UP May Pay $11,000 For YMCA Traffic Study

University Park officials solicited a peer review of the Park Cities YMCA’s traffic study, after questioned were raised by community members regarding its efficacy.

The review would be conducted by Freese and Nichols, and cost the city $11,000. According to the agenda memo for tomorrow’s City Council meeting, the city has paid for similar reviews for other large-scale zoning cases. The $11,000 cost would come from the city’s engineering budget, and will be voted on tomorrow.

Councilmembers discussed the possibility at the previous City Council meeting, acknowledging its probable need. According to a letter from the company, the review will be completed by August 8.

Here’s the letter, sent to public works director Bud Smallwood:

Letter Agreement Fni-up_ymca 7-11-12

By Bradford Pearson Jul. 16, 2012 | 10:40 am | 15 Comments | Comments RSS
15 comments to "UP May Pay $11,000 For YMCA Traffic Study"
  1. XT @ July 16, 2012 at 11:09 am
    C’mon, we need that money to rename parks, or refurb perfectly good existing parks.

    Seriously, why in the world would UP have to foot the bill for that?

  2. Traffic Cop @ July 16, 2012 at 11:29 am
    I will do the study for $10,000.

    It’s going to be a bigger building so there will be more cars. Check please.

  3. BroncoMom @ July 16, 2012 at 12:37 pm
    Could we not wait for the YMCA to really make traffic a night mare on Preston and the surrounding area!!!!
    At least get something for the money!!!!

  4. Scientific Method @ July 16, 2012 at 12:56 pm
    No matter who does the study, if they start with the same information provided by the YMCA about how programming will be the same in the new building as it is now, they will get the same answer.

    And by the way, what can you really learn from a study that says roughly, ‘It’ll be ok’? Where’s the sensitivity testing of the assumptions for programming and attendance? How is “acceptable wait at the traffic light” interpreted? How many cars exiting the YMCA would make it “unacceptable”? Does it consider the total time waiting on all traffic lights to get from the underground parking garage to the other side of Mockingbird? or to the North Tollway? Or just that no one light is very long?

  5. Avid Reader @ July 16, 2012 at 1:19 pm
    What other “similar reviews” has the city paid for in the past? Would love to know if there is a good/legitimate reason the city and not the property owner asking for the zoning changes/construction approval would be on the hook for that cost.

  6. Piper Man @ July 16, 2012 at 3:01 pm
    And so the fleecing begins…..

  7. thufir_hawat @ July 16, 2012 at 3:05 pm
    Put aside that this is a peer review, which is to say one firm grading another’s papers. Even if the new firm were to trash the old one, both sides of the issue just fall back on their entrenched positions, pointing to authority. If the review is the same or slightly different(as is likely), then they have the same appeal, just to emotion instead of authority. Quelle surprise.

    But if it says traffic will be nightmarish, so what? Neither the city nor the Y have the will or the money to either (i) say no to expansion, or (ii) do anything to fix traffic. So the study will reveal that it will be ugly, any fix will be cost-prohibitive, there is no third path, and no one has the stones to say “no.” Which is exactly where we are now without the review.

    It is a textbook example of local political backside covering. That is why it is a waste.

  8. Simon @ July 17, 2012 at 10:04 am
    Notice that it’s a “traffic” study? UP never hires a consultants to do “pedestrian” studies. That’s why I have learned how to sprint across our streets.

  9. DIANE @ July 17, 2012 at 12:09 pm
    wow. a traffic study. i have a revelation: preston is a very busy street. the light at normandy (which is askew) is awful. watching the pedestrians cross preston at normandy, both within and outside of the alleged crosswalk, is cringeworthy. here’s a suggestion. save the money. tell our city council to stop letting businesses and institutions expand to TWICE THEIR SIZE. just say no. if a church, business, restaurant, university ymca, etc. wants to expand beyond reasonable capacity, (traffic, lot size, aesthetic), say no!

  10. ramsey @ July 17, 2012 at 3:10 pm
    There is absolutely no good reason to expand the Y to size proposed. While I would like to believe that the patrons of the Y will use the parking garage and no longer park up & down the side streets (such as the street on which I live, Normandy)as they do now, I do not believe that will occur. It will continue to be too easy for the patrons to park and take a short walk to the Y, rather than go into a parking garage with only 1 way in & out, which might delay their arrival or departure.
    If the City Council determines that it will approve this unnecessary expansion, it is imperative that they improve the traffic flow and the safety of our neighborhood by making Normandy one-way to the east so that people leaving the Y can not make S-curve across Preston to enter Normandy.

  11. Rico @ July 17, 2012 at 9:47 pm
    I made an impulsive trip to the Town North Y on Northhaven this weekend, just to see what good things lie in store for the citizens of UP and their future Y. It’s really nice and Park Cities members should go visit it because it is just a short 10 minute drive, open to all Y members and plenty of room for more people. While I was inspired at the possibilities, the easy trip and easy access did make me wonder why we need the same kind of big facility in University Park when that one is so close at hand. Why not have a beautiful, boutique size Y in UP where the land is scarce and leave the big facilities in areas that have more open space?

  12. Rico @ July 17, 2012 at 10:28 pm
    Inspired by my intrepid voyage out of the bubble this weekend, I made a quick mapquest search of the distance and time from my home in the Fairway of UP to several Dallas Y locations:
    Park South 2500 Romine Av 8 miles, 14 minutes
    Richardson 821 Custer Rd 9 miles, 15 minutes
    White Rock 7301 Gaston 5 miles, 15 minutes
    T Boone Pickens 601 N Akard 6 miles, 10 minutes
    Lake Highlands 8920 Stults Rd 5 miles, 11 minutes
    Lake West 3737 Goldman 7 miles, 17 minutes
    Town North 4332 Northhaven 7miles, 16 minutes

    Just food for thought. I know….. Get a life…..

  13. bm @ July 18, 2012 at 6:39 pm
    Simon, the city hire “consultants” for everything, that way when it does not work they can blame it on them. Some young people have to get on the city council.

  14. Simon @ July 19, 2012 at 9:12 am
    @ bm, I agree. I should have also stated that the focus is always on moving the cars swiftly through town to the detriment of human beings. Notice that I didn’t use the word “pedestrian” which dehumanizes us. UP Elementary is the only safe crosswalk.

  15. Progressive @ August 13, 2012 at 3:29 pm
    What a bunch of whiners – the Y will benefit the community at large and those directly on the east or west are a small group that showing their protectionistic colors. Create some parking districts similar to SMU and give it a rest. The Y was there WAY before most of the residents. Things change. If it is THAT bad, just move.

Leave a Reply