KinkaidAlum Posted February 28, 2017 Share Posted February 28, 2017 (edited) moo. Edited February 28, 2017 by KinkaidAlum 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kinglyam Posted February 28, 2017 Share Posted February 28, 2017 6 minutes ago, samagon said: I can see it in my mind Timoric, a less than 1 mile stretch of land with freeway removed, and purchased by developers so they can make tons of money, meanwhile, the bus terminals, and homeless outreach centers aren't going to move, so it'll be just as unfriendly as current. Yet on the east side the freeway is going to go from spanning 220 feet wide to spanning 550 feet wide for ~1.5 miles, and local level access to downtown is going to be reduced by about 25%, 19 city blocks with existing businesses are going to be taken, and an entire community will be wiped out. Then on the north side the freeway, rather than being sunken into the ground as current, it will be flying through the sky at over 60 feet high right by Hardy Yards. And if you look at how things are currently on the west side of downtown at buffalo bayou, it's pretty much unchanged. hope that helps. Or, you could check out their website. If you look at the 4th public meeting documents, in Appendix G, page 22 has a section showing the 405-foot wide I-10. It's all raised, but with no vertical scale shown. I tried making a jpg of it, but the file didn't work, and the PDF is too big to attach. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triton Posted February 28, 2017 Share Posted February 28, 2017 It just makes me wonder about the road connections when we get the next update from TXDOT this year. The new highway will be south of the rail so Hardy Yards won't be impacted but I truly do wonder if they'll ever try to connect Fulton to San Jacinto. That would be a nice connection. Northside Village seems so hard to get in and out of. So little connections to highways and honestly the rail does increase travel times in the area. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cspwal Posted February 28, 2017 Share Posted February 28, 2017 Why does the downtown connector still have to go over the bayou? Why can't they just stop it at Memorial Drive, and not conitnue to Allen pkwy? It would make the west side look better. The over view shot at the I45/I10 interchange west of downtown is so much freeway - cutting off 4th ward from White Oak bayou 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted February 28, 2017 Author Share Posted February 28, 2017 15 minutes ago, Triton said: It just makes me wonder about the road connections when we get the next update from TXDOT this year. The new highway will be south of the rail so Hardy Yards won't be impacted but I truly do wonder if they'll ever try to connect Fulton to San Jacinto. That would be a nice connection. Northside Village seems so hard to get in and out of. So little connections to highways and honestly the rail does increase travel times in the area. The extension of Fulton to San Jacinto is still in the City's plans. And the I-45 plans show the extension of San Jacinto north to the new location of the freeway, so it looks like they are accommodating those plans. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted February 28, 2017 Author Share Posted February 28, 2017 1 hour ago, Kinglyam said: Or, you could check out their website. If you look at the 4th public meeting documents, in Appendix G, page 22 has a section showing the 405-foot wide I-10. It's all raised, but with no vertical scale shown. I tried making a jpg of it, but the file didn't work, and the PDF is too big to attach. Or, better yet, you could check out the most-recent documents on their website. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted February 28, 2017 Author Share Posted February 28, 2017 12 minutes ago, cspwal said: Why does the downtown connector still have to go over the bayou? Why can't they just stop it at Memorial Drive, and not conitnue to Allen pkwy? It would make the west side look better. Because a lot of traffic flows from Allen Parkway to the freeway and vice versa. (In fact, the initial plan did not have this connection. Comments received at the early public meetings made it clear this was a necessary connection. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cspwal Posted February 28, 2017 Share Posted February 28, 2017 Which direction is more common? If it's I45 south, than this connector will not help that much - you'd be better off going through downtown. If there's that much traffic flow on that side of the city, than maybe they shouldn't do this relocation in the first place 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted February 28, 2017 Author Share Posted February 28, 2017 2 minutes ago, cspwal said: Which direction is more common? If it's I45 south, than this connector will not help that much - you'd be better off going through downtown. If there's that much traffic flow on that side of the city, than maybe they shouldn't do this relocation in the first place The extension doesn't just serve Allen Parkway. It also picks up traffic coming from the southern end of downtown and midtown. Go hang out in that area today at 5:00. A LOT of northbound traffic flows through there (St. Joseph Parkway at I-45). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cspwal Posted February 28, 2017 Share Posted February 28, 2017 I'm just questioning how much benefit we're getting from demolishing the pierce elevated if we still need to serve traffic on the west side of downtown. On a side note, why does 45 go under Dallas street? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted February 28, 2017 Author Share Posted February 28, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, samagon said: I can see it in my mind Timoric, a less than 1 mile stretch of land with freeway removed [more than 1 miles of freeway will be removed], and purchased by developers so they can make tons of money [so what?], meanwhile, the bus terminals, and homeless outreach centers aren't going to move, so it'll be just as unfriendly as current [if it's as unfriendly as you claim, how will developers be able to make tons of money?]. Yet on the east side the freeway is going to go from spanning 220 feet wide to spanning 550 feet wide [False - the freeway will NOT be 550 feet wide; not even close to that] for ~1.5 miles, and local level access to downtown is going to be reduced by about 25% [False - at worst, local level access is reduced from 13 streets to 12 (a 7.6% reduction); and that doesn't count three overpasses over the sunken portion behind the GRB, which may end up being a park, either way providing even more local level access from the east side], 19 city blocks with existing businesses are going to be taken [a bit of an exaggeration to say 19 blocks with existing businesses are being taken; a lot of those blocks are vacant], and an entire community will be wiped out [it's obviously far too early in the process to know how Clayton will be handled; and it's equally obvious that provisions will be made]. Then on the north side the freeway, rather than being sunken into the ground as current, it will be flying through the sky at over 60 feet high right by Hardy Yards [I recommend everyone take a careful look at the plans; while it is all elevated at the very west end of Hardy Yards, where it passes between UH-D and the elevated Metro Rail station (a) I don't know that we have any reason to think it is 60 feet in the sky and (b) by the time it gets to the east end of Hardy Yards, most of it is sunken, the small elevated portion is even less elevated, and it is further removed from Hardy Yards]. And if you look at how things are currently on the west side of downtown at buffalo bayou, it's pretty much unchanged [False. Again, I recommend everyone take a careful look at the current state of the west side freeways and ramps and compare it to the plan; Huge difference]. hope that helps. It would be help more if you stuck to the facts. Edited February 28, 2017 by Houston19514 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kinglyam Posted February 28, 2017 Share Posted February 28, 2017 2 minutes ago, Houston19514 said: Then on the north side the freeway, rather than being sunken into the ground as current, it will be flying through the sky at over 60 feet high right by Hardy Yards [I recommend everyone take a careful look at the plans; while it is all elevated at the very west end of Hardy Yards, where it passes between UH-D and the elevated Metro Rail station (a) I don't know that we have any reason to think it is 60 feet in the sky and (b) by the time it gets to the east end of Hardy Yards, most of it is sunken, the small elevated portion is even less elevated, and it is further removed from Hardy Yards]. The bottom of the light rail is elevated at least 20 feet above existing grade. I don't know how thick the beams and rail surface are, but say about 5 feet or so to the top of the rail surface. Then, the top of the electric lines that power the train are another 15 feet above that. You'll need at least 10 feet of clearance (probably more) to install anything over those electrical lines, so now we've got the bottom of the new freeway at around 50 feet just to get over the light rail. The beams and slab to the top of pavement will be more than 5 feet thick, I'm sure, and may be 10 feet given that the entire thing is elevated. If you look at the Appendix G I referenced, it shows a section cut at the other end of Hardy Yards. The I-10 lanes drop to the ground, but the I-45 lanes stay elevated past Hardy Street. So 60 feet is more than a reasonable expectation, and we should be hopeful that it's no more than that. I know I am, particularly, since I've been planning to build a house on Burnett that would have what I thought would be uninterrupted skyline views. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted February 28, 2017 Author Share Posted February 28, 2017 34 minutes ago, Kinglyam said: The bottom of the light rail is elevated at least 20 feet above existing grade. I don't know how thick the beams and rail surface are, but say about 5 feet or so to the top of the rail surface. Then, the top of the electric lines that power the train are another 15 feet above that. You'll need at least 10 feet of clearance (probably more) to install anything over those electrical lines, so now we've got the bottom of the new freeway at around 50 feet just to get over the light rail. The beams and slab to the top of pavement will be more than 5 feet thick, I'm sure, and may be 10 feet given that the entire thing is elevated. If you look at the Appendix G I referenced, it shows a section cut at the other end of Hardy Yards. The I-10 lanes drop to the ground, but the I-45 lanes stay elevated past Hardy Street. So 60 feet is more than a reasonable expectation, and we should be hopeful that it's no more than that. I know I am, particularly, since I've been planning to build a house on Burnett that would have what I thought would be uninterrupted skyline views. At that point, you may be right. But that is by far the highest point and it is brief. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samagon Posted February 28, 2017 Share Posted February 28, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Houston19514 said: It would be help more if you stuck to the facts. Quote [more than 1 miles of freeway will be removed] The freeway is going to stop at Hamilton (59) and start again at Bagby. Google maps shows .9 miles? Yes, the Pierce is going to be removed, and a longer distance of pierce will be removed than just .9 miles, but except for that .9 miles, freeway is going right back in. If you want to have a semantical argument about it, then you're being silly. Quote [so what?] So they're the only real benefactors of removing the pierce elevated. Quote [if it's as unfriendly as you claim, how will developers be able to make tons of money?] How do businesses on Main street and Walker stay in business? Just because no one wants to walk around the area doesn't mean it isn't a profitable area for developers? Does that make sense? Quote [False - the freeway will NOT be 550 feet wide; not even close to that] am I reading the schematic incorrectly? The current ROW is 220 feet. They are going to add 330 feet to the existing ROW. My math says that adds up to 550 feet. I fully admit I might be reading the schematic incorrectly, and if so, how wide will it be? Quote [False - at worst, local level access is reduced from 13 streets to 12 (a 7.6% reduction); and that doesn't count three overpasses over the sunken portion behind the GRB, which may end up being a park, either way providing even more local level access from the east side] not false. there are 4 major roads that go from west of 59 all they way in to the east end. Leeland, Polk, Harrisburg and Navigation. Why these 4 and not Preston, Congress, Rusk, Capitol, Walker, Lamar, Dallas, Clay, Bell, Pease or Jefferson? Because all those other streets have been dead ended by GRB, various stadiums, or farther out in the east end, they don't cross railroad tracks. So yeah, you have 4 major roads that cross 59 currently that you can take from downtown out to at least wayside without having to do some convoluted street changes. That's 25% reduction by removing Polk from that list of 4. Quote [a bit of an exaggeration to say 19 blocks with existing businesses are being taken; a lot of those blocks are vacant] There are 3 blocks that are only surface lots (so no big deal) every other block google maps says there are active businesses operating. So you say "a lot" and are farther from the mark than I am. maybe we can meet in the middle and agree that while all 19 blocks have some use, not all are fully used? Still 19 blocks that are part of a very quickly growing neighborhood that will be taken. Quote [I recommend everyone take a careful look at the plans; while it is all elevated at the very west end of Hardy Yards, where it passes between UH-D and the elevated Metro Rail station (a) I don't know that we have any reason to think it is 60 feet in the sky and (b) by the time it gets to the east end of Hardy Yards, most of it is sunken, the small elevated portion is even less elevated, and it is further removed from Hardy Yards] We can probably safely assume that after the cutaway at mckee street that it begins elevating. and at least by the time it reaches San Jacinto it will be elevated enough for traffic underneath. It's impossible to really know until it's built, kind of like congress wouldn't know what was in the affordable care act until it was passed. anyway, the i45 lanes are elevated the entire time they are parallel to i10 this includes going over the elysian viaduct (or is that going away?) and all of the surface streets. true it's not 60 feet in the air the whole way, but it's at standard elevated highway height the whole way. So yeah, I may misunderstand the schematic, but that seems to be countered by you not knowing the east side of downtown, or the east end as well as I do. Edited February 28, 2017 by samagon 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kinglyam Posted February 28, 2017 Share Posted February 28, 2017 1 minute ago, Houston19514 said: At that point, you may be right. But that is by far the highest point and it is brief. Perhaps the highest point will be, but without vertical scale on the drawings we have, we don't know how brief. What isn't in question is that there is a proposed elevated major interstate highway through the middle of the 4th-largest city in the USA. Whether it's 60 feet or 20 feet, it's still going to be an eyesore and loud as hell. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted February 28, 2017 Author Share Posted February 28, 2017 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Kinglyam said: Perhaps the highest point will be, but without vertical scale on the drawings we have, we don't know how brief. What isn't in question is that there is a proposed elevated major interstate highway through the middle of the 4th-largest city in the USA. Whether it's 60 feet or 20 feet, it's still going to be an eyesore and loud as hell. We actually have a pretty good idea how brief, because it is mostly below grade at the other end of Hardy Yards, and the I-45 portions that remain elevated are much less so. Another thing that isn't in question is that the proposed elevated major interstate highway through the middle of the 4th-largest city in the USA is just a slight relocation of a current elevated major interstate highway. The suggestion earlier in the thread that this elevated stretch will be replacing a currently-submerged stretch was, as is so much that gets posted about this project, not exactly correct. Edited February 28, 2017 by Houston19514 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kinglyam Posted February 28, 2017 Share Posted February 28, 2017 13 minutes ago, Houston19514 said: We actually have a pretty good idea how brief, because it is mostly below grade at the other end of Hardy Yards, and the I-45 portions that remain elevated are much less so. Another thing that isn't in question is that the proposed elevated major interstate highway through the middle of the 4th-largest city in the USA is just a slight relocation of a current elevated major interstate highway. The suggestion earlier in the thread that this elevated stretch will be replacing a currently-submerged stretch was, as is so much that gets posted about this project, not exactly correct. True, some of it is currently elevated. This proposal basically doubles the elevated portion through downtown, which currently ends at Providence Street. And UHD is probably having a crapfest right now, since this just wiped out their entire expansion plan. https://www.uhd.edu/about/news/Pages/University-of-Houston-Downtown-Receives-Approval-for-Expansion.aspx 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samagon Posted February 28, 2017 Share Posted February 28, 2017 (edited) 27 minutes ago, Houston19514 said: We actually have a pretty good idea how brief, because it is mostly below grade at the other end of Hardy Yards, and the I-45 portions that remain elevated are much less so. Another thing that isn't in question is that the proposed elevated major interstate highway through the middle of the 4th-largest city in the USA is just a slight relocation of a current elevated major interstate highway. The suggestion earlier in the thread that this elevated stretch will be replacing a currently-submerged stretch was, as is so much that gets posted about this project, not exactly correct. 45 will be elevated the entire length of its alignment with i10. It still has to fly over the elysian viaduct, and a railroad track. So basically, the areas of i10 that are currently below grade will have a freeway that is elevated right next to it. and areas of i10 that are currently elevated will have that same new freeway even more elevated right next to it. but hey, they're all poor people and minorities that live north of there, and there's trains and bayous anyway, so no worries, right, at least we're removing the elevated freeway from the affluent predominantly white area so they will feel safer walking around. Edited February 28, 2017 by samagon 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted February 28, 2017 Author Share Posted February 28, 2017 6 minutes ago, Kinglyam said: True, some of it is currently elevated. This proposal basically doubles the elevated portion through downtown, which currently ends at Providence Street. And UHD is probably having a crapfest right now, since this just wiped out their entire expansion plan. https://www.uhd.edu/about/news/Pages/University-of-Houston-Downtown-Receives-Approval-for-Expansion.aspx Not sure why moving the elevated highway from the absolute middle of their property to the northern edge would wipe out their expansion plans. (I suspect they've been keeping up on TXDoT's plans and are planning accordingly.) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted February 28, 2017 Author Share Posted February 28, 2017 (edited) 2 minutes ago, samagon said: 45 will be elevated the entire length of its alignment with i10. It still has to fly over the elysian viaduct, and a railroad track. Yes, we know, and I alluded to that fact, but it will be well below 60 feet in the sky for the vast majority of the alignment. Edited February 28, 2017 by Houston19514 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigFootsSocks Posted March 1, 2017 Share Posted March 1, 2017 Can we stick this discussion to the Transpo thread guys? 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoustonMidtown Posted March 19, 2017 Share Posted March 19, 2017 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross Posted March 19, 2017 Share Posted March 19, 2017 Another potential mural site? 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phillip_white Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 Finally got around to taking the drone around the site. Sorry the video is so short. I know the developers transferred ownership of the streets to the city, but security guy said I was trespassing on private property. Didn't want to piss him off because this is a fun place to fly. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoustonMidtown Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 LOL about the security guard - he (may have been a different one) told me to quit taking pictures last time I rode my bike by - I was taking pictures from the street 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phillip_white Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 12 minutes ago, HoustonMidtown said: LOL about the security guard - he (may have been a different one) told me to quit taking pictures last time I rode my bike by - I was taking pictures from the street That's his maroon car parked across from our cars in the video. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_cuevas713 Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 Are those nicely planned sidewalks!? Whaaaaaaaat!? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoustonMidtown Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cspwal Posted April 10, 2017 Share Posted April 10, 2017 On 4/7/2017 at 5:17 PM, HoustonMidtown said: Fort Hardy 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post urbanize713 Posted April 15, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted April 15, 2017 From 609 10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.