Jump to content

Engineer Proposes I-45 Tunnel


Recommended Posts

Trust me, TxDOT went into the meeting with idea of using the Hardy Toll Road. You didn't scare them one bit. They have to have multiple alternatives for their MIS and EIS reports to the Feds.

They like to go with their prefered plan the furthest until resistance occured. The mere mention of this meeting would show them oposistion exist. They just switch options. Let's see the residents of the area north of downtown go next. They were pushing hard against the Hardy Extension. It's between the heights and the north downtown area (i'm avoiding the word NoDo at all costs). My guess is the Heights will win and the north downtown area will lose. Looks like the more well off will win over the lower income citizens.

My guess is that TxDOT will partner with HCTRA.

My next hope is that the heights and the I-45 Coalition work on getting architectural and landscaping enhancements to the project.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 203
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Trust me, TxDOT went into the meeting with idea of using the Hardy Toll Road.  You didn't scare them one bit.  They have to have multiple alternatives for their MIS and EIS reports to the Feds.

They like to go with their prefered plan the furthest until resistance occured.  The mere mention of this meeting would show them oposistion exist.  They just switch options.  Let's see the residents of the area north of downtown go next.  They were pushing hard against the Hardy Extension.  It's between the heights and the north downtown area (i'm avoiding the word NoDo at all costs).  My guess is the Heights will win and the north downtown area will lose.  Looks like the more well off will win over the lower income citizens. 

My guess is that TxDOT will partner with HCTRA.

My next hope is that the heights and the I-45 Coalition work on getting architectural and landscaping enhancements to the project.

Well, trust ME. You did not attend the meeting. If you had you would have known there was no mention of the Hardy. None.

As far as anyone scaring them, it appears they were more shamed into a re-look.

I know you love building lanes and lanes of new highways from your posts but I know at least 500+ people who don't. And your attempt at waging class war-fare is so old Republican scare tactics. A good gay Republican like yourself should know that.

B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even more of a concerned being 100-feet below.  When tunnels are bored a deep levels, the aim for a hard rock layer but not too hard to cut through.

The Channel Tunnel in Europe used a Chalk layer sandwiched between two more rockier layers to be built.  The tunnel alignment and depth varied by this chalk layer.

Unless Mr. Gonzales had the detailed geologic data though boring and soils analysis, he has no way of knowing this will work.

Another thing to note, Houston does not have an underlying rocky layer to dig through.  When you bore deep under Houston, you hit generally a sandy and silty clay layers.  These material are quickly water logged and are often used to supply water wells in the surburban areas of the county.  Any attempt to tunnel in these areas will see severe baclash from environmental groups and will need many approvals from the TCEQ and Texas Water Board.

Yes, it is possible to build a water tight tunnel, but the realities of putting this into place make it to me not worth it.  I think he just giving hope that is not needed and quite false.  I sent Mr Gonzales' proposal to two geology buddies of mine.  One who has worked on many tunnel projects such as the Big Dig in Boston.  Both has responded that there is no way the costs will be cheaper than just widening the current freeway.  The friend who worked on the Big Dig in Boston divulged one of the biggest problems with the Boston project with the deeper tunnels along I-93 was that the boring information doesn't give a complete picture of what you are tunneling through.  This caused many cost overruns.  Also, the pressures exerted on a tunnel in that situation are great and have cause many of the leaks in the Boston project.  The project went from water tight to having leaks because the outside pressure on the tunnels exceeded with what was expected beyond the typical factor of safety built into the project.

Tunneling and geolical engineering is not an exact science.  It is based a lot on existing experience and empirical data.  After two courses in engineering geology, I'm more worried about tunnels projects because of the lack of hard science we know.  Most of the data we have is emprical and can change easily throughout the proposed project.  Civil engineers rarely a jumping at the prospect of going into geolocical engineering arm of of Civil Engineering because there is a lot of risk.  It's the reason I chose to go into the water resoursces (hydraulics and hydrology) side of civil engineering.

I didn't want to get into this detail of a post before.  But I guessed you forced me too.

INTERESTING reading. am i correct to assume that Mr. Gonzales is actualy Mr. Camacho? Gonzalo is my first name and some folks think I am Gonzales... not the same...

Regarding your comments...you are correct, we need some basic data to make inferences other wise we have the old GIGA, garbage in garbage out.

Regretfully I don't think there is enough information on what you call my "proposal" to make any sound engineering or technical judgements, unless you sent your friends additional data like soil borings? :rolleyes:

Lots of topics you cover... "Any attempt to tunnel in these areas will see severe baclash from environmental groups and will need many approvals from the TCEQ and Texas Water Board." Any further thoughts on this? I don't see its relevance to the I-45 corridor.

If the tunnel concept was only to give hope and not based in sound engineering judgement perhaps TxDOT would have not requested its consulutant to hire a tunnel engineer to look into it. I have to confess to you that all my engineering judgement and that of few other experts who are very familiar with tunnel technology and soil conditions in Houston support the concept of buidling tunnels under I-45.

By the way, I would be interested in learning from your Boston tunnel friends the tunnel methods used. However, for a project that was estimated to cost $2.6 Billion and end up costing over $14 billion, I think there was a lot more than missing soil information. Also, I would love to find out the portion of the $14 billion plus that went in the actual construction of the Boston tunnel.

Also, not sure if I would agree with you on your statement "Civil engineers rarely a jumping at the prospect of going into geolocical engineering arm of of Civil Engineering because there is a lot of risk." Some of the civil engineers I know who are geotechnical/soil experts may disagree with you since civil engineers, including myself, love to work with risk factors and to design around them. It is a challenge.

But just to give you a little confort, I have consulted with several experts in tunneling and some who are very familiar with Houston's geology. Their conclusion based on years of their personal experience is that tunnels are feasible in Houston. However, to address the risk analysis is necessary to do a feasibility study, thus my proposal is not to build a tunnel but to conduct a feasibility analysis that will give our public officials and TxDOT solid data for making appropriate decisions.

Bottom line. Houston has a great opportunity to do some world class engineering. If people don't support the tunnel concept then perhaps they need to think what they will support. I have done the thinking on various alternatives and all roads lead to tunnels.

The tunnel concept is first class engineering. All others is business as ususual. You tell me what Houston and Houstonians deserve? Business as usual or a first class city.

There is one element that you and others have to think about - Houston is the second most polluted city in the USA. Do you think that after living in Houston for many years the pollution may affect your health? Roadway tunnels filter the air. I have not come up with another roadway alternative that does it.

Like I often told members of the I-45 coalition, be careful on what you ask because you might get it.

If you want to learn about tunnel engineering feel free to attend the Houston Transportation and Mobility Conference. We are having some top world class tunnel experts give some presentations on their experiences. Even TxDOT from Dallas will tell us about their choice for building a 2.5 mile twin roadway tunnel.

www.transportationandmobility.com

Keep up the echange of ideas. It is healthy and necessary. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

INTERESTING reading.  am i correct to assume that Mr. Gonzales is actualy Mr. Camacho? Gonzalo is my first name and some folks think I am Gonzales... not the same...

Regarding your comments...you are correct, we need some basic data to make inferences other wise we have the old GIGA, garbage in garbage out.

Regretfully I don't think there is enough information on what you call my "proposal" to make any sound engineering or technical judgements, unless you sent your friends additional data like soil borings?  :rolleyes:

Lots of topics you cover... "Any attempt to tunnel in these areas will see severe baclash from environmental groups and will need many approvals from the TCEQ and Texas Water Board."  Any further thoughts on this? I don't see its relevance to the I-45 corridor.

If the tunnel concept was only to give hope and not based in sound engineering judgement perhaps TxDOT would have not requested its consulutant to hire a tunnel engineer to look into it.  I have to confess to you that all my engineering judgement and that of few other experts who are very familiar with tunnel technology and soil conditions in Houston support the concept of buidling tunnels under I-45.

By the way, I would be interested in learning from your Boston tunnel friends the tunnel methods used.  However, for a project that was estimated to cost $2.6 Billion and end up costing over $14 billion, I think there was a lot more than missing soil information.  Also, I would love to find out the portion of the $14 billion plus that went in the actual construction of the Boston tunnel.

Also, not sure if I would agree with you on your statement "Civil engineers rarely a jumping at the prospect of going into geolocical engineering arm of of Civil Engineering because there is a lot of risk."  Some of the civil engineers I know who are geotechnical/soil experts may disagree with you since civil engineers, including myself, love to work with risk factors and to design around them.  It is a challenge.

But just to give you a little confort, I have consulted with several experts in tunneling and some who are very familiar with Houston's geology.  Their conclusion based on years of their personal experience is that tunnels are feasible in Houston.  However, to address the risk analysis is necessary to do a feasibility study, thus my proposal is not to build a tunnel but to conduct a feasibility analysis that will give our public officials and TxDOT solid data for making appropriate decisions.

Bottom line.  Houston has a great opportunity to do some world class engineering.  If people don't support the tunnel concept then perhaps they need to think what they will support.  I have done the thinking on various alternatives and all roads lead to tunnels.

The tunnel concept is first class engineering.  All others is business as ususual.  You tell me what Houston and Houstonians deserve?  Business as usual or a first class city.

There is one element that you and others have to think about - Houston is the second most polluted city in the USA.  Do you think that after living in Houston for many years the pollution may affect your health?  Roadway tunnels filter the air.  I have not come up with another roadway alternative that does it.

Like I often told members of the I-45 coalition, be careful on what you ask because you might get it.

If you want to learn about tunnel engineering feel free to attend the Houston Transportation and Mobility Conference.  We are having some top world class tunnel experts give some presentations on their experiences.  Even TxDOT from Dallas will tell us about their choice for building a 2.5 mile twin roadway tunnel.

www.transportationandmobility.com

Keep up the echange of ideas.  It is healthy and necessary.  :D

The poster had the name incorrect. It is Camacho. The poster is many times on the wrong end of the facts. He's a very wordy [albiet miss-spelling] kind of guy but is unfamiliar with the project. He said he didn't go to the latest town hall meeting because he didn't like the flyer. Go figure. In any event, he fails to mention anything that doesen't support his ideology of "Damn the neighborhood! More freeway lanes!" For example, much of the Big Dig was cut and cover-not tunneling. He fails to mention this.

In any event, I enjoyed your post and look forward to hearing more of your thoughts on the issue.

B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was at the August 13 meeting and I think the turnout was a big factor in the decision to reevaluate.

The bottom line in this process is the quantity and influence of the elected officials who line up with the opposition. When you start getting Harris County commissioners, congressional reps, and at-large council members opposing a project, then TxDOT takes notice.

I think what we've seen with projects like the Katy Freeway is that the high level powers (such as the mayor's office) stay on the sidelines, letting TxDOT do what it wants because they know it is in the best interests of Houston. Pandering to neighborhoods may be good politics at a certain level but is not in the interests of the overall region. The mayor's office hasn't taken a large role in this project, but I think they're sympathetic or wanting to give the impression of being sympathetic.

I think the point will come a year from now where TxDOT will size up its political situation and have a go/no-go decision. The Mayor's office will probably be critical. If they stay on the sidelines that will probably be a green light for TxDOT. If they get involved in favor of the opposition, then the project has problems. These decisions are often made behind the scenes, so it won't necessarily be visible for all to see.

My view is that this could go either way right now, that is, moving forward as proposed or getting curtailed to some extent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was at the August 13 meeting and I think the turnout was a big factor in the decision to reevaluate.

...

My view is that this could go either way right now, that is, moving forward as proposed or getting curtailed to some extent.

FYI... In April 2005 Council Member Adrian Garcia held a meeting attended by: Gary Trietsch (TxDOT District Engineer), Bob Eury and Guy Hagstette (Downtown Management District), and Mike Sampson (Hines Corporation). I was there as well.

At this meeting there were several VERY important statements made by Mr. Trietsch:

1. If the tunnel concept was something that was desired by the public TxDOT can do it but TxDOT cannot do it by itself and will need help.

2. TxDOT will look at the tunnel concept and evaluated it on its own engineering merits.

3. Mayor White and METRO need to be engaged in the process.

Therefore I must bring up the fact that early in the process TxDOT was and is supportive of alternatives. The sad part is that we tend to grand-stand TxDOT instead of recognizing the fact that TxDOT is willing to work with the community. AND instead of working with TxDOT we work against TxDOT.

Agree, the Mayor's office is VERY critical to any highway development within the City limits. But instead of elected officials be proactive and engage TxDOT early in the process, it is discouraging that it takes the action of few residents to generate enough out-cry and thus get the attention of elected officials.

...TxDOT does not work in a vacuum. All work done by TxDOT is open to the public and for review and approval of our public and elected officials.

In may aspects kjb434 is correct and it is wise to read and try to understand his/her point of view. On the other hand, I don't think it is correct to blame a person for not attending a public meeting.

Reminder that it was the decision of the I-45 coalition to mainly provide the public information on TxDOT's study and not about the tunnel concept. Note that: although the I-45 coalition has sent a letter supporting the feasibility study of the tunnel concept, their support is not exclusive to the tunnel but inclusive to it and any other alternatives.

On a side note and to sign off... will attach a rendering for some of you who might not have seen it.

Gonzalo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I45ParkwayRenderin541.jpg

Top picture was taken south of North Main Street looking south to downtown along I-45.

The bottom is a rendering that was done considering that I-45 is placed in tunnels and the surface is reconstructed into a parkway (Allen Parkway style).

The rendering was done by Tom Dornbush, out talented volunteer and member of the Woodcrest Civic Club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Not to ruin a nice rendering, but METRORail down the middle of the former freeway ROW is completely useless. The rail needs to be near pedestrian centers. The rail stops in that rendering would be a quarter mile from the nearest residence, making it inconvenient and therefore, unused.

The rendering is still nice, though.

This is all water under the bridge, since the major opposition to the I-45 redo just signed off on the TxDOT proposed changes, so TxDOT will now procede with upgrade designs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Red, what if that was commuter rail instead that would run north to IAH & Woodlands?

Now, that could work, since commuter rail has a limited number of stops. In fact, commuter rail would probably not have a stop inside the loop. Maybe one at Northline mall, one at Greenspoint with a spur to IAH, then on to 1960, Louetta and FM 2920. The Woodlands could have stops at the mall and Research Forest, if they or Montgomery County pay for the extension.

Since there are no stops inside the loop, that huge space would work well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That article does not really tell us much. It says DOT will "explore a number of alternatives that will lead to a design that is less intrusive on nearby neighborhoods and will remain within the existing right of way."

It does not tell us anything about what those alternatives might be. Is it possible tunnels are one of the alternatives that will be explored?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems to me that two things happened. One seems to be H-GAC's proposal to upgrade major thoroughfares to keep neighborhood residents off the freeway. This caused concern that neighborhood streets would get very busy.

"The vote had been delayed at the council's October meeting after the I-45 Coalition asked the H-GAC to provide information regarding the use of arterial roads to lessen some of the traffic pressure along I-45."

That quote suggests that the planned upgrades to area streets is not a problem.

"TxDOT's plan for widening I-45 includes adding four "managed lanes" to the freeway between downtown and Beltway 8.

The managed lanes, which will be used as high-occupancy vehicle, toll and public transportation lanes, will expand the number of lanes to 12 along that stretch of I-45.

Residents who live in neighborhoods close to the freeway expressed concerns about the environmental impact of the widening, as well as the amount of right of way that will have to be acquired to expand the freeway.

As part of the next phase of the planning process, TxDOT has agreed to explore a number of alternatives that will lead to a design that is less intrusive on nearby neighborhoods and will remain within the existing right of way."

This quote suggests that TxDOT has agreed to fit the expansion within the existing ROW, and not take any neighborhood land. It could include deleting feeder roads, making the feeders overhang the freeway, tunnelling the freeway, or any other option that stays within the existing ROW. It sounds to me that the neighborhood coalition's main goals were to save neighborhood land and not overload area streets. It does not sound like they were opposed to expanding the freeway per se.

Hopefully, the expansion will continue TxDOT's new-found appreciation for landscaping and design, such as the Southwest Fwy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

I-45 redesign workshop set for may 6.

jim weston of the I-45 coalition.

TxDOT continues its I-45 Schematic Drawing and Environmental Phase. As part of this phase, TxDOT will be holding public meetings called "Scoping Meetings" where public comments are welcomed and encouraged. In these meetings, TxDOT will determine the public's interest and thoughts on a variety of things,“ double decking freeways, access roads, etc.

The I-45 Coalition wants to take a more proactive approach! We want to help determine what the neighborhoods want and give those results to TxDOT before the Scoping Meetings are held. This won't replace TxDOT's Scoping Meetings - but we hope it will help guide TxDOT's roadway design in a manner most sympathetic to the affected communities

more

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I-45 redesign workshop set for may 6.

jim weston of the I-45 coalition.

more

That's a new one on me: an Interstate tunnel. I think there's some out west that go through a mountain that had a hole dynamited through it. As a kid, I enjoyed going through the Baytown-LaPorte Tunnel. But that was a two-lane state highway, not a four-plus lane interstate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a new one on me: an Interstate tunnel. I think there's some out west that go through a mountain that had a hole dynamited through it. As a kid, I enjoyed going through the Baytown-LaPorte Tunnel. But that was a two-lane state highway, not a four-plus lane interstate.

My grandfather used to commute from Bacliff to Anahuac each day via that tunnel...according to him it was not very well ventilated and always left him feeling dizzy by the time he emerged. Just a random thought...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

life for the tunnel concept??

from the chronicle today:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nb/hei...ws/3865481.html

The concept of turning I-45 into a tunnel has gained momentum over the past year. Engineer Gonzalo Camacho, who initially proposed the idea, said TxDOT is taking the concept seriously as an alternative.

He said not only is the tunnel concept the only idea that adds greenspace, but it can also be completed in far less time than the preferred TxDOT plan, which is estimated to take 14 years.

"You put the highway underground and you can get it done in five years," he said.

Said Wilson, "As part of the scoping process for the preliminary engineering and design study, (TxDOT has) to look at the tunnel alternative. It looks to me like they're taking this idea seriously, not just paying it lip service."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A tunnel is so expensive as to be a complete waste of money here. With the expanded Hwy 59, once the Hardy Toll is extended downtown that is probably enough capacity going north out of downtown. Extra lanes would be nice, but the cost/benefit of expanding I-45 north in this segment is probably too high to justify. Way too many other highway needs in the area to be diverting funds to a single project of limited benefit. If any corridor could justify the cost of a tunnel it would be the West Loop reliever bypass (290/610 to 610/Fort Bend Tollway) under Memorial Park.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A tunnel is so expensive as to be a complete waste of money here. With the expanded Hwy 59, once the Hardy Toll is extended downtown that is probably enough capacity going north out of downtown. Extra lanes would be nice, but the cost/benefit of expanding I-45 north in this segment is probably too high to justify. Way too many other highway needs in the area to be diverting funds to a single project of limited benefit. If any corridor could justify the cost of a tunnel it would be the West Loop reliever bypass (290/610 to 610/Fort Bend Tollway) under Memorial Park.

An I-45 downtown bypass is sorely needed too. What are they going to do with the Pierce Elevated once the North Freeway is expanded? Nothing, as far as I know. The tunnel is worth the price though, given TxDoT green-lights construction. An extended timetable plus ROW acquisition can bring nasty cost overruns, to where it costs just as much yet looks infinitely uglier. Look at how much the Katy Freeway budget has gone over.

They are doing a 290 expansion though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No objections if they go the tunnel route, but the Pierce Elevated is what I REALLY would like to see put underground, to open up the bayou into downtown.

Same here. And it would also allow for some expansion to the route, which is not really possible with the current elevated structure because of all the buildings that are right up against it.

North of downtown, I'm really in favor of a major expansion. We don't need another 24 lane Katy monster. One is going to be bad enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


All of the HAIF
None of the ads!
HAIF+
Just
$5!


×
×
  • Create New...