Jump to content

I-45 Rebuild (North Houston Highway Improvement Project)


Recommended Posts

I've thought about it and... I've once again made a plan (yes annoying me has come back) on which someone i know gave me part of the idea. 

Express lanes for the 45 nd the 59 parallel to the 59 taking only half of the block rather than the full block.

The main thing would be between runnels street and i-45. They'd be elevated cos there's really no other easy way to do it. And there would be connection to the i-45 gulf freeway hov And the North freeway express lanes And us-59 eastex how as well as the mainlanes of the mentioned highways, and connection to i-10 Katy freeway. And the 288 express.

Plus reconstruction of the i-45 Allen pkwy interchange, i-45/10, i-45/59 interchanges and the us-59 between the spur 527 and i-45,

20170204_111638.png

Blue: reconstructed highways.

Red:express lanes.

All else: kept intact.

 

20170203_220507.jpg

Sorry for the bad handwriting. And bad drawings. It's pretty much how the final plan may be like. I guess.

Thank you for reading. I guess.

Bye.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I went back and looked at TxDOT's "plan" and this whole idea would cripple the city for a nice long while. It would widen, not close the gap between the East End and Downtown. The Pierce Elevated would be demolished last and it is such a small segment compared to the hell many people, businesses, neighborhoods, etc, would have to go through before anything clears up. And even when it clears up, what have you accomplished??? This would be an absolute disaster for just a small section of covered freeway and a small section of the Pierce elevated demolished in return. Why not make access under 59 more inviting!? Do something with the space provided under the freeway! Double decker 45 and 59 like in other cities! So in summary, TxDOT is going to turn a crap load of dirt for people who can't find another way to get to work other than their cars!? Like give me a break. Those of us who live in the city have to cater to everyone else. I get around just fine on my feet. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Signs have gone up warning about construction to reconfigure the exit from I45 north to US59 north/south.  I got this email about street closures

 

Quote

MAJOR Closures Related to the IH-45 NB to IH-69 SB Direct Connector:
Friday March 3, 2017 through March 2019
TxDOT is redesigning the Direct Connector between IH-45 Northbound and IH-69 Southbound transitioning from a left exit to a right exit. This project has a 25 month projected timeline and construction activity will occur in three phases. Motorists should expect delays and are strongly encouraged to seek alternate routes. Construction schedules are always contingent upon the weather.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/25/2017 at 7:51 PM, cspwal said:

Signs have gone up warning about construction to reconfigure the exit from I45 north to US59 north/south.  I got this email about street closures

 

 

 

 

So the construction of the ramp reconfiguration will be complete in 2019, then in 2021, they'll start reconstruction of the whole interchange, most likely demolishing the new ramp. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forget all this mess..

I don't want to hear it..

I give up now that I see that well..i can up with alternatives in vain..

I wasted 14 months doing alternatives..

Try in to convince people to hear me..

But the only people who did..

Are..

A friend I met because of this project..

And an English guy.. 

I wasted 14 months of my life..

Getting frustrated over all of this stupid project..

And school..

And other situations.. 

All..

For nothing..

Thank you for not hearing..

It makes me realise how I was such an idiot by being confident that they'd hear me..

But I was wrong..

It's like losing a friend (well.. not that bad..) 

It was my favourite highway..

But it's gone..

all hope is gone..

All I want to say is..

TxDOT...

I hate you so damn much..

I'm moving to England for sure..

So that won't matter anyway..

Good luck..

 

Dziękuję..

Do widzenia..

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I the only one who's going to miss the elevated portion of 59?  I liked coming from the airport, going elevated past the GRB, diving into the hole under I-45, then rising, like a phoenix to the elevated portion through midtown.  You can see downtown, the med center, midtown... then you dive back down into the Montrose trench with the colored arches.  The elevated portion is cool.  You can see the scope of the city.  

 

I shall miss you.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Behind the scenes of this disgusting project... ugh..

They're trying to benefit the downtown business owners cos they're the ones who requested the pierce to be demolished, without caring about the through traffic which is rerouted in a less convenient way.. and demolish the awesome skyline views from every highway, which is a reason why this is a nonsense project...

 

I just hope the project doesn't happen. That they'll lose all of the funding and I wish txdot bad luck and I hope that they go broke like massdot went in huge debt.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With all of the advancements made by the car companies with regards to driverless car technology, has TxDOT begun considering such technological advances when analyzing future needs? Many hypothesize widespread adoption within a decade. This project may at best be coming online when the major shift will be occurring.   

 

Following distances will likely shrink when humans no longer drive vehicles--will additional lanes really be needed on new highways or are we spending our funds unnecessarily? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would say that making a road more efficient for humans to navigate will make it more efficient for AI to navigate than the current set up.

 

Say you can get X human-piloted cars through the current setup.  With the elimination of left exits and such, the redesign gives us a 1.25X human-piloted cars going through

Now assume all autonomous cars - and assume they are more 50% more efficient doing freeway stuff.  So the current setup would be 1.5X throughput with all AI cars, but the new setup would be 1.875X the number of AI cars.  So improving the interchange will still provide benefits in a self-driving world.

 

Additionally, it is not a given that fully self-driving cars will happen in that time frame.  The technology might hit snags, there might be regulatory hurdles, or the business model that would fund all autonomous cars doesn't work out so they aren't a huge proportion of the fleet.  TxDot needs to plan for what they know now, not what they guess.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pertaining self driving cars, there was a video I watched a while ago, it gave statistics based on computer models with various percentages of humans driving, vs self driven cars. I think major benefits started to happen around 30% self driving? going up to diminishing returns over 70% self driving.

 

I really hope that if this thing actually happens (I'm still not as convinced as txdot) that it really makes a significant impact for the cost to residents in the immediate area of the areas affected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I know no one has posted here cos it's pointless..

This project totally sucks I want to get all out, I hope that the people who came up with this project get fired, because it'll totally kill downtown Houston and east downtown, and demolish an exaggerated right of way amount 19 blocks at least, am emtire neighbourhood and yeah

But really thinking about it. It's a highway of course it won't be pretty what do they really expect gold and sparkles..? They totally do, itsa highway it's not meant to be freaking pretty, but its not meant to be ugly either, and it's dark below the highway..have you no common sense..?put freaking bright lights to make up for that... have freaking common sense lights can fix the problem.. when it's dark below the highway.

 

I guess the reason why I love elevated highways and I don't complain about them is.. I'm not rich and I grew up where even small overpasses were fascinating. But here overpasses are seen as an ugliness that must be demolished. If it's there then leave it it was built almost 50 years ago most people near there moved there after the highway was built..  and if they chose that then get the he'll over it cos if you chose to live there the deal with the difficulties...

 

So my final words will be.. 

Txdot.. you and your plan both suck yes this is meant to offend you.. 

Goodbye, thank you for not hearing my "trying to make sense" And thank you to those who got this far and read what I've commented... ive more things but this is enough...

Bye..

Edited by Danny1022
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at the maps they are completely taking access to Allen Parkway from I-45 up from Galveston. To get Allen parkway have to exit and go through downtown. They should of left at least two feeder ramps on pierce elevated for northbound traffic on I-45 to Allen Parkway or make pierce into a parkway itself through downtown. Even if you go other way around downtown I do not see any connection of I-45 to the Feeders they planned north of downtown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/31/2017 at 4:54 PM, cougarpad said:

Looking at the maps they are completely taking access to Allen Parkway from I-45 up from Galveston. To get Allen parkway have to exit and go through downtown. They should of left at least two feeder ramps on pierce elevated for northbound traffic on I-45 to Allen Parkway or make pierce into a parkway itself through downtown. Even if you go other way around downtown I do not see any connection of I-45 to the Feeders they planned north of downtown.

 

Or you just take 45 to the downtown connector and go that way.

 

Adding two minutes to your drive isn't a terrible inconvenience. I'd be more sympathetic to the complaints if they weren't either about opposing change because it's change, or putting the perceived interests of EaDo over the rest of the city.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ADCS said:

 

Or you just take 45 to the downtown connector and go that way.

 

Adding two minutes to your drive isn't a terrible inconvenience. I'd be more sympathetic to the complaints if they weren't either about opposing change because it's change, or putting the perceived interests of EaDo over the rest of the city.

They're actually putting downtown interests over the rest of the city, they were the ones who forced the stupid organisation to take off the pierce from downtown, it would be more convenient for the rest of the city including EaDo to preserve the pierce. Although some lanes may need to be added to the 59/10 corridor even with the pierce preserved..

Just saying.. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^ Simply untrue.

 

The biggest issue with the Pierce is that it is bad at serving its putative purpose, transporting through traffic past downtown. The design was made with the expectation that there would be relatively little through traffic. The expansion of the northern and northwestern suburbs hadn't been foreseen, and as a result, we have the present bottlenecks.

 

Now, we have a situation where the Pierce can't be expanded in a cost-effective manner. TxDOT would have to demolish high-rises to do so, and that can't be justified. Leaving it as is would only exacerbate pressures on the rest of the system as population grows. Alternative solutions were needed, and the present plan is the most cost-effective by far, with the greatest amount of stakeholder support.

 

Someone was going to lose on this one - it always happens with any highway project. However, with the exception of a few trendy bars and coffee shop, an aging apartment midrise (by the time construction starts), and public housing the operating agency does not want to continue supporting, EaDo isn't going to be losing much of its present appeal, at least not in the way the predictions of catastrophe on here describe. It still has a rail line and a popular soccer stadium. It is still close to Downtown and its many amenities. It still has a lot of developer attention.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well... then why not widen the 59. Preserve the pierce, eliminate the ramps from the i-45s to the us-59s and from us-59 North to the i-45n amd put them parallel to the i-10 As direct connectors similar to the ones in the us-290/i-610/i-10 connectors and the pierce would be for through traffic only. If you want to get an idea of it look at the photo that I think ive uploaded ⬇ yes maybe half of a block wide of right of way would be taken but that's better than the entire right of way and an entire neighbourhood (idk if its a neighbourhood or apartment complex) if you don't understand the drawing or the writing that's not my problem I made it as clear as possible.

Just saying I mean I'm 101% sure that no one will agree with me but I'm just saying...

 

20170313_143330.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That does nothing to address the through traffic from the North Freeway to the Gulf Freeway. There simply isn't enough space to expand the Pierce without expensive disruptions to surrounding existing property. This is TxDOT we're talking about here - they would not even entertain the notion of permanently relinquishing right-of-way unless engineering constraints made it a particularly viable option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well... onthe txdot project traffic is improved cos in the 45 there would be 3 lanes in the narrowest point, the thing I did would be also 3 lanes, but traffic taken away from an earlier point. Thus it is improved. I wouldn't widen the pierce and well.. never mind this project sucks thank you for not asking any doubts which is why you assumed that I'd widen the pierce when I wouldn't actually. But I give up think whatever the hell you think besides the txdot plan sucks because of the  curves that have to go on the 45..those already slow down traffic.. 

 

But since you agree then I must be wrong like always cos I suck at highways and everything that. I say is wrong and when I don't agree with something every one whos against me is right. I hate life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see this approach as TxDOT trying out a theory. In the end there will be some upside, but mostly I just expect the whole traffic situation to be annoying in new, unforeseen ways.

 

Has anyone bothered to hazard a guess as to how long this might take? I put the over/under at 11 years.

Edited by Nate99
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gonna go a bit off into left field here, but how effective would it be to just re-sign I-10, I-45, and I-69 to portions of I-610 around the city's central core and designate the portions of those freeways inside of 610 as spurs (i.e. I-345, I-569, and I-910)? The thinking is that thru traffic is more likely to simply stay on course than to jump from one highway to another and back again.

 

Re-signing I-45 to the North and East Loops would add about 3 miles. Re-signing I-69 to the West and North Loops would add just 1 mile. Re-signing I-10 to the North Loop adds about 2 miles to the trip. Not really all that significant extensions to thru traffic trips.

 

If simply re-signing the routes could take just 5 or 10% of the thru traffic from the central core, would this expensive project even be necessary? Perhaps spending those funds on West Loop thru lanes and North Loop expansion would be more cost effective and less economically disruptive than in Downtown.

 

Surely TxDOT would have already modeled such though, right?

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

indeed the smartest solution would have been to expand 610 north and east of town from i45 to i45.

 

Even still, I drive the pierce at the worst of times, and the issues are not particularly with the amount of lanes, sure it could use 1 or 2 more, but the curves teamed with elevation changes at the same time, that's what slows down the traffic on pierce itself. other slow downs are all around it, not actually on it. the exit from gulf fwy to 59. in the evenings it's like there's really only 1 lane actually staying on 45. there are 2 forced lanes onto 59 south, and 1 exit for 59 north. most of the traffic in that right most lane in the evenings is going onto 59 north.

 

but pierce actually moves pretty smooth through midtown, all the way till it gets about 200 feet from the Dallas dip, then it slows down to a snails pace. They could do so much to improve flow on the pierce just by fixing the slight curves around buffalo bayou and 6th ward, and get rid of all the elevation changes (most importantly make the dallas underpass an overpass, what were they thinking when they put that under??).

 

They could certainly widen the pierce if they were willing to build more over pierce street, add 1 lane in each direction, and smooth out flow, that would serve everyone so much better.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Sparrow said:

Gonna go a bit off into left field here, but how effective would it be to just re-sign I-10, I-45, and I-69 to portions of I-610 around the city's central core and designate the portions of those freeways inside of 610 as spurs (i.e. I-345, I-569, and I-910)? The thinking is that thru traffic is more likely to simply stay on course than to jump from one highway to another and back again.

 

Re-signing I-45 to the North and East Loops would add about 3 miles. Re-signing I-69 to the West and North Loops would add just 1 mile. Re-signing I-10 to the North Loop adds about 2 miles to the trip. Not really all that significant extensions to thru traffic trips.

 

If simply re-signing the routes could take just 5 or 10% of the thru traffic from the central core, would this expensive project even be necessary? Perhaps spending those funds on West Loop thru lanes and North Loop expansion would be more cost effective and less economically disruptive than in Downtown.

 

Surely TxDOT would have already modeled such though, right?

 

I've been pushing for something similar for a long time. TxDOT does regional traffic a great disservice by not signing 610 for thru traffic.

 

For example, 610 at the North Freeway SB could be signed:

 

610 West: Austin, San Antonio

610 East: Beaumont, Pasadena, Galveston

45 South: Downtown

 

My guess is that TxDOT operates off the assumption that most people navigate by route number, rather than control city. However, in the age of GPS navigation, it would seem to me that control cities are a much more potent navigation tool than route numbers.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Sparrow said:

Gonna go a bit off into left field here, but how effective would it be to just re-sign I-10, I-45, and I-69 to portions of I-610 around the city's central core and designate the portions of those freeways inside of 610 as spurs (i.e. I-345, I-569, and I-910)? The thinking is that thru traffic is more likely to simply stay on course than to jump from one highway to another and back again.

 

Re-signing I-45 to the North and East Loops would add about 3 miles. Re-signing I-69 to the West and North Loops would add just 1 mile. Re-signing I-10 to the North Loop adds about 2 miles to the trip. Not really all that significant extensions to thru traffic trips.

 

If simply re-signing the routes could take just 5 or 10% of the thru traffic from the central core, would this expensive project even be necessary? Perhaps spending those funds on West Loop thru lanes and North Loop expansion would be more cost effective and less economically disruptive than in Downtown.

 

Surely TxDOT would have already modeled such though, right?

 

Have you ever driven on the West Loop?  It doesn't take a traffic engineer to know that rerouting I-69/US59 over the West Loop is not a solution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Houston19514 said:

 

Have you ever driven on the West Loop?  It doesn't take a traffic engineer to know that rerouting I-69/US59 over the West Loop is not a solution.

 

However, judging by the amount of afternoon traffic that exits gulf freeway to go up 59 north, and the lack of traffic on the east loop, it doesn't take a traffic engineer to see that this should be part of the solution.


there's more to the loop than just the west loop through the galleria, and most of it is under-utilized. it could be better utilized if there was better signage as alternate routes.

 

Imagine if 610 east and north from gulf freeway to 45 north were labeled "45 bypass", and inside the loop 45 was labeled "45 alternate".

 

that frees up through traffic coming off 59 and onto the pierce to not have as much traffic going through downtown from south to north on 45.

 

I agree though, the poop-storm that is southwest freeway from shepherd to the pierce elevated sucks and needs to be addressed, trying to get people to take the west loop (its own poop-storm) wouldn't really help.

Edited by samagon
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, samagon said:

They could certainly widen the pierce if they were willing to build more over pierce street, add 1 lane in each direction, and smooth out flow, that would serve everyone so much better.

1

That was an option. They'd have to take one lane away from Pierce St but they could have cantilevered the freeway over Pierce St. to expand it. 

  • Like 1
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...