Jump to content

Bridge Over Brazos St. At Spur 527


Recommended Posts

TxDot has plans for Spur 527-

 

According to TxDoT spokesperson- 527 is targeted to be placed below ground from Alabama to I59.

That will allow commuters and residents the opportunity to experience NO ACCESS from 527........resulting in better informed opinions I’m sure. ;)

 

BTW

COH/PWE reported that when Bagby was entirely closed while Brazos bridge was dismantled NO. Repeat No complaints were received at all, from anyone concerning changes in access.

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

46 minutes ago, trymahjong said:

TxDot has plans for Spur 527-

 

According to TxDoT spokesperson- 527 is targeted to be placed below ground from Alabama to I59.

That will allow commuters and residents the opportunity to experience NO ACCESS from 527........resulting in better informed opinions I’m sure. ;)

 

BTW

COH/PWE reported that when Bagby was entirely closed while Brazos bridge was dismantled NO. Repeat No complaints were received at all, from anyone concerning changes in access.

 

I didn't know about the underground plan. Interesting.  I think they should consider a tunnel connecting it all the way up to 45 so that traffic doesn't have to cut through the neighborhood anymore.

 

People don't complain when they assume something is temporary for construction. Permanent is a different issue.  Put up a fair-sized sign at the Bagby entrance to the Spur saying it may be closed permanently along with a number to call with feedback, and then see what people say...

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Ross said:

Do you really think that Midtown will end up being an area that people only go to, not through? That's stupidly ridiculous. It's fast growing because for decades no one lived there. In the 1990 census, there were less than 1000 people in Midtown. It started growing in the late 90's.

 

You haven't said what the 65,000 cars per day that use the Spur should do if it is closed. They still need to get to Downtown.

 

Personally, I don't give a crap what the residents of Midtown think. They live in Houston, and have to understand it ain't just about them.

 

Do you really think I said that people will "only" go to Midtown, not through it? Can you quote where I said that? Before tossing childish insults like "stupidly ridiculous," why don't you read what I'm actually writing?

 

I am not talking about percentage growth, I'm talking about which neighborhood has the most apartments being built. Midtown leads the entire metro area, with over 5,000 units added in the last 5 years. In terms of interest and land value, it is a more important neighborhood than wherever you live, unless you live either downtown or on Post Oak Blvd.

 

What will the 65,000 cars per day do when the Spur is turned into a surface street? The same thing they do when the Spur ends where it currently ends. Deal with a few traffic lights. I wish all arguments on HAIF were this easy.

 

Edited by H-Town Man
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, ToryGattis said:

I think they should consider a tunnel connecting it all the way up to 45 so that traffic doesn't have to cut through the neighborhood anymore.

We should dig more tunnels in general.  Highway tunnels, subway tunnels, mysterious secret tunnels,  underwater drainage tunnels

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, ToryGattis said:

I think Midtown works great as it is, which is part of why it's growing so fast. It accommodates a ton of cars during the day, but turns into Houston's biggest nightlife neighborhood at night (downtown is able to do this as well).  It also has fantastic access to the rest of the city (partly through the spur), which is very attractive.  And the most walkable part is developing exactly where it should - along rail+one-lane Main St.

 

Midtown is dominated by 5-lane roads with narrow sidewalks and few stops where cars whiz along at 40 mph. It is a hostile environment for pedestrians in most places. The amount of recent mixed-use development and land speculation shows that it is trying to hatch out of its egg as a truly walkable urban neighborhood but it is being held back by decisions made in the past to make it a speedzone for commuters.

 

It was one thing to laugh off the urbanists when land in Midtown was worth $20/SF, but now that it is worth $200/SF, we need to realize that the world has shifted. Houston's future and competitiveness does not rely on helping people in the suburbs commute to downtown easily the way they once did. I say this as a person who lives in the suburbs with a large family. Property values in the core are skyrocketing while values in the suburbs are growing modestly with inflation because preferences are shifting to the urban core. Which means that the balance of interests in these decisions needs to likewise shift. Yes, the commuters are still important, but not as important, while the inner city is exponentially more important.

 

Whatever detriment to the city's interests is caused by southwest commuters having to wait through a few more traffic lights on the way to work downtown is more than made up for by the creation of value resulting from removing a freeway spur in an area where land values are high and interest in urban living is high. This is, at bottom, an economic decision.

 

Edited by H-Town Man
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, cspwal said:

We should dig more tunnels in general.  Highway tunnels, subway tunnels, mysterious secret tunnels,  underwater drainage tunnels

Yes! Especially more mysterious secret tunnels! 😅 (one of my favorite exploring experiences at Rice) And sure, let them drain water too during a hard rain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, H-Town Man said:

 

Midtown is dominated by 5-lane roads with narrow sidewalks and few stops where cars whiz along at 40 mph. It is a hostile environment for pedestrians in most places. The amount of recent mixed-use development and land speculation shows that it is trying to hatch out of its egg as a truly walkable urban neighborhood but it is being held back by decisions made in the past to make it a speedzone for commuters.

 

It was one thing to laugh off the urbanists when land in Midtown was worth $20/SF, but now that it is worth $200/SF, we need to realize that the world has shifted. Houston's future and competitiveness does not rely on helping people in the suburbs commute to downtown easily the way they once did. I say this as a person who lives in the suburbs with a large family. Property values in the core are skyrocketing while values in the suburbs are growing modestly with inflation because preferences are shifting to the urban core. Which means that the balance of interests in these decisions needs to likewise shift.

 

Whatever detriment to the city's interests is caused by southwest commuters having to wait through a few more traffic lights on the way to work downtown is more than made up for by the creation of value resulting from removing a freeway spur in an area where land values are high and interest in urban living is high. This is, at bottom, an economic decision.

 

 

The urban values are increasing as traffic worsens and there are an increasing number of childless households.  Suburbs stay flat because there is plenty of competition (i.e. there is a whole lot of land out there to choose from - not near as much in the core).  But this argument frustrates me the same as people who move next to an airport and then complain about the planes.  The major streets and freeways are well established. If you don't like living next to them, don't move in next to them. But don't move into them and then complain. You made your decision and knew what you were buying into.  Next thing you know, West U, Bellaire, and the westside villages will shrink or cut all their major thru-streets because they don't want people driving through them - they just want to be an endpoint.  It's selfish and self-centered and detrimental to the community as a whole.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, trymahjong said:

TxDot has plans for Spur 527-

 

According to TxDoT spokesperson- 527 is targeted to be placed below ground from Alabama to I59.

That will allow commuters and residents the opportunity to experience NO ACCESS from 527........resulting in better informed opinions I’m sure. ;)

 

BTW

COH/PWE reported that when Bagby was entirely closed while Brazos bridge was dismantled NO. Repeat No complaints were received at all, from anyone concerning changes in access.


This would be incredible! Where did you see this?

 

Just imagine what the area around The Ion will look like then. You can walk from there towards Montrose Blvd on Wheeler/Richmond without worrying about getting shanked underneath the spur encampments.

 

Sounds like a dream!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, ToryGattis said:

 

The urban values are increasing as traffic worsens and there are an increasing number of childless households.  Suburbs stay flat because there is plenty of competition (i.e. there is a whole lot of land out there to choose from - not near as much in the core).  But this argument frustrates me the same as people who move next to an airport and then complain about the planes.  The major streets and freeways are well established. If you don't like living next to them, don't move in next to them. But don't move into them and then complain. You made your decision and knew what you were buying into.  Next thing you know, West U, Bellaire, and the westside villages will shrink or cut all their major thru-streets because they don't want people driving through them - they just want to be an endpoint.  It's selfish and self-centered and detrimental to the community as a whole.

 

Nothing is ever well established. When the freeways were built, it was well established that there were residential neighborhoods there, but the world was changing and those residential neighborhoods had to accept freeways being cut through them and the consequent decline in quality of life. Now the world is changing again. There's absolutely nothing wrong with inner city residents demanding that infrastructure be altered to benefit them. That's just how democracy works in city planning.

 

I think for you this is kind of a culture war thing - you see the prospering inner city as a threat to how life "should be," with everyone living in a tract house growing a family. I actually do sympathize with you on the shift in societal values away from family, but I don't see this as quite the threat that you do, partly because I've lived in cities where families live in urban environments. 

 

An increasingly greater proportion of downtown's workforce is coming and will continue to come from people who live closer to downtown. This means that it is less important to preserve speedways for commuters. I also get the feeling that you think that most of the change has already happened and you don't quite see that Midtown as it is now is only a shadow of what it will be in another 20 years, with tens of thousands of people living there and sidewalks thronged with pedestrians. We are still only in the first chapter of the changes that will occur.

 

Edited by H-Town Man
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, H-Town Man said:

 

Nothing is ever well established. When the freeways were built, it was well established that there were residential neighborhoods there, but the world was changing and those residential neighborhoods had to accept freeways being cut through them and the consequent decline in quality of life. Now the world is changing again. I think for you this is kind of a culture war thing - you see the prospering inner city as a threat to how life "should be," with everyone living in a tract house growing a family. I actually do sympathize with you on the shift in societal values away from family, but I don't see this as quite the threat that you do, partly because I've lived in cities where families live in urban environments. 

 

An increasingly greater proportion of downtown's workforce is coming and will continue to come from people who live closer to downtown. This means that it is less important to preserve speedways for commuters. I also get the feeling that you think that most of the change has already happened and you don't quite see that Midtown as it is now is only a shadow of what it will be in another 20 years, with tens of thousands of people living there and sidewalks thronged with pedestrians. We are still only in the first chapter of the changes that will occur.

 

Until they have kids and want to live somewhere that isn't full of douchebag bars, has yards, garages, good schools, etc. We moved from Midtown to the Greater Heights after our son was born, and didn't want him playing outside with prostitutes, drug dealers, and drunks walking by. We could deal with those aspects when it was just my wife and I, but Midtown is a pretty child hostile area once they get past toddler stage.

 

The businesses downtown aren't made up of just people under 30, and there has to be a way for the workers to get from the suburbs to Downtown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ross said:

Regardless of those results, there will still be hundreds of thousands of people living in Sugar Land, Katy, et al that will need to get to Downtown. Any proposed changes need to take that into account, because those folks are not moving from the suburbs any time soon.

 

I don't have any real issues with closing the Bagby and Brazos ramps to the Spur, but the Spur is still a necessary part of Houston's transit infrastructure.

 

Sorry if my comments came across as being a little too far last night, they were a bit too 'extra'.

 

With that being said, I don't think that there are hundreds of thousands of people that are trying to get downtown because there's only just over 100,000 jobs in Downtown and I don't think that many people are going to court or getting a new passport.

 

It will never be sustainable to have people drive their own vehicles by themselves from outside Beltway 8. Park and Ride ridership is up between 6 and 10% YOY and it needs to increase more. Metro really needs to make a better effort with more options from P&R locations direct to the Med Center or Uptown, etc. 

 

1 hour ago, trymahjong said:

TxDot has plans for Spur 527-

 

According to TxDoT spokesperson- 527 is targeted to be placed below ground from Alabama to I59.

That will allow commuters and residents the opportunity to experience NO ACCESS from 527........resulting in better informed opinions I’m sure. ;)

 

BTW

COH/PWE reported that when Bagby was entirely closed while Brazos bridge was dismantled NO. Repeat No complaints were received at all, from anyone concerning changes in access.

 

"No access" just means driving up to the ramp in Downtown. Not great, but it would be a mega improvement. Would gladly trade having to drive up to an entrance ramp instead of having all of those cars in Midtown.

 

42 minutes ago, ToryGattis said:

 

I didn't know about the underground plan. Interesting.  I think they should consider a tunnel connecting it all the way up to 45 so that traffic doesn't have to cut through the neighborhood anymore.

 

People don't complain when they assume something is temporary for construction. Permanent is a different issue.  Put up a fair-sized sign at the Bagby entrance to the Spur saying it may be closed permanently along with a number to call with feedback, and then see what people say...

 

Would be interesting to see traffic reduction results from non-commuters having their Waze/Google Map "shortcut" blocked with no-through traffic signs.

 

5 minutes ago, ToryGattis said:

 

The urban values are increasing as traffic worsens and there are an increasing number of childless households.  Suburbs stay flat because there is plenty of competition (i.e. there is a whole lot of land out there to choose from - not near as much in the core).  But this argument frustrates me the same as people who move next to an airport and then complain about the planes.  The major streets and freeways are well established. If you don't like living next to them, don't move in next to them. But don't move into them and then complain. You made your decision and knew what you were buying into.  Next thing you know, West U, Bellaire, and the westside villages will shrink or cut all their major thru-streets because they don't want people driving through them - they just want to be an endpoint.  It's selfish and self-centered and detrimental to the community as a whole.

 

So we should never widen or improve highways then because the people living out there should know what they were signing up for? The streets in Midtown are grossly overbuilt except for the 1 hour in each direction that they receive rush hour traffic, and it creates a safety hazard from reckless drivers who treat them like a highway the other 23 hours of the day. There is wanton disrespect for HOV lanes/speed limits/pedestrian right of way. It's more akin to Shepherd/Durham than to West U/ Bellaire. 

1 minute ago, Ross said:

Until they have kids and want to live somewhere that isn't full of douchebag bars, has yards, garages, good schools, etc. We moved from Midtown to the Greater Heights after our son was born, and didn't want him playing outside with prostitutes, drug dealers, and drunks walking by. We could deal with those aspects when it was just my wife and I, but Midtown is a pretty child hostile area once they get past toddler stage.

 

The businesses downtown aren't made up of just people under 30, and there has to be a way for the workers to get from the suburbs to Downtown.

 

gallery_medium.jpg

 

Or we could keep spending $20 billion/year on highway expansion in Texas for a problem that can't be solved and only creates more upkeep costs into perpetuity!

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, H-Town Man said:

 

Nothing is ever well established. When the freeways were built, it was well established that there were residential neighborhoods there, but the world was changing and those residential neighborhoods had to accept freeways being cut through them and the consequent decline in quality of life. Now the world is changing again. There's absolutely nothing wrong with inner city residents demanding that infrastructure be altered to benefit them. That's just how democracy works in city planning.

 

I think for you this is kind of a culture war thing - you see the prospering inner city as a threat to how life "should be," with everyone living in a tract house growing a family. I actually do sympathize with you on the shift in societal values away from family, but I don't see this as quite the threat that you do, partly because I've lived in cities where families live in urban environments. 

 

An increasingly greater proportion of downtown's workforce is coming and will continue to come from people who live closer to downtown. This means that it is less important to preserve speedways for commuters. I also get the feeling that you think that most of the change has already happened and you don't quite see that Midtown as it is now is only a shadow of what it will be in another 20 years, with tens of thousands of people living there and sidewalks thronged with pedestrians. We are still only in the first chapter of the changes that will occur.

 

 

You misunderstand where I'm coming from.  I'm a live-and-let-live guy, families (usually in the suburbs) and non-families (typically urban).  Offer both and let people choose.  The big picture story in cities is that people have pushed the average age of marriage and children back almost a decade, and people want to live in cities and urban neighborhoods during that decade, which is totally fine and great (I live in a Midtown midrise myself). Even some empty nesters are coming back, although that is very small (the vast majority age in place in the suburbs).  What I'm trying to prevent is a scenario where the anti-suburb forces make commuting intolerable, so many major employers move out to the suburbs (like Exxon) and weaken both the core city and the overall metro (imho).  I like that Houston has a strong central core, which can't be said in all cities (and I don't just mean Detroit - I think our core is much stronger than Dallas, Atlanta, Phoenix, and even LA in some ways).  For the typical major employer, 75+% of their employees are family oriented (30-65 age range).  If they are forced to make a choice, they will pick the suburbs.  Let's not force them to make that choice.

 

As far as the future of Midtown, for better or worse I think it will blend into downtown after the Pierce is removed and become more and more like downtown - probably something like a small Manhattan.  And I'll point out Manhattan has giant one-way streets as well and does better than any other city in America for pedestrian life. They are not incompatible.  In fact, midtown will probably become more like Manhattan in another way: big one-way streets moving lots of cars north-south, with smaller more intimate neighborhoods on the cross-streets.  It's a fine model. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Ross said:

Until they have kids and want to live somewhere that isn't full of douchebag bars, has yards, garages, good schools, etc. We moved from Midtown to the Greater Heights after our son was born, and didn't want him playing outside with prostitutes, drug dealers, and drunks walking by. We could deal with those aspects when it was just my wife and I, but Midtown is a pretty child hostile area once they get past toddler stage.

 

The businesses downtown aren't made up of just people under 30, and there has to be a way for the workers to get from the suburbs to Downtown.

 

Becoming clearer and clearer that your opposition to this is based on cultural dislike.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, ToryGattis said:

 

You misunderstand where I'm coming from.  I'm a live-and-let-live guy, families (usually in the suburbs) and non-families (typically urban).  Offer both and let people choose.  The big picture story in cities is that people have pushed the average age of marriage and children back almost a decade, and people want to live in cities and urban neighborhoods during that decade, which is totally fine and great (I live in a Midtown midrise myself). Even some empty nesters are coming back, although that is very small (the vast majority age in place in the suburbs).  What I'm trying to prevent is a scenario where the anti-suburb forces make commuting intolerable, so many major employers move out to the suburbs (like Exxon) and weaken both the core city and the overall metro (imho).  I like that Houston has a strong central core, which can't be said in all cities (and I don't just mean Detroit - I think our core is much stronger than Dallas, Atlanta, Phoenix, and even LA in some ways).  For the typical major employer, 75+% of their employees are family oriented (30-65 age range).  If they are forced to make a choice, they will pick the suburbs.  Let's not force them to make that choice.

 

As far as the future of Midtown, for better or worse I think it will blend into downtown after the Pierce is removed and become more and more like downtown - probably something like a small Manhattan.  And I'll point out Manhattan has giant one-way streets as well and does better than any other city in America for pedestrian life. They are not incompatible.  In fact, midtown will probably become more like Manhattan in another way: big one-way streets moving lots of cars north-south, with smaller more intimate neighborhoods on the cross-streets.  It's a fine model. 

 

This is a more thoughtful post than your previous one. I think though that if we are being honest about letting people choose, then we also need to slowly shift the balance of priority in planning decisions as inner city neighborhoods become more and more important. Perform some cost-benefit analysis. There is obviously a cost to closing the part of the Spur that they want to close for this park plan (although as mollusk made the case above, not very much), and a larger cost to closing the rest of the Spur. Commuters from the southwest will see an increase of 5-10 minutes in their downtown commute, which will have a marginal effect on leasing downtown.

 

What is the opportunity? A major stigma is removed from an up-and-coming urban neighborhood, land along the Spur doubles or triples in value, attracting a wave of development (mostly mid-rise and some high-rise multi-family) similar to what other new parks in the inner city have attracted (Buffalo Bayou, Discovery Green, Super Block), increasing the city's tax base and adding to the image of Houston as a green city with high quality of life. Real estate brokers in urban environments often say that "wherever Whole Foods locates becomes the center of the universe." We already have the new Whole Foods at Elgin and Brazos; remove a stigma and put a park in front of it and you have a catalyst for accelerated redevelopment and value increases over a 5-block radius. The number of commuters lost who live outside the city will be more than compensated by the number of people living in new midrise and highrises on the city tax rolls. Not a hard decision for COH.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, H-Town Man said:

 

This is a more thoughtful post than your previous one. I think though that if we are being honest about letting people choose, then we also need to slowly shift the balance of priority in planning decisions as inner city neighborhoods become more and more important. Perform some cost-benefit analysis. There is obviously a cost to closing the part of the Spur that they want to close for this park plan (although as mollusk made the case above, not very much), and a larger cost to closing the rest of the Spur. Commuters from the southwest will see an increase of 5-10 minutes in their downtown commute, which will have a marginal effect on leasing downtown.

 

What is the opportunity? A major stigma is removed from an up-and-coming urban neighborhood, land along the Spur doubles or triples in value, attracting a wave of development (mostly mid-rise and some high-rise multi-family) similar to what other new parks in the inner city have attracted (Buffalo Bayou, Discovery Green, Super Block), increasing the city's tax base and adding to the image of Houston as a green city with high quality of life. Real estate brokers in urban environments often say that "wherever Whole Foods locates becomes the center of the universe." We already have the new Whole Foods at Elgin and Brazos; remove a stigma and put a park in front of it and you have a catalyst for accelerated redevelopment and value increases over a 5-block radius. The number of commuters lost who live outside the city will be more than compensated by the number of people living in new midrise and highrises on the city tax rolls. Not a hard decision for COH.

 

 

Well, ironically, Whole Foods located there counting on the traffic coming off the spur and up Brazos.  They would very much like it reopened.  I've been to that Whole Foods several times and they are definitely lacking customers right now. The cashiers told me it's dead all the time.  I think Whole Foods took a risk locating in a food desert, and it hasn't paid off so far. We need to support it before they close it, and that may mean seriously considering reopening the Brazos bridge.  

 

I could see closing just Brazos and Bagby as being tolerable, as I said in my post, but closing the entire spur would be a disaster.

 

I think Midtown has developed just fine - gangbusters even - even with the fast one-way streets. No need to remove them. If Manhattan has them, I don't see why we shouldn't either.  Clearly a vibrant walkable community can spring up just fine around them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, cspwal said:

We should dig more tunnels in general.  Highway tunnels, subway tunnels, mysterious secret tunnels,  underwater drainage tunnels

 

Are you sure that more secret tunnels aren't being built as we speak?  How would anyone other than us Mole People know about them? :ph34r:

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, H-Town Man said:

 

Becoming clearer and clearer that your opposition to this is based on cultural dislike.

 

What cultural dislike? I actually liked living in Midtown until after we had a kid, and realized there was not going to be anywhere for him to ride a bike, play outside without close supervision, etc. We still know people who live there, and there are still drunks, homeless, and male prostitutes running around, which makes having a kid there problematic. Everyone we knew who had kids moved, except for one couple. We were fortunate to find a great place in the Greater Heights, others moved to the burbs. And, at the time we moved, the zoned elementary was changed from J Will Jones, which became HAIS, to Blackshear, one of the worst elementaries in HISD. Midtown is now zoned to Gregory-Lincoln, which is a mediocre school with no real hope of improvement, for K-8, and to Lamar for HS, which is better, but still not high on my list, even though it's rated highly.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ToryGattis said:

 

Well, ironically, Whole Foods located there counting on the traffic coming off the spur and up Brazos.  They would very much like it reopened.  I've been to that Whole Foods several times and they are definitely lacking customers right now. The cashiers told me it's dead all the time.  I think Whole Foods took a risk locating in a food desert, and it hasn't paid off so far. We need to support it before they close it, and that may mean seriously considering reopening the Brazos bridge.  

 

I could see closing just Brazos and Bagby as being tolerable, as I said in my post, but closing the entire spur would be a disaster.

 

I think Midtown has developed just fine - gangbusters even - even with the fast one-way streets. No need to remove them. If Manhattan has them, I don't see why we shouldn't either.  Clearly a vibrant walkable community can spring up just fine around them.

 

It's not really clear if you can only provide one example of a walkable neighborhood with fast one-way streets and that example is the one city in the U.S. where people would still walk no matter what the streets were like. Manhattan also benefits from the long blocks between the big avenues so there is some respite from the heavy traffic. You could invite a dozen urban experts to give input on Midtown and probably all twelve would tell you that the wide fast streets are hindering pedestrian life, but why listen to them when you have your one example?

 

Regarding Whole Foods, I can't imagine they would be full of customers since the development I'm talking about hasn't happened yet.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ToryGattis said:

 

Well, ironically, Whole Foods located there counting on the traffic coming off the spur and up Brazos.  They would very much like it reopened.  I've been to that Whole Foods several times and they are definitely lacking customers right now. The cashiers told me it's dead all the time.  I think Whole Foods took a risk locating in a food desert, and it hasn't paid off so far. We need to support it before they close it, and that may mean seriously considering reopening the Brazos bridge.  

 

I wonder how much affect curbside pickup and delivery has had on this.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, trymahjong said:

COH/PWE reported that when Bagby was entirely closed while Brazos bridge was dismantled NO. Repeat No complaints were received at all, from anyone concerning changes in access.

I haven't complained because I'm happy the city is finally fixing a bridge that has been literally falling apart for years.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bulldog said:

I haven't complained because I'm happy the city is finally fixing a bridge that has been literally falling apart for years.

 

Well, that's what people think is happening, but the reality is that the City is considering not rebuilding it or even tearing it down.  See the renderings at the top of this thread. If that's an issue for you, you need to send them feedback at Buildforward@houstontx.gov

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ross said:

Until they have kids and want to live somewhere that isn't full of douchebag bars, has yards, garages, good schools, etc. We moved from Midtown to the Greater Heights after our son was born, and didn't want him playing outside with prostitutes, drug dealers, and drunks walking by. We could deal with those aspects when it was just my wife and I, but Midtown is a pretty child hostile area once they get past toddler stage.

 

There would be more families on the streets, and the streets would be much more hospitable to children, if half of them weren't mini-freeways with cars zooming down at 40-50 mph. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, H-Town Man said:

 

There would be more families on the streets, and the streets would be much more hospitable to children, if half of them weren't mini-freeways with cars zooming down at 40-50 mph. 

Traffic was never an issue for us, or our neighbors. The issue was the street people hassling us, staring at us, asking for money, peeing in our yard, sleeping off a drunk against our fence, and other similar fun things. We lived East of Main, and traffic just wasn't an issue.

 

If cars are going 50 mph, then there's an enforcement issue, and you need to be calling HPD and the Constables every 20 minutes from every phone you own, writing letters to the Captain in charge of that area, writing the Mayor and council members, and anyone else you can think of. Ask for more lights and stop signs. The streets of Midtown are the same size they were when the original subdivisions were platted 100+ years ago, they weren't made wider in recent times.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ross said:

The issue was the street people hassling us, staring at us, asking for money, peeing in our yard, sleeping off a drunk against our fence, and other similar fun things.

 

They were just enjoying the walkability of the neighborhood.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Ross said:

Traffic was never an issue for us, or our neighbors. The issue was the street people hassling us, staring at us, asking for money, peeing in our yard, sleeping off a drunk against our fence, and other similar fun things. We lived East of Main, and traffic just wasn't an issue.

 

If cars are going 50 mph, then there's an enforcement issue, and you need to be calling HPD and the Constables every 20 minutes from every phone you own, writing letters to the Captain in charge of that area, writing the Mayor and council members, and anyone else you can think of. Ask for more lights and stop signs. The streets of Midtown are the same size they were when the original subdivisions were platted 100+ years ago, they weren't made wider in recent times.

 

Ross, if we get more lights and stop signs on those streets, isn't that essentially the same as replacing the Spur with an at-grade avenue with signaled intersections (what I've been advocating)? Won't more lights and stop signs cause the imminent death of downtown as all of Sugarland turns elsewhere for office space?

 

Edited by H-Town Man
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, H-Town Man said:

 

Ross, if we get more lights and stop signs on those streets, isn't that essentially the same as replacing the Spur with an at-grade avenue with signaled intersections (what I've been advocating)? Won't more lights and stop signs cause the imminent death of downtown as all of Sugarland turns elsewhere for office space?

 

No, because the Spur will still be there. Closing the Spur would be a really bad thing. Controlling the traffic is reasonable. There's no reason to allow people to drive 50 on Midtown streets. We had a few issues with speeding on LaBranch, and they put up a stop sign. That lasted about a week before the head of Public Works at the time got pissed off about it delaying his drive home, and had it removed after performing a nominal traffic study. His response to complaints about speeding was "call HPD"

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ross said:

No, because the Spur will still be there. Closing the Spur would be a really bad thing. Controlling the traffic is reasonable. There's no reason to allow people to drive 50 on Midtown streets. We had a few issues with speeding on LaBranch, and they put up a stop sign. That lasted about a week before the head of Public Works at the time got pissed off about it delaying his drive home, and had it removed after performing a nominal traffic study. His response to complaints about speeding was "call HPD"

 

Lol, you completely dodged what I said. If you're okay with adding more traffic lights along Smith, Milam, etc., that has the exact same effect as replacing the Spur with a grade-level avenue. It will add the same additional commute time (5 minutes).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, ToryGattis said:

 

Well, that's what people think is happening, but the reality is that the City is considering not rebuilding it or even tearing it down.  See the renderings at the top of this thread. If that's an issue for you, you need to send them feedback at Buildforward@houstontx.gov

Yes, I know it's silly to think that given the word from CoH and public news sources that all refer to repair and a schedule for it. The last public information was:

Quote

 

In a news release, Houston Public Works said the “bridge deck has deteriorated significantly and is being closed immediately to protect the community from falling debris.”

The 50-year-old bridge will take “several months” to repair, likely opening next summer, officials said.

Interesting that the repair process stalled out right after it started. This turn-it-into-a-park proposal seems like an opportunistic move by Westmoreland. As I said previously it's very clever on their part to use their special interest position to get benefits bestowed on themselves by the government at the expense of thousands of other citizens but I'm optimistic that won't be successful.

 

Don't worry, the city will be getting my input and that of a lot of other people.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, bulldog said:

Yes, I know it's silly to think that given the word from CoH and public news sources that all refer to repair and a schedule for it. The last public information was:

Interesting that the repair process stalled out right after it started. This turn-it-into-a-park proposal seems like an opportunistic move by Westmoreland. As I said previously it's very clever on their part to use their special interest position to get benefits bestowed on themselves by the government at the expense of thousands of other citizens but I'm optimistic that won't be successful.

 

Don't worry, the city will be getting my input and that of a lot of other people.

 

Yep, that's what I thought too and then I saw the work stall and wondered what was going on.  The park proposal is from Houston Public Works, so it's very official.  They're seeking input now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also very suspicious that the first roll-out of this is at the Westmoreland Civic Association meeting? Also I'm pretty sure there are laws about announcing government meetings. 

 

"Brazos Bridge Vicinity Concept" project exists exactly nowhere I can find online. The people hyping it up are only referencing the Project # for the $4 million bridge repair contract, which was already awarded. Did they pull the contract after the demolition? This has shenanigans written all over it. I have lots of questions.

  • Like 3
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...