West Gray road diet

[004n063]

4 hours ago, IntheKnowHouston said:

Other details included in the submitted materials to the city's planning commission for the Residences at 1934 West Gray:

 

• Specific Variance is being sought and extent of variance: 
  
  To reduce the building setback requirement along Woodhead Street from 10 feet to a variable width of 7 feet to 10 feet; and to reduce the building line along West Gray from 25’ to 15’. 
  
   
• The developer is proposing to redevelop the property into a multi-family residential building and integral parking structure, with rooftop pool and gardens combined with ground floor patio and amenities.
  
   
• River Oaks  Shopping Center is one of the oldest shopping centers in Texas and is a mixed-use development featuring a blend of over 70 luxury stores, a big box grocer, a condominium development, as well as the historic Rover Oaks Theater. The properties are developed with a blend of surface parking lots combined with structured garages. It is the developers plan to use this proposed development as a gateway project for the center as it transitions to a more pedestrian friendly experience in alignment with the most desirable development trends in the City of Houston.
  
   
• The current Chase building was built in the 1971 and is a 4-story masonry building and 2 level parking structure that is currently constructed at a 0’ setback along Woodhead Street. The existing pedestrian space along Woodhead is cramped and unwelcoming with a minimum 4’ wide sidewalk. The building façade facing West Gray is separated from the street by dark tinted pedestrian doorway, a loading entrance to the parking garage, and a small parking lot. It provides little aesthetic value and does nothing to invite and draw in potential clients or tenants.
  
   
• The new development, represented in the renderings submitted with this application, presents an opportunity to set a new standard for the West Gray corridor in the River Oaks Shopping Center. With a pedestrian friendly façade, featuring enhanced flatwork, and a mix of local plantings and exotic palm trees, the proposed development will be a gateway project anchoring the vision for the River Oaks District. Plans include an 18’6” pedestrian realm along Woodhead and a 30’ pedestrian realm along West Gray.

 

Psh, next you're going to say that the protected bike lanes will be extended from Bagby to Shepherd. 

 

...right? Please?

[emmanume]

City of Houston has applied for federal funding to reduce driving lanes to one on each direction as well as protected bike lanes on West Gray. From Shepherd to Waugh

[004n063]

15 hours ago, emmanume said:

City of Houston has applied for federal funding to reduce driving lanes to one on each direction as well as protected bike lanes on West Gray. From Shepherd to Waugh

Beautiful! But...2025?? And why stop at Waugh? Why not connect to the existing Gray bike lanes?

Edited November 21, 2022 by 004n063
Adding

[j_cuevas713]

Aren't there some other improvements to W Gray happening soon or is this the same thing? I read recently that they are widening the sidewalks starting next year. 

[Triton]

Surprised W Gray isn't getting a road diet here too. This section needs to be redone and made to look more like that rendering above.

[Texasota]

I think it's supposed to get a road diet and bike lanes between Waugh and Shepherd.

[j_cuevas713]

On 12/13/2022 at 7:54 AM, Texasota said:

I think it's supposed to get a road diet and bike lanes between Waugh and Shepherd.

Yeah it is I just can't find out where I saw that info as well. There will be sidewalk upgrades as well. 

[hindesky]

They touched on this subject at the Montrose TIRZ meeting about Montrose Blvd. improvements. They said that for now the W. Gray street improvements would be from S. Shepherd to Woodhead in part because of the improvements this project will do with their sidewalk. The board was all for this apartment project.

[004n063]

5 hours ago, hindesky said:

They said that for now the W. Gray street improvements would be from S. Shepherd to Woodhead

That is...underwhelming news.

[aachor]

On 12/13/2022 at 7:54 AM, Texasota said:

I think it's supposed to get a road diet and bike lanes between Waugh and Shepherd.

This is so ridiculous. The city will take time out of the lives of thousands of drivers so that five cyclists and the pizza delivery guy don't have to choose between sharing the road with motor traffic or using the sidewalk. A better way to help cyclists would be if the police started enforcing traffic rules. Last I knew, changing lanes without signaling is a good way to kill a cyclist, and it's also against the rules. If the rules are followed, the cyclists can safely share the road.

Also, if you want to encourage people to not use their cars, maybe we should consider turning bus shelters into places where bus passengers might want to wait. Right now they're just the preferred spot for the homeless to store shopping carts of cans or for druggies to smoke crack pipes. 9 out of 10 times I pass a bus shelter, it's being occupied by someone sleeping under their personal trash heap, meanwhile the people waiting for the bus are standing in the elements.

My wife doesn't like to drive. She'd rather take public transport. But the bus situation is very unpleasant. 

Making hellish traffic more hellish is not an actual solution. It will just make living inside the loop more troublesome than it already is.

</annoyed rant> 

Edited December 15, 2022 by aachor

[004n063]

53 minutes ago, aachor said:

This is so ridiculous. The city will take time out of the lives of thousands of drivers so that five cyclists and the pizza delivery guy don't have to choose between sharing the road with motor traffic or using the sidewalk. A better way to help cyclists would be if the police started enforcing traffic rules. Last I knew, changing lanes without signaling is a good way to kill a cyclist, and it's also against the rules. If the rules are followed, the cyclists can safely share the road.

Also, if you want to encourage people to not use their cars, maybe we should consider turning bus shelters into places where bus passengers might want to wait. Right now they're just the preferred spot for the homeless to store shopping carts of cans or for druggies to smoke crack pipes. 9 out of 10 times I pass a bus shelter, it's being occupied by someone sleeping under their personal trash heap, meanwhile the people waiting for the bus are standing in the elements.

My wife doesn't like to drive. She'd rather take public transport. But the bus situation is very unpleasant. 

Making hellish traffic more hellish is not an actual solution. It will just make living inside the loop more troublesome than it already is.

</annoyed rant> 

I ride the bus and my bike every single day as part of my commute. The bus stops could definitely use an upgrade, but they're basically fine, and don't come anywhere near the level of impracticability that is biking on the sidewalks in this city, and certainly don't come anywhere near the level of danger that is biking unprotected on the city's arterials.

Complaining about bike lanes in this city is way out of pocket.

There are 6,400 miles of streets in this city, and about 4,000 highway lane miles. Of all of those miles, roughly two (Austin Street from HCC to Commerce) put bikes on equal footing with cars. Another 15 or so offer something in the way of protection/humanity for people on bikes, though of course at an unambiguously lower level of priority compared with people in cars. 

The humane thing to do would be to build a protected cycleway on every single surface street where car speeds regularly exceed 30mph (or, ideally, 20mph). When that level of parity is reached (though I highly doubt we'll ever get there), maybe I will begin to take complaints like yours seriously.

Edited December 15, 2022 by 004n063

[Ross]

35 minutes ago, 004n063 said:

I ride the bus and my bike every single day as part of my commute. The bus stops could definitely use an upgrade, but they're basically fine, and don't come anywhere near the level of impracticability that is biking on the sidewalks in this city, and certainly don't come anywhere near the level of danger that is biking unprotected on the city's arterials.

Complaining about bike lanes in this city is way out of pocket.

There are 6,400 miles of streets in this city, and about 4,000 highway lane miles. Of all of those miles, roughly two (Austin Street from HCC to Commerce) put bikes on equal footing with cars. Another 15 or so offer something in the way of protection/humanity for people on bikes, though of course at an unambiguously lower level of priority compared with people in cars. 

The humane thing to do would be to build a protected cycleway on every single surface street where car speeds regularly exceed 30mph (or, ideally, 20mph). When that level of parity is reached (though I highly doubt we'll ever get there), maybe I will begin to take complaints like yours seriously.

You will like the changes to 11th Street in the Heights. Nextdoor is blowing up about how the City is catering to 3 cyclists and causing drivers to die. As if it's the fault of the City when a driver hits the bike lane separator. 

[iah77]

1 hour ago, Ross said:

You will like the changes to 11th Street in the Heights. Nextdoor is blowing up about how the City is catering to 3 cyclists and causing drivers to die. As if it's the fault of the City when a driver hits the bike lane separator. 

It's not their fault that they put up something so cheaply with poor signage, poor illumination, and no reflectors in a road?  

[004n063]

6 hours ago, iah77 said:

It's not their fault that they put up something so cheaply with poor signage, poor illumination, and no reflectors in a road?

I'm not on Nextdoor, but it was not my impression that their critiques were as nuanced as that. (Also keep in mind, the work on 11th has only just begun, so I would imagine that a lot of that stuff is still in the works.)

 

I will say, though - I saw about a half-mile's worth of reflective plastic faux-bollards lying broken on the ground near their original positions on Waugh a couple of weeks ago, presumably the result of some drunk-driving teenagers intentionally mowing them down. The city *could* solve that problem with fixed metal bollards, but something tells me Nextdoor wouldn't be too happy about that, either.

[toxtethogrady]

On 11/13/2022 at 8:52 AM, Ross said:

The same NextDoor that, if even a small portion of predictions were true, would have us living in a Mad Max wasteland?

Let's see, it's Sunday, queue the latest "they put their dog poop in my trash bin" post. On Monday it's "OMG, bike lanes are going to destroy Houston and increase my commute by 7 hours a day". Tuesday "HPD is writing tickets again on the XXX bridge. They should leave us poor drivers alone and look for real criminals". Wednesday is "why are they allowing coyotes to live in Houston? Can't they just make them go away so I can let my dog run free without getting eaten?". Thursday is "Can't they arrest the train engineers for blowing their horns at night? My townhome is right next to the tracks, and that horn is keeping me awake. I can't imagine why they need the horn, I think they blow it just to make us mad". Friday is "With all the property taxes I pay, why can't we have a police officer sitting in XXX neighborhood all the time". Saturday is "I left $10,000 cash in my car, and someone broke in and stole it, then took my husband's pickup to carry off the 40 catalytic converters they also stole".

I am perfectly fine with the governmental authorities leaving TikTok alone and banning NextDoor from government phones...

[j_cuevas713]

19 hours ago, aachor said:

This is so ridiculous. The city will take time out of the lives of thousands of drivers so that five cyclists and the pizza delivery guy don't have to choose between sharing the road with motor traffic or using the sidewalk. A better way to help cyclists would be if the police started enforcing traffic rules. Last I knew, changing lanes without signaling is a good way to kill a cyclist, and it's also against the rules. If the rules are followed, the cyclists can safely share the road.

Also, if you want to encourage people to not use their cars, maybe we should consider turning bus shelters into places where bus passengers might want to wait. Right now they're just the preferred spot for the homeless to store shopping carts of cans or for druggies to smoke crack pipes. 9 out of 10 times I pass a bus shelter, it's being occupied by someone sleeping under their personal trash heap, meanwhile the people waiting for the bus are standing in the elements.

My wife doesn't like to drive. She'd rather take public transport. But the bus situation is very unpleasant. 

Making hellish traffic more hellish is not an actual solution. It will just make living inside the loop more troublesome than it already is.

</annoyed rant> 

I take the bus daily and have no issues. You come across all kinds of people of all income/social brackets. That's what living in a city entails; the good, the bad, and the ugly. But I wouldn't trade it for anything because not driving has helped me in more ways than one. Do you realize how many overbuilt, poorly designed streets there are in this city? The city isn't doing anything but rebuilding things how they should have been built to begin with. And riding on the sidewalks? First that's illegal and second I'm trying to get somewhere too. Last thing I need is to run in to someone by accident. Learn some patience on the road or learn to get out of your car and find a new way to move around. 

[Houston19514]

20 minutes ago, j_cuevas713 said:

I take the bus daily and have no issues. You come across all kinds of people of all income/social brackets. That's what living in a city entails; the good, the bad, and the ugly. But I wouldn't trade it for anything because not driving has helped me in more ways than one. Do you realize how many overbuilt, poorly designed streets there are in this city? The city isn't doing anything but rebuilding things how they should have been built to begin with. And riding on the sidewalks? First that's illegal and second I'm trying to get somewhere too. Last thing I need is to run in to someone by accident. Learn some patience on the road or learn to get out of your car and find a new way to move around. 

FWIW, in most areas of the city, riding bikes on sidewalks is not illegal.

Edited December 15, 2022 by Houston19514

[j_cuevas713]

3 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

FWIW, in most areas of the city, riding bikes on sidewalks is not illegal.

Yeah but I still find it's the worst option. I do have friends who were politely told not to ride the sidewalk from police. 

[dbigtex56]

The city ordinance says that riding bicycles on sidewalks in a business district is illegal. 
It's legal to ride on sidewalks outside those districts but they must yield pedestrians the right of way.
Unfortunately many cyclists seem to be unaware that they can injure pedestrians.
I walk on the sidewalk and several times speeding bicycles barely missed me. It was sheer dumb luck that I wasn't hit.

17 minutes ago, j_cuevas713 said:

Yeah but I still find it's the worst option. I do have friends who were politely told not to ride the sidewalk from police. 

 

[004n063]

2 minutes ago, dbigtex56 said:

The city ordinance says that riding bicycles on sidewalks in a business district is illegal. 
It's legal to ride on sidewalks outside those districts but they must yield pedestrians the right of way.
Unfortunately many cyclists seem to be unaware that they can injure pedestrians.
I walk on the sidewalk and several times speeding bicycles barely missed me. It was sheer dumb luck that I wasn't hit.

 

As a matter of practicality, I sometimes ride on the sidewalk, and my general rule of thumb is: riding on the sidewalk is fine...except when it isn't. Same is true of taking the lane on a street without proper infrastructure.

 

But it should never be the prescribed solution. That is just giving up on bikes and feet at the same time.

[jmitch94]

A city with hostile planning and architecture toward bicyclists and pedestrians tries to improve the environment for said cyclists and pedestrians. 
 

People- “No one even bikes or walks in the city, what’s the point!”

 

Gee I wonder why that could be. “If they build it they will come”

[aachor]

1 minute ago, jmitch94 said:

Gee I wonder why that could be. “If they build it they will come”

Nine months out of the year it's 82 degrees with 100% humidity during my morning commute. I don't care if I get a police escort and Sylvester Turner personally cheering me on, I'm not interested in biking to work. If the little non-profit I run starts rolling in piles of cash and we can afford nice showers and locker rooms, I might consider it. hahaha. Until then, I need a nice road for my car, or a nice bus that actually goes to the place I need to go.

I 100% agree that the city is hostile to cyclists. And I think the worst issue is the drivers. I think there is a lot that could be done to improve the streets for cyclists and pedestrians (the sidewalks are a disaster!) before we need to resort to LA style "road diets."

[004n063]

5 hours ago, aachor said:

Nine months out of the year it's 82 degrees with 100% humidity during my morning commute. I don't care if I get a police escort and Sylvester Turner personally cheering me on, I'm not interested in biking to work. If the little non-profit I run starts rolling in piles of cash and we can afford nice showers and locker rooms, I might consider it. hahaha. Until then, I need a nice road for my car, or a nice bus that actually goes to the place I need to go.

I 100% agree that the city is hostile to cyclists. And I think the worst issue is the drivers. I think there is a lot that could be done to improve the streets for cyclists and pedestrians (the sidewalks are a disaster!) before we need to resort to LA style "road diets."

Nobody's asking you to bike to work. But those of us who have to or choose to - and there are a lot more than you realize - would like to be able to do so without feeling like we're about to die.

As for buses going where you need them to, I actually think most of the inner loop is pretty well covered...if you can comfortably walk or ride a bike to/from the nearest stop on your main route (instead of transferring). In other words, bike and pedestrian infrastructure an an important part of bus infrastructure.

Regarding the drivers: honestly, the well-behaved drivers contribute just as much to my fear as the reckless ones, because the rules they're abiding by and especially the designs that encourage their leniency are, in my opinion, the core problem.

West Gray does not need the high design speeds it has. It's not an arterial that people frequently use for 5+mile trips. It is primarily a street, a destination, a first or last mile. But its current design prioritizes car speed (drivers feel comfortable going 35mph or higher on it) and volume (two car lanes in each direction) to a degree that makes it unsafe and unpleasant to walk or bike on. Given its primary function as a destination (rather than a thoroughfare), I would posit that the so-called "road diet" proposed for this segment is really more of a "street bulking" in that it actually increases the level of service for modes (walking, biking, slow driving) suited to its primary function (building community wealth).

Edited December 16, 2022 by 004n063

[Ross]

10 hours ago, aachor said:

Nine months out of the year it's 82 degrees with 100% humidity during my morning commute. I don't care if I get a police escort and Sylvester Turner personally cheering me on, I'm not interested in biking to work. If the little non-profit I run starts rolling in piles of cash and we can afford nice showers and locker rooms, I might consider it. hahaha. Until then, I need a nice road for my car, or a nice bus that actually goes to the place I need to go.

I 100% agree that the city is hostile to cyclists. And I think the worst issue is the drivers. I think there is a lot that could be done to improve the streets for cyclists and pedestrians (the sidewalks are a disaster!) before we need to resort to LA style "road diets."

No, it is not 82 degrees with 100% humidity. Houston is humid, but not that humid.

The road diets will improve things for cyclists and pedestrians. 

[editor]

On 12/14/2022 at 8:09 PM, aachor said:

The city will take time out of the lives of thousands of drivers so that five cyclists and the pizza delivery

Welcome to Western Civilization, where we decided a couple of centuries ago that all people are equally worthy, whether they're in the majority, or not.

[editor]

13 hours ago, aachor said:

Nine months out of the year it's 82 degrees with 100% humidity during my morning commute

People commute to work by bicycle in the summer in cities a lot hotter than Houston.  I've seen plenty of it in Phoenix and Las Vegas.  Those cities are sometimes — but not always — less humid.  Yes, 107° and 95% humidity is a thing out there. 

Can't big tough Texans handle a little humidity when they're cycling, or is that only possible after driving luxury farm machinery to an air-conditioned gym and hopping on a stationary bike while watching Fox News on the big-screen TV and barking into their iPhones?

 

[goofy]

i absolutely love the people who act like Houston is so dissimilar to other cities that strategies proven elsewhere won't work here. 

what always happens is we finally make the change and people adjust to it... like they do everywhere else! 

 

[jmitch94]

People act like the majority of people on earth don’t live in warm climates.

[rechlin]

8 hours ago, editor said:

 Those cities are sometimes — but not always — less humid.  Yes, 107° and 95% humidity is a thing out there.

That is impossible.  The highest dewpoint ever recorded in the US was 90 degrees F.  If that happened with a temperature of 107 F, the humidity would "only" be 60%, with a heat index of 157  F.  107 F with 95% humidity would mean a dewpoint of 105 F, which has never even been recorded in the world (highest dewpoint ever recorded, in Saudi Arabia, was 95 F).

[aachor]

10 hours ago, editor said:

People commute to work by bicycle in the summer in cities a lot hotter than Houston.  I've seen plenty of it in Phoenix and Las Vegas.  Those cities are sometimes — but not always — less humid.  Yes, 107° and 95% humidity is a thing out there. 

Can't big tough Texans handle a little humidity when they're cycling, or is that only possible after driving luxury farm machinery to an air-conditioned gym and hopping on a stationary bike while watching Fox News on the big-screen TV and barking into their iPhones?

 

I think Las Vegas and Phoenix can be quite pleasant above 100°. I've been hiking in Southern Utah at 106° and, so long as I had water and a hat to cover my head, it was beautiful. 

Also, in neither case was I expected to show up to work in an office, hold meetings, and represent anyone other than myself. A little salt crust and body odor is perfectly acceptable trekking through a dessert canyon or touristing on the Vegas strip. 

5 hours ago, jmitch94 said:

People act like the majority of people on earth don’t live in warm climates.

The majority of people are earth would love an automobile with A/C. 

[editor]

6 hours ago, aachor said:

in neither case was I expected to show up to work in an office, hold meetings, and represent anyone other than myself. A little salt crust and body odor is perfectly acceptable trekking through a dessert canyon or touristing on the Vegas strip

You make the mistake of assuming that the people referenced were trekking, or tourists.  They were not.  They were regular commuters. 

People have been commuting by bicycle for longer than they have commuted by car.  It's possible to do it.  And if someone sweats profusely from a little bike ride, I suggest that perhaps more bike rides are in order.

I don't commute, but it's my understanding that people who cycle to work on hot days don't wear the same clothes the bike in when they go to meetings.  This was actually very common in the past.  Sometimes in movies make before 1980, you'll see a businessman pull a new shirt out of his desk drawer.  I assume that cyclists still have some similar arrangement.  

Even KHOU had a shower so that people who biked to work, or jogged during their lunch hour, or who were otherwise sweaty could rinse off. 

 

6 hours ago, aachor said:

The majority of people are earth would love an automobile with A/C.

And yet, somehow they survive without it.  I'm not sure what your point is.

[editor]

16 hours ago, goofy said:

absolutely love the people who act like Houston is so dissimilar to other cities that strategies proven elsewhere won't work here.

There seems to be this notion that Houston is the only place that is hot and humid in America.  I guess they've never been even as far as New Orleans.

[mollusk]

On 12/15/2022 at 5:11 AM, 004n063 said:

I'm not on Nextdoor, but it was not my impression that their critiques were as nuanced as that.

The only thing that Nextdoor and nuance have in common is they both start with N. 🥷

[hindesky]

I biked to work for ten years. I initially started doing it one winter to stay in shape for my road and MTB racing that I did during the rest of the year. Being a crane operator I didn't have to smell good since I was in the cab of a crane. I wore my cycling clothing and brought a change of work clothing. The next winter I started doing it year round. 22 miles round trip from south Pasadena on Fairmont Pkwy to the ship channel. I had a cycling friend who lived in Montrose who was also a racer staying in shape and commuted east bound to the chemical plant he worked at in Pasadena. He was a mechanical engineer. I would often see him early in the morning heading east bound on the same road I was going westbound on. His was a 40 mile round trip.

If the weather was bad in the morning I would drive to work but sometimes got caught in bad weather in the afternoon while heading home. I recall one winter day when it started snowing around noon and had to ride home in the snow.

Edited December 17, 2022 by hindesky

[Ross]

1 hour ago, mollusk said:

The only thing that Nextdoor and nuance have in common is they both start with N. 🥷

Most posters on Nextdoor have had a nuancectomy

[j_cuevas713]

On 12/16/2022 at 1:56 PM, goofy said:

i absolutely love the people who act like Houston is so dissimilar to other cities that strategies proven elsewhere won't work here. 

what always happens is we finally make the change and people adjust to it... like they do everywhere else! 

 

EXACTLY! The city keeps doing these pilot programs for walkability and I'm like just look at NY or Chicago as your pilot .

3 hours ago, hindesky said:

I biked to work for ten years. I initially started doing it one winter to stay in shape for my road and MTB racing that I did during the rest of the year. Being a crane operator I didn't have to smell good since I was in the cab of a crane. I wore my cycling clothing and brought a change of work clothing. The next winter I started doing it year round. 22 miles round trip from south Pasadena on Fairmont Pkwy to the ship channel. I had a cycling friend who lived in Montrose who was also a racer staying in shape and commuted east bound to the chemical plant he worked at in Pasadena. He was a mechanical engineer. I would often see him early in the morning heading east bound on the same road I was going westbound on. His was a 40 mile round trip.

If the weather was bad in the morning I would drive to work but sometimes got caught in bad weather in the afternoon while heading home. I recall one winter day when it started snowing around noon and had to ride home in the snow.

Hell yeah man, that's the grind of riding. Major props on riding 22 miles from Pasadena. I have a buddy who does that ride often. Damn 40 miles is beasty tho .

[BEES?!]

FWIW riding in the summer does legitimately suck. It’s also worth keeping in mind that some people- and I speak from personal experience- are disabled or sick and may not be able to cope with the extreme heat in the summer, so they don’t cycle or walk. Sometimes it isn’t just a matter of choice- high heat and humidity can truly be dangerous for some segments of the population. 

But I also feel like sometimes people exaggerate Houston’s heat. I think from about Mid-Oct to May we have great outdoor weather for doing things like walking and cycling. And, we don’t have to contend with unruly topography, everything is pretty flat so it’s really not so bad to cycle or walk during those nice months. 

[samagon]

On 12/14/2022 at 8:09 PM, aachor said:

This is so ridiculous. The city will take time out of the lives of thousands of drivers so that five cyclists and the pizza delivery guy don't have to choose between sharing the road with motor traffic or using the sidewalk. A better way to help cyclists would be if the police started enforcing traffic rules. Last I knew, changing lanes without signaling is a good way to kill a cyclist, and it's also against the rules. If the rules are followed, the cyclists can safely share the road.

Also, if you want to encourage people to not use their cars, maybe we should consider turning bus shelters into places where bus passengers might want to wait. Right now they're just the preferred spot for the homeless to store shopping carts of cans or for druggies to smoke crack pipes. 9 out of 10 times I pass a bus shelter, it's being occupied by someone sleeping under their personal trash heap, meanwhile the people waiting for the bus are standing in the elements.

My wife doesn't like to drive. She'd rather take public transport. But the bus situation is very unpleasant. 

Making hellish traffic more hellish is not an actual solution. It will just make living inside the loop more troublesome than it already is.

</annoyed rant> 

I don't get the rant.

W. Gray is already basically a one lane in each direction road between Taft and Montrose anyway since cars seem to be permanently parked on the side of the road between these two streets. so it's a street that goes from 1 lane in each direction, to 2 lanes in each direction, and then at Shepherd it turns into a neighborhood street with 1 lane in each direction again.

if there were enough traffic on the road, you'd think the city would have adjusted the section between Taft and Montrose to no parking, or at least set it up for no parking during peak traffic times in each direction (as is often done on other roads in the city), but they never have, so it can't be that bad.

seems like a great opportunity, and I guess it'll be a replica of what they did to Dallas between the same roads.

On 12/17/2022 at 3:30 PM, BEES?! said:

FWIW riding in the summer does legitimately suck. It’s also worth keeping in mind that some people- and I speak from personal experience- are disabled or sick and may not be able to cope with the extreme heat in the summer, so they don’t cycle or walk. Sometimes it isn’t just a matter of choice- high heat and humidity can truly be dangerous for some segments of the population. 

But I also feel like sometimes people exaggerate Houston’s heat. I think from about Mid-Oct to May we have great outdoor weather for doing things like walking and cycling. And, we don’t have to contend with unruly topography, everything is pretty flat so it’s really not so bad to cycle or walk during those nice months. 

and I'd very much agree that people exaggerate Houston weather, for half the year it is very bike-able, and even at the worst, at least the morning ride is in the 70s, or 80s, it isn't until you get into mid day, or the late afternoon that the heat becomes oppressive. 

also, acclimating yourself (and staying suitably hydrated really helps with not having heat related issues. but yes, there are some in the community that absolutely cannot deal with it, and that should be understood and respected.

Edited December 19, 2022 by samagon

[hindesky]

Plus the lanes by the curb between S. Shepherd and Montrose are in such bad shape hardly anyone drives in them anyway.

Edited December 20, 2022 by hindesky

[004n063]

On 12/19/2022 at 4:05 PM, samagon said:

I don't get the rant.

W. Gray is already basically a one lane in each direction road between Taft and Montrose anyway since cars seem to be permanently parked on the side of the road between these two streets. so it's a street that goes from 1 lane in each direction, to 2 lanes in each direction, and then at Shepherd it turns into a neighborhood street with 1 lane in each direction again.

if there were enough traffic on the road, you'd think the city would have adjusted the section between Taft and Montrose to no parking, or at least set it up for no parking during peak traffic times in each direction (as is often done on other roads in the city), but they never have, so it can't be that bad.

seems like a great opportunity, and I guess it'll be a replica of what they did to Dallas between the same roads.

and I'd very much agree that people exaggerate Houston weather, for half the year it is very bike-able, and even at the worst, at least the morning ride is in the 70s, or 80s, it isn't until you get into mid day, or the late afternoon that the heat becomes oppressive. 

also, acclimating yourself (and staying suitably hydrated really helps with not having heat related issues. but yes, there are some in the community that absolutely cannot deal with it, and that should be understood and respected.

Moreover, the point is to make biking, walking, and transit viable options, not binding commitments. If it's hot out and you'd rather drive, then drive. We just want the (safe) option to be there, because there are plenty of contexts in which the bike or the shoe-leather express may actually be the most pleasant option.

[steve1363]

On 12/14/2022 at 8:09 PM, aachor said:

This is so ridiculous. The city will take time out of the lives of thousands of drivers so that five cyclists and the pizza delivery guy don't have to choose between sharing the road with motor traffic or using the sidewalk.

Making hellish traffic more hellish is not an actual solution.

</annoyed rant> 

I’m convinced there are federal funds (of some sort) tied to all of this city activity.  Otherwise it’s illogical.  It has to be political.

[samagon]

12 hours ago, steve1363 said:

I’m convinced there are federal funds (of some sort) tied to all of this city activity.  Otherwise it’s illogical.  It has to be political.

I wouldn't say it's political, but chances are high that the money is federal.

[j_cuevas713]

On 12/22/2022 at 9:09 PM, steve1363 said:

I’m convinced there are federal funds (of some sort) tied to all of this city activity.  Otherwise it’s illogical.  It has to be political.

Political how? If Federal funds are available to finance a project and the city has the ability to request those funds, why wouldn’t they? That goes for any other city in the country. Plus the HGAC directs a lot of the money coming in to the area and they’re mostly conservative. 

[steve1363]

16 hours ago, j_cuevas713 said:

Political how? If Federal funds are available to finance a project and the city has the ability to request those funds, why wouldn’t they? That goes for any other city in the country. Plus the HGAC directs a lot of the money coming in to the area and they’re mostly conservative. 

What I meant is that the federal government won’t release funds for infrastructure unless a certain % is earmarked for carbon reduction projects.

Found these articles…

https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2022/04/21/carbon-reduction-program-buttigieg/

https://highways.dot.gov/newsroom/president-biden-usdot-announce-new-guidance-and-64-billion-help-states-reduce-carbon

“The Carbon Reduction Program will fund a wide range of projects designed to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from on-road highway sources — from installing infrastructure to support the electrification of freight vehicles or personal cars, to constructing Bus Rapid Transit corridors, to facilitating micro-mobility and biking. Under the CRP, states must also develop carbon reduction strategies in consultation with Metropolitan Planning Organizations to identify projects and strategies tailored to reduce carbon dioxide emissions in their states, although states and localities may begin using the CRP funds even before plans are developed and reviewed.”

[004n063]

On 12/22/2022 at 10:09 PM, steve1363 said:

I’m convinced there are federal funds (of some sort) tied to all of this city activity.  Otherwise it’s illogical.  It has to be political.

I think you're probably right about the impetus being federal funding requirements, but I don't see how it is illogical. West Gray - especially the portion affected by the road diet - makes very little sense as a high-speed/high-auto-capacity roadway. It's a retail-dense, mixed-use street within a relatively dense residential area; it effectively ends at Shepherd already, and Allen Parkway is a much better downtownward option for drivers.

The road diet - particularly during the construction phase - will make it an unappealing choice for through-traffic, to be sure. But that's kind of the point. 

[steve1363]

2 hours ago, 004n063 said:

I think you're probably right about the impetus being federal funding requirements, but I don't see how it is illogical. West Gray - especially the portion affected by the road diet - makes very little sense as a high-speed/high-auto-capacity roadway. It's a retail-dense, mixed-use street within a relatively dense residential area; it effectively ends at Shepherd already, and Allen Parkway is a much better downtownward option for drivers.

The road diet - particularly during the construction phase - will make it an unappealing choice for through-traffic, to be sure. But that's kind of the point. 

I meant illogical in the sense that it is not demand-driven.   I guess it depends on the stated objectives of the project.

[004n063]

2 hours ago, steve1363 said:

I meant illogical in the sense that it is not demand-driven.   I guess it depends on the stated objectives of the project.

Yeah, I think we're several rounds of road diets, streetfront redevelopments, etc., away from any of that stuff being driven by presently/concurrently visible demand. But, to borrow a cliché, you don't cancel a bridge project because not enough people are currently swimming across.

[j_cuevas713]

On 12/28/2022 at 12:05 PM, steve1363 said:

I meant illogical in the sense that it is not demand-driven.   I guess it depends on the stated objectives of the project.

How is it no demand driven? The demand the past 10 years has been people wanting a more vibrant, urban, walkable pedestrian realm. Most of our streets are well overbuilt. So it’s logical in more than one aspect to return the street back to it designed purpose as a neighborhood street, not some thoroughfare hybrid. 

Edited December 31, 2022 by j_cuevas713

[004n063]

3 hours ago, j_cuevas713 said:

How is it no demand driven? The demand the past 10 years has been people wanting a more vibrant, urban, walkable pedestrian realm. Most of our streets are well overbuilt. So it’s logical in more than one aspect to return the street back to it designed purpose as a neighborhood street, not some thoroughfare hybrid. 

Ehh, I think Steve is right in the sense that we are presuming (defensibly, I would argue, but still presuming) a certain amount of latent demand for pedestrian and particularly bicycle access that's not really observable right now in the traffic patterns on West Gray. I think that's a fair assessment. This is Houston, after all - "commercial corridor" and "multilane stroad" have lodged a certain synonymity in the public consciousness here.

Personally, though, I'm glad that the city is taking on a more intentional role here, and I hope that the trend accelerates. Car-dependent sprawl (of which I am obviously not a fan) is a bit like a moving walkway: if you don't actively work against it, it'll just get worse and worse. But since Houston has already allowed it to progress as far as it has, I suspect that a lot of (what I would personally call) wise decisions will feel illogical and disconnected for a while.