heights_yankee

If this is true, what explains the growing values of homes in the Norhill that were posted about earlier? Historic, deed restricted and continues to grow in value. My friends who live in a nicely renovated 2/2 on 14th, which is a less desirable street due to the traffic, have seen their home increase in value to the tune of $50k in the 4 years since they bought it.

Yes, that would be my area. We have not modified my home since we moved in almost 7 years ago and it has increased in value almost double what your friends have experienced.

I went out of town for 4 days. We left Thursday and got home last night. In that time, a 3/2 down the street from me (renovated 3 years ago) put a for sale signb up in the yard. Today there was an inspector out there and I just checked HAR and it's "option pending."

There has been no stagnation in this area at all and, again, we already live by "rules" stricter than those everyone is so up in arms about. Not only do homeowners have to answer to the HCAC but they also have to deal with the neighborhood Board, which is sometimes in line with the HCAC and sometimes not. It has caused no slow down, no stagnation, no ghetto. This area is highly desireable and most houses (unless they've been totally jacked and ruined by cheap flips) sell very quickly. As a matter of fact, even the quick flip- some of you may remember the putt putt house on Melwood- sold quickly and the man who bought it has been lovingly making improvements to the home to rememdy some of the subpar work done by the flipper. So, yeah. No ghetto.

Funny, that's exactly what I thought about all the white non-sportsmen wearing white fishing shirts and toting Anti-Wal-Mart yard signs at White Linen Night was that they looked like Republicans from The Woodlands. And in fact, they are doing very Republican things. They're waging a class war and imposing restrictions upon their neighbors. They're even apparently voting Republican. Many of these same people had anti-Sarah-Jackson-Lee stickers slapped on their shirts.

To be fair, many Democrats dislike SJL in the same way many Republicans dislike Rick Perry.

You can check with a fellow HAIF poster and fellow preservationist, heights yankee, who is on the board of Proctor Plaza Historic District. She stated in this very forum that only 3 homes were demolished in the 10 years of historic district staus WITH the 90 day waiting period. That is irrefutable proof that the old ordinance worked.

Ugh. I just typed out a thoughtful and articulate answer to this and when I hit the send button my computer ate the freaking post. I will try to duplicate my genius for you again here...

So, actually this statement isn't accurate. It has not been the 90 day rule that has preserved the homes in my neighborhood, North Norhill/Proctor Plaza. Very few people apply for teardown variances here because of our deed restrictions, which have a lot of control (not all exercised) over new constructions. It is extremely difficult to build a large McCraftsman here, no thanks to the 90 day rule. As long as I have lived here, all applications for tear downs have been approved by the neighborhood association and the HCAC save one- the infamous home at 801 Pizer. They requested a variance to tear down and were denied by the HCAC and pleaded with by their neighbors but they tore it down anyway after the 90 day wait. This is the only one that could have and should have been saved and it fell after 90 days anyway. The other tear downs in this area needed to go due to condition issues (although one was 'demolition by neglect' which is such a sad and shady way of doing it- intentionally letting your property fall in to a dangerous state of disrepair so you can tear it down in hopes of making bigger money. It didn't work and the lot is still vacant. This is not a case study in why the deed restrictions are dangerous or wrong, either, as it is 1 house out of 850. It's rare anywhere to find such a homeowner who is willing to do that with their investment.)

We have roughly 1% new construction and this is primarily because of our neighborhood deed restrictions, which are strikingly similar to what the HCAC is trying to move forward with. Yes, I do favor preservation generally but I also live with in restrictions similar to the ones being proposed already and I see, 1st hand, how they benefit my neighborhood and do no harm to property owners. We are still a very eclectic neighborhood and diverse from a socio-economic standpoint. Our deed restrictions provide for this and protect this, not make it impossible as others have suggested.

Also, values. 2 examples- a bungalow with a large addition on the back recently sold with in 8 days of being listed. Listing price: $500k (Melwood). Another home is a 2/1 with the original footprint and a teeny sunroom added off the larger bedroom in back. It had an offer over asking price within 48hours of being on the market. Asking price was ~$329k. Both cases here are friends of ours. If you search HAR for 77009, you can see 2/1s that sold in the high $200ks or low $300ks, then there are the ones with additions selling for quite a bit more.

No doubt, this fight is not novel. However the arguments seem to isolate Walmart for ills for which others are gulity...and ignored while those others are celebrated. Particularly in the context of what has been posted on many threads herein, that's hypocrisy. That's what's disappointing for me. I think that disappointment is the root of derision which others are projecting.

Actually, there was a lot of discussion on here and on other forums about the Target center when it was proposed. There was not a lot of opposition, as I remember anyway, and I think a lot of that was the location. I think what a lot of people have is an optimism and a hope for something better in the proposed Walmart location. Anyway, the Target drew a lot of criticism, especially as the smaller store names came in and people realized it was a mattress store and a Chili's. There were a lot of pictures of "urban" Target marketplaces that people hoped for and lots of grumbling about the parking lot we ended up with instead.

No, it was not to such a degree as the Walmart issue but again many people have issues with Walmart that go beyond just this development. On the "sorry excuse for a FB page" a lot of people mention having not set foot in a Walmart in years and that their boycott started long before this thread started on the HAIF.

I love how in this thread the same people who are just rich folks who don't care about the poor people who need Walmart are also the same people who resent anyone who makes any money. The people who are accused of being shallow and having no principles are also derided for trying to save the world. This is why this whole conversation makes no sense anymore. People aren't allowed to have varying view points with out being personally maligned for being on the other side of the issue. It's sad, honestly, the path this has taken. I was trying to take part in a conversation which has now gotten so mean spirited that I'm out.

(2) People being underpaid and mistreated…just like dishwashers in the locally owned restaurants, the workers who mill clothes at Target, and those who harvest our food available at the local grocery stores. May we strive to cure all such things.

(3) The proposed Walmart is in the Heights. It’s not. It’s on an odd, ugly undeveloped brownfield, south of the Katy Freeway. I have spoken out against the redevelopment of 945 Heights, (sometimes in most distasteful ways). I have expressed concerns and even argued with Redscare about 2125 Heights. I just don’t view the proposed Walmart as the uber-threat with which it is being treated. The issues for which I have stood before were totally in the middle of our neighborhood. This is not.

I don’t care if this Walmart flies or not. In light of the disaster in the Gulf, the two wars in which our Nation is engaged, and our struggling economy, the furor over this seems absurd. I ask that the discourse over this find a more balanced plateau in all manners.

I do strive to cure all those things. I do it with my pocket book and with my vote in the elections. I work on social injustices on many levels, wherever I feel I have a voice. I'm a whacked out crazy Liberal like that. But politics is another forum. Much like the other stereotypes and generalizations about individuals in this thread, I just don't think it's a fair assumption to say that people who don't want Walmart are dedicating all their time to this issue and nothing else, or that they are coming out of nowhere on the issue when many people have boycotted and fought WM's development for years. It's not a novel thing and it's not just this small number of people on HAIF talking about it.

I wish this was a more balanced discussion as well.

From the same article...

Yes, one of 3 residents who supported the store. Mr Kazamis and you can call people "elitists" all you want but that isn't a hard fact. Battery acid and trash are "facts" that others showed in the meeting. The value drop in property around the Dunvale store is a "fact." While I think statistics are questionable in any situation, I can say that crime stats around Walmarts exist where I have yet to see where a Walmart has brought a decrease in crime to any area. So, it seems name calling and stereotyping are the reasons FOR Walmart and FACTS are the reasons to be OPPOSED to Walmart.

Name one (that isn't a pipe dream).

Well, the HEB that Walmart outbid is a start...

For the AntiWalmarters (over 1000 on FB now), How Spring Valley stopped Walmart

""The impact on real estate values is difficult to measure," 18-year resident John Byerly told the nine-member commission. "But I can tell you that in the 30 years I have been selling real estate, every buyer I dealt with did not want to be anywhere near a situation like this store."

Spring Valley resident Tom Rusnek supported his neighbor's contention with a 10-minute slide show that received a standing ovation from the boisterous crowd.

Rusnek's slides displayed images of Wal-Mart stores in the Houston area. His presentation showed leaking oil and battery acid, piled up storage containers, poorly maintained landscaping, and piles of trash and old tires.

"Property values in Houston last year went up 9.2 percent, and the property values in Spring Valley were up 10.9 percent last year," Rusnek said. "However, last year the property located adjacent to the Dunvale store dropped 11.27 percent."

A second slide show was presented by Bruce Spain. His presentation refuted an independent safety study that was presented last week.

Spain said the study did not take into account the types of crimes that would be committed with a supercenter, and failed to account for crimes such as forgery, vandalism and harassment.

"The study's proposed increase in police officers will consume more than half the tax revenue Wal-Mart will bring to Spring Valley," he said. "And if we meet the required protection of 168 hours the study suggest, then all of the tax revenue will be gone. There will be no new money."

Spain, who said he is a Wal-mart stock holder, was unequivocal in his opposition."

There aren't any better options out there. Not realistic ones. When will see with open eyes what the true state of the economy (and commercial real estate and finance, specifically). It is time to adjust your dated utopian visions of mixed-use, town-square, quasi-urban wholesomeness for all. Quit being willfully ignorant of reality.

This is the reality: Houston Pavillions: mainly empty. West End: almost entirely empty. City Centre: mostly empty. Regent Square: dirt. For three years, dirt. And consider that Houston is in better shape than nearly all of the country. The Costco development got it right on Richmond and would like to see Wal-Mart do the same thing. I think it's unlikely though.

Like Niche said, the growth is coming from well capitalized grocery and big box retail. Dream all you want, there's not going to be mixed use boutique hotel, gymboree/slash whatever built on that large a site. It is not economically viable now and it won't be for years. Right now this country is saturated by retail that people aren't buying. Wal-Mart will bring things people will buy, and a net gain of jobs to the area, period. None of the other big boxes ringing the Heights forced businesses and jobs out. Not Lowes and HD on the north loop, not Target, not the new giant Kroger.

You are using a 20 year old argument pertinent to small town America and it simply doesn't apply in Houston, Texas. Protest Wal Mart labor practices all you want, but understand that keeping people under 40 hours a week is the rule, not the exception, in large retailers. Shop at Target and pretend that the cute sundress you just bought was not made in Ecuador by near-slave labor. Delude yourself into thinking that HEB is a Chinese-plastic free zone. Do whatever makes you feel right and good. But for the love of god, don't keep pushing this non-argument that a Yale St Wal Mart will take jobs and destroy businesses. At this location, in this city, it will not.

If you'd actually go back and read all my comments in this thread rather than just assuming you know what I believe based on the stereotype you have of me, you would see that I have said more than once that I don't think Walmart will take business from the local retailers in the Heights. BUT i also don't think it's going to be a retail and job utopia for all the disenfranchised of the inner loop, either. that's equally as foolish and also short sighted.

Actually, one half of the Heights is not old people. However, over half of the Greater Heights Super Neighborhood is Hispanic. Additionally, 56% of Greater Heights families make less than $50,000 per year, and would benefit greatly from the availability of low priced goods. There is definitely a disconnect between the actual demographic composition of those who live within the Greater Heights area and those with an idealized view of what the Heights is or should be. While some believe that the Heights is an enclave of enlightened upper middle class white citizens with an appreciation of historic homes, range fed meat and poultry, and products lovingly crafted by well paid workers and sold by local merchants who also wish to save the planet, the reality is far different. For every family with a $100,000 income affording them the opportunity to eschew big box stores not named Target, Whole Foods, or HEB and the luxury of installing Pella Architect Series windows on their historic bungalows with the 2 story addition in the back, there are 5 other families whose sub $50,000 incomes make them lucky to even replace the broken glass with a new pane. I do not know if the over $100,000 crowd is blissfully ignorant that over half their neighbors struggle mightily to pay the bills, or if they secretly wish to price them out of the neighborhood. I simply know that a new Walmart built on the other side of a hideously grotesque freeway overpass will not only not harm my property value, but also make the day to day lives of half of my neighbors marginally easier. For that reason, I am not opposed to a Walmart on the site of a former steel factory.

(Source: City of Houston Super Neighborhood Demographics)

You loooove to stereotype. I know a lot of people in that income range who do a lot for their community, who are giving and care about their community. I also know a lot of people in that income range who are total douchebags. I also know a lot people under $50k who are equally as douchy and are more elitist than their higher earning counter parts. Can we leave the stereotyping behind? It really doesn't add much to the discussion.

I live on a very mixed income block and I know that the elderly Hispanic couple across the street from me [who also have their special needs granddaughter living with them] will continue to shop at Fiesta and the stores across Main even if the Walmart is built. My white next door neighbor doesn't earn $100k or probably even $50k (he works as a band photographer) but shops at Whole Foods sometimes, and Fiesta other times. He loves Whole Foods probably because he is the kind of guy that thinks preservatives are a government conspiracy and that the foil wrappers in Velveeta can track your movements for the FBI. If you met him, you would certainly not think there was anything elitist about him even though he is primarily a WF shopper. Ironic that my neighbor on the other side is a DEA agent. The middle aged, gay, white petroleum engineers on the corner might shop at Walmart but they might not. They don't offer many political opinions but based on the careful renovation job they did on their house they're obviously jerks, so I guess we'll say no. Of all the people on my block, all of whom I know, the most likely to shop at Walmart is probably the newest couple- 20 something, DINKS, with small dogs in a 2/1.

I am also curious to see how the demographics you cite are going to change when the new census numbers are released. When the numbers the SN has were put together, they were most likely based on the 2000 census at which point an area like Cottage Grove was 100% low earning and minority. That area is probably only 50% low earning now. I am not saying this is a good thing, but I think the numbers will need to be adjusted. Just like the Target wasn't made a Super because of old demographics, Walmart may be looking at those same demographics and getting a false picture of it supposed clientele. I'm not saying the townhouse hell Cottage Grove has become is a good thing, but it's a very real thing.

But I am curious if the Walmart supporters think that Walmart is the only option? Are you just being so adamant because you don't like it when people have contrary opinions? For example, if this thread wasn't about Walmart, but rather was titled "What would you like to see if you could choose anything for development on this parcel?" What if Walmart were never mentioned and you were starting with a clean slate? Would Walmart be the 1st thing that would come to mind for you? Or would you have had a different vision? Maybe mixed income housing like they have on the east side of Austin? Maybe a small hotel that would employ 300 ppl, plus a restaurant employing 100 more and a few shops, employing 100+ more, all totaling more jobs and generally higher income, even in the lowest positions (hosuekeepers, busboys) for low earners, than Walmart would thus affording these people a better standard of living. If they already live in the area and shop at Walmart, they can continue to go to the (assuming 290) location and still have more pocket money at the end of the day. You might not find it more convenient, but it's about jobs, right? So, rather than 600 parking spaces for one big box, they have a garage with 600+ spaces and multiple businesses, creating more jobs than a Walmart would. Would you want that? Because that is what most of the anti-Walmart people want. We think there are better options out there.

I'd love nothing more than to see the concerned heights neighbors do a real protest of the proposed Yale Wal Mart.

Think of it as a meaningful vacation from strenuous days of blogging, girls lunches at Stella Sola, play dates, bikini boot camp,and taking your overly-accesorized children to Berryhill while the moms relax with some 'ritas. Raise awareness for the cause by mobilizing for hours a day in the 100 degree heat, marching in the dirt with signs and bullhorns. Or how about going door- to- door with clipboards? Forming a human chain in front of the bulldozers? If you did, you might get a tiny bit of insight into the tiring, hot and less-than-comfortable lives of the people for whom WalMart is a good thing.

Yea, I know I'm being hyperbolic and rude. I originally expressed these sentiments in a PM, but I feel compelled to go public with them. I've had dear friends in the Heights on and off for more than 20 years, and there's a lot about it I love. But I am really, really glad that I did not buy a house there. Because lately I find the misdirected, contradictory righteousness just downright suffocating. We're talking about empty dirt by the railroad tracks, on the other side of the freeway, generating no jobs and nothing to the tax base. I understand taking a philosophical stance, but not at the expense of our community during a recession.

I will say this to the Stop Wal-Mart crowd: whatever big box retailer builds on that site, watch the news when they start

hiring. When 5,000 people show up to apply for 250 jobs, ask yourself: are my priorities perhaps misplaced?

I am willing to bet this nastiness is directed at me since I think I am the only obvious mother who has a blog in this thread (and I go to Berryhill and drink margaritas). I don't go to boot camp and I've never had lunch at Stella Sola and I have sons so they don't wear accessories, but I get the fact that you are stereotyping. And I can add to this that you know nothing about me outside of how you have stereotyped me. For you to think I have come to this position in life easily and that I have no understanding of a less-than-comfortable life makes you just as self righteous as anyone else.

As I've said before, I think that people who are anti-Walmart are in many cases because they care about people and feel that WM does a lot of things to perpetuate the poverty cycle. This is what I have expressed many times in this thread. I understand that others think Walmart benefits the poor with their pricing, but I think the bad outweighs the good and a lot of others feel that way as well.

Also, I don't think anyone wants to see nothing on that site and see it remain a dirt lot. People just had higher hopes for this area than 1 giant big box store with a mcdonalds and a 600 space parking lot. There could be something like a scaled down, area appropriate City Centre which would employ a huge and diverse population, from chamber maids at a hotel to clerks, receptionists, waiters thru to management. Maybe people who worked at the new hotel and movie theater might even get some health benefits and be allowed to work a 40 hour week. Who knows? People would just like something else, something better for everyone.

People-watching at a Wal-Mart off of Washington Avenue after the bars close should be a blast! I'm already looking forward to shopping there.

I'm gonna give you that one.

...and if anyone has any interest in reading and/or participating - here is a link to a FB page - Stop Heights Wal-Mart: http://www.facebook.com/StopHeightsWalMart?v=wall

Is this just a FB page or is there any actual community action behind it?

maybe it's the same little bird that told swamplot: http://swamplot.com/walmart-yes-walmart-is-ready-to-land-on-heights-blvd/2010-07-01/

So, someone posted the Swamplot post to Heights Kids Group and a mom in the group responded with this:

I can tell you that I have professional relationships with the developer seeking to build on that site and they are most definitely not negotiating a ground lease with Walmart.

ETA: but now I am unsure of what parcel she is talking about. Still, even Sarnoff was unable to really confirm anything.

Once Yale is developed and the area around Arne's, I'm going to be hard pressed to leave the Heights. I hate traffic.

Yankee,

I was referring to your previous post on the subject of the new Heights Historic District South Application and the new moratorium passed by the Mayor and City Council regarding demolitions and new construction in Houstons Historic Districts (the HPO, or Historic Preservation Ordinance)...A different thread here on HAIF, where you expressed your opinion.

You stated that you supported the regulation of property rights in Houston historic districts yet you are bashing corporate America for limiting home size of their employees (sounds like a stretch but anyway...)

Is there any way you can walk both sides of that fence? If so, please explain how.

The mayor, City Council, and the HAHC now have the power to dictate property use, home size, and new construction in the Heights and other historic districts in Houston. On the same hand you are quoted as blaming a corporation for regulating what their employees can buy and or build.

I honestly don't see the difference.

Thanks for clearing up for me what I believe.

Yankee,

I thought you were a strong supporter of dictating home sizes. What's the problem? The Mayor is now telling us what we can buy and build...all is right in the Heights.

You thought wrong. And what does the mayor have to do with Walmart?

Yes. Isn't that the point of holding an opinion is that you've considered the alternatives and determined your preference?

Besides, it's not like we're arguing over whether brunettes are more attractive than blonds or whether my farts stink. That kind of thing is 100% subjective, and there's no accounting for taste. The Wal-Mart or Yale Street issue can be formulated and argued logically based upon mutually-agreed-upon values and criteria. And that's what we're doing.

This is another area where I think a very, very, verrrrry large majority of people would be in complete agreement.

And for the record, brunettes are also empirically more attractive.

Now we're getting somewhere.

Guilty as charged. When the opinion is based on flawed logic or incorrect information, I feel compelled to point it out. Sorry if it is offensive to you. This is similar to the gentrification arguments that were all the rage a few years back. It was popular to decry gentrification on the grounds that it forced old people and the poor out of their homes. None of this was based on actual facts, just that it seemed logical. When studies were actually done, it was found that few people were ever forced out by gentrification. Some chose to cash out, profiting on the increased home value, using those profits to improve their living conditions. However, most stayed and benefited from the increased development and more choices in retail offerings that the gentrification spurred....like new nearby low price stores.

The same can be said with other Heights arguments, but I'll leave them out of a Walmart discussion, though it is topical to the Heights.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing but, again, you think any opinion different from your own is illogical or incorrect. Take for example a discussion that happened here about Yale being widened. You saw the widening of Yale as something to benefit you and therefore you deemed it "right." People who had concerns about it were deemed "wrong" and their reasons invalidated by your opinions, not by facts because there are no facts to say what will or won't happen if/when the road gets widened because it hasn't happened yet. It's all supposition. Yet you treat it like it's a forgone conclusion that it will be wonderful when actually it could really suck. You do not have the ability to ever say "I am for something and these are my reasons" without adding "and you are incorrect and your reasons invalid. They have to be because they differ from mine."

Same with this. You think because you see a benefit in WalMart for yourself that having it built HAS to be the right answer, which makes other wrong rather than just a different side of the coin. Truly closed minded. You also seem to change your opinions about things just so you can argue with people and that isn't lost on us- even people like me who waste too much time volleying with you.

Granted, I wish that there was a smaller increment than 20-99, but being what it is...my feeling is that that's a medium-sized firm. When a firm has enough staff to take an entire floor of an office building, that's not exactly mom-and-pop in my mind. But hey, these terms like "small business" and "middle class" are so subjective, anyway, as to render the discussion meaningless. That's another valid criticism of HeightsYankee's rant, so thank you.

Wal-Mart has 2.1 million employees, or approximately 21,212 times the number of employees per CEO than a 99-employee "small business".

The owner of a firm that can take up a whole floor is probably not "middle class" but certainly many of his/her employees are. Also, my argument is not solely for "mom & pop" which someone else brought in to the dialogue. My support is for local.

Rant: this word proves the great irony of the conversation happening here (other than irony that this is all just rumor and speculation at this point). I am defending my opinion that I don't want a Walmart near me because I don't like them as a company and I prefer to not see their corporation grow anymore because I think they do more harm than good on several levels. You (and even more so our friend Red) on the other hand rant while stating your opinions as facts and leave no room for anyone to have a differing opinion. It wouldn't get so tired and obnoxious if there was more "You're entitled to your opinion but I think that it's a good thing for X,Y,Z reasons and am happy"... There is a way of talking about things where everyone can give their opinions from their personal angle without having to disprove what the other person believes. You can't seem to do that. You want to spend all your time disproving my opinions instead of just expressing your own and leaving it at that.

2 or 3 Walmarts in 1/4 of the state? And you claim that this has decimated the economy? I'll let your comment speak for itself.

I am not sure why your "automatic assumptions" are valid and mine are not. You "automatically assume" that a Walmart will put Heights retailers out of business (though you do not seem to automatically assume the same for Walmart's alter ego, Target), and you further "automatically assume" that I have not visited the local stores to see their prices. While I freely admit that I do not shop at Urban Soles, it is not because of their prices. They do not sell what I want. And therin lies the rub. The small stores sell what the big boxes will not. There is no danger whatsoever...despite your sniffing to the contrary...of Walmart displacing a single Heights store. Every store you've mentioned carries food or product not carried by Walmart. The only stores impacted by Walmart will be Target, Kroger, HEB and Fiesta, those that sell the everyday mundane plastic crap and staples that are sold at big stores for low prices. Any person of even ordinary intelligence knows that you shop at Walmart when service and quality are not a priority, when the plastic forks are the same everywhere, and only the price matters.

2-3 in 1/4 of the state. one being in my hometown. 1 decimating the economy of that town, the other being in a city with 5x the population of said town. i said that the non-walmart communities continue to thrive.

but your next comment proves to me that you just want to argue with me and you do not truly read what i say because I said not once but TWICE in this thread/the "yale" thread that I do not believe a Walmart will hurt local Heights businesses and I said why. After that, I mentioned the different reasons that I dislike Walmart as a company and most of those reasons have to do with the fact that their policies keep the poor poor. I believe in helping the poor get out of poverty and Walmart is on the other side of that issue for me. I think they are a problem, not a solution.

There are affordable groceries in and around the Heights- Fiesta for example. And there is a Walmart 10-15 minutes away already.

So you're telling him that your values are better; he needs to move. Do you have any idea how condescending that sounds? What if I told you, "Yankee go home!". You'd be pissed.

Let's have some civility, please.

No, I'm not telling him anything. I was being sarcastic. I guess next time I'll remember to add this ---->

Plus, Red would hate the burbs. Many have way more deed restrictions than the Heights will ever have.

Or, I could stay right where I'm at and fight your attempts to turn my neighborhood into Western MA.

Actually, I moved to the Heights b/c it reminded me a lot of Western MA at the time but it is getting less and less like it daily. And we have no deed restrictions or Historic preservation where I am from. I am willing to bet most people don't even know what the term "deed restrictions" means in my town. Ha! Yet, there are a lot of historic homes still standing, mostly because people just like them and see value in them.

Now, down in the city that is another story... but what they have in Boston is different from what we have in Western MA or in Houston. I think most ppl can agree with that to some degree.

You know, I found some interesting things while perusing the Walmart website. First, it appears that there are only 48 Walmarts in the entire state of Massachusetts, so I would suggest that their ability to decimate the 'mom and pop' economy is a bit overstated. However, more interesting was the fact that the average hourly wage of their 12,914 Massachusetts associates is $12.72. That's $26,500 per year, which is ABOVE the poverty level of the average family of four. Considering the skill and education level of a retail employee, 26 thou a year ain't bad wages.

Another interesting tidbit is the fact that Walmart bought $2.23 Billion in products from Massachusetts based suppliers last year, supporting 48,000 Massachusetts supplier jobs. Not Chinese jobs...Massachusetts jobs. Now, I have no idea what the mom and pops support (no one ever does), but Walmart is supporting over 60,000 Massachusetts jobs.

http://walmartstores.com/pressroom/statebystate/State.aspx?st=MA

Western MA has 2 or 3 of those 48 Walmarts but it is 1/4 of the state. People in North Adams are not making that lovely $12+ salary. That is being paid at all the Walmarts to the east where the cost of living is astronomical. Boston and it's surrounding communities are extremely expensive and that salary is barely a living wage in some areas. Where I grew up the COL is significantly less than even the 'burbs of Houston and maybe the manager is making that, but the average employee is not. PLus, that "salary" you quoted is only $4k/year above the poverty line and that assumes the employee is actually allowed to work a full time job, which most are not even though their Walmart job is their only source of income.

Well, crunch, you're just not hip to how the Heights works. When we're complaining about restaurants and D-bag bars, Washington Avenue is NOT the Heights. An interstate highway is a pretty clear line of demarcation. But, when we complain about Walmart, then Washington Avenue is included in the Heights. It works the same with our homes. We don't want uber-riche people building McMansions in the Heights, forcing out the middle class. We'd rather impose such restrictions on them that they cannot afford to repair or remodel their bungalows. By the same logic, we don't want low price Walmart, because they pay low wages. We'd rather have high priced 'mom and pops' for our middle class residents to enjoy. It makes perfect sense to us. Only an Eastie like yourself and Niche couldn't understand something as simple as this.

On average, a locally owned store injects $60/100 back in to their local economy while a national chain gives back under $40. And all "local" business is not mom & pop. I hardly think Heights area businesses like Stella Sola or Lola/Dragon Bowl/Pinks or Harold's can be considered "mom & pop" but they are locally owned.

Also, you do a lot of businesses a disservice by automatically assuming their products are out of reach of "middle class." Many of the stores in the Heights are less expensive than the large retailers who carry the same merchandise. For example Urban Soles Outpost sells everything at MSRP and is typically cheaper than Zappos for most of their stocked items. Our local booksellers usually have better prices than the big retail chains (everything at Heights Books-Libros is 20% off MSRP and they have used books for even less).

Small business owners make up a majority of the "middle class" so I would think you would do more to support them...

Well, crunch, you're just not hip to how the Heights works. When we're complaining about restaurants and D-bag bars, Washington Avenue is NOT the Heights. An interstate highway is a pretty clear line of demarcation. But, when we complain about Walmart, then Washington Avenue is included in the Heights. It works the same with our homes. We don't want uber-riche people building McMansions in the Heights, forcing out the middle class. We'd rather impose such restrictions on them that they cannot afford to repair or remodel their bungalows. By the same logic, we don't want low price Walmart, because they pay low wages. We'd rather have high priced 'mom and pops' for our middle class residents to enjoy. It makes perfect sense to us. Only an Eastie like yourself and Niche couldn't understand something as simple as this.

You can move to the suburbs, get a cheap house and a whole lotta Walmart. Have fun.

Houston, TX is not Westerfield, MA. There are about 60 times the number of people in our region, better higher-paying jobs, productive industry, and modern infrastructure. Your apparent surprise that a cultural institution could not turn around the town's economy is also kind of telling. The problem with towns such as that one is that the core employers cannot sustain their business. And to be clear, a mom & pop dry goods store is not a core employer; a museum is not a core employer; nor is a Wal-Mart; they are all non-core employers enabled by the disposable income injected into the workforce by industry (and to some extent from transfer payments).

Compare cities and towns in the northeast and the rust belt to Texas; with only three exceptions (Beaumont, Wichita Falls, and Sherman-Denison), all of our MSAs are growing. They all also have one or more Wal-Marts, and I'd suspect in higher concentration per capita than they exist in the northeast. Energy is only part of the story; why is Waco growing...or Amarillo? The answer is that Texas is a business-friendly state. We can out-compete Massachusetts and even China in many categories. ...and whether in spite of our Wal-Marts or more likely regardless of them, people move here from stagnant places like Pittsfield, MA for self-betterment in one form or another.

Actually, the economy of Western MA is some residual farming but primarily tourism/culture. It hasn't been industry in most parts of the state for more than 60 years. As I said before, many of the towns throughout the Berkshires are thriving and always have. It's places and events like Cranwell to Tanglewood to the Williamstown Theater Festival which fuel the economy of the western part of the state. It's picturesque and quaint; people come from all over the world to spend weekends or even the summer. However, when people visit MassMoCA, they don't spend a lot of money in North Adams because there is no where for them to spend it. They go to Williamstown or drive down to Lee/Lenox/Stockbridge and shop, buy art, eat because you can do those things in those areas. In North Adams, you can shop at Walmart and the tourists don't want or need it. It's also not a 24 hours Walmart so the "convenience factor" is lost there as well.

As far as coming here for self betterment, I came to Texas as a full time volunteer (VISTA) working to help children in poverty, not to suckle the Texas teet, and ended up marrying a native.

But of course you know more about my hometown and my intentions and my reasons for being than I do, so I digress

My monthly living expenses are only slightly more than half of what a full-time Wal-Mart employee on minimum wage earns. If that level of income is poverty, then whatever definition of poverty you're using was cooked up by one greedy bastard.

Ahhhh. So what you really want here is a job.

The Heights has changed dramatically in the last 10 years and lots of companies (including commercial real estate) are just using the 2000 census with annual adjustments made on average/projected population growth. What can drastically change demographics in a short time in a zip code (or block group) are new apartment complexes due to their high number of households in a limited space. That I am aware of - there have not been many new apartment complexes built - except for the two on I-10 (Target & near Heights blvd) and the one on Yale (at 22nd) and it doesn't look to me that they are marketing and housing "Mexican families" (as you put it). If they are building a store at Northline Commons, not too far from there that will service Walmart's typical (repeat) customer (demographics), I would be very surprised if WalMart put a store in the Heights on Yale at I-10.

We were just talking about this at dinner last night.

The widespread and sustained rumor is that Target used these older stats in development of the Sawyer Heights store and now greatly regret it. They believed that the area would only sustain a small store and now the SH store is one of the highest grossing in metro Houston. Since they dropped the ball and didn't make it a Super Target (like a lot of the people around here had hoped), they are now sticking random produce on aisle end caps and adding food/wine wherever possible to make up for the bad stats they were forced to use...

Which brings up another point- if Walmart has a target demographic of people under a certain income level, but this area has transitioned so much that it's now mostly the educated, upper middle class that The Niche hates so much (because apparently he had a taste of the lifestyle and then lost it, so the rest of us are to blame and we should all be ashamed of our own successes) why should the area be forced to accept a store that caters to the smaller percentage of the area population?