Leonard

Interesting. I haven't measured it. PWE told me it wasn't ADA compliant.

I guess you and I have different definitions of the word "logic". But I do understand your sentiment, I used to not care about the historical ordinance, now I'm all for it. SilverJK, yes, the 380 (and the people's reaction to it) may very well have pointed out problems with TxDOT's and the City's bridge inspection/repair program and especially with the Yale Street Bridge. However, I don't know if TxDOT and the City used the knowledge they gained from the Yale Street Bridge and inspected other old bridges in Houston and in Texas more closely. I hope that they will.

I fail to understand you logic. How can you approve of something that you know nothing about?

You may be right - but the City did do an extra inspection of the bridge that brought about the latest load limit decrease. Possibly because of the 380. Remember when they discovered two inches of asphalt they didn't know anything about? And they couldn't even scrape it off because the bridge couldn't support the equipment? You can call being concerned about bridges with load limits of 3,000 per axle complaining if you want. You can call it a silly add-on (whatever that means).

I don't oppose Walmart because they are based in Arkansas. I couldn't care less where they are based. I don't know what is based in Minneapolis, nor do I care. I don't hate someone because of where they live, I don't hate people because they live in the Heights, or Montrose, or Westchase. I don't hate people who shop at Walmart. I don't hate people who want a better government. I oppose the 380, which is based in Houston. I don't see how you have exposed anything, other than your own unwillingness to even read the 380.

I'm on the same side of the interstate as Walmart. Not sure what you mean by coming in late. You are right, I can't afford West U.

In my opinion, the pro-Walmart people are acting entitled. They don't care that sidewalks and trees were destroyed, as long as they got their Walmart. They don't care that Parker lied on the radio about the 380 being interest-free, as long as they got their Walmart. They don't care that the Request for Council Action was full of lies, as long as they got their Walmart. They don't care that the City is going to reimburse Ainbinder $140K plus interest for paint and balusters on a bridge that is scheduled to be demolished, as long as they got their Walmart. They don't care that the City either continues to lie about, or does not understand the interest rate - it's more than twice what they say it is, as long as they got their Walmart. They don't care that Parker and Ainbinder said they would have built with or without the 380, as long as they got their Walmart.

why are you so concerned with being cool?

None of the pro-Walmart people have posted (I could have missed it somewhere in these 3K + posts) that they are concerned that the sidewalk was removed - even though it was on the approved plans. None of the pro-Walmart people are at all concerned that Walmart converted over 250 caliper inches of public trees to their property (at least I don't recall any posts like this). None of the pro-Walmart people can even see the hydrant in the sidewalk (again, I could have missed this post).

So? It's true.

Yes, the Walmart is one of the lowest uses of property - it's mostly parking lot, which doesn't generate a lot of taxes (just a lot of run-off). Contrary to what the Request for Council Action says, the 380 reimburses all the property taxes, even the amount paid before the Walmart was built. The City will be getting around $150K less in property taxes per year due to the 380 until it is paid off. The City still seems clueless that the interest rate is 10% if paid over time (it's releasing documents that say it's 4.25% - less than half the actual rate.) But reading contracts is hard, and some lawyers just like to skim them - you know, just get the gist - details like interest rates are beneath them. Just because the majority of the people posting on this thread are ok with their government lying to them and being stupid doesn't make it right.

I don't live in the Heights, and I don't really care what stereotypes you have about people that live there or about anyone, but I do live closer to the Walmart than Westchase. My point is that the HEB is better than the Walmart, and denigrating someone because they would prefer a better store to a worse one is lame. Just because the majority of the people posting on this thread prefer lousy stuff to good stuff doesn't really mean anything. Just because the majority of people here think sidewalks and trees are bad doesn't make it so. I really don't care that much about the Walmart - the Mayor and developer said they would have built it with or without the 380. They should have built it without the 380. The 380 did not make it better. it's the taxpayer giveaway that concerns me. I don't like the Kroger or HEB 380's either. But I don't think they would exist without the Ainbinder 380.

Whatever s3mh's motivations are, the 380 stinks. It didn't get better development, the development is substandard and even illegal, even if no one on HAIF can see the fire hydrant in the middle of the sidewalk. They completely removed a sidewalk, even though the sidewalk was in the approved plans and the 380 was marketed as making the sidewalks and trees better. It did not. I agree with htownproud that HEB is ok for neighborhoods and Walmart isn't. Most people looking at the Dunlavy HEB and the Yale Walmart would choose the Dunlay HEB for their neighbor. HEB actually saved a lot of huge trees. If Walmart had built there, it's doubtful there would be a single huge tree left on that lot. There was no 380 for the Dunlavy HEB. HEB is a better neighbor than Walmart.

you make fun of your nieces and nephews?

Probably because they got the HEB instead of the Walmart.

august, I think everyone on this thread knows where Walmart is. My objection is to the 380. If Mayor Parker had given a 380 to build a Walmart in Montrose, I would object to that. Of course, then I would probably be calling her former Mayor Parker.

htown - are you saying that Montrose is too good for a Walmart? Are you saying that Walmarts should only be built on toxic dumps? Would you have been against the Walmart if they had planned to build on Dunlavy?

htownproud - too bad Walmart didn't build where the Montrose HEB is. That would've been a nice addition to your neighborhood.

The good news is that for those of us interested in facts is that we should be able to ask the City for the sales tax numbers for this Walmart once they start paying off the 380. We already have the projected numbers (high and low). That will give us an idea of how well the Walmart is performing.

interest penalties? what are you talking about?

And by that I mean that I don't think that the interest rate for a loan is a petty detail. You might. The difference in what the Mayor said the interest was (none) and the actual interest could be $4M during the lifetime of the loan.

one person's pettiness is another's $4M.

ignorant = uninformed. You are uninformed about the 380 because you haven't read it.

Ross - oh yeah, politicians and lawyers are the most trustworthy people around.

Ross, I assume your opinion is also based on not reading the 380. And yes, they haven't gotten it yet, and with interest it will be much more than $6M.