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.
Author
Topic: North Houston Highway Improvement Project (project partially halted by FHWA) (Read 96475 times)