barracuda

I stopped by mid-afternoon today (Sunday). There were maybe 20 people in the park. I expected more people considering the perfect weather. Niko Niko's seemed to do a decent business though.

A few photos from today. Not quite as pretty on the windowless east side.

That is one ugly building.

I think you have Montrose confused with Uptown. Montrose in to me seems more anti-yuppie in spirit, despite all the townhouse yuppies who've moved into the area.

I can't vouch for the accuracy, but gaydemographics.org has the gay population of 77006 at 15.97% (12.83% Male Couples and 3.14% Female Couples), which is well above average. However, most gay friends of mine do not live in the 77006 zip code because it's too expensive now. We're spread all over the city (but mostly inside the loop).

Thanks...I guess. People opposed to this project do themselves a disservice by making lots of crap up. But what I find even more amusing is that folks think the largest corporation in the world and it's dominion of attorneys needs their help in defending itself against these harmless NIMBYs, who have no legal recourse for stopping this project. But then again, I prefer to play the contrarian.

I, for one, welcome our new overlords. I really just think everyone finally realized what a great and benevolent friend Walmart will be for the community. They were the clear underdog in this fight, but through the persistence and sheer determination of their supporters, they were able to overcome these great and unfair distortions lodged against them. That and the fact that there was nothing to legally block them in the first place. As the inscription on each and every Walmart store proclaims, “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to shop in a fluorescent-lit dreamscape of low, rollback prices, and, oh, check out our special $6 eight-pack of Starter tube socks!” The large community of poor rich folks living in neighboring gated townhome complexes and expensive Heights rebuilds will finally have a place to seek refuge from high prices. It’s about time somebody started looking out for these folks. As for the low-income folks living in Heights Plaza apartments…er, sorry, you gotta move now. There’s progress to be had, and you’re not invited.

I imagine kids all over Houston are screaming the F word nonchalantly after this outrageous lapse in editing.

I actually agree with you for once. This project is almost certainly going to be built, and regardless of what I and others think of Walmart, I'd rather see Ainbinder build with the 380 agreement and make the improvements than get stuck with an ugly and generic development. Opposing the 380 at this point seems akin to shooting ourselves in the foot. If Ainbinder actually builds according to the rendering, it is a significant improvement to the area and not the typical feeder-hugging big-box eyesore.

Best post in this thread.

So only poor folks shop at Walmart? How do they make money? Is poverty contagious?

What exactly is so bad about Walmart's clientele? It seems like folks are constantly belittling Walmart shoppers as some kind of underclass that will wreak havoc on the community (with poor fashion sense I presume). There are plenty of retailers in and around the Heights that already cater to folks on a budget. I shop at some of those stores and can't say I've ever had an issue with the clientele. Does Walmart somehow bring the bad seeds out of the woodwork that other retailers don't? I'd rather this store not be built because another big-box retailer is not high on my list of interests. I feel we are pretty well saturated with them. Besides, pretty much anything I need on a daily basis is already within a couple miles drive. More to the point, I have a problem with Walmart's business practices on a range of issues that were discussed way back in this thread. The city can't do anything to stop this store from being built, but kudos to the all folks giving Walmart a hard time. The company is slowly adapting to the concerns of such people, so at least that is progress.

From the Chronicle: Scare tactics cloud Houston preservation debate

The only other place I can think of nearby is Murphy's Deli on Durham/610N. They're food is nothing exceptional, but the muffaletta is probably cheaper.

I've already stated that I don't think the traffic impact on Yale would be that great other than some additional run-off during I-10 traffic jams. But some folks that actually live near Yale do think it will worsen, and until there is a traffic impact analysis for this development, there's no proof that their concerns are unwarranted. The position of helping the poor was brought up by Walmart supporters. I'm suggesting that is a fallacy based more on a successfully advertising campaign than any actual evidence (other than anecdotal evidence from Attica). A survey of 30,666 indicates their prices are only average for a big-box retailer. Regarding what can or cannot be accomplished, the opponents of the Ashby High Rise seem to have been successful in their efforts, and that development was only projected to add 2,000 extra vehicles a day vs. 10,000 for this project. Repeated community efforts like this may eventually result in some form of zoning in this city, and I know that scares the bejesus out of some folks who view property rights like an NRA member views the second amendment. You did mention that some folks want a Walmart built on that site, but those people have yet to organize a group, perhaps out of embarrassment or more likely out of apathy. The perceived impact of a Walmart not being built is far less to the Walmart supporters than having the store built would be to the folks opposing Walmart. There are plenty of Walmarts and similar retailers within reasonable driving distance to satisfy big-box shopping urges. But I think it'd be really funny if someone organized a facebook campaign to show support for the largest corporation in the world in their fight against the tyrannical local residents who are trying to have an impact on their community.

So all corporations are evil? I would bet the vast majority of those shopping at Central Market and Whole Foods live in the vicinity of those stores (River Oaks, Bellaire, Uptown), none of which are located in the Heights. And yet, you’re presenting an argument that it’s the Heights residents who are pretentious because they assumedly shop there. The major supermarkets in the Heights are Fiesta and Kroger. I guess you don’t visit the Heights often, because the Fiesta near me is always busy, and most of the clientele are working class and mostly Hispanic folks. I do think Central Market can be kind of pretentious, because it’s overpriced gourmet food that isn’t necessarily any better than what you find elsewhere. However, plenty of folks without lots of money shop at Whole Foods because they care about their health or the welfare of the food system that Whole Foods is more diligent than others about supporting. Yes, they sell some overpriced fancy things and I think their CEO is a douchbag, but the core spirit of the store does not seem pretentious to me. It would seem the douchey person would be the one who patronizes a store that abuses human and workers rights. I think the argument is that the negative aspects (primarily traffic) will impact Heights more than other parts of town, regardless of which neighborhood boundary the store falls within. And I’ll say it again…there is no evidence that Walmart is less expensive than numerous other retailers already inside the loop. Yet folks continue to argue that Walmart is going to be a boon to low-income folks. This is simply no evidence of this. There are better ways to support low-income residents than bringing in a mid-priced, poorly ranked retailer into the area. Tenants may pay property taxes indirectly through their rent, but they do not have an investment in the property beyond their lease. Home ownership brings much greater responsibility and justifiably greater concern for the neighborhood vs. someone who can leave at the end of their lease.

Okay, well I get a freebie too next time you want me to cite sources. I live 1.5 blocks from Watson, and it's definitely one of the busier side streets in the neighborhood. How much of that has to do with Target is evidently unknown, but I suspect it's not much. Watson is primarily a neighborhood street, slowed by speed bumps and an interrupted life that ultimately ends at Main. Yale is more apt to absorb excess through-traffic since it's a higher-speed street that continues well past 610N.

No. I guess I need to readjust my shopping schedule. Perhaps, so long as I don't live near the street onto which traffic is emptying in the middle of the night.

I would agree that this is a reasonable deal so long as the tax incentives are comparable to the cost of the infrastructure improvements, and the improvements benefit local residents, not just Walmart. The additional downstream cost to the infrastructure (such as additional load on city sewage and water infrastructure) should also be accounted for in the incentive formula IMO. Agree, but I bet most of the folks in this thread are not within 2 miles of the location. Could you re-post the case study? I'm interested in seeing the numbers. I'd agree that most folks are not going to drive down Yale all the way from 610N to shop at Walmart when they could reach it or other Walmart locations more quickly on the freeway. However, I wouldn't rule out an increase in through traffic on Yale during rush hour or other times when I-10 is clogged. Also consider that the planned Walmart includes a full supermarket and will incur 24-hour traffic vs. Target's mini-grocery and 8am-10pm traffic. But I do think that the majority of increased traffic on Yale north of I-10 will come from existing Heights/Timbergrove residents, and not from through traffic due to the numerous traffic lights and increased drive time.

I hadn't heard they were closing or moving. Kinda sad to hear, as Chances is a fun and very welcoming environment, not to mention a Montrose institution.

In terms of territory overlap, the two stores may share some of the same customers, but the higher concentration will help prevent those customers from visiting competitors who may be farther away. You may be right that the impetus for this location was Target, but again, it's no different from how other retailers often build across from their competitors (CVS and Walgreens, Lowes and Home Depot, McDonald's and Burger King, etc.).

The difference is that Big Lots an Family Dollar don't have much power over their suppliers. Walmart has the ability to make or break a company due to their buying power and market share, so companies are forced to move production to China and other low-cost countries in order to meet Walmart's pricing demands. Target and others now do the same thing, but Walmart is known for being particularly aggressive in demanding pricing concessions. What I find ironic about the recurrent theme that Walmart helps poor folks is that the company played a large role in the transforming job market and increase the reliance on service jobs. As a country, we've basically been cashing in our middle class for a growing lower class, one that is forced to shop at Walmart because it can't afford anything else on minimum-wage service jobs, the only viable option for a growing number of people after Walmart pricing pressure forced vendors to move manufacturing jobs overseas and eliminate once good-paying jobs in the states. I don't believe GM imports much in the way of Chinese components for the cars assembled in North America. The most recent domestic content statistic I found for GM was from 2006 and was 73 percent, significantly different from the 70% imported from China figure posted earlier for Walmart. Speaking of GM, they sold more cars in China than in the U.S. for the first six months of 2010; 1,209,138 vs. 1,069,577. Of course, most of those were made in China for the Chinese market.

That would resolve none of the issues posted in this thread, but it's funny nonetheless. And the Walmart may provide plenty of funny/grotesque people watching... http://www.peopleofwalmart.com/?page_id=9798 P.S. - you probably won't find many actual hippies hanging out at a Starbucks.

I'm merely expressing some opinions on a discussion board. I haven't spoken with the land owners or any local officials to protest the deal. So there's no attempt on my part to control their property. That said, there already are measures to control what is done with the property. There are environmental and infrastructure impacts that could affect nearby residents. Walmart may also seek property tax abatement, which shifts tax burdens onto local taxpayers. Thus, residents should have a say in such matters that will directly affect them. Like I said, capitalism is part of what built the country, but it can't exist in a vacuum. Without our history of government investment in infrastructure, schools and education, military and defense, etc., capitalism wouldn't thrive in this country as it has. The question is, would you want a coal power plant, or say, an industrial lead smelter, built a few miles from your house? If you oppose it, then you are trying to control property rights. Same thing, different reasons. Hmm...well I don't oppose new Heights construction. And in fact, I'm okay with bulldozing houses that are in disrepair and have no real architectural or historical value. But I also live in a neighborhood where the replacement must follow certain historical guidelines, and I'm okay with these rules since I was aware of them when I moved here.

They're not necessarily illogical if they are the basis of rights and laws. You could in effect say that a company that breaks a law affecting workers rights for 10% of its employees has worse corporate ethics than a similar company that breaks the same laws for 1% of it's employees. Already did earlier in the thread, but here it is again. From CR July 2010 page 16, "For all the talk about Walmart's low prices, 30,666 subscribers we surveyed said the prices at 10 other retailers, including JCPenney, Sears, Dillard's, and Meijer, were at least as good." Okay, so some assumptions were made on the basis of multiple documentaries and extensive media coverage of the company's negative business practices and their harmful effect on communities in which they build and operate. I have not been able to find a history of such coverage for other retailers, which may not hold up in court but is interesting nonetheless. And Walmart did pioneer many of the business practices that made them the scape goat they are today. Regardless, I recognize that there's a race to the bottom amongst most if not all big-box retailers at least in part due to Walmart's success at finding ways to bend the rules in their favor. Personal experience may vary, but the survey was based on feedback from 30,666 shoppers. Note that Target was not mentioned in the list of retailers with comparable prices.