I-45 Rebuild (North Houston Highway Improvement Project)

[cloud713]

I remember having the idea of building 45 on the railroad line, if the area hadn't gentrified a bit, that would've been a preferable option in 1997, which could've also entailed widening and straightening Interstate 10 in that segment. Of course, it would've been a massive multi-year project instead of closing three lanes of the Pierce, fixing it up, and doing the other three lanes.

For the theoretical money it would take to demolish the Pierce Elevated, I would wager I wouldn't be alone in saying that I'd rather see it go to mass transit.

Yeah I'm just saying have a west park like (50' wide I believe?) spur/bypass for a couple main lanes up the railroad. Nothing huge like every lane of 45. It would be a way to add more capacity without affecting the other roads with construction.

That would actually be cool/something I could live with if they were able to do it properly.. Keep one half of the pierce (it'd probably be too hard to tear out 4 of the 6 lanes but maybe they aren't all integrated/poured together) for BRT lanes or something.. Eliminate half the barrier while using the other half for the greater good of the people.

[Slick Vik]

Those 13 alleged prime lots are probably worth about $300 million, going by the HCAD values of downtown land, and subtracting some for being further South. Doesn't really offset the 2-3 billion dollars to do the reroute and upgrades to other freeways, plus you probably have less capacity overall.

The thought of running interstate freeway traffic on East-West surface streets is not rational, and is possibly the worst thing I've heard in years for traffic. Talk about killing pedestrian, train, and other North/South traffic. You cannot take interstate traffic and put it on signal controlled surface streets for any length of time.

And those lots have unlimited potential.

Downtown is the easiest place to get out of because of one way grid streets. It's worth putting people in traffic if it makes downtown a better place. You would've preferred freeways to plow through NYC also

[samagon]

I would say the hard line is for keeping the pierce. Proposing that it get torn down gets people up in arms around here.

 

Yes, and there is good reason people get 'up in arms'. Proposing such a thing makes no real sense, you provide no actual examples that are in any way equal to that of the pierce elevated.

 

The idea for removal is built on examples from other cities that are in no way applicable in this instance. The suspected benefit is based on examples from other cities that are not applicable in this instance.

 

These other freeways that were removed could not ever claim the numbers that the pierce elevated does in use, from the article that got this discussion kicked off again:

 

As of an August 2013 study by the Texas A & M Transportation Institute, the section of IH-45 through Downtown is ranked one of the twelve most congested highways in the state

 

 

The claimed result of removal would be to make midtown and downtown more integrated and less imposing for pedestrians to navigate. Not sure if you spend time around the area, but I do. There are as many pedestrians walking from one side to the other as there are walking anywhere in the downtown area, so they don't seem to be that imposed as it is. 

 

Even if you assume that removal of a grade separated highway will increase foot traffic, how exactly would an at grade parkway with thousands of cars in an unbroken line (if you look at the same link I pulled the quote above from, you'd see this is exactly what they are suggesting) be better for people getting from one side to the other than a grade separated highway as we have now?

 

And no one that is claiming that there are benefits to this removal has answered a simple question in that why is it that the residents around 45 are more deserving of a removed freeway than those around 59, or i10 would be of a removed highway?

 

I live near telephone and 45, my commute to work takes me down to beltway 8. every evening when I come home traffic going towards town backs up all the way to telephone road until at least 6:30. that is traveling north. on weekends 45 is backed up at least to the split for downtown pretty much all day. 59/288 is also backed up. 59 is backed up from shepherd all the way to 45. pretty much perpetually, maybe at around 8pm is starts to loosen up a bit and allow freeway speeds.

 

So how exactly is removing the portion of 45 that is the pierce elevated supposed to ease the traffic? Yes, it MIGHT make pedestrian activity better between midtown and downtown, it MIGHT raise property use of the buildings in the area to a higher purpose, I can tell you one thing that would ABSOLUTELY happen, traffic would get worse for the entire city of Houston, it would constrict movement and people would eventually choose just not to travel to places that were easily accessible before. Houston needs to be accessible for it to work, and yanking out a freeway will ruin that accessibility, especially if that freeway is one of the highest traveled in the city, if not the highest traveled. Pierce elevated needs to be augmented, not demolished.

[samagon]

Yeah I'm just saying have a west park like (50' wide I believe?) spur/bypass for a couple main lanes up the railroad. Nothing huge like every lane of 45. It would be a way to add more capacity without affecting the other roads with construction.

That would actually be cool/something I could live with if they were able to do it properly.. Keep one half of the pierce (it'd probably be too hard to tear out 4 of the 6 lanes but maybe they aren't all integrated/poured together) for BRT lanes or something.. Eliminate half the barrier while using the other half for the greater good of the people.

 

Problem is that rail line is heavily used. very heavily. There's no way that line can be removed as the one down westpark was, the line down westpark was no longer being used, I think the last trains to use that was once a year when the circus came to town, they would run up that line to the summit, and all the animals would be paraded across at buffalo speedway.

 

even if this could happen, you would propose splitting one well established community (eastwood) in half to maybe improve the walkability between two other well established communities (downtown and midtown)?

[IronTiger]

And those lots have unlimited potential.

Yeah, parking lots rule!

You would've preferred freeways to plow through NYC also

Association fallacy, though there might be another one as well.

[samagon]

Now, to at least one realistic idea.

 

They should re-arrange the exit ramps from 45 to 59 (northbound lanes) and from 59 to 45 (southbound lanes).

 

There's the exit right after telephone on the northbound section of 45 for the 'downtown exits and scott street' and the entrance from downtown destinations into the SB lanes of 45. these elevated sections were designed to ease the transition into the spur 5 runoff that now goes nowhere (was supposed to be part of the freeway down 35).

 

So, shut down the ramps from 45NB to 59 NB/SB and build them onto that spur section. same for from 59NB/SB onto 45SB. this would at least ease part of the interchange. it would eliminate people waiting until the last possible second from cutting over from 59sb exit back into 45nb traffic (which does cause quite a stir and often wrecks). It also eliminates people entering at scott who are trying to jog over to the other side of the freeway to get to the 59sb ramp. that's a really short distance to do that in and really slows things down as well. people who want to get from scott to 59sb could easily ride up to the entrance at gray street.

 

anyway, it would resolve the part of the problem with the pierce elevated, which is the horrible transitions from 59 to 45sb, and from 45nb to 59. the lanes on that elevated portion of freeway are horrible under utilized at all times of day.

[lithiumaneurysm]

I disagree with this your opening assertion. The biggest problem with the Pierce is that it exists. It's an under-performing asset (transportation-wise) that drags down property values and prevents the needed blending of Midtown's residential focus w/ downtown's business focus.

 

We wouldn't need to subsidize builders to the tune of 10+ million dollars to build apartments downtown if we didn't have such a barrier between downtown and midtown. There would be a more organic blending of the two together if not for such a stark elevated freeway barrier.

 

Planting trees won't help property values immediately adjacent to the elevated freeway. Growing vines won't help disperse the homeless that congregate under the Pierce. 

 

I agree that bulling a parkway from Bagby to 59 does something similar in dividing the two areas. That's why I think its a stupid idea. The downtown street grid is more than capable of handling east/west traffic from 59 to west downtown  in the midtown/downtown junction. If we take the Pease/Jefferson and combine it w/ Pirece/St. Joesph couplet, you've got 20 total lanes full lanes of traffic. Taking away turning / bus lanes, that's still 12 dedicated lanes of East/west flow. 

 

I've read Houston Freeways and while I believe that lot's of effort went into building Houston's freeways, there was little 'innovation' outside of the original Gulf freeway. I might give you reversible HOV lanes, but technically that was funded by METRO. Freeways were built without regard to surrounding neighborhoods. That is not a way we should operate nowadays. I mean, what are the tax implications for 13 new and almost total blocks city that would be added to downtown if the Pierce were to disappear tomorrow? What does the cost of re-routing 45 along other freeways come out to when TxDOT could sell 13 different lots of prime midtown/downtown Houston real estate?

 

I agree that the Pierce does provide a psychological barrier between Downtown and Midtown that's hard to ignore. That's why I'd prefer some sort of sunken / tunneled solution, but it seems TxDOT has already decided it's not willing to spend the money (what a surprise). But I don't know if this barrier is a direct cause of everything you attribute to it. It's quite possible it cheapens the property around it, but I feel like that sort of claim can't be substantiated without some sort of study that simply doesn't exist. I'd agree with IronTiger that the subsidy is a necessity because of Downtown's higher building costs and dilapidated nature. The fact that large portions of both Midtown and Downtown are covered with parking lots won't disappear if the Pierce is demolished.

 

Trees and vines are obviously a cheap solution, but they can make a significant difference to the passing pedestrian. The homeless problem is mainly due to the nature of the surrounding area – plenty of abandoned lots, the Greyhound station, McDonald's, and the fact that Downtown and Midtown currently make up an awkward geographic barrier between poorer districts to the east and wealthy enclaves to the west. In addition, the city basically invites the homeless to congregate under elevated freeway structures by simply not doing anything interesting with the space underneath. There are a million different things you could put under there besides asphalt and a bunch of ugly fences.

 

The grid is capable of handling east/west traffic, but probably not in addition to the north/south traffic that I assume makes up the bulk of what goes on the Pierce Elevated. I think most of the commuters on the Elevated are trying to bypass Downtown, although I can't really back that up with any data.

 

I think the book makes a convincing argument that – at the time – Houston's freeway plan was innovative. While there are certainly many, many negatives that came from it as well – like tearing up neighborhoods and ignoring the need for a multimodal transit system – the general engineering of the highways was well-suited to what the city needed at the time. I completely agree that the focus should be on better neighborhood integration and harmonizing infrastructure with the areas it affects. That's why I think so much work needs to be done on the Downtown freeway complex, because you'd be hard pressed to find any other cluster of urban American freeways that is so completely hostile to the neighborhoods it passes through. However, even though rerouting 45 would open up some valuable real estate, it would come at a steep cost to other areas around Downtown that would take the brunt of freeway expansions to serve that traffic. I find a lot of proposals to route things through East Downtown a little unappealing, since that area has already lived with the burden of that elevated stretch of 59 for so long (which is a much bigger problem than the Pierce Elevated).

[samagon]

LithiumAneurysm the right of it, I think. 

 

Don't remove the pierce, maybe even expand it to allow for more use, but make it more inviting underneath it, better lighting (not necessarily more), greenery, artists, are those fenced in parking lots really the highest and best use of the land? Imagine food truck parks that aren't affected by weather, stalls for weekend markets.

 

The homeless aren't just there because they aren't chased off from the area, there's lots of help for them around that specific area. If they need hospital care the hospital right there is their best choice in the city, there's other helping hand type stuff in the direct area. Would these just disappear if the pierce disappears? Doubtful. so it's doubtful that the homeless would disappear either.

 

Back to the point, Houston was indeed innovative at one time with the building of these freeways, why can't Houston also be on the front of innovation in providing intriguing ways to integrate the unusued portions under the elevated freeways for use by local people? The biggest obstacle I see is providing some kind of safeguard for runoff from the freeway to protect people under it, but something like that must already be done, or else pedestrians wouldn't be safe to travel under it anyway.

 

How awesome would it be to have a swimming pool under a freeway??! No need to worry if you forgot the sunscreen, you don't need it! No need to worry if it's raining, pools still open! Better still, sell the area under the freeway to Schlitterbahn, I bet they could do some cool stuff under there.

 

I think though, that's more of an extreme type example, but hey, think out of the box and someone may see something that's worthwhile, or at least get on a track that leads to a really neat innovation.

Edited August 7, 2014 by samagon

[cloud713]

Problem is that rail line is heavily used. very heavily. There's no way that line can be removed as the one down westpark was, the line down westpark was no longer being used, I think the last trains to use that was once a year when the circus came to town, they would run up that line to the summit, and all the animals would be paraded across at buffalo speedway.

even if this could happen, you would propose splitting one well established community (eastwood) in half to maybe improve the walkability between two other well established communities (downtown and midtown)?

Why would it split Eastwood any more than the rail lines split it? I was envisioning it elevated along side the current tracks, preferably without removing any tracks/w.e.

[samagon]

Why would it split Eastwood any more than the rail lines split it? I was envisioning it elevated along side the current tracks, preferably without removing any tracks/w.e.

 

so far as I know, that wouldn't work, railroad companies don't let you do anything inside their ROW due to insurance concerns, and as far as how it would split it more than it's already split, there's no way that the amount of space would allow for the necessary ROW for a freeway, even if there were no onramps/offramps and it were a true viaduct around downtown, they'd need more ROW than exists there currently. 

 

However, assuming that a railroad would let someone build in their ROW...

 

A railroad is bad enough on its own, true enough, but the neighborhood also grew up around the railroad, much as certain areas of town grow up around freeways where the freeway existed prior to the area of town. Adding a freeway to an already established area (even if crossed in the same location with a railroad already) will scar the landscape for decades, just as it has been demonstrated to do everywhere a freeway is built in already established areas. 

 

I am against new freeways being installed anywhere in an already established area, especially if it goes through a neighborhood, even if it is along an existing railroad track, I will always be against it. That I live a few blocks from there just makes it more personal to me and I'd probably dedicate time to fighting it, rather than just expressing myself on message boards, or signing a random petition.

 

Westpark was a very unique example that worked because you removed a railroad that was adjacent to a roadway, and there was a lot of ROW that existed for most of the distance thanks to forward thinking and planning. So you removed one and dropped another right on top of where the other used to sit.

[IronTiger]

LithiumAneurysm the right of it, I think. 

 

Don't remove the pierce, maybe even expand it to allow for more use, but make it more inviting underneath it, better lighting (not necessarily more), greenery, artists, are those fenced in parking lots really the highest and best use of the land? Imagine food truck parks that aren't affected by weather, stalls for weekend markets.

 

The homeless aren't just there because they aren't chased off from the area, there's lots of help for them around that specific area. If they need hospital care the hospital right there is their best choice in the city, there's other helping hand type stuff in the direct area. Would these just disappear if the pierce disappears? Doubtful. so it's doubtful that the homeless would disappear either.

 

Back to the point, Houston was indeed innovative at one time with the building of these freeways, why can't Houston also be on the front of innovation in providing intriguing ways to integrate the unusued portions under the elevated freeways for use by local people? The biggest obstacle I see is providing some kind of safeguard for runoff from the freeway to protect people under it, but something like that must already be done, or else pedestrians wouldn't be safe to travel under it anyway.

 

How awesome would it be to have a swimming pool under a freeway??! No need to worry if you forgot the sunscreen, you don't need it! No need to worry if it's raining, pools still open! Better still, sell the area under the freeway to Schlitterbahn, I bet they could do some cool stuff under there.

 

I think though, that's more of an extreme type example, but hey, think out of the box and someone may see something that's worthwhile, or at least get on a track that leads to a really neat innovation.

I still think my "column painting" idea isn't a bad one, with the columns together making a truly unique art experience. Better lighting will help show these columns off.

A night market could do wonders, as well and create a cultural gathering place as well as a shelter from any rain.

Westpark was a very unique example that worked because you removed a railroad that was adjacent to a roadway, and there was a lot of ROW that existed for most of the distance thanks to forward thinking and planning. So you removed one and dropped another right on top of where the other used to sit.

Westpark also had a lot of ROW west of the Loop. I believe METRO still holds the other half of it and can put commuter/light rail there.

[Slick Vik]

I would like an example of a nice area under a freeway bridge anywhere.

Edited August 7, 2014 by Slick Vik

[DNAguy]

Now, to at least one realistic idea.

 

They should re-arrange the exit ramps from 45 to 59 (northbound lanes) and from 59 to 45 (southbound lanes).

 

There's the exit right after telephone on the northbound section of 45 for the 'downtown exits and scott street' and the entrance from downtown destinations into the SB lanes of 45. these elevated sections were designed to ease the transition into the spur 5 runoff that now goes nowhere (was supposed to be part of the freeway down 35).

 

So, shut down the ramps from 45NB to 59 NB/SB and build them onto that spur section. same for from 59NB/SB onto 45SB. this would at least ease part of the interchange. it would eliminate people waiting until the last possible second from cutting over from 59sb exit back into 45nb traffic (which does cause quite a stir and often wrecks). It also eliminates people entering at scott who are trying to jog over to the other side of the freeway to get to the 59sb ramp. that's a really short distance to do that in and really slows things down as well. people who want to get from scott to 59sb could easily ride up to the entrance at gray street.

 

anyway, it would resolve the part of the problem with the pierce elevated, which is the horrible transitions from 59 to 45sb, and from 45nb to 59. the lanes on that elevated portion of freeway are horrible under utilized at all times of day.

 

I agree 100%. A lot of 45's problems has to do w/ it's terrible exits and on ramps. I'm sorry for not giving credit to the correct person, but i know it's been suggested that the Allen Parkway to 45 south entrance needs to be closed. It's dangerous. 

 

I like the idea of using the Spur 5 sections as 59 on ramps/ exits. It would actually make even more sense if the Pierce was ever eliminated too.

[august948]

I would like an example of a nice area under a freeway bridge anywhere.

 

How about the Galata Bridge in Istanbul?  I thought you said elsewhere you've been to Istanbul...

 

 

[Slick Vik]

How about the Galata Bridge in Istanbul? I thought you said elsewhere you've been to Istanbul...

I remember that. Being surrounded by water makes a huge difference.

[Slick Vik]

Also under the bridge are restaurants not really areas to walk around

[lithiumaneurysm]

Don't remove the pierce, maybe even expand it to allow for more use, but make it more inviting underneath it, better lighting (not necessarily more), greenery, artists, are those fenced in parking lots really the highest and best use of the land? Imagine food truck parks that aren't affected by weather, stalls for weekend markets.

 

Haha I actually had this exact idea. Open it up as a pedestrian space and line it with food trucks and other stalls. I know Houston has a food truck park already but it's not much more than a parking lot. Wouldn't it be cool if Houston had a food truck alley under the Pierce Elevated, with picnic benches and other stuff? It'd be a cheap and easy way to turn a sketchy stretch of parking lots into a Downtown attraction that represents a little bit of the city's culture.

[Purpledevil]

Wouldn't it, at the very least, be courteous to acknowledge that an example that you requested, was provided? I don't believe there were any stipulations given in your original statement, as to walkability, the freeway's immediate surroundIngs, or industry established.

I'd think that's only right, Slick Vik.

[samagon]

I would like an example of a nice area under a freeway bridge anywhere.

 

How about the Galata Bridge in Istanbul?  I thought you said elsewhere you've been to Istanbul...

 

 

I like it. Great example that just solidifies an even better idea.

I was thinking a little more about this as I was harrowing my way onto 45 this afternoon, why stop at just closing Allen Pkwy entrance? Close all entry and exit points between 59 and 10. Make it a full on downtown viaduct.

In addition to the changes to spur 5, Maybe even close the 59 to 45 entries, make it 2 lanes NB, and 4 sb. Cheap solution. They'd need to make another lane on 59 north and i10 west to accommodate the traffic though. The length of additional travel from 59-10 to get around Houston is just less than a mile...

[JLWM8609]

Now, to at least one realistic idea.

 

They should re-arrange the exit ramps from 45 to 59 (northbound lanes) and from 59 to 45 (southbound lanes).

 

There's the exit right after telephone on the northbound section of 45 for the 'downtown exits and scott street' and the entrance from downtown destinations into the SB lanes of 45. these elevated sections were designed to ease the transition into the spur 5 runoff that now goes nowhere (was supposed to be part of the freeway down 35).

 

So, shut down the ramps from 45NB to 59 NB/SB and build them onto that spur section. same for from 59NB/SB onto 45SB. this would at least ease part of the interchange. it would eliminate people waiting until the last possible second from cutting over from 59sb exit back into 45nb traffic (which does cause quite a stir and often wrecks). It also eliminates people entering at scott who are trying to jog over to the other side of the freeway to get to the 59sb ramp. that's a really short distance to do that in and really slows things down as well. people who want to get from scott to 59sb could easily ride up to the entrance at gray street.

 

anyway, it would resolve the part of the problem with the pierce elevated, which is the horrible transitions from 59 to 45sb, and from 45nb to 59. the lanes on that elevated portion of freeway are horrible under utilized at all times of day.

 

That sounds like a good idea, similar to what they're doing at the 610/290 interchange to allow drivers access to from 290 to I-10 without weaving across 610. Now, as for those who would still need to access 59 from Scott, I would propose a ramp from the feeder road just west of Scott to the Spur section that would connect to 59. That way, they'd still be able to access 59 without all of that weaving that backs up the mainlanes. I would also eliminate all of those antiquated left lane entrances and exits like the ramp from 288 NB to I-45 NB and I-45 SB to US 59 NB. Those left lane exits and entrances screw up the flow of traffic by putting slower traffic into what is supposed to be a passing lane.

[Ross]

I like it. Great example that just solidifies an even better idea. I was thinking a little more about this as I was harrowing my way onto 45 this afternoon, why stop at just closing Allen Pkwy entrance? Close all entry and exit points between 59 and 10. Make it a full on downtown viaduct. In addition to the changes to spur 5, Maybe even close the 59 to 45 entries, make it 2 lanes NB, and 4 sb. Cheap solution. They'd need to make another lane on 59 north and i10 west to accommodate the traffic though. The length of additional travel from 59-10 to get around Houston is just less than a mile...

 

If you close all of the entries/exits between 10 and 59 you eliminate the bulk of the exits used to get to Downtown. I typically 10 to 45 to the Dallas/Pierce exit and turn on Jefferson. The exits aren't really an issue, and tend to spread the traffic on multiple surface streets going to different destinations. I do think the on ramps can be changed. The Allen Parkway ramp is just bad, I avoid it at all costs, and the St Joseph Pkwy ramp needs a better layout to get to Houston avenue/Memorial.

 

[DNAguy]

How about the Galata Bridge in Istanbul?  I thought you said elsewhere you've been to Istanbul...

 

 

 

I've been to Istanbul and eaten under the bridge.

 

It makes a huge difference that it's on the water. I makes a huge difference that cars aren't driving 70+ miles per hour above you (noise, etc).

 

Tip: Instead of eating under the bridge, get a fish sandwich from a street vendor on the south side of the Golden Horn between the bridge and ferry stop. They're cheap and really good. 

Edited August 8, 2014 by DNAguy

[DNAguy]

That sounds like a good idea, similar to what they're doing at the 610/290 interchange to allow drivers access to from 290 to I-10 without weaving across 610. Now, as for those who would still need to access 59 from Scott, I would propose a ramp from the feeder road just west of Scott to the Spur section that would connect to 59. That way, they'd still be able to access 59 without all of that weaving that backs up the mainlanes. I would also eliminate all of those antiquated left lane entrances and exits like the ramp from 288 NB to I-45 NB and I-45 SB to US 59 NB. Those left lane exits and entrances screw up the flow of traffic by putting slower traffic into what is supposed to be a passing lane.

 

The scott on-ramp causes serious traffic issues. It should either be closed off or a concrete divider should be extended from the 59&288 south / 45& 59N split so that people can't cross 4 lanes of traffic to get to 59S.

 

In all actuality this wouldn't reduce freeway access in the area either. If you're at UH, take the spur to get onto 45 then take the exit as normal. If you're in EaDo and need to get to 59 south, then take the 45 feeder and follow it just past 59. Then take a left on Hamilton. There is a 59 south on ramp just past the 45/59 exchange. 

[JLWM8609]

The scott on-ramp causes serious traffic issues. It should either be closed off or a concrete divider should be extended from the 59&288 south / 45& 59N split so that people can't cross 4 lanes of traffic to get to 59S.

 

In all actuality this wouldn't reduce freeway access in the area either. If you're at UH, take the spur to get onto 45 then take the exit as normal. If you're in EaDo and need to get to 59 south, then take the 45 feeder and follow it just past 59. Then take a left on Hamilton. There is a 59 south on ramp just past the 45/59 exchange. 

 

The Scott onramp is so bad that I avoid it sometimes by taking the feeder road to where it turns into Pease, turn left onto Hamilton, and take the ramp from Hamilton onto 59 SB.

[DNAguy]

The Scott onramp is so bad that I avoid it sometimes by taking the feeder road to where it turns into Pease, turn left onto Hamilton, and take the ramp from Hamilton onto 59 SB.

 

Me too. I purposely didn't write about it though b/c I don't want to give up one of 'my' good / semi-secret traffic work-arounds. 

 

[Slick Vik]

I've been to Istanbul and eaten under the bridge.

It makes a huge difference that it's on the water. I makes a huge difference that cars aren't driving 70+ miles per hour above you (noise, etc).

Tip: Instead of eating under the bridge, get a fish sandwich from a street vendor on the south side of the Golden Horn between the bridge and ferry stop. They're cheap and really good.

I agree the mackerel sandwiches are amazing for 5 liras.

[IronTiger]

I think that would relieve problems on the Pierce and make the whole intersection a whole lot less confusing is rebuilding the 45/59/288 interchange. You've got three highways, two junctions, and a part where the two highways run concurrently. If the exits to 59 from the Pierce got off much earlier, you'd have a chance at relieving part of the problem.

Rather than terminating at a five-way intersection at Pierce and Brazos, that exit that split off from 45 much earlier can instead by widening the exit to Bagby/Pierce and continue underground at three lanes where one goes to 59W, one goes to 288S, and one to 59E.

[samagon]

The Scott onramp is so bad that I avoid it sometimes by taking the feeder road to where it turns into Pease, turn left onto Hamilton, and take the ramp from Hamilton onto 59 SB.

 

It's really the quicker way around, pretty much any time of day.

 

I enter at telephone, and by default if I'm going to 59 south, I get on the downtown exits ramp and zoom past all those people sitting in the main lanes.

[JLWM8609]

Me too. I purposely didn't write about it though b/c I don't want to give up one of 'my' good / semi-secret traffic work-arounds. 

 

 

At certain times of day, everyone else has the same idea, so it's not a big secret. I'm usually trying to access 288 instead of 59, but either way, when the Hamilton route is also clogged, that's when I'll decide to take... whoops! Almost let that secret slip!

[cloud713]

so far as I know, that wouldn't work, railroad companies don't let you do anything inside their ROW due to insurance concerns, and as far as how it would split it more than it's already split, there's no way that the amount of space would allow for the necessary ROW for a freeway, even if there were no onramps/offramps and it were a true viaduct around downtown, they'd need more ROW than exists there currently. 

 

However, assuming that a railroad would let someone build in their ROW...

 

A railroad is bad enough on its own, true enough, but the neighborhood also grew up around the railroad, much as certain areas of town grow up around freeways where the freeway existed prior to the area of town. Adding a freeway to an already established area (even if crossed in the same location with a railroad already) will scar the landscape for decades, just as it has been demonstrated to do everywhere a freeway is built in already established areas. 

 

I am against new freeways being installed anywhere in an already established area, especially if it goes through a neighborhood, even if it is along an existing railroad track, I will always be against it. That I live a few blocks from there just makes it more personal to me and I'd probably dedicate time to fighting it, rather than just expressing myself on message boards, or signing a random petition.

 

Westpark was a very unique example that worked because you removed a railroad that was adjacent to a roadway, and there was a lot of ROW that existed for most of the distance thanks to forward thinking and planning. So you removed one and dropped another right on top of where the other used to sit.

true.. so even if you got air-rights to the railroad ROW and elevated a 4 lane freeway above the tracks, not taking up any additional ROW/tearing down structures/buying land/ect, you wouldnt be cool with it? what about a 610W traffic reliever 4 lane tollroad along side the rail line that goes through Memorial Park (and unfortunately Afton Oaks, so it would probably never happen), from 610 south to 610 north? even if it were trenched like the Dallas North Tollway is in the inner city? ive always thought that would be a semi-decent solution to avoiding 610W, logistics/political obstacles aside. only have connections/exits/onramps at 610S, Westpark/59, i10, and 610N.

 

I think that would relieve problems on the Pierce and make the whole intersection a whole lot less confusing is rebuilding the 45/59/288 interchange. You've got three highways, two junctions, and a part where the two highways run concurrently. If the exits to 59 from the Pierce got off much earlier, you'd have a chance at relieving part of the problem.

Rather than terminating at a five-way intersection at Pierce and Brazos, that exit that split off from 45 much earlier can instead by widening the exit to Bagby/Pierce and continue underground at three lanes where one goes to 59W, one goes to 288S, and one to 59E.

agreed.. this interchange sucks and is the root of most of the problems i feel. it needs to be reworked badly if nothing else.