DNAguy

Alright... Everyone ready for this....

(puts on tin foil hat)

What if UT doesn't want to buy that land in the SW... What if they want to instead purchase the KBR lot and adjacent MDI lot?!?!?

Look at the shape of the proposed layout... Very similar to the KBR and Adjacent MDI lots combined

The Ike funding is running out and no Mdi homes will be built on that lot in the near future....

Offices already in place on KBR site with utilities and sewage in place...

The KBR lot was freshly mowed a week ago. (first time in 2 years)....

(tin foil hat off)

No way this happens. UT to south west 100% going to happen

 

I think the a university / research center on the KBR site would be a great addition to the area. Like really great.

 

Maybe A&M can build a Houston campus there. You know the Aggies are going to get REALLY jealous about UT's shiny new Houston campus.

 

If the KBR site is 300.1 acres, then you can bank on the fact the Aggies will buy it as their Houston campus will be bigger and "better" than UT's. Then we can have 3 types of Aggies in the Houston area: Country Ags, City Ags and Sea Ags. What's not to love?

 

 [Kidding... sort of]

 

However, the SW location is superior IMO due to its proximity to the medical center and the current UT system infrastructure, the fact that its greenfield and the potential proximity to future light rail / commuter rail expansion.

 

 

 

They are saying that they have been wanting a presence in Houston for decades, yet they have had a medical presence for 100 years. It doesn't follow.

Plus that is a hell of a lot of land to start out with. The entire Rice Campus is 295 acres. Some of UT 4 yrs campuses are that size. UT Austin, Dallas, SA, etc are huge but they all started smaller and acquired more land. UTD started out as 1 building, UT Austin started out as 40 acres, UT Arlington was less than 10 Acres in its early days before expansion.

Comparing it to other universities, SMU is exactly the same size as Rice at 295 acres, Houston Baptist is 100 acres, Texas state has 38,000 students on 450 acres, lamar is like 270 acres, trinity in SA is 117 acres.

Looking at the medical Reseach fascilities, UT HSC Houston had a tiny foot print. UT HSC San Antonio has 8 campuses and all together they are smaller than this. UT Southwestern is in a Medical district that contain 3 campuses and 4 hospitals and and only take up 230 acres.

So I can only think that the reason UT needs so much land is they are planning a full fledged 4 year stand alone college Campus in Houston.

 

I also agree with this.

 

FWIW, I went to Texas so I'm actually excited they're doing this.

 

It will mostly likely be a research complex offering advanced degrees at first. Then eventually (and like you've stated) become a full 4 year institution. Somehow, it will differentiate itself by focusing on something like engineering or space or medical or possibly a combination all three!. Who knows.

 

It will be interesting how it comes about and how the UT system will try to not cannibalize its flagship campus /  compete with A&M & UH for the Houston area.

 

I do know, however, that compared to California (which Texas does all the time) we as a state are severely behind in top tier public university / higher education infrastructure. Not to mention we will need to educate the ever expanding population.

 

UH is a piece of the puzzle. And I would love for them to get a medical school and grow as a Tier 1 institution. But with the population growth in Houston, there will be a need for another "name brand" 4 year institution other than UH within a generation.

Agreed. This is the catalyst the city needs for major high rise and mixed-use residential/office/retail development in the South Loop/NRG Stadium area.

 

Why do I have a feeling that whatever development is to be sparked by this will be fought tooth and nail by the rodeo?

I haven't heard that being the plan, but it would be interesting if they did. I think it may been known as Hobby International from the time it was renamed for former Gov. Hobby from the old name of Houston International in 1967, until Intercontinental opened in 1969.

 

Today would be the day to do the re-name and go.....

 

 

Thanks for the info DNA....according to SW's website, you only need to present your passport at check-in before proceeding through security for international flights -- since I didn't enter my passport information when I bought my tickets, I want to make sure I am prepared before I get there...you weren't able to show them your passport at a kiosk and then go through security ?

 

 

I tried to use the kiosk, but it was a no-go for me. IDK if other had the same issue.

 

I went to the full service line and they checked me in, printed my boarding pass, and check my luggage. Others in line seemed to have already checked in. I didn't have that luxury and don't really know why.

 

My flight was early so regular security wasn't too bad. I parked, checked luggage, went to security, and was sitting at Pappasitos within 30 minutes. I had 1.5 hrs to kill.

 

Other useful info:

 

Hobby can't serve alcohol until 7 AM (at least on a weekday).

Flew to Mexico and back this weekend.

 

New terminal is nice. The Pappasitios in it is very good and while still at airport prices ($12 for breakfast taco meal), you get A LOT of food. More like two breakfast burritos with beans and potatoes.

 

Two issues (although nothing earth shattering).

 

1.) I didn't enter my passport info when buying the ticket. I thought I could go back later to do that. However, my RR account doesn't let me enter it in. Therefore, I couldn't check in. I had to call in to get my PP # added to the reservation. Then, for some reason, the agent never checked me in. So I had a C# boarding. Ouch. I still can't add my passport info to my RR account. This is a significant oversight by SWA.

 

2.) SWA's system isn't transferring the global entry / TSA  precheck # to international boarding passes as of yet. Had to go through regular security line.

 

Global entry kiosk still worked for me, however, when I returned to Hobby.

 

For those who are flying internationally and returning, the Global entry kiosks are to the right when getting to the immigration checkpoint. The officials are tried to shuffle everyone to the regular kiosks and didn't advertise the Global entry ones. I had to look / ask if they were in use.

 

They are.

 

Overall, SWA is still a little rusty / clunky on its international travel operation. I'm sure they'll get it together.

 

 

I like how they are integrating the new 45 North / West downtown spur into the existing street grid.

 

I hate that we're replacing a trenched section of freeway with an elevated structure.

 

Is there no way to use the existing trenched section of 45 under Dallas and tie that into the 45 spur?

 

 

 

 

I heard that the reason why the bridge is being replaced isn't neccessarily that its past its life, but that it limits the flow of ship channel traffic to between the bridge pillons.

IDK if that's completely. However, when you consider the potential catastophree of a significant ship hitting them (considering the ship AND car traffic) there is no reason to keep this bridge in service IMO.

A suspension bridge is a far better dresign from a safety aspect. It should be a far better design from a traffic flow aspect as well when you consider the increased lanes AND what should be a less steep grade.

Lots of congestion is created at the current bridge becasue the climb is so steep and traffic slows down considerably because of that.

Since we're going to one tag for registration and inspection, why not incorporate a toll-tag with it and have a TRUE one tag system?

 

This may be off topic as well, but I don't see the reason why HCTRA still exists when the state can now build toll roads.

 

Remember, HCTRA was created b/c the state was constitutionally prohibited from building tollroads at the time and a local tolling authority was nice solution for getting roads faster and having local control of that.

 

Wouldn't it be better for everyone now to have TxDOT absorb all local tolling authorities while also devolving tolling authority to their regional districts? It could eliminate bureaucracy, eliminate the 'competition' between dueling tolling authorities (The Houston area has 5 different tolling authorities now - Fort bend, Harris, Montgomery, Brazoria -even though there's no toll roads there yet, and TxDOT), as well as making highway planning more streamlined and coherent.

 

IDK. Sorry to get off topic.

I'm just vaguely reading what's been posted, but for the people who are worried about a trench, I understand their point. It could end up like the 59 trench (unlikely), or it could look like crap.

In order to prevent this, there needs to be a strong push for this proposed green space that would cover the trench.

That should be the focus of both sides; trenching the mega-highway and creating a unified space that won't cut off any neighboorhoods (sorta like 288 did)

 

I think a better example for a design target should be something like US 75 that runs through Uptown Dallas.

 

It has no vegetation, but still looks pretty darn good (as far as a trenched freeway can look 'good'). I imagine the 59 trench would look pretty crappy without the ivy. And we all know that ivy doesn't do well in the dark  .

 

The ultimate design of the 59/69/45 trench should be built to accommodate capping, but look good without it IMO.

TxDOT looking into ways to ease congestion on the Southwest Freeway from 288 all the way to Beltway 8.

 

I guess there's already been a meeting on this last year in September 2014.

 

Here's the TxDOT sight:

 

www.mysouthwestfreeway.com

 

Outside of the "lipstick on a pig" ideas, here are some thoughts (not 100% original btw) on how traffic can be eased on 59 / 69 without much ROW purchased:

 

1.) Configure on ramps / off ramps on top of each other like at 59/69 and Kirby between 610 and the beltway. That way merging and exiting traffic isn't fighting one another

 

2.) Build elevated two-way HOV lanes in current HOV ROW from Spur to past the beltway. (possible?)

 

3.) Reconfigure Chimney Rock exit (headed south)  by exiting before the 610 traffic merges into 59/69 and have those exiting 59/69 to 610 do so before the Chimney Rock entrance to the freeway. Either that or eliminate the Chimney Rock exit / entrances all together.

 

Ideas that might require ROW purchase and most definitely be more expensive even if no ROW:

 

1.) Extend Westpark tollway (WPT) past 610 and grade separate at 610 interchange. Possibly grade separate at Newcastle and have tollway end between Newcastle and Wesleyan. If not, have just have it end between 610 frontage and Newcastle.

 

2.) Direct connector from 610 traffic headed north to WPT headed west.

 

3.) Direct connector from WPT headed east to 610 headed south. (I don't think a WPT east to 610 North can fit)

 

4.) 2 lane Direct connector from 59/69 north to 610 south. Current one lane config. is big bottle neck.

 

5.) Direct connector from southbound 610 traffic to westbound WPT. To limit ROW, the direct connector would have to be after the 59/69 exit and tie into the extended WPT.

 

Ideas that might require significant ROW but not quite to the level of the Katy freeway redesign:

 

1.) If previous #5 option not available, have a direct connector from southbound 610 traffic to westbound WPT on the north side of 59/69. It would be something like that of the new 290 to I10 direct connector. However this leads me to my next idea...

 

2.) Purchase land between 59/69 and Westpark rd. and WPT. Shift 59/69 slightly south and decrease the sharpness of the 59/69 curve at the WPT intersection.

 

Katy Freeway clear-cutting option:

 

1.) Turn single HOV lane into 3 HOT lanes with the middle lane being bi-directional (much like what 290 was supposed to have)

 

2.) Add a full 5th lane to each direction of 59/69.

 

3.) Let them eat cake.

 

Anyone else have any thoughts?

Setup fees and minimum money needed in account before it reloads.

 

TxTag: No start up fee (comes preloaded w/ the cost of the tag) and reloads in $20 increments.

 

EZtag: Costs $15 for the privilege and reloads in $30 increments.

 

There are zero benefits of an EZtag over a TxTag. 

 

When I got my TxTag at a local AAA store 3 to 5 years ago or so, the incentive was even better. It cost $15 for a AAA member and it came w/ $20 pre-loaded on it. I made $ by getting one...... then, of course, I started using it.

 

Yeah, the state recouped that $5 many, MANY times over.

What's with the plaza space btwn the theater and office building?

 

Its both hostile to pedestrians due to the car traffic while making it harder for cars to use the garage due to its large setback / foot traffic.

 

Fail.

 

But considering what there was in this location before, I guess I'll take it.

 

In the land of the blind, the man with one eye is king... or something. IDK.

 

Does filling the inner loop make sense when extending 69?

 

I mean, this whole discontinuous 69 mess leaves a bad taste in my mouth while seemingly no closer to completion.

They should only let those who own property along the proposed lines vote. Problem solved.

As long as they aren't women..... or anything other than white. I mean, that's the way our founders envisioned it.

/troll

Expand 45 without improving pinch points: if you add 2 lanes in each direction there is no more pinch point.

 

ROW cost in downtown: look at google maps today, pierce elevated can add 3 or 4 lanes if it is built out over pierce street, no ROW cost needed there. farther north the land is currently being used as grass, that should be cheaper than even on the east end, the biggest change is to align to go over top of dallas street rather than underneath and minimal row acquisition there. from there up, you're already at 5 lanes wide.

 

eado residents lose land: not just eado, there's a whole complex of low income housing that is going to need to be razed for this. and the land that's lost for a freeway that they are in the shadow of becomes a very wide freeway canyon.

 

3rd ward loses one or two: they lose at least 6 through streets.

 

north houston: it's unfortunate, but there's so many railroad tracks and bayous intersecting right there, you could build a literal wall and it wouldn't really make things worse than they are currently. the psychological barrier that gets added to here is the least impactful because it adds the least, percentage wise.

 

downtown: will be interesting to see how it plays out for them, but yeah, I think it's really a neutral deal. gotta wonder if they are going to just relocate those displaced low income housing from the east of 59 to the west of 59. easiest thing to do.

 

what is the alternate? build on top of pierce street, go over dallas street instead of under it. you can make 45 10 lanes the whole way, take away the ramp from 59 southbound to 45 northbound, take away the ramp from i10 westbound to 45 southbound.

 

but this isn't about what is the alternate, or what would I do. it's about analysis and problem list.

 

Another one I saw: No exit to downtown from westbound I-10. (it appears you can get there from the exit from I-10 WB to 59 SB, and exit near stadiums).

 

Foot traffic around 45/59/288 complex through the east of downtown will be high at all times (but especially during baseball and soccer seasons), this is a potential problem in that St. Emanuel and Hamilton will be treated as traditional Houston feeder roads by drivers. The signaling will have to be such as to keep cars traveling at no faster than 30 mph. if the freeway does get capped through here there are going to be people jaywalking all over the place making it very dangerous for drivers and peds alike.

 

Another problem item: Currently, Polk has a bicycle path on it (one of those with the painted lines), as Polk will no longer be crossing the freeway, are they planning on creating a safe means of cyclists getting across the freeway?

 

I don't have time to debate all your points right now.

 

However, your foot traffic argument is specious in that St Emmanuel won't be treated as a feeder any more than Chartes is now. In fact, when they rebuild St Emmanuel it will be done so to ADA standards that would increase safety. The speed limits and observed speeds of traffic will be that of all streets within the downtown grid. If the area is capped then more foot traffic will probably mean that lights are less likely to timed in succession as people want to cross. This will reduce speeds and increase safety.

 

As far as ROW being available for the Pierce, what grass are you referring to? If the grass you're talking about is Buffalo Bayou Park or Sam Houston Park then no thank you.

 

We don't have enough parks in Houston so let's not go and pave over the ones we do have.

This. Midtown is the name they started using for the area to make it more attractive sounding, like Museum District and Medical Center Area. It's still Third Ward.

 

I have to admire your perseverance. 

 

However, that's some sticky precedence. I mean, wouldn't that logic dictate that we need to still refer to Texas as Tejas y Cohuila or the USA as part of the British Empire?

 

I don't want to sound flippant, but I think you're purposefully trying to make the redesign into something racial or socioeconomic when you invoke the 3rd ward.

 

We all know the 3rd ward has been the epicenter of black culture in Houston. To say that it gets the worst deal, you're accusing TxDOT of unfairly targeting black people.

 

3rd ward is not getting cut off from other areas of Houston and it is not being targeted.

 

I just think its irresponsible for people to continue this refrain. There are real race issues with this country. We don't need to invent one here in Houston to try and stop a freeway redesign.

Actually, seven streets will be cut off.

 

 

Yeah so our math isn't adding up.

 

The only 3rd ward streets that connect to Midtown currently but will not in this plan are :

 

Cleburne and Blodgett

 

My assumptions:

1.) The Boundaries of 3rd ward are I45 south, 288, Spur 5, and Brays Bayou

2.) The only streets that connect 3rd ward to midtown are: Pierce, McGowen, Tuam, Elgin, Alabama, Cleburn, Wheeler,and Blodgett (barely)

 

I count 2.

 

Where do you get 7?

Who gains from this?

Not the people who are using 45 as through traffic, cause the number of lanes available to them won't be changing, and in some places it is even less.

Not the residents of the 3rd ward cause they are going to lose cross streets where 288 and 59 merge.

Not the residents east of downtown cause the freeway is going to take a whole block and make the freeway wider, and that pretty park they showed isn't being installed, or paid for by txdot, so that probably will never happen. Oh, and cross streets are lost here as well.

Not the residents north of downtown cause the freeway is going to be wider and taller.

Not the residents northwest of downtown cause there's no real change.

So far as I can tell, it's just residents of midtown that gain something out of this realignment.

So yes, this plan is horrible, however, I'm trying to reserve my responses in this thread to constructive feedback.

Ok.

I think you're assuming a whole lot when you write this project off.

Consider the alternative. If you expand 45 without improving the pinch points of the other freeways, what did you actually improve?

Did you consider the fact that the cost of ROW in downtown could actually expanding the Pierce more expensive than this plan?

Eado residents lose land that is in the shadow of an elevated freeway that has no real potential.

3rd ward loses one or two (I don't remember) cross streets to midtown. They'll still have access. It may take 1 extra minute. That's right, 1. Let's not conflate this with the original crime of tearing down a minority neighbor and running 288 through it. I mean, come on.

North Houston residents already made a deal with the devil in agreeing to let HCTRA run the north hardy through it and allowing TXDOT to rebuild the Elyssian viaduct. This project will be far less invasive to single family home owners than those two.

Downtown is neutral? Hardly. This actually puts more land for development in downtown but re-routing I10. IT removes an impediment to development in the Pierce. It removes the brutalist freeway on the west side of downtown and allows for a potential 'signature' bridge for downtown.

I have no illusions that the construction is going to suck..... a lot. But I ask you, what is the alternative?

 

In the new configuration, how does one travel 45 northbound to Allen Parkway, or Memorial? In the new configuration, you simply don't. At least, not without exiting at the south of downtown and going through the streets (adding 15 minutes to your commute). So there is insufficient access. How does one travel eastbound on I-10 an access midtown? Even 59/288 northbound doesn't have access to the west side of downtown.

 

When I first saw the design, I was excited, after continuing to look at it, I am less and less excited with each passing day.

 

Your question is whether the whole plan is worth it b/c the 10 ppl / day who drive in from Friendswood and work off Waugh and Memorial have to drive 15 minutes more to work? Really?

 

How does one drive from 45 south to Allen Parkway or Memorial? You leave your house earlier and take surface streets..... surface streets that can accommodate the traffic as they're 5 lanes wide and would probably add 5 more minutes (not 15) to your commute.

 

 

TS.

Not really. The "downtown connectors" will remain, restricting the site. Now all the areas north of UHD and the warehouses will be opened up a TON and be prime for redevelopment.

I left a comment that advised TxDOT to have those connectors 'hug' the freeway more in that area so that way the site north of the tracks could be sold and developed or turned into a park.

Not to get too much off track but......

As TxDOT said, this illistration isn't final. I just hope they keep the footprint of this area and the 59/10 (and now 45) intersection to as much as a 'minimum' as possible so as to either develop or turn areas by the bayou into parks.

http://www.ih45northandmore.com/docs4/15_20150417_Seg3_PM4_Exhibit_01_Overall.pdf

http://houston.culturemap.com/news/home-design/04-30-15-party-on-the-bayou-new-glassed-in-event-space-offers-opportunities-for-unique-celebrations/

Oh man, that grassy patch beyond the treeline and fronting San Felipe is going to be covered in sooooo much pomeranian and labradoodle poop......

 

 

Can you imagine the hospital, mall, and bunker hill west being connected in one coherent walkable district? That would be pretty cool.

 

I mean, one can hope right?

 

THENNNNNN, greater Memorial City can be integrated into Citycentre along I10 to form one large west Houston district...

 

We'll call it the WHE8 district. West Houston, East of 8: WHE8. We'll pronounce like 'wait' or 'weight'.

 

Then we can have this amazing Abbott and Costello routine when we describe the area:

 

Person: Where do you live?

Me: WHE8.

Person: Sure, answer when you can.

Me: I did

Person: Did what?

Me: Answered your question.

Person: No you didn't. You said wait.

Me: Exactly.

 

Hilarious Houston Home Humor.

 

 

 

 

Hines continued:

 

"See there will be a point in which our gridlock will become so bad in this city and the public transportation system so poor, that even your help will not be able to get to your homes until 9 or 10 AM" said Hines.

 

What were mostly blank stares of the wealthy white crowd began to shed away. A frightful gasp was let out from the back of the room when the point finally registered.

One person was reported to have shrieked, "My breakfast won't be prepared until 10AM?!"

 

A palpable sense of panic reverberated amongst the Houston elite. Hines tried to reassure the room with more equine and nonagenarian humor, but the damage was done. Silence took hold and everyone began to shuffle out much like mourners at the funeral of a great man. 

 

 

You left end of the article out.