Residents express frustration at Airport Freeway hearing

Just about everyone agrees the project is needed to relieve tremendous traffic congestion, but at what price for those who live near the freeway?

Comments

[Ron Hill]

The Tx Dot needs to buy both sides of the street. No one should have to live that close to a freway and the noise it makes. It is unsafe for Children and Adults Air quality and cars running into our houses.

[Garl B. Latham]

But why worry about noise and safety and air quality? It's only a controlled-access roadway, for goodness sakes! If we didn't have roads, we couldn't drive our cars...and if we couldn't drive our cars, WE'D ALL DIE!!

Or words to that effect.

Please put me down as one man who:

1. Does NOT agree this project is needed; and

2. Knows, without a doubt, that this project will NOT "relieve traffic congestion" ("tremendous" or otherwise).

We Have Met The Enemy and He Is Us...and he is awfully _stupid_!

Garl B. Latham
A Dallas native; an Irving resident.

[Mekhong Kurt]

To Mr. Latham -- I was raised near Dallas, up in Denton County, but I've been on the other side of the world, in Bangkok the past 15 years (and several more years spent elsewhere in East Asia before coming here), so I'm out of date regarding the Airport Freeway in particular.

That said, I agree with your basic point that ". . . this project will NOT 'relieve traffic congestion' ('tremendous' or otherwise)" -- a belief I share after watching the Thai government build boo-coos of roads and highways all over the place, especially here in the Greater Bangkok area. They also built first a Skytrain and then a subway system, though both are rather limited in their coverage. (Both are set for extensive expansion, but such things come slowly here, particular given the economic crisis and the ongoing political uncertainty the past few years).

As limited as the subway and Skytrain preswently are, I suspect that if a comprehensive analysis of whether they, in tandem, had more, less, or about the same impact as the oodles of new roads, they would come out *way* ahead of roads.

I remember living in Denton in the early 1970's and commuting to north Dallas, near LBJ and Preston Road, a distance of about 28 miles. I-35 was in the midst of a years-long major widening, so sometimes it took me over two hours just to get to work. (Happily, I worked evenings and late nights, so the trip home normally went considerable more quickly than the trip in.)

I have been encouraged that the DFW Metroplex has finally started moving towards mass transit, though buses still receive more emphasis than I think they merit. I really like the idea of light rail, particularly if the science and technology to wed it to alternative energy sources ever come about. Elevated is wonderful -- but ungodly expensive. Even so, I have mulled over wouldn't it be nice to have a two-way rail link running, initially, between Dallas and Austin in the center of I-35, one direction at ground level, the other above it. (I don't think the island is wide enough all the way to accommodate a side-by-side dual railway configuration, though if I'm wrong, that would be okay, too.)

And it would be even better if such a long-distance link used true high-speed trains. Yes, 185mph is very, very good. But not as good as the considerably faster trains available today. Look at the new one in Spain, which competes favorably with air links.

More asphalt isn't the answer. Saw it in Beijing, Guangzhou, etc., and the minute two or four or six more lanes open up, they're clogged, and we're right back at square one.

Wonder if we'll ever be able to step into a closet or onto a platform and say, "Scottie, beam me up!" ;-)