"Lame Duck" Jon Lindsay keeps on quackin'

[pineda]

(from an e-mail sent to me by someone who doesn't know that I oppose this project. )

"Subject: Grand Parkway

re; our February Houston Northwest Chamber of Commerce Governmental Affairs/Transportation Committee meeting

Senator Jon Lindsay urged each of us to start an individual letter campaign urging construction of the Grand Parkway with emphasis on the segment beween SH 249 & I-45. We must not allow NIMBY advocates to delay nor kill a very needed piece of our infrastructure.

If you have any doubts, remember those who referred to the Sam Houston Toll Road as Lindsay

[desirous]

Where would this project get us though? The end of I-45 as we know it?

[rps324]

So...is that e-mail from Jon Lindsay then?

[pineda]

No, just someone from the HNWCC writing their wrap-up of their meeting.

[TheNiche]

So what's the problem with the Grand Parkway, now? Please be as clear and concise with your arguments as possible.

[desirous]

My complaint is that Grand Parkway construction is not an ultimate solution. People using an extended 99 would require another freeway to reach destinations. It nominally improves accessibility, but would only exacerbate traffic on an already overloaded I-45, and on 249, which bisects the gridlocked northwest segment of Sam Houston Tollway, and - you guessed it - I-45. Expand the North Freeway first before all hell breaks loose.

[TheNiche]

My complaint is that Grand Parkway construction is not an ultimate solution. People using an extended 99 would require another freeway to reach destinations. It nominally improves accessibility, but would only exacerbate traffic on an already overloaded I-45, and on 249, which bisects the gridlocked northwest segment of Sam Houston Tollway, and - you guessed it - I-45. Expand the North Freeway first before all hell breaks loose.

My understanding is that expansions are already planned for the North Freeway, the Northwest Freeway, and the north and west segments of Beltway 8. There may be a few years in between when projects are completed, but it really doesn't seem like a disaster in the long run.

[nmainguy]

So what's the problem with the Grand Parkway, now? Please be as clear and concise with your arguments as possible.

It is a hazard to humans as it encourages sprawl which encourages more one passenger SUV's on the roads for the owner's daily commute from their far-flung homes which equals even more damaging particulates for our kids to inhale which raises health care insurance for everyone in the long run.

If you are only interested in the short term instant gratification the GP may provide you and aren't interested in your children's and grandchildren's future, ignore the above.

[pineda]

Heard today:

The revised, supplemental DEIS for Segment F-2 of the Grand Parkway is due out in May. The Public Hearing should be scheduled just in time for Summer Break in June. Deja vu, this is the same way it happened last time they rolled out the DEIS, just in time for Summer Break, about 4 years ago now. BTW, no funding partner has been identified "as of yet", which means HCTRA still doesn't care for the terms being offered by TxDOT, which were, "We'll let you do all the work, but once it's built, we're only going to let you keep enough money to maintain it, everything else above that goes to the state's funds." More later...

[nmainguy]

Heard today:

The revised, supplemental DEIS for Segment F-2 of the Grand Parkway is due out in May. The Public Hearing should be scheduled just in time for Summer Break in June. Deja vu, this is the same way it happened last time they rolled out the DEIS, just in time for Summer Break, about 4 years ago now. BTW, no funding partner has been identified "as of yet", which means HCTRA still doesn't care for the terms being offered by TxDOT, which were, "We'll let you do all the work, but once it's built, we're only going to let you keep enough money to maintain it, everything else above that goes to the state's funds." More later...

pineda,

You seem to be the most informed in this forum on the future GP expansion. What is the prevailing attitude among those most affected? How do you feel about it?

"Loopians" like me are very interested as I think this GP project ultimatly affects us all.

[desirous]

My understanding is that expansions are already planned for the North Freeway, the Northwest Freeway, and the north and west segments of Beltway 8. There may be a few years in between when projects are completed, but it really doesn't seem like a disaster in the long run.

The Northwest Freeway will not be expanded until 2013. The North Freeway is only on the drawing board right now; they haven't even ruled out the tunnel concept yet, last I checked. I wouldn't count on it before 2015 at this rate. As for Beltway 8, I haven't heard anything. Someone have updates on that?

Constructing the Grand Parkway would be a quick business compared to these lumbering hulks.

[ENGcons]

pineda,

You seem to be the most informed in this forum on the future GP expansion. What is the prevailing attitude among those most affected? How do you feel about it?

"Loopians" like me are very interested as I think this GP project ultimatly affects us all.

The GP directly affects multiple neighborhoods in the NW community. My house for one stands to lose 14 ft of my back yard to the project if it goes in its current location. That was not the case when I built there. The majority of people in the area of Spring do not want it becasue they do not see the benifit of building it, which would require the use of eminent domain on a huge level to obtain the right of way. Alot of neighborhoods stand to be disected, or lost if they build this road.

I am no expert on this road and the politics of it but this section is incredibly controversial and it all centers around John Lindsey. I can't prove it of course, but the way he is pushing the building of this road you would think he has something to gain from it.

[TheNiche]

It is a hazard to humans as it encourages sprawl which encourages more one passenger SUV's on the roads for the owner's daily commute from their far-flung homes which equals even more damaging particulates for our kids to inhale which raises health care insurance for everyone in the long run.

If you are only interested in the short term instant gratification the GP may provide you and aren't interested in your children's and grandchildren's future, ignore the above.

Particulate pollution from vehicles is not substantial. Futhermore, only coarse particulates have been scientifically shown to cause substantial health problems. Most of those come from construction sites, and another substantial share comes from industrial production.

The Northwest Freeway will not be expanded until 2013. The North Freeway is only on the drawing board right now; they haven't even ruled out the tunnel concept yet, last I checked. I wouldn't count on it before 2015 at this rate. As for Beltway 8, I haven't heard anything. Someone have updates on that?

Constructing the Grand Parkway would be a quick business compared to these lumbering hulks.

According to the Grand Parkway Association (as of 8/25/2005), segments E, F1, and F2 would open to traffic in Sep-09, Dec-09, and Jul-11, respectively. However, given the precarious nature of funding and the delays that are typical of the political/planning process, it is reasonable to assume that they will deliver at a later date.

Besides, in the long haul, the gap between deliveries just doesn't really seem like it matters.

The majority of people in the area of Spring do not want it becasue they do not see the benifit of building it

Yeah, and my grandparents in Austin resisted the construction of Barton Skyway between Mopac Expwy. and Lamar Blvd. because they argued that the extra traffic and noise would bring down the neighborhood. They were right about that, and of course the Austin City Council gave in, but if you know Austin, then you know about the difficulty of travelling east/west; having the extra connection was in the common good and that common good almost certainly outweighed the cost of a relatively small number of homeowners that would have been affected. I am shamed by their actions.

Just as my grandparents and their neighbors lobbied in their best interests, so shall the citizens of Spring. But the residents of the Spring area are going to have to come to grips with the fact that the common good isn't always perfectly fair. Some people gain, and others lose. As long as there are more gainers than losers, that's what counts.

[dbigtex56]

Particulate pollution from vehicles is not substantial. Futhermore, only coarse particulates have been scientifically shown to cause substantial health problems. Most of those come from construction sites, and another substantial share comes from industrial production.

This statement seems a bit reckless. We cannot infer that ultrafine particulates are not a source of health problems only because they haven't yet been fully studied. Current studies indicate the opposite may be true.

According to research presented by the University of Rochester Particulate Matter Center:

• on a mass basis, ultrafines cause greater adverse affects than fine and coarse particulates

• when ultrafines are inhaled, they are deposited in human tissue to a higher degree than fine or coarse particulates in the respitory tract; this disposition of ultrafine particulates is noted as being higher in asthmatics

(link to source)

I'm also puzzled that diesel truck engines are not cited as a source of coarse particulates. Did the trucking industry have anything to do with funding the source of this information? Or am I overly skeptical?

[mrfootball]

They need to A) Speed Up Expansion of 290 and its planned Toll Road Extend 249 All the way into the Loop and C) Build another friggin' tollroad.

[pineda]

recent Houston Chronicle article addressed "fine particulates" and their toxic effects upon humans

and since the Segment F-2 is still being listed as a potential leg of the I-69 Nafta Superhighway running from Mexico to Canada, this statement is of particular concern to those affected in the Spring area:

Indeed, did you know that, in Houston and many other cities, the risk of getting cancer from diesel exhaust is greater than that from all other air pollutants combined?

Or that a 1999 study commissioned by the city of Houston estimated that approximately 435 area residents die prematurely each year due to our current particle levels?

But it's not one study, or two. Hundreds of rigorous studies tell the same story. Studies by researchers at Harvard, Johns Hopkins and elsewhere consistently demonstrate that higher levels of fine particles, mainly from combustion, translate into more people getting sick and more people dying prematurely. Re-analysis of these data by other scientists at the request of those who doubted the initial findings has only reconfirmed the earlier results.

Quote from TheNiche:

But the residents of the Spring area are going to have to come to grips with the fact that the common good isn't always perfectly fair. Some people gain, and others lose. As long as there are more gainers than losers, that's what counts.

Is it really "for the greater good" that the residents in Spring die earlier than normal so that you can get home a little quicker in the evening? What a heartless way to justify your actions...

[TheNiche]

Did the trucking industry have anything to do with funding the source of this information? Or am I overly skeptical?

Actually, my information (and I'll freely admit that my personal background on the effects of varying forms of pollution is limited) came from a notable environmental economist that works as a local professor.

[nmainguy]

recent Houston Chronicle article addressed "fine particulates" and their toxic effects upon humans

and since the Segment F-2 is still being listed as a potential leg of the I-69 Nafta Superhighway running from Mexico to Canada, this statement is of particular concern to those affected in the Spring area:

Quote from TheNiche:

Is it really "for the greater good" that the residents in Spring die earlier than normal so that you can get home a little quicker in the evening? What a heartless way to justify your actions...

I think people like TheNiche are pretty dug-in so when they make reckless statements as was made regarding pollution, it may just be a scare tactic. Fortunatly most HAIFers don't scare easily and many of us do our research.

Now that I've done my little rant, back to the topic. I'll repeat my original question to you:

pineda,

You seem to be the most informed in this forum on the future GP expansion. What is the prevailing attitude among those most affected? How do you feel about it?

"Loopians" like me are very interested as I think this GP project ultimatly affects us all.

Thanks in advance.

[dbigtex56]

Actually, my information (and I'll freely admit that my personal background on the effects of varying forms of pollution is limited) came from a notable environmental economist that works as a local professor.

Thanks for clarifying that.

My background is extensively limited on just about any subject you can name. The more I learn the more bewildering the world becomes. I sometimes envy the ignorant; they seem so certain.

Which comes first - the values or the priorities? The opinions or the facts to support them? The chicken or the tofu? It makes my head hurt.

Personally, I think the money spent on the Grand Parkway would be better spent on compulsory birth control. But that's a topic for another thread.

[TheNiche]

recent Houston Chronicle article addressed "fine particulates" and their toxic effects upon humans

and since the Segment F-2 is still being listed as a potential leg of the I-69 Nafta Superhighway running from Mexico to Canada, this statement is of particular concern to those affected in the Spring area:

QUOTE: Indeed, did you know that, in Houston and many other cities, the risk of getting cancer from diesel exhaust is greater than that from all other air pollutants combined?

QUOTE: Or that a 1999 study commissioned by the city of Houston estimated that approximately 435 area residents die prematurely each year due to our current particle levels?

Quote from TheNiche:

Is it really "for the greater good" that the residents in Spring die earlier than normal so that you can get home a little quicker in the evening? What a heartless way to justify your actions...

Regarding your first quote, can you find and post a copy of the study that argues this about diesel exhaust. I'd like to see what methodology they used to arrive at such a conclusion. How the researcher could quantitatively assess the impact of varying combinations of pollutants with reliability would be interesting, but plausible I suppose; how they derived the source of each category of pollutant and the sources' net effects seems implausible unless the study sampled significant numbers of people within very fine geographies, and also accounted for their typical exposures. That is, one must not assume that a person has inhaled a "lifetime exposure" because that person lives next to a refinery if half of every day is spent in West Houston. For that matter, it would have to account for the person's historical exposure. Perhaps they live next to a refinery right now, but moved here from near an industrial district in Mexico City two years ago. Perhaps they live in West Houston now, but moved there after 20 years of exposure in southern Texas City. In addition to a lifetime of migration patterns, the data would also have to correct for ethnic/cultural factors. Hispanics are more likely to be overweight, more likely to work in dirty blue collar jobs, and are also disproportionately likely in the Houston area to live around refineries--could that corrupt some correlation between health problems and proximity to pollution sources? You can see how the data could become muddled with any number of issues. For that reason, I want to see the study.

Your second quote from the article may be correctly stated, but doesn't provide enough detail from which to draw USEFUL conclusions. Note: "approximately 435 area residents die prematurely each year". This is not an issue comparable to a cause of death such as FALLING, which can strike anyone anywhere at any time or stage in their life. These things are going to cause premature deaths among the elderly and infeeble. For instance, rather than living to an age of 70, someone may die at the age of 65. These are folks that are either retired or contributing only marginally to the local economy, so the marginal impact is pretty small. And they're talking about the whole Houston area of over 5 million residents. That's not even 0.0087% of the population that died a few years before they should have. And out of that, I'll bet that most of the tiny fraction is concentrated in certain places, like Pasadena/Deer Park/La Porte, and Texas City.

So what miniscule fraction of the tiny initial fraction of people are being killed early by trucks driving along suburban highways? And how much does it really matter given that they're only dropping a few years off of the lives of those affected?

Perhaps even more importantly, if those freeways don't exist, how much more pollution will be emitted by trucks that would now have to stop and accelerate at every red stoplight along the next best alternate route? It's not like the trucks are going to stop coming just because there's congestion. Seems to me that keeping uncongested freeways probably prevents pollution by preventing stop-and-go driving. With that in mind, perhaps the residents of Spring could be made healthier by implementing limited-access high-capacity freeways.

I think people like TheNiche are pretty dug-in so when they make reckless statements as was made regarding pollution, it may just be a scare tactic. Fortunatly most HAIFers don't scare easily and many of us do our research.

My opinions have been developed based upon the information and analysis that appears to eminate from a reasonable and trustworthy source. That's really about as good as most of us can do when faced with truely complicated issues. My source may be incorrect. That'd be a good reason to reassess my opinion...and that's one thing that this board is really good for.

By the way, I do want to see your research...what little I've seen so far doesn't seem to give much cause for panic. You're free to make a cogent argument, but please don't delude yourself into thinking that anyone that doesn't agree with you is closed-minded...that'd be hilariously ironic.

Also, once you've made a convincing argument about the biological effect of pollutants, how about considering the policy implications of various proposals? Citing a death toll isn't a very effective way of coming about an optimal solution.

[pineda]

By the way, I do want to see your research...what little I've seen so far doesn't seem to give much cause for panic.

Gosh, I WISH I had the time to do that for you, t.n., but I really don't. Sorry. If you're really interested, just google the words "fine particulate matter" and "effects" and "humans" and you'll learn plenty. BTW, I never said you were closed-minded, but it does appear that you have your mind already made up on this subject of the Grand Parkway, and I'm sure you won't be convinced otherwise by anything I have to say.

Also, once you've made a convincing argument about the biological effect of pollutants, how about considering the policy implications of various proposals? Citing a death toll isn't a very effective way of coming about an optimal solution.

Actually, over the past five years, the residents of Spring have become very politically savvy and have been working within the system to make changes, instead of just against it. We've met with local politicians, and helped others get elected, we've held meetings with city and county and state planners, and officials with TxDOT and HCTRA, as well as the CTC and other environmental groups. In fact, one of our biggest supporters is a very well-respected attorney well-versed in enviromental laws who also works as a professor at a local Houston university. We stay informed, and help to keep others informed about the changes with the Grand Parkway, and there have been as many changes as there have been various solutions offered up and we'll continuing working on this until the final ROD is issued.

[TheNiche]

Gosh, I WISH I had the time to do that for you, t.n., but I really don't. Sorry. If you're really interested, just google the words "fine particulate matter" and "effects" and "humans" and you'll learn plenty. BTW, I never said you were closed-minded, but it does appear that you have your mind already made up on this subject of the Grand Parkway, and I'm sure you won't be convinced otherwise by anything I have to say.

Actually, over the past five years, the residents of Spring have become very politically savvy and have been working within the system to make changes, instead of just against it. We've met with local politicians, and helped others get elected, we've held meetings with city and county and state planners, and officials with TxDOT and HCTRA, as well as the CTC and other environmental groups. In fact, one of our biggest supporters is a very well-respected attorney well-versed in enviromental laws who also works as a professor at a local Houston university. We stay informed, and help to keep others informed about the changes with the Grand Parkway, and there have been as many changes as there have been various solutions offered up and we'll continuing working on this until the final ROD is issued.

You did an excellent job retorting to my response to nmainguy, although when I referred to an optimal solution, I was really referring to economic optimality rather than political optimality. See, I'm more concerned with having the optimal goals in the first place before I try to go out and get them implemented.

I'd really like to hear what you have to say to my analysis of the effects of pollution once I'd used that data from a source that you appear to endorse. With effects as miniscule as 450 premature deaths per year out of a population of over 5 million, I'm even starting to wonder whether its worth my time to even look at the content of the study when its so easy to take the bottomline conclusion and reasonably break it down to the point that it doesn't matter anymore.

You might also reference a post that I'd written a ways back about a worst-case scenario invovling butadiene or benzene exposures in the greater ship channel area. Similar stuff.

[Double L]

I am sorry but I think the Grand Parkway is a seriously needed project for our infrastructure. Nobody here wants to see more sprawl and more car reliance but I think it is best to cater both to the cars and to the alternatives (Public Transportation, centralized development.)

[RedScare]

With effects as miniscule as 450 premature deaths per year out of a population of over 5 million, I'm even starting to wonder whether its worth my time to even look at the content of the study when its so easy to take the bottomline conclusion and reasonably break it down to the point that it doesn't matter anymore.

I don't really have any position on this road, other than a general feeling of wondering when we'll have enough roads to pave the entire region. However, I wouldn't exactly call 450 premature deaths "miniscule". We have fewer murders than that, yet a poster recently said it was "skyrocketing". The number of deaths from auto accidents is similar to that number, and people talk about the carnage. The number of deaths from second hand cigarette smoke is far less, yet many people want to ban smokers to small islands.

By the same token, it seems a bit disingenuous for suburban residents who use all of our other freeways, and who voted against our mass transit plan (city voters carried the vote) to suddenly claim that THIS highway is dangerous for our health. Maybe if there was more support from Spring residents for regionwide solutions to our air quality problems, I'd be more inclined to support their opposition to this particular highway.

[TheNiche]

I wouldn't exactly call 450 premature deaths "miniscule". We have fewer murders than that, yet a poster recently said it was "skyrocketing". The number of deaths from auto accidents is similar to that number, and people talk about the carnage. The number of deaths from second hand cigarette smoke is far less, yet many people want to ban smokers to small islands.

Key word is premature. A murder is a premature death, but of a different nature than from pollution. Murder frequently happens to young people in their most productive years, preventing them from contributing to the economy. Pollution knocks out the infirm and elderly. Moreover, the pollution may have an average marginal effect that equates to a few lost years per person, while murder frequently causes the loss of nearly the entirety of an adult lifetime. That is a much bigger effect.

I'd really look forward to the day that the Chronicle does a report about the dangers of stairwells. Falls kill a whole lot of people and are the leading accidental cause of death. They can even use Perry Homes or some other developer as the sinister character that is profiting from the death of people using their products...that'd draw in readership. It'll never happen, of course, even in its spun form.

[RedScare]

I'd really look forward to the day that the Chronicle does a report about the dangers of stairwells. Falls kill a whole lot of people and are the leading accidental cause of death. They can even use Perry Homes or some other developer as the sinister character that is profiting from the death of people using their products...that'd draw in readership. It'll never happen, of course, even in its spun form.

I'm waiting for that blockbuster report from TABC on the number of drunks jumping off of balconies and missing the swimming pool. Now, THAT would be the lead story during sweeps week.

[nmainguy]

With effects as miniscule as 450 premature deaths per year out of a population of over 5 million, I'm even starting to wonder whether its worth my time to even look at the content of the study when its so easy to take the bottomline conclusion and reasonably break it down to the point that it doesn't matter anymore.

I realise you along with Parrothead are just another individual whose value of the life of one human, much less 450 miniscule premature deaths per year or the entire population of North korea is expendable. Unless you revise your moral and ethical parameters, you have become irrelevant beyond imagination.

[desirous]

I realise you along with Parrothead are just another individual whose value of the life of one human, much less 450 miniscule premature deaths per year or the entire population of North korea is expendable. Unless you revise your moral and ethical parameters, you have become irrelevant beyond imagination.

Is the best way to save human lives cancelling a highway though? Just as an example, an expanded smoking ban would save far more lives without depriving the populace of infrastructure.

[TheNiche]

I realise you along with Parrothead are just another individual whose value of the life of one human, much less 450 miniscule premature deaths per year or the entire population of North korea is expendable. Unless you revise your moral and ethical parameters, you have become irrelevant beyond imagination.

As I see it, there are two components to human life (assuming for the moment that we don't get into metaphysics, in which everything essentially becomes irrelevent): quantity and quality. If you sacrifice one to its fullest extreme, then the other becomes worthless.

Let me ask you, nmainguy: if you were the effective dictator of the Houston area, with its 450 premature deaths per year from this kind of air pollution, and you had the option of eliminating every single premature death by banning all vehicular movement within or through the region in addition to shutting down every industrial activity resulting in even moderate levels of pollution that might result in such a death, would you do that? The effect would be disasterous. The local economy would tank and people would start moving out of the region to areas where pollution was still permitted...because they have priorities beyond living a long life. They want a higher income so that they can live a higher-quality life, and they're willing to put themselves at risk for that opportunity. If you, as dictator, forced them to stay here 'for their own good', then you've just condemned them to poverty not unlike that in North Korea, except in a much warmer climate. Is that a circumstance that might make you "irrelevant beyond imagination" for lack of ethical or moral concern?

Of course, I wouldn't expect this kind of extremism from you...I'd expect that you'd regulate but not choke Houston's industrial and commercial employment base, even if that means that you'll have to accept that some people will die premature deaths as a result of air pollution. You'd essentially have to balance the trade-off between quantity of life and quality of life, reducing the values of each into a quantifiable formula. It sounds cold, but at its core that's what democracy is all about: balancing the equation.

All this aside: your statement, "Unless you revise your moral and ethical parameters, you have become irrelevant beyond imagination" is in poor taste. Morality and ethics are relative. I cannot define what is moral for you, and you cannot define it for me. I personally welcome further debate on the subject, even though I disagree with you so vehemently; if I am to become "irrelevant beyond imagination" in your eyes, then I can only feel sorry for you.

[nmainguy]

As I see it, there are two components to human life (assuming for the moment that we don't get into metaphysics, in which everything essentially becomes irrelevent): quantity and quality. If you sacrifice one to its fullest extreme, then the other becomes worthless.

Let me ask you, nmainguy: if you were the effective dictator of the Houston area, with its 450 premature deaths per year from this kind of air pollution, and you had the option of eliminating every single premature death by banning all vehicular movement within or through the region in addition to shutting down every industrial activity resulting in even moderate levels of pollution that might result in such a death, would you do that? The effect would be disasterous. The local economy would tank and people would start moving out of the region to areas where pollution was still permitted...because they have priorities beyond living a long life. They want a higher income so that they can live a higher-quality life, and they're willing to put themselves at risk for that opportunity. If you, as dictator, forced them to stay here 'for their own good', then you've just condemned them to poverty not unlike that in North Korea, except in a much warmer climate. Is that a circumstance that might make you "irrelevant beyond imagination" for lack of ethical or moral concern?

Of course, I wouldn't expect this kind of extremism from you...I'd expect that you'd regulate but not choke Houston's industrial and commercial employment base, even if that means that you'll have to accept that some people will die premature deaths as a result of air pollution. You'd essentially have to balance the trade-off between quantity of life and quality of life, reducing the values of each into a quantifiable formula. It sounds cold, but at its core that's what democracy is all about: balancing the equation.

All this aside: your statement, "Unless you revise your moral and ethical parameters, you have become irrelevant beyond imagination" is in poor taste. Morality and ethics are relative. I cannot define what is moral for you, and you cannot define it for me. I personally welcome further debate on the subject, even though I disagree with you so vehemently; if I am to become "irrelevant beyond imagination" in your eyes, then I can only feel sorry for you.

Feel sorry for me.

Don't feel sorry for me.

It makes no difference.

Quantity vs quality? You appear to choose quality. I choose both quality and quantity. They are not mutually exclusive.

Your argument and moral and ethical parameters seem to be so defined that no amount of debate with you could shed any more light on where we stand.