BigFootsSocks

There's a texadelphia opening on the other side on Gaylord. Couple of GFR pads there. Really like how they maximized the space.

On 8/13/2020 at 9:09 AM, Montrose1100 said:

Good? right? The $417 million isn't wasted. I'm sure another firm can pick up the torch and make improvements to what has been built... with significant additional funding I'm sure.

 

What a wonderful bubble we live in on HAIF. Even Reddit to an extent. Scum of the earth on the local news channel comments.

So you're saying this comment doesn't add to the discussion? Huh who would've thought...

I uhhh... I hope this makes sense...let me know if you want ur own commission ty 

https://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/news/2020/06/05/texas-central-stimulus-money.html
 

Does anyone have access to biz journal and want to provide a summary?

I mean...it’s called “Park Place” guys...😏

23 hours ago, Ross said:

Quitman already has a level crossing. Might be updated to an underpass at some point.

Yeah my bad that’s what I meant, couldn’t remember if it was an underpass or overpass

Last one to do is Quitmann and then construction can start. (I may be making that up but it sounds familiar)

Lol the little Husky in the rendering is a nice touch

We’re finally getting a Uniqlo yessss 

No worries, I believe it’s designated as an affordable housing development

Another crane base was installed where they’re working on foundation close to I-10

Glass half full viewpoint; you almost had an Outlet mall here like the ones off 290/99 and 45 South by the Buc-cee’s. Thank the Rosenburg outlet for that (which, funny enough, also failed)

Yeah they’re definitely working on the other one. Guess they just wanted an excuse to have two topping out parties 

On 1/30/2020 at 2:32 PM, BigFootsSocks said:

I wonder when they’ll start on the other building.

Looks like I’ll answer my own thought; they’re digging what looks to be the foundation for the next one. Had a feeling it would be soon since the crane was still up. I wonder why they did it in this order though. 

I heard a comment that the contract is 3 years ahead of schedule on this, which sounds like a lot until you remember the original project scope was for over 9 years 😬

@Luminare Do you have anything on your list that includes the plot of land (and more, idk) that Polka Dot Dogs currently leases a warehouse on? It’s on Ella & 25th and they are supposedly being kicked out for an apartment development. 

I wonder when they’ll start on the other building.

22 hours ago, Twinsanity02 said:

This is not scientifically accurate, but from the content and size I would hypothesize an extremely large bovine. Or a local Texas size Bigfoot.

 

I couldn’t hold it ok? Don’t shame me

Gotta make a mess to clean a mess 

An Alamo Draft House would be nice 

Is that the floor where the pool deck is? 

6 hours ago, Luminare said:

Fair, but lets see how we got to this point, and why I had to say what I said to get you to clarify exactly what you wanted me to answer.

 

 

This was the foundational statement which everything else was built on. I had to know if this still played a factor in what you wanted to know. I'm not going to make the assumption that this doesn't still hold true for you in this conversation, so my initial goal was to try and omit this and move on. Its in this statement that you begin to make initial comparisons of false equivalence focusing on an aesthetic rather than the program and context itself, but I needed to understand where the false equivalence was coming from. This is also were you make your initial statement on what you perceive to be "inviting" and "interacting". Again I needed to understand what this was in relation to.

 

 

Without us knowing what the false equivalence is (from the listeners viewpoint), you then further build the case aesthetically what you prefer over others, and what you deem to be "inviting" and "interacting". You also make it clear that you do have a bias in what transparent means, but again, what is the comparison. From these initial points it seemed that you were comparing the Endowment to the MFAH as if they were like-like comparisons. Something which had to be addressed and untangled.

 

 

This actually then made things more confusing because while you conceded one point about the museum, the listener still doesn't understand where your initial perspective is on this topic and why you are making your initial comparisons. What is your initial comparison that that informs your notions about what is more inviting and that the "full facade matters"? Again the listener still thinks that your comparison is between the Endowment (an office building) and the MFAH expansion (an art gallery).

 

 

NOW we have found the false equivalence and what you were ACTUALLY comparing both the MFAH and the Endowment too. As you can see this was in no way clear. If you frame your argument to just this one quote then it is clear, but to the conversation as a whole it isn't clear. With the evidence above this was a hornets nest to unravel to get hone in on what specifically you were asking for.

 

 

This is why I had to infer these things. Thankfully you did clarify, but only at this point.

 

Now you see why I made the claim this was opaque. You do tend to do this by the way, and I wanted further clarification.

 

AIC does not equal to MFAH and does not equal to Endowment

Your origination point of comparison was the AIC to MFAH aesthetically, but was masked by this topic of the Endowment which has a similar aesthetic, but is a different program/function.

Knowing the basis for this I can say:

 

There was no light issue as their was with MFAH because the program, client, and context called for something different. There were probably light issues associated with the AIC, but of a different kind, and not similar to the MFAH. So while you do prefer the AIC aesthetically, and while its possible the MFAH could have done this same aesthetics, the MFAH had different set of constraints which probably prevented it from looking comparable to the AIC. With that being said, both are actually very transparent, but in different ways that relate to their context and while what you perceive as "transparent" "inviting" and "interacting" is more a matter of opinion than something objectively true, it doesn't make what you said wrong, but it does distort your comparison because you omitting a lot of different variables that were at play for each project.

 

See what I had to get through just to get to this answer?

I’m convinced crockpot and Lumi are the same person😛

Good start but let’s talk about 19th and 20th west of Durham not just in between lol

On 10/24/2019 at 7:18 AM, CrockpotandGravel said:

Originally posted May 28, 2019 in this thread before all of my content were removed from the entire forum earlier this month. Reposting this throws off the flow of the thread (i.e. out of order),  still, it may be helpful for visitors to see what was previously discussed or shared before. I wasn't  able to retrieve  everything I contributed to this forum, but I'm reposting what I do have.



The building last known as Fitzgerald's at 2706 White Oak Dr in the Heights, Houston.

Photos of the demolition process.


******************
The Fitzgerald's lot is not becoming a parking garage but some kind of development, maybe residential based on rumors (posted above). For more on the automated parking garage going in at  2714 White Oak Dr, next to Fitzgerald's  (thread about that here). The automated parking garage was previously planned for the site of 2912 White Oak Dr or 2920 White Oak Dr  (more about the previous planned location in the thread here).
****************



From Instagram last week:


















https://www.instagram.com/p/Bxvw5FbpCOD/

 

Oh god seeing those photos hurts

I disagree I think I’ve pooped things pretty than this but to each their own and I respect your opinion