Posted by 72 million dollars?, a resident of the Adobe-Meadows neighborhood, on Apr 30, 2012 at 10:41 am
Where is this $72 million dollars coming from? If the VTA is paying for it, I assume the money is coming from local sales taxes. Boondoggles like this are why are local sales taxes are so high and why local merchants are going out of business.
Studies have shown that building more highways does not work. In the short term, new highways encourage people to move farther away from their jobs. In the long term, all those extra commuting miles cause more traffic over longer distances. The $72 million dollars is just a down payment on higher gas prices and greater air pollution.
And remember that this $72 million is on top of the $100 million they just spent on those useless new "merging lanes" along Hwy 101 in Palo Alto and Menlo Park.
Posted by @ 72 million dollars?, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Apr 30, 2012 at 10:50 am
This is part of the Santa Clara County portion of the auxiliary lanes project. On the southbound side, VTA and Caltrans is adding an auxiliary lane between Embarcadero Road and San Antonio Road, and again south of the second Rengstorff entrance. But they are not fixing the insane short entrance/exit merge at Charleston and adding an entrance from San Antonio Road onto 101 South, with a merge lane between that and the Rengstorff exit. So South Palo Altans won't benefit from an improved Rengstorff interchange with southbound 101.
Apparently, Mountain View doesn't want to close the dangerous Charleston onramp onto south 101 and replace it with a ramp from San Antonio Road. (They want Palo Alto cars going by their big box stores near 101.) And Palo Alto didn't fight hard enough for this change.
Posted by 101 commuter, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Apr 30, 2012 at 10:58 am
I travel 101 South each workday. I'd like to see an exit lane for Embarcadero/Oregon. Cars getting on 101 going south from University stay in the right lane instead of merging into the other lanes and this creates a very slow exit for those of us getting off at Embarcadero/Oregon. We need a separate lane! Thanks for letting me vent. I know it won't happen.
Posted by Brendan, a resident of the South of Midtown neighborhood, on Apr 30, 2012 at 11:28 am
This has changed the insane Charleston sb entrance for the worse...in a big way! I see this heading towards a major accident in the near future and recommend that everyone avoid it. Silly expenditure or not, this change is DANGEROUS...
Posted by Allen Edwards, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Apr 30, 2012 at 11:46 am
I travel 101 north to just north of SFO a couple of times a week. It has been just wonderful to see the progress they have made in improving the traffic flow with fairly simple changes. It has made a huge difference. Now the projects are moving into our part of the world and that is great too. It is always interesting that some people do not appreciate the progress that is slowly made that makes our collective lives better year after year. As pointed out, there are other changes that would be nice and I hope to see them implemented as well some day.
Posted by rem, a resident of the Adobe-Meadows neighborhood, on Apr 30, 2012 at 1:47 pm rem is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online
Yep, I AGREE with Brendan/Resident,a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood and KP:::
The Charleston entrance/Rengstorff exit is a b!#@h already. Less that a 100 FEET between the ON and OFF ramp..
I would LOVE to close one or the other one. In the late fifties (1950s/early sixty (1960s) Orlando florida had one (Gore ave "on ramp"/South St "off ramp") and we had a couple of wrecks a day. Some of them were deadly.. Gore was DOWN HILL and South was UP HILL. They findly wake up and closed the Gore on Ramp..
Hopefully CalTran will wake and close one these!!!!!
Posted by Donald, a resident of the South of Midtown neighborhood, on Apr 30, 2012 at 9:28 pm
This article is misleading and confusing. There is no way they can widen the freeway for $72 million. In order to widen the freeway they would need to purchase more right of way at an exorbitant cost. What they can do is squeeze more lanes into the existing right-of-way, widen the ramps and convert a regular lane to a carpool lane.
It is obvious that the current funding streams for freeways are inadequate and VTA is slowly beginning a trend towards charging for use. I think they should save years of transition and just make all the freeways toll roads starting as soon as they can.
Posted by BayShoreDriver, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on May 1, 2012 at 11:08 am
If you drive or bike on Bay Shore (either side of the highway but particularly on the east side these days), plan for your commute to be impacted for a long time... It was very dangerous biking with my kids in that area this past weekend, where it used to be very safe.
Posted by Joseph E. Davis, a resident of Woodside, on May 2, 2012 at 11:27 am
Adding more lanes is a good idea, but it does boggle the mind that 3 miles of such can cost $72 million. I doubt that is efficiently spent - we are probably overpaying by quite a bit due to "prevailing wage" (ie, union) laws.