Jump to content


Full Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by iah77

  1. Well a big delay in the project was getting the historic tax credits approved while allowing modifications such as skylights punched in the roof...


    There are a few tenants signed  up already. 



    The fingers furniture site (or can't remember if Macy's site) I don't believe isn't being developed but they are putting some pad sites in front (Fast Food/Commercial Tenants).


    They aren't in a rush and have recently acquired acquired some other big lots recently. They function in a long term land bank strategy. They own so many lots of Harrisburg for example, was there a rush to put in Baker Ripley or the CVS?  It's not even 1/5th developed. 

    • Like 5
  2. 59 minutes ago, bobruss said:

    They're doing some serious earthmoving over on the eastern side along the side street. Must be a retention pond thats at least 30 feet deep.

    It runs almost the full length of the backside. It looks like it will have some interesting landscaping and contouring to provide for run off from the 

    parking lot. I'll be interested to see how they carry out this part of the landscaping. A lot of potential and hopefully they'll remember to plant more Trees. They know what a huge difference a parking lot with large oaks can be, compared to an ugly concrete lot.


    I have a house nearby so would hope so as well but I heavily doubt it because they haven't done it at at other new location I've seen built lately. The oaks at the Montrose store were already there from the torn down apartment complex.  

  3. Since we all pay taxes to maintain street, who exactly gets to demand parking is "spilling" onto public residential streets? Such an elitist way of thinking...


    That area has been commercial for over 100 years and used to be denser so there is not exactly anything new under the sun here. If you want a private street where no one can park there are plenty of those in Cypress or The Woodlands.

  4. 1 hour ago, kbates2 said:


    Yes, this is exactly like that.  If you have a high school in a neighborhood that is underperforming because you don't fund it well, you take taxpayer money and allocate more evenly to fund well.  You don't take taxpayer money and use it to build a second high school a block away that you will fund well while also under-funding the previous high school.  That would be called a complete waste of money.  If the second high school then leads to worse performance at the first, you have effectively hurt the students instead of helping them.  You may have helped a few but you seriously hurt even more.  Your argument hurts taxpayers, students, and existing universities.


    As mentioned, SMU is private - not the same.  UNT is in Denton.  I am fine with UT Woodlands.  

    UH is not undefunded, and if you don't think that's exactly what people do with bad schools then what are all these charter schools doing in the carcasses of bad HISD schools that couldn't compete? 


    People don't seems to understand this is about creating more slots and capacity for students. A city of 7 million can't have one "ok"  public option. Seriously who would  turn away a free state level gift. 


    FYI, it's also a dropout factory with less than 50% of students ever graduating and we are talking about the main campus. UT Dallas for example has a graduation rate of 60%.


    "Overall, 49.4% of U of H Undergrads Finish Within Six Years" 


    • Like 1
  5. I don't think many people here get how high quality projects by Rem Koolhaas/OMA tend to be, it's obviously not going to be easy and fast. The project is advancing on the inside and I know several leases have been signed so it's starting within a few months. The second phase has highrises (3-4), I don't think anyone has posted those renders here. 




    • Like 1
  6. LOL, who are these "people"? Oh yes, it's the city and the site's owner, Midway who corrupt everything they touch. Same people proposing a TIRZ funded trolley to their isolated site while there are literally hundreds of acres of empty lots within a block of light-rail access. Not a dime should going towards making their property easy to lease while there is so much left to waste closer to downtown on existing infrastructure investments. 


    6 hours ago, HoustonIsHome said:

    There is enough space at both the Sears site and the Exxon location to each become a tech cluster. the KBR site is unnecessary. 


    Exxon alone is what 1M SQ feet? Then there are about 4.5 empty lots surrounding it. You can easily house 5M sqfeet there alone. The Sears site is 9 acres not counting the big grassy triangle and the site mentioned in the OP that is fenced off. That area can easily house another 5M SQ feet. Those two sites alone has massive potential, KBR is overkill.


    I think people keep bringing KBR up because it is huge, it is there, we want it to be utilized, but we don't know what to do with it.


    I rather see it as something that utilises it as a whole (college campus, Theme park, Aquarium) than see it forced into some corridor worse: subdivide it like Hardy Yards.


  7. 8 hours ago, Avossos said:

    Honestly blown away. This is a Chelsea Market type meets highline type project. this could REALLY work as long as they are all in.


    Agree with SWstig on high rise component / hotel component. I hope they have a phase in approach that allows them to develop / grow.


    • Like 1
  • Create New...