11th Street Bike Lanes

[Ross]

3 hours ago, Triton said:

I feel anytime I post in the Transportation forum, people are constantly using the sad emoji so I'm sorry to make this post as well... 

It is now widely known that for all new bike infrastructure or road makeover projects, every single one of them are on hold and being reassessed if they are not already under construction, from the mayor's office directly. 

The rumor mill is now saying that this project will likely be re-evaluated in the near future. There are too many residents in the area saying there is considerable traffic using W 8th (fewer on 10th) streets and that the traffic backups on 11th street aren't justifying the minimal bike lane usage. 

Let me reiterate, this is just a rumor at this point.

That's the folks who forget that the 11th street project was not about bike lanes, that was just an extra bit that came about during the design phase.

[j_cuevas713]

The city council meeting has been good. I think modifications will be made but overall things seem to be headed in the right direction. There is lots of support for both 11th and Houston Ave. 

[j.33]

New Youtube video posted. Over 10+ minutes of interviews from Heights residents and 11th Street business owners. Worth the watch and share it with people who you know are in the heights :) 

[004n063]

Very last-minute notice, but there's a rally ride today at 10AM, starting at Regions bank. I think daily rallies might be needed. I'll head up there tomorrow as well, and every evening this coming week. Feel free to join.

[j_cuevas713]

On 3/2/2024 at 9:34 AM, 004n063 said:

Very last-minute notice, but there's a rally ride today at 10AM, starting at Regions bank. I think daily rallies might be needed. I'll head up there tomorrow as well, and every evening this coming week. Feel free to join.

Were you there? I was taking pictures

[004n063]

2 hours ago, j_cuevas713 said:

Were you there? I was taking pictures

Yep, I was the chubby guy on the blue All City.

[s3mh]

I live a few blocks away from 11th street on the west side of Heights Blvd.  I walk, run, bike and drive around this area all the time and have been doing so since I moved into the neighborhood 15 years ago.  There has been no noticeable change in cut through traffic as a result of the changes on 11th street.  If you take W 8th instead of 11th, you are not saving any time as you hit multiple stop signs and have to weave back over to Shep.  There has always been more traffic W 8th versus W9 or 10 because there is a school and church on that street and a lot more traffic coming through MKT.  There is also a busy daycare on Rutland.  But the lion share goes to MKT.  

 

[sapo2367]

16 hours ago, s3mh said:

I live a few blocks away from 11th street on the west side of Heights Blvd.  I walk, run, bike and drive around this area all the time and have been doing so since I moved into the neighborhood 15 years ago.  There has been no noticeable change in cut through traffic as a result of the changes on 11th street.  If you take W 8th instead of 11th, you are not saving any time as you hit multiple stop signs and have to weave back over to Shep.  There has always been more traffic W 8th versus W9 or 10 because there is a school and church on that street and a lot more traffic coming through MKT.  There is also a busy daycare on Rutland.  But the lion share goes to MKT.  

 

I'll second this, the school, daycare and MKT all draw a lot of traffic to 8th street -- nothing to do with the 11th street re-do.

[JLWM8609]

Uh oh 

https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/11th-street-whitmire-19013536.php

 

[Triton]

On 2/3/2024 at 1:17 PM, Triton said:

I feel anytime I post in the Transportation forum, people are constantly using the sad emoji so I'm sorry to make this post as well... 

It is now widely known that for all new bike infrastructure or road makeover projects, every single one of them are on hold and being reassessed if they are not already under construction, from the mayor's office directly. 

The rumor mill is now saying that this project will likely be re-evaluated in the near future. There are too many residents in the area saying there is considerable traffic using W 8th (fewer on 10th) streets and that the minimal bike lane usage isn't justifying the traffic backups on 11th. (<--- edit: had this backwards)

Let me reiterate, this is just a rumor at this point.

3 hours ago, JLWM8609 said:

Uh oh 

https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/transportation/article/11th-street-whitmire-19013536.php

 

So if it's not obvious already how I am getting this info... word travels fast with those in the know, "those in the know" being people connected to the Superneighborhood committees. When the mayor was saying he's going to dismantle the medians on Houston Ave, it was quite widely known within his own office and, shortly after, "those in the know". 

So, while the Houston Ave decision was clear cut, "those in the know" are saying the mayor has not indicated within his office what he plans to do on the 11th street lanes.

That being said, this project came up in the rumor mill very very early. I think betting markets would favor him removing these bikes lanes. I know that people keep posting in this forum that there isn't any noticeable traffic impact but that's not at all what people are saying that attend the Superneighborhood meetings. I seriously encourage people to attend.... And I imagine the final press release when the mayor announces he'll be removing these bike lanes will mimic some of the wording the representatives keep hearing...

That the lack of bike lane usage does not justify the long queue of cars between Shepherd and Heights Blvd and that traffic is funneling into nearby roads (whether it's MKT or not, that's up to a study to find out).

I personally love all the bike lanes we've added around Houston. It's now so much easier for me to go from the Heights to the Rice area than it ever has been. What worries me here is that if they do remove the 11th street bike lanes, that they do something at the bike crossing at Nicholson St. We will need a light there similar to the one on Yale. 

[hbg.50]

The city's plan of attack is fairly obvious...

"The mayor has been very open about his concerns with the 11th Street project. What started out as a request for a safe crossing at Nicholson and 11th Street ended up a bike lane project that makes it difficult for emergency apparatus to maneuver and has negatively impacted a business. He is reviewing this along with other projects," said spokesperson Mary Benton.

There is no mention of traffic.  

I've been critical of this project because it looks like a perpetual construction zone.   Having said that, I support improved walkabity in the city.  If the bike lanes are removed I hope a light is added at the Nicholson intersection.  I would also advocate for more pedestrian islands.  It would be a mistake to revert this road to 4 lanes.  At worst I would add a turn lane similar to Studewood, even though Studewood itself could use a few more pedestrian islands, especially near White Oak.

I wonder which "business" was negatively impacted?   My guess is the Chicken Shack, but who knows...

[Triton]

13 minutes ago, steve1363 said:

It would be a mistake to revert this road to 4 lanes.

I think that's exactly what they would do... just look at what they did with Houston Ave...

Quote

I wonder which "business" was negatively impacted?

Trinity Lutheran Church. Their drivers were inconvenienced with a 5 min delay on 11th St. We must get these masses to Jesus as quickly as possible.

 

(just kidding)

[j_cuevas713]

With the way Whitmire handled Houston Avenue, I'm sold on the idea that these will be removed with no plan for the future. I have yet to hear anything about a "new design" for a crossing at Houston Ave. When Shepherd/Durham are finished in the next few years there will be no east/west connection for cyclists. I've heard rumblings that Phase 2 for Shepherd/Durham are being threatened. It was also confirmed by PW's yesterday that all bike lane projects are paused and that a handful of projects might get canned. That includes Quitman which ironically will have a groundbreaking next Tuesday. Sawyer/Edwards should already be under construction as well. Gulfton is getting $43 million in federal dollars to rebuild that entire neighborhood. I wonder how the feds will view Houston if Whitmire completely dismantles 11th Street and considers removing the lanes on Hillcroft after receiving that federal grant. Blodgett is also under threat. Shabazz has been vocal on using Prop A to bring that issue to the table soon. Things seems to be unraveling for Houston becoming a gold level bike city. This administration is hellbent on undoing anything the previous administration did regardless if there is support. 

Edited March 15 by j_cuevas713

[hindesky]

John Chaad* Whitmire.

*Conservative hiding as a democrat

[Ross]

3 hours ago, steve1363 said:

The city's plan of attack is fairly obvious...

"The mayor has been very open about his concerns with the 11th Street project. What started out as a request for a safe crossing at Nicholson and 11th Street ended up a bike lane project that makes it difficult for emergency apparatus to maneuver and has negatively impacted a business. He is reviewing this along with other projects," said spokesperson Mary Benton.

There is no mention of traffic.  

I've been critical of this project because it looks like a perpetual construction zone.   Having said that, I support improved walkabity in the city.  If the bike lanes are removed I hope a light is added at the Nicholson intersection.  I would also advocate for more pedestrian islands.  It would be a mistake to revert this road to 4 lanes.  At worst I would add a turn lane similar to Studewood, even though Studewood itself could use a few more pedestrian islands, especially near White Oak.

I wonder which "business" was negatively impacted?   My guess is the Chicken Shack, but who knows...

Turner's minions consistently said that TxDoT rules do not allow for a light at Nicholson. If they revert 11th Street, I am going to demand a stop sign at every cross street. There is nothing wrong with the current setup, and emergency vehicles have no issues.

SJL would have been worse in most ways, but I am super annoyed with Whitmire over traffic and giving away $650 million to the firefighters, who I would have told to leave if they don't like their pay. What next, close the libraries and parks to fund public safety?

 

[j_cuevas713]

22 minutes ago, Ross said:

Turner's minions consistently said that TxDoT rules do not allow for a light at Nicholson. If they revert 11th Street, I am going to demand a stop sign at every cross street. There is nothing wrong with the current setup, and emergency vehicles have no issues.

SJL would have been worse in most ways, but I am super annoyed with Whitmire over traffic and giving away $650 million to the firefighters, who I would have told to leave if they don't like their pay. What next, close the libraries and parks to fund public safety?

 

Agree. I'm all for supporting our first responders but $650 million!? And he has yet to detail how we're going to make that happen.

[004n063]

I'm not going to pretend that the 11th street lanes were as badly needed as, say, the Austin or Lamar lanes downtown, in terms of providing bicycle access to previously inaccessible areas.

I also don't think that the Shepherd/Durham lanes do all that much of that.

If it were just about bicycle access, then the optimal solution would have been to dedicate some streets - say some combination of 10th, 13th, 15th, 18th, 22nd, and 26th for E-W, and Nicholson, Rutland, Harvard, Arlington, and Micheaux for N-S - as traffic-calmed streets: narrowing, modal filters, chicanes, mini-roundabouts, textured pavers, planters, and crossing treatments (à la Nicholson@11th) for difficult intersections. This is essentially the Dutch concept of ontvlechten, or "disentangling" (different routes for different modes), and when done right it does a lot for bike utility, with a much lower per-mile cost than through-running infrastructure.

That said, neither of these projects (11th or Shepherd/Durham) was or is about bicycle access. These were stroads, and bad ones at that. They were dangerous, ugly, and generally hostile to anyone outside of a car, and they weren't particularly safe for drivers either. The purpose of the projects was to reduce the danger of the streets. That means lower speeds.

The improvement projects won't turn them into perfectly safe neighborhood streets, nor was there ever a real chance of turning any of them into highly efficient (and safe) roads, due to the amount of commercial development along all of them. But because both of them do have a lot of commercial (and, increasingly, residential) development, the move toward streetification makes sense. They need to be safer. 

Fast moving car traffic on a two-lane highway with miles between exits can be pretty safe. Fast moving car traffic on a street with many commercial driveways and intersections cannot.

Unfortunately, TXDoT does not really permit the kinds of redesigns that can truly slow traffic, so when that is the goal - as it was for these projects - the best option we have is congestion.

[JLWM8609]

11 hours ago, j_cuevas713 said:

Agree. I'm all for supporting our first responders but $650 million!? And he has yet to detail how we're going to make that happen.

Likely with layoffs and reductions in city services

[hbg.50]

1 hour ago, 004n063 said:

Unfortunately, TXDoT does not really permit the kinds of redesigns that can truly slow traffic, so when that is the goal - as it was for these projects - the best option we have is congestion.

You'd better come up with a better selling point than this!

[004n063]

5 hours ago, steve1363 said:

You'd better come up with a better selling point than this!

If we as a city cannot understand the concept of fast cars being bad in certain contexts (e.g. busy neighborhood main streets), then we deserve our doom.

[Triton]

6 hours ago, steve1363 said:

You'd better come up with a better selling point than this!

Seriously.

I think trying to convince the mayor that we had to create congestion in order to slow down the vehicles is a loosing argument. That's a guarantee to them pulling the bike lanes. 

No matter what Whitmire ends up doing, especially with this being the Heights, he has to put in pedestrian safety as a high priority. This is a very walkable area and allowing vehicles going 40mph down this road again is a nonstarter.

[Ross]

3 hours ago, Triton said:

Seriously.

I think trying to convince the mayor that we had to create congestion in order to slow down the vehicles is a loosing argument. That's a guarantee to them pulling the bike lanes. 

No matter what Whitmire ends up doing, especially with this being the Heights, he has to put in pedestrian safety as a high priority. This is a very walkable area and allowing vehicles going 40mph down this road again is a nonstarter.

Not according to the folks on Nextdoor, who seem to be horrified and mad that they cannot drive 40mph or more on 11th. My response to many  of them is they need to move to Katy, where the roads are wide and the speeds are high.

[samagon]

11 hours ago, steve1363 said:

You'd better come up with a better selling point than this!

the real selling point is safety.

a driver going 30, or 35, instead of 40, or 45 is far less likely to cause serious injury, or fatality in an accident. and with the slower speed, may even be able to avoid the accident all together. considering 30, or 35 is the speed limit anyway.

in a world where cars are getting substantially larger and heavier, slower is safer.

Edited March 16 by samagon

[hbg.50]

@Triton you seem well-connected to influential people!  Can you suggest these pedestrian crossings on 11th?  And also on Studewood at 8th and Studewood at 6 1/2 where the road goes from 3 to 5 lanes?

Thanks!

[Triton]

3 hours ago, steve1363 said:

@Triton you seem well-connected to influential people!  Can you suggest these pedestrian crossings on 11th?  And also on Studewood at 8th and Studewood at 6 1/2 where the road goes from 3 to 5 lanes?

Thanks!

I think incorporating islands is a great idea. But you have to remember, we also did a road diet on Studemont. During peak hours, the middle lane would switch between north bound, south bound, and then a neutral turning lane during off-peak hours. They then limited the middle lane to only being a turning lane and installed the islands. 

With this mayor, I doubt he would find a way to install islands in the middle of 11th street while also bringing back 4 lanes of traffic. 

And I wouldn't say I'm too connected. lol My neighborhood and general area have gone through quite a lot the past several years and once you start attending Superneighborhood meetings, it just comes naturally that you'll meet people that know what's going on... even in the mayor's office. Our area was sort of forced to become politically active, whether we wanted to or not.

[hbg.50]

1 hour ago, Triton said:

With this mayor, I doubt he would find a way to install islands in the middle of 11th street while also bringing back 4 lanes of traffic. 

We don't really know what Whitmire is going to do.  I know he comes off as a sour puss but if he's truly only concerned with public safety vehicles then he might listen to an argument for 3 lanes a la Studewood.  The big issue on 11th is no left turns and those oversized concrete barriers. 

I had forgotten Studewood once had those weird bidirectional lanes!  Also I recall the uproar when the islands were first installed.   I don't know if changes were made but the islands are much more aesthetically pleasing now than they were when initially installed.

[mollusk]

People eventually get used to the islands.  The middle of the street signs on White Oak at Michaux seem to last longer without getting run over lately.  🥷

[s3mh]

I have no direct knowledge of anyone's political leanings, but my "walks like a duck" instinct tell me that there are a good number of 11th street opponents who are coming at this not from any genuine concern about traffic and public safety, but are acting on right wing conspiracy theories over 15 minute cities and project zero.  The right wing conspiracy theory is that projects that are intended to make communities more bike and pedestrian friendly are just the beginning of extensive government control over people's movements to the point of a China-like society with CCTV monitoring of everyone and social credit scores.  Ultimately, the conspiracy theory is that 15 minute cities are just the beginning of a plan to imprison people.  This conspiracy theory has gone as far as spawning waves of tik toks and social media posts where people claim that the Texas panhandle fires were the result of Amarillo, Texas adopting a "comprehensive plan", which they believe is code for 15 minute cities planning and eventually having George Soros imprison everyone.

Of course, that is the far right extreme.  Most opponents of 11ht street who are on the right are just coming at this from the usual culture war perspective of any effort to promote biking and pedestrian access being a misguided leftist way of saving the environment by unnecessarily burdening people driving their F250s to their office downtown (if they can fit in the garage). 

This just becomes even more apparent when you look at the arguments being made.  There are basically three main talking points.  Traffic on 11th street is now bad.  Emergency vehicles can't get through.  Traffic is spilling over to neighborhood streets.  These are familiar arguments because they have been advanced by people who are concerned about the lack of zoning and overdevelopment that hurts the existing residential neighborhoods.  The right wing response to that has always been "tough sh#t."  If you do not want traffic, move to the burbs.  Many neighborhoods have complained about people parking on their narrow streets for near by commercial development that then makes it hard for emergency vehicles to get through.  And the city does nothing about it.  

But now that those externalities are the result of a project that benefits pedestrians and cyclists (and not private profits), suddenly those impacts are a burden that no one should bear and the improvements cannot be ripped out soon enough.  

Point is that everyone in the Heights has been taking one for the team with increased traffic, on street parking spillover from commercial development and issue with emergency vehicle access (which is probably the least of the problems for 11th street as 14th st is also an emergency corridor) in order to build more apartments and retail development, etc. in the neighborhood.  If you are going to through a fit over those externalities, then you cannot also wag your finger at everyone else and squawk "Houston has no zoning" when those issues are raised about private development.  

 

 

 

[samagon]

@s3mh a lot of people have a lot of wild opinions on where life is headed, and what we are doing.

as a liberal myself (and don't mistake me, I'm not a democrat calling myself part of the liberal party), like, a true liberal (you can look up the word if you need to), I am very willing to accept and respect the opinion and behavior of people with whom I personally disagree with. I don't like the idea of calling people names (conspiracy theorists, right wing nut jobs, whatever), but hey, I still respect your opinion and beliefs about those people, and I accept you calling them names, even if I don't think it's the best way to be.

can we get back to focusing on what's important, which is that the point of these things is improved safety.

[s3mh]

Just now, samagon said:

@s3mh a lot of people have a lot of wild opinions on where life is headed, and what we are doing.

as a liberal myself (and don't mistake me, I'm not a democrat calling myself part of the liberal party), like, a true liberal (you can look up the word if you need to), I am very willing to accept and respect the opinion and behavior of people with whom I personally disagree with. I don't like the idea of calling people names (conspiracy theorists, right wing nut jobs, whatever), but hey, I still respect your opinion and beliefs about those people, and I accept you calling them names, even if I don't think it's the best way to be.

can we get back to focusing on what's important, which is that the point of these things is improved safety.

I am calling these people out because they are not coming at this in good faith and with public safety in mind.  They are motivated by right wing social media, podcasts, websites, etc. and target the soft underbellies of local politics so they can feel empowered and like they got a win.  Very little difference between the people going after bike lanes motivated on conspiracy theories about 15 minute cities and those infiltrating school boards to ban books based on a Victorian era standard of decency.  People need to know where these people are coming from and that they can be highly organized and very determined so we don't sit on our hands and just think that these issues will work themselves out for the best.