I thought they stopped doing this- Houston communities may lose homes due to freeway

[DCReid]

A booming spike in Houston's population is making traffic terrible. To help with this, a massive $9 billion freeway-widening project was put in place to widen 24 miles of interstate. But the project is threatening to disrupt the lives of thousands of people — most of them are from communities of color...

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/ho...ion/ar-AAUduF4

[Trae]

Originally Posted by DCReid

A booming spike in Houston's population is making traffic terrible. To help with this, a massive $9 billion freeway-widening project was put in place to widen 24 miles of interstate. But the project is threatening to disrupt the lives of thousands of people — most of them are from communities of color...

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/ho...ion/ar-AAUduF4

A lot of buzzwords lol. What this article obviously doesn't say is the expansion of this freeway is key to DEMOLISHING an elevated section of the freeway near downtown (or making it an elevated park like Hi-Line in NYC) thus opening it up to neighborhoods to its west. There are going to be a few hundred people displaced yes (not over 1k because not all those structures are occupied) but they will be well compensated and the freeway is literally already there. It's not like they're talking about building a brand new freeway in the middle of the neighborhood.

Now IMO it's on the state to offer more than market value, which completely throws away the generational wealth argument because often times folks wouldn't even be receiving this money if it wasn't for the new development displacing them. I remember when the Katy Freeway was expanded in Houston's affluent west side that a few residents and businesses were displaced then too. This happens all over and I think is okay so long as you are provided adequate compensation (above market value). There's an entire neighborhood near LAX that was emptied out over time to allow the airport to expand and place a rental car facility there. The homeowners were mostly minority but were well compensated.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Trae

A lot of buzzwords lol. What this article obviously doesn't say is the expansion of this freeway is key to DEMOLISHING an elevated section of the freeway near downtown (or making it an elevated park like Hi-Line in NYC) thus opening it up to neighborhoods to its west. There are going to be a few hundred people displaced yes (not over 1k because not all those structures are occupied) but they will be well compensated and the freeway is literally already there. It's not like they're talking about building a brand new freeway in the middle of the neighborhood.

They are being eminent domained for a stupid freeway. It doesn't matter if they are being "well compensated".

[Trae]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

They are being eminent domained for a stupid freeway. It doesn't matter if they are being "well compensated".

The freeway is already there and the expansion of the freeway includes better neighborhood connectivity elsewhere (more parks, trails, demolishing elevated sections). And freeways aren't stupid, are very much needed, and important for regional movement.

So you think things should just stay as they are. Let a wide freeway continue to get more crowded without any improvements done? I'm looking at the bigger picture as far as the region goes and see how the expansion will lead to numerous improvements in other areas that I already mentioned.

[TWAK]

At least in Stockton, they built over the poor neighborhood (Highway 4).

[benp]

Originally Posted by Trae

The freeway is already there and the expansion of the freeway includes better neighborhood connectivity elsewhere (more parks, trails, demolishing elevated sections). And freeways aren't stupid, are very much needed, and important for regional movement.

So you think things should just stay as they are. Let a wide freeway continue to get more crowded without any improvements done? I'm looking at the bigger picture as far as the region goes and see how the expansion will lead to numerous improvements in other areas that I already mentioned.

It will remove the Pierce Elevated portion of I45 in Midtown, but destroy a whole lot of the areas along I10, I45N, and I69(US59) along the north and east sides of downtown just so more cars can theoretically more easily bypass the downtown area when construction is completed. This does not benefit anyone living on the north or east sides of downtown, only the commuters driving through Houston (ie whose destination is not downtown) and parts of Midtown made available for new "development." It essentially combines 3 interstates (already crowded) into a single highway around downtown.

This also means that there will be 5-10 years of construction and congestion added to every single freeway entering downtown.

People who actually live inside the loop don't need a wider road.

[Trae]

Originally Posted by benp

It will remove the Pierce Elevated portion of I45 in Midtown, but destroy a whole lot of the areas along I10, I45N, and I69(US59) along the north and east sides of downtown just so more cars can theoretically more easily bypass the downtown area when construction is completed. This does not benefit anyone living on the north or east sides of downtown, only the commuters driving through Houston (ie whose destination is not downtown) and parts of Midtown made available for new "development." It essentially combines 3 interstates (already crowded) into a single highway around downtown.

This also means that there will be 5-10 years of construction and congestion added to every single freeway entering downtown.

People who actually live inside the loop don't need a wider road.

It's really not that much displacement if you look at a map. We're talking slivers of land already hugging freeways on the periphery of neighborhoods. This for certain benefits people on the north and east sides because there is a good chance they will use this freeway or interchange. I-45 literally goes to the northern suburbs. I forgot to mention the deck park they want to build over the freeway too, which would CONNECT the neighborhood to the other side. Also it's not really putting three freeways into one (something similar to the ATL DT Connector) because they will have dedicated ramps vs all traffic merging together.

Another thing people aren't talking about is the current freeway design. I-45 North has, IIRC, the highest accidents per mile than any other freeway in the country between downtown and BW8. The reason for this is because of freeway design. This expansion is going to make the freeway safer to drive on with wider lanes, better merges, improved sight distance, etc. Of course that's not discussed in the article either.

Edit: I-45N deck park if freeway moves forward:



So basically what this expansion will do is:

1. Remove a few hundred residents, giving them market level (or above) compensation
2. Doing the same for the businesses in the area

But it will also:

1. Improve a poorly designed freeway
2. Add a deck park connecting neighborhoods across a freeway
3. Lead to the demolition of an elevated freeway downtown or turning it into an elevated park like Hi-Line NYC
4. Adding new trails and paths near the freeway through the improvement of neighborhood streets that will cross it

Pros outweigh the cons to me, especially since the freeway is there already.

[Reverberation]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

They are being eminent domained for a stupid freeway. It doesn't matter if they are being "well compensated".

I know the areas pretty well. Much of the area in question along the north freeway outside of the loop is commercial land. The biggest take IMO is an aging public housing project with terrible access that lies in a floodplain and sadly has been flooded several times in the last 20 years. It needs to be rebuilt somewhere higher. I don’t really like the freeway plan, seems like lots of trouble for little benefit. But the article is typical race baiting word salad. No context.

[Busy Bee]

Edit

[iheartthed]

Saw this story on TV this morning. Unbelievable.

[Crawford]

What is that gigantic freeway on the west side of Houston? That has to be the most epic freeway in the U.S.

Texas loves big trucks and big roads.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by Crawford

What is that gigantic freeway on the west side of Houston? That has to be the most epic freeway in the U.S.

Texas loves big trucks and big roads.

WTF do trucks have to do with it? Katy Frwy is a massive corridor connecting the most populated areas of town...west of downtown. Compared to what it replaced, the wider road is far more efficient. I don't know a whole lot about 610 and Independent Heights but that's a fairly busy route as well as it connects 10, 290, 45 and heads into Uptown. It's always stopped up.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by JManc

WTF do trucks have to do with it?

Bigger vehicles require more space. The U.S. has gigantic lanes and everything overengineered. TX takes it up a level with enormous freeways with huge parallel retail arterials. And most places stopped building freeways decades ago; it appears TX never stopped.

Originally Posted by JManc

Katy Frwy is a massive corridor connecting the most populated areas of town...west of downtown. Compared to what it replaced, the wider road is far more efficient.

Yeah, a 30 lane freeway is more "efficient" than a six lane freeway, but is horrible planning. Efficiency shouldn't drive public policy.

[Trae]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Bigger vehicles require more space. The U.S. has gigantic lanes and everything overengineered. TX takes it up a level with enormous freeways with huge parallel retail arterials. And most places stopped building freeways decades ago; it appears TX never stopped.

Which places, especially fast growing ones like Texas, stopped building freeways, and are you not including tollways when you say this? Also do you realize 45N has been where it's at since the 50s? Not exactly a new freeway.

Yeah, a 30 lane freeway is more "efficient" than a six lane freeway, but is horrible planning. Efficiency shouldn't drive public policy.

It's not 30 lanes. At it's widest it is 14, including the tollway in the middle, and this is just for a short segment at an interchange with another freeway.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Bigger vehicles require more space. The U.S. has gigantic lanes and everything overengineered. TX takes it up a level with enormous freeways with huge parallel retail arterials. And most places stopped building freeways decades ago; it appears TX never stopped.

Yeah, a 30 lane freeway is more "efficient" than a six lane freeway, but is horrible planning. Efficiency shouldn't drive public policy.

You never been to Texas have you? Should we halt all freeway (re)construction and just hope Houstonians eventually warm up to mass transit or are you going to invest where the demand is right now and in the near future?

And no, bigger vehicles doesn't mean bigger freeways. lol We could all be driving Honda Fits and the expansions would still be necessary. Texas cities are growing fast and decades old infrastructure meant for areas a fraction of their sizes are maxed out. See Austin.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by JManc

You never been to Texas have you? Should we halt all freeway (re)construction and just hope Houstonians eventually warm up to mass transit or are you going to invest where the demand is right now and in the near future?

And no, bigger vehicles doesn't mean bigger freeways. lol We could all be driving Honda Fits and the expansions would still be necessary. Texas cities are growing fast and decades old infrastructure meant for areas a fraction of their sizes are maxed out. See Austin.

What are we arguing here? You think freeway expansion in urban neighborhoods is good, I think it's bad.

There's no debate that larger vehicles require more road space. The U.S. has overengineered roads because it has huge vehicles, and TX is an extreme example of both American trends. Big vehicles, big roads.

[mhays]

Originally Posted by JManc

You never been to Texas have you? Should we halt all freeway (re)construction and just hope Houstonians eventually warm up to mass transit or are you going to invest where the demand is right now and in the near future?

And no, bigger vehicles doesn't mean bigger freeways. lol We could all be driving Honda Fits and the expansions would still be necessary. Texas cities are growing fast and decades old infrastructure meant for areas a fraction of their sizes are maxed out. See Austin.

What an odd mindset on an urbanist forum.

None of that means freeways should be expanded. Maybe Houston can gradually adopt less-pathetic mode splits and shorter trips if it stops expanding the system. It can also shift the same money toward other modes.

Or there's a middle ground: Build more lanes but make them all bus/HOV.

Saying it won't isn't the same as saying it shouldn't.

This isn't theoretical. Lots of fast-growing car-dominant places do little if anything to add highway capacity.

[Crawford]

It will also massively expand the freeway, which is pretty much the last thing you want to do from an urbanist perspective. "The freeway was already there, so let's take out more cityscape for more lanes" doesn't make much sense.

[Trae]

Originally Posted by Crawford

It will also massively expand the freeway, which is pretty much the last thing you want to do from an urbanist perspective. "The freeway was already there, so let's take out more cityscape for more lanes" doesn't make much sense.

But what you're saying isn't true. First of all, what urbanity are you going to get on this freeway now, and how is expanding it going to change that? The light rail line is already several blocks away from the freeway so the expansion won't affect the rail at all. Wouldn't the "urbanist perspective" prefer mixed-use development be built along the light rail line vs near a freeway?

So you say they are taking out cityscape, but how much more are they going to add to the city. Wouldn't a brand new deck park connecting a once divided neighborhood and a brand new linear park downtown be more beneficial to the cityscape and used by more people? Will drivers feel safer using 45N to get to Houston's main airport with a more updated/safely designed freeway versus the skinny lane clusterfuck currently there now?

I think too often folks get tunnel vision anytime freeway expansion comes up. They aren't all the same and freeway expansion isn't the only "progress" that has displaced people (I mentioned the LAX example earlier).

[benp]

Well, all I can say is as former resident who lived along Montrose, I can see nothing good coming from this redesign for people who live inside the loop.