AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

The next forum trivia night will take place on OCTOBER 30, 2019 at 8:15 PM Eastern.

Author Topic: Dallas IH 345 study RFQ  (Read 12566 times)

TXtoNJ

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 533
  • Last Login: November 16, 2019, 06:45:15 PM
Re: Dallas IH 345 study RFQ
« Reply #125 on: December 28, 2017, 09:53:36 AM »

Very little traffic is going from Central to Schepps

Do you have data to back up this claim?

Poke around the forum.
Logged

kphoger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10801
  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: November 15, 2019, 04:55:30 PM
Re: Dallas IH 345 study RFQ
« Reply #126 on: December 28, 2017, 11:24:49 AM »

Very little traffic is going from Central to Schepps

Do you have data to back up this claim?

Poke around the forum.

I just re-read all of your posts in this thread, and quoted below is the only post I found of yours that comes close to providing data.  Everything else is personal opinion and personal experience.  So tell us, what data did I miss?

That's what the report is about. Read through it - it's fairly compelling information.
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.

J N Winkler

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6405
  • Location: Wichita, Kansas/Oxford, Great Britain
  • Last Login: November 16, 2019, 11:00:33 PM
Re: Dallas IH 345 study RFQ
« Reply #127 on: December 28, 2017, 12:03:27 PM »

The report presumably being talked about (first link 25 MB, second link 88 MB):

http://dallascitymap.com/CityMAP_Briefing_092716.compressed.pdf

http://dallascitymap.com/DallasCityMAP_09272016_compressed.pdf

As noted upthread, the I-345 removal scenario assumes mode shift to transit and completion of the Trinity Parkway.

The main reason I am not joining the rush to reduce the debate to "Where do the 180,000 cars go?" in spite of my own reservations about I-345 removal is that screenline AADT does not tell the whole story.  It matters where the cars are going, the routes they are taking to get to their respective destinations, and the sensitivity of those journeys to travel time cost and reliability under various network revision scenarios.
Logged
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

mrsman

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2444
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Silver Spring, MD
  • Last Login: Today at 07:14:55 AM
Re: Dallas IH 345 study RFQ
« Reply #128 on: December 29, 2017, 03:59:21 PM »

I've driven on 345 more than most on this board, and I can say with certainty that it functions more like a spur than anything.

45 to 30 to 35E was often just as fast as 45 to 345 to 366.

If I am understanding this correctly:

I-45 to I-30 to I-35E = 1 leg of downtown Dallas freeway box.

I-45 to I-345 to SS 366 = 1 leg of downtown Dallas freeway box.

Approximately equal travel time is what one would normally expect.  On the other hand, this is what happens with I-345 removed:

I-45 to I-345 to US 75 = 1 leg of downtown Dallas freeway box.

I-45 to I-30 to I-35E to SS 366 to US 75 (I-345 removed) = 3 legs of downtown Dallas freeway box.

This notion of the freeway box is really sound.  With the removal of I-345, you are forcing all of the traffic that would take the east side of the box (US 75 to I-45 or US 75 to I-30 East) to take the other 3 sides of the box to compensate for the removal.

All the traffic now has to travel further.  All the traffic now has to join in with the other freeways that are already clogged and add to the mess.  All for what?

Another thing:  There are already many radial traffic flows flowing into the Stemmons Freeway:  I-35E, 114, 183, and DNT.  Should we add another flow of traffic from US 75 into that mix?

The qn shouldn't be how should we get rid of I-345.  The qn should be how to better utilize I-345 so that it provides relief to the existing freeways that are already there.  Is there a better way Us 75 and 366 to form a better connection between I-35E and I-30 east or I-45?

This freeways is not a spur like Milwaukee's Park East freeway or SF's Embarcadero. It is a vital connector between two major radial routes.  Even if it is less busy than I-35E, does not mean that it should be removed completely.
Logged

bugo

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6077
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Oklahoma
  • Last Login: November 13, 2019, 02:56:14 AM
    • No Frills Blog
Re: Dallas IH 345 study RFQ
« Reply #129 on: December 29, 2017, 04:47:03 PM »

I keep hearing how I-345 "cuts through a neighborhood". Correct me if I'm wrong, but judging from aerial photographs, there are no houses close to I-345, just commercial and/or industrial buildings. The claim that I-345 "cuts through a neighborhood" is categorically false, as is much of the information and alternative facts cited by the anti-I-345 crowd. I don't think the presence of I-345 harms the ambience of the Lizard Lounge one bit.

If you want to live in what you call a "nice, pleasant city" then don't move where there has been an elevated freeway for 45 years. Period. Move to San Francisco if you want that shit. I like knowing that if I go to Dallas, I can get from McKinney to the fairgrounds without having to sit at traffic lights or backtrack 15 miles just to get there.

What "neighborhood" does I-345 cut through here?

Logged
This signature has been censored by the AARoads Bureau of Morality.

bugo

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6077
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Oklahoma
  • Last Login: November 13, 2019, 02:56:14 AM
    • No Frills Blog
Re: Dallas IH 345 study RFQ
« Reply #130 on: December 29, 2017, 04:49:57 PM »

Very little traffic is going from Central to Schepps

Do you have data to back up this claim?
No, I don't have one damn shred of data to back up my emotion-based irrational claim.

FIFY
Logged
This signature has been censored by the AARoads Bureau of Morality.

TXtoNJ

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 533
  • Last Login: November 16, 2019, 06:45:15 PM
Re: Dallas IH 345 study RFQ
« Reply #131 on: December 29, 2017, 05:15:33 PM »

Very little traffic is going from Central to Schepps

Do you have data to back up this claim?
No, I don't have one damn shred of data to back up my emotion-based irrational claim.

FIFY

Try again. Start with the CityMAP data that J N Winkler so graciously provided again. And actually visit Deep Ellum so you can see just how wrong you are about the land use.
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1893
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: November 16, 2019, 10:20:42 PM
Re: Dallas IH 345 study RFQ
« Reply #132 on: December 29, 2017, 05:31:29 PM »

Over the past 15 years a decent number of apartment buildings and condominiums have been built near US-75/unsigned I-345 on what used to be somewhat run down industrial looking land. And I think that exposes the true motivation for getting rid of I-345: make way for some high priced, douchey luxury condos built within spitting distance of Deep Ellum. If the highway is removed some real estate guys might make a bunch of money on the building development deals. But that all assumes we won't have another serious downturn in real estate (even though a really bad new pricing bubble already exists).
Logged

kphoger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10801
  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: November 15, 2019, 04:55:30 PM
Re: Dallas IH 345 study RFQ
« Reply #133 on: December 29, 2017, 06:53:34 PM »

Very little traffic is going from Central to Schepps

Do you have data to back up this claim?
No, I don't have one damn shred of data to back up my emotion-based irrational claim.

FIFY

Try again. Start with the CityMAP data that J N Winkler so graciously provided again. And actually visit Deep Ellum so you can see just how wrong you are about the land use.

Looking at those reports linked to by users such as MaxConcrete, austinri, and J N Winkler (fortunately, the pertinent info in the feasibility study from the OP is duplicated in the CityMAP report), I find the following data.

North Central Expressway (southbound US-75) traffic

Morning rush 67% local destination, 11% continuing to I-45.
Afternoon rush 43% local destination, 28% continuing to I-45.

In the morning, more traffic continues to I-45 than to any other radiating freeway.  In the afternoon, traffic continuing to I-45 is roughly the same as traffic continuing to all other radiating freeways combined (28% compared to 29%).

Julius Schepps Freeway (northbound I-45) traffic

Morning rush 25% local destination, 38% continuing to US-75.
Afternoon rush 40% local destination, 24% continuing to US-75.

As expected, traffic patterns in this direction are just flip-flopped.  In the morning, traffic continuing to US-75 is roughly the same as traffic continuing to all other radiating freeways combined (38% compared to 37%).  In the afternoon, more traffic continues to US-75 than to any other radiating freeway.



So what do I see in those numbers?

I see that, while most trips originating on either US-75 or I-45 do indeed have a local destination, the northbound morning rush is a clear counterexample; more traffic continues through downtown on I-345 than uses it to reach a local destination.

And, while the southbound afternoon rush isn't quite as dramatic, roughly 2 out of 7 drivers continue through downtown on I-345 rather than using it to reach a local destination.

And, finally, I see missing information.  What percentage of drivers use I-345 to transition between northern I-35E and either eastern I-30 or US-75?  I see data for how many drivers start out on one and end up on the other, but we don't know how many are using the southern part of the box (without I-345) and how many are using the northern part of the box (including I-345).  And those numbers could end up being critical pieces of information.  For example:  in the afternoon, 39% of drivers coming south on I-35E are headed through downtown to either US-75 or I-30.  How many of those drivers use I-345 as part of that trip?  Who knows?
« Last Edit: December 29, 2017, 08:02:48 PM by kphoger »
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.

Road Hog

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1163
  • Location: Collin County, TX
  • Last Login: November 15, 2019, 08:11:19 PM
Re: Dallas IH 345 study RFQ
« Reply #134 on: December 29, 2017, 08:06:49 PM »

I keep hearing how I-345 "cuts through a neighborhood". Correct me if I'm wrong, but judging from aerial photographs, there are no houses close to I-345, just commercial and/or industrial buildings. The claim that I-345 "cuts through a neighborhood" is categorically false, as is much of the information and alternative facts cited by the anti-I-345 crowd. I don't think the presence of I-345 harms the ambience of the Lizard Lounge one bit.

If you want to live in what you call a "nice, pleasant city" then don't move where there has been an elevated freeway for 45 years. Period. Move to San Francisco if you want that shit. I like knowing that if I go to Dallas, I can get from McKinney to the fairgrounds without having to sit at traffic lights or backtrack 15 miles just to get there.

What "neighborhood" does I-345 cut through here?


In the photo you posted, I counted no less than eight streets that pass underneath I-345. So in agreeing with you, I fail to see how Deep Ellum is cut off from the rest of downtown. An elevated freeway may not be scenic, but it's much less of an obstacle to neighborhood traffic than a surface freeway. (I have no problem with a cut-and-cover platform park, a la Woodall.)
Logged

kphoger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10801
  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: November 15, 2019, 04:55:30 PM
Re: Dallas IH 345 study RFQ
« Reply #135 on: December 29, 2017, 08:23:38 PM »

In the photo you posted, I counted no less than eight streets that pass underneath I-345. So in agreeing with you, I fail to see how Deep Ellum is cut off from the rest of downtown. An elevated freeway may not be scenic, but it's much less of an obstacle to neighborhood traffic than a surface freeway. (I have no problem with a cut-and-cover platform park, a la Woodall.)

Six of which are in the neighborhood of Deep Ellum itself.
Elm, Main, Commerce, Good Latimer, Canton, and Taylor all continue through.
The only ones that don't are basically just alleys.
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.

Duke87

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5292
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Queens, NY
  • Last Login: Today at 01:53:00 AM
Re: Dallas IH 345 study RFQ
« Reply #136 on: December 30, 2017, 01:11:09 PM »

I don't think burying or building below grade is an option, D2 is going in.

According to DART's website, the preferred alternative has D2 at surface level where it crosses I-345. If built as such, this would not be an obstacle to 345 being moved below grade.

The main reason I am not joining the rush to reduce the debate to "Where do the 180,000 cars go?" in spite of my own reservations about I-345 removal is that screenline AADT does not tell the whole story.  It matters where the cars are going, the routes they are taking to get to their respective destinations, and the sensitivity of those journeys to travel time cost and reliability under various network revision scenarios.

Indeed. What will inevitably happen if any removal scenario starts moving forward is that some of the people who live in Joppa or White Rock Hills and work in Uptown or Richardson, etc. will say "shit, my commute is gonna get jacked up, time to move or find a new job so I don't have to drive through there anymore".

People's origins and destinations are not permanently fixed. If they find they "can't get there from here", many will simply stop trying.

So what you really have to weigh in this debate is the value of being able to "get there from here" against the value unlocked by having the freeway gone. Both are difficult to quantify and much of the valuation is subjective, so there isn't an inherently right or wrong answer.

But yes I, like most here, am skeptical of the merit of flat out removing functionally useful infrastructure for the sake of improving local aesthetics.

I could get behind the idea of moving it below grade and capping it, which would achieve significant aesthetic improvement while maintaining the throughput capacity.
Logged
If you always take the same road, you will never see anything new.

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1893
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: November 16, 2019, 10:20:42 PM
Re: Dallas IH 345 study RFQ
« Reply #137 on: December 30, 2017, 10:15:24 PM »

Quote from: Duke87
According to DART's website, the preferred alternative has D2 at surface level where it crosses I-345. If built as such, this would not be an obstacle to 345 being moved below grade.

On Sept 13 the Dallas City Council endorsed the Victory-Commerce-Swiss alignment, which would be built mostly below grade. That includes 2 subway stations on either side of Carpenter Park and the I-345 freeway. Aside from that there's nothing to prevent a highway tunnel from being built under a subway tunnel or vice versa. The soil is more stable for tunneling on the East side of downtown than it is on the West side closer to the Trinity River. That's one of the bigger engineering concerns for the D2 subway line.

Then there's the issue of funding for D2. Not all the money is there for it. And then there's the pesky $1.1 Billion Cotton Belt connector. Not everyone thinks the D2 subway line downtown needs to be the top priority.

Quote from: Duke87
Indeed. What will inevitably happen if any removal scenario starts moving forward is that some of the people who live in Joppa or White Rock Hills and work in Uptown or Richardson, etc. will say "shit, my commute is gonna get jacked up, time to move or find a new job so I don't have to drive through there anymore".

This is the consequence I don't think many of the anti-freeway folks who like Deep Ellum are considering at all. Deep Ellum has absolutely no monopoly at all on places where to socialize, eat, drink, etc in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. There's places all over the Metroplex where people can do that. Make it a royal pain in the ass for visitors to get in and out of Deep Ellum and you'll see a lot less visitors frequenting that area. I know good and well all the taverns, clubs and other businesses in that area can't survive alone on the money from people who live within walking distance. Hell, I live in Oklahoma and I've partied in Deep Ellum more than a few times over the years. One of the attractions for that zone to people out live outside downtown or even out of state is that it's directly connected to the rest of the highway network. If the downtown residents want to cut off access so only they can hang out in Deep Ellum that's on them. They'll get rid of many potential customers who can wine and dine just as easily in Addison, Lewisville, Arlington and lots of other places. And then when the business drops off we'll see how all those luxury condos hold on to their value.
Logged

Duke87

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5292
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Queens, NY
  • Last Login: Today at 01:53:00 AM
Re: Dallas IH 345 study RFQ
« Reply #138 on: December 31, 2017, 12:06:25 AM »

This is the consequence I don't think many of the anti-freeway folks who like Deep Ellum are considering at all. Deep Ellum has absolutely no monopoly at all on places where to socialize, eat, drink, etc in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. There's places all over the Metroplex where people can do that. Make it a royal pain in the ass for visitors to get in and out of Deep Ellum and you'll see a lot less visitors frequenting that area.

I don't see how removing 345 would have any significant impact on the difficulty of getting to Deep Ellum specifically, since anyone going there is exiting the freeway network there already anyway.

I also would therefore expect any removal to increase, not decrease, the value of nearby real estate, because of the reduced noise and improved aesthetics.

The losers in this scenario are the people just passing through, who will suddenly lack a good means of doing so.
Logged
If you always take the same road, you will never see anything new.

austrini

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 210
  • Collin County GIS admin

  • Location: Dallas
  • Last Login: October 10, 2019, 10:17:13 AM
Re: Dallas IH 345 study RFQ
« Reply #139 on: December 31, 2017, 04:01:12 PM »

I keep hearing how I-345 "cuts through a neighborhood". Correct me if I'm wrong, but judging from aerial photographs, there are no houses close to I-345, just commercial and/or industrial buildings.

The vast majority of buildings in your aerial photo are residential.
Logged

bugo

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6077
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Oklahoma
  • Last Login: November 13, 2019, 02:56:14 AM
    • No Frills Blog
Re: Dallas IH 345 study RFQ
« Reply #140 on: December 31, 2017, 07:25:55 PM »

Try again. Start with the CityMAP data that J N Winkler so graciously provided again. And actually visit Deep Ellum so you can see just how wrong you are about the land use.

I have been to Deep Ellum before. There are no single family homes close to the highway.
Logged
This signature has been censored by the AARoads Bureau of Morality.

bugo

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6077
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Oklahoma
  • Last Login: November 13, 2019, 02:56:14 AM
    • No Frills Blog
Re: Dallas IH 345 study RFQ
« Reply #141 on: December 31, 2017, 07:29:26 PM »

I keep hearing how I-345 "cuts through a neighborhood". Correct me if I'm wrong, but judging from aerial photographs, there are no houses close to I-345, just commercial and/or industrial buildings.

The vast majority of buildings in your aerial photo are residential.

Apartment buildings?
Logged
This signature has been censored by the AARoads Bureau of Morality.

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1893
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: November 16, 2019, 10:20:42 PM
Re: Dallas IH 345 study RFQ
« Reply #142 on: January 01, 2018, 03:46:34 AM »

Yeah. It looks like luxury apartments and condos. Look at historical imagery in Google Earth. Most of that stuff didn't exist in the year 2000. A lot of it is fairly new. Getting rid of the I-345 freeway would open space for building even more of the luxury condo stuff.
Logged

Perfxion

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 319
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Houston, TX
  • Last Login: November 15, 2019, 09:27:50 AM
Re: Dallas IH 345 study RFQ
« Reply #143 on: January 01, 2018, 08:41:10 AM »

So they built luxury apartments next to a 30+ year old freeway and now want the freeway removed because it cuts off the neighborhood? That makes as much sense as a church building next to a strip club then complaining to the city that the strip club is too close to the church.
Logged
5/10/20/30/15/35/37/40/44/45/70/76/78/80/85/87/95/
(CA)405,(NJ)195/295(NY)295/495/278/678(CT)395(MD/VA)195/495/695/895

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1893
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: November 16, 2019, 10:20:42 PM
Re: Dallas IH 345 study RFQ
« Reply #144 on: January 01, 2018, 12:17:14 PM »

Some little churches built in metal industrial buildings and the like have been strategically built near bars and topless joints as a ploy to get them shut down. Some cities and towns in the bible belt have had ordinances against bars and strip clubs operating within a certain distance of a church. If the existing bar or strip club has some incident where the town can suspend its liquor license the license would end up suspended permanently.

Likewise, these luxury condos near downtown Dallas and Deep Ellum are built with a somewhat similar ploy, but in a more slippery, sneaky way. The real estate developers get on the side of the New Urbanists who hate freeways and dream of trans-continental bike paths. They adopt the New Urbanist talking points and help the cause because it ultimately aids their goal of getting their hands on a whole lot of land formerly occupied by a freeway. Meanwhile the real estate guys and anti-freeway folks hope everyone else doesn't remember the I-345 freeway was there first, leap-frogging what used to be the ass-end of downtown Dallas. They also hope no one realizes the thing going on with the condo development is gentrification. Once the I-345 freeway is removed and swallowed up with high priced condo buildings the Deep Ellum neighborhood can be transformed from being a night life party zone to a place where you need to have a good suit and maybe be white in order to hang out there.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6099
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:51:08 AM
Re: Dallas IH 345 study RFQ
« Reply #145 on: January 01, 2018, 04:38:52 PM »

So they built luxury apartments next to a 30+ year old freeway and now want the freeway removed because it cuts off the neighborhood? That makes as much sense as a church building next to a strip club then complaining to the city that the strip club is too close to the church.
Some little churches built in metal industrial buildings and the like have been strategically built near bars and topless joints as a ploy to get them shut down. Some cities and towns in the bible belt have had ordinances against bars and strip clubs operating within a certain distance of a church. If the existing bar or strip club has some incident where the town can suspend its liquor license the license would end up suspended permanently.

Likewise, these luxury condos near downtown Dallas and Deep Ellum are built with a somewhat similar ploy, but in a more slippery, sneaky way. The real estate developers get on the side of the New Urbanists who hate freeways and dream of trans-continental bike paths. They adopt the New Urbanist talking points and help the cause because it ultimately aids their goal of getting their hands on a whole lot of land formerly occupied by a freeway. Meanwhile the real estate guys and anti-freeway folks hope everyone else doesn't remember the I-345 freeway was there first, leap-frogging what used to be the ass-end of downtown Dallas. They also hope no one realizes the thing going on with the condo development is gentrification. Once the I-345 freeway is removed and swallowed up with high priced condo buildings the Deep Ellum neighborhood can be transformed from being a night life party zone to a place where you need to have a good suit and maybe be white in order to hang out there.

Actually, that happened in Corona, CA in the late '90's; an Anaheim strip club looking to relocate to Corona, tentatively secured a location in an industrial strip near the CA 91/CA 71 junction in Corona near Prado Dam.  When a local church (of the fundamentalist/evangelical sort) got wind of this, they very quickly -- like within a month -- leased out three units next to where the strip club intended to move and moved their facility (which had been in a similar facility in central Corona) to that location and immediately petitioned the Corona zoning commission to deny permission for the club -- which was granted in short order.  The club ended up moving to another place along the 91 freeway in east Anaheim.  Heard about this from the club owner; once moved, my company converted their main raised stage into a series of subwoofer enclosures! 

But that's not a new tactic; with city zoning ordinances as they are, it's relatively easy for a city -- or developers (or other entities) with connections to city government -- to make efforts to tailor the urban environment to their own advantage.  Unfortunately, many city planners tacitly encourage gentrification; they see that as a viable way to ensure that tax dollars (property & sales) keep accruing to the city, particularly as expenses rise; in some jurisdictions, it has become a vicious cycle!     
Logged

TXtoNJ

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 533
  • Last Login: November 16, 2019, 06:45:15 PM
Re: Dallas IH 345 study RFQ
« Reply #146 on: January 02, 2018, 11:01:55 AM »

Try again. Start with the CityMAP data that J N Winkler so graciously provided again. And actually visit Deep Ellum so you can see just how wrong you are about the land use.

I have been to Deep Ellum before. There are no single family homes close to the highway.

Moving the goalposts.
Logged

bugo

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6077
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Oklahoma
  • Last Login: November 13, 2019, 02:56:14 AM
    • No Frills Blog
Re: Dallas IH 345 study RFQ
« Reply #147 on: January 03, 2018, 12:23:56 AM »

Moving the goalposts.

If anybody is moving anything, it isn't me. I've proven you wrong on about a dozen points. Are you going to admit you were wrong?
Logged
This signature has been censored by the AARoads Bureau of Morality.

TXtoNJ

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 533
  • Last Login: November 16, 2019, 06:45:15 PM
Re: Dallas IH 345 study RFQ
« Reply #148 on: January 03, 2018, 01:44:14 PM »

Moving the goalposts.

If anybody is moving anything, it isn't me. I've proven you wrong on about a dozen points. Are you going to admit you were wrong?

Haven't proven me wrong on a thing. I've pointed you to good information, but you can lead a horse to water...

Truth is, we prioritize different things. You want big freeways, fast speeds, neighborhoods be damned. I want interesting neighborhoods, and then fast freeways outside of those neighborhoods. I think my way of looking at it is a bit more accommodating to different kinds of people. You seem to think that different kinds of people shouldn't have their opinions recognized at all. So it goes.
Logged

1

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 7325
  • UMass Lowell student

  • Age: 20
  • Location: MA/NH border
  • Last Login: Today at 08:25:28 AM
    • Flickr account
Re: Dallas IH 345 study RFQ
« Reply #149 on: January 03, 2018, 01:52:32 PM »

Moving the goalposts.

If anybody is moving anything, it isn't me. I've proven you wrong on about a dozen points. Are you going to admit you were wrong?

Haven't proven me wrong on a thing. I've pointed you to good information, but you can lead a horse to water...

Replies #129 (by bugo, about cutting through a residential neighborhood) and #133 (by kphoger, about how much traffic goes through downtown).
Logged
Clinched

Traveled, plus
US ⒔50
MA ⒐2⒉40.9⒐10⒎10⒐1⒒1⒚14⒈159
NH 27, 111A(E); NY 366; GA 42, 140; FL A1A; CT 32; VT 5A; QC 16⒉16⒌263

Flickr

 


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.