Jump to content

I-45 Rebuild (North Houston Highway Improvement Project)


Recommended Posts

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 months later...

I'm never going to advocate the demolition of the Pierce, but from my experiences last night, it sure feels poorly engineered for something practically rebuilt just less than two decades. Even though I couldn't observe the road that closely, I could feel that there were grooves in the asphalt (like speed humps), causing the car to "gallop" even at 60 mph.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I understand the video correctly, 45 would merge with I-10 and run north of downtown, then merge with 59 and run east of downtown before separating and going nicely on its way. 

 

The Pierce elevated goes away and is partially replaced on the west side with a parkway (at level or below ground) that runs to downtown destinations. 

 

Where the elevated exists today between downtown and midtown would be replaced with a park or something.

 

So if I'm stating that correctly, and I'm not saying I am, is it as simple as replacing the signs on I-10 to I-10/I-45, and similar with 59, and tear down the rest, or is there freeway expansion required to accommodate the additional traffic flow?

 

Also, I see a similar complaint arising in the future against the Eastex Freeway dividing Downtown from the East side, but now you have all 59 and 45 traffic running through it. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I understand the video correctly, 45 would merge with I-10 and run north of downtown, then merge with 59 and run east of downtown before separating and going nicely on its way. 

 

The Pierce elevated goes away and is partially replaced on the west side with a parkway (at level or below ground) that runs to downtown destinations. 

 

Where the elevated exists today between downtown and midtown would be replaced with a park or something.

 

So if I'm stating that correctly, and I'm not saying I am, is it as simple as replacing the signs on I-10 to I-10/I-45, and similar with 59, and tear down the rest, or is there freeway expansion required to accommodate the additional traffic flow?

 

Also, I see a similar complaint arising in the future against the Eastex Freeway dividing Downtown from the East side, but now you have all 59 and 45 traffic running through it. 

 

They're to build a new set of roadways alongside the 59/69 roadways to accommodate 45 traffic. You can find schematics here. Note that these have been modified since they were published, though no new maps have been produced yet.

 

The whole structure will be depressed with the intention of capping it later on, in order to anticipate the complaints you mention.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They're to build a new set of roadways alongside the 59/69 roadways to accommodate 45 traffic. You can find schematics here. Note that these have been modified since they were published, though no new maps have been produced yet.

 

The whole structure will be depressed with the intention of capping it later on, in order to anticipate the complaints you mention.

 

Thanks for clearing that up. That's a very ambitious plan. So one day, all the freeways that surround downtown today will be removed or be underground. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, the caps are mainly behind the convention center and have to be paid for separately from the project, so add no real sense of continuity, that's assuming that they get built since they aren't included in the project.

 

There will be fewer lanes crossing all areas of the expanded freeways which will disrupt any hope of continuity that the caps would bring. To top it off they'll be removing an entire block along the stretch of 59 from current 45 alignment to i10. no new lanes added, some lanes in fact are removed from the freeways current size. 

 

I may be the only person who is not optimistic about this project helping anyone outside of high end developers who want the land the pierce elevated current sits on. I guess we'll see in 10-20 years if it has a net positive impact though, assuming this phase of the project can actually move forward. I'll bet that the other phases get started and this phase gets pushed back a lot.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that I understand it better, I like it a bit more, but not enough to convince me it's worth doing. 

 

I'm all about reclamation of public space from freeways, and downtown not being totally wrapped by elevated freeways. But as Samagon mentions, if it's just going to be about  opening those parcels to developers, I'm not impressed. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that I understand it better, I like it a bit more, but not enough to convince me it's worth doing. 

 

I'm all about reclamation of public space from freeways, and downtown not being totally wrapped by elevated freeways. But as Samagon mentions, if it's just going to be about  opening those parcels to developers, I'm not impressed. 

 

Developers = buildings = more urban integration. Sounds like a win to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that I understand it better, I like it a bit more, but not enough to convince me it's worth doing. 

 

I'm all about reclamation of public space from freeways, and downtown not being totally wrapped by elevated freeways. But as Samagon mentions, if it's just going to be about  opening those parcels to developers, I'm not impressed. 

 

I certainly don't have the popular opinion of the effect this will have.

 

Don't take anyone's word for it though.

 

http://www.ih45northandmore.com/docs4/15_20150417_Seg3_PM4_Exhibit_01_Overall.pdf

 

that's the link to the PDF, if you are curious, load it up (it's really big and will take a while), pull up google maps next to it and work through the flow for both freeway and surface streets.

 

the changes include 59 from Montrose to Lyons, 288 from Wheeler, 45 from Dowling up all the way to the beltway (but as it concerns downtown, it's only past i10), and i10 from Greg to Houston ave. 

 

as someone mentioned, that's probably not current, but it's the most current we have access to as of now. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I certainly don't have the popular opinion of the effect this will have.

 

Don't take anyone's word for it though.

 

http://www.ih45northandmore.com/docs4/15_20150417_Seg3_PM4_Exhibit_01_Overall.pdf

 

that's the link to the PDF, if you are curious, load it up (it's really big and will take a while), pull up google maps next to it and work through the flow for both freeway and surface streets.

 

the changes include 59 from Montrose to Lyons, 288 from Wheeler, 45 from Dowling up all the way to the beltway (but as it concerns downtown, it's only past i10), and i10 from Greg to Houston ave. 

 

as someone mentioned, that's probably not current, but it's the most current we have access to as of now. 

 

Just looking at that file makes my head hurt. I would almost need to print it to a plotter to be able to see it properly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm never going to advocate the demolition of the Pierce, but from my experiences last night, it sure feels poorly engineered for something practically rebuilt just less than two decades. Even though I couldn't observe the road that closely, I could feel that there were grooves in the asphalt (like speed humps), causing the car to "gallop" even at 60 mph.

Those bumps come from the bents that hold up the bridge deck. Before it was rebuilt, the bumps were bouncier and there were more expansion joints.

Edited by JLWM8609
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Driving to the northside today, I noticed construction on I-45NB near White Oak Bayou and Quitman. I went on the TxDOT Project Tracker and found that the bridge and approaches at White Oak Bayou are being replaced. Given that bridges typically last 40-50 years (current bridge was built in 1961 and rehabbed in the late 80s/early 90s), I wondered if this new bridge would be incorporated into the new I-45 plans, or if it'll be demolished, giving it a shorter lifespan than usual. A quick look at the preliminary schematics shows the new bridges for the North Houston Highway Improvement Project will take different paths over White Oak than the current (and currently being constructed) White Oak Bayou Crossing. Seems like TxDOT wouldn't build a new crossing just to have it demolished in the next 10-15 years, unless the current structure is just that bad. That may very well be the case because the current structure is prone to potholes, the gradient causes a low clearance issue at the Hogan overpass, and there's that bad dip at the northern approach just underneath the Quitman overpass.

 

If you want to find it, it's TxDOT Project # 050003044.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the same description that's given to work that's been going on for a number of months on both sides of 45 on the west side of downtown, and currently on the bridge over the Milam exit off of SB45.  The main part of what they're doing is replacing the bridge decking, though I suspect that the supporting members are getting a pretty thorough looking over as well.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the same description that's given to work that's been going on for a number of months on both sides of 45 on the west side of downtown, and currently on the bridge over the Milam exit off of SB45.  The main part of what they're doing is replacing the bridge decking, though I suspect that the supporting members are getting a pretty thorough looking over as well.  

 

I actually saw new supports and a new approach for the White Oak Bayou bridge. I've seen the work they've done to 45 on the west side of Downtown that replaced the bridge decking, but this looks like an outright bridge replacement or perhaps a widening.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What ever is decided trenching the freeway is a potential disaster during heavy rains or tropical cyclones.  Below grade freeways always flood in Houston. Just see 288 May 2015, Southwest freeway June 2001, I-10 March 1992 Just to name a few. People must always come first.

Those are freak storms tho; this past May storm was what they called a 50-year storm; as in once every 50 years (approx). 

 

Yes, it rains, but those kinds of storms are rare and should not steer this project going forward.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What ever is decided trenching the freeway is a potential disaster during heavy rains or tropical cyclones.  Below grade freeways always flood in Houston. Just see 288 May 2015, Southwest freeway June 2001, I-10 March 1992 Just to name a few. People must always come first.

 

And? That's keeping water out of neighborhoods.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look up the article Significant Houston Area Floods. This area has at times huge rainfalls. Tropical Storm Claudette rained 43 inches on Alvin in July 1979. Read the article, it is an eye opener. These massive rainfalls have occurred frequently since records were kept in the mid 1800's. My point is trenching the freeways will lead to stalled unusable roads during heavy rains during tropical storms or hurricanes. This will endanger peoples lives.  As much as I dislike elevated freeways, trenching is not the way to go. A more realistic and uniquesolution taking Houston's environment into account must be thought through. We are not Boston or NYC and need not  imitate them. We do  not need to engage in "me too"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 part of the reason for trenching the freeways is to reduce flooding in neighborhoods. Nobody should be on the roads during severe rainfall. Stay at home. Stay at the office. Don't drive into flooded roadways and you will probably live.

Edited by LarryDierker
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont get why everyone here says it should be turned into a park or greenspace.

Why?

Why not tear down the elevated and turn the real estate into what it was originally......REAL ESTATE.

I thought the whole point was to break down the "barrier" that divides downtown and midtown. If you keep the elevated and make it a green space, the barrier still stands.

Turn them back into city blocks and let more skyscrapers, condos, apartments etc be built on top of them just like the old days, we increase our block count, our building count, our density and most importantly the barrier comes down and Downtown/midtown become seamless....

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont get why everyone here says it should be turned into a park or greenspace.

Why?

Why not tear down the elevated and turn the real estate into what it was originally......REAL ESTATE.

I thought the whole point was to break down the "barrier" that divides downtown and midtown. If you keep the elevated and make it a green space, the barrier still stands.

Turn them back into city blocks and let more skyscrapers, condos, apartments etc be built on top of them just like the old days, we increase our block count, our building count, our density and most importantly the barrier comes down and Downtown/midtown become seamless....

 

Well you can't have buildings on top of it unless it is super deep and built to support structures. 

 

In Boston the park isn't a barrier at all, it depends on how it's done. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well you can't have buildings on top of it unless it is super deep and built to support structures.

In Boston the park isn't a barrier at all, it depends on how it's done.

Huh??

Who said anything about building buildings on top of the pierce elevated? I'm talkin bout tearing it down to reveal the remainder of the surface lots that have been hidden under there forever and using them as real estate again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...