Sparrow

Compare the taxpayer cost per person-mile moved - it's no contest.  Recent Chronicle story said the new Tomball tollway is attracting twice the usage they predicted - freeways are popular, even tolled ones (which pay for themselves, unlike any rail project).

I may just be poking the bear, so to speak, but while toll roads do in fact pay for themselves and more, they don't pay the car payments, and the vehicle maintenance, and the auto insurance, and the tanks of gas, and the registration fees, and the parking, and.... you get the idea--the numerous costs the taxpayer must bear themselves if they wish to use the toll road. 

Comparing highways to railways without considering the various costs of the vehicle to use the pathway of choice, is the same as comparing renting versus buying a house without taking into account taxes and HOA fees.

How about doing a comparison of trip cost instead of "per mile" and consider vehicle expense to the citizenry as well? 

Which corner of Sawdust/Budde is this on? Nothing went before the Houston planning commission it seems. 

Why aren't all intercity bus lines unified at the Downtown Transit Center? Operate much like the Port Authority Bus Terminal in NYC. Does METRO prohibt such a set up? Wouldn't using METRO's terminal be much more financially responsible for Greyhound and the like instead of owning it's own?

If UH is to build a teaching hospital on campus, where do y'all speculate it would be located? 

The land in question went before the Houston Planning Commission earlier this year already for HEB. Two other even larger tracts of land in the immediate area as well even more recently. These big companies like HEB, Kroger, and Wal-Mart are very strategic with their real estate investments. They'll buy land and sit on it just so their competitors can't open a location due to lack of a proper development site. It's no joke when they say the Grocery biz is a high stakes game.

I would actually disagree - orienting the tower along Bell provides for those residents getting a park view, as well as providing privacy for the amenities deck from the public spaces of the park and Toyota Center.  Additionally, I like the garage entrance on Austin - it keeps entering and exiting traffic away from the park and the sidewalk path between the light rail and the Toyota Center.

Also, the curved windows are on the corner facing the bulk of the skyline - those are probably going to be the nicer/more expensive units.

 

It would be nice if the mid rise roof was more used - maybe expand the amenities deck to take up the whole roof, making it a straight wall with no set back.  Maybe they could have patios down there if they want to keep the set back?

Over all, it would be amazing to get this tower in SE downtown - right now that whole area is a dead zone

Orienting the tower along LaBranch or Austin would allow for potential sightlines from their second tower to Root Square--not doing so is reducing the value of their own future project. Creating a patio area to go with the recreational deck in a reoriented building would allow for all of tower 1's residents to partake in the park view. Further, orienting along either north/south street would provide more of the desired sunrise and sunset views. 3300 Main does far better at providing a vast array of views in all directions--a simple standard rectangle is boring.

There is also a garage entrance facing Root Square along Bell. Removing this would indeed be positive for the reasons you mentioned.

If the curved windows will provide for higher rents, make more curved windows. Some folks may like views of Toyota Center and DG, put the curved windows to the east too. Since the skyline view is in high demand, maximize potential profit by creating an L-shaped building instead of a rectangle (even though that would block tower 2's park view).

Yes, this is better than a parking lot, but what isn't?

METRO is increasing the number of spaces at the Grand Parkway P&R starting next Monday Oct. 26th. Capacity to radically increase again by next fall with a 1,650 space garage.

http://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/TXMETRO/bulletins/1205601

I'm not understanding what it is about this project so many are in awe of. This is a less impressive version of Catalyst. Orienting the tower along Bell reduces visual connection to Root Square for their second potential tower. If curves and large windows are the appeal, why only one corner? Seems like a wasted opportunity with their use of the roof--if nothing else increase the number of floors with the mid-rise section and add additional units. Sorry, but I'm not impressed.

I don't think we full realize the magnitude of the confirmation of the Brazos Valley Station.

If Dallas to Houston will be under 90 minutes, then Brazos Valley to Houston should be in the range of 30 minutes or less. Living in the country half way between Huntsville and College Station could provide a faster rush hour commute than living in The Woodlands or Katy--this will indeed be a "game changer" more so than any high-rise or new mixed use development.

I don't think it's out of the realm of possibilities to expect very high demand for a new transit-based bedroom community once this train actually comes online. If I were Huntsville or College Station, I'd probably put updating my annexation plan on my to do list. 

Why has no one mentioned the obvious answer is an elevated track from Houston terminus down 290?

Lol I don't see the confusion there

Indeed, as the initial screening indicates 100% of the urban lengths in both Houston and Dallas are assumed to be on viaduct. Other rural sections will be on embankments with culverts at appropriate locations for crossings where permissible as cost savings versus viaduct, but will still be elevated.

I'd love to take a look at that if anyone has it offhand.

http://www.texascentral.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Step-1-Screening-of-Corridor-Alternatives-Report.pdf

6.3.1 is where you need to look. Page 64. It's a good read.

It's confirmed that TCP will have 3 station locations at the start of operations--Dallas, Houston, and Brazos Valley.

http://www.texascentral.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Texas-Central-Economic-Impact-Release.pdf

Reminds me of the old on-the-fly mailbag exchange.

Seems that the acceleration would be quite abrupt at some point or the train would necessarily be excessively long to allow for a gradual acceleration of the catch car.

This argument is invalidated by how much the reintegration of one neighborhood further fractures all of the other neighborhoods that are part of this realignment. 

Does the unification of Midtown and Downtown with the removal of the Pierce really fracture the Third Ward and the East End so much? I'd argue that it will protect their community from the inevitable manifest destiny of their houses being torn down for high rise after high rise.

The folks in these areas don't have the money to fend off an Ashby Highrise type development. Unifying Midtown and Downtown provides a service to the region in the form of implied de facto zoning. With Houston's lack of zoning what is stopping the next Skyhouse from being built on a few abandoned lots pieced together off of Elgin or Harrisburg? Land is significantly cheaper and more readily available, why not build there? By establishing Downtown/Midtown as the densest, most connected, walkable, urban environment due to physical conditions and economic demand, it just won't make sense for the surrounding neighborhoods to become just like Downtown itself. The neighborhoods can work to maintain their character by keeping their community environment. On the other hand, keeping the status quo, years from now moving along the supply curve, the economics just won't stack up for a high rise Downtown when you can build that very same building in a nearby neighborhood with fewer real estate challenges to overcome and a similar demand curve. Keep the demand curve ever growing for Downtown/Midtown to ensure the supply does not find a better backyard elsewhere.

Enlarging the perceived Downtown neighborhood by removing the Pierce is in effect an annexation of Midtown for developers to focus their skyward endeavors. Such should not be thought of as a backhand to the Third Ward and the East End, but rather as a commitment toward helping their communities maintain their identities.

What they stated in the report was that there is an increased ridership for an extension into downtown Houston, but that the increased numbers were NOT enough to cover the additional cost of moving the line further into downtown. Which kinda sucks, but at the same time, the engineering and construction challenges for elevating the line into downtown as an extension of the Utility Corridor alignment would be pretty intense.

 

 

REMINDER; THIS PDF HAS A DATE OF MARCH 22. THAT'S PRETTY OLD IF YOU REALLY THINK ABOUT IT IN OUR FAST-PACED SOCIETY. THINGS COULD CHANGE. I MEAN, THEY ALWAYS DO, BECAUSE THEY ARE THINGS, BUT THESE SPECIFIC THINGS COULD CHANGE. WHO KNOWS.

The US 290/610 station location scores a "3" for ridership/revenue potential on the stoplight chart on pg. 111 of the pdf, while a Downtown station only scores a "2". This rather clearly shows they view that the 290/610 location will lead to higher ridership than a Downtown station would. Where does it say otherwise?

While the study is dated March of this year, the letter from the CEO is from August alluding to a series of FAQ they've presented to preempt possible questions, so it's not as if they've conducted a whole new analysis of the possibilities since then coming to a completely different outcome.

How about some meaningful info.

www.texascentral.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Step-1-Screening-of-Corridor-Alternatives-Report.pdf

Page 111 of the pdf shows a Houston station location comparison chart. Several other very interesting pages as well.

Also a quote: "Based on this initial screening, the preferred station area for Houston is the location around the intersection of US 290 and IH-610" on page 112.

HTown, read the thread "Hardy Toll Road Widening"--the HTR for one will indeed be tag only by next summer. Hooray!

Not sure when this will happen for the Sam, but surely it can't be too far behind.

Just to put it into perspective.

 

Downtown is currently at 3,024 housing units including the recently completed Skyhouse.

 

Per the Development Map:

Year-end 2015: 3,747 units

Year-end 2016: 5,020 units

Year-end 2017: 7,041 units (most of the units come online in first half of 2017)

 

Over the next 20 months, 4,017 new units come online, an increase of 133% from current. This wave of construction will bring 4,353 new units total (including the already completed Skyhouse), a 162% increase.

...and the majority of those units will be occupied rentals, rather than simply investment condos--a significant distinction for the health of Downtown as a residential neighborhood at it's current growth stage. 

Why isn't something like this in the "going up" section?

 

http://www.chron.com/neighborhood/woodlands/business/article/Building-boom-comes-to-Texas-242-corridor-6498119.php#photo-8612865

This one is of the Texas Children's on the west side of 45.

where are y'all seeing that? i don't even see the mention of the 54 story segment Urb quoted? is my Safari not loading all of the text under Marko's profile?

i wonder what hotel flag could be doing the hotel/lifestyle center. and are we sure that portion will be the short buildings, not the tower? i saw that mentioned on SSP.

#20's link to a Google search, first result click the green down arrow for cached. Middle of third paragraph.

The Hardy Toll Road is in the process of being widened to three lanes each way from FM 1960 northward to the under construction Grand Parkway.

Also of significance, all toll booths will be removed by the summer of 2016 to make the HTR an all-electronic toll facility.

http://communityimpact.com/2015/08/24/hctra-begins-work-on-170-million-hardy-toll-road-overhaul/

This came up via google search:

Don't forget the rest of the cached quote that says with a "200 room hotel and retail lifestyle center on 3 full city blocks".

Complete speculation here, but if I were a betting man, I'd say Hines was the force behind this.

When should we expect solid data on how this is doing?