gmac
-
Posts
518 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by gmac
-
"The 300-unit complex, called the Exchange, will have 50 percent of its units reserved for renters making between 60 and 80 percent of the area median income (or as much as $42,750)" This is the part that threw me. If 50% of the units are for lower-income renters, are those folks supposed to have some kind of secret signal that lets the complex know? I get what you're saying about not upsetting the other renters, but this is a bit secretive to me.
- 1,109 replies
-
- 3
-
-
- alliance residential
- retail
- (and 4 more)
-
Cheapest place at The Exchange is $1260 for a 530 sf studio. Yikes. I thought there were supposed to be some affordable units in this complex, according to some info previously posted in this thread.
- 1,109 replies
-
- 3
-
-
-
- alliance residential
- retail
- (and 4 more)
-
Wow! I remember flying Some Country (is where your baggage ends up) in the early 90s to MSP. Like a Greyhound with wings.
-
You threw out a sweeping generalization about "suburbia", when there are actually very walkable neighborhoods in many of the outlying areas. People in Katy/Cypress/Spring can actually safely walk to stores, restaurants, churches, bars... you name it. The walk may be a half mile, or maybe a couple blocks, but it's eminently doable. What many people DON'T want is a bar right next door with the concomitant issues of noise and traffic. That's no more unreasonable than not wanting a bunch of storage units plopped next door. OTOH, if the bars/entertainment were already there when you purchased your home... tough luck.
-
Sounds like you yearn for the days of cholera and raging fires. Those were the hallmarks of a REAL old-fashioned neighborhood. How many people in Houston have ever actually lived in an "old-fashioned neighborhood" like you describe?
-
$12 what now?
-
That parcel would apparently be better used for a parking garage with storage units on top to meet the neighborhood's needs.
-
Love that forecourt. Much more useful than having a building jammed up against a street.
- 145 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- trammell crow
- retail
- (and 6 more)
-
Would you feel any different if this was replaced with a dozen (or more) condos to increase density?
- 118 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- the heights
- self storage
- (and 2 more)
-
I am way late to this one, but an interesting 2014 piece in the Chronicle about the church: https://www.houstonchronicle.com/local/gray-matters/article/God-s-own-marquee-5814731.php
- 118 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- the heights
- self storage
- (and 2 more)
-
Be more precise in your writing, then. Businesses engaged with the community by providing jobs, many of them paying pretty well.
-
I imagine the corporations that built in Greenspoint and other non-downtown areas had a very different vision from yours. They likely wanted an accessible office complex with somewhat affordable housing potential in the general vicinity. I wouldn't have built anything corporate in a downtown area had I been in a position to do so.
-
"middle of nowhere"???
-
Duly noted.
-
Disagree. I have no problem with necessary projects like early NASA and other infrastructure that served a large segment of society. You're comparing those with a vanity high-speed rail connection between two cities that are already pretty effectively connected.
-
My question was one of curiosity about how you pay directly for the roads. As far as the rail project, if they will commit in writing under penalty of public hara kiri to never accept a penny of tax money and never use eminent domain to secure land, I would be fine with it.
-
This is a helpful explanation: https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot-info/sla/education_series/funding.pdf
-
Sure they would. Those were necessary projects.
-
Which ones? Gas taxes?
-
They would only need about 40,000 passengers @$200 each day for 10 years to break even on a $30B initial investment. Unless my math sucks.
-
Only a couple hundred million if you book early.
-
From TCR's own website: "The Texas High-Speed Train will operate on secure, separate, closed tracks dedicated fully to high-speed passenger trains with no sharing with freight or other passenger rail services, and no dangerous roadway intersections for vehicles, pedestrians or animals to have to cross."
-
Which would neuter its very purpose of providing a rapid link between the two major cities. Plus, the stations at either end, as proposed, are nowhere near any airports.
-
Bingo! Both are huge boondoggles that should be shelved immediately.
-
I have to believe that everyone pulling for this thing to be rammed through is also fine with the I-45 expansion. I mean it's just people's land, right?
