Jump to content

j_cuevas713

Full Member
  • Posts

    3147
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Posts posted by j_cuevas713

  1. 2 hours ago, freundb said:

    It looks like its just repaving, but I was hoping for a bigger project. Washington can back up bad here for no real apparent reason. Not sure how to fix it, but longer turn lanes when traveling east on Washington could help. People turning either direction onto Studemont can end up blocking people trying to travel straight through. 

    I'd say the last thing Washington Ave needs is longer turn signals. That road is overbuilt and is one of the main reasons Metro was going to place light rail down the middle of it. 

    • Like 1
  2. 12 minutes ago, samagon said:

    when I was in Seattle, Pike Place Market was packed. it was a Saturday morning so weekend made a difference I'm sure, but it was very busy.

    Post401 (and those hoping that Houston becomes a tourist destination) could only hope to be as successful as Pike Place.

    Oh yeah for sure. I think with time it will. They will continue to add tenants. Future additions to the building will happen as well. 

     

    15 minutes ago, H-Town Man said:

    How often are concerts though?

     

    Pretty damn often. We aren't just talking about big names either. I'm sure it will host an array of artists continually. That's the whole reason they built it was to have a constant stream of people visiting the site and as an anchor to draw tenants. 

    • Like 1
  3.  

    55 minutes ago, H-Town Man said:

    I guess the big question now is whether the attraction of the rooftop deck can continue to draw enough people to provide business to support the food court tenants, whose rent in turn supports the maintenance of the rooftop deck. Unless they can get some other things going.

     

    The concert venue is also going to help draw people constantly. When I was in SF and Seattle, both of their markets weren't always busy. It was usually big events that drew crowds but otherwise the amount of people was sparse. 

    • Like 3
  4. 1 hour ago, mattyt36 said:

    Yes, if one seriously thinks that TxDOT is doing anything particularly fast, i.e., “pulling a fast one,” then they haven’t been paying attention.

    Of course I’m happy to be proven wrong, but I’ve read nothing indicating this. For those anti-expansion, given it’s a 48-page thread, it’s probably time to summarize the opposition other than simply relying on negative associations with freeways prevalent with urban studies types, e.g., POLLUTION! MORE CONGESTION! DELIBERATELY STICKING IT TO THE POOR PEOPLE!

    It was definitely worth learning these lessons from the 1950s and 1960s, but I’m sorry, it’s just not the same thing. If you can’t see why, then I don’t know what else to say.

    Sure, there could be a change in federal or state policies diverting transportation funding to RAIL. (I won’t say transit, as, like it or not, this project includes plenty of transit capacity. It just isn’t New York, London, or Tokyo. But if you can’t see that this isn’t the same as the 1950s, you probably can’t see that Houston is not New York and you probably also can’t see the freeways and sprawl in the NY suburbs from Long Island to Connecticut to New Jersey.) In any case, the idea of sacrificing this project for a nonexistent rail option or to “promote walkability,” as is stated in the Stop IH-45 Now mission statement is absolutely inane. It’s the kind of thinking that made Toronto replace Montreal as the primary city in Canada in a very short time. You’d be sacrificing for absolutely nothing but decreased economic activity. That may be A-OK for some of you, but surely you can acknowledge it is probably not a winning issue for the majority of residents in Houston, Texas. I wish everyone was like me, too, and decided not to replace a car after it was on its last leg, but I’m not delusional. The choices that you may think we have are false … i.e., they’re not real.

    (All of the above with the “in my opinion” disclaimer, of course.)

    They pulled a fast one with that survey. It gives no alternative options. Yes this has been developing for over a decade but so has the city. 10 years ago we didn’t have half the bike lanes we do, we didn’t have Buffalo Bayou Park, etc. So the mindset of Houstonians has changed too. The desire for a better quality of life has become much more apparent. The Kinder Institute even did a study that shows Houstonians want better transit, more walkability, etc. Some people were caught off guard because TxDOT sold them an idea that they were willing to accept because for so long they just went along with it and questioned nothing. TxDOT is finally being cornered and they aren’t showing their good side. You’re def seeing how entitled and spoiled they are. And that’s the bigger issue. It’s not that this project couldn’t work or benefit Houston in the long term. It’s the fact that this government entity who is supposed to work with the city in developing this is showing they don’t really care. All they care about are the temporary jobs its creating and their bottom line. My buddy works for TxDOT in Midland and he tells me all the time how much TxDOT outsources so many costs that balloon the cost of projects like this one all in the attempt to ask for more and more money. Enough is enough already. We have every right to question the true motives of these guys. Especially when it affects people and they livelihood. I know this forum is all about development and our love for this city and seeing it grow for the better but at some point you have to ask at what cost are we really doing all of this? It’s easy to say oh this needs to happen because it won’t affect me, but say that to those in 3rd Ward and 2nd Ward. 

    • Like 1
  5. Well in either case the Feds just assured the pause has not been lifted. This small “ineffective” group of protestors have made their voice known. I’m actually really proud Houstonians aren’t letting TxDOT just do whatever it wants. They’re really trying to pull a fast one on minority communities. You can talk about all the benefits you want and how displacing homes, etc is not a bid deal. BUT IT IS. Texas leaders have been getting away with so much for so damn long that us as Texans don’t bat an eye. We just accept the status quo because we’ve been told a million times “Oh they would never do something without really making sure it was the best option for Texans.” I call BS! 

    • Like 1
  6. 3 hours ago, kennyc05 said:

    I know they're are plans to redo Lower Westheimer but what about Westheimer in the Highland Village River Oaks District area?

    Before Harvey Lower Westheimer was expected to start but with all the delays from the storm the city decided to combine the construction costs of Lower and Upper Westheimer together. So from my understanding LW is fully funded and could get built today but because it's been combined by the COH with UW, half the cost is now met so it's considered "partially funded."  It's ridiculous really. Hopefully the feds help get this fully funded again. 

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 2
  7. Yeah the presentation dates are off because Hurricane Harvey paused so much but this one is officially kicking off January 2022. To see so much connected walkability is a rare sight in Houston. I walked from Westheimer and Shepherd to Eastside St the other day and what a great walk. It’s amazing how much good infrastructure elevates the architecture of your city and overall aesthetic. 

    • Like 6
  8. Wait so Segment 2 isn't just going to finish at the new Westpark Transit Center? Why wouldn't they get that section connected to the TC and then build off of that? Seems like an unnecessary delay to service. 

  9. On 11/18/2021 at 8:43 PM, Ross said:

    How many people live within walking distance of that location? How many of them are likely to go there?

    It's the developer's money, and they can do what they want, but I just don't see the point in rear parking. It's not like it's a hardship to walk 60 feet across a front parking lot. Again, that's just me.

    It’s a hardship for those with disabilities though. It’s even tougher during Summer months when those extra few steps seem like an eternity. That extra 60 ft is enough to deter business as well. If I’m a business, I’m trying to attract all types of clientele, not just motorists. Otherwise I’m losing potential income as a business owner because I’m only catering to one type of commuter. Parking in the back doesn’t create this massive inconvenience for property owners and aesthetically it’s just nicer. A great example is the shopping center on W Gray and Montrose. And to also ask how many people live in proximity is an even bigger reason we need to build smarter. Just because the current layout doesn’t cater to pedestrians doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be built to handle pedestrians. Especially when Metro is planning a station in this location. 

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 3
  10. 4 minutes ago, editor said:

    Maybe because they draw in other businesses.

    If a big  chain sees potential in an area, other companies will follow.  This isn't just a theory, it's how a lot of retail works.  For example, when a new mall scores an Apple Store, other stores will fall all over themselves to get a space there, too.  It's why retail real estate developers sometimes have fake almost-Apple Stores drawn into their renderings.  It brings in interest from others.

    Back in my college marketing classes, we learned that one of the diner chains (Denny's, I think) famously did zero location research.  It just built next to Holiday Inns whenever it could.  It piggybacked off of the hotel's research.

    That's a very fair point. A business that has an established reputation draws people. 

  11. I emailed them asking why parking wasn't placed in the back. This just seems like such a waste of time and money for an area of town that seems to not really know what direction it's going. You have some semi dense apartment complexes next to a suburban Kroger and future Home Depot that will sit next to a future car wash. And the pedestrian infrastructure is lacking along this corridor.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
  12. On 10/14/2021 at 3:16 PM, pokemonizepic said:

    city is discussing to have temporary (and later on hopefully permanent) protected bike lanes that serve as a detour for the current construction going on at white oak bayou

     

    The guy that is talking in the beginning is the one I spoke with a while back about lane maintenance. He’s originally from Detroit and helped with the planning there. One thing I would like to see are two way lanes northbound and southbound. It’s already hard enough as a cyclist trying to get by cars. So having to navigate from one side of the street to the other across that many lanes of traffic just to get to a bike lane can be a bit challenging. 

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...