Segment E. of Grand Parkway (Katy Freeway To Highway 290)

[TheNiche]

One of the main excuses for this thing is to improve traffic commutes on 290 -- even though there are far more cost effective (though not necessarily cheaper) way of doing just that. The worst thing about the Grand Parkway is that it will be taking away county resources from directly tackling the real, existing transportation problems we face.

I'm really close with one of my cousins that is at TAMU in College Station, so every now and then I'll go up and visit him for a weekend. Traffic was so bad on 290 the first couple of times I tried to get out of Houston that I started going out to Brookshire and then cutting up along a farm road to Hempstead. It takes just as long but is much less frustrating. If I used the I-10 managed lanes, it'd be faster. I don't doubt that there is at least a small population like myself that would prefer to take I-10, even if it is a very indirect route, but I would also agree with you that the argument that Segment E would have a meaningful impact on reducing congestion along 290 is dubious.

Segment E should be built because it really is an essential part of an effective system of collector roads and because whether anybody likes it or not, those areas are going to continue filling in. And when I worked in the Energy Corridor I was shocked to learn that coworkers that lived in Bear Creek had commutes that took twice as long as mine, and I was coming in from the Texas Medical Center area via the West Loop and then I-10, both of which were under construction at the time even though the westerly portions of I-10 had already been completed. Projects like Segment E will alleviate that kind of situation.

The problem is that responsible long term planning doesn't appeal to a wide swath of voters. They want more roads, they want them built in already-developed areas such as where they live (except that it has to be adjacent to the next subdivision over, and not their own), they want them built now, and they don't want to pay for them either by way of muni-bonds or with user fees.

Planning for future growth is all well and fine, but you have to take care of the existing problems first. It's like stock investing -- you never start until you pay down your credit card debt. There are SO many other things that Judge Emmett and the gang should be worrying about before they try to tackle issues related to future growth.

No, this is absolutely nothing like the stock market, and if you keep a good credit score, make all your payments on time, carry a reasonable balance, and stay on top of the credit card companies to give you the best deal, I disagree that credit card debt is necessarily a prerequisite for stock market investments. I've actually used credit card debt to invest in the stock market before--coupled with a margin account--and made money. It was a speculative play and I didn't want to sell any of my other stocks and take the tax hit on them that year. Credit cards aren't bad, it's just that you have to take into consideration your cost of capital.

You mentioned that the right solution to transportation problems might be a whole lot more expensive than our elected officials believe is prudent to spend. I actually agree with you on that. There are hundreds of worthy transportation projects (not all of which fall under the jurisdiction of Judge Emmett), some of which address current shortfalls in service and some of which address the reality that Houston is growing and that there's nothing we can do to stop it. Most big projects are actually one in the same; you wouldn't want to expand an area of our road system to meet current traffic volumes and then have it become ludicrously congested in five years because an adjacent area became developed...would you? But you have to embrace a balanced transportation philosophy that considers current and future needs in order to not fall into that trap.

[TheNiche]

So Where are you suggesting this alternate route that would relieve congestion on 290?

Halfway between 6 and Belt-8?

I'm a proponent of that idea, too, except I'd just like to see grade separations and flyovers along Eldridge or Highway 6.

If there are lots of people commuting to the energy corridor from Cypress, what route are they taking now?

Getting to Memorial City and Westchase seem to be served just fine by the beltway.

Fry Rd., Barker-Cypress, Highway 6, Eldridge, or Beltway 8. It sort of depends on where they are coming from, exactly. Cypress is a big area.

[Houston19514]

As an example of what we SHOULD be doing instead of projects, like the Grand Parkway, take a look at the suburbs of Vancouver (wish I could provide a copy of the map itself instead of just linking to it -- anyone know how?):

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&source...mp;t=h&z=14

Vancouver's suburbs look like suburbs. Nice houses, big yards, cul-de-sacs, the whole 9-yards. But the big difference is the amount of local transportation infrastucture that has been provided. Arterials are very regularly spaced every 1/2-mile. Major, expensive projects like the Grand Parkway are not needed, and traffic works better to boot.

Your evidence is underwhelming. There is a freeway conveniently located just off of your map of suburban Vancouver (and less than 2 miles from the center the tiny slice of suburban Vancouver you showed us.)

[lockmat]

woohoo! Looks like Segment E and F-1 and F-2 are one step closer to being built. Par-tay!

http://blogs.chron.com/houstonpolitics/2010/05/another_mile_down_the_road_on.html

[LTAWACS]

Yippee!!! Another excuse to build out into nothingness!!!!!!

How many endless roads do we need in this city?? I swear, I have written so many people about this Grand PORKway extension, I'm just tired of it!!

We don't need anymore neighborhoods and endless strip center/Applebee's/Home Depot CRAP out there.

Great minds think alike. I'm with you on this one./

[LTAWACS]

Anyone have a map of the whole thing?

[lockmat]

http://www.grandpky.com/

[LTAWACS]

http://www.grandpky.com/

Cool thanks!

[T 2 THA C]

One of the main excuses for this thing is to improve traffic commutes on 290 -- even though there are far more cost effective (though not necessarily cheaper) way of doing just that. The worst thing about the Grand Parkway is that it will be taking away county resources from directly tackling the real, existing transportation problems we face. Planning for future growth is all well and fine, but you have to take care of the existing problems first. It's like stock investing -- you never start until you pay down your credit card debt. There are SO many other things that Judge Emmett and the gang should be worrying about before they try to tackle issues related to future growth.

The project has been shown on governmental planning documents since the early 1960's. Someone recently suggested using segment-E as a relief of 290, probably not a good suggestion, but Grand Pkwy has been planned for a while. Every time I go to Dallas I think im glad they are planning now instead of waiting untill devolopment dictates where infrastructure goes.

[lockmat]

I saw this on HCTRA's website today. Progress, little by little. I wish they published more information though.

Submittals from firms for the final engineering of the Grand Parkway in Harris County will be accepted until 11:00 a.m. on June 9, 2010.

HCTRA Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for Engineering Services

The Harris County Toll Road Authority (HCTRA) is accepting Statements of Interest and Qualifications (SOQ) from firms interested in participating in the final engineering phase of State Highway 99 (Grand Parkway) in Harris County. The requested services are necessary to prepare plans, specifications and construction cost estimates (PS&E) for construction of the project.

Please click here for instructions to obtain a copy of the specifications for the Request for Qualifications (RFQ).

https://www.hctra.org/about_news/hctra-request-for-qualifications-rfq-for-engineering-services/

[Original Timmy Chan's]

I saw this on HCTRA's website today. Progress, little by little. I wish they published more information though.

The RFQ's are for Segments F-1 (290 to 249) and F-2 (249 to I-45).

[Gary]

So they are not done with the engineering phase? I was under the assumption that this was already a done deal and we were waiting on the allocation of funds. As a Katy resident, I'm really anxious to get this thing going since I have to travel to the Telge/290 area weekly. This will also add the flyovers at 99 and 10 which are desperately needed.

[livincinco]

So they are not done with the engineering phase? I was under the assumption that this was already a done deal and we were waiting on the allocation of funds. As a Katy resident, I'm really anxious to get this thing going since I have to travel to the Telge/290 area weekly. This will also add the flyovers at 99 and 10 which are desperately needed.

Amen to that. Nice that they widened I-10, would be even nicer if we could actually get to it during rush hour.

[lockmat]

Is this for ramps on the the existing part of Grand Parkway to the south of I-10?

http://twitpic.com/1tx42w

[20thStDad]

When the grand parkway is done, can I take it to get to south africa to watch soccer games? Seems like it's about that far away so I think so.

[zaphod]

I wonder if this could be taken as an opportunity. While Houston has been growing rapidly it seems to me like it hasn't seen any truly brand new growth areas emerge in like 15 years. Trends have in development have changed since then, and we might see some new suburban node spring up out there as well, right?