Jump to content

DNAguy

Full Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    342

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

 Content Type 

Everything posted by DNAguy

  1. DNAguy
    Add the capital improvements with the new METRO bus plan, and we could get a true walkable neighborhood http://tei-houston.maps.arcgis.com/apps/OnePane/basicviewer/index.html?appid=2832e4e9d2fb4ff1a01a4bac26078ac2
  2. DNAguy
    Actually, the new TIRZ should be closer to the area in yellow in this pic (disregard the difference in yellow hues). That would include all of the development between San Felipe and Westheimer, Highland village, and pretty much anything south of Westheimer
  3. DNAguy
    Considering Houston's tendency to liberally use Heights (as in Heights Wal mart) and River Oaks in all new development, I nominate River Oaks Heights. In all seriousness though, I think the Uptown TIRZ will eventually expand to deal with street improvements and the same accents (silver ring street signs) will follow. We can have a greater Uptown and call this section Uptown East. I would, however, like a totally organically new district to fill in between 610 and Upper Kirby / Greenway to fill the gap. There is already a lot of density along Richmond and Weslayan and more going in. If this becomes a thing, I like Highland Oaks. http://www.houstontx.gov/ecodev/tirzmap.pdf
  4. DNAguy
    Bigots, brunch, and gettin' busy! The unholy trifecta, [crickets]
  5. DNAguy
    So with the Galleria addition (the part that's going to face Westheimer), ROD, and Highland village, Houston will have something of a Rodeo Drive like district..... just more spread out..... and with a freeway..... and with train tracks. So yeah, a Houston version. The distance from Weslayan to the Galleria is 1.2 miles. Maybe we can call it something like Houston's Magnificent mile. Hmmm.
  6. DNAguy
    Links or it never (/isn't) happened (/happening).
  7. DNAguy
    arche, is this you?
  8. DNAguy
    Is it just me or was anyone else fixated on changing the Powerball / Megamillions billboard?
  9. DNAguy
    I think that either the current court location at Riesner, the post office, or hardy yards fits the specification that Eckels gave in this presentation:
  10. DNAguy
    You're right. Should be getting some info soon if this article is to be believed.... http://impactnews.com/houston-metro/the-woodlands/construction-on-houston-to-dallas-high-speed-rail-could-star/
  11. DNAguy
    I think the problem is that all the cool stuff that could go into these three sites (61 Riesner, the DT post office, or Hardy yards/ Burnett TC) are no where close to being finalized or even conceptualized. How do you complain when everything you point out as a negative is all just 'pie in the sky' ideas? The property that the police station / courts sit on at 61 Riesner will be instrumental when expanding LR west of downtown. IT's outside the boundaries of DT... but not by much. It's expensive to tear down all the old buildings and serve the public at the same time. The post office is a large site that has existing rail access and is within the freeway boundaries of DT. No LR stop but w/in a resonable walk from UH downtown stop. Development of the site can mitigate the 'walking problem. It's on the bayou too. That's good and bad. Good b/c it can be a transformative project / bad b/c of the same reason (people won't really except anything less). The Hardy yards / Burnett TC has lots of vacant land and a LR stop. This, however, seems to be the choice of a high speed rail train station if that thing ever happens. So there's a lot up in the air here. Not to mention that we've got a huge problem with I45 affecting all these locations. It's redesign is also a crucial element no taken into consideration. Hell, I'd be surprised if the council members were even aware of all of TxDOT's potential plans for I45. IMO, the best solution is to go by my plan and hold ppl to this: A) Re-route 45 along I10 and 59 east of DT. B.) Re-build 61 Riesner property w/ light rail ROW preserved w/in courts / police station footprint C.) Privately develop the Post office D.) Use Hardy yard site for the HSR station if that happens That's my hope.
  12. DNAguy
    H-town, you are spot on. When you look at the buffalo bayou master plan from some years (http://www.buffalobayou.org/masterplan.html), the east of downtown part is (IMHO) the crown jewel of the entire vision. The current remodel of the western section is the lowest hanging fruit and the best 'bang for the buck.' The downtown section is so utterly costly, I don't know if we have the $ to actually achieve it. That would, however be extremely transformative. If we can sustain the downtown development momentum for another generation, then we've got a fighting chance. And while he western section takes an underutilized park and makes it great, the eastern section takes a polluted, non-used section of a crappy looking river/stream and makes it a reclaimed nature sanctuary in a city's inner core. Who has that in the US? The only places in the world that I think they have inner city nature sanctuaries are Costa Rica and Panama. While this won't be rain forest or nearly as epic, it would put Houston on the map. It would highlight our Janus-like Houstonian nature - a re-repurposing of the bayou and the utter oxymoronical nature of having a nature sanctuary right next to the industrialized ship channel. Hell, its almost poetic.
  13. DNAguy
    @BigFoot I hear you. The catering (straight up prostitution) to developers here in the Houston area is pretty sickening. I understand that one (and only one of many) of the reasons we've had cheaper housing is the countinous amount of housing being built farther and farther out in the metro area. It's really only now with advent of more affulent eempty nest boomers, young professionals, and more importantly, voters moving inside the loop that we are starting to get amentites. The greenery around Houston is pretty naturally extensive, though. When I met a Scotish couple in Ecuador who had flown through Houston (yes I know this sounds a little rediculous), they commented on just how 'green' Houston was when they saw it from the plane. This always stuck with me. I think we'd actually be better off preserving more open space, with the thoughts to eventually add some aamentities when the population warrants, than anything else. I mean, that's how we got Memorial Park. In addition, we should require any development to protect a percentage of the 'natural' element when creating a neighborhood. THis is already done in some of the bigger master planned communities, but needs to be required and somehow standardized. IMHO
  14. DNAguy
    Yes, Houston lacks the beauty of say Denver or San Diego. However, that shouldn't stop us from making the best of what we've got. That's like saying bc I don't look like Brad Pitt, I shouldn't buy nice clothes or take bathes. What I like about this project is that its functional, a public/private partnership, and I think its beautiful. Its a true amenity. Houston can be on the forefront of leveraging the large corporate presence with beautifying the city. Discovery Green and Buffalo Bayou are first.
  15. DNAguy
    This maybe outside purview of this forum, but I'm curious if anyone believes that these developments will somehow lead to Post Oak Park Dr being extended all the way to Bettis. It would seem to me that the owners of the Target property (does Target lease?) would want to provide easier access to both the Westcreek and River Oaks district. Even if the owners didn't have the foresight for pedestrian access, wouldn't giving up a little property to provide vehicular access to Westheimer (Via Bettis and either Westcreek or Kettering lane) be worth it? Would the city of Houston have to be involved if you alter the street plan? I'd imagine that the streetlight would have to be modified as well.
  16. DNAguy
    I completely agree. However, you might get a synergistic (if only for a short while) effect on mobility by the re-configuring of the exchanges btwn 45 and I10 & also I45 and 59. So many of the people are going to stay on 45 and don't need to exit. Forcing half of the lanes for a road to exit causes lane switching and slower speeds. It looked great in the 60's or 80's (whenever they made the P elevated), but its not how the traffic actually flows. I think that most of the congestion in the downtown loop is due more to the exchanges btwn freeways than the # of lanes. That's why I thought the round about idea was never a serious proposal. The problem w/ that option is that you've boxed everyone who's not in the outermost lane in. This would make the outermost two lanes (of the 4 or five that would exist) the most desirable. Ppl would jockey for position and we'd have even more traffic. Has TxDOT done studies on where people using these roads are going? What % of those on the Pierce take it to 288? 59? Continue down 45? I think these questions need to have clear answers b/f any project is completed. Is there a true need to have on/off ramps at Allen Parkway? The 'Dallas street dip' of 45 w/ the on ramp from Houston st / frontage road on the east side + the on ramp from allen parkway to the west is a clear bottle neck. The fact that all three happen within 100 ft was just bad engineering. Eliminated non-needed on/off ramps would be boon for this stretch regardless of total # of lanes. Any 'tunnel related' speed reduction would be compensated by the limited access. If we're after true mobility, having less freeway access downtown is not counterproductive. The downtown street grid is underutilized while the freeways are over utilized in this area. Removing off duty cops from letting one car out of a parking garage at the expense of the timed lights and 100 cars waiting would also help utilize our downtown grid. Yes, some would see marginal increases in commute time. But as a region, we'd see a larger benefit in overall speed and mobility for these downtown freeways.
  17. DNAguy
    Nope, you're right: http://www.ih45northandmore.com/docs/Universe_of_Alts_Seg_3.pdf http://www.ih45northandmore.com/docs/Universe_of_Alternatives_Seg_2&3_aerial_1.pdf Here's the main site TxDOT set up for the whole project http://www.ih45northandmore.com/
  18. DNAguy
    I agree TxDOT wants to do this on the cheap. Making money off another patch job though? I really don't think so. IF you mean that it's about maximizing and securing a revenue stream for maintenance or other projects, then you may be right. Why is there so much emphasis on HOT or multi use lanes? Because TxDOT wants a steady stream of $. If you under engineer the 'free lanes' (which is what they're doing here) you assure that ppl will use the tolled option. Then, TxDOT can get more $ to leverage more projects. Without toll roads TxDOT can't function now. Our years of bad tax policy is coming to roost by having TxDOT produce this drivel. It may also me even less sinister and more about overall incompetence. Does TxDOT have anyone that can accurately vet the tunnel options? What expertise do they even have here? The contractors that they use for a majority of their projects probably are less than qualified too. I imagine this is/was the thinking here: Tunnel? UHhHHHhhhhh. Do you mean elevated concrete freeway with more lanes? No? I think you mean elevated freeway. You keep pronouncing elevated freeway incorrectly when you say tunnel.
  19. DNAguy
    Exactly. There isn't really a difference btwn an elevated freeway, a trenched freeway, or a tunnel without shoulders. I was waiting for Mr Perez to follow his argument w/ the repeated refrain "it rains too much in Houston to have a tunnel' that I always hear when I talk about tunneling 45 in downtown. The ineptitude is staggering. And I actually just spoke w/ a mayoral representative. We'll see if it makes any difference. At least I tried.
  20. DNAguy
    I called the mayor's office. We need the weight of the city of Houston b/c obviously TxDOT could care less of what we the people think. This is pathetic. From the chron article: ‘TxDOT spokesman Danny Perez said the tunnel was taken off the list of reasonable alternatives because of engineering challenges. “There would be no available space for roadway shoulders within a tunnel,” Perez said. “This creates a safety hazard in the event of an accident and greatly reduces access for emergency vehicles.” Vehicles also would face slower speeds in a tunnel, Perez said, defeating part of the purpose of the widening and its ability to handle the growing traffic demand planners predict.’ Like others said b/f, why was TxDOT proposing alternatives that aren't feasible? Why have public comment periods if they aren't going to listen? I've got two major issues w/ the TxDOT hack's statement: A.) All tunnels aren't the same size so the argument that there is not shoulder room for emergency vehicles is just a BS lie. B.) What are they comparing the speed of the tunnels to? An at grade freeway of the same size? Ok, well I10 goes pretty darn slow. An elevated freeway? Well 59 has more lanes than 45 downtown and it goes pretty slow. Mr Perez, don't insult my intelligence w/ your half baked, lazy excuses. TxDOT wants to just keep doing what it always does. Buy up more ROW and add more lanes.
  21. DNAguy
    I'm curious, are the 'schemes' discussed in regards to I45 in downtown being taken seriously by TxDOT. The idea of tunneling 45 south and re-routing 45 N along 59 would be a great for downtown.
×
×
  • Create New...