101 Safety Corridor Options
The Times- Standard reports on ideas being thrown around for the Highway 101 safety corridor between Arcata and Eureka. Looks like there's three or four ideas on how to deal with the corridor flying around:
#1: Remove the safety corridor and remove all medians.
I guess that would mean going back to the way it used to be except you couldn't get on or off the freeway at Indianola Road or Jacobs Avenue. Or at least you couldn't turn left in the southbound lane of 101 at those places. That might prove to be a hassle.
#2: Same as number one but includes a overpass/ interchange at Indianola Road so people can enter and exit the freeway there. Sounds expensive.
#3: Same as number 2 but with a traffic light at Jacob's avenue to allow entrance and exits there. Sounds even more expensive.
#4: Do nothing. Leave it as is.
I think I agree with Larry Glass and some of the others. Seems like the safety corridor works fine the way it is now. If it ain't broke, why try and fix it? Would be nice to have an overpass or two on the corridor, though.
I'll admit I still get bugged not being able to use the first median to leave Jacob's Ave. and head back into Eureka. They removed that option some time ago. Now you have to drive a bit north on Jacob's Avenue and enter the highway at the Murray Field turnoff. Not too much of a hassle, but I liked being able to do it the old way.
Hate to see all of the highway between Eureka and Arcata like that, with no way to exit the southbound lane except by going all the way into Eureka.
You can pick which option you like on the poll I've installed below, assuming my copy and paste works. I'll leave the poll up for a week, or so.
posted by Fred Mangels @ 8:11 AM
12 comments
12 Comments:
What a pain that was. Had the poll on the right sidebar at first. When I went to save the changes in the template I got an error message and it said it couldn't save changes.
Then I found the poll WAS on the sidebar and I couldn't get rid of it. Then I started getting a bunch of error messages.
I panicked, thinking I screwed up my template but after about twenty minutes everything returned to normal.
Must have been a momentary blogspot glitch.
Who knows . . .
Sure, the safety corridor works today with today's flow of traffic. CalTrans has to plan decades ahead of you Fred. You know, long after you've died from natural causes, CalTrans will still be responsible for the safety of Highway 101. A bypass is the only way to go. The safety corridor will be unsafe within 10 years, and this is our one shot in 50 years to get a bypass.
Hmmm...a bypass? That wasn't even mentioned in the news article. You must be a genius.
Point well made, though. Where do you suggest the bypass be made?
I think he means an interchange Fred. And yes, in 10 years the safety corridor will be a death trap again.
State funding doesn't come along at a whim. Infrastructure improvements are becoming scarce as the state tries to merely maintain the roads it already has. Unless you want a privatized pay-as-you-go interchange 20 years from now, be happy CalTrans will pay for it today. If you laugh at the idea of a toll interchange, understand that all vehicles will have mandated tracking devices probably by 2015. You'll get billed automatically as you drive over toll roads and bridges.
The safety corridor works all right now, except that people are ignoring the speed limits too often.
Only one thing will fix that: More CHP black and whites riding back and forth there.
Will the state pay for additional CHP presence in the corridor???
Why would more CHP be needed? People exceed the speed limit whether it's 50 or 60. Twice a day I am passed by at least 30 cars driving 60 or faster.
Let's be honest. The "blood alley" mystique was drummed up by a local newspaper, an unattributed terror-inspiring name that mirrored the writer's opinion of the road. The phrase was then parroted by other media and, much later, adopted by activists.
What we saw in news reporting after the accidents is better described as advocacy journalism.
Yes, several deadly accidents occurred at the intersections by people who made bad judgments. The grouping of those crashes in a short period of time was an anomaly over decades of proven safety.
If your argument is that increased traffic load on the road caused those accidents and portends future calamities, then you bolster the argument for an interchange. The traffic in the corridor will grow over time. What you think is safe today will not be safe in a decade or two. By the time you start shouting "Interchange now!" you'll be hit with a 10 or 15 year wait, if you get one at all. That sort of denial of the mind will, in the end, contribute to future deaths in the corridor.
ok- poll should be closed.
we win.
Leave it alone.
The significant poll is on the TS website.
I vote to make Fred the crossing guard on Indianola. First and only real job he'll ever have that he might actually be able to do. And I'll give a $10,000 bonus to whoever involuntarilly retires him from it.
Sorry to see that cynicism won the day here, Fred. Your invitation to come up with real solutions got lost somewhere in the negative comments.
Happens quite often on the blogs. Goes with the territory.
Post a Comment
<< Home