I-45 Rebuild (North Houston Highway Improvement Project)

[corbs315]

Not sure this is the best place, but this is an interesting Times article

 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/09/08/opinion/urban-highways-segregation.html?referringSource=articleShare

[Big E]

On 9/9/2022 at 1:33 PM, samagon said:

it's not just about the views, it's about the impact to those living near, and the impact to the wildlife of the area.

The impact to wildlife and nearby neighborhoods will be minimal since there is already a freeway there at that location, they are just moving it over slightly and taking the pointless bend out of it. In other words, this section is one that is the least worth pointing to since it encompasses the most minimal changes, while ignoring the areas with the more drastic far reaching ones (like the removal of the Pierce Elevated and the sinking of the freeway between East Downtown and Downtown. 

I do agree that the presence of the Convention Center and stadium throw cold water on the situation a bit, but the new freeway cap will more than make up for it.

[texan]

5 hours ago, corbs315 said:

Not sure this is the best place, but this is an interesting Times article

 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/09/08/opinion/urban-highways-segregation.html?referringSource=articleShare

This opinion piece has exactly the lack of context the Stop I45 group has in all of their statements- not surprised considering the author lives in New York. There's really no independent, critical thought at all in the opposition to this project.

I'm extremely excited for the significantly improved access downtown will have to Fourth Ward, Midtown, and EaDo and the significantly improved low income housing that will be created because of this project.

[corbs315]

1 minute ago, texan said:

This opinion piece has exactly the lack of context the Stop I45 group has in all of their statements- not surprised considering the author lives in New York. There's really no independent, critical thought at all in the opposition to this project.

I'm extremely excited for the significantly improved access downtown will have to Fourth Ward, Midtown, and EaDo and the significantly improved low income housing that will be created because of this project.

Oh I have literally no thoughts on the article itself opinionwise, just sharing since it was an NYT feature with a kinda nifty interactive aspect

[editor]

19 hours ago, texan said:

This opinion piece has exactly the lack of context the Stop I45 group has in all of their statements- not surprised considering the author lives in New York. There's really no independent, critical thought at all in the opposition to this project.

I'm extremely excited for the significantly improved access downtown will have to Fourth Ward, Midtown, and EaDo and the significantly improved low income housing that will be created because of this project.

I don't think the author  lives in New York. I think he lives in Boston. 
 

Also, I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. He's an expert in the affects of freeways in neighborhoods and society around the world. 
 

Are you trying to say that because he doesn't live in Houston that he is not able to study an issue and write about it?  That defies logic. It's like saying someone can't be against the war in Ukraine because they don't live in Kherson.  Or that you can't prefer Windows over macOS because you don't live in Cupertino, California. 
 

There's plenty of good reasons to oppose the I-45 expansion. The problem is, as is often the case, neither side is willing to listen to the other with an open mind. 
 

Also, I'm not sure what magical opening up of access from downtown you're talking about. I live downtown, and there is plenty of access to the places you list.  Getting to and from certain parts of EaDo can be slightly inconvenient, but nothing that requires almost ten billion dollars and displacing a thousand people for. To say that downtown needs improved access to Midtown is particularly specious. Can you explain what you mean do I can understand better?

[Big E]

6 hours ago, editor said:

Also, I'm not sure what magical opening up of access from downtown you're talking about. I live downtown, and there is plenty of access to the places you list.  Getting to and from certain parts of EaDo can be slightly inconvenient, but nothing that requires almost ten billion dollars and displacing a thousand people for. To say that downtown needs improved access to Midtown is particularly specious. Can you explain what you mean do I can understand better?

So are you trying to argue that the massive freeways aren't a barrier between downtown and other central city neighborhoods? Doesn't this literally go against the entire dogma of anti-freeway advocates for the past several decades?

I'll grant that the Pierce Elevated isn't a physical barrier per se, if only because the entire street network passes unimpeded underneath, but I'd argue its far more of a psychological barrier, and depresses surrounding land value because of that. Eliminating it via the reroute would do wonders for downtown and midtown. Also, the Pierce Elevated is an aging mess, and would probably need replacement at some point in the coming decades anyway.

6 hours ago, editor said:

Also, I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. He's an expert in the affects of freeways in neighborhoods and society around the world. 

I'm not sure what even makes one an expert of such or what that would entail. Does it make him different than any other average urban planners?

6 hours ago, editor said:

There's plenty of good reasons to oppose the I-45 expansion.

Name one (aside from the cost, which is only going up by pointlessly delaying it, or the displacement, which we've gone back and forth on in this very thread dozens of times already).

6 hours ago, editor said:

Are you trying to say that because he doesn't live in Houston that he is not able to study an issue and write about it?  That defies logic. It's like saying someone can't be against the war in Ukraine because they don't live in Kherson.  Or that you can't prefer Windows over macOS because you don't live in Cupertino, California. 

The issue isn't whether or not he lives in Houston. Is he saying anything that hasn't already been said a hundred times, or is he just parroting the arguments of those opposed to the project? If the latter is true, then he isn't saying anything of note to add to the conversation, regardless of where he lives.

[Montrose1100]

On 9/9/2022 at 1:33 PM, samagon said:

 

it's not just about the views, it's about the impact to those living near, and the impact to the wildlife of the area.

removing freeways you don't have to worry so much about how it will negatively impact those living in the immediate area, or the impact to wildlife, do you? ignoring as well the possibility of the greenway that DT Houston has suggested might happen. the West, South, and East of downtown is very well served as far as that goes.

as far as views being opened up, literally, the only views that will be better will be between W. Dallas and 59 interchange, basically, the stretch of the Pierce Elevated. 

the downtown connectors for the west side of downtown are going to be more impactful to views than the current freeway structures. the illustration from TXDoT that shows the elevation next to Sabine street lofts, the new structure is going to be even higher than the existing structure. and that cutaway is cleverly placed away from any flyover ramps, which will make the elevation even higher. good times.

https://www.txdot.gov/content/dam/project-sites/nhhip/docs/segment-3-pm4-exhibit-01-overall.pdf

on the plus side though, at least the west side of downtown will receive better local connectivity with Houston getting connected to Allen Parkway, and the sunlight that will get into that area of BBP should be greatly increased. so good for those living in close proximity to that area of downtown.

on the east side of downtown, yes, we'll have a section of freeway that is below grade, but for the distance that will be below grade, we'll have an uninterrupted view of the back side of the convention center, or a great view of the back side of the baseball stadium. .. otherwise the interchanges between 59/45, and 59/45/10 will all be well above grade, so no real improvement there. 

Wish they would get rid of the Giant looming flood flights , and update to something shorter and more modern. Nothing ruins the Sabine Street view like the giant power lines and flood lights.

[samagon]

On 9/10/2022 at 9:34 PM, texan said:

This opinion piece has exactly the lack of context the Stop I45 group has in all of their statements- not surprised considering the author lives in New York. There's really no independent, critical thought at all in the opposition to this project.

I'm extremely excited for the significantly improved access downtown will have to Fourth Ward, Midtown, and EaDo and the significantly improved low income housing that will be created because of this project.

Polk street crossing going away, access to Bell street from EE going away and there's better connectivity between downtown and East End?

that dog doesn't hunt.

but yes, 4th ward is absolutely getting better access (not just to downtown, but southwest as well connecting directly to Allen Parkway).

I guess we'll have to see how traffic entering the 45 connector only entering from Pease, rather than Pease and St. Joseph, but there won't be traffic they have to merge with from Pierce elevated. it'll be interesting to see how this plays out for access to and from midtown during rush hours. hopefully being able to just cross Brazos and not have to merge with other traffic, they'll be able to just get out of the intersections asap, and people won't be blocking the box for those headed south on Smith.

  

2 hours ago, Montrose1100 said:

Wish they would get rid of the Giant looming flood flights , and update to something shorter and more modern. Nothing ruins the Sabine Street view like the giant power lines and flood lights.

me too, but I've been watching them put in bases on the Gulf Freeway south of downtown for the huge flood lights. it'll be interesting to see if they are updating tech at the same time they are replacing the old lights. so have LED and make them more directional to light only the freeways and not create a lot of light pollution for the surrounding neighborhoods.

that to be said, I don't think they are going to shorter flood lights, maybe they'll at least be more modern.

Edited September 12, 2022 by samagon

[mollusk]

2 hours ago, Montrose1100 said:

Wish they would get rid of the Giant looming flood flights , and update to something shorter and more modern. Nothing ruins the Sabine Street view like the giant power lines and flood lights.

Not to mention the need for blackout curtains nearly a half mile away... and now they want to elevate Katy inside the loop.

Edited September 12, 2022 by mollusk

[editor]

12 hours ago, jdbaker said:

The New York Times piece is trash. This is an example of folks trying to jam ideas into a predetermined narrative with little regard for the facts. In other words, these folks were waiting to write a story about freeways and social justice. The fact that this is an existing, not new, freeway and in reality it will mostly improve access to lower income communities is seemingly of no concern to the NYT. In addition, they fail to mention that most of the residential displacements are Lofts at the Ballpark, Clayton Homes (which floods badly and has been significantly vacant since Harvey), along with a collection of feeder road rental homes that are mostly in terrible condition. If that's not enough, the Federal Uniform Relocation Act will literally puts tens of thousands of dollars into the pockets of displaced low income renters. I saw low income renters on 290 get 30k checks when it was widened. If this were being built as a new freeway through the 3rd ward, the NYT article would make sense. As proposed and as written, it's fiction. 

This response illustrates that you have no idea how newspapers or journalism work. 
 

Protip: Something isn't trash just because you disagree with it. 

[hindesky]

Edited September 16, 2022 by hindesky

[HoustonMidtown]

 

[Luminare]

And so it begins...

[hindesky]

https://www.axios.com/local/houston/2022/09/20/central-houston-txdot-nhhip-cap-park

[HoustonMidtown]

 

[Big E]

20 hours ago, Luminare said:

And so it begins...

Ominous. Did something change?

[Luminare]

17 minutes ago, Big E said:

Ominous. Did something change?

Of course its ominous...I foresee *looks into crystal ball* terrible grindlock traffic for years ahead... haha

[hindesky]

[004n063]

On 9/20/2022 at 5:38 PM, Luminare said:

Of course its ominous...I foresee *looks into crystal ball* terrible grindlock traffic for years ahead... haha

Do you mean to tell me that living in a car-centric city doesn't equate to world-class driving conditions?? How could this be???

[hindesky]

[samagon]

On 9/23/2022 at 5:01 PM, 004n063 said:

Do you mean to tell me that living in a car-centric city doesn't equate to world-class driving conditions?? How could this be???

once this i45 project is done, it will be world class, I promise!

[Texasota]

Narrator: "It will not."

[Ross]

6 hours ago, samagon said:

once this i45 project is done, it will be world class, I promise!

In the meantime, we will all wish we could move to a third world country where the traffic is not nearly as bad. Like Kampala, Uganda, where I saw a travel author video about being in a traffic jam that lasted 24 hours.

[004n063]

1 hour ago, Ross said:

In the meantime, we will all wish we could move to a third world country where the traffic is not nearly as bad. Like Kampala, Uganda, where I saw a travel author video about being in a traffic jam that lasted 24 hours.

Or maybe a place that figured out how to move away from car-centric design? E.g. the Netherlands, where biking, walking, transit, and driving are all world-class.

The solution is and always has been viable alternatives to driving.

[HoustonMidtown]

 

[Houston19514]

4 hours ago, 004n063 said:

Or maybe a place that figured out how to move away from car-centric design? E.g. the Netherlands, where biking, walking, transit, and driving are all world-class.

The solution is and always has been viable alternatives to driving.

We’re working on it (most  of the capacity added by the NHHIP is for transit and HOV and our biking infrastructure is improving by leaps and bounds).   And of course it’s a little easier to deal with traffic when your largest metro is about 1/3 the size of Houston.

[004n063]

7 hours ago, Houston19514 said:

We’re working on it (most  of the capacity added by the NHHIP is for transit and HOV and our biking infrastructure is improving by leaps and bounds).   And of course it’s a little easier to deal with traffic when your largest metro is about 1/3 the size of Houston.

Population size isn't really a factor. It's land use patterns. We sprawly as hell, so cars are a necessity for most people. Because of this, we need wide roads and lots of parking. Which makes us sprawlier. Which necessitates more cars. Which necessitates more wide roads and parking lots. Which makes us sprawlier, which-

[Houston19514]

7 hours ago, 004n063 said:

Population size isn't really a factor. It's land use patterns. We sprawly as hell, so cars are a necessity for most people. Because of this, we need wide roads and lots of parking. Which makes us sprawlier. Which necessitates more cars. Which necessitates more wide roads and parking lots. Which makes us sprawlier, which-

Pretending that population size is not a factor is just silly.  FWIW, the Amsterdam metro area of about 2.5 Million people has a density of about 2,500/square mile.  Houston metro's 7.1 Million population has a density of almost 3,000/square mile.

[004n063]

4 hours ago, Houston19514 said:

Pretending that population size is not a factor is just silly.  FWIW, the Amsterdam metro area of about 2.5 Million people has a density of about 2,500/square mile.  Houston metro's 7.1 Million population has a density of almost 3,000/square mile.

But Amsterdam's metro consists of a central city that's much denser than any part of Houston and then several suburbs that are denser than basically any part of Houston, spread out between large swathes of farmland.

Virtually nobody in Amsterdam lives more than a few hundred feet from a grocery store or transit stop. And nobody there lives more than a few dozen feet from the bicycle infrastructure network. This is only possible because endless tracts of single family detached homes with front, back, and side yards - the majority of the Houston metro area - literally does not exist. If you are suggesting that Amsterdam's sprawl is anywhere close to Houston's, you're delusional.

I say population size does not matter because even a small village can be walkable, and a megacity like Tokyo can be easily navigated via walking, biking, or transit. This is not the case in Houston. Our sprawl and insane modeshare for private vehicles chase each other in a perpetual doom loop.

If we want to solve Houston's traffic problems, we need to invest heavily in both transit and transit-oriented development, or the city's economy needs to collapse. 

[iah77]

2 minutes ago, 004n063 said:

But Amsterdam's metro consists of a central city that's much denser than any part of Houston and then several suburbs that are denser than basically any part of Houston, spread out between large swathes of farmland.

Virtually nobody in Amsterdam lives more than a few hundred feet from a grocery store or transit stop. And nobody there lives more than a few dozen feet from the bicycle infrastructure network. This is only possible because endless tracts of single family detached homes with front, back, and side yards - the majority of the Houston metro area - literally does not exist. If you are suggesting that Amsterdam's sprawl is anywhere close to Houston's, you're delusional.

I say population size does not matter because even a small village can be walkable, and a megacity like Tokyo can be easily navigated via walking, biking, or transit. This is not the case in Houston. Our sprawl and insane modeshare for private vehicles chase each other in a perpetual doom loop.

If we want to solve Houston's traffic problems, we need to invest heavily in both transit and transit-oriented development, or the city's economy needs to collapse. 

I think you need to direct you anger at our ridiculous minimum setbacks and parking requirements. Anything you like about Amsterdam is probably not legal here under our present building codes. Keep in mind even applying for small variances can be very expensive.