Quick, Dirty and Nasty: http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/9541/ohyeahhg4.jpg

Note that this also requires a lot less ROW acquisition than the “urban planner’s wet dream” version above. Simplicity is Divine.

There would have to be some takings in order to make Peden work, and there are a few blocks along Peden where that would probably be pretty controversial.

It’s important to consider the overall value to the city as a whole of such improvements, though. Peden is a street in transition, much of it is the back of commercial properties already, and some portions are vacant or quite dilapidated. Other structures along the route are well maintained older properties and new development. It’s a hodge-podge.

While the traffic volume on Peden would be more with my proposal than it is today, it would still only be two lanes of traffic. The opportunity with a one-way street is to design it such that traffic flows very smoothly but at relatively low speeds, 25 MPH or so.

As Gray St. exists today the speed limit is 30. However, the lack of a turn lane, the number of driveways along the street, areas where parking is allowed in the right lane, and the complexity of major intersections (like Gray/Montrose) all contribute to make the average speed of travel on West Gray much lower, probably closer to 18-20 miles per hour.

A one way pair doesn’t need turning lanes, and it creates much simpler intersections with fewer light cycles required. If you pair that with other improvements like driveway consolidation and signal timing (which are logical to include in any major re-build of a street), you could make the flow of traffic very smooth and calm.

Therefore, after these kind of improvements, Peden would not be a bad street to live on.

However, if these kinds of programs become reality, there will be people who are upset that the character of their street has changed. One possible strategy to help these people is to use a city EDC to provide relocation assistance to property owners who wanted it. The EDC could then consolidate lots when possible, and in general could make a small amount of revenue for the city by selling these properties after reconstruction of the street is complete.

Anyway….just a thought. I love the idea of expanding transit and pedestrian neighborhoods in Houston. One of the city’s biggest weaknesses in my mind.

In addition, one of the problems you seek to address, low speeds on West Gray, is at odds with one of your goals, a more pedestrian-friendly area. Walkable areas typically have lower speeds so that traffic is not intimidating to pedestrians.

Anyhow, back to streetcars: I think they might best be put in the curb lanes on West Gray, which would remain more or less in its present configuration. Though this likely wouldn’t improve traffic or parking conditions, it at least wouldn’t make them much worse. Streetscape improvements would do a lot to spruce up the area and you would save the cost of wholesale reconstruction of Peden and Oneil, the latter of which is far too narrow to handle what you suggest.

This is a good discussion to have and I certainly applaud your thought and effort.

The area is about a 1/4 mile in diameter, roughly 13 city blocks in size. For 13 blocks, 3 parking garages (as the ONLY off-street parking) doesn’t seem excessive to me. All the garages are in wrap-around buildings, even the one in the NW corner has a retail ground floor. Also, all of these buildings are represented as 3 or 4 story structures. At the end of the day, that much residential and commercial space would require a lot of parking, more than is on the ground right now, and shared garages are the best solution for that if your primary concern is creating as much human space as you can.

Also, the streetscape would be a pretty inviting, even quasi-green space as compared to what it is now. You’re talking about a change from this:
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=29.753184,-95.400864&spn=0,359.994335&z=19&layer=c&cbll=29.753199,-95.400054&panoid=W2uO0PJMunk58DoDL4Etqg&cbp=12,93.64056303567794,,0,9.784331033839981

To this:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/14577687@N07/1487363345/

As far as green space goes, if it doesn’t look like this in the diagram then I apologize for the poor illustration, but the size of the park and plaza together is greater than the previous park and ‘front lawn’ from the multi-service center. The perspective rendering isn’t showing the total green space, only the new ‘square’ and the buildings surrounding it. Also, the residential buildings would have courtyards which I imagine would be largely green space (like this: http://www.landscapeonline.com/research/lsmp/2007/11/img/greenstar/greenstar-18.jpg). Some might be private, but some might be open as well. I’ve changed these areas to green on this drawing:
http://neohouston.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/labeledplan2.png

So, if I’ve somehow illustrated the idea poorly, I’m sorry. For what it’s worth, my philosophy for design is always to protect what park space exists and add to it whenever possible. The only possible concession to this is if a marginal decrease in the quantity of green space results in a better quality green space and a much more sustainable neighborhood surrounding. In this case, you are losing the open space in front of the multi-service center, but you’re gaining a much better neighborhood, a new ‘town square’ of sorts across the street, and a nicer, bigger park immediately southeast of the site. That’s what I’d envision, anyway, even if it’s not clear in the drawing.

Thanks for your feedback, David, it’s much appreciated!

The diagram shown adds to and improves the existing park southeast of the multi-service center, and creates a new park where there’s currently only surface parking in the redeveloped River Oaks center.

The reason to double up on Gray and Peden is there isn’t enough ROW for any kind of serious improvement to Gray, but if you pair them you can create a more efficient traffic pattern and add transit and pedestrian improvements without needing tremendous additional ROW.

More ROW would be needed on Peden, certainly, but if the street is designed right it would not cost buildings, only parking spaces and a few feet of of some front yards. It’s not perfect, but its a lot better than tearing out an entire row of buildings to make Gray wide enough on its own.