Sparrow

If light rail were to extend from the terminus of the Purple and Green lines westward toward Uptown and the NW Transit Center, which of the two straight forward choices would be most advantageous and why?

Just thinking aloud here for a second, but I would foresee a faster and perhaps cheaper build for a Memorial line that would highlight Houston's park system. But at the same time a line down Washington (or even better perhaps Washington and Center Street??) would likely lead to higher ridership potential and more urban development. Let's be realistic here, you can't build both.

Does Metro have any info on a future extension into this area of town? Surely one would think if TCR does opt for a Galleria "area" high speed rail station, Metro would seek to establish a direct Downtown connection.

Awesome, so when does construction start?

What are the chances the same team who did #1 are the same folks working on #2 and perhaps when they finish that one they will move on to #3?

It seems to me that this developer is all about saving money with smart logistics. In keeping with that trend, a 2015 start date would seem rather reasonable.

Doesn't matter to me what they build on the roof of the GRB, but that's ~8 acres of prime real estate that should have something be it solar panels, Top Golf, soccer fields, park, helicopter landing pads, parking spaces, apartments, train station, botanical gardens, or whatever other ideas they can come up with.

It's not even continuous yet as parts are still under construction, it may be some years before it bridges Spring Creek, but one can't help but see Holzwarth Road as a future great street in it's infancy.

The entire length of future Holzwarth/Sawmill is less than a mile west of I-45. It intersects many major roadways including the North Freeway, Cypresswood, Louetta, Spring Cypress, FM 2920, Spring Stuebner, the under construction Grand Parkway, under construction Springwoods Village Parkway, Sawdust, and Grogan's Mill. There are major area draws within the immediate vicinity including Top Golf, Splashtown, Old Town Spring, future CityPlace (Springwoods' town center), ExxonMobil, and The Woodlands Town Center.

The Woodlands Town Center is a major success. Springwoods Village will no doubt follow suit with ExxonMobil as it's anchor. At some point land development pressure will surely fill these two centers and seek nearby options for growth. The surrounding areas vast expanses of single family homes leaves Holzwarth as the best remaining option for the area. More single family homes in Klein, Spring, Oak Ridge, and The Woodlands will only lead to more demand for dense retail and office space in close proximity.

Holzwarth in the future will be the new Post Oak Boulevard. There are many geographic and socioeconomic similarities between the two. Just as Post Oak is the spine of Uptown, Holzwarth will be the spine of this emerging development corridor.

Thoughts?  

Anyone have some advice I could use about driving in Houston and not getting in a wreck and/or pissing others off?

Put the phone out of reach or turn on the BT.

It doesn't have anything to do with my personal preferences,  If this thing is successful, and it looks promising at any rate, they will end up building a line from DFW to San Antonio.  That line will go through Waco.  Whether they put in a stop now or a stop later is no big deal.  It's all about where the rail line itself is going to run.  Why run it through the middle of the countryside where there truly are only small towns like Mexia and Corsicana when for a few extra miles of track you can get a 90 mile head start on a DFW to San Antonio line?

 

Maybe a future Dallas--SA line would skew the T to the East instead of West as the original Texas T-Bone plan laid out. Hang a right at US 79 as you head up 35. Make the "CS area" stop the junction instead of Temple.

Why run it through the middle of the countryside you ask? Because it's flat. Because it is the middle of the countryside--land is cheap. Because there will be fewer constituents to fight for either rerouting or demanding a local stop that doesn't make financial sense. 

If a stop closer to Madisonville is "just East" of College Station I'll wait on drawing conclusions of what "near" the Galleria means.

Go big or go home...

...Largest indoor Net-Zero Energy park. Air condition the Dome without being tied to the grid. <dramatic pause>

Let NRG employ solar panels, solar chimneys and a myriad of natural ventilation designs, and whatever other "green" technologies they can come up with.

We have the greatest concentration of energy companies in the world--challenge them to recreate the Dome with all of its amenities Zero-Net Energy once operational. Why would they want to spend their profits on such a crazy suggestion? PR and R&D. Largest Indoor Park, that's cool. Largest Indoor Park with a bunch of cutting-edge technology, now that's awesome.

Turn the NRG parking lot into Expo 2025. Make Houston 2025 synonymous with Chicago 1893. Let the New Dome be the focal point of a much larger, much grander plan. Take RFP with minimal criteria that must be met with the winning bid getting use of the land free of charge for X number of decades after the World Expo, at which time the ownership reverts back to the county. What's the benefit to the county? Zero cost to redevelop the Dome because someone else will do it for you, and future sales taxes. Parking, park land, storm water, hotel rooms, cow pens for the Rodeo, energy consumption, anything and everything--spell out what all criteria must be met and let them have their fun, an XPrize sort of competition.

Astrodome XPrize anyone?  

Maybe they'll consider PRT radical enough to study alongside jet packs and hovercraft.

If I recall a certain "Hardy Rail Yards" has been vacant for some time...they already got the name down so why not? At least this way it could connect to the small light rail system we have in place. However, a further out station might be the catalyst for commuter rail.

It would be ludicrous to imagine TCR not building a downtown area station. Any other stations would have to be in addition to a downtown station. 

That being said, I wonder if they have any intent to create a commuter rail service themselves. Is there any legal hurdle for them to do it here in Houston? Does METRO or other government bodies have the exclusive rights to local transit service or anything of that nature?

Why not build three stations in the Houston metro region as they have spoken of in the Metroplex? Run the Dallas--Houston route, but also run a "local" train just between the three local stations. They should maximize the use of the rail line they will construct. The Woodlands to Downtown in 10 minutes. Downtown to Galveston in 20 or so. I'm sure quite a few people will pay the necessary price to make it profitable.

Galveston would be the big winner (or loser I suppose depending upon your viewpoint) in such a scenario. Think of how many new condos can be sold if the island is suddenly 20 minutes from downtown instead of an hour. The island would see a real estate boom! Additionally the trains can be commissioned for hurricane evacuations as they would be able to ferry tens of thousands of people in a reasonably short time frame in an emergency.  

If I were going to build a HSR rail station/TOD development on the north side of Houston, I'd build it at Springwoods Village (i.e. the Exxon development). Right at the major highway intersection of 45 and the future GP. The gray section in the Springwoods Village conceptual plan would be ideal with the rail line bisecting the land. Take the route from downtown up the Hardy and veer west at Old Town Spring. This could be the North Houston/Woodlands stop. Then continue on up the right of way along FM 149 and FM 1486 and onward north. Springwoods has grand plans--a HSR station would fit right in line with what they hope to accomplish. If nothing else I'm sure those execs up at the Exxon HQ would make use of the new line to visit the new campus (and perhaps TCR would find an unlikely investor ).

www.springwoodsvillage.com/images/large/100920_Springwoods-Village-Districts.jpg

Perhaps the angle to go to privately finance a HSR line is by making it more of a real estate venture. Short reference to TOD angle in Texas Tribune article.

www.texastribune.org/2014/08/18/bullet-train-could-change-everything/

The grass at Discovery Green is pathetic. I went twice last year and once the entire big yard was blocked off because they were protecting it while it was growing back and another time I just happen to be there the day they opened it back up after being closed off.

 

Is it because they have too many big events or is it just the type of grass they chose?

 

Actually, just found this article blaming the drought from the year. To me, they just shouldn't have as many big events in the yard. You're not gonna find a grass that will hold up to that much foot traffic. The lawn care takers are in a fight they can't win.

 

http://blogs.houstonpress.com/artattack/2012/04/discovery_green_not_as_green_a.php

I wonder if they could somehow use the roof of the GRB as a location to grow a new lawn to be replanted at DG? I mean if the plan is to use the lawn so heavily, it would be beneficial to replant sod every so often to maintain park standards. Having the transplant grass nearby seems like it would make for easy maintenance. Even if not something as radical as on the roof, what's from keeping the city from growing a replacement lawn for up keep?

Personal Rapid Transit (PRT) is a long bandied about, but oft dismissed form of transportation. Many potential systems are out there, but only a few sad, disappointing examples are in operation across the globe. The promise of mass-transit service with car-like privacy is grand.

Why has PRT been so slow to gain traction?

Will the driverless car usher in the age of PRT? After all, why would any average citizen need to own a car any longer (and pay for gas, insurance, maintenance, etc.)  if a fleet of autonomous taxis is driving every street in America?

Will PRT become the future or will it always remain a vision?

Impact News article quotes Eckels as saying "stops are being considered near Bryan-College Station and possibly along Beltway 8 or the Grand Parkway."

http://impactnews.com/houston-metro/spring--klein/environmental-study-on-high-speed-rail-from-houston-to-dalla/

Also, Instead of having 59 NB traffic navigate the 59/288 split and weave to get onto I-45, why not extend Spur 527 from its current terminus at Elgin and have it terminate at 45 instead, providing a direct link from 59 to 45 without the weaving at 288?

Going way back here y'all, but instead of the suggestion of putting all traffic onto one massive roadway to the east of Downtown as some suggest, why not provide an outlet for traffic to bypass the bottlenecks? Downtown has freeways on all sides, perhaps it would be the most direct solution for the Pierce would be to do the same for Midtown as JLWM8609 suggested. Cut-and-cover a Spur extension all the way to 45. (The inner cartographer in me loves the idea of Midtown being defined fully by clear boundaries on a map.)

As an immediate fix perhaps even a simple change in signage could reduce bottlenecks. Have SB 45 traffic wishing to exit 288S/59S do so by taking I-10 EB north of downtown and take the 59S exit behind the GRB--they'd avoid the Pierce altogether. Same for 288NB/59NB exiting to 45N, sign for them to exit I-10W and then join exit 45N. Some of us do this already depending upon traffic one day to the next. TxDot could potentially reduce the Pierce bottleneck simply by providing alternative exit routes. Perhaps label "thru" route exits via the east side of Downtown and keep the current exits labeled as "local"?

Umm, if I was looking to best "draw a line" between UH, TSU, St. Thomas, Rice, and HCC I'd probably choose Alabama myself. I mean 4 of the five schools do actually directly have access to the roadway. Perhaps one would choose to connect the schools with a mass transit corridor instead of a roadway--Metro has a plan for that one.

Mr. King's suggestion that a major thoroughfare be carved through the Third Ward from UH to the SW corner of the Medical Center simply to "redevelop hundreds of city blocks into an academic/biotech campus" is a vision that only Moses or the Baron himself could be proud of.

What's wrong with Almeda? Its limited access along most of the street with long stretches between lights. Just trench it under the cross street intersections and your golden, parkway from the Texas Medical Center to west Pearland and beyond.

Maybe it's just my view, but parkways ought to have more nature and less urbanity with cars moving along curving, meandering roadways. As one of the straightest roadways in the entire metro region, Almeda is an avenue that is a great candidate for Smart Street improvements--improvements that would likely take stress off of 288. I agree that the intersections ought to be grade separated to ease the flow of traffic, but that's a Smart Street or Express Street, if you prefer.

Perhaps this is why the downtown Hyatt Place was cancelled??

I think some of us are confusing parkways with Smart Streets. Related, but quite a different animal.

Harrisburg as a parkway? Almeda? What??? No.

TxDot has said tunneling isn't an option, but if they really wanted to provide better neighborhood connectivity why wouldn't they consider cut-and-cover? Cut-and-cover the Spur under Bagby/Brazos/Smith and do the same for the 45 main lanes under Pierce/St Joseph/Jefferson. All in all wouldn't be that much of a pain during construction with the many parallel options downtown/midtown provide for local traffic. Freeway traffic would maintain the status quo until the new tunnels are completed. If the "lack of space for shoulders" is the issue as TxDot has said in the past, why not just build two levels of tunnel and just split the traffic? That might even be better to separate local and thru traffic. Austin has a split and so does San Antonio. And don't tell me you can't tunnel in Houston because it would flood. All tunnels require pumping stations, Houston would do the same. Both Midtown and Downtown would see big benefits with a Spur extension and below grade freeways. TxDot could even sell of the valuable land the Elevated currently occupies after they are done dismantling it.

Another great upgrade would be Braeswood as a pipeline from the southwest into the medical center, to take load off of 59.

 

Thoughts?

A Brays Bayou Parkway could be fitting on many fronts: flood mitigation, traffic flow, as well as recreational opportunity.

Brays Bayou is already channelized from roughly 59 all the way to Spur 5. Increase stormwater capacity of the bayou all along this stretch by eliminating the banks and build retaining walls in their place--the banks reduce the maximum potential volume. At the same time install weirs every so often along the course of the bayou to slow the flow toward the bay while creating a waterway with a higher constant minimal water level.

Put the new parkway inside of the retaining walls thereby reducing construction costs and time. Putting the parkway inside of the retaining walls will allow for a reduction in the traffic lanes at grade. Westbound parkway lanes should be on the south side of the bayou and eastbound lanes to the north to facilitate smooth ingress and egress with the surface. 

The additional land made available with the removed at grade lanes can be converted to park land or promenade depending upon the existing surrounding land use. Major cross streets would see traffic flow improvement as stoplight wait time would be reduced with the new parkway below grade. Still want greenery along the bayou instead of concrete or rock walls? Plant ivy along the parkway walls. Of course hike and bike trails would have to be included inside of the retaining walls as well.

The Woodlands Parkway should be parkwayified.

On a side note, wasn't there some sort of street naming ordinance recently passed? You shouldn't be able to call a roadway "_____ Parkway" if it doesn't meet certain design guidelines. I mean come on, "Cypress Creek Parkway" (i.e. FM 1960). Not a chance in hell that that roadway will ever be a true parkway--even if that would be a plus for the community. Cypress Creek Avenue or Cypress Creek Boulevard, sure. Parkway?? No.

It all comes down to money in the end, and the billions of dollars for such an ambitious project simply isn't there. That being said, it would be quite beneficial both for flood control and beautification, as well as perhaps some sort of power generation, to reshape the already urbanized bayous into more of a square shape with vertical walls instead of the gently sloping "v" or "u" shape that currently defines them. A square shape would provide the greatest possible stormwater retention while also providing the possibility for waterside roadways or walkways. Dams every mile or so could provide the water retention beautification and power generating abilities you aim for. Despite more water held back than the current system, by increasing the total volume of the system by changing the shape of the waterway stormwater management ability would increase. Essentially make what is currently a vehicle to remove water as fast as possible into a linear series of retention ponds. Navigability of the waterway would not be possible with the ice cubification of the waterway. Water quality would improve with more time for silt to naturally settle rather than being carried to the bay. Also not as much silt would be in the water in the first place with the reduced flows. Water aquifers would be more replenished in drier times because the water would filter down thru the soil with slower flows rather than flowing to the bay. 

Aside from the money hurdle, the bayous are currently seen as the means of getting stormwater into the bay as quickly as possible. Changing that view would likely prove even more difficult than the financing.  

What exactly does the master control operations department do? The Encompass website gives a bit of an overview, but I don't understand how this will save costs for an existing station. Seems as though the same amount of work would need to be performed whether in house or at some centralized hub--so no labor savings. How is it better for a station to have folks hundreds of miles away doing work folks at a desk feet away can do? Are there operational "hardware" cost savings?