Quote:
Originally Posted by bomberjet
Take the highest risk and highest traffic locations first. So would likely be South Perimeter first, as it's part of the national highway system (if you can call it that).
|
The undisputed
highest risk intersection on the Perimeter based on collisions and fatalities is without question Gunn Rd. currently it is a high traffic uncontrolled intersection that does not even have lights!
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire
I don't see why Pipeline needs an interchange when the reality is that people living in those acreages north of the Perimeter could easily use McPhillips instead. An interchange there is essentially tens of millions of dollars spent to ensure this little clump of ugly sprawl doesn't have to drive an extra couple KMs to McPhillips
|
Excellent suggestion esquire. Since St Marys and St Annes are a similar distance from the existing interchange at Lag the Perimeter we can also cross both those interchanges off the required list and just build some access roads.
The answer isn't to eliminate any of the existing intersections but to treat them all equally. Traffic lights didn't just get randomly put on the Perimeter to slow traffic down. There would be traffic studies to back up their need and that isn't going to change.
In terms of the old MIT map, the grade separations were specifically geared around replacing traffic lights on the Perimeter. As Gunn Rd only has a stop sign it conveniently did not meet that criteria. As Gunn Rd would eventually be replaced by a CPT interchange it is also not a priority.