TxDOT Proposes Elevating I-10 near I-45

[Houston19514]

17 minutes ago, crock said:

the "this is for evacuations" is bullshit because 288 floods intentionally and every version of the i45 plan has them deciding to nullify any ability for i45/i59 through central houston to be functional during a storm, this portion of i10 would not have any traffic to move north/west by TxDot's already stated plans.  

That statement regarding i45/i59[sic] is false.

[hindesky]

"A state proposal to elevate Interstate 10 near White Oak Bayou is raising concerns among neighbors, who worry about the effects a higher freeway would have on noise and drainage."

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/Plan-to-elevate-I-10-raises-concerns-among-17333583.php

[Triton]

Latest schematics of the project

https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/get-involved/hou/i-10-heights-white-oak-bayou/072622-schematic.pdf

https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/get-involved/hou/i-10-heights-white-oak-bayou/072622-schematic-sup.pdf

 

[Triton]

4 minutes ago, Triton said:

Latest schematics of the project

https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/get-involved/hou/i-10-heights-white-oak-bayou/072622-schematic.pdf

https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/get-involved/hou/i-10-heights-white-oak-bayou/072622-schematic-sup.pdf

 

Although I think this project still feels unnecessary to me, I do like they are trying to fix problems with the original design. For example, the eastbound exit to Taylor is pulled back further which should help with people having to cross several lanes over to Taylor (Target side).

Also looks like they try to smoothen out the ramps coming from and going to I-45.

[crock]

22 hours ago, Houston19514 said:

That statement regarding i45/i59[sic] is false.

they're literally said the i45/i69 underground would function similar to 288. 

how is that false? 

[Houston19514]

2 minutes ago, crock said:

they're literally said the i45/i69 underground would function similar to 288. 

how is that false? 

Show us where they said that I45/I69 will be designed to fill with flood water, planning to nullify any ability to function during a storm.

Edited July 28, 2022 by Houston19514

[crock]

2 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

Show me where they said that.

How about you show me where they've said that i45/i69 underground wouldn't be used as retention ponds during a major flood event.  When I asked TxDOT employees how people in the heights/Washington Corridor were supposed to get to the medical center during a major flood event without the pierce elevated they told me with a straight face we would use surface roads.  
 

[crock]

can someone explain if this (highlighted in yellow by me) means the Houston Avenue bridge is being raised, lowered, or not moved? 

[Houston19514]

44 minutes ago, crock said:

How about you show me where they've said that i45/i69 underground wouldn't be used as retention ponds during a major flood event.  When I asked TxDOT employees how people in the heights/Washington Corridor were supposed to get to the medical center during a major flood event without the pierce elevated they told me with a straight face we would use surface roads.  
 

Depressed sections of the proposed project will be designed to provide a 500-year level of protection. This will be achieved through a pumped drainage system that will collect rainwater falling inside the depressed sections and discharge it to an adjacent detention basin or receiving channel. In addition, the entrance points to the depressed sections will be constructed above the adjacent 500-year water surface elevation, such that adjacent floodwaters cannot enter and flood the depressed sections. See Section 3.8.3 of the Final EIS for additional information about studies that will be conducted by TxDOT during project design.

Depressed sections of the proposed project will be designed to handle extreme weather events with rainfall levels similar to the region’s three most recent flood events: Memorial Day (2015), Tax Day (2016), and Hurricane Harvey (2017). Additionally, the project will be designed to meet and/or exceed the most recent guidelines set by the HCFCD. In some cases, there may be water over the roadway during an extreme rainfall event, but the road is designed to still be passable. This will be achieved through a pumped drainage system that will collect rainwater falling inside the depressed sections and discharge it to an adjacent detention basin or receiving channel. For example, the rainwater that falls within the depressed section along US 59/I-69 between Main Street and Alabama Street would be conveyed to a detention facility where it would be held and then discharged at a controlled rate to Brays Bayou. The detention facilities will be sized to accommodate extreme rain events so that the water pumped out of the depressed sections does not overwhelm the receiving bayous. To further protect the depressed sections, the entrance points to these areas would be constructed above the new 500-year water surface elevation such that adjacent floodwaters do not enter the depressed sections and overwhelm the pumps.
The pump stations for the depressed sections of highway will be designed with backup pumps and backup generators to reduce the likelihood of a pump system failure. TxDOT is currently exploring the development of an alert system that will close access to depressed sections of the highways in the event of a pump failure.

 

Edited July 28, 2022 by Houston19514

[crock]

Thanks @Houston19514!

[samagon]

21 hours ago, crock said:

they're literally said the i45/i69 underground would function similar to 288. 

how is that false? 

 

21 hours ago, Houston19514 said:

Depressed sections of the proposed project will be designed to provide a 500-year level of protection. This will be achieved through a pumped drainage system that will collect rainwater falling inside the depressed sections and discharge it to an adjacent detention basin or receiving channel. In addition, the entrance points to the depressed sections will be constructed above the adjacent 500-year water surface elevation, such that adjacent floodwaters cannot enter and flood the depressed sections. See Section 3.8.3 of the Final EIS for additional information about studies that will be conducted by TxDOT during project design.

Depressed sections of the proposed project will be designed to handle extreme weather events with rainfall levels similar to the region’s three most recent flood events: Memorial Day (2015), Tax Day (2016), and Hurricane Harvey (2017). Additionally, the project will be designed to meet and/or exceed the most recent guidelines set by the HCFCD. In some cases, there may be water over the roadway during an extreme rainfall event, but the road is designed to still be passable. This will be achieved through a pumped drainage system that will collect rainwater falling inside the depressed sections and discharge it to an adjacent detention basin or receiving channel. For example, the rainwater that falls within the depressed section along US 59/I-69 between Main Street and Alabama Street would be conveyed to a detention facility where it would be held and then discharged at a controlled rate to Brays Bayou. The detention facilities will be sized to accommodate extreme rain events so that the water pumped out of the depressed sections does not overwhelm the receiving bayous. To further protect the depressed sections, the entrance points to these areas would be constructed above the new 500-year water surface elevation such that adjacent floodwaters do not enter the depressed sections and overwhelm the pumps.
The pump stations for the depressed sections of highway will be designed with backup pumps and backup generators to reduce the likelihood of a pump system failure. TxDOT is currently exploring the development of an alert system that will close access to depressed sections of the highways in the event of a pump failure.

 

so it's par for the course then. do we just explain away the TXDoT representative as being some 'low level person that doesn't know everything about the project' for giving crock bad information?

it seems to me that the person they put in front of the public should be very knowledgeable about the project, and considering how important flooding is, that should be something that is well known to anyone who is paraded in front of the public.

I have seen from the schematics where they intend for the detention ponds to be. I guess (presuming the project goes forward) time will tell if it actually works as is outlined above. I guess if it does fail, TXDoT will have some serious lawsuits to deal with, since they have outlined no flooding of the depressed roadway as part of the project.

Edited July 29, 2022 by samagon

[SmellyHoustonian]

This is a very stupid project to spend $350MM to fix a problem that occurs once every few years for 12 hours or so. Not to mention they are not going to do this in coordination with their other planned elevated managed lanes project and the METRO inner Katy BRT project. 

This along with 45 will manage to screw over the one good commuter bike path in the City for a full a decade (MKT trail from the Heights to Downtown).

[samagon]

can we rename the title of this thread from "raising" to "elevating"

some might confuse raising with razing and get all excited.

[JLWM8609]

On 7/28/2022 at 12:37 PM, crock said:

can someone explain if this (highlighted in yellow by me) means the Houston Avenue bridge is being raised, lowered, or not moved? 

That's the centerline for the Houston Ave. bridge.

 

On 7/29/2022 at 10:20 AM, SmellyHoustonian said:

This is a very stupid project to spend $350MM to fix a problem that occurs once every few years for 12 hours or so. Not to mention they are not going to do this in coordination with their other planned elevated managed lanes project and the METRO inner Katy BRT project. 

It looks like it's not even being done in coordination with the NHHIP because the new ramps at 45 will tie into the current interchange. It's like they future proofed parts of it but not all of it. From what I can tell, the new elevated HOV bridge within this project will be built wide enough to accommodate the future Inner Katy elevated managed lanes at the west end and the I-10 MaX lanes at the east end once they're tied in. Yet, it looks like it'll tie into the present 1x1 HOV bridge that ends at Franklin and Bagby if the NHHIP hasn't built the MaX lanes by then. But like you said, there's a big lack of coordination because METRO's Option 1 is to tie the BRT into the current HOV bridge between Taylor and Studemont to bring the BRT into downtown, but that ramp is scheduled to be removed during the NHHIP. Option 2 is to run it south of I-10 and terminate it at Franklin and Bagby, and looks like they'd use part of the current HOV bridge near Amtrak for that. If they build this as-is, the managed lanes will tie into the HOV bridge, meaning METRO can't use either Option 1 or Option 2 for the busway, and Option 2 won't be able to be started unless the managed lanes connect to the MaX Lanes. Yeah, this is a clusterf... as-is. Hopefully they all get on the same page soon.

METRO Option 1 and 2: 

 

[phillip_white]

I've never seen a rendering with all of these proposed items together.

https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/news/transportation/2022/09/21/433518/could-central-houstons-proposed-downtown-amenities-make-the-i-45-project-more-palatable/

[hindesky]

Saw a crew taking core samples for I think will be the IH 10 Elevation project just west of the Houston Ave. bridge.

[bookey23]

Wait, did this get approved?  This goes right by my house and would cause so much more noise. What a truly moronic use of taxpayer money

[Amlaham]

If a project needs to be stopped, its definitely this one! 

[editor]

On 5/18/2023 at 5:09 PM, Amlaham said:

If a project needs to be stopped, its definitely this one! 

I've decided to stop caring about this project, simply because when it's finished, I will be long dead.

[JClark54]

METRO claims TxDOT's I-10 revamp will increase its BRT project costs: https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/i-10-txdot-metro-bus-transit-18112410.php

 

To make room for TxDOT's managed leans, Metro will swing its BRT busway across the freeway closer to the Loop 610 interchange than initially planned, complicating both the design and the cost of land, Reddy said. That includes some right of way along the freeway on the border of Memorial Park.

The extra cost, which would jump the total price to around $600 million, could be filled by additional regional transportation funding, Metro CEO Tom Lambert said, doled out by the Houston-Galveston Area Council.

“We’re going to take a look at options for grant funding,” Lambert said, adding that federal officials have committed new funding to transit projects in coming years.

[Texasota]

Wait the total cost of the Inner Katy BRT is only 600 million even with TXDOT's shenanigans? What is this, a modern country still capable of building things?

[Twinsanity02]

On 5/18/2023 at 5:09 PM, Amlaham said:

If a project needs to be stopped, its definitely this one! 

Want it stopped? Hire the bunch contracted to build the Beltway 8 shipping channel bridge. I've driven by that for 1 year and seen no activity. Appears to be stopped cold.

[Amlaham]

52 minutes ago, JClark54 said:

METRO claims TxDOT's I-10 revamp will increase its BRT project costs: https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/i-10-txdot-metro-bus-transit-18112410.php

 

To make room for TxDOT's managed leans, Metro will swing its BRT busway across the freeway closer to the Loop 610 interchange than initially planned, complicating both the design and the cost of land, Reddy said. That includes some right of way along the freeway on the border of Memorial Park.

The extra cost, which would jump the total price to around $600 million, could be filled by additional regional transportation funding, Metro CEO Tom Lambert said, doled out by the Houston-Galveston Area Council.

“We’re going to take a look at options for grant funding,” Lambert said, adding that federal officials have committed new funding to transit projects in coming years.

THEY WANT TO REBUILD I10 FROM STUDEMONT TO VOSS?!?! Right of way from MEMORIAL PARK??

i10 is legit in mint condition, there is legit hundreds of roads in and around our area that feel like driving in a 3rd world country. This is so unbelievably frustrating! 

[Texasota]

I mean, I'd love to see the feeders rebuilt as urban streets with much lower speed limits, but I doubt TXDOT agrees with me on that. Otherwise this seems like a truly insane project to prioritize. 

[texan]

So this project and the expansion of I-10 all the way to I-610 W is included in the draft 2024 UTP. This is awful and unnecessary. The least they could do if they have to spend $1.4 billion on it is cap it and allow the city and county to develop the top into a park.

[sapo2367]

[JLWM8609]

If SJL becomes mayor (🥴), she might push to stop this since it could take land from Memorial Park. She helped stop the proposed West Loop widening in the 90s that would've taken some land from Memorial Park.

[hindesky]

I just talked with a TXDOT worker who is supervising the installation of barricades on the empty lot next to Graffiti Park. I asked him about the core drilling I saw a few months ago on IH 10 west of Houston Ave. He confirmed that the drilling was for the elevated highway that is planned. Said it was for the engineers to determine what it would take to build the piers required to elevate the highway.

[Houston19514]

2 hours ago, JLWM8609 said:

If SJL becomes mayor (🥴), she might push to stop this since it could take land from Memorial Park. She helped stop the proposed West Loop widening in the 90s that would've taken some land from Memorial Park.

What makes you think it would take land from Memorial Park? 

[IWantTransit555]

I know it's well too late but I am still mad at the upcoming 45 project and how much it will waste aswell.

[JLWM8609]

On 7/11/2023 at 2:03 PM, Houston19514 said:

What makes you think it would take land from Memorial Park? 

 

[samagon]

 

On 7/11/2023 at 2:03 PM, Houston19514 said:

What makes you think it would take land from Memorial Park? 

video in link for the METRO BRT changes if there's managed lanes inside 610.

from the video, they will have to take land from the polo club too.

I am very comfortable in knowing that for some reason they won't get an inch of land from the polo club, so another solution that doesn't include taking land from either the polo club, or Memorial Park will come up.

[Houston19514]

12 hours ago, JLWM8609 said:

 

I presume you are referring to this language in the Chron article:  "That includes some right of way along the freeway on the border of Memorial Park."

That may or may not mean they plan to take land from Memorial Park. I read "on the border of" to mean "on the border", not across the border.

Further, (1) This is a Chronicle article so the chance of it being fully accurate are less than 100%. (2) The final plans are not yet done.  I doubt Metro even knows for sure if they would need land from Memorial Park, and I am quite certain they will do everything possible to avoid such.  Memorial Park is pretty much considered untouchable.

[samagon]

2 hours ago, Houston19514 said:

I presume you are referring to this language in the Chron article:  "That includes some right of way along the freeway on the border of Memorial Park."

That may or may not mean they plan to take land from Memorial Park. I read "on the border of" to mean "on the border", not across the border.

Further, (1) This is a Chronicle article so the chance of it being fully accurate are less than 100%. (2) The final plans are not yet done.  I doubt Metro even knows for sure if they would need land from Memorial Park, and I am quite certain they will do everything possible to avoid such.  Memorial Park is pretty much considered untouchable.

if you look at the video behind the link I posted, it's from METRO and they definitely depict their ROW as being right on top of the Polo Club and parts of Memorial Park.

it's early days as you say, the plans aren't finalized, we can all probably guess that the Polo Club isn't going to give their land over quietly, so it probably won't even happen that they will get any Memorial Park ROW.

so yeah, the chances of this being the solution are pretty slim.

I'd say that the takeaway here is that it is good to see/hear that TXDoT and METRO are working together this early into the planning phase, rather than working independently towards different solutions.

Edited July 18 by samagon

[twisterhunt]

On 7/9/2023 at 9:05 PM, texan said:

So this project and the expansion of I-10 all the way to I-610 W is included in the draft 2024 UTP. This is awful and unnecessary. The least they could do if they have to spend $1.4 billion on it is cap it and allow the city and county to develop the top into a park.

I wonder if this is just to make sure the funding is still allocated, or if it means this project actually has a chance of going forward? Specific to the proposal for elevating I-10, there was a hearing last July and comment period that ended quite some time ago...I haven't seen any updates on the TXDot page or summarization of public feedback. Maybe I'm naive to think TXDot will consider the feedback / make adjustments to their proposal for raising the freeway 🤔

[004n063]

On 8/28/2023 at 10:03 AM, hindesky said:

I-10 West Inner Katy project: about $1.14 billion to add four nontolled lanes between downtown Houston and the IH 610 Loop

TxDOT, sweetie, go on outside and bite the curb for me. I'll be out in a minute.

[freundb]

I don't know where they are gonna fit two extra lanes on each side of the freeway. 

[august948]

3 hours ago, freundb said:

I don't know where they are gonna fit two extra lanes on each side of the freeway. 

Just released conceptual for the extra lanes...

[august948]

5 hours ago, 004n063 said:

TxDOT, sweetie, go on outside and bite the curb for me. I'll be out in a minute.

TxDOT, sweetie, go start the grill.  Papa's going to throw on a big juicy steak for this one.  'Bout time they expanded the Katy inside the loop.   🥂

[samagon]

11 hours ago, freundb said:

I don't know where they are gonna fit two extra lanes on each side of the freeway. 

we can rest assured the polo club already is spending plenty of money to keep from losing any land.

and maybe a mod can make a new I-10 expansion thread to move some of these posts. 

Edited August 31 by samagon

[sapo2367]

On 8/30/2023 at 11:44 PM, august948 said:

Just released conceptual for the extra lanes...

From this thread -- here is the official rendering

 

[BigFootsSocks]

Ok but that's actually really well-done

[samagon]

23 hours ago, BigFootsSocks said:

Ok but that's actually really well-done

not at all believable though, T-Rex skeletons have never been discovered in the Houston area.

[Twinsanity02]

On 9/1/2023 at 2:14 PM, sapo2367 said:

From this thread -- here is the official rendering

 

Not Including the ramps, I count it as a 48-lane roadway. Even larger than the current Katy or anything in Argentina or wherever. We win! Though I must admit to one fact I

find difficult to believe.

No eighteen wheelers? In Houston?

Edited September 7 by Twinsanity02
Left out a fact.

[steve1363]

28 minutes ago, Twinsanity02 said:

Not Including the ramps, I count it as a 48-lane roadway. Even larger than the current Katy or anything in Argentina or wherever. We win! Though I must admit to one fact I

find difficult to believe.

No eighteen wheelers? In Houston?

Why don’t they just build a double-decker like in the Bay Area?

[mkultra25]

7 hours ago, samagon said:

not at all believable though, T-Rex skeletons have never been discovered in the Houston area.

Yet. Hope springs eternal.

[august948]

On 9/1/2023 at 2:14 PM, sapo2367 said:

From this thread -- here is the official rendering

 

They can add 8 more lanes on the very top pushing the total to 56 lanes!

If we don't break ground on this we won't find those t-rex fossils.

[hindesky]

https://www.txdot.gov/projects/planning/utp.html

[twisterhunt]

I'm not sure how long this document has been out there, but some interesting updates / observations from the Public Meeting Documentation (https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/get-involved/hou/i-10-heights-white-oak-bayou/072822-public-meeting-documentation.pdf). Tons of great info and plenty of public comments (the full doc is 1100 pages). Starting on Page 11 (Section D) there are a number of proposed design updates from the original sharing:

1. Reduced height of proposed I-10 mainlines / HOV structure
2. Existing forest area on the north side of I-10 near Houston Ave will be preserved
3. Potential additional connectivity for shared-use path under I-10
4. Use of 6 ft (vs. 3 ft) height barriers on elevated I-10 mainlanes / HOV

There are also a number of elevated / improved schematics in Section C versus the original TXDOT presentation. One aspect of the proposed Metro BRT project I had not fully appreciated is that the design drawings seem to suggest the BRT lanes will be elevated nearly 40 feet above existing I-10 HOV lanes until halfway between Studemont / Taylor and even ~20 feet above the existing elevated I-10 HOV lanes until around Houston Ave. While not as much a traffic volume / noise concern, quite an eyesore. 

Also, in the responses to public comments section TXDOT leaves the option open for additional noise abatement strategies. 

 

[mollusk]

How about some light abatement while they're at it?  I'm 1/2 mile from the Katy and even further from 45, but over the years it's gotten to where you can just about read at night in my back yard (which is opposite the house/garage from both).  We've had to put blackout curtains in the bedrooms, which weren't necessary before the giant light masts even when I lived closer.