Houston Planning on Walkable Places

[HouTXRanger]

So, I haven't heard anything else on this, but I thought the vote was supposed to be this week. Anyone know when we'll hear if it all got approved? Still confused on how exactly the city council votes and such.

[HNathoo]

1 hour ago, HouTXRanger said:

So, I haven't heard anything else on this, but I thought the vote was supposed to be this week. Anyone know when we'll hear if it all got approved? Still confused on how exactly the city council votes and such.

 

It's expected to be on the 8/5/2020 agenda. Please e-mail the mayor and council members expressing your support.

[HNathoo]

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Houston-considers-a-plan-to-make-the-city-more-15459085.php

[HNathoo]

This passed city council unanimously - pretty big step for Houston Urbanism.

[HouTXRanger]

14 minutes ago, HNathoo said:

This passed city council unanimously - pretty big step for Houston Urbanism.

Unanimously???? Fantastic! I'm going to buy a cake or something to celebrate!

[X.R.]

32 minutes ago, HNathoo said:

This passed city council unanimously - pretty big step for Houston Urbanism.

 

Big win. Emailed the council members after meeting, I'm hoping they received enough support post meeting for them to feel comfortable with their votes. Mayor Turner being such a stalwart in defense of the ordinance probably had a huge impact. 

[j_cuevas713]

This is huge. Well now we can expect denser development. I'm excited to see what we start to get the next 3 to 5 years. I bet you major thoroughfares like Richmond and Montrose are going to change dramatically. 

Edited August 5, 2020 by j_cuevas713

[Texasota]

I'm hoping that the Planning Department starts cranking out new Walkable Places and transit corridors as quickly as possible. Right now only the existing light rail lines, the uptown BRT, and the University BRT will be designated as corridors. They need to add every planned BRT line, Light rail extension, BOOST line, and any other high frequency bus line immediately. The 82 (lower Westheimer) needs to be a transit corridor yesterday. 

 

And then, for the first round of walkable places:

• Washington Corridor
• All of Montrose
• W 19th St
• White Oak
• Yale
• Shepherd
• Durham
• Rice Village
• EaDo
• N Main

...and lots of other places

 

 

[X.R.]

1 hour ago, j_cuevas713 said:

This is huge. Well now we can expect denser development. I'm excited to see what we start to get the next 3 to 5 years. I bet you major thoroughfares like Richmond and Montrose are going to change dramatically. 

 

I very honestly would add the areas around the current rail lines to those two streets. Midtown, just by the buildings that are already there, give a glimpse of what the rail corridors could end up looking like, specifically that area by the Continental Club and a few streets north. All that land around Wheeler (that Rice/Mann don't already own) and south of it, the land south of TMC going to NRG, and the area going southeast of the soccer stadium can finally have development that makes sense and not just random smatterings of...whatever. 

 

 

[Texasota]

Taking inspiration from Luminare, I decided to map where the new walkable places form-based code will go into affect by parcel, rather than just which streets are impacted. I think that shows the real extent, even just of these first three walkable places + the existing transit corridors, a lot better.

 

Warning: this is *very* rough. I prioritized speed over precision, because these shapes get real complicated and determining current parcel boundaries is time consuming. 

 

Very much a work in progress: https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=1Bqs-VU-wmzU1J2JeTbp9MsLBNM2LGSWv&usp=sharing

[HouTXRanger]

27 minutes ago, Texasota said:

Taking inspiration from Luminare, I decided to map where the new walkable places form-based code will go into affect by parcel, rather than just which streets are impacted. I think that shows the real extent, even just of these first three walkable places + the existing transit corridors, a lot better.

 

Warning: this is *very* rough. I prioritized speed over precision, because these shapes get real complicated and determining current parcel boundaries is time consuming. 

 

Very much a work in progress: https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=1Bqs-VU-wmzU1J2JeTbp9MsLBNM2LGSWv&usp=sharing

Very nice! I hope the Montrose TIRZ applies for Walkable Places designation soon, it'll really improve all the development they're trying to do on Westheimer (like the place that just bought the old Half Price Books stripcenter)

[BeerNut]

[wilcal]

On 8/5/2020 at 4:00 PM, Texasota said:

I'm hoping that the Planning Department starts cranking out new Walkable Places and transit corridors as quickly as possible. Right now only the existing light rail lines, the uptown BRT, and the University BRT will be designated as corridors. They need to add every planned BRT line, Light rail extension, BOOST line, and any other high frequency bus line immediately. The 82 (lower Westheimer) needs to be a transit corridor yesterday. 

 

And then, for the first round of walkable places:

• Washington Corridor
• All of Montrose
• W 19th St
• White Oak
• Yale
• Shepherd
• Durham
• Rice Village
• EaDo
• N Main

...and lots of other places

 

 

 

I think it'll be very interesting to see how the first WP corridors will go. TOD is all automatic, but WP can be petitioned by the city OR by the property owners. Also, WP designation still has to be approved by City Council. It also appears that WP corridors can be as small as one road segment. Would hate to see a single block opting out or something silly like that.

 

I think that I read that some areas have already requested WP applications, but that they aren't done yet. 

[Texasota]

Given that the ordinance doesn't go into effect into October, I'm hoping we start hearing about additional walkable places after that.

 

As to to the Transit Corridors - they are not exactly automatic. One element of the updated ordinance is that it give the Planning Director the authority to designate transit corridors. Once they're designated, primary/secondary street designation kicks in based on proximity to stops/stations.

 

I *think* that's why the University line transit corridor only has secondary streets - it's based on proposed/planned station locations, but those could change for the final build.

 

So right now, the only transit corridors are the existing light rail lines, the new uptown BRT, and the planned University BRT between Uptown and UH. 

 

What I would love to see is all planned light rail extensions, BRT lines, *and* high frequency bus/BOOST lines made transit corridors as well. Some of those have final station locations, but for those that don't they could take the University line approach and just do secondary streets until final stations are decided on.

[wilcal]

10 minutes ago, Texasota said:

Given that the ordinance doesn't go into effect into October, I'm hoping we start hearing about additional walkable places after that.

 

As to to the Transit Corridors - they are not exactly automatic. One element of the updated ordinance is that it give the Planning Director the authority to designate transit corridors. Once they're designated, primary/secondary street designation kicks in based on proximity to stops/stations.

 

I *think* that's why the University line transit corridor only has secondary streets - it's based on proposed/planned station locations, but those could change for the final build.

 

So right now, the only transit corridors are the existing light rail lines, the new uptown BRT, and the planned University BRT between Uptown and UH. 

 

What I would love to see is all planned light rail extensions, BRT lines, *and* high frequency bus/BOOST lines made transit corridors as well. Some of those have final station locations, but for those that don't they could take the University line approach and just do secondary streets until final stations are decided on.

 

Ok, so I was confused about this. Talked with someone that was involved with the process, and they said that the secondary streets for University Line were added in now but the primary streets wouldn't start until the BRT stations are actually built and that there were no immediate plans to have any additional transit corridors designated at this time. Secondary TOD rules are opt-in, so by doing it this way, they aren't forcing anyone to do anything, but allowing new development to make changes since the BRT plan is gonna happen.

 

I initially suggested (ok, complained) that Westheimer with the 82 service, and thousands of riders/day should qualify under TOD as well as the new BOOST lines and was basically told no. I think they are still pretty worried about rocking the boat with city council and land owners and they need to continue to make incremental steps at this time. Remember Climate Action Plan recommends eliminating all parking minimums by 2030 inside at least 610. 

[wilcal]

From the planning department's platting update email:

 

Quote

Effective October 1, 2020, the Planning and Development Department will provide applications for Walkable Places Plan (WPP), TOD amendments, Special Parking Area (SPAs), modification of sidewalks and pedestrian realm standards.

• All sidewalk permits will be regulated by the Planning and Development Department. Sidewalks widths will be determined by the (WPP) or by the TOD street classification. Under these requirements, sidewalk widths will vary from 5’ to 10’. Applicants may also apply for a waiver of the modification of the sidewalk standards; application fee is $1,144.

• All modification of existing buildings within a WPP and TOD Streets will be routed to the Planning Department for review. Developers will be guided to provide a pedestrian area that will incorporate a wider sidewalk, safety buffer, and enhanced landscaping. These new requirements will increase the buildable area of developments by reducing the building line along the street and reducing the number of parking spaces required by the code.

With or without establishing a WPP, developers will have the option to create a Special Parking Area (SPA) for any small neighborhood in Houston. The SPA process has been amended and simplified to assist developers with high parking demands.

 

Nothing we didn't already know, except that it's interesting that applicants can try to get a waiver on the sidewalk requirements. 

 

Also will be interesting to see how many SPAs are requested/granted. It was a mega PITA before, so hopefully it's actually easier now. 

[j_cuevas713]

11 hours ago, wilcal said:

From the planning department's platting update email:

 

 

Nothing we didn't already know, except that it's interesting that applicants can try to get a waiver on the sidewalk requirements. 

 

Also will be interesting to see how many SPAs are requested/granted. It was a mega PITA before, so hopefully it's actually easier now. 

Is this in place for areas that could be exceptions to the 5’ minimum? Like an area where the placing a 5’ sidewalk seems unnecessary

[Texasota]

I really don't think that's the idea, but where would less than a 5' sidewalk be preferable? A shared street/woonerf? Otherwise, if you are going to have separate sidewalks, 5' really does need to be the minimum.

 

I would really hope exceptions are only made for the buffer zones between the clear sidewalk and the curb, and *only* if there's just not enough space (like on Harrisburg) because the street was widened but there are still a few 0' lot line buildings. Ultimately I want to see the lane narrowed and some of that clawed back for pedestrians of course.

[H-Town Man]

Does anyone have a link to a summary of what was passed?

 

[wilcal]

50 minutes ago, H-Town Man said:

Does anyone have a link to a summary of what was passed?

 

 

This is a few dozen page PDF put ought by the city: https://www.houstontx.gov/planning/docs_pdfs/User's Guide for WP and TOD report_6_24_2020.pdf

 

It's pretty quick to scan though, and covers both Walkable Places and Transit-Oriented Development. 

[wilcal]

This has been the de-facto thread on TOD, so I thought I would just post it here, but this is the first residential project I've found that appears to be taking advantage of the new TOD standards.

As a quick, recap, under TOD, there is no minimum parking required for SFR.

I noticed on the permit report an ADU going in on W. Alabama, and it is just inside the secondary TOD boundary.

It is a really small 3,132 sq ft lot with a small house and an ADU is being added. Normally, this would require 3 non-tandem parking spots, and while I don't KNOW that they won't provide them, I'm not sure how they would with how the property is aligned and gate is setup. 

Property:

Permit: 

 

 

 

[pokemonizepic]

sidewalk summit today at 5

https://www.houstontx.gov/council/5/sidewalk-summit.html

[wilcal]

On 5/24/2021 at 2:06 PM, wilcal said:

This has been the de-facto thread on TOD, so I thought I would just post it here, but this is the first residential project I've found that appears to be taking advantage of the new TOD standards.

As a quick, recap, under TOD, there is no minimum parking required for SFR.

I noticed on the permit report an ADU going in on W. Alabama, and it is just inside the secondary TOD boundary.

It is a really small 3,132 sq ft lot with a small house and an ADU is being added. Normally, this would require 3 non-tandem parking spots, and while I don't KNOW that they won't provide them, I'm not sure how they would with how the property is aligned and gate is setup. 

Property:

Permit: 

 

 

 

I drove by this property last night and noticed that the ADU was built! It is a really tall, like 1.5 story "tiny" house immediately to the right of this one and slightly set back. At worst I'll get a picture on Wednesday.

 

22 minutes ago, pokemonizepic said:

sidewalk summit today at 5

https://www.houstontx.gov/council/5/sidewalk-summit.html

I'm planning on watching this today. CM Alcorn mentioned on Twitter that she is going to call for more public funds to go towards sidewalk improvements. 

[wilcal]

The TLDR of the event was to show a few programs that the city has to replace sidewalks, but also look at a few hard questions. The main crux is funding of course. Lots of talk about how they are attempting to address the sidewalk issues and different programs already in effect. 

Several new staff members have been added over the last year, which is great. 

I did a live-tweeting of the meeting if y'all want a fast recap: 

 

 

[j_cuevas713]

22 hours ago, wilcal said:

The TLDR of the event was to show a few programs that the city has to replace sidewalks, but also look at a few hard questions. The main crux is funding of course. Lots of talk about how they are attempting to address the sidewalk issues and different programs already in effect. 

Several new staff members have been added over the last year, which is great. 

I did a live-tweeting of the meeting if y'all want a fast recap: 

 

 

It was great to see all the entities involved in building a more sustainable Houston come together. It was also interesting to see certain leaders faced with tough questions. In my opinion you could really tell who had become a little lax at their position and where there was need for real improvement. Overall the meeting was a success. It really shows that this city is taking this stuff seriously. 

Edited September 23, 2021 by j_cuevas713

[wilcal]

31 minutes ago, j_cuevas713 said:

It was great to see all the entities involved in building a more sustainable Houston come together. It was also interesting to see certain leaders faced with tough questions. In my opinion you could really tell who had become a little lax at their position and where there was need for real improvement. Overall the meeting was aa success. It really shows that this city is taking this stuff seriously. 

I think my favorite question was the one about enforcement. From what I was told, it was not possible to enforce sidewalk repair unless a renovation/new construction was happening, but they made it seem like you could just submit a 311 ticket.

My question was the one about the mandatory $100+ permitting fees required for a homeowner to replace their sidewalk.  

I LOVED Bill Fulton's comment about how property owners would never tolerate having to maintain the road in front of their house. Why should we do that with sidewalks?

Edited September 22, 2021 by wilcal

[j_cuevas713]

2 hours ago, wilcal said:

I think my favorite question was the one about enforcement. From what I was told, it was not possible to enforce sidewalk repair unless a renovation/new construction was happening, but they made it seem like you could just submit a 311 ticket.

My question was the one about the mandatory $100+ permitting fees required for a homeowner to replace their sidewalk.  

I LOVED Bill Fulton's comment about how property owners would never tolerate having to maintain the road in front of their house. Why should we do that with sidewalks?

Exactly! And when asked about a bond on sidewalks, I liked how everyone universally agreed. 

[BeerNut]

 

[X.R.]

I was on the live zoom/google call, and I wish I could have given some affirmations or something. The museum district has benefited greatly from the city's initiative, and because of it we see more parents walking with strollers and kids than ever before. Also a lot of joggers, bladers, and walkers. We got significant improvements because of the bike lanes, the local elem school, and certain people requesting sidewalks and ADA improvements. I'm sure it came before other more deserving areas so it doesn't feel as equitable as I would like, but its so nice. I don't really understand why other neighborhoods aren't taking advantage of this, or why people are fighting it like the garden oaks peple: https://www.theleadernews.com/community/oak-forest-residents-at-odds-over-sidewalk/article_caa89f8a-1bd1-11ec-ab02-534e61a541e8.html?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=user-share

It feels like the COH is dedicated to the pedestrian experience in a very significant way and I hope it continues because it benefits people's quality of life in various ways and their property values (for those who don't engage in any of the above listed activities). 

Edited September 23, 2021 by X.R.

[dbigtex56]

17 hours ago, wilcal said:

I think my favorite question was the one about enforcement. From what I was told, it was not possible to enforce sidewalk repair unless a renovation/new construction was happening, but they made it seem like you could just submit a 311 ticket.

My question was the one about the mandatory $100+ permitting fees required for a homeowner to replace their sidewalk.  

I LOVED Bill Fulton's comment about how property owners would never tolerate having to maintain the road in front of their house. Why should we do that with sidewalks?

Thanks for your recap on this meeting. 
I've been trying to get straight answers from the COH about sidewalks for forty years, and have been left with the impression that no one really knew or cared much about the various aspects (i.e., if the homeowner can remove an existing sidewalk without replacing it, who's responsible for construction and financing new sidewalks and repair of existing ones, if laws regarding the blockage of sidewalks are ever enforced, etc.). 
I've been told that the regulations vary depending on in what part of town the sidewalk is located, as it varies from one subdivision to another. Did anyone raise this issue, or was I given misinformation?
Is there a chance that some Einstein can develop a Universal Sidewalk Constant? I'm so tired of the conflicting answers to simple questions.