North Houston Highway Improvement Project

[DJStephens]

How 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.   

[armadillo speedbump]

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.

[MaxConcrete]

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


Photo taken today http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20211225_012_1800.jpg

[kernals12]

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.

I was told that widening the Katy Freeway made traffic worse

[Bobby5280]

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.

[vdeane]

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"

[Plutonic Panda]

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.

[Chris]

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:

[Plutonic Panda]

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.

[kernals12]

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:

Who needs facts when you have a narrative?

[kernals12]

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.

[Chris]

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.

[CtrlAltDel]

I think the Katy Freeway example was also based on cherry picking data.

I think this is here.

[Anthony_JK]

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:

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?

[kernals12]

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

[Bobby5280]

Who 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

[Rothman]

Nobody parties in Worcester.  Nobody.

[sprjus4]

It's also a very costly toll road most people avoid unless they absolutely have to get on it.

Its traffic volumes say otherwise.

[Bobby5280]

Nobody 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.

Its 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.

[kernals12]

Who 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

[bwana39]

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

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.

[TXtoNJ]

To be fair, the "ideals" for Texas interchanges are pretty outdated and detached from the context of urban environments.

[Rothman]

Nobody 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.

[bwana39]

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. 

[TXtoNJ]

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.