I-45 Rebuild (North Houston Highway Improvement Project)

[BigFootsSocks]

Not sure if this has been discussed yet or not, but is anyone else curious what the impact of "tunneling" the new 45/69 behind the GRB will have on the Green/Purple lines?

 

Theyre gonna have to construct a bridge for the lines, and a possible method for this would be to build one half of the bridge so that there's still one line to connect Eado to Downtown, but since there isn't a "switch" on the West side of 69, trams headed West won't be able to cross over (where the line splits by the new GRB Garage) to the Capitol side of the line. If they can't do that, then they can't turn around and head East back towards Eado.

 

I guess they could construct a temporary line by making a sharp S-curve immediately West of Eado Stadium Station, and run the lines parallel to the current ones on Texas Ave, then make the turn Southwest and connect it to the current lines. This would require shutting down Texas Ave, which in itself is a huge issue, but then there's the cost of this whole proposal.

 

Either way, service on the Green/Purple line is going to be...lacking in the coming years. Honestly, they're probably just going to use the Switch they built West of Eado Stadium Station and just shut off service for a year or so while they build the bridge over the new Freeway.

[cspwal]

If it was car traffic they would do it in a series of weekends with extreme highway closures like the Dallas bridge.  Since it's the Metrorail, a year service suspension seems optimistic.

[Houston19514]

I would bet money there will not be a year-long service interruption for the Metro rail line. My best (very amateur) guess would be something along the lines of the suggested temporary relocation of the tracks.  That block of Lofts at the Ballpark apparently have to be torn down.  Perhaps they will be tear those down and build temporary tracks through that site.

[BigFootsSocks]

2 hours ago, Houston19514 said:

I would bet money there will not be a year-long service interruption for the Metro rail line. My best (very amateur) guess would be something along the lines of the suggested temporary relocation of the tracks.  That block of Lofts at the Ballpark apparently have to be torn down.  Perhaps they will be tear those down and build temporary tracks through that site.

I thought of this too, but the turning radius required would mean that they'd have to tear down the new ramp for the elevated Unloading Dock behind the GRB, so if they put in temporary tracks they'd have to put them north of where they are now on Texas Ave.

[Houston19514]

23 minutes ago, BigFootsSocks said:

I thought of this too, but the turning radius required would mean that they'd have to tear down the new ramp for the elevated Unloading Dock behind the GRB, so if they put in temporary tracks they'd have to put them north of where they are now on Texas Ave.

 

Good point.  On the other hand, that ramp may need to be altered again for the highway project anyway (because it currently terminates under the freeway). 

Edited December 5, 2016 by Houston19514

[EllenOlenska]

I'm just coming over from the Cheek Neal Coffee Building. I'm not good at reading the realignment proposal maps, and am curious: would the coffee building (on the northeastern side of the lot) be torn down during the realignment? 

[HNathoo]

12 hours ago, EllenOlenska said:

I'm just coming over from the Cheek Neal Coffee Building. I'm not good at reading the realignment proposal maps, and am curious: would the coffee building (on the northeastern side of the lot) be torn down during the realignment? 

 

The building was designated a historic structure, and will be salvaged. TXDOT had to adjust the road around this building.

[j_cuevas713]

On 12/8/2016 at 8:45 PM, HNathoo said:

 

The building was designated a historic structure, and will be salvaged. TXDOT had to adjust the road around this building.

Are you sure about this? I read in an article from the leader of Preservation Houston that federal and state plans overturn local preservation. Where did you see that they adjusted the road??? I would be beyond happy to know this building would be saved. And what about the Tout Suite building?

[j_cuevas713]

http://offcite.org/im-a-repurposer-preserving-east-downtowns-cheek-neal-coffee-company-building/ 

Nevermind I found the article! Wow this developer is awesome! Tout Suite will be gone BUT thankfully we can keep this beautiful building as a landmark for the East End!

[BeerNut]

This  reminds me I better enjoy all the new developments along St Emanuel while I can...

[Danny1022]

Hi..

I don't know, but I have come up with an alternative to the txdot plan which I can't say it would be cheaper or better than the original plan but i think it wouldn't take so much unnecessary right of way, and it would definitely add more capacity than their proposal, the elevated highways would stay but the underneath of the highways would have walls built and would be filled with some type of dirt like in normal bridges in other parts of the city. Also, most left exits would be eliminated, unlike on the txdot plan in which they keep a lot of left exits and irregular lane configurations.

The US-59 South of tx-288 would be almost the same as the original txdot plan but with exits of the hov to the mainlanes.

An exit from both the tx288 and us59 that would carry traffic to some exits and to the i-10/45N those lanes would carry entrances. They'd be 2 lanes exiting from the us59, merging with 2 from the tx288, making 4 lanes, then at the 45 interchange 2 lanes would merge making 6 lanes, then 4 lanes would exit at the i-10 interchange and the other 2 would continue and merge again at the us-59 main through traffic lanes(there would also be various exits to downtown), 3 lanes would be separated  for through traffic. 

The i-45 and i-10 traffic to the 59 would go on a 4 lame connector similar to the one on the 290/610 to the i-10

The express lanes would be at all 3 highways, the i-10 would have one in each direction as well as the us-59 from i-10 to i-45. The us-59 would have 2 from the 288 to the 45 as well as the i-45 from the i-45hov to the us-59 and from West Dallas street all the way to the beltway 8. The 45 from us-59 to West Dallas street would be 3 lanes wide, there would be a direct connector from the us-59 express to the i-45 express.

The pierce will stay the same width but there would be 3 express lanes in each direction underground.

Also, there would be a direct connector separated but parallel To the 45 which would exit before the 10/45 interchange and would carry traffic to downtown.

In total, the lane configuration would be..

At the i-10/45 interchange 

Current, 21 lanes , txdot: 28, mine 40

I45 at Washington avenue 

Current, 10 lames, txdot 4 (i-45 not included cos rerouted), mine 20(including 6 of the downtown connectors

I-10 at main

Current 8 lanes, txdot 5 lames(3 main, 2 express), mine 5 lanes(4 main and 1 express) (not including their rerouted i-45 and my connector to us 59)

Us-59 elevated and pierce elevated combined.

Currently, 14 lanes total, 7 in each direction, 8 on the 59 and 6 on the 45.

Txdot, 20 total, 11 northbound 9 southbound, 12 on the 59 and 8 on the 45, no express lanes.

Mine, 32 total, 16 on each direction, 10 on the 45 and 12 on the 45, and total of 8 express lanes, 6 on the 45 and 2 on the 59

Us-59 between i-45 and tx-288 

Currently 16 lanes, txdot 20 , mine 20 lanes as well  (4 for direct connectors to the i-45, 8 of exiting traffic, 6 for through traffic, 2 for express lane traffic)

It's probably the most idiotic plan that has ever been invented but.. I guess I wanted to share it, 

[nate4l1f3]

On 12/26/2016 at 9:28 AM, BeerNut said:

This  reminds me I better enjoy all the new developments along St Emanuel while I can...

I'm just reading this thread but everything on St. Emanuel would be torn down?!

 

On 12/26/2016 at 9:28 AM, BeerNut said:

This  reminds me I better enjoy all the new developments along St Emanuel while I can...

 

[BeerNut]

5 hours ago, nate4l1f3 said:

I'm just reading this thread but everything on St. Emanuel would be torn down?!

 

 

Everything on the West side of the st for sure...  Most recent map

[j_cuevas713]

I hope this project doesn't happen. The East End will lose alot.

Edited January 2, 2017 by j_cuevas713

[j_cuevas713]

When you realize the scale of this project, it's almost insanity to let this happen. You lose so much more than you gain. 

[samagon]

I've argued over it so much on this forum already I don't feel like rehashing.

 

I am unsure if there is any political opposition to this, or even a grassroots organization that is going to fight this. If it's still 10 years away, there's still time and I'm sure there is going to be some organization forming opposition to the downtown portion of the realignment, that will be the best way to dedicate your time, rather than the fairly pointless arguments on here.

 

The 225 freeway was stopped. Even though this is a federal thing not local, I still feel the right amount of opposition can make a difference.

[Danny1022]

On 1/3/2017 at 2:28 PM, samagon said:

I've argued over it so much on this forum already I don't feel like rehashing.

 

I am unsure if there is any political opposition to this, or even a grassroots organization that is going to fight this. If it's still 10 years away, there's still time and I'm sure there is going to be some organization forming opposition to the downtown portion of the realignment, that will be the best way to dedicate your time, rather than the fairly pointless arguments on here.

 

The 225 freeway was stopped. Even though this is a federal thing not local, I still feel the right amount of opposition can make a difference.

Yes, exactly. There needs to be opposition, I've tried to convince many people and only 3 didn't become ignorant, the bad thing is only one of those is from Houston. So that's a problem.

The Houstonians either don't know about it or are for it, and I'm sure all people who know about it are for it.

I'll say things to make it make semse. And hopefully some will get some common sense. Cos this plan makes no sense.

1 "how do they know that there'll be 24% higher speeds" They haven't tested the highway cos it hasn't been built. Oh and it's 24%now, in 10 years it'll be a lower number cos the number of cars will rise.

2 they'll clear 14 half blocks of the pierce. 14 halves equals 7 blocks.. kind of. They'll demolish about 20 blocks on the east side.. that's not including an entire apartment complex, they're all like highways like the pierce destroy neighbourhoods, no, the new plan destroys the entire apartment complex, that's just like destroying a neighbourhood in its entirety...

3 distances. And curves of the rerouting. Ugh it makes the routes from west, North and northwest, to the South and southwest longer and harder because of the 3 curves of over 80 degrees at the 3 interchanges of downtown. That'll encourage people to take the already congested 610 or the 59.which are amongst the most congested highways in Texas.

4 the pierce and the 59 elevated are a barrier... the txdot plan is a barrier they close more streets than there already are. They cut Polk street, runnels street and i think commerce street too. And demolish chartres street. Plus the conection to bell street 

And various streets in midtown on the 59.

5 underneath highways in Houston don't work... I'm not saying they might flood, I'm saying they will flood. The pierce can be a good highway since it's elevated..

And they'll need money to pump the water out.

6 they're mostly benefiting the arrogant business owners of those large buildings the ones who asked for the pierce demolition.rather than what most people affected would benefit, most people affected would be through traffic, so then they should be the benefited ones, since they're majority, 

I guess this isn't positive but.. I guess I was trying to get my thoughts out Cos I totally despise this project. And I've tried to get an idea of an alternative but that failed with most people to whom I've showed so I guess using common sense and protesting would thebest way... I guess..

Sorry I wrote so much.

[j_cuevas713]

Why can't TxDot fund a commuter rail system? I really have no clue why they are persistent with roads! I just don't understand why a regional transit solution only involves laying concrete for more cars.

[samagon]

1 hour ago, j_cuevas713 said:

Why can't TxDot fund a commuter rail system? I really have no clue why they are persistent with roads! I just don't understand why a regional transit solution only involves laying concrete for more cars.

right. how many miles of rail would this 6 billion project make?

[j_cuevas713]

Just now, samagon said:

right. how many miles of rail would this 6 billion project make?

Something isn't right with that organization. They seem so out of touch with what's going on in urban environments and what people want. Clearly it's politics and money, but it's so damn frustrating. 

[gmac]

4 hours ago, samagon said:

right. how many miles of rail would this 6 billion project make?

 

In a perfect world, that $6 billion would get you about 60 miles of light rail at $100 mill. a mile.

 

For something pretty useless to many people.

[JLWM8609]

On 1/18/2017 at 5:11 PM, Danny1022 said:

 

5 underneath highways in Houston don't work... I'm not saying they might flood, I'm saying they will flood. The pierce can be a good highway since it's elevated..

And they'll need money to pump the water out.

 

1

 

I'm not sold on this re-routing plan, but depressed highways flooding are actually a good thing. Otherwise, that water would be going into neighborhoods. I'd rather see our freeways used as spillways than our neighborhoods. They can put sensors and gates at the onramps to keep people from entering the freeways while they're flooded. I live along Brays Bayou so it's better to see 288 underwater than Riverside Terrace, and I'm sure the folks in Meyerland would agree about their neighborhoods, too. I doubt pumps add that much extra cost to depressed freeways, and if streets can flood, freeways at ground level can flood, too. You say the Pierce Elevated would be good since it's elevated, but what good would 2 miles of elevated highway do when the depressed and ground level sections at I-10 are flooded by Buffalo and White Oak Bayous?

Edited January 20, 2017 by JLWM8609

[samagon]

19 hours ago, gmac said:

 

In a perfect world, that $6 billion would get you about 60 miles of light rail at $100 mill. a mile.

 

For something pretty useless to many people.

 

if we're comparing the amount of people that get usefulness out of the money spent...

 

getting rid of the pierce elevated is completely useless to all but a very small number of people. Like, 100% completely useless. Basically, unless you are a developer that will have access to buy that land when TXDOT sells it. it is useless.

 

Can we quantify the number of people in Midtown whose quality of life will improve when they can see through where the pierce elevated sits now?

 

We can absolutely raise quality of life for more people with 60 miles of light rail than the removal of the pierce elevated.

 

I mean, great soundbite, but more people would get far greater usefulness out of 60 miles of light rail than the removal of the pierce elevated.

 

don't get me wrong, they need to fix 45 through town, there's just better ways to do it. remove the dallas dip, add a lane in each direction. remove some connectors (59 south to 45 north? Really? Why?) there's a lot of smart changes to 59/288 from montrose up to the 45 interchange. 

 

but then making 45 go through 3 90 degree turns that's where this project really goes off the rails. it will slow traffic down to maybe 45mph on its own. so any gains they might make in mobility in other locations, rerouting 45 destroys all of that. plus they don't add any additional lanes. so they aren't adding any additional capacity, which is really needed.

 

So why not spend 3-4 billion on making some of the changes, and adding a lane to the current location of 45, removing the dallas dip, and then add 20 miles of light rail. higher capacity, and more mobility options. win for everyone (well everyone except the developers who will be able to get the pierce elevated land and the people who will have better life quality by not seeing the pierce elevated).

 

it's a shame it can't be that way.

Edited January 20, 2017 by samagon

[Danny1022]

I'm sick of this project, I despise it and it's ugly , and tunnels are scary, and elevated highways are the best thing ever..

I've tried to make sense I've tried to make everyone have common sense and have come up with 9 alternatives, all kept the pierce, yet no one listened, and there were only controversy coments, only few people bothered to see these plans. That doesn't matter txdot is stubborn anyway...

Out if all of the people I know who have 'both' hated this project and didn't mention public transportation, only one lives in Houston the rest of the controversy seems to be in Europe or other parrs of the us where they don't mind... nor care.

Tunnels are ugly and scary , but well... I won't take the 45 nor 59 after they do this project.. besides itd make it less complicated to go on the 610 than take 3 curves of over 80° turns to go to southwest Houston.

And by the way. Txdot sucks, not just on this project. But they're messing up on other projects like the 610 bus lanes, the bus system sucks and there isn't a Houston underground or over ground... And the 610 59 project. That'll need to be widened eventually... 

And other mess.  Sorry if you dislike this but it's true

I wish that on the poll above there were a keep pierce option cos I'd definitely choose that one. Cos I'm strongly against that reruting .

Shhh...

[Houston19514]

55 minutes ago, samagon said:

 

if we're comparing the amount of people that get usefulness out of the money spent...

 

getting rid of the pierce elevated is completely useless to all but a very small number of people. Like, 100% completely useless. Basically, unless you are a developer that will have access to buy that land when TXDOT sells it. it is useless.

 

Can we quantify the number of people in Midtown whose quality of life will improve when they can see through where the pierce elevated sits now?

 

We can absolutely raise quality of life for more people with 60 miles of light rail than the removal of the pierce elevated.

 

I mean, great soundbite, but more people would get far greater usefulness out of 60 miles of light rail than the removal of the pierce elevated.

 

don't get me wrong, they need to fix 45 through town, there's just better ways to do it. remove the dallas dip, add a lane in each direction. remove some connectors (59 south to 45 north? Really? Why?) there's a lot of smart changes to 59/288 from montrose up to the 45 interchange. 

 

but then making 45 go through 3 90 degree turns that's where this project really goes off the rails. it will slow traffic down to maybe 45mph on its own. so any gains they might make in mobility in other locations, rerouting 45 destroys all of that. plus they don't add any additional lanes. so they aren't adding any additional capacity, which is really needed.

 

So why not spend 3-4 billion on making some of the changes, and adding a lane to the current location of 45, removing the dallas dip, and then add 20 miles of light rail. higher capacity, and more mobility options. win for everyone (well everyone except the developers who will be able to get the pierce elevated land and the people who will have better life quality by not seeing the pierce elevated).

 

it's a shame it can't be that way.

 

To be fair, the $6 Billion does a lot more than just remove the Pierce Elevated. So your comparison of the benefits of 60 miles of light rail to the benefits of removing the Pierce elevated, while ignoring the other benefits of the $6 Billion project is, to put it nicely, incomplete.

[samagon]

10 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

 

To be fair, the $6 Billion does a lot more than just remove the Pierce Elevated. So your comparison of the benefits of 60 miles of light rail to the benefits of removing the Pierce elevated, while ignoring the other benefits of the $6 Billion project is, to put it nicely, incomplete.

Too true. the cost of the downtown section (from the houston freeway site) is $4 billion.

http://www.houstonfreeways.com/analysis#cost

 

so only 40 miles. huge difference. sorry for misrepresentation.

 

and that $40 billion is just an estimate by the most notable newspaper in Houston.

 

I hope he doesn't mind me copy pasting from his site, but his adjustment/idea is really the best possible outcome, it maintains pretty much everything but the removal of the pierce elevated. the cost for that is just too high...

 

• The downtown section of the project is the main budget buster at $4 billion
• Accommodating the desires of downtown Houston interests and inner loop interests caused the cost of the downtown section to skyrocket. Also, this analysis has likely influenced many design adjustments which also incrementally increased the cost.
• The 12-mile section north of downtown, estimated at $3 billion, is more reasonably priced.
• The HGAC TIP financial plan reports that during the four fiscal years from 2017 through 2020, funding for federal and state highway programs is $4.68 billion, or $1.17 billion per year. That amount covers all construction, maintenance, operations and administration in the six-county Houston District, and appears to also include right-of-way funds (although I am not sure about that).
• I'm thinking that around $700 per million year is available for new projects.
• At current funding levels, the downtown section would consume all available Houston-area construction/right-of-way funding for around 6 years and everything north of downtown would consume 4 years of funding, for a total of around 10 years if the project could get all available regional money. Since other priorities will also need to be accommodated, this project could require 15 or more years to complete after construction begins.
• Increased state and/or federal funding would expedite the project. Both Clinton and Trump are calling for increased infrastructure investment, but getting the funding would require a federal gasoline tax increase, which is unlikely to clear congress.
• Some bonds could be issued based on revenue from the MaX lanes. I'm thinking maybe $250 million, which is around 4% of the overall project cost but around 8% of the project cost north of downtown, where the MaX lanes are actually located.
• The section of IH-69 from Spur 527 to SH 288 is slated to proceed first. I fully agree with that plan.
• After the IH-69 section, I prefer to see more cost-effective sections proceed next. That would be the section from Loop 610 to Beltway 8, including the IH-45/IH-610 interchange.
• For downtown (after the IH-69 section between Spur 527 and SH 288), I would prefer to see IH-69 improved and sunk into the trench, leaving IH-45 and IH-10 mostly intact. That should cost in the range of $1 to $1.5 billion if the US 59/IH-10 interchange can be preserved. For that money, IH-69 would get its vaunted 24 mph speed increase and downtown interests would get the freeway sunk below ground level. And it has a price tag which can be funded.

Edited January 20, 2017 by samagon

[Houston19514]

4 minutes ago, samagon said:

Too true. the cost of the downtown section (from the houston freeway site) is $4 billion.

http://www.houstonfreeways.com/analysis#cost

 

so only 40 miles. huge difference. sorry for misrepresentation.

 

and that $40 billion is just an estimate by the most notable newspaper in Houston.

 

Still, there are benefits to even the $4 billion project beyond just the removal of the Pierce Elevated.  

[samagon]

I agree, and I added more to my reply. sorry.

 

My biggest problem with this project is the wasteful removal of the pierce elevated. it's a huge cost burden for everyone that benefits such a small number of people (big money developers and the thousands of residents of midtown). Then the negatives associated with getting the ROW to realign 45. and the realignment is not going to increase capacity on 45. for us taxpayers, that specific part, the realignment of 45 makes no sense.

 

most of the project, yeah, it's ok. go for it. we need additional capacity.

 

but removing the pierce elevated serves no benefit to the people using the freeway system, it's a detriment to everyone living in eado, and the costs associated are just so crazy.

[Danny1022]

1 hour ago, samagon said:

 

if we're comparing the amount of people that get usefulness out of the money spent...

 

getting rid of the pierce elevated is completely useless to all but a very small number of people. Like, 100% completely useless. Basically, unless you are a developer that will have access to buy that land when TXDOT sells it. it is useless.

 

Can we quantify the number of people in Midtown whose quality of life will improve when they can see through where the pierce elevated sits now?

 

We can absolutely raise quality of life for more people with 60 miles of light rail than the removal of the pierce elevated.

 

I mean, great soundbite, but more people would get far greater usefulness out of 60 miles of light rail than the removal of the pierce elevated.

 

don't get me wrong, they need to fix 45 through town, there's just better ways to do it. remove the dallas dip, add a lane in each direction. remove some connectors (59 south to 45 north? Really? Why?) there's a lot of smart changes to 59/288 from montrose up to the 45 interchange. 

 

but then making 45 go through 3 90 degree turns that's where this project really goes off the rails. it will slow traffic down to maybe 45mph on its own. so any gains they might make in mobility in other locations, rerouting 45 destroys all of that. plus they don't add any additional lanes. so they aren't adding any additional capacity, which is really needed.

 

So why not spend 3-4 billion on making some of the changes, and adding a lane to the current location of 45, removing the dallas dip, and then add 20 miles of light rail. higher capacity, and more mobility options. win for everyone (well everyone except the developers who will be able to get the pierce elevated land and the people who will have better life quality by not seeing the pierce elevated).

 

it's a shame it can't be that way.

Yes, that makes sense, one coukd build a subway (either elevated or ground level, to the Katy area or uptown or the north ) and only widen the pierce, reconstruct the 59, allen interchange and modify the i 10 interchange, maybe widen the 59 somewhat staying on the right of way, and also rebuild old bridges, and eliminating some bad merging zones, plus the 59 changes South of the 288. Simple.

It makes more sense than rerouting and making those weird tight turns and put all underground and demolishing 24 blocks next to the 59. 

And make buses that have stops often and that are for shorter routes and affordable rather than for long distances and , and the longer trips made on subway. And if the subway is far then easily take a bus to get close to the subway station, and yeah, similar to cities like London Berlin or Paris. Although that's just a suggestion not a full confirmation. just saying..

[Houston19514]

1 hour ago, samagon said:

I agree, and I added more to my reply. sorry.

 

My biggest problem with this project is the wasteful removal of the pierce elevated. it's a huge cost burden for everyone that benefits such a small number of people (big money developers and the thousands of residents of midtown). Then the negatives associated with getting the ROW to realign 45. and the realignment is not going to increase capacity on 45. for us taxpayers, that specific part, the realignment of 45 makes no sense.

 

most of the project, yeah, it's ok. go for it. we need additional capacity.

 

but removing the pierce elevated serves no benefit to the people using the freeway system, it's a detriment to everyone living in eado, and the costs associated are just so crazy.

 

Why would you say the project does not increase capacity on 45?

Edited January 20, 2017 by Houston19514