Jump to content

iah77

Full Member
  • Posts

    301
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by iah77

  1. 36 minutes ago, Triton said:

    You're right. It's more likely crushed granite. Whatever similar material you'd walk on at Memorial Park.

     

    Either way, I didn't have any issue biking it but I was on my gravel bike. 😅

     

    Random question but does anyone know why none of the bike trails having lighting? The city wants people to be able to commute on them but some of them don't feel so safe after sunset (which can be at early at 5-6 during winter). 

  2. 12 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

     

    Yeah, except the Galleria Neiman's is not on the closing list and is not likely to be, unless the whole company liquidates (which is also not likely).

    Yeah it's always in the top 3 performing in the entire company. Crazy anyone would propose trading a Nieman Marcus for a Dillards lol...

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 2
    • Haha 2
    • Sad 1
  3. On 8/20/2020 at 8:22 AM, Specwriter said:

    Is anyone familiar with the Torre de David in Caracas, Venezuela? It is never finished residential tower that was "colonized" by some homeless in the city. The government was either powerless or indifferent to prevent it though the residents were relocated in 2014, some 20 years after some had first move in. There was book published about the building available on Amazon of course. https://www.amazon.com/Torre-David-Informal-Vertical-Communities/dp/3037782986

     

    Actually the government encouraged the invasion as well as the invasion of the SAMBIL mall they expropriated a few blocks away. 

  4. 34 minutes ago, I'm Not a Robot said:

     

     

    This is a misleading quote then. 

     

    "Arnoldy said he was working the city to assure the project will not overwhelm existing traffic patterns. Rather it will have a “low-rise feel” that better blends into the area."

    Existing traffic patterns being the pattern of having no traffic at all lol... 

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
  5. 1 hour ago, gene said:

    and?

    Yes but not in Houston...and our city was having peaceful protests...and to that point, when do you exactly think the boards should come down? today? tomorrow? a year? 5 years?

     

    Largely peaceful ***

    Did you see the looted Veriozon downtown and the attempt to loot Forever 21 in Gallaria?

     

    Stop trying to tell people how to protect their own property. The boards can come down when the store manager of each store feels SAFE. 

     

    You think they like loosing all this business with the boards? They are literally fearful for their livelihood. 

    • Like 2
  6. 45 minutes ago, gene said:

    You know, this weekend as i drove by Highland Village and River Oaks District and even walked around the galleria it was (to me personally) almost offensive that so many of these businesses are still boarded up...

    without getting political i will say that this is a huge time of change and our city and businesses need to show more faith. We live in such an amazing city with a diverse group of incredible people. I hope these boards come down ASAP...

     Btw, I love Houston and so proud to be born and live here if you can't tell. 

    Did you see the amount of high-end shopping centers looted last week? 

     

    Scottsdale fashion Square in Phoenix , Lenox Square Atlanta ,  The Bravern in Seattle , SoHo in NYC, Nieman Marcus and forty five ten in Dallas?  

  7. 55 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

     

    Source?  (It seems highly unlikely)

    I know, this is literally one of the craziest things I've ever heard on here. Literally a place with one of the highest purchasing power indexes in the United States needs more free stuff for people with iphones and nice cars. People here have clearly never seen what real poverty looks like in a global context  

    • Like 4
  8. 3 hours ago, Avossos said:

     

    It is a pretty cool concept. I like the idea... Doesn't have to be a big percentage at all... 5% or 10% of new buildings are rent controlled or whatever. I wouldn't think those units would be as 'nice' or premier in any way; but it makes for a diverse area.

    That's what one would think but it's not how it plays out 99% of the time with the selection process being extremely un-transparent. I can't believe this is still an idea in 2020, especially in a place as affordable as Houston. There are large one bedrooms going for 800 in some areas like woodland heights which are expensive. 

     

    Btw it starts with this idea and then people start demanding that they be equal units or otherwise they are demeaning to the people inside them. 

    • Like 2
  9. 2 hours ago, samagon said:

     

    I'd like to see option 3: every new apartment complex has to have a certain percentage of units set aside for low income. could you imagine a world?

    I can for sure because that's exactly what happens in NYC and makes it so expensive for anyone trying to buy a market rate apartment...

     

    Why doesn't everyone ask about modifying existing regulations to help lower cost? Not every apartment needs to be so big, have multiple parking spots etc. Cost could be lowered by not having so many building standards. 

    • Like 2
  10. 58 minutes ago, phillip_white said:

     

    I can't give you an example of a project that restricts housing to only those that work nearby (it's probably illegal). But you can imagine that someone who spend an hour or more on the bus to get to work would jump at the opportunity to live closer without paying a rental rate that is a significant portion of their income.

    It isn't legal which is why the local workforce argument never works lol, and I promise these people won't be taking the bus which is why the project will most likely have the same size garage as any other project would. I think it would be visionary if they didn't have a garage to make this argument stronger so people who actually need to be close and use public transportation would actually live there. 

    • Like 4
  11. 1 hour ago, phillip_white said:

     

    I'm sure all of those luxury highrises need maids, maintenance, valet, lawn crew, etc. Projects like this put the workforce near the work. And if highrise people don't want their maid living in the same neighborhood, they should just clean their own home.

    Can you give an example of that here because they can never seem to explain how exactly "local" workforce people are going to be given those units versus people who work in other sides of town. All for putting things in high opportunity zones but claiming it is for local maids and gardeners is a farce. 

  12. 1 hour ago, Luminare said:

    Not surprised. I understand their complaints and empathize, however its not the cities responsibility to subsidize businesses for whatever financial risks they undertake. Its the cities ROW, and they can change it however they please and whenever they wish, and as a business you should be prepared for such things. I'm actually really disappointed with Whole Foods now. I thought they were going to position themselves as genuine local option for that neighborhood, but instead they were actually seeing themselves a grocer for those leaving town after work going home. I thought they might at least be a little bit on board with this because it will actually make walking to that grocer a lot easier for the surrounding neighborhood without the cars dashing from all directions. For the others, again the city isn't responsible for your financial risks. You knew this bridge was closed, and yet you never adjusted your marketing or outreach to draw new customers in? As someone who is normally firmly pro-business and wants to open my own firm one day, I again understand their complaints, but at the same time free enterprise means that the costs good or bad fall squarely on you. What is the ole saying, "Don't put all your eggs in one basket." They put all their hopes this spur would last forever to fuel their business and that is a substantial risk to take. That is not a wise way to run a business. Cities change and they are always adjusting and shifting, and as a business you should be agile enough, and flexible enough to maneuver ones self to the changing tides. Besides, ok the worst that happens is that they fail. I would hate to see that. I'm sure they are great businesses (supposedly), but I'm sure new businesses will gladly take their place to feed off this new change. Maybe ones that will embrace a new dynamic that is centered on the neighborhood and walkability, and not just a place you stop by before you go out to the burbs.

    You sound ridiculous and assume people just have millions laying around to spread their eggs around. There are many small business on the road dude. It's not a subsidy either, the city needs to maintain our infrastructure that we pay taxes for. 

    • Like 7
  13. 5 hours ago, Texasota said:

    No I completely agree with all of that. This is just a *huge* lot - I would've like it better if this was integrated into the announcement of redeveloping it as much higher density mixed use development.

     

    Proposed compromise: it goes in here temporarily, but the redevelopment of the Tower shopping center at Montrose includes either a target or urban sized CityTarget.

     

    That one opens, this one closes, and then this site gets redeveloped with a new Target integrated. And a Muji. And a Flying Tiger. 

     

    Done. Make that happen, development gods!

    I don't know if these two cross streets could even support many more large structures without some sort of major reconstruction or public transportation improvements... 

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
×
×
  • Create New...