other inclines. Trucks become a 30 mph rolling roadblock.

**SkiBall** · 10-02-2017, 07:52 PM

Where are they going to widen the Georgetown hill to? That's a shit ton of dirt work.
It has been stated in this thread prior that the cost of even making it possible to do the actual work is another shit ton of time and money before they even place a cone.
Double deck the whole thing though construction logistics would probably be a nightmare.

**The SnowShow** · 10-02-2017, 08:07 PM

Agree it's not easy but fuck, they built it through Glenwood Canyon. It just sucks that through many stretches, that damned highway becomes one lane because of trucks.

Limit truck traffic on peak hours. They do it elsewhere like NY.

**Kevo** · 10-02-2017, 08:25 PM

Originally Posted by The SnowShow

SLC is a tiny city compared to Denver. If the number of skiers/riders there were the same as here, Park City would certainly be jammed like Summit is.

The Wasatch Front has 2 million people. Denver Metro has 2.8 million. SLC isn't as tiny as you think, and they have drastically better road infrastructure for getting to the mountains.

**Kevo** · 10-02-2017, 08:30 PM

Originally Posted by SkiBall

Where are they going to widen the Georgetown hill to? That's a shit ton of dirt work.
It has been stated in this thread prior that the cost of even making it possible to do the actual work is another shit ton of time and money before they even place a cone.
Double deck the whole thing though construction logistics would probably be a nightmare.

The highway from Geneva to Chamonix goes through a valley like Georgetown. They have a gigantic elevated overpass-esque highway that rises from the valley up to the bench at the top of the valley. At some points it is over 100 feet above the town below. It can be done without cutting into the side of the cliff.

**SkiBall** · 10-02-2017, 09:02 PM

Originally Posted by Kevo

The highway from Geneva to Chamonix goes through a valley like Georgetown. They have a gigantic elevated overpass-esque highway that rises from the valley up to the bench at the top of the valley. At some points it is over 100 feet above the town below. It can be done without cutting into the side of the cliff.

I am just wondering how they would build it overhead with current traffic ongoing. Maybe they could build the supports with somewhat minimal (night lane closures?), but at some point they would have to move everyone to one side. Best option my non-engineering brain, but the execution is a big question mark.

**Kevo** · 10-02-2017, 09:09 PM

Originally Posted by SkiBall

I am just wondering how they would build it overhead with current traffic ongoing. Maybe they could build the supports with somewhat minimal (night lane closures?), but at some point they would have to move everyone to one side. Best option my non-engineering brain, but the execution is a big question mark.

They could build it on the other side of the valley to the South of Georgetown.

**hatchgreenchile** · 10-02-2017, 09:20 PM

As always, this thread repeats itself month to month.

Propose the billions needed to redo i70 to Vail. Make sure you’ve got an elevated split highway through clear creek country to minimize the impact. See what happens with the politicians and TABOR fans.

Fuck it. I’m in the “it is what it is” camp. See you on i70.

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

**skaredshtles** · 10-02-2017, 09:23 PM

Originally Posted by hatchgreenchile

As always, this thread repeats itself month to month.

Propose the billions needed to redo i70 to Vail. Make sure you’ve got an elevated split highway through clear creek country to minimize the impact. See what happens with the politicians and TABOR fans.

Fuck it. I’m in the “it is what it is” camp. See you on i70.

Yup. Me too. Means I'll ski less, but it is what it is. No fucking chance anything meaningful happens in that corridor before I GTFO.

And once I GTFO, I'll probably not be in favor or anything meaningful happening in that corridor.

It's hell getting curmudgeonly.

OK. Not really.

**The SnowShow** · 10-02-2017, 09:24 PM

Originally Posted by Kevo

The Wasatch Front has 2 million people. Denver Metro has 2.8 million. SLC isn't as tiny as you think, and they have drastically better road infrastructure for getting to the mountains.

I think just Denver, Lakewood and Aurora has 2.8 million.....

Not saying it doesn't. That's great and I wish we could step it up.