Jump to content

Mixed-Use Parking Garage At 820 Main St.


MontroseNeighborhoodCafe

Recommended Posts

I guess I should retract my foul language (?) and the use of the term "corporate evil." Although, how else would you describe a corporation that slides into the City of Houston permit and planning meetings w/ a killer plan and slick marketing, and then pull the rug out from under everyone's feet (including all various Downtown Planning associations and Downtown District) and lastly the residents of downtown, and when they're doing the minimum tell everyone "Psych!"

We have separately written formal letters, and our residential building manager and developer have had formal meetings with Hines and offered incentives to have the skin placed, the various Downtown Associations that were created to prevent this kind of thing from happening have pleaded with Hines to do something....no dice. We are now planning a major, collective effort that, if effective, will hopefully secure the rest of downtown's residents from having their livelihood and properties completely compromised by the very obvious short-sightedness of a few individuals. This structure will be there for decades to come. These are our homes, bottom line. This is where we live. I think any one would fight tooth and nail to secure our right for this.

Furthermore, we do not live in a black-out society. It is not enough to tell us that we should get black-out shades. Again, if there are any hopes of drawing future residents into downtown to thrive and flourish, they need to be protected from this type of event.

I regret that I can not put my photos on at this time, but hopefully some of the other folks in the building can oblige. In the meantime, just close your eyes and picture......a giant parking garage. No more, no less.

You don't need to post any photos. Most people here have seen the damage done by a corporation that used to live up to it's word and take risks that have proven to be wildly successful [Pennzoil; Galeria] while others who seem to be too feeble to get out and take a look are probably content that the cheap and tawdry prevails. It's also a shame you feel the need to offer incentives to a corporation that lied their way through the process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I myself am a resident of Commerce. I bought my unit just for the spectacular views of the Esperson buildings, and the Chase (spire) buildings. I live just above this pathetic excuse of development, and the beautiful soft glows and contours of these historic buildings, are now completely washed out by the unobstructed lights of this garage. The blinding lights of the garage stream miserably into my unit, and my current window treatments do a miserable job in snuffing out this crazy light. I feel sorry for those below me, as i've heard that the headlights of the cars, when turned on, shoot straight and hot into the units' windows below.

That this abysmal piece of concrete even attempts to outshine these beautiful architectural masterpieces of Houston's history (the Espersons, Commerce Towers, and Chase (Spire) Buildings). Such hubris is an example of greed and deceipt at its worst. This is a slap in the face not only to Downtown residents but to Houstonians and city visitors.

How can the Downtown District even hope to draw potential residents when their livelihood and properties are thrown aside for the corporate evil.

Ah, but the free market always triumphs! Only the free market can deliver what people want! Any government incursion into the development process is doomed to fail!

[/anti-zoning crowd]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I rode over this morning to check this out. It is as bad as she says. The garage is about as cheap looking as it could possibly be - nothing but rough concrete slab and retaining wires. Floor after floor of fluorescent lights. Your average self-storage block has more architectural character than this thing. You really have to feel for the neighbors looking out on this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are we sure it's complete and they're not going to add a facade of any type? It just really looks unfinished. Maybe they wanted to have it operational and then make it look nice? Or am I just dreaming?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the last I heard (and this was 2 days ago), was that there was no intention of placing a skin on this structure. This was apparently known months if not years ago. The residents of Commerce have only now realized the gravity of the situation when last week, the lights of the structure were turned and left on around the clock (24/7...for safety issues...even though, it is not officially opened yet). Until then, the residential building was relatively silent about this structure going up, realizing that both business and residential must coexist harmoniously in downtown.

Furthermore, apparently no ties were installed in this structure to allow for a skin (of the initial design) over the garage to ever be placed in the future. If I am wrong, please correct me, but this is coming from the top. What I understand is that the Powers That Be were only looking at the bottom line...cost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you mean "Some much for street level retail" ? You mean so much for street retail? There is still retail, isn't there? If there was no retail this would really be the worst thing possible for downtown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's been a couple weeks since I went by, but the Travis side looks too skinny to accomodate anything other than a newspaper stand.

Granted there is a store in the buidling next door. Not sure of the name of that building, but they added a new entrance on the Travis side.

Edited by MidtownCoog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I should retract my foul language (?) and the use of the term "corporate evil." Although, how else would you describe a corporation that slides into the City of Houston permit and planning meetings w/ a killer plan and slick marketing, and then pull the rug out from under everyone's feet (including all various Downtown Planning associations and Downtown District) and lastly the residents of downtown, and when they're doing the minimum tell everyone "Psych!"

We have separately written formal letters, and our residential building manager and developer have had formal meetings with Hines and offered incentives to have the skin placed, the various Downtown Associations that were created to prevent this kind of thing from happening have pleaded with Hines to do something....no dice. We are now planning a major, collective effort that, if effective, will hopefully secure the rest of downtown's residents from having their livelihood and properties completely compromised by the very obvious short-sightedness of a few individuals. This structure will be there for decades to come. These are our homes, bottom line. This is where we live. I think any one would fight tooth and nail to secure our right for this.

I understand where you're coming from, but problems like these are more easily solved in an environment of mutual respect, even if feigned, than one of bitter conflict. That's the reality of it. And even if you perceive that that environment has already been compromised, it doesn't do much good to sink to their level. Otherwise, when PR becomes an issue, a lot of the public will blow you off as whiny self-interested owners that are no better or worse than those that you oppose. People tend to side with a plain-spoken victim, not a vicious aggressor.

And good call trying to pull folks like the Downtown Management District and Central Houston, Inc. into the fray. Although, to be clear, they were not created to prevent this kind of thing, the Management District does have authority to disburse funds for improvements to private property, and if Hines can be shown to have been dishonest in this project, the Management District may be convinced to be more hesitant to help Hines out in any future projects or in renovations to properties they own. Same thing goes with the City, although they tend to be less involved. That approach may give you some leverage beyond just offering a financial incentive.

Realistically, if an agreement can be reached to remodel the garage, your condo association is likely to end up paying for it. And it may be frustrating, but if it is a matter that is valued highly enough, that's what'll probably end up happening.

Furthermore, we do not live in a black-out society. It is not enough to tell us that we should get black-out shades. Again, if there are any hopes of drawing future residents into downtown to thrive and flourish, they need to be protected from this type of event.

When I suggested some sort of a shading system, I meant for the parking garage rather than your building. Perhaps a set of louvres, a screen or wire mesh, or interior baffles near the perimeter of each level of the garage to reduce the amount of line-of-sight exposure to the florescents. If not a complete skin, surely there are ways that wouldn't require significant structural modification that the impacts can be mitigated. If they say that it can't physically be done, try to find an architect or building engineer in your building or that one of your neighbors knows that can refute their claim. If you have to, pay someone for an assessment of what can be done and get some estimates on what it'd cost, and take that to the negotiating table.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"And good call trying to pull folks like the Downtown Management District and Central Houston, Inc. into the fray."

Actually, the above entities were long involved with this before the residents ever got wind of the final change in plans. This is not just a problem for the neighbors across the street. Unless you're reading only a portion of my statements, you can see that this isn't about a narrow focus ("whiny self-interested group") group. Downtowners are overall a group of active and civic-minded, multi-tasking folk who care about their neighborhood and work, live, and play in this newly rejuvenated area. We care deeply about what is going on and up in the core of downtown and surroundings. This abrupt change in a developer's vision does not bode well for future developments, and leads to cynicism and caution when people decide to visit or move here. One can't help but put emotions into what is now perceived as a distortion of trust.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is not just a problem for the neighbors across the street. Unless you're reading only a portion of my statements, you can see that this isn't about a narrow focus ("whiny self-interested group") group.

I know. I'm just giving you some advice on impact mitigation and PR matters. I really am not trying to be adversarial--just realistic, helpful, and constructive. I'm not saying that the outcome will be utopian because it won't be, and I'm not just going to get all pissy and negative like other members of this forum contributing to this thread because it doesn't accomplish anything.

...I'd hope that folks would appreciate a truth-and-results-oriented approach.

Downtowners are overall a group of active and civic-minded, multi-tasking folk who care about their neighborhood and work, live, and play in this newly rejuvenated area. We care deeply about what is going on and up in the core of downtown and surroundings. This abrupt change in a developer's vision does not bode well for future developments, and leads to cynicism and caution when people decide to visit or move here. One can't help but put emotions into what is now perceived as a distortion of trust.

I understand that, but you might be careful not to speak too loudly, and not only because it puts Hines in a tricky PR position in which they're unlikely to waver. A lot of prospective downtown residents don't understand that in a redeveloping area with plenty of building activity, what they know today may change tomorrow. Cherished views may be blocked, creating better views for new residents and worse views for established residents, with commensurate changes in property values. And likewise, freakish situations like this one may arise. The truth is that zoning or building codes typically can't cure ugliness and that you shouldn't expect the City to significantly change anything to accomodate a single neighborhood like downtown. It's not impossible, but it's very unlikely. Barring a regulatory approach, about the last thing that you should want to do is publicize that this kind of thing can happen, which could scare off investors in downtown apartments and prospective owners of downtown condominiums and stunt growth. The best possible outcome is a quiet one between involved parties.

Edited by TheNiche
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest danax
How many of you actually thought that the Hines-developed parking garage would truly be "architecturally significant?" Well, the garage is complete...and it looks and smells like a parking garage! Complete w/ tons of concrete and parallel wiring (ooh, ahh!).

I'm sorry for you and share your feelings. Until some guidelines from the City force a tad of community consideration before permits are issued for these lower-end structures, Houston will continue to be gang raped and passed around by developers. This does not bode well for the Montagu Hotel's future if Hines ends up buying it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Niche-

You play the role of devil's advocate on behalf of every unpopular project so much so that I am just starting to assume that you are the actual devil.

Since you love giving out advice, here's mine to you;

If you want people to take you as sincere and your advice as genuine, you need to pick and choose your battles more wisely. I haven't seen the garage in person, but it is clear, there is NO DEFENSE possible for this development on Main Street in the heart of downtown.

Edited by KinkaidAlum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Niche-

You play the role of devil's advocate on behalf of every unpopular project

Oh, THAT's what's going on. I was wondering what he was smoking when he suggested that we (the Commerce Homeowner's association) pitch in and buy a cover for the ugly garage owned and designed by someone else. I hadn't visited this site since moving to Houston 2 years ago, and wondered what was up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Niche-

You play the role of devil's advocate on behalf of every unpopular project so much so that I am just starting to assume that you are the actual devil.

Since you love giving out advice, here's mine to you;

If you want people to take you as sincere and your advice as genuine, you need to pick and choose your battles more wisely. I haven't seen the garage in person, but it is clear, there is NO DEFENSE possible for this development on Main Street in the heart of downtown.

I've seen this garbage in person and I can also vouch for the ugliness that it is. I was hoping for something more "architecturally significant" but alas, the real Houston showed up--just enough to work and no more. At the very least be like the McKinney garage on Main. Oh well, I guess the economics of it work, which reminds me...

RedScare, not to pile on Niche, but I think you have it right on his perspective here (government vs. business). Look at the suggestions to the private homeowner:

"Negotiate"

"Use nice words"

"Don't cause PR problems"

And so on. My response to that is, "who cares". Bad PR is why companies pay PR people. Bad PR hasn't stopped Jack-in-the-Box after the e.coli problems in the 1990s, bad PR hasn't stopped Taco Bell, bad transfat PR hasn't stopped McDonald's, bad PR hasn't stopped Firestone, bad PR doesn't stop the airlines, and on and on and on.

But one can just glance at the first page of a posting about Metro or TxDOT or the City and can find the very same Niche using strong, if not demeaning, language in referring to those agencies. But then again, they're government, so they must be ok to lambast. Play nice with the companies who have no real responsibility to us the public. Throw rotten eggs at those who at least would be somewhat responsive (albeit slow or maybe ineffectively) to us the public.

One more thing, zoning could've fixed this, and other ordinances could have too. Permits to operate the garage could've been delayed in order to get Hines to keep its "word".

Gee, this sounds a lot like, "we're government, trust us...we're here to help". Shouldn't the same leery eye be cast towards Hines and any other developer that makes grand, un-Houston promises like "architecturally-siignificant" or "pedesrian-friendly" or "transit-oriented"? Ironically, these same companies go through the hoops in every other American city they operate or develop in, but for some reason, Houston has to play by the developers' rules so that a little "guidance" (regulation) doesn't make the development jump all the was from $25 a sf to lease to $25.01 a sf to lease.

Whew! Sorry for the rant. Nothing personal Niche, just noticing what seems a little like a double standard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just read this post for the first time and have a few things to add, or repeat:

-Violet, I'm sorry, you ended up with the short stick on this one.

-Yes, it is very disappointing to see Hines do this. Little by little, they are abandoning the philosophy their founder, Gerald Hines.

-For those who said that Hines should somehow be responsible for their deceit, I am sorry to inform you that it's not possible. Under our no zoning laws, their promises were always empty promises. They cannot be held accountable for not delivering on them.

-However, zoning is no guarantee that this could have been stopped. If parking garages were allowed in downtown by-right in a zoning ordinance (which is likely), the parking would only need to meet safety codes to get a permit. Zoning only helps when the developer is requesting a variance/rezoning/site plan approval/PUD or whatever you want to call the process that goes beyond by-right development and therefore triggers public hearings.

-Stop bashing Niche, he is giving constructive ideas on how to get this resolved. You can choose to ignore him if you want, or disprove his logic if you think he's wrong.

-Bad PR does help. It has not stopped McDonald's or KFC, but it has caused them to add healthful chioces to their menus and to eliminate trans-fats. A well organized PR campaign showcasing Hines lies and self of interest for their hometown would get those executives worried about investors/tenants backlash, at least locally. It won't stop any Pennzol building employee from parking in the garage, but in a couple of years when there are three or four office building under construction in Downtown fighting for tenants, Hines will not want any bad PR. True, Hines will only break ground once they sign a big pre-lease, but they will still be 40-50% vacant and will be fighting for tenants with Crescent, Trammell and Brookfields if they all move forward with current plans.

-Violet, you have another option, albeit an expensive one. Sue Hines. Not for lying, not for building blight in Downtown, but for infringing on your rights - actually, only your lower level neighbors could get away with this. Under the property right laws in this country, you are allowed to certain rights. I am no attorney but I think you can at very least claim that the light is a nuisance on your property which denies you "enjoyment" of your property, one of the four rights you have as a real property owner.

If anyone has any pictures please post for those of us that don't live in Houston.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Niche-

You play the role of devil's advocate on behalf of every unpopular project so much so that I am just starting to assume that you are the actual devil.

Wow, I've never been called the devil before. I've never laughed so hard in an office setting. ^_^

It is true that in matters of policy, I try to at least put forth a perspective that other contributors to the forum have not considered. I prefer the label "intellectual honesty", personally. There's more to life than being a political partisan. At this point in the game, the garage that is there is grandfathered in regardless of any changes in the law, so this isn't about policy theory. It is only about resolving a problem.

Since you love giving out advice, here's mine to you;

If you want people to take you as sincere and your advice as genuine, you need to pick and choose your battles more wisely. I haven't seen the garage in person, but it is clear, there is NO DEFENSE possible for this development on Main Street in the heart of downtown.

My advice to you is threefold:

  1. Most people, when called the devil, are not going to take you seriously. You will get nothing from them. Gracious as I am, you will get nothing from me but another attempt at mature discussion.
  2. You're hardly one to be advising me to pick and choose battles more wisely when you're the one taking a hard stance that something that you've never seen before is ugly. I am not trying to defend the parking garage and I challenge you to point out where I've said that it is a good thing or that its adverse impacts aren't that bad.
  3. I don't see you or anyone else offering advice on how to resolve the matter. The advice is apparently viewed as sound approach or I would suspect that violet and her neighbors wouldn't have already performed many of my recommendations before I was even made aware of the issue.

Edited by TheNiche
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was wondering what he was smoking when he suggested that we (the Commerce Homeowner's association) pitch in and buy a cover for the ugly garage owned and designed by someone else.

If Hines won't do it themselves and you can't get the Management District, TIRZ, or Central Houston to fund it, the only other folks that could pay for that kind of impact mitigation is your condo association. You might be able to work it out so that all interested parties chip in some amount of money.

I realize that it isn't what you want to hear, but if you can work something out, that's how it'll likely be. Someone will have to foot the bill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And so on. My response to that is, "who cares". Bad PR is why companies pay PR people. Bad PR hasn't stopped Jack-in-the-Box after the e.coli problems in the 1990s, bad PR hasn't stopped Taco Bell, bad transfat PR hasn't stopped McDonald's, bad PR hasn't stopped Firestone, bad PR doesn't stop the airlines, and on and on and on.

Each of the companies that you listed market products to consumers, and the bad PR you mention is all health/safety related. That's a very different animal than a firm that markets space in office buildings to businesses that builds an ugly parking garage. Your examples get people killed. This case is one where a limited number of people (to whom Hines is not selling a product) have their views marred. See the difference?

Create a public controversy over aesthetics, and Hines will freeze up. They will do nothing but make a few comments on how aesthetics can be subjective. Beyond that, they won't fuel the fire by trying to debate, and without further input from their side, the matter will die off pretty quickly as far as the press is concerned. The alternative, as far as Hines would be concerned, would be to very quickly make renovations, but then that'd mean that they would be making an investment without any financial return and signalling to their financial stakeholders that they have no backbone.

One more thing, zoning could've fixed this, and other ordinances could have too. Permits to operate the garage could've been delayed in order to get Hines to keep its "word".

But they didn't. What's there is there. Now we have to deal with it.

Edited by TheNiche
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not only is this grotesque structure visually nauseating, it also is a seizure-inducing brightly-lit nightmare! The structure is fleshed out with intensely BRIGHT floodlights on each of its 14 floors, including the roof, that release their ungodly glow (24/7) without obstruction into the living and bedroom units of the Commerce Towers Condominiums! Despite complaints and frustrations by its residents, Hines and its supposed foreign financier refuse to place a skin on this thing as it was initially proposed. If you look along the Main Street corridor at night, you can see muted, soft lighting on most of the buildings (pleasing to the eye). Not so with this sorry excuse for existence!

I myself am a resident of Commerce. I bought my unit just for the spectacular views of the Esperson buildings, and the Chase (spire) buildings. I live just above this pathetic excuse of development, and the beautiful soft glows and contours of these historic buildings, are now completely washed out by the unobstructed lights of this garage. The blinding lights of the garage stream miserably into my unit, and my current window treatments do a miserable job in snuffing out this crazy light. I feel sorry for those below me, as i've heard that the headlights of the cars, when turned on, shoot straight and hot into the units' windows below.

That this abysmal piece of concrete even attempts to outshine these beautiful architectural masterpieces of Houston's history (the Espersons, Commerce Towers, and Chase (Spire) Buildings). Such hubris is an example of greed and deceipt at its worst. This is a slap in the face not only to Downtown residents but to Houstonians and city visitors.

How can the Downtown District even hope to draw potential residents when their livelihood and properties are thrown aside for the corporate evil.

You're in the middle of a downtown business district, not a master planned community. Next you'll want to ban honking, future construction that will block your views, the smell of urine on the sidewalks, drinking fountains that don't output potable water, the noise from construction, noise from METRO buses, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Each of the companies that you listed market products to consumers, and the bad PR you mention is all health/safety related. That's a very different animal than a firm that markets space in office buildings to businesses that builds an ugly parking garage. Your examples get people killed. This case is one where a limited number of people (to whom Hines is not selling a product) have their views marred. See the difference?

Create a public controversy over aesthetics, and Hines will freeze up. They will do nothing but make a few comments on how aesthetics can be subjective. Beyond that, they won't fuel the fire by trying to debate, and without further input from their side, the matter will die off pretty quickly as far as the press is concerned. The alternative, as far as Hines would be concerned, would be to very quickly make renovations, but then that'd mean that they would be making an investment without any financial return and signalling to their financial stakeholders that they have no backbone.

But they didn't. What's there is there. Now we have to deal with it.

I understand and see the difference and I thnk you make my point for me...this "bad" PR would be minor in the grand scheme of things. That leads me to believe that it shouldn't adversely affect Hines too much, and I think can only help the Commerce residents.

As far as Hines' investors goes, I don't think that adding a curtain/skin to the garage would send bad vibes to them. Worse vibes would be if they can't get that retail leased, IMO. Regardless, I would think that with holdings as large and diverse as Hines (2 bldgs. at least 900' in Houston alone!) this parking garage is a "pocket-lint" level project and shouldn't be that big of a deal. If it's an investment without any financial return, is that really that big of a deal? Does EVERYTHING have to have a financial return. If so, we should be seeing some nice quality places filling those retail spots on the garage's opening day. If they take forever to lease the spaces, then maybe the financial return on each an every minor thing that they do with the garage is not as important--thus making the case even more so that something should be done aesthetically to the garage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're in the middle of a downtown business district, not a master planned community. Next you'll want to ban honking, future construction that will block your views, the smell of urine on the sidewalks, drinking fountains that don't output potable water, the noise from construction, noise from METRO buses, etc.

Is that a fair assessment? Downtown is her neighborhood. Whether or not we see it that way is kinda immaterial in a sense because we don't have the same at stake. Why should the voice of Hines (aka downtown property owner) matter more than violet (aka downtown property owner). Downtown residents have a goal for it to be a living, functioning neighborhood where people can LIVE as well as work and enjoy themselves. Is that a misplaced goal on their part? I don't think so. And as more people move downtown, there's gonna be more complaints about noise, urine, etc. Residents that live in neighborhoods along freight rail tracks that predate their neighborhood complain about noise and traffic tie-ups. The nerve of those people--didn't they know they were living near an active freight rail track?

If they can complain and expect action, downtown residents can too, IMO.

Heck, we get complaints from Heights residents when people want to build a different kind of residential structure in a residential area. Go figure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand and see the difference and I thnk you make my point for me...this "bad" PR would be minor in the grand scheme of things. That leads me to believe that it shouldn't adversely affect Hines too much, and I think can only help the Commerce residents.

If the bad PR is minor in the grand scheme of things, how would that motivate Hines to make a capital expenditure that will benefit third parties and not their financial stakeholders? Seems to me that by freezing up, they could contain the damage and then not have to do anything.

As far as Hines' investors goes, I don't think that adding a curtain/skin to the garage would send bad vibes to them. Worse vibes would be if they can't get that retail leased, IMO. Regardless, I would think that with holdings as large and diverse as Hines (2 bldgs. at least 900' in Houston alone!) this parking garage is a "pocket-lint" level project and shouldn't be that big of a deal. If it's an investment without any financial return, is that really that big of a deal? Does EVERYTHING have to have a financial return. If so, we should be seeing some nice quality places filling those retail spots on the garage's opening day. If they take forever to lease the spaces, then maybe the financial return on each an every minor thing that they do with the garage is not as important--thus making the case even more so that something should be done aesthetically to the garage.

Firms make investment decisions on a project-by-project basis. The various decision-making managers are held accountable for the profitability of their respective projects. If you were that person, would you feel very confident in explaining to your higher-up the value added by making a big expenditure, knowing that your pay or even your job is hanging in the balance?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is that a fair assessment? Downtown is her neighborhood. Whether or not we see it that way is kinda immaterial in a sense because we don't have the same at stake. Why should the voice of Hines (aka downtown property owner) matter more than violet (aka downtown property owner). Downtown residents have a goal for it to be a living, functioning neighborhood where people can LIVE as well as work and enjoy themselves. Is that a misplaced goal on their part? I don't think so. And as more people move downtown, there's gonna be more complaints about noise, urine, etc. Residents that live in neighborhoods along freight rail tracks that predate their neighborhood complain about noise and traffic tie-ups. The nerve of those people--didn't they know they were living near an active freight rail track?

If they can complain and expect action, downtown residents can too, IMO.

Heck, we get complaints from Heights residents when people want to build a different kind of residential structure in a residential area. Go figure.

Hines, owns that piece of property and is free (within city guidelines) to do what he wants with it just as Violet is free to do with hers. Downtown residents own very little property as compared to the businesses Downtown. Violet made the conscious decision to move Downtown and hopefully had some idea of the problems that happen Downtown.

IMO people can have goals but at the same time, the goals must be realistic. She made the decision to move downtown fully knowing she has no guaranteed control of anything else. Is she regretting her decision? That is for her to decide.

Yes just like those who move into neighborhoods with active freight rail tracks. Houston has many industrial areas inner loop that require freight rail. If the City of Houston decides to somehow ban freight rail traffic, what signal would that send to businesses (requiring rail) that may be looking to relocate to Houston? It sure wouldn't be positive and might even cause other businesses to think that Houston isn't supportive of businesses.

If her window treatments don't keep out the light, then maybe she should invest in some that do.

Edited by musicman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does EVERYTHING have to have a financial return.

No, sometimes real estate companies get into projects that involve huge financial risk without expecting any financial return, just for fun. Maybe they built this parking garage only to enjoy reading the comments on this forum!

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...