Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 04/18/11 in all areas

  1. 2 points
    I had the privilege of speaking with an Exxon media relations guy and I informed him of the arial photographs we had of the area. I asked him straight up if indeed Exxon was moving forward with an elaborate corporate campus. The gentleman said "I can tell you that site work continues at that location and all options are still on the table---that's anything from leaving things as is on one end to building a new corporate campus on the other. I replied to him, "but sir, there have been thousands of trees cleared from the area and clearly this is in the exact location of the planned corporate campus according to Springwoods Village. Site work requires the removal of thousands of trees?" He replied, a statement on the campus would be released "very soon" and that all he could confirm is that site work continues at that location. When I asked what "very soon" mean, whether it was days or week, he would not comment. So that's the latest from the horses mouth.
  2. 2 points
    the report you posted shows a -9K absorption number for the woodlands, while the numbers i have show +50K thru 1q11... it depends where you're sourcing your numbers as everyonwe tracks them differently. additionally, i know of one and likely 2 major tenants, both currently in greenspoint, that will be vacating their current digs for new ones in the woodlands and neither one of them goes by the name of exxon. i also know of several multifloor tenants who have relocated or intend on relocating from greenspoint to the woodlands in the near future. exxon's departure spells doom for the greenspoint area imo... major tenants do not want to stick around in a ghostown where many of their employees feel unsafe and the amenity pool is shrinking. with the proposed grand parkway construction, hardy toll road, etc transportation between IAH and the woodlands is not a major concern. as most greenspoint employees likely live on the northside anyways, the woodlands is a logical place for many tenants to consider and the amenities that the woodlands provide is a huge draw to large tenants and their employees.
  3. 2 points
    According to you. But are you a Wal-Mart executive or do you own Wal-Mart stock? Then I'd say it's a very safe bet your "opinion" carries no weight at Wal-Mart's corporate headquarters and that soon you'll be joining me and a whole lot of other people shopping at the Heights Wal-Mart. I can't wait. How about you?
  4. 2 points
    Nothing spectacular, but it will certainly be an improvement over what's there now. Hopefully they include street-level retail, it sort of looks that way from the rendering but who knows. http://blogs.chron.c...ionary_pri.html
  5. 2 points
    A quick search netted this article: http://blogs.houstonpress.com/eating/2011/03/tavern_on_west_gray_could_soon.php "Neither Joseph Martin nor the Hanover Company returned phone calls inquiring into the alleged negotiations, but our anonymous tipster claimed that if the acquisition went through, it would be "plus or minus six months" before the Tavern was torn down to make way for a new apartment building."
  6. 1 point
    I just noticed a "request for variance" sign in front of the Tavern Bar, which is located at West Gray and Waugh. The Hanover Company's name is on the sign, and they're requesting a 15' setback, and it also said they're going to build something "multi-family". Does anybody have any additional information on this? Could it be a mid-rise? or a high-rise? or simply another apartment complex? Hanover does some nice stuff, so I'm curious.
  7. 1 point
    That's your choice and you are absolutely free to make it. Whatever makes your boat float. However, I'd like to be free to decide for myself to go to their store in the Heights, and when it opens, I will, if for no other reason than to support free enterprise and oppose... well, I'll be nice and leave it at that.
  8. 1 point
    Some more information, will quote in pieces to address points separately. Updated to 22 floors from previously stated 20 floors: Ground Floor to feature restaurants: Construction details: The rest: Link: http://www.bizjournals.com/houston/blog/2011/04/other-changes-planned-around-new-bbva.html
  9. 1 point
    I heard today from the WF Kirby employees that the opening of the Montrose store is set for June 22nd. Some of them will be moving to the new store and I asked if they knew when it was opening and the guy said "June 22, it just got pushed back by two weeks."
  10. 1 point
    Mai's held their grand reopening over the weekend and I covered the event here: http://innerlooped.com/745/mais-grand-re-opening-with-a-dragon-dance/ There was an awesome dragon dance as part of the opening! The inside of the place is very nice now... but prices still seemed good.
  11. 1 point
    Nice find, here's the listing for it. Includes more than just the tavern, it's almost the entire block. http://www.loopnet.com/Listing/16339311/northeast-corner-of-West-Gray-and-Waugh-1340-West-Gray-Houston-TX/
  12. 1 point
    Ok, there seems to be a lot of discussion on other sites regarding the role that California and Houston had in the design of the Space Shuttle. As the negative feelings have not left me yet (it will be a long time), I want to say some more things about that subject of the California/Houston debate, mainly, as a sort of therapy for me that will keep me from writing some really ugly things on some NYC forums, but also, to add some insight, for whatever its worth. And…there is a lot of trash talk out there on what city did more for the Shuttle design, and the talk is coming from a lot of writers who are speaking from zero experience. I want to tell them some things about the Space Shuttle…because I was there. The bottom line: Both California (Palmdale and Downey) and Houston had important roles early on. For example, the development of the on-board guidance computers, known as General Purpose Computers (GPC’s) was largely an effort that occurred in many places. The Primary Avionics Software was written by IBM in Houston, but the Backup Flight Software was written by Rockwell in California. And thier were individuals here and there who where the only experts in thier field. The alogirthm for the final approach and landing? This one guy named "Howard". The couple of experts that did the reliability analsys? I think it was 2 people, one from Houston and one from MIT. Yet, it was all integrated as a whole and tested, in the Shuttle Avionics Integration Laboratory (SAIL) in JSC Houston. This was the central place. Always was. I will add that the computers themselves were manufactured in upstate Owego/New York. But all the integrated testing – as a complete Shuttle system - was done by Rockwell, Bendix, and Lockheed, in Houston, who had different roles in the laboratory at JSC. In fact, when I joined one of these avionics teams (for an upgrade to the onboard GPC computers in the mid 80’s), there were people from all over the place working on it. I worked with California folks who did the backup flight system (BFS) software, with the teams in Houston for both the hardware and the primary flight software, but I rarely worked with Owego folks. But they all came here to JSC. As time went on and the shuttle program matured, most of the effort consolidated in Houston, until Houston was the primary place for fully integrated Shuttle avionics operations. So, for the majority the program, it was here, period. But at the beginning, California had a big role – for the orbiter, not the whole Shuttle. But they didn’t do everything, just like JSC/Houston didn’t do everything. So I will say this in summary: in my opinion from having worked intimately with the Shuttle avionics: I will say that Houston and Palmdale/Downey had the largest roles in integrating the critical avionics systems that fly it, in the beginning. I think California should get recognition for their early orbiter design work. And they got that on Tuesday, they are going to get a Shuttle. Florida should have gotten recognition for Launch operations, that is undisputable. And it did. But of course Houston should have always gotten the recognition too, as it emerged as the prominent central location for Space Shuttle design and mission operations, for the longest amount of time. The SAIL laboratory was a 3-shift, 24-hour operation for decades. I worked some of those shifts. A lot of people did. And of course there are all the other non avionics systems that JSC worked on which I haven’t even talked about (thermal systems, power, simulators for the astronauts, mission control, etc. etc. etc.) Houston is the undisputed central location for the Shuttle, of any place. There were enough Shuttle orbiters for all three locations, and the Smithsonian. Yet Houston got snubbed in a very suspicious way, given the decades of its history. And that history is undisputed.
  13. 1 point
    If they were going for tourist exposure, then the shuttles should be located at Atlanta (ATL), Chicago (ORD), Los Angeles (LAX), and Dallas/Fort Worth (DFW), where tourists and business travelers alike would be funneled past them by the tens of millions. Not out of the way in obscure third-tier tourist facilities, where they would be seen by only expeditious nerds.
  14. 1 point
  15. 1 point
    Especially once people started questioning why our fearless Republican contingent of politicians did virtually nothing to advance the cause. Now, they have to raise a huge stink to cover up their inaction, and I have every confidence that they will do so. That fearsome letter is just the start! Next up, HEARINGS! Wonder if they'll invite Roger Clemens? He loves talking at those things.
  16. 1 point
    I don't believe it was politically motivated. If it were, I would think that we WOULD have received the shuttle. LA and NYC are already politically safe for Obama... so he has nothing to gain by sending the shuttles to them. Houston (and Texas) is a place Democrats are going to try and make gains in w/ the growing Hispanic population and shift to urban areas. If it were political, they would have tried to woo over voters in potential battle ground states for years to come.
  17. 1 point
    I would never base my vote on something as trivial as where the government chooses to mothball old hardware, but this political angle is suspect. The Smithsonian has long been promised one of the shuttles, and Cape Canaveral is a logical choice. The only "political" choices would be LA and New York. Perhaps I am naive, but what does the President gain by giving a couple of old shuttles to two states that voted solidly Democratic in 2008, and are in no danger in 2012? Nothing. Perhaps Dayton, Ohio would have reaped a political windfall, but they did not get one. This sounds like so much sour grapes, and coming from a state that goes out of its way to sabotage the President's policies, one has to say, what did you expect? This is exactly what Texas' political leaders would have done, so I suppose that is why they are so suspicious that it may have been done to them.
  18. 1 point
    Wait. There are consequences to being a non-compromising, political ideologue? Who knew?
  19. 1 point
    AGAIN with the political yard sign issue....have you not beat that horse to death yet? There are no fewer than 10 posts telling you that it was sarcastic and done with the intent to get a rise out of people, but you keep bringing it up. And you actually ARE wrong more often that you are right, and 99.9% of the times when you are wrong and then someone proves you are wrong with facts and petty things like supporting evidence, you make no response, and then 5 posts later you repeat the same factual inaccuracy. It is frustrating beyond belief, because you seem to want debate, as long as the momentum of the debate is on your side. When the tides change, you no longer debate, you just ignore...that is not debating. It is sticking your head in the sand. Nobody believes a liar even when he is telling the truth. That is why nobody believes you. Everything you say about Walmart may be true, but considering how often you were either lying or just completely wrong in the historic thread, it is not a giant leap to figure out why nobody believes you about walmart either...except for those people who obviously share your hatred of walmart....they might believe the sky is falling as long as we could blame Walmart.
  20. 0 points
    You can hate Walmart all day long, but there is no doubt that as inflation rises, Walmart will be better positioned than any other retailer to leverage its size and buying abilities to keep prices lower than its competitors. Have you seen the price of a Steak recently? A steak is up almost 50% from a year ago....Walmart will be able to eat some of that cost in order to offer it cheaper than their consumers. They do this constantly...more stores, more saturation. Fortunately for Houston, there is enough competition that Walmarts business plan will never shut down all the competition....but your hatred of Walmart will have you paying more for your food than if you shopped elsewhere. Target may be cheaper now, but its unlikely they will be able to eat the inflation that is coming down the food lines as well as Walmart. I am getting almost 50% more for my live cows this year than I did last year at the auction....I can tell you right now that the feed lot is not going to take a lower profit margin, and the shipping is more expensive thanks to higher fuel prices...add to that our brilliant ethanol usage which drives up feed costs and reduces mpg and there is simply no possible way that food prices are not going to rise even higher. Walmart is well positioned to take advantage of that exact scenario....when times are good people dont bargain shop nearly as much as they do when times are tight. This is a good scenario for Walmart....
  21. 0 points
    I think that is a GREAT idea! HOwever, I also think that if Heights residents are getting mailers enticing us to shop at the Silber store, it shows that the Silber store is close enough to the Heights and that a 3rd location within a 7 mile radius is unnecessary.
  22. 0 points
    Of course it has something to do with politics, (you might want to read my auto-signature again). Are you really surprised that Texas isn't getting a lot of love from the federal government given the current state leadership's relationship with the federal government? My point was that there is a legitimate case for locating a shuttle in Los Angeles and specifically at the California Science Center. The museum has a strong space exhibit already, the city has a long history in the aerospace industry and it's a free public museum in the second largest metro in the country. With New York, it comes down to one question - are you locating the shuttle based on historical connection to the shuttle program or are you locating it to make it visible to the highest possible number of people? If you're locating it based on history, then yes, it needs to come to Houston, but if you're locating it to provide maximum visibility, then it's hard to argue that it shouldn't go to New York. In each case, they placed shuttles in locations that would provide the maximum tourist exposure. We can argue whether that was the right criteria to use, but assuming that was the goal, then they put them in the right places.
  23. -1 points
    Its political. Obama has no chance in Texas...he knows it. The shuttles will increase revenue through tourism....he is repaying a favor. These States helped him get elected, and he wants them to help him get re-elected. He is prepaying them for part of the 2012 campaign. What does he have to gain in Texas? Nothing....Texas is still a solidly red state for the time being. Texas has the JSC...if he gave one to JSC it would not look political at all....it would look deserved, earned...like the right thing to do. That is not the Obama way....I was surprised Chicago was not a nominee. As to ideologues not being good at dealmaking...I can't think of more ideological politicians than Obama/Reid/Pelosi. They are farther to the left than the tea-party is to the right....you can't meet in the middle of any political discussion when one group of people wants the government to coddle everyone for everything cradle to grave, and make sure that everyone has equal everything regardless of work. and the other party wants the government out of everything except for the Military. Both parties spend too much money....After watching the "compromise" on the budget play out, financially speaking I dont see much of a difference between parties. Both are completely out of touch with reality. We are losing our world standing as a super power, an economic leader, and the only thing our politicians want to argue about is more of the same....a 38 billion dollar reduction in a 1.3 trillion dollar increase in our deficit from the new budget....only in DC can that be an accomplishment.
  24. -1 points
    I must have missed all the letters to NASA that SLJ, Al Green, Gene Green and mayor Parker wrote outside of and prior to the official "Bring the Shuttle to Houston" contingent.
  25. -1 points
    Walmart is very well know as one of the most penny pinching companies in the world. They would not send a $5 gift card out unless they were very serious about getting the recipient to become a shopper at the new Silber store. Add that to the fact that many getting the gift cards live way closer to the Heights location, and Walmart's business strategy is pretty clear. They want to saturate the Houston market and try to beat the competition not by having the best products at the best price (Target won recent price comparisons promiting a "we'll match competitors" campaign) or by having the better shopping experience (Walmart has lost customers to Dollar stores because they are much easier to get in and out of for purchases of weekly staples than Walmart), but by simply being everywhere. The Target at Sawyer will eventually be surrounded by four Walmarts (counting the proposed Wayside location). Even if Target at Sawyer beats the pants off Walmart on Yale, they will lose the war because Walmart will have a greater market share simply by having so many stores. Walmart has previously used its largesse to increase its profits on the supply side and is doing the same on the demand side.
  26. -1 points
    I changed my avatar to protest the rapidly-passing bill to get rid of the night speed limit. I believe all the "reasons" for getting rid of this to be inaccurate: 1) Supporters say that other states don't have a separate night speed limit (but said state's overall speed limit is lower) 2) Supporters say that headlight technology has gotten better (but many cars are not top-of-the-line, and studies have shown there's no good replacement for daylight. Plus, as you drive, your "lit vision" gets narrower) Additionally, no one has taken into account that removing the night speed limit and altering others to 75 is a needless hit to the budget, plus higher speed limits mean more accidents and gas usage. What say you?
This leaderboard is set to Chicago/GMT-05:00
  • Create New...