samagon

8 hours ago, 004n063 said:

Right. It's the notion of a bare minimum - 8ft for an urbanized area - as "going back for seconds." It's the pitting of two neighborhoods' basic needs against each other. "Deer Park needs sidewalks" is not a valid reason for not investing in Washington Ave sidewalks.

oh yeah, if money were no object, then why not both, I think anyone would be in violent agreement with that.

money is an object though, and it's something that is only available in finite amounts. 

16 hours ago, 004n063 said:

Yes, that's the one. It made me uncomfortable.

The phrase "perfectly good three-foot sidewalk" doesn't belong in the English language, let alone anywhere near a conversation about Washington Ave.

It feels like he's pitting two underserved needs against each other, but with car streets it's "we need whole new slabs," not "why does San Jacinto need four lanes?"

the point I think wasn't that 3' sidewalks are perfectly good. the point, in the context of the statement, was "this area already has something, this area has nothing at all, let's get everyone to a place where we at least have something, and then we can get to upgrading the places with something already"

in an imaginary scenario (which maps to real life), you have 2 areas, one has sidewalks that conform to a historic minimum standard. the other area has nothing at all. is it better:

1. leave the area without sidewalks to still not have sidewalks, and upgrade the existing area with sidewalks to have better sidewalks.

2. leave the area that already has sidewalks alone, and add sidewalks to the area without any sidewalks at all.

that's the crux of what he said, getting hung up on the phrasing of 'perfectly good 3' sidewalks' is pearl clutching and ignoring the broader message, which is, let's serve the completely unserved, before we give those who have something already, extra.

it'll be great if we can have both, I think budgets have something to do with that.

now, if he goes in and walks the minimum sidewalk width ordinance from 5' to 3', then we can start wringing our hands, or clutching our pearls. 

essentially, let's make sure everyone has a plate of food before we start going back for seconds.

20 hours ago, Some one said:

I thought below-grade freeways were supposed to function as flood basins though. 🤔

once TXDoT has rebuilt all the freeways so they will no longer impact commercial trucking with flooding, they will rebuild the freeways again because we need them to act as flood basins. we will go back and forth in this manner until there is no more concrete available.

3 hours ago, JClark54 said:

He may have used the eight-foot sidewalk quip in other interviews, but below is the one that traveled around Houston media that you may have read. 

I didn't interpret the comment as overtly pro-car. Rather, I believe he was trying to highlight the disparity between certain neighborhoods. Audio is in the story, too. 

https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/shows/houston-matters/2023/10/24/467637/john-whitmire-says-as-mayor-he-would-focus-on-collaboration-re-prioritizing-houston-needs/

 

 

 

 

contextually that makes complete sense.

make sure everyone has the bare minimum to survive (or in this case, travel safely), and when that's done, then we can do more.

when was the last time the Houston Freeways book was updated? on that website it says construction on that section of 59 was done in 2006.

the watermark on that photo says 2011.

according to this website, that section of freeway flooded during Harvey.

https://www.news4jax.com/weather/2022/08/25/5-years-ago-remembering-devastating-flooding-from-hurricane-harvey/

at the end of the day, it doesn't matter. TXDoT is going to ram this through because as was mentioned they have to spend all their money on freeways, or the money goes away. if we want to see any changes, then we have to get our representatives to change how TXDoT is required to spend money so they spend money on more than just solutions for vehicle travel.

On 1/27/2024 at 4:07 PM, Stew said:

Hmmm . . . I don't think the Hub is going to make that Feb 5 opening date. That's less than 2 weeks away.

it's hard to see on any of the photos except this one, but the top right, you can see a walkway, there's an entrance to the building, that is what will be the entry/exit, the portion that still has excavators, and work trucks, that is going to not be open until the complete building is open later this year.

whether Feb5, or later next week, or even early the following week, we're closer than it looks from these photos.

On 1/26/2024 at 11:57 AM, Houston19514 said:

 

Even if all that is true, just because there are occasions when freeways have to be closed for construction is not really a good reason to NOT fix flooding of the freeways. 

Here's an interesting audio on the topic of raising Houston's freeways  https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/shows/houston-matters/2019/11/07/351265/when-it-rains-houstons-freeways-flood-one-researcher-wants-to-change-that/

don't disagree with you. 

the claim by TXDoT that flooding causing breaks in commercial traffic and citing how much commerce was impacted is an atrocious argument. I could give two shits about long haul trucking needs through Houston. if TXDoT comes at me with the number of people have died on that stretch of road because of flooding, ok, now you have my attention, but throwing the commercial impact like that matters to locals?

that reasoning makes it very clear that the safety and lives of humans who use those freeways daily are less important than moving freight, unless I missed that part of the presentation where they talk about mitigating people getting stuck in a flooded car on the freeway and drowning. 

sorry for not coming out and just saying that from the get go, it's just that kind of a statement on a presentation just really pulls out that kind of snarky reply.

anyway, let's not talk about raising Houston's freeways, we just talked about going below grade on all of them around downtown. I guess because they aren't in a bayou floodplain, but then, neither is 59 near Montrose, and one of the most iconic pictures of flooded highways in Houston is a dude kayaking down 59. and we just saw 288 get a shiny new refresh, that goes right through a bayou, floods regularly because it is in a bayou floodplain, and all they did was add (managed) lanes. there's little consistency, so it's hard for me to accept a rebuild because of floodplain to really be a thing. I guess maybe the amount of commercial impact on 288 was less, so who cares if it floods, right?

and let's not even discuss that the commercial impact argument ignores that there are alternate routes to avoid a flooded I-10. 610 (either direction), beltway 8 (either direction), soon to be Grand Parkway.

19 hours ago, Houston19514 said:

How many of those construction shut-downs (e.g. Elysian) occurred during an evacuation?  I'll do the research for you:  None. Then consider when the freeway is most likely to be inundated with water; that's right, during an evacuation.

how many of the flooding events happened during an evacuation? the same answer is true. the evacuation happens before the event. there is a point when the message changes from "evacuate" to our favorite term "shelter in place". sometimes, before an event, there isn't time for city, or county officials to execute an evacuation plan and we go straight to shelter in place.

no one ever is recommended to evacuate during an event, that creates an even worse possible scenario of being stranded without any shelter at all.

the city, county or state will never issue an evacuation order when it is not safe to travel, if it determined to not be safe to travel, the evacuation will stop and it will transition to shelter in place. so no, your scenario of a freeway being inundated with water during an evacuation will never happen, nor has it ever happened. 

I can think of one scenario where the media sent the entire town into a frenzy, which overwhelmed the infrastructure, people who had not been instructed to evacuate, attempted to flee, in essence, the freeways were shut down due to people running out of gas and making the freeways (all of them) impassible, so people were still in evacuation mode (even though the official statement had shifted from evacuate to shelter in place). we were extremely lucky that none of the freeways flooded at that time and the storm took a late turn and went in farther east. anyway, that is an excellent example of why there will never be an evacuation order at the same time as there is potential flooding, we will be in shelter in place.

4 hours ago, twisterhunt said:

TxDOT also claims the highway has flooded 10x in the past 32 years - but would be interesting to see the 'duration'

and flooded isn't necessarily impassable.

I wonder during that same 32 year history, how many times was the freeway shut down for construction? all lanes, in all directions? duration for those, I expect 9pm Friday evening through 5am Monday morning to be the duration...

I can think of 2 or 3 times alone for the Elysian street viaduct rebuild.

probably more than the times it's been shut down for floods.

they grow pretty quick, in about 10 years these will be pretty big.

cypress knees suck though.

weird. every time I went they had plenty of people drinking and having a good time.

I did notice it was closed on Saturday afternoon when I went by to drop off the Christmas stuff at the storage unit.

13 hours ago, Stew said:

So on February 6th, I will be able to go in there at lunch time and get some food and sit down at a table and eat it.

If you say so.

It's what I've been told, and if you can do that, you should grab a coffee as well, it'll be tasty, I promise. 

If you can't do that feb 6, then when you can, get a coffee. 

😁

Please sit down to read this shocking news. 

https://abc13.com/greyhound-houston-transfer-magnolia-park-crime-increase-safety/14282030/

I've driven around since the initial move, no HPD presence now.

there has been a constable that hangs out at the flea market every weekend I've driven through that area.

17 hours ago, hindesky said:

They might actually finish this since it's only early January.

extra info that I have. Feb 5 is the day it will open. however, this opening will only include half of the interior, the other half will be completed a bit later with a temp wall between.

On 1/1/2024 at 6:15 PM, wilcal said:

I would have guessed yes..... but the answer is no.

IIRC, it was initially, but the owner applied for the building to be historic, in so making it more difficult than TXDoT felt it would be worth to try and take it.

there's a thread in going up (I believe, or maybe it's buried in the pages here) that covers the 'progress' of this building. the owner went through the arduous process of doing the windows in the original format, and after that I haven't seen any further updates.

On 12/27/2023 at 4:03 AM, Big E said:

There are already parking lots under the Pierce Elevated. If they are just tearing down the structure, the parking lots would just be left intact and continue to be used to make money.

On 12/26/2023 at 8:53 PM, texan said:

Half a city block x11 (plus some more oddly shaped portions of blocks) is quite a sizable amount of land. Especially for walking/running trails. As long as the city has any say, I don’t see parking as a serious suggestion.

if as Big E says, the land is already in use as parking, that means someone already owns the land, convincing all of them to sell to make a park is going to be tricky. 

maybe TXDoT leases the land to someone so they can use it for parking?

do you think the holidays have impacted your traffic counts?

1 minute ago, shasta said:

The University of Houston is a great example of a reverting "district: in Houston.

 

Initially designed for the car to get people in and out, its now taken steps to be a more pedestrian campus and even bigger pedestrian friendly improvements are on the way!

 

I just receive a notification that they plan to release their new master plan in January 2024!

 

I cannot wait for the day that they turn MLK (formerly Calhoun) into 1 car lane in each direction, and make huge pedestrian sidewalks.

they can also do more on University Dr, reduce to 1 lane in each direction west of MLK, and 2 lanes east.

one of my favorite stories specific to the Netherlands going car centric, then reverting:

another story of the Netherlands going car centric, then reverting is more famous, the Damrak in Amsterdam (the main street heading from the central station to the Dam (a very active central square), I don't think there's any videos of this transformation because it was more organic over time slowly removing car lanes to add more pedestrian and bicycle areas, but there's plenty of pictures of it in 1980, and then you can also find plenty of pictures from then to now of how it has transformed.

it went from 6 lanes of traffic with a parking lane, now its a 1 lane, 1 way street, 2 tram lines, sidewalks and bike lanes.

and I'm fully aware that these places started life before cars so after they reshaped them to be car centric, it's easier to revert back to what they had before, but the point is not that we can easily make the change, the point is, ordinances and rules are what force the shape to be what it is, ignoring that we've had 100 years forcing the shape to mold to cars and just saying it grew around cars, that's not accurate, or fair.

20 hours ago, Big E said:

The point is that you've been so hyperbolic about this project and its perceived negative effects, and so obviously dead set against it from the beginning, that it's nearly impossible to take anything you say about the project seriously, since your personal animus towards it is so apparent. When your bias is this obvious, it weighs against considering your viewpoint.

there's no doubt that you're right. I have allowed myself to easily be sucked into arguments with people like Matty36, who take the discussion down completely irrelevant tangents, and so I have gotten completely off track at times. I take responsibility for my part.

I think though, if you go back and find my initial thoughts towards this project, it's always been local connectivity, and the local people who are being negatively impacted that I think this project is hurting. I am not against doing what needs to be done, I have and will always maintain there is a better way to do it.

anyway, I'm actually glad for the project, it has helped to create a very active group of people who are organized to ensure the local people are heard better, in fact this group is who did a lot of the leg work for Prop B that recently passed, which will forever change how HGAC operates. I only wish the formation of that group were about 5 years earlier than it was, perhaps we'd have a much better solution for freeway expansion that takes better care.

15 hours ago, Justin Welling said:

You're right, planners strive to make American cities more human scaled. But that does not mean we want them to be European.  Planners just want cities to be safer for all road users. We want people to have options moving around and to have a choice in their mode and a choice in where they live. We want cities to be livable. We want cities to be vibrant. And we want cities to be enjoyable. It is not that we want our cities to be more European, it is just we want our cities to be better than how they are today :). 

Houston has ordinances in place specifically to make Houston car scaled, cities with zoning have similar rules in residential areas and commercial areas.

parking requirements, setbacks, minimum lot sizes for single family homes. 

these rules were put in place with what I can only assume were best intentions, but they end up creating exactly what we have, car scaled cities. credit where it's due, steps are being taken to try and make it less car centric, see transit oriented development.

as far as European cities always being this way, sure, there is a lot of organic that happened before cars that led them to being walkable, but it wasn't always that way. WWII did a number on many towns in Europe proper, after the war, cities were rebuilt for cars. if you go find pictures of Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Utrecht, Maastricht, The Hague, any town you want in the Netherlands from the 60s and 70s they had very much been rebuilt for cars. wide boulevards, parking lots, even urban freeways. two things happened at the same time for the Netherlands, the oil embargo, and kids being run over on the way to school in the mornings.

the people of the Netherlands, rather than saying, oh, we need more street lights, or parents just need to drive their kids to school, or we need more efficient cars, they actually decided car centric society wasn't great. not that cars were bad, and no one should have them, just that continuing to redevelop towns for cars, instead of people, it was dumb. it has taken the better part of 50 years to fix what was done in the 2 decades following WWII.

if you travel to the Netherlands today, you would be forgiven for thinking it has always been a bike friendly, pedestrian friendly place it is now, they have done a great job with legislations and city planning to make it exactly what it is.

makes sense.

aside from there being a transit station super close, this is still car centric Houston, freeways specifically. getting to and from this place off of I-45 (even though it's like right there, you can almost touch it from the property), it's just not easy to access from the freeway like other freeway frontage locations.

getting to and from UH, again, it's like right there, you can almost touch it, that underpass is not pedestrian or cyclist friendly, at all. if the water pumps that keep it dry aren't working, it floods and you have to find other ways to get to campus (and there was almost an entire year where this was a thing off and on).

if anyone wants to build student housing off Lockwood, they'll really need to work with the city/TXDoT/railroad to improve that underpass at Elgin/Lockwood for it to be better. in a decade or so that won't be an issue with METRO doing the BRT in that space, but I struggle to see how they are going to fit everything in the fixed space they have available (especially in the railroad underpass portion of it, that's a massive bottleneck).

9 hours ago, abe said:

are these storm sewers just laying about, or part of the landscape?

14 hours ago, 004n063 said:

I'll say it again: for anybody on a bike (which is an ever-increasing number), losing Polk is significant. Fixable with proper lanes or paths along Leeland and Rusk, but right now the only safe crossings are Gray and Polk (and kindasorta Runnels). 

my hope is that the Columbia tap trail is extended on Walker and that a 2 way bike path is installed on the southbound feeder road (the roadway that is between the freeway and GRB that turns into Hamilton) to get you either to Polk, or to points north of Walker.

Walker is a good option for something like this because like Preston, it's a road that doesn't go anywhere thanks to civic projects, it is 4 blocks long between GRB and Emancipation.