Trae

I see they show a Le Meridien instead of the W (was this the project that was going to maybe include a W?). Interestingly enough they show a building with an "M"... that "M" looks identical to that of W Hotels just flipped backwards.

They didn't replace the W, with the Le Meridien. Since the beginning, it's been rumored that both are going into this development. That's why the W is upside down.

The author doesn't even think it's the end of Atlanta. It's just a sensationalist title designed to drive more web traffic.

Okay? Why does that matter? It's a good article, that points to some of the problems in Atlanta.

This.

When the merger news came out, all we kept hearing was how Chicago bent over backwards with incentives and whatnot. Then we see that COH paid $65 million in construction at IAH for Continental. This almost looks like a stadium-type deal. It also shows that contrary to the belief of some, COH could've put forward a better incentive package to keep CO here, and would have if given the chance.

Well, according to this, Houston was never an option:

Tilton said moving United's headquarters from Chicago to Houston was never an option.

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Houston, who attended the Senate hearing and submitted written testimony, said she remained opposed to the merger in part because the departure of Continental's corporate headquarters would erode Houston's role as a hub for Continental and imperil “jobs for baggage handlers, ticket agents, other airline workers and many service workers” in a development that “would be devastating to the local Houston economy.”

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, voiced concern about the merger's impact.

“Let me be clear,” Hutchison said in a statement. “The proposed merger is a very hard sell in Texas. I for one am extremely disappointed in this decision to merge.”

Link: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/breaking/7025861.html

Any possibility that some of the Houston suburbs start incorporating (with permission from Houston) this decade? I think we're starting to finally see our suburbs grow up now and start attracting more businesses (like the Dallas area).

Good.

Houston's suburbs are growing up.

Is It Game Over for Atlanta?

by Aaron M. Renn

05/19/2010

http://www.newgeogra...me-over-atlanta

Atlanta is arguably the greatest American urban growth story of the 20th century. In 1950, it was a sleepy state capital in a region of about a million people, not much different from Indianapolis or Columbus, Ohio. Today, it's a teeming region of 5.5 million, the 9th largest in America, home to the world's busiest airport, a major subway system, and numerous corporations. Critically, it also has established itself as the country's premier African American hub at a time of black empowerment.

Though famous for its sprawl, Atlanta has also quietly become one of America's top urban success stories. The city of Atlanta has added nearly 120,000 new residents since 2000, a population increase of 28% representing fully 10% of the region's growth during that period. None of America's traditional premier urban centers can make that claim. As a Chicago city-dweller who did multiple consulting stints in Atlanta, I can tell you the city is much better than its reputation in urbanists circles suggests, and it is a place I could happily live.

As with many other boomtowns, in Atlanta growth itself has been among the biggest industries. Construction particularly played a big role in its economy. The housing crisis cut the legs from under Atlanta's real estate machine. Though prices didn't collapse, new home building did. From 2005 to 2009 Atlanta's number of annual building permits fell by 66,352, the biggest decline of any metro area.

Atlanta grew strongly in the 2000s, with growth of over 1.2 million people, a 29% rise that beat peer cities like Dallas and Houston. But look at the recent past and see a very different dynamic. Domestic in-migration has cratered, only reaching 17,479 last year, or 0.32%. While migration did slow nationally last year due to the economy, Dallas and Houston continued to power ahead. Dallas added 45,241 people (0.72%) and Houston added 49,662 (0.87%). Even Indianapolis added 7,034, but that's 0.42% on a smaller base, meaning Atlanta is actually getting beat on net migration by a Midwest city; its in-migration rate is about on par with Columbus, Ohio, another healthy Midwest metropolis......

More at the link. I don't think it's the end of Atlanta. The slow down in growth can help the city beef up its infrastructure for those already there.

Dallas Is the New L.A.: Chase and Lonestar Will Shoot Here. And, Bonus Good Guys Episodes!

By Robert Wilonsky, Thursday, May. 13 2010 @ 5:40PM)

Categories: From the RTF Dept.

http://blogs.dallasobserver.com/unfairpark/2010/05/dallas_is_the_new_la_chase_and.php

Bradley, if yer sticking 'round through the summer, I sure hope that Trans Am has a good air conditioner.

​Networks won't officially announce which pilots will be turned into full-fledged series till next week's upfronts. But two days after NBC surprised absolutely no one by picking up Jerry Bruckheimer's U.S. Marshals actioner Chase comes word that FOX has indeed placed an order for Lonestar -- the soapy drama about an oil man leading a double life that was known as Midland when it was shooting here with director Marc Webb and co-star Jon Voight earlier this year.

So, I guess Los Angeles has some competition now with Dallas!

If a Downtown property management company offers United a sweet deal, that could be a possibility.

Whatever happened to that one proposed building in the Allen Center? I think it was 5 Allen Center?? That's seem like a good location.

Now that I've had a full dose of Sunday morning laughter and eye-rolling, can we get back to the projected increase of UA/CO hub traffic through IAH? Without using crap data, of course.

What is the projected traffic volume increase to be for IAH after the merger - regardless how/where people get on or off da-plane? Also, how will this (assumed) increase affect Houston financially?

You come in on your high horse to request something that no one knows yet.

As for why United in Chicago instead of Houston? I have no idea. As far as I can tell, it's not based on logic. All the numbers point to Houston. I saw an article in the Times that said that it will costs an extra $20,000 per employee to have United in Chicago.

Other than being the more popular city, I don't know what advantage Chicago has over Houston. It's cheaper to have the HQ in Houston. Not to mention IAH would be the largest hub and more profitable airport than O'Hare. Oh well.

More construction now, instead of planning ahead and doing it before. Right?

North Katy got slammed in the 80's and it's been slammed again in recent years. As suburbs go, the low price points of homes in that area make it very susceptible to economic volatility. Foreclosure maps for this area echo that problem.

It's also a more diverse area than most suburbs--and let's face it--that makes many white suburban home buyers uncomfortable. As time progresses and the trend towards diversification self-reinforces, the area will increasingly have to deal with a stigma involving race and the quality of the schools. And ultimately, that stigma becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. You need look no further than Spring ISD for an example of how it all works.

Yeah, Morton Ranch is easily the most diverse school in Katy ISD, but I've heard test scores have gotten better over the years there. There will be another high school north of Morton Ranch in the future though. The school is already way over capacity.

Bridgeland. It isn't as big (yet), but it's already better. Drive out there sometime and check it out.

I've driven through Bridgeland and don't see how it's much different than the new sections of Cinco Ranch. They look exactly the same. Both have similar "rolling" terrain. But Bridgeland will also extend into the far NW parts of Katy, so it can count as both in the future.

The expanded Europe service is based on the need to service Africa and the Star Alliance hub at Munich. Continental started Newark-Munich and would love to start Houston-Munich but doesn't have the planes to do it.

Paris and Amsterdam were downgraded in favor of connecting passengers through LHR (bmi), FRA (Lufthansa), and Newark. The Paris flight was to feed Air France flights and the Amsterdam flight, while serving oil traffic (corporate contracts with Shell) also served as a connector to KLM's amazing African network.

With a flight to Brussels, Continental can connect to Brussels Airlines even more amazing African network and feed the oil traffic going to Lagos, Dakar, etc. through there.

Madrid is big because of Continental's Latin American routes. Right now there is a monopoly on routes from MAD to Latin/South America and prices are fairly high. Connecting in Newark or IAD would require a second connection in Houston anyway, why not make the flight direct and non-stop and use one of the extra planes you'll now have sitting around?

Guayaquil is still served by Continental. Santiago, Chile is a huge market, just take a ride on a LAN flight out of there, it's nuts and I think Continental has been eyeing it for a while now.

I doubt Houston will get a China flight, the money on them is too fickle. What I predict is, once the approval of the Tokyo Haneda slots goes through, Newark-Narita will become Newark-Haneda, linking up to of the largest cities in the world (Haneda is preferred over Narita in Tokyo) and Houston will get an extra Narita flight or a non-stop to Guam.

That's the other place I think we'll see some expansion, Guam. That place is a cash cow for Continental and I have no doubt that they will connect it with United's Asia network. With all of the government and local traffic going through there, they'll rake it in.

Sure they'll shuffle passengers to O'Hare and San Francisco to get to Asia, but the numbers on the London and Frankfurt flights have been really good. People prefer to connect in Europe (I know I do), and if Continental can feed African flights as well as connecting European traffic, they'll do it. The ATI that is in the process of being granted/reviewed for United, Continental, and Lufthansa is huge. They can share revenue and really push traffic for each other.

Continental/United needs to step on Delta's throat, and have a non-stop to Lagos (from IAH), just like Delta does with Atlanta. It's a cash cow waiting to happen.

Just so long as you aren't zoned to Morton Ranch High School.

What's so bad about Morton Ranch?

Cypress by far.

Cypress is the area roughly between 249 and 290 extending all the way to Longenbaugh. Cypress ends at 529. There are really two distinct areas of Cypress, North and South, however unlike Katy it is not a socioeconomic divide like North/South Katy. You have nice developments on either side of 290. The major differences are geographic. The North side is wooded and heavily forested. The South side is mostly prairie with large-scale master-planned communities.

The schools are great in Cy-Fair and Katy - both have a well-earned, long held reputation for being two of the best districts in the Houston area. Also keep in mind Cy-Fair has almost twice the enrollment of Katy ISD. Cypress is but one part of Cypress-Fairbanks ISD and the schools in the Cypress part of CFISD are very good.

I'm biased because I like big tall, trees, greenery and great schools and I live here. Without question, I'd put the following areas ahead of anywhere in Katy:

The Longwood/Lakewood/Coles Crossing/Northlake/Stable Gate/Rock Creek area between 249 & 290

The Bridgelands/Blackhorse/Cypress Creek Lakes/Cypress Creek Ranch area off Fry between 290 and Longenbaugh

The natural scenery, amenities (hiking, creeks, golf, forests, etc), quality of development, variety of styles and choices and top-notch schools set these apart.

Other nice areas that are comparable (or better) than the better parts of South Katy:

The Stonegate/Towne Lake/Riata Ranch/Copper Lakes areas

The Fairfield/Lakes of Fairhaven/Saddleridge Estates/Cypress Lake Estates/Lakes of Rosehill areas

Oh come on, there really is no difference between South Katy and any part of the "nicer" areas of Cypress. Seriously. Besides that, I think Katy homes have higher value than ones in Cypress, especially Green Trails/Kelliwood. Not to mention the Katy is more connected to Houston than Cypress. AND Katy actually has an identity, while Cypress-Fairbanks is one jumbled mess.

Cinco Ranch is the king of all master-planned communities in the Houston area. Then, you have others like Seven Meadows, Cross Creek Ranch, Firethorne, etc. You can't seriously tell me the ones in Cypress are better, and vice versa (though, Cinco Ranch is the exception...no MPC in Cypress is like Cinco).

I like how you didn't post the good news part of the article, or even mention it. It's not doom and gloom here in Houston.

This post by ricco67 just fed into my thinking over the last few days:

First of all, I never thought an issue like land ownership is would seal a deal of this magnitude.

And 2800 (I'll just use 3000) jobs going is a lot, but not as much as I thought.

Either way, I stand by the fact that Houston will in the long run be better than fine after CO moves. Is it likely that another airline moves into CO's building? No. But who knew that Chevron would swoop in and bring life to Enron's two carcasses when that happened?

Unless someone knows otherwise, I don't know of too many efforts by COH to bring (lure) companies here or keep them here. I know the State uses the Enterprise Fund for a similar type of thing (Wal-Mart Distribution Center) and I know the mayor mentioned using them during her campaign. So I think that Houston (whether just COH or a combination of entites) should have an on-going full court press of not just advertising Houston's great qualities and why it make financial sense to be here, but have some carrots to pull out as well. I think that incentives combined with locational advantage (climate, air and sea transportation routes), cost of entry and cost of doing business here would be almost unfair to any competing cities. Personally, I would like to see them go after national and regional company HQ's and factories as well as being the American/North American HQ's of international companies.

Regardless, I'm personally done with talking about Continental/er, United. Worrying about them at this point is like wondering about if your girlfriend will come back to you after you've seen her cheating with someone else. The best thing for Houston to do is to tell Smisek (who I'm still amazed reportedly didn't return the mayor's nor the governor's phone calls!) and the gang to enjoy the grass on the other side of this shotgun wedding. He'll see the weeds soon enough. If Houston came back from the Oil Bust and Enron, this one will be a footnote in the city's history.

That's one thing Dallas/North Texas does better than the Houston area. Their leaders go out and pursue many different companies for corporate headquarters, from all types of industries. I don't see Houston leaders doing much of the same, but I could be wrong.

The new company’s corporate and operational headquarters will be in Chicago and it will maintain a significant presence in Houston, which will be the combined company’s largest hub. Additionally, the CEO will maintain offices in both Chicago and Houston.

Yeah, Houston got screwed. Don't even get to keep the operational HQ: http://www.unitedcontinentalmerger.com/press-release

Company logo? Found this at SSP:

I only wish the HQ stays in Houston. Looking less likely every day, though, unfortunately.

Oh that. I thought he was talking about some incentives for keeping the HQ in Chicago. The incentives you speak of are not related to the merger or to the Headquarters.

How certain can we really be that the HQ issue is a dead issue? No announcements whatsoever have been made by either Continental or United. So far as we know, the whole "HQ will be in Chicago, United will be the name" meme might be nothing more than the results of creative journalism by the Chicago Tribune, picked up in turn by the rest of the media. I am not giving up hope, for the simple reason that, from a purely business point of view and having nothing to do with my preference for one city or another, putting the merged companies HQ in Chicago would be bone-headed.

I agree. I can see why they would move to Chicago over Houston even five or six years ago, but not now. United culture will most likely continue if you have the merged HQ in Chicago. Continental culture would if it is in Houston. The only thing Chicago offers that Houston doesn't (right now) is the prestige of being in the city. Maybe that's all Smisek needs. Would be shortsighted, though.

The HQ won't be in Sears Tower though. They are just moving some offices there. 77 Wacker Drive would be the HQ if it is going to be in Chicago.

Edit: Or maybe I read that wrong.

Where?

Everywhere.

There was no real indication that Continental was interested in a merger, let alone moving the HQ until US Airways announced their talks with United.

I think there will be a decent sized office left in Houston due to IAH remaining a hub and maintenance base.

Even when Continental first announced a merger with United, there was still nothing from Houston until the next week, when it was rumored the HQ would be in Chicago. Houston and Texas leaders should have been on top of things once Continental entered merger talks again and not towards the end of it. They really dropped the ball.

Why are our city and state leaders so unprepared?

There hasn't been a single indication that the headquarters would be anywhere but Chicago. People can protest to their hearts' content, but it sounds like a done deal. It's not like at this date Continental management is going to stop and say "Wait! Houston wants us to stay here. We didn't realize! Let's renegotiate the deal!"

I posted this in the other thread:

I really don't see how Houston and Texas leaders could have been so blind to this. Of all people, Sheila Jackson-Lee had to get the ball rolling in the media. Now that's pretty sad. It's a shame and pretty embarassing that Continental won't even return any of the messages/calls that Mayor Parker has sent them (among other people). I guess being in Chicago really does mean that much to Smisek. They aren't leaving Houston with anything, except for some more Latin American flights.

Really is too bad. I wish our city officials were more like Dallas'. As much as people here rag on Dallas, they seem to be more prepared when it comes to corporate relocations. It's just that their suburbs like to get in the way.

While I believe in fighting to the bitter end, for some things...

CO management is well accustomed to dissent - which they have in the past just ignored.

You're not changing anyone's minds.

Pilots: http://www.theloanisdue.com/ ... the loan is past DUE. They've been down to 1600 Smith, protesting (about their plight).

Mechanics? - or some other group was down at the base of 1600 Smith hollering and yelling, protesting (about their plight).

Nothing new.

The time to have done any of this was when US Air was trying to work the deal.

It's too late, now.

Next week, as early as Monday... done deal.

I really don't see how Houston and Texas leaders could have been so blind to this. Of all people, Sheila Jackson-Lee had to get the ball rolling in the media. Now that's pretty sad. It's a shame and pretty embarassing that Continental won't even return any of the messages/calls that Mayor Parker has sent them (among other people). I guess being in Chicago really does mean that much to Smisek. They aren't leaving Houston with anything, except for some more Latin American flights.