caveman
Posts:1009
 | | 02/18/2008 7:50 AM |
 Alert | Posted By Cactus Rob on 02/17/2008 10:53 PM Posted By RayDizzle34 on 02/15/2008 11:35 PM I don't know about any of you guys but I have noticed that there is a ridiculous amount of traffic on Smith Enke at peak driving hours and it is nearly impossible to get out of there at times. Like early morning around 6 and afternoons around 5. Do any of you think that a stop light would ever be a possibility at this location?
A traffic signal has already been approved and will be installed in the near future. link? | | | |
|
|
|
caveman
Posts:1009
| | 02/18/2008 7:52 AM |
Alert | Posted By Jason on 02/17/2008 3:46 PM
Why is it so difficult to pull into the intersection and then wait for a gap in traffic?
I thought about this and Jason is right. There is only a single turn lane onto Smith-Enke from both directions so there are definately gaps in the traffic. If ADOT would put in the 2 turn lanes going Southbound that Smith-Enke should have then you would have a problem. Grow a pair and get out there. | | | |
|
|
|
PKMet
Posts:241
| | 02/18/2008 8:29 AM |
Alert | | The traffic light is supposed to be installed at this intersection in the 3rd or 4th quarter of this year. They also need to make the other lane a right turn option onto JWP as the traffic is still going to be backed up on Smith Enke in the mornings with or without a light. I doubt that will ever happen because it involves common sense and could be easily done, but we are dealing with the idiots at ADOT and our city transportation department can't get anything done either. I'm still waiting for them to add the 2nd left hand turn from JWP onto Smith Enke. The lane is already there, why can't they get this done? | |
They are who we thought they were! | |
|
|
|
RichTig
Posts:1403
| | 02/18/2008 8:43 AM |
Alert | Posted By caveman on 02/17/2008 4:24 PM
If you put a light there you are going to cause havok with cars that travel across Smith Enke. Timing the light correctly would be a nightmare and would slow down traffic going across Smith Enke for the convenience of a few residents in VRED. Its not just for VRED residents. There are many people from Tortosa on Smith Enke as well as Provence and the Lakes. MANY people from Senita drive North through VRED to get to Smith Enke to bypass Honeycutt and Edison. The light would be for the entire Maricopa community. | | | |
|
|
|
Jason
Posts:3378
| | 02/18/2008 9:54 AM |
Alert | | Nice. So because people can't stay on the streets designed for them, RED, Province and other neighborhoods that need to use Smith-Enke are suffering. | |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
|
|
Jason
Posts:3378
| | 02/18/2008 2:10 PM |
Alert | Posted By RichTig on 02/18/2008 8:43 AM Posted By caveman on 02/17/2008 4:24 PM
If you put a light there you are going to cause havok with cars that travel across Smith Enke. Timing the light correctly would be a nightmare and would slow down traffic going across Smith Enke for the convenience of a few residents in VRED. Its not just for VRED residents. There are many people from Tortosa on Smith Enke as well as Provence and the Lakes. MANY people from Senita drive North through VRED to get to Smith Enke to bypass Honeycutt and Edison. The light would be for the entire Maricopa community.
Those residents should stay on the roads designed for them. Smith-Enke's capacity wasn't designed to handle RED, VRED, Province, Homestead, Lakes at RED, plus Tortosa, Senita and Glenwilde. Those neighborhoods have Honeycutt and Edison (should they decide to cut through VRED). But to expect Smith-Enke to handle traffic from all of these neighborhoods...a light isn't going to cut it. | |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
|
 |
caveman
Posts:1009
| | 02/18/2008 4:39 PM |
Alert | Honeycutt wasn't designed for much traffic at all. Going from Honeycutt to the 347 is ridiculous. How can a road that is supposed to support so many neighborhoods go to one lane like that? Nobody uses Honeycutt due to the buildup and that huge dip that needs a bridge doesn't make things any better. Lets face it, our town did a poor job on building infrastructure. | | | |
|
|
|
CliffinAZ
Posts:394
| | 02/18/2008 7:04 PM |
Alert | Posted By caveman on 02/18/2008 4:39 PM Honeycutt wasn't designed for much traffic at all. Going from Honeycutt to the 347 is ridiculous. How can a road that is supposed to support so many neighborhoods go to one lane like that? Nobody uses Honeycutt due to the buildup and that huge dip that needs a bridge doesn't make things any better. Lets face it, our town did a poor job on building infrastructure.
Yeah, that dip is a problem. I've heard that the wash has flooded before and left people stuck on the other side.
| | | |
|
|
|
High i
Posts:116
| | 02/19/2008 4:06 AM |
Alert | Posted By Jason on 02/18/2008 2:10 PM Posted By RichTig on 02/18/2008 8:43 AM Posted By caveman on 02/17/2008 4:24 PM
If you put a light there you are going to cause havok with cars that travel across Smith Enke. Timing the light correctly would be a nightmare and would slow down traffic going across Smith Enke for the convenience of a few residents in VRED. Its not just for VRED residents. There are many people from Tortosa on Smith Enke as well as Provence and the Lakes. MANY people from Senita drive North through VRED to get to Smith Enke to bypass Honeycutt and Edison. The light would be for the entire Maricopa community.
Those residents should stay on the roads designed for them. Smith-Enke's capacity wasn't designed to handle RED, VRED, Province, Homestead, Lakes at RED, plus Tortosa, Senita and Glenwilde. Those neighborhoods have Honeycutt and Edison (should they decide to cut through VRED). But to expect Smith-Enke to handle traffic from all of these neighborhoods...a light isn't going to cut it.
It makes perfect sense for people in Tortosa to use Porter and Smith-Enke. Why wouldn't they? They are public streets aren't they? Why wouldn't you use the most convenient route to get to 347? There is no way that everyone who lives off of Honeycutt could possibly use it as the only access to JWP. It simply doesn't have the current capacity to handle that many vehicles.
I doubt that many people from Glenwilde and Senita are going all the way over to Smith-Enke to hit 347. The best way to get from these subdivisions to Smith-Enke would be to use Butterfield in the Villages which passes Edison. The smart thing to do would be to take Edison out to JWP and not have to backtrack to the east to get back to Smith-Enke if you were to stay on Butterfield. It seems to me that about half of the people that live in the Villages would be using Edison, as well. | | | |
|
|
|
RichTig
Posts:1403
| | 02/19/2008 6:02 AM |
Alert | Posted By caveman on 02/18/2008 4:39 PM Honeycutt wasn't designed for much traffic at all. Going from Honeycutt to the 347 is ridiculous. How can a road that is supposed to support so many neighborhoods go to one lane like that? Nobody uses Honeycutt due to the buildup and that huge dip that needs a bridge doesn't make things any better. Lets face it, our town did a poor job on building infrastructure. Smith Enke wasn't designed for much traffic at all. Going from Smith Enke to the 347 is ridiculous. How can a road that is supposed to support so many neighborhoods go to two lanes like that? Everyone uses Smith Enke due to the buildup on Honeycutt and that huge dip that needs a bridge doesn't make things any better. Lets face it, our town did a poor job on building infrastructure. | | | |
|
|
|
PKMet
Posts:241
| | 02/19/2008 7:37 AM |
Alert | | People, the bottom line is: Don't cut through VRED. It is not your personal thoroughfare. Use Honeycutt and don't make life worse for everyone else by backing up Smith Enke and Edison. | |
They are who we thought they were! | |
|
|
|
phxgirl
Posts:224
| | 02/19/2008 7:38 AM |
Alert | | YAY !! It is needed not only for the traffic but also for the school kids wanting to walk to school. As far as comparing it to Chandler BLVD aren't there 3 lanes on both sides, as well as alot of commercial establishments backed next to Chandler, not residential? | | | |
|
|
|
Jason
Posts:3378
| | 02/19/2008 9:30 AM |
Alert | Posted By High i on 02/19/2008 4:06 AM
It makes perfect sense for people in Tortosa to use Porter and Smith-Enke. Why wouldn't they? They are public streets aren't they? Why wouldn't you use the most convenient route to get to 347? There is no way that everyone who lives off of Honeycutt could possibly use it as the only access to JWP. It simply doesn't have the current capacity to handle that many vehicles. I doubt that many people from Glenwilde and Senita are going all the way over to Smith-Enke to hit 347. The best way to get from these subdivisions to Smith-Enke would be to use Butterfield in the Villages which passes Edison. The smart thing to do would be to take Edison out to JWP and not have to backtrack to the east to get back to Smith-Enke if you were to stay on Butterfield. It seems to me that about half of the people that live in the Villages would be using Edison, as well.
Yes, they are public streets, but surely the residents of these neigbhorhods can see that Smith-Enke was not designed to handle that much traffic? Then much like the people that cut in line, why are they so important that they have to cut over to and use roads that don't have the capacity for their traffic?
It doesn't make perfect sense, it's making it impossible for people who have to use Smith-Enke to use it like it was designed.
These people moved to Tortosa, why didn't they consider the fact that Honeycutt was small and build that into their commuting plans. Just leave 5 or 10 minutes earlier people! | |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
|
|
Jason
Posts:3378
| | 02/19/2008 9:33 AM |
Alert | Posted By phxgirl on 02/19/2008 7:38 AM
YAY !! It is needed not only for the traffic but also for the school kids wanting to walk to school. As far as comparing it to Chandler BLVD aren't there 3 lanes on both sides, as well as alot of commercial establishments backed next to Chandler, not residential?
Nope, I'm talking about the Ahwatukee Foothills. Two lanes in each direction, with a median, just like Smith-Enke. That road handles a lot more cars.
| |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
|
|
caveman
Posts:1009
| | 02/19/2008 1:35 PM |
Alert | Posted By Jason on 02/19/2008 9:30 AM Posted By High i on 02/19/2008 4:06 AM
It makes perfect sense for people in Tortosa to use Porter and Smith-Enke. Why wouldn't they? They are public streets aren't they? Why wouldn't you use the most convenient route to get to 347? There is no way that everyone who lives off of Honeycutt could possibly use it as the only access to JWP. It simply doesn't have the current capacity to handle that many vehicles. I doubt that many people from Glenwilde and Senita are going all the way over to Smith-Enke to hit 347. The best way to get from these subdivisions to Smith-Enke would be to use Butterfield in the Villages which passes Edison. The smart thing to do would be to take Edison out to JWP and not have to backtrack to the east to get back to Smith-Enke if you were to stay on Butterfield. It seems to me that about half of the people that live in the Villages would be using Edison, as well.
These people moved to Tortosa, why didn't they consider the fact that Honeycutt was small and build that into their commuting plans. Just leave 5 or 10 minutes earlier people!
What says that people in Tortosa have to drive on Honeycutt? People in this thread need to get real and just deal with it. The quickest path is what people will take no matter where you are. | | | |
|
|
|
Sinbad
Posts:3022
| | 02/19/2008 2:30 PM |
Alert | Posted By Jason on 02/17/2008 3:46 PM
Why is it so difficult to pull into the intersection and then wait for a gap in traffic?
because you don't live in the VREDS so you have no idea how hard it is. People shouldn't be-little things that they don't understand...
If you live in other areas, it's easy to say "No light". That intersection is only going to get worse when the Lakes at REDS is finished. I do agree that a light would be nice.... but I think we need to have a few accidents there before one will be put in... RIGHT CITY PLANNER (not you jason... the real city planner.)? | |
Just doing it one day at a time. Change is good and it should be looked upon as an improvment! not a problem.
______________________________________
***************************************
San Diego Super Chargers! GO!!!
Joined old forum March 2006
Post count: 3068 + these | |
|
|
|
Jason
Posts:3378
| | 02/19/2008 2:49 PM |
Alert | because you don't live in the VREDS so you have no idea how hard it is. People shouldn't be-little things that they don't understand...
That's why I asked, I didn't belittle. And I got my answer, it's backed up past VRED.
What says that people in Tortosa have to drive on Honeycutt? People in this thread need to get real and just deal with it. The quickest path is what people will take no matter where you are.
I didn't say that they have to, but I guess it's too much to ask for people to stick to routes that were planned for them, instead they overload routes that are the only ones available to other neighborhoods. | |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
|
|
twinkleblue
Posts:48
| | 02/19/2008 5:05 PM |
Alert | And next thing you know, everyone is going to have to show ID to prove that they live in a certain neighborhood and are allowed to drive in it. The roads are public thoroughfares, paid for by everyone's taxes. Lol, if they don't enforce immigration laws here, do you seriously think they're going to make you pass an ID check so you can drive on a particular road? Come on people, if you're going to complain, use some common sense while you're doing it. The roads belong to all of us, they are not private! Deena (with two ee's!!!) | | | |
|
|
|
RichTig
Posts:1403
| | 02/19/2008 5:11 PM |
Alert | Denna, you can drive wherever you like. | | | |
|
|
|
magnetic
Posts:111
| | 02/19/2008 5:16 PM |
Alert | Just pull out into traffic and let the people slam on their brakes as most do. | |
25th Infantry Division
<----
Tropic Lightning
| |
|
|
|