 | |
| Click image to enlarge |
(2 lanes thru at Rockaway,
3 lanes thru at Valleymar)
Some people in town have voiced concern
about the number of lanes and the width of the Cal Trans Hwy 1
design, and how it fits into the aesthetics of our coastal community.
I too felt the new design was a little
large so I went ahead and looked at the intersections from all
directions in attempt to improve traffic flow while minimizing the
width and number of lanes.
Here is what I came up with:
I call this the ( 2 + 3 ) concept which
has 2 thru lanes at the Rockaway/Fassler intersection, just like now,
to reduce unnecessary width, and 3 thru lanes at the Valleymar/Reina
Del Mar intersection to increase capacity.
Note the frontage road in front of the
Shell/Tire Shop now extends all the way to the Valleymar. This lane
then becomes both a turn lane and thru lane in front of the Valleymar
Station, to increase capacity at this critical section.
Heading South from SF an additional 3rd
lane is added near the Sewer Plant to increase capacity, then as you
travel toward Rockaway the thru lane becomes a turn only lane at
Fassler, leaving only 2 thru lanes heading Southward.
There are other improvements like
adjusting the width of the Median and Margins and removing the kink
in the roadway near the lumber yard for example. I am sure you have
your own suggestions. But I think the first step is to settle the
lane configuration, and then add the bells and whistles later.
So go ahead and take look at the lane
configurations in the North & South directions and try to improve
it! Add a lane here, or remove one there. Add a turn lane, or move
the bus stop and then see the results for yourself. Good luck!
Submitted by:
Scott McIntosh
Linda Mar Resident
5 comments:
I know that this is a very sensitive subject, but how much tinkering with the design is allowed before the money is lost for this round of funding? Anyone know with certainty? Got a reference?
I notice Loeb and gang (of no) have changed tack again and are now finally admitting that if the current proposed Caltrans projects don't proceed we would lose funding for anything.
I think they realize all the crackpot alternatives are becoming a distraction from their goal of stopping this project.
So far we have in the race for city council:
Spano
Keener
Ruchames
Hutch, read the projects FEIR. There is currently no funding for the proposal and it would not be Measure A funded either. Nope if the staff of the Project Development Team want to pull off this heist they will have to find federal money, a little bit of state transpo money and maybe, just maybe a dollar or two of Measure A money. Please understand (although I know you can't you poor thing) more than 5 million dollars of Measure A money has already been misspent on this widening idea just on consultants. If you factor in staff time and the studies Caltrans has also produced the bill todate is in the tens of millions of dollars.
Your beloved widening fiasco is about money, and money only. Money for staff, money for consultants and money for contractors that pay for lunches. You of all people should be out there fighting this publicly funded golden calf.
Nice try Toddy. There's no funding because none have been requested yet. As soon as the 2nd frivolous lawsuit by your motley crew is tossed this fall, Council will formally request funding.
Don't you worry Todd. There's plenty of measure A and other funding available for a major California State artery.
Post a Comment