cjmalek
-
Posts
12 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by cjmalek
-
Couldn't find a thread of this. Was posted on Hsu Office Instagram page last week. https://product.costar.com/home/news/shared/918232524?utm_campaign=later-linkinbio-tritenre&utm_content=later-15479960&utm_medium=social&utm_source=instagram
- 283 replies
-
- 18
-
-
-
- michael hsus
- edi international
- (and 5 more)
-
Magnolia Hotel
-
True. As of now it is not as extensive, but based on Metro's 2050 vision there will probably be a system in place that could support the "numbered routes"
-
ot sure if there would be the capacity for express routes with out more tracks to pass non express routes.
-
I don't see how it's a horrible suggestion seeing as how it is the standard system of naming for most inner city rail transportation. The actual route should be named, not the line of tracks. It allows for only 4 options movement along the lines. It would allow for multiple routes, like an east end to northside route or southeast to northside route. It would allow for the possibility of express routes, n
-
Ok, yeah sorry about that then. I was only talking about the the rail yards site. If talking about the whole area surrounding the north line, I'm glad to see the improvements made and hope the city move forward fith full force!
-
The city isn't focused on the development of the other areas, those all develop on their own. Unlike how the city is focused on downtown, midtown, and east downtown. Which is evident by the developer tax incentives, park improvements, rethinking parking, improving sidewalks, countless studies, etc. I'm not saying the city should ignore this area and they are not. They are looking into ways to better connect north downtown to the rest of downtown and extending San Jacinto to Burnett. But until they have any thing certain you can't properly build something there, sure you can build something now with no knowledge of how the city aims to improve the infrastructure and connections to the area. It would end up being counter productive. IMO. Essentially the only connection to the site is via rail or main, it's not enough. Creating pedestrian and bike access is not an easy fix. There are significant impediments, such as 1-10, the train tracks, industrial nature of area in-between the site and downtown. Houston has to develop it's core if it wants to compete with other cities and attract top talent. We need to improve the livability of our city. This would be a good addition, but there are better places for resources to be used. I think this area won't develop until east downtown has good momentum going. I mean the east downtown area didn't receive attention until midtown already had good momentum. Developers learned that people wanted to live in downtown/downtown adjacent. I think developers are aware of the rail yards site, but are waiting to see if east downtown can gain momentum similar to midtown.
-
I understand all of that. All of the improvements you mentioned are apart of the Transit Corridor plans the city introduced some time ago. The same improvements are occurring along the southeast line and east line as well (They really need to come up with better line names, something simple like 1, 2, 3, etc.). What I'm trying to say is I don't believe that the city is that concerned about the future of that SITE at the moment. The city is clearly concerned about the development of downtown, midtown, and east downtown. Because this is such an amazing site location wise, I firmly believe that we have to address the issues of connection to the site. Just extending San Jacinto is not enough, there needs to be serious work done to make the site more accessible. Without those numerous connections to downtown (pedestrian, bike, car, bus, and rail) it will be never live up to its full potential. It will become just another Houston island. Take for example highland village or greenway plaza. Imagine how much better highland village would be if it were in a more walkable, connected, urban setting. Greenway plaza is even worse, they are building a lot of housing along richmond and in the surrounding areas. This makes for a completely miserable experience. You are forced to use your car to go anywhere, there are no real walkable options. This is why I believe that there needs to better connections to north downtown and to the site. Also the architecture and planning visualized in the rendering is completely mediocre for a site with such potential.
-
The inclusion of an elevator doesn't mean anything. It's an ADA requirement, also I wouldn't take the giant stairs coming outwards as a indicator that something will be developed there. It's more poor design. I would personally love to see something happen there, but it is not really a priority for the city and really isn't deserving of development at this point in time. We need to focus on making midtown better and actually develop the east side of downtown. I think once all of that is fully in progress then we should focus or attention there. There is such a disconnect between the rail yard site and downtown and until that is addressed I don't think it will be a very successful project. You need much more than a transit stop to make it well connected. That being said I think if they got a proper architect, and had pedestrian, bike, bus, car, and rail connections to downtown this would be amazing. Without those factors it would be severely lacking and be a sort dissconnected island. Which we have to many of already.
-
If you look at the sun paths in Houston, the shadows will generally only affect the houses on the opposite side of Morningside Dr in the late afternoon. It will most likely affect areas to the north. It will have larger shadows in the winter time, due to the sun being closer to the horizon.
-
The renderings that the owner of the site put out are only used to show what can be done on the site, not what will be done.
