Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 07/30/09 in all areas

  1. 1 point
    I always get weird looks when I run to the balcony with the tripod and camera. Tonight their was the first lightning storm… or I should say… first lightning since we moved in. I took about 20 timed shots altogether and only 4 or so were workable. This was the best one of the bunch. I hear they were talking about this strike on the tv/radio yesterday, but i missed it. a huge image link you can zoom in and pan around. http://www.customminds.com/cityscape/2009-07-22/ new blog i created yesterday (testing it out) http://www.customminds.com/photography-blog/
  2. 1 point
    I hope to god that it's not at the Berry Center, I am pretty sure that it will not be.
  3. 1 point
  4. 1 point
    The question is whether you received the fair market value for the vehicle and whatever your out of pocket costs were. If you did, then there's nothing left to recover. If you can document additional losses, you might get something else, but you will have a hard time getting a lawyer to handle the case given the small (in the scheme of things) amount.
  5. 1 point
    Go ahead and show us these studies.
  6. 1 point
  7. 1 point
    further proof that people will whine about anything on this board. people complain when nothing gets built in midtown, then they complain that too many bars and not enough restaurants are being built. Now we have complaints about the origin and price range of the restaurants being built.
  8. 1 point
    Why are people so obsessed with talking on phones ALL the damn time? You hear these conversations everywhere. Just babbling on about nothing. Or the self important blowhards who are 'doing business' for the whole world to hear. I value phone time with people I care about, and I do business over the phone as is reasonably necessary, but for the most part I consider a ringing phone to be an imposition. In the car, I prefer to minimize distraction so I can drive defensively, and save my hide from all the drivers who think they're so skilled the laws of physics and basic principles of cognition don't apply to them. I'm beginning to believe we have raised an entire generation who's self worth is measured in cell phone minutes, and who are emotionally incapable of just being quiet and alone with their thoughts.... but that's too far OT. Oops, almost forgot: You kids get off my lawn.
  9. 1 point
    Also, I doubt a driver who is busy gabbing away on his phone would notice that he's in a school zone, anyhow. I kind of hate these "illegal in a school zone" things -- it's like a lawmaker doesn't have the balls to make an outright ban, but thinks he might get it passed if children are involved.
  10. 1 point
    Anyone got a contact for this? I am ready to start following and writing about it. Please pm me if you do.
  11. 1 point
    Fame City was the bomb back in 1986, and will the mountion in the rendering be call Mount Houston? http://www.tshaonlin...s/MM/hrmuq.html
  12. 0 points
    It does have a "Simpson's" quality about it. Maybe it's the cheap colors or the mundane sky. I say we build it. I'm sure citykid could add about 20 more floors to one of those towers. I would definitely approve of that.
  13. 0 points
    As an "outer-looper", I had no clue this Sears was even open, and I drive by it at least three times a week. I find this statement... insulting. You should move to the inner loop.
  14. 0 points
  15. 0 points
    "Famous last words." The problem is everyone thinks they are better drivers than the rest of the world, and the brain wiring that makes other people drive the equivalent of being drunk while driving and talking on the phone somehow just isn't present in them. Jeez buddy, wake up and smell the coffee. It is EXACTLY because of people like you that believe they are special human beings that we need more laws. The hands-free device thing is a bit of a cop out as well. Studies consistently show that they don't make a difference safety-wise.
  16. -1 points
    There are many Tier-One-correlated variables already listed in your statement; furthermore, I do not believe your list of variables to be exhaustive. You didn't mention football at all, for instance. Of these many variables, some are more important (i.e. take priority) and likely correlate weakly. In a circumstance where an institution has a finite budget (which is to say, every circumstance), capital and operating budgets should reflect these priorities. Furthermore, In the case of on-campus university-operated student housing, much of the existing stock was constructed in a different era and is a legacy of the past, not necessarily reflecting a practical future. The core of your argument seems to be that they have a physical plant of known characteristics, they are better (for reasons not very well articulated), UH should aspire to be like them, and so UH should have a physical plant of similar characteristics. This is poor reasoning. My own analytical paradigm is as follows: first identify the function of UH, second identify what factors allow that function to be optimally fulfilled provided a finite budget. If the function of UH is to be like UT-Austin or TAMU, then UH needs university-operated student housing. If the function of UH is as described in its mission statements, then university-operated student housing is a dubious proposition at best.
  17. -1 points
    Don't look now, but this thread is at risk of becoming complementary and optimistic toward HP. Stop it right now. We didn't have 237 pages of negativity in order to thow it all away because the office space got leased, House of Blues is booming, and Lucky Strike is actually going to open. Somebody throw in a downer of a post! Don't you know that "Lidz" didn't make it!!!!
  18. -1 points
  19. -1 points
    I've download several historic maps of the southeast Harris County and northern Galveston County areas from the Perry-Castaneda Map Collection at UT's website. The historic and topographical are the ones of most interest here. Especially of interest is a 1919 map of "Friendswood", which actually covers all of southeast Harris County from Pasadena down. It shows Galveston Road from South Houston down to League City, and the only place where it diverges from the railroad track is in Webster. Someone driving down Galveston Road would have come to a dead end at what is now Nasa 1, made that jog to the left to go down Old Galveston Road, and taken that across Clear Creek, ending up on Kansas Street in League City. The map of League City is not as accurate as the Harris County side, so I can't say with certainty which way the road went after that.
  20. -1 points
    A total ban on cell phone use while driving would be better, with massive prison time for anyone who causes an accident while using one (maybe not prison, but some major penalty). The bad driving caused by phone use is getting ridiculous. Hang up and watch the road! I'm getting tired of a) Near misses caused by drivers gabbing away on some inconsequential matter Drivers gently weaving between several lanes while talking on the phone c) Drivers going 30mph one minute on the freeway, then speeding up to 65 then back to 35, all while having a phone stuck to their ear Kind of a pet peeve of mine...
  21. -1 points
    Agreed. What is the sense in saying it is illegal to use a mobile in a school zone, but it is OK anywhere else?
  22. -1 points
    Your beliefs go against all fo the studies on the topic, which indicate that talking on a cellphone while driving is as dangerous as drinking and driving. This doesn't mean that everyone is going to be equally affected, any more than everyone who blows 0.08 is equally affected. It does mean, in general, that we're all safer if we don't allow the use of cellphones at all while driving. You may consider that an infringement on your liberties. I don't, because you can still pull to the side of the road and talk. As for passengers in the car, the studies show that while they are a distraction, the impact is small compared to cellphones.
  23. -1 points
    Yall must have some kind of attention deficit problem...I can talk on a phone, and drive, in exactly the same manner and fashion as if I were not on it at all. If Im not on the phone Im listening to the radio, paying the same amount of attention to it, as I would be a person on the phone. It does not take one single bit more of concentration (for me) to be on the phone than it does to talk to a person in the car, which I also do when I have a passenger. As I said in the first 2 responses, I use my hands free blue tooth - and I never text, or dial the phone while driving....heck I dont even dial when Im not using the bluetooth...its just easier to say, call (insert name here) than it is to look the number up and dial it. I have seen the studies, they all show that texting is the same as drinking and driving, not talking with a blue tooth device, and I don't disagree with that - its almost impossible to text and drive...heck its difficult to just text with how small the keys on the phones have gotten. But if your not holding the phone, which I dont, I do not see at all, how your driving is effected unless your just old and slow. Like it or not, I am confident in my ability to drive while I talk on the phone - your opinion, or a stupid law to grab money is not going to change that. And study or no study, I still think a person in the car is a larger distraction than a hands free phone ever could be. A baby is constantly requiring attention, a toddler is worse, a young child is screaming, spilling, unbuckling, fighting,etc... teenagers do whatever it is that they do now, and normal adults talk - they talk about the same things they would talk about if they were on the phone, so there is no difference there. The difference between having a passenger and being on the phone is that you have the added distraction of the persons movements, and emotions, but a slight advantage in a second set of eyes. To me all the studies show is that some people cant do both safely - I know I can. I can also handle a gun safely - Im sure its the same groups of people who are out to save us from ourselves that dont want cell phone in cars, also dont want people to have guns. Its all a money grab in the name of safety - and its very difficult for a politician to stand up and say he is not for safety, let alone the extra money it brings. It may sound like Im some cocky punk kid who thinks the rules dont apply to him, but thats not the case - I know my driving abilities, I don't speed, I don't drive aggressively, and I do a whole lot of coasting... for me (maybe not you) its not distracting or difficult to talk and drive, and I suspect its not for a huge problem for alot of folks. Its just the politicians out to govern all us to protect us from those who probably should not be driving anyway.
  24. -1 points
    Yes, on that map there appear to be many streets that have not existed to my knowledge in recent history, but may have been there back then. The more that I look at historic aerials of the League City area, the more I realize that there were a LOT of dirt or shell roads laid out back then that did not make for good routes to follow and develop for a city that has grown to the size of League City today. Farm Roads like 1266, 517, 518, 646, etc. are now being used as major thoroughfares as we try to cram subdivisions into parcels that were once used for rice farming. I guess the new highways like 270 and 96 are an attempt to split up all of this raw land in a way that makes sense for suburbanization. There is a lot of work to be done, and in the meantime, I think League City will be a hodge podge of a lot of different things. Large waterfront homes in gated communities right next to previously isolated subdivisions of trailers and shacks on waterfront property (this describes Bacliff, too). New, upscale subdivisions off 96 and South Shore Boulevard that surround the Bayridge Subdivision, the Bayridge Apartments, the UTMB Linen Plant, and a proposed hazardous material collection site. It will take many years before gentrification completely takes over and people completely forget that League City was once a small southern farming town, and not the sprawling bedroom community serving the southeast portion of Houston that it is quickly becoming.
  25. -1 points
    I'm taking one of my girlfriends there after the Ottmar Liebert concert on the 8th. I'm sure she'll love it.
  26. -1 points
    More police would always be welcome.
  27. -1 points
    Estimated 80,000 people. I expect hotel occupancy to be pretty tight in Houston this weekend. And traffic on 290/Hwy 6 to be slow.
  28. -1 points
    I think it is hip. I mean I can go to a bar there and drink some beers with my friends after class. And no, I dont wear dockers but when I do, I DON'T "untuck" my shirt.
  29. -1 points
    I hear the traffic is really bad up there... ugh.
  30. -1 points
    It looks... crowded. But oh well.
  31. -1 points
    Fact is, most humans would scoff at the idea of labeling mayors of Houston as persons of honor. In fact I would wager that most would avoid calling them persons at all.
  32. -2 points
    Given that the developers like to keep mum about such things, the chance that the towers are being axed for good would not surprise me in the least. Ugh.
  33. -3 points
    If you can't safely drive and talk please by all means do not, your just a danger to everybody else out there - but I can do it safely, I've done it safely for years, I do it safely daily, and I am confident that I can continue do it safely in the future, and I don't need a study, a politician, a cop, or any other person who thinks more laws and more regulations are the answer to all our problems to tell me not to do it. More rules, regulations, laws and more of a police state are not the answer to our problems. Why don't we put in mandatory breathylzers in cars, and stop checks and road blocks everywhere to check for everything? I had an open bottle of wine in my car this morning from a dinner party last night...I guess I should have been hauled in and gotten an open container violation at the local road block this morning...Its ridiculous. Everyone here seems so willing to give away all of their freedoms for more "protection", its a weak spineless stance on life... At least with this law I can happily ignore it and go about my day and there isnt anything anyone else can do about it...this will definitely be a law I ignore if it progresses past the hands free restriction. Besides I dont trust the studies at all- for every study that takes one particular side I can find 3 that take the other side. All the "studies" now a days, come with a predetermined outcome that the "researchers" are looking for anyway. Global warming...I mean "climate change" is a great example; there are countless studies that say global warming is a myth, and just as many that say its a fact. All are based on "facts" and "experts"
This leaderboard is set to Chicago/GMT-05:00
  • Create New...