Wednesday, September 29, 2010

Yale = 1 Lane is Totally Fine

Admittedly, I hadn't noticed this before, but under the Public Infrstructure improvements section of the Washington Heights Development site, here's point 6 -

'6 - Northbound Left Turn Lane on Yale Street at Koehler.'

So, the city has commented that Yale is a 4 lane road, and can't be widened due to the RR Underpass to the south, and I-10 overpass to the north.  But I guess when Walmart comes to town, its quite alright to restrict the additional traffic that will be encouraged to come to the development traveling on those 4 lanes + the already existing 10K+ cars traveling up & down Yale daily, onto 1 Lane ... and then give them public money to do it ...

Just thinking of some simple math ... 4 lanes / 2 = 2 Lanes, and then 2 Lanes - 1 for a turning lane = 1 Lane left ... gee willikers, thats 1 lane.


  1. FYI Yale can't be widened at the underpass, however, it can be widened within the existing right of way to accommodate the left turn lane; there will always be four lanes of thru traffic. I know ... don't trust but verify.. and should you find, from your councilmember or COH PWE ... I hope you will update the information. It would be unfortunate for inaccurate information to be disseminated.

  2. Anonymous. You may be completely right, but this illustrates exactly what I've been ticked off about from day one ... we have zero answers on this stuff! There's no traffic studies, no recommendations, nothing but what RUDH has put out.

    When the city starts putting out hard data, then I'll listen. But we've been asking, and really haven't gotten squat!

  3. And I'm thinking on this comment a bit further, because you're not the first one to say this quite honestly ... I've heard that there will be street built into the property and/or right of way, but when I asked the Mayor about this directly, she didn't have an answer, so thats what I'm going off of. I'm aware that the city, the developer, and walmart actually do read this blog, so if you guys want to sound off with some info that we can pass along, then by all means, please feel free to send something to me.

  4. It is not my intention to be trite but the fact that the paved section can be widened within the existing right of way to accommodate a left turn lane is apparently one of those "common knowledge" things in the world of traffic engineers --- which is not my world. And, candidly, it's not the Mayor's either but, thankfully, like the developer she has great engineers available to her who will insure the infrastructure that serves this development is appropriate.

    And ... after you asked the Mayor the question, I found out the answer from a traffic engineer. (I didn't know either).

  5. Anonymous ... I don't think you're being trite at all, and I don't take any of this stuff personally. There are plenty of people that disagree, and plenty more that agree with my opinions.

    That said, your constructive feedback is welcome, but is also problematic, and characteristic of the city's communication shortcomings during this process.

    'Common Knowledge' to a traffic engineers encompasses a very, very small portion of the voting and taxpaying public. Additionally, the city has presented no traffic studies, simplified or heavily detailed, for anyone outside of city hall and Ainbinder to understand any of it.

    The reason RUDH put out a traffic count study was to keep it simple, and to back up community concerns with hard data. I think we can accept that the city did their own traffic counts, and has intelligent folks working on all of it ... But there has to be a far more acceptable and concise way of communicating it to the public; one that is far more accessible than posts on my personal blog (This is the greatest blog ... ever ... but the vast majority of Houston doesn't read it).

    So if you, anonymous, did find out the answer, why not have some kind of report, that can help explain those things?

    Here's a fact ... The Mayor's office asked RUDH to help them communicate facts to the group, and RUDH happily agreed to do so ... as long as there was substantial facts to communicate. And to this date, there has been very little.

    Its a shame in the first place that a community organization, any community organization, feels as if they have to look over the city's shoulder on such a controversial topic. But you're always welcome to post away, I'll review, and post if its constructive.

    (I moderate comments on this blog. Basically, the blog magically notifies me that there is a new comment, I read it, and then I publish it, or not - I don't think i've ever not posted a comment, but I won't post things that are overtly personally attacking, etc)