Heading for a traffic jam

[Arch]

warriorpride said:

concerned said:

I have driven down Eola many times at the 7:00 hour and found it was better to take 59 and why would they build an interchange if was not going to be needed. For sure it will increase traffic around the HS site.

Also funny that one of the reasons Macom was not selected was do to having two HS so close together and here these two schools are 4.6 miles apart???

The interchange's main purpose would be to alleviate conjestion on 59 By allowing traffic that comes up & down Eola to get to 88, without need to cut over to 59. These people are west of 59 and are already travelling on Eola - hence, the comment about traffic on Eola not increasing much - people east of 59 ceratainly aren't going to use an Eola interchange.

The point about distance was in proximity to both WV AND NV, and related to geographic distribution.

Today, the cut over on NY, Indian Trail/N. Aurora or Diehl.

Put the interchange there and those that currently divert over by N. Aurora will stay on it and add to the traffic.

It will not increase south of those cutovers, but it will north of those cutovers.

[warriorpride]

archwinsome said:

warriorpride said:

The interchange's main purpose would be to alleviate conjestion on 59 By allowing traffic that comes up & down Eola to get to 88, without need to cut over to 59. These people are west of 59 and are already travelling on Eola - hence, the comment about traffic on Eola not increasing much - people east of 59 ceratainly aren't going to use an Eola interchange.

The point about distance was in proximity to both WV AND NV, and related to geographic distribution.

Today, the cut over on NY, Indian Trail/N. Aurora or Diehl.

Put the interchange there and those that currently divert over by N. Aurora will stay on it and add to the traffic.

It will not increase south of those cutovers, but it will north of those cutovers.

This discussion is pointless. I'm not going to get into an argument over how much traffic there is or will be on Eola. It is what it is, and it will what it will be. Just like the god-awful traffic on all the other major streets around here.

I'm glad that DuPage was engaged proactively by the SB/Admin - and I hope that they can come up with something to help keep the traffic moving at a decent pace during peak traffic times.

[hopefull]

This link to the Aurora comprehensive plan shows two future roads that would help ease congestion at the Eola MVHS. One is an extension of Commons north past the commuter train tracks to North Aurora road. The other shows molitor extending east of Eola and curving south to connect with the residential neighborhood to the south:
www.aurora-il.org/documents/gis/Comprehensive%20Plan.pdf
I have no idea if or when these road will ever be built. Does anyone here know?

[Arch]

warriorpride said:

archwinsome said:

Today, the cut over on NY, Indian Trail/N. Aurora or Diehl.

Put the interchange there and those that currently divert over by N. Aurora will stay on it and add to the traffic.

It will not increase south of those cutovers, but it will north of those cutovers.

This discussion is pointless. I'm not going to get into an argument over how much traffic there is or will be on Eola. It is what it is, and it will what it will be. Just like the god-awful traffic on all the other major streets around here.

I'm glad that DuPage was engaged proactively by the SB/Admin - and I hope that they can come up with something to help keep the traffic moving at a decent pace during peak traffic times.

If you find it pointless, then refrain. By your pointless logic, nothing is worth discussing because it is what it is and will be what it will be.

[warriorpride]

archwinsome said:

warriorpride said:

This discussion is pointless. I'm not going to get into an argument over how much traffic there is or will be on Eola. It is what it is, and it will what it will be. Just like the god-awful traffic on all the other major streets around here.

I'm glad that DuPage was engaged proactively by the SB/Admin - and I hope that they can come up with something to help keep the traffic moving at a decent pace during peak traffic times.

If you find it pointless, then refrain. By your pointless logic, nothing is worth discussing because it is what it is and will be what it will be.

What I view as pointless is someone repeatedly complaining over and over and over again about the same thing.

ETA: especially when the issue is being looked by people that can do something about it

If you're really that concerned, then contact someone that can affect change.

Feel free to continue to discuss traffic on Eola, but I feel that this topic has run its course (in my small mind, any way).

[Arch]

hopefull said:

This link to the Aurora comprehensive plan shows two future roads that would help ease congestion at the Eola MVHS. One is an extension of Commons north past the commuter train tracks to North Aurora road. The other shows molitor extending east of Eola and curving south to connect with the residential neighborhood to the south:
www.aurora-il.org/documents/gis/Comprehensive%20Plan.pdf
I have no idea if or when these road will ever be built. Does anyone here know?

That extension connecting down to burnett would be good for a back-way through the neighborhood to/from N. Aurora (connecting via pennsbury). I would bet the neighborhood would not be appreciative of it though and I can't remember for certain, but I don't believe there is a light at N. Aurora and Penns, but I could be mistaken on that.

[wvhsparent]

There actually is a light on N. Aurora Rd. and Pennsbury Ln. (it's fairly new) There is also a Burnett Dr also ends right at the back of the AME property. I see that being connected to a drive for the Church and quite possibly the school too.

It's not a straight shot to N. Aurora, and I am sure Cambridge Chase and Aurora PD will watch it for errant drivers.
If there is going to be a light at Molitor, I don't think there is much advantage to cutting throught the subdivision.

[Arch]

wvhsparent said:

There actually is a light on N. Aurora Rd. and Pennsbury Ln. There is also a Burnett Dr also ends right at the back of the AME property. I see that being connected to a drive for the Church and quite possibly the school too.

It's not a straight shot to N. Aurora, and I am sure Cambridge Chase and Aurora PD will watch it for errant drivers.
If there is going to be a light at Molitor, I don't think there is much advantage to cutting throught the subdivision.

Ah, good for the light. The N. Aurora/Penns would be for those wanting to avoid the morning fun on Eola who are coming from the east/south east

[proschool]

warriorpride said:

concerned said:

I have driven down Eola many times at the 7:00 hour and found it was better to take 59 and why would they build an interchange if was not going to be needed. For sure it will increase traffic around the HS site.

Also funny that one of the reasons Macom was not selected was do to having two HS so close together and here these two schools are 4.6 miles apart???

The interchange's main purpose would be to alleviate conjestion on 59 By allowing traffic that comes up & down Eola to get to 88, without need to cut over to 59. These people are west of 59 and are already travelling on Eola - hence, the comment about traffic on Eola not increasing much - people east of 59 ceratainly aren't going to use an Eola interchange.

The point about distance was in proximity to both WV AND NV, and related to geographic distribution.

I see people west of 59 travelling Ogden to Route 59 or across Mongomery Road up Frontanac to Commons. How would travelling up Eola help them get on I88?

[wvhsparent]

proschool said:

warriorpride said:

The interchange's main purpose would be to alleviate conjestion on 59 By allowing traffic that comes up & down Eola to get to 88, without need to cut over to 59. These people are west of 59 and are already travelling on Eola - hence, the comment about traffic on Eola not increasing much - people east of 59 ceratainly aren't going to use an Eola interchange.

The point about distance was in proximity to both WV AND NV, and related to geographic distribution.

I see people west of 59 travelling Ogden to Route 59 or across Mongomery Road up Frontanac to Commons. How would travelling up Eola help them get on I88?

Probably because they can bypass all the traffic bottlenecks by the Mall.