WORST location for a traffic incident/road closure?

Started by webny99, June 21, 2023, 11:14:40 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

webny99

#100
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 18, 2024, 09:14:43 AM
QuoteWith the current closure being further west though, wouldn't it still be possible to use the Eisenhower tunnel and CO 9 or CO 131 to avoid the other three passes altogether?

For CO9, you'd still travel over Muddy/Rabbit Ears Pass.

Unless you use CO 134, though I assume that has similar issues and would still require using part of 131.


JayhawkCO

Quote from: webny99 on September 19, 2024, 09:23:20 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 18, 2024, 09:14:43 AM
QuoteWith the current closure being further west though, wouldn't it still be possible to use the Eisenhower tunnel and CO 9 or CO 131 to avoid the other three passes altogether?

For CO9, you'd still travel over Muddy/Rabbit Ears Pass.

Unless you use CO 134, though I assume that has similar issues and would still require using part of 131.


CO134 is just as windy (if not more) than CO131 and goes over Gore Pass. Also adds more mileage.

mgk920

Quote from: Rothman on September 18, 2024, 09:21:34 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 18, 2024, 12:38:38 PMAnd now there's a rockslide shutting down US40 between Craig and Steamboat Springs making that route impassable, too.



Geologists like the rocks.

Was a coyote found under that rock?

On a more serious note, how often to long-distance drivers avoid western Colorado entirely (using I-80 and possibly I-25 instead or even a more southerly routing) due to major road and pass closures?

Mike

thenetwork

Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 19, 2024, 10:25:45 AM
Quote from: webny99 on September 19, 2024, 09:23:20 AM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 18, 2024, 09:14:43 AM
QuoteWith the current closure being further west though, wouldn't it still be possible to use the Eisenhower tunnel and CO 9 or CO 131 to avoid the other three passes altogether?

For CO9, you'd still travel over Muddy/Rabbit Ears Pass.

Unless you use CO 134, though I assume that has similar issues and would still require using part of 131.


CO134 is just as windy (if not more) than CO131 and goes over Gore Pass. Also adds more mileage.

It took me a few seconds, but I assume you mean CO 184 that runs between Kremmling and Oak Creek.  Haven't been down that road yet, but the maps look like 184 is a windy road as a narrower road than US-40.

BTW, It sounds like the US 40 rockslide is cleared as CDOT is closing the EB I-70 thru Glenwood Canyon AGAIN for several hours today to finish cleaning up Monday's debacle and CDOT said the detour (as usual) will be via US 40 via Steamboat.

webny99

Quote from: thenetwork on September 19, 2024, 11:48:24 AM
QuoteCO134 is just as windy (if not more) than CO131 and goes over Gore Pass. Also adds more mileage.

It took me a few seconds, but I assume you mean CO 184 that runs between Kremmling and Oak Creek.  Haven't been down that road yet, but the maps look like 184 is a windy road as a narrower road than US-40.

I think it is CO 134, at least it's marked as such on Google Maps.

thenetwork

#105
Quote from: webny99 on September 19, 2024, 12:10:05 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on September 19, 2024, 11:48:24 AM
QuoteCO134 is just as windy (if not more) than CO131 and goes over Gore Pass. Also adds more mileage.

It took me a few seconds, but I assume you mean CO 184 that runs between Kremmling and Oak Creek.  Haven't been down that road yet, but the maps look like 184 is a windy road as a narrower road than US-40.

I think it is CO 134, at least it's marked as such on Google Maps.

My bad, it is highway 134. Highway 184 is down by the 4 corners.  There's too many 100-series routes in Western Colorado, I get them confused all the time.

And I have clinched CO‐184 numerous times in my last job!

webny99

Quote from: webny99 on June 21, 2023, 11:14:40 PMThat concludes my case that any incident occurring on or near the Bay Bridge has potential to cause greater traffic disruption than an equivalent incident at any other location in the Rochester region.

I'm not entirely changing my opinion here, but a pair of incidents last night and this morning served as a fresh reminder that anything involving NY 590 between Exits 5 and 7 also creates MAJOR issues.

An incident on NY 590 southbound near Exit 6 last night had southbound (non-peak) traffic backed up to NY 104 at one point, a phenomenon typically only seen during the morning rush hour. Rubbernecking also had NY 590 northbound backing all the way up onto the ramp from I-390, which is extremely rare, plus I-490 backed up westbound to beyond Exit 24 and eastbound all the way to downtown.

That had me wondering how bad things could become if something similar happened during the morning rush hour, and it looks like we're about to find out. A major incident just south of Exit 7 had things backed up to NY 104 by 7:15, which is typically pre-morning rush around here, and there's already a 50-minute delay before we even get to the peak of rush hour. That's not to mention the local roads: Winton is backed up over the NY 590 overpass which I don't believe I've ever seen in my life, and Blossom Rd is backed up to Landing Rd, threatening to back up right into the valley. Creek St is also backed up for about a mile approaching Browncroft. So far, things look a bit more manageable further north, with no visible impacts on Bay Rd, and Culver Rd looking notably slow but not overwhelmingly so.

kkt

My nominee is in Oakland, California:

QuoteA portion of the I-80 eastbound to I-580 eastbound connector road collapsed onto the connector road between westbound I-80 and southbound I-880,

Pictures and fuller story:

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/focus/07jul/01.cfm

A gasoline tanker truck was in an accident and exploded, softening the steel and collapsing the roadway above it.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.