Advertisement

user111

Follow

Comment history

Sound Off: How long do opponents of the South Lawrence Trafficway have to file a petition for the U.

What we need is a common-sense solution for getting traffic around Lawrence. That solution is *not* the SLT. We need an elevated road (similar to K-4) that connects I-70 and K-10 where they are closest (just east of Lawrence). The circuitous route taken by the SLT is simply someone's bad idea from way back when that never got properly challenged. But the eastern bypass takes a different approach - I call it the East Lawrence Connector. It would be a fraction of the length of the SLT and it would get people where they want to go in a fraction of the time. Will it solve all the problems on 23rd? No. But the SLT's not gonna do that either. The EAST LAWRENCE CONNECTOR: its time has come!

July 13, 2012 at 8:36 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

10th Circuit Court of Appeals upholds state's approved route of South Lawrence Trafficway through the Baker Wetlands

Hello? <tap tap tap> is this thing on? The SLT will provide limited benefit to east/west and west/east drivers who don't want to go on a LOOPY excursion to take them around town. They want an elevated road, EAST OF TOWN, that connects I-70 and I-10 where they are closest (clear-shot style). I call it the East Lawrence Connector (it's a fraction of the length of the entire SLT). You can call it what you want (East Lawrence Bypass is one some folks are using). But that's what we really need. Not this SLT boondoggle. I mean, c'mon...

July 12, 2012 at 9:28 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Ruling: Officials took ‘hard look’ at SLT plan

Merrill speaks the truth. Now, an East Lawrence Connector (an elevated road connecting I-70 and K-10 east of town where they are closest) would make all the sense in the world. The question is: how does someone get TRACTION for this awesome idea? Thoughts?

July 12, 2012 at 9:22 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

10th Circuit Court of Appeals upholds state's approved route of South Lawrence Trafficway through the Baker Wetlands

It's funny, Chrome doesn't consider it to be misspelled. Regardless, here's why it's STUUUUUUUPID: compare the SLT route to the East Lawrence Connector route I've suggested - which is quicker? I can answer that: the ELC is (hands down). So... as Reticent_Irreverent has asked: how do we get that ball rolling? You still need to figure out a way to get people from one side of Lawrence to the other - but if you wanna bypass the town, the SLT is *not* the best way to do it.

July 11, 2012 at 7:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

10th Circuit Court of Appeals upholds state's approved route of South Lawrence Trafficway through the Baker Wetlands

OK - forget about the flyway (that idea is actually secondary even though I listed it first) - but if you wanted to get around Lawrence going west-to-east and east-to-west would you rather simply "hop" from K-10 to I-70 (and vice versa) or would you rather take this huuuuuuuuuuuuge ridiculous loop that looped all the way south of the town?

July 11, 2012 at 6:57 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

10th Circuit Court of Appeals upholds state's approved route of South Lawrence Trafficway through the Baker Wetlands

My REAL idea is the East Lawrence Connector - I threw the flyway in for others who wanted a quicker way across Lawrence (as opposed to wanting to bypass it entirely). And yeah, it would cost a gajillion dollars. So... what do we need to do to get the East Lawrence Connector ball rolling? Maybe a bake sale? I could make the posters. Thoughts?

July 11, 2012 at 6:49 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

10th Circuit Court of Appeals upholds state's approved route of South Lawrence Trafficway through the Baker Wetlands

@RI - if you had the East Lawrence Connector and an elevated flyway on top of 23rd, why would you need the SLT?

July 10, 2012 at 9:59 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

10th Circuit Court of Appeals upholds state's approved route of South Lawrence Trafficway through the Baker Wetlands

The SLT is the stupidist way EVER to bypass Lawrence going east to west or west to east. It's always been a stupid idea. From day one. Let's face it, the original idea included commercial ventures dotting the route. That never happened and it's not gonna happen. There are two solutions to this problem: 1) a very long elevated road that would cast a shadow over 23rd with exits at Iowa and maybe a few other locations; and 2) the EAST LAWRENCE CONNECTOR: this is also an elevated road and it is a toll entry/exit for I-70. It connects I-70 and K-10 where they are closest (east of town). Problem solved! Next?

July 10, 2012 at 8:10 p.m. ( | suggest removal )