CORNELL 
 
 UNIVERSITY 
 LIBRARY 
 
 FINE ARTS LIBRARY 
 
HAJCI^ STI^EET 
 
 PiAN 
 
 Cornell University Library 
 NAC 2174 .H84A18 
 
 The major street plan for Houston and vi 
 
 HOUSTON 
 
 AND VICINITY 
 
 1942 
 
Pi Cornell University 
 S Library 
 
 The original of this book is in 
 the Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924024404612 
 
THE MAJOR STREET PLAN 
 
 for 
 
 HOUSTON AND VICINITY 
 
 1942 
 
 REPORT 
 
 of the 
 
 CITY PLANNING COMMISSION 
 
 HOUSTON, TEXAS 
 
 MEMBERS 
 
 Jesse Andrews, Chairman 
 Mrs. Ethel Brosius Milton McGinty 
 
 Lewis Cutrer J. G. Turney 
 
 Rev. T.C. Jester M.E.Walter 
 
 TECHNICAL STAFF 
 
 Ralph S. Ellifrit Hare & Hare 
 
 City Planning Engineer City Planning Consultants 
 

 FORMER MEMBERS OF THE 
 CITY PLANNING COMMISSION 
 HAVING A PART IN THIS PLAN 
 
 James Anderson J. M. Nagle 
 
 J. S. Bracewell M. L. Rendleman 
 
 Mrs. E. F. Bussard Royal Roussel 
 
 Sewall Myer }. M. West, Sr. 
 
 l^ 
 
 <{)/ 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
 
 Page 
 
 IMPORTANCE OF THE PLAN 1 
 
 HISTORY OF THE PLAN 2 
 
 APPLICATION OF THE PLAN. 3 
 
 STRUCTURE OF THE PLAN 4 
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF THE PLAN 7 
 
 RECOMMENDED PROJECTS 9 
 
 LIST OF MAPS 
 
 opposite Page 
 
 MAJOR STREET PLAN Against Inside Back Cover 
 
 TYPICAL RADIAL THOROUGHFARES 4 
 
 TYPICAL LOOP OR BY-PASS THOROUGHFARES 6 
 
 TYPICAL CROSSTOWN THOROUGHFARES 8 
 
 RECOMENDATIONS FOR RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION. . . 12 
 
PREFACE 
 
 This report is not intended as a technical treatise of the Major 
 Street Plan. It has been prepared as a simple exposition for the 
 purpose of informing the citizens of Houston as to the Major 
 Street Plan and arousing their interest in not only the plan but 
 also in its development. For this reason the report has been 
 kept brief and free from many of the usual charts, graphs, and 
 from the technical language which often comprise a large part 
 of the average report on this type of subject. 
 
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL 
 TO COUNCIL 
 
 November 27, 1942. 
 
 Honorable C. A. Pickett, Mayor 
 Commissioner Frank Brady 
 Commissioner M. L. Rendleman 
 Commissioner Ben J. Reinicke 
 Commissioner James H. B. House 
 
 Gentlemen: 
 
 Pursuant to the ordinance, passed February 14, 1940, creating Houston 
 City Planning Commission, the Commission has prepared and adopted a 
 Major Street Plan for Houston and vicinity and, as directed by the ordinance 
 referred to, begs leave to transmit to you with this an attested copy. 
 
 It is hoped that this Plan, as its name implies, will constitute the frame- 
 work for future planning so far as street improvements, traffic ways and the 
 location of parks and public buildings are concerned. 
 
 During the course of the preparation of the Plan it has been necessary on 
 more than one occasion for the Commission to invoke the aid of the Mayor 
 and City Council to accomplish some of the essential objectives, as for 
 example, the approval by the Mayor and City Council of a program of 
 expenditure of the $600,000 bond proceeds voted for street widening pur- 
 poses. On each such occasion the response of the Mayor and City Council 
 was prompt and most satisfactory. For the valuable assistance rendered the 
 Commission acknowledges its obligation. 
 
 Respectfully submitted, 
 
 CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF HOUSTON, TEXAS. 
 
 Jesse Andrews, Chairman 
 Mrs. Ethel Brosius 
 Lewis Cutrer 
 Rev. T. C. Jester 
 Milton McGinty 
 J. G. Turney 
 M. E. Walter 
 
IMPORTANCE OF THE PLAN 
 
 AS A GUIDE 
 
 The Major Street Plan of a city has often been compared to the arterial 
 system of the human body and, although trite, there could scarcely be a more 
 apt comparison. The importance of a logical long-range plan in accordance 
 with which a city may grow cannot be sufficiently stressed. 
 
 TO SAFEGUARD THE FUTURE 
 
 We have only to observe the plight of some larger, older cities, due in 
 large part to inadequacy of major thoroughfares with resulting congestion, 
 to picture our future, if we fail to recognize and follow a planned system 
 of growth. As a city expands around its periphery, the load on its central 
 thoroughfares doubles and redoubles. If thoroughfares Have been planned 
 only to meet needs at the time of original development, they soon become 
 congested and inefficient, and in this condition operate to prevent many 
 persons from patronizing the central business district. At this stage decen- 
 tralization sets in, and the financial structure of the city gradually begins 
 to suffer. This condition usually brings forth feverish effort to correct the 
 deficiency, but thoroughfare improvements are by this time almost pro- 
 hibitive in cost, and weak compromise measures are usually then adopted 
 at great expense. 
 
 TO PREVENT RECURRENCE OF PAST ERRORS 
 
 Early in its life Houston was reasonably planned. Today our principal 
 thoroughfare problems begin where these first plans ended. Dead-end 
 streets, jogs, offsets, and narrow rights of way in many parts of Houston 
 give evidence of what has happened in the past and what will happen in the 
 future unless there shall be adherence to a plan for the general framework — 
 a Major Street Plan. 
 
 TOWARD A GREATER CITY 
 
 We have but to study some of the cities that have been well planned and 
 developed according to such plan to recognize the substantial benefits that 
 may be derived. Washington, D. C, is perhaps our foremost example. This 
 city, planned from the beginning by Major L'Enfante, repays with its con- 
 venience of arrangement and orderliness the forethought and perseverance 
 expended. The reputation of any city is measured to a very large extent by 
 its planning, as reflected in spacious thoroughfares, relative absence of 
 congestion, and ease of access from one part of the city to another. 
 
 1 
 
HISTORY OF THE PLAN 
 
 FIRST PLAN— 1836 
 
 The first development of Houston in 1836 was based on a street plan. 
 When the Allen brothers purchased the original site for the city, they did 
 not undertake a piecemeal job, but laid out a simple plan with streets of 
 adequate width. Insofar as the original plan was developed and extended, 
 all went well, but adjacent subdivisions soon began to develop with streets 
 having narrow rights of way, offsets, and dead ends. 
 
 SECOND PLAN— 1913 
 
 However, it was not until 1913 that the first comprehensive Major Street 
 Plan was developed in connection with a general City Planning Report. At 
 that time, when Houston had a population of only 80,000, Arthur Comey, 
 City Planner, was brought from Boston to make plans for Houston's future 
 development. While there is no record of consistent efforts to carry out this 
 plan, it was, no doubt, of real and beneficial influence. 
 
 THIRD PLAN— 1929 
 
 It was not until 1924 that interest was again focused on the need of 
 guiding Houston's then rapid growth. During the following five years 
 exhaustive study was made of Houston's past and future development, on 
 the basis of which a Major Street Plan was again prepared and published 
 as a part of the comprehensive "Report of the City Planning Commission" 
 in 1929. 
 
 PRESENT PLAN— 1942 
 
 The trying period following the publication of the Major Street Plan in 
 1929 and especially the lack of a City Planning Commission with a definite 
 Planning Department during the following six years combined to obscure 
 planning and the development of a major street system. Houston continued 
 to grow so rapidly that in 1940, when the Planning Commission began 
 reviewing the 1929 Major Street Plan, it was found that certain thorough- 
 fare locations previously contemplated were then impracticable, due to the 
 subsequent construction of buildings and to other obstructing developments. 
 As a result of nearly three years of restudy and reconsideration, the Major 
 Street Plan has been redeveloped to meet conditions as they exist today and 
 is presented in this report. 
 
APPLICATION OF THE PLAN 
 
 There are several different specific uses of a Major Street Plan which 
 make it indispensable. It serves as a partial guide for many phases of plan- 
 ning such as zoning, transit, recreation, and subdivision control. 
 
 GUIDE FOR NEW SUBDIVISIONS 
 
 While the major thoroughfare pattern is of great importance in the exist- 
 ing developed portions of a city, its greatest importance is, no doubt, in 
 connection with expansion of the city outward through the developihent of 
 new subdivisions. The individual subdivider, with the best of public- 
 spirited intentions, may make a plat that is, introspectively considered, a 
 well designed unit. However, an accumulation of individually considered 
 subdivisions, laid out without regard to circulation through the city as a 
 whole, is very apt to cause congestion and inefficiency in later years with 
 attendant devaluation of properties, to impair further expansion, and to 
 promote decentralization of business. 
 
 If the real estate developer is aware of a definite plan for major street 
 locations, he will be able to plan more intelligently and will rarely object 
 to requirements of necessarily wide rights of way for major streets in the 
 development of his subdivision. A reasonable Major Street Plan adopted by 
 the City Planning Commission, certified to City Council, and carefully 
 observed by all is assurance to the public that it will be required. in the 
 future to bear only a minimum of expenditures to provide adequate 
 trafficways. 
 
 The City Planning Commission has required and will continue to require 
 that all subdividers conform to this plan in the development of their sub- 
 divisions. 
 
 FRAMEWORK FOR BOND ISSUES 
 
 The development of an adequate major street system for a city cannot, 
 of course, be realized within a short period of time. For this reason there 
 is need for a long-range program that will permit part by part development 
 that will ultimately yield a completed system. The Major Street Plan serves 
 as such a guide, and adherence to it over a long period of time will prevent 
 losses that result from individual, disconnected plans of succeeding adminis- 
 trations. The right of way funds for the 1941 City Bond Program were 
 pledged to carry out definite recommended phases of this Major Street Plan. 
 
 BASIS FOR BUILDING LINES 
 
 This plan furnishes the only logical basis for applying a uniform system 
 of enforceable building set-back lines. In order to prevent business and 
 
other type structures from crowding too closely upon existing and poten- 
 tially heavily traveled thoroughfares, and to make possible future widening 
 of inadequate rights of way, a uniform program for the establishment of 
 building set-back lines should be undertaken. Such building lines have been 
 established on some thoroughfares to meet particular urgent problems. 
 This plan will make possible a city-wide program to protect the safety and 
 general welfare of the people. 
 
 STRUCTURE OF THE PLAN 
 
 The actual preparation of a major thoroughfare plan must be based upon 
 many considerations, such as physical features like rivers, bayous, railroads, 
 density of population, and concentration of business and industry. Of 
 course, economic considerations require that we give careful consideration 
 to existing streets and buildings as a basis of any such plan. 
 
 In general there are four classifications of major streets: Radial or diag- 
 onal, loop or circumferential, cross-town or by-pass, and the usual major 
 street that completes the pattern and provides access to neighborhoods and 
 access from neighborhoods to principal arteries. 
 
 RADIAL THOROUGHFARES 
 
 By far the most vital, from the standpoint of concentrated use, are the 
 radial thoroughfares extending out from the central business district. It is 
 usually on these thoroughfares that we find maximum congestion and 
 greatest traffic volumes. As the city doubles and trebles in size and as auto- 
 mobile registrations mount, we usually find that access to the central busi- 
 ness area is confined to the same means provided when the city was much 
 smaller. The increasing of facilities in the way of radial thoroughfares is 
 usually both difficult and extremely costly if delayed, so the greatest possible 
 foresight should be used to make maximum provisions for future needs. 
 
 In Houston we find these thoroughfares quite limited, with the exception 
 of those extending southwest parallel to and including South Main. To the 
 southeast radial thoroughfares are particularly inadequate in width and 
 number, greatly congesting Telephone Road. The development of the 
 Houston-Galveston Express Thoroughfare over the G. H. E. right of way 
 would greatly relieve this situation. To the north Jensen Drive, Hardy 
 Street, and North Main are inadequate in width and greatly congested by 
 business, although they are the only through connections. The widening of 
 these streets, the connection of Houston Avenue into McKinney, and the 
 development of White Oak Drive are the principal means of relieving this 
 problem. Radiating to the west, Gray is inadequate, and Washington 
 Avenue is greatly overloaded. The best possibility in this direction is Buffalo 
 Drive, which may be developed into an extremely efficient express thorough- 
 fare as well as a beautiful parkway. 
 
iiiiiiiiiiiy -^ 91 
 
 C^' 
 
 Hi ■ 
 
 
 ^^^IrmnTnijiiiiiiiiiiLiii 
 
 -LEG END- 
 
 ■■ Adequate RigW-of-way 
 1^ To be widened 
 )c=i To be opened 
 
 '%^^% 
 
 fe°^^\-5-U— ^ 
 
 IfflJiil 
 
 fy 
 
 3^^,;<^;jjTrmirnTTiTTiinT™ 
 
 MARKET 
 
 %. 
 
 % 
 
 ^^\^v^^%^^— 1^^^^ 
 
 v^^ .# 
 <^^^^ 
 <e^ 
 
 i.4 
 
 ^^ ' • SOAD 
 
 CCALC or MILCt 
 
 TYPICAL UNDEVELOPED 
 RADIAL THOROUGHFARES 
 
 FROM THE 
 
 MAJOR STREET PLAN 
 
 CITY PLANNING COMMISSION 
 HOUSTON TEXAS 
 
 ^■IlUlAZ Sai^^ats^^ 
 
CIRCUMFERENTIAL AND BY-PASS THOROUGHFARES 
 
 Next in importance are circumferential and by-pass thoroughfares. These 
 connections provide main routes of access across and around town without 
 passing through the more congested central areas. By-pass thoroughfares 
 may greatly relieve the downtown area and the radial thoroughfares, if 
 properly located. Houston is at present very inadequately supplied with 
 this type of circulation. Practically our only example is the Old Spanish 
 Trail- Wayside connection, which is most serviceable and worthwhile. An 
 example of a greatly needed unit of this type would be the Kiam-Sixth- 
 White Oak-Quitman-Liberty Road connection. This route, if properly devel- 
 oped, would provide a much needed connection east and west on the north 
 side of Buffalo Bayou and would tend to relieve congestion on Washington 
 and Franklin Avenues. The best example of a circumferential or loop 
 connection is the so-called "Defense Loop," the completion of which is 
 provided for in recent City and County bond programs. This unit would 
 follow the approximate routes of 29th Street, Wayside Drive, Old Spanish 
 Trail, Bellaire Boulevard, and Post Oak Road. 
 
 USUAL THOROUGHFARES 
 
 While the more important major streets serve the specific use of getting 
 traffic to and from the central business district or, perhaps, across town, 
 others have a more nominal use. These major streets serve principally as 
 feeder streets for the more important and heavily traveled thoroughfares. 
 Their purpose is to gather neighborhood traffic and carry it into the more 
 important thoroughfares leading to the downtown area, highways from 
 town, or to some other neighborhood. This type of thoroughfare, properly 
 located, would tend to minimize the use of purely local neighborhood streets 
 for through traffic. Thus, this type of major street fills in the general pattern 
 to provide a major street at intervals of approximately one-half to three- 
 quarters of a mile in the urban area, where practicable. An example of this 
 type of thoroughfare would be Dunlavy Street as shown on the Major Street 
 Plan. 
 
 CAPACITY OF THOROUGHFARES 
 
 While the development of the automobile has resulted in a revolutionary 
 change in local transportation, we can scarcely say that the improvement in 
 design of thoroughfares to meet this change has been more than nominal. 
 Modern heavy traffic has brought problems of congestion and confusion 
 which we have done relatively little to solve. In approaching the problem 
 of thoroughfare planning we find that there are two distinct types of prob- 
 lems: One consists of locating thoroughfares where needed from the stand- 
 point of providing ready convenient access; the other involves the struggle 
 to eliminate congestion and to attain adequate capacity. 
 
AVERAGE TYPES. Where present and future traffic volumes are not 
 expected to be excessive, right of -way widths of eighty and one hundred feet 
 are acceptable. Such right of way will provide for ultimate paving width 
 of fifty-six and sixty feet, yielding four moving and two parking lanes. 
 Where heavier traffic or considerable business development exists or may 
 be expected, the one hundred foot right of way should be considered a mini- 
 mum. While the above rights of way may not seem justified at the time 
 of dedication, a more narrow pavement may first be constructed and later 
 replaced by a wider one of greater capacity. Within the city limits, where 
 development of the Major Street Plan is largely a matter of widening right 
 of way, the choice between a width of eighty or one hundred feet is often 
 almost wholly an economic question. 
 
 FREEWAYS AND PARKWAYS. While the above type thoroughfares 
 serve adequately on many major streets, their relative inefficiency, due to the 
 congestion caused by adjacent business development, frequent intersections, 
 parking and double parking movements, and general local use, has made 
 them quite inadequate in many locations. This condition is especially true 
 in the face of increases in traffic loads during the past decades. The average 
 principal thoroughfare of today requires that traffic, particularly during 
 peak loads, must work its way slowly mile after mile through local traffic 
 and local business. 
 
 The answer to this problem is the freeway and parkway. These thorough- 
 fares do not provide access to adjacent property and are entered oiJy at 
 designated intersections. As a result we find that parking is eliminated, and 
 traffic is able to travel at more constant speeds without confusion. 
 
 Freeways and parkways cannot ordinarily be developed within a city 
 except where a railroad or stream and a large percentage of vacant, inexpen- 
 sive land make possible the acquisition of wide rights of way with few 
 intersections. Many larger cities have already undertaken the development 
 of these limited access express thoroughfares, notably Los Angeles and New 
 York. In the latter city costs of such developments have been extreme, 
 while in Houston, today, many such opportunities may be exploited at 
 comparatively small cost. Such developments would provide relief for the 
 present with provisions for future needs. 
 
 One of the best of our possibilities for a freeway is the proposed express 
 way over the G. H. E. or Old Galveston Interurban. Between St. Bernard 
 Street and the east city limits a great majority of the route is through acre- 
 age with few intersections. The development of this limited access way on 
 a 230-foot right of way would not only greatly relieve present congestion on 
 Telephone Road, but give us our first up-to-date trafficway designed for the 
 sole purpose of providing efficient movement without interference from 
 purely local business and residential use. 
 
rjTim' 
 
 ■iTm 
 
 
 -VM J 
 
 20 
 
 D POSSIBLE FUTURE 
 §1 CONNECTION 
 
 ♦LEGEND* 
 
 Adequate Right-of-way 
 ■i ■■■■■1 To be widened 
 C3c=ii=]c3 To be opened 
 
 TYPICAL UNDEVELOPED 
 
 LOOP OR BY-PASS THOROUGHFARES 
 
 FROM THE 
 
 MAJOR STREET PLAN 
 
 CITY PLANNING COMMISSION 
 HOUSTON TEXAS 
 
 SCALC or MILES 
 
 4^/r-4i afctii^*^^ 
 
Another very worthwhile opportunity for the development of a parkway, 
 which would serve many thousands of people and relieve congestion on 
 adjacent major streets, lies along Buffalo Bayou between the Civic Center 
 and Memorial Park. Through foresighted consideration a great deal of 
 land has already been acquired along Buffalo Drive to provide for a park- 
 way. By the purchase of additional land, all but a small part of which is 
 vacant, the right of way for a thoroughfare of magnificent capacity and 
 grandeur could be achieved. It could be a freeway in the true sense, for 
 throughout its length there would be only four crossings. 
 
 A third evident possibility for the development of a freeway lies along 
 White Oak Drive from the Milam Street Bridge to Houston Avenue, a 
 distance of over one mile without a single grade crossing. 
 
 Since the horse and buggy days we have made very little progress in 
 development of thoroughfares to meet a phenomenal increase in numbers 
 of automobiles and the rapid and revolutionary technical development of 
 motor driven vehicles. If we can but take the first step and develop one 
 freeway type of thoroughfare, the public will fully sense the value of more 
 efficient traffic arteries through which time is saved, nervous strain is 
 greatly reduced, and safety considered. 
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF THE PLAN 
 
 RECENT PROGRESS 
 
 The present adopted Major Street Plan is an outgrowth of the 1929 Plan 
 and has existed in preliminary form since the spring of 1940. First actual 
 accomplishments on this Major Street Plan occurred in 1941 and 1942. 
 
 Realizing the importance of directing every possible effort toward the 
 development of the Major Street Plan, the Planning Commission prepared 
 a map and written recommendations for the use of a minimum of $600,000 
 of the City's then proposed 1941 Bond Program. These recommendations 
 designated a list of right of way purchases, stated the importance of each, 
 and listed them according to their relative importance. City Council accepted 
 the Commission's recommendations and has begun carrying them into 
 effect, so that the first steps in realizing the development of the Major Street 
 Plan were achieved even before its final adoption. 
 
 POST WAR OPPORTUNITIES 
 
 Many conditions point to great public works programs after the war. 
 The development of major streets will, of course, offer an ideal source of 
 useful projects of the type most likely needed. An adopted Major Street 
 Plan is, of course, the only sound basis for the selection of such projects, and 
 the purchase of right of way at this time will make possible an early start 
 
on construction once the war is at an end. An ideal arrangement would be 
 to prepare detailed plans of a recommended list of Major Thoroughfare 
 developments. 
 
 COORDINATION WITH HARRIS COUNTY 
 
 A glance at the Major Street Plan will show that a large part of the plan 
 lies outside of the city limits. That part is entirely under the jurisdiction 
 of the Commissioners Court of Harris County except that new subdivisions 
 must be approved by the Planning Commission. For this reason it is quite 
 evident that a high degree of cooperation will be necessary between the City 
 and the County in order to realize a system of thoroughfares according to 
 plan. The adopted plan was developed in collaboration with the County, 
 and its mutual adoption will tend to insure needed coordination in its devel- 
 opment. Already the County is in the midst of spending the proceeds of 
 a bond issue, voted in the spring of 1941, which expenditures have accom- 
 plished and will accomplish many developments shown on this plan. In 
 addition, full coordination must be realized with respect to state highway 
 developments. 
 
 LONG-RANGE PROGRAM NEEDED 
 
 A start has been made, but experience shows that in the past Major Street 
 Plans have been shelved and neglected for lack of an active program of 
 development and because of lapses in the existence of the Planning Com- 
 mission and the Planning Department. Lacking these agencies, the plan is 
 without a champion — ^is without an alert set of eyes to see that developments 
 do not wander afield, unconscious of the existence of a plan. We have seen 
 this fate befall the 1913 Plan and again the very comprehensive Plan of 
 1929. The drafting of the plan is only the first step and in itself is practi- 
 cally valueless unless the second step is planned and carried out. That phase 
 is the' constant recognition and systematic development of the plan. 
 
 More and more the value of a long-range capital budgeting program is 
 being recognized and adopted by many cities as a means of carrying out 
 their physical development in a business-like manner. Such a program 
 usually covers a period of six years and is based on careful planning to meet 
 the current and anticipated needs of the city. A detailed study of the finan- 
 cial structure of the city, plus the reasonable elasticity of the program, 
 insures its sound adjustment. Such a means of financing capital improve- 
 ments is in marked contrast to the usual system of advancing sporadic bond 
 issues which are brought forth whenever the temper of the taxpayer is 
 considered amenable and in whatever amount it is felt that the traffic will 
 bear. In cases where the Federal Government is expected to join in with 
 grants in aid and otherwise, it is doubtful that it will continue long to join 
 in where no provision for long-range financing as well as planning has 
 been made. 
 
 8 
 
fIL 
 
 llhirmTTT 
 
 QUITMAN «-.•' 
 
 l*vrrffl|iiii!iiiiiiiiiiriTra 
 
 -LEGEND"- 
 
 ^■■'™» Adequate Right-of-way 
 "■^^ To be widened 
 c3 c3 c3 To be opened 
 
 
 SCALl Of HIL«S 
 
 TYPICAL UNDEVELOPED 
 
 CROSS TOWN ARTERI.ES 
 FROM THE 
 
 MAJOR STREET PLAN 
 
 CITY PLANNING COMMISSION 
 HOUSTON TEXAS 
 
 ^^^' 
 
RECOMMENDED PROJECTS 
 
 The Major Street Plan embodies a great number of existing and proposed 
 thoroughfares. Many of the developments proposed on plan will not be 
 needed in the immediate future, and their development beyond acquisition 
 of right of way would be ill-advised at this time. However, a large share 
 of the proposed developments would be of immediate use and value and 
 should be undertaken at the earliest possible date. Because of the large 
 number of proposals on the adopted plan and because of the great amount 
 of study that has been given these matters, we submit a list of the most 
 urgently needed proposed developments. 
 
 In August, 1941, the Planning Commission submitted a recommendation 
 to City Council for the purchase of $600,000 worth of major street rights of 
 way in connection with a bond issue being proposed. City Council adopted 
 this recommendation, and later the bonds were voted. Since the financial 
 position of the city made necessary the issuance of the bonds over a three- 
 year period, only a part of the right of way projects have been carried out 
 to date. The following is a list of projects for which funds have been voted: 
 
 PROJECTS OF 1941 BOND PROGRAM 
 
 1. JENSEN DRIVE — ^Provides for widening of Jensen between Naviga- 
 tion Boulevard and Buffalo Bayou. This right of way has already been 
 purchased under the 1941 Bond Program. 
 
 2. CRAWFORD-ALMEDA CONNECTION— This opening is to be 
 made, carrying Almeda directly into Crawford, and Almeda widened 
 south to Cleburne. A portion of the necessary right of way has been 
 purchased under the 1941 Bond Program. 
 
 3. EUREKA TRAFFIC INTERCHANGE— This project calls for the 
 purchase of approximately 30 acres south of Eureka Underpass for a 
 traffic interchange at the junction of the Hempstead and Katy High- 
 ways. This right of way has already been purchased under the 1941 
 Bond Program. 
 
 4. NORTH SEGMENT OF DEFENSE LOOP— The widening and 
 opening of right of way for the north segment of the so-called Defense 
 Loop, between Shepherd Drive and the east city limit on approxi- 
 mately 29th Street, would provide the first through east-west connec- 
 tion on the north side. About $20,000 of the $50,000 allocated in the 
 1941 Bond Program for this purpose has been used. The County Court 
 has agreed by resolution of September 18, 1942, to complete necessary 
 right of way acquisitions from their 1941 Bond Program after the 
 $50,000 appropriated by the City has been expended according to plan. 
 
5. WASHINGTON-COHN-MEMORIAL DRIVE^This connection re- 
 quires right of way acquisitions for opening and widening. The City 
 Bond Program of 1941 allocated $75,000 toward this right of way, 
 none of which has yet been acquired. 
 
 6. GALVESTON-HOUSTON EXPRESS WAY— This project requires 
 the acquisition of additional right of way along the old Galveston 
 Interurban line between St. Bernard and Park Place. The 1941 Bond 
 Program of the City allocated $200,000 for the purchase of land toward 
 an ultimate 230-foot width. No right of way has as yet been acquired 
 from these funds. 
 
 7. HEINER — ^The widening of Heiner Street between Buffalo Drive and 
 Calhoun would provide a link in a cross town connection by-passing 
 the business district. Money in the amount of $100,000 for the pur- 
 chase of this right of way has been provided in the 1941 Bond Program, 
 but none of the money has yet been spent. 
 
 8. SHEPHERD DRIVE-GREENBRIAR CONNECTION— This con- 
 nection would be made between Richmond Avenue and the S. A. & 
 A. P. Railroad for the purpose of extending Shepherd Drive into South 
 Main. The sum of $50,000 was set aside in the 1941 Bond Program 
 for this right of way. None of this fund has been expended to date. 
 
 OTHER IMPORTANT PROJECTS 
 
 In addition to the above eight street widening and opening projects pro- 
 vided for in the Bond Program voted in 1941, the Planning Commission 
 listed four other important projects for which right of way is badly needed. 
 These projects are as follows: 
 
 9. ELGIN-DUMBLE— The extension of Elgin from Ennis to Dumble at 
 Calhoun Road is recommended. This would provide a valuable east- 
 west connection serving the University of Houston and the High 
 School Stadium, and would provide a by-pass route around the central 
 business district to the Ship Channel and industrial areas. In addition 
 it would join the proposed express thoroughfare on the G. H. E. right 
 of way to furnish a connection completely across the city. 
 
 10. LAWNDALE-LA PORTE ROAD CONNECTION— This project, 
 involving the elimination of two long jogs and the widening of some 
 existing right of way, is very much needed. At present it is the principal 
 route used by the majority of Houston residents traveling to and from 
 Galveston, the Bayshore Area, and many industries east of Houston 
 along the south side of the Ship Channel. If present shipbuilding 
 activities is to continue after the war, this development will be of 
 extreme importance, as it is at present. 
 
 10 
 
11. STUDEWOOD EXTENSION— The extension of Studewood south 
 of Sixth to Washington Avenue is contemplated at this time as the 
 first step in an ultimate connection between North Main and South 
 Main. With the proper development of Buffalo Drive the extension 
 should be continued to that thoroughfare, and ultimately into Lincoln 
 and Montrose. 
 
 12. WHEELER — ^The widening and extension of Wheeler Avenue west 
 of Velasco is needed to provide additional access to the University of 
 Houston, Public School Stadium, and adjacent residential districts. 
 The new right of way needed is at present undeveloped and mostly 
 unplatted. 
 
 There are many other important and worthwhile right of way projects in 
 connection with the alleviation of current traffic congestion and the pro- 
 vision for needs of the near future. The following is a group of additional 
 right of way widening and opening projects that are of real importance: 
 
 SAN JACINTO-MARKET— This connection, widening Rothwell and 
 extending it into Lyons Avenue, and widening Lyons and extending it 
 into Market, which would be widened to McCarty at the junction with 
 the Market Street Road, is highly desirable. At present the northeast 
 portion of Houston is, perhaps, more inadequately served by major 
 thoroughfares than any other section of Houston. This connection 
 would gready relieve this condition, would tend to relieve Navigation 
 Boulevard and Franklin Avenue, and would provide a direct route 
 into the city from Market Street Road. 
 
 BUFFALO PARKWAY— While the city owns a large amount of 
 right of way and bayou frontage along Buffalo Drive, there are still 
 many parcels, most of which are undeveloped and some of which are 
 unsuitable for any other use, that should be purchased for the ultimate 
 development of this parkway. This land should be purchased before 
 more of it is built upon. Adequate right of way would provide for a 
 parkway development that could scarcely be surpassed. When devel- 
 oped, this project would undoubtedly carry a tremendous volume of 
 traffic from the northwest and southwest portions of Houston. 
 
 HOUSTON AVENUE-McKINNEY— This connection would swing 
 southeast from the present terminus of Houston Avenue at West Capi- 
 tol, bridge Buffalo Bayou west of the Coliseum, and connect with 
 McKinney Avenue west of the City Hall. This connection would open 
 more direct and less congested access to the downtown area than pro- 
 vided at present by way of West Capitol Avenue. 
 
 11 
 
WHITE OAK — Proper widening and straightening of White Oak 
 Drive between Buffalo Bayou and Houston Avenue could result in a 
 thoroughly up-to-date and efficient thoroughfare that would carry a 
 great amount of traffic. Like Buffalo Drive, it would be practically 
 without intersections and would serve to move traffic swiftly and 
 smoothly from the downtown area into the northwest portion of 
 Houston. 
 
 CRAWFORD-ELYSIAN-HARDY CONNECTION — This project 
 would carry Crawford Street north from its present terminus at Ruiz 
 swinging it across over the railroad, Buffalo Bayou, and the Southern 
 Pacific yards into Elysian. In addition a grade separation over the 
 railroad would be necessary in the vicinity of Opelousas Street. It 
 would also be necessary to widen Elysian and Hardy. This would 
 provide a complete north-south artery entirely across Houston, supple- 
 menting the Almeda-Crawford connection for which right of way is 
 now being purchased. Present facilities in the area that would be 
 served by this connection are very inadequate and inefficient due to 
 long traffic delays at railroad crossings and the inadequacy of present 
 right of way. 
 
 WAYSIDE-McCARTY CONNECTION— This project would extend 
 from Wayside Drive at about Avenue U, over Buffalo Bayou east of 
 the present bridge, and over Clinton Drive at the present underpass. 
 Thence it would continue northeast through the open area at the east 
 of the Port Terminal Railroad yards and join McCarty north of the 
 Market Street Road. This connection would eliminate the present very 
 devious route along CUnton Drive and through the congested area of 
 McCarty Road between Clinton and Market Street Road. 
 
 KIAM-SIXTH-WHITE OAK-QUITMAN-LIBERTY— This project, 
 consisting of some wholly new right of way and considerable straight- 
 ening and widening of existing right of way, would provide a most 
 valuable east-west connection across the central part of the north side. 
 It would serve to feed traffic into both the Hempstead and Katy high- 
 ways on the west and to the Beaumont highway on the east. Its devel- 
 opment would also tend to remove some of the present traffic going 
 through on Washington, Franklin, and Navigation. 
 
 12 
 
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 
 
 MAJOR STREET 
 
 RIGHTOFWAY ACQUISITION 
 
 1941 
 
 City Planninj Conmission 
 of Houslonjexas 
 
 NOTE 
 THE FIRST EIGHT PROJECTS 
 WERE ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL 
 AND $600,000 IN BONDS WE RE 
 VOTED FOR ACQUISITION OF 
 RIGHT OF WAY FROM 1941-1943 
 
WAUGH DRIVE — With a reasonable amount of development, 
 Waugh Drive could become a much more convenient and efficient 
 thoroughfare, capable of handling increased traffic loads. Of particular 
 importance is the elimination of the present jog between Waugh and 
 Yale at Washington Avenue and the widening of right of way be- 
 tween Nevada and Westheimer, and between Washington Avenue and 
 Cleveland Park. 
 
 KJRBY DRIVE — Kirby Drive forms an extension of Buffalo Drive 
 and if further extended on the south would provide a very desirable 
 north-south route. It has an existing right of way one hundred feet 
 wide south to Westheimer, and this width could be extended to Bis- 
 sonnet with little difficulty. However, Kirby Drive should be widened 
 on south from Bissonnet and carried across Brays Bayou into South 
 Main. Kirby Drive would adapt itself ideally as a boulevard for 
 passenger traffic only. This possibility will, no doubt, be indicated on 
 a Plan for Parkways and Boulevards now being considered. 
 
 WASHINGTON- ROTHWELL CONNECTION — This project 
 would involve an extension from Washington Avenue, near its junction 
 with Preston, in a northeasterly direction into Dart and an extension 
 from Dart across White Oak Bayou into Shea to connect with the 
 proposed Rothwell-Market development. An overpass over the South- 
 ern Pacific tracks and an overpass from Dart over the Bayou, Katy 
 tracks, and North Main would be necessary. The expense of this 
 development would be offset by the provision of a route along the 
 north side of the Bayou similar to the Washington-Franklin-Naviga- 
 tion connection which would serve to relieve traffic through the north 
 part of the downtown area. 
 
 SCOTT-MILBY — ^The development of this connection would involve 
 the elimination of a jog in Scott at Griggs, and its extension into Milby 
 between Holman and Francis. Milby would also need to be widened, 
 and several smaller gaps require opening. This development would 
 provide an outlet from the University of Houston to the northeast part 
 of the city and also provide access through an area that is now inade- 
 quately served. 
 
 STUDEWOOD-LINCOLN-MONTROSE— The extension of Stude- 
 wood south to Washington Avenue was previously recommended, and 
 
 13 
 
this proposed extension would carry it on south, of Washington, across 
 Buffalo Bayou into Lincoln and into Montrose Boulevard, eliminating 
 the present jog at Westheimer. Between Washington Avenue and 
 West Dallas totally new right of way would be involved, while Lincoln 
 would need to be widened throughout its length. Though an expen- 
 sive project, a glance at the Major Street Plan will show the conven- 
 ience of this connection between North and South Main. 
 
 HOUSTON AVENUE-FULTON CONNECTION— This project 
 would involve the widening of Houston Avenue between Woodland 
 Park and North Main and a connection through to Fulton on East 
 Montgomery at Erin. At present, traffic from East Montgomery and 
 Irvington Boulevard feeds into Fulton with inadequate outlets to the 
 south. The proposed connection would drain considerable of this 
 traffic into Houston Avenue, which could more adequately carry the 
 extra load as a result of the proposed Houston-McKinney connection 
 mentioned above. 
 
 14 
 
lC«0S6TI^1B^ H^"c 
 
 ■=^^^ 
 
 -„:± 
 
 'L. 
 
 LJ 
 
 I 
 
 
 mCMULUfl M-iHI 
 
 colli! 
 
 
 
 
 
 PARK_PR. 
 
 
 I- 
 
 
 
 &1 IFF PP.- 
 
 
 Si^ <l 
 
 ^^R liBirn BO*0 
 
 ADOPTED BY 
 HOUSTON CITy PLANNING COMMISSION 
 
 • OKlllt^ rut ^unilM HUHDMO fOUTT 1W0 
 
 jj^.Y''^^ 
 
 MEMBERS OF 
 
 J esse «I<DI)(«S. CHAiaUAN 
 MSETHCIBMSIUS HILTON UCGIMT* 
 LtWIS CUTSCB J TOBIIEY 
 
 »t» ' e J t s'to u t »«lteb 
 
 PLAN CO*! ' ■ 
 Of HOUST 
 IN COLL*- 
 
 HUCO 
 COUI.' 
 
.^' 
 
 
 - OElTfRU 
 
 icjljil: 
 
 1 
 
 MAJOR STUEET 
 PLAN 
 
 HOUSTON 
 
 AND VICINITY 
 
 MT^ftKET 
 
 
 7 
 
 ^ 
 
 .^ 'ss^; 
 
 -5. 
 
 .<^ •! 
 
 V. 
 
 ^ 
 
 %. 
 
 ^. 
 
 ^: 
 
 »c.^4ft \ 
 
 r' 
 
 t^ 
 
 ^ i 
 
 I 
 s 
 
 # 
 
 ■y,' 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 K>— ! 
 
 .ii&^ — . 
 
 CITY PLANNING 
 COMMI S S ION 
 
 R. S CLLIfRIT HARE AND MARE 
 
 PUNNING ENCR consultants 
 
 DUST RIAL ^~^, , 
 
 nk" 
 
 <^ip^f^ 
 
 n 
 
 <^ 
 
 > 
 
 •^^.. 
 
 SUmcitNI WIDTH 
 
 CITY LIMITS 
 
 m 
 
 ~f- 
 
 !.♦ I.' ' 
 
 I I 
 
 't^M 
 
 RpiRt 
 
 i::>' 
 
 
 — Lu: 
 
 / 
 
 ^. 
 
 -"?^ 
 
 TH 
 
 m 
 
 j^A^ ft a 
 
 -U 
 
 I 
 
 ?^ 
 
 ^til:: 
 
 .0 I I 
 
 3-' 
 
 
 
 L.li/> 
 
 'z^- 
 
 ^ 
 
 »«^ 
 
 
 1' 
 
 GA^jC];^^^ 
 
 <<^ 
 
 ,c3«='""0 
 
 «='=^^ 
 
 tiJ' 
 
 •>^- 
 
 ^' n 
 
 .<^ 
 
 I 
 
 ^VWINKLER 
 
 ,^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 "^=Jr 
 
 w.MCMvu. ArRPOST J SOUTH HIOUSTOf^' 
 
 :__llr- 
 
 i^^- 
 
 \ 
 
 •^^ 
 
 X>-- 
 
 =«=pi 
 
 x^. 
 
 VK 
 
 1^ 
 
 'say :^r<^ -^- A .^ 
 
 P 
 
 \ ! 
 
 mj_ PA$_ADEN ^ BL m 
 
 if - •■ -^ I ^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 D I 
 
 M ! 
 
 ^=\ 
 
 \1 
 
 
 n^ 
 
 
 .L. 
 
 \ 
 
 1 1