[pineda]

Say that you were told that a major road would be going within 500' of your local high school, with the intermediate and elementary schools adjacent to that school. Say that there's nothing you can do to stop it because (a) you don't have the money, ( you don't have the political clout, and © you don't own the land being condemned, although you do live in the adjoining neighborhood and your children attend those schools. Say that you're given a choice of either having the major road (we'll call it the Grand Parkway for demonstration purposes) depressed under the intersecting 2-lane roadway (we'll call that road Northcrest) or done as an overpass with no off/on ramps. Having it lie on the road with four-way signalization has been ruled out because the major road will be a tolled facility. So, you have a road that is within 500' of the high school (we'll call that Klein Oak) and within 700' of a 2,000 home neighborhood (we'll call that Northampton). Which would you choose and why?

[TJones]

So will the depressed road going underneath have on/off ramps ?

[pineda]

No, but less than 1,000 away at Gosling Road, there will be off/on ramps. But since there is new toll technology being employed, this will not increase the size of the roadway from the proposed 600-800' wide. The only users will be those persons who have functioning toll tags installed previously in their vehicles.

[Subdude]

I would vote for having the "Grand Parkway" as you call it, being trenched rather than an overpass. It would be quieter and better-looking for the area than an overpass.

[Original Timmy Chan's]

Subdude, on Wednesday, December 7th, 2005 @ 10:26am, said:

I would vote for having the "Grand Parkway" as you call it, being trenched rather than an overpass. It would be quieter and better-looking for the area than an overpass.

And a side bonus is that the depressed section of roadway acts as a huge detention pond in major flooding events, as we saw in TS Allison and numerous other events that have flooded 59 and I-10. Better the water in the freeway than in the neighborhood adjacent to the freeway.

[gto250us]

pineda, on Wednesday, December 7th, 2005 @ 11:51am, said:

Say that you were told that a major road would be going within 500' of your local high school, with the intermediate and elementary schools adjacent to that school. Say that there's nothing you can do to stop it because (a) you don't have the money, ( you don't have the political clout, and © you don't own the land being condemned, although you do live in the adjoining neighborhood and your children attend those schools. Say that you're given a choice of either having the major road (we'll call it the Grand Parkway for demonstration purposes) depressed under the intersecting 2-lane roadway (we'll call that road Northcrest) or done as an overpass with no off/on ramps. Having it lie on the road with four-way signalization has been ruled out because the major road will be a tolled facility. So, you have a road that is within 500' of the high school (we'll call that Klein Oak) and within 700' of a 2,000 home neighborhood (we'll call that Northampton). Which would you choose and why?

What is wrong with a major highway within 500 feet of a school? Spring Branch has several schools adjacent to I-10 and BW-8 and there are no problems.

[pineda]

The issue I've brought here today is not what is wrong with a highway near a school. I'm asking if you had a choice, would you choose a depressed, trenched roadway over a flyover, overpass one and why?

[GoAtomic]

gto250us, on Wednesday, December 7th, 2005 @ 2:21pm, said:

What is wrong with a major highway within 500 feet of a school? Spring Branch has several schools adjacent to I-10 and BW-8 and there are no problems.

Oh, pleeeease ...

[RedScare]

There have been studies that show children living within a short distance of freeways have much higher asthma and allergy rates, among other ailments, so getting too close to a freeway may be problematic.

That said, I would run it through a trench for sound and aesthtic reasons, and plant as many trees as possible on either side to soak up pollutants. I would recommend this approach in any location in which it is feasible, also.

[zaphod]

They oughta bury it.

Quote

There have been studies that show children living within a short distance of freeways have much higher asthma and allergy rates, among other ailments, so getting too close to a freeway may be problematic.

Yeah, thats all true and stuff, and good to think about.

But how long are these kids in the high school going to be spending outside. most of the day they are indoors.

[RedScare]

zaphod, on Thursday, December 8th, 2005 @ 8:20am, said:

They oughta bury it.
Yeah, thats all true and stuff, and good to think about.

But how long are these kids in the high school going to be spending outside. most of the day they are indoors.

True, and with filtered air, no less. I think the study was more concerned with building freeways too close to residential than schools, but it's all bad.

[GoAtomic]

pineda, on Wednesday, December 7th, 2005 @ 7:26pm, said:

The issue I've brought here today is not what is wrong with a highway near a school. I'm asking if you had a choice, would you choose a depressed, trenched roadway over a flyover, overpass one and why?

You know, Pineda, I was thinking about this the other day, and as much as I don't want to see this freeway destroy the peace in Northampton (I grew up there you might recall), it might act as a sort of separator of that neighborhood from everything the other side of the parkway.

In other words, the road 'boundary' might help Northampton become more closely associated with the Woodlands area than with the crappy subdivisions going up along Kuykendahl right now.

And, I would definitely vote for a depressed roadway. It's amazing that you can sit on the terrace at the Town&Country Cafe Express, with BW8 within 50 feet, and barely notice the traffic noise. Out of sight, out of mind, not to mention there would be no bridge supports for graffiti taggers ...

[pineda]

Great question!
Marching band is held outside everyday from 2:30 until 6:30 p.m.
Football, soccer, track, baseball are all practiced outside almost year round.
The drill team and color guard also practice daily.
And remember the intermediate and elementary schools are all adjacent.
So is a neighborhood with local parks filled full of small children.

There are still a lot of unknowns surrounding the Grand Parkway project, but one of the aspects that is sometimes overlooked is that the Grand Parkway Association is still telling people that "IF" a sound barrier or environmental barrier (read: earthern berm) or even trenching the roadway is required, that they are WILLING to contribute SOME of the funding necessary to do so. Not, they WILL do these things, but that they are CONSIDERING ALLOWING some funding PARTNERS. A little ambiguous or what?

Another interesting side note: this past Tuesday, another secretive meeting was held to discuss the Grand Parkway project SDEIS findings for Segment F-2. Only certain elected officials were invited to discuss the joint TxDOT/GPA report. No media were contacted about the meeting. It was held in Room 306 of the Parkway Center Building, part of NHCCC system. This is the same room that Senator Jon Lindsay holds his North Houston Association meetings in. Coincidence? Guess again. What's even more interesting is that Rep. Eissler and Senator Williams from the Woodlands were invited and attended. The Grand Parkway does not even go through their districts. But, Arsdale from Tomball and McCaul from Spring were not issued invitations even though the project goes right through their districts.

The meeting turned out to be a "first look" at the findings of the Supplemental DRAFT Environmental Impact Statement, held for only certain people before the Public Hearing, which is to be scheduled sometime in mid to late January at Klein Oak High School on Northcrest Drive.

One question that continues to dog the officials at the Grand Parkway Association is the question of NEED. They have promised to publish for over three years now, demonstrable proof of NEED for the Grand Parkway with their Traffic Studies in Northern Harris County. These were to be compared to the traffic studies conducted in Southern Montgomery County. Guess what is conspicously missing from the SDEIS? You got it; no traffic studies. Their response this time: "It will be published in the Final EIS." When asked about the traffic studies from Montgomery County, their response: "It did not find our parameters, so we opted not to include them." Huh?

Also, at a Harris County Commissioner's Court meeting held earlier this year, Art Storey of HCTRA, told us that the Grand Parkway "was never a LOCAL mobility project, it was always a REGIONAL project." This was told to us as a way of telling us that local needs were not important, and therefore our opinions did not count. This was a regional mobility project, after all. Yet, at this meeting Tuesday, David Gornet of the Grand Parkway Association repeatedly insisted that this IS a LOCAL mobility project, meant to alleviate traffic from the F.M. 1960 area and enhance the Woodlands mobility. Huh? When David was told that the project is quite a distance from 1960, he said it would EVENTUALLY connect somehow.

When it was pointed out to one of their consulting project engineers that the project was not warranted in the Harris County area as much as it was in the Montgomery County area where they are experiencing much more severe congestion problems than is this area, the engineer replied that people in the Woodlands don't want the project up there and have the money to make sure it never goes up there, and that Montgomery County has been steadily working with TxDOT to enhance their east/west corridors. When he was told that Harris County has consistently been ahead of the curve, not playing catch-up like Montgomery County, with their own east/west corridor projects, especially in Northwest Harris County, he replied that TxDOT is building for the year 2025, not today, and that "they" see a TREND towards more people moving into the Northwest Harris County than moving into Montgomery County, ESPECIALLY when the Woodlands gets ANNEXED by the City of Houston. Nice justification....

When Harris County engineer Gary Trietsch was asked about "funding partners" for this segment F-2 of the Grand Parkway, (since we all know that Art Storey of HCTRA suspended all further work or expenditures of money on the Grand Parkway indefinitely), his reply was that "they" would use SOME (?) federal money, SOME (?) TxDOT money, and that they MIGHT (?) be able to do the project without HCTRA money at all, ALTHOUGH they would certainly WELCOME THAT KIND OF PARTCIPATION BY HCTRA!

Oh, and for those of you reading this that actually know about the different proposed alignments, and there have been several; the Grand Parkway Association, in their finite wisdom, have elected to present Alternative Alignment "F" as their Recommended Preferred Alignment to the FHWA for their review in Washington, D.C. as I write this. Yes, so that means that the information as presented on the website www.grandpky.com is INCORRECT. And for the record, if any of you would like to contact David Gornet of the Grand Parkway Association, his CORRECT e-mail address is dgornet@grandpky.com, not the incorrect one listed on the website for over a year now. Alternative Alignment "F" goes the closest to Klein Oak and Northampton. Apparently, it makes more sense to them to go closer to three schools and an established neighborhood rather than plow through the yet undeveloped blow-torched barren land owned by Ronnie and Cathy Matthews, known as Northcrest Village.

If anyone reading this would like a copy of the Power Point presentation by the Grand Parkway Association, please PM me and I will send you a copy. To me, the most interesting part of the presentation was that no matter how many Public Hearings they seem to hold regarding this 40 year old project for Segment F-2 of the Grand Parkway, they seem to dutifully note all questions/comments/complaints in their report, only to have them repeated the next time at the next meeting, still unanswered. They invite public comments, note them, and then ignore them. Great plan!

This post has been edited by pineda: Thursday, December 8, 2005 at 10:20 AM

[ToolMan]

It's not a big deal having a freeway 500ft. away from a school. I went to Spring High School right next to a freeway and never noticed a thing.

This post has been edited by ToolMan: Thursday, December 8, 2005 at 10:24 AM

[pineda]

Aerial shot of Spring High School, located conveniently just off I-45 North, where an estimated 300,000 vehicles pass by daily.
This is a high crime area, with easy on/off access to the freeway. Businesses to the east side (where the school is located) are dying or are dead already. The surrounding neighborhoods on either side of the freeway are not thriving either. Is this the future for Klein Oak High School and Northampton, just so the folks living in the Woodlands can shave a few minutes off their commutes?

This post has been edited by pineda: Thursday, December 8, 2005 at 12:10 PM

[RedScare]

pineda, on Thursday, December 8th, 2005 @ 11:05am, said:

This is a high crime area, with easy on/off access to the freeway. Businesses to the east side (where the school is located) are dying or are dead already. The surrounding neighborhoods on either side of the freeway are not thriving either. Is this the future for Klein Oak High School and Northampton, just so the folks living in the Woodlands can shave a few minutes off their commutes?

Really? So the Gander Mountain shut down already? And the Super Wal-Mart? And the Target, Home Depot and Lowes?

Yeah, that's one dead-ass section of freeway right there.

[pineda]

I'm sorry, Red, I meant in the immediate area. Should have made that clearer to you.

Plus, if I were looking for a desirable neighborhood with good schools, I don't think having a Gander Mountain, Home Depot or Lowes, Super Target or Wal-Mart really close by would even figure into the equation. But, hey, others have different needs.

This post has been edited by pineda: Thursday, December 8, 2005 at 12:35 PM

[RedScare]

How much more immediate than next door can you get...the Spring High School parking lot?

You might also like to compare Northampton to, say, Enchanted Oaks as far as increase in home values in the last 10 years. They are identical.

http://www.har.com/n...ods/default.cfm

pineda, on Thursday, December 8th, 2005 @ 11:27am, said:

Plus, if I were looking for a desirable neighborhood with good schools, I don't think having a Gander Mountain, Home Depot or Lowes, Super Target or Wal-Mart really close by would even figure into the equation. But, hey, others have different needs.

Then why did you put this quote in your post?

"Businesses to the east side (where the school is located) are dying or are dead already."

[pineda]

There are small businesses in the immediate area of the school that are no longer there or are on the verge of leaving the area. So what if Target and Wal-Mart are doing well in that area? Would you want to live next door to that and the freeway? I wouldn't.

[ToolMan]

I believe the subdivision next to the school is North Hill. That used to be a very good neighborhood however it has gone downhill recently, but I'm pretty sure it's not because of the freeway.

My old neighborhood went bad too (not close to the freeway). It starting getting bad in the early 90's for some reason. My parents eventually moved to Cypresswood.

This post has been edited by ToolMan: Thursday, December 8, 2005 at 3:12 PM

[adagio]

Okay... I have been following this whole strand and I just don't get it.

We have TXDot, the Grand Parkway Association, and a group of politicians pursuing the development of the Grand Parkway.


- We know there is likely not enough funding to make this project happen if HCTRA is not involved.
- The planners of this project have not researched all the options available such as expanding the current roadways and moving the project further up north away from development.
- We can also look at maps and know that the land that currently being planned for the Grand Parkway is currently being developed or in stages of development. I am not just talking about the land around Klein Oak. The land north of FM 2920 and along Boudreaux is being developed at a rapid pace with housing, businesses, and within the next two years a school.
- There are many people along the F2 alignment who do not want the alignment to go through Spring.

Without funding, land, or public support - I just do not see how the Grand Parkway people and their supporters expect this project to work.

Furthermore, we can't continue to try to build highways to keep up with the predicted population increases. The cost of energy, the cost of land, and the cost of building these projects are eventually going to be prohibitive. We should be looking at alternatives to highways and using resources to develop these.

[CE_ugh]

adagio, on Thursday, December 8th, 2005 @ 6:41pm, said:

Okay... I have been following this whole strand and I just don't get it.

We have TXDot, the Grand Parkway Association, and a group of politicians pursuing the development of the Grand Parkway.
- We know there is likely not enough funding to make this project happen if HCTRA is not involved.
- The planners of this project have not researched all the options available such as expanding the current roadways and moving the project further up north away from development.
- We can also look at maps and know that the land that currently being planned for the Grand Parkway is currently being developed or in stages of development. I am not just talking about the land around Klein Oak. The land north of FM 2920 and along Boudreaux is being developed at a rapid pace with housing, businesses, and within the next two years a school.
- There are many people along the F2 alignment who do not want the alignment to go through Spring.

Without funding, land, or public support - I just do not see how the Grand Parkway people and their supporters expect this project to work.

Furthermore, we can't continue to try to build highways to keep up with the predicted population increases. The cost of energy, the cost of land, and the cost of building these projects are eventually going to be prohibitive. We should be looking at alternatives to highways and using resources to develop these.

Well as long as developers continue to build housing further away from the city center, the current infrastructure becomes hopelessly inadequate

[pineda]

Back to the original question:
Trench the road underground or elevate the roadway aboveground? And why?
I'm thinking trench, but is it cost-prohibitive vs. elevation?
Trenching would reduce noise pollution significantly, but what air pollution?
Is air pollution reduced noticeably when the roadway is trenched?
Where's Mr. Camacho when I need him?

[KatieDidIt]

pineda, on Monday, December 12th, 2005 @ 4:19am, said:

Back to the original question:
Trench the road underground or elevate the roadway aboveground? And why?
I'm thinking trench, but is it cost-prohibitive vs. elevation?
Trenching would reduce noise pollution significantly, but what air pollution?
Is air pollution reduced noticeably when the roadway is trenched?
Where's Mr. Camacho when I need him?

Even though they aren't pretty, I think a flyover is better. ALl those depressed roads flood. ANd I think it would be better not to have the Grand Parkway exiting right in front of a school. What a rush hour nightmare that would be.

This post has been edited by KatieDidIt: Monday, December 12, 2005 at 9:35 AM

[pineda]

Katie-
From what I've heard, the main exits/entrances will be Kuykendahl and Gosling.
Right in front of Klein Oak, we have asked for either an elevated or depressed roadway with no access.
You're so right, it would not be an ideal situation for anyone to have an off/on ramp on Northcrest.

[RedScare]

pineda, on Monday, December 12th, 2005 @ 8:19am, said:

Back to the original question:
Trench the road underground or elevate the roadway aboveground? And why?
I'm thinking trench, but is it cost-prohibitive vs. elevation?
Trenching would reduce noise pollution significantly, but what air pollution?
Is air pollution reduced noticeably when the roadway is trenched?
Where's Mr. Camacho when I need him?

I don't think trenching would help as far as air pollution goes. Lots of trees to eat the CO2 and CO would help, though. Trenching is a no-brainer as far as aesthetics and sound deadening. Let's hope they actually care what it looks and sounds like.