DNAguy
-
Posts
342 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by DNAguy
-
-
I love how the American 'can-do' spirit has been reduced to 'can't win, don't try' in this thread.
I mean, has anyone here worked in a dangerous industry? I work at a chemical plant. Do we have injuries? Yes. Do we have recordable releases? Yes. Does that prevent us from engineering solutions to reduce those things? No. Companies take stances like - Zero recordable rates all the time. Do they always achieve them? No. But that doesn't mean they stop trying. And like the government mandate of zero fatalities on roads, industry probably wouldn't take steps on safety and environmental compliance if it wasn't the law / mandated by the government.
Safety costs $$$$$$. No free lunch.
The problem is that people have just come to except that driving is dangerous and people die all the time. What's funny is that if the amount of people that die in automobile accidents every year was a result of a terrorist attack or war casualties, we'd be on the verge of a 60's-esque revolution.
-
-
I agree that another, more traditional movie theater inside the loop would be very nice. We basically have Edwards and nothing else. There is the Sundance film center downtown, and there will be that luxury version of Alamo Draft House opening up at the River Oaks district.
Well, you'll also have a real Alamo Drafthouse at Reagent Square, but that's still years away.
-
What's getting built in the 6th and 7th pictures?
City Centre 5
-
They so need rail or some kind of trolley street car system in this entire area from Memorial City Mall to beltway 8. They are really missing a great opportunity here.
You have to imagine that eventually Memorial City and City Centre will merge together to form a large mix-use / urban like environment.
The existing residential, Beltway 8, and I-10 will be natural barriers, but I can see it expand along the frontage of I10.
I think we can talk about rail when that happens. Anything b/f then is wishful thinking.
Does Metro's new bus plan call for a Frequent bus route between these two areas? I'll have to look again to see.
-
CityCentre is going to be huge.
No kidding! Look at all the additions to this area going in! (Sheraton not really an addition in a 'new building' sense).
-
1
-
-
Wow the entire district is going to be a nice big walkable area... Not to mention it damn near connects seamlessly to Montrose and all the way through Midtown. I'd like to see connectivity between Rice Village and Upper Kirby somehow... Like some sort of pedestrian bridge or something
Wow the entire district is going to be a nice big walkable area... Not to mention it damn near connects seamlessly to Montrose and all the way through Midtown. I'd like to see connectivity between Rice Village and Upper Kirby somehow... Like some sort of pedestrian bridge or something
Wow I'm impressed with the initiative the people in this part of town are into making this place better overall. Now we just need the others to get in gear and help the city out!
Add the capital improvements with the new METRO bus plan, and we could get a true walkable neighborhood
-
1
-
-
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.
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
-
Does that area between the tracks, westheimer, 610 and San Felipe have a name?
It deserves its own name. The developing density in that area is crazy.
I think it should be called Highland Oaks cause River Oaks is to the east and Afton Oaks is immediately south.
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
-
Where are they going to put the new Cracker Barrel?
Next to the Zone D'Erotica!
Bigots, brunch, and gettin' busy! The unholy trifecta,
[crickets]
-
1
-
-
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.
-
1
-
-
So nothing here but street improvements?
Hey now. Apartments, corporate campuses, and skyscrappers dot all areas of the Houston area.
Adequate streets? That's Houston's white whale.
-
4
-
-
This is the only plausible explination I can think of and I've been procrastinating for a while.
Seriously though, GP has a lot of great potential and I'm excited to see what comes next. Maybe we'll see some new info on the university moving in; they haven't announced anything but if you search for the right thing on Google you'll find some juicy details.
Links or it never (/isn't) happened (/happening).
-
Sure. A project we worked on that involved the demolition of an old bank vault to convert into an arts space turned up a hidden room (maybe Prohibition era?). There wasn't anything particularly valuable inside - but it was fascinating none the less. I'm sure there are times when items of note or value do in fact turn up in old rooms/buildings that time forgot.
arche, is this you?
-
6
-
-
Is it just me or was anyone else fixated on changing the Powerball / Megamillions billboard?
-
1
-
-
That train looks sleek.
I know they were considering 290 and 45, but didn't know they were considering 59.
I guess both the Hardy site and the post office site would work for a station, but Hardy is right on the local rail system, while the Post Office site is actually downtown.
The intermodal station designs were beautiful. It would be awesome if we get something like that at either location, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Everthing seems to get watered down. Think about all the fancy ideas they had for the central station downtown, then decided they can't build it.
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:
-
Sounds like were on the same page! Those are my hopes as well, though I thought they wanted to make the post office site the HSR terminal. I guess time will tell. Aren't they supposed to come out with a plan soon for the HSR project? They said the rail line would be on a map within 90 days a few months ago...
You're right. Should be getting some info soon if this article is to be believed....
-
1
-
-
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.
-
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.
-
2
-
-
@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
-
1
-
-
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.
-
1
-
-
So it's not really a "town" but rather a special zone of sorts and they (locals, residents, people who deal with or in this zone, etc) added "township" as part of the name of the zone. Is this correct?
From my understanding, I would say you're correct. The state of Texas has carved out a special zone within Montgomery county that has some privileges of a city, but also operates as an unincorporated area.
It seems like it kind of operates like a TIRZ in a way, with some large differences of course.
Here's some more info that I found from the Woodlands website that you might find interesting:
https://www.thewoodlandstownship-tx.gov/index.aspx?NID=743
http://www.thewoodlandstownship-tx.gov/index.aspx?nid=331
Map of the Woodlands Township boundaries:
http://www.thewoodlandstownship-tx.gov/DocumentCenter/Home/View/149
http://www.thewoodlandstownship-tx.gov/DocumentCenter/View/1188
http://tx-thewoodlandstownship2.civicplus.com/DocumentCenter/Home/View/127
-
@L
See this:
http://www.thewoodlandstownship-tx.gov/DocumentCenter/Home/View/943
If my understanding of the situation is right, the legislature gave The Woodlands a special status back in 1993. That's when they created the Town Center Improvement District of Montgomery County. This has become what we now call The Woodlands Township and is the only community in the state of Texas with such a quasi government status. It was in response to Kingwood's annexation and I think part of the legislation created to make annexation more difficult as a result of the said annexation. As I understand it, this prevented Houston from annexing The Woodlands and put in place some mileposts for The Woodlands city status self determination. The Woodlands gets to levy some taxes for certain things from a board that isn't elected, but also gets to rely on the county for other services like police and fire as an unincorporated are of the county would. Like I said earlier, it can't be annexed by Houston.
That's why most ppl voted last year to keep things the same b/c they get the best of both worlds, taxing authority without having to provide any services. It's cheaper than being a city which would have to tax to provide the services.
I hope this was all correct and helps with some of the confusion. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
-
1
-
-
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.
-
1
-
I-45 Rebuild (North Houston Highway Improvement Project)
in Traffic and Transportation
Posted
How can I like this comment more. I 100% agree. TxDOT is served by poor engineers. I'm sorry. Most work is done for the lowest cost to a contractor. You get what you pay for. I went to the November public meeting. To say that I was 'unimpressed' by the 'engineers' that presented this information is like saying that WW2 was a 'difference of opinion between us and Germany+Japan'.
I put in a public comment that expressed your view after the November TxDOT meeting about this. Here's the thing, all of TxDOT's alternatives that they presented have not been costed out yet. That's right. They've eliminated all the original ideas without taking cost into account. So saying that tunneling isn't desirable has no bearing in reality other than they don't want to do it. They didn't cost it. They seriously don't have the expertise or the contractual resources to look at it so they just say that its not doable.
What else is ridiculous is their spreadsheet showing 'Pros' and 'cons' of the alternatives they did present. They just give it an arbitrary 'Desirable', 'Undesirable', or 'Neutral'. Seriously?! WTF. That's the engineering equivalent of pulling stuff out of your a$$. If I tried to present that at project meeting without any data to back it up, I'd get laughed out of the room.
http://www.ih45northandmore.com/docs3/I-45%20Segment%203%20Renderings_Final.pdf
http://www.ih45northandmore.com/docs3/NHHIP%20Secondary%20Screening%20Matrix%20Draft%2012-19-13.pdf