Houston19514

Yes, it was automated, but there was still a driver/operator on board.

The listing of subways and other such transit systems that may or may not operate without drivers tells us pretty much nothing about the potential for fully autonomous vehicles operating on streets.

Per the locals posting on SSP, as of yesterday, no fence. The Austin Business Journal reported yesterday that the developer said demolition of the existing structure on the site will start in the "next week or so", and they "aim to start construction in November" -- FWIW.

Except, at least so far, they appear to still have drivers on board, even in China. And whether it has a driver on board or not, does not affect the functionality from the passenger point of view. I still don't see any functional difference between this and BRT.

How is this functionally different from BRT? I don't see anything that distinguishes it (other than the outer appearance looks a little more like a light rail car).

I think it's far more likely an example of journalistic incompetence not being new thing. Per St. John the Divine's website, the congregation held its first service in 1940. In December of 1940, just nine months after organizing the church, the inaugural service was held in the beautiful limestone chapel, which is still in existence and used today [on the campus at Westheimer and River Oaks Blvd].

It is on the Caroline side of the building.

The latter. I believe the recent opening was a temporary location.

Austonians on SkyscraperPage reported in early August that the fence was all taken down. I think the smart money is still against this one happening any time soon.

. That's all that Dallas is doing too... this is well short of being under construction...

It's almost impossible to know without more information. It could just as easily be the the result of occupancy being above expectations.

No doubt United will make some use of the "new" Terminal D, just as they do now, but it is quite clear Terminal D will not be anything close to the core of their operation, or of their international operation. United will only have preferential rights to 3 gates on the west side of the new Terminal D West pier. Preferential rights; not exclusive rights. THREE gates, out of, I think, 23 or 24 gates in Terminal D. And only for 10 years. When the Terminal B rebuild is done, one imagines they will be able to move some purely domestic mainline operations from Terminal E over to Terminal B, thus making more room in E for International growth. The "C North" Club, of course, is right at the base of the new Terminal D West Pier, pretty perfectly-located for use by their terminal United's D-West passengers. I'm certain all United clubs at IAH are in line to be refurbished and possibly expanded. I guarantee there will be one or more new/expanded clubs in the refurbished/expanded Terminal B. It's a little . . . pathetic, if you will, 😉 to claim United is only giving "lip service" to growth plans. They have recently spent, and are spending, hundreds upon hundreds of millions of dollars upgrading and expanding their facilities at IAH. Probably wouldn't be doing all that if they didn't have real growth plans. Any chance you can share your sources for the seat capacity statistics? By the way, United plans to complete the Terminal B rebuild about 3 years from now, not 5+.

United clearly has growth plans for IAH. See their plans for massive rebuild of Terminal.B. It is not pathetic or even surprising that they may not be building a club in Terminal D, as it will continue to be primarily for non-United carriers.

Good news, while DFW international traffic did indeed surpass IAH's in 2022, by 1/4 million (2.67%), for the first six months of 2023, IAH is back in the lead, by 164,000 (3.04%). And, as you allowed, when HOU international traffic is added, Houston still led Dallas-Fort Worth in international air passenger traffic in 2022, by about 2/3 million (and the 1st Half/2023 lead widens to more than 2/3 million (12.39%)).

Maybe pay closer attention to what TXDOT actually proposes to do. For example, the I-45 expansion segments 1 & 2 is primarily to add HOV/HOT/bus lanes, not to mention that every TXDOT project in recent years includes a lot of attention to adding landscaping and trees.

Yes, this document is about the city's opportunities to add parks, etc in conjunction with the freeway project; it is not referencing TXDoT's expenditures on the freeways.

Yes there are rules re: trees in parking lots. Houston is actually far more progressive on these matters than we like to give ourselves credit for.

Well, yeah, if Metro decides to keep the number of general-purpose lanes the street (classified as a Major Thoroughfare) currently has, it is unlikely the city would object. It is very possibly a different story if Metro proposes to reduce the number of general-purpose lanes. I guarantee Metro is talking with the City about these plans and working closely with them on the ultimate street design.

Pretty sure we’ve already done this for commercial buildings. https://www.coolrooftoolkit.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Cool-Houston-Codes-Report1.pdf

This was good to see. It had to do with cooperating with other agencies such as TXDoT and the city as those agencies move forward with projects in the area, so they can be sure such other projects are designed and built in a way that will accommodate Metro’s plans for the rail extension .

Either she misspoke or you misunderstood. Metro does not have blanket authority to do what they please with city streets. When one watches Metro Board committee meetings where they get update from staff on various projects, one of the constants is negotiations with the City.

Good candidate for the most nonsensical post ever, given that UH-D will in no way be wedged between interstate highways after the IH45 realignment. Oddly enough, the attached photos show how the campus is currently divided by the current I-10 alignment; the I-10/I-45 realignment will remove that giant obstacle from the middle of the UH-D campus.

Any chance you’ve noticed you could not have been more wrong? Indeed, as I told you would happen, the Yankees sold advertising patches on their jerseys. https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/yankees-add-advertising-patch-to-jersey-sleeves-worth-reported-25-million-a-year/amp/

"all these years"???? IIRC, it opened barely more than 2 years ago, during a then on-going worldwide pandemic. Seems awfully premature to declare failure (but of course, that is the HAIF way).

Here's a Chronicle article that gives an idea of the competing interests Metro has to consider. https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/gulfton-brt-metro-houston-lanes-transit-18175799.php And, again, it's ultimately the city that decides how many lanes there will be for cars.