U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Vermont
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-04-2013, 06:25 PM
 
35,325 posts, read 24,998,888 times
Reputation: 32369

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by harry chickpea View Post
FWIW, A continuous Jersey barrier like that would be a disaster for wildlife attempting to cross the road.
Yeah, deer would do fine, but smaller animals would have issues.

No one wants to pay for this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-04-2013, 10:33 PM
 
43,012 posts, read 92,025,684 times
Reputation: 30379
I hate jersey barriers. They make me tense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-05-2013, 01:21 PM
 
2,601 posts, read 2,757,334 times
Reputation: 2395
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hopes View Post
I hate jersey barriers. They make me tense.
Just use a guardrail. Same idea. 1 lane each direction.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2013, 08:23 PM
 
Location: on a dirt road in Waitsfield,Vermont
2,186 posts, read 5,981,473 times
Reputation: 1126
The idea of an interstate between Bratt and Benn has never been discussed or proposed by anyone before is because it would be a complete waste of time and money. Rt 9 is a perfectly safe state highway and will remain as such. Not nearly enough traffic to warrant the need for an interstate even if the feds and the state were rolling in cash. Many mountain passes out west are also state highways, not interstates. You have a right to your opinion, if you feel it's unsafe then don't drive it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2013, 12:47 AM
 
890 posts, read 2,561,544 times
Reputation: 574
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikelizard860 View Post
Just use a guardrail. Same idea. 1 lane each direction.
You seem to be obsessed with this issue. Tell us - do you know someone who had a bad or fatal accident on this road? I think the other posters on here would gain a different perspective if they knew a little more about why you are so passionate about it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2013, 07:39 AM
 
2,601 posts, read 2,757,334 times
Reputation: 2395
Quote:
Originally Posted by MRVphotog View Post
The idea of an interstate between Bratt and Benn has never been discussed or proposed by anyone before is because it would be a complete waste of time and money. Rt 9 is a perfectly safe state highway and will remain as such. Not nearly enough traffic to warrant the need for an interstate even if the feds and the state were rolling in cash. Many mountain passes out west are also state highways, not interstates. You have a right to your opinion, if you feel it's unsafe then don't drive it.
No it's not a safe road. That's just plain wrong. That's the reason there talking about lowering the speed limit(which will do nothing but drive up tax revenue) Route 9 could get lower speed limit - WCAX.COM Local Vermont News, Weather and Sports-

Ode to Route 9 - Brattleboro Reformer
""It's the most lethal road in Vermont,"

Traffic fatalities up in county - Brattleboro Reformer
Theit babbling about speeding(they want money from tickets!), but the real issue is a lack of a divider. People drive much faster and you have way more cars yet way less fatalities per capita on Interstate 91 in the county.

Route 4 is also very dangerous
Dangerous stretch of Vt. road gets rumble strips - WCAX.COM Local Vermont News, Weather and Sports-

It doesn't need to be a true interstate. Just one lane in each direction with a guard rail with limited access.

High speed road with a ton of sharp curves in it traversing a state with no guard rail is not safe. Period.
The people on here babbling about the fact that it's a good idea not to have a guard rail are probably the same people that fought seat belt laws/airbags ect.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2013, 10:25 AM
 
Location: on a dirt road in Waitsfield,Vermont
2,186 posts, read 5,981,473 times
Reputation: 1126
Majority of accidents happen as a result of equipment failure(tire, brakes etc), excessive speed, distracted and impaired driving. An improved road with more guardrails would have little effect on reducing accidents. One thing is for sure, an improved road results in people driving faster.

Curious what you mean by " limited access " ? That topography does not lend itself well to building some sort of parallel road for local access.

In an ideal world it would be nice to improve roads crossing over all our mountain gaps but the reality of it is that most accidents are not the fault of the road. In my view the road is safe, been driving it for over 40 years. Any curvy mountain road is going to have a higher accident rate so your links and stats are moot.

What will improve the accidents rate is people driving slower, especially in the winter. No drinking, eating or using their WMD(weapons of mass distraction) while driving, especially over a steep curvy mountain road. Do that and the result will be a much safer road for all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2013, 11:07 AM
 
2,601 posts, read 2,757,334 times
Reputation: 2395
Quote:
Originally Posted by MRVphotog View Post
Majority of accidents happen as a result of equipment failure(tire, brakes etc), excessive speed, distracted and impaired driving. An improved road with more guardrails would have little effect on reducing accidents. One thing is for sure, an improved road results in people driving faster.
.
It would reduce(actually eliminate) head on collisions. Kind of obvious, no?

The moron that isn't paying attention crashes into the guard rail and doesn't hit you. DUH! This isn't rocket science.

Remember when everyone was saying "55 stay alive". Interstate system went to 65 and fatalities did NOT increase.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2013, 11:11 AM
 
2,601 posts, read 2,757,334 times
Reputation: 2395
Quote:
Originally Posted by MRVphotog View Post
In my view the road is safe, been driving it for over 40 years.
That doesn't mean it's safe. It's like saying you've been smoking for 40 years and nothing has happened.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-12-2013, 11:14 AM
 
2,601 posts, read 2,757,334 times
Reputation: 2395
There's really no debate to be had here whether a guardrail makes a road safer(everything else being equal). It does. Anyone arguing otherwise lacks common sense or has an agenda The only debate is whether the lives lost/destroyed are worth the $ to put up a guardrail/do road improvements.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Vermont
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top