Jump to content

NYC Texan2

Full Member
  • Posts

    70
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by NYC Texan2

  1. I have to weigh in on the side of ProHouston, jmancuso and shasta. Those that don't like NYC haven't lived there... There is something very, very seductive about going downstairs and walking about 30 yards to get what you want, while enjoying the weather and coming back home within 5 minutes. A car just loses meaning in those conditions. Regarding the stories of people from NYC and CA who say great things about Houston, they are being nice b/c they know you care about their opinion.
  2. Any thought about the impact that this will have on the Pavilions? They are obviously supposed to have an apartment / condo building as well. With groundbreaking on both projects supposedly scheduled during the next 12 months, could this just be another attempt to dilute market interest in somebody else's project? I hate to think that, but it is the game...
  3. The obvious trend in city development is that demand for a specific area causes people to cram in there, and to figure out alternatives when the roads become gridlocked. You can't sustain the sprawl, car-based model when you get this much development . . . Look at New York, or even Brooklyn. To me, the traffic pressure is a good thing and what I have been waiting to see. I agree Metro needs to be paying attention here. Avoiding Westheimer avoiding the elephant in the room (is it possible that they are planning to serve the Galleria through a Post Oak line that would have a transfer station at Richmond?).
  4. This is exciting but not big enough to get much attention outside Houston, I think... Where is this going to be located? I can't place it from the model. Thx
  5. You have to be kidding, Coog. First, go right across I-10 and you are in the middle of Woodland Heights. The Heights goes down to Washington, at least in the traditional maps of Heights Blvd. Second, even the mix of cars driving in the Heights has changed--lots of BMers, etc., compared to even a couple years ago. The Chase Bank at Washington and Studemont is a recognition that the demographics have changed dramatically. One of the traditional drawbacks to the Heights has historically been the lack of retail. The Target and a new grocery would help that perception considerably. People want the Target, especially as an anchor for the eastern side of the Heights. No one is crying about losing a bunch of warehouses that helped to make the Heights an urban island.
  6. I have to say that the info from Intown Homes confirms for me that we should be bullish on this area... The only major groceries available to the Heights are the Kroger at Sheperd / 11th and another Kroger on Yale / 20th. Some people go to the Kroger on West Gray just to get a more upscale selection. A good grocery in Sawyer Heights would draw a ton of Heights traffic. Also, the Sawyer site makes sense for a grocer, since it will be nearly impossible to put together that site acreage north of I-10. It does sound like other retailers are holding out to see how the Target does, though, doesn't it? That seems unusual.
  7. We should probably all hope that the traffic at Kirby and Westheimer becomes as horrible as possible . . . maybe the Upper Kirby folks will then decide that they need a subway / train, as opposed to taking to the battlements to fight it off... The R.O. folks are currently too afraid of the noise / elements to let it happen, and I think small businesses are scared stiff after the construction impact in downtown... This is exciting... I have always thought the stretch of Kirby between R.O. and Rice Village was vastly underutilized. Even the Wachovia bank under construction next to the Page-Parkes site seems like a total waste of space at this point. The area should become relatively more attractive with the completion of the 59 construction into downtown.
  8. This is excellent news. I am not a believer that the Shamrock is going to happen at this point due to the overhang of available condos in downtown (case in point: the St. Germain). Also, I think downtown is still lacking the attractions for families--especially multiple playgrounds, which are just a basic for people with small children. Playgrounds are a fundamental building block for life in Manhattan, and you can't have a car-less culture for children without them. Anyway, I also think the breakout residential projects downtown will fit this profile--being done by developers from out of town who understand the drivers of urban environments. So this is a good sign.
  9. This is a great addition to the neighborhood and should support the continued growth of the Heights, the Washington corridor and downtown. The Washington corridor, in particular, could lose some of its urban wasteland feel through the addition of the retail in this development. I have yet to hear anything convincing about the design of the center, but at least they are saying the right things. I really like that Target has already bought the land, which indicates very serious interest on their end. On the other hand, I really hate the idea of extending the service road. Why do we have to have service roads, anyway? This city is absolutely obsessed with them in a way that no other city I know of is, and I liked living in an area without it.
  10. Very exciting. Sounds like they still need quite a bit of money, though (I'm sure the Dallasites will be happy to oblige otherwise). Just for comparison purposes, how much did the Audrey Beck cost?
  11. I hear you on the negativity, so apologies . . . but the $80 million isn't money they are going to spend to develop the park, just acquire it. If I had more time, I would definitely be more involved, but here is what they need to have for a great urban park (and given that it is right in front of the convention center and its hotel, I think we can all agree that they absolutely must make a positive impression on visitors that will overlook it . . . . And the park should invite people out to eat lunch there from inside the building). Ergo, here's a list of what a great urban park should have from a guy that just moved from walking distance to Central Park: 1. Old-fashioned wooden benches curving (yes, curving) along pathways (they should have people sponsor them like they do in Central Park--that's an idea they really should use) 2. A playground with a water fountain / sprinkler feature for hot summer days 3. A small pond or other water feature 4. A hill or two for variety 5. A broad formal lawn in one section 6. Lots of azeleas (play to our strengths) Here is why Market Square is useless as a residential magnet: 1. No playground 2. No benches that don't face the street 3. Paths that just cut through the block -- they are made to go from A to B, not to wander 4. That horrible, horrible whatever in the center. It is not attractive, and there is no one who would really care if their condo overlooked it or not. 5. Lack of any water feature to hold interest that doesn't face the street (or other feature other than the horrible #4)--there's nothing that nivites you into the park to discover anything I think the Park would lend a very attractive, master planned look to the area, which is all good. I just think that the City Parks Department is in a financial straightjacket and unable to do anything really first-rate.
  12. I just don't understand putting the Fox Sport place in there . . . I don't know whether to blame the Galleria or the chain. Given that the Rainforest Cafe also opened and closed its Galleria location, I just have this feeling that the Galleria marketing crew goes in and frightens these marquis chains away from any more interesting part of town. BTW, they must seriously cover up the parking issues involved with the Galleria generally . . . The Galleria is free to market itself however it wants, but I seriously doubt the Fox Sports Grill can be huge success in that location.
  13. This whole project is just really overblown. The comparisons to Central Park are absolutely ridiculous. If this city treats it like the other parks, it's hopeless. My local park at White Oak Bayou and Studemont is a mix of bad planning, no budget and just total neglect. You would think the city would want to make up for a lack of natural beauty with some nice parkland, but instead it's like pulling teeth. There's no way "Millennium Park" is anywhere in the city's vocabulary. We will be very lucky if it doesn't turn out like Market Square, which is so ugly and useless that it can't make downtown housing grow up around (or anyone even walk in it . . . ever) despite its excellent location.
  14. Could the cost estimates be another factor impacting the start schedule for the Shamrock? I still think it is just not going to happen. Anybody know how much the land was bought for??
  15. I truly don't understand why the city should have to go begging for donations to put together a decent park. Parks can have a huge impact on quality of life, but only if they are done well. Market Square = bad, bad, bad. Central Park = good, very good. This could be an asset and could generate some development, but it is hard to see that the impact will be that great, especially with the hotel and the convention center on two sides. We are basically trying to jump start some in-fill development between the convention center hotel and the Ballpark.
  16. Where is the phone number? The Heights Association should get involved in this--
  17. I don't have a problem with the Target itself. It is a box. I have a problem with everything else about the site plan. Also, remember the site: It is raised about 30 feet above the freeway--no great views from the interstate of the store, except for the signs. Again, it more urban than suburban. I agree with HeightsGuy, as a guy that also lives in the Heights and drives around the area constantly.
  18. Of course, it could quite easily be a CVS if CVS decides to purchase/lease a parcel. This is extremely suburban--basically, I think it is designed to attract enterprises that are more comfortable in a suburban setting than in an urban landscape. Whether this tract is attractive enough to convince those operators will determine if the project goes forward. Target has to be a huge attraction, since there isn't much neighborhood traffic that goes through on Taylor. They could do something much more interesting if they wanted to, I think. They could do roof parking/a parking garage and make the development more dense. they could make a main street setting where they controlled everything on the blocks. It doesn't have to be this way . . . .
  19. Can't say I am overwhemed by the vision, or lack thereof, in that site plan. Looks like a whole bunch of freestanding Applebees. The neighborhood is desperate for the Target though, and it can't hurt. Beats a bunch of warehouses.
  20. That is basically the same thing as saying demand doesn't exist--which may be true. The expense of the units is a function of land value, and if "demand" exists, it will support the values these units are typically marketed at of $250,000 - $500,000. It's really not a lot of money these days for real estate, especially given interest rates and the markets in other cities. The developers want to move the units and will position their offerings as best they can to do that--if the demand won't support these prices, I doubt that they will be able to finance new construction of anything cheaper, unless the market just wants a bunch of studio apartments.
  21. My theory is that Commerce Towers have blown a hole in the sustainability of more downmarket projects due to the fact that there has to be a substantial part of those buildings still unsold. Does anyone have any info regarding the project's status? Hard to believe they are going to make much money at this point. The issue impacts the rest of downtown, since whenever the Commerce Towers owner decides to bail, a whole bunch of well-finished units may be competing for attention with the other proposed projects. For this reason and the obvious delays in breaking ground, I have a hard time believing that the Shamrock is going to happen. Perhaps it will happen with fewer floors, but the delay doesn't make sense in the context of the upward curve of interest rates. Thoughts?
×
×
  • Create New...