samagon

it absolutely feels like this is a commuter tool to bypass i45 traffic. unless you're talking about reducing congestion on other highways, if the access to the tollway is inconvenient, or non-existent then it doesn't benefit. while it does benefit business offices downtown by offering a quick way in, it also hinders the growth of anything other than business offices in downtown by offering a quick way out, which doesn't really help downtown. considering the volume of office jobs that are remote and going remote, doing things to make commuting easier isn't really a long term win.

I fully agree with your assessment to the motivation of opposition, I'd suggest that there are probably some that fit the mold of having politics as the motivating factor, but they are the marginal fringe and can be ignored. which is hard because they are usually loud. the bottom line, they can be ignored. the streets chosen for bike lanes seems silly in a lot of instances. 11th vs 14th for instance. going from Hermann to downtown, they should have used Caroline to minimize the sharrows they had to implement on Austin, and all the turning. as far as all of the stuff the mayor seems to be able to do, how do I keep reading articles about budget shortfalls for meeting his other campaign promises in Houston, and then he is affording to do this stuff? I have to keep telling myself that the alternative was far worse, but this isn't turning out to be much better. let's hope we get a contender in the next cycle that is going to be a better candidate.

that's a bit silly, because of the way the city is designed, people need to access their homes with cars. I'd submit that thoughtfully using one way streets (for cars) in areas that are predominantly residential, along with adding features that make drivers feel like 20mph is a safe speed would go a long way towards slowing people down on streets that are primarily residential, and thereby increasing safety, it would also discourage through traffic. the opposition didn't have a valid argument. all of the doom and gloom that was presented as reasoning for why 11th shouldn't be redone in this manner has not come to pass. businesses have not shut down, kids are not being mowed down on primarily residential streets, emergency vehicles have not been forced to take other routes because they can't fit on the street. were there other reasons that the opposition presented for why this shouldn't have been done? and more to the point, now that it has been done, should it be undone because the opposition feels as if they weren't heard, or that their suggestions weren't taken into account? should there be a lesson learned by people who do these to better prepare and work with everyone in the community to ensure everyone has a chance to provide fact driven feedback, or that good ideas for compromise should be considered? at the end of the day, traffic studies showed that the number of lanes far exceeded the needs of vehicular traffic, the road was redesigned to meet demand. so many people cheer when a road is widened to accommodate growing vehicular needs (while ignoring the safety of others), why are so many upset when the same thing happens in reverse?

you're calling them names while calling them out, you want to talk good faith? there's nothing good faith about that, and you can start there. and besides, you can say they aren't coming to the conversation in good faith, and that your concern for everyone's safety gives you the moral high ground, because that's kind of worthless, they say you aren't coming to the conversation in good faith, and that the freedom of everyone to move freely is the moral high ground. so yeah, explaining why you're calling them names, and not accepting their behavior and opinion, even if you don't agree with it, that's not really getting you there. but you do you, I don't need an explanation for your actions. and don't expect me to cheer you on.

@s3mh a lot of people have a lot of wild opinions on where life is headed, and what we are doing. as a liberal myself (and don't mistake me, I'm not a democrat calling myself part of the liberal party), like, a true liberal (you can look up the word if you need to), I am very willing to accept and respect the opinion and behavior of people with whom I personally disagree with. I don't like the idea of calling people names (conspiracy theorists, right wing nut jobs, whatever), but hey, I still respect your opinion and beliefs about those people, and I accept you calling them names, even if I don't think it's the best way to be. can we get back to focusing on what's important, which is that the point of these things is improved safety.

no one is creating congestion. traffic studies were done. the results of those studies determined that the amount of lanes for vehicles was more than necessary for the volume of vehicles. so they used the surplus ROW to safely accommodate other forms of transportation. if drivers feel entitled to then get off that road and take to side streets then you don't throw away the safety improvements on the initial street, you make other streets safer too. the problem isn't making streets safer, the problem is people who feel they are entitled to drive unsafely, not just on streets like 11th, but then going out of their way to do the same on streets that are completely residential. maybe this mayor should follow through on his campaign promise to put more officers on the streets, or supplement the traffic cops with state troopers, and then the bulk of those officers could go stop the people from speeding on the residential streets.

as I used to say in my briefing at the gokart track: gas on the right, brake on the left, no bumping.

decades of driving that Fairview/Tuam curve with no stop sign, and then there's a stop sign. when I first encountered the stop sign, it was obscured by overgrown oleander. there were no cones, traffic barrels, or other things noting that the traffic pattern had changed. it was just 'surprise stop sign!'. and I was indeed surprised. they didn't even have the flags on the stop sign to help gain attention (not that I'd have seen them through the oleander). I blew through it once, immediately after it was put in, and saw the stop sign when I was too far into the intersection to stop. they seem to have cut back the oleander and I can see it far enough away, but I doubt I'll ever forget that they changed the configuration to have a stop there. if we're redesigning that intersection, just kill that little stub, and make a left turn from Memorial onto Lubbock to accommodate that traffic. or if they want to maintain that section of street for METRO and fire/EMS, but close it to regular traffic and put the left turn from Memorial to Lubbock. long term it shouldn't matter because with the I45 rebuild there's some serious rebuilding of roads on that side anyway.

there are a few points to consider. 1. many of the bikes lanes do not connect together, which makes them roads to nowhere. I can safely cycle down Lawndale from Telephone road to Forest Hill drive, but without any real connections from there, I have to then navigate shared spaces with cars, and that's not healthy for my ability to live a long healthy life. and sure, I can drop into the bayou path on Brays, but that hardly gets me anywhere I want to go, unless I want to go to a park. 2. the amount of money spent on bike infrastructure compared to vehicle infrastructure is pretty similar to use of vehicles compared to bikes. 3. the negative impact for vehicles on roads like 11th, or Lawndale with safe alternatives to vehicles provided is seconds in their overall commute. 4. you aren't using the term road diet because you came up with it, you are using the term because someone else used it, and you haven't been told differently. it isn't a road diet. traffic engineers did studies to see the volume of cars using the road and determined that the amount of ROW being dedicated to vehicles was higher than necessary, so they aren't reducing lanes in an effort to reduce the vehicular travel on those streets (what you would commonly associate with the term diet), they sized the vehicle lanes appropriately for the current volume of cars. in turn, they used the surplus ROW to accommodate safely allowing for other forms of travel. so no, road diet isn't an appropriate term at all. right sizing the vehicular lanes for the volume of cars, and providing safety improvements for other road users is very much more appropriate, or if you just want to write something shorter, maybe just say safety improvements. what people who are against these changes are effectively saying is that the safety of others isn't worth the 15 seconds they have to sacrifice to accommodate them, and that the 1627 crashes with pedestrians and 209 deaths in those collisions is acceptable trade for your convenience. is that who you want to be?

they should at least keep the name, vision zero could mean, zero options, unless it's a car?

right, the terrorists are going to target Houston Ave because taking out that street is going to cripple our entire infrastructure. honestly, they should just close Houston Ave. entirely it seems a bit like wearing the band shirt to the concert to name a street after the town you live in.

I don't understand needing to go through neighborhood streets though. I can easily go up to the next intersection, do a u-turn, and then go right on 11th there should be a solution for a left turn though. I have to wonder if there might be enough room for a roundabout? well, I'm sure with this mayor that won't happen, but maybe for the next mayor they can at least go measure the dimensions to see if it would fit TXDoT recommended specs.

the real selling point is safety. a driver going 30, or 35, instead of 40, or 45 is far less likely to cause serious injury, or fatality in an accident. and with the slower speed, may even be able to avoid the accident all together. considering 30, or 35 is the speed limit anyway. in a world where cars are getting substantially larger and heavier, slower is safer.

when water isn't present in the ground, it has less volume, and settles. so if there's a roadway on top of that settled ground, it too will settle. this doesn't happen uniformly. this is very important around your house, so while it sounds silly, you may need to water your foundation.

no matter what they would have done, this would be the thing. the drought last year kicked a lot of streets in the butt. last spring they scraped and redid the asphalt on MLK going into UH campus, drive it today and you'd have no idea it's been less than a year.

so passive aggressive!

if the end result is the bus drivers not straddling lanes, I can't wait for this to be completed.

Bullritos was having major issues for a while, a new owner came in and was hardly ever open, that lasted a semester. every semester Pinks seemed to have fewer people. I was shocked about Jimmy Johns, there always seemed to be deliveries happening, or customer. I'm glad to see someone is coming in.

and this too. Dollar General Bill White though. I mean, I will say that every time I drove on this stretch, 1/4 of the cars didn't pay attention to the lane directions anyway.

a gas line broken, and a water line broken, it's as if some omnipotent being is telling us that the pedestrian improvements should have been kept. all we need now is for the company doing the work to go bankrupt in the middle of the project for my bingo card to be filled.

how long do the neighbors keep their signs in their yards?

yep, anything that opens this spring will be 'soft' and come with no fanfare.

hopefully they can keep doing this good work and remove any medians from Westheimer as well, all the way from 610 to Highway 6. that's sarcastic by the way.

alternatively, that's the guy stuck behind the metro bus that is straddling both lanes and only going 15 MPH.

well, they can't give the neighborhood without a sidewalk a 3' sidewalk. the current ordinance states 5' is minimum. https://www.houstontx.gov/planning/sidewalk-regulations.html