I-45 North Freeway

[The Great Hizzy!]

What design elements would you like to see with regard to the reconstruction of I-45 from the North Sam to DT?

Mine:

1.) A trenched section from West Little York to the North Loop. The overpasses would have the name of the street lit up and each overpass would have its own distinctive design, from something Art Deco to something avant garde.

2.) On/Exit ramps with design elements similar to those along the trenched section of US 59 (read: the Shepherd exit)

3.) A mix of palms and pines lining the outer walls of the freeway

4.) Uniquely "Houston" miles-to and exit signs rather than the generic green sheet with white lettering.

5) Maybe a fountain-type display at the North Loop interchange.

$$$ no option! Splurge! It's your design...

[The Great Hizzy!]

Well, here is where the irony of building a massive, sprawling superhighway like the Katy would actually ADD to the quality of life in the area... by needing to acquire land via eminent domain, which would result in several structures (including some unsightly ones) and billboards being knocked down. In fact, the future expansion plans for I-45--though a long way off--suggest that TxDOT will need to follow similar steps as the ones they took for the Katy expansion.

[Kirzania]

Oh, no ceiling, eh?

Well, that's simple: a lightrail. Elevated and a straight shot to downtown in five minutes. Maybe it would prove to someone that mass transportation (see: Spain) works.

I really like that idea for "Uniquely "Houston" miles-to and exit signs." Maybe Texas-shaped? Too bad the DoT would probably start tearing their hair out for Houston wanting "its own signs." :shudders: Can you imagine every city having their own shapes and fonts for their signs?

Maybe a fountain-type display at the North Loop interchange.

Yes, yes. Something to look at whilst you sit in traffic.

[kjb434]

Most probably the freeway will be similar to the Katy. The right of way accquisistion won't be as bad as the Katy. The worst parts are from just north of Airline to just north of I-10.

I'm hopeful for an 8 lane configuration with a four lane HOT lane replacing the HOV system. The reconstruction on this project would also only be from the Beltway to I-10. The sections north the Beltway are extremely nice and move traffic quite well.

Light rail is not part of TxDOT so that request for it doesn't even make since. The money doesn't even come from the same approving authorities at the Federal and State level.

I think the portion from I-610 to I-10 has a real possibility to be similar to US-59 from Shepherd to Montrose.

[RedScare]

I'd like to see it below grade as well, with planters in the walls. If they need extra ROW, I'd like to see it go under the feeder roads/exit ramps. The feeders would cantilever over the freeway.

I'm not as big on rail running down freeways, as it is too far from the homes and businesses, though beside it may be fine.

Being an interstate, the signs stay as they are. But, palm trees rock, so running them down the feeders would be cool.

[The Great Hizzy!]

I agree, Red. I've never really cared for that either. Chicago has them and they look odd and even daunting to the pedestrian. Granted, there are pedestrian bridges but still.

New Orleans and Miami are two of the few cities that I've seen use landscaping in the median walls. There are bougainvilleas inside the median walls in Miami. Don't know what the shrubbery and flowers in New Orleans (I-10 east of the 610 interchange) are.

[texas911]

You guys are crazy if you think billboards are what makes Houston unsightly. Billboards are the least of our worries. Ugly architecture, quick buck developers.

Case in point, the new China town on Bellaire would be a great place except there isn't a unifying plan and every single new development looks like a minature Walmart. Giant parking lot off Bellaire with the actual retail building way way back. For sure I thought that they would build differently.

[Kirzania]

You guys are crazy if you think billboards are what makes Houston unsightly. Billboards are the least of our worries.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm pretty sure we're talking about highway exit signs, not billboards. It's just wishing; interstate highway signs are government designated, not state. I hardly notice the billboards here; Georgia is FAR worse. I don't understand why they don't implement some kind of limitation on how many billboards in so many miles.

[UrbaNerd]

I would have a nice trench section built, BUT, the freeway would still have to have those awesome views as it approaches downtown.

-Clear the R.O.W. nicely

-Place the part just N of DT into a trench (perhaps the part N of 610), and give it a nice design- nothing too similar to 59 or the Central Expressway.

-Lots of landscaping

-Some sort of distinct corridor style/markers.

[skwatra]

I remember reading/hearing about how, during the Super Bowl, drivers were encouraged to take out-of-town guests down the Hardy Toll Road or even the Eastex Freeway.  Why?  Because the North Freeway can be depressingly ugly.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

i actually prefer 59 over 45 to IAH because of the lack of traffic, and its about the same distance.

[kjb434]

They coud have restrictions like the Grand Parkway and the Beltway. The Beltway can't have billboards along its route.

Placing a restriction on I-45 would prevent any new ones and we could hope right-of-way accquisition would take many down.

As for rail in the center, I've seen several cities with this. I've used one facility like this in the suburbs in Washingtion DC out near fairfax. The station was essentially a large parking lot with a building over the freeway and rail. This avoided the scary pedestrian bridge to some.

In the end the facility is a park and ride lot with a rail instead of a HOV or HOV lane and a bus. The HOT and HOV land is just a lot cheaper and just as effective.

[RedScare]

Houston has had a billboard ordinance since 1983. No new ones can go up in the city. They do allow replacing existing ones blown down in storms, though.

Now, the city is trying to use its ETJ to help the county control them outside city limits. Big fight gearing up. Plus, every session of the legislature brings a new proposal to limit billboards statewide. Billboard lobby is rather well funded, what with Gannett and Clear Channel, so it has a tough row to hoe.

[HeightsGuy]

You will never be able to make Houston freeways pretty as long as we continue to build feeder roads, plain and simple. Case in point is the stretch of 59 east of Shepherd. It's nice because there are no feeder roads in that stretch, that's all. The nice homes on either side don't make it that way. If there was a feeder road in the original design, those homes would have been long ago replaced by feeder road development. The fact that there aren't feeder roads there gives you a template to allow for a nicely designed segment to shine compared to the rest of the freeways here.

I45 will always have feeder roads, hence it will always be unsightly. 59 north currently looks better only because the expansion wiped out years of ugly feeder road development. Give the area another 5-10 years, it will catch up with I45 again in terms of ugliness. The Katy Freeway's feeder road development only look slightly better because there is more money in the subdivisions behind the freeway that can support higher rents in the buildings that line the feeders.

[kjb434]

I love the feeder roads along the freeway.

The allow a place for commercial development and form buffers for residential.

Soundwalls are nice, but they don't always get rid of all the noises.

Also, on most freeways the feeder roads and the commerical development make it a little easier to widen the freeway in the future or add say rail along side. It's much easier to convince a business to move than residential.

Feeders if used properly as the new Katy Freeway and newer parts of other freeways can help a lot in easing traffic. Spidering the ramps allow for exiting traffic to pile up on the feeder road and not the freeway. A good freeway where spider needs to occure and probably will when it gets rebuilt will US 290. The exit outbound to Hollister-Tidwell allway backs up. If you could exit to the feeder road right before the Pinemont bridge and the entering traffic could enter right before Hollister, you would see a reduction of vehicles weighting to get off.

[HeightsGuy]

I won't argue against feeder roads as effective traffic movers. The only point I am making is that feeder roads are the #1 reason we have ugly freeways in Houston, far far ahead of #2 billboards. And any effort to make I45 north a prettier freeway will only be token as long as it's a 20 mile long strip center.

[RedScare]

In the sense that strip centers can be very unappealing, they may outrank billboards because of their size. Billboards are less of a problem, since they cannot add more. But strip centers will never look as attractive as driving through a treed, residential area.

But, that is Houston's choice...retail over trees...so, the only way to salvage some attractiveness out of this is to create (or improve) ordinances calling for trees and landscaping for new development. A bit of a relaxation in the city parking codes would help as well.

Landscaping highways in Houston has gained traction over the past fews years. That needs to be increased as well.

[The Great Hizzy!]

Interestingly, the South Freeway (SH 288) has feeders yet is dominated by classic early 20th century homes in Third Ward, Riverside Terrace and so forth. The Eastex has feeders yet also has more residential than retail (granted, both the residential and the retail are lower income but still).

New Orleans doesn't really have feeders but other than the stretch of I-10 heading east to Slidell from the I-10/I-610 interchange, its freeways are pretty unattractive, too, even without the strip centers.

I think at the end of the day it's a collaboration of things. Trenched freeways seem to do a better job of mitigating the effects of an overabundance of strip centers or even low end and decayed housing. Landscaping and design asthetics help, too. Elimination of billboards and overbearing retail signage helps even more.

One of the prettiest stretches of freeway in all of Texas, IMO, is the West Loop south stretch from Westpark to Braewswood. No strip centers other than the Meyerland complexes, but there feeders on either side. Solid design asthetics, good landscaping and so forth. Viewing the Uptown skyling while heading north is pretty kick ass, too.

I don't think it's unreasonable to see this design as a good model for 290 or the Gulf Freeway. In the case of the North Freeway, however, I think trenching a section of the freeway north of the Loop would have serious longterm "beautification" effects.

[HeightsGuy]

Well, like I said, The State eminent domain'ed a 100ft strip of development on the Eastex from the loop to beltway 8 when it was rebuilt, and both the Eastex and South freeway were road's to nowhere 20 years ago. Give them both time, they will fill in with an assortment of low-end strip centers.

Am I the only one that thinks feeder roads are eyesores waiting to happen? If so, how else do you explain 45 north's current condition?

[westguy]

The eyesores will happen regardless of the feeders. There will be Wal-Mart, Home Depot, Lowe's, car dealership, rinse, repeat, except along congested thoroughfare maintained by the city.

[HeightsGuy]

Exactly my point, they'd on a congested street that visitors to the city would normally not be on. Look, there isn't a city in the US that doesn't have a problem with poorly designed, ugly strip centers. Other cities just do a much better job at where they are placed.

[GovernorAggie]

What design elements would you like to see with regard to the reconstruction of I-45 from the North Sam to DT?

Mine:

1.) A trenched section from West Little York to the North Loop. The overpasses would have the name of the street lit up and each overpass would have its own distinctive design, from something Art Deco to something avant garde.

2.) On/Exit ramps with design elements similar to those along the trenched section of US 59 (read: the Shepherd exit)

3.) A mix of palms and pines lining the outer walls of the freeway

4.) Uniquely "Houston" miles-to and exit signs rather than the generic green sheet with white lettering.

5) Maybe a fountain-type display at the North Loop interchange.

$$$ no option! Splurge! It's your design...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think you pretty much have it covered as far as the designs go. In my opinion, the best looking urban freeway in Texas may be 410 in north San Antonio from 10 to 281. I like that the designs on the wall evoke archways, along with the bridge supports--and they don't spare the amount of color in that section.

Along those lines, I saw a painting of the Alamo inside the Texas cut-outs on the sides of the freeway, but I know that's not unique. Houston has tons of those, including painting of the Texas flag, the American flag/bald eagle, and even some Super Bowl XXXVIII paintings.

[HeightsGuy]

Further reading on the proposal can be found here:

Draft IH 45 North Hardy Corridor Study

[CDeb]

Not that I'm against the idea, but wouldn't trenching the North Freeway between downtown and the Loop make draining problematic given the proximity of Little White Oak Bayou?

Your thoughts, kjb?

[MaxConcrete]

Not that I'm against the idea, but wouldn't trenching the North Freeway between downtown and the Loop make draining problematic given the proximity of Little White Oak Bayou?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

My thoughts exactly. Little White Oak Bayou runs parallel and immediately adjacent to the freeway from just north of Main to the Loop. At the very minimum the freeway will need to stay at grade for the the bayou crossing. I suppose pump stations could allow other sections to be depressed, but if the objective is to reduce the probability of flooding, then I think trenching will be viewed unfavorably by a technical review.

[kjb434]

I'm thinking they will only keep the portions that are currently trenched. Once they are north of Little White Oak the neighborhood opposition dwindles and TxDOT is a little freer to widen in the area.

Also, SH 288 does trench itself north and south of Brays Bayou and just comes up to pass over the bayou.

I'm think TxDOT will get rid of current embankments and build vertical walls and go in a method similar to Central Expressway as in Dallas.

[Perimeter285]

I think those of us that aren't from Texas originally think that feeder roads are totally expendable. They make the freeway hideous by providing for businesses to line it without any sort of wooded buffer. And as for helping to move traffic, all that money spent on feeders could go towards extra mainlanes, which would be basically as effective. But asking native Texans to give up feeder roads is tantamount to disrespecting the Alamo.

Another Houston freeway phenomenon that has to go: high mast lighting! I hate them hate them hate them!

My dream I-45 would be trenched with tons of landscaping and no feeder roads or high mast lighting. Once we cover those, then I'll get to the details.

[kjb434]

Without the feeder roads to serve as storage for exiting vehicles, they would back up onto the mainlanes causing more traffic problems. The more recently rebuilt freeway use the feeder roads to set the exit further away from the road they are exiting to. This allows the exiting traffic to pile up on the feeder road. Older freeways such as US 290 (inside the beltway) is an example of what a freeway exit that goes directly to the road they are exiting and not set further away. Traffic regularly backs up on to the mainlanes causing slow downs.

The feeder roads add capacity to the freeway in a different way than just adding mainlanes. Also, the commercial development along the feeder road provides a buffer from freeway noise to the residential neighborhoods.

[HeightsGuy]

C'mon KJB, are you really telling us that a 6 lane freeway with a 4 lane feeder can move as many cars as a 10 lane freeway with no feeders?

[CDeb]

C'mon KJB, are you really telling us that a 6 lane freeway with a 4 lane feeder can move as many cars as a 10 lane freeway with no feeders?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No, what he is saying is that feeder roads are needed to make the general purpose lanes more efficient and safe. Having exiting vehicles backing up onto the general purpose lanes is a incredibly dangerous condition.

[RedScare]

kjb, that is not entirely correct. Certainly, the plan is to get local traffic off the mainlanes and onto the feeders. And the feeders allow for exit placement farther from the intended cross street. However, studies are showing that feeders with businesses on them attract more traffic, thereby increasing congestion. Of course, so does adding mainlanes attract more traffic, as well.