Houston19514 Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 (edited) nm Edited July 13, 2012 by Houston19514 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfastx Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 They are repurposing current public parking lots to be apartments. A bunch of parking spots there will therefore be lost, and we counter this with...removing more street parking as well?Are you seriously complaining about parking lots/parking spots being lost? Alright suit yourself, if you'd rather have parking lots, then fine. I can't argue with that.Again, the street is only one freaking block. You think that's gonna make a difference? There is plenty of parking in downtown Houston, lol. You're saying if they can't do what they want to do that they'll have to do something different? Well...yeah!I'm saying that the development might not be as good if they have to split it up on two blocks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfastx Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 (edited) We're trying to make a pedestrian friendly downtown here. Prairie (along with Preston) leads directly from the ballpark to the MetroRail Preston station. Requiring a one-block detour (which adds 2 blocks to your walk) is not the way to build a pedestrian friendly downtown (and is not the way to help retail businesses, if they are included, to succeed.)First of all, parking lots and replacing them with apartments with retail is 100% better for pedestrians than what is currently there. And no it doesn't.Also, another rail station will be closer to the south. I can't believe people seriously think that closing one street for one block will have serious impacts of any kind. It's not like people walk on that street every day. There's literally nothing there but the ballpark. So basically you're saying that this apartment complex with retail shouldn't be built because it might be an inconvenience to a small percentage of pedestrians going to "Lastros" games during summer months??You have got to be kidding me. Edited July 14, 2012 by mfastx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockmat Posted July 14, 2012 Author Share Posted July 14, 2012 Maybe bravery is not the word. But its really a risk putting retail at that location. I would think it would be a much better investment without it. Imo, this is much riskier than putting retail in one park place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Owl Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 The city needs to at least bargain with Finger if Finger wants to take that street. Use it as a negotiating chip. I'd go for street level retail, personally 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livincinco Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 I think that Finger has earned enough of a level of trust with how One Park Place was executed to put the torches and pitchforks away at least until a rendering is available. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 Maybe bravery is not the word. But its really a risk putting retail at that location. I would think it would be a much better investment without it. Imo, this is much riskier than putting retail in one park place.How does it compare to putting retail into Post Midtown? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 How does it compare to putting retail into Post Midtown?Really doesn't compare at all. Post Midtown is in the middle of a huge residential area, upwards of 25,000 residents. This proposed project is the only residential component within 4 blocks in any direction. Even the daytime lunch crowd is several blocks away. This is not a retail goldmine by any measure. It will only have 85 to 90 days of baseball crowds, with the possibility of another 20 days of soccer crowds, if they choose to park on this side of 59. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livincinco Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 Pushing for ground floor retail in this location is not a good idea at all. Downtown desperately needs residential development and you have a very credible developer that is going to provide that. Success with this project will encourage further residential development. It's questionable at best that this area could support retail of any kind at this point. Downtown has enough failed retail without encouraging more.How about letting the developer assess the demand for the amount of retail that the project can support and allowing them to build accordingly? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockmat Posted July 14, 2012 Author Share Posted July 14, 2012 What Redscare and livincinco said.There will be future projects that will benefit from retail, its just too early for this one.It would be cool if he did something like Milhaus proposes to do in midtown. Don't their plans call for residential on the first floor but allow for commercial in the future, or something like that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdude Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 I don't like the idea of closing that block of Prairie, but I can live with it as the street dead-ends on Crawford now. In general though Houston should keep the downtown grid - it's very effective in moving traffic. Retail in that location for now is a non-starter. Overall I'm pretty pleased by the proposal, even though it could turn out as one of those faux-Mediterranean stucco things. This is much better than Ballpark Place, the highrise that had been proposed for the same block. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 (edited) Really doesn't compare at all. Post Midtown is in the middle of a huge residential area, upwards of 25,000 residents. This proposed project is the only residential component within 4 blocks in any direction. Even the daytime lunch crowd is several blocks away. This is not a retail goldmine by any measure. It will only have 85 to 90 days of baseball crowds, with the possibility of another 20 days of soccer crowds, if they choose to park on this side of 59.Plus at least 5 days of college football, plus many days of other events at BBVA Compass Stadium, plus many days of events at the GRB, plus people who stay at Inn @ the Ballpark, plus people who come to the Stadium for tours on non-game days, plus the crowds staying at the fairly likely new convention center hotel. . . Why is everyone ignoring the fact that the little bit of retail that has opened in the area has stayed open (i.e., apparently been at least somewhat successful), with the single exception of that Bell restaurant?Also, wasn't Post Midtown one of the earlier complexes built in the Midtown rehab (i.e., I don't think there were anywhere near 25,000 residents surrounding it when it was built with retail on the ground floor). Edited July 14, 2012 by Houston19514 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 (edited) Why is everyone ignoring the fact that the little bit of retail that has opened in the area has stayed open (i.e., apparently been at least somewhat successful), with the single exception of that Bell restaurant?Well, I personally ignore it because I officed literally one block from this location for 5 years, and watched the numerous attempts of bars and restaurants try and fail in the area. Only the B.U.S. and the other restaurant have made it. The Bells & Whistles was a spectacular failure, the numerous restaurants that attempted to make a go of it at Crawford and Commerce failed, the place at Preston and Labranch failed. Even when the Ballpark opened its restaurants for lunch, it failed. Everthing over there has failed. The courthouse lunch crowd is not enough, and there is not any residential nearby to provide the regular clientele that these places need to survive.That said, the 380 units in this project, plus the 340 in One Park Place, plus the 300 or so at Lofts at the Ballpark might provide enough nearby residential to complement the crowds on gamedays. But, it is nowhere near a sure thing. And, surely not on all four sides of the building. Edited July 14, 2012 by RedScare Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 (edited) Well, I personally ignore it because I officed literally one block from this location for 5 years, and watched the numerous attempts of bars and restaurants try and fail in the area. Only the B.U.S. and the other restaurant have made it. The Bells & Whistles was a spectacular failure, the numerous restaurants that attempted to make a go of it at Crawford and Commerce failed, the place at Preston and Labranch failed. Even when the Ballpark opened its restaurants for lunch, it failed. Everthing over there has failed. The courthouse lunch crowd is not enough, and there is not any residential nearby to provide the regular clientele that these places need to survive.That said, the 380 units in this project, plus the 340 in One Park Place, plus the 300 or so at Lofts at the Ballpark might provide enough nearby residential to complement the crowds on gamedays. But, it is nowhere near a sure thing. And, surely not on all four sides of the building.Dude, by your own account, everything has NOT failed. And the closer you get to the actual site we are discussing, the higher the success rate has been. B.U.S., Home Plate Bar & Grille, Vic & Anthony's... all successful (at least to the extent they are still open). Crawford and Commerce? Then let's throw in Texas at Austin, where I believe Irma's Southwest Grille is still open. The neighborhood really has a pretty good track record going, considering we are talking about an industry with a VERY low survival rate.Agreed all 4 sides of the buildings is probably not practical. (They also have to have room for parking garage entrance ramps, loading docks, etc.) I envision retail on 3 side of the south building (Texas, Crawford and Prairie) and two sides of the north building (Crawford and Prairie). Hopefully also building it so that a third side of the north building could also be converted to retail at a later date. Edited July 14, 2012 by Houston19514 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livincinco Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 Plus at least 5 days of college football, plus many days of other events at BBVA Compass Stadium, plus many days of events at the GRB, plus people who stay at Inn @ the Ballpark, plus people who come to the Stadium for tours on non-game days, plus the crowds staying at the fairly likely new convention center hotel. . . Why is everyone ignoring the fact that the little bit of retail that has opened in the area has stayed open (i.e., apparently been at least somewhat successful), with the single exception of that Bell restaurant?Also, wasn't Post Midtown one of the earlier complexes built in the Midtown rehab (i.e., I don't think there were anywhere near 25,000 residents surrounding it when it was built with retail on the ground floor).Could retail survive in that location? Maybe. The difference is that you are talking about requiring the developer to include retail (on all sides) even if he feels it's not appropriate. That's where we're disagreeing. I wouldnt be surprised if the finished plan has some retail facing the ballpark (we haven't seen the plans yet, remember?), but this is a big win for the area and downtown in general even if it doesn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 Whatever you say. I've got an idea. Rather than trying to convince a guy who has actually owned a restaurant downtown about how easy it is to make a killing by the Ballpark, why don't you bust out with your half a million and call Marvy to pre-lease a space. You'll make a killing, and we can have HAIF happy hours there (assuming we could find a seat).You can talk out of your arse and perhaps convince a couple of the high schoolers on here that retail will be a piece of cake at this location, but those of us who have actually spent our money doing it aren't buying. I doubt you have any experience in this area whatsoever to talk so big. Do you even live in Houston? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 Whatever you say. I've got an idea. Rather than trying to convince a guy who has actually owned a restaurant downtown about how easy it is to make a killing by the Ballpark, why don't you bust out with your half a million and call Marvy to pre-lease a space. You'll make a killing, and we can have HAIF happy hours there (assuming we could find a seat).You can talk out of your arse and perhaps convince a couple of the high schoolers on here that retail will be a piece of cake at this location, but those of us who have actually spent our money doing it aren't buying. I doubt you have any experience in this area whatsoever to talk so big. Do you even live in Houston?Oh, you do love your strawmen, don't you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 (edited) Could retail survive in that location? Maybe. The difference is that you are talking about requiring the developer to include retail (on all sides) even if he feels it's not appropriate. That's where we're disagreeing. I wouldnt be surprised if the finished plan has some retail facing the ballpark (we haven't seen the plans yet, remember?), but this is a big win for the area and downtown in general even if it doesn't.I'm not sure where the idea came from that I would require retail on all four sides. The most important are (1) Crawford and (2) Texas. Hopefully also Prairie. Make provisions for future retail on Preston.I know we haven't seen the plans yet. Hopefully, Finger is already contemplating retail on all four sides and the roof (j/k although, it could be a fun idea, being across from the ballpark. . . ). This whole conversation started with my suggesting that if Finger wants the city to abandon Prairie, it gives the City the opportunity to make sure this development contributes as much as possible to the desired urban fabric of downtown Houston (i.e., keep a pedestrian path along Prairie and have as much ground level retail as possible).Personally, I would not even count this as a big win for downtown if it does not include retail at least on Crawford. I would count it as overall perhpaps a slight plus for downtown, but a huge lost opportunity.The reasons people on this board are throwing up to show that retail can't be successful on this site would apply just as well to the idea of putting apartments on this site. And yet, here comes Marvy Finger, building apartments on this site that is "close to nothing". Edited July 14, 2012 by Houston19514 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livincinco Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 Posted earlier today in the Ben Milam thread:Good news/bad news:Good: more residential in downtown. More Activity in the MinuteMaid Park neighborhood.Bad: they are demolishing the old hotel and asking the city to abandon Prairie Street between Crawford and La Branch.IF the city is prepared to abandon Prairie (and it sounds like they are), they should require at least 2 things in exchange (in addition to money for the property). (1) the city should require that the pedestrian route be maintained along the Prairie path. We should not allow another superblock to cut off pedestrian access to MinuteMaid. (2) They should require ground floor retail space, preferably on all sides of the project, but most definitely along the Prairie pedestrian path and along Crawford and Texas.The idea that you would require ground floor retail on all sides of the project came from here, lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kylejack Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 (edited) Why is everyone ignoring the fact that the little bit of retail that has opened in the area has stayed open (i.e., apparently been at least somewhat successful), with the single exception of that Bell restaurant?Because it isn't so. Picazo failed at LaBranch and Preston. More importantly, though, is that there isn't a lot that is working around here restaurant-wise, aside from V&A and Irma's.Let them decide on their own if they want to offer retail, but let's keep our public right of way. Edited July 14, 2012 by kylejack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 The idea that you would require ground floor retail on all sides of the project came from here, lol.Yeah, did you notice the word "preferably"? LOL If you continue reading through the thread you'll see I was totally focused on Texas, Crawford and Prairie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kylejack Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 Yeah, did you notice the word "preferably"? LOL If you continue reading through the thread you'll see I was totally focused on Texas, Crawford and Prairie.Preferably require is what you said. Which means that you prefer that they require. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 Because it isn't so. Picazo failed at LaBranch and Preston. More importantly, though, is that there isn't a lot that is working around here restaurant-wise, aside from V&A and Irma's.Let them decide on their own if they want to offer retail, but let's keep our public right of way.Again, the closer you come to the actual site we are talking about, the more successful the venues seem to have been. See, B.U.S., Home Plate Bar & Grille, Vic & Anthony's.Sites like LaBranch and Preston, Commerce and Crawford are symptomatic of the problems with downtown. A grouping of restaurants/bars/retail has a LOT better chance of success than an individual restaurant surrounded by parking lots, with no connectivity to anything.Generally, I am all in favor of letting developers decide for themselves. HOWEVER, in this case, the developer is asking the City for a huge favor. The City should not be abandoning streets in the downtown grid without making sure they are geting the best possible development of that space, in keeping with the city's vision for downtown. i.e., require some ground level retail in exchange. If the city says no to abandoning Prairie, then the city has no bargaining power and it has to be left to the vision of Marvy Finger (who I am happy to say, appears to have a lot more vision than a lot of participants on this board.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 Preferably require is what you said. Which means that you prefer that they require.Wow. Way to misquote, dude. "They should require ground floor retail space, preferably on all sides of the project, but most definitely along the Prairie pedestrian path and along Crawford and Texas." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livincinco Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 If the city says no to abandoning Prairie, then the city has no bargaining power and it has to be left to the vision of Marvy Finger (who I am happy to say, appears to have a lot more vision than a lot of participants on this board.)I agree with you. I'm pretty comfortable leaving this to the vision of Marvy Finger. The execution of One Park Place shows that he should be given the benefit of the doubt with this development. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Owl Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 Actually you know what would be awesome -- if they had a flat roof on top of the apartments, and you could have events/parties up there overlooking the game. a la Wrigley Field in Chicago. That would be cool (of course assuming you could see thought the glass wall when the roof is shut...) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 (edited) Interesing factoid: The One Park Place development planned by Trammel Crow included 17,000 squre feet of ground floor retail.The location is pretty clearly a better location for retail now than it was 10 or so years ago (because of the addition of BBVA Compass, the addition of the new apartments across 59, the coming additional light rail stations, the fact that the GRB is now approximately 1 block closer; the fairly likely addition of a new convention center hotel 2 blocks away. . .) Edited July 14, 2012 by Houston19514 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 (edited) Actually you know what would be awesome -- if they had a flat roof on top of the apartments, and you could have events/parties up there overlooking the game. a la Wrigley Field in Chicago. That would be cool (of course assuming you could see thought the glass wall when the roof is shut...)That's exactly what I was thinking when I sort of accidentally suggested rooftop retail. I just recently read about a new development next door to a major league stadium, I think St. Louis, that will have a rooftop venue to which they will actually sell game tickets. But that apparently couldn't work here, because, you know, a restaurant three blocks away failed. And three blocks away in another direction, another restaurant failed . ;-) Edited July 14, 2012 by Houston19514 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 I agree with you. I'm pretty comfortable leaving this to the vision of Marvy Finger. The execution of One Park Place shows that he should be given the benefit of the doubt with this development.That was my point as well. In fact, virtually every person but one has suggested that Marvy Finger has done right by downtown and probably has a much better idea of what will be successful that a HAIF expert. Rather than have the City of Houston "require" things that might seem cool, I'd rather let a proven expert put forth his vision. Clearly, if he is already asking the City to sell him Prairie, he has something in mind. I'd like to know what it is before I demand that the City "require" something. I've had my fill of the City's requirements. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 That was my point as well. In fact, virtually every person but one has suggested that Marvy Finger has done right by downtown and probably has a much better idea of what will be successful that a HAIF expert. Rather than have the City of Houston "require" things that might seem cool, I'd rather let a proven expert put forth his vision. Clearly, if he is already asking the City to sell him Prairie, he has something in mind. I'd like to know what it is before I demand that the City "require" something. I've had my fill of the City's requirements.As you know, the "but one" person to whom you are referring has not once suggested that Marvy Finger has not done right by downtown or that he probably has a much better idea of what will be successful than I do. But facts can get in the way when you want to activate your strawman factory to make personal attacks, can't they?I look forward to seeing Marvy's vision. My only point all along is that the city should NOT be abandoning downtown grid streets without requiring/assuring that the resulting development fits in with the city's vision for downtown (i.e. at least substantial street level retain). That's all. Again, as I have said before, if the city does not abadon the street, then it's up to Marvy's vision, pure and simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.