TheNiche

I thought it was just AWP who don't want wal mart.

http://www.economist...s-retail-reform

AWP are like Baskin Robbin's 31 Flavors. It takes all kinds.

Edit: Oh, by "those people" I didn't mean poor people. I meant those Woodlander suburbanites. [Hiss of a feral cat].

Surely you didn't. Socially-concious as y'all are, no Heights resident would put that kind of sentiment out there so flagrantly. Its simply not plausible because you know that a Woodlander could've picked up on the possibility that they might be able to smear you by quoting your statement out of context, knowing all the while that it wasn't your intention.

Angry white people, regardless of physical configuration or political affiliation, are cannibalistic birds of a feather. They flock together, then pick each other apart, viciously.

The neighborhood is just fine, physically speaking. So is The Woodlands.

What I hate are highly-insulated subcultures of similarly-obnoxious people, especially when as generational breeding cycles kick in. By my observation, affluent obnoxious people have a greater wherewithall to actualize and then mass-communicate their smug preferences, and so the criticisms that I am leveling at the Heights and The Woodlands are several orders of magnitude greater than what I might level at, say, Pasadena or even Spring. It is also notable that my 'hate-on' diminishes with distance. So right now, at this moment, I do not care about Austin or College Station, even if they are highly deserving of criticism. It is also notable that I have a respect for differently-obnoxious people, such as seem to gravitate toward the East End and Third Ward.

Yeah. Every time I am up in The Woodlands, all I hear about is how much they hate Walmart, want a more walkable/less car centric neighborhood and want to preserve historic bungalows and shop at small independent businesses. CongraTulations. You really nailed it this time.

The cultural differences are only skin-deep, not that much greater than the difference between buying a silver car or buying a beige car.

You could fit at least ten Trader Joes into the Heights Walmart.

Yeah, but how many Trader Joes would get built on eleven acres? With or without a Wal-Mart, there will be something, and there will be traffic. The only differences as far as neighborhood impact or desirability are qualitative (i.e. Are the shoppers predominantly white or brown? Are the shoppers predominantly rich or poor? That kind of thing. And I for one, don't care.)

Yes, to me it seems small. Even with the expansion (to 40,000), the stadium would be in the lower third of NCAA FBS stadium capacities.

The campus is quickly growing (2.4% annual student population growth since 2005), outpacing Texas A&M (1.9%) and UT-Austin (0.6%). It is the principal public higher education institution in one of the fastest growing metro areas in the country.

Most NCAA FBS stadium have seating for a population that is significantly greater than the student body. Of course, one driver for this is that most students (including grad students) are enrolled in a university for four years or less; however, they will be alumni for many years after. For example, looking at the largest universities in Texas that are also in the FBS:

University - Current Enrollment - Stadium Capacity - Ratio

University of Texas at El Paso - 22,640 - 52,000 - 2.3

University of Texas at Austin - 51,145 - 100,119 - 2.0

Texas Tech University - 32,327 - 60,454 - 1.9

Texas A&M University - 51,895 - 83,002 - 1.6

University of Houston - 39,824 - 40,000 - 1.0

University of North Texas - 35,722 - 30,850 - 0.9

Furthermore, looking at the future Big East Conference, UH would rank near the bottom in stadium capacity, despite being one of the largest schools in the conference (in terms of student enrollment).

Well, I can't argue with this - but not because I agree, but because I haven't seen the pricing/cost analysis. But, generically - Smaller stadium and competition for tickets doesn't necessarily translate to greater profit. And, while I know you're using the term informally, state universities are not in the business of making a profit - at a minimum, they're there to provide an education to members of the populace; in regards to sports facilities, they support such programs in order to (i) provide recreation for the university community and (ii) garner moral and financial support for the school. I don't think that packing a stadium and leaving some people who want to attend games out is the best way to achieve these goals.

Look, I'm REALLY glad that my alma mater is revamping its football digs - but I'm a bit disappointed that the initial phase is such a modest expansion from its current capacity. These expansion plans just seem a bit short-sighted to me.

I would argue that the purpose of student athletics is primarily to enhance the brand awareness among prospective students in the short term and brand loyalty among alumni in the long term. Football is particularly effective at marketing a university to out-of-state and international students that otherwise would be completely unfamiliar with a school that has traditionally had only a regional draw and a more regionally-limited diaspora; but even a girls' volleyball team, paraded around the Chinese countryside, can drum up a surprising number of applications. These students pay higher tuition rates, which helps the school indirectly, but immediately. And from a larger pool of applicants, the student body quality will increase as well, which in turn leads to greater prestige, and prestige results in even more applications, easier hiring of better professors, a warmer reception from employers of the school's graduates, and a wealthier and more proud alumni base. In the very long term, that alumni base will reward the school with charitable donations and also with generational loyalty.

To the extent that UH Football will now receive additional television air time, it is important to craft the appropriate image. When the camera tilts upward to view the stands, nobody is counting how many rows there are of seats, but they certainly notice whether those seats are occupied. And when there are empty stands (like at the TicketCity Bowl game), it communicates the wrong message. For most games, 40,000 seats is plenty. It'll probably be a long while before we can fill 60,000, even for the most highly anticipated of games; and if we need more than that for some special event, there's Reliant Stadium.

UH is just starting out, really. It could increase the student population to match or even exceed that of UT-Austin, but it still wouldn't be of like-kind. It'll take a while. Perhaps, a long while. In the meantime, where very-big stadium capacities are concerned, it is better to lease than to own.

I, too, hope that the Heights (or somewhere close enough that the Heights can rhetorically annex the location) gets a Trader Joe's. Thereafter, I can mockingly congradulate them for being more Woodlands-icious than ever before.

I hope that Exxon is doing some time lapse photography of their construction site from a good vantage point. It's be crazy to watch all those cranes in action, simultaneously, at a fever pace.

Old Navy is better than this? Ugh. No wonder I've never heard of it, and thank goodness.

You heard it here first, folks! There are developers in place. It will happen. Tigereye assures us.

Holy Crap! This is BIG...

It is a big, malleable, long-term idea...with a nice rendering. Nothing more. Eeven the chairman of the group tasked with making it happen (Ric Campo, CEO of Camden Property Trust) struck me as being cautious in his statements.

i'm not so sure about this. It's a catch 22 in the sense that people really need a reason to live downtown. At first glance, who wants to pay 3x the amount of rent that they could pay anywhere else, and not have access to hardly any amentities? Downtown see,s to be shaping up with the Discovery Green, OPP/Grocery store, and hotel, but these type of developments need to continue. They need to make these things more visible too. I was surprised to see the Phonecia grocery store able to put such a large display on the building. Very good step. But better lighting and visibility would be a great start. Downtown feels so drab and uninviting with all the voids between destinations.

The demand is sourced from 1) people who work downtown, 2) large energy and law firms that require corporate housing for their out-of-town visitors, and 3) people that have just recently moved here from the east or west coasts that are used to paying ridiculously high rents and that just assume that downtown is where the cool kids live.

The HP store seems to be the only mainstream bookstore in close proximity to much of east, northeast, and southeast Houston. The next nearest stores towards the east are Barnes and Noble outlets in Deerbrook Mall (Humble) to the northeast and the Fairway Market Place in Pasadena to the southeast. Both of those stores are just outside the Beltway. There is an additional store in Baybrook II in Webster to the southeast.

They've got a lock on the ghetto. Yeah. Awesomeness.

So I take it you don't ride the 50, 52 or the 30 very much?? I've been on each of those buses and seen 4 or 5 Foever 21 bags on them at a time. 2nd and 3rd Ward know about Houston Pavillions, and the rail lines are gonna make for a faster trip.

I've never so much as seen a Forever 21 bag.

I had figured that it was oriented to upper middle class women and was bringing the attention of monied individuals to the downtown area as an option for their shopping needs. That's the sort of foot traffic that it takes to develop a viable shopping district. But if its only attracting poor people to spend money on items that they can scarcely afford, then screw it. It serves no purpose compatible with social policy. Thank you; your comments have soured me to the prospect that a subsidy of Houston Pavilions has any redeeming qualities.

It was a mistake to remove the residential and hotel portion.

Its easy to say that in hindsight, but perceptions within the marketplace changed abruptly at various points through the development process. Developers never want to sacrifice any amount of built area (because they're getting a fee from their investors as part of the deal, and the fee is usually based on the cost to build the project), but that is what it took to get the project financed through even the least responsible of the active banks at that time (which has since failed).

The mistake was to build it. But presupposing that you believe that something built is better than nothing built, it was not a mistake to make the sacrifices that they had to.

Some rail extensions will be going west, BUT those aren't the ones opening immediately

Those aren't even the ones under construction.

I just hope with the rail extensions that downtown will start to thrive - only time will tell.

Yeah sure, rail to the barrio will drive sales at Houston Pavilions. Maybe the new owner can generate interest from pawn shop operators and refresquerias, and then strike it rich!

I know that Books-A-Million was struggling as an anchor and basically getting free rent. I have to wonder how well the other stores are doing and whether a new owner would have a tolerance for a legacy of lease concessions.

From the article:

"We have a successful venture," Icken said. "We started with an overarching objective to enhance retailing space in the proximity of Discovery Green, the convention center, and that's been achieved."

No, that's bull. The City wanted a proof of concept. What it proved is that the market fundamentals do not exist for a critical mass of retail in the heart of downtown and along light rail to be successful.

Rut-Row! Houston Pavilions, which took $14.3 milllion in TIRZ money from the City, is now in receivership to a bank that took over a failed bank from receivership.

When will Houston learn, downtown is for office buildings and hotels, not entertainment-driven retail?

To quote myself from November of 2006:

I can't believe that I'm doing this, but it seems like I need to ask a question. One previously asked by Plastic.

Why do we place so much importance on redeveloping downtown Houston? Why are we willing to throw so much money at it? Honestly, for what?

So my kitchen is better, and my security and concierge services are equal. They can walk to Carrabba's, but I can walk to Christian's Tailgate (and Glass Wall and Stella Sola, but whatever).

Tough call.

Those places have fewer television ads and aren't chain restaurants. So there.

So, that's what a million dollar kitchen looks like, huh?

Yours is better, I know. But when you pay Randy to attach one to a 3,000-square-foot residence whose key amenity is being Carraba's adjacent (because it damned sure ain't security), yeah, apparently that's what you get.

There is no concierge or guard, but this type of living requires none in my opinion.

Worst. Ad. Copy. Ever.

Not to speak for Wernicke, but I wonder if he meant the life expectancy of the building?

Institutionally-owned real estate tends to get maintained pretty well where water intrusion and vermin are concerned. If this is a wood frame building, it doesn't concern me particularly much. The biggest threats to it would either be that Houston gets built out and that this gets replaced by a highrise at some point, probably once all of us are old, decrepit, and have dementia...or that inexpensive substitutes for oil and gas are developed and that Houston goes the way of Detroit. Either way, who the hell cares?

$39 million doesn't seem like enough to make it anything exceptional for that prime location... probably be some sort of unsustainable wood frame construction like the adjacent Camden Midtown.

Provided that the forestry practices are sound (which they generally are), then in what manner is wood frame construction not sustainable? It's certainly a locally available building material. The cultivation and harvesting of forests produces far fewer and less harmful emissions than the manufacturing of steel or concrete.

Thanks for all the pictures - was the snow from a Cougar promo event?

Perhaps it had something to do with UH's new conference affiliation with all those snowy northeastern schools. At least, that's the best I can figure...

The buildings are all still there, I presume due to the contract with T-Mobile. Does anyone have any news about this?