Mas89 said:

---

Yes. I am directly involved and no, it has not been done already on most tracts. The land being taken is enough for two lanes, not four. I'll be glad to give you a tour if you would like to see in person just pm me.

---

If you're directly involved, then why are you bringing up Plum Grove in your argument? The proposed cross-section is four lanes through the Harris County portion and extends into Liberty County, well past Plum Grove. I-1 has around 25% of the ROW acquired and I-2A and 2B have all ROW acquired.

CDUB98 said:

---

Outsider's perspective:

The way it seems to me is that traffic projections and designs are created based on a roughly ten year outlook, but by the time all the regulatory , environmental, and all other requirements are met, and the road actually built, it is already at capacity or worse.

It simply takes too long to go from concept to completion. The road is farked before it is done.

---

With induced demand also as a part of that equation, in many cases this is correct. Design-build delivery helps combat this to a large degree.

Just to put a image with this discussion, the alignment within the red arrows is the currently proposed two-lane section. The rest of the alignment before and after is a four-lane cross-section. The alignment and bridge over US 90 would be constructed as a four-lane section.

This part of Liberty County is one of the least-dense areas in the entire region. It's almost literally nothing but large-tract farmlands, and little to zero growth. I'm not sure how or why anyone would try and pass this area off as the "fastest growing area of Houston". Huh?

Quote:

---

Design-build delivery helps combat this to a large degree.

---

Does it?

As I stated before, it seems everywhere in this city, any highway is maxed out or worse at the time it is fully commissioned.

Something doesn't seem right in the whole chain of events; as if there is an entire piece missing from the thought process regarding future load.

I'm only a Mechanical Engineer by degree and been in management for a while, and thus don't know all the inner workings of this, but I can see that something isn't working in the process when a road is royally screwed from the day it opens.

CDUB98 said:

---

Quote:

---

Design-build delivery helps combat this to a large degree.

---

Does it?

As I stated before, it seems everywhere in this city, any highway is maxed out or worse at the time it is fully commissioned.

Something doesn't seem right in the whole chain of events; as if there is an entire piece missing from the thought process regarding future load.

I'm only a Mechanical Engineer by degree and been in management for a while, and thus don't know all the inner workings of this, but I can see that something isn't working in the process when a road is royally screwed from the day it opens.

---

Design-Build delivery knocks anywhere from 3 to 5 years off the process, so yes, it does help. Future traffic loading is most certainly a part of the equation, but where things can go wrong in a hurry is induced demand once a particular roadway is built (or widened). It's why certain roads can never be wide enough (IH-10 for example west of the Beltway). You can run traffic projections all day long, but nothing will ever overcome induced demand.

We are all to blame. It's easy to armchair QB the planners and engineers that get roads built, since you see lots of vehicles on the new or widened roads immediately. It's the nature of the beast in an area that has zero reliance on public (mass) transit on a large scale. The issue, which should be obvious by now, is that adding more and more concrete to roadways is not the answer.

Why can induced volume, in a worse case scale, not be included in traffic studies? Seems there has to be some type of factor that can be added to the model.

CDUB98 said:

---

Why can induced volume, in a worse case scale, not be included in traffic studies? Seems there has to be some type of factor that can be added to the model.

---

Regional traffic models attempt to include induced demand at a macroscopic level. The short answer is that including microscopic factors for induced demand will blow up the number of lanes needed for a given roadway project. It's just too much of a wild ass guess at that point, and is certainly nothing you can construct initially within a time or budget constraint.

Quote:

---

The short answer is that including microscopic factors for induced demand will blow up the number of lanes needed for a given roadway project.

---

Seems, given the history of "at capacity" I mention above, maybe it would be better. Just my thought.

Would the budget increase by a lot? Yup,. but, if the road didn't need new work/addition as soon as it was done, maybe it would have been better to spend the dollars now rather than inflation adjusted money later.

Really short answer is that no agency has the capacity to budget for all potential future growth. They can plan and estimate, but that doesn't mean they can pay for it now. There are also factors that traffic studies can't account for, like nearby construction projects or whatever else may lead people to divert to the new "open" lanes instead of their old routes.

In a perfect world, yes. But where do you stop? Back to the Katy Freeway, should the initial widening project from years ago have included 20 lanes in each direction? 30? 40? The answer is yes, if you wanted to account for unknown induced demand. Would that project have ever had dirt turned? Never.

To mitigate congestion on freeways, there are basically two options: 1) Keep adding more and more capacity, or 2) Attempt to decrease the demand.

The "volume to capacity ratio" that best determines the level-of-service has two ways to decrease, either increase the denominator (option 1), or decrease the numerator (option 2). The first option has been SOP for TxDOT for the past 40 years, and you can see where that has ended up. Induced demand has led to increasing the denominator, while at the same time increasing the numerator by a faster rate. It's not working.

Question: What is the population/traffic demand time frame used in traffic studies for these expansions?

Is 10 years? 20 years? Is the growth even looked at, or is the goal just a set capacity increase?

I'm not trying to be obtuse about this, really. I'm just trying to gain a better understand of the methodology that goes into these.

For instance, if only a 10 year projection is used, no wonder we are screwed as soon as we're done.

Is 30-40 years on the future a realistic time frame? No.

I agree that there needs to be a stopping point for projection, but I can't help but wonder if the projection time frame is too low, or again, if only gained capacity is looked at, are they being too short sighted.

Different topic / new string:

Mass transit to lower the numerator/demand.

Given the poor planning of Houston's past, mass transit seems more expensive than mass freeway....at the moment.

Has anyone done cost curves or analysis to find out that inflection point?

The typical traffic projection design horizon is 20 years. H-GAC utilizes and maintains a travel demand model of the entire region that can output projected traffic volumes based on a variety of inputs and design scenarios. It utilizes existing traffic counts along with historical and current growth rates, as well as all known future development.

Thanks for the clarification.

We don't have earthquakes. Build up.

Anagrammatic Nudist said:

---

Just to put a image with this discussion, the alignment within the red arrows is the currently proposed two-lane section. The rest of the alignment before and after is a four-lane cross-section. The alignment and bridge over US 90 would be constructed as a four-lane section.

This part of Liberty County is one of the least-dense areas in the entire region. It's almost literally nothing but large-tract farmlands, and little to zero growth. I'm not sure how or why anyone would try and pass this area off as the "fastest growing area of Houston". Huh?

---

Yes, the Plum Grove subdivisions are the fastest growing area of Houston and sold more lots in 2018 than any other in the Houston area. Currently building new roads on another 12,000 acres. Almost entirely located in Liberty County above the north red arrow. Nice article on the developer by Bloomberg News. There will be 4 on off ramps on the GP there in that subdivision. Largest COLONIA in the U.S. per Bloomberg.

The map shown is at least 18 months old and does not include most of the new construction. A lot of the land shown on the map has been purchased by developers and the south part will soon be developed by the gulf logistics park and the petrochemical industry in Mt. Belvieu.

The grand parkway being only one lane in each direction is going to be a bottleneck and a cluster &%#@ as soon as it opens. Just imagine any of our Houston loops being one lane today. CRAZY.

Hopefully it will be built above the flood zone as the previous GP segment opened West of hwy 59 has been closed due to roadway flooding 3 times in the last 3 years.

The two-lane section will not be a bottle-neck when it opens. Not even close. The segments that need four lanes will have four lanes. Not sure why you're not understanding this.

And why do you keep bringing up Plum Grove with your argument? Those segments are proposed with four lanes! That's the only neighborhood you keep referring to, and it doesn't correlate to your point at all.

CDUB98 said:

---

I think his argument is that the traffic between the 4-lane sections is going to be higher than you project due to the commuting between Plum Grove and work.

At least, that is how I interpret it.

---

Plum Grove has been included in the traffic projections along Segments H and I-1, along with other background projections. Plum Grove is also much closer to work centers along the US 59 corridor, Kingwood, The Woodlands, etc, then anything southeast along the I-1 or I-2 segments of the proposed Grand Parkway. Oil field workers in Mont Belvieu, Channelview, etc, aren't going to live 25 miles to the north and pay $10 each way to commute from a "new colonia" development.

His argument does not correlate to his point. A four-lane section provides access to the Plum Grove area from US 59. That is going to be the primary trip distribution percentage.

trust me, you're never going to get these types to concede anything. Everyone's an expert in their own mind.

Diggity said:

---

trust me, you're never going to get these types to concede anything. Everyone's an expert in their own mind.

---

Oh no doubt.

"Just imagine any of our Houston loops being one lane today. CRAZY."

I mean good lord.

Refineries, etc. I know you understood my point but congrats on getting your shot and pouncing at juvenile name-calling.

When I'm Mare, I will incentivize Houston corporations to allow their employees to work from home at least 2 days a week, thereby decreasing rush hour traffic up to 20%

nonameag99 said:

---

Show me an oil field in Mont Belvieu or Channel View

Dumb ass traffic engineer

---

Speaking of engineers, I wonder how they managed to design the current Grand parkway-99 so well going west of hwy 59 that it has flooded 3 times already. Not counting Harvey of course when it was closed for a couple weeks.

Was the flood data flawed or something? Did they not see the creeks and River? Or did the HGAC tell txdot it does not rain as much up there?

Design for a 100 or 500 year storm, and if the roadway floods then it serves one of its purposes as part of the drainage and retainage system. Amazingly when a lot of rain falls, things flood.

To keep the Kingwood trash from invading Conroe or Sugar Land trash from invading Katy during floods (depending on which end of Grand Parkway you are talking about)

We may have achieved Peak Orange Barrel.

Why are entrance ramps put so close to major interchanges so everyone has to fight past each other to get to where they need to go?

Why aren't independent entrance and exit ramps used more often? Is it just cost?

tk for tu juan said:

---

To keep the Kingwood trash from invading Conroe or Sugar Land trash from invading Katy during floods (depending on which end of Grand Parkway you are talking about)

---

Reverse on that idea. Please keep Katrina hoodies in Spring and out of Kingwood.

LOL at the new grand parkway flooding every year from a " 100 year flood ".
3 100 year floods in 3 years already.

Anagrammatic Nudist said:

---

You don't understand what 100 year flood means do you?

Hint: it has nothing to do with the amount of time between storms.

---

Yes. I have read the definition and realize a 100 year flood can happen every month. I also know that 12 to 15 inches of rain in a 3 day period that has repeatedly flooded that new GP road is damn sure not a 100 year flood for the Houston area.