HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Southwest

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Feb 15, 2007, 10:08 PM
Sekkle's Avatar
Sekkle Sekkle is offline
zzzzzzzz
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland area
Posts: 2,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by PHX31 View Post
Why don't we just displace all homes and business in the entire city, build one humongous road that covers the entire metro area, and people can just live and work in their cars?

By the way, I just posted this article on the general transportation forum, so if anyone wants to defend this idea to a wider audience... good luck!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Feb 15, 2007, 11:47 PM
plinko's Avatar
plinko plinko is offline
them bones
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Santa Barbara adjacent
Posts: 6,892
Quote:
Originally Posted by DevdogAZ View Post
As for the next phase they discussed for the I-17 to 202 section, I'm not sure how they're going to do that. They'd have to widen the tunnel, and I don't know if there's room for any additional lanes in that canyon. Widening the excavated portion of that section of the freeway would take lots of residential development that borders the freeway on both sides.
The plan is only for the I-10 section from I-17/24th down and around the Broadway curve down to the 202 interchange. This plan doesn't effect the 'Inner Loop' section of I-10 through downtown at all.

That being said, PHX31 is on the right track about each end of the thing. How the hell does that work? I suppose you just tie everything in at interchanges but I still can't see how you can cut the freeway in 1/2 and not expect a cluster!

Still, if they intend to do this: BUILD IT ALL AT ONCE! This is not the type of project you can build in segments. Talk about disruptive...like 10-15 years disruptive...

You know, Los Angeles is nearby proof that you can't build cities at moderate densities and build your way out with highway lanes. That's why most freeways in LA County are at the most 8-10 lanes. Once you get beyond that they simply aren't effective anymore at moving traffic efficiently. Orange County still seems to think they can...and the intersections of the 16 lane mega Orange freeways with the older but equally passable LA freeways are backed up 7 days a week for most daylight hours.
__________________
Even if you are 1 in a million, there are still 7,000 people just like you...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2007, 12:06 AM
DevdogAZ's Avatar
DevdogAZ DevdogAZ is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 374
^^^ Ah, I misread the original article and didn't realize it said "202 SANTAN" so I was thinking the only place where the 10 and the 202 intersect was at the mini-stack.

Which reminds me of one of my biggest pet peeves of the Valley's freeway numbering system. Why do they keep the same number when there are segments of the freeway on two sides of town? Tell me where the 101/McDowell is? There's two places. 101/Shea? Two places. 202/Gilbert? Two places. Why don't they give the different segments different numbers so we don't have the potential confusion?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2007, 12:57 AM
HooverDam's Avatar
HooverDam HooverDam is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Country Club Park, Greater Coronado, Midtown, Phoenix, Az
Posts: 4,610
Quote:
Originally Posted by DevdogAZ View Post
Which reminds me of one of my biggest pet peeves of the Valley's freeway numbering system. Why do they keep the same number when there are segments of the freeway on two sides of town? Tell me where the 101/McDowell is? There's two places. 101/Shea? Two places. 202/Gilbert? Two places. Why don't they give the different segments different numbers so we don't have the potential confusion?
Probably because its all the same highway. I lived in St Louis for college, and roads would magically change names as they went through different cities and towns (which happens here as well, but not as often). I really hated....one road would have 5 different names and it would be very confusing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2007, 1:25 AM
DevdogAZ's Avatar
DevdogAZ DevdogAZ is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by HooverDam View Post
Probably because its all the same highway. I lived in St Louis for college, and roads would magically change names as they went through different cities and towns (which happens here as well, but not as often). I really hated....one road would have 5 different names and it would be very confusing.
I realize it's the same road, but when it loops like that, it's silly to give it the same name. I'd like to see the 101 be split into two names, one east of the 17 and one west. I'd also like to see the 202 get split into two names, one north of the 60, one south. That would mostly eliminate the confusion.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2007, 1:29 AM
Diddle E Squat Diddle E Squat is offline
_________________________
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 597
Quote:
Originally Posted by PHX31 View Post
How is it going to work? Essentially an inner freeway and an outer freeway? How do people get off the inner freeway, or how do people on the outer freeway continue on east and west? Talk about a major bottle neck... 24 lanes dropping to 10 or 12. How would they get around that? There's already tons of traffic west of I-17 in the west of this monster freeway, and tons of traffic south of US60 south of this monster freeway. How will there not be bottlenecks? Do people in charge not have any more ideas rather than keep building bigger and bigger and more and more freeways?

Why don't we just displace all homes and business in the entire city, build one humongous road that covers the entire metro area, and people can just live and work in their cars?
You can find a 22-lane example of how this would work in that evil auto-centric hellhole known as Toronto (Highway 401.)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2007, 1:59 AM
JCarp's Avatar
JCarp JCarp is offline
Lurking Fish
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: "Valley of the Sun"
Posts: 84
24 Lanes????

Just a few observations from someone who lives south of town (Maricopa to be exact) and drives I-10 daily…

Inbound, the freeway bogs down at the 202 “Santan” and finally picks up at the Broadway Curve. While a few extra lanes might be nice from…

Quote:
Tempe, where U.S. 60 dumps drivers from the East Valley onto the interstate toward Phoenix

…I would much rather have those extra lanes from the 202 to the 60. Or better yet, put in light rail (or even Commuter Rail) from Chandler to Tempe parallel to I-10. That would relieve some of the congestion on the southern (or should I say East) end of I-10.

Outbound, the freeway starts to bog down as it nears the airport, and doesn’t pick up again until around the 202 “Santan”. This makes me believe that the biggest bottleneck again is at the 202, helping back up traffic all the way into the heart of Phoenix. Again a few more lanes would be nice, but I would prefer more transit options instead of a 24 lane freeway. Or even some extra lanes in the center of I-10 that could be used by either direction pending on the need (I-15 toward San Diago has this option).

Another fix (that is even in the works) would be to finish extending the 202 from I-10, south of South Mountain, back to the 10. This would enable some of the traffic to just avoid driving thru the middle of Phoenix, putting less cars (and big trucks) on the road, alleviating the need for all those extra lanes.

I feel that this is so simple that a child… well at least a teenage commuter… could figure it out.

This fix is only for the south east end of the valley. Maybe another "expert" can give us their fix for the rest of it.

One last note… I moved here from Salt Lake City a few years ago, and loved their light rail system when I was there. When it came to ridership projections, SLC’s light rail currently has four times as many riders then what they thought they were going to have. It works people. I just wish I could use it here…

Thank you all for letting me vent on the freeway issue, I will hold my ideas for light-rail for another time.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2007, 4:28 AM
SethAZ SethAZ is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Downtown Tempe
Posts: 85
DevdogAZ, I thought the 101 and 202 were already split into two names: the 101 north/south to the 17 is named Pima and the other half of the 101 through Glendale is the Agua Fria. The 202 through Tempe up to Power Rd (and soon to the 60) is the Red Mountain and the other half is the SanTan 202
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2007, 10:25 AM
oliveurban's Avatar
oliveurban oliveurban is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Tempe, AZ
Posts: 2,908
Post

More ...

Tempe pushes for 24 lanes on Broadway Curve
Plans calls for connector freeways to run alongside I-10

Bob Golfen
The Arizona Republic
Feb. 16, 2007

A remedy for Interstate 10's notorious Broadway Curve in Tempe, one of the worst freeway bottlenecks in the Valley, will not come easily. Or soon.

But while designers and engineers at the Arizona Department of Transportation wrestle with the complex project, Tempe officials are growing impatient.

Air pollution from idling cars and trucks stuck in rush-hour traffic, along with city streets crowded with commuters trying to avoid the freeway mess, are prompting calls for acceleration of the I-10 widening project, which is not slated to begin until 2011.

The concept for the I-10 improvements now being studied call for additional "local lanes" to be built alongside the current freeway to serve as connector routes between U.S. 60, Tempe, east Phoenix and Sky Harbor International Airport. In some areas, the total lanes on and around I-10 will total 24, double the number of current lanes.

Nearly 300,000 vehicles pass through the area daily, fed by heavily traveled U.S. 60 and Arizona 143, a major access route to Sky Harbor, along with through traffic on I-10 heading to and from downtown Phoenix.

On Thursday evening, Tempe council members met with ADOT representatives to discuss the project and its implications.

"The problem we face is that when the U.S. 60 was expanded to its widest width through Tempe, we were promised that ramps would be built and the Broadway Curve would be widened to handle more traffic," Tempe Mayor Hugh Hallman said.

The immediate traffic needs are being ignored as ADOT and planners at the Maricopa Association of Governments, or MAG, look far ahead to the needs of the future, Hallman said. The scope of the project has grown and the improvements have been pushed back at least three years, he said.

"I appreciate that they want to plan for the people who want to live in Maricopa and Pinal County 2030, but they are substantially undermining the quality of life for the people who are living here in Tempe now," he said.

Traffic through the freeway segment is expected to grow by half during the next 20 years, said ADOT spokesman Doug Nintzel, with projected growth putting the daily traffic load at 450,000. Freeway planners must look to the future, Nintzel said, or risk building highways that quickly become obsolete as traffic pressure increases.

"It's not that ADOT is adding on to it," he said. "The local communities have expressed a desire to make these improvements, and ADOT is working with regional planners as to what they believe should be done."

Accelerating the freeway construction would be beneficial, he added, but the complicated issues of design and engineering are still on the drawing board. And the federally required environmental study could take another two years.

In the concept plan, each local connector alongside I-10 would be a four-lane freeway in itself and would include a web of ramps designed to take local traffic off I-10. The current I-10 lanes would serve as express lanes through the area, Nintzel said, "with destinations farther down the line."

The idea is to take significant traffic off the main trunk of I-10 while simplifying the flow of vehicles through the segment.

"The ultimate goal is to try and segregate traffic to get the traffic going downtown in the correct lanes and traffic going to airport in the correct lanes to avoid all the weaving that's going on," said Bob Hazlett, senior engineer for MAG.

"This has been in the regional transportation plan for some time now as a widening project for the Broadway Curve to facilitate the ramps from U.S. 60 as well as improve the interchange at Arizona 143."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2007, 10:40 PM
JI5 JI5 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Central Phoenix
Posts: 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by DevdogAZ View Post
^^^ Which reminds me of one of my biggest pet peeves of the Valley's freeway numbering system. Why do they keep the same number when there are segments of the freeway on two sides of town? Tell me where the 101/McDowell is? There's two places. 101/Shea? Two places. 202/Gilbert? Two places. Why don't they give the different segments different numbers so we don't have the potential confusion?
Do what I do, and just ASSUME people are talking about the east side of town. West side?? Where is that?!? Who goes there? Santan Freeway??? Does that exist??
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2007, 12:14 PM
combusean's Avatar
combusean combusean is offline
Skyriser
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Nob Hill, San Francisco, California
Posts: 5,354
Sky Harbor expects to get go-ahead to build $1.1 bil people-mover train

Ginger D. Richardson
The Arizona Republic
Feb. 18, 2007 12:00 AM

Quote:
Your flight leaves at 9 a.m. on a Friday - peak travel time at Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport.

But rather than crawling through morning traffic on the always congested Sky Harbor Boulevard and fighting for mere inches of curb space at the constantly crammed Terminal 4, you have a friend drop you off just north of the airport, at the corner of 44th and Washington streets.

There is more space here - plenty of room to pull your car up to the curb, where a Skycap quickly greets you. In no time at all, your bags are checked, and your boarding pass is in your hand.

You hop on a driverless, automated train, and within four minutes you arrive at your destination: bustling Terminal 4.

This is Sky Harbor in 2013.

The first step to making it a reality could happen this week. On Tuesday, the Phoenix City Council is scheduled to give the go-ahead to build a $1.1 billion people-mover system that will ultimately make it easier for travelers to get into, out of and around the airport.

The starter phase of the project will connect Terminal 4 with the airport's east economy parking garages and lots and the Metro's light-rail system. Its 2013 opening date, though, is nearly five years after the expected completion of light rail, meaning those passengers wishing to connect to the airport will have to be bused to the terminals for the foreseeable future.

The automated train system is one of several major Sky Harbor improvement projects approved last year by the Federal Aviation Administration. Others include a new 33-gate terminal, the realignment of Sky Harbor Boulevard and construction of two new taxiways.

In total, the airport has planned enhancements that will cost more than $2.9 billion over the next 10 years, making this the most ambitious, and most expensive, expansion in the airport's 78-year history. The upgrades are designed to help Phoenix accommodate the Valley's air-traffic needs in the coming decades.

The new round of construction follows other major improvement work at the airport. In recent years, officials have built an $89 million air traffic control tower, a $285 million rental-car center and refinished much of Terminal 4's passenger areas.

The new work means that passengers will continue to have to grapple with construction-related hassles in the coming years and may have to pay more to use the airport, via higher parking rates, ticket fees and rental car charges.

Easing congestion

Phoenix Sky Harbor is the nation's eighth-busiest airport.

Last year, more than 41 million passengers passed through its gates, and conservative estimates suggest that the number is expected to increase to more than 50 million by 2015.

Airport administrators say that Sky Harbor's airfield can handle the anticipated growth.

But its roadway system cannot.

For example, congestion at Terminal 4's curbs during the busy holiday travel season resulted in a backlog of vehicles spilling out onto Sky Harbor Boulevard, the airport's main thoroughfare. The Thanksgiving Day incident forced the airport to divert traffic into the terminal parking garage, and aviation officials fear the problem will only get worse in the coming years.

"The roadway system is going to fail, just like our freeways have failed," Deputy City Manager David Krietor said. "And we're just not going to be able to move traffic through the airport."

The new automated train system would help eliminate some of the strain by giving passengers another way to get in and out of Sky Harbor. Plans call for the starter line to connect to Terminal 4 because 80 percent of the airport's passengers leave or arrive at its gates.

The terminal serves the airport's two hub carriers, US Airways and Southwest Airlines.

Design and cost

Phoenix first recognized the need for an automated train system back in 2001 but struggled with the project's design and ballooning cost. Original plans called for tunneling the tram under the airport's terminals and Interstate 10 on the airport's western end, near the rental-car center.

This new plan saves money by keeping the train's tracks at ground level, elevating them as it nears the airport. But the project's first phase will still cost $420 million. The second segment will extend from Terminal 4 west to Terminal 3 and what is now Terminal 2. The line will continue on to the rental-car center at 16th Street and Buckeye Roads. It will cost an additional $650 to $700 million.

And those numbers do not account for inflation.

Airport officials say they plan to construct a new transit center at 44th Street and Washington so that light-rail passengers who wish to head into Sky Harbor can simply take an escalator to the new train system. The train station also will function much like a terminal without planes, so that passengers arriving by car can simply drop friends and family off at the curb.

"This is really going to be the new north entrance into Sky Harbor airport," Acting Aviation Director Danny Murphy said of the new center. "It will have all the curb amenities that any terminal has."

Next steps

Once the airport receives Phoenix City Council approval to move forward, it plans to seek proposals from developers interested in building and managing the system.

Airport trains, or people movers, are at nearly 20 U.S. airports, including Denver, Dallas/Fort Worth and Atlanta.

The systems differ. Some run on rubber tires, others on track. Most have top speeds in the 35 miles per hour range. Many are designed to make it easier for passengers to catch connecting flights out of different terminals.

The one at San Francisco International, however, is probably most like what Sky Harbor is planning to build. The system, called AirTrain, was designed mainly to get passengers to the airport's rental-car center and outlying parking areas.

Lee Mitchell, the system's administrator, said about 300,000 people use the train every month and it has helped to cut down on vehicular traffic at the airport.

"We had a lot of bus shuttle services, and it did eliminate that," Mitchell said. "And if you are renting a car here at the airport, you basically have to take this."

Sky Harbor is not specifying which kind of system it wants here, Deputy Aviation Director Jane Morris said, because it wants companies to propose what they think will work best.

"We don't want to pick a type because then you limit your options," she said.

Although the train's starter segment should be open by 2013, construction on the extension will not begin until 2016 because the airport needs the time to pay for this and the other improvement projects.

It will likely be 2020 before the entire train line is finished.

Reach the reporter at ginger .richardson@arizonarepublic.com
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2007, 1:08 PM
Azndragon837 Azndragon837 is offline
Desert Urbanite
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona
Posts: 1,429
^Finally, is what I say. They need to hurry up and build that darn people-mover. It is desparately needed, and it will definately help out airport vehicle and passenger traffic. 2013 may be a long ways away, but something is better than nothing.

-Andrew
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted Feb 19, 2007, 7:06 PM
sundevilgrad's Avatar
sundevilgrad sundevilgrad is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 736
Doesn't look like US Airways or Southwest is very pleased about the increased rent associated with the train... It'll be interesting to see how this turns out.

Airlines balk at Sky Harbor expansion fees
Ginger D. Richardson
The Arizona Republic
Feb. 19, 2007 12:00 AM

Phoenix is ready to forge ahead with a $2.9 billion expansion of Sky Harbor International Airport, a move that would ensure that the Valley's primary commercial airfield could accommodate passenger traffic for decades.

But although the city says the construction is necessary to keep the airport from choking on its own growth, the plan is not sitting well with Sky Harbor's two hub carriers - Southwest Airlines and US Airways - who feel that some of the projects may not be needed.

Both airlines would help foot the bill by paying higher fees and rent over the next decade. advertisement




"We have a real long history of partnership with the city of Phoenix," Bob Montgomery, Southwest's vice president of properties, said Sunday. "That is what is so troubling. It's a complete departure from that relationship."

Morgan Durrant, a spokesman for US Airways, said, "Our initial reaction . . . is that the proposed fee increases are quite disturbing. We're a low-cost airline, and it's difficult to grow low-fare service at a high-cost airport."

Phoenix's planned expansion program includes a host of large-scale projects, including construction of a 33-gate terminal where Terminal 2 now stands and an automated train system that would make it easier to move passengers into, out of and around the airport.

Other plans include construction of two cross-field taxiways and the straightening of Sky Harbor Boulevard.

The Federal Aviation Administration in the spring deemed the projects necessary after a federal approval process that began in 2001.

Sky Harbor officials say the planned upgrades, which also include improvements to Terminal 4, would benefit the airlines, too, and that they should share in the costs. Airport officials briefed the carriers on the plan last week.

"These investments are required for us to maintain Sky Harbor as an asset for the entire state," acting Aviation Director Danny Murphy said.

Without the improvements, Sky Harbor officials said, residents and visitors will start to see more frequent baggage backups and flight delays, longer security lines and continual logjams at the terminals' curbside check-in areas.


What's being built
Sky Harbor officials say the construction would help it keep up with booming population growth.

Last year, more than 41 million people traveled through Sky Harbor's gates, and the airport logged 546,510 takeoffs and landings, according to the FAA.

Those numbers are expected to jump to as many as 50 million people and 670,000 takeoffs and landings by 2015.

But the airport, as it is today, cannot accommodate those numbers.

One of the first projects that officials plan to start is construction of a $1.1 billion automated train system designed to quickly shuttle passengers from a new north airport entrance at 44th and Washington streets to the airport's east economy parking garages and lots and on to Terminal 4.

The system is to be built in phases. Planning for the first segment, which ends at Terminal 4, is to begin almost immediately and is scheduled to open in 2013.

The second phase, which won't be ready until 2020, would extend the train line west through the heart of the airport, connecting passengers with the airport's other terminals and the rental-car center.

The second major planned project is construction of a 33-gate terminal at a cost of about $650 million.

The new building would give Phoenix more gate space and allow the airport to possibly shift all of the Southwest Airlines operations out of Terminal 4. That would alleviate congestion there while still giving US Airways room to expand.

Federal regulations require that construction work begin within three years of receiving FAA approval, or in spring 2009. So even though Sky Harbor doesn't plan to start building the terminal until 2013, it will begin site and preparation work immediately.

Construction is expected to be completed by 2016.

In the meantime, Sky Harbor plans to begin designing and building a final, eight-gate concourse on the south side of Terminal 4. The area would help accommodate the growth needs of both Southwest Airlines and US Airways until the new terminal is complete.

Preliminary estimates for the new concourse are $80 million.

Finally, Terminal 4 is scheduled for a major face lift. In recent years, Phoenix has done a lot of work to the passenger level, reconstructing and upgrading the retail and food areas. But similar improvements are needed to the baggage claim and ticketing levels as well as the terminal's mechanical and air-conditioning systems.


Paying for it
Sky Harbor is self-funding, meaning that fees charged to the customers and airlines that use it must cover its expenses.

Therefore, it is turning first to its airlines to help pay for the work. The airport got about $88 million in 2005 in fees it charged its carriers. But hitting airlines with additional costs is proving to be an unpopular idea. Three airlines - United, Continental and American - are suing Los Angeles because airport commissioners at Los Angeles International recently approved steep boosts in terminal-maintenance fees.

Southwest, which is fighting an increase in the rental rates of terminals there, filed a formal complaint with the Department of Transportation on Friday, Montgomery said.

Sky Harbor's proposed increases of 5 percent a year aren't nearly as high, but carriers are still concerned. In particular, they have questions about whether the $1.1 billion train system is necessary.

"We're going to be paying special attention to that portion of it," said Durrant, of US Airways.

Montgomery was even more blunt.

"We've not received one letter from a customer saying Sky Harbor is too congested," he said.

"I think the bottom line is that we disagree (with their assessment) that it is needed, or that it will do anything it is supposed to do."

The airlines, which measure expenses by cost per enplaned passenger, say that simply passing their costs on to customers in the form of higher fares isn't an option in the competitive industry.

"In the end, our customers don't care what the source of the cost problem is," Gary Kelly, Southwest's chief executive officer, said in an interview in Phoenix this month.

"They just want to pay a good, decent low fare."

At Sky Harbor, the cost per enplaned passenger is $4.65, but it would jump to $7 or $8 by 2016 with the planned increases.

Deputy Aviation Director Paul Blue said the airport has worked hard to listen to its carriers and opted to stretch out construction over a longer time to avoid burdening them with unnecessary costs.

In total, the airport has identified $5 billion in capital needs over the next two decades.

"We have had extensive meetings with them," Blue said. "We have taken to heart their advice.

"We're talking about change that is going to average about 5 percent of a year for the next 10 years, so I don't think what we are proposing has any resemblance to what is going on in Los Angeles."

In addition to charging the airlines more, Phoenix hopes that it will be able to take in extra cash via the passenger facility charge, a $4.50 fee tacked on to every ticket originating at the airport. The FAA last week submitted legislation to Congress that would, among other things, increase that fee to $6.

The revenue adds up: During fiscal 2006, the fee racked up more than $94 million in revenue for Sky Harbor.



If the Phoenix City Council on Tuesday authorizes the airport to move forward, which it is expected to do, site work on the terminal project and design and planning on the automated train system could begin almost immediately.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted Feb 19, 2007, 7:07 PM
sundevilgrad's Avatar
sundevilgrad sundevilgrad is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 736
Damn double post...

Last edited by sundevilgrad; Feb 19, 2007 at 8:07 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted Feb 20, 2007, 11:19 PM
DevdogAZ's Avatar
DevdogAZ DevdogAZ is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by SethAZ View Post
DevdogAZ, I thought the 101 and 202 were already split into two names: the 101 north/south to the 17 is named Pima and the other half of the 101 through Glendale is the Agua Fria. The 202 through Tempe up to Power Rd (and soon to the 60) is the Red Mountain and the other half is the SanTan 202
Sure, the freeways have names, but does anybody use them? Does anyone say, "Take the Pima north to the Squaw Peak" or do they say, "Take the 101 to the 51?" In my opinion and experience, the names are unnecessary as they just serve to confuse people. They simply need to create unique numbers for each segment to differentiate them.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted Feb 20, 2007, 11:37 PM
vertex's Avatar
vertex vertex is offline
under the influence...
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Chandler, AZ
Posts: 2,600
Quote:
Originally Posted by DevdogAZ View Post
Sure, the freeways have names, but does anybody use them? Does anyone say, "Take the Pima north to the Squaw Peak" or do they say, "Take the 101 to the 51?" In my opinion and experience, the names are unnecessary as they just serve to confuse people. They simply need to create unique numbers for each segment to differentiate them.
Sorry, but I can't disagree more. Most natives and old-timers still refer to these freeways by the names. Red mountain, Santan, Pima, Maricopa, Agua Fria, Superstition, Squaw Peak, Black Canyon, Hohokam, Papago, etc.

I will agree that the names of the newer freeways aren't as well known. But honestly it's a lot easier to simply say the "Red Mountain" freeway, rather than describing it as "that 202 segment that runs thru north Mesa".

The only real confusion came when they reused "Pima" for the Scottdale 101; Pima used to refer to the segment of I-10 south/east of the Broadway curve, before it turned into the Maricopa.

Oh, and renaming the Squaw Peak as the Piestewa didn't help either.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2007, 12:18 AM
nbrindley's Avatar
nbrindley nbrindley is offline
-_-
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: PHX->IC,IA->ATL
Posts: 254
I have to agree with devdog on this one. I lived in Phoenix for 12 years, and the only freeways I ever referred to by name were the Squaw Peak and Black Canyon freeways, and even then I didn't always use the names. For everything else I always used the highway number. I always hated listening to the traffic on the radio, because they would blitz through it and say things like "there's an accident on the Maricopa and the Red Mountain is slowing quite a bit" and I would never have a clue as to where they were talking. Even after 4 years of doing deliveries throughout the entire metro, to the point that I new exactly where every major road in the valley was, I only vaguely knew what the hell the names of the freeways were.

And while we're on the topic, I still don't know what 'The Stack' refers to.

Last edited by nbrindley; Feb 21, 2007 at 12:33 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2007, 1:29 AM
combusean's Avatar
combusean combusean is offline
Skyriser
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Nob Hill, San Francisco, California
Posts: 5,354
^ The stack is that monster interchange for the I-10 and I-17. The "mini-stack" is the I-10/AZ-202/AZ-51 interchange, and the "Split" is where the 17 splits off the 10 west of the airport.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2007, 4:38 AM
combusean's Avatar
combusean combusean is offline
Skyriser
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Nob Hill, San Francisco, California
Posts: 5,354
Scottsdale Chamber members back light rail

The Business Journal of Phoenix - 11:34 AM MST Tuesday, February 20, 2007

Quote:
Scottsdale business people would prefer light-rail type transportation along Scottsdale Road and the Loop 101 freeway and may be willing to support local bonds to help pay for such a system, according to a survey released Tuesday by the Scottsdale Area Chamber of Commerce.

The survey, conducted earlier this month, was sent to about 1,500 chamber members via e-mail with 322 responding.

Other survey results showed:

* 82 percent of respondents find getting around Scottsdale more challenging than five years ago.
* Carpools, flex-time and telecommuting were not seen as strong options.
* More than 80 percent say the freeway system is important to their business and needs to be widened.
* 60 percent say more buses are needed.
* 63 percent would favor voter-approved bonding to pay for transportation improvements while 50 percent favor special taxing on the beneficiaries of such improvements.
Good for Scottsdale. Hopefully city honchos can listen to the wise sages in the business community rather than the backward NB&C's that have hitherto dominated the discussion
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2007, 6:19 AM
JI5 JI5 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Central Phoenix
Posts: 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by DevdogAZ View Post
Sure, the freeways have names, but does anybody use them? Does anyone say, "Take the Pima north to the Squaw Peak" or do they say, "Take the 101 to the 51?" In my opinion and experience, the names are unnecessary as they just serve to confuse people. They simply need to create unique numbers for each segment to differentiate them.
I actually used to have an inside-joke about this with my co-workers. We used to always give directions using the names of the freeways instead of the numbers. Its fun, you should try it sometime.

"Take the agua fria freeway to the superstition freeway, get off on the hohokam, and take that to the red mountain freeway. That will turn into the maricopa fwy. Exit 7th street." LOL!
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Southwest
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:47 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.