Jump to content

Recommended Posts

On 5/28/2021 at 2:30 PM, Kinglyam said:

Here's hoping residents can get together and convince HEB to buy that last 10 acres and do something with a bit of retail in there. Seems like the perfect place for an HEB, given all the units nearby, and the only grocery store within a 1-mile radius is that little Fiesta on Fulton.

Even if you have higher density from these projects and others nearby (the new development on the Bayou, across I-10 off of McKee for instance), the AMI isn't nearly high enough for HEB to consider for a store. If anything, they will be looking at something in East River Phase 2 or across the Bayou in Second Ward (at the old Olshan compound, for instance), and even that is a question mark. 

It's baffling, but HEB has zero stores east of 45 inside the loop, yet three within an approximately two mile radius near Montrose. I know everyone here in Texas seems to love HEB, but their unwillingness to put a store anywhere except nicer neighborhoods is a bit messed up. The new store on 288 might seem like a step in the right direction, but even that was a relocation of an existing store away from a more economically depressed area towards a more affluent area (Museum District and Med Center). 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I know it has been said before, but this is such an immensely disappointing use of land so close to downtown. 

The second set of apartments are called the "Exchange"   https://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/article/Mixed-income-housing-project-breaks-ground-near-14973901.php The 300-unit comp

They were loading out the crawler crane that built the 2 story precast parking garage.

Posted Images

Posted (edited)

Yeah, there's not enough ppl. And there's already a NNS fiesta just 1.08 km from Leona St in Hardy Yards.

I've looked at that old TSP red warehouse and thought it would make the perfect place for  Houston Farmers Market clone. Much better long run positioning. Along the redline, bus depot. Easy distance from just about every bustling development center/district could have access to it, unlike the Houston Farmers Market which isn't very accessible without a car, this would be by everyone within walking distance of the rail. With midtown, eado, east river, and DT new spree of res units going up it's a place for all these people to get farmers market food.

Edited by Two
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Two said:

Yeah, there's not enough ppl. And there's already a NNS fiesta just 1.08 km from Leona St in Hardy Yards.

I've looked at that old TSP red warehouse and thought it would make the perfect place for  Houston Farmers Market clone. Much better long run positioning. Along the redline, bus depot. Easy distance from just about every bustling development center/district could have access to it, unlike the Houston Farmers Market which isn't very accessible without a car, this would be by everyone within walking distance of the rail.

I agree. While I like the new farmer's market, the pedestrian access still isn't the best. From the sidewalk to the front entrance there is no pedestrian walkway. Not sure who to contact about that. And like you said, simply getting there is a challenge without a car. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The other major problem with this area of the Northside is there is a lack of quick access from the surrounding highways. Whether we want to admit it or not, Houston is still a very car centric city and all of the HEBs, with the exception of the Montrose location, all are within several blocks of a major highway. 

On the other hand, the major plus if HEB did build here is its closeness to downtown. I could see people coming here after work before having to sit in traffic.

That being said, there are much better areas around downtown to build another HEB... Eado, Midtown or maybe even on the ground floor of a major development in downtown itself.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kinglyam said:

Which I anticipate will have about as much effect on the end result as any other backlash against development in a non-rich neighborhood. 

It's interesting they are saying "higher density" but will be single family homes? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, iah77 said:

It's interesting they are saying "higher density" but will be single family homes? 

It says they're considering all sorts of things, including condos. Which could still be built as part of a mixed-use development. I think that would be a really good option for lower-income people to buy into instead of renting. That would build value quickly, and I suspect have more resale options than a single-family home.

6 minutes ago, Texasota said:

A fully built out rowhouse neighborhood would be great, and pretty easy to integrate multiple affordability levels into.

Do they even build rowhouses anymore? I can't see that happening. If it were single-family homes, I bet it would be row after row of the stuff CRV is building there, at best. Probably even with a suburban layout with cul-de-sacs and the whole nine yards. At least that would fit in with the outside-parking apartments that Prose appears to be doing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Kinglyam said:

Do they even build rowhouses anymore? I can't see that happening. 

Who's they? The City? I don't think they have before, but this would be a great opportunity to do something more interesting. I just don't know what else "higher density" could mean if they're planning all single family, unless only the market rate stuff is single family and the affordable stuff is condos. Even then, I would think the single family stuff would at least be semi-detached (twins) rather than all detached. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So where's Yellow Cab moving to, if the "North Site" is going to be developed at their current location?

Maybe the city can get Elvin Hayes to revamp his Yellow Cab ad for the new development. 

"When you really make it big - single-family home big - you're on Hays Street."

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Kinglyam said:

Which I anticipate will have about as much effect on the end result as any other backlash against development in a non-rich neighborhood. 

False.

The Northside has prevented several similar developments from moving forward, for better or worse. I would know... I've attended the meetings with the superneighborhood community members and the developers. 

I remember shortly after the 2016 election, the Northside superneighborhood held a meeting with a developer looking to build affordable housing which I remember being close to UH-D (but don't quote me on that one). People were yelling Josue Flores' name, the boy who had been murdered by a person staying at the Salvation Army site, as a key reason not to go ahead with this. They chanted "we have enough housing on this side! Go to some other part of town that can take them in!" I supported the development but the backlash was intense to the point they were yelling down anyone who supported it (if anyone could find an article, that would be great!). 

It was quite a vivid experience because I remember people crying when the decision was read that the housing development would not go forward.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

@Triton Do you think it'll be any different with these being homes that are being sold to the public via a land trust? I'm not aware of any similar efforts in this neighborhood.

I would think that there might be different community feedback considering these will be homes for sale and not "just" subsidized apartments. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Texasota said:

Who's they? The City? I don't think they have before, but this would be a great opportunity to do something more interesting. I just don't know what else "higher density" could mean if they're planning all single family, unless only the market rate stuff is single family and the affordable stuff is condos. Even then, I would think the single family stuff would at least be semi-detached (twins) rather than all detached. 

"They" is a general developer "they." I haven't seen an attached home under development anywhere for years. Developers seem to go out of their way to be able to claim it's a detached property, even if the houses are so close you could literally knock on your neighbor's window from your own window.

Since a lot of it is supposed to be income-limited, clearly that seems like a cheaper option. But it's not all limited, and the developers will still want to appeal to whomever has the money to pay market rate. Not that I think there is going to be a lot of demand for houses in a mixed-income neighborhood with no amenities nearby, when you've got places like East River with real mixed used and plenty of pure gentrification going on.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, wilcal said:

@Triton Do you think it'll be any different with these being homes that are being sold to the public via a land trust? I'm not aware of any similar efforts in this neighborhood.

I think these will likely move forward, in all honesty. I'm just saying, this area has been known to protest against several different developers, despite it being a poorer community. If you remember, they even protested against White Oak Music Hall and received a settlement out of proceedings.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

I spoke to some neighbors yesterday who attended the first meeting. They reported the first round of comments were uniformly negative.

Supposedly the plan is to sell the homes below $90,000, then artificially cap the property value increases on these homes at 1.5% per annum (less than the Fed's target inflation rate), which I expect would have the effect of depressing neighborhood property value growth, too. I'm not an economist, but it seems to me that having an artificial cap below the annual inflation rate is NOT going to help lower income homeowners build capital?

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kinglyam said:

I spoke to some neighbors yesterday who attended the first meeting. They reported the first round of comments were uniformly negative.

Supposedly the plan is to sell the homes below $90,000, then artificially cap the property value increases on these homes at 1.5% per annum (less than the Fed's target inflation rate), which I expect would have the effect of depressing neighborhood property value growth, too. I'm not an economist, but it seems to me that having an artificial cap below the annual inflation rate is NOT going to help lower income homeowners build capital?

Capping the property tax valuation will absolutely help low income homeowners build equity by reducing their annual tax bill. This is the same idea behind homestead exemptions, over 65, disabled, etc. The properties are still appraised at market value, but the increase on taxable valuation is limited. Also, there is usually a 10 year waiting period before they can be sold at full market value without having to return some portion of the profit to the city. There was a similar program in 3rd Ward a few years ago and those houses are probably worth $100k more by now. Because the tax valuation is limited, the homeowner isn't forced out of their home due to their income not increasing as fast as gentrification.

 

That being said, I definitely don't think Hardy Yards is the right places for this type of development scheme. They should be targeting the area northeast of St Arnold's or 5th Ward where there are more vacant lots than houses.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, phillip_white said:

Capping the property tax valuation will absolutely help low income homeowners build equity by reducing their annual tax bill. This is the same idea behind homestead exemptions, over 65, disabled, etc. The properties are still appraised at market value, but the increase on taxable valuation is limited. Also, there is usually a 10 year waiting period before they can be sold at full market value without having to return some portion of the profit to the city. There was a similar program in 3rd Ward a few years ago and those houses are probably worth $100k more by now. Because the tax valuation is limited, the homeowner isn't forced out of their home due to their income not increasing as fast as gentrification.

 

That being said, I definitely don't think Hardy Yards is the right places for this type of development scheme. They should be targeting the area northeast of St Arnold's or 5th Ward where there are more vacant lots than houses.

What my neighbor heard was that they couldn't SELL the house for more than 1.5% per year they lived in the house. It had nothing to do with the tax valuation. When asked about it, the city representative said it was intended to keep the houses available for low income people, meaning they will never sell at market value. Perhaps my neighbor misunderstood, but it doesn't sound like it based on that response.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, KinkaidAlum said:

Very similar to the affordable housing that replaced the public housing along Allen Parkway. It also discourages schemers from buying and flipping.

What affordable housing is that? The only thing I'm aware of is the gang-infested crime hub at Allen Parkway Villages, but I thought that is all public housing.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

By apologies for not believing that a non-profit could come up with something so idiotic. Capping the market valuation is essentially providing a crutch without treating the underlying poverty issues. From some light googling, I was able to find this:

https://www.houstonclt.org/faq

The first FAQ states that this would be a ground lease, not a purchase.

Quote

The CLT homeowner can sell their home no more than the home's "Resale Formula Price", which is set out in the Ground Lease and agreed upon before the purchase. The Resale Formula Price equals the home's initial sales price plus a fixed increase of 1.25% of the initial price per year. The Resale Formula Price is designed to allow the homeowner to build some equity in the home through appreciation, while ensuring the home is affordable to future limited-income buyers at resale.

As @Kinglyammentioned, owning the home is essentially a piggy bank with a negative interest rate.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Kinglyam said:

I spoke to some neighbors yesterday who attended the first meeting. They reported the first round of comments were uniformly negative.

Supposedly the plan is to sell the homes below $90,000, then artificially cap the property value increases on these homes at 1.5% per annum (less than the Fed's target inflation rate), which I expect would have the effect of depressing neighborhood property value growth, too. I'm not an economist, but it seems to me that having an artificial cap below the annual inflation rate is NOT going to help lower income homeowners build capital?

To be extra clear, the "homeowners" are only buying the house. The idea of using a Community Land Trust model is that the trust will always own the land and the homeowner will typically be purchasing a 99 year lease. The land will still be owned by a non-profit, so I would imagine the homeowners would only pay property tax based on the value of the improvement. 

I think that the idea of a CLT is as more about providing an affordable housing option that equity can be built with and not about gaining equity from property value growth. 

17 hours ago, Kinglyam said:

What my neighbor heard was that they couldn't SELL the house for more than 1.5% per year they lived in the house. It had nothing to do with the tax valuation. When asked about it, the city representative said it was intended to keep the houses available for low income people, meaning they will never sell at market value. Perhaps my neighbor misunderstood, but it doesn't sound like it based on that response.

Future purchasers will also have to meet certain income criteria as well (likely 80% of AMI).  The Houston CLT site has these requirements listed:

  • Gross AMI < 80% ($63k for a family of four)
  • US Citizen/Permanent Resident
  • Take an 8 hour homebuyer class
  • Be able to obtain a 30 year mortgage
  • Meet their DTI requirement
  • Have $350 out of pocket for closing costs
  • Have  >$1,000 in personal funds after closing

Future buyers will have to meet those same requirements if they buy one of the units maintained by the CLT. Market rate units will of course be market rate. 

31 minutes ago, kbates2 said:

If they were sprinkling this in various neighborhoods it wouldn't have such a high likelihood of turning into a slum.

They actually do have a program where you can approach the Houston CLT to do a single house purchase, but remember that at least a portion of these homes will be sold (land and house) at full market rate to create a mixed-income community. The people that qualify to buy a home via the CLT model actually stand to gain (and lose) financially based on upkeep.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, phillip_white said:

By apologies for not believing that a non-profit could come up with something so idiotic. Capping the market valuation is essentially providing a crutch without treating the underlying poverty issues. From some light googling, I was able to find this:

https://www.houstonclt.org/faq

The first FAQ states that this would be a ground lease, not a purchase.

As @Kinglyammentioned, owning the home is essentially a piggy bank with a negative interest rate.

What is the return on paying rent? That is the alternative here. 

And the mortgage on $100k with property taxes on the improvement is going to be what $800ish? And they'll retain $150-$200/month in equity. Where can they get a quality house for that price while also generating some equity albeit it will track behind inflation value. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, wilcal said:

What is the return on paying rent? That is the alternative here. 

And the mortgage on $100k with property taxes on the improvement is going to be what $800ish? And they'll retain $150-$200/month in equity. Where can they get a quality house for that price while also generating some equity albeit it will track behind inflation value. 

Yes, that was my point. Piggy bank with negative interest rate.

But keep in mind that someone along the line will be responsible for maintenance. A low income earner with no savings other than home equity will be a tight spot trying to make an unexpected repair. Again, if this were sprinkled throughout Houston it might work, but amassing large subsidized rent-locked neighborhoods is not a good idea.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, phillip_white said:

Yes, that was my point. Piggy bank with negative interest rate.

Yes, versus a completely empty piggy bank. Actually, probably negative since there is 0 chance that they can find comparable housing at this price point. 

Quote

But keep in mind that someone along the line will be responsible for maintenance. A low income earner with no savings other than home equity will be a tight spot trying to make an unexpected repair. Again, if this were sprinkled throughout Houston it might work, but amassing large subsidized rent-locked neighborhoods is not a good idea.

Have CLTs been perfect? No, of course not. However, there are hundreds in the US and they have been nearly universally successful. Houston would really have to come up with something unique to ourselves if this turned in to a slum area. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, wilcal said:

They actually do have a program where you can approach the Houston CLT to do a single house purchase, but remember that at least a portion of these homes will be sold (land and house) at full market rate to create a mixed-income community. The people that qualify to buy a home via the CLT model actually stand to gain (and lose) financially based on upkeep.  

You really think anyone is going to pay full market rate to live in a neighborhood where the surrounding properties have artificially limited value increases? Realtors and assessors aren't going to ignore that when they assess the market value of the house, are they? Or will there be two different valuations, one for people making <80% AMI, and another one for everyone above that? My guess is that everyone who can afford market value will look elsewhere, and this will be entirely low-income.

Frankly, I think this will be sellable to the community if and only if they build it as condos on top of one or two layers of retail. That would, I think, be very progressive and maybe even visionary (which is why it won't happen). If they build more pure residential housing, particularly with only one little kids park in the area, then nobody will mix. If, however, they have the retail that everyone wants to go to, all the different social classes will have places to mix. Which is supposed to be one of the main points behind mixed income developments, isn't it? To prevent the social stratification that comes with gentrification?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kinglyam said:

You really think anyone is going to pay full market rate to live in a neighborhood where the surrounding properties have artificially limited value increases?

They aren't competing with those units. The buyers are completely different. 

Quote

Realtors and assessors aren't going to ignore that when they assess the market value of the house, are they? Or will there be two different valuations, one for people making <80% AMI, and another one for everyone above that? My guess is that everyone who can afford market value will look elsewhere, and this will be entirely low-income.

That is exactly it. Anyone buying market rate will just see the listing on Zillow or whatever else. They will also be able to sell for full market rate whenever they sell because they own the land and the house. CLT buyers will just own the house, and the value for what they sell it for will be capped. 

Quote

Frankly, I think this will be sellable to the community if and only if they build it as condos on top of one or two layers of retail. That would, I think, be very progressive and maybe even visionary (which is why it won't happen). If they build more pure residential housing, particularly with only one little kids park in the area, then nobody will mix. If, however, they have the retail that everyone wants to go to, all the different social classes will have places to mix. Which is supposed to be one of the main points behind mixed income developments, isn't it? To prevent the social stratification that comes with gentrification?

You should definitely tell them that, but yeah, it is not going to happen. There was a project in Midtown where something similar to what you are describing was going to happen (but all rental and not purchase) but it got cancelled. 

Also remember that these are not isolated areas but established neighborhoods. There's already some bars/restaurants/etc. And also, remember that we are not talking about families that are destitute poor or homeless that are just off the street, we are talking about a family of four making up to $50k/year. 

I'm actually going to email one of my professors that has studied CLTs extensively and find out if he can point to any specific mixed-sale CLTs that have been successful or failures. The majority of them don't integrate market-based pricing to my knowledge. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Kinglyam said:

What my neighbor heard was that they couldn't SELL the house for more than 1.5% per year they lived in the house. It had nothing to do with the tax valuation. When asked about it, the city representative said it was intended to keep the houses available for low income people, meaning they will never sell at market value. Perhaps my neighbor misunderstood, but it doesn't sound like it based on that response.

so while it makes the home available to a new buyer, the person selling will be making less money (after inflation) than the bought it for. keep the poor poor I guess.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, samagon said:

so while it makes the home available to a new buyer, the person selling will be making less money (after inflation) than the bought it for. keep the poor poor I guess.

What about the interest saved by not purchasing the land? You have to look at the whole picture.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, wilcal said:

What about the interest saved by not purchasing the land? You have to look at the whole picture.

there's certainly plusses and minuses on both sides.

alternatively, they can pay rent, which is always going to go up, and when they are ready to move there is nothing they get out of it other than maybe their security deposit back.

as someone else pointed out, those random expenses of homeownership (AC repair in August) can catch you off guard, and if you're month to month anyway, it might be easier to just call a landlord, rather than having to find the cash to afford a service call.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, so quick update. Basically this is the Houston Land Bank which is not a CLT. 

Land Banks typically are used to convert distressed property (typically property taxes) and convert them into something usable, typically new housing.

Houston Land Bank used private developers to build the housing and then it is sold, although there is an option for some properties to be sold using a land trust option.

More info on their site

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/9/2021 at 11:48 AM, Kinglyam said:

I spoke to some neighbors yesterday who attended the first meeting. They reported the first round of comments were uniformly negative.

Supposedly the plan is to sell the homes below $90,000, then artificially cap the property value increases on these homes at 1.5% per annum (less than the Fed's target inflation rate), which I expect would have the effect of depressing neighborhood property value growth, too. I'm not an economist, but it seems to me that having an artificial cap below the annual inflation rate is NOT going to help lower income homeowners build capital?

What baffles me is that HEB says that they will no longer be building HEB Central Markets. There are multiple of these stores in San Antonio and Austin area yet Houston has one. HEB just spent a lot of money expanding the one in Houston, yet they now say the stores are not profitable. Then why expand the one in Houston? Plus go into that store and see how busy it is and HEB is saying it is not profitable? They should build an HEB Central Market in the Hardy Yards. Two other locations for HEB Central Markets are the Clear Lake and Woodlands areas. An HEB in Hardy Yards or the Midway development would be nice but be even better if it was a Central Market.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, cougarpad said:

What baffles me is that HEB says that they will no longer be building HEB Central Markets. There are multiple of these stores in San Antonio and Austin area yet Houston has one. HEB just spent a lot of money expanding the one in Houston, yet they now say the stores are not profitable. Then why expand the one in Houston? Plus go into that store and see how busy it is and HEB is saying it is not profitable? They should build an HEB Central Market in the Hardy Yards. Two other locations for HEB Central Markets are the Clear Lake and Woodlands areas. An HEB in Hardy Yards or the Midway development would be nice but be even better if it was a Central Market.

Where did they say Central Markets are not profitable or that the Houston Central Market is not profitable?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, cougarpad said:

What baffles me is that HEB says that they will no longer be building HEB Central Markets. There are multiple of these stores in San Antonio and Austin area yet Houston has one. HEB just spent a lot of money expanding the one in Houston, yet they now say the stores are not profitable. Then why expand the one in Houston? Plus go into that store and see how busy it is and HEB is saying it is not profitable? They should build an HEB Central Market in the Hardy Yards. Two other locations for HEB Central Markets are the Clear Lake and Woodlands areas. An HEB in Hardy Yards or the Midway development would be nice but be even better if it was a Central Market.

I understand that they basically considered the new "upgraded" HEB experience to be sufficient, while the CM experience I guess was too expensive to develop and maintain. But since they had already developed the Houston one, adding more to it wasn't as big a deal. They just wouldn't want to spend the money to buy this land and develop an all new CM, that wouldn't be as profitable as a regular HEB.

Besides, as someone earlier said, this area has poor access to the freeways compared to other locations (though not sure that is the case compared to other EMPTY large lots), which makes CM less desirable.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Kinglyam said:

I understand that they basically considered the new "upgraded" HEB experience to be sufficient, while the CM experience I guess was too expensive to develop and maintain. But since they had already developed the Houston one, adding more to it wasn't as big a deal. They just wouldn't want to spend the money to buy this land and develop an all new CM, that wouldn't be as profitable as a regular HEB.

Besides, as someone earlier said, this area has poor access to the freeways compared to other locations (though not sure that is the case compared to other EMPTY large lots), which makes CM less desirable.

Which I don't understand because in Dallas they are opening 4 Central Markets and they are not hybrids including one near downtown in Victory Park. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Texasota said:

I can't be the only person who prefers the hybrid style HEBs to Central Market, can I? I can't think of any reason to go to Central Market rather than the HEBs on Washington or West Alabama. 

The HEBs you list are my go-to ones, but as far as Central Market being better? Depends on what you want, personally, I like:

-More bulk spices (which become comically cheap in normal commercial quantities)

-More bulk tea/coffee

-Based deli (and lets not forget the meat and lox "ends" that make for the best/cheapest lunch you can get in town)

For me, Central Market fills this wild void between "special occasion" shopping (like the butcher counter) and "staples shopping" (deli, spices, etc.)

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

central market has some very specialized stuff, if you are looking for it.

but, if you aren't interested in that, then any old HEB will probably work.

for instance, there's this stuff called Maggi Seasoning. I can get it in HEB no problem, I can also get it at CM, no problem. 

so what's the problem, you ask? well, one (the one you can get in HEB) has a yellow top. the other (CM) has a red top, and is labeled "Wurze".

the yellow top is a completely different flavor than the red top, yellow top is good, but red top is that much better. basically, they are made for different markets. the red one is imported from Germany.

or if you want a Polish version, you can go to Phoenecia, which is a red cap too.

anyway, there's stuff there that you can't get elsewhere.

on a side, if you haven't tried Maggi, or Wurze as a topper for your food, give it a shot. it mixes well on spaghetti, and in pretty much any soup. https://www.cooksinfo.com/maggi

Edited by samagon
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...



×
×
  • Create New...