Letter to the editor: 3 lanes better

To the editor:

I was disappointed to see the recent editorial encouraging a four-lane option on Kasold Drive. This is the same editorial that acknowledged that the three-lane option was safer for bicyclists/pedestrians, was $1.5 million cheaper than the four-lane option, and that the traffic on Kasold had remained stable over the past two decades. The editorial also acknowledged professional traffic engineers’ and transportation planners’ determination that the three-lane option would be able to handle the existing and projected traffic.

The counter-argument against the three-lane option is that it “feels like a mistake.” While the three-lane design would be a change, the newspaper should realize the true costs of a four-lane option. As people who have built an oversized patio deck know, no matter how much you actually use it, you have to maintain the entire thing. Also, three lanes can handle almost the same traffic as a four-lane option. Plus, three lanes are much safer for everyone. On a four-lane road, a car making a left turn creates a massive blind spot for adjacent cars that can lead to collisions with vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians.

There seem to be numerous compelling arguments for a three-lane road. I hope the J-W editorial writers, residents and the City Commission recognize that change can be good, especially when backed by compelling facts, and not conjectures. The City Commission isn’t only deciding for the existing residents along the street, but for all city users, both today and for the next 50 years.