Big E
-
Posts
438 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Big E
-
-
8 hours ago, arche_757 said:
Anyone know the end date for the Toyota brand that adorns the roof (and name)?
I’d be happy with an update, but is it NHL caliber? Was it built with that intention in mind?
Yes, it was specifically built to be used for both hockey and basketball. The fact that the NHL hasn't awarded Houston an expansion team is honestly baffling to me.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, editor said:
That looks... boring. A number of cities have rehabbed the streams running through their city centers in recent years. Houston can do better than this.
Here's Seoul's recently rehabbed urban canal:
Kyoto:
Chicago:
Tumbleweed is right. This isn't meant to be something on the level of what you are proposing. The first and foremost point of this project is flood prevention and water diversion. Everything else is secondary. This canal isn't even that long; hardly worth that much effort.
-
9 hours ago, Erik Asuncion said:
Yes, the reality of this project displacing thousands of low-income and minority residents and multiple small businesses is a BS reason to halt a project.
Everyone who agrees with moving the project forward is not adversely affected by it.
First, the so called "small businesses" are overwhelmingly national chains, strip malls, car lots, fast food restaurants, etc. when it comes to Section 1, while most of the "businesses" to be destroyed by section 3 are abandoned or already closed, with a handful remaining in the effected areas. Lets not act like this is some great loss in businesses that won't be immediately replaced by new ones once construction is over. We've been over this multiple times in this thread already.
Second, most of the people displaced are renters, who will simply rent somewhere else. And every resident effected by this will be compensated by the state and/or receive housing assistance, which that article linked to earlier points out:
QuoteThat, coupled with $27 million in affordable housing assistance TxDOT must provide to make up for lost apartments and homes, will allow many residents to stay in the area despite risk of gentrification,
Seriously, this is all known, and the federal government has this information, along with all other relevant info from the project, to judge by whatever BS criteria they want to use. With all the information they have, they should not have taken a year to review this project. You can't talk about wanting to "Build back better" while going out of your way to stifle a major infrastructure project and expect anyone to take you seriously.
-
1
-
1
-
-
On 4/1/2022 at 11:19 AM, hindesky said:
"State Transportation Leaders urge feds to end pause" Dug Begley reports in the Houston Chronicle.
Seriously, it should not have taken them this long to review this project. The stoppage was BS to begin with, but there is no reason this should have taken another year.
-
7
-
-
6 hours ago, Triton said:
When is this thing going to finally start? As far as I can tell, the 59/I-69 portion near Midtown should be able to start moving forward right? That's the first phase and I don't believe the federal government is reviewing that section...?
If I remember correctly, the federal government is only allowing some preliminary work to be done on parts of Section 3. But no major construction is forthcoming, nor will there be much, is any, right of way acquisition, until the federal government finally gets out of the way.
-
15 minutes ago, hindesky said:
According to Dug Begley of the Houston Chronicle, the rebuild of IH 45 will cost $750mil more than expected.
To be expected with all the delays and the rising costs of key materials.
-
6
-
-
I don't think this development was ever going to be successful as it was designed. Something more along the lines of Miami's Brickell City Centre, with a far more mixed use development and taller towers, would have been more successful. A project like this would have only worked in that kind of a mixed use context. Trying to be a dour, drab, traditional mall, except outdoors (and exposed to the elements), was probably never going to work downtown, especially with the retail mix they were going for. Even as a place to eat, most people in the area probably went to Houston's tunnel system, a food hall, or Houston Center, for that.
-
3
-
-
2 hours ago, j_cuevas713 said:
Yeah I mean I'm not against CityCentre by any means. I just wish first thoughts would be downtown before any other place in the city.
Companies go where the money is. Downtown is not a hopping retail environment, hence why Greenstreet struggled. On the other hand, City Centre has been very successful, and is already an established retail center. The idea is a no brainer, and the only place I even see this concept going besides here is Uptown.
-
3
-
-
On 3/9/2022 at 3:17 PM, samagon said:
i-10, when built originally went around Katy. there's a section of i-10 that veers south approximately 3000 feet, which was to accommodate not going through Katy. you can exit highway 90, and that is going through Katy. had i-10 plowed through that, Katy would be a very different place now.
the Woodlands didn't exist when i-45 was built.
the interstate highway system was built to divert around rural towns. take a look at a map sometime, you can focus in on i-10 between Houston and San Antonio, but every other interstate is built the same way. Katy, Brookshire, Sealy, Columbus, Schulenburg, Seguin. each of these places i-10 was originally built to NOT plow through the middle of the community. they knew then what you are trying to ignore now, that freeways destroy communities.
On 3/10/2022 at 10:58 AM, Andrew Ewert said:They clearly said *urban* neighborhood. Katy and the Woodlands certainly do not fall in that category. You should be asking about places like the Galleria, or The Heights/GOOF. I would argue that those are the exceptions to the rule; and not even necessarily exceptions. Even in those areas, the blocks immediately adjacent to freeways are typically pretty rough.
News flash to both of you gentlemen. When most of these freeways were first being developed and built, neighborhoods like the Galleria area and Sharpstown were also undeveloped or developing suburbs. Those skyscrapers and the Galleria didn't exist when the loop was put in, it was farmland. Sharpstown was still developing when the right of way was taken for the Southwest Freeway. The Beltway's right of way was mostly through farmland, except when it came to Jersey Village, which did exist at the time, and, as Samagon pointed out, the freeway was diverted around that town, which is why it has that weird notch in it. Ever wonder why Houston's freeways are so straight? Its because they were traveling through farmland and undeveloped land, except the parts closest to downtown
-
2
-
-
On 2/21/2022 at 5:11 PM, samagon said:
I don't like this thread, as there is nothing that will ever be accomplished from arguing about whether it should/shouldn't be built. however making a statement like this....
and then not providing any proof that they want freeways to flood.
I'm going to ask that you provide some documentation from TXDOT that says this is the goal.
as a matter of fact, most of the documents I have found show that, explicitly, these below grade freeways should never flood, up to and including, 500 year events.
to continue flooding... the concern by residents that by making the freeways wider, it is going to kick more water into their neighborhoods and increase the severity of flooding events, that's a hot topic we can probably discuss, and is probably part of the discussion at the national level.
http://www.houstontx.gov/planning/nhhip/docs_pdfs/NHHIP_June_Public_Meetings_Comments_Received.pdf
That first link doesn't go anywhere, so I don't know what you are linking to. As for the second, I read the article and found this quote:
QuoteIn the past, TxDOT officials have conceded many of the spots lack the ability to handle severe storms because drainage is outdated or nearby bayous swell, meaning the system meant to carry water away has nowhere to put it. They argue, however, that flooding the depressed segments of freeway helps keep that water out of nearby homes.
TxDOT is outright conceding that they are using the freeways as ad-hoc detention ponds. They know they will flood. They accept it as better than the alternative, due to the city's numerous drainage issues.
The third link is a link to comments to public meetings. I don't know what that supposed to accomplish, since those comments come from all kinds of people, with all kinds of goals, interests, and fears, who have no knowledge of engineering. At least one comment actually opposes raising a depressed freeway above the ground because they fear that it will force flooding into surrounding areas:
QuoteHow are you going to keep my house and neighbors houses from flooding if you raise the elevation of the freeway. I-45 south of Main Street where water already collects and came close to the bottom of the North Street Bridge.
-
3 hours ago, samagon said:
I don't think that is their goal at all, and I don't think that can be their goal. when the highways flood, people lose cars and people lose lives, specifically because the water comes up faster than the people can escape. numerous deaths of people stranded in their cars (or those unwise enough to drive into flooded highways) would suggest that using a freeway as an overflow retention is a bad idea.
as someone quoted above, they are committed to designing this so it has equipment that can drain them when we have 500 year flood events, which is a great goal, and hopefully there is redundancy, and hopefully they are moving the water to a location takes into consideration that when that area floods, the water has no where to go.
I think at one point they may have considered highways as retention ponds. after flooding events of our recent history, when you review the volumes of water that fell in major flooding events vs the volume of water these structures will hold it won't stop the flooding, and certainly, when the rain is coming down in Meyerland a trenched freeway near downtown isn't going to have any appreciable effect on Brays Bayou flood levels.
Yes, that is the explicit goal. Look, the people who build these freeways aren't stupid. They know they will flood, they know the local water table, the know how close to sea level any particular area of Houston is. They take all that into account. When major rains or tropical events happen, those freeways are closed traffic. Most of the deaths that happen when someone drives into a flooded freeway is due to people ignoring warning signs and blockades, like that infamous case of that young woman who drove her SUV into a flooded exit ramp and drowned. She drove around a barricade and workers warning her against it to do so.
All in all, most flood deaths of people who die in their cars is due to people trying to drive through flood waters in the first place. This is never advisable for anyone, in any circumstance.
-
1
-
-
On 2/18/2022 at 3:11 PM, aachor said:
Additionally, I've looked at elevations for the proposed below-grade freeway and the road surface sits just below flood stage for the Buffalo Bayou. I think it's just a given that this thing will flood when we get a slow moving tropical storm. To me, that fact outweighs the benefits of burying the freeway.
TxDOT are well aware of this, as is everyone else involved in the project. Sunken freeways in Houston are designed to flood, on purpose. They are basic extra reservoirs that can be used to hold excess amounts of water during large rain events. They build them like that for that very reason.
-
5
-
-
On 2/8/2022 at 7:57 AM, samagon said:
but where else would all that stuff go that the neighbors wouldn't fight tooth/nail to keep it from coming?
East Houston near the ports and refineries? A field in the middle of South Houston somewhere. Or maybe they can knock down the apartments in Gulfton and put it there. And if the residents complain, tell them they can stay and be guaranteed three square meals and a cot to sleep on, but won't be able to leave whenever they want.
-
1
-
-
On 2/10/2022 at 2:25 PM, Luminare said:
These institutions only have a finite amount of political will and time to get this going.
Which is precisely why those who are acting against the project are trying to do it now. They want to syphon what political will there is behind this project in order to stop it. It will only hurt Houston in the long run, as the money earmarked will get spent elsewhere.
-
3
-
-
On 2/2/2022 at 11:43 AM, Amlaham said:
Hate that the jails and Sheriffs office sits on probably the best lots in Houston, but it is what it is :)
I've often find myself obsessing over the idea of moving the sheriff's office, jails, inmate intake, county administration building and courthouses out of downtown and into some new civic center complex (and yes, I know that Houston already technically has a neighborhood called Civic Center; they can move city hall too and keep the building itself as historic). That area is susceptible to flooding anyway (as Harvey showed, disrupting court operations for over a year), and the city of Houston already wants to build a new public safety facility to house the city court, HPD Headquarters, and the Central Precinct. The city and county have already combined their prisoner intake and jail facilities, not sure why they haven't put their heads together to move the facilities to a more palatable location.
On 2/2/2022 at 1:44 PM, samagon said:since the population center of Houston is now west of the loop, maybe it makes sense to move the criminal justice wing over to the Galleria area? lol
That...might not actually be a bad idea. The only problem is that the level of development might forgo moving there. South and East Houston/Harris County are comparatively under developed in comparison.
-
2
-
-
12 hours ago, thatguysly said:
Yes. In the parking lot area to the east of the Wells Fargo. That middle triangle of property is just left and begging to be developed.
There's also that large site that's right behind the Astoria...
-
2
-
-
22 hours ago, freundb said:
You guys seem to be getting personally offended by this simple comparison. Its just a little fun fact
Except its not being shared as a "fun little fact". Its being shared it as some kind of gotcha and using it to make a point and since its being shared to make a point in the first place, its only natural to scrutinize that point to see if it makes any sense.
-
2
-
-
On 1/12/2022 at 4:26 PM, Andrew Ewert said:
I cannot overstate how much I hate this idea. Yes, build high-rises all over downtown. I love them. But this is a once-in-a-century chance to reclaim a huge swath of green space walkable from downtown. Think Millennium Park in Chicago.
I mean, they could easily split parts of the cap between development and parkland/plazas. This cap will be long and wide, with plenty of room for both. It doesn't have to be an either/or decision.
-
3
-
-
7 hours ago, Twinsanity02 said:
The way I understand "River Oaks" is north of Westhimer, west of Shepherd , and east of Willowick with a further westward bulge to Inverness. All this calling areas all the way to the Loop "River Oaks" seems like to put it politely pure piffle. If you don't live in River Oaks pretending doesn't make it so.
I have a hard time thinking of anything west of those train tracks as River Oaks, though apparently anything north of Afton Oaks and East of the loop is.
-
2
-
-
5 hours ago, urbanize713 said:
Damn, that makes 7 Marriott’s off Main in Downtown. Think they need to expand to Midtown. A Moxy could do well in Midtown.
Doubt they want a lot of hotels near the homeless.
-
On 1/12/2022 at 4:07 PM, jmitch94 said:
You know damn well that the major cities in Texas will not see a single cent of that money. All of it will be funneled to rural areas because that is where the state governments voter base is and “big city bad.”
Shhhhh....Don't tell him.
On 1/12/2022 at 9:49 AM, shasta said:The strategy for Houston, and most of Texas, is to pass on the costs of infrastructure on to the developer. You want this development YOU help pay for the sidewalk upgrades, etc...no coincidence they are doing sidewalk and street upgrades right now around Regent Square and the Hanover project.
I actually fail to see how that's a bad thing? Part of the reason suburban sprawl is what is, is because the states and federal governments have long been subsidizing its growth. Actually forcing developers to pay for their developments seems like it might actually go a long way to slowing that trend.
On 1/12/2022 at 9:49 AM, shasta said:It will be very interesting to see how Texas handles President Biden's Infrastructure Bill....so do we ACCEPT the federal funds earmarked for improvements in Texas or do we REJECT the funding out of political pride and grandstanding?
The answer is obvious. We'll take the money because it is our tax dollars too, just like Texas has always taken earmarked dollars, just like every other state. People may heehaw about the billions of dollars in spending that will almost certainly be waisted but they'll take the money all the same and heehaw about it later.
On 1/12/2022 at 9:49 AM, shasta said:Uh...No. We have some of the worst infrastructure and planning of any major world city that claims to be "alpha status".
We desperately need some kind of city plan, or vision, or we will continue to have have haphazard developments , some quality, but surrounded by poor sidewalks, no connectivity, even ditches a block or two over. .....quite pathetic
And yet the city still functions as it should and millions still move here, tens of thousands more coming every year. One wonders why if infrastructure was really that bad.
-
3
-
-
On 1/8/2022 at 12:48 PM, JLWM8609 said:
I realize this is conceptual, and I'm not sure if this was covered earlier in the thread, but this video shows a potential multimodal station with elevated lanes called a REAL Station placed on part of the Pierce Elevated ROW. I think this is a good idea, but isn't the whole reason for moving 45 to eliminate an elevated structure? You can look a little further and see what looks like a connection to the connector ramps that will feed into downtown from the relocated I-45. Does this mean that TxDOT is planning to redevelop the old Pierce Elevated ROW into another type of elevated road structure, and thus keep an elevated road barrier between Downtown and Midtown?
Yeah, this does nothing for me. It feels like an ill thought out sop to those who claim that the NHHIP doesn't have enough transit. I'd rather they tear down the structure, sell the land, and put the money towards the freeway caps.
-
On 1/9/2022 at 1:56 PM, Luminare said:
More impressive is that its private companies doing this themselves rather than specific city planning. Although good city planning helps properly stitch these large developments together in a seamless way (that will be the next step if that could be achieved), its better than what was on offering before.
If anything, this shows how much we don't need more extensive city planning. Developers are doing this because there is a demand for these kinds of spaces and this kind of development. The city didn't have to do jack, and its reaping the benefits. And better the city didn't do anything, because it would only mess up and do things to make these kinds of developments (or other kinds of developments that aren't like this) impossible, like in so many other cities.
-
2
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Houston19514 said:
There doesn't seem to be any movement at all on the rail portions of MetroNext. Not sure why they are low on the priority list. But it is unfair to flatly say they are taking a while to start on any of their projects. Several of the MetroNext projects are well underway and several of the major (non-rail) projects are moving along about as fast as such things can move. (it's an unfortunate fact of life that anything using federal dollars takes a LONG time to get through all of the federal regulatory hurdles).
We all got to remember that Covid is still a thing, and Covid had led to decreased transit ridership nationwide, and is putting transit agencies in the red. I don't expect much to be done transportation wise, for the foreseeable future other than what has already been started. Federal money from that infrastructure bill will help get things off the ground, but we all know how much red tape comes with any kind of federal money.
I-45 Rebuild (North Houston Highway Improvement Project)
in Traffic and Transportation
Posted · Edited by Big E
So what? The fact is it benefits someone, and thousands of someones at that. And no it won't just benefit them either. It benefits anyone who uses that freeway, including people who live in the city and commute north, national international and state traffic, regional traffic in general, etc.
Well, at least you are honest about your selfishness. Its not going to endear anyone to your side of the argument, however.
You have no right to tell other people how to live.
Can they? Maybe they can't. Maybe its something that can only be done by rebuilding the freeway to accommodate the changes? And even if they could, its honestly irrelevant. They are doing it as part of this project.
I don't, and never said I did. I'm just not disingenuous, and won't pretend that what's being lost is some great, insurmountable loss for the city. Why do you hate commuters so much?
You are contradicting yourself now. First, you say it only benefits commuters (which isn't even true, but I digress), but now you say there are no benefits. Pick one and stop talking out of both sides of your mouth.
Based on what exactly?
Once again, I don't know what you are using to prognosticate but you should stop before you are made to eat crow when these things do in fact eventually happen.