<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Thank you for a great meeting</title>
	<atom:link href="http://Save64.org/thank-you-for-a-great-meeting/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://Save64.org/thank-you-for-a-great-meeting/</link>
	<description>Protect our neighborhoods</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Aug 2010 07:01:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Matthew</title>
		<link>http://Save64.org/thank-you-for-a-great-meeting/comment-page-1/#comment-77</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Jul 2009 13:50:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://Save64.org/?p=132#comment-77</guid>
		<description>I walked away from the meeting this week with the feeling that most everyone knows something *needs* to be done ultimately. No one wants to find out too late that we should have been proactive.

With that said, I see the purpose of the discussions/meetings as a means to ensure that all alternatives are considered for *both* short and long term needs. The &#039;open discussion&#039; should not be reserved only for the future while asking us to accept that superstreets are the only option for short term improvements.  This especially true since we all know interim solutions have a habit of becoming the permanent fix when the money runs out. 

I could be convinced that superstreets have been shown to work in other locales. And they may work extremely well on 64. But let&#039;s think it through and get some meaningful consensus. Particularly from the local governments and the parents of students at nearby schools.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I walked away from the meeting this week with the feeling that most everyone knows something *needs* to be done ultimately. No one wants to find out too late that we should have been proactive.</p>
<p>With that said, I see the purpose of the discussions/meetings as a means to ensure that all alternatives are considered for *both* short and long term needs. The &#8216;open discussion&#8217; should not be reserved only for the future while asking us to accept that superstreets are the only option for short term improvements.  This especially true since we all know interim solutions have a habit of becoming the permanent fix when the money runs out. </p>
<p>I could be convinced that superstreets have been shown to work in other locales. And they may work extremely well on 64. But let&#8217;s think it through and get some meaningful consensus. Particularly from the local governments and the parents of students at nearby schools.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bendal</title>
		<link>http://Save64.org/thank-you-for-a-great-meeting/comment-page-1/#comment-75</link>
		<dc:creator>Bendal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Jul 2009 12:57:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://Save64.org/?p=132#comment-75</guid>
		<description>AFAIK there are absolutely no plans whatsoever and no funding at all to turn US 64 into a freeway.  The only active plans for US 64 at this time are to add superstreet designs to the intersections, which WILL reduce both congestion and increase safety.   Superstreets have been successful in doing this everywhere they have been used in NC, and do not create a significant burden on anyone trying to cross the road or make a left turn from a side street.

Like it or not, US 64 is a growing corridor and will continue to develop.  The huge development at the NC 55 interchange, more and more subdivisions, all are steadily moving further west towards the lake.  The road already has backups in the area closest to US 1 thanks to all the traffic signals; those will just keep getting worse. Saying &quot;well the traffic is not that bad right now&quot; is similar to the lobster in the pot where the water is gradually getting hot; by the time you realize the traffic is bad, any solutions will be very expensive or won&#039;t be effective.

NCDOT is providing an interim solution (superstreets) and is asking for an open discussion about how best to provide a long term solution as well.  No one&#039;s going to turn US 64 into a freeway any time soon, but it is important to know what will need to be done eventually.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>AFAIK there are absolutely no plans whatsoever and no funding at all to turn US 64 into a freeway.  The only active plans for US 64 at this time are to add superstreet designs to the intersections, which WILL reduce both congestion and increase safety.   Superstreets have been successful in doing this everywhere they have been used in NC, and do not create a significant burden on anyone trying to cross the road or make a left turn from a side street.</p>
<p>Like it or not, US 64 is a growing corridor and will continue to develop.  The huge development at the NC 55 interchange, more and more subdivisions, all are steadily moving further west towards the lake.  The road already has backups in the area closest to US 1 thanks to all the traffic signals; those will just keep getting worse. Saying &#8220;well the traffic is not that bad right now&#8221; is similar to the lobster in the pot where the water is gradually getting hot; by the time you realize the traffic is bad, any solutions will be very expensive or won&#8217;t be effective.</p>
<p>NCDOT is providing an interim solution (superstreets) and is asking for an open discussion about how best to provide a long term solution as well.  No one&#8217;s going to turn US 64 into a freeway any time soon, but it is important to know what will need to be done eventually.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
