Jump to content

Low-income housing on Old Richmond Road


jrc

Recommended Posts

According to HAR, the price range for homes in Park Pointe is $139-204K, so I'd be willing to bet that "sugarlandcitizen" doesn't really live there. I would also imagine that most Park Pointe residents are aware that they are zoned to Austin High School, not Kempner.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to HAR, the price range for homes in Park Pointe is $139-204K, so I'd be willing to bet that "sugarlandcitizen" doesn't really live there. I would also imagine that most Park Pointe residents are aware that they are zoned to Austin High School, not Kempner.

According to these maps Park Pointe is zoned to:

* Lakeview ES: http://www.fortbend.k12.tx.us/cmf/var/tidb...080818_1302.pdf

* Garcia MS: http://www.fortbend.k12.tx.us/cmf/var/tidb...080818_1304.pdf

* Austin HS: http://www.fortbend.k12.tx.us/cmf/var/tidb...080818_1305.pdf

Goldshire Townhomes would be at 16827 Old Richmond Rd. According to FBISD's zone tool: http://zonemaps.fortbend.k12.tx.us/edulog/webquery/ it would be zoned to Oyster Creek ES, Garcia MS, and Austin HS.

These maps and the tool confirm what JRC said.

Edited by VicMan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would also imagine that most Park Pointe residents are aware that they are zoned to Austin High School, not Kempner.
I also find it odd that "sugarlandcitizen" has knowledge of what it would cost to rent a 3-bedroom unit in Goldshire Townhomes ...

Yes.

Something is not right.

I would bet "sugarlandcitizen" does not actually live in the above mentioned subdivision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a long time resident of Village of Oak Lake, which is the subdivision in the midst of which this developer is proposing to put this complex, I have a right, if not an obligation, to oppose it. A few of the relevant facts;

- the developer will make about $2MM off of the deal, other than that, he has no underlying moral purpose of putting it 2 blocks from my home, instead of near his home on the fairway in the Sweetwater Country Club golf course

- the entrance to the 150 unit complex will be on a two lane blacktop road, 100yards from a curve, with ditches on each side, it will be accidents waiting to happen with an estimated 150-200 vehicles entering/exiting

- there is absolutley NO public transportation near here, the closest being Park and Ride lots on the SW Freeway, or the bus lines on Westheimer, 50% of the units will be rented to persons earning <50% of the AMGI (Area Median Gross Income), if they do not own a car they are in the middle of nowhere basically

- the schools near here already using portable units, adding 300-500 kids will not improve that problem

If you are a resident and want to take the time to read the 355 page application it is here; "http://www1.tdhca.state.tx.us/htc/2009apps/index.htm" it is number 09166.

This is not about race, my African American neighbor across the street has been my friend since 1995, I have Columbian and Chinese neighbors. All of us have invested our money in paying the martgage on our loans, we dont want to see our home values decline for the benefit of this developer.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Old Richmond Rd is scheduled to be widened and aligned later this year.
^ Taking bets now on how much developer is paying him to post up here!

No kidding.

And he got an entire thread temporarily closed down by his hate speech in another forum. A reverse racist post that was later deleted by the moderator. Not good...

Edited by AK123
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sobti should consider building his housing in far southern Houston in the Worthing, Sterling, or Madison high school attendance zones - there is an abundance of land out there. In addition HISD is building a new middle school in the Madison attendance zone.

Some of the complaints regarding the Old Richmond Road area are that the schools are expanding too quickly over there. In southern Houston the area is developing at a slower pace, so it would be easier on the population.

Some other low and medium income developments are being proposed for southern Houston. Corinthian Pointe, a development of homes in southern Houston which was backed by the Windsor Village United Methodist Church, is discussed here: http://www.houstonarchitecture.info/haif/i...?showtopic=5971

I must also add another reason why it makes more sense to have this development in southern Houston than in Sugar Land: METRO. METRO has routes in southern Houston, as you can see on this map: http://www.ridemetro.org/SchedulesMaps/Pdf...-System-Map.pdf

Edited by VicMan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh nooooooooo! Not the poor with their black people, and METRO, and rap music, and Mex-uh-cans, and thugs, and stupid kids who will make school bad for my precious little angel! Take them along with the homeless people and give them a one way ticket to Dallas!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think some of the complaints by the Fort Bend County neighborhoods are legitimate. AFAIK the schools around Austin High are already overcrowded, so a large Section 8 complex would increase the severity of traffic and school overcrowding around that area. On the other hand parts of southern Houston are semi-rural with open pastures with cows and horses grazing. A section 8 complex along Scott, Orem, Airport, or Fuqua in the Worthing, Sterling, or Madison zones won't overwhelm the area neighborhoods. Also remember that the Madison HS zone will get a new K-8, so there will be room for more residents there.

Having said that, the City of Sugar Land needs some public transportation as it hosts headquarters (Minute Maid) and large offices (Schlumberger) of several major companies, and their workers need transportation. Either it starts its own transit agency, or it joins METRO.

Oh nooooooooo! Not the poor with their black people, and METRO, and rap music, and Mex-uh-cans, and thugs, and stupid kids who will make school bad for my precious little angel! Take them along with the homeless people and give them a one way ticket to Dallas!
Edited by VicMan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh nooooooooo! Not the poor with their black people, and METRO, and rap music, and Mex-uh-cans, and thugs, and stupid kids who will make school bad for my precious little angel! Take them along with the homeless people and give them a one way ticket to Dallas!

You're view of "fairness" supports sprawl more than my SUV and cookie-cutter house in my MPC ever will. Politically correct or not, its the facts of life. The whole point of moving WAY out into the burbs and paying all that extra money is to get away from low-income developments like this.

Please don't push your fairness mentality on us who choose to move not only away from it, but FAR away from it. Otherwise, don't let me catch you complaining about sprawl in any other threads.

You can't have it both ways.

Edited by Jeebus
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must also add a factor that would be in favor of having this development in southern Houston; The WaterLights District in Pearland will have some office buildings and retail. While WaterLights is in Pearland, it's in the northernmost part. I think WaterLights will be in Harris County and in Houston ISD; I'll have to check the maps for it to see if it is on the other side of the county line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sugarlandcitizen: Pearland's on its way to becoming a major area too. But Pearland won't allow much zoning for multi-family housing. Southern Houston (Sterling, Worthing, and Madison high school attendance zones) is an easy location as the infrastructure and schools have plenty of room for expansion. Placing it near METRO routes will make it easy for the population to get around to grocery stores, convenience stores, and other places. Residents who have more motivated children will get free HISD bus transportation to the magnet schools.

Unlike the northeast Fort Bend area, residents won't be as likely to oppose a development along Scott (towards Woodson K-8), Fuqua, Almeda-Genoa, Almeda, Mykawa, Orem, MLK, etc.

According to this http://hrc-ic.tdhca.state.tx.us/hrc/Vacanc...SearchResults.m the 77047 zip code, which has Law Elementary (HISD), only has one apartment complex funded by the TDHCA. That complex is the Alta Gardens Apartments at 3525 South Sam Houston Pkwy. East. (Zoned to Law ES, Woodson MS, and Worthing HS) - It has 9 vacancies out of the 48 one bedroom, 107 two bedroom, and 85 three bedroom units. Sobti, this place may need more apartments. It is so easy to build out here at 77047.

Edited by VicMan
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point is that Sugar Land is on its way to becoming a major city. The population is exploding and companies are relocating there.

As with any major city, there needs to be affodable housing put in to help balance all levels of society. This is what comes along with living in a rural city.

So I have a better idea. If you do not want to live in a healthy, vibrant, and growing area like fort bend then move to the "rural" areas that VicMan is referring to. If you want to live in Fort Bend, then you must deal with the wide range of people that are living and working in the area....

And as far as your property values, I would be more concerned about whats happening with mortgage rates and the national economy. Your property values are falling right now.

It won't be "healthy and vibrant" much longer if low-income multi-family housing is allowed to move in. That's what killed formerly good areas such as Alief, Sharpstown, and Bammel.

So the economy is pushing down property values... why in the world would we want to push them down even more by building low-income apartments in an area surrounded by single family homes?

You sure do seem to be going to a lot of trouble to sugar-coat this and convince others it's good for the area, when it's not. Do you happen to work in real estate development by chance?

I'm told by the experts that developments built using public tax money must have the area's public support in order to happen. From all I've seen and heard from surrounding neighborhoods on this one, it's obvious this one does not have support, and in fact is causing quite the opposite reaction.

Edited by AK123
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Therefore Sobti needs to consider building this in an area where there is less opposition. The 77047 zip code is a perfect place for Sobti's development, as it is close to Pearland and only has one TDHCA-supported complex. With a Google aerial view one will see parcels of undeveloped land.

It won't be "healthy and vibrant" much longer if low-income multi-family housing is allowed to move in. That's what killed formerly good areas such as Alief, Sharpstown, and Bammel.

So the economy is pushing down property values... why in the world would we want to push them down even more by building low-income apartments in an area surrounded by single family homes?

You sure do seem to be going to a lot of trouble to sugar-coat this and convince others it's good for the area, when it's not. Do you happen to work in real estate development by chance?

I'm told by the experts that developments built using public tax money must have the area's public support in order to happen. From all I've seen and heard from surrounding neighborhoods on this one, it's obvious this one does not have support, and in fact is causing quite the opposite reaction.

Valid points.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They want more people to move there, so I dont understand the argument that no more people can move to Fort bend because it seems like schools are crowded. As traffic increases, they will build roads and schools to accomodate.

Also, the TDHCA site says that the state has to approve who applies to live in these developments. A criminal and background check is also done. I dont know about you guys, but I would rather have the state overseeing the apartment leasing than a private landlord looking to lease up quickly.

The schools don't seem crowded, they are crowded. Some subdivisions along 1464 have been rezoned to 3 different elementary schools in almost as many years because of the crowding issue. And there are still no plans to build another.

You really don't seem to know much about this area unless it's something you think will build your case.

Multiple studies have show that this kind of housing exerts negative effects on the surrounding area.

Federally assisted housing programs, particularly public housing developments, have been associated with negative neighborhood impacts by a number of investigators (Carter, Schill, and Wachter 1998; Newman and Schnare 1997; Schill and Wachter 1995). (3 separate studies)

Edited by AK123
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Sobti takes a look at some of the schools at 77047 they are not particularly overcrowded and have ample room to grow. HISD is building the Billy R. Reagan K-8 in the Madison High School attendance zone, so Sobti could have his complex zoned to Reagan K-8 or to Dowling, depending on where the K-8 is. https://www.houstonisd.org/portal/site/Bond...00028147fa6RCRD

There will also be a relief school for Mitchell Elementary School in southeast Houston - James DeAnda Elementary School will be in the Sterling High School attendance zone. https://www.houstonisd.org/portal/site/Bond...00028147fa6RCRD

Unlike northeast Fort Bend, southern Houston has plenty of room to grow and Sobti should build his complex in southern Houston.

The schools don't seem crowded, they are crowded. Some subdivisions along 1464 have been rezoned to 3 different elementary schools in almost as many years because of the crowding issue. And there are still no plans to build another.

You really don't seem to know much about this area unless it's something you think will build your case.

Multiple studies have show that this kind of housing exerts negative effects on the surrounding area.

Federally assisted housing programs, particularly public housing developments, have been associated with negative neighborhood impacts by a number of investigators (Carter, Schill, and Wachter 1998; Newman and Schnare 1997; Schill and Wachter 1995). (3 separate studies)

Public housing developments exert a negative impact on property values (Lee, Culhane, and Wachter, 1999).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think VicMan is stuck with some land he cant unload and hopes Sobti will read this and buy his land.

I wish I owned land over there!

BTW if I was stuck with land I couldn't unload I wouldn't have suggested all of those different streets or areas - it would have been solely geared towards one address.

however I am sure TDHCA has heard them all, especially from 1998 :) They still allocate more money to the program year after year. Tax Credit Housing has to be built. It is a federal mandate.

Then it should be built in a region that can accomodate tax credit housing. Sugarlandcitizen, there is every reason to support putting it in the Madison, Worthing, or Sterling attendance zones. There is no reason to build this development in an area that will be negatively affected by the tax credit housing. Build it in an area that will not be affected by this tax credit housing.

I could look up more area zip codes and see how many TDHCA-supported housing is in them. If there are any that have none, you need to support building the Goldshire Townhomes in that zip code.

Edited by VicMan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think VicMan is stuck with some land he cant unload and hopes Sobti will read this and buy his land.

Good job bringing in the research AK123, however I am sure TDHCA has heard them all, especially from 1998 :) They still allocate more money to the program year after year. Tax Credit Housing has to be built. It is a federal mandate.

Or perhaps VicMan is actually looking at this smart.

There is lots of competition this year for developments wanting the government subsidy. There's only so much money to go around. And the Goldshire development has caused a lot of public outcry compared to the others. I hear it even made front page of one of the local Fort Bend newspapers (and not in a good way).

You still have yet to answer why you are so interested in convincing the rest of us that this development is a good thing for the area, when all evidence and most other opinions tell otherwise. I'd have to hypothesize that you're working PR for the developer or have a financial stake in the project.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this school will be nowhere near the area of interest.

I'm saying that Sobti should change his "area of interest" from northeast Fort Bend to southern Houston. DeAnda ES will be in southern Houston.

Anyway you can use this tool to check for vacancies in TDHCA-supported developments. Lemme look up the vacancies of some Bush, Kempner, and Travis high school-area zip codes and see what else there is in that area. The zoned schools within the zip code are also listed. 16827 Old Richmond Road is at 77498. Keep in mind this only shows vacancies, and not numbers of supported complexes.

* 77083 - 3 complexes, 72 vacancies - Hodges Bend MS, Fleming ES, Holley ES, Mission Bend ES, Mission Glen ES, Mission West ES

* 77469 - 1 complex, 4 vacancies - Bush HS, Travis HS, Crockett MS, Jordan ES, Oakland ES, Pecan Grove ES,

* 77478 - No vacancies - Dulles HS, Dulles MS, Barrington Place ES, Dulles ES, Highlands ES,

* 77479 - No vacancies - Clements HS, First Colony MS, Fort Settlement MS, Sartartia MS, Austin Parkway ES, Brazos Bend ES, Colony Bend ES, Colony Meadows ES, Commonwealth ES, Cornerstone ES, Settlers Way ES, Walker Station ES

* 77498 - No vacancies - Austin HS, Kempner HS, Garcia MS, Sugar Land MS, Drabek ES, Lakeview ES, Oyster Creek ES, Sugar Mill ES, Townewest ES

There are 76 vacancies left in the area. Because the area already has heavy usage of its infrastructure, it's not wise to build a 150 unit low income complex.

On the other hand there are two zip codes in southern Houston which have little development and have little to no vacancies for any TDHCA complexes.

* 77047 - 1 complex, 9 vacancies - Almeda ES, Law ES, Rhoads ES, Woodson K-8

* 77048 - No vacancies - Codwell ES, Frost ES, Thomas MS, Sterling HS

Notice how the entire zip codes have few schools within them. There are acres of open land, and a 150-unit Section 8 complex can fit comfortably in this area.

Edited by VicMan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. This only measures vacancies. Anything fully booked isn't listed.

2. Wouldn't you say the same of 77048 or 77047?

3. But you shouldn't build a complex in an area when the complex will over-tax the area's infrastructure. Notice how the Sugar Land-area zips had several schools per zip code.

Anyhow, here are maps of the two "empty" southern Houston zip codes:

* http://cbtcws.cityofhouston.gov/zipcodes/z...p?zipcode=77047

* http://cbtcws.cityofhouston.gov/zipcodes/z...p?zipcode=77048

047 and 048 are very close to the new WaterLights district of Pearland, which will house some office buildings and retail.

No complexes or vacancies in 77478, 77479, 77498.

I think that proves the point that THIS AREA NEEDS AFFORDABLE RENTAL HOUSING.

SUGAR LAND HAS OVER 75,000 PEOPLE AND FORT BEND HAS OVER 500,000. YOU CANNOT EXPECT A CITY OF THAT SIZE TO FUNCTION WITHOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

Edited by VicMan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No complexes or vacancies in 77478, 77479, 77498.

I think that proves the point that THIS AREA NEEDS AFFORDABLE RENTAL HOUSING.

SUGAR LAND HAS OVER 75,000 PEOPLE AND FORT BEND HAS OVER 500,000. YOU CANNOT EXPECT A CITY OF THAT SIZE TO FUNCTION WITHOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

It seems to be running just fine right now. Why tinker with a well-oiled machine? People choose Sugar Land and its surrounding communities for the very reasons you want to change.

As with any major city, there needs to be affodable housing put in to help balance all levels of society. This is what comes along with living in a rural city.

Sugar Land is NOT a major city. It is a small town that an adjacent major city grew out to. See the above comment about your needs assessments.

The point is that Sugar Land is on its way to becoming a major city. The population is exploding and companies are relocating there.

Only one of those three statements are correct.

Edited by Jeebus
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is obvious this complex is not proposed to be built near "sugarlandcitizens" home. They don't allow that sort of thing in First Colony or Sweetwater.

This is about a developer getting a $2MM fee, not about helping low income folks. Irresponsible developers and the banks that lend to the (such as Capital One in this case) is what this is about. Take for example the strip retail center built between Voss and W Airport on Hwy 6. It was built more than a year ago. Yesterday afternoon I counted approximately 20 storefronts in the strip. Do you know how many are leased? Three (3) are leased, one is a PostNet mail store, which which competes with a mail center 150 yards down in an older part of the adjacent strip. The other 2 are a Goodwill Donation center and a Texas workforce commission applicaton center. The Noble Roman Pizza joint unfortunately recently closed. Why is this strip generally unleased? Because of bad developement and lax lending. The Goodwill center is not the type of business I expected nearby when I purchased my home in 1995. Now GoldShire wants to put low income housing in my subdivision. Why? probably because the land is cheap, so he will put 150 units on 10 acres. So the density will be say, at least 600 people living on 10 acres. Mr. Sobti why not buy land on Bellaire or Bissonnet, surely there are plenty of tenement apartment blocks that have recently burned down because they dont meet fire code. You will do the folks in that area a greater service by giving them NEW affordable housing in the area that they live, isn't that what this is about?

As I stated before this is not about race, and when posters suggest that it is, they do not know my subdivision or my neighbors of all races who are faithfully paying thier mortgages and want to retain the value in thier homes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One more point:

This is a TDHCA TAX CREDIT development.

This is NOT a subsidized housing program or Section 8 housing. All residents are responsible for the full amount of rent each month, ther are no vouchers.

The developer of the project wants $2mil in tax funds to help build it.

And yes the rents would be very low in comparison to other area apts. Spin it any way you want, but it is still technically low-income housing.

So are you the one hired to do PR for the development? Or are you in real estate development for this complex?

You've yet to answer that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for the wonderful post!!

It is not leased because people IN THAT AREA cannot afford to spend anymore. The Goodwill Donation Center and the Texas workforce commission opened because people are now buying second hand clothes and are applying with the state for jobs. IN THAT AREA!!!

THIS IS THE EXACT REASON WE NEED AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE AREA. YOU JUST ANSWERED YOUR OWN QUESTION!!!!

That reasoning is all just assumptions.

A Goodwill opened on Hwy 6 near Dulles in First Colony too. Does that mean that area is also having problems?

And there is plenty of affordable housing in that area. 77083. More vacancies available right now in that zip than the 150 units the developer wants to build new just south of it.

And why do you keep skirting my other question about your involvement in this development?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

deanda will be farther east than you believe. it will be east of telephone.

Ah, I see. I know DeAnda will relieve Mitchell. Mitchell's boundary is here: http://dept.houstonisd.org/ab/schoolbounda.../MitchellES.pdf

From looking at Mitchell's boundary it seems likely that DeAnda's boundary will extend west of Telephone, just as Mitchell's boundary does now. There's a possibility DeAnda's boundary may go west of Mykawa.

BTW, where can I find the addresses of DeAnda, Reagan K-8, and the Sharpstown reliever school?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No complexes or vacancies in 77478, 77479, 77498.

I think that proves the point that THIS AREA NEEDS AFFORDABLE RENTAL HOUSING.

SUGAR LAND HAS OVER 75,000 PEOPLE AND FORT BEND HAS OVER 500,000. YOU CANNOT EXPECT A CITY OF THAT SIZE TO FUNCTION WITHOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

Why? You keep making this statment but never say why. I damn sure don't wan't low income housing in my 77478 area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...
As a long time resident of Village of Oak Lake, which is the subdivision in the midst of which this developer is proposing to put this complex, I have a right, if not an obligation, to oppose it. A few of the relevant facts;

- the developer will make about $2MM off of the deal, other than that, he has no underlying moral purpose of putting it 2 blocks from my home, instead of near his home on the fairway in the Sweetwater Country Club golf course

- the entrance to the 150 unit complex will be on a two lane blacktop road, 100yards from a curve, with ditches on each side, it will be accidents waiting to happen with an estimated 150-200 vehicles entering/exiting

- there is absolutley NO public transportation near here, the closest being Park and Ride lots on the SW Freeway, or the bus lines on Westheimer, 50% of the units will be rented to persons earning <50% of the AMGI (Area Median Gross Income), if they do not own a car they are in the middle of nowhere basically

- the schools near here already using portable units, adding 300-500 kids will not improve that problem

If you are a resident and want to take the time to read the 355 page application it is here; "http://www1.tdhca.state.tx.us/htc/2009apps/index.htm" it is number 09166.

This is not about race, my African American neighbor across the street has been my friend since 1995, I have Columbian and Chinese neighbors. All of us have invested our money in paying the martgage on our loans, we dont want to see our home values decline for the benefit of this developer.

As a resident of Southwest Houston I also have an obligation to oppose the Goldshire Townhomes project in Sugarland.

We have plenty of low-cost housing in my area. A lot of it is falling apart. And some developer wants government funds to build brand new apartments on virgin land in Sugarland?

This is beyond stupid. We should be FIXING problem properties and turning them into safe, convenient places for working people to live. We should NOT randomly build new low-cost housing on virgin land.

Alas though, money talks. It's easier and quicker for developers to close on raw land and throw up garbage. I heard one say as much when there was a hearing on the Costa Del Rey apartment project last year. They stand to make more money that way.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

NIMBY :(

This is why I live in the Heights and not in Sugarland (yes, one word, as it was originally intended). In my neighborhood we have low medium and upper income and for the most part we live well amongst each other. Where would you have "them" live?

Edited by EMME
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since this thread is revived, I'll go ahead and post updates.

The downtown hearing in April had a huge showing. Thanks Sugar Land!

There is now a new community organization created in opposition of the proposed Goldshire Townhomes. Big thanks to all the area HOA leaders who have worked hard on this

http://www.united77498.org

As well as a twitter page

http://twitter.com/United77498

And a facebook page

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=93063828560

Everyone in Sugar Land has until June 15th to contact TDHCA with their complaints if they haven't yet already. Details on how to do that can be found on the above pages. The decision by TDHCA will be made the following month.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NIMBY :(

This is why I live in the Heights and not in Sugarland (yes, one word, as it was originally intended). In my neighborhood we have low medium and upper income and for the most part we live well amongst each other. Where would you have "them" live?

I'm calling you out. The Heights is one of Houston's most desirable neighborhoods, and I can guarantee you that if some developer could even afford the land to throw up a high-density, low-income development there, your neighborhood would be up in arms. Of course, you know this won't happen, because the land is too expensive. So it's easy for you to sit back and insult those of us who choose to live in the suburbs. NIMBY? Damned right! That's why I live here.

Oh, and where would I have "them" live? How about near some sort of public transportation?

By the way, I grew up in Sugar Land. It might've been one word at some point in its history, but it has been two words for as long as I can remember.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm calling you out. The Heights is one of Houston's most desirable neighborhoods, and I can guarantee you that if some developer could even afford the land to throw up a high-density, low-income development there, your neighborhood would be up in arms. Of course, you know this won't happen, because the land is too expensive. So it's easy for you to sit back and insult those of us who choose to live in the suburbs. NIMBY? Damned right! That's why I live here.

Oh, and where would I have "them" live? How about near some sort of public transportation?

By the way, I grew up in Sugar Land. It might've been one word at some point in its history, but it has been two words for as long as I can remember.

Almost every apartment complex in/near the Heights is low income housing. I wouldn't mind one bit if all those trashy places just fell down (while empty). Yes, there are a few exceptions, but in general they are an eyesore. I get where you are coming from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what is the latest development with this project?? Is the sign still there?

The sign is down, but I am being told that the developer took it down to make people think the project had been canceled. That is not the case.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm calling you out. The Heights is one of Houston's most desirable neighborhoods, and I can guarantee you that if some developer could even afford the land to throw up a high-density, low-income development there, your neighborhood would be up in arms. Of course, you know this won't happen, because the land is too expensive. So it's easy for you to sit back and insult those of us who choose to live in the suburbs. NIMBY? Damned right! That's why I live here.

Oh, and where would I have "them" live? How about near some sort of public transportation?

By the way, I grew up in Sugar Land. It might've been one word at some point in its history, but it has been two words for as long as I can remember.

OK, you got me, I wouldn't want a high density any-income development in my neighborhood. And I will add, that while I may differ in opinion with you, I always respect people for standing up for what they want and believe rather than just complaining about it forever, so I support you (not that that means a hill of beans to you).

The sign is down, but I am being told that the developer took it down to make people think the project had been canceled. That is not the case.

Never believe it until you see it in writing!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Make sure Sobti *confirms* and *announces* the cancellation.

It's not canceled. The developer is still trying to get the state's money to build it.

I think it's a trick to throw people off. A dirty trick at that.

How do I know? Because I see the big "United77498.org" anti-Goldshire signs along some of the boulevards and have overheard conversations on the hoopla it's caused. Heck, I was over in Lake Olympia (Missouri City) the other day and there was a lady complaining about Goldshire and their foolishness going on in Sugar Land.

Link to comment
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...