Jump to content

mattyt36

Full Member
  • Posts

    1,269
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by mattyt36

  1. God bless them indeed. Personally responsible for Discovery Green, BBP, and Emancipation Park, in addition to everything else they have done. Houston is so lucky to have such a great and non-flashy tradition of philanthropy.
  2. That's fascinating--why did UT own land in Timbergrove?
  3. I'm sure it's been discussed before but does anyone know the origin of the whole "West Main Street" nomenclature?
  4. Best idea I've heard since the whole Houston Needs a Swimming Hole people.
  5. Oh wonderful, the worst of both worlds. There was some pretty interesting stuff in there, like I did not know the Midtown TIRZ has this exclave around the Menil. Also the street proposals are pretty game-changing if they proceed--Fannin, San Jacinto, and Crawford going two-way. And McGowen getting the Bagby/Caroline treatment. I guess that leaves only Smith, Louisiana, Milam, and Travis as the main "drive-through" streets. I wish they weren't 4 blocks in a row, though.
  6. Below is a link to the Midtown Parks and Public Space Master Plan that I believe came out last week, which does not refer to the SkyPark as anything more than an option. https://midtownhouston.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Midtown-Parks-and-Public-Space_DRAFT_230216.pdf
  7. Oh goody, it’s like deja vu … all over again.
  8. Deflation an economic no bueno as secondary effects will likely be more pronounced on wages. Wages are just not going to remain the same in a deflationary environment--it's hard enough to get producers to increase wages in an inflationary environment, so the thought that they'd leave them unchanged in a deflationary environment is pollyannish--wages are linked to the price level, certainly not perfectly and certainly not in lockstep, but they are tied very closely. "Crushing market demand" will result in another housing crisis--more foreclosures as mortgages go "underwater" and wipe out of a lot of middle-class wealth (sure, it may be on paper, but that's not how people think of it). Disinflation, fine. What Is Deflation? Why Is It Bad? – Forbes Advisor
  9. Federal funding regulations are relatively watertight--I doubt they'd let any land sales to be diverted away from the Housing Authority as a condition of receiving grants to begin with. So it's not like the funds could be used for, say, highway expansion. (Oh, the supreme irony for people who wanted to use highway funds to convert Lofts at the Ballpark to low-income housing!) I suppose they could just sit on the proceeds, but I am sure there are at least some performance requirements as well.
  10. What?! You mean you're not just an evil capitalist trying to stick it to the people?! Your "plan" could even include additional public housing?! This idea that people in rental units, public or subsidized low-income rental housing, etc., have inherent rights that somehow are superior to rights extended to every other renter or property owner is absurd. No one who rented an apartment at the Lofts at the Ballpark seriously thought that that gave them a right to live there for the rest of their lives at some nominal annual increase in rent versus their original lease, come hell or high water, I'm not sure why people living in public housing should think the same--they already have the rent control and legal rights to reaccommodation, which is more than pretty much everyone else.
  11. Wow, who would've ever guessed that a below market-rate housing project would be oversubscribed? I mean, totally logic-defying!
  12. Hmmmmmm, well, wonder what gives them the luxury to make such a "principled" decision? The answer is eluding me, even though I think it should be rather obvious . . .
  13. Regardless of whether it was "fortunate" or "unfortunate," the above is the simple reality. The current configuration is getting more "inefficient" from a land use perspective by the day. The proceeds could also be used to develop additional housing units elsewhere, as they have in plenty of other jurisdictions. Even if buildings are public landmarks, it doesn't mean they have to continue to be used for the same purpose. Below is a link from a Cite article from 1995 with a historical overview, including several proposals to sell the property going back to 1977. Evidently Kenneth Schnitzer wanted it in the early 1980s. https://offcite.rice.edu/2010/03/DepletedLegacy_Lang_Cite33.pdf (Didn't they recently sell part of the land already?)
  14. The juxtaposition of this development next to public housing is . . . interesting. One wonders when that land will inevitably be sold.
  15. Well it wouldn't really work considering UA has an exclusive long-term lease to Terminal B (assuming they exercise the redevelopment option). Not that HAS couldn't renegotiate (and the conceptual Terminal B program appears to have changed), but the current business deal doesn't really envision it.
  16. Well $50 million from Oxy for Boy Scout badges won’t hurt.
  17. The central terminal roadway complex is the main impediment to continued development and has shown exactly why especially over the last couple of years. Future terminal development would have to happen at a different site. Maybe this B redevelopment will address it. It’d actually make sense if the A redevelopment was coordinated with B for a new central west terminal, perhaps using that space west of the Marriott to eliminate the need of driving through B to get to A.
  18. Well appropriate, considering he was Dutch so well aware of the dangers of flooding.
  19. Obviously it is in an impressionistic style
×
×
  • Create New...