General Road and Highway Discussion

[danbrotherston]

Do you or do you not see limiting VMT as a goal? That will determine if you see an argument against this or not. Because along with all road expansion projects increasing VMT will be a direct result. I'm not saying it isn't worth a concession for improving Lancaster (although I think these are less linked than you folks seem to feel) but it does not change the fact that you are contemplating a project that will increase VMT.

Let's think about this a different way. What if we put a speedbump on the 85? Should we do that? It'll reduce speeds and hence throughput.

OK. Now what if the speedbump was already there and we were going to spend some amount of money to remove it? Should we?

I kind of see this as a pretty similar situation to what we have now.

Those are not remotely similar. Hitting pretty much any speedbump at 100km/h (and typical speeds are much higher) would be extremely dangerous. We'd probably see weekly crashes. The current restriction does not create even remotely such risk.

But lets take a different example...King St. from DT to Uptown, should we install speed bumps/speed tables/raised crosswalks there? Yes I think we should, for all the same reasons, and because there it does not create a safety hazard.