AARoads Forum

Regional Boards => Mid-South => Topic started by: MaxConcrete on April 22, 2015, 09:19:38 PM

Title: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: MaxConcrete on April 22, 2015, 09:19:38 PM
http://www.ih45northandmore.com/scoping_documents4.aspx (http://www.ih45northandmore.com/scoping_documents4.aspx)

In particular see these schematics
http://www.ih45northandmore.com/docs4/16_20150417_Seg3_PM4_Exhibit_02_Eastern_Half.pdf (http://www.ih45northandmore.com/docs4/16_20150417_Seg3_PM4_Exhibit_02_Eastern_Half.pdf)
http://www.ih45northandmore.com/docs4/17_20150417_Seg3_PM4_Exhibit_03_Western_Half.pdf (http://www.ih45northandmore.com/docs4/17_20150417_Seg3_PM4_Exhibit_03_Western_Half.pdf)
http://www.ih45northandmore.com/docs4/15_20150417_Seg3_PM4_Exhibit_01_Overall.pdf (http://www.ih45northandmore.com/docs4/15_20150417_Seg3_PM4_Exhibit_01_Overall.pdf)

Earlier "leaks" of info hinted at a major rebuild, but this is more than I expected.

* Complete rebuild of the *entire* downtown Houston freeway complex. Everything.
* Removal of the Pierce Elevated and realigning I-45 along US 59 on the east side of downtown
* A super-wide new trench on the east side of downtown with 18 freeway lanes plus frontage roads.
* Abandoning a wide section of US 59 in northeast downtown and realigning it to eliminate curves, sending it directly through the Clayton Homes housing project. The abandoned section is relatively new, rebuilt and widened in 2003.
* Demolishing and rebuilding the US 59/I-10 interchange, most of which was built in 2003.
* Interstate 10 on the north side of downtown widened to 18 freeway lanes to accommodate I-10, I-45 and the I-10 express lanes. Since the term "express lanes" is used rather than "managed lanes", it suggests the I-10 express lanes will not be tolled.
* Realignment of I-10/I-45 west of Elysian, and abandonment of the existing I-10 corridor.
* Freeways on the west side of downtown no longer serve through-traffic and are downsized to provide connections into downtown. Freeway will still exist northward from the current western end of the Pierce Elevated.
* On the south side of downtown, the elevated US 59 is sunk into a trench and widened, with five northbound lanes and four southbound lanes.
* The US 59/SH 288 interchange is completely rebuilt.
* The US 59/SH 288 trench gets more lanes, generally around 20 lanes.
* On the northwest side of downtown, complete rebuild of the I-45/I-10 multiplex. It looks like the elevated HOV structure is also a goner, replaced by the four elevated I-10 express lanes.

The I-45 corridor north of downtown is also slated to be widened from downtown to Beltway 8.
* From I-10 to I-610, the corridor is kept narrow to appease the neighborhood, 4-2M-2M-4 plus frontage roads (M=managed). At North Main, the frontage road is on top of the main lanes.
* Complete rebuild of the I-45/I-610 interchange to be five-level.
* 4-2M-2M-4 configuration from I-10 to BW8. I think this is underdesigned. It needs to be 5-2M-2M-5, especially since a very wide corridor is being cleared and space is available.
* From I-610 to BW8, the corridor is widened to be 480 feet wide. This will be a huge right-of-way clearance event. But as anyone who has driven the corridor knows, the corridor is a dump and leaves a bad impression of Houston, so this clearance should be beneficial.

There's no mention of the cost. I'm thinking this is between $5 and $7 billion. I think there is political will to get the downtown rebuild done. But it is anyone's guess how long the entire project will require.
 
 
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: bjrush on April 22, 2015, 09:41:45 PM
Who is coming up with this stuff? TxDOT or a consultant for TxDOT
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: MaxConcrete on April 22, 2015, 09:50:40 PM
Quote from: bjrush on April 22, 2015, 09:41:45 PM
Who is coming up with this stuff? TxDOT or a consultant for TxDOT

TxDOT led this study, and they always have consultants on the team.

This study has been ongoing for a very long time (early 2000s) and the delays appear to be caused by the need to get more input and approval from stakeholders, mainly the City of Houston and the downtown Houston business establishment. So I think downtown Houston interests are on board with this. In fact, they probably demanded these costly features which added immensely to the cost.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on April 22, 2015, 10:17:20 PM
You know, with the short linear distance of the loop in downtown Houston, has anyone ever thought of making an 8-10 lane one way loop, like a massive freeway rotary around the core.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: nexus73 on April 22, 2015, 10:42:29 PM
Lordy, if ODOT could only Think Big when it comes to the PDX freeway mess! 

Rick
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: nolia_boi504 on April 22, 2015, 10:56:07 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on April 22, 2015, 10:17:20 PM
You know, with the short linear distance of the loop in downtown Houston, has anyone ever thought of making an 8-10 lane one way loop, like a massive freeway rotary around the core.
That actually was one of the options considered.

http://abc13.com/traffic/future-plans-for-big-changes-for-i-45/240341/
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Chris on April 23, 2015, 08:38:12 AM
Wow...

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fyzoond1.png&hash=8b4724388cfef3bf8a60b214f3cc981e88439a71)
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: pctech on April 23, 2015, 09:02:37 AM
Where are they going to come up with "mind boggling" money for a project like this? TX. is a fairly wealthy state, but doesn't have this much road building money floating around.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: MaxConcrete on April 23, 2015, 09:27:42 AM
Houston Chronicle report

Short Version
http://www.chron.com/news/transportation/article/I-45-moving-sinking-and-shifting-from-Pierce-6216991.php (http://www.chron.com/news/transportation/article/I-45-moving-sinking-and-shifting-from-Pierce-6216991.php)

Long Version
http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/transportation/article/Massive-I-45-project-would-remove-Pierce-6217572.php?t=040dea6378fda33e64&cmpid=email-premium (http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/transportation/article/Massive-I-45-project-would-remove-Pierce-6217572.php?t=040dea6378fda33e64&cmpid=email-premium)


Excerpts:

A massive plan to add managed lanes along Interstate 45 and potentially to reconfigure downtown freeway access will debut publicly Thursday, years after state officials started discussions of what could be the largest freeway rebuilding project ever undertaken in the Houston area.

In documents posted Tuesday, planners outlined broadly the proposal to add two managed lanes to I-45 from the Sam Houston Tollway in northern Houston to U.S. 59 south of the city's central business district. A public meeting to detail the proposal is scheduled Thursday.

Though the project stretches for roughly 16 miles, it's the southernmost four miles that have received the most attention. In the plans posted, TxDOT proposes to depress the freeway — much like U.S. 59 west of Spur 527 — between Cavalcade and Quitman streets.

In downtown, sweeping changes are planned, including realigning the freeway to run parallel to U.S. 59. Moving the freeway would mean eliminating the Pierce Elevated, which carries I-45 across the central business district.

Remaking I-45 will take years, with public meetings and more detailed analysis remaining. Officials said it is too early to pinpoint an exact cost, but transportation officials predict all of the work will cost "north of $6 billion," said Quincy Allen, district engineer for TxDOT's Houston office.

 
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: TXtoNJ on April 23, 2015, 10:08:44 AM
The biggest hurdle I see (other than funding, of course) is the five-level stack at 610. It's close to gentrifying neighborhoods, and they will not be happy about the added visual impact that the added flyover height will have.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: longhorn on April 23, 2015, 12:33:49 PM
Makes sense to me ,I think the present I-10/I-45 interchange is an engineering marvel, having two right angle freeways parallel each other as traffic interchanges and then depart.

This would tear down the hwy 59/I-10 interchange only a few years after being rebuilt.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Henry on April 23, 2015, 01:16:02 PM
I am not the least bit surprised by this. It proves once again that when it comes to highway planning, ambition doesn't get any bigger than in TX!
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Anthony_JK on April 23, 2015, 03:35:27 PM
I have a question: how are they going to connect the Hardy Toll Road extension to this monstrosity??

My usual concerns about tearing down perfectly fine freeways aside, though, I can live with this proposal.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Chris on April 23, 2015, 03:42:28 PM
The design includes ramps to and from the future Hardy Toll Road

See: http://www.ih45northandmore.com/docs4/15_20150417_Seg3_PM4_Exhibit_01_Overall.pdf
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: TXtoNJ on April 23, 2015, 04:04:14 PM
I'm having a little bit of trouble reading the schematics. North of 610, where the red bridge graphics are shown on 45, are those to indicate where 45 is going over the cross street (red being the freeway bridge), or passing under the cross street (red being the overpass bridge)? If it's the latter, this is even more monumental a change.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: mrsman on April 26, 2015, 03:02:29 PM
Quote from: nolia_boi504 on April 22, 2015, 10:56:07 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on April 22, 2015, 10:17:20 PM
You know, with the short linear distance of the loop in downtown Houston, has anyone ever thought of making an 8-10 lane one way loop, like a massive freeway rotary around the core.
That actually was one of the options considered.

http://abc13.com/traffic/future-plans-for-big-changes-for-i-45/240341/

A better place for a one-way freeway loop is Kansas City.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Anthony_JK on April 26, 2015, 08:45:33 PM
Quote from: Chris on April 23, 2015, 03:42:28 PM
The design includes ramps to and from the future Hardy Toll Road

See: http://www.ih45northandmore.com/docs4/15_20150417_Seg3_PM4_Exhibit_01_Overall.pdf

Ahhh....just noticed that.  Thanks.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: codyg1985 on April 28, 2015, 08:42:49 AM
I can only imagine how much of a pain the construction would be for this.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: longhorn on April 28, 2015, 09:30:36 AM
Quote from: codyg1985 on April 28, 2015, 08:42:49 AM
I can only imagine how much of a pain the construction would be for this.

Right now TXDot has done the impossible, they have rebuilt two/thirds of I-35 while keeping it open. It will be a little painful, but at the end well worth it.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Chris on April 29, 2015, 04:45:37 PM
Some renders in this video:

Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: pctech on April 30, 2015, 09:46:32 AM
This one project will probably cost more than La. DODT's entire annual budget.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: The Ghostbuster on April 30, 2015, 05:09:51 PM
Only in Texas. Some of the things (highway projects) that happen there, you couldn't get away with anywhere else.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Buffaboy on May 01, 2015, 12:40:03 AM
I'd shyt my pants if NYSDOT could come up with anything CLOSE to anything in these schematics, EVEN in NYC/downstate.

It's sad too, because the Tappan Zee Br. cost $3B AND people cried foul thinking it sucked up all the money.

And in most Upstate cities they wouldn't allow the eminent domain to make it happen.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Henry on May 01, 2015, 12:51:32 PM
Quote from: pctech on April 30, 2015, 09:46:32 AM
This one project will probably cost more than La. DODT's entire annual budget.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 30, 2015, 05:09:51 PM
Only in Texas. Some of the things (highway projects) that happen there, you couldn't get away with anywhere else.
Agreed on both counts.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: MaxConcrete on May 01, 2015, 03:36:22 PM
The Houston Business Journal is reporting strong support for the new downtown design from the downtown business community. This support is crucial because those interests have political influence. Strong support could also move it to construction sooner, especially with the likelihood of a substantial increase in TxDOT's budget.

http://www.bizjournals.com/houston/blog/breaking-ground/2015/04/houston-real-estate-heavyweights-all-for-downtown.html (http://www.bizjournals.com/houston/blog/breaking-ground/2015/04/houston-real-estate-heavyweights-all-for-downtown.html)

Houston real estate heavyweights all for downtown highway transformation
Apr 30, 2015, 11:41am CDT


A plan to decommission a portion of I-45 running through downtown Houston could increase development and connectivity downtown, real estate experts say.

A Texas Department of Transportation proposal to realign Interstate 45 downtown with Highway 59 would render the Pierce Elevated, a portion of I-45 that runs along Pierce Street through the central business district, unused. At a recent Urban Land Institute panel on downtown Houston, real estate experts were united in support of the plan to demolish or transform the Pierce Elevated.

The group of panelists, representing various sectors of the real estate industry including office, multifamily and retail, all agreed that the plan would lessen or remove a barrier between areas of downtown that could result in improved connectivity and more development.

"I couldn't be more enthusiastic about it," said Sanford Criner, vice chairman at CBRE with more than 40 years' experience with office leasing and development. "Mobility is always important, but our problem isn't getting people downtown, it's what can we do with them when they're here?

....
 
 
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: NE2 on May 01, 2015, 04:14:20 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.texasfreeway.com%2FHouston%2Fhistoric%2Froad_maps%2Fimages%2F1965_houston_humble_highres.jpg&hash=f78338b1dc94c2fa49462ef546866188a9833702)
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Anthony_JK on May 01, 2015, 09:16:39 PM
Quote from: NE2 on May 01, 2015, 04:14:20 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.texasfreeway.com%2FHouston%2Fhistoric%2Froad_maps%2Fimages%2F1965_houston_humble_highres.jpg&hash=f78338b1dc94c2fa49462ef546866188a9833702)

Or better yet, just force all through traffic to use the Grand Parkway and demolish EVERY FREEWAY inside..or make them 4-lane boulevards. /sarcasm

Who pays your salary, NE2? Grover Norquist?? #YaMadSon
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: NE2 on May 01, 2015, 10:03:40 PM
I've run out of original ideas to post.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Anthony_JK on May 02, 2015, 10:30:09 AM
OOPS....wrong Norquist; meant JOHN "Dump all freeways" Norquist, not Grover.


Although, Grover sucks, too.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Atomica on May 03, 2015, 12:47:54 AM
I question the need to demolishing such recent additions to the system myself...However, Texas are sitting on top of a $15bn surplus and they are attracting more business and more residents sooooo....
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: codyg1985 on May 03, 2015, 10:12:17 AM
Quote from: Atomica on May 03, 2015, 12:47:54 AM
I question the need to demolishing such recent additions to the system myself...However, Texas are sitting on top of a $15bn surplus and they are attracting more business and more residents sooooo....

It certainly makes you wonder how far ahead they planned when the I-10/US 59 interchange was revamped.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: mrsman on May 03, 2015, 11:19:20 AM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on May 01, 2015, 03:36:22 PM
The Houston Business Journal is reporting strong support for the new downtown design from the downtown business community. This support is crucial because those interests have political influence. Strong support could also move it to construction sooner, especially with the likelihood of a substantial increase in TxDOT's budget.

http://www.bizjournals.com/houston/blog/breaking-ground/2015/04/houston-real-estate-heavyweights-all-for-downtown.html (http://www.bizjournals.com/houston/blog/breaking-ground/2015/04/houston-real-estate-heavyweights-all-for-downtown.html)

Houston real estate heavyweights all for downtown highway transformation
Apr 30, 2015, 11:41am CDT


A plan to decommission a portion of I-45 running through downtown Houston could increase development and connectivity downtown, real estate experts say.

A Texas Department of Transportation proposal to realign Interstate 45 downtown with Highway 59 would render the Pierce Elevated, a portion of I-45 that runs along Pierce Street through the central business district, unused. At a recent Urban Land Institute panel on downtown Houston, real estate experts were united in support of the plan to demolish or transform the Pierce Elevated.

The group of panelists, representing various sectors of the real estate industry including office, multifamily and retail, all agreed that the plan would lessen or remove a barrier between areas of downtown that could result in improved connectivity and more development.

"I couldn't be more enthusiastic about it," said Sanford Criner, vice chairman at CBRE with more than 40 years' experience with office leasing and development. "Mobility is always important, but our problem isn't getting people downtown, it's what can we do with them when they're here?

....
 


Would TX DOT be able to leverage the increased value of the real estate to help pay for the highway improvements?
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: MaxConcrete on May 03, 2015, 12:53:02 PM
Quote from: Atomica on May 03, 2015, 12:47:54 AM
I question the need to demolishing such recent additions to the system myself...However, Texas are sitting on top of a $15bn surplus and they are attracting more business and more residents sooooo....

I asked a representative at the public meeting about the realignment of US 59 on the northeast side of downtown. As you mention, that section of freeway is a distribution system into downtown, entirely elevated, with some impressive structures, completed around 2003.

He told me that it is desirable to remove the curve in the existing alignment, and more significantly the realignment will make constructability much easier. He also said they already have approval to basically wipe out the Clayton Homes housing project. He said the housing project is susceptible to flooding and the residents will be relocated to new housing. I'm sure the downtown Houston real estate and business interests would love to see that low-income housing moved elsewhere, because having it removed will make the area much more attractive for redevelopment.
 
 
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Atomica on May 04, 2015, 12:33:26 AM
Quote from: codyg1985 on May 03, 2015, 10:12:17 AM
Quote from: Atomica on May 03, 2015, 12:47:54 AM
I question the need to demolishing such recent additions to the system myself...However, Texas are sitting on top of a $15bn surplus and they are attracting more business and more residents sooooo....

It certainly makes you wonder how far ahead they planned when the I-10/US 59 interchange was revamped.


And how much growth they had planned for as well.  They know by now that their business-friendly and freedom-friendly environment has bolstered its population and traffic growth.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Chris on May 04, 2015, 07:28:54 AM
Quote from: pctech on April 30, 2015, 09:46:32 AM
This one project will probably cost more than La. DODT's entire annual budget.

Greater Houston's GDP is twice as big as the state of Louisiana. :)

And of course, such a mega project means that kind of money is spent over multiple years.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Henry on May 04, 2015, 01:03:21 PM
So will the total length of I-45 change if and when the project is done?
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: mrsman on May 09, 2015, 10:09:30 PM
What I find very interesting is that this plan is being touted by the anti-road folks at Streetsblog and similar sites as being a positive in removing the Pierce elevated, while ignoring the fact that they are widening the other freeways to take over some of the loss of capacity.

Do people here believe that this project will be an overall positive for the driving public?
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: MaxConcrete on May 10, 2015, 11:35:23 AM
I just placed online a thorough analysis of the plan which identifies problems and concerns

http://houstonfreeways.com/analysis (http://houstonfreeways.com/analysis)

If any technically-oriented types out there want to review my list, I would be pleased to get some feedback to verify my concerns are valid.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Anthony_JK on May 10, 2015, 10:12:10 PM
Personally, I think it would have been better if they didn't remove the Pierce Elevated, had dropped it in a trench and widened it to handle existing I-45 traffic, replaced the proposed managed lanes with regular free lanes, and used alternatives like expanded light rail corridors to handle the commuter traffic.


I understand how downtown business leaders want to expand development, but this is sounding more like an expensive clusterwack more and more.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: TXtoNJ on May 11, 2015, 12:53:40 PM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on May 10, 2015, 10:12:10 PM
Personally, I think it would have been better if they didn't remove the Pierce Elevated, had dropped it in a trench and widened it to handle existing I-45 traffic, replaced the proposed managed lanes with regular free lanes, and used alternatives like expanded light rail corridors to handle the commuter traffic.I understand how downtown business leaders want to expand development, but this is sounding more like an expensive clusterwack more and more.

1. There appears to be two primary practical concerns behind the removal of the Pierce. First, expansion of the existing deck is infeasible given the property values of the surrounding buildings. Furthermore, given the development of the surrounding neighborhood, such an expansion would likely fail a "highest, best use" test. The second practical concern is that trenching the Pierce would likely cost multiple billions for a single mile of roadway, due to takings and the difficulties of constructing a trenched roadway in dense, urbanized surroundings. Double-decking would likely be the most cost-effective way of expanding the Pierce, which is politically infeasible.

2. Light rail isn't designed to handle commuter traffic, and would not address the primary concerns with the Pierce, which is its failures in handling through traffic. You would need higher-speed commuter or interurban rail to address that, which is difficult in a sprawled, multinodal city like Houston.

3. Free lanes would be nice, but would have their own sets of problems (weaving, which is endemic in Houston) owing to the current funding environment, and TxDOT's aversion to creating divided express and local lanes.

4. Reconstruction of any freeway system in the center of a city will be an expensive cluster unless corners are cut, like they were for the first Pierce reconstruction.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: The Ghostbuster on May 11, 2015, 04:06:50 PM
Does anyone know how much this "massive, mind-boggling" rebuild is going to cost? Or how long it will take to complete the projects?
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Perfxion on May 11, 2015, 04:53:15 PM
My guess is 6.5 to 7.5 billion dollars. Plus 5 to 8 years giving the fact that they would need to do the I69/US59/I45 section first to allow traffic to still move. Then the revamp/deconstruction of the Peirce section. Plus, city is still trying to bring in events like the Superbowl, World Cup, and Wresltemania, which a project like that makes those bids next to impossible to achieve.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: MaxConcrete on June 26, 2016, 03:23:46 PM
The Houston Chronicle reported on the current status of the project.
http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/transportation/article/Houston-s-7-billion-highway-project-would-widen-8323573.php?t=a0e53f5b64&cmpid=email-premium (http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/transportation/article/Houston-s-7-billion-highway-project-would-widen-8323573.php?t=a0e53f5b64&cmpid=email-premium)

Highlights

TxDOT posted the latest design schematics on the project web site in May and I updated my analysis of the project design.
http://houstonfreeways.com/Home/analysis (http://houstonfreeways.com/Home/analysis)
Project site: http://www.ih45northandmore.com/ (http://www.ih45northandmore.com/)

Highlights
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: longhorn on June 27, 2016, 09:39:33 AM
When was the I-10/59 (now I-69) interchange redone? Five or seven years ago? And it will be replaced in five to seven years? Amazing.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Chris on June 27, 2016, 09:48:05 AM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on June 26, 2016, 03:23:46 PM

  • They are hoping for a ROD in 2018 with construction to start in 2020

I'm amazed how fast the decision-making process is in this case. In most areas such a very large project would require decades of political indecisiveness and shifting priorities before it gets built with a reduced scope.

This project hardly appeared on the radar until 2015, right?
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: US 81 on June 27, 2016, 11:56:28 AM
I'm no highway engineer, but the way Houston floods, it surprises me to see plans for more trenching of highways.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: TXtoNJ on June 27, 2016, 04:22:12 PM
Quote from: US 81 on June 27, 2016, 11:56:28 AM
I'm no highway engineer, but the way Houston floods, it surprises me to see plans for more trenching of highways.

Flooded freeways hold water that would otherwise sit in neighborhoods. Any expansion of impervious surface requires a retention offset, and trenching freeways provides much of that retention.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: US 81 on June 27, 2016, 04:51:12 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on June 27, 2016, 04:22:12 PM
Quote from: US 81 on June 27, 2016, 11:56:28 AM
I'm no highway engineer, but the way Houston floods, it surprises me to see plans for more trenching of highways.

Flooded freeways hold water that would otherwise sit in neighborhoods. Any expansion of impervious surface requires a retention offset, and trenching freeways provides much of that retention.

Ah, the light dawns. Thank you.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: noelbotevera on June 27, 2016, 05:53:26 PM
Not only am I interested with DFW's projects, but I'm interested with what Houston can do. I just haven't really spoke much about them, but this is of real interest. I'm actually ok with the Pierce Elevated being demolished, because that is a bottleneck at 6 lanes while the other side is 8 lanes. Hoo boy.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: US 41 on June 27, 2016, 07:59:13 PM
When I drove through Houston in November it didn't seem like it was that bad in the downtown area. I was stuck in a traffic jam because of an incident that closed every lane, except for the far right lane. Besides that traffic seemed to move pretty well, which surprised me since it is the 4th largest city in the US. If you really wanted to avoid the downtown area you could take I-610. The only reason I didn't take I-610 is because I like to drive to drive right through the middle of huge cities.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: MaxConcrete on June 27, 2016, 09:34:44 PM
Quote from: Chris on June 27, 2016, 09:48:05 AM

I'm amazed how fast the decision-making process is in this case. In most areas such a very large project would require decades of political indecisiveness and shifting priorities before it gets built with a reduced scope.

This project hardly appeared on the radar until 2015, right?

The process actually started in 2002 but was suspended between 2005 and 2011 due to lack of consensus and lack of money. The process has been in the active study mode since around 2012.

http://www.ih45northandmore.com/history.aspx (http://www.ih45northandmore.com/history.aspx)

While it still took some time to get to this point, there are probably only a very few cities in the USA which can implement a project this ambitious, both politically and financially. Dallas is working toward something similar, but it is being done one small section at a time.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: MaxConcrete on June 27, 2016, 09:55:36 PM
Quote from: longhorn on June 27, 2016, 09:39:33 AM
When was the I-10/59 (now I-69) interchange redone? Five or seven years ago? And it will be replaced in five to seven years? Amazing.
It was completed by early 2004, if I recall correctly. (Most of it was open in late 2013, just in time for the Super Bowl.) The record for the shortest-lived major interchange is the original IH-10 west and BW8 interchange, Houston's first five-level interchange which existed from 1988 to around 2007 (19 years). The I-10/59 interchange would have to come down before 2023 to break the record, and I think it is unlikely it will be replaced before 2023.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: MaxConcrete on February 24, 2017, 11:42:36 PM
It looks like this project is going to happen, sooner rather than later.

Yesterday TxDOT approved $922 million toward the $1.7 billion first phase on the south side of downtown. (I'm assuming the rest of the funding is in place). Work on the section of IH-69 between Spur 527 and SH 288 could start as soon as 2020, with additional work north of SH 288 starting in 2021 and 2022. According to the article, the TxDOT Commission is slated to approve more funds next month to continue pushing work northward, including the relocation of IH-45. A ROD is expected this year, and a public meeting should take place within the next few months. The most recent number I've seen for all downtown work is $2.9 billion.

Probably subscriber-only
http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/transportation/article/State-accelerates-start-time-for-major-I-45-10958185.php (http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/transportation/article/State-accelerates-start-time-for-major-I-45-10958185.php)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fww3.hdnux.com%2Fphotos%2F57%2F36%2F37%2F12445678%2F4%2F920x1240.jpg&hash=047ff2c0c97d7b41b8e85233afe3e59b04fb856d)

Project site with schematics
http://www.ih45northandmore.com/ (http://www.ih45northandmore.com/)
Quote
...
Though these first steps are incremental compared to the overall plan, officials say they are important and send the clear message: The I-45 freeway is relocating and the elevated portion along Pierce will be abandoned and maybe demolished within the next dozen years.

Work on revamping the freeway intersections is slated for late 2020 or early 2021, years ahead of when state officials first predicted when they unveiled their construction plans in 2014.

For the Houston region, it might be the most significant freeway project in anyone's lifetime. That's because it reconfigures the three interstates that form the backbone of how Houstonians move - I-45, I-69 and Interstate 10 - in the one area where they are so closely tangled and reliant on drivers making transitions from one to another as smooth as possible.

The state commitment, provided the Texas Transportation Commission proceeds with its planned changes to the Unified Transportation Plan that sets all state highway project priorities, would contribute $923 million of the $1.7 billion needed to rebuild I-45, I-69 and Texas 288 where the three freeways converge. Most of the money comes from Texas Clear Lanes, a program aimed at addressing congestion in the state's five biggest cities.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: DNAguy on February 28, 2017, 02:06:26 PM
What the heck is TxDOT doing w/ the 610 rebuild? I was super jazzed about this post until I saw that!

That has 5 lanes in both directions and a significant median (enough for a HOV even!) in-between.

If you want to rebuild 610, do the part from 288 to 45. That section is a POS, engineered to 1960's standards, and has discontinuous frontage roads at rr crossings that cause traffic jams by forcing folks onto the highway for local trips. I know it's most poor black folks who live in that area so TxDOT could care less, but A LOT of petrochemical trucks use those roads so time = $$$$. 288 to 225 needs to be redesigned and rebuilt. 610 from i45 to 225 needs an 610 west style (I10 to 290) revamp with direct 225 to I45 connectors that are separated from 610 traffic. Do that and stop wasting $.

As someone who commutes from 90A to Deer Park everyday, I can attest that the major cause of traffic on the section of 610 slated to be rebuilt is:
1.) The 288 interchange (which will likely likely be solved when its rebuild)
2.) 90A-Main / frontage traffic backing up onto the freeway (Would be solved with direct connectors from 90A north to 610 east & 610 west to 90A south 
3.) S Post Oak's traffic backing up onto 610 (A problem solved with adding overpasses to 90A and/or extending the FB tollroad to South Post Oak)

The work they're doing does nothing to address these issues.

I can't even TxDOT. I just can't even....
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: longhorn on February 28, 2017, 03:43:26 PM
So the recently built I-69/59 over I-10 interchange will be changed or remodeled?
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: MaxConcrete on February 28, 2017, 08:23:34 PM
Quote from: longhorn on February 28, 2017, 03:43:26 PM
So the recently built I-69/59 over I-10 interchange will be changed or remodeled?

According to the plan it will be totally demolished and replaced. Somewhat of a shame, since it has some nice, long, high ramps into downtown.

Depending on exactly when it happens, it could take the record for the shortest-lived major interchange. But most likely it won't take the record, because the original 5-level IH-10 West/Beltway 8 interchange lasted from 1989 until 2008, only 19 years. To beat that record, the new interchange will need to be done by 2022, which is unlikely.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: MaxConcrete on February 28, 2017, 08:34:49 PM
Quote from: DNAguy on February 28, 2017, 02:06:26 PM
What the heck is TxDOT doing w/ the 610 rebuild? I was super jazzed about this post until I saw that!

That has 5 lanes in both directions and a significant median (enough for a HOV even!) in-between.

If you want to rebuild 610, do the part from 288 to 45. That section is a POS, engineered to 1960's standards, and has discontinuous frontage roads at rr crossings that cause traffic jams by forcing folks onto the highway for local trips. I know it's most poor black folks who live in that area so TxDOT could care less, but A LOT of petrochemical trucks use those roads so time = $$$$. 288 to 225 needs to be redesigned and rebuilt. 610 from i45 to 225 needs an 610 west style (I10 to 290) revamp with direct 225 to I45 connectors that are separated from 610 traffic. Do that and stop wasting $.

As someone who commutes from 90A to Deer Park everyday, I can attest that the major cause of traffic on the section of 610 slated to be rebuilt is:
1.) The 288 interchange (which will likely likely be solved when its rebuild)
2.) 90A-Main / frontage traffic backing up onto the freeway (Would be solved with direct connectors from 90A north to 610 east & 610 west to 90A south 
3.) S Post Oak's traffic backing up onto 610 (A problem solved with adding overpasses to 90A and/or extending the FB tollroad to South Post Oak)

The work they're doing does nothing to address these issues.

I can't even TxDOT. I just can't even....

The work on Loop 610 will add an interchange at Cambridge Street to create a new access route into the Medical Center. The project is not part of a Loop 610 rebuild or widening; it is strictly for medical center access.

As for widening between between SH 288 and IH 45: as you mentioned it is a mostly black, lower-income area. And because of the low-income minority status, it becomes very difficult to gain approval for highway improvements due to "environmental justice" issues. Political leadership does not want to be seen as pushing highway improvements through a minority area where there is opposition (and there always is opposition), so (the last time I checked) nothing is planned and nothing is slated to happen in the long term regional plan (i.e. the next 30 years).
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Anthony_JK on March 01, 2017, 03:48:40 AM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on February 28, 2017, 08:34:49 PM
Quote from: DNAguy on February 28, 2017, 02:06:26 PM
What the heck is TxDOT doing w/ the 610 rebuild? I was super jazzed about this post until I saw that!

That has 5 lanes in both directions and a significant median (enough for a HOV even!) in-between.

If you want to rebuild 610, do the part from 288 to 45. That section is a POS, engineered to 1960's standards, and has discontinuous frontage roads at rr crossings that cause traffic jams by forcing folks onto the highway for local trips. I know it's most poor black folks who live in that area so TxDOT could care less, but A LOT of petrochemical trucks use those roads so time = $$$$. 288 to 225 needs to be redesigned and rebuilt. 610 from i45 to 225 needs an 610 west style (I10 to 290) revamp with direct 225 to I45 connectors that are separated from 610 traffic. Do that and stop wasting $.

As someone who commutes from 90A to Deer Park everyday, I can attest that the major cause of traffic on the section of 610 slated to be rebuilt is:
1.) The 288 interchange (which will likely likely be solved when its rebuild)
2.) 90A-Main / frontage traffic backing up onto the freeway (Would be solved with direct connectors from 90A north to 610 east & 610 west to 90A south 
3.) S Post Oak's traffic backing up onto 610 (A problem solved with adding overpasses to 90A and/or extending the FB tollroad to South Post Oak)

The work they're doing does nothing to address these issues.

I can't even TxDOT. I just can't even....

The work on Loop 610 will add an interchange at Cambridge Street to create a new access route into the Medical Center. The project is not part of a Loop 610 rebuild or widening; it is strictly for medical center access.

As for widening between between SH 288 and IH 45: as you mentioned it is a mostly black, lower-income area. And because of the low-income minority status, it becomes very difficult to gain approval for highway improvements due to "environmental justice" issues. Political leadership does not want to be seen as pushing highway improvements through a minority area where there is opposition (and there always is opposition), so (the last time I checked) nothing is planned and nothing is slated to happen in the long term regional plan (i.e. the next 30 years).

I would figure, though, with Prez Trumpster's proposals to do away with most regulations constraining highway construction and environmental impact on "environmental justice" communities, it should get a bit easier to approve upgrades through poor Black communities. That is, if the "freeway teardown" folks don't get there first.

I agree that something really does need to be done on that segment of 610 between 45 and 288. A more fully directional interchange between 610 and 45 would be pretty nice.

BTW...are there still plans for a tollway along SH 35 which would go from 45/610 to Alvin to connect with the proposed Grand Parkway?
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: TXtoNJ on March 01, 2017, 09:47:36 AM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on March 01, 2017, 03:48:40 AM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on February 28, 2017, 08:34:49 PM
Quote from: DNAguy on February 28, 2017, 02:06:26 PM
What the heck is TxDOT doing w/ the 610 rebuild? I was super jazzed about this post until I saw that!

That has 5 lanes in both directions and a significant median (enough for a HOV even!) in-between.

If you want to rebuild 610, do the part from 288 to 45. That section is a POS, engineered to 1960's standards, and has discontinuous frontage roads at rr crossings that cause traffic jams by forcing folks onto the highway for local trips. I know it's most poor black folks who live in that area so TxDOT could care less, but A LOT of petrochemical trucks use those roads so time = $$$$. 288 to 225 needs to be redesigned and rebuilt. 610 from i45 to 225 needs an 610 west style (I10 to 290) revamp with direct 225 to I45 connectors that are separated from 610 traffic. Do that and stop wasting $.

As someone who commutes from 90A to Deer Park everyday, I can attest that the major cause of traffic on the section of 610 slated to be rebuilt is:
1.) The 288 interchange (which will likely likely be solved when its rebuild)
2.) 90A-Main / frontage traffic backing up onto the freeway (Would be solved with direct connectors from 90A north to 610 east & 610 west to 90A south 
3.) S Post Oak's traffic backing up onto 610 (A problem solved with adding overpasses to 90A and/or extending the FB tollroad to South Post Oak)

The work they're doing does nothing to address these issues.

I can't even TxDOT. I just can't even....

The work on Loop 610 will add an interchange at Cambridge Street to create a new access route into the Medical Center. The project is not part of a Loop 610 rebuild or widening; it is strictly for medical center access.

As for widening between between SH 288 and IH 45: as you mentioned it is a mostly black, lower-income area. And because of the low-income minority status, it becomes very difficult to gain approval for highway improvements due to "environmental justice" issues. Political leadership does not want to be seen as pushing highway improvements through a minority area where there is opposition (and there always is opposition), so (the last time I checked) nothing is planned and nothing is slated to happen in the long term regional plan (i.e. the next 30 years).

I would figure, though, with Prez Trumpster's proposals to do away with most regulations constraining highway construction and environmental impact on "environmental justice" communities, it should get a bit easier to approve upgrades through poor Black communities. That is, if the "freeway teardown" folks don't get there first.

I agree that something really does need to be done on that segment of 610 between 45 and 288. A more fully directional interchange between 610 and 45 would be pretty nice.

BTW...are there still plans for a tollway along SH 35 which would go from 45/610 to Alvin to connect with the proposed Grand Parkway?

They're building ramps from SB 45 to WB 610, actually. And last I remember, the SH 35 tollway is on hiatus indefinitely. Too much development around Pearland for there to be a viable corridor.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: DNAguy on March 01, 2017, 11:08:39 AM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on March 01, 2017, 09:47:36 AM
They're building ramps from SB 45 to WB 610, actually.

I don't understand why they did this really.

Surface streets and the existing SH35 / frontage road route to WB 610 adequately handle anyone making the making the SB45 to WB 610 trip

The $30 MM or so it's costing to build that flyover is a waste of resources that should be saved for a more comprehensive overhaul of the 225/610 interchange to 45/610 interchange that is a complete mess OR put into more deserving projects.

You might have an argument for the EB 610 to NB 45 flyover they're building...... but that's going to do didly for actually alleviating any congestion on 610 as it's mostly due to:
1.) the steep grade of 610 over 45
2.) the steep grade + tight curve of the EB 610 to SB 45 direct connector
3.) The Hobby airport exiting traffic fighting with the merging direct connector traffic on 45
4.) The entering traffic onto 610 fighting the exiting traffic to SB45 at ~ Woodridge / SH35

Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: silverback1065 on March 01, 2017, 11:30:58 AM
why not just remove all of 45, is the stub really that necessary?
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: TXtoNJ on March 01, 2017, 12:07:39 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on March 01, 2017, 11:30:58 AM
why not just remove all of 45, is the stub really that necessary?

Yes. It's the primary means by which S. Downtown, Midtown and Montrose access the freeway system.

This, incidentally, leads to one of the primary knocks against the Pierce Elevated - it's practically useless to those who live in the area. People coming from the southwest use Spur 527, the downtown Gulf Freeway exits from the southeast, and the Jackson/Chenevert exits from the south. The Pierce serves 95%+ through traffic, and it does not do that particularly well.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: compdude787 on March 01, 2017, 03:44:31 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on March 01, 2017, 12:07:39 PM
The Pierce serves 95%+ through traffic, and it does not do that particularly well.

Why not?
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: inkyatari on March 01, 2017, 03:49:49 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on February 24, 2017, 11:42:36 PM

Yesterday TxDOT approved $922 billion toward the $1.7 billion first phase on the south side of downtown. (I'm assuming the rest of the funding is in place).

I saw this and my eyes bugged out,  :-o then I realized it was a typo...
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: DNAguy on March 01, 2017, 04:43:38 PM
Quote from: compdude787 on March 01, 2017, 03:44:31 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on March 01, 2017, 12:07:39 PM
The Pierce serves 95%+ through traffic, and it does not do that particularly well.

Why not?

1.) Tight curve radius on western end of downtown
2.) # of lanes (3 in each direction)
3.) Left and right exits / entrances
4.) Engineering of overpass itself (its like being in a boat w/ all the bobbing up and down at speeds > 30 mph)
5.) The terrible interchanges with I10 and 59/69
6.) And finally everyone seems to be distracted by the tall buildings to the point that they forget how to drive.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: silverback1065 on March 01, 2017, 05:28:37 PM
Quote from: DNAguy on March 01, 2017, 04:43:38 PM
Quote from: compdude787 on March 01, 2017, 03:44:31 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on March 01, 2017, 12:07:39 PM
The Pierce serves 95%+ through traffic, and it does not do that particularly well.

Why not?

1.) Tight curve radius on western end of downtown
2.) # of lanes (3 in each direction)
3.) Left and right exits / entrances
4.) Engineering of overpass itself (its like being in a boat w/ all the bobbing up and down at speeds > 30 mph)
5.) The terrible interchanges with I10 and 59/69
6.) And finally everyone seems to be distracted by the tall buildings to the point that they forget how to drive.

:-D to #6

this must have been designed back in the original interstate construction days.  generally all interstates in downtown areas are terribly designed by today's standards.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Henry on March 02, 2017, 09:49:58 AM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on February 28, 2017, 08:23:34 PM
Quote from: longhorn on February 28, 2017, 03:43:26 PM
So the recently built I-69/59 over I-10 interchange will be changed or remodeled?

According to the plan it will be totally demolished and replaced. Somewhat of a shame, since it has some nice, long, high ramps into downtown.

Depending on exactly when it happens, it could take the record for the shortest-lived major interchange. But most likely it won't take the record, because the original 5-level IH-10 West/Beltway 8 interchange lasted from 1989 until 2008, only 19 years. To beat that record, the new interchange will need to be done by 2022, which is unlikely.
Sign of the times...nothing lasts forever these days, does it? :(
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: longhorn on March 02, 2017, 10:31:26 AM
Quote from: DNAguy on March 01, 2017, 04:43:38 PM
Quote from: compdude787 on March 01, 2017, 03:44:31 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on March 01, 2017, 12:07:39 PM
The Pierce serves 95%+ through traffic, and it does not do that particularly well.

Why not?

1.) Tight curve radius on western end of downtown
2.) # of lanes (3 in each direction)
3.) Left and right exits / entrances
4.) Engineering of overpass itself (its like being in a boat w/ all the bobbing up and down at speeds > 30 mph)
5.) The terrible interchanges with I10 and 59/69
6.) And finally everyone seems to be distracted by the tall buildings to the point that they forget how to drive.

What is so terrible on the I-10 interchange. Its the same as the Mixmaster in downtown Dallas. I think its pretty innovative, two major freeway parallel each other, exchange traffic, and then separate. No right angle exits.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: MaxConcrete on April 06, 2017, 10:07:05 PM
I just noticed an updated "project overview briefing packet" on the project web site
http://www.ih45northandmore.com/docs4/20170327_NHHIP_Presentation_Project%20Overview%20Briefing%20for%20Website.pdf (http://www.ih45northandmore.com/docs4/20170327_NHHIP_Presentation_Project%20Overview%20Briefing%20for%20Website.pdf)
Project site http://www.ih45northandmore.com/ (http://www.ih45northandmore.com/)

On the last page there is a cost summary for the downtown work
Construction: $3.067 billion
Right-of-way: $875.4 billion

Total: $3.942 billion

Those numbers do not include the deck park, which could add another couple hundred million dollars.

The right-of-way on the east side of downtown, $423.6 million, is quite high.

Construction of Interstate 10 on the north side of downtown, including the big interchange complex with IH-45, is also quite high at $1.63 billion.

Work on the south side of downtown is slated to start in 2020, and work on the north side of downtown is slated to start in 2026. So that would put completion around 2030.

There's no word on the rest of the project, from downtown north to Beltway 8. North of downtown is actually most of the project length, and I'm concerned it could get pushed into the distant future (after 2030) since the downtown work will consume most available funding. I'm thinking some new transportation funding will be needed to get that part of the project moving forward anytime soon. I'm not optimistic about any non-tolled funding from a Trump infrastructure program, but that would seem to be the best hope for new funding in the short term.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Chris on April 25, 2017, 12:39:11 PM
The draft EIS has been published: http://www.ih45northandmore.com/draft_eis.aspx
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: compdude787 on April 28, 2017, 12:26:05 PM
Quote from: Chris on April 25, 2017, 12:39:11 PM
The draft EIS has been published: http://www.ih45northandmore.com/draft_eis.aspx

Cool! Looks like the new combined I-45/I-69 is going to be one heck of a wide freeway! I count a total of 21 lanes, not including frontage roads.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: TXtoNJ on April 28, 2017, 04:08:08 PM
Looking at the new schematics, am I correct in seeing that there is no direct movement from 45N to 10E, 45S to 59N, 59S to 45N and 10E to 45S? Not that it's an issue - I doubt there is much traffic that flows that way - but it is a bit of a sea change in how TxDOT approaches Interstate connections.

There will be a lot of "TO I-XX" signs here, something you really don't see in the Houston area.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Chris on April 28, 2017, 04:29:30 PM
The I-10 / I-45 mix will feature up to 32 freeway lanes.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FEgOQHdA.png&hash=1e51355f95a2badebfeace9a4a6efcb9e9aa97f5)
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: intelati49 on April 28, 2017, 04:36:19 PM
Quote from: Chris on April 28, 2017, 04:29:30 PM
The I-10 / I-45 mix will feature up to 32 freeway lanes.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FEgOQHdA.png&hash=1e51355f95a2badebfeace9a4a6efcb9e9aa97f5)

This is mindboggling. Two thoughts: 1. I should move to Texas and get a EIT there. 2. How the hell do they intend to pay for this?
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 28, 2017, 04:46:58 PM
Quote from: intelati49 on April 28, 2017, 04:36:19 PM
Quote from: Chris on April 28, 2017, 04:29:30 PM
The I-10 / I-45 mix will feature up to 32 freeway lanes.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FEgOQHdA.png&hash=1e51355f95a2badebfeace9a4a6efcb9e9aa97f5)

This is mindboggling. Two thoughts: 1. I should move to Texas and get a EIT there. 2. How the hell do they intend to pay for this?

It's Texas, I'm sure they'll find a way!
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: TXtoNJ on May 04, 2017, 09:50:53 AM
http://ih45northandmore.com/

The new May 2017 schematics have been added to the project website. Someone with a more careful eye than me (MaxConcrete?) may want to take a look at the revisions listed here.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: MaxConcrete on May 04, 2017, 10:00:51 PM
The changes in the new schematics versus the May 2016 schematics are mostly minor. I'm hoping to be able to post a full analysis on HoustonFreeways.com this weekend.

In short

Mid and south side of downtown: minimal changes

North side of downtown
Some beneficial tweaks at the IH 69/IH 10 interchange
The IH 10/IH 45 interchange complex received the most changes, including shifting the IH 10 eastbound main lanes to the west side of the multiplex. There are numerous tweaks, mostly adding lanes to certain ramps, for example the downtown spur connector. All changes are beneficial.

IH 45 between IH 10 and IH 610, including the 45/610 interchange is basically the same.

IH 45 from IH 610 to BW 8 has minimal changes, mostly some ramp repositioning.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: TXtoNJ on May 16, 2018, 02:21:47 PM
New schematics:

http://www.ih45northandmore.com/
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: MaxConcrete on May 17, 2018, 12:35:46 AM
Thanks for the tip about the new schematics

After a side-by-side comparison to the May 2017 schematics, there are only two non-negligible changes.
1. The SH 288 toll lanes previously ended/started with a connection ramp into Chenevert street. The residents in that area were complaining about it last year. The ramp into Chenevert is now eliminated. There is now a ramp from the southbound SH 288 frontage road into the southbound toll lane, and the northbound toll lane terminates into the ramp which connects into IH 45 (both northbound and southbound)
2. Changes on the south end of the downtown connector. Last year's design went over West Dallas Street, but the new design goes under Dallas Street and a new overpass over the connector is added at Andrews Street. The northbound frontage road smooth transition into Houston street is eliminated, and it now requires crossing the Dallas bridge with a left turn and right turn. The new drawing also suggests that the Sabine Street bridge over Buffalo Bayou will be replaced.

Item 1 is probably a plus from the mobility perspective. Item 2 has a minimal effect, but probably slightly negative due to the loss of the smooth transition to Houston Street.

Of course I'm disappointed that there are no changes which address any of my items of concern which I posted last year, so I think I can safely conclude that there will be no changes relating to my items of concern
http://houstonfreeways.com/analysis (http://houstonfreeways.com/analysis)

On a more positive note, TxDOT representatives stated in a recently posted video (long video) that the Interstate 10 Express lanes will not be tolled and appear to be restriction-free, and the IH 45 MaX lanes will not be tolled, but will be restricted to HOV vehicles at peak periods.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9IFTSNIn0A&t=28s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9IFTSNIn0A&t=28s)

Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: TXtoNJ on June 04, 2019, 01:32:49 PM
New schematics on www.ih45northandmore again
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Chris on June 04, 2019, 04:21:30 PM
Are there major changes?
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: longhorn on June 04, 2019, 04:39:20 PM
So the relatively new I-69/I-10 interchange will be replaced, after............12-15 years of use?
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Anthony_JK on June 05, 2019, 10:20:42 AM
Quote from: longhorn on June 04, 2019, 04:39:20 PM
So the relatively new I-69/I-10 interchange will be replaced, after............12-15 years of use?

It doesn't look like it will be as much replaced as refined to add the through and MAX lanes for the realigned I-45, as well as account for the completion of the Hardy Toll Road extension.

Personally, I'm still not so happy about taking out the Allen Elevated, but I guess that's what they wanted.

If the MAX lanes are going to be free and mostly unrestricted, I want to know how they are going to pay for all this without the "magic" of tolling. Not that I mind, though.

Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: thisdj78 on June 05, 2019, 06:47:05 PM
Quote from: longhorn on June 04, 2019, 04:39:20 PM
So the relatively new I-69/I-10 interchange will be replaced, after............12-15 years of use?

They did the same with the Beltway 8/Katy Freeway interchange. It was approximately 15 years old when they started replacing it.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: MaxConcrete on June 08, 2019, 09:30:41 PM
Quote from: Chris on June 04, 2019, 04:21:30 PM
Are there major changes?
I did a side-by-side comparison of the new and prior schematics.
All changes are minor, and most are very minor.

The most significant change is that the Montrose bridge over IH-69 is no longer slated to be replaced. The number of lanes on IH-69 remains the same, and it appears they are squeezing in the lanes by narrowing the HOV lane width.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Bobby5280 on June 09, 2019, 07:11:32 PM
Narrow lanes? Do they not realize this project is located in Texas, a place where lots of people drive great big vehicles? It's not some far flung Eastern European community where people are tooling around in tiny cars.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: MaxConcrete on July 26, 2019, 09:46:57 PM
Funding for segment 2 of the project (between IH-10 and Loop 610 including the 610 interchange) received a crucial endorsement today when HGAC committed $100 million in discretionary funds as requested by the Texas Transportation Commission, which has tentatively allocated $840 million to the $1.225 billion segment 2.

http://www.h-gac.com/transportation-policy-council/meeting-agendas/documents/2019/july/ITEM-08-North-Houston-Highway-Improvement-Program.pdf (http://www.h-gac.com/transportation-policy-council/meeting-agendas/documents/2019/july/ITEM-08-North-Houston-Highway-Improvement-Program.pdf)

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/transportation/article/Houston-area-officials-commit-100-million-to-14189219.php?src=hp_totn (https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/transportation/article/Houston-area-officials-commit-100-million-to-14189219.php?src=hp_totn)

Project opposition is launching an all-out effort to kill or delay the project. There was a large, hostile crowd at the meeting. I was at the meeting and spoke in favor of the funding. According to the news report, 59 of 65 speakers opposed the project. I was speaker #14 and was the first to speak in favor. Houston celebrity "Mattress Mac" spoke ahead of me and opposed the project. In the end, only one member of the policy council voted against the funding, which is a good outcome and suggests council support remains strong. However, we certainly have not heard the last from the opposition and I'm thinking there may be a lawsuit to stop the project. The Houston Chronicle has also been very biased in its project reporting, being against the project.

In terms of segment 2, it is unexpectedly expensive at $1.225 billion. The TxDOT UTP lists the Loop 610 interchange at $520 million. If that is construction cost only, then it will likely become the most expensive interchange ever built in Texas. (The High Five in Dallas had a construction cost around $260 million when awarded around 2000.) The main lanes south of the interchange are listed at $320 million. I don't know about the remaining $385 million, it may be right-of-way acquisition, utility relocation, design, project management, etc.

With the newly added funding in the UTP, total project funding is now at $4.7 billion, and includes all work from the Loop 610 interchange southward, including all elements of the downtown work.

UTP: https://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/division/transportation-planning/utp.html (https://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/division/transportation-planning/utp.html)




Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 26, 2019, 10:19:51 PM
Do the people who oppose this project not realize they live in freaking Houston? The expansion of Katy Freeway and other major highways outside of the I-610 loop should have been a clue as to what would eventually happen. They should also realize the expansion along I-10 and I-69 is a direct consequence of re-routing I-45 around the East side of downtown so the old elevated freeway can be removed.

Houston is a giant-sized metro. No one is getting around that entire metro using bicycles and light rail trains. It's still a very very car-oriented metropolis and it's one that continues to add population at a fairly rapid pace. Houston could be the nation's 3rd largest city in terms of city limits population, passing Chicago, within the next 10-20 years. All modes of transportation will have to be expanded dramatically. Roads, rail, buses, bike paths, etc. Everything. It's not a zero sum game situation.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Plutonic Panda on July 28, 2019, 06:01:57 PM
Hopefully these people don't have an impact and this project proceeds on schedule.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: In_Correct on July 29, 2019, 06:34:59 PM
Large Hostile Crowd, :fight: I Would Like You To Meet My Good Friend Water Hose.  :pan:
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Anthony_JK on July 30, 2019, 03:18:12 AM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on July 26, 2019, 09:46:57 PM

[...]

Project opposition is launching an all-out effort to kill or delay the project. There was a large, hostile crowd at the meeting. I was at the meeting and spoke in favor of the funding. According to the news report, 59 of 65 speakers opposed the project. I was speaker #14 and was the first to speak in favor. Houston celebrity "Mattress Mac" spoke ahead of me and opposed the project. In the end, only one member of the policy council voted against the funding, which is a good outcome and suggests council support remains strong. However, we certainly have not heard the last from the opposition and I'm thinking there may be a lawsuit to stop the project. The Houston Chronicle has also been very biased in its project reporting, being against the project.

[...]


Let me guess....they want to tear down the entire Interstate freeway network inside of I-610 and turn current I-69/US 59 through downtown Houston into a high-speed rail line?

Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: silverback1065 on July 30, 2019, 07:04:09 PM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on July 30, 2019, 03:18:12 AM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on July 26, 2019, 09:46:57 PM

[...]

Project opposition is launching an all-out effort to kill or delay the project. There was a large, hostile crowd at the meeting. I was at the meeting and spoke in favor of the funding. According to the news report, 59 of 65 speakers opposed the project. I was speaker #14 and was the first to speak in favor. Houston celebrity "Mattress Mac" spoke ahead of me and opposed the project. In the end, only one member of the policy council voted against the funding, which is a good outcome and suggests council support remains strong. However, we certainly have not heard the last from the opposition and I'm thinking there may be a lawsuit to stop the project. The Houston Chronicle has also been very biased in its project reporting, being against the project.

[...]


Let me guess....they want to tear down the entire Interstate freeway network inside of I-610 and turn current I-69/US 59 through downtown Houston into a high-speed rail line?

:-D don't you love freeway haters?
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: rte66man on July 30, 2019, 09:24:54 PM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on July 30, 2019, 03:18:12 AM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on July 26, 2019, 09:46:57 PM

[...]

Project opposition is launching an all-out effort to kill or delay the project. There was a large, hostile crowd at the meeting. I was at the meeting and spoke in favor of the funding. According to the news report, 59 of 65 speakers opposed the project. I was speaker #14 and was the first to speak in favor. Houston celebrity "Mattress Mac" spoke ahead of me and opposed the project. In the end, only one member of the policy council voted against the funding, which is a good outcome and suggests council support remains strong. However, we certainly have not heard the last from the opposition and I'm thinking there may be a lawsuit to stop the project. The Houston Chronicle has also been very biased in its project reporting, being against the project.

[...]


Let me guess....they want to tear down the entire Interstate freeway network inside of I-610 and turn current I-69/US 59 through downtown Houston into a high-speed rail line?

Nah, they want at-grade boulevards..............
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 31, 2019, 12:03:14 PM
I wonder if the folks wanting these at-grade boulevards as opposed to freeways ever drive any significant distance, like 10 miles, on such streets. It doesn't take long to get really tired of all the stop lights.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: compdude787 on July 31, 2019, 04:53:32 PM
^ I totally agree with that! It truly amazes me how people think that freeways are unnecessary when so many people use them. Even in traffic it's still slower to take surface streets than the freeway for the most part.

And I also cannot stand it when none of the lights on a road are synchronized and you end up having to stop at every single one. :angry:
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: thisdj78 on August 01, 2019, 09:40:29 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on July 31, 2019, 12:03:14 PM
I wonder if the folks wanting these at-grade boulevards as opposed to freeways ever drive any significant distance, like 10 miles, on such streets. It doesn't take long to get really tired of all the stop lights.

Maybe they see older European cities and envision the same for here. Difference is, those cities were built before the age of cars and public transportation is key there.

It's hard to convert a large car driven city to other modes of transportation (which is what removing freeways would require).
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: silverback1065 on August 01, 2019, 06:50:54 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on July 31, 2019, 12:03:14 PM
I wonder if the folks wanting these at-grade boulevards as opposed to freeways ever drive any significant distance, like 10 miles, on such streets. It doesn't take long to get really tired of all the stop lights.

the answer is an obvious no  :-D
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: NE2 on August 01, 2019, 06:54:31 PM
Quote from: In_Correct on July 29, 2019, 06:34:59 PM
Large Hostile Crowd, :fight: I Would Like You To Meet My Good Friend Water Hose.  :pan:
Found the bootlicker.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Bobby5280 on August 01, 2019, 07:36:39 PM
Quote from: thisdj78Maybe they see older European cities and envision the same for here. Difference is, those cities were built before the age of cars and public transportation is key there.

They know European cities aren't spread out over large areas like American cities. Population density is much higher. The United States dismantled much of its old passenger rail infrastructure decades ago while the passenger rail infrastructure in Europe (and Asia for that matter) has grown and continually modernized. The culture about transit use is very different overseas whereas car culture dominates in the US.

Even without the cultural and policy differences, time is still a big drawback to mass transit. You cannot get around in a big city very fast using subways, light rail lines, buses, etc. It's a good bet the policy makers championing mass transit use don't even use it themselves. I picture those "suits" using private car services, limousines and even helicopters hopping from one helipad to the next.

The "romance" with mass transit sours pretty quickly when you experience the amount of time it drains from your day by using it. I lost 3 hours every day to my commute between Manhattan and Staten Island back in college. Even a train ride from the middle of Brooklyn to Midtown Manhattan would often take at least 45 minutes to an hour or more each way.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Plutonic Panda on August 01, 2019, 08:17:49 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on August 01, 2019, 07:36:39 PM
Quote from: thisdj78Maybe they see older European cities and envision the same for here. Difference is, those cities were built before the age of cars and public transportation is key there.

They know European cities aren't spread out over large areas like American cities. Population density is much higher. The United States dismantled much of its old passenger rail infrastructure decades ago while the passenger rail infrastructure in Europe (and Asia for that matter) has grown and continually modernized. The culture about transit use is very different overseas whereas car culture dominates in the US.

Even without the cultural and policy differences, time is still a big drawback to mass transit. You cannot get around in a big city very fast using subways, light rail lines, buses, etc. It's a good bet the policy makers championing mass transit use don't even use it themselves. I picture those "suits" using private car services, limousines and even helicopters hopping from one helipad to the next.

The "romance" with mass transit sours pretty quickly when you experience the amount of time it drains from your day by using it. I lost 3 hours every day to my commute between Manhattan and Staten Island back in college. Even a train ride from the middle of Brooklyn to Midtown Manhattan would often take at least 45 minutes to an hour or more each way.
China has 3-4 times the US population and I have heard most of it is in the east region.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: kphoger on August 02, 2019, 02:30:28 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on August 01, 2019, 07:36:39 PM
Even without the cultural and policy differences, time is still a big drawback to mass transit. You cannot get around in a big city very fast using subways, light rail lines, buses, etc.

Having used transit extensively in Chicago, I disagree with that statement.  Not having to find a parking spot downtown, not having to deal with traffic jams, etc–all of that saves time and, depending on the service, offsets the added time of waiting for transfers.  In fact, at rush hour, I found that I could often get around faster on transit than in my own car.

For tourists, transit is also superior in my opinion, as you don't have to pay for expensive parking and then walk a mile from your parking spot to wherever you're going.  Directions are easy too.  Instead of having to know all the streets to turn on, you just have to know what bus or rail line to get on and where to get off.  Pretty much any A-to-B journey can thus be accomplished with two transfers max.

I'd amend your statement to say you cannot get around in a small city very fast using transit, because smaller cities tend to have less frequent departures.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: thisdj78 on August 02, 2019, 04:19:17 PM
Quote from: kphoger on August 02, 2019, 02:30:28 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on August 01, 2019, 07:36:39 PM
Even without the cultural and policy differences, time is still a big drawback to mass transit. You cannot get around in a big city very fast using subways, light rail lines, buses, etc.

Having used transit extensively in Chicago, I disagree with that statement.  Not having to find a parking spot downtown, not having to deal with traffic jams, etc–all of that saves time and, depending on the service, offsets the added time of waiting for transfers.  In fact, at rush hour, I found that I could often get around faster on transit than in my own car.

For tourists, transit is also superior in my opinion, as you don't have to pay for expensive parking and then walk a mile from your parking spot to wherever you're going.  Directions are easy too.  Instead of having to know all the streets to turn on, you just have to know what bus or rail line to get on and where to get off.  Pretty much any A-to-B journey can thus be accomplished with two transfers max.

I'd amend your statement to say you cannot get around in a small city very fast using transit, because smaller cities tend to have less frequent departures.

Or to amend even further, you can't get around big automobile-centric cities very fast using public trans. Examples would be LA, Phoenix, Houston & Dallas. The growth of these cities came after the car, whereas NYC and to a lesser extend Chicago, experienced growth when not many people had cars....therefore it's easier to get around without one in those cities.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: nolia_boi504 on August 02, 2019, 05:22:12 PM
Quote from: kphoger on August 02, 2019, 02:30:28 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on August 01, 2019, 07:36:39 PM
Even without the cultural and policy differences, time is still a big drawback to mass transit. You cannot get around in a big city very fast using subways, light rail lines, buses, etc.

Having used transit extensively in Chicago, I disagree with that statement.  Not having to find a parking spot downtown, not having to deal with traffic jams, etc–all of that saves time and, depending on the service, offsets the added time of waiting for transfers.  In fact, at rush hour, I found that I could often get around faster on transit than in my own car.

For tourists, transit is also superior in my opinion, as you don't have to pay for expensive parking and then walk a mile from your parking spot to wherever you're going.  Directions are easy too.  Instead of having to know all the streets to turn on, you just have to know what bus or rail line to get on and where to get off.  Pretty much any A-to-B journey can thus be accomplished with two transfers max.

I'd amend your statement to say you cannot get around in a small city very fast using transit, because smaller cities tend to have less frequent departures.
Chicago's highways are significantly smaller than ours, and they don't have multiple massive business centers outside of the downtown area like we do. Plus their high parking rates, lack of parking options, congested streets, etc etc, etc are all a direct result of their mass transit focus from decades ago. Houston has evolved completely different than Chicago/NY. What works there doesn't work here. We should continue focusing on transit in heavily populated areas (Downtown, Galleria, etc).

Pixel 3

Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Plutonic Panda on August 02, 2019, 10:05:04 PM
Quote from: kphoger on August 02, 2019, 02:30:28 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on August 01, 2019, 07:36:39 PM
Even without the cultural and policy differences, time is still a big drawback to mass transit. You cannot get around in a big city very fast using subways, light rail lines, buses, etc.

Having used transit extensively in Chicago, I disagree with that statement.  Not having to find a parking spot downtown, not having to deal with traffic jams, etc–all of that saves time and, depending on the service, offsets the added time of waiting for transfers.  In fact, at rush hour, I found that I could often get around faster on transit than in my own car.

For tourists, transit is also superior in my opinion, as you don't have to pay for expensive parking and then walk a mile from your parking spot to wherever you're going.  Directions are easy too.  Instead of having to know all the streets to turn on, you just have to know what bus or rail line to get on and where to get off.  Pretty much any A-to-B journey can thus be accomplished with two transfers max.

I'd amend your statement to say you cannot get around in a small city very fast using transit, because smaller cities tend to have less frequent departures.
Thats generally only true if you have no transfers. Even a single transfer from my experience can add quite a bit of time to the trip and make it that much worse on the top of the grocery of reasons mass transit sucks.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Bobby5280 on August 03, 2019, 12:27:21 AM
Quote from: kphogerHaving used transit extensively in Chicago, I disagree with that statement.  Not having to find a parking spot downtown, not having to deal with traffic jams, etc–all of that saves time and, depending on the service, offsets the added time of waiting for transfers.  In fact, at rush hour, I found that I could often get around faster on transit than in my own car.

I lived in New York City for 5 years and traveled daily between Staten Island and Manhattan for 4 of those years and Brooklyn for the last. Using the buses, subways and Staten Island Ferry was anything but fast. The commute was at least 90 minutes each way. The only way I could shave any time at all, maybe 10-15 minutes at most, was catching a bus over the Verrazano Bridge and getting on the R Train in Bay Ridge at just the right time. The commute was a slog.

Contrast that to my experiences temping at a couple "Wall Street" companies during the summers. I'd work late and the car service for Merrill Lynch would take me from the World Financial Center to my front door step in Staten Island in under 30 minutes. It was a pretty big extreme, and not one lost on me when I hear rich politicians extolling the virtues of mass transit when those same douche bags don't soil themselves with riding on the subway with "common folk." They're getting from point A to point B in a car service or some other kind of exclusionary gig.

Mass transit does offer its benefits. But time saving is definitely NOT one of them. If I was back in NYC the ONLY benefit I would see in using mass transit as opposed to driving a car is the cost savings on tolls and garage parking. There is absolutely nothing time saving about taking the bus, train and ferry.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: rte66man on August 03, 2019, 09:09:22 AM
Bringing this back on subject......

Any updates on the Hardy Toll Road connection to I10/I69?
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Revive 755 on August 03, 2019, 11:20:09 AM
Quote from: nolia_boi504 on August 02, 2019, 05:22:12 PM
Chicago's highways are significantly smaller than ours, and they don't have multiple massive business centers outside of the downtown area like we do. Plus their high parking rates, lack of parking options, congested streets, etc etc, etc are all a direct result of their mass transit focus from decades ago. Houston has evolved completely different than Chicago/NY. What works there doesn't work here. We should continue focusing on transit in heavily populated areas (Downtown, Galleria, etc).
Pixel 3

Schaumburg, Oak Brook, and whatever village/city has the area along Lake Cook Road west of the Tri-State might disagree with the "business centers outside of downtown" part (maybe not the "massive" part though).

I strongly agree about the size of the highways in Chicagoland, especially considering the smaller St. Louis and Omaha metro seem to have as many highways at the same width.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: kphoger on August 05, 2019, 02:05:10 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on August 03, 2019, 12:27:21 AM
I lived in New York City for 5 years and traveled daily between Staten Island and Manhattan for 4 of those years and Brooklyn for the last. Using the buses, subways and Staten Island Ferry was anything but fast. The commute was at least 90 minutes each way. The only way I could shave any time at all, maybe 10-15 minutes at most, was catching a bus over the Verrazano Bridge and getting on the R Train in Bay Ridge at just the right time. The commute was a slog.

What was the travel time by car for the same trip?  Without knowing that, I have no idea if 90 minutes is good or bad.  From your front door of your house to the front door of your destination, what was the time difference between driving and transit?
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: thisdj78 on August 05, 2019, 02:51:07 PM
Quote from: kphoger on August 05, 2019, 02:05:10 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on August 03, 2019, 12:27:21 AM
I lived in New York City for 5 years and traveled daily between Staten Island and Manhattan for 4 of those years and Brooklyn for the last. Using the buses, subways and Staten Island Ferry was anything but fast. The commute was at least 90 minutes each way. The only way I could shave any time at all, maybe 10-15 minutes at most, was catching a bus over the Verrazano Bridge and getting on the R Train in Bay Ridge at just the right time. The commute was a slog.

What was the travel time by car for the same trip?  Without knowing that, I have no idea if 90 minutes is good or bad.  From your front door of your house to the front door of your destination, what was the time difference between driving and transit?

I don't live there but have made that drive several times while there on business. Hotel to office was an hour minimum in non-peak times.

I looked up the route on Waze and it shows an hour and 26 minute drive during morning rush hour. But of course it could be different depending on which part of Staten and Manhattan you're going to and from, but probably not by much.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Chris on August 05, 2019, 03:49:17 PM
Nearly 600,000 Americans commute 90 minutes or more one way, according to the U.S. Census Bureau: https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2013/cb13-41.html

About 8.1 percent of U.S. workers have commutes of 60 minutes or longer, 4.3 percent work from home, and nearly 600,000 full-time workers had "megacommutes" of at least 90 minutes and 50 miles. The average one-way daily commute for workers across the country is 25.5 minutes, and one in four commuters leave their county to work.

According to Out-of-State and Long Commutes: 2011, 23.0 percent of workers with long commutes (60 minutes or more) use public transit, compared with 5.3 percent for all workers.

(...)

Based on the 2006-2010 American Community Survey, 586,805 full-time workers are mega commuters -- one in 122 of full-time workers. 


So while there are a lot of anecdotes about the terrible commutes and large amounts of people having very long commutes, the actual share of them is pretty low: 8.1% commute 60 minutes or more and only 0.8% of full-time workers commute 90 minutes or more. So it's safe to say a 90 minute commute is an outlier, though they might be more common in certain metropolitan areas with severely unaffordable housing or a higher transit share, as transit commutes tend to be significantly longer than other modes, this is true even in Europe.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: kphoger on August 05, 2019, 04:59:19 PM
The reason I asked is that I don't consider a 90-minute public transit travel time to be outrageous, if the drive time is also 90 minutes.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: In_Correct on August 05, 2019, 07:39:16 PM
Quote from: kphoger on August 05, 2019, 04:59:19 PM
The reason I asked is that I don't consider a 90-minute public transit travel time to be outrageous, if the drive time is also 90 minutes.

Also consider that the roads can some times have delays which means the travel time is similar with general Public Transit and some times faster with Commuter Rail.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Bobby5280 on August 08, 2019, 11:56:34 AM
Quote from: kphogerWhat was the travel time by car for the same trip?  Without knowing that, I have no idea if 90 minutes is good or bad.  From your front door of your house to the front door of your destination, what was the time difference between driving and transit?

Commuting by car took about half the time. When my parents where in NYC I would sometimes be able to catch a ride in my Dad's carpool from Fort Wadsworth in Staten Island to midtown Manhattan. That, and the short subway ride on the 6 train from 59th and 23rd Street would take roughly 45 minutes. This was roughly 30 years ago. Driving time might be a little longer in 2019, but I'm sure that the buses, ferry and subway haven't sped up at all either.

If I lived in NYC I would probably still use mass transit rather than drive a car into Manhattan. The tolls and parking costs are way too expensive. Cost savings is really the only advantage of using mass transit in New York City. Mass transit has plenty of its own drawbacks. I froze my butt off plenty of times standing at bus stops or on outdoor subway platforms. There's not too much shelter from the wind and rain there. Summer weather in the subway can be pretty unpleasant too. I've read NYC's homeless population has grown dramatically in recent years, so I imagine the subways have plenty of that piss, orange juice and carbon smell. Even if things are clean you still have to deal with crowds. God forbid you have to carry anything like a briefcase or portfolio case onto a crowded bus or subway car with standing room only space. Those real world features of mass transit aren't included in the romantic sales pitch proponents of mass transit sell to the public.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: nolia_boi504 on August 09, 2019, 10:27:06 PM


Quote from: Bobby5280 on August 08, 2019, 11:56:34 AM
Quote from: kphogerWhat was the travel time by car for the same trip?  Without knowing that, I have no idea if 90 minutes is good or bad.  From your front door of your house to the front door of your destination, what was the time difference between driving and transit?

Commuting by car took about half the time. When my parents where in NYC I would sometimes be able to catch a ride in my Dad's carpool from Fort Wadsworth in Staten Island to midtown Manhattan. That, and the short subway ride on the 6 train from 59th and 23rd Street would take roughly 45 minutes. This was roughly 30 years ago. Driving time might be a little longer in 2019, but I'm sure that the buses, ferry and subway haven't sped up at all either.

If I lived in NYC I would probably still use mass transit rather than drive a car into Manhattan. The tolls and parking costs are way too expensive. Cost savings is really the only advantage of using mass transit in New York City. Mass transit has plenty of its own drawbacks. I froze my butt off plenty of times standing at bus stops or on outdoor subway platforms. There's not too much shelter from the wind and rain there. Summer weather in the subway can be pretty unpleasant too. I've read NYC's homeless population has grown dramatically in recent years, so I imagine the subways have plenty of that piss, orange juice and carbon smell. Even if things are clean you still have to deal with crowds. God forbid you have to carry anything like a briefcase or portfolio case onto a crowded bus or subway car with standing room only space. Those real world features of mass transit aren't included in the romantic sales pitch proponents of mass transit sell to the public.

I wish more people with experience/perspective like you would speak up more about the downsides of public transit. I especially agree with your last sentence, where those "minor" inconveniences are swept aside.

Pixel 3

Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: kphoger on August 10, 2019, 05:17:33 PM
I doubt the "romantic sales pitch proponents of mass transit" have ever had to actually get by without a car in the suburbs.  In the northern states.  In February.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: kphoger on August 10, 2019, 05:32:24 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on August 08, 2019, 11:56:34 AM
God forbid you have to carry anything like a briefcase or portfolio case onto a crowded bus or subway car with standing room only space. Those real world features of mass transit aren't included in the romantic sales pitch proponents of mass transit sell to the public.

There was this one time...

I was catching Amtrak out of Chicago's Union Station with my then-two-year-old daughter.  We were getting there from Glen Ellyn, out in the western suburbs.  I had a rolling suitcase, a backpack, a car seat, a pack-and-play, a diaper bag, and maybe something else I'm forgetting.  As such, my goal was to get from Glen Ellyn to Union Station with as little walking as possible.  We took Metra to Oak Park, then took a city bus down Harlem to the Eisenhower, then the Blue Line L from Harlem to Clinton, then walked a few blocks from the Clinton subway station to Union Station–and all she was old enough to really carry was a stuffed animal.  I counted at the end, and I had made use of seven total strangers along the way.  This included loading or unloading things on or off a bus or train, and even one lady who held my daughter's hand to cross the street in downtown Chicago because for some reason she was refusing to budge and I didn't have an empty hand to grab her with.  Oh yeah, and the elevator was out of service at the Clinton subway station, so I had to haul all that baggage up the stairs without being able to help my daughter, who could still only climb stairs by using her hands–one of which was clutching the stuffed animal.  Which therefore became quite filthy.

Or those times I took Pace bus to do my grocery shopping, hauling one of those old-lady carts full of groceries on and off the bus.  That would have been impossible on a crowded CTA bus downtown, but it worked OK in the suburbs–but only because I was strong enough to load the whole cart onto my back while climbing the steps of the bus.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Bobby5280 on August 13, 2019, 02:05:24 PM
Your story gave me more flashbacks to living in New York City, as well as living in Japan. My family didn't have a car when we were stationed in Japan for 3 years. When we lived off the Marine Corps base "out in town" we had to heat our old rental house using kerosene heaters. That meant frequent trips at least a half mile away to the nearest "Mama San Shop" convenience story that sold kerosene among other things. We would buy our groceries on the Marine Corps base and push them in four wheel carts all the way back home. Complete pain in the ass.

Hauling bags of groceries onto a city bus or subway train is no picnic either. Gotta always buy light loads of stuff and make more trips to the store.
:-/
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: In_Correct on August 14, 2019, 04:51:22 PM
These comments about the problems with public transit reminds me of The Bob Newhart Show, about Dr. Hartley walking endlessly to get to work. One of the scenes has him walking with Elliot Carlin.

Even if there are many problems with Public Transit, There are times that I want to take Public Transit. There are too many dangerous drunk drivers, or on the smart phones, or they simply do not have an understanding of traffic rules. Or perhaps some traffic rules is too dangerous. I hate "Turn Right On Red". I have heard an increase of horns honking at each other. Also if there are self driving cars that is going to cause even more problems as the car stalls during a software update.  :-o :crazy: :paranoid: :rolleyes:

Another concern I have is Ethanol. I will go out of my way to get NON Ethanol Gas (and even Diesel might contain Ethanol.) and almost every gas station in urban and suburban areas is going to have Ethanol, perhaps even E85. It seems they want to scare people who use conventional Petrol, and even Diesel.

I like to drive. I certainly like carrying every thing that I need. But if driving becomes too annoying, I would much rather take Public Transit if it is there and functional.

Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 21, 2020, 03:55:01 PM
I was looking at the project as a refresher and I really hope this thing is built. It has the potential to be game changing for downtown area. One of the documents has timeline established of 2021 to begin construction on the downtown loop which is segment 1. Is that still the right start date?
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: hotdogPi on January 21, 2020, 05:23:40 PM
Quote from: kphoger on August 10, 2019, 05:17:33 PM
I doubt the "romantic sales pitch proponents of mass transit" have ever had to actually get by without a car in the suburbs.  In the northern states.  In February.

I've done it.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: MaxConcrete on January 21, 2020, 06:33:28 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 21, 2020, 03:55:01 PM
One of the documents has timeline established of 2021 to begin construction on the downtown loop which is segment 1. Is that still the right start date?

Yes, the current plan is to award a design-build contract for all the downtown work in 2021. The contract amount is currently listed at $2.9 billion
https://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/let/2021/harris.htm#050008001 (https://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/let/2021/harris.htm#050008001)

Downtown will require a major right-of-way clearance, and the Houston Chronicle recently reported on the relocation of the Mexican Consulate.
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/transportation/article/Mexican-consulate-moving-to-southwest-Houston-to-14905843.php (https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/transportation/article/Mexican-consulate-moving-to-southwest-Houston-to-14905843.php)
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.732366,-95.3819319,3a,75y,114.21h,99.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sH7DeTer3HT80YmrEjXaRug!2e0!7i3328!8i1664?hl=en (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.732366,-95.3819319,3a,75y,114.21h,99.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sH7DeTer3HT80YmrEjXaRug!2e0!7i3328!8i1664?hl=en)

The ROD has not yet been released. When the ROD is issued, there is a good chance of a lawsuit against the project, which could delay it. Other factors could also cause delay, such as right-of-way clearance and utility relocation. So far, the all-out efforts of the opposition (including the anti-project Houston Chronicle) to kill the project have failed.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 21, 2020, 06:53:41 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on January 21, 2020, 06:33:28 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 21, 2020, 03:55:01 PM
One of the documents has timeline established of 2021 to begin construction on the downtown loop which is segment 1. Is that still the right start date?

Yes, the current plan is to award a design-build contract for all the downtown work in 2021. The contract amount is currently listed at $2.9 billion
https://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/let/2021/harris.htm#050008001 (https://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/let/2021/harris.htm#050008001)

Downtown will require a major right-of-way clearance, and the Houston Chronicle recently reported on the relocation of the Mexican Consulate.
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/transportation/article/Mexican-consulate-moving-to-southwest-Houston-to-14905843.php (https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/transportation/article/Mexican-consulate-moving-to-southwest-Houston-to-14905843.php)
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.732366,-95.3819319,3a,75y,114.21h,99.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sH7DeTer3HT80YmrEjXaRug!2e0!7i3328!8i1664?hl=en (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.732366,-95.3819319,3a,75y,114.21h,99.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sH7DeTer3HT80YmrEjXaRug!2e0!7i3328!8i1664?hl=en)

The ROD has not yet been released. When the ROD is issued, there is a good chance of a lawsuit against the project, which could delay it. Other factors could also cause delay, such as right-of-way clearance and utility relocation. So far, the all-out efforts of the opposition (including the anti-project Houston Chronicle) to kill the project have failed.
I am having a hard time understanding why they are protesting this project so fiercely. This project is tearing down a major divisive freeway, reconnecting neighborhoods, allow for a slight uptick in red line service, adding potential for new large park caps in several different places, and if I am not mistaken, will fund street bike/ped improvements along with a couple new trails/greenways.

That is all of the things it will do besides alleviate car traffic, modernize a roadway, and in turn will improve rubber tire mass transit lines but I get they do not care for those things. It doesn't make much sense for this to be protested as I am sure this will be the last time this freeway network in the vicinity gets widened this century.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: MaxConcrete on January 21, 2020, 07:29:10 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 21, 2020, 06:53:41 PM
I am having a hard time understanding why they are protesting this project so fiercely. This project is tearing down a major divisive freeway, reconnecting neighborhoods, allow for a slight uptick in red line service, adding potential for new large park caps in several different places, and if I am not mistaken, will fund street bike/ped improvements along with a couple new trails/greenways.

That is all of the things it will do besides alleviate car traffic, modernize a roadway, and in turn will improve rubber tire mass transit lines but I get they do not care for those things. It doesn't make much sense for this to be protested as I am sure this will be the last time this freeway network in the vicinity gets widened this century.

The Chronicle published a pro-project op-ed I submitted last August
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/opinion/outlook/article/Houston-needs-the-I-45-expansion-Opinion-14277421.php (https://www.houstonchronicle.com/opinion/outlook/article/Houston-needs-the-I-45-expansion-Opinion-14277421.php)

However, the Chronicle buried it deep inside the print edition of the paper on a weekday, and held me to 700-word limit. I was mainly responding to two 2000+ word anti-project op-eds which the Chronicle featured on the front page of the Sunday editorial section (on different dates), including one by Jeff Speck who has no connection to Houston but is a well-known anti-freeway activist.

As for the opposition, they are generally recycling the usual claims that have been used against urban freeways for the last 50 years. The business community and City of Houston realize the benefits far outweigh any costs, and they support the project. As long as CoH stays on board, I think the project will surely move forward. Mayor Turner was re-elected in December, and he supports the project, and has said nothing negative about the project since re-election. (He did make some negative comments before the election, probably lip service to certain constituencies).
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 21, 2020, 07:40:50 PM
I just read your article. Very good article explaining as much detail as possible in 700 characters. Then I went to the comments to see what responses were and  :banghead:
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Anthony_JK on January 22, 2020, 03:58:57 AM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on January 21, 2020, 06:33:28 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 21, 2020, 03:55:01 PM
One of the documents has timeline established of 2021 to begin construction on the downtown loop which is segment 1. Is that still the right start date?


Yes, the current plan is to award a design-build contract for all the downtown work in 2021. The contract amount is currently listed at $2.9 billion
https://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/let/2021/harris.htm#050008001 (https://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/let/2021/harris.htm#050008001)

Downtown will require a major right-of-way clearance, and the Houston Chronicle recently reported on the relocation of the Mexican Consulate.
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/transportation/article/Mexican-consulate-moving-to-southwest-Houston-to-14905843.php (https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/transportation/article/Mexican-consulate-moving-to-southwest-Houston-to-14905843.php)
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.732366,-95.3819319,3a,75y,114.21h,99.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sH7DeTer3HT80YmrEjXaRug!2e0!7i3328!8i1664?hl=en (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.732366,-95.3819319,3a,75y,114.21h,99.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sH7DeTer3HT80YmrEjXaRug!2e0!7i3328!8i1664?hl=en)

The ROD has not yet been released. When the ROD is issued, there is a good chance of a lawsuit against the project, which could delay it. Other factors could also cause delay, such as right-of-way clearance and utility relocation. So far, the all-out efforts of the opposition (including the anti-project Houston Chronicle) to kill the project have failed.

So, what exactly do the opponents of this project want? Bring back the Pierce Elevated section? Or, blow out all the remaining sections and kill or boulevardize all the freeways in Houston inside of I-610 and the US 59/I-69 corridor? Or, even, rip that down and force I-69 to use the Grand Parkway (TX 99), as what was proposed originally in the TTC-69 tollway proposals?
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: jbnv on January 22, 2020, 09:59:26 AM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on January 22, 2020, 03:58:57 AM
So, what exactly do the opponents of this project want? Bring back the Pierce Elevated section? Or, blow out all the remaining sections and kill or boulevardize all the freeways in Houston inside of I-610 and the US 59/I-69 corridor? Or, even, rip that down and force I-69 to use the Grand Parkway (TX 99), as what was proposed originally in the TTC-69 tollway proposals?

Probably just to be kings and tell people what they can and cannot do. We saw the same thing with I-49 in Lafayette.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 22, 2020, 01:01:56 PM
Quote from: jbnv on January 22, 2020, 09:59:26 AM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on January 22, 2020, 03:58:57 AM
So, what exactly do the opponents of this project want? Bring back the Pierce Elevated section? Or, blow out all the remaining sections and kill or boulevardize all the freeways in Houston inside of I-610 and the US 59/I-69 corridor? Or, even, rip that down and force I-69 to use the Grand Parkway (TX 99), as what was proposed originally in the TTC-69 tollway proposals?

Probably just to be kings and tell people what they can and cannot do. We saw the same thing with I-49 in Lafayette.
Is that project officially dead!?
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Anthony_JK on January 22, 2020, 07:24:59 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 22, 2020, 01:01:56 PM
Quote from: jbnv on January 22, 2020, 09:59:26 AM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on January 22, 2020, 03:58:57 AM
So, what exactly do the opponents of this project want? Bring back the Pierce Elevated section? Or, blow out all the remaining sections and kill or boulevardize all the freeways in Houston inside of I-610 and the US 59/I-69 corridor? Or, even, rip that down and force I-69 to use the Grand Parkway (TX 99), as what was proposed originally in the TTC-69 tollway proposals?

Probably just to be kings and tell people what they can and cannot do. We saw the same thing with I-49 in Lafayette.
Is that project officially dead!?

More like in limbo until funding is resolved.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Chris on January 23, 2020, 12:24:31 PM
TxDOT released a bunch of visualizations on their Youtube channel today, so it doesn't look like it's dead.








Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: MaxConcrete on January 23, 2020, 07:59:52 PM
Quote from: Chris on January 23, 2020, 12:24:31 PM
TxDOT released a bunch of visualizations on their Youtube channel today, so it doesn't look like it's dead.


Those all appear to be the original animated visualizations from May 2017 (as indicated in the videos) with no updates.

For the downtown, the 2017 animation does not include two major design changes in the most recent schematic: 1) The removal of the connection ramp to/from the SH 288 managed lanes, and 2) the downtown connector now goes under West Dallas Street.

For section 2 (IH-10 to Loop 610), changes have been minimal since 2017 but the video shows U-turns at N.Main (north side) and Cottage Street, and those U-turns have been eliminated.

North of Loop 610, I don't think there have been any changes so the animation should still be accurate.

It does seem strange for the videos to be reposted without the needed updates.

Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: MaxConcrete on February 01, 2020, 02:31:08 PM
The City of Houston is in process of holding meetings to get public feedback, including a meeting this morning which I attended.

All the options are visible on the survey site
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/MTHBX5S (https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/MTHBX5S)

Overview

My Take
The project is not at risk and will probably proceed without major changes. But TxDOT will need to implement some changes to satisfy CoH, and I think a high percentage of options are infeasible or expensive, which may cause some political difficulty.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Plutonic Panda on February 10, 2020, 07:37:18 PM
More negative press on this. I really hope these RE/T folks don't fuck this project up.

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/transportation/article/I-45-project-TxDOT-freeway-project-7B-TxDOT-15039483.php
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Bobby5280 on February 10, 2020, 09:19:11 PM
I think it's nothing short of INSANE for any of these groups to seriously be thinking about building abnormally narrow lanes.

I pretty much avoid I-35E to the North of Dallas due to the narrow lanes on that interim upgrade. 11' wide lanes might be okay if everyone is driving little tiny Fiat cars. Many millions of American drivers are getting around in full size trucks, SUVs and other large vehicles. It's not any fun to be moving along at 60mph-70mph feeling like you're going to trade paint with vehicles in the adjacent lanes.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Rothman on February 10, 2020, 09:47:51 PM
Somebody would not deal with eastern freeways well.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: thisdj78 on February 10, 2020, 10:08:59 PM
Quote from: Rothman on February 10, 2020, 09:47:51 PM
Somebody would not deal with eastern freeways well.

The average speed limit on freeways in East Coast cities is 55mph isn't it?

It's like 65 in Texas cities (sometimes 60 in construction zones)
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Rothman on February 10, 2020, 10:30:21 PM


Quote from: thisdj78 on February 10, 2020, 10:08:59 PM
Quote from: Rothman on February 10, 2020, 09:47:51 PM
Somebody would not deal with eastern freeways well.

The average speed limit on freeways in East Coast cities is 55mph isn't it?

It's like 65 in Texas cities (sometimes 60 in construction zones)

You believe speed limits matter when it comes to trading paint out here in the East?  You poor naive chump. :D
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: thisdj78 on February 10, 2020, 10:46:37 PM
Quote from: Rothman on February 10, 2020, 10:30:21 PM


Quote from: thisdj78 on February 10, 2020, 10:08:59 PM
Quote from: Rothman on February 10, 2020, 09:47:51 PM
Somebody would not deal with eastern freeways well.

The average speed limit on freeways in East Coast cities is 55mph isn't it?

It's like 65 in Texas cities (sometimes 60 in construction zones)

You believe speed limits matter when it comes to trading paint out here in the East?  You poor naive chump. :D

Of course it doesn't matter, but when the speed of traffic is moving at an average of 55-60 vs 70-80 (and in larger vehicles on top of that), it makes difference in someone's perception of safety.

As someone who's spent a lot of time driving in NYC and Boston, I'm nowhere near naive or a chump. 😎
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Rothman on February 10, 2020, 10:49:03 PM
Pfft.  Your experience doesn't sound very representative.

Let's get him out here on the roads!
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: J N Winkler on February 10, 2020, 11:19:34 PM
I don't mind 11 ft unit lane width, though I prefer 12 ft.  What I really want to avoid is 10 ft, which is good for a 30% reduction in capacity.

On Kellogg Avenue in Wichita, the West Street flyover was built in the mid-1980's with 11 ft lanes and the adjoining sections of the Kellogg freeway were built later with 12 ft lanes.  This results in a fairly abrupt transition (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.6746131,-97.3757517,3a,75y,63.17h,90.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJsv_95aKGP5wIyDIs2AYIg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) eastbound as the width of the traveled way expands from 33 ft to 36 ft while the centerline stays laterally fixed.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: silverback1065 on February 11, 2020, 07:48:45 AM
they can't make them less than 12 ft, any thing less than 12 is substandard for an interstate. 
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Bobby5280 on February 13, 2020, 03:07:09 PM
Brand new highways desiring an Interstate designation can't have travel lanes less than 12' wide. But that rule apparently isn't stopping people from trimming lane sizes on expansions of existing Interstate highways.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: nolia_boi504 on February 13, 2020, 06:01:58 PM
Aren't there requirements for shoulder widths as well? Looks like 610 West loop will permanently be shoulderless where the elevated bus lanes drop through the middle of the highway.... l

Pixel 4

Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: rte66man on February 16, 2020, 06:50:31 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on February 11, 2020, 07:48:45 AM
they can't make them less than 12 ft, any thing less than 12 is substandard for an interstate. 

Tell that to Dallas drivers on the recently rebuilt I35E
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: MaxConcrete on February 16, 2020, 07:42:41 PM
Quote from: rte66man on February 16, 2020, 06:50:31 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on February 11, 2020, 07:48:45 AM
they can't make them less than 12 ft, any thing less than 12 is substandard for an interstate. 

Tell that to Dallas drivers on the recently rebuilt I35E

It is surprising FHWA allowed the 11-foot-wide lines on an interstate. I'm thinking it was allowed because it is an "interim" configuration, planned to be temporary until the ultimate configuration is built.

The ultimate configuration from IH 635 to south of the Bush Turnpike (the Dallas County section) has $600 million in funding in the 2020 UTP and it is slated for award in August 2021
https://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/let/2021/dallas.htm#019603274 (https://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/let/2021/dallas.htm#019603274)

The 2020 UTP also funds work north of SH 121 (Rayburn Turnpike) in Lewisville on or before FY 2023. The Lewisville area is probably the worst area for 11-foot-wide lanes.

So by the mid-to-late 2020s, a lot of the 11-foot-wide lanes should be eliminated.

Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: BrandonC_TX on February 17, 2020, 12:55:18 AM
It will be crazy if TxDOT once again uses narrow lanes on the downtown Houston project.  I believe they did that on US 290 in northwest Houston as well, though the full left shoulder makes it seem not as bad as I-35E north of Dallas (which lacks a left shoulder from on the entire rebuilt section from I-635 to US 380).

NCTCOG's Mobility 2045 plan (https://www.nctcog.org/trans/plan/mtp/2045#plandocument) does not call for improvements on I-35E in the Lewisville/Lake Dallas area until the 2037-2045 timeframe (keeping a 4+2R+4 configuration there), though TxDOT has nothing to do with that plan.  I would expect full improvements sooner, and the configuration of the ultimate project is very similar to the I-45 project in north Houston (while woven ramps between the managed lanes on I-35E might make that project seem more expensive, all the major stack interchanges are already in place thanks to the interim project, whereas I-45 in north Houston calls for a new 5-level stack at I-610).

It just surprises me to see all the narrow lanes on recent TxDOT projects, where TxDOT has maintained very high standards in the recent past.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: dfwmapper on February 17, 2020, 03:15:29 AM
I'm guessing that most of the substandard designs date back to the budget shortfall era when the only hope of ever getting anything built was cutting every possible corner. Remember that highway funding had mostly dried up in this state until we passed Prop 1 in 2014 (rainy day fund) and Prop 7 in 2015 (sales and vehicle registration taxes) to steal money from other sources to pay for roads.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: sprjus4 on February 17, 2020, 10:17:10 AM
The upcoming expansion of Loop 1604 in San Antonio from 4 (2 each way) to 10 lanes (4 + 1 HOV each way) is being built with reduced 11 foot lanes to accommodate a narrow ROW. Not sure how I feel about that though.

I-264 in the Hampton Roads region of Virginia has 11 foot lanes, and while it's certainly noticeable when driving, people seem to maintain doing 70+ mph on the 8-lane 55 mph highway without issue.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 19, 2020, 11:39:19 AM
Trying to keep this non political as a possible is hard but now Streetsblog seems to be using the tragedy that happened to George and the unrest that followed to play the race card and claim this freeway expansion is now racist. Good stuff.

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2020/06/08/houstons-i-45-project-is-a-reminder-of-urban-renewal-racism/#disqus_thread
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Echostatic on June 19, 2020, 11:51:36 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 19, 2020, 11:39:19 AM
Trying to keep this non political as a possible is hard but now Streetsblog seems to be using the tragedy that happened to George and the unrest that followed to play the race card and claim this freeway expansion is now racist. Good stuff.

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2020/06/08/houstons-i-45-project-is-a-reminder-of-urban-renewal-racism/#disqus_thread

They ran a similar article a few years ago about the I-35 Capital Express upcoming in Downtown Austin.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: sprjus4 on June 19, 2020, 11:59:11 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 19, 2020, 11:39:19 AM
Trying to keep this non political as a possible is hard but now Streetsblog seems to be using the tragedy that happened to George and the unrest that followed to play the race card and claim this freeway expansion is now racist. Good stuff.

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2020/06/08/houstons-i-45-project-is-a-reminder-of-urban-renewal-racism/#disqus_thread
:no:

It won't change anything. Much like the upcoming I-35 project, this will be most likely be constructed as planned and provide significant relief to the current mess that is Downtown.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 19, 2020, 12:01:22 PM
Quote from: Echostatic on June 19, 2020, 11:51:36 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 19, 2020, 11:39:19 AM
Trying to keep this non political as a possible is hard but now Streetsblog seems to be using the tragedy that happened to George and the unrest that followed to play the race card and claim this freeway expansion is now racist. Good stuff.

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2020/06/08/houstons-i-45-project-is-a-reminder-of-urban-renewal-racism/#disqus_thread

They ran a similar article a few years ago about the I-35 Capital Express upcoming in Downtown Austin.
There is no denying previous accounts of freeways that were built with racist planning or simply taking advantage of locations that are occupied mainly by minorities. With that said what is the endgame with the mentality of "we can't build through here because there are too many minorities?"  So the 241 in South OC can't be extended because of a bunch of wealthy white people that live there don't want it near them and we can't widen this freeway because there are too many minorities in this area. So how do you build and expand freeways/infrastructure? I don't get it.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 19, 2020, 12:04:14 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 19, 2020, 11:59:11 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 19, 2020, 11:39:19 AM
Trying to keep this non political as a possible is hard but now Streetsblog seems to be using the tragedy that happened to George and the unrest that followed to play the race card and claim this freeway expansion is now racist. Good stuff.

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2020/06/08/houstons-i-45-project-is-a-reminder-of-urban-renewal-racism/#disqus_thread
:no:

It won't change anything. Much like the upcoming I-35 project, this will be most likely be constructed as planned and provide significant relief to the current mess that is Downtown.
I sure hope so. I'm fairly certain many "POC"  will be using this freeway now and after it's expanded.

Funny enough it also has many improvements to localized areas along its path, adds bike lanes, improved service on the red line with a grade separation, adds new trails, removed part of an elevated freeway, and paves way for several park caps to better connect neighborhoods. Why is that never mentioned from the RE/T groups?
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: nolia_boi504 on June 19, 2020, 12:05:44 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 19, 2020, 12:04:14 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 19, 2020, 11:59:11 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 19, 2020, 11:39:19 AM
Trying to keep this non political as a possible is hard but now Streetsblog seems to be using the tragedy that happened to George and the unrest that followed to play the race card and claim this freeway expansion is now racist. Good stuff.

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2020/06/08/houstons-i-45-project-is-a-reminder-of-urban-renewal-racism/#disqus_thread
:no:

It won't change anything. Much like the upcoming I-35 project, this will be most likely be constructed as planned and provide significant relief to the current mess that is Downtown.
I sure hope so. I'm fairly certain many "POC"  will be using this freeway now and after it's expanded.

Funny enough it also has many improvements to localized areas along its path, adds bike lanes, improved service on the red line with a grade separation, adds new trails, removed part of an elevated freeway, and paves way for several park caps to better connect neighborhoods. Why is that never mentioned from the RE/T groups?
Because that makes too much sense and doesn't sell clicks...stupid media!

Pixel 4

Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: sprjus4 on June 19, 2020, 12:10:04 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 19, 2020, 12:04:14 PM
Funny enough it also has many improvements to localized areas along its path, adds bike lanes, improved service on the red line with a grade separation, adds new trails, removed part of an elevated freeway, and paves way for several park caps to better connect neighborhoods. Why is that never mentioned from the RE/T groups?
And the proposed expansions aren't "racist". It follows along the existing path of I-10 and I-45 and only builds upon them. Will right of way acquisition be needed? Yes. It's not a purposely selected path for a new location freeway that bypasses a white community to tear through a black community. That's what RE/T groups try to make it out to be.

How about right of way acquisition that's taken when a freeway is expanded through a white suburban area? Is that "racist"?

As for the trails, freeway removal, and caps, they love to advocate for all these things (and don't get me wrong, when it can be appropriately constructed - I'm all for it), and when they're implemented, they could care less. But if we widen a freeway in the process to accommodate additional traffic from a re-routed road along with just a general need for more capacity, split lane configurations, etc. :-o
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: kphoger on June 19, 2020, 12:28:57 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 19, 2020, 12:10:04 PM
And the proposed expansions aren't "racist". It follows along the existing path of I-10 and I-45 and only builds upon them. Will right of way acquisition be needed? Yes. It's not a purposely selected path for a new location freeway that bypasses a white community to tear through a black community.

The property value of houses next to freeways tends to be lower than that of houses farther from freeways.  Black residents tend to be economically disadvantaged compared to white residents.  Therefore, I assume black residents are more likely to live in the houses slated for acquisition than white residents.  But that doesn't make the plan racist.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: sprjus4 on June 19, 2020, 12:41:27 PM
Quote from: kphoger on June 19, 2020, 12:28:57 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 19, 2020, 12:10:04 PM
And the proposed expansions aren't "racist". It follows along the existing path of I-10 and I-45 and only builds upon them. Will right of way acquisition be needed? Yes. It's not a purposely selected path for a new location freeway that bypasses a white community to tear through a black community.

The property value of houses next to freeways tends to be lower than that of houses farther from freeways.  Black residents tend to be economically disadvantaged compared to white residents.  Therefore, I assume black residents are more likely to live in the houses slated for acquisition than white residents.  But that doesn't make the plan racist.
Should DOTs now construct new freeways through white neighborhoods instead of widening existing freeways? Redundancy could be the answer to solve racism.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: kphoger on June 19, 2020, 01:04:26 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 19, 2020, 12:41:27 PM

Quote from: kphoger on June 19, 2020, 12:28:57 PM

Quote from: sprjus4 on June 19, 2020, 12:10:04 PM
And the proposed expansions aren't "racist". It follows along the existing path of I-10 and I-45 and only builds upon them. Will right of way acquisition be needed? Yes. It's not a purposely selected path for a new location freeway that bypasses a white community to tear through a black community.

The property value of houses next to freeways tends to be lower than that of houses farther from freeways.  Black residents tend to be economically disadvantaged compared to white residents.  Therefore, I assume black residents are more likely to live in the houses slated for acquisition than white residents.  But that doesn't make the plan racist.

Should DOTs now construct new freeways through white neighborhoods instead of widening existing freeways? Redundancy could be the answer to solve racism.

Either that, or people could just accept the fact that every project has its downsides.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: MaxConcrete on June 19, 2020, 01:56:05 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 19, 2020, 11:59:11 AM
It won't change anything. Much like the upcoming I-35 project, this will be most likely be constructed as planned and provide significant relief to the current mess that is Downtown.

I don't think we can assume it will proceed as planned. For the last 1-2 years the opposition has waged an all-out war to kill this project, and they are getting more support. Recently the City of Houston acceded to the opposition and drastically changed its position, from supporting the current design to opposing it. Now CoH opposes all planned improvements north of downtown, and they actually want to reduce current mobility options by removing the HOV lane. CoH basically took all the complaints of the opposition and used it as their new position on the project. CoH still supports the downtown work (with remediation) since the downtown work eliminates three elevated freeways.  I blogged about the ridiculous and harmful request here
https://houstonstrategies.blogspot.com/2020/05/the-city-of-houstons-problematic.html (https://houstonstrategies.blogspot.com/2020/05/the-city-of-houstons-problematic.html)

The Houston Chronicle is also waging war against the project. They have been running anti-project editorials regularly, and recently their regular (non-editorial) reporting has been biased against the project.

There is now a page on the official site for the dialog
http://www.ih45northandmore.com/CityOfHoustonFacilitationGroup.aspx (http://www.ih45northandmore.com/CityOfHoustonFacilitationGroup.aspx)

Combine the opposition from the City of Houston with expected large cuts to TxDOT funding in the next few years, and I think there is a reasonable chance the project will not survive. The main question is if TxDOT will be willing to do only the downtown work, and then bottleneck I-45 north of downtown as currently requested by CoH. In my opinion, it makes no sense to spend the 4+ billion to relocate I-45 in the downtown area just to shrink it north of downtown. On the other hand, the downtown work will be benefcial for I-69 and I-10.

My heart won't be broken if the entire project is canceled, since it is very expensive and provides very limited mobility benefits.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 19, 2020, 02:01:22 PM
I really hope this project goes through as planned. I've emailed several leaders vocalizing my support for this project. It would be incredible and a game changer for the area. It sucks that mega projects like this fade so much opposition and are often canceled or reduced in size. Far too often everyone complains about current conditions but when a real solution is presented people whine and moan about change.

I also disagree this project will provide "limited mobility benefits."  
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: sprjus4 on June 19, 2020, 03:15:20 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on June 19, 2020, 01:56:05 PM
I don't think we can assume it will proceed as planned. For the last 1-2 years the opposition has waged an all-out war to kill this project, and they are getting more support. Recently the City of Houston acceded to the opposition and drastically changed its position, from supporting the current design to opposing it. Now CoH opposes all planned improvements north of downtown, and they actually want to reduce current mobility options by removing the HOV lane. CoH basically took all the complaints of the opposition and used it as their new position on the project. CoH still supports the downtown work (with remediation) since the downtown work eliminates three elevated freeways.  I blogged about the ridiculous and harmful request here
https://houstonstrategies.blogspot.com/2020/05/the-city-of-houstons-problematic.html (https://houstonstrategies.blogspot.com/2020/05/the-city-of-houstons-problematic.html)
The City of Houston should either get a no-build, meaning the elevated freeways stay, and traffic gets far worse Downtown in the coming years, or a full-build. Either all components of the project get constructed, or none.

Quote from: MaxConcrete on June 19, 2020, 01:56:05 PM
provides very limited mobility benefits.
Disagree.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: jbnv on June 19, 2020, 04:42:31 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 19, 2020, 12:01:22 PM
So how do you build and expand freeways/infrastructure?

You don't.

That's the endgame for many of these opponents. Just stop the thing from ever getting built. Throw anything at it that makes it more expensive and/or postpones it (which also makes it more expensive). Legislation, lawsuits, injunctions--whatever you can get from the government. 

See Interstate 49 through Lafayette, LA. We've been talking about it for four decades. No ground broken and little hope of any ground actually getting broken, thanks to a handful of obnoxious activists.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: bwana39 on June 20, 2020, 12:23:05 PM

The bottom line is the Pierce Elevated (IH45 on the west side of downtown Houston) needs replaced. No build is not a good option.  The suggested loop aroung downtown is going to displace a whole lot of stuff.

Actually burying I45 although expensive might actually be the better choice.


Quote from: sprjus4 on June 19, 2020, 03:15:20 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on June 19, 2020, 01:56:05 PM
I don't think we can assume it will proceed as planned. For the last 1-2 years the opposition has waged an all-out war to kill this project, and they are getting more support. Recently the City of Houston acceded to the opposition and drastically changed its position, from supporting the current design to opposing it. Now CoH opposes all planned improvements north of downtown, and they actually want to reduce current mobility options by removing the HOV lane. CoH basically took all the complaints of the opposition and used it as their new position on the project. CoH still supports the downtown work (with remediation) since the downtown work eliminates three elevated freeways.  I blogged about the ridiculous and harmful request here
https://houstonstrategies.blogspot.com/2020/05/the-city-of-houstons-problematic.html (https://houstonstrategies.blogspot.com/2020/05/the-city-of-houstons-problematic.html)
The City of Houston should either get a no-build, meaning the elevated freeways stay, and traffic gets far worse Downtown in the coming years, or a full-build. Either all components of the project get constructed, or none.

Quote from: MaxConcrete on June 19, 2020, 01:56:05 PM


Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: -- US 175 -- on June 21, 2020, 12:43:34 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on June 20, 2020, 12:23:05 PM

Actually burying I45 although expensive might actually be the better choice.


If Houston weren"t close to sea level and susceptible to flooding and hurricanes, that might be an option.  Buffalo Bayou flooding was so bad during/after Harvey, it took out a whole TV station.  So, if the project is a thing, progesses, and gets done, my money (if I had any) would be on elevating or at least keeping I-45 above water.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: CoreySamson on June 22, 2020, 12:46:29 PM
Quote from: -- US 175 -- on June 21, 2020, 12:43:34 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on June 20, 2020, 12:23:05 PM

Actually burying I45 although expensive might actually be the better choice.


If Houston weren"t close to sea level and susceptible to flooding and hurricanes, that might be an option.  Buffalo Bayou flooding was so bad during/after Harvey, it took out a whole TV station.  So, if the project is a thing, progesses, and gets done, my money (if I had any) would be on elevating or at least keeping I-45 above water.

Actually, it would be better if 45 were sunk below ground than building a new bridge, despite what Houston's flooding history might say.

If they sink it below ground, then water that would otherwise end up in people's homes would drain in there. Indeed, not being able to drive on 45 for a few days while it drained is better than more families devastated by a flooding event than necessary.

I can't really think of any other cons for sinking 45. The pavement on 288 and 59, which has been flooded time and time again, seems fine and not damaged, which would be my other big concern.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: texaskdog on June 22, 2020, 01:04:12 PM
Quote from: kphoger on June 19, 2020, 12:28:57 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 19, 2020, 12:10:04 PM
And the proposed expansions aren't "racist". It follows along the existing path of I-10 and I-45 and only builds upon them. Will right of way acquisition be needed? Yes. It's not a purposely selected path for a new location freeway that bypasses a white community to tear through a black community.

The property value of houses next to freeways tends to be lower than that of houses farther from freeways.  Black residents tend to be economically disadvantaged compared to white residents.  Therefore, I assume black residents are more likely to live in the houses slated for acquisition than white residents.  But that doesn't make the plan racist.

they do tear out the poorest of areas, which is not racist as much of an economics issue.  Around here "tolerant Austin" they claim to be for the minorities but are gentrifying them out of their communitites.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: texaskdog on June 22, 2020, 01:04:38 PM
Quote from: -- US 175 -- on June 21, 2020, 12:43:34 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on June 20, 2020, 12:23:05 PM

Actually burying I45 although expensive might actually be the better choice.


If Houston weren"t close to sea level and susceptible to flooding and hurricanes, that might be an option.  Buffalo Bayou flooding was so bad during/after Harvey, it took out a whole TV station.  So, if the project is a thing, progesses, and gets done, my money (if I had any) would be on elevating or at least keeping I-45 above water.

Houston is always underwater
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Perfxion on June 23, 2020, 09:26:13 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 19, 2020, 11:39:19 AM
Trying to keep this non political as a possible is hard but now Streetsblog seems to be using the tragedy that happened to George and the unrest that followed to play the race card and claim this freeway expansion is now racist. Good stuff.

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2020/06/08/houstons-i-45-project-is-a-reminder-of-urban-renewal-racism/#disqus_thread

Can't call it the race card when many places done this many times over the years. One large ongoing complaint has always been massive displacement without replacement. As much of a relief this may be, you can't go Fitzowl on a neighorhood and just shrug your shoulder. Urbran renewal projects tend to do that to POC way too often.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: nolia_boi504 on June 23, 2020, 01:10:08 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on June 22, 2020, 12:46:29 PM
Quote from: -- US 175 -- on June 21, 2020, 12:43:34 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on June 20, 2020, 12:23:05 PM

Actually burying I45 although expensive might actually be the better choice.


If Houston weren"t close to sea level and susceptible to flooding and hurricanes, that might be an option.  Buffalo Bayou flooding was so bad during/after Harvey, it took out a whole TV station.  So, if the project is a thing, progesses, and gets done, my money (if I had any) would be on elevating or at least keeping I-45 above water.

Actually, it would be better if 45 were sunk below ground than building a new bridge, despite what Houston's flooding history might say.

If they sink it below ground, then water that would otherwise end up in people's homes would drain in there. Indeed, not being able to drive on 45 for a few days while it drained is better than more families devastated by a flooding event than necessary.

I can't really think of any other cons for sinking 45. The pavement on 288 and 59, which has been flooded time and time again, seems fine and not damaged, which would be my other big concern.
Totally agree. It took nearly a month after Harvey to drain and fix the beltway at Memorial. Traffic really sucked getting around it, but the volume of water that it held could have done much more damage elsewhere.

I have always assumed that park areas around Allen Pkwy and similar were designed to flood in major rain events. The media (both national and local) make a big fuss about how poorly they were designed. But, let's face it, we have a flood problem. The types of rain events we faced the last few years would have crippled any other city, especially if they don't have areas to hold large amounts of water (Barker/Addicks Reservoir, sunken freeways, etc).

I'm definitely not saying these systems are perfect. But the situation could be far worse.

Pixel 4

Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Ned Weasel on June 23, 2020, 03:42:38 PM
Quote from: Perfxion on June 23, 2020, 09:26:13 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 19, 2020, 11:39:19 AM
Trying to keep this non political as a possible is hard but now Streetsblog seems to be using the tragedy that happened to George and the unrest that followed to play the race card and claim this freeway expansion is now racist. Good stuff.

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2020/06/08/houstons-i-45-project-is-a-reminder-of-urban-renewal-racism/#disqus_thread

Can't call it the race card when many places done this many times over the years. One large ongoing complaint has always been massive displacement without replacement. As much of a relief this may be, you can't go Fitzowl on a neighorhood and just shrug your shoulder. Urbran renewal projects tend to do that to POC way too often.

Thank you so much for saying this.  I 100% agree.

Frankly, I don't consider "StreetsBlog" to be the greatest journalism ever, and I'm not inherently opposed to all highway expansions.  But as planners and designers, anyone who proposes a highway expansion that displaces residents and/or businesses should have an ethical responsibility to include a fair, just, and equitable proposal for replacement of housing units and business spaces.

In other words, it's bad design to just say "Let someone else figure that out."

No disrespect intended toward FritzOwl, however.  I just do very strongly believe that any highway proposals that don't give thought to the broader social and physical context should stay in Fictional Highways.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 23, 2020, 04:11:19 PM
Quote from: Perfxion on June 23, 2020, 09:26:13 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 19, 2020, 11:39:19 AM
Trying to keep this non political as a possible is hard but now Streetsblog seems to be using the tragedy that happened to George and the unrest that followed to play the race card and claim this freeway expansion is now racist. Good stuff.

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2020/06/08/houstons-i-45-project-is-a-reminder-of-urban-renewal-racism/#disqus_thread

Can't call it the race card when many places done this many times over the years. One large ongoing complaint has always been massive displacement without replacement. As much of a relief this may be, you can't go Fitzowl on a neighorhood and just shrug your shoulder. Urbran renewal projects tend to do that to POC way too often.
You absolutely can call it the race card since if this were a white neighborhood this card wouldn't be used. Regardless of what has happened in the past, we need an expanded freeway. Many POC of will use it and benefit from it. They are pulling the card and they have done it before.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Perfxion on June 23, 2020, 05:13:01 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 23, 2020, 04:11:19 PM
Quote from: Perfxion on June 23, 2020, 09:26:13 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 19, 2020, 11:39:19 AM
Trying to keep this non political as a possible is hard but now Streetsblog seems to be using the tragedy that happened to George and the unrest that followed to play the race card and claim this freeway expansion is now racist. Good stuff.

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2020/06/08/houstons-i-45-project-is-a-reminder-of-urban-renewal-racism/#disqus_thread

Can't call it the race card when many places done this many times over the years. One large ongoing complaint has always been massive displacement without replacement. As much of a relief this may be, you can't go Fitzowl on a neighorhood and just shrug your shoulder. Urbran renewal projects tend to do that to POC way too often.
You absolutely can call it the race card since if this were a white neighborhood this card wouldn't be used. Regardless of what has happened in the past, we need an expanded freeway. Many POC of will use it and benefit from it. They are pulling the card and they have done it before.

When people oppose a freeway in a white neighborhood, it doesn't get built. When black neighborhoods oppose, its still plans as is. Can you name all the black neighborhoods that had freeways blocked because it would destroy the area? Again, it isn't the race card when successful freeway blocking in a neighborhood only happens in white neighborhoods.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: mrsman on June 23, 2020, 06:22:00 PM
Quote from: Perfxion on June 23, 2020, 05:13:01 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 23, 2020, 04:11:19 PM
Quote from: Perfxion on June 23, 2020, 09:26:13 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 19, 2020, 11:39:19 AM
Trying to keep this non political as a possible is hard but now Streetsblog seems to be using the tragedy that happened to George and the unrest that followed to play the race card and claim this freeway expansion is now racist. Good stuff.

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2020/06/08/houstons-i-45-project-is-a-reminder-of-urban-renewal-racism/#disqus_thread

Can't call it the race card when many places done this many times over the years. One large ongoing complaint has always been massive displacement without replacement. As much of a relief this may be, you can't go Fitzowl on a neighorhood and just shrug your shoulder. Urbran renewal projects tend to do that to POC way too often.
You absolutely can call it the race card since if this were a white neighborhood this card wouldn’t be used. Regardless of what has happened in the past, we need an expanded freeway. Many POC of will use it and benefit from it. They are pulling the card and they have done it before.

When people oppose a freeway in a white neighborhood, it doesn't get built. When black neighborhoods oppose, its still plans as is. Can you name all the black neighborhoods that had freeways blocked because it would destroy the area? Again, it isn't the race card when successful freeway blocking in a neighborhood only happens in white neighborhoods.

I can't in Houston, but there are several black neighborhoods in other cities that have been successful in blocking freeways.  Washington Dc blocked many of their roads through black neighborhoods.  The revolts propelled the career of Marion Barry, the mayor for life.  Yes, I-395 did blow through some neighborhoods on the southside of town, but the I-95 North Cenrtral Freeway and the I-70S freeways were stopped at the Beltway and were prevented from going through.

And to this day, parts of US 71 in Kansas City still have grade crossings.   They cleared homes for the expressway but still blocked the freeway completion project.  At this point, no new home need destroyed for this, yet it is still being blocked on racism grounds.

Another one is Baltimore.  Yes, some black neighborhoods there got destroyed for I-170 and I-95 construction, but I-70 was stopped dead in its tracks at the Baltimore city line near I-695.  So the unfinished I-170 did destroy homes for about a one mile corridor, the larger freeway project that would have connected this to the rest of I-70 was cancelled.

I can acknowledge that there were certainly racial elements at play at deciding which areas would be destroyed for a highway project, and yes given two equal routings the one through a minority neighborhood would likely get picked.  But some white areas were destroyed and some black areas were saved.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Some one on June 23, 2020, 08:53:42 PM
Quote from: mrsman on June 23, 2020, 06:22:00 PM
Quote from: Perfxion on June 23, 2020, 05:13:01 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 23, 2020, 04:11:19 PM
Quote from: Perfxion on June 23, 2020, 09:26:13 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 19, 2020, 11:39:19 AM
Trying to keep this non political as a possible is hard but now Streetsblog seems to be using the tragedy that happened to George and the unrest that followed to play the race card and claim this freeway expansion is now racist. Good stuff.

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2020/06/08/houstons-i-45-project-is-a-reminder-of-urban-renewal-racism/#disqus_thread

Can't call it the race card when many places done this many times over the years. One large ongoing complaint has always been massive displacement without replacement. As much of a relief this may be, you can't go Fitzowl on a neighorhood and just shrug your shoulder. Urbran renewal projects tend to do that to POC way too often.
You absolutely can call it the race card since if this were a white neighborhood this card wouldn't be used. Regardless of what has happened in the past, we need an expanded freeway. Many POC of will use it and benefit from it. They are pulling the card and they have done it before.

When people oppose a freeway in a white neighborhood, it doesn't get built. When black neighborhoods oppose, its still plans as is. Can you name all the black neighborhoods that had freeways blocked because it would destroy the area? Again, it isn't the race card when successful freeway blocking in a neighborhood only happens in white neighborhoods.

I can't in Houston, but there are several black neighborhoods in other cities that have been successful in blocking freeways.  Washington Dc blocked many of their roads through black neighborhoods.  The revolts propelled the career of Marion Barry, the mayor for life.  Yes, I-395 did blow through some neighborhoods on the southside of town, but the I-95 North Cenrtral Freeway and the I-70S freeways were stopped at the Beltway and were prevented from going through.

And to this day, parts of US 71 in Kansas City still have grade crossings.   They cleared homes for the expressway but still blocked the freeway completion project.  At this point, no new home need destroyed for this, yet it is still being blocked on racism grounds.

Another one is Baltimore.  Yes, some black neighborhoods there got destroyed for I-170 and I-95 construction, but I-70 was stopped dead in its tracks at the Baltimore city line near I-695.  So the unfinished I-170 did destroy homes for about a one mile corridor, the larger freeway project that would have connected this to the rest of I-70 was cancelled.

I can acknowledge that there were certainly racial elements at play at deciding which areas would be destroyed for a highway project, and yes given two equal routings the one through a minority neighborhood would likely get picked.  But some white areas were destroyed and some black areas were saved.
Don't forget I-83, which although it was built past 695, the last few miles was stopped dead in its track (it was supposed to terminate at I-95).

Although it's not a black community, I can think of one example in Houston. 225 was supposed to be extended to US 59 in Downtown, but was eventually canceled thanks to East End's protests. Heck, there were even ghost stubs too (which eventually got removed as part of 59's (and I-10 junction) rebuild in 2003).
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: bwana39 on June 23, 2020, 09:39:37 PM
Quote from: stridentweasel on June 23, 2020, 03:42:38 PM
Quote from: Perfxion on June 23, 2020, 09:26:13 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 19, 2020, 11:39:19 AM
Trying to keep this non political as a possible is hard but now Streetsblog seems to be using the tragedy that happened to George and the unrest that followed to play the race card and claim this freeway expansion is now racist. Good stuff.

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2020/06/08/houstons-i-45-project-is-a-reminder-of-urban-renewal-racism/#disqus_thread

Can't call it the race card when many places done this many times over the years. One large ongoing complaint has always been massive displacement without replacement. As much of a relief this may be, you can't go Fitzowl on a neighorhood and just shrug your shoulder. Urbran renewal projects tend to do that to POC way too often.

Thank you so much for saying this.  I 100% agree.

Frankly, I don't consider "StreetsBlog" to be the greatest journalism ever, and I'm not inherently opposed to all highway expansions.  But as planners and designers, anyone who proposes a highway expansion that displaces residents and/or businesses should have an ethical responsibility to include a fair, just, and equitable proposal for replacement of housing units and business spaces.

In other words, it's bad design to just say "Let someone else figure that out."

No disrespect intended toward FritzOwl, however.  I just do very strongly believe that any highway proposals that don't give thought to the broader social and physical context should stay in Fictional Highways.

I agree with you but......

It is going to displace communities. It SHOULD place the displaced residents in better housing, better neighborhoods, adn better prospects fo rthe future.

What happens is the landlords take their money and run and the renters are left to their own devices to find a new slum (IE housing at the same depressed price point.) The robber barrons prevail again.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: kphoger on June 24, 2020, 09:30:27 AM
Quote from: bwana39 on June 23, 2020, 09:39:37 PM
It is going to displace communities. It SHOULD place the displaced residents in better housing, better neighborhoods, adn better prospects fo rthe future.

I'd rather see "equivalent" in place of "better".  I don't consider it to the job of the DOT to provide upward mobility at taxpayer expense.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: STLmapboy on June 24, 2020, 09:44:56 AM
Quote from: kphoger on June 24, 2020, 09:30:27 AM
Quote from: bwana39 on June 23, 2020, 09:39:37 PM
It is going to displace communities. It SHOULD place the displaced residents in better housing, better neighborhoods, adn better prospects fo rthe future.

I'd rather see "equivalent" in place of "better".  I don't consider it to the job of the DOT to provide upward mobility at taxpayer expense.

Yeah. I believe one of the projects will be demolished for this.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: silverback1065 on June 24, 2020, 12:17:14 PM
i would think they would be happy for this. it removes a massive stretch of highway and will reconnect so much. what's not to like about that?
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: bwana39 on June 24, 2020, 01:39:36 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on June 24, 2020, 09:44:56 AM
Quote from: kphoger on June 24, 2020, 09:30:27 AM
Quote from: bwana39 on June 23, 2020, 09:39:37 PM
It is going to displace communities. It SHOULD place the displaced residents in better housing, better neighborhoods, adn better prospects fo rthe future.

I'd rather see "equivalent" in place of "better".  I don't consider it to the job of the DOT to provide upward mobility at taxpayer expense.


Yeah. I believe one of the projects will be demolished for this.


By better, I don't think I mean fancier. I think what I mean is better maintained in a place with better schools and opportunities.  The point is to replace the substandard housing with units that meet the minimal standards for decency.

The biggest problem in our cities is the failure to maintain properties. As housing standards go down, crime goes up. I get that this problem does not belong to the DOT, at the same time getting rid of substandard housing is desirable regardless of how it is attained.

Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: kphoger on June 24, 2020, 01:46:08 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on June 24, 2020, 01:39:36 PM
The point is to replace the substandard housing with units that meet the minimal standards for decency.

This I can get behind.

Quote from: bwana39 on June 24, 2020, 01:39:36 PM
in a place with better schools and opportunities.

This I cannot.

Quote from: bwana39 on June 24, 2020, 01:39:36 PM
getting rid of substandard housing is desirable regardless of how it is attained.

This I'm not sure about.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: webny99 on June 25, 2020, 12:38:36 PM
Quote from: kphoger on June 24, 2020, 09:30:27 AM
Quote from: bwana39 on June 23, 2020, 09:39:37 PM
It is going to displace communities. It SHOULD place the displaced residents in better housing, better neighborhoods, and better prospects for the future.

I'd rather see "equivalent" in place of "better".  I don't consider it to the job of the DOT to provide upward mobility at taxpayer expense.

Agree as a general rule, but the problem is that "equivalent" can be hard to measure, as where do you draw the line between "equivalent" and "worse"?
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: MaxConcrete on August 17, 2020, 09:11:45 PM
An updated animated rendering was posted today

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpP0HrHrlRs

This rendering is consistent with the December 2019 schematic. The main changes are the elimination of the connections to Chenevert at the 69/288 interchange, sinking the south end of the downtown connector into a trench, and some tweaking of the eastbound frontage road on the southwest side of the 69/10/45 interchange.

I don't see changes to the design since the December 2019 schematic. When the the City of Houston published its measured opposition to the project earlier this year, it included a wish list of changes in the downtown area (but no major downsizing was requested in the downtown area).

An H-GAC committee is currently studying the project and how to handle the CoH requests for changes. My best guess is that they needed the TxDOT design to be accurately shown in the rendering, so it was updated. I'm thinking that changes are still possible and likely depending on the committee recommendation.

The animation still does not cover the 45/10 multiplex on the northwest side of downtown, which is one of the more interesting sections of the project.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: bwana39 on August 22, 2020, 01:40:06 AM
The title on thread states a fallacy. TXDOT did not recommend this. TXDOT said I-45 through downtown needed rebuilt. Their original goal was to replace it in the same basic footprint as it currently occupies. Urbanists demanded that the current I-45 route be abandoned. The city of Houston supported the Urbanist initiative.  TXDOT has proposed a road that accomplishes both goals. IE .."This is what Houston asked for"

From an Urbanist perspective;the cross country freeways should barely cross the  outskirts of the metro area. Then PERHAPS freeways leading TO downtown but not through it or even around it. Arterials would route traffic into and out of downtown and discourage thru traffic.

Not sure it is a win for the Urbanists. Between the pain of construction on ALL THREE of the downtown interstates, it may take 2 decades to ever settle in from the construction.  About the only saving grace is that I-45 on the west side of downtown is slated to stay to after the mid-point of the project.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Plutonic Panda on August 22, 2020, 01:54:49 AM
The project as currently proposed is absolutely incredible and will do wonders for Houston. It's beautiful and I hope it is built. Houston will be a better city once this is built.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Bruce on August 22, 2020, 02:43:03 AM
God this whole thread makes me want to puke.

All this money could be used to fix some of Houston's more pressing needs, like having a functional drainage system or rail transit.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: sprjus4 on August 22, 2020, 10:17:14 AM
Quote from: Bruce on August 22, 2020, 02:43:03 AM
God this whole thread makes me want to puke.

All this money could be used to fix some of Houston's more pressing needs, like having a functional drainage system or rail transit.
Meanwhile traffic on the existing interstates, which is already terrible, will continue to get significantly worse in future years. The rebuild was needed 20 years ago.

Have you ever driven I-10 / I-45 / I-69 around Downtown during rush hour?
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Bruce on August 22, 2020, 12:33:17 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on August 22, 2020, 10:17:14 AM
Quote from: Bruce on August 22, 2020, 02:43:03 AM
God this whole thread makes me want to puke.

All this money could be used to fix some of Houston's more pressing needs, like having a functional drainage system or rail transit.
Meanwhile traffic on the existing interstates, which is already terrible, will continue to get significantly worse in future years. The rebuild was needed 20 years ago.

Have you ever driven I-10 / I-45 / I-69 around Downtown during rush hour?

No, but I've seen plenty of credible data to suggest that wanton freeway expansion in Houston has resulted in more traffic, not less: Reducing congestion: Katy didn't (https://cityobservatory.org/reducing-congestion-katy-didnt/) (uses Transtar data).

A smart strategy of easing chokepoints and investing in real alternatives (and thinking beyond just the pandemic) like public transit would actually work.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: sprjus4 on August 22, 2020, 01:18:20 PM
Quote from: Bruce on August 22, 2020, 12:33:17 PM
No, but I've seen plenty of credible data to suggest that wanton freeway expansion in Houston has resulted in more traffic, not less: Reducing congestion: Katy didn't (https://cityobservatory.org/reducing-congestion-katy-didnt/) (uses Transtar data).
Ah, the induced demand fallacy.

Quote
A smart strategy of easing chokepoints and investing in real alternatives (and thinking beyond just the pandemic) like public transit would actually work.
Not against having public transit, but there's little to suggest that it would do much to actually ease congestion. Most people are going to continue to prefer to drive, despite what RE/T groups may believe.

Did it ever occur that not all traffic is local? Houston is the junction of 3 major interstate highways that carry a significant amount of through traffic. Expanding light rail and transit isn't going to result in rush hour becoming free flowing on the interstates. Expansion of roads is necessary and will continue as planned.

Are you suggesting I-35 in Downtown Austin is adequate and shouldn't be expanded?
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: rte66man on August 22, 2020, 03:01:54 PM
Quote from: Bruce on August 22, 2020, 02:43:03 AM
God this whole thread makes me want to puke.

All this money could be used to fix some of Houston's more pressing needs, like having a functional drainage system or rail transit.

Rail transit in Houston won't work because the major business areas are too diffused. Downtown, Airport, Galleria, Spring, the Woodlands etc. plus all the reverse commutes. But the biggest reason is the car culture is too entrenched. Mass transit works better where business is far more concentrated.

I see you are from the greater Seattle area. If Houston was laid out all strung out from north to south like that, then public transit might work. Houston is like a giant wagon wheel with expansion on all 4 sides (only constricted by Galveston Bay). Rail transit would be prohibitively expensive to build out.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Plutonic Panda on August 22, 2020, 03:20:35 PM
Quote from: Bruce on August 22, 2020, 12:33:17 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on August 22, 2020, 10:17:14 AM
Quote from: Bruce on August 22, 2020, 02:43:03 AM
God this whole thread makes me want to puke.

All this money could be used to fix some of Houston's more pressing needs, like having a functional drainage system or rail transit.
Meanwhile traffic on the existing interstates, which is already terrible, will continue to get significantly worse in future years. The rebuild was needed 20 years ago.

Have you ever driven I-10 / I-45 / I-69 around Downtown during rush hour?

No, but I've seen plenty of credible data to suggest that wanton freeway expansion in Houston has resulted in more traffic, not less: Reducing congestion: Katy didn't (https://cityobservatory.org/reducing-congestion-katy-didnt/) (uses Transtar data).

A smart strategy of easing chokepoints and investing in real alternatives (and thinking beyond just the pandemic) like public transit would actually work.
The overwhelmingly majority of people there use the car. This is an amazing project. Houston can have a rail expansion with this project.

FYI, this project will support BRT, improve walkability/biking infrastructure, build parks, and improve operations to the red line.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Chris on August 23, 2020, 03:54:08 AM
Quote from: Bruce on August 22, 2020, 12:33:17 PM
No, but I've seen plenty of credible data to suggest that wanton freeway expansion in Houston has resulted in more traffic, not less: Reducing congestion: Katy didn't (https://cityobservatory.org/reducing-congestion-katy-didnt/) (uses Transtar data).

The population of Greater Houston has grown by nearly 2.5 million people since 2000. That's similar to the entire metro area of cities like Austin, Kansas City, Portland, Sacramento or Las Vegas added in just 20 years.

Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: bwana39 on August 23, 2020, 09:32:55 AM
QuoteA smart strategy of easing chokepoints and investing in real alternatives (and thinking beyond just the pandemic) like public transit would actually work.

Getting people from the Houston suburbs on mass transit?   Even if you could relatively cover all directions, the mindset just isn't there 
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: rte66man on August 23, 2020, 12:03:26 PM
Went back and forth a few times on the TxDOT conceptualization as it relates to the Hardy Connector.  From what I saw, no connection from WB 10 to NB Hardy and I wasn't able to see under the deck by the convention center but there wasn't a connection for SB Hardy to EB 45. If true, that is really unfortunate.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: bwana39 on August 24, 2020, 05:30:28 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on June 24, 2020, 12:17:14 PM
i would think they would be happy for this. it removes a massive stretch of highway and will reconnect so much. what's not to like about that?

The developers are happy about it. The urbanists are still unhappy. Their goal for freeway removal is removal WITHOUT replacement. This replacement actually will clear out moderate and lower income people, street level businesses, and lots more.  This may even be a LOSS for the urbanists as there will be more lane miles downtown after it is finished than there currently are.

Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Bobby5280 on August 25, 2020, 10:45:21 PM
The New Urbanists need to get themselves caught up with some current events (along with some other key groups of people involved in urban planning and development).

These trendy yet high cost of living urban centers are facing an existential threat brought on by the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, resulting economic downturn and the various yet persistent states of lock-down. Businesses and residents are both figuring out they don't really have to live and work in the hard to afford urban center. Improvements in technology and leaps in Internet speeds are making it possible for them to leave for less costly locations with far shorter commute times (or no drive time at all).

There is suddenly a lot more empty offices in these urban centers. And there is a growing number of changed minds and attitudes about people working remotely from home, after the pandemic forced many businesses to try it. Tens of millions of Americans have lost their jobs. A big wave of rental evictions and property foreclosures will start rolling any day now. These urban Whole Foods Utopias are going to get hurt.

Even for people living in urban centers who are still doing well financially they've seen their quality of life get hit by this pandemic. Many outlets of leisure, entertainment and nightlife are still closed or only partially re-opened with restrictions. We may eventually get a vaccine for SARS-CoV-2. But how long will it be until the next pandemic hits? There is no guarantee life will go 100% back to "normal" anytime soon. How many people will still want to pay a high premium to live in an urban center that's as dull as any small town?

Houston doesn't have a living cost problem quite as absurd as New York City or San Francisco. But it's not exactly cheap either. The suburbs in the Houston metro have exploded in size due in large part to people looking for more home for their bucks. A great deal of decentralization has happened. The downtown area of Houston doesn't have a monopoly on high rise office space or even culture and nightlife. The consequences of this pandemic will make it more obvious.

If TX DOT wants to do a big overhaul of the downtown Houston freeway network I think they'll eventually be able to do what they wish. Given the current circumstances and likely trends going forward, the New Urbanists won't be able to block this project forever, much less sustain their philosophy for the long term either. Factors like income inequality, falling fertility rates and now these pandemics just fowl up that whole idea. Social Distancing may give way to Living Distancing
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Chris on August 26, 2020, 04:34:36 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on August 25, 2020, 10:45:21 PMA great deal of decentralization has happened. The downtown area of Houston doesn't have a monopoly on high rise office space or even culture and nightlife.

I've read this interesting statistic about I-35E in Dallas (in relation to the Horseshoe Project), that when I-35E was built 80% of traffic on it had a destination or origin in downtown Dallas. Nowadays, 80% just passes by, to another point in the metro area.

The problem with 'new urbanism' and transit advocates is that they still think in terms of everything must go to downtown, as if we are still in the 1950s. Rail services are still mostly catering to that, but that has become a small minority of all commuting and non-commuting trips in an urban area.

The same goes for criticism about sprawl, it's still measured in distance from downtown while someone living in the Katy or Woodlands area isn't even that likely to travel all the way to downtown Houston on I-10 or I-45. The highest traffic volume on I-10 is way west of downtown, traffic volumes actually go down as you approach downtown, contrary to 'conventional wisdom' that there is an ever larger flow of traffic joining the freeway on their way to downtown. That's how rail transit work, but that's not how road transportation works anymore.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Bobby5280 on August 26, 2020, 02:02:35 PM
Quote from: ChrisThe problem with 'new urbanism' and transit advocates is that they still think in terms of everything must go to downtown, as if we are still in the 1950s. Rail services are still mostly catering to that, but that has become a small minority of all commuting and non-commuting trips in an urban area.

I think the New Urbanist mindset is even more outdated than that. One thing many of them like to do is point to European cities, where there is a far greater level of density, mixed use properties, walk-ability, use of mass transit and longer distance rail transit. They want American cities to function more like these European cities. But they conveniently overlook the fact those European cities were built-out long before automobiles became popular. In some cases the street layouts pre-date automobiles by hundreds of years.

Rail travel made the first form of urban sprawl possible. Cities like London and Paris or even New York City and Boston here in the US used rail travel to grow out to their current boundaries. Some of these rail corridors are just as big and disruptive as a major highway. Many old cities have one or more major railroad stations built in the city centers. There's no doubt those train stations and rail corridors going to them displaced a lot of homes in order to be built. Prior to rail everyone was on foot, on a horse or in a horse-drawn carriage. Cities were far smaller in geographical size and far more densely packed with population.

Back in the 1980's metro areas like Dallas-Fort Worth and the Northern Virginia suburbs of DC began to change the relationship of downtown urban centers and the suburbs. The old idea was big business needed to locate its operations in a skyscraper downtown and let the employees commute in from the suburbs. JCPenney's move from Manhattan to the Dallas area was a key example. Rather than renting space in a tower downtown they built a new HQ campus miles away in Plano. JCPenney chose to build its HQ closer to where its employees would likely be living.

The Manhattan commercial real estate market was still able to thrive in the last 30 years. But a lot of that has been supplemented by international customers and speculators. The commercial real estate market in Manhattan is now in a deep tail-spin. And not all of the down-turn is COVID-19 related. Meanwhile the DFW market is currently the hottest commercial real estate market in the nation, followed by Austin.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Chris on August 26, 2020, 02:55:23 PM
Most American urbanists also seem to have a romanticized idea of transportation in Europe. The share of driving is around 80% in most EU countries, fluctuating between 75 and 90% in most countries. Yes you can get around by public transport, but if your destination is not in a city center it is time-consuming and impractical, so most people drive.

These people tend to overlook the fact that traveling as a tourist is very different from regular daily commuting, where the vast majority of trips do not start and end in a historic, dense city center.

And unlike U.S. cities, European downtowns tends to have far less office employment. A large chunk of city center employment is in the hospitality, retail and tourist sector, which are mostly low-paying jobs in areas with a high cost of living, effectively creating some kind of an urban / suburban-periphery divide in terms of socio-economics but also transportation patterns.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: bwana39 on August 26, 2020, 03:24:56 PM
Here is a simple fact. As far as disruption goes, it would be less disruptive to close the Pierce elevated  and tear it down then Dig a cut and cover tunnel for I-45 along its current route.  Close the tunnel in. Build the streetscape that the various downtown groups want on the surface.  Do little or nothing to the fairly recently constructed or revamped (current) I-10 and I-69.

They should leave I-10 and I-69 as is and build the tunnel. The disruption of the (extra) traffic  detoured around downtown probably would be similar to the disruption from rebuilding I-69 and I-10 even with the current I-45 still open.  It might be less. Undoubtedly it would NOT be more.

Flooding.  Come on... The Washburn tunnel in Pasadena has been there 60 years. The Baytown Tunnel was there for 40+. The Belle Chase Tunnel  and the Harvey Tunnel in metro New Orleans , there is even a tunnel in Houma LA. The tunnels in Mobile are way closer to the gulf than this.  The cut and cover proposed  over I-69 / I-45 is going to be in effect tunnel.  (Much like the Woodall Rogers Freeway in Dallas.)

They are going to build a tunnel regardless of where I-45 is routed.  Frankly it has the same likelihood of flooding as Central Expressway in Dallas (the below grade sections north of downtown)  if they use similar drainage techniques. https://www.texastribune.org/2018/07/06/hurricane-harvey-floods-houston-water-tunnel/  (Central drains using a similar algorithm.)     Remember when the Southwest freeway flooded and boats were floating down it.   Any roadway in Houston (or even less flood prone areas) is going to require flood mitigation of one sort or another if it is significantly below grade. 

The only advantage of the proposed east / north loop over a tunnel along the current route of I-45 is if developers wanted to build another set of skyscrapers down the (current) R.O.W. once I-45 is removed.

One other advantage to keeping the current I-45 alignment: 1 wreck on the proposed roadway could completely shutdown two or even all three freeways. I know Houston police do a better job of getting traffic going after a wreck than others (especially DALLAS) but.....

Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Bobby5280 on August 26, 2020, 05:29:19 PM
Quote from: ChrisMost American urbanists also seem to have a romanticized idea of transportation in Europe.

I suspect at least some are transportation hypocrites. That really goes for people in positions to actually change policy, like politicians and other community leaders. They'll recommend the "average person" strap-hang on a city bus or subway train. Meanwhile those New Urbanists are actually driving, using a taxi cab or even a private car service. 30 years ago when I lived in NYC it seemed like a status symbol to not have to use mass transit.

The only thing I miss about commuting in New York City: the Staten Island Ferry. The scenery was pretty cool. However I do not miss waiting on the ferry in the terminals, having to stand due to all the homeless people sleeping (and peeing) on the benches. I don't miss riding the bus or the subway.

Quote from: bwana39Here is a simple fact. As far as disruption goes, it would be less disruptive to close the Pierce elevated  and tear it down then Dig a cut and cover tunnel for I-45 along its current route.

Building a cut and cover tunnel in downtown Houston is a non-starter. First: there is no such thing as anyone building a super highway tunnel in the US without it costing an absolutely insane amount of money. Second: Houston is badly flood prone. Some of their freeways can act like bath tubs to hold flood water. Tunnels don't hold up so well to that.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: bwana39 on August 27, 2020, 01:18:02 AM
Quote from: bwana39Here is a simple fact. As far as disruption goes, it would be less disruptive to close the Pierce elevated  and tear it down then Dig a cut and cover tunnel for I-45 along its current route.

QuoteBuilding a cut and cover tunnel in downtown Houston is a non-starter. First: there is no such thing as anyone building a super highway tunnel in the US without it costing an absolutely insane amount of money. Second: Houston is badly flood prone. Some of their freeways can act like bath tubs to hold flood water. Tunnels don't hold up so well to that.

"A seven-block “cap” will cover the freeway behind the GRB, creating the possibility of a park that reconnects Downtown to EaDo. South of Downtown, TxDOT will change I-69 from elevated to depressed,..." (https://kinder.rice.edu/urbanedge/2019/06/03/experts-share-what-txdots-i-45-project-means-houston)

This will in effect be a tunnel! As to tunnel cost, the tunnels we have built in the major cities of late have been bored tunnels. I am talking cut and cover. Just like the depressed / deck park sections would functionally be. Don't say a tunnel won't work all the while you plan on building a tunnel. The expense of the proposed I-45 (and rebuilt I-69 and I-10)would far outweigh a cleanly built tunnel along the current I-45 route if it is closed for the duration.

I said tunnel. I guess I should have said depressed freeway with a continuous cap?



Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: silverback1065 on August 27, 2020, 02:35:02 PM
Cut and cover tunnels aren't as simple and minimally destructive as you think.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: bwana39 on August 27, 2020, 08:44:52 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on August 27, 2020, 02:35:02 PM
Cut and cover tunnels aren't as simple and minimally destructive as you think.

I get that. There are water, sewer, gas, storm drains, and perhaps even steam. Then there are electric and communications cables. Probably other stuff out there too.  There might even be pedestrian tunnels. Then there are the foundations of the adjacent buildings, not to mention vibration and other construction related complications to buildings in the area. (An area wider than you might think!)

Disruption of traffic crossing the ROW (which would be a ditch in the interim. ) I am not suggesting open it all up at once....

No, I didn't oversimplify or dismiss the complications. The fact is whether they call it a tunnel or not, the "depressed roadway with a cap" is in effect going to be a tunnel. I don't think it matters which side of downtown it is on. Either place, it will retain similar complications.

As to the alternative of a bored tunnel, it could go under much of the existant details, that said, this is where the balooning expenses have historically come in. Who is to say that if the proposed freeway was going to be built at ground level (it is not slated to be) that it will not have the same type of cost overruns.

Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: MaxConcrete on September 25, 2020, 07:47:06 PM
The FEIS has been issued. I don't see any changes that were not already known, and all previously-known changes were minor. The ROD can be issued after 30 days.
http://www.ih45northandmore.com/final_eis.aspx (http://www.ih45northandmore.com/final_eis.aspx)

The H-GAC study group is in progress and could recommend changes.

If there is a lawsuit on deck, it would probably be filed in the near future.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Plutonic Panda on September 25, 2020, 07:55:36 PM
Tentatively, when could construction begin? 2022 by chance?
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: MaxConcrete on September 25, 2020, 08:10:11 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on September 25, 2020, 07:55:36 PM
Tentatively, when could construction begin? 2022 by chance?
It is slated for a 2022 start, but I think delays are likely, especially if there is a lawsuit.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Plutonic Panda on October 29, 2020, 11:56:24 AM
30 day comment period has been extended for another 30 days.

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/Comment-deadline-extended-for-7B-planned-rebuild-15682077.php
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: bluecountry on October 29, 2020, 04:17:00 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on August 27, 2020, 02:35:02 PM
Cut and cover tunnels aren't as simple and minimally destructive as you think.
How so?
It is buried, and if you put green space, parks, rain garden, affordable housing as the 'cover' it works.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: silverback1065 on October 29, 2020, 04:25:38 PM
Quote from: bluecountry on October 29, 2020, 04:17:00 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on August 27, 2020, 02:35:02 PM
Cut and cover tunnels aren't as simple and minimally destructive as you think.
How so?
It is buried, and if you put green space, parks, rain garden, affordable housing as the 'cover' it works.

do they even allow anything more than a park on top of capped freeways? i've never seen anything more than that. i feel like a tunnel would be needed if you wanted to place buildings on top.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: rte66man on October 30, 2020, 09:59:33 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on October 29, 2020, 04:25:38 PM
Quote from: bluecountry on October 29, 2020, 04:17:00 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on August 27, 2020, 02:35:02 PM
Cut and cover tunnels aren't as simple and minimally destructive as you think.
How so?
It is buried, and if you put green space, parks, rain garden, affordable housing as the 'cover' it works.

do they even allow anything more than a park on top of capped freeways? i've never seen anything more than that. i feel like a tunnel would be needed if you wanted to place buildings on top.

Yes they do. See Minneapolis as one example:
https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9815753,-93.2771086,794m/data=!3m1!1e3
https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9793158,-93.2794253,3a,75y,33.43h,94.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSQnbssf0Gf0bO9uOTRaSfQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Kansas City is another
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.097581,-94.5882976,871m/data=!3m1!1e3
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0962925,-94.5852085,3a,75y,264.86h,94.14t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSQsp43Z9vzeVCz8WVdhbfQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Both are only one block at a time but it's still a cap.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on October 30, 2020, 11:20:12 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on October 29, 2020, 04:25:38 PM
Quote from: bluecountry on October 29, 2020, 04:17:00 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on August 27, 2020, 02:35:02 PM
Cut and cover tunnels aren't as simple and minimally destructive as you think.
How so?
It is buried, and if you put green space, parks, rain garden, affordable housing as the 'cover' it works.

do they even allow anything more than a park on top of capped freeways? i've never seen anything more than that. i feel like a tunnel would be needed if you wanted to place buildings on top.

From the state that Silverback loves to hate...
Columbus's High Street cap (from I-670 below) - https://goo.gl/maps/hiRmw62uoDMrX8U9A
Columbus's High Street cap (from High St above I-670) - https://goo.gl/maps/RtcB5tCRUmBwKTRMA
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: BigManFromAFRICA88 on November 01, 2020, 11:48:43 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on October 29, 2020, 04:25:38 PM
Quote from: bluecountry on October 29, 2020, 04:17:00 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on August 27, 2020, 02:35:02 PM
Cut and cover tunnels aren't as simple and minimally destructive as you think.
How so?
It is buried, and if you put green space, parks, rain garden, affordable housing as the 'cover' it works.

do they even allow anything more than a park on top of capped freeways? i've never seen anything more than that. i feel like a tunnel would be needed if you wanted to place buildings on top.

I-5 through downtown Seattle has entered the chat.

EDIT: And Georgia SR 400 through the Buckhead CBD as well.
Title: Pierce Elevated.
Post by: bwana39 on November 07, 2020, 01:24:38 PM
Personally, I would still  prefer keeping I-45 & I-69 separate.

This said, I had had  based my opinions solely on my on-the ground recollections. I am not sure I had ever really looked closely at a map of downtown Houston. My perception was that the current route was relatively straight and the replacement route was circumnavigous.  The proposed route is indeed not straight, but it appears to be similar in mirror to the current route.  So, any argument about replacing a relatively straight through route with a looping one flies out the door. The proposed route for I-45 is about 3/4 of a mile longer.

I still have some issues. These superwide freeways are great until they aren't. What happens when a single wreck shuts down I-10, I-45, & I-69.

The Pierce Elevated was just an extender to make the north and south stubs of US-75 into downtown meet.  It was built elevated and without exits and entrances to the surface streets. By its design, it was supposed to be literally a bypass of downtown. As it was elevated there should have been minimal interference between downtown and midtown. What happened was that Midtown as most urban core neighborhoods declined during the last half of the twentieth century. Victorian homes became multi-family tenements. Changing demographics NOT I-45 caused the changes. This century gentrification came.

So here is what happens when the Pierce elevated is gone. It literally creates "new land". Places where developers can build (or in some cases restore / refurbish) properties along the corridor. It may make transitions of urban buildings in downtown to residential units more viable (as services are now closer to downtown. ) I used the word MAY. The fact is the footprint of the freeway is fairly small. 

The Pierce elevated needs replaced. While capacity is one of the issues, the bigger issue is it needs to be rebuilt. 60 year-old bridges that have been used heavily (much like I-345 in Dallas) need replacement.

There have been some successful freeway removals in the US. All of them before this have either removed the freeway from a waterfront or have been replaced by tunnels in a similar path.  For Houston, a tunnel is an option that has been barely mentioned. The irony is part of the project moving the Freeway to the Southeast side of downtown includes what is a defacto tunnel. (So the line goes... A tunnel wouldn't work, but let's build a depressed roadway with a covered deck at ground level...in function a tunnel.). 

Houston just needs to finish the improvements on I-610 so the through traffic has somewhere else to go. Close the Pierce elevated then build a tunnel to bridge the gap. It might be inconvenient, but I can assure you no more inconvenient than rebuilding I-69 and I-10 both to accomplish this.  This proposal will probably work well in the end, but getting there may stall any benefits.  Building a tunnel along the Pierce corridor could cut down many of the negatives of the current proposal as well.

This all said, as close in as I-610 is, just closing and removing the Pierce elevated MIGHT be achievable with MINIMAL upgrades at all.  Time, not engineering would prove that out.

Tear it down and leave it be for a couple of years. See what the traffic actually does.... If it is unmanageable, build the tunnel. If it adapts without a big increase in gridlock. Build just the boulevard...

Here is my bet... They build the freeway basically as proposed. Some time a decade or later someone proposes to bridge the freeway stub that will still reach to around Smith Street with the freeways south of downtown with a tunnel.  IE replace the Pierce elevated.





Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: MaxConcrete on November 07, 2020, 02:44:29 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on November 07, 2020, 01:24:38 PM
The Pierce elevated needs replaced. While capacity is one of the issues, the bigger issue is it needs to be rebuilt. 60 year-old bridges that have been used heavily (much like I-345 in Dallas) need replacement.
The pavement/deck of the Pierce Elevated was replaced in 1997, and it still has plenty of life in it, 20+ years. However, the Pierce Elevated has suffered from inadequate capacity for decades.

Quote from: bwana39 on November 07, 2020, 01:24:38 PM
Here is my bet... They build the freeway basically as proposed. Some time a decade or later someone proposes to bridge the freeway stub that will still reach to around Smith Street with the freeways south of downtown with a tunnel.  IE replace the Pierce elevated.
I agree that the downtown work for the NHHIP will most likely proceed as planned, and this work will be the first part of the NHHIP to proceed. Opposition is focusing on IH-45 north of downtown, and they are trying to kill that part of the project.

I disagree that some kind of vehicular replacement for the Pierce Elevated will be built. That would be expensive, and the main purpose of the project from the perspective of downtown interests is to get rid of the Pierce Elevated.





[/quote]
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: silverback1065 on November 07, 2020, 10:40:26 PM
Why does this thread have a different name now?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on November 08, 2020, 12:12:42 AM
This name is more appropriate, IMO.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: bwana39 on November 08, 2020, 08:33:36 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on November 07, 2020, 10:40:26 PM
Why does this thread have a different name now?

This is a larger project than just the reroute of I-45 around downtown. It is a three segment project: Segment 3 is the downtown freeways modification. The reroute of I-45 is the biggest highlight, but it includes work on the entire downtown freeway system including  I-10, I-69, and TX-288. It is expected to be done first.

Segment 2 is widening  the North Freeway (I-45) from the I-10 split to I-610 including revamping the I-610 / I-45 interchange.
.
Segment 1 is widening of the North Freeway (I-45) from I-610 to Beltway-8.

At this point, the plan for the downtown  part is mostly  decided. Construction is still years off. There is still a good bit of controversy surrounding the part going north of downtown.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: STLmapboy on November 13, 2020, 01:36:09 PM
So when will the contract be awarded? Has the comment period ended?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on November 13, 2020, 02:28:24 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 13, 2020, 01:36:09 PM
So when will the contract be awarded? Has the comment period ended?
The public comment period was extended for 30 days and is still active.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: bwana39 on November 13, 2020, 02:29:02 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 13, 2020, 01:36:09 PM
So when will the contract be awarded? Has the comment period ended?

see below...
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on October 29, 2020, 11:56:24 AM
30 day comment period has been extended for another 30 days.

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/Comment-deadline-extended-for-7B-planned-rebuild-15682077.php
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: MaxConcrete on December 09, 2020, 01:37:41 PM
https://www.bizjournals.com/houston/news/2020/12/08/houston-mayor-pushes-back-on-txdot-i-45-plans.html?cx_testId=40&cx_testVariant=cx_27&cx_artPos=0#cxrecs_s (https://www.bizjournals.com/houston/news/2020/12/08/houston-mayor-pushes-back-on-txdot-i-45-plans.html?cx_testId=40&cx_testVariant=cx_27&cx_artPos=0#cxrecs_s)

According to the article, the latest communication from Houston Mayor Turner to TxDOT focuses on asking TxDOT for more funding to replace displaced housing, and also seeks TxDOT's response to flooding concerns. The article mentions Turner still would like to see a narrower footprint for the project.

I think this is mostly a favorable development for the project. I have not seen the Mayor's December 8 letter, but the article suggests that Turner seems to no longer be asking major changes to the project, but is focusing on mitigation.

My perception (which is based on publicly available info only) is that TxDOT is planning to press forward with the FEIS design with little or no changes. This could invite a lawsuit from certain parties, but it does not sound like the city of Houston is threatening to participate in litigation.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: MaxConcrete on January 16, 2021, 05:40:16 PM
Here's the latest status of the project.

A special committee of HGAC (the regional planning council) has been working for the last 6-12 months to develop a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between all parties. On January 8 the committee ended its planned activity when an impasse was reached. TxDOT refused to sign the memorandum of understanding due to language that certain parties wanted. (I don't know the specifics of that language.) TxDOT Houston director Eliza Paul said they "agree to disagree". There won't be a signed memorandum, but instead the committee will submit a resolution to the TPC with goals and objectives. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEbX6g--c0c (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEbX6g--c0c)

Harris County has hired legal counsel. Harris County Commissioner Garcia says they have not yet made a decision to file a lawsuit against the project, but TxDOT is expecting a lawsuit as soon as the ROD is issued. Having a lawsuit is not a surprise, but the news here is that Harris County is taking the lead, as opposed to a community interest organization like LINK. Of course, Harris County would have unlimited resources to pursue legal action, whereas a community organization would not.

In separate action, most of the downtown work has been delayed due to financial constraint, which presumably is loss of revenue due to Covid. https://www.h-gac.com/getmedia/27fd20e3-92a8-48f4-b901-0f5c43316b34/STIP-Movement-Detail-Pages-January2021.pdf (https://www.h-gac.com/getmedia/27fd20e3-92a8-48f4-b901-0f5c43316b34/STIP-Movement-Detail-Pages-January2021.pdf)

IH69 from Spur 527 to SH288 ($260 million): still listed for 2022
IH69 from SH288 to IH45 ($485 million): still listed for bidding in July 2022
IH69/IH10 interchange and IH10 on the north side of downtown ($1.06 billion): delayed from 2022 to 2024
IH69 on the east side of downtown ($1.14 billion): delayed from 2022 to 2025
IH45 on the west side of downtown ($243 million): delayed from 2022 to 2025
All work on the northwest side of downtown (IH45/IH10 interchange) to Loop 610: no longer scheduled, listed as 2030 start date in planning documents

My impression: Signing the MOU would probably have forced TxDOT to significantly alter the FEIS plan, which TxDOT was not willing to do. So that is good news for keeping the FEIS plan alive. Most likely this will be settled by a lawsuit and court decision. This could delay the schedule if TxDOT ultimately wins, but since the schedule is already delayed, it may not have much effect. If TxDOT loses in court, the schedule is moot and the entire project is in doubt.
It's unclear to me if the first projects on the south side of downtown, which are noncontroversial, will able to be able to proceed in 2022 if a lawsuit is filed. That depends on whether there is an injunction against TxDOT for work on the project.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: MaxConcrete on January 22, 2021, 10:19:39 PM
I just watched the very long video of the discussion at today's H-GAC meeting for the NHHIP agenda item, which was to approve the resolution from the NHHIP committee. The resolution is a set of guidelines for interagency cooperation, but is mainly a mechanism for anti-project interests to alter the project. https://hgac.swagit.com/play/01222021-784 (https://hgac.swagit.com/play/01222021-784)

TxDOT stated it cannot support the resolution, mainly because it would not be consistent with the federally mandated project process. I'm also thinking it included language which could be used against TxDOT if there is litigation, which appears likely if the project proceeds.

TxDOT Houston Director Eliza Paul and TxDOT Commissioner Ryan insinuated that TxDOT could withdraw the project funding if the resolution is passed. The suggestion of funding being withdrawn caused some concern, and then there was a motion to table the item so the TPC can better understand if approving the resolution would have consequences for the funding. The motion to table passed, so there was no vote on the resolution.

TxDOT director James Bass also stated in a letter that if HGAC wants the project stopped, it needs to vote to remove the project from the official documents. TxDOT is saying it will continue to work with partners after the ROD is approved for potential changes. However, it's looking more like it will be all-or-nothing, and the Transportation Policy Council is going to need to vote on whether to continue the project or not.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 22, 2021, 10:51:38 PM
This will suck if the project is canceled
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Chris on February 04, 2021, 01:24:20 PM
The record of decision has been issued for the I-45 North project.

Houston Chronicle: TxDOT moves I-45 rebuild to next phase (https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/TxDOT-moves-I-45-rebuild-to-next-phase-15924892.php)

Link to ROD: https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/hou/news/record-of-decision.pdf
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: MaxConcrete on February 04, 2021, 06:51:19 PM
Quote from: Chris on February 04, 2021, 01:24:20 PM
The record of decision has been issued for the I-45 North project.

Now we'll be waiting to see if (and more likely when) a lawsuit is filed against the project. Harris County has already engaged law firm Irvine & Conner, so presumably they have been preparing the lawsuit. http://www.irvineconner.com/ (http://www.irvineconner.com/)

I'll also be interested to see how quickly TxDOT starts to acquire right-of-way for the project. Some property has already been acquired, for example the building shown below on the north side of Interstate 10. The Clayton Homes housing project is being cleared, and TxDOT says it is also relocating the Mexican consulate, although the building still appeared to be occupied the last time I was in the area. See page 2 in this document http://www.ih45northandmore.com/docs/English_NHHIP_Newsletter_Issue_2_20201027.pdf (http://www.ih45northandmore.com/docs/English_NHHIP_Newsletter_Issue_2_20201027.pdf)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20201226-i10-building.jpg&hash=78c6b30a85073fe164b3a5a3afbc3d1014b0bace)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: achilles765 on February 05, 2021, 02:39:30 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on August 22, 2020, 10:17:14 AM
Quote from: Bruce on August 22, 2020, 02:43:03 AM
God this whole thread makes me want to puke.

All this money could be used to fix some of Houston's more pressing needs, like having a functional drainage system or rail transit.
Meanwhile traffic on the existing interstates, which is already terrible, will continue to get significantly worse in future years. The rebuild was needed 20 years ago.

Have you ever driven I-10 / I-45 / I-69 around Downtown during rush hour?
Especially both 45 and 69. They each go down to three lanes each direction, there are no exits on 69 heading southbound, and so much weaving on 45 because of places where there are both left and right exits at the same time.
Heading north on 45 isn't we bad now that they reconfigured the interchange with 69/288 but it still backs up a bit.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: silverback1065 on February 05, 2021, 11:59:07 AM
Quote from: achilles765 on February 05, 2021, 02:39:30 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on August 22, 2020, 10:17:14 AM
Quote from: Bruce on August 22, 2020, 02:43:03 AM
God this whole thread makes me want to puke.

All this money could be used to fix some of Houston's more pressing needs, like having a functional drainage system or rail transit.
Meanwhile traffic on the existing interstates, which is already terrible, will continue to get significantly worse in future years. The rebuild was needed 20 years ago.

Have you ever driven I-10 / I-45 / I-69 around Downtown during rush hour?
Especially both 45 and 69. They each go down to three lanes each direction, there are no exits on 69 heading southbound, and so much weaving on 45 because of places where there are both left and right exits at the same time.
Heading north on 45 isn't we bad now that they reconfigured the interchange with 69/288 but it still backs up a bit.

and that's also not a state project fixing the drainage would be a local project.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Anthony_JK on February 11, 2021, 02:10:51 AM
Quote from: Bruce on August 22, 2020, 12:33:17 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on August 22, 2020, 10:17:14 AM
Quote from: Bruce on August 22, 2020, 02:43:03 AM
God this whole thread makes me want to puke.

All this money could be used to fix some of Houston's more pressing needs, like having a functional drainage system or rail transit.
Meanwhile traffic on the existing interstates, which is already terrible, will continue to get significantly worse in future years. The rebuild was needed 20 years ago.

Have you ever driven I-10 / I-45 / I-69 around Downtown during rush hour?

No, but I've seen plenty of credible data to suggest that wanton freeway expansion in Houston has resulted in more traffic, not less: Reducing congestion: Katy didn't (https://cityobservatory.org/reducing-congestion-katy-didnt/) (uses Transtar data).

A smart strategy of easing chokepoints and investing in real alternatives (and thinking beyond just the pandemic) like public transit would actually work.

You mean, a "smart strategy" like blowing up every freeway inside the 610 Loop or Sam Houston Tollway and putting light rail on every third major thoroughfare in downtown Houston?

No, thank you.

I'm actually for keeping the Pierce Elevated in order to maintain the continuity of I-45 and only doing spot improvements to the remaining freeways, rather than this prohibitively expensive rebuild and reroute of I-45. But, at least I see the reality of keeping major freeways in place and not demolishing them just so you can have your beautiful but choked down "boulevards".

Like it or not, even in the age of COVID, people mostly drive. And, they're not going to stop driving. Yes, give them some decent alternatives (like upgrading and improving the bus system and adding in spots a light rail corridor or three), but New Urbanist excess in tearing down decent transportation modes is madness.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: silverback1065 on February 11, 2021, 01:45:54 PM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on February 11, 2021, 02:10:51 AM
Quote from: Bruce on August 22, 2020, 12:33:17 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on August 22, 2020, 10:17:14 AM
Quote from: Bruce on August 22, 2020, 02:43:03 AM
God this whole thread makes me want to puke.

All this money could be used to fix some of Houston's more pressing needs, like having a functional drainage system or rail transit.
Meanwhile traffic on the existing interstates, which is already terrible, will continue to get significantly worse in future years. The rebuild was needed 20 years ago.

Have you ever driven I-10 / I-45 / I-69 around Downtown during rush hour?

No, but I've seen plenty of credible data to suggest that wanton freeway expansion in Houston has resulted in more traffic, not less: Reducing congestion: Katy didn't (https://cityobservatory.org/reducing-congestion-katy-didnt/) (uses Transtar data).

A smart strategy of easing chokepoints and investing in real alternatives (and thinking beyond just the pandemic) like public transit would actually work.

You mean, a "smart strategy" like blowing up every freeway inside the 610 Loop or Sam Houston Tollway and putting light rail on every third major thoroughfare in downtown Houston?

No, thank you.

I'm actually for keeping the Pierce Elevated in order to maintain the continuity of I-45 and only doing spot improvements to the remaining freeways, rather than this prohibitively expensive rebuild and reroute of I-45. But, at least I see the reality of keeping major freeways in place and not demolishing them just so you can have your beautiful but choked down "boulevards".

Like it or not, even in the age of COVID, people mostly drive. And, they're not going to stop driving. Yes, give them some decent alternatives (like upgrading and improving the bus system and adding in spots a light rail corridor or three), but New Urbanist excess in tearing down decent transportation modes is madness.

if anything covid killed mass transit. at least it has here in indy.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on February 12, 2021, 09:03:43 AM
Couldn't TxDOT move the homes that are in the ROW? There's lots of vacant land nearby so in many cases, the homes would only have to move down the street.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: bwana39 on February 12, 2021, 01:33:02 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on February 12, 2021, 09:03:43 AM
Couldn't TxDOT move the homes that are in the ROW? There's lots of vacant land nearby so in many cases, the homes would only have to move down the street.

In a lot of cases, the homes are rentals. The owners would prefer to cash in as opposed to having the house moved. Generally on substandard and minimally standard houses, Texas governmental agencies give a minimum figure based on square footage that significantly exceeds the value of the dwelling at the time of purchase. Moving it to a new location, he would have the former value in a new place. 

As to homeowners, this might be a good proposition, but regardless, it won't be the same familiar view out the front door.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: J N Winkler on February 12, 2021, 01:50:38 PM
While relocating houses and other built improvements are an option that remains on the table, I don't see it coming close to being the preferred choice except possibly for mobile homes and other types of manufactured structures.  Most of the house-moving stories I've seen in connection with highway construction have been in the late 1940's and early 1950's, when:  (1) people expected to be asked to relocate on very short notice, (2) there was a housing shortage, and (3) it was much more common for houses not to have indoor plumbing, piped hot water, and other amenities that are now expected if not legally required.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on February 12, 2021, 02:12:10 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on February 12, 2021, 01:50:38 PM
While relocating houses and other built improvements are an option that remains on the table, I don't see it coming close to being the preferred choice except possibly for mobile homes and other types of manufactured structures.  Most of the house-moving stories I've seen in connection with highway construction have been in the late 1940's and early 1950's, when:  (1) people expected to be asked to relocate on very short notice, (2) there was a housing shortage, and (3) it was much more common for houses not to have indoor plumbing, piped hot water, and other amenities that are now expected if not legally required.

The house moving business is still a pretty big one (https://www.realtor.com/advice/buy/how-much-does-it-cost-to-move-a-house/). And if that idea doesn't work, TxDOT should develop replacement housing itself.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: TXtoNJ on February 12, 2021, 02:16:41 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on February 12, 2021, 02:12:10 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on February 12, 2021, 01:50:38 PM
While relocating houses and other built improvements are an option that remains on the table, I don't see it coming close to being the preferred choice except possibly for mobile homes and other types of manufactured structures.  Most of the house-moving stories I've seen in connection with highway construction have been in the late 1940's and early 1950's, when:  (1) people expected to be asked to relocate on very short notice, (2) there was a housing shortage, and (3) it was much more common for houses not to have indoor plumbing, piped hot water, and other amenities that are now expected if not legally required.

The house moving business is still a pretty big one (https://www.realtor.com/advice/buy/how-much-does-it-cost-to-move-a-house/). And if that idea doesn't work, TxDOT should develop replacement housing itself.


Having the transportation department get in the business of land development is a complete non-starter in Texas. There would be laws against it quickly, if there weren't already.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: J N Winkler on February 12, 2021, 02:47:59 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on February 12, 2021, 02:12:10 PMThe house moving business is still a pretty big one (https://www.realtor.com/advice/buy/how-much-does-it-cost-to-move-a-house/). And if that idea doesn't work, TxDOT should develop replacement housing itself.

The article does note that the permitting process is convoluted, with costs to use a state highway running to the thousands of dollars, and the total cost can range from $15,000 to over $200,000.

Not all people displaced by a highway actually want to live in their current houses in new locations--a large number will be satisfied with a replacement elsewhere that has equal amenities at minimum (improved provision often falls out of the negotiation).  They can stick the state DOT with the bill for moving household effects since highway agencies in the US are legally mandated to provide relocation assistance as well as compensation for the land and improvements they take.

Typically replacement housing, moving services, etc. are purchased on the open market and the expenses are vouchered to the state DOT.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: MaxConcrete on February 12, 2021, 08:34:17 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on January 16, 2021, 05:40:16 PM
In separate action, most of the downtown work has been delayed due to financial constraint, which presumably is loss of revenue due to Covid. https://www.h-gac.com/getmedia/27fd20e3-92a8-48f4-b901-0f5c43316b34/STIP-Movement-Detail-Pages-January2021.pdf (https://www.h-gac.com/getmedia/27fd20e3-92a8-48f4-b901-0f5c43316b34/STIP-Movement-Detail-Pages-January2021.pdf)

IH69 from Spur 527 to SH288 ($260 million): still listed for 2022
IH69 from SH288 to IH45 ($485 million): still listed for bidding in July 2022
IH69/IH10 interchange and IH10 on the north side of downtown ($1.06 billion): delayed from 2022 to 2024
IH69 on the east side of downtown ($1.14 billion): delayed from 2022 to 2025
IH45 on the west side of downtown ($243 million): delayed from 2022 to 2025
All work on the northwest side of downtown (IH45/IH10 interchange) to Loop 610: no longer scheduled, listed as 2030 start date in planning documents

The latest document posted on the HGAC site (see page 61-62 https://www.h-gac.com/getmedia/ba8b4e23-e65d-4bc4-8cc1-9ea0ac70ebee/Item-9.pdf) now lists the $1.06 billion of work on the northwest side of downtown for fiscal year 2022. Previously it was listed for 2030. This seems to make sense to me, because the IH10 Inner Katy project is a high priority (see separate thread) with the BRT listed for fiscal year 2023 and it really needs this section of the NHHIP to be built for connections into downtown. The costs per section seem to fluctuate from document to document and may depend on whether right-of-way is included, and I think the overall project cost has probably stayed about the same. Fiscal year 2022 seems somewhat optimistic, and of course everything depends on no lawsuit being filed and TxDOT still having sufficient funding.

IH 45 and IH 10 on the northwest side of downtown ($1.06 billion): 2022 (was 2030)
IH69 from Spur 527 to SH288 (now listed at $378 million): 2022  (unchanged)
IH69 from SH 288 to IH 45 (now listed at $347 million): 2022 (unchanged)
IH69 from SH 288 to IH 45 signature bridges ($86 million): 2022
IH69/IH10 interchange and IH10 on the north side of downtown (now listed at $1.44 billion): 2024 (unchanged)
IH 45 west side of downtown (now listed at $263 million): 2025 (unchanged)
IH 69 on the east side of downtown (now listed at $1.84 billion): 2025 (unchanged)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on February 12, 2021, 08:50:01 PM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on February 11, 2021, 02:10:51 AM
Quote from: Bruce on August 22, 2020, 12:33:17 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on August 22, 2020, 10:17:14 AM
Quote from: Bruce on August 22, 2020, 02:43:03 AM
God this whole thread makes me want to puke.

All this money could be used to fix some of Houston's more pressing needs, like having a functional drainage system or rail transit.
Meanwhile traffic on the existing interstates, which is already terrible, will continue to get significantly worse in future years. The rebuild was needed 20 years ago.

Have you ever driven I-10 / I-45 / I-69 around Downtown during rush hour?

No, but I've seen plenty of credible data to suggest that wanton freeway expansion in Houston has resulted in more traffic, not less: Reducing congestion: Katy didn't (https://cityobservatory.org/reducing-congestion-katy-didnt/) (uses Transtar data).

A smart strategy of easing chokepoints and investing in real alternatives (and thinking beyond just the pandemic) like public transit would actually work.

You mean, a "smart strategy" like blowing up every freeway inside the 610 Loop or Sam Houston Tollway and putting light rail on every third major thoroughfare in downtown Houston?

No, thank you.

I'm actually for keeping the Pierce Elevated in order to maintain the continuity of I-45 and only doing spot improvements to the remaining freeways, rather than this prohibitively expensive rebuild and reroute of I-45. But, at least I see the reality of keeping major freeways in place and not demolishing them just so you can have your beautiful but choked down "boulevards".

Like it or not, even in the age of COVID, people mostly drive. And, they're not going to stop driving. Yes, give them some decent alternatives (like upgrading and improving the bus system and adding in spots a light rail corridor or three), but New Urbanist excess in tearing down decent transportation modes is madness.

Memorial Drive carries less traffic now than it did in 1960, thanks to the Katy Freeway.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: MaxConcrete on March 11, 2021, 05:11:05 PM
As expected, Harris County has filed the lawsuit to stop the project.

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/Harris-County-sues-to-stop-I-45-rebuild-plans-by-16018449.php (https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/Harris-County-sues-to-stop-I-45-rebuild-plans-by-16018449.php)

At this point, anything can happen, either outside of the courtroom (TxDOT withdrawing funding) or with the court's decision.

As long as HGAC maintains its support for the project, my expectation is that it will go to trial and the court will decide the future of the project.

Whatever happens, the project is not moving forward anytime soon. The initial issue to be determined is if an injunction to stop ongoing work on the project will be issued. Without an injunction, preliminary work such as ROW acquisition and design can proceed. If there's no injunction and if TxDOT ultimately wins litigation, the project could resume quickly.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: abqtraveler on March 12, 2021, 10:03:23 AM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on March 11, 2021, 05:11:05 PM
As expected, Harris County has filed the lawsuit to stop the project.

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/Harris-County-sues-to-stop-I-45-rebuild-plans-by-16018449.php (https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/Harris-County-sues-to-stop-I-45-rebuild-plans-by-16018449.php)

At this point, anything can happen, either outside of the courtroom (TxDOT withdrawing funding) or with the court's decision.

As long as HGAC maintains its support for the project, my expectation is that it will go to trial and the court will decide the future of the project.

Whatever happens, the project is not moving forward anytime soon. The initial issue to be determined is if an injunction to stop ongoing work on the project will be issued. Without an injunction, preliminary work such as ROW acquisition and design can proceed. If there's no injunction and if TxDOT ultimately wins litigation, the project could resume quickly.

The FHWA issued a letter to TxDOT yesterday asking them to pause work on the I-45 expansion project to review letters in opposition to the project. IMHO, building and expanding freeways in the Houston metro are hasn't worked well in reducing traffic congestion and maybe it's time to take a look at some mass transit options. The Houston metro area has to be the largest metro area in the country that doesn't have a robust mass transit network with things like light rail or subways. Given that Houston is on par with Chicago population-wise, you'd think they would have had a robust mass transit network by now, but they don't.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on March 12, 2021, 10:05:15 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on March 12, 2021, 10:03:23 AM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on March 11, 2021, 05:11:05 PM
As expected, Harris County has filed the lawsuit to stop the project.

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/Harris-County-sues-to-stop-I-45-rebuild-plans-by-16018449.php (https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/Harris-County-sues-to-stop-I-45-rebuild-plans-by-16018449.php)

At this point, anything can happen, either outside of the courtroom (TxDOT withdrawing funding) or with the court's decision.

As long as HGAC maintains its support for the project, my expectation is that it will go to trial and the court will decide the future of the project.

Whatever happens, the project is not moving forward anytime soon. The initial issue to be determined is if an injunction to stop ongoing work on the project will be issued. Without an injunction, preliminary work such as ROW acquisition and design can proceed. If there's no injunction and if TxDOT ultimately wins litigation, the project could resume quickly.

The FHWA issued a letter to TxDOT yesterday asking them to pause work on the I-45 expansion project to review letters in opposition to the project. IMHO, building and expanding freeways in the Houston metro are hasn't worked well in reducing traffic congestion and maybe it's time to take a look at some mass transit options. The Houston metro area has to be the largest metro area in the country that doesn't have a robust mass transit network with things like light rail or subways. Given that Houston is on par with Chicago population-wise, you'd think they would have had a robust mass transit network by now, but they don't.

A transit system would be massively expensive and be useless to anyone who doesn't work downtown

Edit: and actually, these express lanes do help mass transit since buses can use them for free.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: TXtoNJ on March 12, 2021, 10:48:22 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on March 12, 2021, 10:03:23 AM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on March 11, 2021, 05:11:05 PM
As expected, Harris County has filed the lawsuit to stop the project.

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/Harris-County-sues-to-stop-I-45-rebuild-plans-by-16018449.php (https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/Harris-County-sues-to-stop-I-45-rebuild-plans-by-16018449.php)

At this point, anything can happen, either outside of the courtroom (TxDOT withdrawing funding) or with the court's decision.

As long as HGAC maintains its support for the project, my expectation is that it will go to trial and the court will decide the future of the project.

Whatever happens, the project is not moving forward anytime soon. The initial issue to be determined is if an injunction to stop ongoing work on the project will be issued. Without an injunction, preliminary work such as ROW acquisition and design can proceed. If there's no injunction and if TxDOT ultimately wins litigation, the project could resume quickly.

The FHWA issued a letter to TxDOT yesterday asking them to pause work on the I-45 expansion project to review letters in opposition to the project. IMHO, building and expanding freeways in the Houston metro are hasn't worked well in reducing traffic congestion and maybe it's time to take a look at some mass transit options. The Houston metro area has to be the largest metro area in the country that doesn't have a robust mass transit network with things like light rail or subways. Given that Houston is on par with Chicago population-wise, you'd think they would have had a robust mass transit network by now, but they don't.

You'd need transit stakeholders who are interested in doing more than slapping themselves on the back for doing the bare minimum.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: abqtraveler on March 12, 2021, 11:13:37 AM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on March 12, 2021, 10:48:22 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on March 12, 2021, 10:03:23 AM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on March 11, 2021, 05:11:05 PM
As expected, Harris County has filed the lawsuit to stop the project.

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/Harris-County-sues-to-stop-I-45-rebuild-plans-by-16018449.php (https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/Harris-County-sues-to-stop-I-45-rebuild-plans-by-16018449.php)

At this point, anything can happen, either outside of the courtroom (TxDOT withdrawing funding) or with the court's decision.

As long as HGAC maintains its support for the project, my expectation is that it will go to trial and the court will decide the future of the project.

Whatever happens, the project is not moving forward anytime soon. The initial issue to be determined is if an injunction to stop ongoing work on the project will be issued. Without an injunction, preliminary work such as ROW acquisition and design can proceed. If there's no injunction and if TxDOT ultimately wins litigation, the project could resume quickly.

The FHWA issued a letter to TxDOT yesterday asking them to pause work on the I-45 expansion project to review letters in opposition to the project. IMHO, building and expanding freeways in the Houston metro are hasn't worked well in reducing traffic congestion and maybe it's time to take a look at some mass transit options. The Houston metro area has to be the largest metro area in the country that doesn't have a robust mass transit network with things like light rail or subways. Given that Houston is on par with Chicago population-wise, you'd think they would have had a robust mass transit network by now, but they don't.

You'd need transit stakeholders who are interested in doing more than slapping themselves on the back for doing the bare minimum.

If they took the time and effort to figure out where to place the transit lines and stations to have the greatest impact on moving people from A to B while reducing traffic on the existing road network, then the investment would be worth it. But for Houston, they've gotten to the point where they can no longer expand their way out of traffic congestion. Up in the DFW Metroplex, they're recognizing this problem and are starting to integrate more mass transit solutions alongside highway improvement projects.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: MaxConcrete on March 12, 2021, 01:37:07 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on March 12, 2021, 10:03:23 AM
Given that Houston is on par with Chicago population-wise, you'd think they would have had a robust mass transit network by now, but they don't.

One of the main purposes of NHHIP is to add managed lanes to serve multiple needs, including public transit. The project does not include sustained general purposed main lanes, only new lanes at bottleneck locations. Most right-of-way needs along IH45 is for the managed lanes.

As pointed out by others, Houston has an extensive HOV system. Ridership on commuter transit services has collapsed everywhere since Covid-19. This makes Houston's low-cost HOV system look a lot smarter than vastly more expensive train systems used by other cities, including Chicago.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on March 12, 2021, 01:55:41 PM
What impact does the FHWA request have? Can TxDOT not simply ignore it and proceed as legally possible?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: abqtraveler on March 12, 2021, 02:04:05 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 12, 2021, 01:55:41 PM
What impact does the FHWA request have? Can TxDOT not simply ignore it and proceed as legally possible?

The FHWA has to sign off on the EIS and ROD. They could withhold that approval if TxDOT elects to ignore their letter and continue moving forward with the I-45 widening.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on March 12, 2021, 02:08:12 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on March 12, 2021, 02:04:05 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 12, 2021, 01:55:41 PM
What impact does the FHWA request have? Can TxDOT not simply ignore it and proceed as legally possible?

The FHWA has to sign off on the EIS and ROD. They could withhold that approval if TxDOT elects to ignore their letter and continue moving forward with the I-45 widening.
I suppose that this would further delay the project but then TxDOT could sue no? What grounds could they hold it up on if TxDOT does everything legally?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on March 12, 2021, 02:11:11 PM
PS, Houston absolutely needs a large, HRT system in downtown. It needs to be elevated like CTAs.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on March 12, 2021, 02:37:04 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 12, 2021, 02:11:11 PM
PS, Houston absolutely needs a large, HRT system in downtown. It needs to be elevated like CTAs.

Why? Those el trains are hideous.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on March 12, 2021, 02:41:49 PM
Another thing that doesn't bode well for transit ridership: A not insubstantial number of people take the bus only because they want to save on gas. This is confirmed by the decline in ridership after gas prices crashed in 2014. Electric cars are way more efficient than gasoline ones, which will surely put a dent in ridership
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Chris on March 12, 2021, 02:43:30 PM
Wouldn't it be weird if a project of this magnitude would not be sued? I would expect such a large project to be appealed against.

Houston is one of the few metro areas that has seen its congestion level gone down. It also ranks lower today than it did during the 1980s, even with the explosive population growth. Houston has been better in keeping its infrastructure up with the growing demand than many other metropolitan areas.

More transit could be nice, but this wouldn't make a dent in traffic volumes. It should be a separate consideration. Even in Europe, which has urbanized more transit-friendly, new transit projects never reduce traffic volumes on freeways. Only covid or huge economic crises manage to do that.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on March 12, 2021, 02:52:47 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on March 12, 2021, 02:37:04 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 12, 2021, 02:11:11 PM
PS, Houston absolutely needs a large, HRT system in downtown. It needs to be elevated like CTAs.

Why? Those el trains are hideous.
I don't think subway will work in Houston with the constant floods. At grade rail sucks.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on March 12, 2021, 02:54:22 PM
Quote from: Chris on March 12, 2021, 02:43:30 PM
Wouldn't it be weird if a project of this magnitude would not be sued? I would expect such a large project to be appealed against.

Houston is one of the few metro areas that has seen its congestion level gone down. It also ranks lower today than it did during the 1980s, even with the explosive population growth. Houston has been better in keeping its infrastructure up with the growing demand than many other metropolitan areas.

More transit could be nice, but this wouldn't make a dent in traffic volumes. It should be a separate consideration. Even in Europe, which has urbanized more transit-friendly, new transit projects never reduce traffic volumes on freeways. Only covid or huge economic crises manage to do that.
Any transit planner that claims to build a rail or bus project to reduce traffic congestion is simply saying so to get car drivers to vote for it.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on March 12, 2021, 03:07:28 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 12, 2021, 02:52:47 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on March 12, 2021, 02:37:04 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 12, 2021, 02:11:11 PM
PS, Houston absolutely needs a large, HRT system in downtown. It needs to be elevated like CTAs.

Why? Those el trains are hideous.
I don't think subway will work in Houston with the constant floods. At grade rail sucks.
That's a reason to not build rail at all.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Bobby5280 on March 12, 2021, 03:10:30 PM
Quote from: abqtravelerIMHO, building and expanding freeways in the Houston metro are hasn't worked well in reducing traffic congestion and maybe it's time to take a look at some mass transit options. The Houston metro area has to be the largest metro area in the country that doesn't have a robust mass transit network with things like light rail or subways.

Houston actually does have a mass transit system, including some mass transit rail. But building a much more elaborate light rail or subway system still won't solve the problem.

The real issue with Houston's traffic is the very outdated street layouts in most parts of the metro. There is virtually no traffic filtering at all. In most neighborhoods every cross street and driveway is able to empty directly out onto the main arterial streets. That's a great recipe for gridlock and it contributes directly to traffic jams on the freeways. Cars trying to exit the freeway get hung up in surface street traffic at the end of the exit ramps. Then traffic backs up the full length of the exit ramp and then backs up into the main lanes of the freeway itself.

It doesn't matter if a particular freeway in Houston is 30 lanes wide. If traffic can't exit the freeway efficiently the traffic will clog its way backward into the freeway.

The newest neighborhoods built farther on the outskirts of Houston have more modern street layouts which allow traffic signals on surface streets to be spaced considerably farther apart and allow more efficient movement of vehicle traffic. City planners in Houston have to figure out some way how to remodel the old street grids to do the same thing.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on March 12, 2021, 03:27:47 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on March 12, 2021, 03:10:30 PM
Quote from: abqtravelerIMHO, building and expanding freeways in the Houston metro are hasn't worked well in reducing traffic congestion and maybe it's time to take a look at some mass transit options. The Houston metro area has to be the largest metro area in the country that doesn't have a robust mass transit network with things like light rail or subways.

Houston actually does have a mass transit system, including some mass transit rail. But building a much more elaborate light rail or subway system still won't solve the problem.

The real issue with Houston's traffic is the very outdated street layouts in most parts of the metro. There is virtually no traffic filtering at all. In most neighborhoods every cross street and driveway is able to empty directly out onto the main arterial streets. That's a great recipe for gridlock and it contributes directly to traffic jams on the freeways. Cars trying to exit the freeway get hung up in surface street traffic at the end of the exit ramps. Then traffic backs up the full length of the exit ramp and then backs up into the main lanes of the freeway itself.

It doesn't matter if a particular freeway in Houston is 30 lanes wide. If traffic can't exit the freeway efficiently the traffic will clog its way backward into the freeway.

The newest neighborhoods built farther on the outskirts of Houston have more modern street layouts which allow traffic signals on surface streets to be spaced considerably farther apart and allow more efficient movement of vehicle traffic. City planners in Houston have to figure out some way how to remodel the old street grids to do the same thing.

Interesting, where is this problem most severe?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on March 12, 2021, 03:36:19 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on March 12, 2021, 03:07:28 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 12, 2021, 02:52:47 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on March 12, 2021, 02:37:04 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 12, 2021, 02:11:11 PM
PS, Houston absolutely needs a large, HRT system in downtown. It needs to be elevated like CTAs.

Why? Those el trains are hideous.
I don't think subway will work in Houston with the constant floods. At grade rail sucks.
That's a reason to not build rail at all.
I disagree. Downtown Houston needs a robust rail system and it should elevated heavy rail. I don't find Chicago's elevated rail ugly as it adds a cool gritty element to the city. I do believe they are going to rebuild it so maybe that will make it more visually appealing. Every major city around the world has a robust rail network and Houston should too.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: abqtraveler on March 12, 2021, 04:23:10 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 12, 2021, 03:36:19 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on March 12, 2021, 03:07:28 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 12, 2021, 02:52:47 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on March 12, 2021, 02:37:04 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 12, 2021, 02:11:11 PM
PS, Houston absolutely needs a large, HRT system in downtown. It needs to be elevated like CTAs.

Why? Those el trains are hideous.
I don't think subway will work in Houston with the constant floods. At grade rail sucks.
That's a reason to not build rail at all.
I disagree. Downtown Houston needs a robust rail system and it should elevated heavy rail. I don't find Chicago's elevated rail ugly as it adds a cool gritty element to the city. I do believe they are going to rebuild it so maybe that will make it more visually appealing. Every major city around the world has a robust rail network and Houston should too.
Boston was built mostly on landfill pushed into Boston Harbor and the Back Bay, yet they were able to build subways and place their highways in underground tunnels that don't flood. If they can do that, Houston could do that too.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on March 12, 2021, 04:28:03 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on March 12, 2021, 04:23:10 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 12, 2021, 03:36:19 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on March 12, 2021, 03:07:28 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 12, 2021, 02:52:47 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on March 12, 2021, 02:37:04 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 12, 2021, 02:11:11 PM
PS, Houston absolutely needs a large, HRT system in downtown. It needs to be elevated like CTAs.

Why? Those el trains are hideous.
I don't think subway will work in Houston with the constant floods. At grade rail sucks.
That's a reason to not build rail at all.
I disagree. Downtown Houston needs a robust rail system and it should elevated heavy rail. I don't find Chicago's elevated rail ugly as it adds a cool gritty element to the city. I do believe they are going to rebuild it so maybe that will make it more visually appealing. Every major city around the world has a robust rail network and Houston should too.
Boston was built mostly on landfill pushed into Boston Harbor and the Back Bay, yet they were able to build subways and place their highways in underground tunnels that don't flood. If they can do that, Houston could do that too.
Houston gets way more heavy rain than Boston does though. I don't see why am elevated rail system wouldn't be ideal. I don't view them as unsightly but I can see why many do.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: TXtoNJ on March 13, 2021, 10:59:43 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on March 12, 2021, 03:10:30 PM
Quote from: abqtravelerIMHO, building and expanding freeways in the Houston metro are hasn't worked well in reducing traffic congestion and maybe it's time to take a look at some mass transit options. The Houston metro area has to be the largest metro area in the country that doesn't have a robust mass transit network with things like light rail or subways.

Houston actually does have a mass transit system, including some mass transit rail. But building a much more elaborate light rail or subway system still won't solve the problem.

The real issue with Houston's traffic is the very outdated street layouts in most parts of the metro. There is virtually no traffic filtering at all. In most neighborhoods every cross street and driveway is able to empty directly out onto the main arterial streets. That's a great recipe for gridlock and it contributes directly to traffic jams on the freeways. Cars trying to exit the freeway get hung up in surface street traffic at the end of the exit ramps. Then traffic backs up the full length of the exit ramp and then backs up into the main lanes of the freeway itself.

It doesn't matter if a particular freeway in Houston is 30 lanes wide. If traffic can't exit the freeway efficiently the traffic will clog its way backward into the freeway.

The newest neighborhoods built farther on the outskirts of Houston have more modern street layouts which allow traffic signals on surface streets to be spaced considerably farther apart and allow more efficient movement of vehicle traffic. City planners in Houston have to figure out some way how to remodel the old street grids to do the same thing.

The funny thing is that this can be easily done through traffic calming measures. Conversion of streets to pedestrian- and/or bike-only ingress/egress allow for a greater implementation of road hierarchy while still permitting an integrated urban environment.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: hotdogPi on March 13, 2021, 11:35:28 AM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on March 13, 2021, 10:59:43 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on March 12, 2021, 03:10:30 PM
Quote from: abqtravelerIMHO, building and expanding freeways in the Houston metro are hasn't worked well in reducing traffic congestion and maybe it's time to take a look at some mass transit options. The Houston metro area has to be the largest metro area in the country that doesn't have a robust mass transit network with things like light rail or subways.

Houston actually does have a mass transit system, including some mass transit rail. But building a much more elaborate light rail or subway system still won't solve the problem.

The real issue with Houston's traffic is the very outdated street layouts in most parts of the metro. There is virtually no traffic filtering at all. In most neighborhoods every cross street and driveway is able to empty directly out onto the main arterial streets. That's a great recipe for gridlock and it contributes directly to traffic jams on the freeways. Cars trying to exit the freeway get hung up in surface street traffic at the end of the exit ramps. Then traffic backs up the full length of the exit ramp and then backs up into the main lanes of the freeway itself.

It doesn't matter if a particular freeway in Houston is 30 lanes wide. If traffic can't exit the freeway efficiently the traffic will clog its way backward into the freeway.

The newest neighborhoods built farther on the outskirts of Houston have more modern street layouts which allow traffic signals on surface streets to be spaced considerably farther apart and allow more efficient movement of vehicle traffic. City planners in Houston have to figure out some way how to remodel the old street grids to do the same thing.

The funny thing is that this can be easily done through traffic calming measures. Conversion of streets to pedestrian- and/or bike-only ingress/egress allow for a greater implementation of road hierarchy while still permitting an integrated urban environment.

Boston's traffic is bad because of a lack of good surface roads.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on March 13, 2021, 11:48:28 AM
Quote from: 1 on March 13, 2021, 11:35:28 AM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on March 13, 2021, 10:59:43 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on March 12, 2021, 03:10:30 PM
Quote from: abqtravelerIMHO, building and expanding freeways in the Houston metro are hasn't worked well in reducing traffic congestion and maybe it's time to take a look at some mass transit options. The Houston metro area has to be the largest metro area in the country that doesn't have a robust mass transit network with things like light rail or subways.

Houston actually does have a mass transit system, including some mass transit rail. But building a much more elaborate light rail or subway system still won't solve the problem.

The real issue with Houston's traffic is the very outdated street layouts in most parts of the metro. There is virtually no traffic filtering at all. In most neighborhoods every cross street and driveway is able to empty directly out onto the main arterial streets. That's a great recipe for gridlock and it contributes directly to traffic jams on the freeways. Cars trying to exit the freeway get hung up in surface street traffic at the end of the exit ramps. Then traffic backs up the full length of the exit ramp and then backs up into the main lanes of the freeway itself.

It doesn't matter if a particular freeway in Houston is 30 lanes wide. If traffic can't exit the freeway efficiently the traffic will clog its way backward into the freeway.

The newest neighborhoods built farther on the outskirts of Houston have more modern street layouts which allow traffic signals on surface streets to be spaced considerably farther apart and allow more efficient movement of vehicle traffic. City planners in Houston have to figure out some way how to remodel the old street grids to do the same thing.

The funny thing is that this can be easily done through traffic calming measures. Conversion of streets to pedestrian- and/or bike-only ingress/egress allow for a greater implementation of road hierarchy while still permitting an integrated urban environment.

Boston's traffic is bad because of a lack of good surface roads.

It's the lack of any access management. There are residential driveways on Route 9!
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Bobby5280 on March 13, 2021, 11:49:40 AM
Quote from: kernals12
Quote from: Bobby5280The real issue with Houston's traffic is the very outdated street layouts in most parts of the metro.
Interesting, where is this problem most severe?

That's tough to say. I've had horrible traffic experiences at the interface between freeways and surface streets across many parts of Houston. There are dozens upon dozens of locations where you have a major crossing street connecting with a freeway and the crossing surface street is just pigged with traffic signals at multiple intersections in close proximity to the freeway. The area around Belaire, West University Park and going farther West is pretty bad. Zones along I-45 in any part of central Houston and going well to the North and South can be soul-crushing.

One area I particularly hate is Gessner Road crossing I-10. Just South of I-10 a large hospital is on the West side of Gessner and a large indoor mall is on the East side. I was stuck in traffic at that location once; it took a half hour just to move from the traffic light at Kingsride Lane up to I-10. The Interstate was visible up ahead; I could have walked there faster.

Quote from: abqtravelerBoston was built mostly on landfill pushed into Boston Harbor and the Back Bay, yet they were able to build subways and place their highways in underground tunnels that don't flood. If they can do that, Houston could do that too.

You must be looking at the history of Boston's "Big Dig" with some rose colored glasses. That project had all kinds of water intrusion problems, among other issues. Historic Boston was not built at all on land fill. You might be thinking about Logan International Airport. Some parts of the "T" subway system are built underground, but most of its track miles are built at or above grade. The commuter rail network going farther to Boston's outskirts is hardly underground at all.

Quote from: TXtoNJThe funny thing is that this can be easily done through traffic calming measures. Conversion of streets to pedestrian- and/or bike-only ingress/egress allow for a greater implementation of road hierarchy while still permitting an integrated urban environment.

Some spots in downtown Houston might respond well to road diets, but it would be tricky to deploy elsewhere. In some respects the situation appears almost as hopeless as trying to un-explode a hand grenade. Many regions of the Houston area are a tangled mess.

Houston needs to upgrade a lot of major arterials with grade separated intersections. They need to cut off a lot of side streets and driveways from directly accessing the major streets. The trouble is so much stuff has been built so close to the main streets that it's difficult or impossible to build any substantial street upgrades at all. Too many places are so packed in with clutter. Houston's biggest sin was becoming a giant major city before a lot of modern urban planning techniques were put into use. The street layout of Houston in its oldest zones is not much different than cities in developing countries.

Quote from: Plutonic PandaDowntown Houston needs a robust rail system and it should elevated heavy rail. I don't find Chicago's elevated rail ugly as it adds a cool gritty element to the city. I do believe they are going to rebuild it so maybe that will make it more visually appealing. Every major city around the world has a robust rail network and Houston should too.

If Chicago's "L" lines didn't already exist today and they wanted to start building them from scratch it would be impossible to do. The "L" network is over 100 years old. New elevated rail lines are much more difficult to build. The construction costs are routinely outrageous. That ridiculous situation is matched only by all the government red tape and litigation that always plagues such projects. As costly and controversial as elevated rail can be, putting the rail lines under ground is even worse. In Houston's case I think subways are a non-starter.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: TXtoNJ on March 13, 2021, 11:58:16 AM
Yeah outside the loop, a combination of developers and small business interests will prevent any sort of improvement to the situation. There's really only hope inside the loop.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: abqtraveler on March 13, 2021, 12:21:04 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on March 13, 2021, 11:49:40 AM

Quote from: abqtravelerBoston was built mostly on landfill pushed into Boston Harbor and the Back Bay, yet they were able to build subways and place their highways in underground tunnels that don't flood. If they can do that, Houston could do that too.

You must be looking at the history of Boston's "Big Dig" with some rose colored glasses. That project had all kinds of water intrusion problems, among other issues. Historic Boston was not built at all on land fill. You might be thinking about Logan International Airport. Some parts of the "T" subway system are built underground, but most of its track miles are built at or above grade. The commuter rail network going farther to Boston's outskirts is hardly underground at all.


Here are a couple of links to good articles that discuss how much of Boston was created by filling in the Back Bay and other inlets into Boston Harbor. Point is, most of the city was built on landfill. A lot of that fill was garbage produced by the city's residents. Now I never said the Big Dig was without its own problems, but they managed to fix those problems and I haven't heard of an instance of the Big Dig tunnels flooding in at least the past decade, despite a few hurricanes and intense rain events that brought flooding to nearby areas.

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/culture/article/Boston-landfill-maps-history
http://www.celebrateboston.com/map/boston-1775.htm
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Finrod on March 16, 2021, 05:21:26 AM
Comparing Boston's Logan airport with Houston's Hobby airport (all data via wikipedia):

Boston averages 43 inches of rain over 126 days a year
Houston averages 54 inches of rain over 103 days a year

So Houston gets more rain over fewer days; averaging approximately half an inch of rain per rain day as opposed to Boston's third of an inch of rain per rain day.  Also Boston gets a significant amount of its winter precipitation via snow instead of rain, and snow won't flood until it melts.

I would guess that would mean that Houston tunnels would be at significantly greater flooding risk than Boston's.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on March 30, 2021, 06:12:31 PM
This doesn't sound good:

https://www.texasobserver.org/in-houston-a-plan-to-expand-interstate-45-encounters-federal-pushback/
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: silverback1065 on March 30, 2021, 08:28:23 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 30, 2021, 06:12:31 PM
This doesn't sound good:

https://www.texasobserver.org/in-houston-a-plan-to-expand-interstate-45-encounters-federal-pushback/

not surprising. pete says he's against virtually all highways and this of course would be his pet project to be against. i still have no idea why he's the head of this. i'm not convinced he has any idea what he's doing, let alone knows anything about transportation. his "smart streets" project in south bend turned out nice, but doesn't provide the kind of experience i think you would need for this job.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: abqtraveler on March 30, 2021, 11:06:00 PM
Quote from: Finrod on March 16, 2021, 05:21:26 AM
Comparing Boston's Logan airport with Houston's Hobby airport (all data via wikipedia):

Boston averages 43 inches of rain over 126 days a year
Houston averages 54 inches of rain over 103 days a year

So Houston gets more rain over fewer days; averaging approximately half an inch of rain per rain day as opposed to Boston's third of an inch of rain per rain day.  Also Boston gets a significant amount of its winter precipitation via snow instead of rain, and snow won't flood until it melts.

I would guess that would mean that Houston tunnels would be at significantly greater flooding risk than Boston's.

As part of the tunnel design, you could incorporate a system of pumps with redundant power to keep the tunnels dry even when the power goes out. Add to that a series of watertight bulkheads (remotely operated, also on redundant power) to isolate any flooding that does occur to keep the entire system from being flooded.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: bwana39 on April 01, 2021, 05:50:49 PM
Here is the issue for this entire project.

The first part of it is a widening project from the (Current) I-10 -I-45 split going to around Beltway 8. This portion of this project is causing LOTS of conflict  because it is possibly destroying neighborhoods. This part of the project would include a complete reconstruction of the I-45 / I-610 junction.

The part south of the current I-10 split and the (proposed) southern I-69 split is so far in the future, that in spite of the seeming finality, anything could happen.
 
Any argument against a tunnel is moot. . there is already a tunnel planned for this. They call it a depressed highway section with a ground level deck park.  It would be as easy to do the same thing to replace the Pierce Elevated as it is t build it on the south side of downtown.  This whole downtown proposal is just a way to try to create (new) buildable commercial land on the reclaimed row from I-45.





Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: MaxConcrete on April 01, 2021, 07:46:13 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on April 01, 2021, 05:50:49 PM
The part south of the current I-10 split and the (proposed) southern I-69 split is so far in the future, that in spite of the seeming finality, anything could happen.

The planned construction sequence is to start on the south end with the section of IH 69 between Spur 527 and SH 288, and then proceed northward. All the work from the south end to the IH-45/IH610 interchange (including the interchange) is funded, at about $5.1 billion. If the project proceeds it won't necessarily be in exact order from south to north, but downtown will be done first.

Nothing north of IH 610 is funded.

You are correct that IH 45 north of Loop 610 is the most controversial due to the planned right-of-way clearance.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on April 01, 2021, 09:35:34 PM
So if it was a white neighborhood it would be fine. I mean this is insanity. How is this road ever supposed to get widened then?

https://apple.news/A6zuE9OFbRcuwlLjxCF1DXw
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: MaxConcrete on April 01, 2021, 10:50:29 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 01, 2021, 09:35:34 PM
So if it was a white neighborhood it would be fine. I mean this is insanity. How is this road ever supposed to get widened then?

https://apple.news/A6zuE9OFbRcuwlLjxCF1DXw

It certainly looks like Buttigieg is going to make an example of Houston by killing the project. That will also burnish his anti-car credentials.

What's lost in all of this is that the minority communities which the feds are "protecting" would be the main beneficiaries of the mobility improvements. Those minority communities will lose the mobility benefits when the project is cancelled. Houston is only 24% white. The City of Houston and Harris County want a plan that forces more people onto public transit that goes downtown, but the minority workforce generally does not work downtown. The Hispanic workforce in particular (construction, trades, landscape, industrial workers, warehousing) is more reliant on highways to go to dispersed work sites.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Chris on April 02, 2021, 06:49:04 AM
If you observe the news reports and actions taken, it seems that transportation policy on the left side of politics has been hijacked by the far left, with all this 'racist highways' and 'climate killer' rhetoric. This is also true in Europe, there are almost no moderate / pragmatic center-left views on transportation anymore.

I think this can be attributed to the failure of understanding their own electorate and being stuck in an ideological bubble. Parties that say they represent the working class or lower incomes don't seem to understand that those people usually rely on a car to commute to work, they typically do not work in a shiny office tower near a transit station (or from home), but much more likely in a dispersed landscape of suburban industrial or commercial sites.

You can also see they tend to have a very 1960s view of suburbs: white people commuting to work to downtown, on highways built over minority neighborhoods. Suburbs are much more diverse today, and so are the commuters.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on April 02, 2021, 07:37:21 AM
Quote from: Chris on April 02, 2021, 06:49:04 AM
If you observe the news reports and actions taken, it seems that transportation policy on the left side of politics has been hijacked by the far left, with all this 'racist highways' and 'climate killer' rhetoric. This is also true in Europe, there are almost no moderate / pragmatic center-left views on transportation anymore.

I think this can be attributed to the failure of understanding their own electorate and being stuck in an ideological bubble. Parties that say they represent the working class or lower incomes don't seem to understand that those people usually rely on a car to commute to work, they typically do not work in a shiny office tower near a transit station (or from home), but much more likely in a dispersed landscape of suburban industrial or commercial sites.

You can also see they tend to have a very 1960s view of suburbs: white people commuting to work to downtown, on highways built over minority neighborhoods. Suburbs are much more diverse today, and so are the commuters.

That's been the case since the 60s, except back then it was smog, not climate change, that was the issue. But I'd question how much impact the far left has on transportation planning, with plenty of Democrats backing massive highway projects.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on April 02, 2021, 07:46:08 AM
Couldn't extending the Hardy Toll Road to Downtown, as has long been proposed, do the same thing as this widening but with far less community disruption?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: abqtraveler on April 02, 2021, 09:01:35 AM
Quote from: Chris on April 02, 2021, 06:49:04 AM
If you observe the news reports and actions taken, it seems that transportation policy on the left side of politics has been hijacked by the far left, with all this 'racist highways' and 'climate killer' rhetoric. This is also true in Europe, there are almost no moderate / pragmatic center-left views on transportation anymore.

I think this can be attributed to the failure of understanding their own electorate and being stuck in an ideological bubble. Parties that say they represent the working class or lower incomes don't seem to understand that those people usually rely on a car to commute to work, they typically do not work in a shiny office tower near a transit station (or from home), but much more likely in a dispersed landscape of suburban industrial or commercial sites.

You can also see they tend to have a very 1960s view of suburbs: white people commuting to work to downtown, on highways built over minority neighborhoods. Suburbs are much more diverse today, and so are the commuters.

In some places run by progressive politicians, they're even talking about tearing down some inner-city freeways without providing any alternative to disperse the traffic these freeways currently carry. Out here in Albuquerque (we're another city that has been recently hijacked by the progressive "woke" mob), they've already spent nearly a quarter-billion dollars to reduce the number of lanes on Central Avenue to accommodate a rapid bus line know as the Albuquerque Rapid Transit (ART).

An officials out here are  already talking about adding more ART routes along other major corridors within the city by eliminating lanes on already-congested highways, when the real problem is most of the recent residential development has been to the west of the Rio Grande, while most of the job growth has been to the east of the river, and there are not enough bridges across the Rio Grande to get commuters from home to work and back in a timely manner. 

Long-range planning documents show that officials out here have zero intent to construct any more bridges across the Rio Grande, nor expand the capacity of any of the existing bridges. Instead, those planning documents state officials' desire to remove existing travel lanes from some thoroughfares to accommodate dedicated bus lines. Politicians out here seem to think that they can somehow force people out of their cars and into mass transit if they eliminate lanes on our roads and make everyone's drive to work as miserable as possible. But history should tell us that mass transit out here doesn't work:  the Rail Runner Express that was touted as an alternative to widening I-25 between Albuquerque and Santa Fe carries so few people that it doesn't even pay for its own operating costs (it's actually shut down right now due to COVID-19 public health orders), and ART buses running empty down Central Avenue. 
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 12:00:22 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on April 02, 2021, 09:01:35 AM
Quote from: Chris on April 02, 2021, 06:49:04 AM
If you observe the news reports and actions taken, it seems that transportation policy on the left side of politics has been hijacked by the far left, with all this 'racist highways' and 'climate killer' rhetoric. This is also true in Europe, there are almost no moderate / pragmatic center-left views on transportation anymore.

I think this can be attributed to the failure of understanding their own electorate and being stuck in an ideological bubble. Parties that say they represent the working class or lower incomes don't seem to understand that those people usually rely on a car to commute to work, they typically do not work in a shiny office tower near a transit station (or from home), but much more likely in a dispersed landscape of suburban industrial or commercial sites.

You can also see they tend to have a very 1960s view of suburbs: white people commuting to work to downtown, on highways built over minority neighborhoods. Suburbs are much more diverse today, and so are the commuters.

In some places run by progressive politicians, they're even talking about tearing down some inner-city freeways without providing any alternative to disperse the traffic these freeways currently carry. Out here in Albuquerque (we're another city that has been recently hijacked by the progressive "woke" mob), they've already spent nearly a quarter-billion dollars to reduce the number of lanes on Central Avenue to accommodate a rapid bus line know as the Albuquerque Rapid Transit (ART).

An officials out here are  already talking about adding more ART routes along other major corridors within the city by eliminating lanes on already-congested highways, when the real problem is most of the recent residential development has been to the west of the Rio Grande, while most of the job growth has been to the east of the river, and there are not enough bridges across the Rio Grande to get commuters from home to work and back in a timely manner. 

Long-range planning documents show that officials out here have zero intent to construct any more bridges across the Rio Grande, nor expand the capacity of any of the existing bridges. Instead, those planning documents state officials' desire to remove existing travel lanes from some thoroughfares to accommodate dedicated bus lines. Politicians out here seem to think that they can somehow force people out of their cars and into mass transit if they eliminate lanes on our roads and make everyone's drive to work as miserable as possible. But history should tell us that mass transit out here doesn't work:  the Rail Runner Express that was touted as an alternative to widening I-25 between Albuquerque and Santa Fe carries so few people that it doesn't even pay for its own operating costs (it's actually shut down right now due to COVID-19 public health orders), and ART buses running empty down Central Avenue.

The people you describe frustrate me. this is delusional thinking, they're in a fanciful bubble where everyone lives near a dense downtown like area.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 12:03:36 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 01, 2021, 09:35:34 PM
So if it was a white neighborhood it would be fine. I mean this is insanity. How is this road ever supposed to get widened then?

https://apple.news/A6zuE9OFbRcuwlLjxCF1DXw

Yes. that is the logic of these lunatics.

What will likely happen is it will be approved once Biden is out of office and the parties in power change. i.e. wait 4-8 yrs.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on April 02, 2021, 12:46:54 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 12:00:22 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on April 02, 2021, 09:01:35 AM
Quote from: Chris on April 02, 2021, 06:49:04 AM
If you observe the news reports and actions taken, it seems that transportation policy on the left side of politics has been hijacked by the far left, with all this 'racist highways' and 'climate killer' rhetoric. This is also true in Europe, there are almost no moderate / pragmatic center-left views on transportation anymore.

I think this can be attributed to the failure of understanding their own electorate and being stuck in an ideological bubble. Parties that say they represent the working class or lower incomes don't seem to understand that those people usually rely on a car to commute to work, they typically do not work in a shiny office tower near a transit station (or from home), but much more likely in a dispersed landscape of suburban industrial or commercial sites.

You can also see they tend to have a very 1960s view of suburbs: white people commuting to work to downtown, on highways built over minority neighborhoods. Suburbs are much more diverse today, and so are the commuters.

In some places run by progressive politicians, they're even talking about tearing down some inner-city freeways without providing any alternative to disperse the traffic these freeways currently carry. Out here in Albuquerque (we're another city that has been recently hijacked by the progressive "woke" mob), they've already spent nearly a quarter-billion dollars to reduce the number of lanes on Central Avenue to accommodate a rapid bus line know as the Albuquerque Rapid Transit (ART).

An officials out here are  already talking about adding more ART routes along other major corridors within the city by eliminating lanes on already-congested highways, when the real problem is most of the recent residential development has been to the west of the Rio Grande, while most of the job growth has been to the east of the river, and there are not enough bridges across the Rio Grande to get commuters from home to work and back in a timely manner. 

Long-range planning documents show that officials out here have zero intent to construct any more bridges across the Rio Grande, nor expand the capacity of any of the existing bridges. Instead, those planning documents state officials' desire to remove existing travel lanes from some thoroughfares to accommodate dedicated bus lines. Politicians out here seem to think that they can somehow force people out of their cars and into mass transit if they eliminate lanes on our roads and make everyone's drive to work as miserable as possible. But history should tell us that mass transit out here doesn't work:  the Rail Runner Express that was touted as an alternative to widening I-25 between Albuquerque and Santa Fe carries so few people that it doesn't even pay for its own operating costs (it's actually shut down right now due to COVID-19 public health orders), and ART buses running empty down Central Avenue.

The people you describe frustrate me. this is delusional thinking, they're in a fanciful bubble where everyone lives near a dense downtown like area.

The issue is that the automobile and the single family dwelling represent 3 things they hate
1. Individualism
2. Independence
3. Responsibility

They want a populace of sheep dependent upon the state for housing and transportation.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on April 02, 2021, 01:02:12 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 12:03:36 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 01, 2021, 09:35:34 PM
So if it was a white neighborhood it would be fine. I mean this is insanity. How is this road ever supposed to get widened then?

https://apple.news/A6zuE9OFbRcuwlLjxCF1DXw

Yes. that is the logic of these lunatics.

What will likely happen is it will be approved once Biden is out of office and the parties in power change. i.e. wait 4-8 yrs.
I bet we see the same shit with the 605 proposal in Los Angeles. :/
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 01:03:50 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 02, 2021, 01:02:12 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 12:03:36 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 01, 2021, 09:35:34 PM
So if it was a white neighborhood it would be fine. I mean this is insanity. How is this road ever supposed to get widened then?

https://apple.news/A6zuE9OFbRcuwlLjxCF1DXw

Yes. that is the logic of these lunatics.

What will likely happen is it will be approved once Biden is out of office and the parties in power change. i.e. wait 4-8 yrs.
I bet we see the same shit with the 605 proposal in Los Angeles. :/
They tried to pull it here in Indianapolis and failed thankfully. They also proposed this stupid at grade boulevard to replace 65 and 70 downtown. Traffic studies showed 3+ hr delays caused by this. These people claim to care about others, they only care about themselves.

Pixel 5

Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: abqtraveler on April 02, 2021, 02:32:57 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 01:03:50 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 02, 2021, 01:02:12 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 12:03:36 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 01, 2021, 09:35:34 PM
So if it was a white neighborhood it would be fine. I mean this is insanity. How is this road ever supposed to get widened then?

https://apple.news/A6zuE9OFbRcuwlLjxCF1DXw

Yes. that is the logic of these lunatics.

What will likely happen is it will be approved once Biden is out of office and the parties in power change. i.e. wait 4-8 yrs.
I bet we see the same shit with the 605 proposal in Los Angeles. :/
They tried to pull it here in Indianapolis and failed thankfully. They also proposed this stupid at grade boulevard to replace 65 and 70 downtown. Traffic studies showed 3+ hr delays caused by this. These people claim to care about others, they only care about themselves.

Pixel 5

At least in Indiana the "woke" progressive mobs haven't made much inroads, given that Indiana is a deep red state with plenty of good folks that respect American values. If somehow the progressive mobs were to flip a state like Indiana, it would be the end of America as we know it.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on April 02, 2021, 02:35:46 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on April 02, 2021, 02:32:57 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 01:03:50 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 02, 2021, 01:02:12 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 12:03:36 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 01, 2021, 09:35:34 PM
So if it was a white neighborhood it would be fine. I mean this is insanity. How is this road ever supposed to get widened then?

https://apple.news/A6zuE9OFbRcuwlLjxCF1DXw

Yes. that is the logic of these lunatics.

What will likely happen is it will be approved once Biden is out of office and the parties in power change. i.e. wait 4-8 yrs.
I bet we see the same shit with the 605 proposal in Los Angeles. :/
They tried to pull it here in Indianapolis and failed thankfully. They also proposed this stupid at grade boulevard to replace 65 and 70 downtown. Traffic studies showed 3+ hr delays caused by this. These people claim to care about others, they only care about themselves.

Pixel 5

At least in Indiana the "woke" progressive mobs haven't made much inroads, given that Indiana is a deep red state with plenty of good folks that respect American values. If somehow the progressive mobs were to flip a state like Indiana, it would be the end of America as we know it.

They don't have much influence seemingly anywhere. New Jersey is a very liberal state, but they're still going ahead with a massive expansion of the Turnpike and Garden State Parkway.

The anti-car crowd may be noisy but they are a minority. Where opposition to new highways comes from is ordinary people who are worried about noise, smog, and displacement.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 02:38:23 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 02, 2021, 02:35:46 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on April 02, 2021, 02:32:57 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 01:03:50 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 02, 2021, 01:02:12 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 12:03:36 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 01, 2021, 09:35:34 PM
So if it was a white neighborhood it would be fine. I mean this is insanity. How is this road ever supposed to get widened then?

https://apple.news/A6zuE9OFbRcuwlLjxCF1DXw

Yes. that is the logic of these lunatics.

What will likely happen is it will be approved once Biden is out of office and the parties in power change. i.e. wait 4-8 yrs.
I bet we see the same shit with the 605 proposal in Los Angeles. :/
They tried to pull it here in Indianapolis and failed thankfully. They also proposed this stupid at grade boulevard to replace 65 and 70 downtown. Traffic studies showed 3+ hr delays caused by this. These people claim to care about others, they only care about themselves.

Pixel 5

At least in Indiana the "woke" progressive mobs haven't made much inroads, given that Indiana is a deep red state with plenty of good folks that respect American values. If somehow the progressive mobs were to flip a state like Indiana, it would be the end of America as we know it.

They don't have much influence seemingly anywhere. New Jersey is a very liberal state, but they're still going ahead with a massive expansion of the Turnpike and Garden State Parkway.
Their level of support is paper thin. Just a very loud vocal minority. Unfortunately this vocal minority has some political clout which aids In their loudness.

Pixel 5

Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Wayward Memphian on April 02, 2021, 03:15:46 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on April 02, 2021, 02:32:57 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 01:03:50 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 02, 2021, 01:02:12 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 12:03:36 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 01, 2021, 09:35:34 PM
So if it was a white neighborhood it would be fine. I mean this is insanity. How is this road ever supposed to get widened then?

https://apple.news/A6zuE9OFbRcuwlLjxCF1DXw

Yes. that is the logic of these lunatics.

What will likely happen is it will be approved once Biden is out of office and the parties in power change. i.e. wait 4-8 yrs.
I bet we see the same shit with the 605 proposal in Los Angeles. :/
They tried to pull it here in Indianapolis and failed thankfully. They also proposed this stupid at grade boulevard to replace 65 and 70 downtown. Traffic studies showed 3+ hr delays caused by this. These people claim to care about others, they only care about themselves.

Pixel 5

At least in Indiana the "woke" progressive mobs haven't made much inroads, given that Indiana is a deep red state with plenty of good folks that respect American values. If somehow the progressive mobs were to flip a state like Indiana, it would be the end of America as we know it.

The end of America is you know is likely on it's way anyways. This nation is reaching peak incompatibility.

The only question is will it be hot. I now have met folks making their own primers to get around the shortage. Lots of used machining stuff out there being put to use in farm shops and garages.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: abqtraveler on April 02, 2021, 03:20:40 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 02, 2021, 02:35:46 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on April 02, 2021, 02:32:57 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 01:03:50 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 02, 2021, 01:02:12 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 12:03:36 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 01, 2021, 09:35:34 PM
So if it was a white neighborhood it would be fine. I mean this is insanity. How is this road ever supposed to get widened then?

https://apple.news/A6zuE9OFbRcuwlLjxCF1DXw

Yes. that is the logic of these lunatics.

What will likely happen is it will be approved once Biden is out of office and the parties in power change. i.e. wait 4-8 yrs.
I bet we see the same shit with the 605 proposal in Los Angeles. :/
They tried to pull it here in Indianapolis and failed thankfully. They also proposed this stupid at grade boulevard to replace 65 and 70 downtown. Traffic studies showed 3+ hr delays caused by this. These people claim to care about others, they only care about themselves.

Pixel 5

At least in Indiana the "woke" progressive mobs haven't made much inroads, given that Indiana is a deep red state with plenty of good folks that respect American values. If somehow the progressive mobs were to flip a state like Indiana, it would be the end of America as we know it.

They don't have much influence seemingly anywhere. New Jersey is a very liberal state, but they're still going ahead with a massive expansion of the Turnpike and Garden State Parkway.

The anti-car crowd may be noisy but they are a minority. Where opposition to new highways comes from is ordinary people who are worried about noise, smog, and displacement.
And the NJTA adds a component to the equation that allows them to pursue unlimited expansions of the NJ Turnpike and the Garden State Parkway:  hush money, and lots of it.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Wayward Memphian on April 02, 2021, 03:24:24 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on March 30, 2021, 11:06:00 PM
Quote from: Finrod on March 16, 2021, 05:21:26 AM
Comparing Boston's Logan airport with Houston's Hobby airport (all data via wikipedia):

Boston averages 43 inches of rain over 126 days a year
Houston averages 54 inches of rain over 103 days a year

So Houston gets more rain over fewer days; averaging approximately half an inch of rain per rain day as opposed to Boston's third of an inch of rain per rain day.  Also Boston gets a significant amount of its winter precipitation via snow instead of rain, and snow won't flood until it melts.

I would guess that would mean that Houston tunnels would be at significantly greater flooding risk than Boston's.

As part of the tunnel design, you could incorporate a system of pumps with redundant power to keep the tunnels dry even when the power goes out. Add to that a series of watertight bulkheads (remotely operated, also on redundant power) to isolate any flooding that does occur to keep the entire system from being flooded.

That all sounds good till you get the price tag and then nearly double that cause...gubmint.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Rothman on April 02, 2021, 05:07:23 PM


Quote from: abqtraveler on April 02, 2021, 02:32:57 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 01:03:50 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 02, 2021, 01:02:12 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 12:03:36 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 01, 2021, 09:35:34 PM
So if it was a white neighborhood it would be fine. I mean this is insanity. How is this road ever supposed to get widened then?

https://apple.news/A6zuE9OFbRcuwlLjxCF1DXw

Yes. that is the logic of these lunatics.

What will likely happen is it will be approved once Biden is out of office and the parties in power change. i.e. wait 4-8 yrs.
I bet we see the same shit with the 605 proposal in Los Angeles. :/
They tried to pull it here in Indianapolis and failed thankfully. They also proposed this stupid at grade boulevard to replace 65 and 70 downtown. Traffic studies showed 3+ hr delays caused by this. These people claim to care about others, they only care about themselves.

Pixel 5

At least in Indiana the "woke" progressive mobs haven't made much inroads, given that Indiana is a deep red state with plenty of good folks that respect American values. If somehow the progressive mobs were to flip a state like Indiana, it would be the end of America as we know it.

Conservatives don't have a monopoly on American values.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 05:11:20 PM
Quote from: Rothman on April 02, 2021, 05:07:23 PM


Quote from: abqtraveler on April 02, 2021, 02:32:57 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 01:03:50 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 02, 2021, 01:02:12 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 12:03:36 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 01, 2021, 09:35:34 PM
So if it was a white neighborhood it would be fine. I mean this is insanity. How is this road ever supposed to get widened then?

https://apple.news/A6zuE9OFbRcuwlLjxCF1DXw

Yes. that is the logic of these lunatics.

What will likely happen is it will be approved once Biden is out of office and the parties in power change. i.e. wait 4-8 yrs.
I bet we see the same shit with the 605 proposal in Los Angeles. :/
They tried to pull it here in Indianapolis and failed thankfully. They also proposed this stupid at grade boulevard to replace 65 and 70 downtown. Traffic studies showed 3+ hr delays caused by this. These people claim to care about others, they only care about themselves.

Pixel 5

At least in Indiana the "woke" progressive mobs haven't made much inroads, given that Indiana is a deep red state with plenty of good folks that respect American values. If somehow the progressive mobs were to flip a state like Indiana, it would be the end of America as we know it.

Conservatives don't have a monopoly on American values.
I never said that and I'm not even conservative

Pixel 5

Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Rothman on April 02, 2021, 05:22:36 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 05:11:20 PM
Quote from: Rothman on April 02, 2021, 05:07:23 PM


Quote from: abqtraveler on April 02, 2021, 02:32:57 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 01:03:50 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 02, 2021, 01:02:12 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 12:03:36 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 01, 2021, 09:35:34 PM
So if it was a white neighborhood it would be fine. I mean this is insanity. How is this road ever supposed to get widened then?

https://apple.news/A6zuE9OFbRcuwlLjxCF1DXw

Yes. that is the logic of these lunatics.

What will likely happen is it will be approved once Biden is out of office and the parties in power change. i.e. wait 4-8 yrs.
I bet we see the same shit with the 605 proposal in Los Angeles. :/
They tried to pull it here in Indianapolis and failed thankfully. They also proposed this stupid at grade boulevard to replace 65 and 70 downtown. Traffic studies showed 3+ hr delays caused by this. These people claim to care about others, they only care about themselves.

Pixel 5

At least in Indiana the "woke" progressive mobs haven't made much inroads, given that Indiana is a deep red state with plenty of good folks that respect American values. If somehow the progressive mobs were to flip a state like Indiana, it would be the end of America as we know it.

Conservatives don't have a monopoly on American values.
I never said that and I'm not even conservative

Pixel 5
I didn't say you did.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on April 02, 2021, 05:31:39 PM
Well, this thread is definitely going to get locked
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 05:33:45 PM
Probably. I'm done talking politics. Back to road stuff

Pixel 5

Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on April 02, 2021, 07:33:35 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 02, 2021, 05:31:39 PM
Well, this thread is definitely going to get locked
There's a few comments that borderline discussing politics but in this case how do you get around discussing politics with this? This project is becoming a political talking point and its future is at stake because of it. It's a massive project and critical to Houston which is a major city so if this thread was locked how would it be discussed?

I personally was thinking about it when I posted it and thought about not posting it but considering how connected it is to the project I went ahead and did.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 07:56:44 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 02, 2021, 07:33:35 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 02, 2021, 05:31:39 PM
Well, this thread is definitely going to get locked
There's a few comments that borderline discussing politics but in this case how do you get around discussing politics with this? This project is becoming a political talking point and its future is at stake because of it. It's a massive project and critical to Houston which is a major city so if this thread was locked how would it be discussed?

I personally was thinking about it when I posted it and thought about not posting it but considering how connected it is to the project I went ahead and did.
I agree. It's not possible to avoid politics with this. I just don't want to start angry flamewar arguments so I tread lightly.

Pixel 5

Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on April 02, 2021, 08:04:51 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 07:56:44 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 02, 2021, 07:33:35 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 02, 2021, 05:31:39 PM
Well, this thread is definitely going to get locked
There's a few comments that borderline discussing politics but in this case how do you get around discussing politics with this? This project is becoming a political talking point and its future is at stake because of it. It's a massive project and critical to Houston which is a major city so if this thread was locked how would it be discussed?

I personally was thinking about it when I posted it and thought about not posting it but considering how connected it is to the project I went ahead and did.
I agree. It's not possible to avoid politics with this. I just don't want to start angry flamewar arguments so I tread lightly.

Pixel 5
Right and I doubt unfortunately this will be the only project that sees this going forward. I know in the past there was likely a partisan divide to some extent of certain infrastructure being and where but today is has been taken to the extreme IMO almost to the point where someone will label you being a member of a certain group/party simply for vocalizing support for a particular project. It's happened to me multiple times on BOTH sides.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: bwana39 on April 03, 2021, 03:19:09 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on April 02, 2021, 02:32:57 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 01:03:50 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 02, 2021, 01:02:12 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 02, 2021, 12:03:36 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 01, 2021, 09:35:34 PM
So if it was a white neighborhood it would be fine. I mean this is insanity. How is this road ever supposed to get widened then?

https://apple.news/A6zuE9OFbRcuwlLjxCF1DXw

Yes. that is the logic of these lunatics.

What will likely happen is it will be approved once Biden is out of office and the parties in power change. i.e. wait 4-8 yrs.
I bet we see the same shit with the 605 proposal in Los Angeles. :/
They tried to pull it here in Indianapolis and failed thankfully. They also proposed this stupid at grade boulevard to replace 65 and 70 downtown. Traffic studies showed 3+ hr delays caused by this. These people claim to care about others, they only care about themselves.

Pixel 5

At least in Indiana the "woke" progressive mobs haven't made much inroads, given that Indiana is a deep red state with plenty of good folks that respect American values. If somehow the progressive mobs were to flip a state like Indiana, it would be the end of America as we know it.


Texas is a Deep Red STATE Houston on the other hand is not.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 04, 2021, 06:44:34 PM
I think TX DOT should take the billions of dollars they proposed to spend improving the highways in downtown Houston and spend it elsewhere in the state on more do-able projects. They could convert US-287 from Fort Worth to Amarillo to 100% Interstate quality and probably still have plenty of money left over. The I-69 system has hundreds of miles worth of road in Texas waiting to get built/upgraded. Same goes for I-14.

I say let the New Urbanist idiots have their way with major city downtown districts. They're obviously looking at the situation through rose colored glasses and ignoring some important historical trends. Look what happened in the DFW metroplex more than 30 years ago, and other areas like North Virginia. Lots of firms decided it was not necessary to be located in a downtown office tower. It was too expensive and too much of a PITA for employees to commute downtown. So they relocated and decentralized. They started building business parks out in the suburbs. JCPenney's HQ in Plano was an important blip in that trend. I remember when it first opened; there was hardly anything else nearby, just empty grassland. Now it's all built over with development.

This anti-roads crap the New Urbanists are promoting will do even more to drive businesses out of downtown areas. Many downtown districts are already in bubble economies due to the hatefully extreme prices of housing and office space. It's economically NOT sustainable. At some point it's all going to crash and those downtown areas will fall into deep decline.

And let's not forget about what ever faster broadband Internet is doing to change business. Firms don't even have to be located in a major city; they can move to locations with much lower costs of living and doing business. They can have more employees working remotely. This isn't 100% a good thing since it creates another angle for outsourcing jobs overseas. But that has already been happening in a big way for a long time.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on April 04, 2021, 07:24:26 PM
^^^ the problem with your proposal is it makes tens of not hundreds of thousands of people suffer due to the will of the few.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on April 04, 2021, 10:55:30 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 04, 2021, 06:44:34 PM
I think TX DOT should take the billions of dollars they proposed to spend improving the highways in downtown Houston and spend it elsewhere in the state on more do-able projects. They could convert US-287 from Fort Worth to Amarillo to 100% Interstate quality and probably still have plenty of money left over. The I-69 system has hundreds of miles worth of road in Texas waiting to get built/upgraded. Same goes for I-14.

I say let the New Urbanist idiots have their way with major city downtown districts. They're obviously looking at the situation through rose colored glasses and ignoring some important historical trends. Look what happened in the DFW metroplex more than 30 years ago, and other areas like North Virginia. Lots of firms decided it was not necessary to be located in a downtown office tower. It was too expensive and too much of a PITA for employees to commute downtown. So they relocated and decentralized. They started building business parks out in the suburbs. JCPenney's HQ in Plano was an important blip in that trend. I remember when it first opened; there was hardly anything else nearby, just empty grassland. Now it's all built over with development.

This anti-roads crap the New Urbanists are promoting will do even more to drive businesses out of downtown areas. Many downtown districts are already in bubble economies due to the hatefully extreme prices of housing and office space. It's economically NOT sustainable. At some point it's all going to crash and those downtown areas will fall into deep decline.

And let's not forget about what ever faster broadband Internet is doing to change business. Firms don't even have to be located in a major city; they can move to locations with much lower costs of living and doing business. They can have more employees working remotely. This isn't 100% a good thing since it creates another angle for outsourcing jobs overseas. But that has already been happening in a big way for a long time.

But now the new urbanists are trying to bring all the congestion and crowding of downtown to the suburbs. They want to turn Tysons Corner, VA into a 2nd Arlington
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: sprjus4 on April 05, 2021, 08:39:36 AM
^

It effectively is already becoming that.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: silverback1065 on April 05, 2021, 08:45:55 AM
I don't know much about this place but ya I would just abandon this project and move to upgrade other stuff.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on April 05, 2021, 09:04:36 PM
Maybe instead of expanding the right-of-way of Interstate 45 to add additional lanes, they could put the new lanes on an elevated deck above the existing lanes. It might not look pretty, but it would help prevent dislocations and keep the existing freeway at its existing width.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: silverback1065 on April 05, 2021, 09:11:27 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 05, 2021, 09:04:36 PM
Maybe instead of expanding the right-of-way of Interstate 45 to add additional lanes, they could put the new lanes on an elevated deck above the existing lanes. It might not look pretty, but it would help prevent dislocations and keep the existing freeway at its existing width.

Austin hates this idea and I bet Houston would too.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: bwana39 on April 05, 2021, 10:19:33 PM
My thoughts on the part north of I-610 is just to extend Hardy Toll Road to I-10 (downtown). This thing is underutilized virtually all of time except for rush hour and especially in the morning toward its end at I-610.

Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on April 05, 2021, 11:12:35 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 05, 2021, 09:11:27 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 05, 2021, 09:04:36 PM
Maybe instead of expanding the right-of-way of Interstate 45 to add additional lanes, they could put the new lanes on an elevated deck above the existing lanes. It might not look pretty, but it would help prevent dislocations and keep the existing freeway at its existing width.

Austin hates this idea and I bet Houston would too.

It would also be very, very expensive.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 06, 2021, 01:35:15 AM
Just leave I-45 as is -including the old Pierce Elevated. Leave it be. It will cost plenty of money to remove. And if I-45 can't be properly re-routed around the East side of downtown Houston then the existing, arguably disruptive, elevated I-45 section just needs to remain in place.

Quote from: Plutonic Panda^^^ the problem with your proposal is it makes tens of not hundreds of thousands of people suffer due to the will of the few.

Um, if the loudest voices in the urban centers leveraging outrage culture say they don't want a multi-billion dollar highway project built there...then, hey, wish granted! Move the money elsewhere in the state where it's easier to build/improve highways. There is a huge list of projects in need outside city centers. Too bad for all the other urban people suffering who didn't bother to stand up for themselves and let the insanity take over.

Quote from: kernals12But now the new urbanists are trying to bring all the congestion and crowding of downtown to the suburbs. They want to turn Tysons Corner, VA into a 2nd Arlington

I lived in Northern Virginia back in the 1980's. Tysons Corner was really built up even back then. That zone is about as busy as any area along the Capital Beltway. I shudder to think what New Urbanists might be trying to foist on roads there. None of the main arterials would be good candidates to undergo a so-called road diet.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: rte66man on April 06, 2021, 07:30:40 AM
Quote from: bwana39 on April 05, 2021, 10:19:33 PM
My thoughts on the part north of I-610 is just to extend Hardy Toll Road to I-10 (downtown). This thing is underutilized virtually all of time except for rush hour and especially in the morning toward its end at I-610.

The city is trying desperately to permanently kill the southern Hardy extension. Makes no sense to me.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on April 06, 2021, 08:21:23 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 06, 2021, 01:35:15 AM
Just leave I-45 as is -including the old Pierce Elevated. Leave it be. It will cost plenty of money to remove. And if I-45 can't be properly re-routed around the East side of downtown Houston then the existing, arguably disruptive, elevated I-45 section just needs to remain in place.

Quote from: Plutonic Panda^^^ the problem with your proposal is it makes tens of not hundreds of thousands of people suffer due to the will of the few.

Um, if the loudest voices in the urban centers leveraging outrage culture say they don't want a multi-billion dollar highway project built there...then, hey, wish granted! Move the money elsewhere in the state where it's easier to build/improve highways. There is a huge list of projects in need outside city centers. Too bad for all the other urban people suffering who didn't bother to stand up for themselves and let the insanity take over.

Quote from: kernals12But now the new urbanists are trying to bring all the congestion and crowding of downtown to the suburbs. They want to turn Tysons Corner, VA into a 2nd Arlington

I lived in Northern Virginia back in the 1980's. Tysons Corner was really built up even back then. That zone is about as busy as any area along the Capital Beltway. I shudder to think what New Urbanists might be trying to foist on roads there. None of the main arterials would be good candidates to undergo a so-called road diet.
That's the issue. We shouldn't be pandering to the loudest voices.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Perfxion on April 06, 2021, 11:21:22 AM
Its laughable some think it's just the left that are freeway killers. Super 7 in Connecticut would like a word with you. And you can't ignore past actions and think it would not be brought up as opposition to current projects. There will be push back then it might happen and those who pushed back move on. There will be those who don't want some communities lost forever then not being able to afford to live in the cities they grew up on. All of this is SOP on any major project.

I think this project will be done but I think the state and the city will have to make sure the areas east of downtown aren't too gentrified to the point all future projects go SF route of hell no.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: bwana39 on April 06, 2021, 11:29:15 AM
Quote from: rte66man on April 06, 2021, 07:30:40 AM
Quote from: bwana39 on April 05, 2021, 10:19:33 PM
My thoughts on the part north of I-610 is just to extend Hardy Toll Road to I-10 (downtown). This thing is underutilized virtually all of time except for rush hour and especially in the morning toward its end at I-610.

The city is trying desperately to permanently kill the southern Hardy extension. Makes no sense to me.

I am not sure but it might be toll road bias. The idea that the rich and privileged will use a toll road, but the poor will be excluded.... It might be the city versus the Harris County (HCTRA is a component of the county government.)  It Might be because the property to be used for it is mostly low density light industrial.  It might work better if it were tied into I-69 near Evella Street (in the realm of displacing homes.). 
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 06, 2021, 11:35:00 AM
Quote from: Plutonic PandaThat's the issue. We shouldn't be pandering to the loudest voices.

Yeah, we shouldn't. But it's going to take years or even decades to put that genie back in the bottle.

At the risk of sounding political various media personalities and then 24 hour "news" channels began raking in lots of advertising revenue by broadcasting fear and outrage as primary content. Soon after the growth of the Internet spawned web sites and social media platforms doing the same thing. Now we have elected "lawmakers" who don't have any interest in actually doing the work of governing. They're polishing their brand as people intent on "blowing up the system" when they're really nothing more than whores trying to make as many appearances as possible on TV, partly as a ploy to sell books, land a TV talk show contract or some other money making plan. Before anyone gets their panties in a twist thinking I'm attacking their cherished political party, I'm not. This problem has infected much of governing on the state and federal level. It's only when you get down to local, smaller city/town politics that things start becoming more sane again. There's not as much media exposure and opportunity to sell advertising there.

Houston is a big enough city where outrage culture and media stunts can be leveraged to block an important highway improvement project that would actually be beneficial to Houston. One would think the New Urbanist types would have been on board since the project involved demolishing the Pierce Elevated and "connecting" downtown Houston with the Midtown area. But once the whole deal turned into a racial issue the outrage culture thing took over.

While TV, Internet sites and politicians as media whores deserve plenty of criticism so does the cattle that make up much of the general public. It's pretty much all our fault these outlets and lawmakers are successful using these ploys. We're participating in that dance. We're the ones tuning into it, eating up the bull$#!+ (and seeing the advertising). We're the ones voting for the biggest loud mouths rather than sane grown ups. We're not interested in details, nuance, much less anything involving compromise. Our side must win at all costs. That's where we are now.

Until the general public pulls its collective head out of its own ass things are just going to get worse. Any major new public works project will turn into a hot potato of outrage. The United States is becoming ever more pathetic in its ability to build major infrastructure projects or any big things at all. Meanwhile we have competition that is able to get the job done in terms of new highways, high speed rail, artificial islands, etc.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on April 06, 2021, 12:24:56 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on April 06, 2021, 11:29:15 AM
Quote from: rte66man on April 06, 2021, 07:30:40 AM
Quote from: bwana39 on April 05, 2021, 10:19:33 PM
My thoughts on the part north of I-610 is just to extend Hardy Toll Road to I-10 (downtown). This thing is underutilized virtually all of time except for rush hour and especially in the morning toward its end at I-610.

The city is trying desperately to permanently kill the southern Hardy extension. Makes no sense to me.

I am not sure but it might be toll road bias. The idea that the rich and privileged will use a toll road, but the poor will be excluded.... It might be the city versus the Harris County (HCTRA is a component of the county government.)  It Might be because the property to be used for it is mostly low density light industrial.  It might work better if it were tied into I-69 near Evella Street (in the realm of displacing homes.).
Won't the 4 extra lanes on i-45 be tolled?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on April 06, 2021, 12:34:53 PM
QuoteI lived in Northern Virginia back in the 1980's. Tysons Corner was really built up even back then. That zone is about as busy as any area along the Capital Beltway. I shudder to think what New Urbanists might be trying to foist on roads there. None of the main arterials would be good candidates to undergo a so-called road diet.

Hopefully once the Battlefield Parkway interchange is finished, the yuppies who are eying those luxury high rises will decide to instead live on 3 acres in Western Loudoun County
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: bwana39 on April 06, 2021, 01:58:20 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 06, 2021, 12:24:56 PM
]
Won't the 4 extra lanes on i-45 be tolled?

Probably.  You see how that is going as well. 

My real thought is the developers see the obvious choice for a route for the Hardy extension being light industrial  that the developers can buy at a relatively low cost (they may already own some of them and renting them out), redevelop and make a killing. 
If I am a developer, I see low use density land inside 610. I think, huh? What makes me money? Redevelopment or a freeway?

Ever notice that the public policy the far right HATES comes to benefit some among their own ranks.   
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on April 06, 2021, 02:13:58 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on April 06, 2021, 01:58:20 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 06, 2021, 12:24:56 PM
]
Won't the 4 extra lanes on i-45 be tolled?

Probably.  You see how that is going as well. 

My real thought is the developers see the obvious choice for a route for the Hardy extension being light industrial  that the developers can buy at a relatively low cost (they may already own some of them and renting them out), redevelop and make a killing. 
If I am a developer, I see low use density land inside 610. I think, huh? What makes me money? Redevelopment or a freeway?

Ever notice that the public policy the far right HATES comes to benefit some among their own ranks.

Nothing increases land value like a freeway. When developer Frank Sharp built his Sharpstown subdivision in the 50s, he left a little strip of land that he gave to the Texas DOT for free to build US 59, because he knew that freeway access would make the rest of his land way more valuable.

So if developers wanted to build something there, they'd find they'd be better off if they leave a little for the Hardy extension
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: bwana39 on April 06, 2021, 08:29:40 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 06, 2021, 02:13:58 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on April 06, 2021, 01:58:20 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 06, 2021, 12:24:56 PM
]
Won't the 4 extra lanes on i-45 be tolled?

Probably.  You see how that is going as well. 

My real thought is the developers see the obvious choice for a route for the Hardy extension being light industrial  that the developers can buy at a relatively low cost (they may already own some of them and renting them out), redevelop and make a killing. 
If I am a developer, I see low use density land inside 610. I think, huh? What makes me money? Redevelopment or a freeway?

Ever notice that the public policy the far right HATES comes to benefit some among their own ranks.

Nothing increases land value like a freeway. When developer Frank Sharp built his Sharpstown subdivision in the 50s, he left a little strip of land that he gave to the Texas DOT for free to build US 59, because he knew that freeway access would make the rest of his land way more valuable.

So if developers wanted to build something there, they'd find they'd be better off if they leave a little for the Hardy extension

As a general rule, I agree with you, but the corridor for Hardy inside of 610 is within a couple of miles of the existing freeways. There is no added value to the surroundings from an additional freeway. The owners would get current market value for the land as it is if the HTR were extended. They could redevelop it and make far more money.  Add insult to injury, there would probably be one or perhaps ZERO exits between I-610 and either I-69 or I-45. Exits from the freeway add value....
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on April 06, 2021, 09:10:27 PM
What is holding up the HTR extension? Money? Overwhelming opposition? The fact that Interstate 45 is just to the west and Interstate 69 is just to the east?
Title: I-610
Post by: bwana39 on April 06, 2021, 10:10:54 PM
Interstate 610 is one of the tightest complete inner belts in the nation.  If it had been built out to 6-8 lanes each direction and none of the feeder freeways had gone completely through the city center, (every one of them did) the idea the urbanists seem to espouse might have worked.

I-610 was built with three lanes in each direction. I-45 skirted downtown. I-10 skirted downtown . US-59 (now I-69) skirted downtown. SH-288 is the only freeway that doesn't extend through downtown.  Traffic patterns are established. Businesses, services, and industry grew up based on the freeways being like they are.

Uptown in Dallas proves that a freeway is not what stops downtown from expanding. Once you start building across the freeway, it becomes as much a part of of the city center as the part on the opposite side. Getting rid of  a freeway that does not block a natural scene (think the Embarcadero Freeway or the Alaskan Way both were by the bay,) doesn't achieve anything especially when there is adequate crossings from one side to the other (note the Pierce Elevated allows every street to cross) I-345 allows most of the streets to cross.  The only thing that changes is that there is suddenly a large portion of land to build buildings in adjacent to the now narrower roadway(s). Someone benefits from this. Probably those who have an inside track to buy them when they are sold off. (Generally much later at the buyer's request).
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: TXtoNJ on April 07, 2021, 09:54:11 AM
Quote from: bwana39 on April 06, 2021, 01:58:20 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 06, 2021, 12:24:56 PM
]
Won't the 4 extra lanes on i-45 be tolled?

Probably.  You see how that is going as well. 

My real thought is the developers see the obvious choice for a route for the Hardy extension being light industrial  that the developers can buy at a relatively low cost (they may already own some of them and renting them out), redevelop and make a killing. 
If I am a developer, I see low use density land inside 610. I think, huh? What makes me money? Redevelopment or a freeway?

Ever notice that the public policy the far right HATES comes to benefit some among their own ranks.   

Yes that's the big difference. Thirty years ago, nobody thought Northside Village would be anything but slum forever. Then the Heights gentrified over the past 15 years, and now those run-down shacks are cute Craftsman bungalows just waiting to be restored, or shotgun shacks waiting for a teardown and replacement with McMansions.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: MaxConcrete on April 07, 2021, 12:43:14 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 06, 2021, 09:10:27 PM
What is holding up the HTR extension? Money? Overwhelming opposition? The fact that Interstate 45 is just to the west and Interstate 69 is just to the east?

Harris County Commissioners Court (which controls the Harris County Toll Road Authority) is now against the Hardy Toll Road downtown extension. That's because the court has a 3-2 democrat majority as of the 2018 election. The County Judge Lina Hidalgo won with a very slim margin, mainly due to anti-Trump vote and also due to straight ticket party voting (which was still allowed in 2018, but that was the last election it was allowed). 30-year-old Hidalgo can be described as an AOC clone, but with less charisma and is less publicity-seeking. Generally speaking, she is anti-car and anti-road. She has already tried to transfer toll revenue to non-transportation use, but I think she was forced to drop that effort due to legal issues.

Hidalgo is also responsible for the anti-NHHIP lawsuit.

For the Hardy Toll Road extension, the last info I'm aware of is that HCTRA is initiating a study to further study how the project can be redesigned to better serve the community. So, basically it's a formal process to cancel the extension. I don't know why the formality is needed. Maybe because agreements are in place with other agencies. For example TxDOT rebuilt the Elysian viaduct (which is about to be completed) which is designed to be connected to the toll road extension.

So the short answer is that that the HTR extension is almost certainly dead, but there is a formal process in progress. If republicans could defeat Hidalgo in 2022, that could bring it back to life, but most likely the court will be permanently democrat-controlled going forward.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on April 07, 2021, 12:53:55 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on April 07, 2021, 12:43:14 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 06, 2021, 09:10:27 PM
What is holding up the HTR extension? Money? Overwhelming opposition? The fact that Interstate 45 is just to the west and Interstate 69 is just to the east?

Harris County Commissioners Court (which controls the Harris County Toll Road Authority) is now against the Hardy Toll Road downtown extension. That's because the court has a 3-2 democrat majority as of the 2018 election. The County Judge Lina Hidalgo won with a very slim margin, mainly due to anti-Trump vote and also due to straight ticket party voting (which was still allowed in 2018, but that was the last election it was allowed). 30-year-old Hidalgo can be described as an AOC clone, but with less charisma and is less publicity-seeking. Generally speaking, she is anti-car and anti-road. She has already tried to transfer toll revenue to non-transportation use, but I think she was forced to drop that effort due to legal issues.

Hidalgo is also responsible for the anti-NHHIP lawsuit.

For the Hardy Toll Road extension, the last info I'm aware of is that HCTRA is initiating a study to further study how the project can be redesigned to better serve the community. So, basically it's a formal process to cancel the extension. I don't know why the formality is needed. Maybe because agreements are in place with other agencies. For example TxDOT rebuilt the Elysian viaduct (which is about to be completed) which is designed to be connected to the toll road extension.

So the short answer is that that the HTR extension is almost certainly dead, but there is a formal process in progress. If republicans could defeat Hidalgo in 2022, that could bring it back to life, but most likely the court will be permanently democrat-controlled going forward.

Maybe the legislature could intervene.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: bwana39 on April 07, 2021, 02:32:02 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 07, 2021, 12:53:55 PM


Maybe the legislature could intervene.

All they would have to do is make the HCTRA a fully independent agency (Like NTTA is) .

I may sound like a giant cheerleader for NTTA, I really am not,  but from a perspective of building toll roads (where they are well utilized) they get the job done and they generally in the current times pat their bills.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: bluecountry on April 07, 2021, 10:11:18 PM
The only logical and fair thing to do is this:

-Eliminate Pierce freeway
-Bury I45, cover it with green space, parks, mixed used affordable housing
-ONLY improve the highway so it has full breakdown lanes, safe merges, and dedicated transit/HOV-3 or HOT 24/7 lanes in each direction (still have at least 2 free lanes).

The central core of a city is for LOCAL business only, NOT THROUGH traffic.
If you don't have business inside 610, stay on 610 then to 10 east to Baytown or 45 south to Galveston or 10 west to San Antonio or 45 north to Dallas.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: sprjus4 on April 07, 2021, 10:22:27 PM
Quote from: bluecountry on April 07, 2021, 10:11:18 PM
The only logical and fair thing to do is this:

-Eliminate Pierce freeway
-Bury I45, cover it with green space, parks, mixed used affordable housing
-ONLY improve the highway so it has full breakdown lanes, safe merges, and dedicated transit/HOV-3 or HOT 24/7 lanes in each direction (still have at least 2 free lanes).

The central core of a city is for LOCAL business only, NOT THROUGH traffic.
If you don't have business inside 610, stay on 610 then to 10 east to Baytown or 45 south to Galveston or 10 west to San Antonio or 45 north to Dallas.
The problem is that it's usually much quicker, especially outside peak hours, to go through. I usually am going I-10 West to I-69 South, and have always gone through Downtown.

I-610 isn't really an effective "bypass" .
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 08, 2021, 01:04:15 AM
Quote from: bluecountry-Bury I45, cover it with green space, parks, mixed used affordable housing

Reminder: Houston is a FLOOD PRONE CITY. Digging a new freeway into a trench and capping it with deck parks and "affordable housing" might sound like a good idea on paper. But it's not all that do-able in Houston's case.

Quote from: bluecountryThe central core of a city is for LOCAL business only, NOT THROUGH traffic.

Over 2 million people live in the "core" of the Houston metro area. Most of them get around in automobiles. Houston is not New York City. And even in NYC people are cabbing-it if they have the money to do so.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on April 08, 2021, 01:18:22 AM
Quote from: bluecountry on April 07, 2021, 10:11:18 PM
The only logical and fair thing to do is this:

-Eliminate Pierce freeway
-Bury I45, cover it with green space, parks, mixed used affordable housing
-ONLY improve the highway so it has full breakdown lanes, safe merges, and dedicated transit/HOV-3 or HOT 24/7 lanes in each direction (still have at least 2 free lanes).

The central core of a city is for LOCAL business only, NOT THROUGH traffic.
If you don't have business inside 610, stay on 610 then to 10 east to Baytown or 45 south to Galveston or 10 west to San Antonio or 45 north to Dallas.
2 free lanes..... lol you just lost any creditability you had. I might as well counter that with wanting 50 free lanes. Same logic.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: bwana39 on April 08, 2021, 11:36:52 AM
Quote from: bluecountry on April 07, 2021, 10:11:18 PM
The only logical and fair thing to do is this:

-Eliminate Pierce freeway
-Bury I45, cover it with green space, parks, mixed used affordable housing
-ONLY improve the highway so it has full breakdown lanes, safe merges, and dedicated transit/HOV-3 or HOT 24/7 lanes in each direction (still have at least 2 free lanes).

The central core of a city is for LOCAL business only, NOT THROUGH traffic.
If you don't have business inside 610, stay on 610 then to 10 east to Baytown or 45 south to Galveston or 10 west to San Antonio or 45 north to Dallas.

I would agree with you BUT.... I-610 is not adequate for this. I-10 actually has more lanes by itself than 610 does.  If this had been done circa 1963 it would have been a win.

I was probably the first poster on this thread to say move I-45 to a tunnel under the current Pierce elevated.  Then came the moot arguments about tunnels being a bad fit in Houston (The plan is to put I-69 in a depressed roadway with a deck-park at ground level. This is nothing but a tunnel.  ) Tunnel on the south side is OK... Tunnel on the west side; NOT OK.

Regardless of what is done with the Pierce elevated, affordable housing will not be what is constructed in its wake.

BTW... The cities themselves demanded the freeways come to their downtowns.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: abqtraveler on April 08, 2021, 11:47:02 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 08, 2021, 01:04:15 AM
Quote from: bluecountry-Bury I45, cover it with green space, parks, mixed used affordable housing

Reminder: Houston is a FLOOD PRONE CITY. Digging a new freeway into a trench and capping it with deck parks and "affordable housing" might sound like a good idea on paper. But it's not all that do-able in Houston's case.

Quote from: bluecountryThe central core of a city is for LOCAL business only, NOT THROUGH traffic.

Over 2 million people live in the "core" of the Houston metro area. Most of them get around in automobiles. Houston is not New York City. And even in NYC people are cabbing-it if they have the money to do so.

And just like in NYC, it's impossible to eliminate all of the truck traffic within the urban core, as tens of thousands of trucks each day have to make pick-ups and deliveries to the multitude of businesses within the urban core.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: bwana39 on April 08, 2021, 12:08:04 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on April 08, 2021, 11:47:02 AM

Quote from: bluecountry-Bury I45, cover it with green space, parks, mixed used affordable housing

Reminder: Houston is a FLOOD PRONE CITY. Digging a new freeway into a trench and capping it with deck parks and "affordable housing" might sound like a good idea on paper. But it's not all that do-able in Houston's case.



Whether you believe the tunnel is viable or not they are planning on doing this on I-69 on the south side of downtown.   

As tunnels go, the Washburn tunnel (under the  HOUSTON) ship channel has been in place since 1950.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: silverback1065 on April 08, 2021, 12:21:14 PM
all the downtown freeways could have been 3 digits and the main 2 digit routes could have bypassed. then through traffic could be encouraged to go around... maybe.  :hmmm: Anyway, extending the Hardy Toll Road is a stupid idea, there are 2 parallel freeways in close proximity. I'm for improving highways, but adding lanes like Texas is doing is going towards induced demand imo. Never been a fan of Texas road design, just induces sprawl and poorly designed cities.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: bwana39 on April 09, 2021, 12:32:08 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 08, 2021, 12:21:14 PM
all the downtown freeways could have been 3 digits and the main 2 digit routes could have bypassed. then through traffic could be encouraged to go around... maybe.  :hmmm: Anyway, extending the Hardy Toll Road is a stupid idea, there are 2 parallel freeways in close proximity. I'm for improving highways, but adding lanes like Texas is doing is going towards induced demand imo. Never been a fan of Texas road design, just induces sprawl and poorly designed cities.


Lots of things could have been... The problem is we have to deal with what is.

Poorly designed cities??? Houston doesn't even have zoning laws. In 1993, they passed some occupancy restrictions, but that regulates (broadly)what you can use a building for. You can technically still build heavy industrial in a neighborhood.  You just cannot live in an old plant or use a home for manufacturing. (That is a gross over-simplification, but it should make the point.)
https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Weirdest-images-from-Houston-s-lack-of-zoning-laws-9171688.php#photo-10795336

I could get into a lengthy discussion of sprawl, but it boils down to lack of property standards and lack of disincentive to convert agricultural land to urban / suburban use.

Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 09, 2021, 12:09:53 PM
Quote from: silverback1065Never been a fan of Texas road design, just induces sprawl and poorly designed cities.

That is an overly simplistic statement. BTW, I believe Texas has some of the best super highways in the nation. They're certainly among the most impressive in scale.

Far more factors drive urban and suburban sprawl than highways. Cost of living in the city core forces many people to look farther away from the core for more affordable housing and other ammenities. Fear of crime also drives people out into the suburbs. Couples move out to suburbs looking for "better" quality school systems.

Some businesses choose not to inhabit city center office towers and opt for "low rise" suburban office campuses instead. Some are doing this to build their work place closer to where their employees can afford to live or choose to live.

New trends involve various work at home setups or a mix between working virtually and visiting the office in person only when necessary. No one has to live in an extreme cost city center to do business like that. And with the anti-roads sentiment among New Urbanists they seem driven on making city cores an absolute pain in the ass to visit by tearing out all the freeways. No motorist will want to slog his way through dozens of layers of traffic signals to reach a city core and then have to pay a punitive fortune to park. But that's the concept New Urbanists are promoting. The problem is there is zero romance at all spending an hour or two riding city buses and trains to reach a city core either. New Urbanists conveniently leave out that reality. All the more reason to build/rent more modest office space outside the city core and allow new kinds of work to take hold.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: In_Correct on April 10, 2021, 01:00:35 AM
There is also this:

https://www.keranews.org/texas-news/2020-02-19/far-north-fort-worth-is-booming-how-the-city-is-addressing-the-growing-pains

An old article, but it says:

Quote

What is Fort Worth doing about the boom?

A couple of years ago, they got a report back on economic development that was pretty eye-opening to them. It showed that Fort Worth had the risk of becoming a bedroom community to Dallas County ... and they want to stop that.

One of the things they're doing is trying to redevelop the urban core area. They want to focus on getting corporate headquarters, and they want to grow the number of residential units within a mile of the downtown business district.  This is good for the city because it doesn't require the infrastructure that a northern suburb does. All of that infrastructure is already there – it just needs to be updated a little bit when you're talking about inside the city.

Having a high concentration of residents in the loop makes it more likely that a corporate headquarters will want to look inside the loop.


That would be successful as long as they keep said Infrastructure in place. More people can increase the traffic so keep the Interchanges and Frontage Roads and Other Bridges for crying out loud.

Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: silverback1065 on April 10, 2021, 10:53:31 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 09, 2021, 12:09:53 PM
Quote from: silverback1065Never been a fan of Texas road design, just induces sprawl and poorly designed cities.

That is an overly simplistic statement. BTW, I believe Texas has some of the best super highways in the nation. They're certainly among the most impressive in scale.

Far more factors drive urban and suburban sprawl than highways. Cost of living in the city core forces many people to look farther away from the core for more affordable housing and other ammenities. Fear of crime also drives people out into the suburbs. Couples move out to suburbs looking for "better" quality school systems.

Some businesses choose not to inhabit city center office towers and opt for "low rise" suburban office campuses instead. Some are doing this to build their work place closer to where their employees can afford to live or choose to live.

New trends involve various work at home setups or a mix between working virtually and visiting the office in person only when necessary. No one has to live in an extreme cost city center to do business like that. And with the anti-roads sentiment among New Urbanists they seem driven on making city cores an absolute pain in the ass to visit by tearing out all the freeways. No motorist will want to slog his way through dozens of layers of traffic signals to reach a city core and then have to pay a punitive fortune to park. But that's the concept New Urbanists are promoting. The problem is there is zero romance at all spending an hour or two riding city buses and trains to reach a city core either. New Urbanists conveniently leave out that reality. All the more reason to build/rent more modest office space outside the city core and allow new kinds of work to take hold.

your thinking is exactly the problem. single choice transportation, we need more choices than cars.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Anthony_JK on April 10, 2021, 01:49:07 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 10, 2021, 10:53:31 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 09, 2021, 12:09:53 PM
Quote from: silverback1065Never been a fan of Texas road design, just induces sprawl and poorly designed cities.

That is an overly simplistic statement. BTW, I believe Texas has some of the best super highways in the nation. They're certainly among the most impressive in scale.

Far more factors drive urban and suburban sprawl than highways. Cost of living in the city core forces many people to look farther away from the core for more affordable housing and other ammenities. Fear of crime also drives people out into the suburbs. Couples move out to suburbs looking for "better" quality school systems.

Some businesses choose not to inhabit city center office towers and opt for "low rise" suburban office campuses instead. Some are doing this to build their work place closer to where their employees can afford to live or choose to live.

New trends involve various work at home setups or a mix between working virtually and visiting the office in person only when necessary. No one has to live in an extreme cost city center to do business like that. And with the anti-roads sentiment among New Urbanists they seem driven on making city cores an absolute pain in the ass to visit by tearing out all the freeways. No motorist will want to slog his way through dozens of layers of traffic signals to reach a city core and then have to pay a punitive fortune to park. But that's the concept New Urbanists are promoting. The problem is there is zero romance at all spending an hour or two riding city buses and trains to reach a city core either. New Urbanists conveniently leave out that reality. All the more reason to build/rent more modest office space outside the city core and allow new kinds of work to take hold.

your thinking is exactly the problem. single choice transportation, we need more choices than cars.

Agreed, but only to a point.

Yes, there should be more alternatives to driving in larger cities. However, since the majority of transportation usage will remain with cars and trucks for the forseeable future, and CBD's and inner cities need high-quality facilities that are accessible, it is a dangerous and highly irresponsible risk to tear down major freeways that directly access these locations.

I have no problem with building more alternative transportation modes; but not at the expense of removing vital freeways.

As for Houston, I still think that they should have retained and improved the Allen Elevated rather than creating this convoluted reroute of I-45. It is what it is, I guess. (Until, of course, it isn't.)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: silverback1065 on April 10, 2021, 02:01:39 PM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on April 10, 2021, 01:49:07 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 10, 2021, 10:53:31 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 09, 2021, 12:09:53 PM
Quote from: silverback1065Never been a fan of Texas road design, just induces sprawl and poorly designed cities.

That is an overly simplistic statement. BTW, I believe Texas has some of the best super highways in the nation. They're certainly among the most impressive in scale.

Far more factors drive urban and suburban sprawl than highways. Cost of living in the city core forces many people to look farther away from the core for more affordable housing and other ammenities. Fear of crime also drives people out into the suburbs. Couples move out to suburbs looking for "better" quality school systems.

Some businesses choose not to inhabit city center office towers and opt for "low rise" suburban office campuses instead. Some are doing this to build their work place closer to where their employees can afford to live or choose to live.

New trends involve various work at home setups or a mix between working virtually and visiting the office in person only when necessary. No one has to live in an extreme cost city center to do business like that. And with the anti-roads sentiment among New Urbanists they seem driven on making city cores an absolute pain in the ass to visit by tearing out all the freeways. No motorist will want to slog his way through dozens of layers of traffic signals to reach a city core and then have to pay a punitive fortune to park. But that's the concept New Urbanists are promoting. The problem is there is zero romance at all spending an hour or two riding city buses and trains to reach a city core either. New Urbanists conveniently leave out that reality. All the more reason to build/rent more modest office space outside the city core and allow new kinds of work to take hold.

your thinking is exactly the problem. single choice transportation, we need more choices than cars.

Agreed, but only to a point.

Yes, there should be more alternatives to driving in larger cities. However, since the majority of transportation usage will remain with cars and trucks for the forseeable future, and CBD's and inner cities need high-quality facilities that are accessible, it is a dangerous and highly irresponsible risk to tear down major freeways that directly access these locations.

I have no problem with building more alternative transportation modes; but not at the expense of removing vital freeways.

As for Houston, I still think that they should have retained and improved the Allen Elevated rather than creating this convoluted reroute of I-45. It is what it is, I guess. (Until, of course, it isn't.)
To be clear I don't advocate for any removals. Except for certain exceptions like i-375 in Detroit, that highway isn't very useful anymore. Or the two x75's branching off 275 in st. Pete.

Pixel 5

Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on April 10, 2021, 02:43:00 PM
^^^ wow lol. Those two freeways are bizarre.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: In_Correct on April 10, 2021, 10:18:22 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 10, 2021, 10:53:31 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 09, 2021, 12:09:53 PM
Quote from: silverback1065Never been a fan of Texas road design, just induces sprawl and poorly designed cities.

That is an overly simplistic statement. BTW, I believe Texas has some of the best super highways in the nation. They're certainly among the most impressive in scale.

Far more factors drive urban and suburban sprawl than highways. Cost of living in the city core forces many people to look farther away from the core for more affordable housing and other ammenities. Fear of crime also drives people out into the suburbs. Couples move out to suburbs looking for "better" quality school systems.

Some businesses choose not to inhabit city center office towers and opt for "low rise" suburban office campuses instead. Some are doing this to build their work place closer to where their employees can afford to live or choose to live.

New trends involve various work at home setups or a mix between working virtually and visiting the office in person only when necessary. No one has to live in an extreme cost city center to do business like that. And with the anti-roads sentiment among New Urbanists they seem driven on making city cores an absolute pain in the ass to visit by tearing out all the freeways. No motorist will want to slog his way through dozens of layers of traffic signals to reach a city core and then have to pay a punitive fortune to park. But that's the concept New Urbanists are promoting. The problem is there is zero romance at all spending an hour or two riding city buses and trains to reach a city core either. New Urbanists conveniently leave out that reality. All the more reason to build/rent more modest office space outside the city core and allow new kinds of work to take hold.

your thinking is exactly the problem. single choice transportation, we need more choices than cars.

Dallas, Tarrant, and Denton counties each have their own rail systems which badly needs expansion. Also, they do not necessarily work together. Houston's rail system is even worse than they are.

It is important to have rail especially since people do not know how to drive such as speeding and passing on shoulders, and at the same time demand Road Diets.

N.I.M.B.Y. prevents rail upgrades also. Removing ANY Infrastructure Upgrade including "Short Interstates" is not the solution. Gainesville Current U.S. 82 has the bridge over what seems to be an old alignment of U.S. 77

https://www.google.com/maps/place/US-82,+Gainesville,+TX/@33.6416325,-97.1346286,17z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x8636cd1b2145f725:0x8b2add7a157b27f7!8m2!3d33.6411655!4d-97.1363966

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.6411478,-97.1334213,3a,75y,2.9h,103.09t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSie_KRw5lYYjacvBEAK8DA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.6422548,-97.1333506,3a,75y,162.8h,104.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s15_77c_L5mDym-UOwjKU7w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

which is useful especially since there is many traffic using it. Even after they ever start the U.S. 82 Realignment,

https://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/projects/studies/wichita-falls/us82-gainesville.html

that bridge must stay in place, and be a part of B.R. 82.

It is ludicrous to expect Rail upgrades if they want to downgrade a Highway.

The Problem Attitudes are those that hate bridges. Rail Lines are best elevated.

Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on April 10, 2021, 11:54:31 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 10, 2021, 10:53:31 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 09, 2021, 12:09:53 PM
Quote from: silverback1065Never been a fan of Texas road design, just induces sprawl and poorly designed cities.

That is an overly simplistic statement. BTW, I believe Texas has some of the best super highways in the nation. They're certainly among the most impressive in scale.

Far more factors drive urban and suburban sprawl than highways. Cost of living in the city core forces many people to look farther away from the core for more affordable housing and other ammenities. Fear of crime also drives people out into the suburbs. Couples move out to suburbs looking for "better" quality school systems.

Some businesses choose not to inhabit city center office towers and opt for "low rise" suburban office campuses instead. Some are doing this to build their work place closer to where their employees can afford to live or choose to live.

New trends involve various work at home setups or a mix between working virtually and visiting the office in person only when necessary. No one has to live in an extreme cost city center to do business like that. And with the anti-roads sentiment among New Urbanists they seem driven on making city cores an absolute pain in the ass to visit by tearing out all the freeways. No motorist will want to slog his way through dozens of layers of traffic signals to reach a city core and then have to pay a punitive fortune to park. But that's the concept New Urbanists are promoting. The problem is there is zero romance at all spending an hour or two riding city buses and trains to reach a city core either. New Urbanists conveniently leave out that reality. All the more reason to build/rent more modest office space outside the city core and allow new kinds of work to take hold.


your thinking is exactly the problem. single choice transportation, we need more choices than cars.


Not really. The car is the best way of getting around, we don't need inferior alternatives.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: MaxConcrete on April 11, 2021, 01:48:15 PM
I posted a blog article articulating the extensive project benefits and listing the cancellation risks due to the lawsuit

http://houstonstrategies.blogspot.com/ (http://houstonstrategies.blogspot.com/)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on April 11, 2021, 03:00:58 PM
Great, great article MC. Indeed it will be a huge blow to Houston. I'm bracing myself for what I feel is the ultimate outcome for the 5, 605 project in LA. I hope Houston doesn't follow CAs path in canceling freeway projects left and right.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 11, 2021, 05:49:45 PM
Quote from: silverback1065your thinking is exactly the problem. single choice transportation, we need more choices than cars.

My thinking is based on REALITY. It's financially impossible to canvas most cities enough with various types of rail service that people don't need to drive cars some distance to reach a train station. The costs of building the lines is so perversely expensive that building any rail lines at all is out of reach for all but the largest cities.

And please show me anyone who truthfully enjoys riding the bus.

I've personally had years of experience riding city buses in New York City, along with taking the subway and Staten Island Ferry. Waiting outside in the weather at a bus stop is often a suck-tastic experience. Unless you live in a really large city, like NYC, you might be standing at that bus stop for quite a while. In smaller cities, like where I currently live, the city buses have a pretty limited number of routes and a limited schedule. The cost of commuting by cab or by Ãœber gets very expensive very fast. Pedaling a bicycle along city streets isn't very safe thanks to so many motorists driving with their heads up their digital a$$es. Around here the only adults riding bicycles through the neighborhoods look like hoodlums. So if you're on a bicycle motorists passing by might think you're a crackhead.

Until the United States can figure out some way how to build any kind of rail-based mode of transportation in a cost effective manner highways and super highways are going to remain very critical modes of transportation in urban and suburban areas.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: hotdogPi on April 11, 2021, 05:53:17 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 11, 2021, 05:49:45 PM
And please show me anyone who truthfully enjoys riding the bus.

I'm perfectly fine with riding the bus.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on April 11, 2021, 05:55:37 PM
Quote from: 1 on April 11, 2021, 05:53:17 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 11, 2021, 05:49:45 PM
And please show me anyone who truthfully enjoys riding the bus.

I'm perfectly fine with riding the bus.
In the US, you're likely in a super small minority.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on April 11, 2021, 10:41:38 PM
Count me in that "super small minority". Here in Madison, the bus system is the only major public transit option; since I don't have a car, I use the bus system to get around (and might try the proposed bus rapid-transit line when it opens in a few years). Madison has had rail proposals, which haven't gone forward. I am grateful for that, since I prefer buses to trains.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on April 11, 2021, 10:49:15 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 11, 2021, 10:41:38 PM
Count me in that "super small minority". Here in Madison, the bus system is the only major public transit option; since I don't have a car, I use the bus system to get around (and might try the proposed bus rapid-transit line when it opens in a few years). Madison has had rail proposals, which haven't gone forward. I am grateful for that, since I prefer buses to trains.
Okay you are in that "super small majority"  and empirical evidence exists to prove it.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on April 11, 2021, 11:12:31 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 11, 2021, 05:55:37 PM
Quote from: 1 on April 11, 2021, 05:53:17 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 11, 2021, 05:49:45 PM
And please show me anyone who truthfully enjoys riding the bus.

I'm perfectly fine with riding the bus.
In the US, you're likely in a super small minority.

Pretty much anywhere. I am definitely sure New Delhi residents wish they could get to work in their own air conditioned automobile rather than a sweaty, noisy, smelly bus.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on April 11, 2021, 11:15:50 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 11, 2021, 10:41:38 PM
Count me in that "super small minority". Here in Madison, the bus system is the only major public transit option; since I don't have a car, I use the bus system to get around (and might try the proposed bus rapid-transit line when it opens in a few years). Madison has had rail proposals, which haven't gone forward. I am grateful for that, since I prefer buses to trains.

I would strongly implore you to go on Autotrader. You will find that a 15 year old Honda Civic will give you orders of magnitude more independence than a bus pass.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on April 11, 2021, 11:30:35 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 11, 2021, 11:12:31 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 11, 2021, 05:55:37 PM
Quote from: 1 on April 11, 2021, 05:53:17 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 11, 2021, 05:49:45 PM
And please show me anyone who truthfully enjoys riding the bus.

I'm perfectly fine with riding the bus.
In the US, you're likely in a super small minority.

Pretty much anywhere. I am definitely sure New Delhi residents wish they could get to work in their own air conditioned automobile rather than a sweaty, noisy, smelly bus.
You can believe that which is why modal share is moving towards cars in BRIC countries.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: In_Correct on April 11, 2021, 11:45:59 PM

I also do not have any problem with riding Public Transportation. In addition to my other reasons, there are also the insufficient Highway Interchanges. They are not big enough and requires you slow down immensely before you are near the exit, since many traffic is stopped at traffic lights ... all the way through the ramp ... and the line continues on the shoulder.

As for long distance travel, I prefer to drive Motor Homes.

Bicycles are silly.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Rothman on April 12, 2021, 12:32:54 AM
There's tolerance and preference.  My son tolerated getting around by bus since he had to.  He resisted taking a car I was replacing for a while, until he thought it would increase his job prospects while in college.

So, we dropped off the car a week or so ago.  Recently asked him if he liked having it and he grinned ear-to-ear.

It's one thing to make do riding transit and another to realize the independence a car enables.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on April 12, 2021, 07:07:59 AM
PS, I'm not trying to put busses down. IMO, America should focus more on its bus network than its rail. BRT should be used considered waaaaaay more than it is and actually built like true BRT and not enchanted bud service. With that said, there is no denying people in the US in general have a negative view of busses.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: silverback1065 on April 12, 2021, 07:56:16 AM
Geeze with all these benefits, you'd think the woke urbanists would love it. Makes me wonder if any of these people even know what the project entails.

Pixel 5

Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on April 12, 2021, 09:42:33 AM
Wait a minute, commuters prefer cars!?!! What

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-12/gasoline-usage-in-india-jumps-in-march-as-commuters-prefer-cars?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=news_tab&utm_content=algorithm
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: hotdogPi on April 12, 2021, 09:48:24 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 12, 2021, 09:42:33 AM
Wait a minute, commuters prefer cars!?!! What

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-12/gasoline-usage-in-india-jumps-in-march-as-commuters-prefer-cars?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=news_tab&utm_content=algorithm

That article says more people are using cars because they're seeing a surge in COVID cases. It's because they don't want to get sick, not because of the transportation itself.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on April 12, 2021, 09:54:46 AM
Quote from: 1 on April 12, 2021, 09:48:24 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 12, 2021, 09:42:33 AM
Wait a minute, commuters prefer cars!?!! What

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-12/gasoline-usage-in-india-jumps-in-march-as-commuters-prefer-cars?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=news_tab&utm_content=algorithm

That article says more people are using cars because they're seeing a surge in COVID cases. It's because they don't want to get sick, not because of the transportation itself.
Okay and?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: silverback1065 on April 12, 2021, 09:54:51 AM
ya ridership is WAY down due to covid on mass transit.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on April 12, 2021, 10:01:23 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 12, 2021, 09:54:51 AM
ya ridership is WAY down due to covid on mass transit.
Ridership was already varying and dipping in many areas before COVID.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: silverback1065 on April 12, 2021, 10:25:15 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 12, 2021, 10:01:23 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 12, 2021, 09:54:51 AM
ya ridership is WAY down due to covid on mass transit.
Ridership was already varying and dipping in many areas before COVID.

Needs citation.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Chris on April 12, 2021, 11:25:30 AM
There was a considerable amount of reporting about the ridership decline pre-pandemic.

For example:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/falling-transit-ridership-poses-an-emergency-for-cities-experts-fear/2018/03/20/ffb67c28-2865-11e8-874b-d517e912f125_story.html

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-02-24/what-s-driving-transit-ridership-declines

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/387498-mass-transit-is-collapsing-everywhere
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on April 12, 2021, 11:40:41 AM

Since 2013, the number of registered automobiles in the United States has risen by 40 million, or about 16%. And it's happening everywhere, even in Western Europe. And there's no reason to expect it to let up. Electric cars will be super cheap to run and new AI enabled factories will be able to spit out new cars at very low cost with little to no human labor. In such an environment, who will want to take a bus?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: bwana39 on April 12, 2021, 12:51:19 PM
My thought on mass transit is people will use it if it  fits all of the following.
1) It is the most reliable way to get there at the acceptable price point.
2) It is convenient (both in time and accessibility to both the destination and to the origin point.)
3) People of similar SES use this transit option both on the macro (the whole system) and the micro (the particular conveyance or line).

As a rule, most of those who drive have a far higher tolerance to price point than the actual fare for public transit.  Some have to drive with a price point that is out side their comfort zone because there is no routes that match their location or schedule.  There are some that would benefit from and utilize more localized mass transit, but far and wide, larger usage of mass transit will only come about if options become narrower. That means prices drive access to auto transit costs up exponentially. 

I will add one thing. the only place the train is a good choice is from from a park and ride to downtown and some limited places alongside the line. Yes, Joe Biden rode the train home every day from Washington DC.  How many others had the opportunity to do so? How many other people were able to make it fit their life and lifestyle.....
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 13, 2021, 12:26:09 AM
Car payments, insurance, fuel, tag fees and other costs (like tolls, parking, etc) can get pretty expensive. But mass transit carries a substantial daily cost too. And it's not practical for certain trips like when you need to go to the grocery store. A person can carry only so many bags of groceries onto a bus. Even for choices of vehicle many people need something with some hauling capacity. My current vehicle is a crew cab pickup truck and the previous vehicle I had was a regular cab pickup truck.

I don't mind parking and riding a train into the core of a giant-size city like New York City, particularly the Manhattan part of it. It's easier to take a subway into a place like that and not worry about having to find (and afford) a place to park. Not many other cities have the balance tilting in favor of mass transit like NYC. In most other cities it's easier/faster to drive.

Quote from: kernals12Electric cars will be super cheap to run and new AI enabled factories will be able to spit out new cars at very low cost with little to no human labor. In such an environment, who will want to take a bus?

I don't have as positive an outlook for electric cars.

So far I haven't seen any electric cars that are less expensive than a comparable gasoline powered vehicle. A small economy car basically costs near double when it is built as an electric vehicle. The batteries are not cheap. And there is only so much lithium and cobalt in the world. In order to scale production to replace all gasoline powered vehicles in the United States or other countries as well they have to invent new battery technology that uses resources that are far more plentiful and even "renewable."

Automation in manufacturing hasn't lowered prices to "low cost" levels for many kinds of big ticket products. If anything, stuff is getting more and more expensive. Raw materials prices have shot up through the roof lately. And even when they come back down to normal levels all of the components that go into an automobile will still carry a substantial cost regardless of how the vehicle is assembled or the nature of its power plant.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: CoreySamson on April 13, 2021, 12:48:48 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 13, 2021, 12:26:09 AM

Quote from: kernals12Electric cars will be super cheap to run and new AI enabled factories will be able to spit out new cars at very low cost with little to no human labor. In such an environment, who will want to take a bus?

I don't have as positive an outlook for electric cars.

So far I haven't seen any electric cars that are less expensive than a comparable gasoline powered vehicle. A small economy car basically costs near double when it is built as an electric vehicle. The batteries are not cheap.
Although the upfront cost is much greater (and even though I'm not really into the premise of electric cars) you have to admit that maintenance costs for electric vehicles will be cheaper than gasoline-powered vehicles in the long run, as the electric drivetrain has fewer moving parts that could break versus a gasoline one, and so are more reliable (older Prius batteries tend to outlast the car itself, for example). Plus running costs would probably be lower too if you charge at home versus paying a lot for gas. I personally think the ideal at this point is plug-in hybrids, though.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on April 13, 2021, 07:30:37 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 13, 2021, 12:26:09 AM
Car payments, insurance, fuel, tag fees and other costs (like tolls, parking, etc) can get pretty expensive. But mass transit carries a substantial daily cost too. And it's not practical for certain trips like when you need to go to the grocery store. A person can carry only so many bags of groceries onto a bus. Even for choices of vehicle many people need something with some hauling capacity. My current vehicle is a crew cab pickup truck and the previous vehicle I had was a regular cab pickup truck.

I don't mind parking and riding a train into the core of a giant-size city like New York City, particularly the Manhattan part of it. It's easier to take a subway into a place like that and not worry about having to find (and afford) a place to park. Not many other cities have the balance tilting in favor of mass transit like NYC. In most other cities it's easier/faster to drive.

Quote from: kernals12Electric cars will be super cheap to run and new AI enabled factories will be able to spit out new cars at very low cost with little to no human labor. In such an environment, who will want to take a bus?

I don't have as positive an outlook for electric cars.

So far I haven't seen any electric cars that are less expensive than a comparable gasoline powered vehicle. A small economy car basically costs near double when it is built as an electric vehicle. The batteries are not cheap. And there is only so much lithium and cobalt in the world. In order to scale production to replace all gasoline powered vehicles in the United States or other countries as well they have to invent new battery technology that uses resources that are far more plentiful and even "renewable."

Automation in manufacturing hasn't lowered prices to "low cost" levels for many kinds of big ticket products. If anything, stuff is getting more and more expensive. Raw materials prices have shot up through the roof lately. And even when they come back down to normal levels all of the components that go into an automobile will still carry a substantial cost regardless of how the vehicle is assembled or the nature of its power plant.


Wrong, wrong, wrong

Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: hotdogPi on April 13, 2021, 07:33:13 AM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 13, 2021, 07:30:37 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 13, 2021, 12:26:09 AM
Car payments, insurance, fuel, tag fees and other costs (like tolls, parking, etc) can get pretty expensive. But mass transit carries a substantial daily cost too. And it's not practical for certain trips like when you need to go to the grocery store. A person can carry only so many bags of groceries onto a bus. Even for choices of vehicle many people need something with some hauling capacity. My current vehicle is a crew cab pickup truck and the previous vehicle I had was a regular cab pickup truck.

I don't mind parking and riding a train into the core of a giant-size city like New York City, particularly the Manhattan part of it. It's easier to take a subway into a place like that and not worry about having to find (and afford) a place to park. Not many other cities have the balance tilting in favor of mass transit like NYC. In most other cities it's easier/faster to drive.

Quote from: kernals12Electric cars will be super cheap to run and new AI enabled factories will be able to spit out new cars at very low cost with little to no human labor. In such an environment, who will want to take a bus?

I don't have as positive an outlook for electric cars.

So far I haven't seen any electric cars that are less expensive than a comparable gasoline powered vehicle. A small economy car basically costs near double when it is built as an electric vehicle. The batteries are not cheap. And there is only so much lithium and cobalt in the world. In order to scale production to replace all gasoline powered vehicles in the United States or other countries as well they have to invent new battery technology that uses resources that are far more plentiful and even "renewable."

Automation in manufacturing hasn't lowered prices to "low cost" levels for many kinds of big ticket products. If anything, stuff is getting more and more expensive. Raw materials prices have shot up through the roof lately. And even when they come back down to normal levels all of the components that go into an automobile will still carry a substantial cost regardless of how the vehicle is assembled or the nature of its power plant.


Wrong, wrong, wrong

Dividing by GDP also divides by population, and the population is growing. You need to divide by median income.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on April 13, 2021, 07:42:57 AM
Quote from: 1 on April 13, 2021, 07:33:13 AM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 13, 2021, 07:30:37 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 13, 2021, 12:26:09 AM
Car payments, insurance, fuel, tag fees and other costs (like tolls, parking, etc) can get pretty expensive. But mass transit carries a substantial daily cost too. And it's not practical for certain trips like when you need to go to the grocery store. A person can carry only so many bags of groceries onto a bus. Even for choices of vehicle many people need something with some hauling capacity. My current vehicle is a crew cab pickup truck and the previous vehicle I had was a regular cab pickup truck.

I don't mind parking and riding a train into the core of a giant-size city like New York City, particularly the Manhattan part of it. It's easier to take a subway into a place like that and not worry about having to find (and afford) a place to park. Not many other cities have the balance tilting in favor of mass transit like NYC. In most other cities it's easier/faster to drive.

Quote from: kernals12Electric cars will be super cheap to run and new AI enabled factories will be able to spit out new cars at very low cost with little to no human labor. In such an environment, who will want to take a bus?

I don't have as positive an outlook for electric cars.

So far I haven't seen any electric cars that are less expensive than a comparable gasoline powered vehicle. A small economy car basically costs near double when it is built as an electric vehicle. The batteries are not cheap. And there is only so much lithium and cobalt in the world. In order to scale production to replace all gasoline powered vehicles in the United States or other countries as well they have to invent new battery technology that uses resources that are far more plentiful and even "renewable."

Automation in manufacturing hasn't lowered prices to "low cost" levels for many kinds of big ticket products. If anything, stuff is getting more and more expensive. Raw materials prices have shot up through the roof lately. And even when they come back down to normal levels all of the components that go into an automobile will still carry a substantial cost regardless of how the vehicle is assembled or the nature of its power plant.


Wrong, wrong, wrong

Dividing by GDP also divides by population, and the population is growing. You need to divide by median income.

I'm not dividing by GDP, I'm dividing by the measured price of all goods and services in the economy.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: In_Correct on April 13, 2021, 03:07:36 PM
Quote(older Prius batteries tend to outlast the car itself, for example)

This is a problem. Automobiles are supposed to last for ever. Bus Grease Monkey has proven that.

The Battery Electric Rail Vehicle has been around since the early 1800s. Diesel Electric has been around since the early 1900s. Even Regenerative Braking has been around in the Turbine Locomotives.

So Called Renewable Energy should be used for certain types of Rail systems, not Automobiles. Diesel Electric is best for Automobiles, certain types of Rail systems ... and in occasional types of Rail systems it is best for them to switch back to Turbine.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Scott5114 on April 13, 2021, 03:48:53 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 12, 2021, 07:07:59 AM
BRT should be used considered waaaaaay more than it is and actually built like true BRT and not enchanted bud service.

Dispensaries run by wizards???
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on April 13, 2021, 09:38:16 PM
Enchanted bud service? Is that where I can get a Budweiser or a Bud Light instantly on-demand? I'm just kidding! I know Plutonic Panda meant "enhanced bus service".
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on April 14, 2021, 01:14:46 AM
Sorry I had a bit too much wine tonight... I mean last night
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on April 14, 2021, 08:29:23 PM
The City Council has approved 400 apartments (https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/housing/article/Houston-council-approves-East-End-affordable-16100730.php) that will serve as replacement housing for those currently living in the Clayton Homes complex, which will be demolished if the highway project goes through.

Also, the Clayton Homes were very badly damaged by Hurricane Harvey. It might not be such a bad thing to replace housing with a freeway interchange on flood prone land.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: armadillo speedbump on April 14, 2021, 09:35:48 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 14, 2021, 08:29:23 PM
Also, the Clayton Homes were very badly damaged by Hurricane Harvey. It might not be such a bad thing to replace housing with a freeway interchange on flood prone land.

I wonder if the County Grad Student has figured that out yet.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on April 14, 2021, 09:37:35 PM
The stupid web story requires a subscription to the Houston Chronicle to read the whole story. Well isn't that ducky. :ded:
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on April 14, 2021, 09:52:24 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 14, 2021, 09:37:35 PM
The stupid web story requires a subscription to the Houston Chronicle to read the whole story. Well isn't that ducky. :ded:

Just stop the page from fully loading before the paywall slams down.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on April 14, 2021, 10:38:21 PM
That worked! Thanks kernals12.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: In_Correct on April 14, 2021, 10:39:49 PM
Quote

East End affordable housing project receives approval from Houston city council

April 14, 2021
Updated: April 14, 2021 12:23 p.m.

https://s.hdnux.com/photos/01/17/46/37/20867041/3/1200x0.jpg

(https://s.hdnux.com/photos/01/17/46/37/20867041/3/1200x0.jpg)

A piece of vacant land (center) owned by the Houston Housing Authority on sits across the street from new housing developments and original older houses in Second Ward on Tuesday, April 13, 2021, in Houston. City Council on Wednesday OK'd plans for the first phase of what will be a 900-unit mostly affordable housing complex.

Mark Mulligan, Houston Chronicle / Staff photographer

City Council on Wednesday approved a 400-unit affordable housing project in the East End, clearing the way for construction despite concerns raised about potential environmental health risks at the property.

The project at 800 Middle St. will house low-income residents, including those expected to be displaced from the nearby Clayton Homes housing complex that the Texas Department of Transportation plans to demolish to make way for its expansion of Interstate 45. The Houston Housing Authority, which is overseeing the project along with an Ohio-based private developer, sold Clayton Homes to the state transportation agency in 2019 and used a portion of the proceeds to buy the land at 800 Middle St.

The land is located east of downtown along the southern shore of Buffalo Bayou, less than a mile from Clayton Homes.

City Council approved the project on a unanimous vote, without any discussion.

About three-quarters of the 400 proposed units will be for households earning up to 60 percent of the area median income, defined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development as roughly $45,000 for a family of four. The remainder would be for households with incomes up to 30 percent of the area median income. Housing officials ultimately plan to build 900 units at the site, some of which would be offered at market rate.

The project will be partially subsidized through a federal tax credit for low-income housing projects funded by tax-exempt bonds.

The proposed development has come under scrutiny from local developer Alan Atkinson, who has filed a federal lawsuit in which he argues the property is unsuitable for development due to its location next to a lead processing facility and its prior use as an ash landfill site for city garbage incinerators decades ago. Atkinson has alleged the previous landowner and the city housing authority misrepresented the environmental status of the land in inspection reports submitted to state and federal officials.

The city has denied Atkinson's charges, arguing in court filings that the land had no "known environmental issues"  until storm weather caused part of the property to erode along the bank of Buffalo Bayou in early 2020.

Those who support the project, including Councilmember Karla Cisneros, say the new apartment complex will provide needed affordable housing in a gentrifying area of the city. They also argue it will help ensure Clayton Homes residents are relocated nearby their current residences.

jasper.scherer@chron.com


They should have not built that subdivision to begin with if they knew it would be flooded all the time.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on April 14, 2021, 11:12:19 PM
Quote from: In_Correct on April 14, 2021, 10:39:49 PM
Quote

East End affordable housing project receives approval from Houston city council

April 14, 2021
Updated: April 14, 2021 12:23 p.m.

https://s.hdnux.com/photos/01/17/46/37/20867041/3/1200x0.jpg

(https://s.hdnux.com/photos/01/17/46/37/20867041/3/1200x0.jpg)

A piece of vacant land (center) owned by the Houston Housing Authority on sits across the street from new housing developments and original older houses in Second Ward on Tuesday, April 13, 2021, in Houston. City Council on Wednesday OK'd plans for the first phase of what will be a 900-unit mostly affordable housing complex.

Mark Mulligan, Houston Chronicle / Staff photographer

City Council on Wednesday approved a 400-unit affordable housing project in the East End, clearing the way for construction despite concerns raised about potential environmental health risks at the property.

The project at 800 Middle St. will house low-income residents, including those expected to be displaced from the nearby Clayton Homes housing complex that the Texas Department of Transportation plans to demolish to make way for its expansion of Interstate 45. The Houston Housing Authority, which is overseeing the project along with an Ohio-based private developer, sold Clayton Homes to the state transportation agency in 2019 and used a portion of the proceeds to buy the land at 800 Middle St.

The land is located east of downtown along the southern shore of Buffalo Bayou, less than a mile from Clayton Homes.

City Council approved the project on a unanimous vote, without any discussion.

About three-quarters of the 400 proposed units will be for households earning up to 60 percent of the area median income, defined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development as roughly $45,000 for a family of four. The remainder would be for households with incomes up to 30 percent of the area median income. Housing officials ultimately plan to build 900 units at the site, some of which would be offered at market rate.

The project will be partially subsidized through a federal tax credit for low-income housing projects funded by tax-exempt bonds.

The proposed development has come under scrutiny from local developer Alan Atkinson, who has filed a federal lawsuit in which he argues the property is unsuitable for development due to its location next to a lead processing facility and its prior use as an ash landfill site for city garbage incinerators decades ago. Atkinson has alleged the previous landowner and the city housing authority misrepresented the environmental status of the land in inspection reports submitted to state and federal officials.

The city has denied Atkinson's charges, arguing in court filings that the land had no "known environmental issues"  until storm weather caused part of the property to erode along the bank of Buffalo Bayou in early 2020.

Those who support the project, including Councilmember Karla Cisneros, say the new apartment complex will provide needed affordable housing in a gentrifying area of the city. They also argue it will help ensure Clayton Homes residents are relocated nearby their current residences.

jasper.scherer@chron.com


They should have not built that subdivision to begin with if they knew it would be flooded all the time.


Builders, whether private or public sector, are very often not concerned with the consequences of their actions.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on April 14, 2021, 11:19:21 PM
The environmental impact statement says Segment 1 will displace 23,000 jobs. How's that? There doesn't like that many businesses in the right of way.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: silverback1065 on April 15, 2021, 08:08:27 AM
Quote from: In_Correct on April 13, 2021, 03:07:36 PM
Quote(older Prius batteries tend to outlast the car itself, for example)

This is a problem. Automobiles are supposed to last for ever. Bus Grease Monkey has proven that.

The Battery Electric Rail Vehicle has been around since the early 1800s. Diesel Electric has been around since the early 1900s. Even Regenerative Braking has been around in the Turbine Locomotives.

So Called Renewable Energy should be used for certain types of Rail systems, not Automobiles. Diesel Electric is best for Automobiles, certain types of Rail systems ... and in occasional types of Rail systems it is best for them to switch back to Turbine.

Electric cars are ascendant and will eventually replace gas powered cars.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: bwana39 on April 15, 2021, 10:55:34 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 15, 2021, 08:08:27 AM
Quote from: In_Correct on April 13, 2021, 03:07:36 PM
Quote(older Prius batteries tend to outlast the car itself, for example)

This is a problem. Automobiles are supposed to last for ever. Bus Grease Monkey has proven that.

The Battery Electric Rail Vehicle has been around since the early 1800s. Diesel Electric has been around since the early 1900s. Even Regenerative Braking has been around in the Turbine Locomotives.

So Called Renewable Energy should be used for certain types of Rail systems, not Automobiles. Diesel Electric is best for Automobiles, certain types of Rail systems ... and in occasional types of Rail systems it is best for them to switch back to Turbine.

Electric cars are ascendant and will eventually replace gas powered cars.


Electric cars. In some cases that means COAL Powered cars?   Manufacturing these cars is far from environmentally neutral.  Disposal of the batteries MAY wind up a bigger environmental dilemma than EVERYTHING in an internal combustion powered car, truck, or bus: INCLUDING the emissions.

While it would immediately lessen the carbon monoxide emissions, what does it leave down the line of if there is a problem.  In moment, Nuclear power is the cleanest, most efficient, and reliable power generation. If there is a problem, the long-term outlook is not as rosy.  Battery operated cars may have the same iffy outlook as an old used up Nuclear Power Plant.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on April 15, 2021, 08:42:48 PM
Let's not turn this thread into a electric car vs. gas powered debate like what happened in the New York thread in the Northeast Regional Board. Stick to the subject's headline: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild). Much obliged.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: silverback1065 on April 16, 2021, 02:08:18 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on April 15, 2021, 10:55:34 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 15, 2021, 08:08:27 AM
Quote from: In_Correct on April 13, 2021, 03:07:36 PM
Quote(older Prius batteries tend to outlast the car itself, for example)

This is a problem. Automobiles are supposed to last for ever. Bus Grease Monkey has proven that.

The Battery Electric Rail Vehicle has been around since the early 1800s. Diesel Electric has been around since the early 1900s. Even Regenerative Braking has been around in the Turbine Locomotives.

So Called Renewable Energy should be used for certain types of Rail systems, not Automobiles. Diesel Electric is best for Automobiles, certain types of Rail systems ... and in occasional types of Rail systems it is best for them to switch back to Turbine.

Electric cars are ascendant and will eventually replace gas powered cars.


Electric cars. In some cases that means COAL Powered cars?   Manufacturing these cars is far from environmentally neutral.  Disposal of the batteries MAY wind up a bigger environmental dilemma than EVERYTHING in an internal combustion powered car, truck, or bus: INCLUDING the emissions.

While it would immediately lessen the carbon monoxide emissions, what does it leave down the line of if there is a problem.  In moment, Nuclear power is the cleanest, most efficient, and reliable power generation. If there is a problem, the long-term outlook is not as rosy.  Battery operated cars may have the same iffy outlook as an old used up Nuclear Power Plant.

not all power is generated by coal. and actually now very little is by coal, it is mostly natural gas. eventually most of our power will be from renewables. your point about disposal being a problem is fallacious, you are pretending electric cars were promised to have little to no impact on the environment, that is simply not true. Also nuclear has a big problem of what to do with the radioactive waste it creates.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: silverback1065 on April 16, 2021, 02:31:19 PM
i recently saw an article about a study being done to replace US 75/I-345 in Dallas by upgrading several north/south streets as blvds. Why are woke urbanists obsessed with blvds? they tout them like they are the end all be all to solve traffic problems in downtowns. in reality they turn into crappy over clogged roads that are hard to cross as a ped like West St. in downtown Indianapolis.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on April 16, 2021, 03:19:51 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 16, 2021, 02:31:19 PM
i recently saw an article about a study being done to replace US 75/I-345 in Dallas by upgrading several north/south streets as blvds. Why are woke urbanists obsessed with blvds? they tout them like they are the end all be all to solve traffic problems in downtowns. in reality they turn into crappy over clogged roads that are hard to cross as a ped like West St. in downtown Indianapolis.

They like the boulevards of Paris (apparently unaware that in order to build them, Haussman wiped out working class communities on a scale that would make Robert Moses blush)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: In_Correct on April 16, 2021, 04:16:42 PM
Urbanists like to pretend that they are poor and displaced. The area not far from The Unfinished Corridor Bridge are not low income. They see Road Diets as "Friendly" and since that area is known for parties ... they want to block off the traffic and throw things at cars.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: bwana39 on April 16, 2021, 05:22:49 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 16, 2021, 02:08:18 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on April 15, 2021, 10:55:34 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 15, 2021, 08:08:27 AM
Quote from: In_Correct on April 13, 2021, 03:07:36 PM
Quote(older Prius batteries tend to outlast the car itself, for example)

This is a problem. Automobiles are supposed to last for ever. Bus Grease Monkey has proven that.

The Battery Electric Rail Vehicle has been around since the early 1800s. Diesel Electric has been around since the early 1900s. Even Regenerative Braking has been around in the Turbine Locomotives.

So Called Renewable Energy should be used for certain types of Rail systems, not Automobiles. Diesel Electric is best for Automobiles, certain types of Rail systems ... and in occasional types of Rail systems it is best for them to switch back to Turbine.

Electric cars are ascendant and will eventually replace gas powered cars.


Electric cars. In some cases that means COAL Powered cars?   Manufacturing these cars is far from environmentally neutral.  Disposal of the batteries MAY wind up a bigger environmental dilemma than EVERYTHING in an internal combustion powered car, truck, or bus: INCLUDING the emissions.

While it would immediately lessen the carbon monoxide emissions, what does it leave down the line of if there is a problem.  In moment, Nuclear power is the cleanest, most efficient, and reliable power generation. If there is a problem, the long-term outlook is not as rosy.  Battery operated cars may have the same iffy outlook as an old used up Nuclear Power Plant.

not all power is generated by coal. and actually now very little is by coal, it is mostly natural gas. eventually most of our power will be from renewables. your point about disposal being a problem is fallacious, you are pretending electric cars were promised to have little to no impact on the environment, that is simply not true. Also nuclear has a big problem of what to do with the radioactive waste it creates.

As to the coal. I said SOME. It is not as you said very little. It is around 20%. While that is half of what it was less than a decade ago, it is still significant. In some states, coal still is over 50% of the electricity generated. Ironically, greater use of electric cars MIGHT actually increase the utilization of coal as much of our coal generation is being idled first. So as demand peaks, coal burning increases. That was only a MINOR point.

The renewals have ramped up to close to 20%, but is far more expensive than fossil fuels.

you are pretending electric cars were promised to have little to no impact on the environment. That is the inference. Not mine, but those of proponents of battery electric cars now.  Today: A gasoline powered car is cleaner to produce than a plug-in electric or a gas electric hybrid.  There is debate on the long-run weather the way the seeming environmental advantages to electrical generation fueling the cars actually fully offsets the cradle to grave environmental issues of the electric powered cars.    I am not suggesting we will never overcome this. It may actually happen sooner than later. The point is we aren't there yet.

Yes nuclear waste is a major concern. So is battery waste, plastic waste, and even how to best deal with the production of non-ferrous metals that have a larger role in electric cars.  Plastics are still mostly made from petroleum. 
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: In_Correct on April 16, 2021, 09:49:39 PM
Many people expect their cars to be unreasonably fast. If a Battery Electric Automobile loses much of its power when it falls below 50%, there is a risk for inattentive speeding car drivers to crash into it. These issues must be resolved before Battery Electric Automobiles be come wide spread.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSdi3STy0YA

The trains from Cabview Holland Dutch Railways, for example in the Grand Tour Of Holland video, are Battery Electric. For some time the power lines were missing yet the train still operated. How ever, it needed to connect to power eventually.

Installing this system would require a Solar Road Surface and probably a Wireless Charging System. The wireless charging system is not recommended. The cars would need Pantographs.

But first there would have to be maintenance on the existing road surfaces and infrastructure.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: bwana39 on April 17, 2021, 02:34:51 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on April 16, 2021, 02:31:19 PM
i recently saw an article about a study being done to replace US 75/I-345 in Dallas by upgrading several north/south streets as blvds. Why are woke urbanists obsessed with blvds? they tout them like they are the end all be all to solve traffic problems in downtowns. in reality they turn into crappy over clogged roads that are hard to cross as a ped like West St. in downtown Indianapolis.

Even in Dallas. Jefferson Boulevard USED to be what they think they see in the future with a boulevard downtown. Look at it now, The freeway did not come anywhere close. Drive down Jefferson today. It has activity, but not the vibrant walkability they keep promoting.

This is I have said multiple times. It is about creating new land for development.  I am not going to say that it will not create short-term growth. The west end was like this for a couple of decades. Mid-town was the place to be for a while. Sure something new may make a short-term boom, but in the long run getting rid of this freeway (Whether you are talking about I-345 or the Pierce elevated) creates permanent traffic disruption for a temporary boon.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: bluecountry on April 26, 2021, 09:18:20 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on April 08, 2021, 11:47:02 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 08, 2021, 01:04:15 AM
Quote from: bluecountry-Bury I45, cover it with green space, parks, mixed used affordable housing

Reminder: Houston is a FLOOD PRONE CITY. Digging a new freeway into a trench and capping it with deck parks and "affordable housing" might sound like a good idea on paper. But it's not all that do-able in Houston's case.

Quote from: bluecountryThe central core of a city is for LOCAL business only, NOT THROUGH traffic.

Over 2 million people live in the "core" of the Houston metro area. Most of them get around in automobiles. Houston is not New York City. And even in NYC people are cabbing-it if they have the money to do so.

And just like in NYC, it's impossible to eliminate all of the truck traffic within the urban core, as tens of thousands of trucks each day have to make pick-ups and deliveries to the multitude of businesses within the urban core.

Yes, traffic INSIDE 610 should be for people with direct business INSIDE 610, not through traffic.

Unlike NYC, Houston DOES have the luxury of NOT being on the 95 corridor, people are not going from New England to Florida, hence unless induced there is NO REASON why you have to have so much THROUGH traffic in the centra core.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: sprjus4 on April 26, 2021, 09:20:02 AM
Quote from: bluecountry on April 26, 2021, 09:18:20 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on April 08, 2021, 11:47:02 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 08, 2021, 01:04:15 AM
Quote from: bluecountry-Bury I45, cover it with green space, parks, mixed used affordable housing

Reminder: Houston is a FLOOD PRONE CITY. Digging a new freeway into a trench and capping it with deck parks and "affordable housing" might sound like a good idea on paper. But it's not all that do-able in Houston's case.

Quote from: bluecountryThe central core of a city is for LOCAL business only, NOT THROUGH traffic.

Over 2 million people live in the "core" of the Houston metro area. Most of them get around in automobiles. Houston is not New York City. And even in NYC people are cabbing-it if they have the money to do so.

And just like in NYC, it's impossible to eliminate all of the truck traffic within the urban core, as tens of thousands of trucks each day have to make pick-ups and deliveries to the multitude of businesses within the urban core.

Yes, traffic INSIDE 610 should be for people with direct business INSIDE 610, not through traffic.

Unlike NYC, Houston DOES have the luxury of NOT being on the 95 corridor, people are not going from New England to Florida, hence unless induced there is NO REASON why you have to have so much THROUGH traffic in the centra core.
Because I-10 through is the most direct route for not only east-west traffic, but also traffic between I-10 West to I-69 South.

There's no effective bypass of Houston. You either drive through, take I-610 which adds distance and has just as much traffic problems and is the same speed limit as I-10 (60 mph), or pay a toll and go even further out of the way.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: hotdogPi on April 26, 2021, 09:21:38 AM
Quote from: bluecountry on April 26, 2021, 09:18:20 AM
Unlike NYC, Houston DOES have the luxury of NOT being on the 95 corridor, people are not going from New England to Florida, hence unless induced there is NO REASON why you have to have so much THROUGH traffic in the centra core.

I-10 isn't through traffic?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: TXtoNJ on April 26, 2021, 11:36:22 AM
Quote from: 1 on April 26, 2021, 09:21:38 AM
Quote from: bluecountry on April 26, 2021, 09:18:20 AM
Unlike NYC, Houston DOES have the luxury of NOT being on the 95 corridor, people are not going from New England to Florida, hence unless induced there is NO REASON why you have to have so much THROUGH traffic in the centra core.

I-10 isn't through traffic?

Relatively little, all things considered:

(https://i.imgur.com/rDTKd4n.jpg)

Houston's a classic port terminus - it's really not on the way from anywhere to anywhere else. It's too far south to catch traffic going from the West Coast to the East Coast (that goes through Denver, OKC, or Dallas), and too far east to catch traffic from Mexico that's going anywhere but the Gulf Coast and/or Florida (which, due to geography, usually just sees shipping traffic).

Truck traffic in Houston is either O/D in Houston, or on the way from one O&G location in the Gulf Coast region to another.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: silverback1065 on April 26, 2021, 11:44:25 AM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on April 26, 2021, 11:36:22 AM
Quote from: 1 on April 26, 2021, 09:21:38 AM
Quote from: bluecountry on April 26, 2021, 09:18:20 AM
Unlike NYC, Houston DOES have the luxury of NOT being on the 95 corridor, people are not going from New England to Florida, hence unless induced there is NO REASON why you have to have so much THROUGH traffic in the centra core.

I-10 isn't through traffic?

Relatively little, all things considered:

(https://i.imgur.com/rDTKd4n.jpg)

Houston's a classic port terminus - it's really not on the way from anywhere to anywhere else. It's too far south to catch traffic going from the West Coast to the East Coast (that goes through Denver, OKC, or Dallas), and too far east to catch traffic from Mexico that's going anywhere but the Gulf Coast and/or Florida (which, due to geography, usually just sees shipping traffic).

Truck traffic in Houston is either O/D in Houston, or on the way from one O&G location in the Gulf Coast region to another.

My goodness I-90 carries a TON of trucks!
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: sprjus4 on April 26, 2021, 11:47:27 AM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on April 26, 2021, 11:36:22 AM
Quote from: 1 on April 26, 2021, 09:21:38 AM
Quote from: bluecountry on April 26, 2021, 09:18:20 AM
Unlike NYC, Houston DOES have the luxury of NOT being on the 95 corridor, people are not going from New England to Florida, hence unless induced there is NO REASON why you have to have so much THROUGH traffic in the centra core.

I-10 isn't through traffic?

Relatively little, all things considered:

(https://i.imgur.com/rDTKd4n.jpg)

Houston's a classic port terminus - it's really not on the way from anywhere to anywhere else. It's too far south to catch traffic going from the West Coast to the East Coast (that goes through Denver, OKC, or Dallas), and too far east to catch traffic from Mexico that's going anywhere but the Gulf Coast and/or Florida (which, due to geography, usually just sees shipping traffic).

Truck traffic in Houston is either O/D in Houston, or on the way from one O&G location in the Gulf Coast region to another.
You're considering through truck traffic. How about traffic altogether?

Also, Downtown Houston acts as a split for traffic on I-10 West either remaining on I-10 West towards San Antonio or splitting onto I-69 South towards Corpus Christi, the Rio Grande Valley, and Mexico.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: TXtoNJ on April 26, 2021, 01:52:53 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on April 26, 2021, 11:47:27 AM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on April 26, 2021, 11:36:22 AM
Quote from: 1 on April 26, 2021, 09:21:38 AM
Quote from: bluecountry on April 26, 2021, 09:18:20 AM
Unlike NYC, Houston DOES have the luxury of NOT being on the 95 corridor, people are not going from New England to Florida, hence unless induced there is NO REASON why you have to have so much THROUGH traffic in the centra core.

I-10 isn't through traffic?

Relatively little, all things considered:

(https://i.imgur.com/rDTKd4n.jpg)

Houston's a classic port terminus - it's really not on the way from anywhere to anywhere else. It's too far south to catch traffic going from the West Coast to the East Coast (that goes through Denver, OKC, or Dallas), and too far east to catch traffic from Mexico that's going anywhere but the Gulf Coast and/or Florida (which, due to geography, usually just sees shipping traffic).

Truck traffic in Houston is either O/D in Houston, or on the way from one O&G location in the Gulf Coast region to another.
You're considering through truck traffic. How about traffic altogether?

Also, Downtown Houston acts as a split for traffic on I-10 West either remaining on I-10 West towards San Antonio or splitting onto I-69 South towards Corpus Christi, the Rio Grande Valley, and Mexico.

Trucks use through routes far more than personal autos do, so it's a better measure than all traffic for this question.

You can also see on the map that relatively little traffic is being diverted from Houston down to Corpus or the Valley, both because freight is shipped from the Port of Houston to Veracruz or other Mexican terminals by water or rail (you see very little O&G truck traffic crossing the border), and because the majority of Mexico's population is best served by the I-10/I-35 route.

Even then, though, there is relatively little Mexican-American population east of Houston on the Gulf Coast (using Hispanic as a reasonable analog, Florida excepted):

(https://i.imgur.com/auhLVGX.png)

The places where there are higher percentages of Mexican-Americans east of Texas are better served by the I-35 corridor, and traffic counts show it.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: armadillo speedbump on April 26, 2021, 06:26:22 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on April 26, 2021, 11:36:22 AM
Quote from: 1 on April 26, 2021, 09:21:38 AM
Quote from: bluecountry on April 26, 2021, 09:18:20 AM
Unlike NYC, Houston DOES have the luxury of NOT being on the 95 corridor, people are not going from New England to Florida, hence unless induced there is NO REASON why you have to have so much THROUGH traffic in the centra core.

I-10 isn't through traffic?

Relatively little, all things considered:

(https://i.imgur.com/rDTKd4n.jpg)

Houston's a classic port terminus - it's really not on the way from anywhere to anywhere else. It's too far south to catch traffic going from the West Coast to the East Coast (that goes through Denver, OKC, or Dallas), and too far east to catch traffic from Mexico that's going anywhere but the Gulf Coast and/or Florida (which, due to geography, usually just sees shipping traffic).

Truck traffic in Houston is either O/D in Houston, or on the way from one O&G location in the Gulf Coast region to another.

LOL, wut?

First, the map doesn't show what you claim it does.  I-10 on both sides of Houston is busier than I-40 across Arizona, and a lot of other major corridors.  It's in the same class as as I-40 across Oklahoma. 

Second, there's a heck of a lot more traffic on it than just Houston origin/destinations.  It's the most direct route from SoCal and Mexico to the huge markets of Florida.  5 million persons in SA and Austin, and some of those markets are fed by I-10 from SC, NC, southern GA, MS, LA.  Plenty of energy related cross traffic from mid and southern TX to Beaumont and LA.  Might want to visit H-GAC's website or contact them, I'm sure they have plenty of data about the amount of through traffic, and it ain't just a pittance. 

Third, a lot of the port related traffic has to slog across the Houston metro.  The distribution and sort warehouses where goods are transitioned from 40' international containers to trucks or 53' domestic containers are all over the area.  An increasing number in Katy and a bunch in SA (and of course DFW).  610 is often slower than taking I-10 through downtown for a lot of this.

Fourth, no, the vast majority of goods from the manufacturing interior of Mexico do not necessarily ship through ports.  Freight transportation isn't a one size fits all.  Low value goods more  often seek the cheapest route, high value often the fastest.  Plenty is trucked to FL or the Southeast rather than slow boats and multiple handlings, or the in between rail options.

Fifth, as to the non-truck traffic, just the portion of the Beaumont and southern LA diaspora that has moved to the west side of Houston provides plenty of I-10 traffic crossing inside the loop.  Back and forth to visit relatives, the annual repairs after said relatives get flooded again, LSU tailgating, nutria hunting season, etc. And I hear there might be a tourist draw or two for Texans in NOLA....

Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: armadillo speedbump on April 26, 2021, 06:29:08 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on April 26, 2021, 01:52:53 PM
Trucks use through routes far more than personal autos do, so it's a better measure than all traffic for this question.

You can also see on the map that relatively little traffic is being diverted from Houston down to Corpus or the Valley, both because freight is shipped from the Port of Houston to Veracruz or other Mexican terminals by water or rail (you see very little O&G truck traffic crossing the border), and because the majority of Mexico's population is best served by the I-10/I-35 route.

Even then, though, there is relatively little Mexican-American population east of Houston on the Gulf Coast (using Hispanic as a reasonable analog, Florida excepted):

(https://i.imgur.com/auhLVGX.png)

The places where there are higher percentages of Mexican-Americans east of Texas are better served by the I-35 corridor, and traffic counts show it.

LOL, double wut??

Unclear what point is attempting to be made.  Though I'll note that percentages can be very different than actual raw numbers.  Size matters.

No offense, but are you perhaps a college student?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: TXtoNJ on April 26, 2021, 08:13:25 PM
You're pretty smug for someone who doesn't know how to interpret basic data visualizations, I've got to say.

No offense, but have you lived on one of those large corridors, and compared the traffic to Houston? You sound like someone who hasn't left Texas much.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: armadillo speedbump on April 26, 2021, 10:23:32 PM
Good point, I've only lived and worked in Houston, San Antonio, Fort Worth, Little Rock, Nashville, Atlanta, and suburban Philly.  Masters level planning work plus 7 years with a Class I railroad.  Of course they don't know anything about freight movements... 

What's the reason for singling out Hispanics to try and illustrate why there is allegedly little through traffic on I-10 across Houston?  I see very little relevance.  Nonetheless, east of Houston (excluding Florida) there's almost 3 million Hispanics in Beaumont-PA, LA, MS, AL, GA, SC, and NC.  The fastest route between them and SA is I-10 through Houston.  For those crossing the border at Laredo, the all interstate route via SA is virtually the same timewise as using the 2-lanes and small towns of US59.  So what exactly is the point you're trying to make?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: sprjus4 on April 26, 2021, 11:01:00 PM
Quote from: armadillo speedbump on April 26, 2021, 10:23:32 PM
For those crossing the border at Laredo, the all interstate route via SA is virtually the same timewise as using the 2-lanes and small towns of US59.  So what exactly is the point you're trying to make?
Either way, going southwest on I-69 / US-59 or staying on I-10, you're going through Houston regardless.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: MaxConcrete on May 02, 2021, 05:56:21 PM
At Friday's meeting of the Texas Transportation Commission, Chairman Bruce Bugg mentioned that has met with Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner twice recently in person as part of the Commission's efforts to keep the project moving forward.
See opening remarks, comments begin at 23:00 http://txdot.swagit.com/play/04292021-553 (http://txdot.swagit.com/play/04292021-553)

The Commission approves eminent domain every month, and this month's list included 8 parcels for NHHIP. This is the first eminent domain action for NHHIP. Most of these parcels are small properties along IH-45 south of IH-69. However, multiple large buildings have already been acquired without eminent domain, including two along IH-10 on the north side of downtown.

Also, the Houston Chronicle recently reported that planning on the section of IH-69 between Spur 527 and SH 288 is proceeding.
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/Metro-set-to-spend-millions-to-make-sure-I-45-16118744.php?utm_campaign=CMS%20Sharing%20Tools%20(Premium)&utm_source=t.co&utm_medium=referral  (https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/Metro-set-to-spend-millions-to-make-sure-I-45-16118744.php?utm_campaign=CMS%20Sharing%20Tools%20(Premium)&utm_source=t.co&utm_medium=referral)

QuoteThough TxDOT has halted development of many segments, the portion along I-69 from Spur 527 to Texas 288 – which includes Wheeler – remains on pace for construction to start next year. Widening I-45 and redoing the downtown system is spread across many distinct but connected projects, and TxDOT had approvals and design ready for the first segments, but has halted development of the others until a lawsuit filed by Harris County and the federal review are settled.

This all seems to indicate that parts of the project are continuing to move forward while work on other parts has been suspended due to the lawsuit.

Below: The building with the graffiti, including the lower section in the foreground, has been acquired. This photo also shows some of the massive palm tree devastation which occurred everywhere in the Houston area due to the February freeze.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20210306-NHHIP-warehouse.jpg&hash=c6ec0fc87a9e4cc8109fded6140dc28a125d615f)

Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: kernals12 on May 04, 2021, 07:15:45 AM
I imagine the downtown rebuild is going to be the least controversial
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on May 04, 2021, 10:23:09 AM
I'm super happy to see this project moving forward. Now if we can just get the Hardy Toll road extension built. That is a tragedy they decided to "shelve"  that project.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: bwana39 on May 04, 2021, 10:52:32 AM
Quote from: kernals12 on May 04, 2021, 07:15:45 AM
I imagine the downtown rebuild is going to be the least controversial

As far as controversial in relationship to the activists, you are probably right.  There is a less vocal segment of the population who are dismayed at the idea that all the eggs are being in one basket. It is theoretically possible for one wreck to shut down all three downtown interstates.

The prospect of the construction bringing downtown to a crawl for a decade is also daunting.  There are some who believe the Pierce Elevated corridor should have a freeway of some sort whether it is just replace it, build a tunnel, or some other alternative.  While not everyone is on board for the downtown plan, it is probably going to meet minimal opposition.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on May 04, 2021, 11:06:24 AM
It would be prudent to build cut and cover tunnel bypass with limited portal access in the path of the pierce elevated. Id even support tolls. Do what Washington state did to the Alaskan Way Viaduct.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: MaxConcrete on May 04, 2021, 11:25:17 AM
Quote from: bwana39 on May 04, 2021, 10:52:32 AM
While not everyone is on board for the downtown plan, it is probably going to meet minimal opposition.
I don't like the loss of the Pierce Elevated as a transportation corridor, but this plan is a compromise with positives and negatives. Its removal is part of the comprehensive downtown plan and certain downtown interests really want it gone, so I think there's no chance of it being used for a transportation corridor, except maybe for pedestrian and bicycle.

It would be nice if the Pierce corridor could be used for managed lane connections through downtown. But I don't see that as a possibility.

While the Pierce Elevated had its pavement replaced in 1997 and still has plenty of life, it's not going to last forever. My concern is that if NNHIP does not move forward, the future of the Pierce Elevated will be need to be considered again at some point in the future. At that time in the future, the political climate could be even less favorable. For example, the anti-car/anti-road folks may have more power and demand its removal *without* a replacement and just route traffic on existing streets (or use existing IH-69 and and IH-10), similar to the effort to remove IH-345 in Dallas. So my view is that it's better to take what can be achieved now, rather than risk a much worse outcome in the future.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: CoreySamson on May 04, 2021, 03:44:04 PM
I'm one of those people that doesn't really like the idea of removing the Pierce Elevated. I like having the option of getting onto the interstate from anywhere in downtown and being able to drive around the downtown "loop" to get to the freeway I need to get on. I also don't like the idea of a single crash shutting down downtown. My idea for the Pierce elevated to solve its traffic would be to put the southbound lanes in a trench while having the northbound lanes on a new viaduct over the trench (almost like a cross between a double-decker freeway and the I-10/I-35 concurrency in San Antonio). This would allow for greater traffic flow.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: triplemultiplex on May 04, 2021, 08:04:49 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on May 04, 2021, 03:44:04 PM
I also don't like the idea of a single crash shutting down downtown.

That would have to be one spectacular crash to shut down multiple parallel carriageways.  :spin:
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: abqtraveler on May 04, 2021, 10:19:12 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on May 04, 2021, 11:25:17 AM
Quote from: bwana39 on May 04, 2021, 10:52:32 AM
While not everyone is on board for the downtown plan, it is probably going to meet minimal opposition.
I don't like the loss of the Pierce Elevated as a transportation corridor, but this plan is a compromise with positives and negatives. Its removal is part of the comprehensive downtown plan and certain downtown interests really want it gone, so I think there's no chance of it being used for a transportation corridor, except maybe for pedestrian and bicycle.

It would be nice if the Pierce corridor could be used for managed lane connections through downtown. But I don't see that as a possibility.

While the Pierce Elevated had its pavement replaced in 1997 and still has plenty of life, it's not going to last forever. My concern is that if NNHIP does not move forward, the future of the Pierce Elevated will be need to be considered again at some point in the future. At that time in the future, the political climate could be even less favorable. For example, the anti-car/anti-road folks may have more power and demand its removal *without* a replacement and just route traffic on existing streets (or use existing IH-69 and and IH-10), similar to the effort to remove IH-345 in Dallas. So my view is that it's better to take what can be achieved now, rather than risk a much worse outcome in the future.

The problem is if the NHHIP doesn't move forward, there will still be the push to remove the Pierce Elevated. There are not a whole lot of options in dealing with the Pierce Elevated, aside from maintaining and periodic rehabilitation of the viaduct to extend its service life. I recall driving on the Pierce Elevated through downtown Houston and noticed the high-rise buildings that go right up to the edge of the viaduct (not just one or two, but lots of buildings built right up against the Pierce Elevated), thus leaving zero room for expansion.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: In_Correct on May 05, 2021, 09:55:10 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on May 04, 2021, 08:04:49 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on May 04, 2021, 03:44:04 PM
I also don't like the idea of a single crash shutting down downtown.

That would have to be one spectacular crash to shut down multiple parallel carriageways.  :spin:

one spectacular deliberate crash. :spin:  :banghead:
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: bwana39 on May 06, 2021, 02:31:07 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on May 04, 2021, 08:04:49 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on May 04, 2021, 03:44:04 PM
I also don't like the idea of a single crash shutting down downtown.

That would have to be one spectacular crash to shut down multiple parallel carriageways.  :spin:

Or single gas tanker leaking from or a single semi dangling from the top flyover of the I-69/I-45 to I-10 /I-45 intersection...
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: achilles765 on May 17, 2021, 04:08:44 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on May 04, 2021, 08:04:49 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on May 04, 2021, 03:44:04 PM
I also don't like the idea of a single crash shutting down downtown.

That would have to be one spectacular crash to shut down multiple parallel carriageways.  :spin:

have you ever spent much time on the freeways here in Houston? it is very likely that this will happen once a month at least lol
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: bwana39 on May 17, 2021, 10:55:52 AM
Quote from: achilles765 on May 17, 2021, 04:08:44 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on May 04, 2021, 08:04:49 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on May 04, 2021, 03:44:04 PM
I also don't like the idea of a single crash shutting down downtown.

That would have to be one spectacular crash to shut down multiple parallel carriageways.  :spin:

have you ever spent much time on the freeways here in Houston? it is very likely that this will happen once a month at least lol

Not that much, but enough to agree with you. I will also give you that the freeways in Houston get cleared and reopened far faster than they do in North Texas.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: MaxConcrete on May 27, 2021, 07:27:37 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on May 02, 2021, 05:56:21 PM
The Commission approves eminent domain every month, and this month's list included 8 parcels for NHHIP. This is the first eminent domain action for NHHIP. Most of these parcels are small properties along IH-45 south of IH-69.

This month's eminent domain list includes another 8 properties for NNHIP. Seven are small properties, mostly less then 0.5 acre and mostly along IH 69 just north of IH 45.
https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/commission/2021/0527/7.pdf (https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/commission/2021/0527/7.pdf)

There is one large property, the Houston Police Department station on the southeast corner of IH45 and IH69. The building and parking lot include 3.6 acres. I'm surprised that eminent domain is needed to purchase a goverment property. I suppose TxDOT and the City of Houston could not agree on a price.

TxDOT recently had a meeting to solicit consultants for IH-69 south of IH-45 to SH 288. This presentation includes a couple of cross section views.
https://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot/ppd/meetings/05132021/presentation.pdf (https://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot/ppd/meetings/05132021/presentation.pdf)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: jadebenn on June 09, 2021, 08:32:46 PM
I hope they get an injunction against further property acquisitions/the new FHWA leadership shuts that down. This project shouldn't be moving forward until the lawsuit's settled.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 09, 2021, 09:00:58 PM
Quote from: jadebenn on June 09, 2021, 08:32:46 PM
I hope they get an injunction against further property acquisitions/the new FHWA leadership shuts that down. This project shouldn't be moving forward until the lawsuit's settled.
Nice first post. Hopefully you stay far away from any decision making process.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: jadebenn on June 09, 2021, 09:21:08 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 09, 2021, 09:00:58 PM
Quote from: jadebenn on June 09, 2021, 08:32:46 PM
I hope they get an injunction against further property acquisitions/the new FHWA leadership shuts that down. This project shouldn't be moving forward until the lawsuit's settled.
Nice first post. Hopefully you stay far away from any decision making process.
Nice welcoming to the forum. Hopefully you can learn to be more considerate of other people's opinions.

I don't see why it's radical to state that a project currently under scrutiny by the local and federal government shouldn't be continuing land acquisition at this time. Especially if it gets cancelled, which seems pretty likely to me considering how hostile said levels of government have become. Who's going to go to bat for this now? The county, which doesn't want it? The city, which doesn't want it? The federal government, which is very hostile to these kinds of projects under the new administration and has decided to make an example of this particular one? The only people in favor seem to be those at the state level, and while it's theoretically possible to ram this through... Why? Take those funds and go use them somewhere people actually want them used.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 09, 2021, 09:23:49 PM
Quote from: jadebenn on June 09, 2021, 09:21:08 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 09, 2021, 09:00:58 PM
Quote from: jadebenn on June 09, 2021, 08:32:46 PM
I hope they get an injunction against further property acquisitions/the new FHWA leadership shuts that down. This project shouldn't be moving forward until the lawsuit's settled.
Nice first post. Hopefully you stay far away from any decision making process.
Nice welcoming to the forum. Hopefully you can learn to be more considerate of other people's opinions.

I don't see why it's radical to state that a project currently under scrutiny by the local and federal government shouldn't be continuing land acquisition at this time. Especially if it gets cancelled, which seems pretty likely to me considering how hostile said levels of government have become. Who's going to go to bat for this now? The county, which doesn't want it? The city, which doesn't want it? The federal government, which is very hostile to these kinds of projects under the new administration and has decided to make an example of this particular one? The only people in favor seem to be those at the state level, and while it's theoretically possible to ram this through... Why? Take those funds and go use them somewhere people actually want them used.
It's not my job or duty to "welcome"  you. Plenty of other posters here for that. I'm responding to your ridiculous post wanting to further delay this project that will benefit hundreds of thousands of drivers who need results now.

The county and city should sure just say we don't want it and give a giant fuck you to the thousands of motorist who use this road. Great plan.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: jadebenn on June 09, 2021, 09:33:45 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 09, 2021, 09:23:49 PM
It's not my job or duty to "welcome"  you. Plenty of other posters here for that. I'm responding to your ridiculous post wanting to further delay this project that will benefit hundreds of thousands of drivers who need results now.

The county and city should sure just say we don't want it and give a giant fuck you to the thousands of motorist who use this road. Great plan.
The cost of living in the outer suburbs is traffic. If they don't want traffic, they shouldn't be living in the outer suburbs. The city has no obligation to cater to the suburbs' whims at the expense of its own residents, nor should it. All widening this road will do is stimulate further sprawl on the peripheries of the region until we're back at square one. I should know. I live in an outer ring suburb that's seen this exact thing happen (we're not really the outer ring anymore). So I can't blame the city for swinging negative on this project. I mean, it wouldn't really benefit me either. Maybe it'd be better for a few years, but all it'd do is push me further (relatively) into the city as new suburbs sprung up. That's not growth. That's a ponzi scheme.

Anyway, did some further digging, and it looks like the FHWA agrees with me on asking TxDOT to halt further property acquisitions.

[tweet]1399813701176287236[/tweet]
(https://i.imgur.com/RWAc0RI.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/t4dqpsB.jpg)

Evidently, this happened about 8 days ago, but I didn't hear about it 'till I looked at another forum. Correction, the letter's dated May 6th, so I have no idea what's happening there. I was going off the other forum's post date.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 09, 2021, 09:39:32 PM
Ah yes, the tired old induced demand argument and telling people if you don't like traffic then move. So that's your argument. Got it.

Either way, I'll reiterate my opinion and hope TxDOT pushes forward and this road is widened. More sprawl, freeways, and homes are good for me!
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: jadebenn on June 09, 2021, 09:48:06 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 09, 2021, 09:39:32 PM
Ah yes, the tired old induced demand argument and telling people if you don't like traffic then move. So that's your argument. Got it.

Either way, I'll reiterate my opinion and hope TxDOT pushes forward and this road is widened. More sprawl, freeways, and homes are good for me!
There's something ironic about a Los Angelite telling a Houstonian they should widen their urban freeways. :-D

Anyway, good luck. I don't think I've ever heard of a federal administration as anti-highway as this one. If it weren't for that, I'd definitely expect the project to proceed despite local opposition. With it, though...

Personally, I don't have a problem with freeways in general, though I do understand why the urban ones suck. My hot take is that Houston should just maintain the Pierce Elevated and I-45 as-is. Though if you want a really spicy take, I've heard there are a couple of groups convinced that with the viaduct as old as it is, they see an opportunity to a do a freeway removal by fait accompli if they block the I-45 rebuild. I'm a bit more hesitant about that possibility, though.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 09, 2021, 10:15:28 PM
You're not wrong about the current admin. While I do live in LA I am from OKC.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: jadebenn on June 09, 2021, 10:21:31 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 09, 2021, 10:15:28 PM
You're not wrong about the current admin. While I do live in LA I am from OKC.
Yeah, when the administration wants a program for federal matching funds for freeway removal in their infrastructure bill, it kind of shows how far the conversation has shifted, huh? I'm one of those naïve, young, college-aged urbanists, but my dislike of freeways ends at a city's outer loop, so I'm hoping we don't fling too far the other way (though I'm certain some would argue we already have).

As for the LA thing, that was just meant to be some light ribbing. :P While I do still live in Houston, and have so for many, many, years, I wasn't born here, and it's likely I won't be living here much longer.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 09, 2021, 10:27:56 PM
Quote from: jadebenn on June 09, 2021, 10:21:31 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 09, 2021, 10:15:28 PM
You're not wrong about the current admin. While I do live in LA I am from OKC.
Yeah, when the administration wants a program for federal matching funds for freeway removal in their infrastructure bill, it kind of shows how far the conversation has shifted, huh? I'm one of those naïve, young, college-aged urbanists, but my dislike of freeways ends at a city's outer loop, so I'm hoping we don't fling too far the other way (though I'm certain some would argue we already have).

As for the LA thing, that was just meant to be some light ribbing. :P While I do still live in Houston, and have so for many, many, years, I wasn't born here, and it's likely I won't be living here much longer.
Ah, I see. Yeah I think we'd probably agree more than not. If I came across harsh earlier sorry my vodka to juice ratio was a bit off and I can jump the gun sometimes.

I definitely think we need more transportation options in Houston than just cars. Keep in mind this projects adds many miles of trails and bike lanes. It also adds a grade separation for the red line to reduce end to end travel times. Houston needs to get on the ball with a serious mass transit network. DFW and Austin are doing just that. Houston, San Antonio, and dare I say El Paso, need to develop serious mass transit plans to compliment a real Texas triangle HSR system or else it won't matter if you still have to drive to the station anyways. That's my real beef with the current proposal for LA to Vegas HSR is it stopping in Victorville.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: In_Correct on June 09, 2021, 11:07:58 PM
QuoteNice first post.

QuoteNice welcoming to the forum.

:bigass: Welcome To AARoads Forum!  :bigass:

I had not checked that Message Board where people introduced them selves, but there have been several new people recently. I got you mixed up with them. And I got them mixed up with you.

QuoteAll widening this road will do is stimulate further sprawl on the peripheries of the region until we're back at square one.

Not exactly. Gentrification is much more likely to stimulate Sprawl. The traffic is increasing no matter where the Highways are located. The only thing about this project I am against is that they are trying to reroute traffic from Pierce Elevated. If they demolish it, that would be terrible. Texas needs to ban Freeway Removals. I also welcome Property Acquisitions since both the Highway and Rail systems badly need expansions and also Tolls. While Plutonic Panda might have been drinking, I am naturally grouchy.

QuotePersonally, I don't have a problem with freeways in general, though I do understand why the urban ones suck.

Reasons why they might suck includes:

They do not yet look like this:

https://i.imgur.com/XBAJ74O.jpg

They are not yet tolled.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 09, 2021, 11:26:22 PM
Are there any freeway removals in Texas that legitimately could use a removal? I can certainly agree with some of the removals like 375 in Detroit. I'm not completely anti freeway removal.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: jadebenn on June 09, 2021, 11:44:51 PM
There's no real isolated bits I'm aware of since Texas never had major freeway revolts, so anything you take away is going to be fairly integral to the system. Like, the Pierce and I-345 are less important than some others, but they're definitely functional. You don't have anything like the portion of I-395 in front of the capitol in DC, where you could make a fairly strong case that the incomplete stub is worse than not having it at all (since you're just concentrating the traffic before dumping it into an arterial all at once).
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 09, 2021, 11:46:34 PM
Even though many here have made the case to keep the Pierce, it's the only freeway I can think of where I'd remove it.

On the flip side, you could build a massive flood tank and build a freeway through it. As crazy as that sounds simply close it when flooding rain is in the forecast.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: jadebenn on June 09, 2021, 11:52:01 PM
It's not that crazy. A lot of the highways in Houston are intentionally built that way. I pass through a bunch of flood depth markers whenever I head downtown, and it's really not avoidable whenever you go below-grade in a city so prone to flooding, so you may as well design it in.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 10, 2021, 12:01:34 AM
Quote from: jadebenn on June 09, 2021, 11:52:01 PM
It's not that crazy. A lot of the highways in Houston are intentionally built that way. I pass through a bunch of flood depth markers whenever I head downtown, and it's really not avoidable whenever you go below-grade in a city so prone to flooding, so you may as well design it in.
That's my thought. I propose elevated heavy rail instead of subways but freeways can be more resilient to floods unless I'm mistaken. A full tunnel for the pierce would be a good alternative but I'd rather see the billions spent on a real heavy transit system for downtown Houston.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: jadebenn on June 10, 2021, 12:35:20 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 10, 2021, 12:01:34 AM
Quote from: jadebenn on June 09, 2021, 11:52:01 PM
It's not that crazy. A lot of the highways in Houston are intentionally built that way. I pass through a bunch of flood depth markers whenever I head downtown, and it's really not avoidable whenever you go below-grade in a city so prone to flooding, so you may as well design it in.
That's my thought. I propose elevated heavy rail instead of subways but freeways can be more resilient to floods unless I'm mistaken. A full tunnel for the pierce would be a good alternative but I'd rather see the billions spent on a real heavy transit system for downtown Houston.
Heavy rail in Houston would mean elevation, and elevation means a big NIMBY factor in this day and age, because people think we still build noisy claptraps like the Chicago El. I'd personally love to see it, but it'd be a hard sell politically.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: sprjus4 on June 10, 2021, 01:13:15 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 09, 2021, 11:26:22 PM
Are there any freeway removals in Texas that legitimately could use a removal? I can certainly agree with some of the removals like 375 in Detroit. I'm not completely anti freeway removal.
I could see downgrading I-37 between SH-286 and Shoreline Blvd (the first couple blocks is already at-grade) in Corpus Christi, once the Harbor Bridge replacement / relocation is done. That part of the freeway will no longer be needed for through traffic connecting to the bridge, merely an outlet into Downtown. Demolish some of the old overpasses and make it a surface boulevard like the last 2 blocks are.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Bobby5280 on June 10, 2021, 01:14:26 PM
Quote from: jadebennThe cost of living in the outer suburbs is traffic. If they don't want traffic, they shouldn't be living in the outer suburbs.

Stated as if living in the city center is practical and affordable for everybody.

Cost of housing is by far the biggest reason why people move farther away from a city center into the suburbs and exhurbs. Some people with lots of money do so since they can pay far less per square foot for a big home. Many others are priced out of the city center because the suburbs or exhurbs are the only places they can find anything remotely affordable to buy/rent that isn't located in a crime-filled combat zone.

The sheer absurdity of the real estate market today is showing what a crock of $#!+ the whole "new urbanist" concept has become. The ideology is completely out of touch with people who aren't rich or at least upper middle class. Many of the kinds of businesses new urbanists pitch as part of the city core utopia depend on lot of a low paid service industry workers. Where do the new urbanists expect these workers to live when buying or renting in the city core is getting to require a six figure income just to make ends meet? I can't see coffee shops paying baristas $50 per hour or better.

What we have happening instead is massive amounts of gentrification in city cores and the areas near the cores. Not everyone who gets shoved out of the core will stay in that region and agree to commute significant distances to work a $#!+-pay job. We already see large numbers of people leaving California and the Northeast US for destinations like Texas. And the misery index has been ramping up in Texas' biggest cities, so that might encourage migration to other places. We have a lot of speculative real estate buying nonsense going on here in Oklahoma now.

The whole sales pitch to convince everyone to live in the city core only works if everyone can afford to live there.

Quote from: Plutonic PandaI definitely think we need more transportation options in Houston than just cars. Keep in mind this projects adds many miles of trails and bike lanes. It also adds a grade separation for the red line to reduce end to end travel times. Houston needs to get on the ball with a serious mass transit network. DFW and Austin are doing just that. Houston, San Antonio, and dare I say El Paso, need to develop serious mass transit plans to compliment a real Texas triangle HSR system or else it won't matter if you still have to drive to the station anyways. That's my real beef with the current proposal for LA to Vegas HSR is it stopping in Victorville.

The United States has a far more fundamental problem: we don't know how to build anything related to passenger rail with a reasonable price tag. It all turns into an extreme cost boondoggle, especially high speed rail. Subways, light rail and commuter rail have similar problems with runaway costs.

The only kind of mass transit that can be deployed to cover most cities effectively is bus travel. There ain't any kind of romance or convenience about riding a city bus.

Quote from: In_CorrectNot exactly. Gentrification is much more likely to stimulate Sprawl. The traffic is increasing no matter where the Highways are located. The only thing about this project I am against is that they are trying to reroute traffic from Pierce Elevated. If they demolish it, that would be terrible. Texas needs to ban Freeway Removals. I also welcome Property Acquisitions since both the Highway and Rail systems badly need expansions and also Tolls. While Plutonic Panda might have been drinking, I am naturally grouchy.

The thing that should be happening is long range planning. Texas used to be really good at this in regards to highways. They would get the right of way secured where a freeway could be built decades into the future, but start out with either a 2 lane road with vacant land to the side or a divided highway/street with a large median in the middle.

The bad thing about the Pierce Elevated is lack of space for any expansion. The current, aging facility has 3 lanes in each direction with no inner left shoulder. I-45 needs to have at least 4 or 5 lanes in each direction. If the Pierce Elevated was re-built on the same spot no new lanes could be added.

In some respects high speed rail corridors are even more difficult to plan and acquire land for the route. A true 200mph+ HSR line requires paths that are extremely straight and only the most gradual of curves for any bends. That leaves far less room for error when a property owner whose land is in the proposed path refuses to sell. Highways and even freeways have a little more flexibility in how much they can bend to get around an obstacle.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: bwana39 on June 10, 2021, 03:33:59 PM
Texas used to be good at this.....
When we are taking about urban freeway corridors, it comes down to the economics from the sixties and seventies.  Build it as narrow as possible.  This is what they have to work with both with the Canyon in Dallas and the Pierce Elevated in Houston.

Another part of the difference between building an urban freeway in the sixties and today is there is opposition to building them. In the sixties, most of the opposition was poor renters who lived in and around the path. The owners as a whole were ready to move the properties. 

Today, there is much more resistance from a multitude or reasons. Ironically, the people in the downtown area who fought to insure the freeway didn't  bypass downtown are the very ones who want rid of them today . (I realize that the business interests were the powers back then and today it is two groups: The people who live in the urban center and the owners of curbside commercial properties.

The TXDOT handbook advises the districts to buy all of the right of way for a projected expansion at the start. Pretty much any reroute or significant upgrade of a US Highway or a potential freeway would be to buy ROW for 2/2/2/2 or 2/3/3/2 at minimum. This doesn't always happen, but when it does, it prevents problems down the line.



Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Bobby5280 on June 10, 2021, 11:55:00 PM
I'm not a fan at all of freeway removal campaigns in major cities that don't include a replacement that maintains or improves traffic moving capacity. The downtown Houston proposal that relocates I-45 would be a net improvement for I-45, I-10 and I-69 all while removing the Pierce Elevated. The new urbanist folks just want all the freeways removed and make it a costly and time consuming ordeal to visit the city core by auto.

The new urbanists oddly assume freeway removals would have no effect on the number of people visiting the city core either for work or leisure. It appears they did not notice certain trends that really took off in the 1980's and never really stopped. 40 years ago major companies and various other kinds of businesses discovered it was no longer necessary to be located in a downtown zone. More and more workers were being forced out to the suburbs and exhurbs to find the combination of more affordable housing in safer neighborhoods. Some companies decided get out of city center towers and open suburban corporate campuses.

Today not only is it no longer necessary for a big company to lease space in a downtown skyscraper it's no longer necessary for the big company to be located in a giant sized city. Technology is allowing most kinds of corporate business to be done anywhere. Considering our nation's declining birth rate it's likely more couples will prioritize living in a region where they can afford to start a family.

Anyway, with all that said, if the new urbanists make a city core a complete pain in the @$$ to ever visit then a lot of people will just stop visiting. That won't be so good for business in the city core.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: achilles765 on June 11, 2021, 01:29:16 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 09, 2021, 11:46:34 PM
Even though many here have made the case to keep the Pierce, it's the only freeway I can think of where I'd remove it.

On the flip side, you could build a massive flood tank and build a freeway through it. As crazy as that sounds simply close it when flooding rain is in the forecast.

the problem with that is that ANY rain here can be flooding rain.  and we never can completely know when its going to rain heavily haha.
The second problem with that idea is that the planned route is going to be the ONLY north-south route in the city center.  Surface streets often flood more quickly than the freeways, as long as the freeways are not depressed or below grade.  the freeway stretches that flood the most are the ones that are depressed: IH 45 near North Main, IH 69 through Montrose, Beltway 8 in Memorial City, most of 288.
The pierce elevated is also the only freeway with a choice of exits for downtown.  There is exactly one exit on IH 69 heading south, and only one heading north.  IH 10 only has one each direction as well.  But the Pierce Elevated allows one to exit onto McKinney, Dallas, Pierce (and the Dallas Street/Pierce Street Exit ramp is long and has exits for Bagby and a turn lane for Gray), Allen Parkway heading south; while the northbound side has that long ramp for IH 69/US 59/SH 288 which itself has exits to Scott Street, Emancipation Avenue, St Joseph Parkway, and Pease Street; Allen Parkway, and Houston Avenue/Memorial.
I have not yet seen anywhere what the planned exits and entrances are for this project.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: bwana39 on June 11, 2021, 08:04:41 AM
We keep talking about the infeasibility of a tunnel, but the fact is they are going to build a fully depressed roadway (with the goal of putting a deck park above it.) While it will only be about 20 to 25 feet below grade, it is still a tunnel for all practical purposes subject to the same flooding that a true tunnel would be. Arguments against a tunnel however well founded or not are moot.

As to the practical application, the Washburn Tunnel has stood since the fifties without flooding being a problem.  The Baytown tunnel had its problems, but flooding was not one of them. I will admit that the depressed portion of the Southwest Freeway DID flood during a hurricane some tears ago, but it is still in the same depressed canyon.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: TXtoNJ on June 11, 2021, 12:40:12 PM
Pierce needs to go - the plan as it exists is a good one, and only the most absolutist of roadgeeks could think otherwise.

QuoteThe pierce elevated is also the only freeway with a choice of exits for downtown.  There is exactly one exit on IH 69 heading south, and only one heading north.  IH 10 only has one each direction as well.  But the Pierce Elevated allows one to exit onto McKinney, Dallas, Pierce (and the Dallas Street/Pierce Street Exit ramp is long and has exits for Bagby and a turn lane for Gray), Allen Parkway heading south; while the northbound side has that long ramp for IH 69/US 59/SH 288 which itself has exits to Scott Street, Emancipation Avenue, St Joseph Parkway, and Pease Street; Allen Parkway, and Houston Avenue/Memorial.
I have not yet seen anywhere what the planned exits and entrances are for this project.

That's what the Downtown Connector is for. There are going to be practically no changes to the exits available - it's just the segment along Pierce that solely serves through traffic that will be rerouted.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: bwana39 on June 11, 2021, 02:04:11 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on June 11, 2021, 12:40:12 PM
Pierce needs to go - the plan as it exists is a good one, and only the most absolutist of roadgeeks could think otherwise.
****
That's what the Downtown Connector is for. There are going to be practically no changes to the exits available - it's just the segment along Pierce that solely serves through traffic that will be rerouted.

I agree with the exits available. ESPECIALLY coming in from and departing toward the north.  If only the elevated is removed.   
Going from south of downtown to the northwest part of downtown will be a little more inconvenient.

The through traffic will have a minimally longer route and a wider path. 

My personal qualms come down to a very negative experience in / around downtown Houston over 30 years ago.  I think it was US-59 and SH-288. (I certainly am not sure what highways it was. That is just my best guess.) They had that traffic pattern so that the two middle lanes had opposite direction traffic on both sides.  I had been drinking. My wife was driving (We were both less than 25 years old). It was disorienting for both of us. I just have a sour spot for that particular highway setup. It might be fine with barriers between it so  that you don't have oncoming headlights on both your right and left.


Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: jadebenn on June 12, 2021, 08:12:08 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on June 10, 2021, 11:55:00 PM
Anyway, with all that said, if the new urbanists make a city core a complete pain in the @$$ to ever visit then a lot of people will just stop visiting. That won't be so good for business in the city core.
Give me an example of this ever happening to a city not already in decline. Because plenty of modern cities have been selecting other modes of transportation over vehicular transportation, and this prediction hasn't happened. Vehicular traffic has been on a massive decline in Seattle, for example, so much that some people were calling the city's initiatives "the War on Cars" and the local economy didn't suffer for it. Or how about the legacy cities, or ones that had huge freeway revolts that prevented much of their local freeway networks being built. NYC has no urban freeways in the core, and DC tore up their freeway map and built a metro network instead. They're not exactly suffering for their lack of vehicular access. Sure, I'm certain the car commuters in those places want to tear their hair out, but why exactly should they be catered to at the expense of everyone else?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: sprjus4 on June 12, 2021, 09:49:08 PM
DC and New York City have good and reliable metro systems.

Houston...? Not really

Bad comparison.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: achilles765 on June 13, 2021, 05:43:24 AM
Quote from: bwana39 on June 11, 2021, 02:04:11 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on June 11, 2021, 12:40:12 PM
Pierce needs to go - the plan as it exists is a good one, and only the most absolutist of roadgeeks could think otherwise.
****
That's what the Downtown Connector is for. There are going to be practically no changes to the exits available - it's just the segment along Pierce that solely serves through traffic that will be rerouted.

I agree with the exits available. ESPECIALLY coming in from and departing toward the north.  If only the elevated is removed.   
Going from south of downtown to the northwest part of downtown will be a little more inconvenient.

The through traffic will have a minimally longer route and a wider path. 

My personal qualms come down to a very negative experience in / around downtown Houston over 30 years ago.  I think it was US-59 and SH-288. (I certainly am not sure what highways it was. That is just my best guess.) They had that traffic pattern so that the two middle lanes had opposite direction traffic on both sides.  I had been drinking. My wife was driving (We were both less than 25 years old). It was disorienting for both of us. I just have a sour spot for that particular highway setup. It might be fine with barriers between it so  that you don't have oncoming headlights on both your right and left.




I have heard a lot of people describing that stretch you just described.  I think it US 59 closer to IH 10 or that area; but that was totally redone years ago.  Im curious as to what it looked like before because I have a hard time picturing this.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: bwana39 on June 13, 2021, 08:14:23 AM
Quote from: achilles765 on June 13, 2021, 05:43:24 AM
Quote from: bwana39 on June 11, 2021, 02:04:11 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on June 11, 2021, 12:40:12 PM
Pierce needs to go - the plan as it exists is a good one, and only the most absolutist of roadgeeks could think otherwise.
****
That's what the Downtown Connector is for. There are going to be practically no changes to the exits available - it's just the segment along Pierce that solely serves through traffic that will be rerouted.

I agree with the exits available. ESPECIALLY coming in from and departing toward the north.  If only the elevated is removed.   
Going from south of downtown to the northwest part of downtown will be a little more inconvenient.

The through traffic will have a minimally longer route and a wider path. 

My personal qualms come down to a very negative experience in / around downtown Houston over 30 years ago.  I think it was US-59 and SH-288. (I certainly am not sure what highways it was. That is just my best guess.) They had that traffic pattern so that the two middle lanes had opposite direction traffic on both sides.  I had been drinking. My wife was driving (We were both less than 25 years old). It was disorienting for both of us. I just have a sour spot for that particular highway setup. It might be fine with barriers between it so  that you don't have oncoming headlights on both your right and left.




I have heard a lot of people describing that stretch you just described.  I think it US 59 closer to IH 10 or that area; but that was totally redone years ago.  Im curious as to what it looked like before because I have a hard time picturing this.

That was actually where I was thinking it was, I just cannot imagine what two freeways it was, so I assumed I just had the location mixed up. Country boy and girl (figuratively) lost in the city at night.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Bobby5280 on June 13, 2021, 04:00:40 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280Anyway, with all that said, if the new urbanists make a city core a complete pain in the @$$ to ever visit then a lot of people will just stop visiting. That won't be so good for business in the city core.

Quote from: jadebennGive me an example of this ever happening to a city not already in decline. Because plenty of modern cities have been selecting other modes of transportation over vehicular transportation, and this prediction hasn't happened.

We're getting into uncharted territory. California just experienced its first net loss of population in the state's history, nearly 200,000 people. People are migrating away from the Northeast states too. Downtown cores in America's biggest cities tend to be extremely expensive. It's not a good arrangement for young adult workers looking at starting families.

40 years ago in metros like DC and DFW major companies started building corporate campuses out in the suburbs closer to where more of their employees could live comfortably. Even in Seattle some major companies have their main offices built away from the city core. Under the current circumstances this kind of trend could accelerate. Removing a bunch of downtown freeways could actually increase suburban sprawl by making both housing and office space on the city outskirts even more attractive.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: Thegeet on June 16, 2021, 04:10:59 AM
Not sure if this is mentioned, but would TxDOT demolish the existing I-45 freeway from 69/59 to I-10? Or will it be a 3di?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: sprjus4 on June 16, 2021, 10:18:14 AM
Quote from: Thegeet on June 16, 2021, 04:10:59 AM
Not sure if this is mentioned, but would TxDOT demolish the existing I-45 freeway from 69/59 to I-10? Or will it be a 3di?
Yes.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: bwana39 on June 16, 2021, 11:01:10 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 16, 2021, 10:18:14 AM
Quote from: Thegeet on June 16, 2021, 04:10:59 AM
Not sure if this is mentioned, but would TxDOT demolish the existing I-45 freeway from 69/59 to I-10? Or will it be a 3di?
Yes.

No not exactly. They would demolish the part of the existing freeway called the Pierce Elevated.  This part runs from I-69 / US-59 on the south side of downtown to around Jefferson Street on the North side of downtown.  The freeway stub into downtown would remain from I-10 to flow into Pearce, Jefferson, and Pease.  There would be  city streets bridging the former freeway path with the freeway running around the East side of downtown adjacent to I-69 then I-10.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (all work suspended)
Post by: MaxConcrete on June 24, 2021, 09:57:02 AM
FHWA has officially halted virtually all work on the project. This appears to be separate and independent of the lawsuit against the project.

https://abc13.com/i-45-houston-downtown-project-north-highway-improvement-txdot/10824254/ (https://abc13.com/i-45-houston-downtown-project-north-highway-improvement-txdot/10824254/)
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/Federal-officials-tell-TxDOT-again-to-slow-down-16268146.php (https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/Federal-officials-tell-TxDOT-again-to-slow-down-16268146.php)

Now we need to see if the TxDOT commission will leave funding in place, or if NHHIP will be defunded and the funds distributed elsewhere. At the June 10 NCTCOG meeting director Morris said "We have a major push working with TxDOT headquarters to advance projects in Dallas-Fort Worth as other big projects in the rest of the state do not move forward. So, [name] and Mo and Carl and John and our office are working hard to get really big projects slotted for any opportunities that either Washington or Austin wish to advance (transportation projects)."
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (all work suspended)
Post by: abqtraveler on June 24, 2021, 11:39:05 AM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on June 24, 2021, 09:57:02 AM
FHWA has officially halted virtually all work on the project. This appears to be separate and independent of the lawsuit against the project.

https://abc13.com/i-45-houston-downtown-project-north-highway-improvement-txdot/10824254/ (https://abc13.com/i-45-houston-downtown-project-north-highway-improvement-txdot/10824254/)
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/Federal-officials-tell-TxDOT-again-to-slow-down-16268146.php (https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/Federal-officials-tell-TxDOT-again-to-slow-down-16268146.php)

Now we need to see if the TxDOT commission will leave funding in place, or if NHHIP will be defunded and the funds distributed elsewhere. At the June 10 NCTCOG meeting director Morris said "We have a major push working with TxDOT headquarters to advance projects in Dallas-Fort Worth as other big projects in the rest of the state do not move forward. So, [name] and Mo and Carl and John and our office are working hard to get really big projects slotted for any opportunities that either Washington or Austin wish to advance (transportation projects)."

An article I read this morning stated the FHWA is now stepping in to block TxDOT from acquiring the needed property to complete the NHHIP, and is conducting an audit of TxDOT's environmental review process. TxDOT is in a unique position where it has been delegated the authority to act as a Lead Agency for preparing NEPA documentation, unlike other states where the FHWA serves as the Lead Agency to sign off on the Final EIS and ROD. I would anticipate that following the FHWA's audit of TxDOT, they will probably strip TxDOT of their authority of sign off on EISs and RODs and pull that back to the FHWA.

I wouldn't say that the NHHIP is necessarily "dead," but I can see the FHWA stepping in an telling TxDOT to "go back to the drawing board and figure out a better solution...and oh by the way...you (TxDOT) will not be signing off on the EIS and ROD...we'll do that after you give us something we like." 

https://abc13.com/i-45-houston-downtown-project-north-highway-improvement-txdot/10824254/
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (all work suspended)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 24, 2021, 12:30:26 PM
It's been less than a year with the new admin and we have 3 major projects around the country essentially canceled now. FHWA "halted"  work on the 710 in LA and now Houston. The 495/270 P3 had been progressing for years and all the sudden has local MPO vote against it. I wonder what's next in this lovely trend.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (all work suspended)
Post by: bwana39 on June 25, 2021, 11:25:47 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 24, 2021, 12:30:26 PM
It's been less than a year with the new admin and we have 3 major projects around the country essentially canceled now. FHWA "halted"  work on the 710 in LA and now Houston. The 495/270 P3 had been progressing for years and all the sudden has local MPO vote against it. I wonder what's next in this lovely trend.


I doubt these will be the only ones. The current administration is anti-car which extrapolates to anti-highway.  Realistically they are unsure of what direction they want to go.  I think these stop work orders are as much about figuring out how to actually proceed as opposed to a true desire to not eventually do the work.

Sort of like We don't think this has been considered through the lens of how we think as opposed to them actually opposing it. (We being the administration)

I think time will tell.  Not sure it will be good, but it might not be as bad as we fear. (It could be even worse)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (all work suspended)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 25, 2021, 12:17:24 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on June 25, 2021, 11:25:47 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 24, 2021, 12:30:26 PM
It's been less than a year with the new admin and we have 3 major projects around the country essentially canceled now. FHWA "halted"  work on the 710 in LA and now Houston. The 495/270 P3 had been progressing for years and all the sudden has local MPO vote against it. I wonder what's next in this lovely trend.


I doubt these will be the only ones. The current administration is anti-car which extrapolates to anti-highway.  Realistically they are unsure of what direction they want to go.  I think these stop work orders are as much about figuring out how to actually proceed as opposed to a true desire to not eventually do the work.

Sort of like We don't think this has been considered through the lens of how we think as opposed to them actually opposing it. (We being the administration)

I think time will tell.  Not sure it will be good, but it might not be as bad as we fear. (It could be even worse)
Very good take on it.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Chris on June 25, 2021, 02:04:02 PM
As an outsider, I'm trying to understand the legal situation.

As I understand, the federal government can make rules about the environmental approval process if federal funding is involved, right? I've read about projects not taking up federal funding to avoid a lengthier process using EPA regulations.

How is this situation with I-45 in Houston? Is there federal involvement in funding or construction? If not, can the federal government overrule the state in approving and executing highway projects?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: sprjus4 on June 25, 2021, 02:57:01 PM
^ I believe it has to do with federal funding. Certainly a project of this size and scope would have some percentage of such.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: J N Winkler on June 25, 2021, 03:42:28 PM
Quote from: Chris on June 25, 2021, 02:04:02 PMAs I understand, the federal government can make rules about the environmental approval process if federal funding is involved, right? I've read about projects not taking up federal funding to avoid a lengthier process using EPA regulations.

AIUI, it is not possible to avoid federal involvement through 100% state/local funding if the project affects interests that are within federal jurisdiction, such as "waters of the United States" (a legal term of art that encompasses not just surface water but also any area with hydric soils, such as wetlands), properties of unusual cultural or historical interest, land owned directly by the federal government, etc.  This is because in order for construction to happen, the relevant federal agency must grant a permit, and this is considered an "action" that triggers a requirement for environmental review.

Declining federal funding for a controversial project is usually more about changing the shape of the federal review that happens than it is about avoiding it altogether.  For example, when Kansas DOT compiled a supplemental EIS for the South Lawrence Trafficway, the US Army Corps of Engineers served as the lead federal agency, rather than FHWA.  By planning to use 100% state funding for the project, KDOT pared back federal review to that required for a wetlands permit, which is within USACE jurisdiction.

Quote from: Chris on June 25, 2021, 02:04:02 PMHow is this situation with I-45 in Houston? Is there federal involvement in funding or construction? If not, can the federal government overrule the state in approving and executing highway projects?

I don't know the specifics for the NHHIP, but I would expect at minimum some involvement in permitting.  Even if a state chooses to decline federal funding, the federal government can put the state DOT in a world of hurt for building a project (or indeed undertaking any form of construction activity) when any necessary federal permits are not obtained.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: bwana39 on June 25, 2021, 05:13:59 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on June 25, 2021, 03:42:28 PM
Quote from: Chris on June 25, 2021, 02:04:02 PMAs I understand, the federal government can make rules about the environmental approval process if federal funding is involved, right? I've read about projects not taking up federal funding to avoid a lengthier process using EPA regulations.

AIUI, it is not possible to avoid federal involvement through 100% state/local funding if the project affects interests that are within federal jurisdiction, such as "waters of the United States" (a legal term of art that encompasses not just surface water but also any area with hydric soils, such as wetlands), properties of unusual cultural or historical interest, land owned directly by the federal government, etc.  This is because in order for construction to happen, the relevant federal agency must grant a permit, and this is considered an "action" that triggers a requirement for environmental review.

Declining federal funding for a controversial project is usually more about changing the shape of the federal review that happens than it is about avoiding it altogether.  For example, when Kansas DOT compiled a supplemental EIS for the South Lawrence Trafficway, the US Army Corps of Engineers served as the lead federal agency, rather than FHWA.  By planning to use 100% state funding for the project, KDOT pared back federal review to that required for a wetlands permit, which is within USACE jurisdiction.

Quote from: Chris on June 25, 2021, 02:04:02 PMHow is this situation with I-45 in Houston? Is there federal involvement in funding or construction? If not, can the federal government overrule the state in approving and executing highway projects?

I don't know the specifics for the NHHIP, but I would expect at minimum some involvement in permitting.  Even if a state chooses to decline federal funding, the federal government can put the state DOT in a world of hurt for building a project (or indeed undertaking any form of construction activity) when any necessary federal permits are not obtained.

TXDOT has an arrangement where they conducted the EI studies in house. One of the possibilities is the Fed may want to reclaim the EIS processes.  (Results were submitted to the Feds for concurrence.) Seldom was there pushback.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (all work suspended)
Post by: jadebenn on June 27, 2021, 01:33:59 AM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on June 24, 2021, 09:57:02 AM
FHWA has officially halted virtually all work on the project. This appears to be separate and independent of the lawsuit against the project.

https://abc13.com/i-45-houston-downtown-project-north-highway-improvement-txdot/10824254/ (https://abc13.com/i-45-houston-downtown-project-north-highway-improvement-txdot/10824254/)
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/Federal-officials-tell-TxDOT-again-to-slow-down-16268146.php (https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/Federal-officials-tell-TxDOT-again-to-slow-down-16268146.php)

Now we need to see if the TxDOT commission will leave funding in place, or if NHHIP will be defunded and the funds distributed elsewhere. At the June 10 NCTCOG meeting director Morris said "We have a major push working with TxDOT headquarters to advance projects in Dallas-Fort Worth as other big projects in the rest of the state do not move forward. So, [name] and Mo and Carl and John and our office are working hard to get really big projects slotted for any opportunities that either Washington or Austin wish to advance (transportation projects)."
I just found out about this today.

My guess is that's exactly what's going to happen. TxDOT's going to take the money and redistribute it elsewhere.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 27, 2021, 03:48:29 AM
So the downtown portion is canceled as well?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on June 27, 2021, 11:17:56 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 27, 2021, 03:48:29 AM
So the downtown portion is canceled as well?

Nothing is officially canceled at this point. Everything is on hold and under review. I think the downtown work has the best chance of proceeding since it appears to have less opposition and also has features the anti-freeway folks like, such as retirement of the Pierce Elevated and sinking two miles of freeway below ground.

Also, right of way acquisition so far has focused on the downtown work. For example, demolition of the large office building along Interstate 10 is nearly complete.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20201106-NHHIP-ROW-a.jpg&hash=e6425faffc1fe51d8c1c3d39157ed65dd29488f3)
Above: November 6, 2020

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20210627-demolition.jpg&hash=00c1592bd928e04ea353a08847d21954b47ae3b1)
Above: June 26, 2021
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: TXtoNJ on June 27, 2021, 02:14:07 PM
My guess is that the downtown work proceeds as planned, and everything else will be reduced to no capacity added work, possibly looking something like the US 75 Central Expressway in Dallas.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 27, 2021, 02:29:19 PM
If TxDOT doesn't add any capacity due to neighboring opposition than they ought to add tolls to this stretch of Highway alone and toll it accordingly to keep it free flowing. Maybe the neighbors who put up such a stink will like that.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: jadebenn on June 27, 2021, 03:01:15 PM
It would never, ever in a million years happen politically, but I'd honestly be in favor of repealing the gas tax and replacing it with tolls. The idea that the gas tax has served as an effective user fee hasn't been true for decades now, if it was ever.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: TXtoNJ on June 27, 2021, 03:46:21 PM
Quote from: jadebenn on June 27, 2021, 03:01:15 PM
It would never, ever in a million years happen politically, but I'd honestly be in favor of repealing the gas tax and replacing it with tolls. The idea that the gas tax has served as an effective user fee hasn't been true for decades now, if it was ever.

Keep the gas tax, but recategorize it as a kilowatt-hour tax, apply equally to all energy forms.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 27, 2021, 05:00:18 PM
I'm honestly not a fan of tolls as I've said multiple times on this forum however I'd fully be in favor of TxDOT not adding a single lane on the north stretch where the most opposition was and adding tolls. It isn't to retaliate against the nearby opposition but if they don't want to support anything else besides saying no and being "unconstructive"  and TxDOT in good faith has presented multiple alternatives then fuck it. Add congestion pricing.

Another option is adding tunnels or a roadway beneath I-45 in similar fashion to the 635 expansion in Dallas. Although that'd likely be a multi billion dollar venture in its own requiring a completely new EIS and become its own separate project.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on June 27, 2021, 05:45:02 PM
Quote from: jadebenn on June 27, 2021, 03:01:15 PM
It would never, ever in a million years happen politically, but I'd honestly be in favor of repealing the gas tax and replacing it with tolls. The idea that the gas tax has served as an effective user fee hasn't been true for decades now, if it was ever.

I think we're going to wind up with a per mile fee. Connecticut already has passed a law creating one for trucks.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on June 27, 2021, 05:46:16 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on June 27, 2021, 03:46:21 PM
Quote from: jadebenn on June 27, 2021, 03:01:15 PM
It would never, ever in a million years happen politically, but I'd honestly be in favor of repealing the gas tax and replacing it with tolls. The idea that the gas tax has served as an effective user fee hasn't been true for decades now, if it was ever.

Keep the gas tax, but recategorize it as a kilowatt-hour tax, apply equally to all energy forms.

Why?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: TXtoNJ on June 27, 2021, 06:35:54 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on June 27, 2021, 05:46:16 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on June 27, 2021, 03:46:21 PM
Quote from: jadebenn on June 27, 2021, 03:01:15 PM
It would never, ever in a million years happen politically, but I'd honestly be in favor of repealing the gas tax and replacing it with tolls. The idea that the gas tax has served as an effective user fee hasn't been true for decades now, if it was ever.

Keep the gas tax, but recategorize it as a kilowatt-hour tax, apply equally to all energy forms.

Why?

The only people who benefit from user fees that aren't energy taxes are the trucking companies who are already heavily subsidized for the road use, based on the relative damage done to the road surface. With the increase in EV use, converting the gas tax to an overall energy tax ensures that infrastructure funding declines evenly, rather than starkly, until we get to the point that energy taxes can be raised to fully cover the cost of maintenance and expansion.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: In_Correct on June 28, 2021, 01:30:54 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 27, 2021, 02:29:19 PM
If TxDOT doesn’t add any capacity due to neighboring opposition than they ought to add tolls to this stretch of Highway alone and toll it accordingly to keep it free flowing. Maybe the neighbors who put up such a stink will like that.

I am delighted that you typed this.

Quote from: jadebenn on June 27, 2021, 03:01:15 PM
It would never, ever in a million years happen politically, but I'd honestly be in favor of repealing the gas tax and replacing it with tolls. The idea that the gas tax has served as an effective user fee hasn't been true for decades now, if it was ever.

Not necessary to repeal the Gas Tax. How ever, there must be a National Toll Road Authority. They can convert every Superhighway into Beautiful Toll Roads.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 28, 2021, 02:51:21 PM
Quote from: In_Correct on June 28, 2021, 01:30:54 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 27, 2021, 02:29:19 PM
If TxDOT doesn't add any capacity due to neighboring opposition than they ought to add tolls to this stretch of Highway alone and toll it accordingly to keep it free flowing. Maybe the neighbors who put up such a stink will like that.

I am delighted that you typed this.

Quote from: jadebenn on June 27, 2021, 03:01:15 PM
It would never, ever in a million years happen politically, but I'd honestly be in favor of repealing the gas tax and replacing it with tolls. The idea that the gas tax has served as an effective user fee hasn't been true for decades now, if it was ever.

Not necessary to repeal the Gas Tax. How ever, there must be a National Toll Road Authority. They can convert every Superhighway into Beautiful Toll Roads.
I figured you'd get a kick out of that. Absolutely no way it happens ever in Texas– converting a free road to a toll road. In this case I'd support it.

If a nationwide toll system is ever realized in a replacement to the gas tax then all fuel taxes should be banned and the expectation of quality should go way up. Many roads like I-40 and I-70 should have their speed limits removed after upgrades are made to rural parts creating no speed limit zones. This should coincide with a more strict driver license testing rules.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: vdeane on June 28, 2021, 09:42:14 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on June 27, 2021, 05:46:16 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on June 27, 2021, 03:46:21 PM
Quote from: jadebenn on June 27, 2021, 03:01:15 PM
It would never, ever in a million years happen politically, but I'd honestly be in favor of repealing the gas tax and replacing it with tolls. The idea that the gas tax has served as an effective user fee hasn't been true for decades now, if it was ever.

Keep the gas tax, but recategorize it as a kilowatt-hour tax, apply equally to all energy forms.

Why?
Because it's the best, most efficient way to structure things?  Taxes should be as invisible and painless as possible.  Slapping a bill on motorists once a year goes against that.  They should also be minimally invasive.  The way tolls slap a bill on people and lead to issues like transponder discrimination and lack of interoperability are self-evident.  Regarding a mileage tax, you're building a whole new bureaucracy to administer this thing and slapping a big bill on motorists once a year.  Not every state has annual inspections, so this would have to be filed annually, like taxes.  Do you know anyone who likes doing taxes?  I don't.  And how do you propose to solve the issue of people faking odometer readings?  Or the issue of driving out of state?  I don't want a GPS in my car tracking my every move.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: hotdogPi on June 28, 2021, 09:44:47 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 28, 2021, 09:42:14 PM
Or the issue of driving out of state?

I've never understood why this is an issue. Can't they just make the tax go to the home location (state/province/etc.) regardless of where the driving was?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Revive 755 on June 28, 2021, 09:57:40 PM
Quote from: Chris on June 25, 2021, 02:04:02 PM
How is this situation with I-45 in Houston? Is there federal involvement in funding or construction? If not, can the federal government overrule the state in approving and executing highway projects?

FHWA gets greater say on projects involving most interstates no matter the funding.  The one exception I am aware of being the tollways signed as interstates in Illinois.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: vdeane on June 28, 2021, 10:19:58 PM
Quote from: 1 on June 28, 2021, 09:44:47 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 28, 2021, 09:42:14 PM
Or the issue of driving out of state?

I've never understood why this is an issue. Can't they just make the tax go to the home location (state/province/etc.) regardless of where the driving was?
If I'm driving across the country, why should New York get the money for all those miles?

This is going to be a particular issue for pass-through states and areas with significant cross-state commuter traffic.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: bwana39 on June 29, 2021, 12:18:46 PM
I know this is a non-starter, but the motor fuels tax is too low. It has not increased in years . All the while, the overall fuel economy has gotten better. Which means the only reason it is up at all is the increase of miles driven. The fuel tax cost per vehicle mile is actually down significantly.

The state motor fuels tax  historically was a premium tax similar to hotel / motel, car rental, or the Texarkana , Arkansas' 12% tax on restaurant meals. It should be at least as much as the regular sales taxes. In Texas, based on $3.00 per gallon, that should be just under 27 cents per gallon.  About 1/3rd more.

As to the shift to electric vehicles, in the long run, there is going to have to be allowance for that in the tax model. In the short run, perhaps to encourage the adaption of these (supposedly) less polluting vehicles, there should be just a nominal fee per year. After they gain in popularity, then the tax equation should be tweaked.  I know no-one loves a free-rider, but there are lots of them on the tax landscape. Some exemptions / credits are helpful and others solely benefit the receiver of the benefit.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on June 30, 2021, 01:53:19 PM
At today's commission meeting, the commission decided to receive public comment on the removal of funding for NHHIP. Comment will be received starting July 9, and the plan is to have a decision at the August meeting (at the end of August).

From the tone of comments from Chairman Bugg and Houston Commissioner Ryan, it sounds like they are ready to defund NHHIP. Public comment appears to be a necessary step before they can defund.

It was mentioned that $503 million has been spent over the last 15 years for project development.

My take: the project will be officially canceled unless there is a drastic change in circumstances in July, including FHWA clearance to resume work and the Harris County lawsuit dropped. I don't see either of those happening.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: jadebenn on June 30, 2021, 05:08:34 PM
I feel bad for and sympathize with all the people who have worked on and supported this project for about a decade and a half, only to see it fall apart in the final stretch. I've been on that side of the battle with other projects. It's not a good feeling at all.

I do wish there was a way to redefine the project objectives without tearing up the whole EIS process and starting from scratch. Tastes and opinions have clearly changed since the project was originally approved, and it'd be nice if there was a better way to accommodate that than a process that's made this pretty much a "take it or leave it" decision.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: TXtoNJ on June 30, 2021, 06:33:21 PM
Houston's never going to get out of its own way
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Anthony_JK on June 30, 2021, 07:13:09 PM
Welp....if that is the case, they need to keep the Allen Elevated open.

Unless, of course, the real plans of the New Urbanists now that they've tanked the NHHIP is to flatten every freeway inside of the I-610 loop and convert them all to surface boulevards and light rail corridors in order to "save the downtown".
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on June 30, 2021, 08:10:53 PM
I said it before and I'll say it again; transportation funding should be devolved to the state level.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: vdeane on June 30, 2021, 09:44:34 PM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on June 30, 2021, 07:13:09 PM
Welp....if that is the case, they need to keep the Allen Elevated open.

Unless, of course, the real plans of the New Urbanists now that they've tanked the NHHIP is to flatten every freeway inside of the I-610 loop and convert them all to surface boulevards and light rail corridors in order to "save the downtown".
I think it's safe to say that the ultimate goal of the Urbanists and the current administration in Washington is to do exactly that.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: jadebenn on July 01, 2021, 12:48:42 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 30, 2021, 09:44:34 PM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on June 30, 2021, 07:13:09 PM
Welp....if that is the case, they need to keep the Allen Elevated open.

Unless, of course, the real plans of the New Urbanists now that they've tanked the NHHIP is to flatten every freeway inside of the I-610 loop and convert them all to surface boulevards and light rail corridors in order to "save the downtown".
I think it's safe to say that the ultimate goal of the Urbanists and the current administration in Washington is to do exactly that.
I doubt that. But unpopular opinion (here): The city would be better for it.

But honestly, I think a big issue with the project here was the messaging around it. It was sold as being another highway expansion, probably because people thought that would play better for public support. That might have been true in 2005 when this project started, but my personal take on public opinion now is that Houston's pretty burnt out on highway expansion projects. Most of them were sold as congestion-reducing measures, and while any traffic engineer knows that the throughput was what they were really after, that's not the impression the public got. So it's hard to get people excited for another big highway project when they feel like the past ones didn't actually help them out (incorrectly or otherwise).

But I think there was a missed opportunity to emphasize that this was more of a rerouting. You could've gotten some people onboard that are normally against this kind of project. But it felt like that was an afterthought (especially with how little of the Pierce was actually planned to be removed), so it didn't really help build a coalition like it could've.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: bwana39 on July 01, 2021, 06:07:47 PM
Quote from: jadebenn on July 01, 2021, 12:48:42 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 30, 2021, 09:44:34 PM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on June 30, 2021, 07:13:09 PM
Welp....if that is the case, they need to keep the Allen Elevated open.

Unless, of course, the real plans of the New Urbanists now that they've tanked the NHHIP is to flatten every freeway inside of the I-610 loop and convert them all to surface boulevards and light rail corridors in order to "save the downtown".
I think it's safe to say that the ultimate goal of the Urbanists and the current administration in Washington is to do exactly that.
I doubt that. But unpopular opinion (here): The city would be better for it.

But honestly, I think a big issue with the project here was the messaging around it. It was sold as being another highway expansion, probably because people thought that would play better for public support. That might have been true in 2005 when this project started, but my personal take on public opinion now is that Houston's pretty burnt out on highway expansion projects. Most of them were sold as congestion-reducing measures, and while any traffic engineer knows that the throughput was what they were really after, that's not the impression the public got. So it's hard to get people excited for another big highway project when they feel like the past ones didn't actually help them out (incorrectly or otherwise).

But I think there was a missed opportunity to emphasize that this was more of a rerouting. You could've gotten some people onboard that are normally against this kind of project. But it felt like that was an afterthought (especially with how little of the Pierce was actually planned to be removed), so it didn't really help build a coalition like it could've.

The real contention is with the part North of the I-45 / I-10 Split. There was not a whole lot of opposition to the re-route around downtown and the Pierce Elevated removal. Most of the part of the near northside of downtown has already been purchased.

All of the Pierce elevated was to be removed. What you mean is how little of the existent I-45 was being removed. The original North Freeway downtown feeder / collector was to be left in place
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on July 02, 2021, 09:51:52 PM
It appears like FHWA is going to do whatever it takes to kill NHHIP. A letter in the agenda for next week's NCTCOG meeting says that FHWA is blocking approval of the entire statewide transportation improvement plan due to inclusion of a certain project. While the project is not named, it is almost surely NHHIP. See item 4.1
https://www.nctcog.org/nctcg/media/Transportation/Committees/RTC/2021/agenda-packet-jul.pdf?ext=.pdf (https://www.nctcog.org/nctcg/media/Transportation/Committees/RTC/2021/agenda-packet-jul.pdf?ext=.pdf)

"It is our understanding that USDOT and TxDOT are at an impasse on approval of the Transportation Improvement Program in Texas.
...
Federal approval of the STIP has extended past the originally anticipated timeframe, and projects slated for FY 2021 and early FY 2022 implementation are being delayed.
...
Without STIP approval, agreements for these projects cannot be executed, nor can procurements be finalized. Approval is being delayed by a single project not in our region. Please help us expedite approval of the 2021-2024 STIP to enable these important projects to proceed to implementation."

Of course, this is very distressing to everyone around the state whose projects are delayed due to NHHIP.

This further suggests that NHHIP is going to be defunded in the 2022 UTP.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on July 02, 2021, 11:32:26 PM
Has something like that ever happened before? This is bloody ridiculous. I'm really starting to think their beef has absolutely nothing to do with the north section in particular just not wanting to widen a freeway at all including the downtown section. This is infuriating.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: TXtoNJ on July 03, 2021, 11:16:35 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 02, 2021, 11:32:26 PM
Has something like that ever happened before? This is bloody ridiculous. I'm really starting to think their beef has absolutely nothing to do with the north section in particular just not wanting to widen a freeway at all including the downtown section. This is infuriating.

Pete's trying to make a splash. He still wants to be president, after all.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: bwana39 on July 03, 2021, 12:52:36 PM
Cities: There are people in major US Cities especially New York, L.A., and Washington who never leave their cities. Their cities are an island. They have no idea how the city interacts with the rest of the world. All they can see is their city.

In the fifties, sixties, and seventies,  the leaders in the cities were people who had gotten higher education after WWI and WWII. These men in large portion had grown up dispersed through rural communities (small town and farms). They understood how the transportation grid affected the United States as a whole.  For a lot of the people who grew up in the cities and did not travel back to the rural areas, this was not the case. ( I knew a MSGT in the army who said he had never been out of NYC before he went to boot camp. He said he rarely had left Bed-Stuy for other parts of the City. The plains of Kansas and even rural Maryland were huge culture shocks.)

I can explain this concept with an illustration. I had a friend who was a city girl. She only bought cut up chicken pieces. Her reason was she was squeamish with a whole (grocery store) chicken because she could envision that it had been a living animal but not with the pieces. On the other hand, I have killed and cleaned chickens, squirrel, fish, frogs, pigs, deer, etc. To me it is not a big deal.  The point is two different perspectives of the same process. (Maybe I should have used the live or dressed chickens comparison?)

For these city residents, the city is more than just the center of their world, it is the entire world as their point of reference.

Then there is a perspective of what government is supposed to do. In discussion of the inner city connector in Shreveport, the topic actually centered more on what the same money invested in the community could / would do in the community not a particular objection to the freeway.  I also think we tend to think of ghettos in terms of squalor.  A ghetto is a place where people of a particular ethnicity, race, religious expression, or other common denominator live. At times, we think it is purely a function of economics or SES. That isn't universally or even generally true. When we think about the term "wealthy enclave" we don't think ghetto, but it is indeed a ghetto. put in or restrict to an isolated or segregated area or group..  Just like a wealthy enclave, many (perhaps most) minority enclaves exist because of choice.

As much as the people in the ghettos and other lower income communities scream about roads coming through "their" communities, the real issue they face (and when faced with it they will agree) is gentrification and the rent / purchase cost increases that comes with it.

Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Thegeet on July 03, 2021, 02:02:46 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on July 02, 2021, 09:51:52 PM
It appears like FHWA is going to do whatever it takes to kill NHHIP. A letter in the agenda for next week's NCTCOG meeting says that FHWA is blocking approval of the entire statewide transportation improvement plan due to inclusion of a certain project. While the project is not named, it is almost surely NHHIP. See item 4.1
https://www.nctcog.org/nctcg/media/Transportation/Committees/RTC/2021/agenda-packet-jul.pdf?ext=.pdf (https://www.nctcog.org/nctcg/media/Transportation/Committees/RTC/2021/agenda-packet-jul.pdf?ext=.pdf)

"It is our understanding that USDOT and TxDOT are at an impasse on approval of the Transportation Improvement Program in Texas.
...
Federal approval of the STIP has extended past the originally anticipated timeframe, and projects slated for FY 2021 and early FY 2022 implementation are being delayed.
...
Without STIP approval, agreements for these projects cannot be executed, nor can procurements be finalized. Approval is being delayed by a single project not in our region. Please help us expedite approval of the 2021-2024 STIP to enable these important projects to proceed to implementation."

Of course, this is very distressing to everyone around the state whose projects are delayed due to NHHIP.

This further suggests that NHHIP is going to be defunded in the 2022 UTP.
Are there any others projects that may suffer from this?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on July 03, 2021, 02:26:49 PM
Quote from: Thegeet on July 03, 2021, 02:02:46 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on July 02, 2021, 09:51:52 PM
It appears like FHWA is going to do whatever it takes to kill NHHIP.
Are there any others projects that may suffer from this?

In the short term it appears that projects in DFW and elsewhere will be delayed until the approval is received.

The best-case scenario is that the impasse is resolved soon and only NHHIP is affected. But with the apparent new activist policy at FHWA, I am concerned that FHWA could start targeting other projects, such as the Interstate 30 work in Dallas. Or they may try to derail the Interstate 35 project in Austin, as it is still in the environmental study phase. It seems like any freeway project in an urban area could be at risk.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: sprjus4 on July 03, 2021, 02:39:39 PM
What a joke, honestly. The current administration is so blind sighted to the necessity of the majority of these projects, and using straight up politics to get sorely needed improvements canceled in the name of activism and this unrealistic lifestyle without cars.

The FHWA shouldn't be swayed by what party is in charge, etc. but that's bureaucrats and DC for you.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: TXtoNJ on July 03, 2021, 02:49:00 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2021, 02:39:39 PM
What a joke, honestly. The current administration is so blind sighted to the necessity of the majority of these projects, and using straight up politics to get sorely needed improvements canceled in the name of activism and this unrealistic lifestyle without cars.

That's not why they're doing it though - it's paying off constituents who don't want the expansion, and punishing the (largely suburban and developer) opponents who do. Ideology is just the window dressing
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on July 03, 2021, 02:56:44 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on July 03, 2021, 02:49:00 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2021, 02:39:39 PM
What a joke, honestly. The current administration is so blind sighted to the necessity of the majority of these projects, and using straight up politics to get sorely needed improvements canceled in the name of activism and this unrealistic lifestyle without cars.

That's not why they're doing it though - it's paying off constituents who don't want the expansion, and punishing the (largely suburban and developer) opponents who do. Ideology is just the window dressing
If that were the case wouldn't they support the commuters as there are much more of them?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: vdeane on July 03, 2021, 10:10:42 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 02, 2021, 11:32:26 PM
Has something like that ever happened before? This is bloody ridiculous. I'm really starting to think their beef has absolutely nothing to do with the north section in particular just not wanting to widen a freeway at all including the downtown section. This is infuriating.
The overall goal of the feds trying to kill a project that they don't like due to politics is not that different from the Trump administration doing all it could to stonewall the Gateway project and congestion pricing in NYC.  The latter even including withholding approval for a required EIS!

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 03, 2021, 02:56:44 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on July 03, 2021, 02:49:00 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2021, 02:39:39 PM
What a joke, honestly. The current administration is so blind sighted to the necessity of the majority of these projects, and using straight up politics to get sorely needed improvements canceled in the name of activism and this unrealistic lifestyle without cars.

That's not why they're doing it though - it's paying off constituents who don't want the expansion, and punishing the (largely suburban and developer) opponents who do. Ideology is just the window dressing
If that were the case wouldn't they support the commuters as there are much more of them?
The core voting block for the Democrats are those urban people who were mentioned that never leave their home cities and seldom even leave their neighborhood.  The entire underpinning of the freeway removal movement rests on an ideology that believes that the interests of anyone outside of the city (not metro area - the core city itself) the road passes through are not valid.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Anthony_JK on July 04, 2021, 02:04:23 AM
Quote from: bwana39 on July 01, 2021, 06:07:47 PM
Quote from: jadebenn on July 01, 2021, 12:48:42 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 30, 2021, 09:44:34 PM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on June 30, 2021, 07:13:09 PM
Welp....if that is the case, they need to keep the Allen Elevated open.

Unless, of course, the real plans of the New Urbanists now that they've tanked the NHHIP is to flatten every freeway inside of the I-610 loop and convert them all to surface boulevards and light rail corridors in order to "save the downtown".
I think it's safe to say that the ultimate goal of the Urbanists and the current administration in Washington is to do exactly that.
I doubt that. But unpopular opinion (here): The city would be better for it.

But honestly, I think a big issue with the project here was the messaging around it. It was sold as being another highway expansion, probably because people thought that would play better for public support. That might have been true in 2005 when this project started, but my personal take on public opinion now is that Houston's pretty burnt out on highway expansion projects. Most of them were sold as congestion-reducing measures, and while any traffic engineer knows that the throughput was what they were really after, that's not the impression the public got. So it's hard to get people excited for another big highway project when they feel like the past ones didn't actually help them out (incorrectly or otherwise).

But I think there was a missed opportunity to emphasize that this was more of a rerouting. You could've gotten some people onboard that are normally against this kind of project. But it felt like that was an afterthought (especially with how little of the Pierce was actually planned to be removed), so it didn't really help build a coalition like it could've.

The real contention is with the part North of the I-45 / I-10 Split. There was not a whole lot of opposition to the re-route around downtown and the Pierce Elevated removal. Most of the part of the near northside of downtown has already been purchased.

All of the Pierce elevated was to be removed. What you mean is how little of the existent I-45 was being removed. The original North Freeway downtown feeder / collector was to be left in place

If most of the opposition locally was to the mass displacements on I-45 north of I-10, as well as not enough emphasis on mass transit alternatives, then what does that say for H-GAC's and TXDOT's decision to withdraw the Hardy Toll Road extension to I-10/I-69/US 59?? That would have possibly mitigated plenty of the need for reconstructing that section. Also, there is the northeast quadrant of the Sam Houston Tollway between I-69 and I-10 that is essentially underutilized.

I'm guessing it's an issue of TxDOT underestimating local opposition to highways-only based transportation development and biting off more than they thought they could chew.

No, I don't think most local opponents of the NHHIP really do want to level every freeway inside 610, but there are plenty of New Urbanism advocates licking their chops about attempting to transform major US cities' transpo systems into the fantasies of Paris or Scandanavian systems. I'm an advocate of more balance through more use of rail and bus based transit, but not to the point of ripping down needed freeways that serve major areas.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on July 04, 2021, 08:16:31 AM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on July 04, 2021, 02:04:23 AM
Quote from: bwana39 on July 01, 2021, 06:07:47 PM
Quote from: jadebenn on July 01, 2021, 12:48:42 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 30, 2021, 09:44:34 PM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on June 30, 2021, 07:13:09 PM
Welp....if that is the case, they need to keep the Allen Elevated open.

Unless, of course, the real plans of the New Urbanists now that they've tanked the NHHIP is to flatten every freeway inside of the I-610 loop and convert them all to surface boulevards and light rail corridors in order to "save the downtown".
I think it's safe to say that the ultimate goal of the Urbanists and the current administration in Washington is to do exactly that.
I doubt that. But unpopular opinion (here): The city would be better for it.

But honestly, I think a big issue with the project here was the messaging around it. It was sold as being another highway expansion, probably because people thought that would play better for public support. That might have been true in 2005 when this project started, but my personal take on public opinion now is that Houston's pretty burnt out on highway expansion projects. Most of them were sold as congestion-reducing measures, and while any traffic engineer knows that the throughput was what they were really after, that's not the impression the public got. So it's hard to get people excited for another big highway project when they feel like the past ones didn't actually help them out (incorrectly or otherwise).

But I think there was a missed opportunity to emphasize that this was more of a rerouting. You could've gotten some people onboard that are normally against this kind of project. But it felt like that was an afterthought (especially with how little of the Pierce was actually planned to be removed), so it didn't really help build a coalition like it could've.

The real contention is with the part North of the I-45 / I-10 Split. There was not a whole lot of opposition to the re-route around downtown and the Pierce Elevated removal. Most of the part of the near northside of downtown has already been purchased.

All of the Pierce elevated was to be removed. What you mean is how little of the existent I-45 was being removed. The original North Freeway downtown feeder / collector was to be left in place

If most of the opposition locally was to the mass displacements on I-45 north of I-10, as well as not enough emphasis on mass transit alternatives, then what does that say for H-GAC's and TXDOT's decision to withdraw the Hardy Toll Road extension to I-10/I-69/US 59?? That would have possibly mitigated plenty of the need for reconstructing that section. Also, there is the northeast quadrant of the Sam Houston Tollway between I-69 and I-10 that is essentially underutilized.

I'm guessing it's an issue of TxDOT underestimating local opposition to highways-only based transportation development and biting off more than they thought they could chew.

No, I don't think most local opponents of the NHHIP really do want to level every freeway inside 610, but there are plenty of New Urbanism advocates licking their chops about attempting to transform major US cities' transpo systems into the fantasies of Paris or Scandanavian systems. I'm an advocate of more balance through more use of rail and bus based transit, but not to the point of ripping down needed freeways that serve major areas.

HOT lanes are Bus Rapid Transit, it's just that they also allow car pools and single occupancy vehicles willing to pay a toll set to ensure free flowing traffic.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: TXtoNJ on July 04, 2021, 10:52:21 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 03, 2021, 02:56:44 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on July 03, 2021, 02:49:00 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2021, 02:39:39 PM
What a joke, honestly. The current administration is so blind sighted to the necessity of the majority of these projects, and using straight up politics to get sorely needed improvements canceled in the name of activism and this unrealistic lifestyle without cars.

That's not why they're doing it though - it's paying off constituents who don't want the expansion, and punishing the (largely suburban and developer) opponents who do. Ideology is just the window dressing
If that were the case wouldn't they support the commuters as there are much more of them?

The commuters directly impacted are not going to be the ones voting in future primaries of the party currently in Washington. The people inside the Loop are.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Anthony_JK on July 04, 2021, 12:09:17 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on July 04, 2021, 08:16:31 AM
[...]

HOT lanes are Bus Rapid Transit, it's just that they also allow car pools and single occupancy vehicles willing to pay a toll set to ensure free flowing traffic.


Outside of the tollways and the Katy HOT lanes inside of I-10 in west Houston (and the newly built toll express lanes inside SH 288), most of the Houston system of bus/HOV lanes are not HOT, but free HOV/express lanes with access to Park-and-Ride and bus terminals. That's also the setup for all of I-45's HOV lanes.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on July 04, 2021, 05:23:04 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 03, 2021, 10:10:42 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 02, 2021, 11:32:26 PM
Has something like that ever happened before? This is bloody ridiculous. I'm really starting to think their beef has absolutely nothing to do with the north section in particular just not wanting to widen a freeway at all including the downtown section. This is infuriating.
The overall goal of the feds trying to kill a project that they don't like due to politics is not that different from the Trump administration doing all it could to stonewall the Gateway project and congestion pricing in NYC.  The latter even including withholding approval for a required EIS!

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 03, 2021, 02:56:44 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on July 03, 2021, 02:49:00 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2021, 02:39:39 PM
What a joke, honestly. The current administration is so blind sighted to the necessity of the majority of these projects, and using straight up politics to get sorely needed improvements canceled in the name of activism and this unrealistic lifestyle without cars.

That's not why they're doing it though - it's paying off constituents who don't want the expansion, and punishing the (largely suburban and developer) opponents who do. Ideology is just the window dressing
If that were the case wouldn't they support the commuters as there are much more of them?
The core voting block for the Democrats are those urban people who were mentioned that never leave their home cities and seldom even leave their neighborhood.  The entire underpinning of the freeway removal movement rests on an ideology that believes that the interests of anyone outside of the city (not metro area - the core city itself) the road passes through are not valid.
The NYC congestion pricing plan to convert free roads to tolled is complete bullshit and I hope never sees the light of the day. I don't really see that as a valid comparison.

I will say regarding the Gateway project I was very irritated with the Trump admin for blocking that and it seemed like nothing more than an intentional "punishment"  to the area. I was worried it would set a bad precedent and I did think about it.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: jadebenn on July 08, 2021, 07:21:41 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on July 04, 2021, 10:52:21 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 03, 2021, 02:56:44 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on July 03, 2021, 02:49:00 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on July 03, 2021, 02:39:39 PM
What a joke, honestly. The current administration is so blind sighted to the necessity of the majority of these projects, and using straight up politics to get sorely needed improvements canceled in the name of activism and this unrealistic lifestyle without cars.

That's not why they're doing it though - it's paying off constituents who don't want the expansion, and punishing the (largely suburban and developer) opponents who do. Ideology is just the window dressing
If that were the case wouldn't they support the commuters as there are much more of them?

The commuters directly impacted are not going to be the ones voting in future primaries of the party currently in Washington. The people inside the Loop are.
I actually think you hit on something big here: IMO, this is all stemming from the wealth and political shifts of the past 20 years. It used to be that just about every American inner city was economically depressed compared to the surrounding suburbs. Apartments near downtown would be cheaper than homes further out. Very few people with the means to do so lived in these inner areas.

Then, around the 90s, crime starts dropping dramatically and suddenly all this inner city land skyrockets in value. It takes a while for the markets to catch on, but when they do, you see a bit of a reversal of the urban flight and gentrification of these areas (which actually sucks for the people who used to live there; now they're poor and have long commutes). What these more financially affluent (and therefore politically-powerful) residents and businesses end up doing is changing the composition of both parties to increasingly split around urban-rural lines. Ruralites lean one way, urbanites lean the other, and the suburbs are "neutral ground."

So, say this hypothetical urbanite-dominated party gains control of the federal government and its highway infrastructure. It wouldn't be surprising if they chose to prioritize one of the major parts of their coalition, at the expense of those on the fence and those against them, would it?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on July 08, 2021, 10:43:25 PM
The proposed funding for NHHIP is available online. https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/tpp/utp/north-houston-highway-improvement-project.pdf (https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/tpp/utp/north-houston-highway-improvement-project.pdf)

This will all be moot if the project is canceled, but if the project survives then here are my observations of the funding

Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on July 08, 2021, 11:13:03 PM
So they didn't defund this project? That is good. Hopefully TxDOT can fight the FHWAs decision somehow.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: jadebenn on July 09, 2021, 04:07:47 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 08, 2021, 11:13:03 PM
So they didn't defund this project? That is good. Hopefully TxDOT can fight the FHWAs decision somehow.
Good luck when the city, county, and feds are all united against them. As many here have previously said, the administration clearly wants to make an example of this project.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on July 09, 2021, 06:40:59 AM
Quote from: jadebenn on July 09, 2021, 04:07:47 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 08, 2021, 11:13:03 PM
So they didn't defund this project? That is good. Hopefully TxDOT can fight the FHWAs decision somehow.
Good luck when the city, county, and feds are all united against them. As many here have previously said, the administration clearly wants to make an example of this project.

I thought the city was in favor
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: jadebenn on July 09, 2021, 06:46:52 AM
Quote from: kernals12 on July 09, 2021, 06:40:59 AM
Quote from: jadebenn on July 09, 2021, 04:07:47 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 08, 2021, 11:13:03 PM
So they didn't defund this project? That is good. Hopefully TxDOT can fight the FHWAs decision somehow.
Good luck when the city, county, and feds are all united against them. As many here have previously said, the administration clearly wants to make an example of this project.

I thought the city was in favor
Used to be. Not anymore.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on July 09, 2021, 08:48:11 AM
Quote from: jadebenn on July 09, 2021, 04:07:47 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 08, 2021, 11:13:03 PM
So they didn't defund this project? That is good. Hopefully TxDOT can fight the FHWAs decision somehow.
Good luck when the city, county, and feds are all united against them. As many here have previously said, the administration clearly wants to make an example of this project.
TxDOT needs to work with city and county leaders to see what their alternatives are and what they don't like about this project that could possibly be improved.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: abqtraveler on July 09, 2021, 09:01:59 AM
Quote from: kernals12 on July 09, 2021, 06:40:59 AM
Quote from: jadebenn on July 09, 2021, 04:07:47 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 08, 2021, 11:13:03 PM
So they didn't defund this project? That is good. Hopefully TxDOT can fight the FHWAs decision somehow.
Good luck when the city, county, and feds are all united against them. As many here have previously said, the administration clearly wants to make an example of this project.

I thought the city was in favor

They are when it comes to removing the Pierce Elevated, but the city opposes just about everything else beyond that.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: bwana39 on July 09, 2021, 11:28:13 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 09, 2021, 08:48:11 AM
Quote from: jadebenn on July 09, 2021, 04:07:47 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 08, 2021, 11:13:03 PM
So they didn't defund this project? That is good. Hopefully TxDOT can fight the FHWAs decision somehow.
Good luck when the city, county, and feds are all united against them. As many here have previously said, the administration clearly wants to make an example of this project.
TxDOT needs to work with city and county leaders to see what their alternatives are and what they don't like about this project that could possibly be improved.

TXDOT went to lengths to make a plan that the city wanted. TXDOT originally had wanted to replace the Pierce Elevated. Houston wanted it gone. They came up with the alternative of the massive 3-sided duplex.  I still don't think there is a big problem with this part of it.

The problem seems to be with the widening north of I-610.  I think the solution should be to extend the HTR on out to I-69 or I-10. Then again Houston doesn't like that either. I-45 is congested and the Hardy is underutilized.  Part of that problem is that I-610 is not a good entry point to HTR both because it is somewhat out of the way and because getting onto I-610 from either I-69 or I-45 is not smooth and I-610 itself is congested.  Tolls seemingly are not the issue.

It is hard to plan when the next time the administration changes so do the priorities.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: jadebenn on July 09, 2021, 11:09:17 PM
TxDOT' hands are cuffed as well. By Texas law, 98% of TxDOT funds must be spent on auto infrastructure. That means no sweetening the pot and agreeing to "mitigate impacts" by:

* Funding local street projects (bike lanes, sidewalk improvements)
* Building transit infrastructure into the project (the best TxDOT can do is managed HOV/HOT lanes)
* Building that freeway cap (they can make provisions for it, but that's all)

This kind of wheeling and dealing is almost totally unavailable to them, and thus make it a lot harder for local politicians to go back to their constituents and say, "Okay, maybe we don't like this project, but look at what I got them to give us if it goes through." It's not totally absent - I do recall some flood infrastructure improvements being planned as part of this - but that's not really a big-ticket "sellable" item for most people.

Likewise, a big reimagining of the goals of the project (e.g: no footprint expansion) would probably need a new EIS, and there'd be very little of the existing design and engineering work that could be reused. So that puts you all the way back at the beginning of the design process; It's basically a cancellation of the existing project either way.

It's also important to note that the motivations of the new administration differ from those of the city. Their goals align, so they're working together, but they have slightly different reasons to be in opposition. As far as local city officials are concerned, this would piss off their constituency, and the benefits wouldn't happen until long after they're out of office. The political calculus is easy, and it's not good.

As for the feds, the racial impact is important and factors heavily into their decision-making, but it's not the whole story. They're also rewarding their voter base (we all know the cities lean differently from the state in aggregate), and doing a big symbolic thing to make a point of their changed transportation priorities (highways are out, transit is in). Bunch of different reasons behind that. Urbanists don't like urban freeways, environmentalists don't like increased car travel, poor voters don't like hearing about projects that impact other poor voters, etc. There's a pretty substantial anti-highway expansion coalition that's formed over the past decade, and this is their first real time in the big chair.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: vdeane on July 10, 2021, 11:30:49 PM
Quote from: jadebenn on July 09, 2021, 11:09:17 PM
Urbanists don't like urban freeways
Urbanists don't like freeways period.  What do you think the high speed rail push is about?  It's not about getting people to stop flying, it's about getting people to stop driving.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on July 10, 2021, 11:40:28 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 10, 2021, 11:30:49 PM
Quote from: jadebenn on July 09, 2021, 11:09:17 PM
Urbanists don't like urban freeways
Urbanists don't like freeways period.  What do you think the high speed rail push is about?  It's not about getting people to stop flying, it's about getting people to stop driving.

Actually, they've gone after flying now too. It's not a coincidence that flying is being attacked far more today than it was during the environmental movements of the 70s, despite being cleaner. It's because flying has gone from being the preserve of the rich to being accessible to the masses.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: vdeane on July 11, 2021, 12:23:18 AM
Quote from: kernals12 on July 10, 2021, 11:40:28 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 10, 2021, 11:30:49 PM
Quote from: jadebenn on July 09, 2021, 11:09:17 PM
Urbanists don't like urban freeways
Urbanists don't like freeways period.  What do you think the high speed rail push is about?  It's not about getting people to stop flying, it's about getting people to stop driving.

Actually, they've gone after flying now too. It's not a coincidence that flying is being attacked far more today than it was during the environmental movements of the 70s, despite being cleaner. It's because flying has gone from being the preserve of the rich to being accessible to the masses.
Environmental/climate activists are going after flying.  Not Urbanists (though those groups do tend to overlap).
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: jadebenn on July 14, 2021, 05:34:42 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 10, 2021, 11:30:49 PM
Quote from: jadebenn on July 09, 2021, 11:09:17 PM
Urbanists don't like urban freeways
Urbanists don't like freeways period.  What do you think the high speed rail push is about?  It's not about getting people to stop flying, it's about getting people to stop driving.
HSR doesn't remove the need for trucking, and only provides endpoint connectivity. As someone who hangs around in those kinds of communities, I've never heard of someone complain about a highway or freeway outside of a city's beltway.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: vdeane on July 14, 2021, 08:51:42 PM
Quote from: jadebenn on July 14, 2021, 05:34:42 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 10, 2021, 11:30:49 PM
Quote from: jadebenn on July 09, 2021, 11:09:17 PM
Urbanists don't like urban freeways
Urbanists don't like freeways period.  What do you think the high speed rail push is about?  It's not about getting people to stop flying, it's about getting people to stop driving.
HSR doesn't remove the need for trucking, and only provides endpoint connectivity. As someone who hangs around in those kinds of communities, I've never heard of someone complain about a highway or freeway outside of a city's beltway.
They do, however, complain about driving in general all the time, and want to get VMT down.  Many of them openly want to end private car ownership entirely.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 15, 2021, 12:39:18 AM
Ending private vehicle ownership? That sounds even more impossibly kooky than the chances the US will get a real high speed rail network anytime soon. Americans love their vehicles and the independent mobility they provide. And high speed rail networks are impossible to build in the US because we can't figure out how to build true HSR without it turning into a giant cost boondoggle. The US has gotten bad enough with the cost of new highways. HSR boils the red ink up to a whole new magnitude.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: vdeane on July 15, 2021, 01:28:20 PM
Well, the idea is also to end driving by humans.  Everyone would just subscribe to a service and summon a self-driving car with an app when they need one.  And I don't think Urbanists care about costs.  If anything they'd say "just make the drivers pay, because things like free parking are a subsidy for them and they get too many of those".
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on July 15, 2021, 02:25:49 PM
Why widen the freeway? Just tear it down so there isn't a traffic issue anymore:

https://www.texasobserver.org/the-road-home/
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: bwana39 on July 15, 2021, 03:54:28 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 15, 2021, 02:25:49 PM
Why widen the freeway? Just tear it down so there isn't a traffic issue anymore:

https://www.texasobserver.org/the-road-home/

We could tear down all the roads and require everyone to live within walking distance of their jobs or within walking distance of mass transit that takes them to within walking distance of their work.
Can you imagine the gentrification around those points?  While mass transit has its plusses and minuses, even in cities where it is plentiful, there are still lots of cars.

San Francisco and New York City are both in the top-five cities with the worst traffic congestion.  They are also the home to the two most comprehensive mass transit systems in the US.  While mass transit might lessen traffic, the fact is that POV traffic is still needed and used.

I will also add the Texas Observer article seemingly flexes between two different factoids. The fact that 85% of Texans live in urban areas and the fact that the people in the Urban Cores of the major Cities want expanded mass transit options to infer that 85% of Texans support major mass transit capital outlays. ( I am not sure a full 85% actually live in the city limits of cities of over 4,000 people) By the way only about half of the people in Texas live within 30 miles of towns over 250,000.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 15, 2021, 09:36:01 PM
Quote from: vdeaneWell, the idea is also to end driving by humans.  Everyone would just subscribe to a service and summon a self-driving car with an app when they need one.  And I don't think Urbanists care about costs.

The Urbanists apparently don't care about reality either. I wonder if they've been keeping up with the social experiment involving mask use in public or COVID-19 vaccines. Or even wearing seatbelts. Not everyone wants to go along, even if going along can be life saving.

I strongly suspect at least some (if not a lot) of so-called New Urbanists are hypocrites. We're hearing a bunch of this stuff from lawmakers who are often also upper income elites. These aren't the types of people who stand out in the weather waiting for a city bus. They romanticize mass transit but aren't living the reality. I have a keen appreciation for driving a personal vehicle, developed after 5 years of using mass transit in New York City. There is a lot that sucks about taking the bus or train. I suspect some of these Urbanists are taking cabs and car services to work and other destinations, if they're not driving their own personal vehicles.

Quote from: bwana39We could tear down all the roads and require everyone to live within walking distance of their jobs or within walking distance of mass transit that takes them to within walking distance of their work.
Can you imagine the gentrification around those points?

Many kinds of service businesses would cease to function. The employees would not find any affordable places to live in many job locations. Really, that's already becoming a big problem.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on July 15, 2021, 09:50:02 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on July 15, 2021, 03:54:28 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 15, 2021, 02:25:49 PM
Why widen the freeway? Just tear it down so there isn't a traffic issue anymore:

https://www.texasobserver.org/the-road-home/

We could tear down all the roads and require everyone to live within walking distance of their jobs or within walking distance of mass transit that takes them to within walking distance of their work.
Can you imagine the gentrification around those points?  While mass transit has its plusses and minuses, even in cities where it is plentiful, there are still lots of cars.

San Francisco and New York City are both in the top-five cities with the worst traffic congestion.  They are also the home to the two most comprehensive mass transit systems in the US.  While mass transit might lessen traffic, the fact is that POV traffic is still needed and used.

I will also add the Texas Observer article seemingly flexes between two different factoids. The fact that 85% of Texans live in urban areas and the fact that the people in the Urban Cores of the major Cities want expanded mass transit options to infer that 85% of Texans support major mass transit capital outlays. ( I am not sure a full 85% actually live in the city limits of cities of over 4,000 people) By the way only about half of the people in Texas live within 30 miles of towns over 250,000.

They also ignore the impact of freeways on surface streets. Memorial Drive has less traffic on it now than it did in 1960 thanks to the Katy Freeway.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on July 21, 2021, 08:29:34 PM
Here's the newest twist on the NHHIP story. TxDOT just posted a promotional video for the REAL network, which is a conceptual network of interconnected managed lanes to serve future mobility needs and accommodate technologies of the future.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjtVjCcRzDo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjtVjCcRzDo)

I'm super-excited to see this video because I was the co-author of a 2017 report promoting this idea. In fact, I prepared the report including all the graphics and maps.
http://houstonstrategies.blogspot.com/2017/05/max-lanes-next-generation-strategy-for.html (http://houstonstrategies.blogspot.com/2017/05/max-lanes-next-generation-strategy-for.html)

So here's the twist: The video shows the Pierce Elevated corridor as a REAL network downtown connector, including a hub station. Of course this is entirely dependent on NNHIP moving forward, to make the corridor available.

Reality check: this may be hard sell to downtown interests who want to get rid of the Pierce Elevated if/when NHHIP moves forward.

Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Anthony_JK on July 21, 2021, 10:05:15 PM
Fascinating, but I just can't see the New Urbanist crowd endorsing this idea, when their primary goal is to remove and downgrade freeways and replace them with rail-based transit and higher-density housing. Also, there's the danger of privatizing public infrastructure as a means of paying for all this.

Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Henry on July 22, 2021, 12:12:56 PM
Well, there are far fewer people interested in driving than there were 30 years ago, and even if the electric vehicle becomes our only mode of transportation, I don't see that trend changing anytime soon. New Urbanism is definitely to blame for all this, plus the freeway revolts that left a lot of corridors either unbuilt or incomplete further prove their point, which is that cities should be bypassed entirely, with mass transit and surface boulevards serving the downtowns. And they continue to ignore the sad reality that all cities as a whole have suffered greatly from crime and violence over the years, even in areas where the opposition was successful in stopping a freeway from coming through them, while thinking that renewal and gentrification will be the magic pill that solves everything. (It simply does not work that way.)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on July 22, 2021, 03:27:59 PM
Maybe if existing Interstate 45 between Interstate 69 and Interstate 10 along the Pierce Elevated is eventually torn down, the remnants of the Interstate 45 freeway could become an extension of Spur 527, with 527 running up Brazos St. (Northbound) and Bagby St. (Southbound) to connect the existing 527 with the former Interstate 45 freeway (527 would be signposted along this route as well). I would suggest connecting connecting the 527 and former 45 freeways, but that likely wouldn't fly.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: In_Correct on July 24, 2021, 04:32:59 PM
New Urbanists do not like any Infrastructure ... even if it is Rail ... and Private.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Thegeet on July 24, 2021, 06:08:04 PM
Quote from: In_Correct on July 24, 2021, 04:32:59 PM
New Urbanists do not like any Infrastructure ... even if it is Rail ... and Private.
That's why we can't have nice things. Everyone tries to block everything. Such a shame.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: In_Correct on July 24, 2021, 08:17:17 PM
Either that or it takes much longer to build them.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: abqtraveler on July 26, 2021, 12:16:53 AM
Quote from: Thegeet on July 24, 2021, 06:08:04 PM
Quote from: In_Correct on July 24, 2021, 04:32:59 PM
New Urbanists do not like any Infrastructure ... even if it is Rail ... and Private.
That's why we can't have nice things. Everyone tries to block everything. Such a shame.
There's a name for people in power who try to block things. They're called CAVE (Citizens Against Virtually Everything) people.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Thegeet on July 26, 2021, 12:18:37 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on July 26, 2021, 12:16:53 AM
Quote from: Thegeet on July 24, 2021, 06:08:04 PM
Quote from: In_Correct on July 24, 2021, 04:32:59 PM
New Urbanists do not like any Infrastructure ... even if it is Rail ... and Private.
That's why we can't have nice things. Everyone tries to block everything. Such a shame.
There's a name for people in power who try to block things. They're called CAVE (Citizens Against Virtually Everything) people.
Lol, the cavemen. They don't have technology. (SB reference)

But, yeah. Every time they oppose something is to "protect" , but they only hinder.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: TXtoNJ on July 26, 2021, 11:23:12 AM
Quote from: In_Correct on July 24, 2021, 04:32:59 PM
New Urbanists do not like any Infrastructure ... even if it is Rail ... and Private.

That's not true at all. Tokyo's metro is largely private, and held up as an example.

New Urbanists aren't the local NIMBY types who reflexively oppose anything out of a fear of property value decline.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: achilles765 on July 26, 2021, 04:38:29 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 22, 2021, 03:27:59 PM
Maybe if existing Interstate 45 between Interstate 69 and Interstate 10 along the Pierce Elevated is eventually torn down, the remnants of the Interstate 45 freeway could become an extension of Spur 527, with 527 running up Brazos St. (Northbound) and Bagby St. (Southbound) to connect the existing 527 with the former Interstate 45 freeway (527 would be signposted along this route as well). I would suggest connecting connecting the 527 and former 45 freeways, but that likely wouldn't fly.

I like this idea. So would spur 527 remain a freeway? Your idea kind of could build on my idea and how I've always wanted spur 527 to get a 3di. It could go up brazos/bagby to where the pierce is, and then what, turn to the south and meet up with 69/45 near st Joseph parkway and emancipation? Or head to I 10?

Or..new idea I've just come up with because of your suggestion: spur 527 becomes interstate 269, heads down your route along bagby/brazos, elevated of course, then around downtown where the pierce is/was, splits with the left side continuing as 269 and ending at I 10, and the right side veering and becoming interstate 245 to connect to interstate 45/69
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: jadebenn on July 28, 2021, 03:56:15 AM
Quote from: In_Correct on July 24, 2021, 04:32:59 PM
New Urbanists do not like any Infrastructure ... even if it is Rail ... and Private.
Very much not true.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: bwana39 on July 28, 2021, 02:23:51 PM
This morning, I saw a link on KHOU's website about a survey TXDOT was doing in regards to NHHIP. It has disappeared since this morning.

I cannot find it anywhere.

I did however find a rebuttal to it from Mayor Sylvester Turner.



This is the Mayor's Rebuttal
https://houstontx.gov/planning/nhhip/index.html
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on August 23, 2021, 06:45:22 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on June 30, 2021, 01:53:19 PM
At today's commission meeting, the commission decided to receive public comment on the removal of funding for NHHIP. Comment will be received starting July 9, and the plan is to have a decision at the August meeting (at the end of August).

From the tone of comments from Chairman Bugg and Houston Commissioner Ryan, it sounds like they are ready to defund NHHIP. Public comment appears to be a necessary step before they can defund.

It was mentioned that $503 million has been spent over the last 15 years for project development.

My take: the project will be officially canceled unless there is a drastic change in circumstances in July, including FHWA clearance to resume work and the Harris County lawsuit dropped. I don't see either of those happening.
Max, any update? I know it isn't quite the end of August but are you still sticking with the opinion this project will be defunded and canceled?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on August 23, 2021, 07:31:59 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on August 23, 2021, 06:45:22 PM
Max, any update? I know it isn't quite the end of August but are you still sticking with the opinion this project will be defunded and canceled?

There's no new publicly available information that I'm aware of. The results of the online survey, which could be decisive, are not available. My speculation was that the online survey is biased in favor of the opposition since they are more vocal and more likely to "turn out" to vote. That would give the commission political cover to write off the $503 million spent so far.

At the July Commission meeting there was strong support for maintaining the funding. H-GAC director Craig Raborn spoke in support of retaining funding, as did numerous business organizations and a few political officials. Speakers at the separate public hearing were mostly against the project.

My current view is that this will be a difficult decision for the commission. The three major project impediments cited by Chairman Bugg still remain: 1) FHWA halt of the project, 2) the Harris County lawsuit against the project, and 3) lack of support from the Houston congressional delegation. Not mentioned by Bugg is opposition by the City of Houston. It's possible there is negotiation in progress behind the scenes, but I would be surprised since Bugg said that Buttitieg did not respond Bugg's request for a meeting. The three strikes against the project may be too much to overcome.

I don't if Governor Abbott is going to be involved in the decision or not, and I don't know it that would be favorable for the funding or not.

I'm thinking that anything can happen, including a partial defunding. At the public hearing, I spoke in favor of maintaining funding for the section of IH-69 between Spur 527 and SH 288 as an alternative to complete defunding. I'm not expecting to know the decision until the August 31 meeting, or possibly a little sooner if the final UTP is released in advance.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: sprjus4 on August 31, 2021, 03:07:38 PM
https://twitter.com/TxDOT/status/1432778882818711554
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on August 31, 2021, 03:34:42 PM
I'll say it again: skip the widening north of I-10. Pick your battles wisely.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on August 31, 2021, 06:21:18 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on August 31, 2021, 03:34:42 PM
I'll say it again: skip the widening north of I-10. Pick your battles wisely.
Or separate them into two different projects.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Henry on August 31, 2021, 06:51:09 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on August 31, 2021, 06:21:18 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on August 31, 2021, 03:34:42 PM
I'll say it again: skip the widening north of I-10. Pick your battles wisely.
Or separate them into two different projects.
Perhaps redo the thing like Minneapolis-St. Paul, where you have I-45 on a separate alignment from I-10 and I-69. Similar to what I-94 is separate from I-35W in the former city, and I-35E in the latter.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on August 31, 2021, 07:06:56 PM
Quote from: Henry on August 31, 2021, 06:51:09 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on August 31, 2021, 06:21:18 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on August 31, 2021, 03:34:42 PM
I'll say it again: skip the widening north of I-10. Pick your battles wisely.
Or separate them into two different projects.
Perhaps redo the thing like Minneapolis-St. Paul, where you have I-45 on a separate alignment from I-10 and I-69. Similar to what I-94 is separate from I-35W in the former city, and I-35E in the latter.

I-45 already is on a separate alignment.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on August 31, 2021, 10:02:11 PM
I just need a clarification; how many lanes did the Katy Freeway have before and after the widening?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on August 31, 2021, 11:11:08 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on August 31, 2021, 10:02:11 PM
I just need a clarification; how many lanes did the Katy Freeway have before and after the widening?
The original Katy Freeway had six regular lanes and one reversible HOV lane, which was created from the interior shoulders. Frontage roads generally had two lanes each way.

It now has 10 regular lanes, 4 managed lanes, and at least 6 frontage lanes (3 each way) from Loop 610 to SH 6. West of SH 6, the managed lanes become two HOV lanes (one each way) and main lanes drop to 8 west of Greenhouse. Around the Grand Parkway there are auxiliary lanes.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on September 01, 2021, 12:17:42 AM
So I'd say this is good news for the future of this project...?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on September 01, 2021, 12:23:50 AM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on August 31, 2021, 11:11:08 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on August 31, 2021, 10:02:11 PM
I just need a clarification; how many lanes did the Katy Freeway have before and after the widening?
The original Katy Freeway had six regular lanes and one reversible HOV lane, which was created from the interior shoulders. Frontage roads generally had two lanes each way.

It now has 10 regular lanes, 4 managed lanes, and at least 6 frontage lanes (3 each way) from Loop 610 to SH 6. West of SH 6, the managed lanes become two HOV lanes (one each way) and main lanes drop to 8 west of Greenhouse. Around the Grand Parkway there are auxiliary lanes.
So the amount of traffic rose by about 45%, per TXDOT, in response to a 100% increase in lane capacity (even before considering traffic levels on parallel roads)? Then what was up with that study claiming travel times increased which has made any rational discussion of highway widenings impossible?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on September 01, 2021, 12:58:01 AM
Quote from: kernals12 on September 01, 2021, 12:23:50 AM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on August 31, 2021, 11:11:08 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on August 31, 2021, 10:02:11 PM
I just need a clarification; how many lanes did the Katy Freeway have before and after the widening?
The original Katy Freeway had six regular lanes and one reversible HOV lane, which was created from the interior shoulders. Frontage roads generally had two lanes each way.

It now has 10 regular lanes, 4 managed lanes, and at least 6 frontage lanes (3 each way) from Loop 610 to SH 6. West of SH 6, the managed lanes become two HOV lanes (one each way) and main lanes drop to 8 west of Greenhouse. Around the Grand Parkway there are auxiliary lanes.
So the amount of traffic rose by about 45%, per TXDOT, in response to a 100% increase in lane capacity (even before considering traffic levels on parallel roads)? Then what was up with that study claiming travel times increased which has made any rational discussion of highway widenings impossible?
There is still a bottleneck closer to downtown, no? So if travel levels rose the bottleneck would get worse. I believe TxDOT will address that soon.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Bobby5280 on September 01, 2021, 02:04:21 PM
One of the biggest problems with traffic snarls in Houston is its very outdated INEFFICIENT surface street grid. Let me tell you, it absolutely SUCKS. The grid-lock down on the surface streets stops up the traffic flow. So it backs up onto the frontage roads and then the off-ramps. And it does that until the traffic snarl backs up onto the freeways.

In Houston these kinds of traffic jams can happen at any time. All it takes is a catalyst, like a serious fender bender. I was in a horrible jam on I-45 near midnight up near the Woodlands. All traffic was re-directed onto the frontage roads.

On an ordinary Saturday afternoon it took me over 30 minutes to drive just a couple or so blocks on Gessner Road, from the South side of Memorial City up to I-10. It was ridiculous.

In the Houston metro area you pretty much have to visit newer (and more affluent) suburbs to the outside of Beltway 8 before you'll start encountering street layouts that have any kind of access filtering. In the older parts closer to Houston's center all kinds of cross streets, parking lots and driveways empty out directly onto the main arterial streets.

The widest parts of the Katy Freeway expansion were built in areas that have very little if any access control over the number of driveways and cross streets connecting directly with main surface streets. Even the frontage roads along I-10 are absolutely littered with driveways in between street intersections. Weaving conflicts abound.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on September 01, 2021, 02:46:34 PM
Worse than the OKC grid? I swear about 70 percent of OKC's traffic issues on local streets are due to horribly timed lights that should either by synchronized or retimed.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Bobby5280 on September 01, 2021, 07:19:28 PM
OKC isn't nearly as bad as Houston. OKC does have plenty of neighborhoods where the street grid designs are badly outdated. Some major arterials in OKC, such as Northwest Expressway can be a real PITA. Houston has the same situation, but on a bigger scale and over six times the population size. I just don't get stressed in OKC traffic like I do driving in the DFW area or especially Houston. The issues in OKC are more annoying than they are stressful.

I think I get just as many annoyances driving around Lawton as I do in OKC. The big thing here in Lawton is all the slow-pokes going 15-20mph under the speed limit, gumming up the flow of traffic. No signal turns and lane changes are common here too.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: TheBox on September 21, 2021, 09:06:33 PM
Which one is more likely to happen?

TxDOT's I-45 North expansion (between Beltway 8 and Downtown) + I-45 Downtown overhaul
or
HCTRA's Hardy Toll Road downtown extension
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on September 21, 2021, 09:28:43 PM
If I had to take a wild guess, I would say probably neither.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: austrini on September 24, 2021, 11:04:47 AM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on July 26, 2021, 11:23:12 AM
Quote from: In_Correct on July 24, 2021, 04:32:59 PM
New Urbanists do not like any Infrastructure ... even if it is Rail ... and Private.

That's not true at all. Tokyo's metro is largely private, and held up as an example.

New Urbanists aren't the local NIMBY types who reflexively oppose anything out of a fear of property value decline.


People in here use the term "New Urbanists" in every thread like it's some kind of outgroup of hippies instead of what it actually is - an early 90s school of urban planners that's been incorporated thoroughly into all urban and transportation planning for 20 years.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on September 24, 2021, 11:32:28 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong but I've heard this on more than one occasion. Traditional urbanism doesn't factor in cars or light rail given urban planning started long before the rise of mass transit and cars. "New"  urbanism factors in cars and how to "sustainably"  incorporate infrastructure fostering car use in a way that also allows for you walkable communities. I'm not sure if that's the case however.

I think new urbanism is cool and the neighborhoods being built like Wheeler District in OKC are picturesque but I prefer good ol suburbia. I live smack in the middle of Hollywood and to me if I'm going to live stacked up next to each other I'm going all in like I am now but I guess for families or someone wanting something in the middle new urbanism works good.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: TXtoNJ on September 24, 2021, 01:47:35 PM
Yeah, New Urbanism is just fine, and doesn't interfere with anyone's life who's not named FritzOwl.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Anthony_JK on September 24, 2021, 08:11:47 PM
Well, I'm a strong critic of some of the more extreme "kill all freeways" New Urbanists, but there is something positive about their approach in favoring more balance in transportation choices, and making neighborhoods more user friendly for walkers and bikers. I only wish they would understand that people aren't leaving their cars any time soon.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: austrini on September 25, 2021, 04:50:47 PM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on September 24, 2021, 08:11:47 PM
Well, I'm a strong critic of some of the more extreme "kill all freeways" New Urbanists, but there is something positive about their approach in favoring more balance in transportation choices, and making neighborhoods more user friendly for walkers and bikers. I only wish they would understand that people aren't leaving their cars any time soon.

There aren't really 'new urbanists' anymore, there are just planners. Modern city planning started with cars and planners like George Kessler or Le Corbusier who designed places that were meant to facilitate movement by cars and ignored most other factors. The revolution of new urbanism just started taking into account that pedestrians existed. It's so thoroughly incorporated into planning now that no one really uses 'new urbanism' anymore except in a historical sense. We just moved from "cars only" and diversified into "cars and other stuff" like what took place before modern planning. Induced demand has led to other options being considered like spreading out road/street options and creating alternatives both to save money and give people the best quality of life. This is the way it works in essentially every country except this one and the Gulf States.

Planners in Texas (I am in my 10th year of being one) are essentially rubber stamps for sprawl, and when you widen a freeway it induces both sprawl and demand and creates a feedback loop leading to constant widening. At some point using freeways as the only option for large scale transport infrastructure becomes impossible simply because of the engineering and ROW requirements. So with the Katy (IH10 west) widened to one of the world's widest freeways we found out that's about the limit to what you can do, and it hasn't really helped with traffic in the long term. The numbers on IH 45 are saying, yeah, you can widen all of this but if we look back historically to similar projects it's not helped.

There aren't planners that are anti-freeway that I know personally. It's just a tool in an arsenal that you can choose to use or not. People aren't leaving their cars but you have to balance that with types of movement that people use and want to use. How do you take into account the considerable part of the population that can't drive or can't afford cars? Young people who just use uber? Or long haul interstate traffic? I know this is a road forum and there are people here like "widen!" and "moar freeway!" but it's a lot more nuanced than that.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on September 25, 2021, 05:11:01 PM
The idea we shouldn't widen freeways because they'll need to be widened again in the future is absurd, IMO. Eventually self driving cars will also be able to relieve some capacity issues being more efficient in moving as well as being to drive faster. There are many human elements that create traffic jams such as rubbernecking and reckless driving which can lead to accidents and thus traffic congestion.

The Katy freeway also has a bottleneck downtown which you didn't mention. It's about the limit in terms of what is financially possible today but in theory you could double the capacity by building a second deck or tunnel and that hasn't been done. Maybe in the future new technologies will become a reality that can substantially reduce the cost of infrastructure. That's long term thinking, not we should be widening freeways like Texas does because they'll just become clogged again in the long run.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: vdeane on September 25, 2021, 05:16:39 PM
Quote from: austrini on September 25, 2021, 04:50:47 PM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on September 24, 2021, 08:11:47 PM
Well, I'm a strong critic of some of the more extreme "kill all freeways" New Urbanists, but there is something positive about their approach in favoring more balance in transportation choices, and making neighborhoods more user friendly for walkers and bikers. I only wish they would understand that people aren't leaving their cars any time soon.

There aren't really 'new urbanists' anymore, there are just planners. Modern city planning started with cars and planners like George Kessler or Le Corbusier who designed places that were meant to facilitate movement by cars and ignored most other factors. The revolution of new urbanism just started taking into account that pedestrians existed. It's so thoroughly incorporated into planning now that no one really uses 'new urbanism' anymore except in a historical sense. We just moved from "cars only" and diversified into "cars and other stuff" like what took place before modern planning. Induced demand has led to other options being considered like spreading out road/street options and creating alternatives both to save money and give people the best quality of life. This is the way it works in essentially every country except this one and the Gulf States.

Planners in Texas (I am in my 10th year of being one) are essentially rubber stamps for sprawl, and when you widen a freeway it induces both sprawl and demand and creates a feedback loop leading to constant widening. At some point using freeways as the only option for large scale transport infrastructure becomes impossible simply because of the engineering and ROW requirements. So with the Katy (IH10 west) widened to one of the world's widest freeways we found out that's about the limit to what you can do, and it hasn't really helped with traffic in the long term. The numbers on IH 45 are saying, yeah, you can widen all of this but if we look back historically to similar projects it's not helped.

There aren't planners that are anti-freeway that I know personally. It's just a tool in an arsenal that you can choose to use or not. People aren't leaving their cars but you have to balance that with types of movement that people use and want to use. How do you take into account the considerable part of the population that can't drive or can't afford cars? Young people who just use uber? Or long haul interstate traffic? I know this is a road forum and there are people here like "widen!" and "moar freeway!" but it's a lot more nuanced than that.
Define "helped with traffic".  If the backup is over a smaller area or shorter period of time, I would consider that an improvement, even if there's still a backup, but many advocates against car travel will point to that and call it a failure.  There's definitely also a push to get people into more active modes of transportation over cars rather than simply accommodating people who would rather not or who are unable to drive, too.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Bobby5280 on September 25, 2021, 06:40:22 PM
Quote from: austriniPlanners in Texas (I am in my 10th year of being one) are essentially rubber stamps for sprawl, and when you widen a freeway it induces both sprawl and demand and creates a feedback loop leading to constant widening. At some point using freeways as the only option for large scale transport infrastructure becomes impossible simply because of the engineering and ROW requirements. So with the Katy (IH10 west) widened to one of the world's widest freeways we found out that's about the limit to what you can do, and it hasn't really helped with traffic in the long term. The numbers on IH 45 are saying, yeah, you can widen all of this but if we look back historically to similar projects it's not helped.

Sprawl is happening in this region of the country regardless if freeways get built or not.

I can point to multiple examples here in Oklahoma where ODOT, OTA and various local city organizations completely goofed up certain very important corridors because they chose not to plan at all. The suburbs of Yukon and Mustang are growing at a fairly rapid pace, more than just about any other location in Oklahoma. Yet various groups utterly failed to plan for that growth. So now we have an idiotically stunted South "extension" of the Kilpatrick Turnpike, all curvy and stupid for all the new properties it had to dodge. Meanwhile, the OK-4 and OK-9 routes where the Kilpatrick Turnpike should have been extended are quickly getting covered up with development. Pretty soon any kind of substantial upgrade will be impossible, much less a new freeway or toll road. They'll be ordinary surface streets overrun with traffic signals.

The Dallas Fort Worth metro has multiple corridors that are probably now impossible to upgrade because sprawl got to those corridors before any freeway. US-380 between Denton and McKinney has turned into a big mess. It didn't have to be if TX DOT bothered to pay attention to that area 30 years ago. They knew the sprawl was advancing that direction way back then. The best case scenario for US-380 now is maybe a couple short segments of limited access, but stop light intersections out the ying-yang everywhere else. Freeway sized ROW could have at least been reserved along TX-114 from the Texas Motor Speedway complex to Rhome and US-287. Now that's all getting covered up with one massive housing development after another plopping right in there. It won't be long before there are loads and loads of traffic signals along that highway.

Speaking of Katy Freeway, the problem with that location is not the super wide freeway at all. It's the HORRIBLE SURFACE STREETS. It's an outdated 40-50 year old street grid design with no traffic filtering whatsoever. Every side street, every parking lot entrance and every driveway dumps right out onto the main roads in that part of Houston. Much of the rest of Houston has the same problem. Add to that countless numbers of traffic signals. Drivers have to get to the outer fringes of Houston to find any surface streets that can go 100 yards or more without a driveway or side street connecting to it or a traffic signal every couple blocks.

Quote from: austriniThere aren't planners that are anti-freeway that I know personally. It's just a tool in an arsenal that you can choose to use or not. People aren't leaving their cars but you have to balance that with types of movement that people use and want to use. How do you take into account the considerable part of the population that can't drive or can't afford cars? Young people who just use uber? Or long haul interstate traffic? I know this is a road forum and there are people here like "widen!" and "moar freeway!" but it's a lot more nuanced than that.

Planners may not be overtly anti-freeway. But plenty of lawmakers are, either from a political angle (which is common on the coasts) or from an angle of being cheapskates (that's Oklahoma).

I'm all for building sidewalks and isolated bicycle paths. But I really detest so-called "shared use" lanes on streets where bicyclists are expected to share the road with cars. That policy is 100% out of touch with reality. Riding a bicycle on city streets in most parts of this nation is currently a very risky, dangerous thing to do. The law may say bicyclists have just as much right to a lane as a car. But what good does the law do for a bicyclist after he has been killed by a car whose driver was too busy looking at his phone rather than the road? Real bike paths cost money. Unfortunately places like many parts of Oklahoma don't want to blow money on that kind of thing. Lawmakers are being cheap. And I think they see bicycles as some kind of politically "progressive" kind of thing, so they automatically hate that. Places like Lawton (where I live) can feel like a throw-back to the 1980's.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: DJStephens on September 26, 2021, 12:06:43 PM
The bike lane thing here (las Cruces NM) is awful as well.  There have been bike lanes striped on many of the increasingly clogged main thoroughfares in town.   While parallel, safer arterials exist.
Narrowing of main lanes to 11 feet (US 70 / N main street) has occurred.  To squeeze in a bike lane. Road diets have been undertaken, often where there should have been widening to a five lane cross - section.   
And the thing is - little to no bikes are seen.  Where are they?   Most bike enthusiasts are in the foothills of the mountains around town, on their BMX style bikes.  Or on old Hwy 28, which goes through farmland south of Mesilla.   Certainly seems counter-intuitive.   Everyone else, including most of the students - are in their cars.   
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Chris on September 26, 2021, 03:52:24 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 25, 2021, 05:16:39 PMDefine "helped with traffic".  If the backup is over a smaller area or shorter period of time, I would consider that an improvement, even if there's still a backup, but many advocates against car travel will point to that and call it a failure.

I wonder if there is any data about this regarding the Katy Freeway. It is often pointed out that it didn't entirely eliminate traffic congestion, and this would then be considered a 'failure', but if it is down from say, a brutal 7-8 hours per day to 2 hours in each direction, this is a huge gain.

If you look at the Congestion Index (https://www.tomtom.com/en_gb/traffic-index/ranking/?country=US) for 2019, Houston is only the 20th most congested urban area in the U.S, despite being the 5th largest Metropolitan Statistical Area in the country. So it pulls below its weight for congestion despite being 'notoriously' car oriented.

Worldwide, Houston is only the 224th most congested city in the index, which is actually quite impressive. Out of the cities with a similar or greater population, only Dallas ranks lower on the list.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: austrini on September 27, 2021, 04:04:42 PM
Quote from: Chris on September 26, 2021, 03:52:24 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 25, 2021, 05:16:39 PMDefine "helped with traffic".  If the backup is over a smaller area or shorter period of time, I would consider that an improvement, even if there's still a backup, but many advocates against car travel will point to that and call it a failure.

I wonder if there is any data about this regarding the Katy Freeway. It is often pointed out that it didn't entirely eliminate traffic congestion, and this would then be considered a 'failure', but if it is down from say, a brutal 7-8 hours per day to 2 hours in each direction, this is a huge gain.

Yeah, peak period delays have trended, sometimes sharply, upward except in 2020 for obvious reasons. If the DOT had not widened the freeway, they would have gone up about the same amount. Essentially widening freeways makes it economical to develop property that would not have been otherwise due to travel times. The widened freeway cuts travel times, suddenly it's economical to put a bunch of houses way out there, and the travel times revert to pre-widening as sprawl is induced. It's pretty well studied. That's not to say you should not widen freeways, but the effects are well known. At some point it becomes just buying bigger belts to address obesity rather than losing weight. So IH 10 travel times are about the same as before widening (it went from 13 minutes before widening to 15 minutes after with zero traffic delay) so, we will widen it again to 44 lanes. This will cost 7 billion dollars and reduce travel time from 15 minutes to 13 minutes. In 2038, we will budget to widen it to 52 lanes, which will reduce travel time from 15 minutes to 13 minutes. At some point you just sort of have anything paved or you figure something else out. Maybe stacking them on to of each other would help!

https://traffic.houstontranstar.org/hist/hist_traveltimes_menu.aspx

I love the Oklahoma guy who argues that big freeways should plow through cities and then complains about the street grid being wonky, that's fantastic cognitive dissonance. I'm actually going to save a screenshot of that and use it in my next AICP presentation. Let me know if you want a username credit.

It's great how you say Mustang and Yukon are growing and the DOT didnt plan for it. Like the DOT is responsible for approving subdivisions and strip malls and has any say in that at all. No one at TxDot got to tell anyone on 380 not to put in 100,000 houses and no one gave TxDot money to widen 380 or buy ROW either. Someone DID tell TxDot to put a traffic light on 380 in front of the Wal Mart in Crossroads. It was literally the Wal Mart corporate office.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: vdeane on September 27, 2021, 04:55:23 PM
I believe the complaint was that TXDOT didn't plan for how to upgrade the road to account for the developments, not that TXDOT didn't get the developments stopped.  Which brings up another point: sprawl often happens with no road upgrades.  So if the sprawl is coming anyways, wouldn't we want the roads to keep travel times from growing too much, rather than have congestion become much worse?  It seems like many Urbanists actually prefer the latter, as a way to punish people for living in surburbia and driving rather than in dense urban development and walking/bicycling/riding transit.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on September 27, 2021, 05:32:38 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 27, 2021, 04:55:23 PM
I believe the complaint was that TXDOT didn't plan for how to upgrade the road to account for the developments, not that TXDOT didn't get the developments stopped.  Which brings up another point: sprawl often happens with no road upgrades.  So if the sprawl is coming anyways, wouldn't we want the roads to keep travel times from growing too much, rather than have congestion become much worse?  It seems like many Urbanists actually prefer the latter, as a way to punish people for living in surburbia and driving rather than in dense urban development and walking/bicycling/riding transit.
Be careful or you could find yourself as the New York guy who he'll screenshot and use during one his presentations. Lol

The tired old "widening freeways is akin to buying a bigger belt to fix obesity"  trope prevails yet again. Lots of questions and comments he dodged. I just when my question regarding latent demand and the distinction between it and induced demand will ever be answered because after 10 years of studying urban planning and infrastructure(not in school) I've never had an answer to that.

If this were NYC id say yeah induced demand would be more of an issue if not showing that people would prefer to drive if it was more practical there. How many people drive in Houston again? Yeah I'd say growth tends to add more traffic and demand for bigger infrastructure.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: austrini on September 27, 2021, 05:48:11 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 27, 2021, 04:55:23 PM
I believe the complaint was that TXDOT didn't plan for how to upgrade the road to account for the developments, not that TXDOT didn't get the developments stopped.  Which brings up another point: sprawl often happens with no road upgrades.  So if the sprawl is coming anyways, wouldn't we want the roads to keep travel times from growing too much, rather than have congestion become much worse?  It seems like many Urbanists actually prefer the latter, as a way to punish people for living in surburbia and driving rather than in dense urban development and walking/bicycling/riding transit.

Well, I'm not sure what you mean by urbanist.... people who live in cities? Planners? Does the Houston city planner care about the Sugarland city planner? no. Urban planners would be pro-less-travel time because it causes less wear and tear on infrastructure and produces less carbon with less idling engines.

Sprawl will happen with no road upgrades but it will not be as economically viable due to travel times and utility extensions. Katy would have still been sprawly without IH 10's widening, but by much less. This is easy to witness in most American cities. Sprawl followed new freeways. Now freeways have to follow sprawl, but it's not the DOTs fault.

There's a big development in Wylie called Inspiration and they just plopped it there without mentioning anything to TxDot except a pipe relocation... and the only way in or out was on FM 2514. The developers made millions, and you guys are like "buT th DOT dIdNt pLaN!1" So now there are big traffic jams on FM 2514 every day and no money for the DOT to do anything about it. Maybe you should blame the developer? Or the city for approving it? A turn lane was eventually added, of course at the cost to the taxpayer and not the developers.

So IH 45's widening is in response to a need. The question being asked is when do you stop adding lanes. Once you make it 26 lanes, history has shown it will not mitigate what you're trying to mitigate, and if you make it 36 lanes you get the same eventuality.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Bobby5280 on September 27, 2021, 06:02:04 PM
Quote from: austriniI love the Oklahoma guy who argues that big freeways should plow through cities and then complains about the street grid being wonky, that's fantastic cognitive dissonance. I'm actually going to save a screenshot of that and use it in my next AICP presentation. Let me know if you want a username credit.

Be sure to bring along your own strawman as a prop to use in your presentation to misinterpret my statements or just make up more $#1+ I never said.

I never said anything about plowing a freeway through an already fully developed urban area (aka a "city").

If you want to discount the effect surface designs have on traffic patterns that would make me wonder if you're actually a planner at all.

Houston in particular is famous for surface street gridlock. And it does contribute to jams that back up on the freeways. What do you expect will happen when traffic that is trying to exit an Interstate can't do so because of gridlock at the end of the exit ramp? The traffic light might be green, but if you have cars in your way you won't be able to move. That is indeed a factor on why the Katy Freeway expansion hasn't miraculously solved traffic problems in that part of Houston. I can tell you from my own driving experience there that the surface streets in that area really SUCK. It's a f***king free for all. Every alley, driveway, parking lot or whatever connects to the main roads. And you can't drive much farther than throwing distance before hitting another traffic signal.

As a comparison, take a look at Colorado Springs. It is badly under-served by freeways. But at least they have some limits applied to what can directly access a main surface arterial such as Powers Blvd. BTW that road was intended to be a freeway, but got down-graded. They at least applied some strict limits to the number of streets crossing Powers at grade. Traffic signaled intersections are spaced fairly far apart. Entrances to parking lots of businesses are confined to lesser side streets. Residential subdivisions have only so many ways in and out. If Houston had more controls like that in place the traffic on the freeways and surface streets would move much better.

Quote from: austriniIt's great how you say Mustang and Yukon are growing and the DOT didnt plan for it.

It doesn't take a genius to be able to forecast urban growth, the resulting traffic needs and make plans for it like planning where new highways might be needed in the future or existing roads expanded. Texas has usually been pretty good at that sort of thing. At least they were in the past.

In Wichita Falls what is currently Kell Freeway was just a surface street in the 1970's. They widened it to a divided street with a huge median and it stayed that way until the late 1980's when it was finally time to start building the freeway. They got the ROW secured many years earlier when it was easy and far less expensive to do so. Several super highway corridors in DFW were built-out in the same manner.

Various parties here in Oklahoma could have copied that approach, specifically in the case of Yukon and Mustang. They knew the growth was coming back in the 1990's when they could have started reserving room on S Sara Road. ODOT and OTA did a little bit of that on OK-4 just South of Bridge Creek going to the H.E. Bailey turnpike extension. They built a new pair of bridges over the Canadian River. But they didn't follow through on anything else. And even the OTA's spur going from I-44 to Norman stops miles short of I-35. It's all half-a$$ nonsense. BTW, I don't mean to make it sound like I'm letting the buck stop at them. The biggest jerks in the situation are the politicians giving ODOT, OTA or various city planners their marching orders, funding (or lack thereof).

The thing that is really going to suck (and be much more costly) is ODOT, OTA, OK State or who ever may eventually be forced to build out that Kilpatrick outer loop the original way intended in reaction to bad traffic problems. They'll be stuck having to "plow" a new super highway through already developed areas. That's a whole lot worse than having the freeway ROW reserved ahead of all the development.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on September 27, 2021, 06:16:25 PM
Quote from: austrini on September 27, 2021, 05:48:11 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 27, 2021, 04:55:23 PM

So IH 45's widening is in response to a need. The question being asked is when do you stop adding lanes. Once you make it 26 lanes, history has shown it will not mitigate what you're trying to mitigate, and if you make it 36 lanes you get the same eventuality.
You don't stop but I am highly skeptical as society evolves with new technologies we ever need to have a 50 lane highway. That's simply fear mongering at its finest.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on September 27, 2021, 06:22:26 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on September 27, 2021, 06:02:04 PM

If you want to discount the effect surface designs have on traffic patterns that would make me wonder if you're actually a planner at all.
It's clear as day this person already have a huge bias but I wondered the same until I realized some of the urban planners I've talked to are quite frankly comical, some of the things they say. I've been legitimately baffled of the fact these people are employed by the government and in charge of planning the future. You'd hope one day citizens will wake up and realize these dumbass principles like using induced demand against freeway widening is a bunch of bullshit and demand better planning.

I'm not holding my breath but I'd be nice to LA realize that during my lifetime.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: vdeane on September 27, 2021, 10:56:24 PM
Quote from: austrini on September 27, 2021, 05:48:11 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 27, 2021, 04:55:23 PM
I believe the complaint was that TXDOT didn't plan for how to upgrade the road to account for the developments, not that TXDOT didn't get the developments stopped.  Which brings up another point: sprawl often happens with no road upgrades.  So if the sprawl is coming anyways, wouldn't we want the roads to keep travel times from growing too much, rather than have congestion become much worse?  It seems like many Urbanists actually prefer the latter, as a way to punish people for living in surburbia and driving rather than in dense urban development and walking/bicycling/riding transit.

Well, I'm not sure what you mean by urbanist.... people who live in cities? Planners? Does the Houston city planner care about the Sugarland city planner? no. Urban planners would be pro-less-travel time because it causes less wear and tear on infrastructure and produces less carbon with less idling engines.

Sprawl will happen with no road upgrades but it will not be as economically viable due to travel times and utility extensions. Katy would have still been sprawly without IH 10's widening, but by much less. This is easy to witness in most American cities. Sprawl followed new freeways. Now freeways have to follow sprawl, but it's not the DOTs fault.

There's a big development in Wylie called Inspiration and they just plopped it there without mentioning anything to TxDot except a pipe relocation... and the only way in or out was on FM 2514. The developers made millions, and you guys are like "buT th DOT dIdNt pLaN!1" So now there are big traffic jams on FM 2514 every day and no money for the DOT to do anything about it. Maybe you should blame the developer? Or the city for approving it? A turn lane was eventually added, of course at the cost to the taxpayer and not the developers.

So IH 45's widening is in response to a need. The question being asked is when do you stop adding lanes. Once you make it 26 lanes, history has shown it will not mitigate what you're trying to mitigate, and if you make it 36 lanes you get the same eventuality.

Urbanists would basically be those who are trying to push people out of suburbia and cars into denser areas using bikes and transit to get around, especially those pushing for things like freeway removals.  Not that I'm not necessarily talking planners here per se (although the two groups often overlap), but primarily advocates (like the people who come up with Freeways Without Futures, or Streetsblog and the like).

Also, nice way to put words into my mouth.  I was commenting on what the other person said that it appeared you misunderstood, not to say that I think the congestion is the fault of TXDOT.  That said, I'm not sure how things are in Texas, but in New York, we have things like Highway Work Permit review and SEQR review that means that developments shouldn't be happening along state highways without NYSDOT knowing about it.  That turn lane you mention sounds like something we might require a developer to do to get approved to build an access to our road.

I actually grew up in a metro area that would seem to be a counter-example to the "sprawl follows freeways" argument.  Back when the freeways were being built, planners assumed that the west side of Rochester would grow a lot and that the east side was pretty much built out.  That's why I-490 runs parallel to the Thruway for a long time heading west (and NY 531 heads towards Brockport) while I-490 dives straight to the Thruway on the east side and NY 104 heading to Webster in the northern part of the metro is the only freeway heading east.  That didn't pan out, and as a result, I-490 is still pretty rural through Chili and Riga, while people on the east side can find themselves further from the freeway than the "Outer Loop" is from downtown and driving down arterial roads to get everywhere.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: austrini on September 30, 2021, 10:38:25 AM
Yeah, there are definitely planners that are anti-suburbia in the way that suburbia costs more and is less efficient. Simply because you have to support more infrastructure to have suburbia... water, sewer, power, internet, paved roads to lots of buildings rather than one or two. Then there are environmentalists to take it further. I see a lot of that at work every day and have to figure out how to differentiate between people (like many in here) who love giant freeways and get anal about route numbers vs. the people (not in here) who want everyone to live in Paris level density to save the planet and the trees.

TxDot is very much aligned with the people in here, and we're buying up ROW all over the place. I did misunderstand, I think. In Texas the state level transportation meetings (there is one today) will often but not always have to rubber stamp turn ins and outs on state roads but there isn't any input on what they go to. So you can add a junction for a single driveway or for 10,000 houses. The DOT in general doesn't know. Most of the time it's approved at the city level and someone may or may not let the state know. So most planning at the more local level is devolved to COGS (councils of government) which is where I work and then further devolved to municipalities, counties, or utility districts. So there is a disconnection in planning for future capacity because it is spread across three levels of government and there isn't a real mechanism to translate between each of them.

The area along 35W between Denton and Fort Worth currently has 50,000+ houses in the pipeline the cities are approving or have approved, and it's in our transportation plan to be upgraded. The houses will be there very much before the freeway is budgeted to be widened ... which is 2045. One extra freeway lane, one express lane (I think) and two extra frontage road lanes.  :-/
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: rte66man on October 02, 2021, 03:31:06 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on September 27, 2021, 06:02:04 PM
Quote from: austriniIt's great how you say Mustang and Yukon are growing and the DOT didnt plan for it.

It doesn't take a genius to be able to forecast urban growth, the resulting traffic needs and make plans for it like planning where new highways might be needed in the future or existing roads expanded. Texas has usually been pretty good at that sort of thing. At least they were in the past.

In Wichita Falls what is currently Kell Freeway was just a surface street in the 1970's. They widened it to a divided street with a huge median and it stayed that way until the late 1980's when it was finally time to start building the freeway. They got the ROW secured many years earlier when it was easy and far less expensive to do so. Several super highway corridors in DFW were built-out in the same manner.

Various parties here in Oklahoma could have copied that approach, specifically in the case of Yukon and Mustang. They knew the growth was coming back in the 1990's when they could have started reserving room on S Sara Road. ODOT and OTA did a little bit of that on OK-4 just South of Bridge Creek going to the H.E. Bailey turnpike extension. They built a new pair of bridges over the Canadian River. But they didn't follow through on anything else. And even the OTA's spur going from I-44 to Norman stops miles short of I-35. It's all half-a$$ nonsense. BTW, I don't mean to make it sound like I'm letting the buck stop at them. The biggest jerks in the situation are the politicians giving ODOT, OTA or various city planners their marching orders, funding (or lack thereof).

I like the way you keep dragging out the Kilpatrick SW extension as an example of poor planning.  The plans are irrelevant. Any road map of the 60's will show you what ODOT wanted to do. As always, there wasn't even enough money to 'reserve' RoW given the competing priorities.  Unless ODOT was willing to step in and buy the land, they had no legal way to prevent the development. That ship has sailed. you should go ahead and bury that horse 6 feet under and leave him there.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on October 02, 2021, 05:01:51 PM
Quote from: rte66man on October 02, 2021, 03:31:06 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on September 27, 2021, 06:02:04 PM
Quote from: austriniIt's great how you say Mustang and Yukon are growing and the DOT didnt plan for it.

It doesn't take a genius to be able to forecast urban growth, the resulting traffic needs and make plans for it like planning where new highways might be needed in the future or existing roads expanded. Texas has usually been pretty good at that sort of thing. At least they were in the past.

In Wichita Falls what is currently Kell Freeway was just a surface street in the 1970's. They widened it to a divided street with a huge median and it stayed that way until the late 1980's when it was finally time to start building the freeway. They got the ROW secured many years earlier when it was easy and far less expensive to do so. Several super highway corridors in DFW were built-out in the same manner.

Various parties here in Oklahoma could have copied that approach, specifically in the case of Yukon and Mustang. They knew the growth was coming back in the 1990's when they could have started reserving room on S Sara Road. ODOT and OTA did a little bit of that on OK-4 just South of Bridge Creek going to the H.E. Bailey turnpike extension. They built a new pair of bridges over the Canadian River. But they didn't follow through on anything else. And even the OTA's spur going from I-44 to Norman stops miles short of I-35. It's all half-a$$ nonsense. BTW, I don't mean to make it sound like I'm letting the buck stop at them. The biggest jerks in the situation are the politicians giving ODOT, OTA or various city planners their marching orders, funding (or lack thereof).

I like the way you keep dragging out the Kilpatrick SW extension as an example of poor planning.  The plans are irrelevant. Any road map of the 60's will show you what ODOT wanted to do. As always, there wasn't even enough money to 'reserve' RoW given the competing priorities.  Unless ODOT was willing to step in and buy the land, they had no legal way to prevent the development. That ship has sailed. you should go ahead and bury that horse 6 feet under and leave him there.
You'd have a point if the type of bullshit that caused the road to be the way it is didn't still exist in Oklahoma. Can you name me a single initiative in the entire goddamn state where there is active planning for new freeway routes in the future? OKC showed some of the highest growth in the state and yet there are zero plans for a new freeway facility.

The OTA will likely push the Kickapoo south to connect with I-35 but that will be buying up properties, lawsuits, curves to avoid certain properties, etc that could be mitigated with better planning a long time ago.

OKC is going to end up in a very shitty situation unless some serious planning begins this decades to preserve ROW for future high capacity transportation corridors.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Bobby5280 on October 03, 2021, 01:40:17 AM
Quote from: rte66manI like the way you keep dragging out the Kilpatrick SW extension as an example of poor planning.  The plans are irrelevant. Any road map of the 60's will show you what ODOT wanted to do. As always, there wasn't even enough money to 'reserve' RoW given the competing priorities.

I keep dragging out the Kilpatrick SW extension as an example of poor planning because it is. And I'm not buying the excuse there wasn't enough money to buy up ROW way back when they should have done so. They blew a bunch of money on a pair of new bridges over the Canadian River back when the H.E. Bailey extension was built. They could have gone with a single 2-lane bridge and use the savings to Super-2 the OK-4 route from I-44 up thru Bridge Creek and Mustang. They could have done that back in the 1970's-1980's time frame when the Kilpatrick plan was starting to gel.

The Oklahoma state government, and by extension ODOT & OTA, has a reputation for doing things barely good enough to get by. Some projects get started and left unfinished for years, decades or permanently. For instance, I don't have much faith OTA (or ODOT) will do anything to extend the Kickapoo Turnpike farther South or North. They can sign it as I-240 if they want. I'm still probably never going to use it.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on October 03, 2021, 01:56:16 AM
There's a good change we'll hear about a south extension soon. Unfortunately it seems it might only be extended to highway 9 which is completely useless if so but we'll see.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Bobby5280 on October 03, 2021, 03:07:15 PM
For my own selfish purposes, if the Kickapoo Turnpike doesn't at bare minimum wrap down and across to I-35 I'll see zero value in using it for my road trips on I-44 beyond OKC, such as trips up to Tulsa and beyond. I'll just stay on I-44. And I'd probably still stay on I-44 anyway unless the Kickapoo Turnpike somehow joined to the H.E. Bailey Turnpike extension either directly or by the HEB getting properly extended to I-35.

For me to even mess with driving on the Kickapoo Turnpike at all it would have to net me some substantial time savings over staying on I-44 thru OKC. When I drive thru OKC I rarely do so during rush hour. So I avoid the jams that can happen on I-44 just North of the OKC Fairgrounds, by Penn Square Mall and near the I-35 junction. I would have to pay a premium in tolls to go around OKC. Paying that premium would be stupid if I was having to drive through 3 traffic signals by Riverwind Casino and 11 of them on OK-9 thru the South side of Norman.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: J N Winkler on October 03, 2021, 03:17:10 PM
Just a gentle reminder:  discussion of turnpike extensions in Oklahoma belongs on the Central States board.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on October 03, 2021, 03:24:00 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on October 03, 2021, 03:17:10 PM
Just a gentle reminder:  discussion of turnpike extensions in Oklahoma belongs on the Central States board.
Wow we did get off topic that's pretty funny. My ADHD is so bad I'll click on this topic expecting to read about an update regarding this project in Houston see the discussion about turnpike extensions in Oklahoma and immediately forget what the original topic is supposed to be about. My bad
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: rte66man on October 03, 2021, 05:11:06 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on October 02, 2021, 05:01:51 PM
Quote from: rte66man on October 02, 2021, 03:31:06 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on September 27, 2021, 06:02:04 PM
Quote from: austriniIt's great how you say Mustang and Yukon are growing and the DOT didnt plan for it.

It doesn't take a genius to be able to forecast urban growth, the resulting traffic needs and make plans for it like planning where new highways might be needed in the future or existing roads expanded. Texas has usually been pretty good at that sort of thing. At least they were in the past.

In Wichita Falls what is currently Kell Freeway was just a surface street in the 1970's. They widened it to a divided street with a huge median and it stayed that way until the late 1980's when it was finally time to start building the freeway. They got the ROW secured many years earlier when it was easy and far less expensive to do so. Several super highway corridors in DFW were built-out in the same manner.

Various parties here in Oklahoma could have copied that approach, specifically in the case of Yukon and Mustang. They knew the growth was coming back in the 1990's when they could have started reserving room on S Sara Road. ODOT and OTA did a little bit of that on OK-4 just South of Bridge Creek going to the H.E. Bailey turnpike extension. They built a new pair of bridges over the Canadian River. But they didn't follow through on anything else. And even the OTA's spur going from I-44 to Norman stops miles short of I-35. It's all half-a$$ nonsense. BTW, I don't mean to make it sound like I'm letting the buck stop at them. The biggest jerks in the situation are the politicians giving ODOT, OTA or various city planners their marching orders, funding (or lack thereof).

I like the way you keep dragging out the Kilpatrick SW extension as an example of poor planning.  The plans are irrelevant. Any road map of the 60's will show you what ODOT wanted to do. As always, there wasn't even enough money to 'reserve' RoW given the competing priorities.  Unless ODOT was willing to step in and buy the land, they had no legal way to prevent the development. That ship has sailed. you should go ahead and bury that horse 6 feet under and leave him there.
You'd have a point if the type of bullshit that caused the road to be the way it is didn't still exist in Oklahoma. Can you name me a single initiative in the entire goddamn state where there is active planning for new freeway routes in the future? OKC showed some of the highest growth in the state and yet there are zero plans for a new freeway facility.

The OTA will likely push the Kickapoo south to connect with I-35 but that will be buying up properties, lawsuits, curves to avoid certain properties, etc that could be mitigated with better planning a long time ago.

OKC is going to end up in a very shitty situation unless some serious planning begins this decades to preserve ROW for future high capacity transportation corridors.

The US81 bypass of Chickasha comes immediately to mind. A 4 lane, fully limited access bypass along the west side.

The issue is MONEY.  I actually agree that RoW needs to be preserved. However, the funds allocated for roads is extremely inadequate to do that as well as keep up with existing improvements. Right or wrong, the general populace won't vote for increased taxes to pay for RoW preservation when their shitty 2-lane state highway needs shoulders and bridge replacements.

If we were to task ODOT/OTA with buying up RoW for a SE Norman bypass from wherever the Kickapoo extension connects over to OK9 by the casino, how much do you think that would cost today? Yes, it will cost more next year but that's not the point. The money just isn't there.

To follow the moderator's "gentle guidance" to get this back on topic, what chance is there for a change in the board makeup so the project could get off center and move forward?  Not as familiar with Houston politics as I used to be.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Chris on October 04, 2021, 10:00:47 AM
Where is all the congestion? 9 a.m. and only some local congestion around downtown. If you compare that with European cities, you'll see that almost the entire urban highway network will be jammed up at 9 a.m. on a Monday morning.

(https://i.imgur.com/H047kVk.png)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Rothman on October 04, 2021, 10:37:01 AM
Quote from: Chris on October 04, 2021, 10:00:47 AM
Where is all the congestion? 9 a.m. and only some local congestion around downtown. If you compare that with European cities, you'll see that almost the entire urban highway network will be jammed up at 9 a.m. on a Monday morning.

(https://i.imgur.com/H047kVk.png)
Zoom in.  You're looking at it way zoomed out.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: hotdogPi on October 04, 2021, 11:09:06 AM
Quote from: Rothman on October 04, 2021, 10:37:01 AM
Quote from: Chris on October 04, 2021, 10:00:47 AM
Where is all the congestion? 9 a.m. and only some local congestion around downtown. If you compare that with European cities, you'll see that almost the entire urban highway network will be jammed up at 9 a.m. on a Monday morning.

(https://i.imgur.com/H047kVk.png)
Zoom in.  You're looking at it way zoomed out.

I-610 is much less congested than MA 128 normally is during rush hour.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: bwana39 on October 04, 2021, 11:23:06 AM
9:00 AM How is the traffic where you are at 10:00 AM?  Texas; being on central time shifts the day an hour earlier than on the east coast. That is the real point of comparison.
Most of Texas tends to work from seven AM or later to about 5:00PM. Most of the offices work 8-5 with an hour for lunch.  Bank lobbies tend to be 9-3 (or 9-4)

I agree that I-610  is not nearly as congested as even the closer in downtown loop or SHT (Beltway 8). It is however congested if you hit it at the wrong times.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on October 07, 2021, 05:08:20 PM
Update from CEW about this project retaining the funding per the updated 10 yr plan:

https://www.constructionequipmentguide.com/texas-transportation-commission-approves-10-year-plan/53999
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on November 15, 2021, 03:08:51 PM
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/Harris-County-considering-pause-of-I-45-lawsuit-16622452.php

Harris County is considering pausing their lawsuit, sounds like they're willing to come to some kind of agreement with TxDOT.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: bwana39 on November 25, 2021, 09:02:46 AM
https://www.yahoo.com/news/houston-highway-project-sparks-debate-203458040.html

Just a new discussion

https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/texas-news/houston-highway-project-sparks-debate-over-racial-equity/2824537/
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on November 30, 2021, 12:09:15 PM
Breaking news.... 
The Texas Transportation announced that FHWA has ended the pause on sections 3A and 3B, and authorized some pre-construction work to proceed on section 3C.

It was reported that extensive discussions between TxDOT and FHWA have taken place in the recent month and discussions are ongoing.

The project has been delayed at least 2 years due to the FHWA pause.

This discussion will be available in the video of today's meeting when posted, see the meeting opening remarks.

Direct  link to map for people who use browsers that require https: http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/NHHIP-sections.png (http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/NHHIP-sections.png)

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2FNHHIP-sections.png&hash=614416f77bf99fb2eadd08513c07deaf4d12760c)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on November 30, 2021, 12:50:43 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on November 30, 2021, 12:09:15 PM
Breaking news.... 
The Texas Transportation announced that FHWA has ended the pause on sections 3A and 3B, and authorized some pre-construction work to proceed on section 3C.

It was reported that extensive discussions between TxDOT and FHWA have taken place in the recent month and discussions are ongoing.

The project has been delayed at least 2 years due to the FHWA pause.

This discussion will be available in the video of today's meeting when posted, see the opening remarks.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2FNHHIP-sections.png&hash=614416f77bf99fb2eadd08513c07deaf4d12760c)
Your photo isn't displaying. Also, I'm not seeing news of this anywhere?

Edit: I see it now,

So FHWA has let TxDOT go forward to some degree with every part of the downtown rebuild except for the part that would make urbanists happy?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on November 30, 2021, 03:32:24 PM
Yeah I'm pretty confused by this as well what's the point of even undertaking any of it if they're not gonna fix the bottleneck? Before TxDOT goes and spends billions they probably should make sure they can do the entire project.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: TXtoNJ on November 30, 2021, 04:11:20 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on November 30, 2021, 12:50:43 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on November 30, 2021, 12:09:15 PM
Breaking news.... 
The Texas Transportation announced that FHWA has ended the pause on sections 3A and 3B, and authorized some pre-construction work to proceed on section 3C.

It was reported that extensive discussions between TxDOT and FHWA have taken place in the recent month and discussions are ongoing.

The project has been delayed at least 2 years due to the FHWA pause.

This discussion will be available in the video of today's meeting when posted, see the opening remarks.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2FNHHIP-sections.png&hash=614416f77bf99fb2eadd08513c07deaf4d12760c)
Your photo isn't displaying. Also, I'm not seeing news of this anywhere?

Edit: I see it now,

So FHWA has let TxDOT go forward to some degree with every part of the downtown rebuild except for the part that would make urbanists happy?


No, all of 3 is a go - 3D is last because it's the most intensive and disruptive during construction.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on November 30, 2021, 04:27:14 PM
I'm still not seeing any one reporting that FHWA has lifted its freeze.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: abqtraveler on November 30, 2021, 04:46:02 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on November 30, 2021, 04:27:14 PM
I'm still not seeing any one reporting that FHWA has lifted its freeze.
What is your source that the FHWA has lifted its "pause" on Section 3 of the NHHIP?  I did a Google search can can't find anything to that effect.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on November 30, 2021, 04:52:43 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on November 30, 2021, 04:46:02 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on November 30, 2021, 04:27:14 PM
I'm still not seeing any one reporting that FHWA has lifted its freeze.
What is your source that the FHWA has lifted its "pause" on Section 3 of the NHHIP?  I did a Google search can can't find anything to that effect.

Maxconcrete
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on November 30, 2021, 05:08:00 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on November 30, 2021, 04:46:02 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on November 30, 2021, 04:27:14 PM
I'm still not seeing any one reporting that FHWA has lifted its freeze.
What is your source that the FHWA has lifted its "pause" on Section 3 of the NHHIP?  I did a Google search can can't find anything to that effect.

This was announced during the meeting of the Texas Transportation Commission, which is livestreamed.

There is probably not yet a news report because the Houston Chronicle transportation reporter was busy on the ship channel bridge report
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/Harris-County-to-spend-300M-more-to-fix-Ship-16663883.php

Why do people think I'm a liar? When was the last time I posted invalid information? (answer: never)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on November 30, 2021, 05:31:04 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on November 30, 2021, 04:52:43 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on November 30, 2021, 04:46:02 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on November 30, 2021, 04:27:14 PM
I'm still not seeing any one reporting that FHWA has lifted its freeze.
What is your source that the FHWA has lifted its "pause" on Section 3 of the NHHIP?  I did a Google search can can't find anything to that effect.

Maxconcrete
He rarely posts anything except facts and news articles not sure what reason you'd have to doubt him. He is among the most credible posters on this forum, IMO.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: J N Winkler on November 30, 2021, 06:42:21 PM
Direct link to Texas Transportation Commission meeting agendas, minutes, and media files for 2021 (https://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/administration/commission/2021-meetings.html)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Rothman on November 30, 2021, 07:21:26 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on November 30, 2021, 05:31:04 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on November 30, 2021, 04:52:43 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on November 30, 2021, 04:46:02 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on November 30, 2021, 04:27:14 PM
I'm still not seeing any one reporting that FHWA has lifted its freeze.
What is your source that the FHWA has lifted its "pause" on Section 3 of the NHHIP?  I did a Google search can can't find anything to that effect.

Maxconcrete
He rarely posts anything except facts and news articles not sure what reason you'd have to doubt him. He is among the most credible posters on this forum, IMO.
Ad hominem.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: hotdogPi on November 30, 2021, 07:30:56 PM
Quote from: Rothman on November 30, 2021, 07:21:26 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on November 30, 2021, 05:31:04 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on November 30, 2021, 04:52:43 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on November 30, 2021, 04:46:02 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on November 30, 2021, 04:27:14 PM
I'm still not seeing any one reporting that FHWA has lifted its freeze.
What is your source that the FHWA has lifted its "pause" on Section 3 of the NHHIP?  I did a Google search can can't find anything to that effect.

Maxconcrete
He rarely posts anything except facts and news articles not sure what reason you'd have to doubt him. He is among the most credible posters on this forum, IMO.
Ad hominem.

Looks like a legitimate argument. Compare a typical link posted by cpzilliacus and one posted by kernals12.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on November 30, 2021, 07:33:57 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on November 30, 2021, 05:08:00 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on November 30, 2021, 04:46:02 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on November 30, 2021, 04:27:14 PM
I'm still not seeing any one reporting that FHWA has lifted its freeze.
What is your source that the FHWA has lifted its "pause" on Section 3 of the NHHIP?  I did a Google search can can't find anything to that effect.

This was announced during the meeting of the Texas Transportation Commission, which is livestreamed.

There is probably not yet a news report because the Houston Chronicle transportation reporter was busy on the ship channel bridge report
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/Harris-County-to-spend-300M-more-to-fix-Ship-16663883.php

Why do people think I'm a liar? When was the last time I posted invalid information? (answer: never)

It's called trust but verify. Don't get your panties in a twist.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Rothman on November 30, 2021, 07:36:34 PM


Quote from: 1 on November 30, 2021, 07:30:56 PM
Quote from: Rothman on November 30, 2021, 07:21:26 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on November 30, 2021, 05:31:04 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on November 30, 2021, 04:52:43 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on November 30, 2021, 04:46:02 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on November 30, 2021, 04:27:14 PM
I'm still not seeing any one reporting that FHWA has lifted its freeze.
What is your source that the FHWA has lifted its "pause" on Section 3 of the NHHIP?  I did a Google search can can't find anything to that effect.

Maxconcrete
He rarely posts anything except facts and news articles not sure what reason you'd have to doubt him. He is among the most credible posters on this forum, IMO.
Ad hominem.

Looks like a legitimate argument. Compare a typical link posted by cpzilliacus and one posted by kernals12.

Ad hominem is never legitimate.  The argument should be attacked on its own merits.  Cpzilliacus isn't perfect and kernals12 can even manage a decent post once a year or so.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on November 30, 2021, 07:37:30 PM
Houston Public Media's reporting

https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/news/transportation/2021/11/30/414398/txdot-gets-the-ok-to-continue-limited-work-on-a-controversial-i-45-expansion/
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: TXtoNJ on November 30, 2021, 09:18:10 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on November 30, 2021, 07:33:57 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on November 30, 2021, 05:08:00 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on November 30, 2021, 04:46:02 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on November 30, 2021, 04:27:14 PM
I'm still not seeing any one reporting that FHWA has lifted its freeze.
What is your source that the FHWA has lifted its "pause" on Section 3 of the NHHIP?  I did a Google search can can't find anything to that effect.

This was announced during the meeting of the Texas Transportation Commission, which is livestreamed.

There is probably not yet a news report because the Houston Chronicle transportation reporter was busy on the ship channel bridge report
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/Harris-County-to-spend-300M-more-to-fix-Ship-16663883.php

Why do people think I'm a liar? When was the last time I posted invalid information? (answer: never)

It's called trust but verify. Don't get your panties in a twist.

Look, I know you're young, but possibly before you were born, MaxConcrete wrote a comprehensive book about Houston Freeways. There's probably nobody outside of TxDOT that has a more detailed knowledge of the system.

If he says it, it's as good as gold.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on December 01, 2021, 04:55:58 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/AjdBSEE.png)

How come they need that much clearance between the main lanes and the frontage roads?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Bobby5280 on December 01, 2021, 07:09:06 PM
Quote from: kernals12How come they need that much clearance between the main lanes and the frontage roads?

The space is needed for various types of ramps to merge in/out of the freeway. Space is also needed for support pylons of any flyover ramps. Room is also needed for drainage, utilities, etc.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on December 01, 2021, 08:52:12 PM
The city of Houston found that, with minor changes, the need for eminent domain takings on the NW corner of the rebuilt i-45/I-610 interchange would be eliminated
(https://i.imgur.com/XFJe6ZP.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/njPwdYg.png)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Echostatic on December 02, 2021, 01:25:19 AM
Seems like a no-brainer, honestly. Still a plenty wide curve and reduces project cost.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: achilles765 on December 05, 2021, 03:16:37 AM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on November 30, 2021, 04:11:20 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on November 30, 2021, 12:50:43 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on November 30, 2021, 12:09:15 PM
Breaking news.... 
The Texas Transportation announced that FHWA has ended the pause on sections 3A and 3B, and authorized some pre-construction work to proceed on section 3C.

It was reported that extensive discussions between TxDOT and FHWA have taken place in the recent month and discussions are ongoing.

The project has been delayed at least 2 years due to the FHWA pause.

This discussion will be available in the video of today's meeting when posted, see the opening remarks.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2FNHHIP-sections.png&hash=614416f77bf99fb2eadd08513c07deaf4d12760c)
Your photo isn't displaying. Also, I'm not seeing news of this anywhere?

Edit: I see it now,

So FHWA has let TxDOT go forward to some degree with every part of the downtown rebuild except for the part that would make urbanists happy?


No, all of 3 is a go - 3D is last because it's the most intensive and disruptive during construction.

LOL that is an understatement...I still cannot even imagine how hellish things are going to be during the construction... I am glad I live five minutes from downtown and don't have to use a freeway most of the time. Though I do cross IH 69/US 59...
I do really hope that there is an exit to better serve Franklin Street/Canal/Navigation/Harrisburg.  And some more (or rebuilt) overpasses or underpasses at those damn railroad tracks... UP is always blocking traffic from East End for hours...
I really feel for anyone who regularly uses the Pierce Elevated though
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on December 05, 2021, 09:45:51 AM
Quote from: Echostatic on December 02, 2021, 01:25:19 AM
Seems like a no-brainer, honestly. Still a plenty wide curve and reduces project cost.

I think this is a product of the use-it-or-lose-it system of government budgeting. If they don't spend the money on this ramp and all the ROW acquisition it requires, then they lose the right to use those funds. This incentivizes wasteful spending.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: DJStephens on December 05, 2021, 04:14:39 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on December 01, 2021, 07:09:06 PM
Quote from: kernals12How come they need that much clearance between the main lanes and the frontage roads?

The space is needed for various types of ramps to merge in/out of the freeway. Space is also needed for support pylons of any flyover ramps. Room is also needed for drainage, utilities, etc.

Braided ramps.  These are likely going to be heavily employed.  Quite a few of them are beginning to take shape on the new Montana Ave Frwy in E. El Paso (US - 62/180).   The Montana Ave Frwy is only going to have a six lane cross - section, while personally believe they should have gone for eight.   
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: armadillo speedbump on December 06, 2021, 03:37:09 PM
Did the city and county do much exploration into using the Hardy Toll Road extension to provide alternate capacity to downtown from the north instead of I-45 expansion?  This would avoid the neighborhood impacts of I-45 expansion from downtown to I-610.  The Hardy was to use former railroad ROW that had the railroad relocated and mostly just industrial land that would be impacted by an expanded interchange at the south end of the Hardy Toll Road.  You might not be able to duplicate the exact amount of additional capacity, and there might be painful upgrades along I-610 in between 45 and the Hardy.  Would need about a mile of elevated roadway on 610 if you wanted to avoid taking any homes.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on December 25, 2021, 06:55:21 PM
Right-of-way clearance is proceeding on the southwest side of the intersection of IH 69 and SH 288.

According to the press report when FHWA allowed some work to proceed, FHWA authorized TxDOT to proceed with design work only on this section. I'm thinking this clearance work was a contract in progress when FHWA suspended the entire project earlier this year, and this clearance is being allowed to proceed. Another building just west of the demolished building is fenced off and it looks like the interior is being gutted in preparation for demolition.

View below is from December 12. Link to photo for people using Chrome: http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20211212_012_1600.jpg (http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20211212_012_1600.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20211212_012_1600.jpg&hash=90975d77a42ddff5f11ab9b4319b5e510ffe971d)

Photo taken today http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20211225_012_1800.jpg (http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20211225_012_1800.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20211225_012_1800.jpg&hash=549b9ae376b30a6aa80b6b74d21b04e767ef645e)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on January 07, 2022, 09:08:59 AM
Quote from: Chris on October 04, 2021, 10:00:47 AM
Where is all the congestion? 9 a.m. and only some local congestion around downtown. If you compare that with European cities, you'll see that almost the entire urban highway network will be jammed up at 9 a.m. on a Monday morning.

(https://i.imgur.com/H047kVk.png)

I was told that widening the Katy Freeway made traffic worse
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 07, 2022, 12:23:26 PM
The widening of Katy Freeway did not make traffic worse. There are two factors making traffic worse on Houston's West side. One: Houston is still adding a lot of new residents, thus increasing traffic levels. Two: they widened I-10, but they did nothing to improve the surface street network near the massive highway.

Bad surface street design is often the source of many traffic jams. If a primary surface arterial has frequent traffic signals and driveways from every property connecting directly to it that arterial will be very inefficient at moving large amounts of traffic. The interface between the surface street arterial and the freeway can be a very severe bottleneck. If the surface street sucks at moving traffic it will cause back-ups that accumulate over the off ramps and then back-build onto the freeway main lanes.

There is very little access filtering along the frontage roads adjacent to Katy Freeway. The same goes for the arterial streets crossing under I-10, such as Silber Rd or Antoine Dr near I-610 or Bunker Hill Rd and Gessner Rd closer to Beltway 8. The Memorial City and City Center zones around there can be a real nightmare. You have to drive farther West, nearly to Katy Mills, before more modern surface street grid designs begin to appear.

Houston was already a huge city before traffic engineers started incorporating methods of traffic access control along surface streets and in commercial or residential developments. A giant-sized, modern freeway built over the top of an outdated surface street grid isn't going to work as well as intended.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: vdeane on January 07, 2022, 12:57:38 PM
It's worth noting that the New Urbanists and other people who hate freeways don't see traffic as we do.  We think "the traffic is moving faster and/or it's stop and go over a smaller area and/or a shorter period of time" is good because it's less congested, but they don't - to them, less traffic means "overall VMT is lower".  To them, it's not traffic speed that's the issue, but the fact that people are driving at all, so more people driving, even if they're at free-flow = "more traffic" in their minds.  Those arguments would be met with "there would be less sprawl because the congestion discourages living out there"
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 07, 2022, 03:06:22 PM
Quote from: vdeane on January 07, 2022, 12:57:38 PM
It's worth noting that the New Urbanists and other people who hate freeways don't see traffic as we do.  We think "the traffic is moving faster and/or it's stop and go over a smaller area and/or a shorter period of time" is good because it's less congested, but they don't - to them, less traffic means "overall VMT is lower".  To them, it's not traffic speed that's the issue, but the fact that people are driving at all, so more people driving, even if they're at free-flow = "more traffic" in their minds.  Those arguments would be met with "there would be less sprawl because the congestion discourages living out there"
Yep. They want everyone to live the way they think people should live.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Chris on January 07, 2022, 03:27:41 PM
I think the Katy Freeway example was also based on cherry picking data.

The Katy Freeway was reported to have had terrible congestion, with 10-13 hours per day of congested traffic flow, often in both directions. Nowadays it looks like it's not nearly as bad. And there are the express lanes which provide free-flow traffic.

Here's a photo of the Katy Freeway, pre-widening, from the Houston Freeways book:
(https://i.imgur.com/wOftxib.jpg)

Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 07, 2022, 03:38:24 PM
Same thing with the 405. Though you could argue that was a waste of money too given they there are bottlenecks on both ends of the project extents that are the main cause of traffic backups. Part of me almost thinks that planners knew this and it wasn't going to help traffic to sour peoples opinions on freeway construction.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on January 07, 2022, 04:47:59 PM
Quote from: Chris on January 07, 2022, 03:27:41 PM
I think the Katy Freeway example was also based on cherry picking data.

The Katy Freeway was reported to have had terrible congestion, with 10-13 hours per day of congested traffic flow, often in both directions. Nowadays it looks like it's not nearly as bad. And there are the express lanes which provide free-flow traffic.

Here's a photo of the Katy Freeway, pre-widening, from the Houston Freeways book:
(https://i.imgur.com/wOftxib.jpg)
Who needs facts when you have a narrative?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on January 07, 2022, 04:51:24 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 07, 2022, 03:38:24 PM
Same thing with the 405. Though you could argue that was a waste of money too given they there are bottlenecks on both ends of the project extents that are the main cause of traffic backups. Part of me almost thinks that planners knew this and it wasn't going to help traffic to sour peoples opinions on freeway construction.

Also, note how they only focus on those two freeway projects only. If the Big Dig had made traffic worse, they'd be pouncing all over it.

Also, just a few years ago, New Jersey widened 35 miles of the turnpike to 12 lanes where before it had been 6 or 10. I haven't heard them claim that made traffic worse.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Chris on January 07, 2022, 05:26:33 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2022, 04:47:59 PM
Who needs facts when you have a narrative?

'They widened the freeway to 26 lanes and it only made traffic worse!'

Of course this is a misrepresentation of reality, but it makes for good headlines feeding into the confirmation bias of certain groups.

Though I think the average citizen doesn't really care or read about stuff like this. It caters to the Streetsblog type of readers I suppose.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: CtrlAltDel on January 07, 2022, 09:49:17 PM
Quote from: Chris on January 07, 2022, 03:27:41 PM
I think the Katy Freeway example was also based on cherry picking data.
(https://i.imgur.com/wOftxib.jpg)

I think this is here (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7844089,-95.5454089,16z).
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Anthony_JK on January 07, 2022, 09:55:08 PM
Quote from: Chris on January 07, 2022, 03:27:41 PM
I think the Katy Freeway example was also based on cherry picking data.

The Katy Freeway was reported to have had terrible congestion, with 10-13 hours per day of congested traffic flow, often in both directions. Nowadays it looks like it's not nearly as bad. And there are the express lanes which provide free-flow traffic.

Here's a photo of the Katy Freeway, pre-widening, from the Houston Freeways book:
(https://i.imgur.com/wOftxib.jpg)



Eeeee-yi. That is indeed horrible.

What I find fascinating is the ROW arrangement there, with the abandoned MKT/"Katy" rail line, the 2-way local road, the transmission line eavesment, and then the 6-lane I-10 with 2-lane access roads and single lane reversable HOV lane. That was a lot of spare room to clear to create the modern Katy Freeway/Tollway.

Wasn't there an alternative given that would have rehabbed the rail line as a light rail corridor in lieu of building the express toll lanes?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on January 07, 2022, 10:58:41 PM
Quote from: Chris on January 07, 2022, 05:26:33 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2022, 04:47:59 PM
Who needs facts when you have a narrative?

'They widened the freeway to 26 lanes and it only made traffic worse!'

Of course this is a misrepresentation of reality, but it makes for good headlines feeding into the confirmation bias of certain groups.

Though I think the average citizen doesn't really care or read about stuff like this. It caters to the Streetsblog type of readers I suppose.

Well we've got a few politicians echoing that false belief
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 07, 2022, 11:41:07 PM
Quote from: Kernals12Who needs facts when you have a narrative?

Are you claiming to provide facts rather than your own narrative?

Apparently you breezed over what I said about Houston's old street grid design and how it contributes greatly to traffic snarls.

Quote from: Kernals12Also, note how they only focus on those two freeway projects only. If the Big Dig had made traffic worse, they'd be pouncing all over it.

No, the Big Dig made headlines with its massive cost overruns, tunnels leaking water and all sorts of other crap. By the time the project was finished some people thought it was a miracle the thing was completed at all. I guess 15 years after that 15 year long project concluded some people have apparently forgotten about the staggering costs and controversy involved.

If the Big Dig didn't do anything to make traffic worse in Downtown Boston it's probably only because it's such a pain in the ass driving into such a historically old street grid and trying to find affordable parking that no one wants to bother. Maybe we'll just party out in Worcester instead.

Quote from: Kernals12Also, just a few years ago, New Jersey widened 35 miles of the turnpike to 12 lanes where before it had been 6 or 10. I haven't heard them claim that made traffic worse.

The upper portion of the New Jersey Turnpike from exit 8 on North has had 4 carriageways and 12 lanes dating back to the f***king 1980's. The widening down to exit 6 was finished almost a decade ago. Also, your tossing out something of an apples-oranges argument. The New Jersey Turnpike has a limited number of exits. It's also a very costly toll road most people avoid unless they absolutely have to get on it. And by the way the New Jersey Turnpike and feeders into it get jammed on a regular basis.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Rothman on January 08, 2022, 12:13:10 AM
Nobody parties in Worcester.  Nobody.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: sprjus4 on January 08, 2022, 12:14:15 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 07, 2022, 11:41:07 PM
It's also a very costly toll road most people avoid unless they absolutely have to get on it.
Its traffic volumes say otherwise.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 08, 2022, 12:48:43 AM
Quote from: RothmanNobody parties in Worcester.  Nobody.

I'd rather attempt partying in Worcester than trying to find parking in downtown Boston. If worse came to worse there are other places to visit in the region. Springfield, Providence, Hartford, Concord, etc.

Quote from: sprjus4Its traffic volumes say otherwise.

They're bent over the barrel, not having much of any other choice. I guess there's route 1, but, oh well.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on January 08, 2022, 09:21:47 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 07, 2022, 11:41:07 PM
Quote from: Kernals12Who needs facts when you have a narrative?

Are you claiming to provide facts rather than your own narrative?

Apparently you breezed over what I said about Houston's old street grid design and how it contributes greatly to traffic snarls.

Quote from: Kernals12Also, note how they only focus on those two freeway projects only. If the Big Dig had made traffic worse, they'd be pouncing all over it.

No, the Big Dig made headlines with its massive cost overruns, tunnels leaking water and all sorts of other crap. By the time the project was finished some people thought it was a miracle the thing was completed at all. I guess 15 years after that 15 year long project concluded some people have apparently forgotten about the staggering costs and controversy involved.

If the Big Dig didn't do anything to make traffic worse in Downtown Boston it's probably only because it's such a pain in the ass driving into such a historically old street grid and trying to find affordable parking that no one wants to bother. Maybe we'll just party out in Worcester instead.

Quote from: Kernals12Also, just a few years ago, New Jersey widened 35 miles of the turnpike to 12 lanes where before it had been 6 or 10. I haven't heard them claim that made traffic worse.

The upper portion of the New Jersey Turnpike from exit 8 on North has had 4 carriageways and 12 lanes dating back to the f***king 1980's. The widening down to exit 6 was finished almost a decade ago. Also, your tossing out something of an apples-oranges argument. The New Jersey Turnpike has a limited number of exits. It's also a very costly toll road most people avoid unless they absolutely have to get on it. And by the way the New Jersey Turnpike and feeders into it get jammed on a regular basis.

New Urbanists never show any interest in nuance, so neither do I.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: bwana39 on January 08, 2022, 11:20:37 AM
Quote from: kernals12 on December 01, 2021, 08:52:12 PM
The city of Houston found that, with minor changes, the need for eminent domain takings on the NW corner of the rebuilt i-45/I-610 interchange would be eliminated
(https://i.imgur.com/XFJe6ZP.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/njPwdYg.png)

The reduced ramp speed flys straight in the face of the ideals for Texas freeway intersections. What happens is backups when the traffic slows for the ramp. Traffic backs up when the slower traffic merges into the new route.

Lower radius ramps may be the more palatable plan for the community, in the end, all it does is create more traffic backed up and in the long run that will wind up making the places not taken for the construction less desirable. Let's save it so it can be abandoned or sold for low end rental property in a decade or less.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: TXtoNJ on January 08, 2022, 11:33:09 AM
To be fair, the "ideals" for Texas interchanges are pretty outdated and detached from the context of urban environments.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Rothman on January 08, 2022, 12:19:49 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 08, 2022, 12:48:43 AM
Quote from: RothmanNobody parties in Worcester.  Nobody.

I'd rather attempt partying in Worcester than trying to find parking in downtown Boston. If worse came to worse there are other places to visit in the region. Springfield, Providence, Hartford, Concord, etc.

None of those places are places to party.  Springfield is now a carbon copy of Biff's alternate Hill Valley and widely joked about as MA's "elephant graveyard" (Lion King meme).

Just plan for it.  Boston's a great town.  Utilize transit options.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: bwana39 on January 08, 2022, 07:04:41 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 08, 2022, 11:33:09 AM
To be fair, the "ideals" for Texas interchanges are pretty outdated and detached from the context of urban environments.


To be fair, why do they have to be "outdated?" That is just an opinion from  urbanists versus a more realistic view of what the greater portion of Texans seem to support.

No! what happens if they build the low radius ramps, the community that is there declines because it is immediately adjacent to a busy intersection. If I believed that the low radius ramps MIGHT allow the local community to be affected significantly less than with the wider high speed ramps, I might be able to agree. Simple fact, the Church and the other people in the area tolerate the new dynamics for a while then flee to greener pastures. 
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: TXtoNJ on January 08, 2022, 08:17:12 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on January 08, 2022, 07:04:41 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 08, 2022, 11:33:09 AM
To be fair, the "ideals" for Texas interchanges are pretty outdated and detached from the context of urban environments.


To be fair, why do they have to be "outdated?" That is just an opinion from  urbanists versus a more realistic view of what the greater portion of Texans seem to support.

No! what happens if they build the low radius ramps, the community that is there declines because it is immediately adjacent to a busy intersection. If I believed that the low radius ramps MIGHT allow the local community to be affected significantly less than with the wider high speed ramps, I might be able to agree. Simple fact, the Church and the other people in the area tolerate the new dynamics for a while then flee to greener pastures. 

There's already a ramp there. This just means that there's a symbolic win for the North Houston black community, since this church doesn't get destroyed. What's more, it reduces a ton of opposition to the rest of the project.

Let cities be cities already. We tried urban freeways for a century now, and it's clear they're a failure for any purpose other than putting more cars on the road.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 08, 2022, 08:55:16 PM
Yea I don't think Texas interchanges are outdated at all. If anything they're the most modern interchanges that exist.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on January 08, 2022, 09:05:02 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 08, 2022, 08:17:12 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on January 08, 2022, 07:04:41 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 08, 2022, 11:33:09 AM
To be fair, the "ideals" for Texas interchanges are pretty outdated and detached from the context of urban environments.


To be fair, why do they have to be "outdated?" That is just an opinion from  urbanists versus a more realistic view of what the greater portion of Texans seem to support.

No! what happens if they build the low radius ramps, the community that is there declines because it is immediately adjacent to a busy intersection. If I believed that the low radius ramps MIGHT allow the local community to be affected significantly less than with the wider high speed ramps, I might be able to agree. Simple fact, the Church and the other people in the area tolerate the new dynamics for a while then flee to greener pastures. 

There's already a ramp there. This just means that there's a symbolic win for the North Houston black community, since this church doesn't get destroyed. What's more, it reduces a ton of opposition to the rest of the project.

Let cities be cities already. We tried urban freeways for a century now, and it's clear they're a failure for any purpose other than putting more cars on the road.


They make it easier to get around. They're why most of the world's least congested cities are in America. Is it any wonder that developing countries are copying the American, rather than the European model and filling their cities with expressways?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Scott5114 on January 08, 2022, 11:51:08 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 08, 2022, 08:17:12 PM
Let cities be cities already. We tried urban freeways for a century now, and it's clear they're a failure for any purpose other than putting more cars on the road.

Apparently someone has never been to Oklahoma City.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 09, 2022, 12:31:34 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on January 08, 2022, 11:51:08 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 08, 2022, 08:17:12 PM
Let cities be cities already. We tried urban freeways for a century now, and it's clear they're a failure for any purpose other than putting more cars on the road.

Apparently someone has never been to Oklahoma City.
Or any other American city
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: TXtoNJ on January 09, 2022, 01:56:34 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on January 08, 2022, 11:51:08 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 08, 2022, 08:17:12 PM
Let cities be cities already. We tried urban freeways for a century now, and it's clear they're a failure for any purpose other than putting more cars on the road.

Apparently someone has never been to Oklahoma City.

Lol. If only you knew how wrong you are.

I've got no problem with highway construction and expansion in suburbs and rural areas. It's why I'm on this site. They're completely inappropriate in an urban environment, unless you want your city to just be a giant suburb (like most in the Sunbelt). The best projects within cities are the ones that make them less impactful, like the I-45 project will.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 09, 2022, 03:52:42 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 09, 2022, 01:56:34 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on January 08, 2022, 11:51:08 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 08, 2022, 08:17:12 PM
Let cities be cities already. We tried urban freeways for a century now, and it's clear they're a failure for any purpose other than putting more cars on the road.

Apparently someone has never been to Oklahoma City.

Lol. If only you knew how wrong you are.

I've got no problem with highway construction and expansion in suburbs and rural areas. It's why I'm on this site. They're completely inappropriate in an urban environment, unless you want your city to just be a giant suburb (like most in the Sunbelt). The best projects within cities are the ones that make them less impactful, like the I-45 project will.
How exactly are freeways failures?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 09, 2022, 04:20:53 PM
Freeways do indeed have their place within urban areas. Any downtown zone in the US would be excruciating to visit by car if the motorist had to pass through dozens of traffic signals on surface streets to get there.

The downtown zones of most major US cities have attractions, such as arenas and stadiums, that depend on high numbers of people to visit. The office towers support many thousands of workers. Those sites are significantly dependent on the highway network to get people in/out of downtown. Not everyone is going to take a train into work. Even cities with large subway & commuter train networks, such as NYC, still have plenty of super highways connecting to the city core.

If anything is a big failure it's the widespread, very American and very stupid zoning policies for housing in cities across the nation. Some people call it the "missing middle" problem. You can have tall apartment towers downtown. But almost everywhere else is zoned for single family homes. Those policies have done more to create sprawl than any of the freeways. The situation is getting worse now since the only new construction for either extreme of housing is being built for rich buyers. The cost of housing in European cities is very high as well, but there is a much greater variety of housing types available to rent/buy. That allows greater levels of population density, mixed use buildings, walk-ability, etc. Until American cities by and large re-think their zoning policies our cities will continue to be very dependent on automobiles for travel whether there are any freeways or not.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: TheBox on January 09, 2022, 06:50:22 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 09, 2022, 04:20:53 PM
Freeways do indeed have their place within urban areas. Any downtown zone in the US would be excruciating to visit by car if the motorist had to pass through dozens of traffic signals on surface streets to get there.

The downtown zones of most major US cities have attractions, such as arenas and stadiums, that depend on high numbers of people to visit. The office towers support many thousands of workers. Those sites are significantly dependent on the highway network to get people in/out of downtown. Not everyone is going to take a train into work. Even cities with large subway & commuter train networks, such as NYC, still have plenty of super highways connecting to the city core.

If anything is a big failure it's the widespread, very American and very stupid zoning policies for housing in cities across the nation. Some people call it the "missing middle" problem. You can have tall apartment towers downtown. But almost everywhere else is zoned for single family homes. Those policies have done more to create sprawl than any of the freeways. The situation is getting worse now since the only new construction for either extreme of housing is being built for rich buyers. The cost of housing in European cities is very high as well, but there is a much greater variety of housing types available to rent/buy. That allows greater levels of population density, mixed use buildings, walk-ability, etc. Until American cities by and large re-think their zoning policies our cities will continue to be very dependent on automobiles for travel whether there are any freeways or not.

Have to agree with his take on American Zoning
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Scott5114 on January 09, 2022, 06:59:01 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 09, 2022, 01:56:34 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on January 08, 2022, 11:51:08 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 08, 2022, 08:17:12 PM
Let cities be cities already. We tried urban freeways for a century now, and it's clear they're a failure for any purpose other than putting more cars on the road.

Apparently someone has never been to Oklahoma City.

Lol. If only you knew how wrong you are.

Well, explain it to me, then. Take the Oklahoma City freeway system as an example, and justify how your viewpoint is consistent with it. Be sure to take into account the ongoing density increases in Bricktown, Deep Deuce, Automobile Alley, Wheeler district, etc.

Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 09, 2022, 04:20:53 PM
If anything is a big failure it's the widespread, very American and very stupid zoning policies for housing in cities across the nation. Some people call it the "missing middle" problem. You can have tall apartment towers downtown. But almost everywhere else is zoned for single family homes. Those policies have done more to create sprawl than any of the freeways. The situation is getting worse now since the only new construction for either extreme of housing is being built for rich buyers. The cost of housing in European cities is very high as well, but there is a much greater variety of housing types available to rent/buy. That allows greater levels of population density, mixed use buildings, walk-ability, etc. Until American cities by and large re-think their zoning policies our cities will continue to be very dependent on automobiles for travel whether there are any freeways or not.

As a counterpoint...Houston has no zoning system whatsoever, and yet it is, by and large, also very dependent on automobiles.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Anthony_JK on January 09, 2022, 08:53:31 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 09, 2022, 01:56:34 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on January 08, 2022, 11:51:08 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 08, 2022, 08:17:12 PM
Let cities be cities already. We tried urban freeways for a century now, and it's clear they're a failure for any purpose other than putting more cars on the road.

Apparently someone has never been to Oklahoma City.

Lol. If only you knew how wrong you are.

I've got no problem with highway construction and expansion in suburbs and rural areas. It's why I'm on this site. They're completely inappropriate in an urban environment, unless you want your city to just be a giant suburb (like most in the Sunbelt). The best projects within cities are the ones that make them less impactful, like the I-45 project will.

Right, because having residents slough through bumper-to-bumper traffic on surface roads with endless stoplights just to get to the suburbs is far more ideal, right?

Nope.

While there could be a bit more balance in inner city transport, and I am all for increasing public transportation alternatives, we still need freeways to access inner cities. We can do a lot better job of how we design them though neighborhoods, and we can better take into account how better to integrate them within their environments through CSS and better development. But, even those in the inner cities travel outside them, and as long as people use cars and trucks for the majority of their travel, they will use freeways to get where they are going.  People can't carry their goods on trains, and walking and bicycling isn't ideal in bad weather.

Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on January 09, 2022, 10:36:57 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 09, 2022, 04:20:53 PM
Freeways do indeed have their place within urban areas. Any downtown zone in the US would be excruciating to visit by car if the motorist had to pass through dozens of traffic signals on surface streets to get there.

The downtown zones of most major US cities have attractions, such as arenas and stadiums, that depend on high numbers of people to visit. The office towers support many thousands of workers. Those sites are significantly dependent on the highway network to get people in/out of downtown. Not everyone is going to take a train into work. Even cities with large subway & commuter train networks, such as NYC, still have plenty of super highways connecting to the city core.

If anything is a big failure it's the widespread, very American and very stupid zoning policies for housing in cities across the nation. Some people call it the "missing middle" problem. You can have tall apartment towers downtown. But almost everywhere else is zoned for single family homes. Those policies have done more to create sprawl than any of the freeways. The situation is getting worse now since the only new construction for either extreme of housing is being built for rich buyers. The cost of housing in European cities is very high as well, but there is a much greater variety of housing types available to rent/buy. That allows greater levels of population density, mixed use buildings, walk-ability, etc. Until American cities by and large re-think their zoning policies our cities will continue to be very dependent on automobiles for travel whether there are any freeways or not.

People prefer sprawl.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: hotdogPi on January 10, 2022, 07:08:09 AM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 09, 2022, 10:36:57 PM
People prefer sprawl.

From what I understand, Massachusetts's suburbs, which you're much more familiar with, are much different from sprawl (which is generally post-WWII). Sprawl is basically cookie cutter suburbs.

I live in an area where an urban lifestyle is possible. I don't drive, so I have to walk or take the bus; since the recommendation is to walk 5 miles per day, I often get my walking in by going to dinner or the grocery store. I sometimes have to have dinner early, though, as I won't walk in the dark, and it's the shortest time of year right now. (For those of you not from here: sunset was 4:10 at its earliest, and there's about 15 minutes between sunset and being too dark. I often walk there and take the bus back.) Since the buses don't run on Sundays, if I'm at a restaurant on Saturday., I get enough for leftovers.

On the other hand, driving in this area is perfectly fine. Sometimes there's congestion, but nowhere near what it is in Boston.

Sprawl basically leaves driving as the only option. I don't think I could live the way I do 15 miles from the center of Phoenix or Atlanta.

Of note: In Massachusetts, most undivided roads are one lane in each direction, which makes them fairly easy to cross on foot. Most sprawled out places have multilane roads. If there's no median, they're dangerous to cross on foot.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 10, 2022, 11:17:56 AM
Old historic cities in Massachusetts are very different from today's norm of residential zoning. Even many of the suburbs existed before the post-WWII boom of homogenized neighborhood design. Structures like multi-family brownstones, town houses and modest sized apartment buildings are common in close proximity to single family structures.

Quote from: Scott5114As a counterpoint...Houston has no zoning system whatsoever, and yet it is, by and large, also very dependent on automobiles.

Houston and its suburbs absolutely do have zoning systems for homes. Some of the oldest (and most run-down) parts of Houston will have some variety of housing types, like low-income projects. Farther out from the downtown core the variety decreases. Specific neighborhoods like River Oaks or University Place have specific home types. There is city-dictated zoning. And then there is private zoning enforced by HOA's or developers.

Quote from: kernals12People prefer sprawl.

It has nothing to do with what they prefer. It has more to do with what they can afford or how much home they can buy in a specific location. Generally homes get more affordable the farther you move out from the city core. Buyers have to balance home price affordability against a longer distance commute.

The big failure of the New Urbanist vision to get more people to live closer to the city core is no one is building housing units near the core that are affordable to regular middle class people. All too often any new mixed-use development in a downtown zone features apartments with sky high prices. The buyers tend to be well-off people who likely already own a huge home in the suburbs. They buy those downtown apartments as crash pads, party places or maybe as an investment asset to buy and hold (like what has happened with so many towers in Manhattan and Brooklyn). Lots of international money is pouring into properties like that as a hedge against currency inflation. The home pricing pressures are likely to keep getting worse until they completely tank the broader economy. If too many Americans are paying 50%, 60% or 70% of their income on housing that doesn't leave much room to afford anything else. 70% of our economy depends on people having the ability to buy stuff.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Scott5114 on January 10, 2022, 01:27:23 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 10, 2022, 11:17:56 AM
Quote from: Scott5114As a counterpoint...Houston has no zoning system whatsoever, and yet it is, by and large, also very dependent on automobiles.

Houston and its suburbs absolutely do have zoning systems for homes. Some of the oldest (and most run-down) parts of Houston will have some variety of housing types, like low-income projects. Farther out from the downtown core the variety decreases. Specific neighborhoods like River Oaks or University Place have specific home types. There is city-dictated zoning. And then there is private zoning enforced by HOA's or developers.

This is false:



The only regulations seem to be that you can't build too high close to the airport, and that there are zoning regulations in this specially-designated district:


If private sector developers and HOAs determine that they'd like to follow a zoning-like system, that is the free market making that determination. It is not zoning, however. (And Houston famously has a lot of instances of adjoining land use that doesn't make a lot of sense, suggesting that the free market is asleep at the switch on this one.)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 10, 2022, 01:56:39 PM
Showing skyscrapers next to single family homes lol scaaaaary. You see this all the time in LA.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: TXtoNJ on January 10, 2022, 03:46:57 PM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on January 09, 2022, 08:53:31 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 09, 2022, 01:56:34 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on January 08, 2022, 11:51:08 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 08, 2022, 08:17:12 PM
Let cities be cities already. We tried urban freeways for a century now, and it's clear they're a failure for any purpose other than putting more cars on the road.

Apparently someone has never been to Oklahoma City.

Lol. If only you knew how wrong you are.

I've got no problem with highway construction and expansion in suburbs and rural areas. It's why I'm on this site. They're completely inappropriate in an urban environment, unless you want your city to just be a giant suburb (like most in the Sunbelt). The best projects within cities are the ones that make them less impactful, like the I-45 project will.

Right, because having residents slough through bumper-to-bumper traffic on surface roads with endless stoplights just to get to the suburbs is far more ideal, right?

Vancouver works just fine. Sure, people on the north shore complain about traffic, but they complain in West Houston, too.

With respect to OKC upthread - you really want to rely on an extremely prominent example of a successful freeway reroute/impact reduction to make some point about freeways not negatively impacting urban development? Especially when the city is consistently committing to MAPS funds toward public transport, with broad public support in a very red state.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 10, 2022, 03:50:29 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 10, 2022, 03:46:57 PM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on January 09, 2022, 08:53:31 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 09, 2022, 01:56:34 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on January 08, 2022, 11:51:08 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 08, 2022, 08:17:12 PM
Let cities be cities already. We tried urban freeways for a century now, and it's clear they're a failure for any purpose other than putting more cars on the road.

Apparently someone has never been to Oklahoma City.

Lol. If only you knew how wrong you are.

I've got no problem with highway construction and expansion in suburbs and rural areas. It's why I'm on this site. They're completely inappropriate in an urban environment, unless you want your city to just be a giant suburb (like most in the Sunbelt). The best projects within cities are the ones that make them less impactful, like the I-45 project will.

Right, because having residents slough through bumper-to-bumper traffic on surface roads with endless stoplights just to get to the suburbs is far more ideal, right?

Vancouver works just fine. Sure, people on the north shore complain about traffic, but they complain in West Houston, too.

With respect to OKC upthread - you really want to rely on an extremely prominent example of a successful freeway reroute/impact reduction to make some point about freeways not negatively impacting urban development? Especially when the city is consistently committing to MAPS funds toward public transport, with broad public support in a very red state.
Really? I've heard traffic in Vancouver is horrible.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on January 10, 2022, 04:16:09 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 10, 2022, 03:50:29 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 10, 2022, 03:46:57 PM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on January 09, 2022, 08:53:31 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 09, 2022, 01:56:34 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on January 08, 2022, 11:51:08 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 08, 2022, 08:17:12 PM
Let cities be cities already. We tried urban freeways for a century now, and it's clear they're a failure for any purpose other than putting more cars on the road.

Apparently someone has never been to Oklahoma City.

Lol. If only you knew how wrong you are.

I've got no problem with highway construction and expansion in suburbs and rural areas. It's why I'm on this site. They're completely inappropriate in an urban environment, unless you want your city to just be a giant suburb (like most in the Sunbelt). The best projects within cities are the ones that make them less impactful, like the I-45 project will.

Right, because having residents slough through bumper-to-bumper traffic on surface roads with endless stoplights just to get to the suburbs is far more ideal, right?

Vancouver works just fine. Sure, people on the north shore complain about traffic, but they complain in West Houston, too.

With respect to OKC upthread - you really want to rely on an extremely prominent example of a successful freeway reroute/impact reduction to make some point about freeways not negatively impacting urban development? Especially when the city is consistently committing to MAPS funds toward public transport, with broad public support in a very red state.
Really? I've heard traffic in Vancouver is horrible.
I think he's talking about the one in Washington
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Scott5114 on January 10, 2022, 07:36:51 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 10, 2022, 03:46:57 PM
With respect to OKC upthread - you really want to rely on an extremely prominent example of a successful freeway reroute/impact reduction to make some point about freeways not negatively impacting urban development? Especially when the city is consistently committing to MAPS funds toward public transport, with broad public support in a very red state.

I-40 isn't the only freeway in Oklahoma City, you know.

The Crosstown was mostly realigned due to the poor condition of the aging elevated structure more than anything having to do with urban development, regardless of anything the biker gang will tell you. ODOT saw the opportunity to rid itself of the liability of maintaining an elevated structure, and also added four lanes to the freeway to boot. And the realigned freeway is still in an urban area (it's within walking distance of the old right-of-way, actually).
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: vdeane on January 10, 2022, 09:04:22 PM
It's worth noting that Houston does have other planning tools in use, just not zoning.  So it's not actually a free for all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TaU1UH_3B5k
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: bwana39 on January 10, 2022, 09:40:18 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on January 10, 2022, 07:36:51 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 10, 2022, 03:46:57 PM
With respect to OKC upthread - you really want to rely on an extremely prominent example of a successful freeway reroute/impact reduction to make some point about freeways not negatively impacting urban development? Especially when the city is consistently committing to MAPS funds toward public transport, with broad public support in a very red state.

I-40 isn't the only freeway in Oklahoma City, you know.

The Crosstown was mostly realigned due to the poor condition of the aging elevated structure more than anything having to do with urban development, regardless of anything the biker gang will tell you. ODOT saw the opportunity to rid itself of the liability of maintaining an elevated structure, and also added four lanes to the freeway to boot. And the realigned freeway is still in an urban area (it's within walking distance of the old right-of-way, actually).

This is pretty much the same thing they did with I-30 in Fort Worth when they tore down the Lancaster Elevated and moved i-30 to a new path just a short distance farther south.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on January 10, 2022, 10:46:43 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on January 10, 2022, 09:40:18 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on January 10, 2022, 07:36:51 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 10, 2022, 03:46:57 PM
With respect to OKC upthread - you really want to rely on an extremely prominent example of a successful freeway reroute/impact reduction to make some point about freeways not negatively impacting urban development? Especially when the city is consistently committing to MAPS funds toward public transport, with broad public support in a very red state.

I-40 isn't the only freeway in Oklahoma City, you know.

The Crosstown was mostly realigned due to the poor condition of the aging elevated structure more than anything having to do with urban development, regardless of anything the biker gang will tell you. ODOT saw the opportunity to rid itself of the liability of maintaining an elevated structure, and also added four lanes to the freeway to boot. And the realigned freeway is still in an urban area (it's within walking distance of the old right-of-way, actually).

This is pretty much the same thing they did with I-30 in Fort Worth when they tore down the Lancaster Elevated and moved i-30 to a new path just a short distance farther south.
And in Providence when they moved I-195 south from its old location between Downtown and the Jewelry District.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 10, 2022, 11:08:20 PM
Quote from: Scott5114The Crosstown was mostly realigned due to the poor condition of the aging elevated structure more than anything having to do with urban development, regardless of anything the biker gang will tell you.

The old Crosstown elevated highway was badly outdated. I think it was also an eye-sore. The re-location of I-40 a few blocks farther South was badly needed. The re-location was not a freeway removal (like what is being proposed in some places). It was actually a freeway expansion. I think the design of the re-located Crosstown Expressway actually makes it easier to visit downtown OKC by auto. And that was before the at-grade Oklahoma City Blvd in the space of the old Crosstown was completed. That further improves the ease of getting in/out of Bricktown by car.

Quote from: vdeaneIt's worth noting that Houston does have other planning tools in use, just not zoning.  So it's not actually a free for all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TaU1UH_3B5k&t=185s

Thanks for posting that video from the City Beautiful YouTube channel. I knew Houston had a lot of tools to control what kinds of buildings get built in specific locations, even if it isn't technically called zoning. The various tools listed in the video achieve the same effect.

Here's another video related to Houston from the Not Just Bikes YouTube channel:
"Why City Design is Important (and Why I Hate Houston)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxykI30fS54

The video is fairly long, but interesting. I don't entirely agree with all the points in the video. The author is very pro mass transit and anti car culture. But walk-ability and the missing middle in housing types within many American metros is still a very serious problem. The video's author doesn't bash Houston entirely. He gives the city credit for dramatically improving its bus service and building some new dedicated bike paths and pedestrian facilities in certain areas.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Scott5114 on January 11, 2022, 12:42:27 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 10, 2022, 11:08:20 PM
Quote from: Scott5114The Crosstown was mostly realigned due to the poor condition of the aging elevated structure more than anything having to do with urban development, regardless of anything the biker gang will tell you.

The old Crosstown elevated highway was badly outdated. I think it was also an eye-sore. The re-location of I-40 a few blocks farther South was badly needed. The re-location was not a freeway removal (like what is being proposed in some places). It was actually a freeway expansion. I think the design of the re-located Crosstown Expressway actually makes it easier to visit downtown OKC by auto. And that was before the at-grade Oklahoma City Blvd in the space of the old Crosstown was completed. That further improves the ease of getting in/out of Bricktown by car.

I don't necessarily agree with it being an eyesore–I kinda liked it for its '60s utilitarian aesthetic–but that's probably a function of my nostalgia for the thing, since we didn't go downtown all that often when it was around. I got to go to both the grand opening of the new highway and the open house immediately before demolition of the old one (I actually have the cover off of one of the junction boxes for the Crosstown's lighting system in my living room).

But it was both very outdated and in very bad shape, so it needed to be demolished and rebuilt; the only question was whether to use the existing right of way or not. The realignment simply made more sense because it allowed for a non-elevated structure and provided more room for expansion.

A lot of the urbanist types were left fuming after the project was completed, because, in their eyes, Oklahoma City Boulevard isn't much better than the freeway it replaced, other than the area immediately surrounding the Thunder arena and Scissortail Park. They were hoping the City of OKC would immediately tear it out and restore the grid once they got the keys to it. OKC doesn't seem to have much interest in doing that, though, probably because it would be a much bigger expense than the city wants to take on, and there's plenty of infrastructure that has more wrong with it than being not to a vocal minority's liking.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Chris on January 11, 2022, 05:33:58 AM
'Why I hate Houston'.

Houston is one of the fastest-growing cities in the U.S. It's interesting to observe that ordinary people like the cities which urbanists hate the most.

The same is true for much of the Sunbelt, this is the fastest growing area of the U.S., despite all the urbanist objections about how sprawling and bad it is supposedly is. Apparently, it is what people prefer.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: triplemultiplex on January 11, 2022, 11:25:15 AM
If the restaurant only sells Coke and most people get Coke, does that mean everyone prefers Coke?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 11, 2022, 02:42:49 PM
Quote from: Scott5114A lot of the urbanist types were left fuming after the project was completed, because, in their eyes, Oklahoma City Boulevard isn't much better than the freeway it replaced, other than the area immediately surrounding the Thunder arena and Scissortail Park. They were hoping the City of OKC would immediately tear it out and restore the grid once they got the keys to it. OKC doesn't seem to have much interest in doing that, though, probably because it would be a much bigger expense than the city wants to take on, and there's plenty of infrastructure that has more wrong with it than being not to a vocal minority's liking.

I can't imagine what else the city could have done with the new at-grade OKC Blvd than what they built. A bunch of lots in and around the old elevated highway to the West of downtown are still pretty run down or industrial looking. There would not have been a big rush to develop lots left vacant where the old elevated Crosstown once stood.

The Western end of OKC Blvd between I-40 and Klein Ave functions like a freeway, one that is not Interstate quality. The East end from the front of Toby Keith's restaurant to the I-40/I-235 interchange is pretty much a freeway on/off ramp. However, OKC Blvd is flanked by sidewalks starting at the Riverwalk and going a dozen or so blocks West to Classen. The Blvd is at the front of Scissortail Park. The OKC Streetcar system has a stop there. It's a short walk from there to the Skydance Bridge. Almost all the surface streets crossing the new I-40 have pedestrian access. Shields Blvd is one exception. Overall, it's not difficult to get around downtown OKC by foot or bicycle. The critics up there should be glad they don't live here in Lawton!

Quote from: ChrisThe same is true for much of the Sunbelt, this is the fastest growing area of the U.S., despite all the urbanist objections about how sprawling and bad it is supposedly is. Apparently, it is what people prefer.

I don't like the either-or, zero sum game that is preached by some New Urbanists: replace roads with sidewalks and bike paths. That's not going to work. But the cars only approach doesn't work so well either. A balance of BOTH is needed.

We have this ridiculously dangerous situation here in Lawton with the intersection of I-44 and Gore Blvd. The problem has existed for many years and has been growing worse. That point is very much the main gateway between the East and West sides of Lawton. The intersection is a choke point for motor vehicles. There are 3 traffic signals in short succession there. The location is a dangerous hurdle for anyone trying to use Gore Blvd to cross over I-44 on foot or on a bicycle. There are NO sidewalks on Gore Blvd crossing I-44. There are no sidewalks along Gore in that vicinity either. Some of the complaints from the Just Not Bikes guy about his Houston walking adventure are more extreme here. If you're going to walk along Gore Blvd to cross over I-44 you have to tread very carefully and hope you don't get clipped by a side view mirror of a passing car. The situation is bad enough that some people choose to walk down the hill and jay-walk across the main lanes of I-44 instead. Several pedestrians have been hit and killed on the Interstate over years. But obviously not enough deaths to get any solutions in the works on that matter.

Any complaints about this down here are dismissed with excuses. "Well, he should have been driving in a car." Not everyone can drive a car. Some can't afford it. Some don't have the ability due to old age or other disabilities. Yet they're on their own, on foot. It almost feels like there is a political ideology tied up in this. Building pedestrian bridges over highways or adding sidewalks to streets are seen as acts of socialist communism by some.

We have a lot of lower wage, service industry workers in Lawton. And I see plenty of them on foot there on Gore Blvd trying to cross that damned intersection. There is a fair amount of casino customers doing the same thing.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 11, 2022, 04:45:27 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 11, 2022, 11:25:15 AM
If the restaurant only sells Coke and most people get Coke, does that mean everyone prefers Coke?
I'm not understanding this analogy.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Scott5114 on January 11, 2022, 05:15:19 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 11, 2022, 02:42:49 PM
I can't imagine what else the city could have done with the new at-grade OKC Blvd than what they built. [...] The Western end of OKC Blvd between I-40 and Klein Ave functions like a freeway, one that is not Interstate quality.

And that's their problem–the portion west of Klein is just as bad as I-40 was in their eyes, despite the fact that it's no longer Interstate quality. I remember seeing design concepts that suggested having a big roundabout at OKC Blvd/Classen/Western instead of the overpass that is there now (and perpetually has a lot of homeless people sheltering under it). Another option that they like was building nothing at all on the old alignment and just reconnecting streets that had been cut off by the right-of-way.

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 11, 2022, 04:45:27 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 11, 2022, 11:25:15 AM
If the restaurant only sells Coke and most people get Coke, does that mean everyone prefers Coke?
I'm not understanding this analogy.

I think he's saying basically that people may choose to live in Houston in spite of, not because of, the sprawling nature of the city. That is, the city's growth is due to other factors than people simply liking the sprawl.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Henry on January 11, 2022, 07:11:28 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 10, 2022, 10:46:43 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on January 10, 2022, 09:40:18 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on January 10, 2022, 07:36:51 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 10, 2022, 03:46:57 PM
With respect to OKC upthread - you really want to rely on an extremely prominent example of a successful freeway reroute/impact reduction to make some point about freeways not negatively impacting urban development? Especially when the city is consistently committing to MAPS funds toward public transport, with broad public support in a very red state.

I-40 isn't the only freeway in Oklahoma City, you know.

The Crosstown was mostly realigned due to the poor condition of the aging elevated structure more than anything having to do with urban development, regardless of anything the biker gang will tell you. ODOT saw the opportunity to rid itself of the liability of maintaining an elevated structure, and also added four lanes to the freeway to boot. And the realigned freeway is still in an urban area (it's within walking distance of the old right-of-way, actually).

This is pretty much the same thing they did with I-30 in Fort Worth when they tore down the Lancaster Elevated and moved i-30 to a new path just a short distance farther south.
And in Providence when they moved I-195 south from its old location between Downtown and the Jewelry District.
Also in Denver when they buried I-70 next to the old viaduct.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on January 11, 2022, 08:38:28 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 11, 2022, 11:25:15 AM
If the restaurant only sells Coke and most people get Coke, does that mean everyone prefers Coke?

If the restaurant is only selling coke, then it's because most people prefer coke. It's why Detroit has all but given up on passenger cars in favor of SUVs.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: TXtoNJ on January 11, 2022, 09:00:34 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 11, 2022, 08:38:28 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 11, 2022, 11:25:15 AM
If the restaurant only sells Coke and most people get Coke, does that mean everyone prefers Coke?

If the restaurant is only selling coke, then it's because most people prefer coke. It's why Detroit has all but given up on passenger cars in favor of SUVs.

It might be that coke is more profitable than other choices for the owner, and the owner's got a deal with city hall to make sure no other restaurants open in town.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Rothman on January 11, 2022, 11:17:41 PM
I would like Coke and a car, please.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: triplemultiplex on January 13, 2022, 09:51:04 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 11, 2022, 04:45:27 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 11, 2022, 11:25:15 AM
If the restaurant only sells Coke and most people get Coke, does that mean everyone prefers Coke?
I'm not understanding this analogy.

If the consumer is only limited to one option, then how can one make a statement about their preference?  That's what I mean.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: ethanhopkin14 on January 13, 2022, 02:27:21 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 11, 2022, 08:38:28 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 11, 2022, 11:25:15 AM
If the restaurant only sells Coke and most people get Coke, does that mean everyone prefers Coke?

If the restaurant is only selling coke, then it's because most people prefer coke. It's why Detroit has all but given up on passenger cars in favor of SUVs.

Not necessarily.  Restaurants have soft drink deals so that they only sell Coke products or Pepsi products.  It makes a very unrealistically skewed sample.  This may seem like I am going on a tangent, but I think this is the meaning behind the original question.  If the restaurant is only selling coke, that doesn't mean most people prefer Coke, its just what their option is because the restaurant struck a deal with Coke to sell their product.  The test only really 100% works if you give the public every soft drink to chose from and you run the numbers every time each product is selected.

People who lived in dictatorships loved the dictator!  The reality was they didn't have a choice to like anything but the dictator. 
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 13, 2022, 03:24:21 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 13, 2022, 09:51:04 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 11, 2022, 04:45:27 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 11, 2022, 11:25:15 AM
If the restaurant only sells Coke and most people get Coke, does that mean everyone prefers Coke?
I'm not understanding this analogy.

If the consumer is only limited to one option, then how can one make a statement about their preference?  That's what I mean.
But in this case alternatives do exist even in Houston. Shitty service but it's there. We need to focus on increasing transit connections, better service, and more cycling infrastructure along with expanding infrastructure for cars.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: TXtoNJ on January 14, 2022, 11:51:23 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 13, 2022, 03:24:21 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 13, 2022, 09:51:04 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 11, 2022, 04:45:27 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 11, 2022, 11:25:15 AM
If the restaurant only sells Coke and most people get Coke, does that mean everyone prefers Coke?
I'm not understanding this analogy.

If the consumer is only limited to one option, then how can one make a statement about their preference?  That's what I mean.
But in this case alternatives do exist even in Houston. Shitty service but it's there. We need to focus on increasing transit connections, better service, and more cycling infrastructure along with expanding infrastructure for cars.

The issue isn't so much the infrastructure so much as the development it incentivizes - hugely-profitable single-family detached suburban housing on greenfields, that subsequently require more car infrastructure for the traffic this land use generates.

It's like using Afrin for nasal congestion - yes, there's a temporary relief, but do it too much and you can't get off of it without the congestion being worse than before.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: bwana39 on January 14, 2022, 02:10:59 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 14, 2022, 11:51:23 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 13, 2022, 03:24:21 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 13, 2022, 09:51:04 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 11, 2022, 04:45:27 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 11, 2022, 11:25:15 AM
If the restaurant only sells Coke and most people get Coke, does that mean everyone prefers Coke?
I’m not understanding this analogy.

If the consumer is only limited to one option, then how can one make a statement about their preference?  That's what I mean.
But in this case alternatives do exist even in Houston. Shitty service but it’s there. We need to focus on increasing transit connections, better service, and more cycling infrastructure along with expanding infrastructure for cars.

The issue isn't so much the infrastructure so much as the development it incentivizes - hugely-profitable single-family detached suburban housing on greenfields, that subsequently require more car infrastructure for the traffic this land use generates.

It's like using Afrin for nasal congestion - yes, there's a temporary relief, but do it too much and you can't get off of it without the congestion being worse than before.

The issue is that the only way to keep the sprawl in check is to build multi-family housing to replace slums and clear the slums and build replacement single family housing communities.  We know how that frames in the political correct 2020's. That leaves the choices are simply greenfield building versus gentrification.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 14, 2022, 02:38:25 PM
Yeah there's a lot of moving parts to this. They're also exist at it to suggest that people do generally want cars as opposed to taking alternative transportation. Count me in as someone that prefers suburban sprawl over dense urban development with trains and cycleways. Though I do think we need more of the latter.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: TXtoNJ on January 17, 2022, 09:55:45 AM
Quote from: bwana39 on January 14, 2022, 02:10:59 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 14, 2022, 11:51:23 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 13, 2022, 03:24:21 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 13, 2022, 09:51:04 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 11, 2022, 04:45:27 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 11, 2022, 11:25:15 AM
If the restaurant only sells Coke and most people get Coke, does that mean everyone prefers Coke?
I'm not understanding this analogy.

If the consumer is only limited to one option, then how can one make a statement about their preference?  That's what I mean.
But in this case alternatives do exist even in Houston. Shitty service but it's there. We need to focus on increasing transit connections, better service, and more cycling infrastructure along with expanding infrastructure for cars.

The issue isn't so much the infrastructure so much as the development it incentivizes - hugely-profitable single-family detached suburban housing on greenfields, that subsequently require more car infrastructure for the traffic this land use generates.

It's like using Afrin for nasal congestion - yes, there's a temporary relief, but do it too much and you can't get off of it without the congestion being worse than before.

The issue is that the only way to keep the sprawl in check is to build multi-family housing to replace slums and clear the slums and build replacement single family housing communities.  We know how that frames in the political correct 2020's. That leaves the choices are simply greenfield building versus gentrification.

You mainly need to upscale SFD housing in central areas where land values are high, and that's where the NIMBYs start shrieking bloody murder. Slums generally have higher density by necessity, even if it's of the informal variety.

The real problem is that upper-middle class landholders in desirable areas don't want their neighbors cashing out and converting their houses to 2 to 4-plexes, because they feel it will decrease property values, or increase traffic, even if that's demonstrably not the case. Press further, and you get the "change the character of the neighborhood" - in reality, they don't want to associate with owners or renters they feel are beneath their social class.

Houston's actually been one of the better areas to address these issues, but a lot of that has been an accident of history - inside the loop north of Buffalo Bayou was so depressed, for so long, that most of the landowners were renting their houses out. They didn't mind cashing out whole blocks to put up "townhouse farms". However, 15 years onward from when the density boom really picked up, you're hearing the NIMBY lines of complaint that wouldn't be out of place in Austin.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on January 17, 2022, 10:39:01 AM
The massive infill development in Houston's core is the entire reason for the project that is the subject of this thread. Studies have shown that reduced VMT in denser areas is largely self-selection bias, i.e. people who don't like driving tend to live in denser areas. These urbanites don't stay in the city, they have relatives to visit and jobs to go to in the suburbs.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on January 17, 2022, 01:00:18 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 17, 2022, 10:39:01 AM
The massive infill development in Houston's core is the entire reason for the project that is the subject of this thread. Studies have shown that reduced VMT in denser areas is largely self-selection bias, i.e. people who don't like driving tend to live in denser areas. These urbanites don't stay in the city, they have relatives to visit and jobs to go to in the suburbs.
I think there is some truth. It's hard to prove a false negative(is that the correct term?). To say that someone could be doing something they aren't but would if x was true isn't easy to prove. Not really sure if any study has been taken to try and look into that.

If you gave someone the option to have a condo the same size as their suburban home, quick parking, a private large patio/yard(something only seen in ultra luxury units), high quality schools, right next to a transit stop, at the same price of their current house, but the catch is it becomes super inconvenient to drive, would they take it? I know many people that wouldn't because they like living in suburbs. That is their preference. Anecdotal, I know. But I am largely the same way. I'd love living in the far flung reaches of the Phoenix metro with a fleet of cars over anywhere in the center of any major city. I would never take transit unless I was out for a night of drinking.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 17, 2022, 05:16:40 PM
I think money drives the decisions on where to live more than anything else. The conventional thinking is you get much more house for the money out in the suburbs than you do in the city center. People move farther and farther out trying to find a better balance of affordability weighed against commute times/costs/difficulty. City centers and suburbs have their other pros and cons. But money is the main thing that matters.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: TXtoNJ on January 17, 2022, 05:37:37 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 17, 2022, 05:16:40 PM
I think money drives the decisions on where to live more than anything else. The conventional thinking is you get much more house for the money out in the suburbs than you do in the city center. People move farther and farther out trying to find a better balance of affordability weighed against commute times/costs/difficulty. City centers and suburbs have their other pros and cons. But money is the main thing that matters.

You're 100% correct. The bigger questions are around why greenfield construction leads to cheaper housing options than densifying existing stock. Ultimately, it comes down to public policy.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: bwana39 on January 17, 2022, 05:54:51 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 17, 2022, 05:37:37 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 17, 2022, 05:16:40 PM
I think money drives the decisions on where to live more than anything else. The conventional thinking is you get much more house for the money out in the suburbs than you do in the city center. People move farther and farther out trying to find a better balance of affordability weighed against commute times/costs/difficulty. City centers and suburbs have their other pros and cons. But money is the main thing that matters.

You're 100% correct. The bigger questions are around why greenfield construction leads to cheaper housing options than densifying existing stock. Ultimately, it comes down to public policy.

No, it comes from an economic precept. Land NEVER reduces in value (and as a whole any Real Property doesn't.). Which means in practice that urban land is worth more than rural land because it has an established price that is more. Even when a seller incurs a loss, it is because he overpaid for it initially not because it actually is worth less now.  The cost of raw land will hardly ever be less than the previous sale even when significant remediation or structure removal costs are going to incurred.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: TXtoNJ on January 17, 2022, 10:29:12 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on January 17, 2022, 05:54:51 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 17, 2022, 05:37:37 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 17, 2022, 05:16:40 PM
I think money drives the decisions on where to live more than anything else. The conventional thinking is you get much more house for the money out in the suburbs than you do in the city center. People move farther and farther out trying to find a better balance of affordability weighed against commute times/costs/difficulty. City centers and suburbs have their other pros and cons. But money is the main thing that matters.

You're 100% correct. The bigger questions are around why greenfield construction leads to cheaper housing options than densifying existing stock. Ultimately, it comes down to public policy.

No, it comes from an economic precept. Land NEVER reduces in value (and as a whole any Real Property doesn't.). Which means in practice that urban land is worth more than rural land because it has an established price that is more. Even when a seller incurs a loss, it is because he overpaid for it initially not because it actually is worth less now.  The cost of raw land will hardly ever be less than the previous sale even when significant remediation or structure removal costs are going to incurred.

The existence of agricultural reserves in other parts of the world belies your point. Economic precepts are always the creature of the policy structures that create them. They are not laws of nature.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 17, 2022, 10:48:29 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJYou're 100% correct. The bigger questions are around why greenfield construction leads to cheaper housing options than densifying existing stock. Ultimately, it comes down to public policy.

Prices are (normally) set by supply and demand. The farther you move away from the city center the less demand there is for housing. Now public policy does come into play when suburban towns pick and choose the kinds of residential developments that are allowed to go forward. That's not to mention the kinds of people they want living in those homes. And home builders themselves have very clearly shown their bias toward building great big McMansions as opposed to building more modest sized, less expensive homes. That forces buyers with modest budgets to consider really difficult choices where all the options have serious drawbacks.

Quote from: bwana39Land NEVER reduces in value (and as a whole any Real Property doesn't.).

The Great Recession of the 2000's says hello.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: TXtoNJ on January 18, 2022, 06:32:06 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 17, 2022, 10:48:29 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJYou're 100% correct. The bigger questions are around why greenfield construction leads to cheaper housing options than densifying existing stock. Ultimately, it comes down to public policy.

Prices are (normally) set by supply and demand. The farther you move away from the city center the less demand there is for housing. Now public policy does come into play when suburban towns pick and choose the kinds of residential developments that are allowed to go forward. That's not to mention the kinds of people they want living in those homes. And home builders themselves have very clearly shown their bias toward building great big McMansions as opposed to building more modest sized, less expensive homes. That forces buyers with modest budgets to consider really difficult choices where all the options have serious drawbacks.

Quote from: bwana39Land NEVER reduces in value (and as a whole any Real Property doesn't.).

The Great Recession of the 2000's says hello.

Agreed - my point is that supply/demand are generally set by public policy, particularly when it comes to land use. Nobody is acquiring land by conquest anymore, hopefully.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: bwana39 on January 18, 2022, 08:21:36 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 17, 2022, 10:48:29 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJYou're 100% correct. The bigger questions are around why greenfield construction leads to cheaper housing options than densifying existing stock. Ultimately, it comes down to public policy.

Prices are (normally) set by supply and demand. The farther you move away from the city center the less demand there is for housing. Now public policy does come into play when suburban towns pick and choose the kinds of residential developments that are allowed to go forward. That's not to mention the kinds of people they want living in those homes. And home builders themselves have very clearly shown their bias toward building great big McMansions as opposed to building more modest sized, less expensive homes. That forces buyers with modest budgets to consider really difficult choices where all the options have serious drawbacks.

Quote from: bwana39Land NEVER reduces in value (and as a whole any Real Property doesn't.).

The Great Recession of the 2000's says hello.

While prices were stagnant around 2008. Sales tapered off because sellers did not want to sell.  Yes, the short term did have a downturn in prices, but also had more dramatic loss of inventory.  People were not selling because of the reduced prices.

Outside the great depression, there have not been long term price reductions (or corrections) on properties.  This also said, supply and demand set the sales volume, not the price. Supply and demand in real estate is a function of price. As the price increases supply will increase. As prices decrease (or fail to increase sufficiently) supply will retreat.

Prices are increasing right now due to a perceived supply shortage (new construction is down) but material prices for new construction are as big or bigger reasons for both the shortage of new builds and increase in prices of new builds.

If simple economics were actually in play housing costs would have increased about 600% max in the past 40 years. Instead they have increased around 1000% (10X) . The reason for the outsized inflation is the lack of resets. While there have been flat spots, even on the great recession, the only time prices decreased is when people HAD to sell. Most people, even those who move every few years "just because" stayed put.  Those who had to move for one reason or another did sell. New construction did not totally stop (and prices were just flat there.)

So to agree with your argument, yes there is no supply in the urban locale at the same price point as the rural greenfield construction. Therefore, there is low demand in the urban area at its price point.

Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Bobby5280 on January 18, 2022, 12:39:05 PM
Quote from: bwana39While prices were stagnant around 2008. Sales tapered off because sellers did not want to sell.  Yes, the short term did have a downturn in prices, but also had more dramatic loss of inventory.  People were not selling because of the reduced prices.

The real estate crash of the mid-late 2000's was a lot more messy than that, thanks to all the speculative buying and building that was taking place. The crash wrecked the global economy.

I still remember 2000's era national TV commercials from sketchy lenders trying to sucker people into getting adjustable rate mortgages. I can't remember the name of the company (Countrywide maybe), but there was this one commercial where this housewife berates her husband like he's some kind of idiot for being hesitant about getting on the hook for a home they can't really afford. "We can do this" is the catch phrase she uses when the poor sap finally gives in.

There were big residential developments way out on the fringes of major metros like DC that were left vacant. Some developments didn't even finish construction and were eventually bulldozed. Personal bankruptcies soared. Others who couldn't file for bankruptcy simply walked away from their homes and mortgages. Soaring gasoline prices combined with ARM notes hitting their adjustment phases left a bunch of buyers flat broke. What could the bank do with these broke people? Throw them in debtors prison? They had no alternative than just be stuck with the bad notes. Some of this was the fault of banks for having such stupidly low lending standards, even fraudulently low considering how low income minorities were targeted in the final phase of the mezzo-scale Ponzi scheme with a good bit of reverse red-lining.

The US Government is the only thing that put a floor under declining property values in that crash. They came in and bailed out the banks for all their bad loans. Had the government not stepped in many large institutional lenders would have been left insolvent. The lenders deserved to be severely punished for what they did. Unfortunately if they were left to fail it would have shut off business cash flow operations for much of the nation. That would have pushed us into Great Depression 2.0.

Quote from: bwana39Outside the great depression, there have not been long term price reductions (or corrections) on properties.  This also said, supply and demand set the sales volume, not the price. Supply and demand in real estate is a function of price. As the price increases supply will increase. As prices decrease (or fail to increase sufficiently) supply will retreat.

The real estate market functions just as much on a specific local basis as it does on any kind of national scale. The notion that property, such as homes or land, do not lose value is a MYTH. The Great Recession is an example of runaway excess on a national scale.

Local markets can hit downturns just as severe if not worse. All it takes is a major employer in a modest sized town closing shop for good. Here in Lawton if the Goodyear plant (one of the largest tire factories in the world, if not the largest) were to shut down our local real estate market would be plunged into a severe downturn. The nearby town of Cache would devastated. There isn't a lot of other Goodyear-equivalent jobs in this area for blue-collar workers. Many employees would just leave the area. This happened in a big way to cities in the so-called "rust belt." Lots of small towns in Oklahoma seeing population decline. Young people are leaving and older residents are dying off. Meanwhile the old homes are just left sitting there, often falling into disrepair.

The current real estate market in the US is nothing short of absurd. Median home prices in many cities do not at all reflect average income. Investors both domestic and international are artificially propping up high prices by buying up properties as investment assets. These pricing conditions are NOT sustainable. They're really not going to be sustainable over the long term due to how badly ordinary people are being price squeezed.

Not many young adults are buying up these McMansions out in the suburbs and exhurbs. The buyers are mostly middle aged or retiring people. What are those older buyers of big homes going to do 20 years from now when they (or their estates) want to sell but there are hardly any buyers? The United States has all the conditions in place for our nation's birth rate to crash down much worse than it's already doing. Our long term economy depends a great deal on enough new Americans being born to keep the system running. The American Dream of a wife, nice house and a couple kids costs a shit ton of money. Lots of young adults are being priced out of that convention of living. Some are even happy to opt out of that and stay single and child-less. There are many thousands of square miles worth of "R1" zoned housing that may be really tough to sell a generation from now.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: J N Winkler on February 07, 2022, 09:43:22 PM
TxDOT has just advertised a RFP for PS&E development for NHHIP Segment 3B, covering I-69/US 59 from SH 288 to I-45.  Submissions are due on March 4.  This is a relatively short but very busy one-mile segment (one cross-section shows an eventual 21 lanes under the Elgin Street bridge, which currently has 17) and the eventual deliverable for this procurement will be a plans set, with advertising for construction to happen at a later date.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on February 07, 2022, 10:20:50 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on February 07, 2022, 09:43:22 PM
TxDOT has just advertised a RFP for PS&E development for NHHIP Segment 3B, covering I-69/US 59 from SH 288 to I-45.  Submissions are due on March 4.  This is a relatively short but very busy one-mile segment (one cross-section shows an eventual 21 lanes under the Elgin Street bridge, which currently has 17) and the eventual deliverable for this procurement will be a plans set, with advertising for construction to happen at a later date.
http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot/ppd/meetings/013122/presentation.pdf (http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot/ppd/meetings/013122/presentation.pdf)

There are some points of interest for the RFP.

First, this segment was originally slated to be design build, as you can see the map on page 12 still shows it as DB1. Since this RFP is for PS&E (plans, schedule and estimates), it is now a conventional design-bid-build job. I don't know the reason for the change, but very high prices on recent design build jobs could be an influence.

Second, since the contract finalization is slated for June 2022, it should take at least a year for the PS&E which suggests the earliest possible bidding would be in the second half of 2023. The job is currently listed at $514 million for bids to be received in July 2023. However, since everything in the project is being delayed, I think July 2023 is optimistic, especially since the FHWA is in no hurry to fully approve any part of this project. https://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/let/2023/harris.htm#002713200 (https://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/let/2023/harris.htm#002713200)

Third, this segment has the least amount of right-of-way acquisition in the entire project (see page 16), and most of the properties are already cleared (see photos I posted previously). So this is the segment most likely to actually be built, and it could possibly be the only segment to be built if FHWA decides to cancel everything else due to the planned right-of-way acquisition.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: J N Winkler on February 08, 2022, 02:30:40 PM
MaxConcrete--many thanks for sharing your insights!

Quote from: MaxConcrete on February 07, 2022, 10:20:50 PMFirst, this segment was originally slated to be design build, as you can see the map on page 12 still shows it as DB1. Since this RFP is for PS&E (plans, schedule and estimates), it is now a conventional design-bid-build job. I don't know the reason for the change, but very high prices on recent design build jobs could be an influence.

I wonder if the goal is to cover downside risk by ensuring that TxDOT is not paying a design-builder to stay on the clock for a project that may be cancelled and also has a set of plans on the shelf in case federal stimulus funds become available with little advance notice.

It doesn't seem to me terribly common, but over the years I've run into situations where projects are taken to 100% design only for a finished plans set to be thrown out and replaced (not simply updated) when the project needs to be re-scoped for reasons of cost or environmental compliance.

I'm also curious as to why potential proposers are being asked to execute a nondisclosure agreement to obtain the design documentation package.  This is fairly unusual for design solicitations, and some of the items listed as being included in the package, such as reference information documents, are routinely uploaded to the FTP server (where they are on open public access) for large design-build procurements.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on February 08, 2022, 11:05:41 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on February 08, 2022, 02:30:40 PM
I wonder if the goal is to cover downside risk by ensuring that TxDOT is not paying a design-builder to stay on the clock for a project that may be cancelled and also has a set of plans on the shelf in case federal stimulus funds become available with little advance notice.

I'm also curious as to why potential proposers are being asked to execute a nondisclosure agreement to obtain the design documentation package.  This is fairly unusual for design solicitations, and some of the items listed as being included in the package, such as reference information documents, are routinely uploaded to the FTP server (where they are on open public access) for large design-build procurements.

I agree, TxDOT wants the plans ready so the project can proceed very quickly if/when FHWA allows it to proceed. The design-build process to request proposals, make the selection and execute the contract takes a very long time - always at least a year. With the plans ready, they can put it out to bid and get the contract underway in 2-3 months.

As for the NDA, it is unusual and I can't think of anything that would be sensitive. It's probably due to the lawsuit in progress, and TxDOT probably wants to ensure the consultant does not hand over any design information to the plaintiff or any of the opposition organizations.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on February 13, 2022, 06:04:44 PM
Demolition of the former Mexican consulate at 4507 San Jacinto (southeast corner at IH-69 in midtown) is underway. This is on the section of IH 69 on the far south end of the project between Spur 527 and SH 288. This section is one of the most likely to proceed, even if the rest of the project is canceled.

This is this second largest building to be demolished so far, after the large office building along Interstate 10.

The demolition of this building is a favorable sign for this section. However, the construction job is not shown on TxDOT's 2-year letting schedule, and numerous other properties, mostly residential, still need to be cleared.

http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20220212_NHHIP_ROW_1_1600.JPG (http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20220212_NHHIP_ROW_1_1600.JPG)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20220212_NHHIP_ROW_1_1600.JPG&hash=b47e0f64955ef520372128d923b37da50230fe65)

In this view, the on-ramp to NB IH-69 is in the foreground
http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20220212_NHHIP_ROW_5_1600.JPG (http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20220212_NHHIP_ROW_5_1600.JPG)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20220212_NHHIP_ROW_5_1600.JPG&hash=89e8fac146e5d5d732c737ec44977b4cb77d478b)

This building is very close to the freeway, and the on-ramp visible on the left side is within 10 feet feet of the building.
http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20220212_NHHIP_ROW_6-1600.JPG (http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20220212_NHHIP_ROW_6-1600.JPG)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20220212_NHHIP_ROW_6-1600.JPG&hash=af1253c24e9cf60d59f9b6f7c2ab5b291dfe24dc)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on March 12, 2022, 06:57:28 PM
The former Mexican consulate is now gone, except for some rubble remaining behind the fence. As of last weekend it was still standing.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20220312_002_1600.jpg&hash=6d2cd83c4eb3c58a1678eec4083fc6d7e4f44335)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: triplemultiplex on March 15, 2022, 12:08:51 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on March 12, 2022, 06:57:28 PM
The former Mexican consulate is now gone, except for some rubble remaining behind the fence. As of last weekend it was still standing.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20220312_002_1600.jpg&hash=6d2cd83c4eb3c58a1678eec4083fc6d7e4f44335)

I got excited about the graffiti until I looked closer and realized, no, it doesn't say "El Barto".
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: J N Winkler on March 15, 2022, 03:52:39 PM
I kind of liked the "Queso" tag on the top floor--that is topnotch stencil work over what appears to be a photorealistic rendition of a city skyline.  Oh well!  Ephemeral art is ephemeral.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on March 22, 2022, 10:51:20 PM
So it seems this project is moving forward as planned? At least the downtown section:

QuoteThe Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) recently announced the issuance of the Record of Decision (ROD) for the North Houston Highway Improvement Project (NHHIP), which signals the completion of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process for environmental clearance. Specifically, the ROD constitutes approval of the Preferred Alternative for this crucial project to improve safety and mobility along one of the state's most congested roadways, as described in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the project.

https://www.constructionequipmentguide.com/txdot-reaches-decision-on-houston-infrastructure-project/55881
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on March 23, 2022, 12:35:22 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 22, 2022, 10:51:20 PM
So it seems this project is moving forward as planned? At least the downtown section:

QuoteThe Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) recently announced the issuance of the Record of Decision (ROD) for the North Houston Highway Improvement Project (NHHIP), which signals the completion of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process for environmental clearance. Specifically, the ROD constitutes approval of the Preferred Alternative for this crucial project to improve safety and mobility along one of the state's most congested roadways, as described in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the project.

https://www.constructionequipmentguide.com/txdot-reaches-decision-on-houston-infrastructure-project/55881

That article is about a year out of date, even though it is dated March 22, 2022. It fails to mention the FHWA suspension and the lawsuit.

The answer to your question is: No, nothing is moving forward as planned at this time.

Just today, H-GAC had a public meeting and most of the downtown work has been removed from the 4 year plan. (I can't find the presentation online.)

Remaining in the 4-year plan:
IH 69, Spur 527 to SH 288: $461 million, listed for start in 2023
IH 69, SH 288 to IH 45: $456 million, listed for start in 2025
Interchange at IH 45 and IH 10: $982 million, listed for start in 2026

All other work downtown work is postponed to start in 2028 and 2030, and no work north of downtown is scheduled.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on March 23, 2022, 12:43:58 AM
Okay thanks for the response. I thought it was weird seeing that and nothing posted here. Odd they'd post something so out of date. Usually they are pretty good about being accurate.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Thegeet on March 23, 2022, 01:00:11 AM
When can we expect to see a final decision?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on April 19, 2022, 08:59:28 PM
Is there any particular reason they're not putting these added lanes on a second deck? Your first response is probably that it would cost too much, which is what I assumed, but they're doing that in San Antonio.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on April 19, 2022, 09:49:56 PM
Max, any update on this? What's your thoughts this is getting dragged out I'm thinking this isn't looking good.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on April 19, 2022, 10:47:10 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 19, 2022, 09:49:56 PM
Max, any update on this? What's your thoughts this is getting dragged out I'm thinking this isn't looking good.

At the March TxDOT Commission meeting, Chairman Bugg spoke about the project status. He mentioned FHWA's suspension letter from April 2021 and highlighted FHWA's statement that it would provide an expeditious decision. A year later TxDOT has apparently not received a status or timeline.

I agree: the longer FHWA keeps the suspension in place, the greater the risk to the project, especially with inflation on the increase. And that may be FHWA's intent, to delay the project indefinitely to allow the cost to increase, and eventually TxDOT will reallocate funding to other projects. In fact, we may see funding reallocated for the 2023 UTP, which is approved in August or September.

As I mentioned on March 23, most work has been pulled out the 4-year plan with delayed work around downtown now listed for 2028 and 2030. Only $2 billion remains in the 4-year plan.

I still expect the approx $1 billion of work on IH-69 south of IH-45 to proceed, but everything else is very uncertain. I'm thinking we may know something more by the end of the year.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 19, 2022, 11:59:21 PM
Quote from: MaxConcreteInterchange at IH 45 and IH 10: $982 million, listed for start in 2026

A billion dollars? For one interchange? Holy shit.

I think I said it before. If the anti-freeway folks want to block the projects in downtown Houston then TX DOT should definitely re-direct that funding elsewhere in the state. It's not like there is a lack of major highway projects to build in other parts of Texas. A whole lot of I-69 outside of Houston remains not built. There's I-27 in West Texas. Certain US Highway corridors in Texas and even some state highway corridors need serious upgrade work. The billions meant for that stuff in downtown Houston will likely be appreciated by motorists elsewhere.

What's funny is many of the anti-freeway folks still expect all those billions of dollars to still be spent in their locales, but just on other crap. Yeah, naw, highway dollars need to be spent on highways. Just not their highways.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: bwana39 on April 20, 2022, 12:40:14 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 19, 2022, 11:59:21 PM
Quote from: MaxConcreteInterchange at IH 45 and IH 10: $982 million, listed for start in 2026

A billion dollars? For one interchange? Holy shit.



The "High 5" in Dallas (US-75 I-635) was over a billion a decade ago...  nearly 2 decades and a shade under $300,000,000. I must have listened to something spoken in hyperbole. 
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on April 20, 2022, 12:53:16 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 19, 2022, 11:59:21 PM
Quote from: MaxConcreteInterchange at IH 45 and IH 10: $982 million, listed for start in 2026

A billion dollars? For one interchange? Holy shit.

I think I said it before. If the anti-freeway folks want to block the projects in downtown Houston then TX DOT should definitely re-direct that funding elsewhere in the state. It's not like there is a lack of major highway projects to build in other parts of Texas. A whole lot of I-69 outside of Houston remains not built. There's I-27 in West Texas. Certain US Highway corridors in Texas and even some state highway corridors need serious upgrade work. The billions meant for that stuff in downtown Houston will likely be appreciated by motorists elsewhere.

What's funny is many of the anti-freeway folks still expect all those billions of dollars to still be spent in their locales, but just on other crap. Yeah, naw, highway dollars need to be spent on highways. Just not their highways.

If you look at what they're doing, $1 billion isn't that shocking. They are straightening out both freeways and creating an immensely complicated spaghetti junction.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on April 20, 2022, 01:14:03 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on April 20, 2022, 12:40:14 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 19, 2022, 11:59:21 PM
Quote from: MaxConcreteInterchange at IH 45 and IH 10: $982 million, listed for start in 2026

A billion dollars? For one interchange? Holy shit.



The "High 5" in Dallas (US-75 I-635) was over a billion a decade ago...

Really? I thought the original high five interchange was about 300 million or so.

Quote repaired.  --J N Winkler
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: J N Winkler on April 20, 2022, 01:24:23 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on April 20, 2022, 12:40:14 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 19, 2022, 11:59:21 PM
Quote from: MaxConcreteInterchange at IH 45 and IH 10: $982 million, listed for start in 2026

A billion dollars? For one interchange? Holy shit.

The "High 5" in Dallas (US-75 I-635) was over a billion a decade ago...

I can't speak to the ROW cost since I don't remember TxDOT including that in letting schedules back in 2001, but all or nearly all of the construction for the High Five was done through one contract, CCSJ 2374-01-069, that was let in April 2001 for $261 million.  The plans set ran to over 5000 sheets.

There are more Maltese cross stacks in the state of Texas (a first-level subdivision of a sovereign country with UN representation) than on any continent other than North America, and probably all continents other than North America combined.  Texas also has more than twice as many stacks of this type as California, which is the runner-up among American states with nine.  This interchange form has long been highly affordable in Texas compared to other places--besides the High Five, several were later built in DFW and Houston for roughly $250 million each.  (I-410/US 281 in San Antonio proved fairly expensive at about $400 million.)

This said, I expect the NHHIP as a whole to be a cost bomb simply because so much of it will have to be built under traffic in some of the most congested parts of the Houston metro.  Aside from I-45/I-610 (north), where the present left exits and entrances are to be removed, I don't think it will add to the state's stack count.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Bobby5280 on April 20, 2022, 01:38:06 PM
Quote from: bwana39The "High 5" in Dallas (US-75 I-635) was over a billion a decade ago...

No. The High Five project in Dallas was built for around $260 million. Not a billion. I remember following progress of that project and even checking out the site in person a couple different times before it was finished.

(Edit: Just now seeing J N Winkler's response)

Quote from: kernals12If you look at what they're doing, $1 billion isn't that shocking. They are straightening out both freeways and creating an immensely complicated spaghetti junction.

I can understand why the entire I-45/I-10/I-69 project around downtown Houston would run into the billions of dollars. That's a lot of new roadways running on elevated structures for pretty long distances around the downtown zone. But one interchange is just one interchange. And if TX DOT is forced to cancel or scale-back a lot of the plans then a new I-45/I-10 interchange would have to be affected just as much.
Title: Re: TxDOT recommends massive, mind-boggling rebuild of downtown Houston freeways
Post by: bwana39 on April 20, 2022, 05:34:45 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on May 01, 2015, 03:36:22 PM
The Houston Business Journal is reporting strong support for the new downtown design from the downtown business community. This support is crucial because those interests have political influence. Strong support could also move it to construction sooner, especially with the likelihood of a substantial increase in TxDOT's budget.

http://www.bizjournals.com/houston/blog/breaking-ground/2015/04/houston-real-estate-heavyweights-all-for-downtown.html (http://www.bizjournals.com/houston/blog/breaking-ground/2015/04/houston-real-estate-heavyweights-all-for-downtown.html)

Houston real estate heavyweights all for downtown highway transformation
Apr 30, 2015, 11:41am CDT


A plan to decommission a portion of I-45 running through downtown Houston could increase development and connectivity downtown, real estate experts say.

A Texas Department of Transportation proposal to realign Interstate 45 downtown with Highway 59 would render the Pierce Elevated, a portion of I-45 that runs along Pierce Street through the central business district, unused. At a recent Urban Land Institute panel on downtown Houston, real estate experts were united in support of the plan to demolish or transform the Pierce Elevated.

The group of panelists, representing various sectors of the real estate industry including office, multifamily and retail, all agreed that the plan would lessen or remove a barrier between areas of downtown that could result in improved connectivity and more development.

"I couldn't be more enthusiastic about it," said Sanford Criner, vice chairman at CBRE with more than 40 years' experience with office leasing and development. "Mobility is always important, but our problem isn't getting people downtown, it's what can we do with them when they're here?

....
 


If this is what downtown Houston wants good for them. I will make one comment here. The Pierce elevated doesn't physically separate anything. EVERY street crosses (under) it. It may very well create an emotional barrier, but that said, if they just commenced building one block west of it, the continuity of downtown would happen.

As much of the problem with the elevated is what goes on under it. Houston as much as many other major cities has a homeless problem. The one problem getting rid of the elevated freeway would actually solve is there would probably not be a convenient place for the homeless to camp. I am not sure of the solution to homelessness, but getting rid of a freeway just moves the homeless encampments to another location. It does nothing for the homeless people.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on April 20, 2022, 11:24:57 PM
I just became aware of this document published by the downtown Houston TIRZ (tax increment reinvestment zone) on March 8
NHHIP exhibits start on page 26
http://www.downtowntirz.com/downtownhouston/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Board-Book-FINAL-3.8.22.pdf (http://www.downtowntirz.com/downtownhouston/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Board-Book-FINAL-3.8.22.pdf)

According to page 29 (exhibit page 11), "TxDOT is providing a 30-acre concrete cap over the trenched highways." That statement isn't clear to me. Does it mean TxDOT is providing it in the design (without paying for it), or is TxDOT actually paying for its construction?

A 30-acre deck will increase the cost by at least $500 million, and probably much more. If TxDOT pays for the NHHIP deck, it means TxDOT will also need to pay for decks in Austin (IH-35) and Dallas (IH-345 and IH-30), which could be another $1 billion in expense.

Looking at the document, including the added work of the deck park, reinforces that NHHIP is a tremendously ambitious project. The presentation doesn't even cover a potential Pierce Elevated park. And of course the NHHIP section north of downtown is highly ambitious, if it can move forward.

Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Thegeet on April 21, 2022, 12:48:35 AM
Here's an article I found just now: https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/Opponents-deluge-TxDOT-officials-with-calls-to-17107221.php
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on April 21, 2022, 11:55:08 AM
Pretty obvious astroturfing
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Anthony_JK on April 21, 2022, 12:18:35 PM
If Houston is that opposed to this project, then may as well just pull it.

Extend the Hardy Toll Road down to the 69/10 interchange and let that serve as the 45 reliever.

Extend the Westpark Tollway west to a connection with I-10 west of Katy and use that to relieve I-10/Katy Tollway.

Complete the SH 146 connection to I-45 South and the eastern semicircle of the Grand Parkway.

Use alternative public transport (buses, expanded light rail) for the rest.

Either that, or allow the New Urbanists to blow up/tear down every freeway inside of 610.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: bwana39 on April 21, 2022, 04:33:41 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on June 11, 2021, 08:04:41 AM
We keep talking about the infeasibility of a tunnel, but the fact is they are going to build a fully depressed roadway (with the goal of putting a deck park above it.) While it will only be about 20 to 25 feet below grade, it is still a tunnel for all practical purposes subject to the same flooding that a true tunnel would be. Arguments against a tunnel however well founded or not are moot.

As to the practical application, the Washburn Tunnel has stood since the fifties without flooding being a problem.  The Baytown tunnel had its problems, but flooding was not one of them. I will admit that the depressed portion of the Southwest Freeway DID flood during a hurricane some years ago, but it remains in the same depressed canyon.

Way back here we discussed the deck parks. We may not have discussed whom is paying for them, but we did discuss them.

As to funding a different project.....

The Deck park expansion on Woodall Rogers in Dallas was bid by TXDOT.... https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=30808.msg2695994#msg2695994
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (includes downtown rebuild)
Post by: abqtraveler on April 25, 2022, 11:20:15 AM
Quote from: bwana39 on April 21, 2022, 04:33:41 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on June 11, 2021, 08:04:41 AM
We keep talking about the infeasibility of a tunnel, but the fact is they are going to build a fully depressed roadway (with the goal of putting a deck park above it.) While it will only be about 20 to 25 feet below grade, it is still a tunnel for all practical purposes subject to the same flooding that a true tunnel would be. Arguments against a tunnel however well founded or not are moot.

As to the practical application, the Washburn Tunnel has stood since the fifties without flooding being a problem.  The Baytown tunnel had its problems, but flooding was not one of them. I will admit that the depressed portion of the Southwest Freeway DID flood during a hurricane some years ago, but it remains in the same depressed canyon.
Tunnels that are properly designed to withstand...say a 500-year flood event would incorporate design elements such as drainage systems, pumps, and bulkhead doors that can keep the entire tunnel system dry, or at the very worst, isolate flooding to the smallest area possible during a major flood event. Other cities that are prone to flooding have successfully tunneled freeways below their urban cores with designs where the tunnels stay dry during such floods. It can be done in Houston as well.

Way back here we discussed the deck parks. We may not have discussed whom is paying for them, but we did discuss them.

As to funding a different project.....

The Deck park expansion on Woodall Rogers in Dallas was bid by TXDOT.... https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=30808.msg2695994#msg2695994
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: cbalducc on May 01, 2022, 10:36:36 AM
Now the Houston interstate revolt has made news in Great Britain.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/apr/29/texas-highway-expansions-project-displacements-protests

I think the best way of this revolt succeeding is to elect a mayor who is against the project.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: cbalducc on May 01, 2022, 10:44:02 AM


No, it comes from an economic precept. Land NEVER reduces in value (and as a whole any Real Property doesn't.). Which means in practice that urban land is worth more than rural land because it has an established price that is more. Even when a seller incurs a loss, it is because he overpaid for it initially not because it actually is worth less now.  The cost of raw land will hardly ever be less than the previous sale even when significant remediation or structure removal costs are going to incurred.
[/quote]
Doesn't urban land decrease in value if it is located in an area that is no longer desirable?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on May 01, 2022, 04:43:47 PM
Demolition of the large warehouse just east of Main Street is in progress. These photos were taken today. This is the largest building by land area to be demolished so far, and probably the largest in square footage. (A large three-floor office building was demolished just east of this location, possibly more square footage than the warehouse but probably not.)

http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20220501-NHHIP-ROW-b.jpg (http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20220501-NHHIP-ROW-b.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20220501-NHHIP-ROW-b.jpg&hash=7a8117fb460086f86890197d410dd8996aed77ea)

http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20220501-NHHIP-ROW-a.jpg (http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20220501-NHHIP-ROW-a.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20220501-NHHIP-ROW-a.jpg&hash=1387d2f35c36c6a9c8ca77e1a599bf09c499125c)

The image below shows the warehouse location at the end of Naylor Street. This location is actually a right-of-way squeeze point. Due to the railroad on the north and the historic building on the south (the long rectangular building on Naylor Street), the available right-of-way is only 360 feet wide. The Interstate 10 main lanes are stacked on top of the frontage roads. At the warehouse location, all freeway lanes will be transitioning from depressed (eastward) to superelevated (westward) to go over the elevated light rail along Main Street. Interstate 45 (yellow lanes) are an extra level up.

http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/warehouse-location.jpg (http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/warehouse-location.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2Fwarehouse-location.jpg&hash=eca602e44bfe9ce9dc18422f9d4f230fdc984623)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: brad2971 on May 01, 2022, 05:01:57 PM
Quote from: cbalducc on May 01, 2022, 10:44:02 AM


No, it comes from an economic precept. Land NEVER reduces in value (and as a whole any Real Property doesn't.). Which means in practice that urban land is worth more than rural land because it has an established price that is more. Even when a seller incurs a loss, it is because he overpaid for it initially not because it actually is worth less now.  The cost of raw land will hardly ever be less than the previous sale even when significant remediation or structure removal costs are going to incurred.


This might be correct when talking about numbers of dollars paid. If we are talking about the inflation-adjusted value of urban or rural land, vast swaths of the Midwest and Great Plains states vehemently disagree with the idea that "Land NEVER reduces in value (and as a whole any Real Property doesn't.)." This chart shows the 25-year dip in  inflation adjusted value of ag land just since 1970:

https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/farm-economy/land-use-land-value-tenure/farmland-value/

And if we're discussing urban land, Detroit, Gary, Muncie, Cleveland, even Buffalo have some things to say about "Land NEVER reduces in value" as well.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on May 01, 2022, 10:29:40 PM
I just found something hilarious on the website of one of the groups opposing this
(https://i.imgur.com/U5Yzo8C.png)

They claim that public transit is superior in every way then they immediately start complaining about the problems caused by trains
Edit: also, their grammar leaves much to be desired
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on May 01, 2022, 10:32:42 PM
Quote from: brad2971 on May 01, 2022, 05:01:57 PM
And if we're discussing urban land, Detroit, Gary, Muncie, Cleveland, even Buffalo have some things to say about "Land NEVER reduces in value" as well.
Unless some unfortunate circumstance manifests that reduces the human population by double digit percentage points, even the land in the cities you mentioned will eventually become more and more expensive. That is the point; that land almost will certainly increase in value over time. Maybe in the short term they may drop in value but they will increase in the future.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: bwana39 on May 02, 2022, 12:07:49 AM
Quote from: brad2971 on May 01, 2022, 05:01:57 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on January 17, 2022, 05:54:51 PM

No, it comes from an economic precept. Land NEVER reduces in value (and as a whole any Real Property doesn't.). Which means in practice that urban land is worth more than rural land because it has an established price that is more. Even when a seller incurs a loss, it is because he overpaid for it initially not because it actually is worth less now.  The cost of raw land will hardly ever be less than the previous sale even when significant remediation or structure removal costs are going to incurred.


This might be correct when talking about numbers of dollars paid. If we are talking about the inflation-adjusted value of urban or rural land, vast swaths of the Midwest and Great Plains states vehemently disagree with the idea that "Land NEVER reduces in value (and as a whole any Real Property doesn't.)." This chart shows the 25-year dip in  inflation adjusted value of ag land just since 1970:

https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/farm-economy/land-use-land-value-tenure/farmland-value/

And if we're discussing urban land, Detroit, Gary, Muncie, Cleveland, even Buffalo have some things to say about "Land NEVER reduces in value" as well.

I am going to own this one. I agree if you do detailed current value versus inflation you are 100% correct. All types of properties may fail to keep up with (or outperform) inflation. My original statement was probably ambiguous. I should have said previous price point as opposed to previous price.

I might add that part of the reason those rustbelt cities have structures that are falling in is one or both of two reasons. 1) Owners hold onto them because they will not take a loss. 2) The worth of the land is (viewed as) worth more than the reduced value of the structure with land.  People don't take losses on real properties unless they have NO other alternative.

Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Anthony_JK on May 03, 2022, 01:48:22 AM
Quote from: kernals12 on May 01, 2022, 10:29:40 PM
I just found something hilarious on the website of one of the groups opposing this
(https://i.imgur.com/U5Yzo8C.png)

They claim that public transit is superior in every way then they immediately start complaining about the problems caused by trains
Edit: also, their grammar leaves much to be desired

I believe they are talking more about heavy freight rail lines passing through neighborhoods: they would favor converting arterials and freeway ROW for passenger freight (light rail and commuter rail).

What they forget about freeways is that they are not necessarily for urban sprawl; they also provide direct service to downtown business districts as well as large venues within the inner city itself (in Houston's case, Minute Maid Park, for example). The fact that they were originally built over mostly poor neighborhoods of color without any thought of their residents was a crime and a tragedy, but that doesn't mean that they can't be better integrated within such neighborhoods in a less intrusive and more integrated form. That may be a small comfort for those who would rather oppose them on NIMBY grounds alone, but it is possible to build freeways that can move traffic as well as be much friendlier to the neighborhoods. Obviously, it wouldn't hurt to balance it out with more public transit and even some rail-based transit. That's a far cry, though, from the "FREEWAYS SUCK, TEAR THEM ALL DOWN AND FORCE PEOPLE OUT OF THEIR CARS, AND DON'T LET THEM POLLUTE OUR NEIGHBORHOODS!!!" mentality of some of the more rabid New Urbanists.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on May 26, 2022, 05:08:52 PM
Any news on the project from today's TTC meeting?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on May 26, 2022, 06:14:17 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on May 26, 2022, 05:08:52 PM
Any news on the project from today's TTC meeting?

The powerpoint presentation is posted. I missed the livestream. Video should be posted Friday or Monday. More details are surely available in the discussion.
https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/commission/2022/0526/7c.pdf (https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/commission/2022/0526/7c.pdf)

Key items in the presentation

QuoteStatus - May 2022
— FHWA completing its fact-finding phase
— Anticipate a formal FHWA response soon
— Expect discussion to finalize TxDOT's Voluntary Resolution Agreement

If pause were lifted today:
» Results in a minimum three-year delay for construction start
» 3A: let in 2024 at the earliest
» 3B: let in 2025 at the earliest

Sections 3A and 3B are on IH-69 south of IH-45. It looks like a decision is expected soon. The "Voluntary Resolution Agreement" appears to be the solution. The question is, how much downsizing will it involve?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Anthony_JK on May 26, 2022, 06:41:03 PM
That would probably mean that the I-45 transfer to I-69 and I-10 is now DOA, right?

If so, what does that mean for the Pierre Elevated portion of I-45? Is it still scheduled to be removed and converted into a surface connection to local streets?

Also, what does that mean for the improvements to I-45 from I-10 to I-610? I still say that extending the Hardy Toll Road to I-69/I-10 would be a more feasible and less extreme option.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on May 26, 2022, 07:02:51 PM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on May 26, 2022, 06:41:03 PM
That would probably mean that the I-45 transfer to I-69 and I-10 is now DOA, right?

If so, what does that mean for the Pierre Elevated portion of I-45? Is it still scheduled to be removed and converted into a surface connection to local streets?

Also, what does that mean for the improvements to I-45 from I-10 to I-610? I still say that extending the Hardy Toll Road to I-69/I-10 would be a more feasible and less extreme option.


I don't know anything about the terms of the ""Voluntary Resolution Agreement". I was just speculating that FHWA is going to need some concessions for the project to proceed. But I really don't know.

The terms of the agreement could be minimal to the project design, or could be drastic.  We'll find out when the agreement is disclosed.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on May 26, 2022, 07:26:54 PM
Maybe TxDOT will just need to build replacement housing, put in soundwalls, and build more electric car chargers.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on May 26, 2022, 07:34:08 PM
Also: how come they can expand I-35 in San Antonio with elevated express lanes, but not do the same in Houston?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on May 26, 2022, 07:55:03 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on May 26, 2022, 07:34:08 PM
Also: how come they can expand I-35 in San Antonio with elevated express lanes, but not do the same in Houston?
San Antonio has historically been willing to accept elevated lanes, mainly the elevated lanes on Interstate 10 and around downtown. San Antonio appears to have concluded that elevated lanes are not harmful and are preferred over displacements. San Antonio is much smaller in population than DFW and Houston, so they're wise enough to know that their funding allocations are much smaller and they need to stretch their funding as far as possible by avoiding very expensive designs like trenches and deck parks.

Elevated lanes were considered for most of the length of NHHIP including another deck above the Pierce Elevated and along IH-45 north of downtown. Most elevated lanes options were rejected. I was not in Houston at the time of that planning phase around 2010, but I believe they were rejected due to opposition due to perceived community impacts, and the only new elevated lanes in the final design are on the north side of downtown.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on May 26, 2022, 08:55:17 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on May 26, 2022, 07:55:03 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on May 26, 2022, 07:34:08 PM
Also: how come they can expand I-35 in San Antonio with elevated express lanes, but not do the same in Houston?
San Antonio has historically been willing to accept elevated lanes, mainly the elevated lanes on Interstate 10 and around downtown. San Antonio appears to have concluded that elevated lanes are not harmful and are preferred over displacements. San Antonio is much smaller in population than DFW and Houston, so they're wise enough to know that their funding allocations are much smaller and they need to stretch their funding as far as possible by avoiding very expensive designs like trenches and deck parks.

Elevated lanes were considered for most of the length of NHHIP including another deck above the Pierce Elevated and along IH-45 north of downtown. Most elevated lanes options were rejected. I was not in Houston at the time of that planning phase around 2010, but I believe they were rejected due to opposition due to perceived community impacts, and the only new elevated lanes in the final design are on the north side of downtown.


Really? People actually preferred hundreds of residential and business displacements just because elevated lanes look kind of ugly?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: TXtoNJ on May 26, 2022, 11:55:47 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on May 26, 2022, 08:55:17 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on May 26, 2022, 07:55:03 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on May 26, 2022, 07:34:08 PM
Also: how come they can expand I-35 in San Antonio with elevated express lanes, but not do the same in Houston?
San Antonio has historically been willing to accept elevated lanes, mainly the elevated lanes on Interstate 10 and around downtown. San Antonio appears to have concluded that elevated lanes are not harmful and are preferred over displacements. San Antonio is much smaller in population than DFW and Houston, so they're wise enough to know that their funding allocations are much smaller and they need to stretch their funding as far as possible by avoiding very expensive designs like trenches and deck parks.

Elevated lanes were considered for most of the length of NHHIP including another deck above the Pierce Elevated and along IH-45 north of downtown. Most elevated lanes options were rejected. I was not in Houston at the time of that planning phase around 2010, but I believe they were rejected due to opposition due to perceived community impacts, and the only new elevated lanes in the final design are on the north side of downtown.


Really? People actually preferred hundreds of residential and business displacements just because elevated lanes look kind of ugly?

You been to Houston?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on June 21, 2022, 09:37:00 PM
UPDATE: the City of Houston has blocked demolition by withholding needed permits
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Houston-to-delay-demolition-of-apartments-near-17258539.php?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=HC_AfternoonReport&utm_term=news&utm_content=headlines&sid=5b02328c2ddf9c12eaed3685
(https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Houston-to-delay-demolition-of-apartments-near-17258539.php?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=HC_AfternoonReport&utm_term=news&utm_content=headlines&sid=5b02328c2ddf9c12eaed3685)
More trouble....

The demolition contractor is about to begin demolition of the 375-unit Lofts at the Ballpark, which is not public housing. The demolition contractor has secured the site and moved equipment into position. Now Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee is trying to stop the demolition. She's trying to get FHWA to stop it, but if that doesn't work I expect the opposition to seek a court order.

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Plan-to-demolish-apartments-near-Minute-Maid-Park-17255957.php (https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Plan-to-demolish-apartments-near-Minute-Maid-Park-17255957.php)
https://www.bizjournals.com/houston/news/2022/06/21/sheila-jackson-lee-lofts-at-the-ballpark-txdot-i45.html (https://www.bizjournals.com/houston/news/2022/06/21/sheila-jackson-lee-lofts-at-the-ballpark-txdot-i45.html)

QuoteU.S. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee is questioning the legality of an effort by the Texas Department of Transportation to demolish a three-building apartment complex near Minute Maid Park to make way for the planned expansion of Interstate 45, adding weight to a protest effort led by community activists.

During a June 21 press conference, Lee said the demolition of the 375-unit Lofts at the Ballpark complex at 601 St. Emanuel St. would disproportionately affect minority communities while the I-45 expansion project is currently on pause. Last year, the Federal Highway Administration ordered the I-45 expansion project, dubbed the North Houston Highway Improvement Project, to hold off on construction while the federal agency investigates whether Black and Hispanic communities will be disproportionately affected by the construction.

TxDOT acquired the Lofts at the Ballpark complex in June 2021 and quickly began working to relocate the residents living there. TxDOT said all of the residents had been moved out of the complex as of May 2022. Those who were forced to move received relocation assistance.

(https://media.bizj.us/view/img/12288237/dsc0336*750xx1306-994-246-86.jpg)

(https://s.hdnux.com/photos/01/26/22/61/22621261/3/ratio3x2_1200.jpg)
(https://s.hdnux.com/photos/01/26/22/61/22621262/3/ratio3x2_1200.jpg)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: armadillo speedbump on June 22, 2022, 02:21:58 AM
So no one lives there, they've all been relocated since TXDOT bought the building, yet SJL is claiming tearing down an empty building that no longer can be rented out will somehow disproportionally affect the minority community.

Par for her extremely corrupt course.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on June 22, 2022, 08:18:34 AM
FHWA has already allowed ROW clearance for that part of the project. This is pure grandstanding.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: bwana39 on June 22, 2022, 12:41:12 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on June 22, 2022, 08:18:34 AM
FHWA has already allowed ROW clearance for that part of the project. This is pure grandstanding.

Yeah BUT.... The place we are in right now begs the question of the construction EVER being done.  I think she is off base, but using it as low-income housing until there is actually a FIRM decision of whether the modified freeway is ever going to be built or how is not necessarily a wrong way to think.

The ROW for FM2348 in near Mount Pleasant (north of the UPRR) was purchased (some through imminent  domain) and cleared based on the portion of road north of US-67 being aligned to fit the FM 1001 /I-30 overpass. Instead the intersection wound up being routed to meet the existing FM1001 / US-67 intersection. And the existing portion of FM1001 between US-67 and I-30 remaining unchanged.

The Convenience store immediately south of the I-30 intersection was bought and torn down. Since the reroute failed to materialize, the ROW south of US-67 has been sold and a business has built a building on part of it.  A new truck stop / convenience store is now sitting on the same location as previously. The government (it this case Titus County) bought the properties and went to the expense of demolition and clearing then sold them to others for a significant loss, not counting the demolition expenses.

This is not as clear cut as we would seem to suggest. We may, indeed, be getting the cart before the horse.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Henry on June 22, 2022, 01:21:29 PM
I think Houston is making a big mistake with its threat to cancel the I-45 project. All the buildings either have been or will be torn down, so this is going to be a waste of money if the construction doesn't proceed. Also, why reroute it around the east side of downtown when the elevated section could've been rebuilt for much less?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on June 22, 2022, 01:33:52 PM
Quote from: Henry on June 22, 2022, 01:21:29 PM
I think Houston is making a big mistake with its threat to cancel the I-45 project. All the buildings either have been or will be torn down, so this is going to be a waste of money if the construction doesn't proceed. Also, why reroute it around the east side of downtown when the elevated section could've been rebuilt for much less?

My interpretation of TxDOT's proceeding with the demolition is that the downtown part of NHHIP is expected to proceed. Of course, TxDOT is privy to the state of negotiations with FHWA.

Sure, it would have been far less expensive to leave the downtown freeways as-is and just do maintenance for many decades into the future. But NHHIP is a grand compromise plan. Downtown interests wanted the I-69 elevated structures removed (i.e. sunk below ground), and the Pierce Elevated removed entirely. TxDOT wanted to relieve bottlenecks, and rebuild I-45 north of downtown as part  of the plan. So the NHHIP plan gives downtown interests what they want, and TxDOT gets what it wants. The plan is very expensive and that's the downside for TxDOT. The plan requires right-of-way clearance, but now the interests which stand to receive benefits don't want to incur any of the negatives.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: bwana39 on June 22, 2022, 01:35:53 PM
Quote from: Henry on June 22, 2022, 01:21:29 PM
I think Houston is making a big mistake with its threat to cancel the I-45 project. All the buildings either have been or will be torn down, so this is going to be a waste of money if the construction doesn't proceed. Also, why reroute it around the east side of downtown when the elevated section could've been rebuilt for much less?

A vocal minority (not necessarily members of minority groups) got the ears of Secretary Buttigieg and President Biden and had the project re-examined. I really am not sure what the governmental and neo-governmental planning agencies think. The bottom line is TxDOT is proceeding as if section 3 is going to be built as planned.

QuoteAlso, why reroute it around the east side of downtown when the elevated section could've been rebuilt for much less?
It is specifically what the vocal downtown interests wanted. TxDOT said in not exactly a private manner when new problems started cropping up after the plan seemed to be firmly in place that TxDOT gave them what they wanted (rerouting around the Pierce Elevated) and still it was not enough. TxDOT wanted to just rebuild the freeway in the same place. It was the locals (the same ilk as those wanting rid of the previously invisible I-345 in Dallas ) who just short of demanded it.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 22, 2022, 02:31:50 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on June 22, 2022, 01:33:52 PM
Quote from: Henry on June 22, 2022, 01:21:29 PM
I think Houston is making a big mistake with its threat to cancel the I-45 project. All the buildings either have been or will be torn down, so this is going to be a waste of money if the construction doesn't proceed. Also, why reroute it around the east side of downtown when the elevated section could've been rebuilt for much less?

My interpretation of TxDOT's proceeding with the demolition is that the downtown part of NHHIP is expected to proceed. Of course, TxDOT is privy to the state of negotiations with FHWA.

Sure, it would have been far less expensive to leave the downtown freeways as-is and just do maintenance for many decades into the future. But NHHIP is a grand compromise plan. Downtown interests wanted the I-69 elevated structures removed (i.e. sunk below ground), and the Pierce Elevated removed entirely. TxDOT wanted to relieve bottlenecks, and rebuild I-45 north of downtown as part  of the plan. So the NHHIP plan gives downtown interests what they want, and TxDOT gets what it wants. The plan is very expensive and that's the downside for TxDOT. The plan requires right-of-way clearance, but now the interests which stand to receive benefits don't want to incur any of the negatives.
Are there any renderings of the new plan or is it the same as the old renderings?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on June 22, 2022, 02:54:35 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on June 22, 2022, 01:33:52 PM
Quote from: Henry on June 22, 2022, 01:21:29 PM
I think Houston is making a big mistake with its threat to cancel the I-45 project. All the buildings either have been or will be torn down, so this is going to be a waste of money if the construction doesn't proceed. Also, why reroute it around the east side of downtown when the elevated section could've been rebuilt for much less?

My interpretation of TxDOT's proceeding with the demolition is that the downtown part of NHHIP is expected to proceed. Of course, TxDOT is privy to the state of negotiations with FHWA.

Sure, it would have been far less expensive to leave the downtown freeways as-is and just do maintenance for many decades into the future. But NHHIP is a grand compromise plan. Downtown interests wanted the I-69 elevated structures removed (i.e. sunk below ground), and the Pierce Elevated removed entirely. TxDOT wanted to relieve bottlenecks, and rebuild I-45 north of downtown as part  of the plan. So the NHHIP plan gives downtown interests what they want, and TxDOT gets what it wants. The plan is very expensive and that's the downside for TxDOT. The plan requires right-of-way clearance, but now the interests which stand to receive benefits don't want to incur any of the negatives.
Sounds a lot like Boston's Big Dig
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on June 22, 2022, 03:20:10 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 22, 2022, 02:31:50 PM
Are there any renderings of the new plan or is it the same as the old renderings?
As far as publicly available information, nothing has changed. The most recent schematics are still the official plan.
https://www.txdot.gov/nhhip/updates.html (https://www.txdot.gov/nhhip/updates.html)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: TXtoNJ on June 24, 2022, 12:34:25 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on June 22, 2022, 01:35:53 PM
Quote from: Henry on June 22, 2022, 01:21:29 PM
I think Houston is making a big mistake with its threat to cancel the I-45 project. All the buildings either have been or will be torn down, so this is going to be a waste of money if the construction doesn't proceed. Also, why reroute it around the east side of downtown when the elevated section could've been rebuilt for much less?

A vocal minority (not necessarily members of minority groups) got the ears of Secretary Buttigieg and President Biden and had the project re-examined. I really am not sure what the governmental and neo-governmental planning agencies think. The bottom line is TxDOT is proceeding as if section 3 is going to be built as planned.

QuoteAlso, why reroute it around the east side of downtown when the elevated section could've been rebuilt for much less?
It is specifically what the vocal downtown interests wanted. TxDOT said in not exactly a private manner when new problems started cropping up after the plan seemed to be firmly in place that TxDOT gave them what they wanted (rerouting around the Pierce Elevated) and still it was not enough. TxDOT wanted to just rebuild the freeway in the same place. It was the locals (the same ilk as those wanting rid of the previously invisible I-345 in Dallas ) who just short of demanded it.

I think you're conflating a lot of disparate interests. For example, downtown land developers are not opposed to any part of this - they got what they wanted. It's the local activist/NGO class that have been agitating the most against this, along with local politicians who have larger ambitions. This is mostly about building clout for them.

Just wait for the midterms.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: bwana39 on June 24, 2022, 03:51:54 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on June 24, 2022, 12:34:25 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on June 22, 2022, 01:35:53 PM
Quote from: Henry on June 22, 2022, 01:21:29 PM
I think Houston is making a big mistake with its threat to cancel the I-45 project. All the buildings either have been or will be torn down, so this is going to be a waste of money if the construction doesn't proceed. Also, why reroute it around the east side of downtown when the elevated section could've been rebuilt for much less?

A vocal minority (not necessarily members of minority groups) got the ears of Secretary Buttigieg and President Biden and had the project re-examined. I really am not sure what the governmental and neo-governmental planning agencies think. The bottom line is TxDOT is proceeding as if section 3 is going to be built as planned.

QuoteAlso, why reroute it around the east side of downtown when the elevated section could've been rebuilt for much less?
It is specifically what the vocal downtown interests wanted. TxDOT said in not exactly a private manner when new problems started cropping up after the plan seemed to be firmly in place that TxDOT gave them what they wanted (rerouting around the Pierce Elevated) and still it was not enough. TxDOT wanted to just rebuild the freeway in the same place. It was the locals (the same ilk as those wanting rid of the previously invisible I-345 in Dallas ) who just short of demanded it.

I think you're conflating a lot of disparate interests. For example, downtown land developers are not opposed to any part of this - they got what they wanted. It's the local activist/NGO class that have been agitating the most against this, along with local politicians who have larger ambitions. This is mostly about building clout for them.

Just wait for the midterms.

The problem for TxDOT is the fact the city and county agreed then the (seeming) support from either or both waned.  As you said wait until the mid-terms. The problem is local elections will locally make a new and yet to be ascertained set of realities and agendas in Houston and Harris county. Perhaps more so than the new congressional balance.

I simplified the concept to TxDOT versus the agenda of the city and county.

Yes, to some extent, it is co-mingling of constituencies. The land developers wanted rid of the Pierce Elevated to be able to more seamlessly expand downtown into mid-town. They indeed have everything THEY want. The developers and the hardcore urbanists worked as  a coalition to get rid of the Pierce Elevated. The developers got what they wanted. The urbanists clearly want(ed) more.

It is possible Rep Jackson-Lee MAY be grandstanding to work some sort of trade with the Segment 1 issues. There are still seriously unresolved issues north of I-610.

The reality is it is impossible for TxDOT to have a plan when they cannot figure out the demands and intentions of major stakeholders. We don't know a lot of what is happening behind the scenes, but in reality, what we are seeing is of greater consequence than it should be.  The real issue , just like in a romantic relationship is how to interpret the consent. DONTSTOP might be Don't!.... STOP!!! or it could be Don't Stop. the same letters, but set in their own context opposite meanings. It all boils down to how it is punctuated.

Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: TXtoNJ on June 27, 2022, 11:23:09 AM
SJL sees that this is driving attention and Inner Loop money from individual donors. Opportunist as ever.

When you say "county" what you mean is Lina - she's got bigger ambitions than county office, and this is a great vehicle for her to get national recognition beyond what she already has in the Democratic Party - especially since it bypasses the completely dysfunctional state party.

Buttigieg is also running with this because he wants to be President, and he couldn't do so last time because black voters don't know who the hell he is. So slowing this down helps him both with social justice and black voters, by his estimation.

I don't think the TxDOT plans have significantly changed. Costs would have exploded even if construction started in 2021.

The midterms are important, because in the case of a likely Democratic collapse, Pete's going to challenge Biden in the primary again as the woke candidate, and it's very possible Hidalgo gets appointed to some junior Cabinet position as a rising star in the party. As soon as the DoT hold releases, plans can go forth as already laid down - just more expensive.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on July 21, 2022, 09:47:58 AM
TxDOT has posted the video for the proposed modifications to Interstate 10 just west of NHHIP. The meeting is next week so the schematics are not online yet. Looking at the cross section, it appears it will be a long high-level elevated structure, about the level of the existing HOV lanes. The new HOV structure appears to be wide enough to be restriped to 2x2.

This project appears to be entirely separate from NHHIP in terms of the EIS. It is surely much easier administratively to move this project forward, since there are no displacements, no capacity expansion and this takes the freeway out of the flood zone. The video says they want to start work in summer 2024, which (if it actually happens) will probably be before any construction starts on NHHIP, if construction on NHHIP can proceed at all.

http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/ih-10-heights-cross-section.png (http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/ih-10-heights-cross-section.png)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2Fih-10-heights-cross-section.png&hash=f1c0101b85267c42ce4ef85d32535a2bd66ea4ac)

Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on July 21, 2022, 09:54:22 AM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on July 21, 2022, 09:47:58 AM
TxDOT has posted the video for the proposed modifications to Interstate 10 just west of NHHIP. The meeting is next week so the schematics are not online yet. Looking at the cross section, it appears it will be a long high-level elevated structure, about the level of the existing HOV lanes. The new HOV structure appears to be wide enough to be restriped to 2x2.

This project appears to be entirely separate from NHHIP in terms of the EIS. It is surely much easier administratively to move this project forward, since there are no displacements, no capacity expansion and this takes the freeway out of the flood zone. The video says they want to start work in summer 2024, which (if it actually happens) will probably be before any construction starts on NHHIP, if construction on NHHIP can proceed at all.

http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/ih-10-heights-cross-section.png (http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/ih-10-heights-cross-section.png)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2Fih-10-heights-cross-section.png&hash=f1c0101b85267c42ce4ef85d32535a2bd66ea4ac)


isn't TxDOT planning to add 4 managed lanes on that section of the Katy Freeway?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on July 30, 2022, 02:27:38 PM
Is that different from the project to extend the managed lanes to I-45 from the existing section or did they scrap they? I also read there will be a small amount of ROW expansion.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on July 30, 2022, 04:48:19 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 30, 2022, 02:27:38 PM
Is that different from the project to extend the managed lanes to I-45 from the existing section or did they scrap they? I also read there will be a small amount of ROW expansion.
Yes this is separate from the proposed main project to add 2x2 managed lanes between I-45 and I-610 (West Loop), which is called the Inner Katy corridor.
https://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/get-involved/about/hearings-meetings/houston/022521.html (https://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/get-involved/about/hearings-meetings/houston/022521.html)

The most recent public meeting was in February 2021. I have not heard of any TxDOT developments since that meeting, but Houston Metro recently announced its selected option which is a standalone elevated structure. This appears to eliminate concept B from further consideration.

https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/get-involved/hou/i-10-inner-katy-corridor/022521-ml-concept-b.pdf (https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/get-involved/hou/i-10-inner-katy-corridor/022521-ml-concept-b.pdf)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on July 30, 2022, 05:35:13 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on July 30, 2022, 04:48:19 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 30, 2022, 02:27:38 PM
Is that different from the project to extend the managed lanes to I-45 from the existing section or did they scrap they? I also read there will be a small amount of ROW expansion.
Yes this is separate from the proposed main project to add 2x2 managed lanes between I-45 and I-610 (West Loop), which is called the Inner Katy corridor.
https://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/get-involved/about/hearings-meetings/houston/022521.html (https://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/get-involved/about/hearings-meetings/houston/022521.html)

The most recent public meeting was in February 2021. I have not heard of any TxDOT developments since that meeting, but Houston Metro recently announced its selected option which is a standalone elevated structure. This appears to eliminate concept B from further consideration.

https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/get-involved/hou/i-10-inner-katy-corridor/022521-ml-concept-b.pdf (https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/get-involved/hou/i-10-inner-katy-corridor/022521-ml-concept-b.pdf)
It looks to me like none of the proposed alternatives would work with elevated GP lanes so they'd have to come up with a new alternative.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Duke87 on August 04, 2022, 01:00:53 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on June 24, 2022, 03:51:54 PM
The problem for TxDOT is the fact the city and county agreed then the (seeming) support from either or both waned.

I think a lot of it comes down to that the city and county agreed to the concept of rerouting I-45 along the Eastex Corridor and removing Pierce under the assumption that this would reduce the overall footprint of downtown freeways. Then they saw the renderings.

Suddenly, realization in hand that the project will actually take more land than it will free up, people don't like it so much anymore.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: TXtoNJ on August 05, 2022, 10:42:09 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on August 04, 2022, 01:00:53 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on June 24, 2022, 03:51:54 PM
The problem for TxDOT is the fact the city and county agreed then the (seeming) support from either or both waned.

I think a lot of it comes down to that the city and county agreed to the concept of rerouting I-45 along the Eastex Corridor and removing Pierce under the assumption that this would reduce the overall footprint of downtown freeways. Then they saw the renderings.

Suddenly, realization in hand that the project will actually take more land than it will free up, people don't like it so much anymore.

It's more that everything was fine while it remained inside baseball. Then it became a vehicle for larger political ambitions.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: jadebenn on August 09, 2022, 10:55:00 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on August 05, 2022, 10:42:09 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on August 04, 2022, 01:00:53 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on June 24, 2022, 03:51:54 PM
The problem for TxDOT is the fact the city and county agreed then the (seeming) support from either or both waned.

I think a lot of it comes down to that the city and county agreed to the concept of rerouting I-45 along the Eastex Corridor and removing Pierce under the assumption that this would reduce the overall footprint of downtown freeways. Then they saw the renderings.

Suddenly, realization in hand that the project will actually take more land than it will free up, people don't like it so much anymore.

It's more that everything was fine while it remained inside baseball. Then it became a vehicle for larger political ambitions.
No, I think Duke87 had it right the first time. It's getting harder and harder to get political buy-in from cities for freeway expansions at all, and it's getting worse every year. A not-quite removal of the Pierce Elevated doesn't seem as attractive of a trade-off as it used to be.

To be fair, I'd say the Houston political class in general is still okay with the project, but it's hard to deny enthusiasm has cooled. This would've been a slam-dunk not that many years ago.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on August 10, 2022, 09:48:18 AM
Quote from: jadebenn on August 09, 2022, 10:55:00 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on August 05, 2022, 10:42:09 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on August 04, 2022, 01:00:53 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on June 24, 2022, 03:51:54 PM
The problem for TxDOT is the fact the city and county agreed then the (seeming) support from either or both waned.

I think a lot of it comes down to that the city and county agreed to the concept of rerouting I-45 along the Eastex Corridor and removing Pierce under the assumption that this would reduce the overall footprint of downtown freeways. Then they saw the renderings.

Suddenly, realization in hand that the project will actually take more land than it will free up, people don't like it so much anymore.

It's more that everything was fine while it remained inside baseball. Then it became a vehicle for larger political ambitions.
No, I think Duke87 had it right the first time. It's getting harder and harder to get political buy-in from cities for freeway expansions at all, and it's getting worse every year. A not-quite removal of the Pierce Elevated doesn't seem as attractive of a trade-off as it used to be.

To be fair, I'd say the Houston political class in general is still okay with the project, but it's hard to deny enthusiasm has cooled. This would've been a slam-dunk not that many years ago.
Even Portland is widening highways now. Highway expansions have always been controversial and usually they get canceled not due to public opposition but for lack of funds.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Thegeet on August 30, 2022, 01:14:54 AM
Record of decision: Aug. 2, 2022.
https://www.txdot.gov/about/newsroom/local/houston/txdot-announces-nhhip-record-of-decision.html
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on August 30, 2022, 09:10:10 AM
Quote from: Thegeet on August 30, 2022, 01:14:54 AM
Record of decision: Aug. 2, 2022.
https://www.txdot.gov/about/newsroom/local/houston/txdot-announces-nhhip-record-of-decision.html

The ROD was issued in February 2021, just prior to the FHWA project suspension and the Harris County lawsuit.
https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/hou/news/record-of-decision.pdf (https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/hou/news/record-of-decision.pdf)

So it's old news. I don't know why that press release is dated Aug. 4, 2022. It must be a mistake, or some kind of malfunction related to the new web site design.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: rte66man on September 01, 2022, 08:33:11 AM
https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/news/transportation/2022/08/31/432075/txdot-keeps-controversial-i-45-expansion-on-long-term-slate-of-projects/

Quote
TxDOT keeps controversial I-45 expansion on long-term slate of projects

ADAM ZUVANICH | POSTED ONAUGUST 31, 2022, 4:30 PM (LAST UPDATED: AUGUST 31, 2022, 5:15 PM)
Share

A busload of Houston residents traveled Tuesday to Austin, where they demonstrated outside of Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) headquarters and spoke out against its Interstate 45 expansion project, asking to have more of a say in its design and execution and in some cases asking for it to be removed from the state agency's long-term transportation plan.

About 60 members of STOP TxDOT I-45, a local grassroots organization that opposes the multi-billion-dollar freeway expansion, commented on the project and its potential impacts during a meeting of the Texas Transportation Commission, which oversees TxDOT. The five-member commission, without discussing the plan for I-45 or responding to the feedback from members of the public, still voted to keep the controversial project and its funding on TxDOT's slate of transportation work over the next 10 years.

It was the latest development in a drawn-out battle between TxDOT and Houston-area stakeholders who oppose the plan for the North Houston Highway Improvement Project (NHHIP), which calls for widening and rerouting I-45 between downtown and Beltway 8 and displacing more than 1,000 homes and businesses in low-income communities of color. Work on the project is largely on hold, per a request by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), while it investigates complaints made under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and audits TxDOT's implementation of federal environmental review requirements.

"We weren't discouraged," said Ally Smither, an organizer for STOP TxDOT I-45 who traveled to Austin and spoke before the commission. "We've come to expect TxDOT to treat us like this. We will keep showing up and keep waiting for the FHWA verdict."

TxDOT, through its media relations office, did not comment on the feedback it received from impacted residents and how that might have affected the decision by the transportation commission.

The Greater Houston Partnership, an economic development organization that represents about 950 businesses in the region, released a statement from president and CEO Bob Harvey saying it supports the transportation commission's decision to keep the I-45 project on TxDOT's Unified Transportation Program, which is the 10-year plan. TxDOT has said the goal of the project is to improve traffic flow, hurricane evacuation routes and stormwater drainage while accommodating high-occupancy, electric and self-driving vehicles.

"This project will improve mobility, address flooding issues and enhance Houston's overall quality of life," Harvey said. "The partnership advocates using the (NHHIP) to realize long-sought opportunities to reconnect communities with new pedestrian and cycling pathways while providing the prospects for new parks and greenspaces."

Impacted residents, groups like STOP TxDOT I-45 and Houston-area elected officials at the municipal, county, state and federal levels have expressed concerns about the project because of how many it will displace and also because of its potential to increase flooding risks as well as noise and air pollution. Harris County sued TxDOT over the project in March 2021, asking a federal judge to require TxDOT to give greater consideration to those concerns and work more closely with local stakeholders.

Molly Cook, another STOP TxDOT I-45 organizer who made the Tuesday trip to Austin, said she does not want the Houston region to lose out on the transportation funding that's been earmarked for the project, even though she opposes specifics of the plan. She does not want the project to displace any homes or businesses or expand the existing footprint of I-45, she said.

Houston City Council member Karla Cisneros, who represents residents who would be impacted by the I-45 project, expressed a similar sentiment in a letter submitted to the Texas Transportation Commission and shared with Houston Public Media. Cisneros urged TxDOT to work with local stakeholders "instead of fighting us," adding that highway reconstruction projects "need to solve serious existing problems, many of which were in fact created by construction of the highways in the first place."

According to Cook and Smither, residents from cities such as Austin, El Paso, Dallas, Fort Worth and San Antonio also attended Tuesday's meeting and expressed opposition to highway projects in their parts of the state.

"Our cities deserve better," Cisneros wrote in her letter. "On behalf of Houston and other urban residents of Texas, we insist that TxDOT partner with us. The state's aging highway infrastructure desperately needs attention, but it must be done responsibly and in collaboration with our cities. A project that goes away does not get us to where we want. Nor will a project that is just wrong get us to where we want. Let's work together."
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on September 01, 2022, 10:34:51 AM
Quote from: rte66man on September 01, 2022, 08:33:11 AM
https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/news/transportation/2022/08/31/432075/txdot-keeps-controversial-i-45-expansion-on-long-term-slate-of-projects/

Quote
TxDOT keeps controversial I-45 expansion on long-term slate of projects

ADAM ZUVANICH | POSTED ONAUGUST 31, 2022, 4:30 PM (LAST UPDATED: AUGUST 31, 2022, 5:15 PM)
Share

A busload of Houston residents traveled Tuesday to Austin, where they demonstrated outside of Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) headquarters and spoke out against its Interstate 45 expansion project, asking to have more of a say in its design and execution and in some cases asking for it to be removed from the state agency's long-term transportation plan.

About 60 members of STOP TxDOT I-45, a local grassroots organization that opposes the multi-billion-dollar freeway expansion, commented on the project and its potential impacts during a meeting of the Texas Transportation Commission, which oversees TxDOT. The five-member commission, without discussing the plan for I-45 or responding to the feedback from members of the public, still voted to keep the controversial project and its funding on TxDOT's slate of transportation work over the next 10 years.

It was the latest development in a drawn-out battle between TxDOT and Houston-area stakeholders who oppose the plan for the North Houston Highway Improvement Project (NHHIP), which calls for widening and rerouting I-45 between downtown and Beltway 8 and displacing more than 1,000 homes and businesses in low-income communities of color. Work on the project is largely on hold, per a request by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), while it investigates complaints made under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and audits TxDOT's implementation of federal environmental review requirements.

"We weren't discouraged," said Ally Smither, an organizer for STOP TxDOT I-45 who traveled to Austin and spoke before the commission. "We've come to expect TxDOT to treat us like this. We will keep showing up and keep waiting for the FHWA verdict."

TxDOT, through its media relations office, did not comment on the feedback it received from impacted residents and how that might have affected the decision by the transportation commission.

The Greater Houston Partnership, an economic development organization that represents about 950 businesses in the region, released a statement from president and CEO Bob Harvey saying it supports the transportation commission's decision to keep the I-45 project on TxDOT's Unified Transportation Program, which is the 10-year plan. TxDOT has said the goal of the project is to improve traffic flow, hurricane evacuation routes and stormwater drainage while accommodating high-occupancy, electric and self-driving vehicles.

"This project will improve mobility, address flooding issues and enhance Houston's overall quality of life," Harvey said. "The partnership advocates using the (NHHIP) to realize long-sought opportunities to reconnect communities with new pedestrian and cycling pathways while providing the prospects for new parks and greenspaces."

Impacted residents, groups like STOP TxDOT I-45 and Houston-area elected officials at the municipal, county, state and federal levels have expressed concerns about the project because of how many it will displace and also because of its potential to increase flooding risks as well as noise and air pollution. Harris County sued TxDOT over the project in March 2021, asking a federal judge to require TxDOT to give greater consideration to those concerns and work more closely with local stakeholders.

Molly Cook, another STOP TxDOT I-45 organizer who made the Tuesday trip to Austin, said she does not want the Houston region to lose out on the transportation funding that's been earmarked for the project, even though she opposes specifics of the plan. She does not want the project to displace any homes or businesses or expand the existing footprint of I-45, she said.

Houston City Council member Karla Cisneros, who represents residents who would be impacted by the I-45 project, expressed a similar sentiment in a letter submitted to the Texas Transportation Commission and shared with Houston Public Media. Cisneros urged TxDOT to work with local stakeholders "instead of fighting us," adding that highway reconstruction projects "need to solve serious existing problems, many of which were in fact created by construction of the highways in the first place."

According to Cook and Smither, residents from cities such as Austin, El Paso, Dallas, Fort Worth and San Antonio also attended Tuesday's meeting and expressed opposition to highway projects in their parts of the state.

"Our cities deserve better," Cisneros wrote in her letter. "On behalf of Houston and other urban residents of Texas, we insist that TxDOT partner with us. The state's aging highway infrastructure desperately needs attention, but it must be done responsibly and in collaboration with our cities. A project that goes away does not get us to where we want. Nor will a project that is just wrong get us to where we want. Let's work together."

A few months ago, a developer announced it was building a new subdivision in Fort Bend County with 14,000 homes and yet the demolition of 800 homes for a vital highway improvement project is going to cause a housing shortage??
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: bwana39 on September 01, 2022, 11:13:57 AM
Quote from: kernals12 on September 01, 2022, 10:34:51 AM



A few months ago, a developer announced it was building a new subdivision in Fort Bend County with 14,000 homes and yet the demolition of 800 homes for a vital highway improvement project is going to cause a housing shortage??

There are two schools in this demographic thought. There is the school of thought that there is new housing being started in greater Houston. (IE Fort Bend, Galveston, Brazoria, Montgomery, or even Trinity or Chambers counties. )
The other school of thought is there is a shortage of housing in the Fifth Ward.

Some people are clearly just oriented to the metro area. Others are oriented to a particular neighborhood.  Going farther, the affordability of the housing and/or the transportation related to the housing is GENERALLY greater in the more remote areas and less in more economically disadvantaged areas such as the fifth ward.

While we hear that people groups want integration and equality, is it always the case?  The bottom line is SOME if not MANY of some people groups  prefer to remain in mostly (voluntarily) segregated areas. That means that the loss of these housing units does indeed cause a decline in available properties and perhaps an actual shortage in that particular neighborhood.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: bwana39 on September 01, 2022, 11:51:52 AM
Quote from: rte66man on September 01, 2022, 08:33:11 AM
https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/news/transportation/2022/08/31/432075/txdot-keeps-controversial-i-45-expansion-on-long-term-slate-of-projects/

Quote
TxDOT keeps controversial I-45 expansion on long-term slate of projects

ADAM ZUVANICH | POSTED ONAUGUST 31, 2022, 4:30 PM (LAST UPDATED: AUGUST 31, 2022, 5:15 PM)
Share

A busload of Houston residents traveled Tuesday to Austin, where they demonstrated outside of Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) headquarters and spoke out against its Interstate 45 expansion project, asking to have more of a say in its design and execution and in some cases asking for it to be removed from the state agency's long-term transportation plan.

About 60 members of STOP TxDOT I-45, a local grassroots organization that opposes the multi-billion-dollar freeway expansion, commented on the project and its potential impacts during a meeting of the Texas Transportation Commission, which oversees TxDOT. The five-member commission, without discussing the plan for I-45 or responding to the feedback from members of the public, still voted to keep the controversial project and its funding on TxDOT's slate of transportation work over the next 10 years.

It was the latest development in a drawn-out battle between TxDOT and Houston-area stakeholders who oppose the plan for the North Houston Highway Improvement Project (NHHIP), which calls for widening and rerouting I-45 between downtown and Beltway 8 and displacing more than 1,000 homes and businesses in low-income communities of color. Work on the project is largely on hold, per a request by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), while it investigates complaints made under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and audits TxDOT's implementation of federal environmental review requirements.

"We weren't discouraged," said Ally Smither, an organizer for STOP TxDOT I-45 who traveled to Austin and spoke before the commission. "We've come to expect TxDOT to treat us like this. We will keep showing up and keep waiting for the FHWA verdict."

TxDOT, through its media relations office, did not comment on the feedback it received from impacted residents and how that might have affected the decision by the transportation commission.

The Greater Houston Partnership, an economic development organization that represents about 950 businesses in the region, released a statement from president and CEO Bob Harvey saying it supports the transportation commission's decision to keep the I-45 project on TxDOT's Unified Transportation Program, which is the 10-year plan. TxDOT has said the goal of the project is to improve traffic flow, hurricane evacuation routes and stormwater drainage while accommodating high-occupancy, electric and self-driving vehicles.

"This project will improve mobility, address flooding issues and enhance Houston's overall quality of life," Harvey said. "The partnership advocates using the (NHHIP) to realize long-sought opportunities to reconnect communities with new pedestrian and cycling pathways while providing the prospects for new parks and greenspaces."

Impacted residents, groups like STOP TxDOT I-45 and Houston-area elected officials at the municipal, county, state and federal levels have expressed concerns about the project because of how many it will displace and also because of its potential to increase flooding risks as well as noise and air pollution. Harris County sued TxDOT over the project in March 2021, asking a federal judge to require TxDOT to give greater consideration to those concerns and work more closely with local stakeholders.

Molly Cook, another STOP TxDOT I-45 organizer who made the Tuesday trip to Austin, said she does not want the Houston region to lose out on the transportation funding that's been earmarked for the project, even though she opposes specifics of the plan. She does not want the project to displace any homes or businesses or expand the existing footprint of I-45, she said.

Houston City Council member Karla Cisneros, who represents residents who would be impacted by the I-45 project, expressed a similar sentiment in a letter submitted to the Texas Transportation Commission and shared with Houston Public Media. Cisneros urged TxDOT to work with local stakeholders "instead of fighting us," adding that highway reconstruction projects "need to solve serious existing problems, many of which were in fact created by construction of the highways in the first place."

According to Cook and Smither, residents from cities such as Austin, El Paso, Dallas, Fort Worth and San Antonio also attended Tuesday's meeting and expressed opposition to highway projects in their parts of the state.

"Our cities deserve better," Cisneros wrote in her letter. "On behalf of Houston and other urban residents of Texas, we insist that TxDOT partner with us. The state's aging highway infrastructure desperately needs attention, but it must be done responsibly and in collaboration with our cities. A project that goes away does not get us to where we want. Nor will a project that is just wrong get us to where we want. Let's work together."

There are some people who want all the freeways removed from the cities altogether.  They are a small but very vocal minority. They can be the proverbial "squeaky wheel".

There are groups who want transportation expansion except where they don't want it. NIMBY.

All projects can be controversial. If one person disagrees with the proposal and they can get others to listen and as little as THINK there might be merit to the argument, there is controversy. Controversial simply means one or more people disagree and people are listening. Something can be controversial and 95+% of the people agree with it. It doesn't take a majority or even significant number of people disagreeing to make something controversial. A small number of partisans can make anything controversial. The question is should the vocal minorities that create controversy  actually have the clout that they seem to be getting?

The only controversy with any merit is how much weight these minority voices should wield.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on September 01, 2022, 12:39:06 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on September 01, 2022, 11:13:57 AM
Quote from: kernals12 on September 01, 2022, 10:34:51 AM



A few months ago, a developer announced it was building a new subdivision in Fort Bend County with 14,000 homes and yet the demolition of 800 homes for a vital highway improvement project is going to cause a housing shortage??

There are two schools in this demographic thought. There is the school of thought that there is new housing being started in greater Houston. (IE Fort Bend, Galveston, Brazoria, Montgomery, or even Trinity or Chambers counties. )
The other school of thought is there is a shortage of housing in the Fifth Ward.

Some people are clearly just oriented to the metro area. Others are oriented to a particular neighborhood.  Going farther, the affordability of the housing and/or the transportation related to the housing is GENERALLY greater in the more remote areas and less in more economically disadvantaged areas such as the fifth ward.

While we hear that people groups want integration and equality, is it always the case?  The bottom line is SOME if not MANY of some people groups  prefer to remain in mostly (voluntarily) segregated areas. That means that the loss of these housing units does indeed cause a decline in available properties and perhaps an actual shortage in that particular neighborhood.
okay, I'm confused. Only a tiny portion of the 5th ward  at the SW corner will be impacted by this.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: bwana39 on September 01, 2022, 02:30:29 PM
Perhaps fifth ward is overly specific. The real problems on the highway are in the city council district "H" but the fifth ward community activists seem to be ramrodding it. The 5th ward activists do not limit themselves to the 5th ward.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on September 01, 2022, 07:15:11 PM
I'm starting to wonder if the North Houston Highway Improvement Project will ever be built. Or will TXDOT have to go back to the drawing board if the locals kill this project?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on September 01, 2022, 07:16:14 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 01, 2022, 07:15:11 PM
I'm starting to wonder if the North Houston Highway Improvement Project will ever be built. Or will TXDOT have to go back to the drawing board if the locals kill this project?
Well it looks like it is moving forward, no? Is there a new timeline for construction?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on September 01, 2022, 07:52:45 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on September 01, 2022, 07:16:14 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 01, 2022, 07:15:11 PM
I'm starting to wonder if the North Houston Highway Improvement Project will ever be built. Or will TXDOT have to go back to the drawing board if the locals kill this project?
Well it looks like it is moving forward, no? Is there a new timeline for construction?

We can't make any statements about the future of NHHIP until we get a decision from FHWA.

TxDOT is keeping the allocated funding in place so construction (of the funded sections) can proceed if FHWA authorizes the project to proceed. But TxDOT's keeping funding in the UTP does not mean it will proceed to construction.

If FHWA rules against the project, then anything can happen. Of course it depends on the details of FHWA's findings. The outcome could range anywhere from minimal changes to indefinite suspension to complete cancellation.

To answer Plutonic Panda's question: The latest information from TxDOT is in the May 2022 update below. Most likely the earliest possible start of any work has been further delayed another year to 2025 due to no response from FHWA.
https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/commission/2022/0526/7c.pdf (https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/commission/2022/0526/7c.pdf)

I'm thinking that the FHWA decision about the project is going to be made by Pete Buttigieg. Since he surely has future political ambitions, there is a good chance his decision will seek to maximize endearment from the progressive wing of the Democratic party (which is now most of the Democratic party).
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Bobby5280 on September 01, 2022, 08:06:56 PM
I think TX DOT should re-direct the funding for that downtown Houston project elsewhere in the state. They only have numerous I-69 related projects to build (I-69, I-69E, I-69C, I-69W and I-369). Then I-2 is kind of related to the I-69 effort. I-27 and the Ports to Plains Corridor has just as much history. On top of that there's I-14. The Dallas-Fort Worth metro has plenty of super highway projects in need of build-out. The same goes for the San Antonio-Austin region. The El Paso metro has needs. US-287 between Amarillo and Fort Worth needs heavy improvement. It goes on and on.

But I guess the ultimate idea of cancelling that downtown Houston highway project is so all the funding can be hijacked to build bicycle paths and extremely over-priced subway lines.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on September 08, 2022, 09:24:23 PM
The Houston Business Journal is reporting that demolition of the Lofts at the Ballpark has resumed.

https://www.bizjournals.com/houston/news/2022/09/08/txdot-lofts-at-the-ballpark-demolition-i45-project.html?cx_testId=40&cx_testVariant=cx_27&cx_artPos=0#cxrecs_s (https://www.bizjournals.com/houston/news/2022/09/08/txdot-lofts-at-the-ballpark-demolition-i45-project.html?cx_testId=40&cx_testVariant=cx_27&cx_artPos=0#cxrecs_s)

QuoteThe Texas Department of Transportation has resumed the demolition of the three-building Lofts at the Ballpark apartment complex, despite the pause previously issued on the Interstate 45 expansion project.

"Delaying demolition presents significant public health and safety concerns and would require resources to keep the buildings secured,"  TxDOT said in a Sept. 8 statement to the Houston Business Journal. "Demolition of the initial building is underway, and a timeline for the additional buildings is to be determined."

Demolishing the apartment project will make way for the expansion of I-45, part of the massive North Houston Highway Improvement Project</a>. The NHHIP has been met with opposition from many people in the Houston area due to a claim that the project will disproportionately affect minority communities. The Federal Highway Administration put a pause on the project to investigate the claim.

The apartment demolition process had been halted in June, when Mayor Sylvester Turner announced Houston's permitting office put an administrative hold on the project. The hold was issued so the FHWA could determine whether or not the apartment complex was an early acquisition in the project, meaning it was purchased prior to the federal pause. As an early acquisition, demolition is allowed to continue.

"TxDOT has indicated it will not be seeking any further permits," Turner's June statement said. "State and federal properties are exempt from local building codes and do not require demolition permits. Assuming no objection by FHWA, and no demolition permit being requested by TxDOT, the city has no legal basis to stop the demolition."

The demolition of the property does not conflict with the FHWA's terms regarding the NHHIP pause, TxDOT said in its Sept. 8 statement to the HBJ. In an email from the mayor's office, city of Houston Attorney Arturo Michel said the Texas attorney general has said that the state of Texas is exempt from complying with building code ordinances for property that it owns or controls.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on September 11, 2022, 06:13:35 PM
Pro-project editorial from the Greater Houston Partnership, which is the most influential business organization in the region. The GHP was silent for a long time but they have finally started public advocacy, which could be helpful to get the project moving.

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/opinion/outlook/article/Opinion-Let-s-move-forward-on-I-45-TxDOT-17430928.php (https://www.houstonchronicle.com/opinion/outlook/article/Opinion-Let-s-move-forward-on-I-45-TxDOT-17430928.php)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on September 14, 2022, 07:47:48 AM
Buttigieg visited Houston. Sounds like he has an open mind about the project
https://www.masstransitmag.com/management/news/21280652/tx-buttigieg-touts-federal-funding-during-tour-of-houston-transportation-projects

Stop I-45 activists got snubbed.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on September 17, 2022, 05:02:04 PM
Good news! Demolition of the Lofts at the Ballpark is in progress.

http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20220917_NHHIP_005-1600.jpg (http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20220917_NHHIP_005-1600.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20220917_NHHIP_005-1600.jpg&hash=da656a9b1b593bdd79ba2b0499258b3aa1736572)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on September 17, 2022, 06:17:16 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on September 17, 2022, 05:02:04 PM
Good news! Demolition of the Lofts at the Ballpark is in progress.

http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20220917_NHHIP_005-1600.jpg (http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20220917_NHHIP_005-1600.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20220917_NHHIP_005-1600.jpg&hash=da656a9b1b593bdd79ba2b0499258b3aa1736572)

May every 5 over 1 apartment complex meet the same fate.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Scott5114 on September 17, 2022, 08:50:59 PM
Sort of strange that it looks like nobody went through to salvage all of the cabinets, etc. from inside the building before demo began. You'd think the apartment company would have wanted to reuse them somewhere.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on September 21, 2022, 10:04:36 AM
Somewhat of an update: https://www.axios.com/local/houston/2022/09/20/central-houston-txdot-nhhip-cap-park
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on September 22, 2022, 02:57:57 PM
https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/news/transportation/2022/09/21/433518/could-central-houstons-proposed-downtown-amenities-make-the-i-45-project-more-palatable/amp/

Stop I-45's dishonesty or ignorance is showing here. They claim Central Houston's vision could be implemented without the project, except:

I-69 would remain Elevated, so no deck park.
Pierce Elevated would remain a freeway, so no "high line" style project


They also claim the project would not address "our reliance on single occupancy vehicles", except the additional lanes will be reserved for carpools and buses.

It's pretty clear Stop I-45 is a fringe group trying to push an extremist anti-car agenda and is using the people who will be displaced as pawns.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on November 13, 2022, 11:14:53 PM
The Clayton Homes housing project on Runnels Street is fully vacated and fenced. Relocating all the residents of the 184 units is a big step, since they (presumably) all needed subsidized housing.

There is no evidence of demolition about to start. But as the photo shows, the fence has been breached. There is an abundance of homeless people in the area who would probably like to seize control of the property, so I think TxDOT will need to proceed with demolition promptly.

http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20221113-NHHIP_010_1600.jpg (http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20221113-NHHIP_010_1600.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20221113-NHHIP_010_1600.jpg&hash=74de6032acf8033dce73477c547e19572d650cd3)

http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20221113-NHHIP_007-1600.jpg (http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20221113-NHHIP_007-1600.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20221113-NHHIP_007-1600.jpg&hash=090da657b2792c2cdc03aca0550f2e7b583038b6)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 13, 2022, 11:42:49 PM
Yeah, those vacated apartment buildings look like they could up in flames pretty well from homeless squatters starting camp fires inside of them to stay warm.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on December 06, 2022, 11:50:00 AM
More ridiculous tactics to thwart this plan:

QuoteCommunity petition to designate White Oak Bayou as park could thwart I-45 expansion in Houston

A petition was started in November and over 1,900 signatures are already in support of the designation, with a total goal of 3,200 signatures.


https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/news/transportation/2022/12/05/438696/community-petition-to-designate-white-oak-bayou-as-park-could-thwart-i-45-expansion-in-houston/?fbclid=IwAR1wp6CtvwuEJdrAMu_--PDnG4nEQ_Q_wAiHfVhAPLabuTCg_Kz_Uu9RDro
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on December 19, 2022, 03:08:36 PM
The City of Houston and TxDOT have reached a memorandum of understanding to mitigate the impact of the project.

https://www.houstontx.gov/mayor/press/2022/nhhip-mou.pdf
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on December 19, 2022, 03:42:32 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on December 19, 2022, 03:08:36 PM
The City of Houston and TxDOT have reached a memorandum of understanding to mitigate the impact of the project.

https://www.houstontx.gov/mayor/press/2022/nhhip-mou.pdf

Also

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/I45-expansion-project-back-on-17663766.php (https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/I45-expansion-project-back-on-17663766.php)

This looks like mostly good news. My main point of concern is the provision "Reducing the NHHIP Footprint". Any reduction will require lane removal, or compromising standards (such as ramp radius).
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on December 19, 2022, 04:45:15 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on December 19, 2022, 03:42:32 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on December 19, 2022, 03:08:36 PM
The City of Houston and TxDOT have reached a memorandum of understanding to mitigate the impact of the project.

https://www.houstontx.gov/mayor/press/2022/nhhip-mou.pdf

Also

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/I45-expansion-project-back-on-17663766.php (https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/I45-expansion-project-back-on-17663766.php)

This looks like mostly good news. My main point of concern is the provision "Reducing the NHHIP Footprint". Any reduction will require lane removal, or compromising standards (such as ramp radius).

Any freeway that's built in a dense urban area not on existing ROW is going to have to make some compromises.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: MaxConcrete on February 23, 2023, 08:59:05 PM
NHHIP was discussed at today's commission meeting. https://www.txdot.gov/about/leadership/texas-transportation-commission/meeting-dates-agendas.html (https://www.txdot.gov/about/leadership/texas-transportation-commission/meeting-dates-agendas.html)

The TxDOT manager handling the federal investigation says that FHWA has finished its investigation and the recommended agreement has been submitted to the office of the Secretary of Transportation, Pete Buttigieg.

Now it's up to Buttigieg. The question is, will he accept the agreement as-is, or seek modifications to curry favor with anti-highway interests?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: TheBox on March 05, 2023, 10:58:14 AM
Kinda off-topic, but is it just me or is North Fwy (I-45) inside the SHT/Beltway 8 is showing it's age compared to Katy Freeway (I-10), Northwest Freeway (US-290), and even both Southwest and Eastex Freeways (US-59/I-69)?
Especially for a major freeway that connects 2 big cities in Texas

the newly rebuilt Katy and Northwest freeways may be an unfair comparison yes (and were on the same level before they were both rebuilt the past two decades, if not worse), but even Southwest and Eastex Freeways ages much better than North Freeway does when neither of those tw US-59/I-69 freeways connect to any city that's on the level of Dallas, San Antonio, nor Austin (the RGV, Corpus Christi, Longview-Marshall look like small towns in comparison)

Just compare North Fwy to the Northline Commons and you'll see my point

EDIT: not to mention, kinda thin in comparison
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: J N Winkler on March 05, 2023, 01:22:11 PM
Quote from: TheBox on March 05, 2023, 10:58:14 AMKinda off-topic, but is it just me or is North Fwy (I-45) inside the SHT/Beltway 8 is showing it's age compared to Katy Freeway (I-10), Northwest Freeway (US-290), and even both Southwest and Eastex Freeways (US-59/I-69)?  Especially for a major freeway that connects 2 big cities in Texas.

The newly rebuilt Katy and Northwest freeways may be an unfair comparison yes (and were on the same level before they were both rebuilt the past two decades, if not worse), but even Southwest and Eastex Freeways ages much better than North Freeway does when neither of those two US-59/I-69 freeways connect to any city that's on the level of Dallas, San Antonio, nor Austin (the RGV, Corpus Christi, Longview-Marshall look like small towns in comparison)

The part of the Southwest Freeway just west of downtown was extensively rebuilt in the early 2000's.  I have a copy of the construction plans set, which runs to over 2000 sheets; the project was advertised soon after TxDOT started putting plans online.  The NBI shows bridges on the Eastex Freeway with reconstruction dates in the 1990's.

In contradistinction, while bridges on the North Freeway do also show reconstruction dates in the 1990's, the geometric design has been updated far less extensively.  The mainlanes do not have continuous left shoulders, unlike the nearby Eastex, and the I-45/I-610 interchange is still in its 1960's configuration with left exits (the NHHIP proposes to replace it with a true Maltese cross stack).
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Anthony_JK on March 06, 2023, 12:52:28 AM
I'd say that even the North Freeway doesn't compare to the East and Baytown East freeways when it comes to age....especially that ancient interchange with Spur 330/Crosby-Lynchburg Road where there is no direct access from I-10 eastbound to south Spur 330/Decker Drive and vice versa. That segment could use some real modernization as well, especially with ultimate construction of the NE quadrant of the Grand Parkway and the Ship Channel bridge on I-610.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: Thegeet on March 06, 2023, 02:43:28 AM
Quote from: TheBox on March 05, 2023, 10:58:14 AM
Kinda off-topic, but is it just me or is North Fwy (I-45) inside the SHT/Beltway 8 is showing it's age compared to Katy Freeway (I-10), Northwest Freeway (US-290), and even both Southwest and Eastex Freeways (US-59/I-69)?
Especially for a major freeway that connects 2 big cities in Texas

the newly rebuilt Katy and Northwest freeways may be an unfair comparison yes (and were on the same level before they were both rebuilt the past two decades, if not worse), but even Southwest and Eastex Freeways ages much better than North Freeway does when neither of those tw US-59/I-69 freeways connect to any city that's on the level of Dallas, San Antonio, nor Austin (the RGV, Corpus Christi, Longview-Marshall look like small towns in comparison)

Just compare North Fwy to the Northline Commons and you'll see my point

EDIT: not to mention, kinda thin in comparison
Yeah, I agree. Apart from that, some of the bridges look extremely gross. Yuck.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: bwana39 on March 06, 2023, 02:18:39 PM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on March 06, 2023, 12:52:28 AM
I'd say that even the North Freeway doesn't compare to the East and Baytown East freeways when it comes to age....especially that ancient interchange with Spur 330/Crosby-Lynchburg Road where there is no direct access from I-10 eastbound to south Spur 330/Decker Drive and vice versa. That segment could use some real modernization as well, especially with ultimate construction of the NE quadrant of the Grand Parkway and the Ship Channel bridge on I-610.

There is an example much like this in D-FW. Eastbound SH-183 has no direct access to NB I-35E.
SS-557 ("To US-80") outside of Terrell neither I-20 nor SS-557 EB has direct access to the WB lanes of the other.

Generally when traffic rarely if ever transitions in what amounts to a U-turn situation. TxDOT generally lets a non-freeway connection do the job.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: TXtoNJ on March 07, 2023, 10:13:32 AM
Project is a go again:

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/i-45-rebuild-txdot-houston-pause-lifted-17822603.php?utm_campaign=CMS%20Sharing%20Tools%20(Premium)&utm_source=t.co&utm_medium=referral
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA)
Post by: kernals12 on March 07, 2023, 10:19:13 AM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on March 07, 2023, 10:13:32 AM
Project is a go again:

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/i-45-rebuild-txdot-houston-pause-lifted-17822603.php?utm_campaign=CMS%20Sharing%20Tools%20(Premium)&utm_source=t.co&utm_medium=referral

Good to see that the urbanists have not yet completely taken over.

I do hope TxDOT quickly makes good on its promise to provide replacement housing.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: MaxConcrete on March 07, 2023, 12:56:30 PM
The FHWA has signed the agreement to allow the project to proceed, fully lifting the project hold effective immediately.

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/i-45-rebuild-txdot-houston-pause-lifted-17822603.php (https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/i-45-rebuild-txdot-houston-pause-lifted-17822603.php)

It appears that no changes to the design and lane count are included in the agreement, although TxDOT has agreed to study possible reductions in right-of-way acquisition. Opportunities for ROW reduction are very limited. Most TxDOT obligations are related to housing replacement and relocation, flood control and pedestrian amenities.

This is good news. In the near term we will probably see the right-of-way acquisition move at full speed. The section of I-69 between Spur 527 and SH 288 is slated to receive bids in June 2024. The next project is slated for 2027. The project hold was 2 years, and the opposition effort has caused a much longer delay to the project. So large-scale construction is still many years in the future.

QuoteThe Federal Highway Administration and Texas Department of Transportation announced Tuesday morning they had reached an agreement, similar to those TxDOT reached with Harris County and Houston in December, outlining various commitments related to the planned $9.7 billion rebuild of I-45 from downtown Houston north to Beltway 8. The agreement immediately lifts the federal pause placed on the project on March 8, 2021, and resolves the audit conducted by federal officials related to TxDOT's adherence to federal environmental rules.

Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: Chris on March 07, 2023, 02:07:00 PM
https://highways.dot.gov/newsroom/fhwa-and-txdot-sign-agreement-allow-i-45-north-houston-highway-improvement-project-move

Here's the FHWA news release.

The actions in the VRA will be performed in addition to and/or in compliance with the mitigation actions already committed to by TxDOT, as contained within the Record of Decision (ROD), including:

* Twice Annual Public Meetings through Design and Construction;
* Mitigating Displacements, Relocations, Housing, and Other Community Impacts;
* Drainage Improvements to Reduce Flooding;
* Parks, Open Space, Trails, Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities;
* Community Access During Construction;
* Highway "Footprint"  Reduction;
* Structural Highway Caps;
* Air Quality Mitigation; and
* Meaningful Access for Persons with Limited English Proficiency (LEP).

Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: Bobby5280 on March 07, 2023, 02:22:05 PM
Quote from: kernals12Good to see that the urbanists have not yet completely taken over.

It seems the New Urbanists are creating a good bit of backlash.

Over in Europe there is a growing amount of political back-tracking in response to extremely angry public reactions over efforts to create "15 Minute Cities." That effort is New Urbanism pushed to another extreme. They're trying to completely ban automobiles in city centers. The efforts have created a logistical mess for everything ranging from construction projects to people to just trying to get to work.

I can speak from experience what a pain in the ass it is to haul a couple suitcases on a crowded subway train after landing at JFK Airport. It's essential to travel light when taking mass transit, but not everyone can do that. Many of us take for granted being able to haul a lot of things in our personal vehicles.

The "15 Minute City" ideology conveniently ignores the fact city centers serve a lot more purposes that just providing a place where upper class douches can live in luxury apartments. Many city center businesses rely heavily on customer traffic coming in from the suburbs and points beyond. I like visiting spots in downtown Oklahoma City; it's fairly easy to get in and out via automobile. And there is a decent amount of free or cheap parking. If I wanted to visit Bricktown but had to park clear out in Newcastle and take a bus the rest of the way into downtown I wouldn't bother visiting downtown OKC at all.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: Chris on March 07, 2023, 04:18:22 PM
15 minute cities are just fantasy. One that the media embraced, without checking how realistic this is.

Paris was the first to come up with this fantasy, but only 12% of Parisians (those living in the municipality, i.e. the core city) actually commute to work in 15 minutes or less. The concept is completely out of touch with reality.

Not to mention in Houston. Although interestingly, the 2019 mean journey to work in Harris County was 29 minutes. In Paris (the city core), 55% of commuters have a journey to work of more than 30 minutes.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: kernals12 on March 07, 2023, 06:40:17 PM
Quote from: Chris on March 07, 2023, 04:18:22 PM
15 minute cities are just fantasy. One that the media embraced, without checking how realistic this is.

Paris was the first to come up with this fantasy, but only 12% of Parisians (those living in the municipality, i.e. the core city) actually commute to work in 15 minutes or less. The concept is completely out of touch with reality.

Not to mention in Houston. Although interestingly, the 2019 mean journey to work in Harris County was 29 minutes. In Paris (the city core), 55% of commuters have a journey to work of more than 30 minutes.

Also, if you're never going to venture more than 15 minutes from your house, why do you need to live in Houston? You might as well live in Johnson City.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: Bobby5280 on March 07, 2023, 08:39:07 PM
Having a short commute is one of the reasons why I live in Lawton. It's little more than a 5 minute drive from my house to my workplace. New York City has lots of things to see and do, but after living there for 5 years I was sick of it and couldn't wait to leave. I sure don't miss those commutes eating 2-3 hours my life Monday-Friday.

I'm suspicious of the people selling the "New Urbanism" thing. My impression is the lawmakers and other proponents are upper income elites who don't have to live the daily grind of riding city buses and subways. I can recall my days of living in NYC and how it was a status symbol of sorts for people to use a car service or at least take a cab from place to place rather than ride a bus or subway train. I certainly don't picture any of those elites freezing their asses off standing at a bus stop.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: The Ghostbuster on March 07, 2023, 08:53:40 PM
I'm no fan of New Urbanism either (there is plenty of it here in Madison). I see it as trying to turn every neighborhood it is built in into "Manhattan". The New York City one that is.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: bluecountry on March 08, 2023, 08:48:25 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on March 07, 2023, 06:40:17 PM
Quote from: Chris on March 07, 2023, 04:18:22 PM
15 minute cities are just fantasy. One that the media embraced, without checking how realistic this is.

Paris was the first to come up with this fantasy, but only 12% of Parisians (those living in the municipality, i.e. the core city) actually commute to work in 15 minutes or less. The concept is completely out of touch with reality.

Not to mention in Houston. Although interestingly, the 2019 mean journey to work in Harris County was 29 minutes. In Paris (the city core), 55% of commuters have a journey to work of more than 30 minutes.

Also, if you're never going to venture more than 15 minutes from your house, why do you need to live in Houston? You might as well live in Johnson City.
No actually the point is that everything you need is within a 15 minute walk from your house so you do not need to use a car regulate.
As someone who lived in the UES of NYC, I had a car, and used it for out of town/weekend trips not M-F and it was great.
So no, the 15 minute is not some conspiracy.

In any event, I am firm believer in stop I-45 UNLESS the agree to cap the highway.
IMO, highways in the urban dense core should only be built if they can be tunneled or cut/covered or capped like I-93 in Boston.
So from what I see, this is a horrible and ugly plan that will continue to make Houston a laughable 'city' compared to real cities.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: sprjus4 on March 08, 2023, 09:33:53 PM
Quote from: bluecountry on March 08, 2023, 08:48:25 PM
In any event, I am firm believer in stop I-45 UNLESS the agree to cap the highway.
IMO, highways in the urban dense core should only be built if they can be tunneled or cut/covered or capped like I-93 in Boston.
So from what I see, this is a horrible and ugly plan that will continue to make Houston a laughable 'city' compared to real cities.
Unfortunately for you, looks like the current plan is a go.

The highway expansion will help to re-route I-45 and allow the substandard and narrow viaduct on the west side of Downtown to be demolished.

I imagine upon completion, traffic flow around the central core on the interstates will generally be smoother, and the highways will be more modern and safe.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: Bobby5280 on March 09, 2023, 11:33:09 AM
It's pie in the sky dreaming to think every urban freeway can be dug into a trench and capped. The Big Dig in Boston cost billions of dollars yet the tunnels aren't very long. They had all sorts of problems too with water seeping through the tunnel walls.

Trying to do cut and cover tunnels around downtown Houston would run into the same problems. Considering the fact Houston is far more prone to tropical storm strikes than Boston it's likely such cut-and-cover highway tunnels would flood.

It's ridiculous to build attractions such as Minute Maid Park in the downtown area yet expect the massive crowds to just ride a city bus or some nonsense. Houston already has multiple skyscraper districts in various parts of the metro. That's a reaction to workers moving farther and farther out from costly city centers that are too complicated and time-draining to visit. The New Urbanism ideology doesn't stop to consider how much time it actually takes to ride a bus or train. The ideology sure as hell doesn't consider the obscene extreme prices of housing in that Utopian urban center.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: DJStephens on March 09, 2023, 01:32:55 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on March 09, 2023, 11:33:09 AM
It's pie in the sky dreaming to think every urban freeway can be dug into a trench and capped. The Big Dig in Boston cost billions of dollars yet the tunnels aren't very long. They had all sorts of problems too with water seeping through the tunnel walls.
The total cost of the "big dig" was close to $22 Billion, as recalled.   Over the close to fifteen years of the project.  The original Artery, had it's southern section already tunneled, via cut and cover method, when it was actually discovered how atrocious the elevated section (circa '50) was going to turn out.  But it never had enough capacity, only 3 x 3.   The "new" cut and cover Artery doesn't have enough capacity, either, the third Harbor crossing to the Airport "saves" it to an extent.  It really should have been 5 x 5 in the main downtown section.   
Pork, grafts, and corruption plagued the "big dig" project, and while it was finally completed, it was multiple times more expensive, than if it had been done two decades before, in conjunction with, or immediately after hypothetical Inner Belt construction.   The single most glaring episode, was the falling of a concrete ceiling tile, that fell and killed a motorist in one of the "new" tunnels.  Turned out non galvanized rod had been used to hold the panels in place, instead of correct treated hardware elements for the enviroment.   
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: Chris on March 09, 2023, 02:43:27 PM
The Boston Big Dig cost seems like a bit of financial voodoo, the Wikipedia page about the project is also cluttered with figures, comparing 1982 dollars to 2007 dollars, with an 'as of 2020', and 'to 2038 with interest' figures put in as well. As if it is an attempt to get the highest score possible. This makes it kind of difficult to compare the Big Dig actual construction cost to other urban highway tunnel projects, such as M-30 in Madrid, A2 in Maastricht, Netherlands or A86 Duplex in Paris.

However it seems that putting urban freeways in a trench is an unfavorable idea in Houston due to flooding. They have planned to raise I-10 west of I-45 for that reason.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: abqtraveler on March 09, 2023, 02:50:53 PM
Quote from: Chris on March 09, 2023, 02:43:27 PM
The Boston Big Dig cost seems like a bit of financial voodoo, the Wikipedia page about the project is also cluttered with figures, comparing 1982 dollars to 2007 dollars, with an 'as of 2020', and 'to 2038 with interest' figures put in as well. As if it is an attempt to get the highest score possible. This makes it kind of difficult to compare the Big Dig actual construction cost to other urban highway tunnel projects, such as M-30 in Madrid, A2 in Maastricht, Netherlands or A86 Duplex in Paris.

However it seems that putting urban freeways in a trench is an unfavorable idea in Houston due to flooding. They have planned to raise I-10 west of I-45 for that reason.
You can mitigate the flooding issues if you properly design the tunnels to include a system of pumps and bulkhead doors that automatically activate when the rain rate exceeds a given threshold for a specified period of time.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: Bobby5280 on March 09, 2023, 03:42:38 PM
I can just imagine how some massive bulkhead doors would work at the openings of freeway tunnels. Some clown looks up from his phone to see a tunnel door 1 second before he smashes into it.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: Rothman on March 09, 2023, 06:22:54 PM
Big Dig cost $15B, rounding up.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: abqtraveler on March 09, 2023, 07:27:15 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on March 09, 2023, 03:42:38 PM
I can just imagine how some massive bulkhead doors would work at the openings of freeway tunnels. Some clown looks up from his phone to see a tunnel door 1 second before he smashes into it.
There would have to be some advanced signage with lights and closure gates to compel motorists to exit the freeway when the bulkhead doors are closed.

Alternatively, you could build I-45 at grade level, then cover it in a way that allows for development and park space to be built directly over the highway. That would reduce the amount of supporting infrastructure needed to minimize the flooding concern.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on March 09, 2023, 08:34:03 PM
They couldn't justify(in their mind) tunnels in downtown Austin; arguably the best places in the entire state that makes sense for them. There's zero chance tunnels are built here. We the approval just get this built while we can.

Max, do you know if there's any changes to the timeline? I would imagine it's been updated or should be soon.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: MaxConcrete on March 09, 2023, 11:41:29 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 09, 2023, 08:34:03 PM
Max, do you know if there's any changes to the timeline? I would imagine it's been updated or should be soon.

No new timeline has been released. There are multiple issues to be resolved, see https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/i45-widening-deal-txdot-steps-17711664.php (https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/i45-widening-deal-txdot-steps-17711664.php)

I don't think a schedule can be made until agreements are reached for all the details.
As of now, two projects are scheduled
1. I-69 between Spur 527 and SH 288, $493 million, listed for bids in June 2024.
2. Interchange at I-10 and I-45 on the northwest side of downtown, around $1 billion, listed for 2027

No other work is scheduled, but most work is listed for the 2030s.

If agreements on oustanding issues can be reached, I think we could see a speedup and possibly building each of the three sections as single jobs, rather then piecemeal over long periods of time. Houston will get a new mayor next year. A supportive mayor will likely speed up the process, and an opposition-oriented mayor could cause more delays and other project difficulties.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: Anthony_JK on March 10, 2023, 12:28:05 AM
There are below-grade trenched sections of I-69/US 59 just to the west of the South Freeway interchange. Not sure if they flood in heavy rain or hurricane conditions....but then again, no one needs to be out in the middle of a landfalling Hurricane Ike in the first place.

Two sections of the NHIP are scheduled to be ultimately capped: the segment of I-69/US 59/relocated I-45 adjacent to Minute Maid Park, and a segment of I-45 just north of the divergence of I-10 west heading towards the Katy Freeway. The city would have to find donors willing to pay for the caps, since that would not be considered "transportation needs" that would qualify for Fed-state interstate funding; perhaps the recent grant H-GAC received could be a down payment on that.

Also, the realignment of I-10 and relocated I-45 east of the Allen Elevated section would be trenched as well.

From what I have seen, they do have mitigation measures set to deal with possible flooding (natural swales, retention ponds, relocation of Buffalo Bayou, etc.

I still say that they should have kept and improved the Allen Elevated section instead of rerouting I-45 and saved a ton of money and time. But, it is what it is. I'm just relieved that the project is somewhat back on track....for now.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: Rothman on March 10, 2023, 06:56:07 AM
Interesting that the caps are not eligible for NHPP funding at 90%.  Wonder why they wouldn't be considered bridges over the Interstate.  STBG Flex funding is used for multipurpose trails, so it isn't like eligibility for federal funding is that restricted (although there was a local engineer that got caught trying to pay for a dog park with federal transportation funding...).

So, I would think caps are eligible for either NHPP or Flex at 80% at least, depending on what is going on the caps. Anyway, the excuse of not being able to use 90% does not tell the whole story one way or another.

Shoot, even if this were totally true, it would be a ripe time to get Buttiegieg to change the eligibility.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: rte66man on March 10, 2023, 09:24:23 AM
Quote from: Rothman on March 10, 2023, 06:56:07 AM
Interesting that the caps are not eligible for NHPP funding at 90%.  Wonder why they wouldn't be considered bridges over the Interstate.  STBG Flex funding is used for multipurpose trails, so it isn't like eligibility for federal funding is that restricted (although there was a local engineer that got caught trying to pay for a dog park with federal transportation funding...).

So, I would think caps are eligible for either NHPP or Flex at 80% at least, depending on what is going on the caps. Anyway, the excuse of not being able to use 90% does not tell the whole story one way or another.

Shoot, even if this were totally true, it would be a ripe time to get Buttiegieg to change the eligibility.

Makes me wonder how CDOT paid for a school playground on the I70 cap project in Denver.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: sprjus4 on March 10, 2023, 10:21:05 AM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on March 10, 2023, 12:28:05 AM
There are below-grade trenched sections of I-69/US 59 just to the west of the South Freeway interchange. Not sure if they flood in heavy rain or hurricane conditions....but then again, no one needs to be out in the middle of a landfalling Hurricane Ike in the first place.
First responders?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: bwana39 on March 10, 2023, 02:18:10 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on March 10, 2023, 10:21:05 AM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on March 10, 2023, 12:28:05 AM
There are below-grade trenched sections of I-69/US 59 just to the west of the South Freeway interchange. Not sure if they flood in heavy rain or hurricane conditions....but then again, no one needs to be out in the middle of a landfalling Hurricane Ike in the first place.
First responders?

They flooded completely in IKE.  They flooded to a lesser extent from Harvey. IKE practically destroyed the freeway. 

That said, there are non-freeway surface streets for first responders to take.  The freeways maybe the fastest route with traffic, in a post-hurricane recovery, there won't be that much traffic out on the surface streets. Even with a few flooded places, the bigger problem EVERYWHERE immediately after a hurricane is debris and downed trees.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: bluecountry on March 13, 2023, 12:13:37 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on March 09, 2023, 11:33:09 AM
It's pie in the sky dreaming to think every urban freeway can be dug into a trench and capped. The Big Dig in Boston cost billions of dollars yet the tunnels aren't very long. They had all sorts of problems too with water seeping through the tunnel walls.

Trying to do cut and cover tunnels around downtown Houston would run into the same problems. Considering the fact Houston is far more prone to tropical storm strikes than Boston it's likely such cut-and-cover highway tunnels would flood.

It's ridiculous to build attractions such as Minute Maid Park in the downtown area yet expect the massive crowds to just ride a city bus or some nonsense. Houston already has multiple skyscraper districts in various parts of the metro. That's a reaction to workers moving farther and farther out from costly city centers that are too complicated and time-draining to visit. The New Urbanism ideology doesn't stop to consider how much time it actually takes to ride a bus or train. The ideology sure as hell doesn't consider the obscene extreme prices of housing in that Utopian urban center.
Disagree.

1.  You can tunnel, cut and cover, OR cap/sell air rights.
2.  You build Minute Maid so there is a large population living nearby that can walk/bike vs having to import 100% longer distance people.


Quote from: Anthony_JK on March 10, 2023, 12:28:05 AM
There are below-grade trenched sections of I-69/US 59 just to the west of the South Freeway interchange. Not sure if they flood in heavy rain or hurricane conditions....but then again, no one needs to be out in the middle of a landfalling Hurricane Ike in the first place.

Two sections of the NHIP are scheduled to be ultimately capped: the segment of I-69/US 59/relocated I-45 adjacent to Minute Maid Park, and a segment of I-45 just north of the divergence of I-10 west heading towards the Katy Freeway. The city would have to find donors willing to pay for the caps, since that would not be considered "transportation needs" that would qualify for Fed-state interstate funding; perhaps the recent grant H-GAC received could be a down payment on that.

Also, the realignment of I-10 and relocated I-45 east of the Allen Elevated section would be trenched as well.

From what I have seen, they do have mitigation measures set to deal with possible flooding (natural swales, retention ponds, relocation of Buffalo Bayou, etc.

I still say that they should have kept and improved the Allen Elevated section instead of rerouting I-45 and saved a ton of money and time. But, it is what it is. I'm just relieved that the project is somewhat back on track....for now.
That is absurd.  The project should never be approved until the highway has a plan to cap.  Just awful.

Quote from: DJStephens on March 09, 2023, 01:32:55 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on March 09, 2023, 11:33:09 AM
It's pie in the sky dreaming to think every urban freeway can be dug into a trench and capped. The Big Dig in Boston cost billions of dollars yet the tunnels aren't very long. They had all sorts of problems too with water seeping through the tunnel walls.
The total cost of the "big dig" was close to $22 Billion, as recalled.   Over the close to fifteen years of the project.  The original Artery, had it's southern section already tunneled, via cut and cover method, when it was actually discovered how atrocious the elevated section (circa '50) was going to turn out.  But it never had enough capacity, only 3 x 3.   The "new" cut and cover Artery doesn't have enough capacity, either, the third Harbor crossing to the Airport "saves" it to an extent.  It really should have been 5 x 5 in the main downtown section.   
Pork, grafts, and corruption plagued the "big dig" project, and while it was finally completed, it was multiple times more expensive, than if it had been done two decades before, in conjunction with, or immediately after hypothetical Inner Belt construction.   The single most glaring episode, was the falling of a concrete ceiling tile, that fell and killed a motorist in one of the "new" tunnels.  Turned out non galvanized rod had been used to hold the panels in place, instead of correct treated hardware elements for the enviroment.
Are you kidding me?  Make it 5x5?  Absolutely not.
The goal was to ease congestion and the god awful blight of the highway, you do this with full 12 foot lanes, shoulders, and easy merges in a city not making a mega highway; especially when it is designed for local not thru traffic!

Also, the big dig cost so much because Boston is an old city with colonial era roads and pre 19th century utilities that were a mess.
This would not be an issue in Houston.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: sprjus4 on March 13, 2023, 12:56:11 PM
Quote from: bluecountry on March 13, 2023, 12:13:37 PM
That is absurd.  The project should never be approved until the highway has a plan to cap.  Just awful.
There is a plan to cap. It's designed to be. It needs to be funded via other sources. That's not on the state through transportation dollars to do.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: Anthony_JK on March 13, 2023, 10:52:05 PM
The caps are already there in the proposal; the development of the space the caps would take over would require supplemental funding from sources other than initial construction.

The actual caps can be funded out of base construction costs, but any enhancements and development of the space taken by the caps and the adjacent properties would require additional supplemental sources for funding (local, private, etc.).
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: jgb191 on March 14, 2023, 12:50:42 AM
I don't know how relevant this is to this topic, but the North Sam Tollway segment between Hardy Tollway and J.F. Kennedy Blvd is only six lanes wide (three in each direction).  I believe that North segment might be one of the busier segments of the entire S.H. Tollway loop owing to a lot of traffic to and from the Bush airport.  When will that be widened to at least four each direction (to make it eight-lanes)?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: abqtraveler on March 14, 2023, 06:16:59 AM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on March 13, 2023, 10:52:05 PM
The caps are already there in the proposal; the development of the space the caps would take over would require supplemental funding from sources other than initial construction.

The actual caps can be funded out of base construction costs, but any enhancements and development of the space taken by the caps and the adjacent properties would require additional supplemental sources for funding (local, private, etc.).
Of course. Development of the parcels of land that were freed up by the Big Dig was paid for by local funds for parks or private investors for buildings.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: bwana39 on March 14, 2023, 11:28:05 AM
Quote from: jgb191 on March 14, 2023, 12:50:42 AM
I don't know how relevant this is to this topic, but the North Sam Tollway segment between Hardy Tollway and J.F. Kennedy Blvd is only six lanes wide (three in each direction).  I believe that North segment might be one of the busier segments of the entire S.H. Tollway loop owing to a lot of traffic to and from the Bush airport.  When will that be widened to at least four each direction (to make it eight-lanes)?

The busier portion is from the energy corridor to I-45.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: bluecountry on March 18, 2023, 07:30:42 PM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on March 13, 2023, 10:52:05 PM
The caps are already there in the proposal; the development of the space the caps would take over would require supplemental funding from sources other than initial construction.

The actual caps can be funded out of base construction costs, but any enhancements and development of the space taken by the caps and the adjacent properties would require additional supplemental sources for funding (local, private, etc.).
That should have been a concession to build.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: MaxConcrete on March 20, 2023, 11:14:23 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on November 13, 2022, 11:14:53 PM
The Clayton Homes housing project on Runnels Street is fully vacated and fenced. Relocating all the residents of the 184 units is a big step, since they (presumably) all needed subsidized housing.

There is no evidence of demolition about to start. But as the photo shows, the fence has been breached. There is an abundance of homeless people in the area who would probably like to seize control of the property, so I think TxDOT will need to proceed with demolition promptly.

http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20221113-NHHIP_010_1600.jpg (http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20221113-NHHIP_010_1600.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20221113-NHHIP_010_1600.jpg&hash=74de6032acf8033dce73477c547e19572d650cd3)

http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20221113-NHHIP_007-1600.jpg (http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20221113-NHHIP_007-1600.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20221113-NHHIP_007-1600.jpg&hash=090da657b2792c2cdc03aca0550f2e7b583038b6)

There was a large fire at the vacant property on Saturday, LOL!

This link has a video report.
https://www.click2houston.com/news/local/2023/03/19/fire-damages-clayton-homes-apartments-in-downtown-houston/ (https://www.click2houston.com/news/local/2023/03/19/fire-damages-clayton-homes-apartments-in-downtown-houston/)

Quote
HOUSTON — A massive fire reportedly broke out at an apartment complex in downtown Houston Saturday.

The Houston Fire Department responded to the blaze at the Clayton Homes Apartments located in the 1910 block of Runnels Street.

Crews say the two-alarm fire began at around 8 p.m. Saturday night.

The complex was said to have been shut down back in July 2022, and demolition was reportedly set to take place in the near future as part of the ongoing I-45 expansion project.

Arson investigators were on scene following the fire, working to determine what may have caused the flames.

From https://www.houstonarchitecture.com/haif/topic/45066-i-45-rebuild-north-houston-highway-improvement-project/page/62/#comments (https://www.houstonarchitecture.com/haif/topic/45066-i-45-rebuild-north-houston-highway-improvement-project/page/62/#comments)
(https://i.imgur.com/eUp8uyT.jpg)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on March 21, 2023, 01:43:10 AM
Should've just let it burn lol
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: triplemultiplex on March 22, 2023, 11:19:46 PM
Says someone who doesn't live downwind from the fire. :P
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: MaxConcrete on May 04, 2023, 02:07:18 PM
The pause and lawsuit delayed the project. TxDOT revealed the new schedule on Friday and the Chronicle reported on it today.
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/harris-county-i-45-rebuilding-project-houston-18073985.php (https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/harris-county-i-45-rebuilding-project-houston-18073985.php)

See agenda item 11 for video of the presentation
https://hgac.swagit.com/play/04282023-609 (https://hgac.swagit.com/play/04282023-609)
Presentation: https://www.txdot.gov/content/dam/project-sites/nhhip/images/i45-nhhip-presentation-to-hgac-transportation-policy-council-april2023.pdf (https://www.txdot.gov/content/dam/project-sites/nhhip/images/i45-nhhip-presentation-to-hgac-transportation-policy-council-april2023.pdf)

In short, the schedule is pushed into the future. WAY into the future. Downtown work is scheduled to be finished in 2038, and the overall project in 2042. I'll be 75 years old when it is done!

The first job (3B) is scheduled to start in 2024, but it is only a small drainage job. Freeway construction, estimated at $585 million, is slated to start in 2025.
Job 3A is now slated to start in 2026 and the price has increased to $640 million.
I'm especially disappointed that segment 2 is now slated for 2033 to 2039. The interchange is a major bottleneck on Loop 610, but now relief is 16 years in the future.


(https://s.hdnux.com/photos/01/32/53/35/23770959/5/1200x0.jpg)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: kernals12 on May 04, 2023, 03:26:05 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on May 04, 2023, 02:07:18 PM
The pause and lawsuit delayed the project. TxDOT revealed the new schedule on Friday and the Chronicle reported on it today.
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/harris-county-i-45-rebuilding-project-houston-18073985.php (https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/harris-county-i-45-rebuilding-project-houston-18073985.php)

See agenda item 11 for video of the presentation
https://hgac.swagit.com/play/04282023-609 (https://hgac.swagit.com/play/04282023-609)

In short, the schedule is pushed into the future. WAY into the future. Downtown work is scheduled to be finished in 2038, and the overall project in 2042. I'll be 75 years old when it is done!

The first job (3B) is scheduled to start in 2024, but it is only a small drainage job. The first freeway construction is slated to start in 2025.
Job 3A is now slated to start in 2026 and the price has increased to $640 million.
I'm especially disappointed that segment 2 is now slated for 2033 to 2039. The interchange is a major bottleneck on Loop 610, but now relief is 16 years in the future.


(https://s.hdnux.com/photos/01/32/53/35/23770959/5/1200x0.jpg)

With any luck, the traffic delays this will cause will get people to see that taking away lanes of traffic does in fact make traffic worse and making more of them makes it better.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: rte66man on May 06, 2023, 07:13:50 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on May 04, 2023, 02:07:18 PM
The pause and lawsuit delayed the project. TxDOT revealed the new schedule on Friday and the Chronicle reported on it today.
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/harris-county-i-45-rebuilding-project-houston-18073985.php (https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/harris-county-i-45-rebuilding-project-houston-18073985.php)

I'm especially disappointed that segment 2 is now slated for 2033 to 2039. The interchange is a major bottleneck on Loop 610, but now relief is 16 years in the future.

(https://s.hdnux.com/photos/01/32/53/35/23770959/5/1200x0.jpg)

Yeah, the part that is needed the most is one of the last to be done. I cannot imagine how bad the backups will be at either end.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: TXtoNJ on May 08, 2023, 12:54:23 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on May 04, 2023, 02:07:18 PM
The pause and lawsuit delayed the project. TxDOT revealed the new schedule on Friday and the Chronicle reported on it today.
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/harris-county-i-45-rebuilding-project-houston-18073985.php (https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/harris-county-i-45-rebuilding-project-houston-18073985.php)

See agenda item 11 for video of the presentation
https://hgac.swagit.com/play/04282023-609 (https://hgac.swagit.com/play/04282023-609)
Presentation: https://www.txdot.gov/content/dam/project-sites/nhhip/images/i45-nhhip-presentation-to-hgac-transportation-policy-council-april2023.pdf (https://www.txdot.gov/content/dam/project-sites/nhhip/images/i45-nhhip-presentation-to-hgac-transportation-policy-council-april2023.pdf)

In short, the schedule is pushed into the future. WAY into the future. Downtown work is scheduled to be finished in 2038, and the overall project in 2042. I'll be 75 years old when it is done!

The first job (3B) is scheduled to start in 2024, but it is only a small drainage job. Freeway construction, estimated at $585 million, is slated to start in 2025.
Job 3A is now slated to start in 2026 and the price has increased to $640 million.
I'm especially disappointed that segment 2 is now slated for 2033 to 2039. The interchange is a major bottleneck on Loop 610, but now relief is 16 years in the future.


(https://s.hdnux.com/photos/01/32/53/35/23770959/5/1200x0.jpg)

Net effect of this is that 35 in Austin gets done before 45 in Houston. The budget for both of these is too big to have concurrent work in the absence of a 2009 TIGER-style stimulus.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: MaxConcrete on May 08, 2023, 01:50:14 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on May 08, 2023, 12:54:23 PM
Net effect of this is that 35 in Austin gets done before 45 in Houston. The budget for both of these is too big to have concurrent work in the absence of a 2009 TIGER-style stimulus.

I-35 Austin is currently on a fast track. Recent documents have a schedule which shows the entire project complete in summer 2032.
https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/ppd/meetings/022823/presentation.pdf (https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/ppd/meetings/022823/presentation.pdf)

Under the NHHIP schedule, only two sections would be done by 2032, with another (3C-1) nearing completion. So NHHIP would actually just be getting started by 2032, with the most difficult jobs (3D, 2) just underway or not even started.

It is possible that TxDOT Houston is throttling NHHIP so that NHHIP won't consume nearly all available funds in Houston for about 10 years. With a 20-year schedule, other projects can proceed concurrently. A prime candidate is the Inner Katy project. TxDOT recently reached an agreement with Houston Metro to accommodate Metro's elevated BRT, and TxDOT is soliciting consultants.
https://www.txdot.gov/business/peps/opportunities/meetings/pre-rfp-meeting-3-sd-pse-contracts-inner-katy-houston.html (https://www.txdot.gov/business/peps/opportunities/meetings/pre-rfp-meeting-3-sd-pse-contracts-inner-katy-houston.html)

Other projects slated to proceed soon are Interstate 10 widening in Brookshire (to 4-1-1-4, with frontage roads added) and more work on the SH 35 freeway with an interchange at Loop 610. A new multi-billion-dollar ship channel bridge for Loop 610 is also slated for the 2030s, but it remains to be seen if that moves forward.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: MaxConcrete on May 18, 2023, 09:08:25 PM
Demolition of Clayton homes is underway.

Image credit to hindesky on HAIF
https://www.houstonarchitecture.com/haif/topic/45066-i-45-rebuild-north-houston-highway-improvement-project/page/64/#comments (https://www.houstonarchitecture.com/haif/topic/45066-i-45-rebuild-north-houston-highway-improvement-project/page/64/#comments)


(https://i.imgur.com/jqi9qXw.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/HNfU4xw.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/E96RPAF.jpg)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: bwana39 on May 19, 2023, 11:58:14 AM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on May 18, 2023, 09:08:25 PM
Demolition of Clayton homes is underway.

Image credit to hindesky on HAIF
https://www.houstonarchitecture.com/haif/topic/45066-i-45-rebuild-north-houston-highway-improvement-project/page/64/#comments (https://www.houstonarchitecture.com/haif/topic/45066-i-45-rebuild-north-houston-highway-improvement-project/page/64/#comments)


(https://i.imgur.com/jqi9qXw.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/HNfU4xw.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/E96RPAF.jpg)

You realize that forty years from now, this will be remembered as the highway took away an urban paradise.

It was flood prone, and had been shut down BEFORE the freeway because it was contaminated with mold and sewerage. . It was relatively inexpensive.  Ironically it still will not be the mostly Hispanic residents who will be waxing nostalgic about it,
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: J N Winkler on May 19, 2023, 12:13:52 PM
We will just have to see--there doesn't seem to be much nostalgia for Pruitt-Igoe (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruitt%E2%80%93Igoe), for example, even though the architect was Minoru Yamasaki, who went on to design the Twin Towers.

As for the current scheduling of the various NHHIP phases, I think the lengthy timeline creates opportunities for cost escalation and has the potential to embolden opposition.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: bwana39 on May 19, 2023, 12:47:38 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on May 19, 2023, 12:13:52 PM
We will just have to see--there doesn't seem to be much nostalgia for Pruitt-Igoe (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruitt%E2%80%93Igoe), for example, even though the architect was Minoru Yamasaki, who went on to design the Twin Towers.

As for the current scheduling of the various NHHIP phases, I think the lengthy timeline creates opportunities for cost escalation and has the potential to embolden opposition.

Yes, but it was not replaced by a freeway....
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: DJStephens on May 23, 2023, 11:07:50 PM
Quote from: bluecountry on March 13, 2023, 12:13:37 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on March 09, 2023, 11:33:09 AM
It's pie in the sky dreaming to think every urban freeway can be dug into a trench and capped. The Big Dig in Boston cost billions of dollars yet the tunnels aren't very long. They had all sorts of problems too with water seeping through the tunnel walls.

Trying to do cut and cover tunnels around downtown Houston would run into the same problems. Considering the fact Houston is far more prone to tropical storm strikes than Boston it's likely such cut-and-cover highway tunnels would flood.

It's ridiculous to build attractions such as Minute Maid Park in the downtown area yet expect the massive crowds to just ride a city bus or some nonsense. Houston already has multiple skyscraper districts in various parts of the metro. That's a reaction to workers moving farther and farther out from costly city centers that are too complicated and time-draining to visit. The New Urbanism ideology doesn't stop to consider how much time it actually takes to ride a bus or train. The ideology sure as hell doesn't consider the obscene extreme prices of housing in that Utopian urban center.
Disagree.

1.  You can tunnel, cut and cover, OR cap/sell air rights.
2.  You build Minute Maid so there is a large population living nearby that can walk/bike vs having to import 100% longer distance people.


Quote from: Anthony_JK on March 10, 2023, 12:28:05 AM
There are below-grade trenched sections of I-69/US 59 just to the west of the South Freeway interchange. Not sure if they flood in heavy rain or hurricane conditions....but then again, no one needs to be out in the middle of a landfalling Hurricane Ike in the first place.

Two sections of the NHIP are scheduled to be ultimately capped: the segment of I-69/US 59/relocated I-45 adjacent to Minute Maid Park, and a segment of I-45 just north of the divergence of I-10 west heading towards the Katy Freeway. The city would have to find donors willing to pay for the caps, since that would not be considered "transportation needs" that would qualify for Fed-state interstate funding; perhaps the recent grant H-GAC received could be a down payment on that.

Also, the realignment of I-10 and relocated I-45 east of the Allen Elevated section would be trenched as well.

From what I have seen, they do have mitigation measures set to deal with possible flooding (natural swales, retention ponds, relocation of Buffalo Bayou, etc.

I still say that they should have kept and improved the Allen Elevated section instead of rerouting I-45 and saved a ton of money and time. But, it is what it is. I'm just relieved that the project is somewhat back on track....for now.
That is absurd.  The project should never be approved until the highway has a plan to cap.  Just awful.

Quote from: DJStephens on March 09, 2023, 01:32:55 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on March 09, 2023, 11:33:09 AM
It's pie in the sky dreaming to think every urban freeway can be dug into a trench and capped. The Big Dig in Boston cost billions of dollars yet the tunnels aren't very long. They had all sorts of problems too with water seeping through the tunnel walls.
The total cost of the "big dig" was close to $22 Billion, as recalled.   Over the close to fifteen years of the project.  The original Artery, had it's southern section already tunneled, via cut and cover method, when it was actually discovered how atrocious the elevated section (circa '50) was going to turn out.  But it never had enough capacity, only 3 x 3.   The "new" cut and cover Artery doesn't have enough capacity, either, the third Harbor crossing to the Airport "saves" it to an extent.  It really should have been 5 x 5 in the main downtown section.   
Pork, grafts, and corruption plagued the "big dig" project, and while it was finally completed, it was multiple times more expensive, than if it had been done two decades before, in conjunction with, or immediately after hypothetical Inner Belt construction.   The single most glaring episode, was the falling of a concrete ceiling tile, that fell and killed a motorist in one of the "new" tunnels.  Turned out non galvanized rod had been used to hold the panels in place, instead of correct treated hardware elements for the enviroment.
Are you kidding me?  Make it 5x5?  Absolutely not.
The goal was to ease congestion and the god awful blight of the highway, you do this with full 12 foot lanes, shoulders, and easy merges in a city not making a mega highway; especially when it is designed for local not thru traffic!
They didn't build the Inner Belt (I-695) and some of the necessary radial expressways (I-95, Rte 2).  Many were built (Turnpike,  I-93, SE expressway), but not all. The Belt would have "dispersed" downtown traffic.  Final design revisions in the mid to late sixties either buried, depressed, or placed critical Belt sections at ground level.   Original plans were all elevated viaduct.  That is why a  5 x 5 "cut and cover" replacement central artery would have been optimal.  Because they didn't build the Inner Belt back in the day. 
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: abqtraveler on May 24, 2023, 01:39:27 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on May 23, 2023, 11:07:50 PM
Quote from: bluecountry on March 13, 2023, 12:13:37 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on March 09, 2023, 11:33:09 AM
It's pie in the sky dreaming to think every urban freeway can be dug into a trench and capped. The Big Dig in Boston cost billions of dollars yet the tunnels aren't very long. They had all sorts of problems too with water seeping through the tunnel walls.

Trying to do cut and cover tunnels around downtown Houston would run into the same problems. Considering the fact Houston is far more prone to tropical storm strikes than Boston it's likely such cut-and-cover highway tunnels would flood.

It's ridiculous to build attractions such as Minute Maid Park in the downtown area yet expect the massive crowds to just ride a city bus or some nonsense. Houston already has multiple skyscraper districts in various parts of the metro. That's a reaction to workers moving farther and farther out from costly city centers that are too complicated and time-draining to visit. The New Urbanism ideology doesn't stop to consider how much time it actually takes to ride a bus or train. The ideology sure as hell doesn't consider the obscene extreme prices of housing in that Utopian urban center.
Disagree.

1.  You can tunnel, cut and cover, OR cap/sell air rights.
2.  You build Minute Maid so there is a large population living nearby that can walk/bike vs having to import 100% longer distance people.


Quote from: Anthony_JK on March 10, 2023, 12:28:05 AM
There are below-grade trenched sections of I-69/US 59 just to the west of the South Freeway interchange. Not sure if they flood in heavy rain or hurricane conditions....but then again, no one needs to be out in the middle of a landfalling Hurricane Ike in the first place.

Two sections of the NHIP are scheduled to be ultimately capped: the segment of I-69/US 59/relocated I-45 adjacent to Minute Maid Park, and a segment of I-45 just north of the divergence of I-10 west heading towards the Katy Freeway. The city would have to find donors willing to pay for the caps, since that would not be considered "transportation needs" that would qualify for Fed-state interstate funding; perhaps the recent grant H-GAC received could be a down payment on that.

Also, the realignment of I-10 and relocated I-45 east of the Allen Elevated section would be trenched as well.

From what I have seen, they do have mitigation measures set to deal with possible flooding (natural swales, retention ponds, relocation of Buffalo Bayou, etc.

I still say that they should have kept and improved the Allen Elevated section instead of rerouting I-45 and saved a ton of money and time. But, it is what it is. I'm just relieved that the project is somewhat back on track....for now.
That is absurd.  The project should never be approved until the highway has a plan to cap.  Just awful.

Quote from: DJStephens on March 09, 2023, 01:32:55 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on March 09, 2023, 11:33:09 AM
It's pie in the sky dreaming to think every urban freeway can be dug into a trench and capped. The Big Dig in Boston cost billions of dollars yet the tunnels aren't very long. They had all sorts of problems too with water seeping through the tunnel walls.
The total cost of the "big dig" was close to $22 Billion, as recalled.   Over the close to fifteen years of the project.  The original Artery, had it's southern section already tunneled, via cut and cover method, when it was actually discovered how atrocious the elevated section (circa '50) was going to turn out.  But it never had enough capacity, only 3 x 3.   The "new" cut and cover Artery doesn't have enough capacity, either, the third Harbor crossing to the Airport "saves" it to an extent.  It really should have been 5 x 5 in the main downtown section.   
Pork, grafts, and corruption plagued the "big dig" project, and while it was finally completed, it was multiple times more expensive, than if it had been done two decades before, in conjunction with, or immediately after hypothetical Inner Belt construction.   The single most glaring episode, was the falling of a concrete ceiling tile, that fell and killed a motorist in one of the "new" tunnels.  Turned out non galvanized rod had been used to hold the panels in place, instead of correct treated hardware elements for the enviroment.
Are you kidding me?  Make it 5x5?  Absolutely not.
The goal was to ease congestion and the god awful blight of the highway, you do this with full 12 foot lanes, shoulders, and easy merges in a city not making a mega highway; especially when it is designed for local not thru traffic!
They didn't build the Inner Belt (I-695) and some of the necessary radial expressways (I-95, Rte 2).  Many were built (Turnpike,  I-93, SE expressway), but not all. The Belt would have "dispersed" downtown traffic.  Final design revisions in the mid to late sixties either buried, depressed, or placed critical Belt sections at ground level.   Original plans were all elevated viaduct.  That is why a  5 x 5 "cut and cover" replacement central artery would have been optimal.  Because they didn't build the Inner Belt back in the day.
The I-695 Inner Belt was never built because the Governor of Massachusetts ordered the cancellation of all proposed freeways inside the 128 loop in 1970, in response to widespread community opposition in Boston. The only exception was I-93 (Central Artery), as most of it was built by 1973 (I think the upper and lower decks section through Charlestown wasn't yet finished, but close). But I-95 inside 128 was cancelled, and rerouted over the 128 beltway. The I-695 Innerbelt was cancelled, and I think a couple others as well. The idea was to construct mass transit lines and subways in the corridors for the cancelled freeway segments, which I believe was mostly accomplished, but the side effect of cancelling the I-695 Innerbelt was the hours-long traffic jams on the Central Artery that ultimately led to the Big Dig project.

Houston is in a bit of a different situation than Boston, as the Houston metro area doesn't have much in the way of mass transit to speak of.  From my travels to and through Houston, I haven't noticed much in the way of passenger rail (both light and heavy), and Houston certainly doesn't have subways. Also, Houston's freeway network was largely built from the city center outward, whereas Boston's was built starting in the outlying areas and working inward.

They could probably figure out a way to incorporate mass transit into the Houston metro area, but at this point, I would suspect it would be much more costly and time consuming than what they're proposing to do with the NHHIP.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: The Road Warrior on June 14, 2023, 04:32:06 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on May 23, 2023, 11:07:50 PM
That is absurd.  The project should never be approved until the highway has a plan to cap.  Just awful.

This is outdated information. The final plan now has the freeway caps being built by TXDOT. The only thing that's not covered in the current plans are anything that will be built on the caps (whether that's parks or private development). That will have to be handled by private interests.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: bwana39 on June 16, 2023, 04:55:44 PM
[/color]
Quote from: The Road Warrior on June 14, 2023, 04:32:06 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on May 23, 2023, 11:07:50 PM
That is absurd.  The project should never be approved until the highway has a plan to cap.  Just awful.

This is outdated information. The final plan now has the freeway caps being built by TXDOT. The only thing that's not covered in the current plans are anything that will be built on the caps (whether that's parks or private development). That will have to be handled by private interests.

While the CAPS are part of the engineering for the freeway, is the funding in place for them? TxDOT doesn't normally pay for them even though they secure the engineering and let the contracts for them.  The promise right now is caps. What will actually get built 15 years from now is still up in the air. I feel there is a 50% likelihood the Pierce Elevated will still be standing and utilized as a freeway when I am gone. (I am 62.)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 16, 2023, 05:00:17 PM
It would be nice if they would just rebuild the Pierce Elevated and keep it but build it higher so more sunlight reaches the bottom making it less of a dividing road.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: bwana39 on June 16, 2023, 05:10:44 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 16, 2023, 05:00:17 PM
It would be nice if they would just rebuild the Pierce Elevated and keep it but build it higher so more sunlight reaches the bottom making it less of a dividing road.

It isn't about the sunlight. It is about the people who reside under it. Getting rid of it is mainly about getting the homeless out of downtown.

Downtown Houston is over 1,000 acres. People are walking in less than half of it. After dark, most of it is a ghost town except for the bedded down homeless and a few of them who wander.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: TheBox on July 03, 2023, 10:25:58 AM
I just realized something, that Love's Travel Stop at I-45 @ Patton St is the only major truck stop within the I-610 inner loop, and its not even in the cities eastern half (which is more industrial) but rather the middle, and on top of that the closest one to Downtown by far

Since it's probably gonna be capped, are they gonna make a new exit to Patton St or maybe worse-case scenario demolish that truck stop all together if there's enough buzz and uproar about that one?
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: hotdogPi on July 03, 2023, 10:30:44 AM
Do urban areas even need truck stops? I live on a long-distance corridor (the northern half of I-495), and the only truck stop I'm aware of that's anywhere remotely close to here is I-95 exit 3 in New Hampshire.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: bwana39 on July 03, 2023, 10:38:36 AM
Quote from: TheBox on July 03, 2023, 10:25:58 AM
I just realized something, that Love's Travel Stop at I-45 @ Patton St is the only major truck stop within the I-610 inner loop, and its not even in the cities eastern half (which is more industrial) but rather the middle, and on top of that the closest one to Downtown by far

Since it's probably gonna be capped, are they gonna make a new exit to Patton St or maybe worse-case scenario demolish that truck stop all together if there's enough buzz and uproar about that one?

That is far outside the capped part.   This said, The 610 loop on the north and east side of downtown is only 3-4 miles from the city center and less than ten in the other directions.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: Chris on July 03, 2023, 02:06:17 PM
Quote from: 1 on July 03, 2023, 10:30:44 AM
Do urban areas even need truck stops?

Urban cores usually don't have space for them, but there is a significant demand for overnight truck parking close to major cities. Truck drivers often need to deliver their load in the morning, but cannot find parking within reasonable driving range.

There is a huge shortage of truck parking, especially in more urbanized regions. Trucking is not just driving long-distance, shippers and receivers are typically in metropolitan areas to serve their customers.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: Rothman on July 03, 2023, 02:15:43 PM
Quote from: Chris on July 03, 2023, 02:06:17 PM
Quote from: 1 on July 03, 2023, 10:30:44 AM
Do urban areas even need truck stops?

Urban cores usually don't have space for them, but there is a significant demand for overnight truck parking close to major cities. Truck drivers often need to deliver their load in the morning, but cannot find parking within reasonable driving range.

There is a huge shortage of truck parking, especially in more urbanized regions. Trucking is not just driving long-distance, shippers and receivers are typically in metropolitan areas to serve their customers.
And then you have tight restrictions in places like NYC, where some shippers have to break up 53' loads and allocated time slots.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: TheBox on July 03, 2023, 05:01:16 PM
As someone who lives in a small neighborhood with not 1 but now 2 trucking businesses, one of them know what to be (tho they shifted from flatbed for the longest time to sea-containers last year, and now recently back to flatbed's seemingly, likely with a deal/contractor), and the other has the same 5-6 flatbeds and 5-6 dumps (half of which are 18-wheelers) parked there and feels more like of another expansion of the mix mash of different kinds of small 18-wheelers businesses in 1 spot from the other 2 streets nearby to the east (also the same trucks that always park there too), and that's not the only one around it.
It's inside the beltway but outside the 610 inner loop and thus still far from Downtown.

These ones specifically go to West Loop (via S. Post Oak), South Loop (via Hiram Clarke and then S. Main), South Fwy (via W. Orem), and Southwest Fwy (via again W. Orem and S. Main but to the west)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: MaxConcrete on July 04, 2023, 09:20:34 PM
The demolition of Clayton Homes is complete.  Photo credit to Hindesky on HAIF
https://www.houstonarchitecture.com/haif/topic/45066-i-45-rebuild-north-houston-highway-improvement-project/page/64/#comments (https://www.houstonarchitecture.com/haif/topic/45066-i-45-rebuild-north-houston-highway-improvement-project/page/64/#comments)

(https://i.imgur.com/JD8HMwG.jpg)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: MaxConcrete on July 13, 2023, 10:14:18 PM
TxDOT has resumed eminent domain acquisition for the project. This month's list includes 23 parcels. All parcels are located along I-10 east of I-69, and they are all small parcels.

Details start on page 599
https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/commission/2023/0711/7.pdf (https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/commission/2023/0711/7.pdf)
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: MaxConcrete on December 06, 2023, 11:06:50 PM
TxDOT is having 3 public meetings this month. Today's meeting focused on the downtown section, and numerous design changes were presented.

Presentation boards (https://nhhippublicmeetings.com/2023/)

The design changes do not affect any of the originally-planned main lanes.

The downtown work is now estimated at $5.7 billion. (I don't know if this is a change from the previous estimate, since I'm not aware of a direct comparison value.)

All downtown work is scheduled to be completed in 2037.

I-69 from SH 288 to I-45: This is the first section to be built, scheduled for 2025 to 2030. Estimated cost is $152 million for drainage improvements and $496 million for highway improvements. Design changes are minimal, none affecting the main lanes. The "signature" bridge designs are not finalized. The depictions in the display board suggest that the arches are purely aesthetic, with no structural role.

I-59 I-69 from Spur 527 to SH 288: This will be the second section to begin construction, starting in 2026 and completing in 2032. No changes to main lanes. The freeway caps have been extended. The planned frontage roads along I-69 are eliminated. Loss of the westbound frontage road is a negative impact in my opinion, but loss of the eastbound frontage road has a negligible impact. However, the right-of-way is being widened on the north side (in spite of the frontage road removal) due to the need for specialized "D-wall" retaining walls resulting from the deep trench and high groundwater.

I-10 in the UH-Downtown area: adjustments to adjacent streets. No changes to main lanes.

I-10/I-45 shared section: This has the most lanes of any section in NHHIP (around 36), using multiple elevated structures. The updated design says that all roadways will pass over the railroad. This may cause all structures to be moved upward, but I can't say for certain. For those familiar with Houston, this railroad is the "Be Someone" crossing which is a graffiti magnet, and it appears it will be at ground level in the new design.

I-10/I-69 interchange: minor adjustments to I-10 frontage road, ramp and adjacent street

There are some right-of-way reductions, mostly along I-10 in the vicinity of I-69.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: Plutonic Panda on December 06, 2023, 11:30:28 PM
^^^ I think you meant I-69 instead of I-59. I'm not too familiar with Houston but I looked around and couldn't find I-59 anywhere. Though if it's I-69 I am surprised they'd remove the service roads and not build a cantilever design like US-75 in Dallas.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: Some one on December 07, 2023, 12:02:42 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on December 06, 2023, 11:30:28 PM
^^^ I think you meant I-69 instead of I-59. I'm not too familiar with Houston but I looked around and couldn't find I-59 anywhere. Though if it's I-69 I am surprised they'd remove the service roads and not build a cantilever design like US-75 in Dallas.
It's surprisingly common for people to refer to I-69/US 59 as I-59. It doesn't help that the real I-59 is about 200 miles to the right LOL. Off-topic, but I remember a year ago when I was driving down Sugar Land, there were detour signs for I-59.  :-D.

As for the design changes, it's disappointing they aren't doing more to reduce ROW acquisitions, but I'm glad they're at least making the efforts to make the projects less disruptive/more manageable.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: MaxConcrete on December 10, 2023, 09:23:48 AM
Good news! Actually, great news.

John Whitmire was elected (https://www.click2houston.com/news/politics/2023/12/08/houston-mayor-runoff-election-results-for-december-9-2023/) Mayor of Houston in Saturday's runoff over Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee with a decisive 64.4% of the vote.

Whitmire is a traditional Democrat and is generally suppportive of NHHIP. I don't recall that he ever made any statements against the project, although he has endorsed additional community involvement.

Jackson Lee is a leader of anti-NHHIP efforts. She is a longtime enemy of TxDOT. She is very anti-TxDOT and anti-freeway. In the early 1990s she lead an opposition effort against the West Loop expansion, and she succeeded in getting it canceled. Today, the West Loop is consistently the most congested freeway segment in Texas. Having her as mayor would be disastrous for Houston's future mobility plans, and she would also be bad news for the business climate. I expect she'll remain politically active (e.g. a community organizer), but she won't have any power.
UPDATE: Jackson Lee will not retire from congress at the end of her current term. She will run to retain her seat in the U.S. House.

I'm hopeful Whitmire will try to accelerate the project to get it done sooner than the current schedule, which extends to the late 2030s. Getting it done by the end of a second term (2032) would be a nice goal.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: Some one on December 10, 2023, 03:08:27 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on December 10, 2023, 09:23:48 AM
Good news! Actually, great news.

John Whitmire was elected (https://www.click2houston.com/news/politics/2023/12/08/houston-mayor-runoff-election-results-for-december-9-2023/) Mayor of Houston in Saturday's runoff over Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee with a decisive 64.4% of the vote.

Whitmire is a traditional Democrat and is generally suppportive of NHHIP. I don't recall that he ever made any statements against the project, although he has endorsed additional community involvement.

Jackson Lee is a leader of anti-NHHIP efforts. She is a longtime enemy of TxDOT. She is very anti-TxDOT and anti-freeway. In the early 1990s she lead an opposition effort against the West Loop expansion, and she succeeded in getting it canceled. Today, the West Loop is consistently the most congested freeway segment in Texas. Having her as mayor would be disastrous for Houston's future mobility plans, and she would also be bad news for the business climate. I expect she'll remain politically active (e.g. a community organizer), but she won't have any power.

I'm hopeful Whitmire will try to accelerate the project to get it done sooner than the current schedule, which extends to the late 2030s. Getting it done by the end of a second term (2032) would be a nice goal.
Tbf the West Loop expansion was going to cut into Memorial Park, so I can see why it got canceled. As for NHHIP, I hope that Whitmire finds a nice compromise and get NHHIP through while mitigating ROW acquisition/damages and exploring multimodal options, like the future bike lanes and METRORapid.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: armadillo speedbump on December 25, 2023, 09:42:22 PM
Quote from: Some one on December 10, 2023, 03:08:27 PM

Tbf the West Loop expansion was going to cut into Memorial Park, so I can see why it got canceled. As for NHHIP, I hope that Whitmire finds a nice compromise and get NHHIP through while mitigating ROW acquisition/damages and exploring multimodal options, like the future bike lanes and METRORapid.

Very little effect on Memorial Park, and it was ridiculous to throw the baby out with the bathwater.  I'm going to assume you don't have to commute via the I-10 to US 59 segment of the West Loop.  Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Mars) never has to either, and she has a driver, so no skin off her back.  She (and the Galleria area snobs that keep torpedoing 610W solutions) did a terrible disservice to the city.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: Some one on December 25, 2023, 11:41:17 PM
Quote from: armadillo speedbump on December 25, 2023, 09:42:22 PM
Quote from: Some one on December 10, 2023, 03:08:27 PM

Tbf the West Loop expansion was going to cut into Memorial Park, so I can see why it got canceled. As for NHHIP, I hope that Whitmire finds a nice compromise and get NHHIP through while mitigating ROW acquisition/damages and exploring multimodal options, like the future bike lanes and METRORapid.

Very little effect on Memorial Park, and it was ridiculous to throw the baby out with the bathwater.  I'm going to assume you don't have to commute via the I-10 to US 59 segment of the West Loop.  Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Mars) never has to either, and she has a driver, so no skin off her back.  She (and the Galleria area snobs that keep torpedoing 610W solutions) did a terrible disservice to the city.
I don't, but I'm aware of how shitty that part of I-610 is. I'm pretty sure it's common among Houstonians that 610 between 59 and I-10 is unbearable to drive in. I'm all for TXDOT improving that section of 610, but unfortunately, any plans to expand it are dead on arrival. So ig all they can do now is find other ways to improve that section. I wouldn't say they did a terrible disservice. It sucks, yeah but Uptown and Memorial Park aren't suffering from the cancellation.

FWIW, I'm not a huge fan of Sheila Jackson either. But I don't entirely disagree with her stance on freeways, urban ones at least.

ETA: Here's to hoping that if/when the University BRT and/or Inner Katy/Gulfton BRT extension get built, we'll see more people using the uptown bus lanes, thus taking cars off the West Loop. One can only hope   :-/
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: MaxConcrete on March 19, 2024, 08:06:27 PM
TxDOT had a meeting (https://www.txdot.gov/business/peps/opportunities/meetings/pre-rfp-meeting-pse-sd-contracts-nhhip-segments-3c-4-2a-houston-district.html) last week to solicit consultants for PS&E (plans, schedule and estimates) for NHHIP sections 3C-4 and 2A.

Presentation (https://www.txdot.gov/content/dam/docs/business/peps/meetings/fy2024/2024-03-13-hou/presentation.pdf)

See map on page 9 of the presentation for the sections.
3C-4 is Interstate 10 on the northwest side of downtown, including the huge interchange complex with I-45.
2A is I-45 north of I-10 to just south of I-610 (excluding any work at the Loop 610 interchange).

There's no "new" news but items of interest are
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: ski-man on March 21, 2024, 08:57:23 PM
Have they ever said if the existing portion of I-45 from the I-10 split to where the Pierce Elevated starts will be given a 3-digit designation like I-145 or I-545??
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: MaxConcrete on March 21, 2024, 09:08:59 PM
Quote from: ski-man on March 21, 2024, 08:57:23 PM
Have they ever said if the existing portion of I-45 from the I-10 split to where the Pierce Elevated starts will be given a 3-digit designation like I-145 or I-545??

I have not heard anything about a new route designation. The section you mention is usually called the downtown connector. It is scheduled to start construction in 2031 and be completed in 2037, so there's no hurry for the route designation.
Title: Re: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project resumed March 2023)
Post by: Henry on March 21, 2024, 11:23:12 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on March 21, 2024, 09:08:59 PM
Quote from: ski-man on March 21, 2024, 08:57:23 PM
Have they ever said if the existing portion of I-45 from the I-10 split to where the Pierce Elevated starts will be given a 3-digit designation like I-145 or I-545??

I have not heard anything about a new route designation. The section you mention is usually called the downtown connector. It is scheduled to start construction in 2031 and be completed in 2037, so there's no hurry for the route designation.
If anything, it would stay unsigned, like I-345 in Dallas is, but if they insist on a designation, then I-145 would certainly be the way to go.