Walmart Supercenter At 111 Yale St.

[TheNiche]

As a student of nuance and of getting to the core of what drives human behavior, I can tell you almost invariably whenever the canards of property values and crime are brought up as reasons to oppose something, they're ALWAYS a guise for latent racism or classism.

"Guise" probably is not the right word. Try "symptom". And you should tack on "within our society" to the end of the sentence.

I'll give you an example that should hit close to (your) home. FM 1960 has become a demographic boundary, and some residents there feel threatened by an influx of brown-colored and/or poor students to the local schools. On account of that I can observe white flight from Spring before that, and Aldine before that--and the consequent impact on home values--I would not buy in your neighborhood. I might rent there if I worked close by, but I would sooner buy in Aldine (stable) than FM 1960 (in transition). And had I already bought in the FM 1960 area, I'd give some thought to selling in the near future. It's not about the neighborhood, class, or skin color; it's about my future consumptive power.

I suspect that there are far more people motivated by greed than there are out-and-out racists and classists. But in the housing market, it doesn't matter why you're selling and effectively tilting the balance of supply and demand, just that you are.

Now...having said this, I would never embarrass myself by railing against an affordable housing project on 1960 or a Wal-Mart in the Heights. Drawing attention to the issue would be counter-productive if it undermines market demand for housing or causes the neighbors to put their homes on the market. Actions speak louder than words, after all. I'm doubting, frankly, that anybody in the Heights is going to sell out because of a Wal-Mart opposite a freeway from their neighborhood. That would be dumb.

So it leaves me wondering what the true motivations are, here, for all this talk. Are particular neighborhood activists just being highly vocal to try and make themselves feel important, to gain standing in their social circles, or to try and break into municipal politics? Is the hipster subculture just that sheepish and/or oversensitive and/or melodramatic that they feel the need to blow every little thing out of proportion? Are these just cynics, curmudgeons, and otherwise crotchety people whom feel the need to complain about everything new? Or are there--in actuality--just a lot of educated and/or self-important dummies trying to engage themselves in a visceral community issue that they don't understand? I'm thinking that it's all of the above. I quoted 'Animal Farm' on another Heights thread recently, and I'm reminded of it again. Although the issue is very different here, the characters are present, it seems.

[AtticaFlinch]

"Guise" probably is not the right word. Try "symptom". And you should tack on "within our society" to the end of the sentence.

I'll grant you the word change to symptom. I actually struggled with what word to use, and at the time, guise seemed best. In retrospect, you're right about that. But, I don't think it's symptomatic of our society alone. I think the fear of the others and, to a lesser extent, the protection of our own are what's motivated all human social interaction for most of human history. I also think it wasn't until the Age of Enlightenment and the rise of individuality that we humans started learning to be motivated by ideas far less insular. However, that doesn't mean we're all at that point, or even that any one of us is at that point always. If we were conflict would disappear, and everybody would have a let and let live attitude about pretty much everything.

I quoted 'Animal Farm' on another Heights thread recently, and I'm reminded of it again. Although the issue is very different here, the characters are present, it seems.

If I remember correctly, I positive repped that post - mostly because I wish I'd thought of it first.

I also wonder how many of the pigs even caught the reference.

[s3mh]

So it leaves me wondering what the true motivations are, here, for all this talk. Are particular neighborhood activists just being highly vocal to try and make themselves feel important, to gain standing in their social circles, or to try and break into municipal politics? Is the hipster subculture just that sheepish and/or oversensitive and/or melodramatic that they feel the need to blow every little thing out of proportion? Are these just cynics, curmudgeons, and otherwise crotchety people whom feel the need to complain about everything new? Or are there--in actuality--just a lot of educated and/or self-important dummies trying to engage themselves in a visceral community issue that they don't understand? I'm thinking that it's all of the above. I quoted 'Animal Farm' on another Heights thread recently, and I'm reminded of it again. Although the issue is very different here, the characters are present, it seems.

Maybe the more relevant inquiry should be what are the true motivations for people who support cramming a suburban style big box retailer that has a proven track record of having a negative impact on the surrounding area in terms of crime, traffic and small business opportunity into one of the few neighborhoods left in the City of Houston that has not been consumed by big box retail and PUD hyperconformity? Is it class envy? Is it a bizarre schadenfreude to hope that unique character of the Heights and West End are crushed by the big box retailers and cookie-cutter residential developers? Is it a belief that democracy should simply bow down before deep pocketed developers and retailers and give them anything they want, regardless of what the community may think? Is it a hatred of all that has resulted from popular resistance movements in the US (racial integration, labor laws, abortion rights, gay rights, environmental protection, etc.)? Or is it that the evidence against a big box supercent smashed into the West End/Heights area is so overwhelming that the only tactic left is to personally insult people in the community who dare to speak out, dare to organize, dare to participate in their democracy, dare to stand in the way of corporate profits in order to protect their community?

I will tell you that the Wal-Mart opposition is nothing like the caricatue you have invented. The Wal-Mart opposition is made up of people of all ages and from all walks of life. Some have spent a lifetime working for the Heights and West End communities, and some are participating in their community for the very first time. You can put them down all you want, but that will not change a thing. While you think you have made a differene by bullying a few people who are against Wal-Mart on a message board with your insults, the thousands who are joining together are making a difference. It is no coincidence that the application for the reverse curve variance on Koehler was tabled for two weeks to require further study.

[usc619]

I'm am very glad we are getting a wal-mart in the Heights

[JJVilla]

I will tell you that the Wal-Mart opposition is nothing like the caricatue you have invented. The Wal-Mart opposition is made up of people of all ages and from all walks of life. Some have spent a lifetime working for the Heights and West End communities, and some are participating in their community for the very first time. You can put them down all you want, but that will not change a thing. While you think you have made a differene by bullying a few people who are against Wal-Mart on a message board with your insults, the thousands who are joining together are making a difference. It is no coincidence that the application for the reverse curve variance on Koehler was tabled for two weeks to require further study.

This is true. You got to wonder why people would defend slimey companies like this and then say thay are for the working class. There are many examples but if your business is decimated by them then you would not be in favor of them, as has occurred in many small towns across the USA. For the record I grew up poor, am a minority and have been unemployed for more than a couple of months, too.

Either way the simple solution is not set a foot in their business or buy from them, as is case of any company you don't like.

Edited August 9, 2010 by JJVilla

[AtticaFlinch]

Maybe the more relevant inquiry should be what are the true motivations for people who support cramming a suburban style big box retailer that has a proven track record of having a negative impact on the surrounding area in terms of crime, traffic and small business opportunity into one of the few neighborhoods left in the City of Houston that has not been consumed by big box retail and PUD hyperconformity?

Because none of what you just said has been proven. None at all. And, it's a little weird you point to the 'burbs as a hyperconformist area, but in another thread you support the hyperconformity of historic districts. It's not that you don't want hyperconformity, you just want the hyperconformity to fit within your vision.

Is it class envy?

Turning the tables on the rhetoric, huh? No, it's not class envy. Especially considering the majority of the people who will be positively affected by this won't be in whatever class you consider yourself. Another wickedly elitist talking point from S3mh though. I wonder if you can even understand how douchey the accusation of class envy sounds. Everybody wants more money. I don't understand where you're going with that.

Is it a bizarre schadenfreude to hope that unique character of the Heights and West End are crushed by the big box retailers and cookie-cutter residential developers?

Oh, that's where you're going. Well, how about this? I'll admit to exacting a little bit of pleasure out of seeing some prissy, hipster elitists squirm because their vision of utopia is being forced to allow other inferior people in. But, that doesn't motivate me to support the building of this Walmart. I support it because as I now take advantage of Walmart's low prices (and they are considerably lower than the competition), I also wish I'd been able to take advantage of those low prices while a Montrose or Greenway resident. I'm certain there are plenty of people, maybe outside your social circle, who feel the same way.

Is it a belief that democracy should simply bow down before deep pocketed developers and retailers and give them anything they want, regardless of what the community may think?

No. But if you'd read many of the supporters' comments rather than ignore them as seems more obvious, you'd find there is a strong commitment to independence and personal responsibility. We do support the builders and the land owners doing with their property what they deem fit. It is, after all, their property. By your logic, non-religious people should be able to tell churches they can't build nearby, and homes without children should be able to tell school districts they can't build nearby. For that matter, since a home doesn't have kids, they should be able to choose whether or not they pay school taxes. It is all up to the individual to determine everything about the environment that immediately surrounds him, right? Wrong. The individual can control what happens within his house, so long as he doesn't violate the law and doesn't hurt anyone. That's it. Any more than that, and you become the very thing that you're complaining about.

Is it a hatred of all that has resulted from popular resistance movements in the US (racial integration, labor laws, abortion rights, gay rights, environmental protection, etc.)?

Oh please. Protesting a Walmart building near your neighborhood is nowhere near on par with those movements. It's embarassing you continue to make this comparison.

Or is it that the evidence against a big box supercent smashed into the West End/Heights area is so overwhelming that the only tactic left is to personally insult people in the community who dare to speak out, dare to organize, dare to participate in their democracy, dare to stand in the way of corporate profits in order to protect their community?

Well no, but then again, there is no evidence overwhelming against this Walmart! And you have a bad perception problem, because these attacks against your weak arguments aren't attacks against you personally. Unless you are a racist or a classist. In which case, you do suck at life.

I will tell you that the Wal-Mart opposition is nothing like the caricatue you have invented. The Wal-Mart opposition is made up of people of all ages and from all walks of life. Some have spent a lifetime working for the Heights and West End communities, and some are participating in their community for the very first time. You can put them down all you want, but that will not change a thing. While you think you have made a differene by bullying a few people who are against Wal-Mart on a message board with your insults, the thousands who are joining together are making a difference. It is no coincidence that the application for the reverse curve variance on Koehler was tabled for two weeks to require further study.

And you can mischaracterize the support all you'd like, but that doesn't change anything either. If you think two weeks will stop the Walmart, then clearly you've never witnessed community opposition to a Walmart before play out in the local press and the courts. I said it near the beginning of this thread, without an ecological or cultural reason to oppose this store, the community has no chance in defeating it. If over half of all residents of the Heights and all other areas within a ten mile radius opposed it, and signed a petition to prove it, this store wouldd still get built. Houston, TX is the wild west of real estate, and cronyism still exists, but it exists for those with the deepest pockets. There's no other way to say it, but you're SOL. Redirect your energies to a fight worth having. If you don't like Walmart's business practices, pressure your congressman into passing some retail reform laws. Otherwise, you're hurting people this store could benefit in your zeal to make your neighborhood just a little more pretentious.

Edited August 9, 2010 by AtticaFlinch

[J008]

Well, how about this? I'll admit to exacting a little bit of pleasure out of seeing some prissy, hipster elitists squirm because their vision of utopia is being forced to allow other inferior people in.

Are you referring to Wal Mart Co as the inferior people? They are the fortune #1 company; collectively the Waltons dwarf all other living human accumulations of wealth; We are all economically inferior relative to wal mart.

No one should take a way from their success, but in my opionion actual residents should be able to determine what they want there neighborhood to look like (most of the ones I know are against it), especially if they are being asked to subsidize it.

Edited August 9, 2010 by J008

[AtticaFlinch]

Are you referring to Wal Mart Co as the inferior people?

No. I think most of the people opposed to the Walmart think Walmart's shoppers are inferior. Otherwise, I have a hard time justifying the numerous references to peopleofwalmart.com, crime increases and property devaluations.

[dbigtex56]

I'm pretty sure I didn't, but to be safe, perhaps you can give a little detail into what exactly you meant. The quote in question for ease of reference: "So, the building of this Wal-Mart is going to benefit low-income citizens ... by demolishing their affordable housing?"

Weird. So you two thought the low prices were intended only to benefit low income residents of just this one apartment complex? That's weirder than the idea that this Walmart is being built to service just Heights residents.

No. We're not doing this. You continue to quote out of context, then distort our meanings.

Go quote yourself.

[AtticaFlinch]

No. We're not doing this. You continue to quote out of context, then distort our meanings.

Go quote yourself.

Well, rather than continue to just naysay my understanding of what little context was present, why don't you explain what you meant, but this time clearly? Clear communication is a good way to avoid being misunderstood, if I was indeed misunderstanding you. Perhaps it'll help if I explain the path to my own conclusions, and you can tell me where I erred. In reading your statement, my initial thought was that you must be saying since Walmart's supposed building plan included the bulldozing of one single solitary low-income apartment complex, then that must be wryly conclusive evidence Walmart doesn't actually benefit any and all people who live in low income housing. Am I right so far? Because I didn't think so. I thought, "How ridiculous that I'd think that's what dbigtex meant, especially as he's proven to be reasonable and generally above bad logic and hyperbole." But what else could it have meant, what else could it have meant? I stretched the openings into the darkest recesses of my brain hoping that somewhere within would lie a clue as to what you meant. You're above piss poor logic and inflated exaggeration, at least you have been in the past, so surely you must have an alternate reason, something I hadn't considered. I clambered through my brain searching for other permutations in logic, and I followed individual thought patterns, though mostly to dead-ends. At one point, near the end of my patience, I stumbled across the assumption that indeed, surely dbigtex understood this to be the only possible set of poor people this Walmart would benefit. Otherwise, his (your) statement could only possibly be pointless and wrong. I knew there was no way for you to avoid being wrong, but I didn't want your statement to be pointless and wrong.

Yes, this is an accurate retelling of how I reached that conclusion as, like you, I never hyperbolize. And resultingly, that's what I went with. That's what I wrote for the whole world to see. That's how I publicly interpreted your words. But, you've told me I was wrong, and you told be I'm being wrong deliberately. So I asked you to clarify your statement, but again, you just told me I'm being deliberately wrong. You haven't given me any insight into this "context" of which you speak so elusively, but hopefully someday perhaps we can reach those dizzying heights of lucidity. Hopefully someday I can know just what the hell you meant. For now, you just appear churlish, and as if you're avoiding giving an explanation for what you meant. But I pretty sure I'm probably being deliberately wrong about that too.

[s3mh]

And you can mischaracterize the support all you'd like, but that doesn't change anything either. If you think two weeks will stop the Walmart, then clearly you've never witnessed community opposition to a Walmart before play out in the local press and the courts. I said it near the beginning of this thread, without an ecological or cultural reason to oppose this store, the community has no chance in defeating it. If over half of all residents of the Heights and all other areas within a ten mile radius opposed it, and signed a petition to prove it, this store wouldd still get built. Houston, TX is the wild west of real estate, and cronyism still exists, but it exists for those with the deepest pockets. There's no other way to say it, but you're SOL. Redirect your energies to a fight worth having. If you don't like Walmart's business practices, pressure your congressman into passing some retail reform laws. Otherwise, you're hurting people this store could benefit in your zeal to make your neighborhood just a little more pretentious.

Wal-Mart can be defeated. Spring Valley stopped them. Helotes stopped them. And those efforts were nothing compared to what Wal-Mart is up against in the Heights.

Two weeks won't stop Wal-Mart. But the councilman that requested the deferral may be a start. The developers are counting on a 380 agreement with the City to make this development happen. To date, no such agreement has been reached. Political support for such an agreement is erroding very quickly. That is what happens in a democracy, even without zoning.

[usc619]

Like it or not, there's a Wal-Mart coming to a block near you!

[AtticaFlinch]

Wal-Mart can be defeated. Spring Valley stopped them. Helotes stopped them. And those efforts were nothing compared to what Wal-Mart is up against in the Heights.

Two weeks won't stop Wal-Mart. But the councilman that requested the deferral may be a start. The developers are counting on a 380 agreement with the City to make this development happen. To date, no such agreement has been reached. Political support for such an agreement is erroding very quickly. That is what happens in a democracy, even without zoning.

Alright, let's run with this. Let's say you're successful. Let's say the Walmart doesn't build. If that happens, what have you accomplished? All your talk of corporate tyranny, democracy and noble and just causes, what did you do? What did you achieve? How did preventing the Walmart from building make the world better?

Preservation of a neighborhood's character isn't making the world better, and that's all you've achieved. Stop mythologizing your quest. You're slaying windmills, not giants. Your quest isn't noble, it's a farce. Preventing this Walmart won't make Walmart a better corporate citizen. It just robs poor people within the loop of their hard won earnings, and it robs your neighbors of convenience. Your goal isn't noble. Your goal is selfish.

[J008]

Your goal is selfish.

So what! What is wrong with advocating for ones own self interest? That is the only reason Wal Mart exsists is to promote their self interest.

The only altruistic argument I have heard is the one that WalMart will somehow help the low income folks and that residents should shut up and support this greater good, less they be called elitists.... or worse yet HIPSTER elitists.

Seriously, Are there really that many Hipsters? In the Heights? against Wal Mart? and that are "elite"?

[aggie92]

but in my opionion actual residents should be able to determine what they want there neighborhood to look like (most of the ones I know are against it), especially if they are being asked to subsidize it.

Most of the ones I know are for this Walmart (all Heights area residents). Guess we need to start posting how many friends now.

I'm with some of the others on this and don't quite get what the opposition gains by trying to win a fight against Walmart.

[aggie92]

Maybe the more relevant inquiry should be what are the true motivations for people who support cramming a suburban style big box retailer that has a proven track record of having a negative impact on the surrounding area in terms of crime, traffic one of the few neighborhoods left in the City of Houston that has not been consumed by big box and small business opportunity into retail and PUD hyperconformity? Is it class envy? Is it a bizarre schadenfreude to hope that unique character of the Heights and West End are crushed by the big box retailers and cookie-cutter residential developers?

Did you forget that in terms of Big Box Retailers there is already Target, Home Depot, and Lowe's? I'm personally glad that all 3 of these came to the Heights. As much as I try to go to C&D Hardware, it is just not the same selection when I am working on a project and have the options that both Lowes and Home Depot present. My only dislike against Target is that they built it too small without a large enough grocery section.

[AtticaFlinch]

So what! What is wrong with advocating for ones own self interest?

Lots, especially if your selfishness can unnecessarily harm or disadvantage other people. That said it may be refreshing to hear it anyhow. In fact, it would be the first time on this thread someone opposing the Walmart construction was honest about their reasons. I really wish someone would say that rather than continue to wrap up their disdain in the same-ol' retreaded sanctimonious BS of which we're becoming so familiar.

That is the only reason Wal Mart exsists is to promote their self interest.

Agreed. I'm not a fan of Walmart. On a macro level, I have a huge problem with Walmart. Their blatant disregard for valuable archaeological sites is like a knife in my archaeologist heart. Then again, I recognize this isn't entirely Walmart's fault. (Hell, this article lists the Tennessee Titans, the state of Georgia and Whole Foods (?!) as also being bad corporate stewards to important American Indian burial and other heritage sites.) Our lax laws, our disregard for our past and the ridiculously high cost of living makes Walmart and its practices an inevitability. If you want to protest Walmart as a company, I'm right there with you. If you want to protest our values as a nation, I'm on board. If you want to protest our paucity of corporate restrictions, I'll join the picket line with you. But, on a micro level, I appreciate my Walmart. Having one nearby sure has freed up my disposable income. If you were smart, you'd let it free up your disposable income too.

Edit: I can't think of a better selfish reason than that. Can you?

The only altruistic argument I have heard is the one that WalMart will somehow help the low income folks and that residents should shut up and support this greater good, less they be called elitists.... or worse yet HIPSTER elitists.

I know! What jerks we are! How dare we put the welfare of others before you!

Edit: Also, much earlier in the thread I proofed out how this Walmart would be better for the environment than forcing people to drive farther out. It's not necessarily altruistic, but it is planet positive and falls in line with my KPFT membership.

Seriously, Are there really that many Hipsters? In the Heights? against Wal Mart? and that are "elite"?

No, there aren't. But the ones who are there sure are loud.

Edited August 10, 2010 by AtticaFlinch

[TheNiche]

Well, rather than continue to just naysay my understanding of what little context was present, why don't you explain what you meant, but this time clearly? Clear communication is a good way to avoid being misunderstood, if I was indeed misunderstanding you. Perhaps it'll help if I explain the path to my own conclusions, and you can tell me where I erred. In reading your statement, my initial thought was that you must be saying since Walmart's supposed building plan included the bulldozing of one single solitary low-income apartment complex, then that must be wryly conclusive evidence Walmart doesn't actually benefit any and all people who live in low income housing. Am I right so far? Because I didn't think so. I thought, "How ridiculous that I'd think that's what dbigtex meant, especially as he's proven to be reasonable and generally above bad logic and hyperbole." But what else could it have meant, what else could it have meant? I stretched the openings into the darkest recesses of my brain hoping that somewhere within would lie a clue as to what you meant. You're above piss poor logic and inflated exaggeration, at least you have been in the past, so surely you must have an alternate reason, something I hadn't considered. I clambered through my brain searching for other permutations in logic, and I followed individual thought patterns, though mostly to dead-ends. At one point, near the end of my patience, I stumbled across the assumption that indeed, surely dbigtex understood this to be the only possible set of poor people this Walmart would benefit. Otherwise, his (your) statement could only possibly be pointless and wrong. I knew there was no way for you to avoid being wrong, but I didn't want your statement to be pointless and wrong.

Yes, this is an accurate retelling of how I reached that conclusion as, like you, I never hyperbolize. And resultingly, that's what I went with. That's what I wrote for the whole world to see. That's how I publicly interpreted your words. But, you've told me I was wrong, and you told be I'm being wrong deliberately. So I asked you to clarify your statement, but again, you just told me I'm being deliberately wrong. You haven't given me any insight into this "context" of which you speak so elusively, but hopefully someday perhaps we can reach those dizzying heights of lucidity. Hopefully someday I can know just what the hell you meant. For now, you just appear churlish, and as if you're avoiding giving an explanation for what you meant. But I pretty sure I'm probably being deliberately wrong about that too.

Best. Rant. Ever. I read it over with a Lewis Black voice in my head.

[TheNiche]

The only altruistic argument I have heard is the one that WalMart will somehow help the low income folks and that residents should shut up and support this greater good, less they be called elitists.... or worse yet HIPSTER elitists.

Seriously, Are there really that many Hipsters? In the Heights? against Wal Mart? and that are "elite"?

You didn't attend White Linen Night, I gather. The WASPs were handing out anti-Wal-Mart yard signs to other WASPs...in between browsing Wind-Water Gallery, Harold's, Urban Soles, and checking out the BMWs and Minis on offer by Momentum.

I'll concede a point, if only for the sake of reasonableness. There aren't many hipsters in the Heights. You're right. It's mostly just very WASPy. They would prefer to think of themselves as hipsters, but aren't fooling anybody. The ones wearing the anti-SJL stickers came off particularly as Woodlanders.

[dbigtex56]

To clarify: People have made the argument that Walmart will benefit low-income people in the Heights area.

In the context of that argument - which, I assumed, was understood - I made a remark that people who live in an affordable apartment complex on Heights Blvd might feel that this development was not beneficial to them, as it involved the demolition of their homes.

How this statement came to be so misunderstood is a mystery to me.

[TheNiche]

To clarify: People have made the argument that Walmart will benefit low-income people in the Heights area.

In the context of that argument - which I assumed, was understood - I made a remark that people who live in an affordable apartment complex on Heights Blvd might not feel that this development was beneficial to them, as it involved the demolition of their home.

Exactly how this statement came to be so misunderstood is a mystery to me.

ONE: The Heights is just one neighborhood that will be served by this Wal-Mart. The 2nd Ward will be served by this Wal-Mart and is certainly more aesthetically and economically prominent than the Heights; why not call the Wal-Mart's service area the "2nd Ward area"?

TWO: The firm that I worked for the did apartment demo/rebuilds made it rather worthwhile for the renters. Muss and fuss is not worth a few concessions on the back end.

[Jesse]

The 3 mile distance is somewhat arbitrary, but I figured it sounded reasonable.

Edited August 10, 2010 by Jesse

[Jesse]

Since everyone here clearly knows what everyone else thinks and wants, let's put it to a vote (which in my opinion is what the city should do):

http://www.houstonarchitecture.com/haif/topic/23710-walmart-at-i-10-and-yale-for-or-against/

[AtticaFlinch]

To clarify: People have made the argument that Walmart will benefit low-income people in the Heights area.

In the context of that argument - which, I assumed, was understood - I made a remark that people who live in an affordable apartment complex on Heights Blvd might feel that this development was not beneficial to them, as it involved the demolition of their homes.

How this statement came to be so misunderstood is a mystery to me.

I take it you're the type of person who wouldn't sacrifice one person to save a thousand.

And no, your intent was perfectly understood. What's not understood is how you let the demolition of one apartment complex speak for the plight of all poor people in the area. Surely it sucks that some poor people will lose their crappy homes, but the far greater benefit is that many of those same people will now be able to fill their new crappy homes with more food and functional solutions for modern living. Their buying power will still increase, even if their home base has moved.

Since everyone here clearly knows what everyone else thinks and wants, let's put it to a vote (which in my opinion is what the city should do):

http://www.houstonar...for-or-against/

Why? Not why should we vote, but why do you think the city should put it to a vote? Why should you or I have a say in what happens with this piece of property?

No one can articulate a cogent answer to that question. There is not a good reason why. Should we vote every time a new construction project comes up? Or just ones involving Walmart? Or just ones in the Heights? What makes Walmart or the Heights so special? I get that Walmart is the lightning rod for retail run amok, and I get that (some) Heights residents think they're God's chosen people, but c'mon. Just because some people's perception is askew doesn't mean the rest of us have to indulge their idiosyncracies. The people of this city shouldn't be forced to the polls every time some virulently vocal minority group gets their knickers knotted up. That group of loudmouths should be slapped on the hand, told to play well with others and stop acting like brats.

[Gooch]

You didn't attend White Linen Night, I gather. The WASPs were handing out anti-Wal-Mart yard signs to other WASPs...in between browsing Wind-Water Gallery, Harold's, Urban Soles, and checking out the BMWs and Minis on offer by Momentum.

I'll concede a point, if only for the sake of reasonableness. There aren't many hipsters in the Heights. You're right. It's mostly just very WASPy. They would prefer to think of themselves as hipsters, but aren't fooling anybody. The ones wearing the anti-SJL stickers came off particularly as Woodlanders.

I'm not sure how your blatent bigotry against WASPs is any different than their supposed bigotry against Walmart shoppers.

[Jesse]

Why? Not why should we vote, but why do you think the city should put it to a vote? Why should you or I have a say in what happens with this piece of property?

No one can articulate a cogent answer to that question. There is not a good reason why. Should we vote every time a new construction project comes up? Or just ones involving Walmart? Or just ones in the Heights? What makes Walmart or the Heights so special? I get that Walmart is the lightning rod for retail run amok, and I get that (some) Heights residents think they're God's chosen people, but c'mon. Just because some people's perception is askew doesn't mean the rest of us have to indulge their idiosyncracies. The people of this city shouldn't be forced to the polls every time some virulently vocal minority group gets their knickers knotted up. That group of loudmouths should be slapped on the hand, told to play well with others and stop acting like brats.

I think that in normal, day to day business, you're right - putting everything to a vote would basically grind life to a halt. That's why (in theory) we elect representatives who think along the same lines as we do to vote for us.

However, I think this project is different. Not specifically because it is WalMart, but because it has obviously caused quite a stir in the neighborhood. Sure, WalMart is the 'lightning rod for retail run amok' (have you seen "Wall-E"?), but this entire development is going to create a "larger than normal impact". Installation of multiple traffic lights, creation/extension of streets, increase in the number and size of delivery trucks to the area, a focal point for more cars to travel to/from on a daily basis.

I guess that's the distinction that seems to be lost here... is the argument against WalMart? Or against Airbinder's development? I suspect its the latter being masked by the former. People wonder why Airbinder has kept quiet on this whole thing? Who wouldn't? They're reaping the (monetary) benefits while Walmart is taking the heat. People forget that Airbinder is taking down the apartment complex, Airbinder is extending the streets, installing lights, etc. Walmart is just 1 tenant of the lot, correct?

I'm not hiding the fact that I do not like Walmart, and I will not shop there. But the devil's advocate argument here is what if it were a giant highrise (ie: Asby Highrise)? Or a(nother) Home Depot? Or Macy's? I wonder what the arguments would be then - would it focus on the store itself or the impact to the streets/neighborhood? It's a hard question to answer - are people anti-Walmart or anti-development? Both? Neither? 1 of each?

I don't think Heights residents are "god's chosen people", by the way, and I would sincerely appreicate you not continuously making argumentative remarks like that. We're a neighborhood, much like any other. We're tight knit - it's not often in Houston (that's I've found so far) that so many residents take time to say hi, wave, or walk along the streets and paths. It's a community. We care about or neighborhood, our people, and our way of life. Don't you? Wherever it is that you live - don't you care about what goes on around you? Don't you watch out for your friends and neighbors? Didn't you choose your area to live in because you liked it? Don't you want to preserve your way of life, and make every effort to make it better? If you don't, I truly pity you. To insinuate that Heights residents are "better" than everyone else because we care is disgusting.

[s3mh]

Alright, let's run with this. Let's say you're successful. Let's say the Walmart doesn't build. If that happens, what have you accomplished? All your talk of corporate tyranny, democracy and noble and just causes, what did you do? What did you achieve? How did preventing the Walmart from building make the world better?

Preservation of a neighborhood's character isn't making the world better, and that's all you've achieved. Stop mythologizing your quest. You're slaying windmills, not giants. Your quest isn't noble, it's a farce. Preventing this Walmart won't make Walmart a better corporate citizen. It just robs poor people within the loop of their hard won earnings, and it robs your neighbors of convenience. Your goal isn't noble. Your goal is selfish.

Here is what will happen if Wal-Mart is stopped:

HEB will step in Wal-Mart's place and open a store that is similar to the Buffalo Speedway location (HEB was on the verge of a deal for the property and is still willing to do it). The immediate neighborhood that abuts the site will see their property values increase as they will be within walking distance from a new HEB. Empty lots in that neighborhood will be developed, meaning economic benefits for everyone from construction workers to developers. The HEB will solidify the residential aspect of the Heights, West End and Rice Military neighborhoods and prevent the domino effect of big box development that always follows a Wal-Mart. Traffic in the area will be kept at manageable levels. The police department will not be put in a position where it cannot respond to residents because it has to go out to Wal-Mart a couple times a day to respond to calls (they are under a hiring freeze for the foreseeable future).

The poor downtrodden folks who must shop at Wal-Mart will have to drive an extra few miles to get to either Silber/I10 or Crosstimbers/45. Or they could go to Ross on Shepherd and get better deals on clothes or got to Fiesta/Kroger/HEB and get competitive prices for groceries.

This is about one neighborhood and not about the whole world. But, don't underestimate the power of one. If this effort is successful, others will here about it and follow the example. HOAs in Meyerland are organizing to pressure the landlord to refuse to renew Wal-Mart's lease because of the crime problem at that location.

And as for the "selfish" comment, why is it that Wal-Mart can pursue its own selfish goals and your poor downtrodden friends have an absolute right to be 4-7 minutes closer to a Wal-Mart, but the residents who live in the neighborhood and have to deal with all the adverse effects of a Wal-Mart are selfish yuppie, hipster, wasp, crybabbies?

[AtticaFlinch]

I think that in normal, day to day business, you're right - putting everything to a vote would basically grind life to a halt. That's why (in theory) we elect representatives who think along the same lines as we do to vote for us.

However, I think this project is different. Not specifically because it is WalMart, but because it has obviously caused quite a stir in the neighborhood. Sure, WalMart is the 'lightning rod for retail run amok' (have you seen "Wall-E"?), but this entire development is going to create a "larger than normal impact". Installation of multiple traffic lights, creation/extension of streets, increase in the number and size of delivery trucks to the area, a focal point for more cars to travel to/from on a daily basis.

If normal is the current state, then any development would have a larger than normal impact. That still doesn't merit any special consideration from voters. The basic point is, no one would give a crap if this wasn't a Walmart. If this was a highrise development, HAIF commenters would be saying things like, "Oh man, I sure do wish it had a zillion floors and not just 25," and "You should just be happy they're building that many. Bad economy and all." If it was a midrise development, the comments would be along the lines of, "I sure do hope they put in an Amy's Ice Cream with all the useful ground floor retail," and "Yeah, I could use an Amy's Ice Cream within biking distance. Then I could get my workout and my ice cream all at once tee hee."

Some people are full of hate and anger, and very often they don't know why, and they have no clue where to direct it. So they center their impotent rage on the biggest thing around. It's everywhere. It's on the news. It's on the interwebs. It's in damned near every neighborhood and small town in America. It's more American than apple pie and baseball. It's the center of life in some communities. And why not be angry with such an imposing behemoth. It's like all that impotent rage I had against my parents and "the man" when I was a teenager. That's what this rage is against Walmart. It's angst. The world sucks right now. Walmart is clearly a villain. Therefore, let's rail against the beast. The only problem is, Walmart's not the beast. Walmart's the thumbnail on the beast. The entire system is flawed, and raging against this machine is dumb and pointless. It's teenage aggression. It's misdirected anger. Walmart isn't the problem. Walmart has never been the problem. The system that allows Walmart to exist is the problem.

But many people don't care. They take their impotent rage and rename it Sancho Panza, and they take off on foolhardy crusades to defeat imaginary monsters.

I guess that's the distinction that seems to be lost here... is the argument against WalMart? Or against Airbinder's development? I suspect its the latter being masked by the former. People wonder why Airbinder has kept quiet on this whole thing? Who wouldn't? They're reaping the (monetary) benefits while Walmart is taking the heat. People forget that Airbinder is taking down the apartment complex, Airbinder is extending the streets, installing lights, etc. Walmart is just 1 tenant of the lot, correct?

It's against Walmart, and it's against Walmart shoppers. Every other reason given is an after-the-fact justification.

I'm not hiding the fact that I do not like Walmart, and I will not shop there. But the devil's advocate argument here is what if it were a giant highrise (ie: Asby Highrise)? Or a(nother) Home Depot? Or Macy's? I wonder what the arguments would be then - would it focus on the store itself or the impact to the streets/neighborhood? It's a hard question to answer - are people anti-Walmart or anti-development? Both? Neither? 1 of each?

There would be no argument then. People would be positively giddy with eager anticipation.

I don't think Heights residents are "god's chosen people", by the way, and I would sincerely appreicate you not continuously making argumentative remarks like that. We're a neighborhood, much like any other. We're tight knit - it's not often in Houston (that's I've found so far) that so many residents take time to say hi, wave, or walk along the streets and paths. It's a community. We care about or neighborhood, our people, and our way of life. Don't you? Wherever it is that you live - don't you care about what goes on around you? Don't you watch out for your friends and neighbors? Didn't you choose your area to live in because you liked it? Don't you want to preserve your way of life, and make every effort to make it better? If you don't, I truly pity you.

Frankly, I don't try to "preserve" anything. The world regularly changes, and I welcome the change. And if you truly think you can manage to keep the world static and unchanging, or even if you merely want it to remain static and unchanging, then I pity you.

To insinuate that Heights residents are "better" than everyone else because we care is disgusting.

If you want me to stop being combative, how about you stop mischaracterizing what I've said? I don't think Heights residents are any better than anyone else. Many of you do though (I took the liberty of bolding a statement where you've set yourself apart for your uniqueness from the rest of the residents of Houston in the quoted statement before this one). And it's not because you "care", for whatever that even means. It's because you've blindly jumped on the cool hate-Walmart bandwagon, and you haven't given any real consideration to the impact your position makes - not just on you, not just on your neighbors, but on everyone who lives within the loop and everyone who passes through. Plus, at the end of the day, you don't own this property and therefore have no right to dictate the terms of development for it, not under current law, and to change the law midstream to affect one developer and one buyer reeks of cronyism worse than what already exists - and this time suppossedly in the name of what's right and good.

[AtticaFlinch]

Here is what will happen if Wal-Mart is stopped:

HEB will step in Wal-Mart's place and open a store that is similar to the Buffalo Speedway location (HEB was on the verge of a deal for the property and is still willing to do it). The immediate neighborhood that abuts the site will see their property values increase as they will be within walking distance from a new HEB. Empty lots in that neighborhood will be developed, meaning economic benefits for everyone from construction workers to developers. The HEB will solidify the residential aspect of the Heights, West End and Rice Military neighborhoods and prevent the domino effect of big box development that always follows a Wal-Mart. Traffic in the area will be kept at manageable levels. The police department will not be put in a position where it cannot respond to residents because it has to go out to Wal-Mart a couple times a day to respond to calls (they are under a hiring freeze for the foreseeable future).

The poor downtrodden folks who must shop at Wal-Mart will have to drive an extra few miles to get to either Silber/I10 or Crosstimbers/45. Or they could go to Ross on Shepherd and get better deals on clothes or got to Fiesta/Kroger/HEB and get competitive prices for groceries.

1) You don't know any of this to be true. It's all speculation. You have none of the secret boardroom meeting details between Ainbender, HEB or Walmart. You've scapegoated one company in this whole ordeal and lionized another. You have absolutely no idea why HEB pulled out, and even if they did pull out becuase Walmart made a better offer, then ask yourself why HEB didn't counter. Also ask yourself why should Ainbender be forced to accept a lower bid on their property just to make you feel better. They aren't responsible to you.

2) You completely didn't answer my question. I didn't ask you to speculate about the future course of events should the Walmart not build. I asked you in what way forcing the Walmart to not build makes the world any better. I'm curious if the positive benefits of not building the Walmart would outweigh the positive benefits of building the Walmart. Frankly, giving about 500 thousand people a higher quality of life rates higher in my book than preserving the character of a neighborhood for about 30 thousand people. (Which I still fail to see how the character of the Heights will be affected by this Walmart anyhow.)

This is about one neighborhood and not about the whole world. But, don't underestimate the power of one. If this effort is successful, others will here about it and follow the example. HOAs in Meyerland are organizing to pressure the landlord to refuse to renew Wal-Mart's lease because of the crime problem at that location.

And as for the "selfish" comment, why is it that Wal-Mart can pursue its own selfish goals and your poor downtrodden friends have an absolute right to be 4-7 minutes closer to a Wal-Mart, but the residents who live in the neighborhood and have to deal with all the adverse effects of a Wal-Mart are selfish yuppie, hipster, wasp, crybabbies?

I don't know, why are you acting like "selfish yuppie, hipster, wasp, crybabbies [sic]"? I wish you'd stop already, it's embarrassing to the children.

[SilverJK]

imposing personal beliefs on others property rights and saying it is because you "care", classic. Would it be okay if Walmart built just off the back of the current buildings on the property, so it still looks like a rundown vacant lot from the road? You yuppies disgust me (as I ride my vespa to the farmers market.... doh!)

Edited August 10, 2010 by SilverJK