Sparrow

That new roadway could potentially be very interesting for the school. Perhaps integration with the Heights Hike and Bike trail could create a nice bayou-side promenade that could become an iconic image of an expanded future campus.

Don't you mean northwest corner? The full block right? Or the triangular land by the railroad tracks?

TCR has fully intended this to be a two cities project. Dallas. Houston. The third station would only be built it economic conditions make it feasible. It's not about the places in between. Never has been. Sorry. Why do the Joe Plumbers of our state insist that passenger rail cannot be profitable? Airlines are profitable aren't they? I didn't think our airlines were government run in this country. Freight rail? That's right, they're not. Guess what, even space travel is proving to be a big money business. If one form of transportation can find a way to be profitable, why not another means of transit? I'm not sure if I'm feeding the trolls here, but what's with all the negativity and nimbyism and talk about "cooks"?

It's just one development beginning now. I see now with matching up the rendering in the HBJ with the plat layout. Clock tower matches up with the Twitter image. The HBJ article is just way off in saying the development will be at "North Main and Burnett" streets. Misleading at best. My bad y'all. It's a smart play to begin the far side of the development first so that there are still options to densify future plans closer to the light rail station if conditions warrant. You really can't do that if you start closest to the station first and build eastward from there.

Ya, sorry y'all, it was working when I tested it. Not sure what's going on. Go to page five in IamHouston's link above and scroll all the way right. The link is there.

It's on the next planning commission agenda if you're having trouble viewing.

Hold on a second. Am I understanding correctly? So now we have two separate developments both named "Residences at Hardy Yards" one at Main/Burnett and the other at Hardy/Leona? Or will that simply be the name for all developments on this property? ftp://edrc.houstontx.gov/2015/Applications//2015-0678/SubdivisionPlatPDF_Hardy_Yards_Multifamily_Plat.pdf

Also says 52 stories.

Everything you need to know about parking in Downtown Houston: http://downtownhouston.org/resource/parking/ (Friendly tip: Often on-street parking can be had without too much circling for much cheaper than a garage--and is free after 6p if you're ever headed to an Astros or Rockets game and don't mind walking a few blocks.)

Anyone planning on attending any of the open house meetings that begin tomorrow night?

New Downtown development map for April 2015 http://downtownhouston.org/site_media/uploads/attachments/2015-04-08/150408_Development_Map__Renders_11X17.pdf Of note: Block 334 and SkyHouse Main are both scheduled for completion Q1 of 2016.

Whatever happened to the Westheimer/railroad crossing grade separation study? Couldn't they just construct some sort of berm-tunnel over the tracks and have Westheimer go over the berm? I'm thinking cut-and-cover tunnel construction, just without the cutting. A berm crossing would be much less objectionable than a bridge one would think. On the east side of the tracks you might have to close the Westheimer/Suffolk intersection, but surely the Mid Lane intersection could remain open--the incline required wouldn't be so incredible. Do the same for San Felipe and Richmond. I think long term it would be awesome to cover the entire length of track in this area with a berm-tunnel to create a bike path and jogging trail above.

New series of meetings scheduled for this month by TCP (Texas Central Partners--the entity that will develop and operate the railway, not to be confused with TCR, the entity that is promoting the development of the railway). http://texascentral.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/TCR-WEB-ad-OpenHouse-v61.pdf (As an aside, it's interesting to note that the Cypress meeting will take place in Tin Hall which was on the most recent Planning Commission agenda to be redeveloped into single family housing.)

First short section of Grand Parkway in north Harris County is now open to traffic--feeder roads between new I-45 feeder lanes westward to Holzwarth Road. Main lane construction continues. Absolutely amazing transformation in this area. Unrecognizable from just a few short years ago.

I'd say we need someone to get it back on track.

http://www.ih45northandmore.com/docs4/Public%20Meeting%20Notice%20(English).pdf Creates 4 managed lanes between I-10 and the North Belt. Additional right-of-way required.

I'd put my money on the high-end grocer from Austin occupying such a building in Downtown long before the San Antonio chain tosses it's hat in the ring.

Really just how big an assumption is it that rail provides a disincentive to sprawl. Sprawl is development blanketing the countryside in all directions it can flow. Edge cities may develop where stops are located, but TOD is not sprawl. Do you really think NYC would have developed as it did without rail? C'mon man. There's a place for rail and there's a place for highways. It's not a this or that sort of question. Both are needed at one time or another--anyone denying that fact either has a vested financial interest or simply fails to be pragmatic and open to logical reasoning. There is not a single mode solution to the transportation question. Perhaps the anti-highway wording was wrong for what I was attempting to get across. Let just go with the phrase opposite of highway. It's not a this mode rather than that mode connotation that I intended. Over the decades rural landowners have become used to fighting land takings for highway development--take the Grand Parkway or the TTC as examples. They are hard-wired to believe any takings will irrevocably effect them in a negative manner and developers are poised to pounce on farmland the very moment road construction begins. How could they possibly fathom a way that a taking of their land will benefit them in any way whatsoever? Highway development over the decades has resulted in preconceived notions before any degree of research on the matter is undertaken. The thinking is that everyone wants to know what is in it for them these days. No one is concerned about the greater good. What's in it for me--that's the bottom line. Social Capitalism. "Why should I give up my peace and quiet and part of my land just so some city folk can get where they're going faster? In what way do I benefit?"--that's what these people are thinking. So the PR thing to do is to lean on the deductive reasoning that while a train zooming past rural farmland a few dozen times each day is a personal cost, at the same time a greater benefit is received in the form of a preserved way of rural life. If they want development to continue to migrate and swallow up farm land--sure, continue to fight against the train. But let's get real rural folks--trains are nothing new. They've been crisscrossing the continent for far more than a century. The image that needs to be portrayed to the rural landowners is how the rail will benefit them in the form of countryside preservation. It's called spin. PR 101. Rural landowners don't want to here how you can travel from Houston to Dallas in 90 minutes. How does that benefit them when they live hours away from both cities? Provide a vision to the landowners that their way of life will be more readily assured by developers not having incentive to buy land along the transit line as they would along the freeway--no station, no development incentive. It would be like building a gas station along I-45 if the closest exit was 100 miles away.

It's rather GRB meets Alley Theatre if you ask me.

Perhaps TCR should consider the PR move of pushing rail as the anti-highway to the Rural Opposition. When you build a new highway thru virgin lands development will soon come your way in the form of sprawl. When you build a rail corridor passing thru the same virgin lands--but not stopping--you provide no incentive for the suburbs to come that way. Push the idea to the Rural Opposition that failure to build the high speed rail will limit the density the city can provide and in doing so will further induce sprawl and the outward expansion of development farther into the countryside. A densifying city core correlates to slower suburban expansion rates thus preserving the rural countryside--instead of destroying it. Building rail will actually preserve farmland and the rural way of life for a greater length of time than if they weren't to build at all. No rail = more cars + more highway lane construction + more suburbia + more time wasted stuck in slow traffic Yes rail = fewer cars + no orange highway construction barrels + more city density + peaceful drive to Aunt Edna's farm

A nice thought, but I would think the space would just be way too small. The next best hope for the Nau Center is to lease some of the under development retail space in the GRB.

Not sure exactly how long the TCR high speed rail station for Downtown would need to be, but how about putting it on the east side of MMP where the Astros premium parking is now? Sort of a "New" Union Station. There's the proposal out there to bring it toward Downtown using the I-10 corridor, just bring it a bit farther east and come south along Hamilton (all elevated of course). Any 59 expansion wouldn't effect this parcel anyhow given it's proximity to the GRB. If the city abandons Hamilton from Congress down to Texas, so be it. It's not a vital roadway anyhow. New home for the New Hope housing? With pleasure. The Astros parking lots on the east side of 59 could be developed, or at least sizable garages (with GFR of course) could be built. METRO already has light rail in the area and it is very convenient for car access. A taxi stand could be created by making a dedicated taxi only lane between the station and MMP. Connect MMP directly to New Union Station and the garages/development across 59 via skybridges as well as to the GRB.

Eliminating the current I-45 alignment in favor of a dual signed eastern side 59 and 45 would be a BIG mistake. Imagine the gridlock one little fender bender will create. The whole system will begin to back up because of the choke point. At least now if the east side is backed up you can go around the west side of Downtown to bypass the problem and vice versa. That one little accident would put thousands of cars onto Downtown streets trying to bypass the gridlock. To improve flows on the Pierce: 1) Create a west side of Midtown highway so that Southwest Freeway to/from North Freeway traffic bypasses the Pierce altogether. Create a two lane cut-and-cover Spur extension under both Smith and Louisiana. Create exits/entrances at Elgin, McGowen, and Gray in addition to a direct connector to/from 45. 2) Create a 45 to 288 S direct connector similarly to what being done with the 610/290/10 interchange to eliminate the backups and weaving that happens after exiting the Pierce. 3) Eliminate the 59/288 exit to 45 North at the Pierce. Create a dedicated direct connector north of Downtown for 45 North Freeway bound traffic from 288 (or 59 drivers that didn't take the Spur). What's even better is the direct connectors can be built without completely shutting down freeways for years at a time as other proposals may require. Cut-and-cover of a bypass under Smith and Louisiana thru Midtown wouldn't be pretty, but it wouldn't be devastating if done a block or two at a time.

For all those hoping and wishing for a unified skyline from Downtown to the Med Center, this is a depressing reminder of how far we have yet to go...

Less than 4 weeks to go until start of service! Metro is still set to begin on April 11th, right?