Leonard

I don't think anything should have been in the 380. And I've already said explicitly that I don't think replacing the bridge should be in the 380. Planeing, resurfacing and painting both Yale Street and Heights bridges are in the original 380 list. They took out planeing and resurfacing and added lights and baluster repair. It's a fact - the Yale Street Bridge is in the 380. How is stating a verifiable fact an unsupportable theory?

If this is true, this William Simon guy sounds like a real creep. Standing around watching hungry babies wait another hour for some formula that they have "been waiting for" so he can enjoy "substantially and significantly higher" sales. And he thinks it's "interesting". Really disgusting.

TGM - it's not an "argument" - it's a fact. The Yale Street Bridge is in the Ainbinder 380 and so is the Walmart.

Uh - the 380 links the bridge and Walmart. We get to reimburse the nice new balusters, lights and paint on the bridge 15 months after the Walmart opens via the 380.

Niche, I guess I don't hold Red's dissection of the 380 in the same high esteem you do. But you are right, it's pointless to discuss.

The 380 expense was capped due to protests from the community - they've reached the cap I would guess. However, it did call for bigger trees on Yale which they did not do. It was one of the things that Parker went on about. It's not wrong to point out we did not end up with bigger trees as a result of the 380. We got exactly the same trees we would have gotten without the 380. I don't think the developer should pay to replace the bridge. The bridge is over 80 years old. Bridges are built to last for 50. It's time for it to be replaced. It should not come as a surprise to the City that infrastructure doesn't last forever. I do think it's odd that everyone that supports the 380 sees no problem at all with a bridge on a 4 lane major road in Houston having a 6000 lb load limit. I guess if the government tells you it's good, you believe it.

Oh, come on Red - you can't mean to say that you think the government never wastes money.

ALL the 380's are horrible. The HEB one is an undisguised giveaway. Just because the disguise of the Ainbinder 380 fools you, does not mean it is not a giveaway. Just because you think Walmart can build without connecting to sewer doesn't make it true.

The Ainbinder 380 was NOT one of the "better written" ones. Borrowing money at unknown and uncapped interest? Ridiculous. Nothing in the 380 is required, except for the Walmat to open. If the developer doesn't do an item, they simply don't get paid for that item. Case in point - thicker trees. There is no penalty on the developer for not planting thicker trees on Yale. They already maxed out the 380 (which the people got capped) so they simply don't care. And DUH the issue is with the City for the 380. DUH DUH DUH. DUH the CITY should have done due diligence with the bridge. DUH DUH DUH. The City doesn't ADMINISTER 380's, they just pass them.

Those troopers better break step if they march across the Yale Street Bridge.

TGM, the City is recommending Heights Boulevard as a truck route. I think that map is a joke by heights. It's doubtful that large trucks could make all those turns on those streets. That being said, I think trucks will also have a hard time going south from I10 on Heights and making a right turn onto Koehler without going across both lanes of traffic on Koehler and perhaps up onto the opposite curb. I guess we will see how it works out. Lastly, it was clearly fwkis letter to the Mayor that caused this latest drop in load limits, and that s3mh had nothing to do with it.

And Niche, to keep your own "logic", I hope that you are expending as much effort on every other anti walmart effort that currently exists, has ever existed or will exist as you do on this one.

Niche, this is the worst bridge in Texas, according to the ratings. Which other bridges are in poor condition that you are so concerned about? Please elaborate on the several approaches to the store that Walmart 18-wheelers can take. The Entech report says that the limits were lowered to the previous level (8,000 lbs single axle, 10,000 lbs tandem) in late 2010. Signage didn't go up until late 2011. Why? Do you really think it is acceptable to have a bridge on a major thoroughfare with over 13,000 vehicles a day that has a limit of 3,000 lbs per axle? And traffic count of passenger vehicles is pretty important, don't you think?

Marksmu, if you have a non-commercial license and are driving a non-commercial vehicle I think you should fully expect to be able to drive across a 4-lane bridge on a major thoroughfare in a major city in the USA. This isn't some shabby little bridge over a crick out in a remote area. It will be interesting to see if the City intends to enforce these ridiculously low limits on people with "regular" licenses in "regular" vehicles. Also interesting is the line from the City's press release that Red pointed out - that the deterioration wasn't recent. When did the deterioration occur? Why weren't the load limits lowered at that point in time? There is a lot the City and TxDOT aren't telling us about this bridge. And Marksmu, there is no reason to get my camera out. The City says they've borrowed one to record the bridge.

fwki, your letter to the mayor got results! http://www.ellencohen.org/2012/09/yale-street-bridge-load-limit-further-reduced-by-txdot/

fwki - let's hear your tree plan.

Kroger got 380 money too. I guess you can call that bootstrapping onto a few million dollars the old fashioned way. I wonder if Kroger has made their $40K "donation" to Olivewood yet?

Construction on the bridge isn't scheduled until late 2016. It will be closed for 12-18 months at that time, if the condition of the bridge does not require it to be closed sooner. It will be 2018 before the bridge is complete.

HTX - glad you hate the Walmart. Angustora - Whether or not the road work is required can be debated all day (I think the traffic signal and turn lanes would be required), but even the biggest 380-lovers must admit that the development must connect to sewer and storm drainage. The 380 reimburses for these. The development would not have gone forward without connecting to the sewer system. Walmart is not allowed to flush their lo-flo urinals into the parking lot. Connecting to the sewer system is required, not optional. The ROW for the Koehler extension is estimated at 58.08 a square foot, but the abandonment by COH of the alley is estimated at 15 a square foot. Both pieces of land run between Heights and Yale. Both are reimbursable under the 380. The City is supposed to reimburse what Ainbinder actually paid for the land, plus unknown and uncapped interest. The $115K cosmetic work plus unknown and uncapped interest on the Yale Street Bridge is a complete waste. That bridge is now scheduled for demolition. TGM - I don't think "buy local" means "less than a mile away."

Why would RUDH pay for any changes to the jogging trail to nowhere?

here's an article on the jogging trail to nowhere http://www.chron.com/life/gray/article/Gray-A-place-to-display-art-cars-3810884.php

Redscare, what day? I looked back over a month and couldn't find any reference to a greenfield on the Stop the Heights Walmart facebook page. In what context was it said?

samagon, there should be trees in the walmart parking lot AND along the streets. The median already has trees. Developers are supposed to keep the street trees alive for 2 years. The live oaks on Yale survived for 22 years. For the 380 - they pay now, we pay them back later plus unknown and uncapped interest. nobody is going to walk from I10 along Yale to get to Walmart, but they might swim (bridge being torn down joke). Houston19514, from a low-ranking government official.

Red, not wanting to pay for cosmetic work on a bridge that is schedule to be demolished is not the same as not wanting to pay for the bridge to be replaced. I'm all for replacing the bridge. I think that is what public money is for - public infrastructure. Marksmu, I don't object to the development itself, I object to the City saying the 380 is going to make it better, specifically as to sidewalks and trees. I think I've typed "specifically as to sidewalks and trees" in here a few times. We are paying for the sidewalks and trees. The trees are going into the Walmart parking lot. Mitigation of demolished trees in the ROW calls for trees replaced in the ROW. Chapter 33 calls for street trees. There are none. Why? The replat of Koehler calls for street trees. There are none. Why? How is no trees better than trees? I object to the 380. And I will continue to object to the 380. And I hope that someday the City will not be able to enter into this kind of deal.

Houston19514, did you see the link I posted previously to the approved planting plan? That plan is no longer valid. I don't have a link for the new plan, but if I find one, I will post it. I do appreciate you asking for the data and I wish I could provide it to you now. Red, the City is on the hook for around $115K worth of cosmetic work on the current bridge - plus 20% overhead and unknown interest. Yay new balusters and paint!