ig2ba

I'd agree with you for those who tend to be couples/older families. However, most of the people parking at the zoo lot are families with multiple kids with multiple strollers, other junk to load up to bring with the kids, picnic supplies, etc. and visitors from out of town. If Houston were a city with true mass transit... then you'd have a point.

 

Yes, there are a lot of options nearby for parking... but no one knows about them unless you live nearby. For those visiting, there is no clear signage or indication of where there is public parking available and where it's at. Heck, even the Ben Taub parking garage (where people park at and walk across to the zoo entrance on the back side) has notices posted saying that the garage is to only be used for hospital visitors.

I think that explains it well. There are two types of people in this situation: those who need signs to tell them exactly where to park and those who just park. Some people need a signs leading them all the way from 288 telling them to park at on street parking in the museum district to go see a concert at Miller Outdoor. It's probably mostly a suburban/city divide, but not entirely.

Here's the truth; people are LAZY.

 

There is plenty of parking at Hermann Park. There's the zoo lot, the golf lot, on-street parking, medical center garages, and museum district garages. There's also the easy option of parking anywhere in Midtown and taking the train. 

 

I find it amusing that people would rather circle in their cars for half an hour waiting for a spot rather than walk 10 minutes when their final destination is a f'in park.

 

Hermann Park is our city's crown jewel. We'll have spent around $100 million on the park/zoo/miller by the time this 100th birthday is done and you want to add a parking garage? 

 

No thanks. It's time to change our culture. Parking cannot continue to be a "right" in Central Houston.

I'm cool with a parking garage north of Hermann Drive in the context of more development of the Museum District. Hermann at Jackson looks good.

For within the park, here's a question: would you be for a parking garage if it meant a smaller overall footprint for parking by removing surface parking lots. The zoo could be expanded or just plain old fashioned green space for now. If you'd still oppose such a parking garage, how would you feel if several levels of it were below ground? Or all of it?

I've noticed this too - parking can be a disaster, especially on the weekends. Would have been nice to put in an underground garage under the new centennial gardens, similar to the garage under discovery green.

 

Once the gardens are finished it should open the parking back up to where people can street park in the neighborhood to the north and the walk over won't be as far.

 

Part of the problem is people are generally more willing to drive around for 20+ minutes for a parking spot rather than park slightly farther away and walk an extra 1/4 of a mile.

Yep. I see that too. I usually just park a little further away, requiring an extra 3-4 minute walk but probably a time savings overall, since I don't have to wait for a line of cars to figure things out. Only on rare occasions do I have to find a spot much further away.

FWIW, I heard that the final decisions on the offices you mentioned, Bakersfield, Covington, and Pittsburgh (i.e., the extent of eventually moving part of those operations to Houston and obviating the necessity of new construction there), is what delayed the Houston tower, and that the Houston tower will be appropriately funded once those decisions are made.  It's worth noting that Chevron is moving forward with its Midland campus (uh-oh, a campus!), presumably because their future presence and needs have been well-settled.

I think there is very little to no work that could be moved from Bakersfield to Houston or Pittsburgh to Houston. They could always sell their assets in those locations, in which case people would be transferred to the purchasing company or have to return to home base. I think that's pretty unlikely since Chevron only exists in PA because they bought Atlas very recently (in 2011 I think).

I suspect Midland is going forward because the Permian is booming right now. A suburban campus in Midland means 4 miles from downtown, not 35 like Camp Strake is.

From what I have understood the final investment decision has been slated for Q3 of 2014 not 2015.

 

I think one BIG issue that some people here are missing is that the decision to build here or there is a big decision that isn't made in reaction to small events.  This tower has been on the drawing boards at HOK for a few years now and Chevron has been planning it for even longer.  The economics of building are resolved well before a building gets to this level of design.  It would be highly unusual for a company to pull the plug on something that is this far designed.

That was the plan until they announced cost cuts last month. The cuts included delays in the new downtown Houston, Bakersfield, Covington, and Pittsburgh offices.

I don't mean to imply that anyone is pulling the plug. The project already has money to do preliminary engineering and this will continue, though at a slower pace than expected before. The final decision will determine whether and when they get the remaining 90% of the money for the project to proceed.

Calrification please: the final decision on whether to fund this project, or final decision on funding for this project?

 

So this seems like a 2016 project.

Both. Once the final decision is made to fund, then the project has funding.

BRT would still cause right of way issues and headaches for businesses because Richmond would have to get rebuilt so I don't see that happening either.

You'd think, but legislative intent doesn't always show up in the final bill. I'm curious what wording was used that would disallow spending on BRT but allow it for regular buses.

New information on this tower that I've heard in the last couple days:

• The final decision on whether to fund this project will be in Q3 of 2015.
• The construction will run through 2019. I'm not sure if this includes work after the building is already opened, or if the date that it will be opened is in 2019. I suspect that it includes the finishing touches.
• 850 feet now, but still 50 floors. I don't know which one is an error. Or maybe they're expecting future Chevron employees to be taller than current employees.
• They are hiring Chevron employees for this project starting now.

Except for the last bullet, I can't confirm that any of these will actually come to pass, but this is the latest info.

Does his amendment also preclude federal funding for BRT on Richmond?  Maybe that's still an option in which case it could tie in to the planned BRT on Post Oak.

Good question. It would be wonderful if we could see the text in the bill, but I suppose that would require investigative journalism of some kind.

Depending on what the text says, I see that there are still some options:

• BRT for University Line on Richmond. BRT for Uptown Line on Post Oak. ROW and initial engineering paid for by federal money. Potential upgrade to LRT - we're on our own.
• Split the projects up. Uptown Line along I-610 feeder and south of Richmond paid for by federal money; Houston or Uptown TIRZ pay the rest. University Line east of Shepherd and west of GWP (on Westpark?) paid for by federal money; between Shepherd and Greenway Plaza, we're on our own.
• Below grade options still allowed. More expensive, but with federal funding still on the table, it's possible to construct parts of this underground.

Just disgusting.  Classic dirty politics at its finest.  Wonder how much Culberson got paid to pull this off. 

 

Anyway, I'd prefer any rail line down this street to be a subway instead.  Better yet, tunnel it down Westheimer, all the way out to Beltway 8.  Of course that'll never happen, but that'd be the best rail line in Houston.

Me too. I'm not a fan of the rail being all at grade throughout the Galleria area. That seems to be asking for trouble. Yes, it costs more, but it's better to spend more money to fix a problem - congestion - than a little less money to make the problem worse.

you have better sources on this board than nancy.

That's often true, but it's hard to tell the good sources from the bad ones. I tend to ignore the ones of the variety "I know a guy close to the business who wouldn't lie and is never wrong".

No - separate businesses.  Two Shell will be vacated and Pennzoil Place has been vacated.  One Shell Plaza was recently renovated and nearly all CBD staff have been consolidated there.

For clarity's sake, which businesses?

Its oil companies. Making you spend more on gas getting to work is a good thing

Peanuts. And conspiracy theory talk too. If they wanted employees to spend more on gas, they wouldn't give employee discounts on gasoline, no matter what the size of the discount. Also, you'd have to drive at least 30 cars at 60 mph for an hour to waste the same amount of money in gas as the productivity of your average O&G company office worker. So no.

i figure traffic may drop initially when the tolls start, but once construction starts getting more severe along 290 i predict traffic will pick back up on the grand parkway. and by the time 290 construction is finished (and people stop taking GP as a detour) the areas along the grand parkway will be developed enough to sustain traffic on its own.

The other parts of the Grand Parkway will be completed (from 290 to 249 to I-45) before the 290 expansion. Right? That should add traffic before 290 reduces it.

So 18,000 cars per day is what TxDOT is reporting for the first few weeks of use.

Is anyone surprised? Higher than you expected? Lower?

https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=208557532588506606958.0004cbcbfdb789c392269&msa=0&ll=29.757224,-95.365577&spn=0.029842,0.038581

You can download a KML.

This is belated, but thanks a bunch.

Speaking of trolls

No kidding. Getting people to discuss a rumor which is most likely false is one thing. Not the best thing, but HAIFers would sometimes rather discuss BS (this) or fantasy (what's your favorite transit plan for the exurbs?) then a new topic. I get that.

Calling a person/place/thing a name with the goal of getting people angry and swearing, necessitating moderator intervention ... that's a whole 'nother level of unpleasantness. Pretty much the textbook definition of trolling. Oh, the irony!

Well say what you want and criticize away. im just passing along the info from a very, very reliable source who is close to the negotiations. Next time, I'll keep it to myself.

When you get a chance, could you ask your source why Chevron bought the parcel bounded by Milam/Leeland/Travis/Pease just a couple weeks before announcing they are delaying the tower at 1600 Louisiana.

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/real-estate/article/Chevron-buys-another-parcel-downtown-5112259.php

Just spending somewhere around 10 million dollars as a head fake?

I drove the whole thing in the morning of the second day it was open, and was surprised by how many cars there were, considering it's such a new road and quiet time of the week. It looked like the traffic is about what you'd expect to see on I-10 east of Lake Charles. It certainly has many times more vehicles than Segment I of the Grand Parkway, and I think more traffic than I normally see on the Fort Bend Parkway (which I only drive on off-peak hours). I seriously doubt all the people I saw on Segment E were road geeks.

Sorry for not replying directly. Lafayette, Covington, and Henry Hub are all in the state of Louisiana. Hurricane Katrina did not hit Louisiana Street.

They have offices at Lafayette, Covington, and Henry Hub. The Covington one was built soon after Katrina, so it must be that one.

I don't think we should read into this too much as being a downtown- or even Houston-specific issue. The word is that they planned other buildings in Pittsburgh and Bakersfield, and these have been delayed (but I don't think cancelled yet).

The expansion of their building in Louisiana, which was over capacity from when it was opened in 2008, has also been delayed.

Don't know.  But I can guess that the Grand Parkway will be the first to undergo major renovation/expansion work (talking about the existing segments first).  Light Rail may add on, or replace a section of track here or there due to wear and tear, but the four traffic lanes on the GP will probably need to be widened in the next 5-10 years.  Mark my words.

"need to be" widened and "will be widened" are two separate things. I very much doubt that any part of Segment E or Segment D (besides the current work to finish overpasses) will be widened in the next 10 years. Maybe an extra merge lane for a short distance, but nothing else.

TxDOT's budget is very strained. Tolls, even if sufficient along this section to support widening - very unlikely for a new-build exurban toll road - will be redirected to other toll projects. Segment E was deemed marginally viable by HCTRA in the first place.

Need? That's a different matter. I could envision morning backups on SB 99 to EB 10 and in the evening WB 10 to NB 99. Do you think there will be more congestion than this by 2023?

I think that is a nifty coincidence, but it's not a competition, since they're two different projects run by two different government agencies serving two different parts of the area.

...that being said, I still don't see why Forbidden Gardens had to close for the Grand Parkway extension.

It's not a competition in that the two agencies are literally competing. But in the minds of some in the public, it is a competition. Public sentiment leads to legislator (in)action which leads to funding, so it could eventually have effects. Way down the road. If the results are extremely different. Maybe. I think.

I don't think they did have to close. They closed and mentioned that Grand Parkway as a reason why. It's as good a reason as any - better than blaming Obama, Bush, etc.

That's what I don't understand.  Given the resistance of the neighborhood, why would they continue to push the tower?  Why not work with the neighborhood to come up with something everyone can live with?  Who are they benefiting by being  confrontational? 

Themselves and other developers in the future.

And any business who relies on predictability of regulations and the rule of law.

Besides these groups, nobody really.