Ornlu said:
agnerd said:
Build standard intersections so that when they eventually run a freeway down the middle they won't have to tear anything up! I know it's a new concept, but let's at least TRY to plan for the future and see if that works out...
No, build the actual FREEWAY! It's time for this section to go full freeway, with overpasses, access roads, off ramps, etc. The traffic volumes are high enough, the crash statistics are bad enough, and the money is there. TXDOT will need to supplement (okay, triple...) their current t budget, but it's needed.
If TXDOT drops $36M on this, this section will never become a real freeway. Better to get nothing now, and a real freeway later, then a partial solution that will preclude us frI'm fixing 2818.
I guess none of you attended the public meeting.
The proposed design is building the access roads for a future freeway section
now. As a result, it will require minimal tear out if/when a freeway with overpasses is built along this corridor. The cost to build a full freeway section today would be over $60M.
If the corridor were just widened with raised medians and standard traffic signals, it would all have to be torn out to build a freeway in the future. The traffic study showed that standard design would be at capacity 10 years from the time construction is complete. I think they said the super street concept will not be at capacity for at least 25 years.
I read the links within the links that others have posted and think the super street concept makes sense. If there are fewer traffic signal cycles, resulting in longer green lights, it seems reasonable that more traffic can flow through the intersections. Also, is it really that big of a deal to drive a few hundred feet further to take a left by way of a U-turn if you spend less time overall than sitting and waiting for the lights to change?
Sounds like most you that are writing off the concept haven't even spent any time to try and understand it. Sounds like it accomplishes everything that is typically complained about in this forum - planning for now and the future, efficient use of tax payer dollars ($36M vs. $60M), addressing known congestion and safety issues.