More Concrete is Better Carries the Day: H-GAC Transportation Policy Council Favors TxDOT Plan Over People
By Evelyn L. Merz
It was standing room only in the meeting room at the Houston-Galveston Area Council on July 26. I was there to attend the meeting of the H-GAC Transportation Policy Council (TPC), at which the Council was to vote on committing $100 million to Segment #2 of the North Houston Highway Improvement Project – an action requested by the Texas Department of Transportation “to demonstrate the region’s desire for advancing this investment.” (per TPC Agenda Item handout)
Segment #2 of I-45 North extends from I-10 north to the Loop 610 North. The current plan aims to reduce the ubiquitous traffic snarls of that segment by using the old Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) standby of adding more lanes, although the project would also replace the interchange at I-45 North and Loop 610. The most visible price of TxDOT’s plan would be severe social impacts: neighborhood impacts due to the loss of 168 single family homes, 1,067 multi-family homes, and 331 businesses with 24,873 employees. Resident displacement and affordable housing are vital concerns. Environmental impacts include the decrease in air quality due to increased particulates and vehicle emissions, increased neighborhood noise levels, and concerns over flooding due to increased impermeable surface,
H-GAC staff recognized the negative impacts, but their mitigation proposals were basically window-dressing
An early indication that there was support for approving the $100 million was a motion by Larry Millican, representing the City of League City, that the TPC approve the $100 million BEFORE all the people who signed up to speak to the Council ever had a chance to deliver their statements. However, he was willing to have the public speak AFTER the vote was taken. After the initial disbelief that a member of the Council actually wanted to silence meaningful public input, the audience erupted with objections. The chairman of the Council ruled that the public should be heard before a vote.
A multitude of speakers from the affected neighborhoods, social justice organizations, and environmental groups plus local politicians spoke out against committing $100 million to such a neighborhood-unfriendly highway design. They called for a delay on the vote and a revision to the design. Only a handful spoke in favor. Public comments extended for more than three hours. One of the most memorable statements was made by Jim McIngvale (aka “Mattress Mac”), who declaimed, “You shall not crucify Houstonians upon a cross of concrete!”
At the conclusion of the public comments, Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo (also a TPC member) offered an amendment to Larry Millican’s motion that would delay a vote to commit the $100 million until January 2020 so that public concerns could be addressed. Harris County Precinct 2 Commissioner Adrian Garcia seconded the motion, but his ability to second the motion was called into question by another TPC member. Although Harris County has two positions on the TPC, Commissioner Garcia does not hold the second position; he is the alternate for County Judge Hidalgo. The second position is held by Commissioner Steve Radack, who was not present at the meeting. After a long discussion, the TPC chairman ruled that Commissioner Garcia could exercise the second vote for Harris County, so his second of the motion was allowed to stand.
Unfortunately, when the final vote was taken, the only vote in favor of County Judge Hidalgo’s motion was Hidalgo’s. Commissioner Garcia chose to abstain from the vote. During discussion prior to the vote, the Texas Department of Transportation representative stated that if the TPC did not approve the $100 million during the meeting as requested, then the project would “lose its place in line” to receive funding, and that he could not assure when the funds would be available in the future. With the threat of lost funding plus the assurances from TxDOT that the plan was not final, the passage of the motion to approve funding was predictable.
However, TxDOT’s verbal assurances of plan flexibility can hardly be considered reliable in light of the recommendations by TPC staff to mitigate neighborhood and resident impacts. Staff recommendations range from inadequate to useless. TPC staff recommended $1.5 million for community planning activities to identify “additional measures to mitigate potentially adverse impacts.”
Some of the staff’s suggestions include pedestrian and bicycle paths, “enhanced landscaping”, and “transportation related investments that strengthen the historical and cultural identity of affected neighborhoods”. How could any of these ideas possibly mitigate for the loss of housing and businesses? Another idea is the creation of a “low emissions zone” in the adjacent neighborhoods, which deliberately avoids the air quality diminution and negative health impacts from the addition of four additional lanes, both during construction and operation. The zone would seek to reduce emissions generated within the neighborhoods with measures such as
- “Low or no emissions school buses” [Using Texas Volkswagen settlement $, perhaps]
- “Reduced truck idling” [Exactly who will be enforcing this?]
- “Public access to electric vehicle recharging facilities” [How many residents in low income areas own electric vehicles?]
- “Replacement of high emission, heavy duty trucks operating with in the zone with low or no emissions vehicles” [There is not a dedicated set of heavy duty trucks operating only in the zone. High emission trucks come from everywhere.] , and
- “Enhanced air quality monitoring” [Will the enhanced monitoring protect the residents from TxDOT after monitoring proves that air quality is worse?]
If the July 26th meeting proved anything, it was (1) that the only solution to traffic that TxDOT understands is to expand the number of lanes and (2) that the H-GAC Transportation Policy Council will vote to follow the money. A roomful of people went home with less faith that government works for them.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Houston Sierra Club’s comments are below.
July 26, 2019 Houston Sierra Club comments delivered to the Transportation Policy Council of the Houston-Galveston Area Council (H-GAC) on the staff recommendation to commit $100 million to fund Segment 2 of the North Houston Highway Improvement project located on I-45 North between I-10 and North Loop of 610:
Good afternoon. My name is Evelyn Merz. I am the Conservation Chair of the Lone Star Chapter and the Houston Regional Group of the Sierra Club. I am here today on behalf of the Sierra Club. The Sierra Club shares the concerns on displacement of residents and businesses and the injustices inherent in this project expressed by earlier speakers. However, I will focus my comments on air quality and flood risk, which are topics on which the Sierra Club has experience.
The staff recommendation to create a “low emissions zone” is frankly a pitiful attempt to mitigate air quality impacts. Do you think that electric vehicle recharge facilities and enhanced air quality monitoring will protect local residents and workers from the particulates and emissions of traffic on the expanded highway and protect them from the tremendous amount of particulates and emissions generated during construction and inevitable traffic backups?. These aren’t solutions. They’re window dressing.
The earlier presenter from the staff of the H-GAC noted that the recently released National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Atlas 14 Rainfall Frequency data would be used. HOW will it be considered? The Harris County Flood Control District will be re-mapping all the watershed floodplains in Harris County as a result of Atlas 14. It is widely accepted that areas currently mapped in the 500-year floodplain will generally be in the 100-year floodplain after re-mapping. Exactly how has TxDOT accounting for the major expansion of the 100-year floodplain?
The standard procedure has been to treat close-in neighborhoods as sacrifice zones to enhance mobility for more distant and yet-to-be built neighborhoods. We need an opportunity to develop and comment on an alternative that protects the livability of neighborhoods, the health of residents, and safety from expected increase and severity of rainfall events. We ask you to delay this vote.