ig2ba

Frustrated because they have to slow down to 65 mph for awhile, then speed back up? (BTW, the speed limit in most of the reconstructed mainlanes is 60 mph, not 65 mph). If they get frustrated that easily, they need to re-evaluate how seriously they take their driving (with the assistantance of law enforcement, of course) and maybe take up a hobby.

It's only a speedtrap if you're speeding. And then only if you're going 3+ over the limit. 60 - 65 mph at rush hour is really not a bad deal. Remember what it used to be like? I really wish that they would have some enforcement in the mainlanes. I generally keep in the second lane from the right on the Katy freeway. On some days I find that people - most people - are probably doing 75 mph. When I'm going eastbound inside the Belt, I have to get three lanes over to the left if I want to continue on I-10. I am certainly not a timid driver, but I think that I might someday be forced to exit to 610 because so many people are driving agressively here. It's like they have a build in need to be nervous on the road; when all the congestion is taken away from a freeway, they must do something to compensate and get their adrenaline fix.

So those are my only two choices? 2-3 seconds MINIMUM (bold mine, caps original) or "tap your brakes and go"? In later posts, you're describing the stopping process, not the amount of time you are stopped. If that takes you 2 seconds (from the time of applying the brakes to being stopped) or 15 seconds, that's up to you. Also, if you found something in a driver's education guide, that doesn't hold any weight. While these classes are useful, sometimes there's all kinds of propaganda in here - depending on the course. They give you rules of thumb and guidelines for many things and pretend as if they're required by law. For instance (a little off topic), the "rule" for following distance used to be 1 car length for every 10 mph. I saw this in old driver's ed films. Then it became 2 second following distance. Now, some courses are teaching a 4 second following distance. Where does it end? Will it be 8 or 10 seconds in a generation? Should I believe it just because they say it's so? They don't provide any reason for these changes. They don't provide any research which supports this change. There has been no change in any law that requires this following distance. I myself leave as much room as possible - I love my space on the highway - and let people pass if they're within 10 car lengths of my car. But there's no law as these courses pretend there is. Have you ever heard of someone pulled over for less than 2 seconds following distance?

It looks like it could be more like 115 ft. inside the loop. (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=29....mp;t=h&z=19) Outside the loop, it looks like it's right at 100 ft. (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=29....mp;t=h&z=19). However, there is existing ROW outside the mainlanes, both inside and outside the loop. Outside the loop, it's level ground and just grass. Inside the loop, it's primarily earthen slopes. If Westpark Tollway was done in a 50 ft. right of way, I would think that we could have a 2x2 lane toll road and still have room for rail here. If we are serious (and by that I mean willing to spend the money at some point in the future) about having rail, AND a toll road, AND maybe adding a fifth mainlane in each direction, it could probably be done in the style of the North Central Expressway (U.S. 75) in Dallas. But where would this train go once it gets to the 288/59 interchange? Elevated? Or underground all the way to the proposed Intermodal Center? That's almost 3 miles! Could that cost be justified? Even by 2040? I wouldn't think so. If it wouldn't go to the Intermodal Center, where would it end up? It would need some place to drop all of these commuters that would connect them to light rail or buses. Another issue is at the interchange with I-610. Is there room here for toll lanes AND rail?

2 to 3 seconds "MINIMUM"? Where do you get that from?

I believe this is already the highest interchange in Houston. The rebuild would almost certainly make it even larger. Maybe you'll be able to see Austin from the top. Even if the rebuilt columns become ugly over time, maybe the view from the top will outweigh this. I guess we'll see. Maybe another question in this thread could be: What is the best view from an interchange in Houston?

Going from eastbound I-610 to northbound I-45, you must stop at a traffic light: http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&z=17&a...007231&om=1 Also, I think they, TxDOT, could rebuild the 59/I-45 interchange on the available ROW and still add a few extra lanes and also avoid left entrances/exits. (They do intend to rebuild this portion when the redo the North Freeway.) They might have to get creative, though. For instance, they might consider building two levels below grade like at the Westpark Tollway/Beltway 8 interchange. Or, like the tunnel ramps at I-10/I-610 West Loop (not yet finished) or I-610/Southwest Freeway. While this option might be more expensive, it might also be more pleasing to the anti-freeway crowd or people that think ALL interchanges are ugly. Don't forget the new ramps coming from the planned 288 toll lanes. Where exactly will they go? We'll find out soon, I suppose. There will be meetings this week, though if anyone is interested: http://www.dot.state.tx.us/about_us/public...ngs/houston.htm http://www.dot.state.tx.us/about_us/public...on_02_21_22.doc

I would probably choose safety as my top criterion rather than ugliness. In that case, I'd have to agree with others and choose the Allen Parkway/Memorial/Houston Ave at I-45 mess. It's not particularly pretty from a driver's perspective either. However, I think they have improved the aesthetics of the bike and walking paths underneath I-45. Next, I'd probably go for lack of functionality. This would probably be a tie between the 59/I-45 interchange downtown and the Gulf Freeway/I-610 interchange. The one downtown because it has too few lanes and has too many left entrances and left exits. The I-45/I-610 interchange lacks direct connections! Going southbound on I-45 to westbound I-610, or eastbound I-610 to northbound I-45, you have to wait at stop lights!!! There are probably plenty of ugly interchanges in Houston, but I'd like to see some of these problems fixed first before they start spending time and money to paint the columns at BW 8 and 290.

They do have plans for the North Loop West, but it is mostly a resurfacing project, as far as I know. There are probably more pressing traffic problems to tackle than this section of the Loop. Also, most of the construction they're doing between I-45 and U.S. 59 on the North Loop is resurfacing. Unfortunately, I think this part of the Loop is maxed out in terms of width on the current right of way (12 lanes); maybe this will be more than enough capacity after Hardy is built into downtown.

It's not that TxDOT didn't plan for congestion at the West Loop. They planned to expand the West Loop back in 1991 - approaching two decades ago. Unfortunately, political opposition (one example: Sheila Jackson Lee) made this untenable at the time. TxDOT recognized the need for a rebuild but could only reconstruct the West Loop as a no-capacity-added project (in order to avoid a more lengthy and another politically-charged debate and approval process). This is why the West Loop still narrows to 8 lanes for about a mile. Cleverly, though, TxDOT appears to have striped for only 8 lanes, but built enough pavement in many places for more lanes. My guess is that they'll try to restripe for 10 lanes in most spots within a few years if/when the traffic becomes unbearable.

I assume we're all talking about this? http://www.houstonrailplan.com/projects/terminal.htm I haven't heard any updates lately, but they do have contact information on the website if anyone feels motivated to contact them. It does seem strange though, that they are still (since August 2006) proposing this Westheimer overpass even though it has among the lowest Benefit/Cost ratios (0.29 compared to about .71 for Richmond and San Felipe). The Shepherd-Durham overpasses (or underpasses) seem to be more of a sure thing. Also, was this topic discussed elsewhere on HAIF?