My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
2002-01-28 Regular Meeting
LaPorte
>
City Secretary
>
Minutes
>
City Council
>
2000's
>
2002
>
2002-01-28 Regular Meeting
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/8/2022 7:57:09 AM
Creation date
3/21/2025 2:00:35 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Meetings
Meeting Body
City Council
Meeting Doc Type
Minutes
Date
1/28/2002
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
42
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Chairman Johnson Speech to TEX21 Page 3� <br />cion is that the high points might focus on the following: <br />• In accordance with the minute orders adopted in October 1999 and June 2001, all new <br />interstate highways, new location freeways or relief routes shall be constructed as a <br />controlled access facility with no frontage roads, unless required for circuitry of travel. <br />Access rights for development will not be granted. <br />• The Executive Director must approve all other frontage roads after completion of a traf- <br />fic study that shows the frontage road will have little or no negative impact to the op- <br />erations of the main lanes. <br />• Any requests for exceptions to the above will be brought before the Commission for <br />their consideration. <br />• All release of access control shall continue to be brought to the Commission for ap- <br />proval in accordance with the existing policy. <br />Let me emphasize the following: Point 1 refers only to new facilities. Point 2 allows the Ex- <br />ecutive Director to approve other frontage roads as long as they have minimal impact on the <br />main lanes. Points 3 & 4 place exception and access control authority with the Commission <br />and add significant flexibility. <br />In closing, allow me to give you my interpretation. Earlier, I mentioned a "change in starting <br />points." In essence, instead of assuming frontage roads with access rights, we now start with <br />the premise, no frontage roads, no access rights. From that point, the corridor is studied and if <br />it will support frontage roads without impeding mobility and impacting, in a negative way, <br />safety, frontage roads could be justified. <br />My friend and fellow Commissioner, Robert Nichols, puts our dilemma in these terms: <br />25% of the Interstate System in the Metro or Urban areas are at 95% capacity. An- <br />other 40% are at 80%. The current forecast is for an approximate 50% increase in <br />traffic in the next 18 years. For starters, it just won't fit! Secondly, if we continue to <br />develop frontage roads, it impacts our most vital corridors, and adds traffic to the main <br />lanes for which we do not have the resources, either sufficient R.O. W. or available <br />funds, to expand. <br />Thank you for your time. I'll be happy to take any questions. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.