Houston Planning on Walkable Places

[cspwal]

There's parking minimums in east downtown?

[wilcal]

15 minutes ago, cspwal said:

There's parking minimums in east downtown?

 

For now. They are trying to extend the no parking minimum district from downtown into east downtown and further south into Midtown, but it  hasn't happened yet. 

[Houston19514]

1 hour ago, wilcal said:

 

For now. They are trying to extend the no parking minimum district from downtown into east downtown and further south into Midtown, but it  hasn't happened yet. 

 

There are no parking minimums in the portion of EADO south of Texas Ave and west of Emancipation Ave. Under the city parking ordinance, that is defined as part of the Central Business District.

[wilcal]

37 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

 

There are no parking minimums in the portion of EADO south of Texas Ave and west of Emancipation Ave. Under the city parking ordinance, that is defined as part of the Central Business District.

 

That is totally right. I forgot that it does stick several blocks into East Downtown!

[lithiumaneurysm]

On 5/1/2019 at 10:15 AM, Texasota said:

Check it: http://www.houstontx.gov/planning/Commissions/docs_pdfs/walkable_places/Walkable Places _May 1st 2019 Draft.pdf

 

This looks genuinely impressive.

 

These are great improvements over the current code, especially mandatory compliance near transit stops and more stringent site planning standards. However, if I'm reading slide 21 correctly, development in Walkable Place zones will still have to meet 100% of the city's minimum parking requirements. That's disappointing—excessive parking is probably the biggest issue on corridors like Lower Westheimer, but at least with this new ordinance future lots will be placed behind buildings. Requiring additional bike parking doesn't offset the impact of surface parking lots on walkability. I wish the committee would have been a bit bolder here; if we want these Walkable Places to represent something other than the Houston status quo, parking needs to be completely optional.

[Houston19514]

16 hours ago, lithiumaneurysm said:

 

These are great improvements over the current code, especially mandatory compliance near transit stops and more stringent site planning standards. However, if I'm reading slide 21 correctly, development in Walkable Place zones will still have to meet 100% of the city's minimum parking requirements. That's disappointing—excessive parking is probably the biggest issue on corridors like Lower Westheimer, but at least with this new ordinance future lots will be placed behind buildings. Requiring additional bike parking doesn't offset the impact of surface parking lots on walkability. I wish the committee would have been a bit bolder here; if we want these Walkable Places to represent something other than the Houston status quo, parking needs to be completely optional.

 

But see, Slide #49 (I think), "Off-Street Parking Standards".  It seems to provide for reduced (and eliminated) parking requirements at least for some streets (TOD Streets and Primary TOD Streets)

[lithiumaneurysm]

5 hours ago, Houston19514 said:

 

But see, Slide #49 (I think), "Off-Street Parking Standards".  It seems to provide for reduced (and eliminated) parking requirements at least for some streets (TOD Streets and Primary TOD Streets)

 

True, which is good. But TOD Streets are a much more limited classification than Walkable Places, which can be created anywhere if property owners support it. TOD Streets are, of course, limited to where fixed transit exists, which doesn't cover much of the city. Better than nothing, though.

[H-Town Man]

20 hours ago, lithiumaneurysm said:

 

True, which is good. But TOD Streets are a much more limited classification than Walkable Places, which can be created anywhere if property owners support it. TOD Streets are, of course, limited to where fixed transit exists, which doesn't cover much of the city. Better than nothing, though.

 

So if 19th Street in the Heights were made a Walkable Place, new development would have to have building facades along the street, but would still have to meet minimum parking requirements behind the buildings. That's frustrating.

 

[Texasota]

Unless there's a frequent bus that runs 19th St. I assume there isn't, but if there's one on 20th/Cavalcade then that might do most of the job.

[Houston19514]

5 minutes ago, Texasota said:

Unless there's a frequent bus that runs 19th St. I assume there isn't, but if there's one on 20th/Cavalcade then that might do most of the job.

 

Good catch.  And, yes, there is a high-frequency bus route on 20th/Cavalcade.

[cspwal]

So frequent buses count as a transit corridor, not just light rail or BRT?

[Houston19514]

1 hour ago, cspwal said:

So frequent buses count as a transit corridor, not just light rail or BRT?

 

The slide show is not entirely clear, but I think so.

[BeerNut]

https://www.houstontx.gov/planning/Commissions/docs_pdfs/walkable_places/Walkable_Places_Presentation_May_15th_2019.pdf

 

[HNathoo]

They had a meeting today. Does anyone know what new developments may have occurred? 

[Texasota]

New presentation: http://www.houstontx.gov/planning/Commissions/docs_pdfs/walkable_places/WP-Presentation-06112019-final.pdf

 

I'm looking through it now.

[Texasota]

Ok this looks like some tweaking, maybe even improvements. Nothing to freak out about yet.

Edited June 12, 2019 by Texasota

[j_cuevas713]

Rejoice!!! The parking min exemption has extended to Eado and Midtown!!!

[Texasota]

Woo! Except not all of Midtown, correct? Not east of San Jac for some reason?

[j_cuevas713]

30 minutes ago, Texasota said:

Woo! Except not all of Midtown, correct? Not east of San Jac for some reason?

Yeah which makes sense because most of that is residential anyways. Still this is great because originally it was only a small section of EaDo, now its all of the East End. 

[Texasota]

I disagree that that makes sense - parking requirements for residential properties are also a problem.

 

That said this is definitely a great start.

[cspwal]

Without parking requirements, they're more likely to get a small coffee shop on a corner

 

With parking requirements, they're more likely to get a starbucks on a pad site surrounded by parking and a drive through

[thedistrict84]

On 7/17/2019 at 3:02 PM, j_cuevas713 said:

Yeah which makes sense because most of that is residential anyways. Still this is great because originally it was only a small section of EaDo, now its all of the East End. 

 

The original proposal only included a few blocks of EaDo (up to Emancipation I believe), but now covers the entirety of EaDo.

 

The rest of the East End (i.e., everything east of the BNSF tracks/outside of the EaDo “triangle”) is not included, unfortunately. It would have been nice to extend it throughout the East End/Second Ward to at least Sampson St.

[Luminare]

Heres an article about it:

https://kinder.rice.edu/urbanedge/2019/07/17/houston-extends-minimum-parking-exemptions-east-end-midtown

Map from article:



A few highlighted quotes:

 

Quote

"It seems to make sense," said Councilmember Michael Kubosh, referring to the recent development in East Downtown. The change, he said, will benefit people, "who want to be able to walk to a restaurant or a store. People like me, well, I’m going to have to be dropped off."

 

Quote

But some council members expressed hesitation about the push to lift parking requirements. "I'm glad to see that there appears to be a carve out and a compromise that is focusing these concentrated no parking requirements primarily along the Main Street corridor and to the west," said Councilmember Mike Laster about the exemption's expansion into Midtown. But, he argued, "the market has determined that they can make money as it is," he said. "We have parking requirements to protect neighborhoods," he argued.

 

Quote

"More parking lots in our neighborhoods do not protect our neighborhoods," Councilmember Robert Gallegos, whose district includes East Downtown, responded. He also said he reached out to the planning department to enhance transit-oriented development and was told there would be additional proposals brought to council later this year.

 

Quote

Councilmember Greg Travis, the only council member to vote against the amendment, insisted parking spaces were necessary because people wouldn't walk to destinations. "Today? Walk for two blocks, it's not going to happen." 

 

The interesting part was that only 1 person voted against (Greg Travis). Even those who had hesitations still voted for it anyway (following the ole Houston mantra of "go where the wind is blowing" or simply going with where business is wanting to go to next. If businesses want it than Houston wants it...which is a blessing and a curse). Fantastic news. It also said in an article that new transit oriented proposals are already in the pipeline for later this year. This means that people were waiting for this to take shape and now we could see a whole bunch more development coming along soon.

EDIT: This also might be a shock to y'all, but guess which District Greg Travis represents...District G (River Oaks, Afton Oaks, Post Oak, Memorial, Memorial City, Briar Forest, Areas around HWY 6, and parts of Energy Corridor). I'm shocked he opposed this. Totally shocked.

Edited July 18, 2019 by Luminare

[EllenOlenska]

I find the Sabine-Memorial expansion to be really interesting. 
 

[j_cuevas713]

Think about the level of density we will reach because of this! I think they should eventually consider Montrose and 3rd Ward

Edited July 19, 2019 by j_cuevas713

[Texasota]

Well, maybe. As implied by the new name, that's in the market's hands now.

[X.R.]

30 minutes ago, j_cuevas713 said:

Think about the level of density we will reach because of this! I think they should eventually consider Montrose and 3rd Ward

 

Having spent a ton of time in montrose, it almost seems like they already don't have the same parking minimums as the rest of the city. Many nights, every parking spot is full for that expanse of montrose-westheimer down at least 5-6 streets to the west (except for that shake shake, thank god). I guess they do having minimums cause that HEB got a pretty decent parking lot, but generally it doesn't feel like any other part of the inner city (with its mix of people walking, biking, and limited parking spots). Is it already different or am I crazy. 

 

 

[Texasota]

There are a few businesses along Westheimer that were grandfathered in and have limited or no parking, but that's true in other parts of the city as well.

 

I've never had any trouble finding parking in Montrose, but I also have no problem with walking a couple blocks. 

[Luminare]

1 hour ago, j_cuevas713 said:

Think about the level of density we will reach because of this! I think they should eventually consider Montrose and 3rd Ward

 

While I think many of us would like to see that, I think the most pragmatic approach would be to next extend this exemption to anything on a major bus route that has frequent service, and all light rail lines. In both cases the exemption should stretch at least a couple blocks out from those lines (buses or light rail, and now we can add BRT). That is the most logical and has a solid rational and argument to be past.

[Texasota]

19 minutes ago, Luminare said:

 

While I think many of us would like to see that, I think the most pragmatic approach would be to next extend this exemption to anything on a major bus route that has frequent service, and all light rail lines. In both cases the exemption should stretch at least a couple blocks out from those lines (buses or light rail, and now we can add BRT). That is the most logical and has a solid rational and argument to be past.

 

That's also the plan (as I understand it) for the transit corridor ordinance, which has been finalized and will have a few more public meetings on the final ordinance before being voted on (hopefully? maybe?) at the end of the year.