Bob Yancy, why does the city want a busy thoroughfare through Pebble Creek?

16,051 Views | 134 Replies | Last: 5 days ago by PS3D
Bob Yancy
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to VStarr2024 • 10:33p, 8/13/25
VStarr2024 said:
The last thing that CS needs is another Holleman boondoggle where we need an extra Major Collector/Major Thoroughfare but keep it a minor collector because we resist growth. North south Major Thoroughfares and Major Collectors are lacking throughout this town and I don't remember what Lakeway is classified as, but it's too late to revise it, and is not separated enough from SH6 to justify upgrading it to one. Rock prairie is one and Southern Point Parkway will eventually connect east west to it by the Lick creek WWTP, but will be an even bigger bridge and investment by COCS to make happen. Pebble Creek Parkway has always been treated like a Major Collector with special privileges until it came time to extend it. They already made southern pointe run an upgraded major waterline from the end of PC pkwy to serve it water, and the city condemned a massive easement on private land along the power lines to do so. I don't know what the development to the south looks like or if the same guy sold off, but I remember that property owner putting up a huge fight because the waterline screwed up his plans for the property, but the city said those plans wouldn't work anyways because they would go against the MPO and the extension of pebble creek pkwy, of which they were keeping the WL in alignment with. If the MPO is changed, I can smell a nice lawsuit incoming from that property owner and potentially southern pointe. Keep the MPO as is and don't create another boondoggle because people don't want growth in their backyard and ruin their temporary special privileges. That area to the south will need multiple connections to the north outside of SH6, and I'd prefer to not be on the hook as a taxpayer for a massive bridge through Lick Creek Park to make it happen.


Sounds well reasoned and knowledge based, but what do we do with the cart crossings? Are we going to have golf carts crossing 4 lanes in two places?

Edited: never mind answered my own question. It's doable by law, maybe. (See link) AI says no to crossing 4 lanes, but I couldn't find that in this document.

The golf cart issue alone throws harsh light on an inescapable truth, though. Pebble Creek Parkway is a unique street in a unique neighborhood to College Station. Sometimes the best laid future plans of mice and men don't easily correlate with reality. A four lane PC Parkway is a very different scenario than what exists today. It's an extremely pedestrian/recreational street. Lakeway isn't. Rock Prairie isn't.

https://www.tml.org/DocumentCenter/View/2822/Golf-Carts--2021-07-PDF

Respectfully

Yancy '95
My opinions are mine and should not be construed as those of city council or staff. I welcome robust debate but will cease communication on any thread in which colleagues or staff are personally criticized. I must refrain from comment on posted agenda items until after meetings are concluded. Bob Yancy 95
Reply Quote
4
3 edits
woodiewood1
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to double b • 4:43a, 8/14/25
double b said:
woodiewood1 said:
Brian Alg said:
Bob Yancy said:
The patently false statement is that we are giving a gift to the Bombers or building a ball field for them. We are not.

The Bombers are the only tenant you or anyone else with the city are willing to make any commitment to. When it comes to those prime May weekends, perhaps you are planning on leaving Little Leaguers in the lurch, perhaps you are planning on leaving the travel baseball entrepreneurs in the lurch. But the only thing we can be assured of is that Uri and the Bombers are getting primary access to a ~$10 million championship field that is built to their specifications.

Bob Yancy said:
But I'm just telling you I engage in media, in person and over the phone at least as much as any other council member and I'm giving you my word, I get way more feedback in support of 3 new ball fields than opposed. It's just that simple.

If you have evidence that 13,217 College Station voters are now telling you that they do in fact want a championship field, I would love to see it. Can you post it here? If it is something the city has, could you tell me what to ask for in an Open Records Request?

The Bomber issue to me is almost a no-issue to me whether the park is built or not. The Bombers don't have games in May. It is not MLB team or even a minor league team that play 150 or so days a year. Assuming their schedule will be similar to what they have had, they play from Jun 1 to July 31,,,,61 days, Of those two months, the Bombers used the home field 4 weekends out of the 8. They used the park for a total of 17 home games out of the 61 days. If they need other days for practicing and/or days in May, they can practice early in the day when it doesn't have an affect on other teams using it in the evenings.

To me it would be nice to get at least one "permanent" paying tenant for at least for the two months,

I do like that the park and the fields can be and will be also used by local teams, taxpayer families, much of the time, Everything the city does doesn't have to be an effort in making a profit.



You're assuming that the Bombers actually paid for the field. I think this is one of the arguments against accommodating them. They wore out their welcome with the COB and failed to hold up their end of the deal.

What I understand is that the Bombers contract with the city of Bryan did not have them paying rent on the field nor paying utilities. The City terminated the contract and tried to negotiate with the bombers on a rental amount and paying of the utilities, I didn't know that the Bombers didn't uphold their end of the deal, What did they not do?

"
  • Rent and Utilities: The Bombers had operated under an exclusive use agreement for 18 years without paying rent or utilities, as the City of Bryan covered these costs. The City sought to change this, proposing that the Bombers pay a negotiated rental rate and cover their own utilities during their season. This was a key sticking point that Infinity Sports Entertainment rejected, according to WTAW.
  • Exclusive Use vs. Maximizing Public Investment: The City's primary motivation was to ensure Travis Field, a public facility, was being used to its fullest potential and providing the best value for taxpayers. This meant exploring options for other uses of the field beyond just the Bombers' season. Infinity, however, sought to maintain its exclusive use rights and resisted any proposals that would alter the agreement and potentially reduce its control over the stadium, according to KBTX News 3.
"
Reply Quote
woodiewood1
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Bob Yancy • 4:46a, 8/14/25
Bob Yancy said:
VStarr2024 said:
The last thing that CS needs is another Holleman boondoggle where we need an extra Major Collector/Major Thoroughfare but keep it a minor collector because we resist growth. North south Major Thoroughfares and Major Collectors are lacking throughout this town and I don't remember what Lakeway is classified as, but it's too late to revise it, and is not separated enough from SH6 to justify upgrading it to one. Rock prairie is one and Southern Point Parkway will eventually connect east west to it by the Lick creek WWTP, but will be an even bigger bridge and investment by COCS to make happen. Pebble Creek Parkway has always been treated like a Major Collector with special privileges until it came time to extend it. They already made southern pointe run an upgraded major waterline from the end of PC pkwy to serve it water, and the city condemned a massive easement on private land along the power lines to do so. I don't know what the development to the south looks like or if the same guy sold off, but I remember that property owner putting up a huge fight because the waterline screwed up his plans for the property, but the city said those plans wouldn't work anyways because they would go against the MPO and the extension of pebble creek pkwy, of which they were keeping the WL in alignment with. If the MPO is changed, I can smell a nice lawsuit incoming from that property owner and potentially southern pointe. Keep the MPO as is and don't create another boondoggle because people don't want growth in their backyard and ruin their temporary special privileges. That area to the south will need multiple connections to the north outside of SH6, and I'd prefer to not be on the hook as a taxpayer for a massive bridge through Lick Creek Park to make it happen.


Sounds well reasoned and knowledge based, but what do we do with the cart crossings? Are we going to have golf carts crossing 4 lanes in two places?

Edited: never mind answered my own question. It's doable by law, maybe. (See link) AI says no to crossing 4 lanes, but I couldn't find that in this document.

The golf cart issue alone throws harsh light on an inescapable truth, though. Pebble Creek Parkway is a unique street in a unique neighborhood to College Station. Sometimes the best laid future plans of mice and men don't easily correlate with reality. A four lane PC Parkway is a very different scenario than what exists today. It's an extremely pedestrian/recreational street. Lakeway isn't. Rock Prairie isn't.

https://www.tml.org/DocumentCenter/View/2822/Golf-Carts--2021-07-PDF

Respectfully

Yancy '95



"A four lane PC Parkway is a very different scenario than what exists today. It's an extremely pedestrian/recreational street. Lakeway isn't. Rock Prairie isn't."

Spot on,

This reminds me of the proposal a few years ago to run a four lane 2818 through Emerald Parkway all the way to Hwy 30,

Reply Quote
3
Hornbeck
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:50a, 8/14/25
AG
I think one thing we're all missing is that the plan for Fitch to be the route of the I-214 loop, paid for by the Feds.
Reply Quote
2
1 edit
techno-ag
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Hornbeck • 11:22a, 8/14/25
AG
Hornbeck said:
I think mine thing we're all missing is that the plan for Fitch to be the route of the I-214 loop, paid for by the Feds.

How many years out, though.
Pro College Station Convention Center
Reply Quote
maroon barchetta
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to techno-ag • 12:15p, 8/14/25
techno-ag said:
Hornbeck said:
I think mine thing we're all missing is that the plan for Fitch to be the route of the I-214 loop, paid for by the Feds.

How many years out, though.


If they use the Lincoln Drive plan, the answer is "not in our lifetime".
Reply Quote
6
BCS-Ag
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to ElephantRider • 1:39p, 8/14/25
ElephantRider said:
BCS-Ag said:
It looks to me like Pebble Creek parkway was originally planned to be a neighborhood to neighborhood collector. Anyone that bought in that area should have taken this into account. This reeks of the mess that Appomattox has become, it was originally supposed to be a north-south connector that is now broken up because of very similar resistance. I get it and would resist if I was in the neighborhood as well, but we have to recognize that stopping it causes a bigger long-term problem.

If local government keeps caving to everyone who complains about road projects in their area, eventually it will be too late to do anything and we're stuck with a huge mess on our hands.

People are going to be upset about projects that affect them, that's just how it is and is the whole reason eminent domain exists. Nobody complaining about the East Loop would have given a rat's ass if it was a West Loop.


FIFY: If local government keeps caving to everyone who complains about road projects in their area, WE ARE GOING TO LOOK LIKE AUSTIN!

A little AI-assisted Austin history: When Resistance Made Traffic Worse
  • Built in the 1960s: I-35 was constructed through East Austin along the former East Avenue, dividing the city and displacing Black and Latino neighborhoods.
  • Double-decking in the 1970s: TxDOT tried to add capacity by stacking upper-deck lanes over the lower roadway between the UT campus and Mount Calvary Cemetery. It fixed nothing.
  • Capital Express Central (current project): A $4.5$4.9 billion, decade-long expansion to up to 20 lanes, including burying parts of the highway, building decks, demolishing over 100 homes/businesses, and reconstructing downtown bridges.
  • Protests and lawsuits: Groups like Rethink35 sued and resisted it for anti-growth reasons, claiming TxDOT bypassed environmental rules and ignored better alternatives, especially for East Austin.
  • End result: Delays and resistance made congestion worse, and the eventual project became more expensive, disruptive, and drawn-out than it needed to be.
Reply Quote
9
birdman
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BCS-Ag • 3:16p, 8/14/25
BCS-Ag said:
FIFY: If local government keeps caving to everyone who complains about road projects in their area, WE ARE GOING TO LOOK LIKE AUSTIN!

I'd say we'd look more like a democracy where our politicians understand and listen to their bosses.
Reply Quote
5
birdman
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:18p, 8/14/25
I honestly can't figure out what a 4 lane road through Pebble Creek accomplishes. Seriously, it's a crappy solution in search of a non-existent problem.
Reply Quote
9
Aggie_Fire
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to birdman • 7:15p, 8/14/25
AG
birdman said:
I honestly can't figure out what a 4 lane road through Pebble Creek accomplishes. Seriously, it's a crappy solution in search of a non-existent problem.

No one wants to build a 4-lane road through PC right now. This is all about removing it off of the City's 2045 plan. Some residents want to remove it now from the plan before it's even needed. So when it's needed one day, it is no longer on the plan.

If the 4 lane designation is removed, the reality is, 20 years from now this could all get reversed and it could be built anyways. Eventually the needs can and/or will outweigh feelings & desires.

Roads are built for 2 reasons: Planning and Reactionary. Plan ahead and it's cheaper...or wait until it's past due and it will be more expensive.

In summary: Damned if you do...damned if you don't! This also pretty much sums up city government.
Reply Quote
4
AggiePhil
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:43p, 8/14/25
AG
Anyone have a link to a petition to extend PCP?
Reply Quote
Bob Yancy
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:13p, 8/14/25
Pebble Creek Parkway has been added to the agenda as a workshop item for sometime in the near future, as promised. Everyone will have their opportunity to weigh in. I thank my colleagues for agreeing tonight to add it.

I met with the developer. They are not married to any ideas about the parkway's future, only to a quality development and I must say, it looks very exciting to me as one member of council. No plans are finalized and I'll step back and allow the process with our staff to do its thing.

I look forward to hearing from the bosses on what y'all think. I'll update this thread with the date and time when I know.

Have a good evening. Respectfully yours,

Bob Yancy '95
My opinions are mine and should not be construed as those of city council or staff. I welcome robust debate but will cease communication on any thread in which colleagues or staff are personally criticized. I must refrain from comment on posted agenda items until after meetings are concluded. Bob Yancy 95
Reply Quote
1
maroon barchetta
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Bob Yancy • 10:52p, 8/14/25
Bob, I'm waiting for the time you post here and say "Someone brought a proposal to us this evening and it was dumber than a box of hammers. A third-grader could have put together a better proposal. This person had to be on low-purity meth when they sketched this out and handed it to us."

I never hear you tell us anything really stunk. They are always good.

Do you ever have ideas presented to council that are just whacky?
Reply Quote
Bob Yancy
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to maroon barchetta • 10:58p, 8/14/25
maroon barchetta said:
Bob, I'm waiting for the time you post here and say "Someone brought a proposal to us this evening and it was dumber than a box of hammers. A third-grader could have put together a better proposal. This person had to be on low-purity meth when they sketched this out and handed it to us."

I never hear you tell us anything really stunk. They are always good.

Do you ever have ideas presented to council that are just whacky?


Lol you mean like this?
Reply Quote
5
Bob Yancy
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Bob Yancy • 11:10p, 8/14/25
Bob Yancy said:
maroon barchetta said:
Bob, I'm waiting for the time you post here and say "Someone brought a proposal to us this evening and it was dumber than a box of hammers. A third-grader could have put together a better proposal. This person had to be on low-purity meth when they sketched this out and handed it to us."

I never hear you tell us anything really stunk. They are always good.

Do you ever have ideas presented to council that are just whacky?


Lol you mean like this?


Not really. Most people are rational actors pursuing self interest in a limited resource environment. Best to use empathy and objectivity to understand their issue and make the best call.

Respectfully

Yancy '95
My opinions are mine and should not be construed as those of city council or staff. I welcome robust debate but will cease communication on any thread in which colleagues or staff are personally criticized. I must refrain from comment on posted agenda items until after meetings are concluded. Bob Yancy 95
Reply Quote
2
1 edit
maroon barchetta
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Bob Yancy • 11:13p, 8/14/25
Bob Yancy said:
maroon barchetta said:
Bob, I'm waiting for the time you post here and say "Someone brought a proposal to us this evening and it was dumber than a box of hammers. A third-grader could have put together a better proposal. This person had to be on low-purity meth when they sketched this out and handed it to us."

I never hear you tell us anything really stunk. They are always good.

Do you ever have ideas presented to council that are just whacky?


Lol you mean like this?


Exactly like that.
Reply Quote
woodiewood1
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to birdman • 5:51a, 8/15/25
birdman said:
I honestly can't figure out what a 4 lane road through Pebble Creek accomplishes. Seriously, it's a crappy solution in search of a non-existent problem.

Since Pebble Creek Parkway originates on Fitch, would drivers going south on Hwy 6 turn on Fitch, go to PC, drive through PC and then hit Hwy 6 a few miles south of where they would be otherwise if they stayed on Hwy 6 driving farther in distance and taking more time to arrive at where they would be otherwise?

Seems to me the only people going south on PC to get the Hwy 6 would be residents of PC subdivision.

What am I missing?

These not a lot of options to add a major roadway going south to take traffic off Hwy 6. Making Hwy 6 to three lanes in each direction will address the issue for the next decade or so,

To me the long-term solution, way beyond my lifetime might be either the dreaded East Loop or maybe a two-lane elevated road, one lane in each direction, that goes down Hwy 6 from about Tabor Road and drop back down about where Nantucket is that traffic that is just going through the county without stopping would take?
Reply Quote
5
3 edits
Aggieland Proud
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:48a, 8/15/25
AG
Maybe I'm missing something as I'm relatively new to the area and PC, but I think most folks understand that Pebble Creek Parkway was intended to someday connect it to a development to the south. The difference is it was to be a parkway as Yancy has stated similar to what the start of it near Fitch and not a 4 lane expressway that would carry 18 wheelers. Huge difference; thus the uproar.
Reply Quote
3
woodiewood1
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Aggieland Proud • 12:30p, 8/15/25
Aggieland Proud said:
Maybe I'm missing something as I'm relatively new to the area and PC, but I think most folks understand that Pebble Creek Parkway was intended to someday connect it to a development to the south. The difference is it was to be a parkway as Yancy has stated similar to what the start of it near Fitch and not a 4 lane expressway that would carry 18 wheelers. Huge difference; thus the uproar.

That's true, but the whole discussion has been looking at options to take traffic that is going south off of Hwy 6, That was the only reason for the now dead East Loop,
Reply Quote
harrierdoc
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to woodiewood1 • 7:37a, 8/16/25
AG
woodiewood1 said:
Aggieland Proud said:
Maybe I'm missing something as I'm relatively new to the area and PC, but I think most folks understand that Pebble Creek Parkway was intended to someday connect it to a development to the south. The difference is it was to be a parkway as Yancy has stated similar to what the start of it near Fitch and not a 4 lane expressway that would carry 18 wheelers. Huge difference; thus the uproar.

That's true, but the whole discussion has been looking at options to take traffic that is going south off of Hwy 6, That was the only reason for the now dead East Loop,


I'm not sure how the east loop was going to address traffic on Highway 6. It seems to me that was really to anticipate growth east of Highways 6 and 30 and to enable major thoroughfare access to those areas. I would say this is the same, not necessarily taking traffic off of Highway 30, but connecting major development build to current infrastructure and to also offload Fitch, for people in pebble Creek to be able to access Highway 30 going south instead of coming up to Fitch to get on highway 30 as it really builds up. Also, as pebble Creek continues to grow, I don't know that I would want all that traffic coming through the only major entryway into that area and I would want a good large egress point going south. And then you also have to think about access for emergency vehicles to both the Farr reaches of pebble Creek, as well as to the newer subdivisions to the south.
Reply Quote
4
1 edit
Flatlander
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to woodiewood1 • 10:08a, 8/16/25
woodiewood1 said:
Aggieland Proud said:
Maybe I'm missing something as I'm relatively new to the area and PC, but I think most folks understand that Pebble Creek Parkway was intended to someday connect it to a development to the south. The difference is it was to be a parkway as Yancy has stated similar to what the start of it near Fitch and not a 4 lane expressway that would carry 18 wheelers. Huge difference; thus the uproar.

That's true, but the whole discussion has been looking at options to take traffic that is going south off of Hwy 6, That was the only reason for the now dead East Loop,

That's a strawman. The 4-lane PCP has been in the thouroughfare plan for years. The reason it is coming up now is because someone just now learned about it, started a petition, and is raising a ruckus. No one is legitimately proposing to make PCP an expressway relief-route for Hwy 6.
Reply Quote
7
wareagle044
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Flatlander • 10:36a, 8/18/25
Makes it a great opportunity for the project stakeholders to put it on the table, explain the need with transparency and provide the knowledge to those who've just learned of it.

If they can't or won't educate. Then maybe they don't know enough to move forward.
Reply Quote
1 edit
PS3D
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:05p, 8/20/25
Bob Yancy said:
DoubleE65 said:
Bob - the real question is what happens to the two golf cart crossings on PCP? I think we both know PCCC ownership isn't footing the bill for tunnels.


Really really good question. Eloquent testimony to the fact that Pebble Creek Parkway must remain a parkway.

Respectfully

Yancy '95

The scenic "parkway" in traditional sense is higher-speed anyway, much like Allen Parkway or Memorial Parkway in Houston, or the pre-Interstate "parkways" in New York. (Southwest Parkway in College Station is not technically a parkway). I can't go zipping around Pebble Creek Parkway at 40 mph (or higher), so its not even a parkway in that sense. I think it's 30 in Pebble Creek "Parkway".

Flatlander said:

That's a strawman. The 4-lane PCP has been in the thouroughfare plan for years. The reason it is coming up now is because someone just now learned about it, started a petition, and is raising a ruckus. No one is legitimately proposing to make PCP an expressway relief-route for Hwy 6.


The actual plan for Pebble Creek Parkway was supposed to connect back to Highway 6 (I assume that part is dead since the disconnected part was renamed) but the plan also has Pebble Creek looping back around to Highway 6, behind Southern Pointe, and based on the map, connecting to that little turnaround area off Highway 6 between Peach Creek Road and Westward Ho. I do think that the width of the roadway in Pebble Creek for the most part is wide enough for a separate lane (you make the current lane a bit narrower), and it wouldn't serve as an unofficial Highway 6 bypass unless the highway was completely jammed for some unusual reason (as in, not rush hour traffic). It could be a way for people in Southern Pointe to access the retail and restaurants in Tower Point, which would take pressure off of Highway 6.

However, that's probably cold comfort to the Pebble Creek people because they're worried about the "southbound trucks to Southern Pointe Parkway" issue. I appreciate Mr. Yancy's admission of conflict of interest, but I still believe Pebble Creek Parkway at the very least connecting to Pipeline Road (as a two-way road) should be studied.
Reply Quote
2
t-rex
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Bob Yancy • 5:08p, 8/20/25
AG
Bob Yancy said:
Buford T. Justice said:
Is Rock Prairie off of the table from a conversational perspective? (South of Fitch). It needs drastic improvement, and it appears that there is room to expand. All that is needed in my opinion is a relief valve into PC.


Still on the table.

Respectfully

Yancy '95

Wherever you build the road someone will be impacted. Just because more people in PC complain more loudly doesn't mean they should get their way and disadvantage other people.
Reply Quote
5
1 edit
MeKnowNot
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to PS3D • 6:03p, 8/20/25
PS3D said:
Bob Yancy said:
DoubleE65 said:
Bob - the real question is what happens to the two golf cart crossings on PCP? I think we both know PCCC ownership isn't footing the bill for tunnels.


Really really good question. Eloquent testimony to the fact that Pebble Creek Parkway must remain a parkway.

Respectfully

Yancy '95

The scenic "parkway" in traditional sense is higher-speed anyway, much like Allen Parkway or Memorial Parkway in Houston, or the pre-Interstate "parkways" in New York. (Southwest Parkway in College Station is not technically a parkway). I can't go zipping around Pebble Creek Parkway at 40 mph (or higher), so its not even a parkway in that sense. I think it's 30 in Pebble Creek "Parkway".

Flatlander said:

That's a strawman. The 4-lane PCP has been in the thouroughfare plan for years. The reason it is coming up now is because someone just now learned about it, started a petition, and is raising a ruckus. No one is legitimately proposing to make PCP an expressway relief-route for Hwy 6.


The actual plan for Pebble Creek Parkway was supposed to connect back to Highway 6 (I assume that part is dead since the disconnected part was renamed) but the plan also has Pebble Creek looping back around to Highway 6, behind Southern Pointe, and based on the map, connecting to that little turnaround area off Highway 6 between Peach Creek Road and Westward Ho. I do think that the width of the roadway in Pebble Creek for the most part is wide enough for a separate lane (you make the current lane a bit narrower), and it wouldn't serve as an unofficial Highway 6 bypass unless the highway was completely jammed for some unusual reason (as in, not rush hour traffic). It could be a way for people in Southern Pointe to access the retail and restaurants in Tower Point, which would take pressure off of Highway 6.

However, that's probably cold comfort to the Pebble Creek people because they're worried about the "southbound trucks to Southern Pointe Parkway" issue. I appreciate Mr. Yancy's admission of conflict of interest, but I still believe Pebble Creek Parkway at the very least connecting to Pipeline Road (as a two-way road) should be studied.

Any ideas how much the relatively long bridge to cross the creek (Alum Creek?) would cost to make this connection possible? Is that cost on the taxpayers or the developer? I can't think of any existing two lane road in College Station that has that long of a bridge.

Also, they didn't extend Pebble Creek across Fitch due to the cost of the bridge that would require and are now reluctant to extend (Mid Town) Town Lake to the frontage road due to the cost of the bridges that would require.

If we were to factor in utility in how tax dollars are spent (ha ha!!!) I believe that the Town Lake connection would require a much shorter bridge and serve a greater volume of traffic, so the cost per vehicle for this work would be a better return on investment.




Reply Quote
3
The Brazos Kid
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to MeKnowNot • 8:39p, 8/20/25
MeKnowNot said:
PS3D said:
Bob Yancy said:
DoubleE65 said:
Bob - the real question is what happens to the two golf cart crossings on PCP? I think we both know PCCC ownership isn't footing the bill for tunnels.


Really really good question. Eloquent testimony to the fact that Pebble Creek Parkway must remain a parkway.

Respectfully

Yancy '95

The scenic "parkway" in traditional sense is higher-speed anyway, much like Allen Parkway or Memorial Parkway in Houston, or the pre-Interstate "parkways" in New York. (Southwest Parkway in College Station is not technically a parkway). I can't go zipping around Pebble Creek Parkway at 40 mph (or higher), so its not even a parkway in that sense. I think it's 30 in Pebble Creek "Parkway".

Flatlander said:

That's a strawman. The 4-lane PCP has been in the thouroughfare plan for years. The reason it is coming up now is because someone just now learned about it, started a petition, and is raising a ruckus. No one is legitimately proposing to make PCP an expressway relief-route for Hwy 6.


The actual plan for Pebble Creek Parkway was supposed to connect back to Highway 6 (I assume that part is dead since the disconnected part was renamed) but the plan also has Pebble Creek looping back around to Highway 6, behind Southern Pointe, and based on the map, connecting to that little turnaround area off Highway 6 between Peach Creek Road and Westward Ho. I do think that the width of the roadway in Pebble Creek for the most part is wide enough for a separate lane (you make the current lane a bit narrower), and it wouldn't serve as an unofficial Highway 6 bypass unless the highway was completely jammed for some unusual reason (as in, not rush hour traffic). It could be a way for people in Southern Pointe to access the retail and restaurants in Tower Point, which would take pressure off of Highway 6.

However, that's probably cold comfort to the Pebble Creek people because they're worried about the "southbound trucks to Southern Pointe Parkway" issue. I appreciate Mr. Yancy's admission of conflict of interest, but I still believe Pebble Creek Parkway at the very least connecting to Pipeline Road (as a two-way road) should be studied.

Any ideas how much the relatively long bridge to cross the creek (Alum Creek?) would cost to make this connection possible? Is that cost on the taxpayers or the developer? I can't think of any existing two lane road in College Station that has that long of a bridge.

Also, they didn't extend Pebble Creek across Fitch due to the cost of the bridge that would require and are now reluctant to extend (Mid Town) Town Lake to the frontage road due to the cost of the bridges that would require.

If we were to factor in utility in how tax dollars are spent (ha ha!!!) I believe that the Town Lake connection would require a much shorter bridge and serve a greater volume of traffic, so the cost per vehicle for this work would be a better return on investment.





Make it a toll bridge!
Reply Quote
1
jeepdriver54
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:58p, 8/22/25
AG
Make no mistake, the East Loop project was and will be nothing more than opening up a quiet part of Brazos County to local developers so they can build more overpriced and expensive homes that only the elites can afford.
Reply Quote
1
PS3D
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:32p, 8/22/25
MeKnowNot said:
Any ideas how much the relatively long bridge to cross the creek (Alum Creek?) would cost to make this connection possible? Is that cost on the taxpayers or the developer? I can't think of any existing two lane road in College Station that has that long of a bridge.

Alum Creek looks like it can be easily crossed just like every other creek crossing like several roads (Longmire near Longmire Park, Southwood over Bee Creek, Holleman over Bee Creek, Villa Maria over Burton Creek...is there something special about Alum Creek in particular that can't be solved with some big pipes and a bit of concrete?


jeepdriver54 said:
Make no mistake, the East Loop project was and will be nothing more than opening up a quiet part of Brazos County to local developers so they can build more overpriced and expensive homes that only the elites can afford.

Is this hyperbole or is this what East Loop NIMBYs actually believe?
Reply Quote
4
MeKnowNot
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to PS3D • 3:23p, 8/25/25
PS3D said:
MeKnowNot said:
Any ideas how much the relatively long bridge to cross the creek (Alum Creek?) would cost to make this connection possible? Is that cost on the taxpayers or the developer? I can't think of any existing two lane road in College Station that has that long of a bridge.

Alum Creek looks like it can be easily crossed just like every other creek crossing like several roads (Longmire near Longmire Park, Southwood over Bee Creek, Holleman over Bee Creek, Villa Maria over Burton Creek...is there something special about Alum Creek in particular that can't be solved with some big pipes and a bit of concrete?



The difference is that there is a pretty wide floodplain that would need to be crossed.

https://www.bcsunited.net/fema/firm_maps/2014_Maps/48041C0350E.pdf
Reply Quote
1
PS3D
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to MeKnowNot • 4:49a, 8/26/25
MeKnowNot said:
PS3D said:
MeKnowNot said:
Any ideas how much the relatively long bridge to cross the creek (Alum Creek?) would cost to make this connection possible? Is that cost on the taxpayers or the developer? I can't think of any existing two lane road in College Station that has that long of a bridge.

Alum Creek looks like it can be easily crossed just like every other creek crossing like several roads (Longmire near Longmire Park, Southwood over Bee Creek, Holleman over Bee Creek, Villa Maria over Burton Creek...is there something special about Alum Creek in particular that can't be solved with some big pipes and a bit of concrete?



The difference is that there is a pretty wide floodplain that would need to be crossed.

https://www.bcsunited.net/fema/firm_maps/2014_Maps/48041C0350E.pdf

All of the creeks have large floodplains, but that doesn't equal to large bridges. WDF east of Pebble Creek crosses Spring Creek but is about 150 ft. long which is just about 50 feet longer at most than the existing creek crossings. The Carter's Creek floodplain is large, but the bridges aren't.
Reply Quote
1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.