Culberson And METRO Reach Compromise

[Slick Vik]

Usually there is, but I agree it's not ideal when housing is close to the freeway. In CA, that is very common. In Houston, it's pretty uncommon. The feeder provides some spacing, and the usual commercial development provides even more in most cases. The most valuable use of land along a feeder is almost always commercial. If residential is there, it's often because of zoning (in places outside of Houston, like Bellaire with 610) or deed restrictions.

It's not just in bellaire. Much of 610 is like that actually in Houston city limits.

[Sparrow]

The buffer is the combination of feeder lanes plus the commercial development along the feeder, usually a big parking lot combined with a big box store or strip center (or office towers).  The residential ends up at least a couple hundred feet from the freeway, which gets outside the worst of the pollution plume.

 

So now sprawl is environmentally friendly???

 

Without feeder roads such development would be much more likely to occur in neighborhood centers and downtown areas in more dense, walkable, shorter drive districts thus reducing the "pollution plume" in the first place. Don't get me wrong, feeder roads do make way finding more straightforward, and they're a Houston way of life, but let's not be afraid to consider another alternative.

 

The answer is rarely 100/0 of one choice over another. Sometimes feeder roads are a better design, sometimes exits directly to perpendicular thoroughfares would be more appropriate. I'd say it's all about the last word in the title of this thread--compromise.   

[Houston19514]

So now sprawl is environmentally friendly???

 

Without feeder roads such development would be much more likely to occur in neighborhood centers and downtown areas in more dense, walkable, shorter drive districts thus reducing the "pollution plume" in the first place.

 

Do you have any evidence to support this claim?

 

[IronTiger]

It's not just in bellaire. Much of 610 is like that actually in Houston city limits.

 

Garden Oaks/Oak Forest looks like that, but that may just be it--deed limits and restrictions. East of 45, it looks like the same case originally, but many of those houses have been converted to freeway-facing commercial establishments. Either way, when you consider all the freeways (not just 610) in Houston, the vast majority faces commercial establishments. It's not quite that way in Los Angeles.

[samagon]

Do you not think the houses just off 610 don't get air pollution because of 2-3 feeder lanes? The effects of immediate air pollution affect far beyond that. That's a bad argument.

 

The number I've seen used for increased incidents of people who get asthma is 1000 yards and for people who already have asthma 2 miles is the distance for increased attacks.

 

so shade an area 1000' away from freeways. both with and without feeders. do a count of residences in the shaded areas.

 

You shouldn't even need to calculate the data to know that the number of residences in that shaded area is higher without feeders. 

 

You're right though, whether you live next to a freeway with no feeder (20 yards from freeway shoulder), or next to a feeder (50 yards from freeway shoulder), or behind a big box store (500 yards from freeway shoulder), you have a higher likelihood of getting asthma, but in the locations with feeders, there are less residences in that area.

 

So yeah, it sucks if you have to live next to a freeway under any conditions, but feeders provide us all with an overall healthier society.

 

 

So now sprawl is environmentally friendly??? 

 

 

No, feeders provide for an overall healthier society.

 

sprawl is in every city that grew up with freeways, not just cities that grew up with freeways that have feeders. Sprawl is not going away. Density will improve in houston as mass transit improves, but sprawl isn't going away. Maybe if every car vanished over night.

[LarryDierker]

Do the vehicles using the feeders not create pollution also? I can't see how the feeders are much of a buffer.

[samagon]

they do create pollution as well, but the huge big box stores, malls, and office buildings that line the feeders, these are the buffers.

 

It's far more common for freeways with feeders to have commercial developments on the feeders and extending back from the freeway a few hundred yards.

 

It's far more common for freeways without feeders to have homes build right up to within tens of yards of the freeway.

[IronTiger]

Do the vehicles using the feeders not create pollution also? I can't see how the feeders are much of a buffer.

Traffic on the feeders is far less than on the mainlanes (usually), but the point is the buffers that frontage roads foster.

[ADCS]

Traffic on the feeders is far less than on the mainlanes (usually), but the point is the buffers that frontage roads foster.

 

High-traffic commercial development is often noisier than a freeway with a sound barrier (easy to construct when the funds for feeders are freed up). Likewise, it's generally more pleasant to live next to a sound wall than it is to live next to the loading area of a strip center.

[ToryGattis]

High-traffic commercial development is often noisier than a freeway with a sound barrier (easy to construct when the funds for feeders are freed up). Likewise, it's generally more pleasant to live next to a sound wall than it is to live next to the loading area of a strip center.

 

I'm just going to flat out disagree with that.  A few backside delivery trucks during the business day don't make that much noise (and almost none at night) - certainly compared to the continuous rumble of freeway traffic, 18-wheeler air-brakes, or firetruck and police sirens screaming by.  And the benefits of the air pollution buffer far outweigh any noise.

[Slick Vik]

The number I've seen used for increased incidents of people who get asthma is 1000 yards and for people who already have asthma 2 miles is the distance for increased attacks.

so shade an area 1000' away from freeways. both with and without feeders. do a count of residences in the shaded areas.

You shouldn't even need to calculate the data to know that the number of residences in that shaded area is higher without feeders.

You're right though, whether you live next to a freeway with no feeder (20 yards from freeway shoulder), or next to a feeder (50 yards from freeway shoulder), or behind a big box store (500 yards from freeway shoulder), you have a higher likelihood of getting asthma, but in the locations with feeders, there are less residences in that area.

So yeah, it sucks if you have to live next to a freeway under any conditions, but feeders provide us all with an overall healthier society.

No, feeders provide for an overall healthier society.

sprawl is in every city that grew up with freeways, not just cities that grew up with freeways that have feeders. Sprawl is not going away. Density will improve in houston as mass transit improves, but sprawl isn't going away. Maybe if every car vanished over night.

Not sure how feeders provide a healthier society. They encourage people to drive, which means more cars, which means more air pollution.

[ADCS]

I'm just going to flat out disagree with that.  A few backside delivery trucks during the business day don't make that much noise (and almost none at night) - certainly compared to the continuous rumble of freeway traffic, 18-wheeler air-brakes, or firetruck and police sirens screaming by.  And the benefits of the air pollution buffer far outweigh any noise.

 

Fair enough - your experiences may have been different from my own.

[BigFootsSocks]

I'm just going to flat out disagree with that. A few backside delivery trucks during the business day don't make that much noise (and almost none at night) - certainly compared to the continuous rumble of freeway traffic, 18-wheeler air-brakes, or firetruck and police sirens screaming by. And the benefits of the air pollution buffer far outweigh any noise.

I assume the the sound barrier would block more light pollution from the highway than the 24/7 lights on strip centers though.. so trade of?

[IronTiger]

The backs of strip centers facing residential usually aren't illuminated, save for small lights on the wall, while sound walls will not block out one of those tall high-mast lighting systems.

To me, between the two, the choice is obvious.

[Trae]

they do create pollution as well, but the huge big box stores, malls, and office buildings that line the feeders, these are the buffers.

It's far more common for freeways with feeders to have commercial developments on the feeders and extending back from the freeway a few hundred yards.

It's far more common for freeways without feeders to have homes build right up to within tens of yards of the freeway.

How are you so sure of this? There are commercial areas behind a small buffer zone along these freeways in a lot of these areas. Not to mention in places like the Northeast, there is usually a nice tree buffer between the freeways and homes instead of just a sound wall.

[ToryGattis]

How are you so sure of this? There are commercial areas behind a small buffer zone along these freeways in a lot of these areas. Not to mention in places like the Northeast, there is usually a nice tree buffer between the freeways and homes instead of just a sound wall.

 

Based on my experience driving around Houston and LA/OC - your mileage may vary in other cities.  NE tree buffers are nice too, but I don't think they tend to be as wide of an air pollution buffer as a feeder + commercial development (I could be wrong, it's been a long time since I drove NE freeways.  I don't remember how thick the tree buffer is, but would be surprised if it's hundreds of feet).

[curbur]

I don't remember how thick the tree buffer is, but would be surprised if it's hundreds of feet).

 

Usually not.

[samagon]

Not sure how feeders provide a healthier society. They encourage people to drive, which means more cars, which means more air pollution.

 

cars being a convenient mode of transit encourage people to drive. take away the feeders, people would still drive. take away the freeways and people would still drive.

[samagon]

How are you so sure of this? There are commercial areas behind a small buffer zone along these freeways in a lot of these areas. Not to mention in places like the Northeast, there is usually a nice tree buffer between the freeways and homes instead of just a sound wall.

 

you can do an experiment to test my theory. I may do it myself.

 

step 1:

take all the freeways in Houston with feeders in google maps and draw a box 2000 yards wide (with the freeway in the middle). count up residences.

 

step 2:

go to a place like LA, find freeways that were developed around the same time as in Houston and take the same distance of freeway in google maps, draw a box 2000 yards wide (with the freeways in the middle). count up residences.

 

I'll bet you a beer at the next haif happy hour that there are less residences when feeders exist than when they don't.

[BigFootsSocks]

The backs of strip centers facing residential usually aren't illuminated, save for small lights on the wall, while sound walls will not block out one of those tall high-mast lighting systems.

To me, between the two, the choice is obvious.

They most certainly are; there's light from the parking lots (which never go off), light for security reasons on the backside of buildings, and light from the signs.

This isn't Austin where they et to turn that crap off; here in Htown that crap is on 24/7

[Slick Vik]

I'm just going to flat out disagree with that. A few backside delivery trucks during the business day don't make that much noise (and almost none at night) - certainly compared to the continuous rumble of freeway traffic, 18-wheeler air-brakes, or firetruck and police sirens screaming by. And the benefits of the air pollution buffer far outweigh any noise.

I disagree. I lived by a Kroger at one time and the truck unloading each night at the dock was unbearable.

Based on my experience driving around Houston and LA/OC - your mileage may vary in other cities. NE tree buffers are nice too, but I don't think they tend to be as wide of an air pollution buffer as a feeder + commercial development (I could be wrong, it's been a long time since I drove NE freeways. I don't remember how thick the tree buffer is, but would be surprised if it's hundreds of feet).

Common sense says trees are better than concrete for air pollution.

[IronTiger]

I disagree. I lived by a Kroger at one time and the truck unloading each night at the dock was unbearable.

If it wasn't for the "common sense" logical fallacy regarding trees being better than concrete, I admit I have to agree with you here. You see, I did work at a Kroger, night shift, and we had trucks arriving well after 10 and trucks for things like dairy and bread arriving in the wee hours of the morning.

Really, we can argue about things like "well, does the commercial establishment have a wall behind it, is it open 24 hours a day, etc.", and for that, it does depend and there are variables in all of this. A 24-hour superstore is different than a hotel, which is different than a gas station, which is different than a business that's completely shut during night.

[Slick Vik]

If it wasn't for the "common sense" logical fallacy regarding trees being better than concrete, I admit I have to agree with you here. You see, I did work at a Kroger, night shift, and we had trucks arriving well after 10 and trucks for things like dairy and bread arriving in the wee hours of the morning.

Really, we can argue about things like "well, does the commercial establishment have a wall behind it, is it open 24 hours a day, etc.", and for that, it does depend and there are variables in all of this. A 24-hour superstore is different than a hotel, which is different than a gas station, which is different than a business that's completely shut during night.

Logical fallacy? Do trees not absorb carbon dioxide?

[ADCS]

you can do an experiment to test my theory. I may do it myself.

 

step 1:

take all the freeways in Houston with feeders in google maps and draw a box 2000 yards wide (with the freeway in the middle). count up residences.

 

step 2:

go to a place like LA, find freeways that were developed around the same time as in Houston and take the same distance of freeway in google maps, draw a box 2000 yards wide (with the freeways in the middle). count up residences.

 

I'll bet you a beer at the next haif happy hour that there are less residences when feeders exist than when they don't.

 

There are a couple of problems with this comparison -

 

1. The vast majority of development in Houston came after the development of the freeway system. Houston really didn't extend past the loop at that point, so the feeders would have come first, then the development.

 

2. In LA, where freeways were imposed on top of existing transit and natural corridors within a developed environment, denser development taking advantage of the previous infrastructure would have already been in place. Furthermore, LA has geographic constraints that Houston doesn't have.

[BigFootsSocks]

HOW HAS NO ONE REALIZED WE DERAILED A TRAIN THREAD WITH A HIGHWAY TOPIC?!

This has never happened.

[samagon]

the comparison is valid. I did say LA, but I was thinking about the LA area, specifically southish LA, and into Orange County.

 

A lot of orange county grew up around the freeways, the freeways weren't plowed through the middle of neighborhoods.

 

Besides, pretty much everywhere inside the loop was built the exact same way.

 

It's interesting too...

areas of Houston inside the loop that don't have feeders are more apt to have homes built right up to the freeway (59 inside shepherd up through downtown).

areas of Houston inside the loop that have always had feeders and were built the exact same way (the gulf freeway from downtown all the way out). they tend to have commercial developments built where homes once were. Sure, it's just one or two layers deep in some cases, but in other cases, lots of houses were bought up by commercial entities.

 

These are two excellent examples of freeways that were built right through the middle of residential areas, and how they both grew independently based upon whether they had a feeder or not.

 

but don't take my word for it, please, look here: http://www.historicaerials.com/

 

Look at Houston. i10 was under construction in 1966, lots of homes were taken and then there were lots of homes right up to the feeder. then, look at today, it's all commercial. the same happens in quite a few places all over Houston. Mainly where feeders exist.

 

Now, go over to LA. Look around Orange County, the 405 specifically near where the 405 and 5 meet, where el toro airfield was. 405 was built in the 70s out in that area. No homes, nothing. freeway is built, and homes start popping up right on the freeway. the 5 existed out in that area way before it was anything other than orange groves. Now though, it's homes right up on the freeway.

 

Now, come back to Houston. Look at outlying areas where areas grew up around the freeways (Katy and Sugarland, the same as my Southern California example), it's mostly commercial developments, and really big ones, then a few hundred yards beyond those, is where the residential begins.

 

I'm not saying that different parts of the country would have grown like Houston had they used feeders, but as we're really the only example, you kind of have to draw that conclusion.

[cspwal]

HOW HAS NO ONE REALIZED WE DERAILED A TRAIN THREAD WITH A HIGHWAY TOPIC?!

This has never happened.

 

[ADCS]

the comparison is valid. I did say LA, but I was thinking about the LA area, specifically southish LA, and into Orange County.

 

A lot of orange county grew up around the freeways, the freeways weren't plowed through the middle of neighborhoods.

 

Besides, pretty much everywhere inside the loop was built the exact same way.

 

It's interesting too...

areas of Houston inside the loop that don't have feeders are more apt to have homes built right up to the freeway (59 inside shepherd up through downtown).

areas of Houston inside the loop that have always had feeders and were built the exact same way (the gulf freeway from downtown all the way out). they tend to have commercial developments built where homes once were. Sure, it's just one or two layers deep in some cases, but in other cases, lots of houses were bought up by commercial entities.

 

These are two excellent examples of freeways that were built right through the middle of residential areas, and how they both grew independently based upon whether they had a feeder or not.

 

but don't take my word for it, please, look here: http://www.historicaerials.com/

 

Look at Houston. i10 was under construction in 1966, lots of homes were taken and then there were lots of homes right up to the feeder. then, look at today, it's all commercial. the same happens in quite a few places all over Houston. Mainly where feeders exist.

 

Now, go over to LA. Look around Orange County, the 405 specifically near where the 405 and 5 meet, where el toro airfield was. 405 was built in the 70s out in that area. No homes, nothing. freeway is built, and homes start popping up right on the freeway. the 5 existed out in that area way before it was anything other than orange groves. Now though, it's homes right up on the freeway.

 

Now, come back to Houston. Look at outlying areas where areas grew up around the freeways (Katy and Sugarland, the same as my Southern California example), it's mostly commercial developments, and really big ones, then a few hundred yards beyond those, is where the residential begins.

 

I'm not saying that different parts of the country would have grown like Houston had they used feeders, but as we're really the only example, you kind of have to draw that conclusion.

 

There's another huge difference - Southern California is largely incorporated, and land use zoning is widespread. That's not the case for much of the Houston area.

[samagon]

that's also true, but I don't care to investigate whether those areas were zoned at the time those developments were built.

 

my point stands well enough with just Houston as the example. feeders seem to introduce a natural buffer of commercial developments along the freeway, this pushes residential farther away from the freeways, thus reducing the number of people living in an area where they would be at higher risk of getting sick because of their proximity to the freeway.

[IronTiger]

If you want more examples of how frontage roads do work in this way, check out the 635 in Dallas...even though frontage roads aren't quite as widespread, the development in Dallas is very similar.