Development Dilemma In Neartown Neighborhoods

[Subdude]

KinkaidAlum's point is well made. The City slipped W Alabama in through the back door under the pretext of alleviating traffic flow to downtown while Spur 527 work was going on. Now that Spur 527 is finished, the stretch of 59 from Shepherd to 527 is even more of a train wreck than it ever was at peak times (I see it crossing Woodhead every day), so there is little prospect of the City returning W Alabama to what it was. That said, I doubt it ever intended to in the first place, cyclists and residents be damned.

They've also significantly lengthened red light times on roads intersecting Westheimer and Alabama - again residents getting shafted in order to keep E/W traffic moving - most of which is commuter traffic....

They did claim that the W Alabama configuration was temporary during construction, and that afterwards they would bring the bike lanes back.

I wouldn't go so far as to claim that people shouldn't have a say if they don't live in the neighborhood, but I still don't think smooth traffic flow on each and every street is the be-all and and end-all of development. Traffic on Westheimer at Dunlavy isn't that horrendous, and there are alternatives (Alabama, Fairview) for those who just can't deal with it. I just think getting rid of on-street parking on Westheimer would quickly destroy one of the few popular pedestrian-oriented strips in the city. If the alternative is more lanes for cars, and big street-facing parking lots like on lower Westheimer, then who needs it? If anything, I think more streets should have on-street parking.

[musicman]

They did claim that the W Alabama configuration was temporary during construction, and that afterwards they would bring the bike lanes back.

I wouldn't go so far as to claim that people shouldn't have a say if they don't live in the neighborhood, but I still don't think smooth traffic flow on each and every street is the be-all and and end-all of development. Traffic on Westheimer at Dunlavy isn't that horrendous, and there are alternatives (Alabama, Fairview) for those who just can't deal with it. I just think getting rid of on-street parking on Westheimer would quickly destroy one of the few popular pedestrian-oriented strips in the city. If the alternative is more lanes for cars, and big street-facing parking lots like on lower Westheimer, then who needs it? If anything, I think more streets should have on-street parking.

on street parking is fine IF the street was designed for it. i don't think that cutting through neighborhoods is the proper way to address the problem but i must admit i do it.

[sidegate]

i agree with subdude; I think eliminating on-street parking would just bring more commuter cars, increase the average speed limit on that stretch, and generally detract from the ambience. as a resident, I can live with it...

it is a great strip - I love the zero ft setback, it gives it such an intimate feeling.

while we're on that subject, does anyone know what will replace the run down red antiques shop beside the gas station at the corner of westheimer and woodhead?

[KinkaidAlum]

And why are we all so certain that on street parking wasn't part of Lower Westheimer's design?

Most of those buildings are built to the street/sidewalk. There are few buildings along that stretch that follow Houston's typical strip mall design with surface parking separating the street and building. The few that are there came in the last decade or so.

As for West Alabama; it was a DUMB decision by the city not to return the bike lanes and middle turn lane back to their original forms. The City of Houston should be trying to make Inner Loop neighborhoods more liveable. It shouldn't place the concerns of commuters over those of local residents and it is just plain silly to not allow people to make left turns to THEIR HOMES, THEIR BUSINESSES, TO THE MENIL, or TO THE UST during certain times of the day. That causes people to make tough decisions... do you drive longer to go around and create more local congestion or do you risk making an illegal left turn?

[TheNiche]

As for West Alabama; it was a DUMB decision by the city not to return the bike lanes and middle turn lane back to their original forms. The City of Houston should be trying to make Inner Loop neighborhoods more liveable. It shouldn't place the concerns of commuters over those of local residents and it is just plain silly to not allow people to make left turns to THEIR HOMES, THEIR BUSINESSES, TO THE MENIL, or TO THE UST during certain times of the day. That causes people to make tough decisions... do you drive longer to go around and create more local congestion or do you risk making an illegal left turn?

Assuming that much of Richmond is taken up for LRT, as I strongly suspect will be the case, don't you think that some extra vehicular capacity on Alabama might act as a release valve, keeping congestion in the area managable and commuters out of people's neighborhoods?

As for the tough decisions...is that what you'd consider "tough"???

[musicman]

The City of Houston should be trying to make Inner Loop neighborhoods more liveable. It shouldn't place the concerns of commuters over those of local residents and it is just plain silly to not allow people to make left turns to THEIR HOMES, THEIR BUSINESSES, TO THE MENIL, or TO THE UST during certain times of the day.

so you're against rail on richmond?

[sidegate]

Assuming that much of Richmond is taken up for LRT, as I strongly suspect will be the case, don't you think that some extra vehicular capacity on Alabama might act as a release valve, keeping congestion in the area managable and commuters out of people's neighborhoods?

As for the tough decisions...is that what you'd consider "tough"???

yeah, looks like richmond rail is coming in some form or another. i happen to support, it but I fear that W Alabama's current configuration is here to stay. I've tried in vain to bring it up with the City, but I think it will take a head-on collision in that middle lane for something to happen...

Most of those buildings are built to the street/sidewalk. There are few buildings along that stretch that follow Houston's typical strip mall design with surface parking separating the street and building. The few that are there came in the last decade or so.

is that because a setback is code now? or was it a personal choice on the part of the developer?

[musicman]

yeah, looks like richmond rail is coming in some form or another. i happen to support, it but I fear that W Alabama's current configuration is here to stay. I've tried in vain to bring it up with the City, but I think it will take a head-on collision in that middle lane for something to happen...

is that because a setback is code now? or was it a personal choice on the part of the developer?

the mayor was on tv this past weekend saying the design is the future of houston. so i think we can only expect more. but i think bike lanes are just as impt.

the westheimer buildings are old developments. they were just built close to the street a long time ago. some areas do have closer setback like in freedman's town.

[TheNiche]

yeah, looks like richmond rail is coming in some form or another. i happen to support, it but I fear that W Alabama's current configuration is here to stay. I've tried in vain to bring it up with the City, but I think it will take a head-on collision in that middle lane for something to happen...

is that because a setback is code now? or was it a personal choice on the part of the developer?

I don't even think that a collision is going to change anything. Alabama w/contraflow lane is here to stay.

The City requires a certain amount of parking for new retail development as well as has cumbersome setbacks along major thoroughfares. Developers could always seek variances, but that eats into their schedule, increases their holding costs, and all that for potentially nothing if the politicians don't see eye-to-eye with you...

[Subdude]

If and when rail is built on Richmond, I can see where, as much as I dislike being unable to make a left turn for miles, keeping the Alabama contraflow would make a lot of sense. Until the rail is built, however, the city should stick to its word and return Alabama to the old configuration. I've never seen Alabama so clogged with traffic that the contraflow lane is especially necessary to begin with. Right now it is just an inconvenience.

Regarding Westheimer, I'm not aware that it needs to be especially designed for on-street parking. The street is there, you just let people park on it. Seems straightforward to me. Too bad they didn't take that approach on lower Westheimer. Instead that section has been stuck with a series of generic strip centers set back from the street.

[musicman]

Regarding Westheimer, I'm not aware that it needs to be especially designed for on-street parking. The street is there, you just let people park on it. Seems straightforward to me. Too bad they didn't take that approach on lower Westheimer. Instead that section has been stuck with a series of generic strip centers set back from the street.

and the traffic flows much more nicely because parking is provided.

[Subdude]

Well yeah, traffic flows nicely, but then it becomes just like any other commercial strip. Lower Westheimer at one point was a cool, although extremely seedy, neighborhood. Now it seems to lack any particular character at all. I'm a big fan of on-street parking, because it reduces the demand for parking lots, slows traffic in pedestrian areas, and allows a degree of street life. This is what you still see on the section from Dunlavy to Commonwealth, where antique shops and such have been able to flourish without a lot of parking lots. Maybe people feel more comfortable walking around when there is a barrier of parked cars from traffic lanes. I think one of the best things that the city could do to spur development downtown would be to devote as much space as possible to on-street parking instead of traffic lanes. I'm not saying that traffic flow isn't important, but it isn't the only consideration. Cities are for people as well as for cars. As unpleasant as it is, I can live with the Alabama contraflow, because there isn't as much pedestrian activity or retail to begin with. But Westheimer has a great base of street activity, and it would be a shame to lose it just to improve traffic flow for a mile or two.

[sidegate]

if people are half-decent drivers and get in lane in time then on street parking isn't an issue. I grew up in Belfast where on street parking on both sides of the street in *tiny* Victorian terraced streets is the norm, such that there is often room for only one car going each way. but with common courtesy & consideration on the part of drivers, people get by. they know it's the price of living close-in. of course in general cars are smaller, and more people cycle and walk....but that's another story.

[KinkaidAlum]

and the traffic flows much more nicely because parking is provided.

Yeah, there is nothing worse than driving 45 mph down Westheimer near Montrose only to have to come to a complete stop 2 miles from the intersection of Westheimer @ Dunlavy because of that darn on-street parking!

It doesn't matter the time of day, traffic always gets jammed on the 3-4 blocks that have on-street parking. It's like the Katy Freeway out there.

[KinkaidAlum]

so you're against rail on richmond?

I fully support light rail on Richmond.

Do you not understand the concept of light rail?

Light rail serves the LOCAL citizens more than anyone else by giving them an alternative means of transportation.

Now, I'd be heavily against a COMMUTER RAIL LINE down Richmond Avenue because it wouldn't serve the local citizens, much like the "new" West Alabama.

[sidegate]

west alabama is a strange street at the best of times tho'. west of shepherd there are the two permanent west bound lanes, a turning lane, then an east bound lane. I've never been able to figure out why it isn't just two lanes each way, with the two inner lanes for turning as required.

then further west it suddenly dead ends into someone's front yard. weird.

west alabama is a strange street at the best of times tho'. west of shepherd there are the two permanent west bound lanes, a turning lane, then an east bound lane. I've never been able to figure out why it isn't just two lanes each way, with the two inner lanes for turning as required.

then further west it suddenly dead ends into someone's front yard. weird.

[dbigtex56a]

I'm in favor of any changes which will increase frustation and slow automotive traffic east of S. Shephard on Westheimer, W. Alabama and Richmond. These streets were intended to service the immediate neighborhood, not to facilitate alternative pass-through routes for commuters.

Motorists who value swift, ununencombered passage are better persuaded to utilize roads intended for those purposes - Allen Parkway or the Southwest Freeway. If making these alternative routes less attractive achieves that goal, then let's reduce lanes, add more traffic lights, on-street parking, reenstate left turn options and otherwise create more pleasant and functional local thouroghfares for the residents of these neighborhoods, instead of catering to the invading hordes.

[musicman]

Yeah, there is nothing worse than driving 45 mph down Westheimer near Montrose only to have to come to a complete stop 2 miles from the intersection of Westheimer @ Dunlavy because of that darn on-street parking!

It doesn't matter the time of day, traffic always gets jammed on the 3-4 blocks that have on-street parking. It's like the Katy Freeway out there.

The Mayor was on the news yesterday and he mentioned how keeping traffic moving in the city is his priority. councilmember sue lovell is also siding with the mayor on his traffic proposals.

I fully support light rail on Richmond.

Do you not understand the concept of light rail?

Light rail serves the LOCAL citizens more than anyone else by giving them an alternative means of transportation.

Now, I'd be heavily against a COMMUTER RAIL LINE down Richmond Avenue because it wouldn't serve the local citizens, much like the "new" West Alabama.

in an earlier post you said "it is just plain silly to not allow people to make left turns to THEIR HOMES, THEIR BUSINESSES, TO THE MENIL, or TO THE UST during certain times of the day." when rail gets put on richmond it will definitely affect how local residents get to THEIR HOMES, THEIR BUSINESSES, TO THE MENIL, or TO THE UST. if that is the main problem you have, then you should be against both alabama's current road config and the new light rail because they do affect local traffic.

[KinkaidAlum]

The Mayor was on the news yesterday and he mentioned how keeping traffic moving in the city is his priority. councilmember sue lovell is also siding with the mayor on his traffic proposals.

in an earlier post you said "it is just plain silly to not allow people to make left turns to THEIR HOMES, THEIR BUSINESSES, TO THE MENIL, or TO THE UST during certain times of the day." when rail gets put on richmond it will definitely affect how local residents get to THEIR HOMES, THEIR BUSINESSES, TO THE MENIL, or TO THE UST. if that is the main problem you have, then you should be against both alabama's current road config and the new light rail because they do affect local traffic.

Uh, not if local residents decide to UTILIZE the light rail. Then, they can exit at a station and WALK to their homes, businesses, classes, restaurants, Menil, etc... That's the beauty of mass transit.

[bachanon]

Uh, not if local residents decide to UTILIZE the light rail. Then, they can exit at a station and WALK to their homes, businesses, classes, restaurants, Menil, etc... That's the beauty of mass transit.

that sounds nice, but how often do you think these same local residents will be going the direction of either rail line, or that there will be public transportation that connects with the rail line taking them near their desired destination? i would argue that some trips could utilize the mass transit option, but that many more trips would not.

[TheNiche]

I fully support light rail on Richmond.

Do you not understand the concept of light rail?

Light rail serves the LOCAL citizens more than anyone else by giving them an alternative means of transportation.

Now, I'd be heavily against a COMMUTER RAIL LINE down Richmond Avenue because it wouldn't serve the local citizens, much like the "new" West Alabama.

It is funny that your preferred transportation policies effectively diminish the range and mobility that individuals have within the region. The net effect is that their consumption choices are also diminished.

Variety is the spice of life, IMO. When people are limited to a small area of accessible employment and shopping, their quality of life is adversely affected.

I'm in favor of any changes which will increase frustation and slow automotive traffic east of S. Shephard on Westheimer, W. Alabama and Richmond. These streets were intended to service the immediate neighborhood, not to facilitate alternative pass-through routes for commuters.

Motorists who value swift, ununencombered passage are better persuaded to utilize roads intended for those purposes - Allen Parkway or the Southwest Freeway. If making these alternative routes less attractive achieves that goal, then let's reduce lanes, add more traffic lights, on-street parking, reenstate left turn options and otherwise create more pleasant and functional local thouroghfares for the residents of these neighborhoods, instead of catering to the invading hordes.

I have it on authority from a former TXDoT traffic engineer that the design of the new Southwest Freeway near Spur 527 was sabotaged by special interests that held sway with people that were able to permanently alter the demand projections provided by the Texas Transportation Institute (TTI). As a result, the Southwest Freeway was not built to handle sufficient traffic. The result is pass-thru-traffic. You can hardly blame the commuters for their plight (or yours).

that sounds nice, but how often do you think these same local residents will be going the direction of either rail line, or that there will be public transportation that connects with the rail line taking them near their desired destination? i would argue that some trips could utilize the mass transit option, but that many more trips would not.

Your argument would be sound.

[musicman]

Uh, not if local residents decide to UTILIZE the light rail. Then, they can exit at a station and WALK to their homes, businesses, classes, restaurants, Menil, etc... That's the beauty of mass transit.

i guess the people who i know is the area are too well off to use mass transit. for most of their daily trips, mass transit will not be an option.

[MidtownCoog]

too well off

That's just the Houstonian in you. You gotta shake that bad habit and narrow view.

In the world outside of Houston, public transport is not just for the po folk.

[musicman]

That's just the Houstonian in you. You gotta shake that bad habit and narrow view.

In the world outside of Houston, public transport is not just for the po folk.

Yes i am a native but my comments weren't a bad habit nor narrow view. that is an honest assessment. public transportation isn't just for the "po folk" but if it increases travel times for the commuter, there is less likelyhood of them using it.

[KinkaidAlum]

It is funny that your preferred transportation policies effectively diminish the range and mobility that individuals have within the region. The net effect is that their consumption choices are also diminished.

Nowhere in my post did I state that I am against commuter rail. I simply stated that I would be against a commuter rail line down Richmond.

It seems that many posters on this forum cannot comprehend the difference between commuter rail (heavy) and light rail. The two serve entirely different functions even though when fully operational (like in Boston or NYC) they can greatly compliment each other.

My original point was that changing West Alabama into a street for commuters rather than a local one would be as assinine as putting commuter rail instead of light rail down Richmond Avenue.

Now, as for the folks who know people who live near Richmond and those folks are too good for light rail; I suggest you make new friends. The ones you currently have sound like snobs.

Additionally, if we build the light rail down Richmond into the Galleria area (rather than down Westpark to some transit center), the people who live near Dunlavy at West Alabama could choose to walk a couple of blocks and take the rail to...

HIGHER EDUCATION

UH-Downtown, South Texas College of Law, St Thomas, U of Houston, Texas Southern, Rice, Baylor College of Medicine, UT Health Science Center, Prairie View ATM Nursing, Texas Woman's University, HCC Central Campus

OFFICES

downtown, midtown, greenway, medical center, uptown/galleria (at least Southern sections)

RECREATIONAL

Downtown Aquarium, new downtown park, Toyota Center, Minute Maid Park, Robertson Stadium, Hoffeinz Pavilion, Rice Stadium, Reckling Field, Cougar Field, Autry Court, Reliant Arena, Reliant Stadium, Hermann Park, Market Square bar scene, midtown bar scene, the Galleria

CULTURAL

Wortham Center, Jones Hall, Alley Theatre, Hobby Center, MFA, Contemporary Arts, Menil, Rothko, Children's Museum, Museum of Science, Holocaust Museum, new Asia House, Cockrell Butterfly House, Houston Zoo, Ensemble Theatre

[TheNiche]

Nowhere in my post did I state that I am against commuter rail. I simply stated that I would be against a commuter rail line down Richmond.

It seems that many posters on this forum cannot comprehend the difference between commuter rail (heavy) and light rail. The two serve entirely different functions even though when fully operational (like in Boston or NYC) they can greatly compliment each other.

My original point was that changing West Alabama into a street for commuters rather than a local one would be as assinine as putting commuter rail instead of light rail down Richmond Avenue.

With respect to that specific hypothetical scenario, I'd agree with you, actually. But from your other input, generally, it seems like you're willing to sacrifice every convenience of those that don't live in a particular neighborhood just so that you can have peace, quiet, and utmost convenience within your own little enclave. If that is what you want, it strikes me that you probably need to live in the faux-urban environment such as is found in Sugar Land, The Woodlands, or Pearland. True-urban is gritty, and caters to everyone without exclusion.

Now, as for the folks who know people who live near Richmond and those folks are too good for light rail; I suggest you make new friends. The ones you currently have sound like snobs.

Behold! For this is is the present and future of the greater Montrose area!

[sidegate]

As a result, the Southwest Freeway was not built to handle sufficient traffic. The result is pass-thru-traffic. You can hardly blame the commuters for their plight (or yours).

They need to take out those HOV lanes. Eminently laudible in their intent, but just in the wrong city at the wrong time. They're kind of like the little walking guy you see on the traffic lights round the city as you wait at the red light, with not a pedestrian in sight for miles. Always makes me laugh....

[musicman]

Now, as for the folks who know people who live near Richmond and those folks are too good for light rail; I suggest you make new friends. The ones you currently have sound like snobs.

Additionally, if we build the light rail down Richmond into the Galleria area (rather than down Westpark to some transit center), the people who live near Dunlavy at West Alabama could choose to walk a couple of blocks and take the rail to...

your IF scenario is not realistic as it is not in metro's plans.

as for the snobs living in the area....many value their time and most will only use the light rail IF it saves them time. currently the majority of their trips will be more efficient if they drive to their destination.

[MidtownCoog]

currently the majority of their trips will be more efficient if they drive to their destination.

Sounds like your friends are inefficent to begin with. I try to make as few trips as possible, and when I do I combine them.

Some of us like me take the bus, even though we could get to downtown quicker by driving.

And I ain't po.

[TheNiche]

They need to take out those HOV lanes. Eminently laudible in their intent, but just in the wrong city at the wrong time. They're kind of like the little walking guy you see on the traffic lights round the city as you wait at the red light, with not a pedestrian in sight for miles. Always makes me laugh....

I don't follow... HOV lanes get a lot of use, and traffic studies have proven their effectiveness at relieving congestion.

Sounds like your friends are inefficent to begin with. I try to make as few trips as possible, and when I do I combine them.

Some of us like me take the bus, even though we could get to downtown quicker by driving.

And I ain't po.

But you take the bus from a P&R lot in northeast Houston to downtown Houston, and back. Commuters tend to be much more willing to use mass transit than are people who are running errands.

I'd also bet that people in the Montrose area tend to eat out a lot more than people in your neck of the woods...those kinds of trips aren't as easily combined.