102IAHexpress

On 10/25/2019 at 12:05 PM, X.R. said:

 On the looped-in pod he mentioned that he'd want people people to "collide" while utilizing the space, whether its yoga, morning runs, etc, so I'm assuming there will be programming for that space. Those are the actual renderings from the current designer.

 

Great idea on paper. In reality I wonder if anyone over there has talked to an actual bio-medical researcher. "Yoga, morning runs?" I'm just not seeing it. These scientists are not soccer moms. They are usually pretty introverted. For the most part very, very few Americans. Mostly foreigners on visa. Typically they are focused on their pipetting and not much else. 

I could see TMC staff/non scientists and Americans who live near by use the space to "collide." But I would imagine that they are not the target users of this space? 

46 minutes ago, Naviguessor said:

If you've never complained about the effing tourists, you don't live in a tourist town.  Who among us has ever complained about the all tourists in Houston?

Do, 2-8-1'ers count as tourists? If so, then I complained about all the 2-8-1 tourists visiting Downtown when I lived at Rice. 

52 minutes ago, H-Town Man said:

 

Point taken. But the context of the discussion was our poor hotel performance since the oil bust. Also I believe I read in the past year or so that the highest revenue night for downtown hotels is still Wednesday rather than Friday or Saturday, indicating primarily business clientele. So while we may have some tourism, it is not enough to fill our hotels, and we lag significantly behind Austin, San Antonio, and DFW.

 

I'll defer to you on the highest revenue night for Downtown being Wednesday. But even if it is, wouldn't the same be true of downtown New York, San Francisco, Washington, etc.? Other than pure tourist cities like Las Vegas and Orlando, wouldn't all central business district hotels generate more revenue during the middle of the week as opposed to the weekend? 

Regarding weekend occupancy only and not revenue, then I agree Houston in general lags behind other cities. 

On 10/5/2019 at 3:25 PM, BeerNut said:

 

What is Houston lacking to make it a tourist destination?  From my perspective the things that are the biggest draw for tourist areas Houston will never have.  We don't have the right geography, historical pedigree, or cultural significance that other tourist dominated destinations have.  Houston should focus on it's strengths which are food, museum district, and performing arts.  I did see Mayor Turner mention bringing an amusement park to Houston on Twitter.

Houston already is a tourist destination. Keep in mind, the second largest inbound market to the US is Mexico (behind Canada). A large chunk of the Mexico tourist market goes to California, New York, and Houston. https://www.ustravel.org/system/files/media_root/document/Research_Country-Profile_Mexico.pdf

Now, does Houston get a lot of European tourists, like New York, Chicago and San Francisco do? No. Does Houston get domestic tourists like, Orlando, New York and Las Vegas do? No.

But Houston -does- get tourists from Central and South America. Admittedly, this group is a relatively small slice of the overall US tourist market. However, it is just factually wrong to suggest that Houston is not a tourist destination. I personally have met many Mexicans who have told me they were in town visiting Houston, just to go shopping at the Galleria. 

Don't get stuck trying to hammer a square into a round tourist hole. Tourism can take many forms and colors. 

Kind of off topic, but there is a brilliant/scathing essay in the WSJ today written by Professor Azra Raza of Columbia Med. School, very critical of America's (TMC's) current approach to cancer research.

Quote

What we need now is a paradigm shift. Today, the newest methods generating the most research and expense tend to be focused on treating the worst cases—chasing after the last cancer cells in end-stage patients whose prognoses are the worst. …

 

So what is the solution?

For one thing, all of us in the biomedical sciences need to descend from our high horse and humbly admit where we have been wrong. We have sought to model cancer in petri dishes and mice, seeking out single drugs for simple genetic mutations. But cancer is far too complex a problem to be solved with such reductionism. We have not made much progress in the past 50 years and won’t advance much more in another 50 if we insist on the same-old same-old.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/cancer-is-still-beating-uswe-need-a-new-start-11570206319

6 minutes ago, Twinsanity02 said:

I worked as a biomedical researcher for several years at UT Med- Houston. There are zillions of research labs spread out throughout  the TMC. I am somewhat confused about how this one will be set up.  Are there going to be a smattering of labs from UT Med, MD Anderson, Baylor Med, the Institute for Molecular Med, Texas A&M etc etc? 

 

I suppose the research will be focused on specific areas. Anyone know?

Cool, my wife is also in biomedical! I have no idea how it will be setup, very good question.

I dare to say, although the design is very cool, it may be a design in search of a problem. My wife collaborates with labs all across the world, all the time. She did it a lot too, when she was at Methodist. She just picks up the phone or uses skype to move along the collaboration. Sometimes if there is very, very famous professor (literally a Nobel Laureate) that professor may have an "entourage" of post-docs and assistant professors that help coordinate things, and at -that- level it may help to meet those teams in person. But most collaborations can be achieved with technology. 

9 minutes ago, BeerNut said:

@102IAHexpressSmithville Research Park is relocating to TMC3.  I'm not sure how much impact this will have. 

That's true. I'm also not sure about the impact, but probably can't hurt? But keep in mind Smithville is part of the MD Anderson system (I believe?) and it's just consolidating into the new facility. It's not really a true lateral move from an outside lab/professor. 

Cool design. I'll add my 2cents, since my wife is a professor of medicne, who left the TMC for more advanced research opportunities elsewhere. I hope the TMC3 design (whatever it ultimately becomes) is able to help retain/attract top professors/labs. That should be the main goal (I think). What we, non-researchers think, is besides the point.

For all the talk about how big TMC is, which it is, the research is not that broad or advanced besides cancer and cardiovascular. There's a lot of similarities to the energy industry actually. Houston is -the- place to be for energy, but lags big time in other sectors. The TMC is one of the best places for cancer and cardiovascular (but not the best), but lags in pretty much every thing else.

So, how will this design, via our tax dollars, make research better in Houston? I have no clue. I asked my wife and she has no idea either. As of right now, US News and World Report has -1- medical school in Houston in the top 50, only 2 in the top 100 (3 if you count UTMB Galveston). If the design gamble pays off, then great. But If top labs/professors around the country don't show interest, within the next two years, of relocating to the TMC, then I would rather scrap the design all together and use the tax dollars to setup a scholarship fund for McGovern, and UTMB Galveston and make their tuition free of charge. Much better return on investment for society as a whole. 

1 hour ago, urbanize713 said:

Curious what the other sides look like. At first glance the curves are slightly reminiscent of  Lake Point Tower in Chicago. 

I was thinking that too. I took a quick pick. This is how it looks from my bedroom window. For lots of reasons, it is one of the most hated buildings in Chicago.

As of now, Forever 21 in Downtown is NOT closings its doors, Forever 21 has not died. These are just facts. I have no idea why Luminare claimed otherwise? This may be better suited for another thread on declining societal norms, but for some reason people can’t admit when they are wrong anymore and instead engage in ad hominem attacks and get defensive. HAIF can do better. 

11 hours ago, Luminare said:

I didn't even say that it was closing today or into the future, but bankruptcy does present that threat.

 

You literally did. It's like I'm talking to Trump. We can all read what you posted.

Anyways, for those interested in -facts-, as of right now the downtown Forever 21 has been spared. Very good news for downtown. I would suggest we all try to limit our "knee jerk" reactions before facts are posted. https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/10/01/forever-21-closings-list-these-178-stores-could-close/3833982002/

13 minutes ago, Luminare said:

 

I think this has been both a clarification and communication issue. I was merely using your quote as a launching point to a more general discussion about several threads which have discussed Forever 21's bankruptcy which was to be used as a more broader discussion on how some seem to be spelling doom of retail in downtown due to this one companies incompetence. Also people seem to be overly sensitive to the topic of retail in downtown.

 

You seem to be looking to discuss Forever 21 more in-depth which is not what I was looking to do in my statement. That is something that should have been pointed out and clarified. That is on me in that instance.

 

Other than that I stand by my general statement about what I'm seeing, and my focus is on that and not on Forever 21 specifically. That help?

Not really helpful, no.    You stated:

37 minutes ago, Luminare said:

 

...but all the sudden one retailer closes its doors in a retail development ...

Just trying to understand where -you- got that from? Not from any of other threads, that I took a quick glace at. Seems like you just made it up? So far, there is no evidence that the Forever 21 in downtown is closing. It may close in the future, indeed I hope it does not (see my post above), but in any event it seems like -you- where the one making knee jerk reactions. 

5 minutes ago, Luminare said:

 

I like how we have all been excited by the growth of downtown and the growth of new uses in downtown, but all the sudden one retailer closes its doors in a retail development that has never been that successful and all the sudden there is panic like this is a harbinger of things to come. Its like that one quote from the Joke in The Dark Knight (with slight alterations for this context), "Nobody panics when things go according to plan, even if the plans are horrifying. If I tell the press that tomorrow [Amazon will deliver with drones and that I can get my groceries deliver via an app], nobody panics. But when I say one little old [retailer that has been under performing for years dies], everyone loses their minds!"

 

Enough with the hot takes and knee jerk reactions everyone. Everything is fine. Next door all of The Shops and Houston Center is being renovated and altered to create more retail and will probably bring in more of the retail we would actually like to see in downtown. Lets just wait and see. Its not like downtown Houston is the reason Forever 21 went bankrupt, and it wouldn't have been the reason it would have been saved.

Huh? Who said Forever 21 is closing its doors? Do you have a source? They filed for bankruptcy, true,  but what does that have to do with closing? Do you know how bankruptcy works? I agree, enough with the knee jerk reactions. 

Any news on what will happen to the Forever 21 in downtown? Hopefully the Forever 21 location in downtown is not affected by the recent bankruptcy filing. I assume Forever 21 will seek restructuring/concessions from all their landlords, (including the downtown location) so, hopefully both sides can come to new terms. If not, maybe another retailer or grocery store can come in to that space? The future of downtown is not good (for retail) if there is another giant vacant retail space, again. 

Update. Texas Central signs design-build agreement with Italian firm Salini Impreglio

https://www.salini-impregilo.com/en/texas-high-speed-rail.html

1 hour ago, Purdueenginerd said:

This project (the spaceport in general) doesnt pass my sniff test. There's clearly a future for private ventures into space, but right now the economic of space flights appear to break down into 3 groups. 

 

1.) Governments, Spycraft, Defense, scientific research. 

2.) Telecommunications 

3.) Stupidly Rich Tourists. 

 

To me, Private companies are mostly going after contracts in the 1 and 2 categories. Is there any indications that there's sufficient demand to build a spaceport, much less in Houston?  I dont know... convince me I'm wrong. I'm a Star Trek fan, so I want to like this, but call me a healthy skeptic. 

 

 

You are correct about spaceports in general. Last year Wired had an interesting article about the boom and bust of spaceports in general. https://www.wired.com/story/americas-spaceport-boom-is-outpacing-the-need-to-go-to-space/?CNDID=13660475&mbid=nl_090518_daily_list3_p4

Essentially, there is an oversupply of spaceports in the US. And it is correct to question the need for Houston's Spaceport, especially when the airport system could use funds for sooo many other projects. I'm afraid we may have another Bayport Cruise Terminal fiasco on our hands. 

At this point, we have the FAA horizonal license, so I am all for utilizing it. However, I'm not sure why we need to spend so much money on capital costs for a port without tenants. IMO, the best play (in Houston) of the three options above is number three. Stupidly rich tourists. You don't need any new construction. Just market Space Center Houston as the "terminal" and have the tourists ride in one those silver Airstreams to the runway at Ellington. It's marketing gold for the city. But of course we will not take advantage of it. We don't need a bunch of tenants at the port. We just need -one- to operate the space tourism flights. 

11 hours ago, Houston19514 said:

 

Of course, it's entirely possible that (alleged) policy could change if they actually built the parking garage and possibly had more spaces than they needed on a daily basis...

 

Recall, there was some arrangement between the Incarnate Word Academy and Houston First Corporation regarding this proposed garage.  I had always presumed the arrangement included parking availability for the then-proposed Houston visitors center/museum across the street.

haha, l love that "alleged" quip. Totally clueless. 

Without getting into a tax seminar, the proposed parking garage is up in the air right now. One of the updates to the tax code from the 2017 Tax Cut and Jobs Act affects for the first time churches and their parking lots, believe it or not. Google "Church Parking Tax" It may get repealed it may not. 

The new code is below. 

Quote

26 U.S. Code Section 512(a)(7)

(7) Increase in unrelated business taxable income by disallowed fringe

Unrelated business taxable income of an organization shall be increased by any amount for which a deduction is not allowable under this chapter by reason of section 274 and which is paid or incurred by such organization for any qualified transportation fringe (as defined in section 132(f)), any parking facility used in connection with qualified parking (as defined in section 132(f)(5)(C)), or any on-premises athletic facility (as defined in section 132(j)(4)(B)). The preceding sentence shall not apply to the extent the amount paid or incurred is directly connected with an unrelated trade or business which is regularly carried on by the organization. The Secretary shall issue such regulations or other guidance as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out the purposes of this paragraph, including regulations or other guidance providing for the appropriate allocation of depreciation and other costs with respect to facilities used for parking or for on-premises athletic facilities. 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/512

10 hours ago, Texasota said:

A single-patron garage at this location would be incredibly wasteful. I would think it would be mostly empty in the evenings, exactly when it would be most useful to people coming down for events. If Houston First has anything to do with this project I would be very surprised if it's not open to public, at least outside of school and service hours. 

It would be incredibly useful actually. A church parking lot that appears full is a warning sign for most church goers to not even attempt to park and instead go on their way. Simply put if it looks like too much of a hassle they will leave and go somewhere else. In this case, instead of parking at Annunciation they will leave and attend mass at the Co-Cathedral with plenty of easier parking on that side of Downtown. 

I'll refer you to the Ten Commandments of Church parking. https://thomrainer.com/2016/03/ten-commandments-church-parking-lots/

On 9/3/2019 at 6:51 AM, Nate99 said:

I'm guessing they've done the math on what they can charge for parking during Astros home games, and it came out positive. 

This is flat out false and wrong. 

Astros fans looking for parking are considered trespassers and regularly bounced from trying to park on the lot whether they want to pay to park or not. The pastor will not even allow parishioners to park on the lot, attend mass, and then attend MMP afterwards. The surface lot and future garage (if it is ever built) will be 100% free of charge for Annunciation/IWA parishioners, faculty, administration, staff and visitors. 

Very cool pics! Brings back memories. This is what I tried to post earlier.

On 6/24/2019 at 4:04 PM, H-Town Man said:

We can hope and pray that whatever they do, they can find a way to bring back the observation deck for public use. Even if this would require charging admission, that space is important to the city and the original intent should be restored.

 

I imagine there will be streetscape improvements, ideally synergizing with Hines' other nearby assets, although the renovation at Calpine Center was touted as major and merely involved adding interior retail to the lobby.

 

What was the reason for closing the sky lobby? Was there a reason given? I don't remember anymore. I worked on the 73rd floor of the building for six years. I never had an issue with the sky lobby tourists. They always seemed well behaved from what I remember.

Because it's Friday and I like you all so much, I'll share a pic of one of the restricted elevators. Lots of buttons!

19 hours ago, gclass said:

^^^ @CREguy13  GORGEOUS APPLE STORE depiction.  however, until houston starts to incorporate more forward-thinking officials/individuals such as yourself, we shall continue to DREAM/FANTASIZE throughout our fair city.  in most big cities comparable to houston, development of this exciting nature is already done.  in houston, CHASE TOWER management would have to undergo HELL and HIGH WATER to get something of this nature done!

 

if i have stated it once, i've stated it a thousand times beforehand, and i'll state it just once more... "here in our fair city of houston, really exciting out of the box development of this nature moves at a much... much... much... much... SLOWER PACE than most cities of comparable size".  heck, just think about it for a moment, the CITY OF NEW ORLEANS is built around MORE FLOOD CONTROLLED ARMY CORP OF ENGINEERED STRUCTURES imaginable... and yet, they still seem to incorporate and move much faster upon development than houston.  not to mention, i could just see your APPLE STORE depiction being constructed somewhere along CANAL STREET before the idea even reaches any officials here in houston.  it's a really sad situation, however, it's just the way it is...    

This is just false. Developers in other cities, envy how easy it is to build in Houston. Apple or any other retailer/developer can do pretty much whatever they want in Houston, and no one over at CoH would stop/hinder/request a kickback. Houston, compared to other cities of its size is extremely easy to build in and permit. More importantly, Houston has way fewer NIMBY lawsuits from local citizens than cities of comparable size. Again, I have no idea why you think city of Houston officials would even care one way of the other, they haven't cared in the past. Up here in Chicago, President Obama can't even build his library in the hood without people suing/seeking an injunction. From today's WSJ Activist NIMBY's have prevented a huge development of an abandoned steel mill. https://www.wsj.com/articles/activists-try-to-stop-a-huge-chicago-development-over-1-3-billion-in-tax-incentives-11562849876?mod=searchresults&page=1&pos=4#comments_sector

1 hour ago, H-Town Man said:

 

Or prisoners?

 

Probably hotel guests instead? If the Downtown At A Glance survey included inmates, Downtown's population would almost double.  In downtown there are usually between 8K-9K inmates in the jails in a given day. https://www.tcjs.state.tx.us/docs/AbbreRptCurrent.pdf

But inmates are really more like hotel guests. Temporary occupants for a night or two. True prisoners that actually reside in downtown and counted in the Federal Census? Perhaps the Joe Kegans State Jail in downtown holds actual prisoners? But I'm not sure. 

14 hours ago, X.R. said:

 

I've thought about gentrification in that area, but I also want to keep this short, so DM if you wanna talk about the area. The spirit of the people who live there should be celebrated: you got newly immigrated people and their kids, mom and dad working multiple jobs to provide a better life than they had all the while instilling a love for family and their heritage. Gulfgate/Hobby/South Houston is my favorite part of Houston, I love it, I grew up there, and to me its what Houston is all about.

 

But the area is transient. The group of people who live there now aren't the same group of people from five years ago even. As soon as the parents make more money, or in my case the kids started to help out, you move out. We aren't the wards that have 50+ years of the same families living there. So whats there to gentrify? And if you're a homeowner in that area, you finally will have access to something you never thought you would/part of the American dream: property that appreciates, and maybe can be sold so you can move to a better neighborhood. The schools objectively are terribad, sometimes you'll wake up to your car on cinderblocks or the car is just gone, and you shouldn't be in the parks after 7pm-ish. Most people who live there know it and will move to Pasadena, Pearland, Clear Lake, etc at first chance. I've realized I can love the area and still understand it has deep issues. I think public transit would help so much with saving money, and finally, finally open that area up to the rest of Houston who I feel largely sees it as just the area they have to drive through to get to Hobby.

 

And what will immigrants do with more white neighbors? What we always do, which is work, survive, and do the best for the families. 

Interesting. Thank you for your observations. My question was more about rail and increased rents. Also, you make it seem as there is no public transit available now? Do you not count the bus as public transit? What about uber? Taxi's? 

Also, personal antidotes aside, the trend in sunbelt cities is that increased rents are causing people, including immigrants to leave urban areas. From yesterday's wall street journal:

Quote

After several years of surging urban growth, Apex and suburbs like it now account for 14 of the 15 fastest-growing U.S. cities with populations over 50,000, according to the census. Millennials priced out of popular big cities are flocking to Frisco, Texas, Nolensville, Tenn., Lakewood Ranch, Fla., and Scottdale, Ga.—not exactly household names but among the fastest-growing destinations in the U.S. 

“The back-to-the-city trend has reversed,” said William Frey, a demographer at the Brookings Institution, citing last year’s census data.

Millennials, the generation now ages 23 to 38, are no longer as rooted as they were after the economic downturn. Many are belatedly getting married and heading to the suburbs, just as their parents and grandparents did. 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/american-suburbs-swell-again-as-a-new-generation-escapes-the-city-11561992889?mod=hp_lista_pos2

Everywhere Metro's light rail has been built, rents have gone up. This may change that area indeed. Wouldn't it be better for the people in that area to get better bus service instead? 

I see. Let's say you're 1000% certain el tren will transform that area for the better, dare I say it, gentrify the area. How would that help the immigrants who now have the burden of increased rents in their more gentrified neighborhood because of your "tren."