Jump to content
HAIF - Houston's original social media

East River: KBR Site Puchased by Midway


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Mr.Clean19 said:

That is going to be a problem with any pool. 

 

The problem increases with bayou proximity. I have a friend living near the Brazos River in Richmond, where there are very high bluffs. Lots of snakes and yes gators streaming through the neighborhood.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Phase I is underway, here's our first look:       More renderings can be found in the brochure below:   https://images1.loopnet.com/d2/2hO8ds_6cesMWwAvCHKLz8FOD

One of the buildings at KBR that faces downtown. Really visible from afar.   

Finally an update (from HBJ):   A spokeswoman for Midway said in an email that the company is in discussions with the city of Houston about how the project will be delivered over the next se

Posted Images

38 minutes ago, nate4l1f3 said:

Serious question because I don’t know, but if there are occasional gators in the bayous what’s stopping them from attacking a kayak or canoe?  Have there been incidents of this in Houston? 

Stranger things have happened. Some of us remember when Jimmy Carter was attacked by a giant rabbit.
 

rabbit.PNG

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, nate4l1f3 said:

Serious question because I don’t know, but if there are occasional gators in the bayous what’s stopping them from attacking a kayak or canoe?  Have there been incidents of this in Houston? 

I've been attacked by a snake on the Guadalupe. I mean, it happens. But it's rare for gators to do it though... usually they steer clear in my experience. But if not, I guess at least you have a paddle?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/6/2019 at 9:35 AM, cspwal said:

QKRjpKu.jpg&key=48f304b915b13fe676b08e21

 

Looking at this image, it doesn't look like they are expecting any transit at all - anyone not already at this site will arrive by car.  It's set back from the main road by probably 1/4 mile, so everywhere well inside it will be 1/2 mi from a bus stop at Jensen and the entrance road.  I doubt they will have buses inside it, and of course this is on the other side of the bayou from the Green line, so light rail is out of the question. 

 

Having at least a pedestrian bridge cross the bayou might help the idea that you can walk to this place

Really? It is only 1100 feet TOTAL from Jenson on the West to Meadow St on the East. Everywhere on this whole site plan you posted is less than 1/4 mile from anywhere else. This phase is only about 1/5 of a mile by 1/5 of a mile total.

Edited by JJxvi
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

^^ I think that that area is cut just to keep the powerline easement clear and accessible.  I have not seen any concrete plans yet for any bridges of any kind over the bayou.  There do appear to be some on the MIDWAY conceptual plans, but I do not think that these are firmly confirmed or would even be build by Midway.  They would more likely be build by BBP. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Naviguessor said:

^^ I think that that area is cut just to keep the powerline easement clear and accessible.  I have not seen any concrete plans yet for any bridges of any kind over the bayou.  There do appear to be some on the MIDWAY conceptual plans, but I do not think that these are firmly confirmed or would even be build by Midway.  They would more likely be build by BBP. 

Well last I read the Greenways Project in conjunction with this development had the new bridges approved for construction.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a presentation at the East End District a couple weeks back where it was explained access for Jensen, Meadow and Gregg are all being removed/relocated back west of McKee, and that TXDOT has been using misdirection in wording when talking to the neighborhoods about keeping access. Apparently it seriously screws up access to Ninfas / Navigation and those businesses. 

 

We're in the Near Northside area and found out at a similar public meeting because of the expected huge increase in traffic. A representative with Greater Houston said they had been caught by surprise, but that it was on the list of grievances to address with TXDOT. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, HOUTEX said:

There was a presentation at the East End District a couple weeks back where it was explained access for Jensen, Meadow and Gregg are all being removed/relocated back west of McKee, and that TXDOT has been using misdirection in wording when talking to the neighborhoods about keeping access. Apparently it seriously screws up access to Ninfas / Navigation and those businesses. 

 

We're in the Near Northside area and found out at a similar public meeting because of the expected huge increase in traffic. A representative with Greater Houston said they had been caught by surprise, but that it was on the list of grievances to address with TXDOT. 

Wow screw TXDOT

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, HOUTEX said:

There was a presentation at the East End District a couple weeks back where it was explained access for Jensen, Meadow and Gregg are all being removed/relocated back west of McKee, and that TXDOT has been using misdirection in wording when talking to the neighborhoods about keeping access. Apparently it seriously screws up access to Ninfas / Navigation and those businesses. 

 

We're in the Near Northside area and found out at a similar public meeting because of the expected huge increase in traffic. A representative with Greater Houston said they had been caught by surprise, but that it was on the list of grievances to address with TXDOT. 

Wow screw TXDOT

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, nate4l1f3 said:

Serious question because I don’t know, but if there are occasional gators in the bayous what’s stopping them from attacking a kayak or canoe?  Have there been incidents of this in Houston? 

 

I’ve kayaked in waters with a much higher consentration of gators than Buffalo Bayou and as long as you leave them alone and don’t get to close to a nest you’ll be fine. 

 

This part of Texas has a gator population of over half a million and they can be found in all bodies of water around Houston including Conore and Livingston. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, HOUTEX said:

There was a presentation at the East End District a couple weeks back where it was explained access for Jensen, Meadow and Gregg are all being removed/relocated back west of McKee, and that TXDOT has been using misdirection in wording when talking to the neighborhoods about keeping access. Apparently it seriously screws up access to Ninfas / Navigation and those businesses. 

 

We're in the Near Northside area and found out at a similar public meeting because of the expected huge increase in traffic. A representative with Greater Houston said they had been caught by surprise, but that it was on the list of grievances to address with TXDOT. 

 

K75JoIq.jpg

 

I don't know. That looks like access to Jensen to me (circled in red). That took me what? maybe 5mins? Its ok to not like TxDOT. I don't really care for them much either, but this idea about TxDOT scheming in a backroom somewhere smoking cigars and talking about how they are enjoying eliminating access to the highway is a bit dull. I could easily insert "TxDOT" with "The Government" or "Society", and it would sound like every other conspiracy I've ever heard. 

 

Its hilarious how the same people who want TxDOT to build rail or bury highways all the sudden flip out when they don't get immediate access to the highway that they claim they hate so much. You can't have it both ways. Some sacrifices will have to be meet and some compromises will have to be reached.

 

They also can't just be sticking it to poor ole 5th Ward or poor ole Near Northside, because they are also limiting access over on the 59 side. I'm sure the rich folk in the Museum District, Boulevard Oaks, and Montrose/Midtown or rejoicing as I type.

 

Making something more efficient and better requires trimming the fat a bit. That means some access will be taken away so that the highway functions better overall....thats literally the definition of efficiency. Considering access to a highway isn't a fundamental right, its safe to say then the focus should be on the maximization of efficiency instead of the maximization of autonomy.

 

Oh, and considering how deeply rooted Greater Houston is embedded in many actions that happen in Houston, I'm willing to also go as far as to say that "Greater Houston" rep wasn't at all "surprised". If that person was then they suck at their job, or thought he/she would get mobbed if he/she said otherwise.

 

I hate the fact that I actually have to defend TxDOT, but this monkey business has to stop.

 

EDIT: @j_cuevas713 come on man. you are a good contributor, and I enjoy reading your comments. Any other day I would stand with you to give TxDOT the middle finger, but its gotta make sense. Do better.

 

EDIT 2: Just for kicks I thought I'd look into Gregg St Area. Found something interesting here too

 

68WfOak.jpg

 

Its funny because Waco St which leads into Hirsch Rd. which leads into N. York St. (we really should fix that huh) goes directly to Navigation Blvd. meaning its a way better access point than having anything from Gregg St. I think Ninfa's will be ok. East End will be just fine. You WANT access from Gregg St, but it seems you are getting exactly the access you NEED.

Edited by Luminare
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, HOUTEX said:

There was a presentation at the East End District a couple weeks back where it was explained access for Jensen, Meadow and Gregg are all being removed/relocated back west of McKee, and that TXDOT has been using misdirection in wording when talking to the neighborhoods about keeping access. Apparently it seriously screws up access to Ninfas / Navigation and those businesses. 

 

We're in the Near Northside area and found out at a similar public meeting because of the expected huge increase in traffic. A representative with Greater Houston said they had been caught by surprise, but that it was on the list of grievances to address with TXDOT. 

 

yup, if you want Jensen you have to exit back at McKee. Not a huge deal, it adds 2 extra signaled intersections.

 

The problem is, if you want to get from 45SB to the McKee exit so you can make it to Jensen street you have to cross 4 lanes of traffic in exceedingly short order. less than 1/4 mile?

 

you will still be able to exit from i-10 (either way) into downtown and turn left of Franklin to get you to Navigation, but again, not as ideal as it is now.

 

Once this development is up and running access from a freeway (any freeway) is going to be poor.

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, samagon said:

 

yup, if you want Jensen you have to exit back at McKee. Not a huge deal, it adds 2 extra signaled intersections.

 

The problem is, if you want to get from 45SB to the McKee exit so you can make it to Jensen street you have to cross 4 lanes of traffic in exceedingly short order. less than 1/4 mile?

 

you will still be able to exit from i-10 (either way) into downtown and turn left of Franklin to get you to Navigation, but again, not as ideal as it is now.

 

Once this development is up and running access from a freeway (any freeway) is going to be poor.

 

I actually agree that there should probably be a more straightforward off ramp to Jensen. I'm wondering if they are having problems with clearing the railroad underneath making an approach entrance too steep to be worth it. Currently the railroad would actually go over the highway?

 

My contention is that the way they are currently positioning the current configuration is probably due to logistics rather than some harebrained scheme to screw the locals. This is an incredibly complex project with a lot of moving pieces. The odds of the quirks in this design arising from incompetence or logistical issues is higher than what could be attributed to malice.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Luminare said:

 

I actually agree that there should probably be a more straightforward off ramp to Jensen. I'm wondering if they are having problems with clearing the railroad underneath making an approach entrance too steep to be worth it. Currently the railroad would actually go over the highway?

 

My contention is that the way they are currently positioning the current configuration is probably due to logistics rather than some harebrained scheme to screw the locals. This is an incredibly complex project with a lot of moving pieces. The odds of the quirks in this design arising from incompetence or logistical issues is higher than what could be attributed to malice.

 

I absolutely agree, I do not believe that any of the choices they have made were made out of malice. 

 

That doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.

 

"your intentions were in the right place, so all is forgiven, please proceed with knocking development of these neighborhoods back a few decades in relation to other areas of the city." 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a conspiracy theory at all. There's an exit today at both McKee, and at Jensen. TXDOT is eliminating the latter and parsing words such that people will think the exit is only being moved to make it easier on themselves - no malice required. Two access points going to one. Seems pretty black and white.

 

If you care to attack me or poke fun for simply passing along what we heard that's fine, but fact is a that will create more traffic issues getting into Near Northside and makes access to the Fifth Ward and East End more difficult.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Luminare said:

Its funny because Waco St which leads into Hirsch Rd. which leads into N. York St. (we really should fix that huh) goes directly to Navigation Blvd. meaning its a way better access point than having anything from Gregg St. I think Ninfa's will be ok. East End will be just fine. You WANT access from Gregg St, but it seems you are getting exactly the access you NEED.

 

And just to add, Hirsch runs right by the eastern edge of the East River property (albeit the last stage to be developed), so this will probably be the preferred route for interstate traffic to reach the development.

 

(which is great news for me, as I’ll be walking or biking there from the other direction and won’t have as much vehicular traffic to deal with 👍🏻)

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Angostura said:

 

Don't need 'em.

 

I'd rather we get buildings that look good from the sidewalk, rather than from a helicopter, freeway or rendering. You can actually get tons of density at mid-rise heights as long as you don't surround the buildings with surface parking or green space that no one ever sets foot in. They've also managed to keep the internal rights-of-way reasonably narrow.

 

Cities like Paris and Barcelona achieve really high densities with essentially nothing over 8 stories.

See Washington, DC

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, HOUTEX said:

Not a conspiracy theory at all. There's an exit today at both McKee, and at Jensen. TXDOT is eliminating the latter and parsing words such that people will think the exit is only being moved to make it easier on themselves - no malice required. Two access points going to one. Seems pretty black and white.

 

If you care to attack me or poke fun for simply passing along what we heard that's fine, but fact is a that will create more traffic issues getting into Near Northside and makes access to the Fifth Ward and East End more difficult.

 

No, they are not eliminating the exit to Jensen. Merely relocating it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The concern is mostly that the relocated exit now has two additional road crossings (Hardy & McKee) and at least 1 at grade railroad crossing (UPRR). I've seen plots that indicate that the BNSF RR (West belt), which is an extremely busy rail line, will have some type of underpass, but other plots do not indicate this, so it is unclear if this underpass will happen or not.

 

If it was merely exiting a mile further up and a smooth ride down a disruption free access road (Rothwell St), then it wouldn't be a big deal, but as it stands it looks like it'll be two road intersections (currently a poorly managed intersection btw), and potentially up to two on-grade rail crossings. The latter, especially, is a deal breaker and really hinders accessibility to the neighborhood, not to mention that it can be an emergency hazard, and wasn't TXDOT trying to get away from rail crossings at service roads anyway?

 

The only way I can see this being sensible is the service rds having the right of way at Hardy / McKee and not having on-grade rail crossings. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, LS27 said:

The concern is mostly that the relocated exit now has two additional road crossings (Hardy & McKee) and at least 1 at grade railroad crossing (UPRR). I've seen plots that indicate that the BNSF RR (West belt), which is an extremely busy rail line, will have some type of underpass, but other plots do not indicate this, so it is unclear if this underpass will happen or not.

 

If it was merely exiting a mile further up and a smooth ride down a disruption free access road (Rothwell St), then it wouldn't be a big deal, but as it stands it looks like it'll be two road intersections (currently a poorly managed intersection btw), and potentially up to two on-grade rail crossings. The latter, especially, is a deal breaker and really hinders accessibility to the neighborhood, not to mention that it can be an emergency hazard, and wasn't TXDOT trying to get away from rail crossings at service roads anyway?

 

The only way I can see this being sensible is the service rds having the right of way at Hardy / McKee and not having on-grade rail crossings. 

 

Traffic going to Jensen can survive a couple of traffic signals.

 

The plan shows the access road going underneath railroad bridges for both railroad crossings.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

 

Traffic going to Jensen can survive a couple of traffic signals.

 

The plan shows the access road going underneath railroad bridges for both railroad crossings.

 

Traffic today can probably handle it.  But traffic in any scenario where Hardy Yards , East River or Frank Liu's MDI Site have been developed and those thousands of additional drivers are getting off I-10 and you're gonna have backups for days at McKee & Hardy. Plus Nance is being closed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, HOUTEX said:

 

Traffic today can probably handle it.  But traffic in any scenario where Hardy Yards , East River or Frank Liu's MDI Site have been developed and those thousands of additional drivers are getting off I-10 and you're gonna have backups for days at McKee & Hardy. Plus Nance is being closed.

 

Have you done millions of dollars worth of traffic studies and committed hours upon hours of time dedicated to traffic analysis over the next 10-20 years?

Edited by Luminare
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, HOUTEX said:

 

Traffic today can probably handle it.  But traffic in any scenario where Hardy Yards , East River or Frank Liu's MDI Site have been developed and those thousands of additional drivers are getting off I-10 and you're gonna have backups for days at McKee & Hardy. Plus Nance is being closed.

 

I cannot imagine why any significant amount of Eastbound I-10 and Southbound I-45 traffic to the MDI site would use the Jensen exit, even with the current arrangement; that traffic will most likely go to Hirsch Rd.

 

Similarly, much of the traffic bound for East River will use the Hirsch exit, especially if there is any amount of congestion using the Jensen exit.

 

Traffic bound for Hardy Yards will almost certainly exit the access road before it reaches McKee, or, presumably there will be a U-turn lane at McKee,and Hardy Yards traffic will take that - either way, Hardy Yards traffic won't be creating a great deal of congestion at Mckee and none at Hardy.

Edited by Houston19514
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Houston19514 said:

 

Similarly, much of the traffic bound for East River will use the Hirsch exit, especially if there is any amount of congestion using the Jensen exit.

  

 

Jensen exit as of today literally spits you out onto where East River is. I don't know if you're specifically talking about with regards to future plans or if you're talking about today if East River were open. You can rationalize it however you want, it's not a benefit to the area even if it's not a huge detriment. 

 

You are going to bat for TXDot alot in a thread that's supposed to be about the construction of a game changer for the City.  

 

Luckily txdot hasn't seemed to scare away developers from the area and I can't wait to see what this area looks like despite having to work around this. 

Edited by I'm Not a Robot
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Houston19514 said:

 

Get over it.  There will be easy access to Jensen, the East Side, EADO, East River and Ninfa's.

 

how is cutting across 4 lanes of traffic (assuming is going from 45SB to 10EB to Jensen) 'easy access'?

 

there's going to be accidents caused by people doing exactly this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Luminare said:

 

Have you done millions of dollars worth of traffic studies and committed hours upon hours of time dedicated to traffic analysis over the next 10-20 years?

 

I sincerely doubt traffic simulations have figured any of that will ever be anything other than industrial. The best data they have would only show current daily car counts or old census data and some growth rate. Midway's plans were only just released and it looks like a lot of new office space and shops along or near by Jensen. For that reason I'd be there will be zero people that use Hirsch to get there if not forced to - plus they frequently park trains on Hirsch for long periods of time. It's not a good route south of I-10. 

Edited by HOUTEX
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/12/2019 at 11:42 AM, Angostura said:

 

Don't need 'em.

 

I'd rather we get buildings that look good from the sidewalk, rather than from a helicopter, freeway or rendering. You can actually get tons of density at mid-rise heights as long as you don't surround the buildings with surface parking or green space that no one ever sets foot in. They've also managed to keep the internal rights-of-way reasonably narrow.

 

Cities like Paris and Barcelona achieve really high densities with essentially nothing over 8 stories.

 

On 3/12/2019 at 1:30 PM, Sky-guy said:

See Washington, DC

 

Houston has lax zoning, anyway, so the sky rises would go up as long as the market demands it.

Edited by AnTonY
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Another way to look at this regarding Skyscrapers is that this project is moving from west to east. They done want to block potential view by building tall buildings first. I have a feeling that Midway has a good strategy in place to maximize the downtown view and waterfront.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Naviguessor said:

Houston doesn’t have lax zoning. 

Houston doesn’t have zoning. 

"Lax" because it still has some regulations on development that would typically be packaged in a zoning ordinance. And some of these regulations actually limit the urban growth of the city.

Edited by AnTonY
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Angostura said:

I would trade a 6- or 8-story height cap outside the CBD for zero parking minimums citywide.

 

You need to stop saying completely reasonable things that I actually agree with, it’s making me feel conflicted because I’m used to disagreeing with you. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd certainly make the trade if that were the only choice. Otherwise, I'd rather not have an arbitrary height-cap as well. Let the city grow and breathe east without any cookie-cutter regulations to increase COL.

Edited by AnTonY
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Angostura said:

 

I would trade a 6- or 8-story height cap outside the CBD for zero parking minimums citywide.

 

There's a story about Jesse Jones visiting Paris and being impressed, and wanting Houston to be built out with 10 story or shorter buildings. Then the Esperson buildings went up and he essentially decided, "If you can't beat them, beat them," so then he built the taller Gulf Building.

 

Point being that building tall is more or less in Houston's DNA, as are multiply skylines. I think that this is our one big advantage over Washington D.C., a city with a higher value economy than ours - we look like a real, organic city, while they look contrived and sterile. If you look at the illustrations of European cities circa 1600 in Braun & Hogenberg's Civitates Orbis Terrarum, Houston actually resembles these cities much more closely than does D.C. or many European cities today. All have a kind of three-dimensionality, a sense of taking off and building as upward and outward as possible, albeit limited by the constraint of walls.

 

I am with you 100% on abolishing parking minimums, and I very much want to see pedestrian life take off in Houston, and life without a car to be possible. But even if this happens, it's going to look very different in Houston from our more by-the-book urban cities.

 

Edited by H-Town Man
  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, H-Town Man said:

I am with you 100% on abolishing parking minimums, and I very much want to see pedestrian life take off in Houston, and life without a car to be possible. But even if this happens, it's going to look very different in Houston from our more by-the-book urban cities.

 


If you are referring to car-centricness, then that will depend very much on how much the people here truly love their cars. Do people here truly like their vehicles and having to use them to go anywhere? Or do they only want them in efforts to compensate for the environment (i.e. need for amenities, peer pressure, etc)?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, AnTonY said:


If you are referring to car-centricness, then that will depend very much on how much the people here truly love their cars. Do people here truly like their vehicles and having to use them to go anywhere? Or do they only want them in efforts to compensate for the environment (i.e. need for amenities, peer pressure, etc)?

I think many people love their cars.It gives them a sense of freedom and control. I for one took the metro as often as I could when working at TMC. Nevertheless The Houston MSA( as is DFW) is very large in area, nearly the size of Massachusetts, growing, very rapidly, and inexpensive for middle class families, unlike Boston or SF.  We are going to be a automobile oriented city for a very long time.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Highrise Tower changed the title to East River: KBR Site Puchased by Midway

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...



×
×
  • Create New...