GovernorAggie

Maybe I have this wrong, but I understood CSOM's rumor about Randall's problems applying to the whole chain, not the Midtown location. If that's the case, then it will be only a matter of time before another grocer moves in. I'd love for Kroger of HEB as well. DOes HEB have any "urban" store locations in its portfolio?

Any chance that any of their developments work their way into the CBD?

Forget it Transit Nut. Metro's spending in this plan is minute compared to TxDOT, HCTRA, and the like. But Metro is ALWAYS the subject du jour.

You mean like how one side of Sugar Land is cut off from the other by UP? Or how one side of Tomball is cut off from the other by the freight tracks? We're not talking about a wall being built. When I think "cut off" I think of Third Ward being cut-off from Midtown by 288. Now THAT'S a cut-off.

LOL, I'm with you on that one! That thing may as well be chicken wire wrapped around a frame--but it gets the effect done! Mobile, AL just opened the RSA Tower--35 floors...over 700 feet (I think closer to 800 actually)! It has a huge see-through spire (at least 100') at the top a la Bank of America Atlanta. Bank of America Charlotte's crown is also about 100' tall.

Wells Fargo is lit again!

As a former resident of Charlotte (home to as many F500 headquarters as Dallas--including Bank of America, Wachovia, Duke Energy and other smaller companies like Family Dollar and Cato clothing stores), I can tell you that Kotkin is sorta off-base in his assertion and grouping it with Houston. That place is stiving A LOT to be like a Boston or Baltimore or San Francisco. They have changed a lot of ordinances, and years ago the Mayor and City Council OUTLAWED cul-de-sacs on the principle of traffic problems they cause (true phenomenon IMO). The city is all about more urban-styled, mixed-use developments as a policy, going as far to even make a Super Wal Mart include housing in its development (which Wal Mart agreed to, IIRC--goes to show that if your city is desirable, developers will do whatever they have to do to 'get in where they can fit in').They're building their version of BW8, but already planned out land uses at each future interchange. Ironically, it's those big companies that are trying to lure these 'creative class' types. Doing things like fronting the city a $100 Million interest-free loan to build its new arena, and participating in several new projects in their downtown (several new condo towers--a few in the 30-50+ story range). Sorry for the rant, just thought Kotkin should've left Charlotte out of that group, maybe substitute somewhere like Orlando.

You know, I've seen this parking garage referred to quite a bit here. Has anyone ever given thought to why the spaces haven't been filled? There could be a ton of issues, such as: maybe the space isn't configured well, maybe the lease options are not very good, or maybe--just maybe there has been interest and attempts to fill the space, but for whatever reason it isn't. I mean, come back if HCC (or whoever owns it) says, "hey, we never got any calls about this space" and then go off on how its a waste and not a good example of urbanity and a bad omen to pedestrian development in Midtown and so on and so on.

I don't disagree with the usefulness of lighting and any impacts on rents or occupancy. But, doesn't that same principle apply to architecture in general? Why pay extra for designs and shapes when you can build a box design off the shellf for the lowest cost possible? Along those same lines, we'll see more LEED-certified buildings in the future not because people have somehow become environmentally sensitive, but instead its because LEED buildings are easier on energy costs, and with tenants being more and more responsible for picking up the utilities tab as part of their leases, a developer has to offer buildings with lower energy costs. Lower costs -> lower overhead -> more profit.

Point taken. But couldn't that be addressed with technology? Can't LEDs be used whenever possible? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think they are quite better as far as the use of electricity goes. By the way, the article doesn't say that they would turn them off completely, just from 2 a.m. to 6 a.m., when no one sees them but the night owls and truckers blowing through town. I'd be happy if downtown Houston was well-lit for the same amount of hours that Dallas is talking about shutting down--4. 8 pm to 12 am is a good start IMO. Plus it looks as if the ordinance isn't limited to downtown Dallas, but would include nearly all businesses except those open between 2 and 6.

Was wrong about the crane installation equipment being across from Greyhound. However, the base is definitely in the ground on that block.

Traffic impact studies are long overdue. I can't believe it's just now coming up. Developers will build what they want as long as they think the market will buy into it...but I think that they should also have to cover that freedom of choice. I think that Houstonians pay too much of their tax dollars for road widening projects for private developers to make money (or at least not spend money to help with needed widenings or turn lanes).

Just an FYI, A crane is about be installed on the Main/Dallas/Polk/Fannin block. The base is already in and I think I saw the installation equipment waiting across from Greyhound today.

I've been wondering the same thing about the Donald. Charlotte has drawn his interest so much so that apparently he's close to buying land for what could turn out to be that city's tallest tower (current tallest is 60-story, 871 ft. Bank of America headquarters). However, not even a sniff of a rumor of him in Houston. If he ever did come, I think he'd go downtown--it's the most nationally known photographed skyline in the city, and it's where the current tallest is. If he were to try to best JPMC, even by just 20 ft., he'd have the tallest building in Houston, in Texas, and west of the Mississippi River all in one motion. I say that b/c it seems to me that Trump is as much about image as he is about economics.

Come again? HCTRA got something wrong? Is Earth upside down today?

Good point. Now that I think about, driving in on 45 South, downtown's skyline is definitely like an afterthought after Gallery Furniture and everything else grabs your attention with their flashy signage (actually in a not-so-safe way, directional and guide signs on 45 are like an afterthought, too!).

I think you'd be fine by just naming some of them based on where they are or some nearby attractor. In fact, I'll throw out some names, and maybe you all can guess which ones I'm talking about: Northline Interchange Gulfgate Interchange Greenspoint Interchange Westchase (or Memorial City) Interchange Otherwise you could go to actual people's names. The Spaghetti Junction in Atlanta is technically the "Tom Moreland Interchange" for example. Georgia has quite a few interchanges named after people (even some small diamond interchanges) including highway patrol officers.

Agreed. Park Shops is not a fair comparison of HP. Park is clearly aimed at the working crowd (except for their lite Saturday hours), whereas HP may not get its busiest UNTIL 5-6 pm. Apple and orange.

I hope they announce more retailers soon.

Niche, those are all fair and good responses. Just a couple questions: 1. Let's say the Metro's and HCTRA's decision-makers are elected. On what basis would you elect them? By district? All at-large (which I think will go through about as easy as a camel through a needle's eye)? If by district, how do you divide them? 2. Regarding the under-building of TMC Transit Center and the Red Line--do you think the original goal was to underbuild one or both? Or is it possible that they were "working with what they had" (in financial and more importantly, political, capital)? As I've said before, apparently Sen. Benson had funds ready to go in the 80s to build subway at least through downtown...and Metro had voter approval for an all-elevated system later in the 80s. We all know about the influence of Culberson, DeLay, and Lanier on the outcomes of at least the Red Line, so do you think the money spent on Red Line was a "at least we can pay for this" approach? Do you think that the project would've been better with congressional support for an FTA match (a $648 million LRT could've been much different that a $324 million LRT)? Then again, the alternative could've been waiting until $648 million was in the bank, but then you run the risk of another Lanier taking that away on a whim.

Not to get on too much of a tangent, but the author mentioned his intrigue in visiting the Woodlands, a master planned community "by private developers, not by the government." He liked the idea as opposed to the urban corridor stuff around the transit stations. I think it's great, too, for master-planned communities to exist. It shows that people really do like what they offer. The only problem is that it really only allows big-time developers to implement these great developments (GGP/Rouse, Crescent, Trammel Crow, Hines, Friendswood Dev. Corp., etc.). I think that the urban corridors would be good for smaller developers like Liu to do things easier near the stops. I just don't think that it should be harder to do TOD than it is to build master planned communities. OTOH, I know of a Duany project that is along an outerbelt freeway, so I guess it goes a variety of ways.

That's cool, Niche. That's just fascinating to me regarding the economists, but I can't say that I'm surprised once I think about it long enough. I wonder how they feel about any rail-based transit, or transit in general.

I did not know that. This explains a lot.

I know. But so does HCTRA. One is expected to deal with the public. The other shrugs its shoulders at the public.

To your first point, pull back from the trees and look at the forest. My point about all of those cities complaining about their transit agencies was that those are cities with well-established rail-based transit systems, and honestly I pointed them out because I would think that even the biggest LRT opponents (or Metro opponents) in this town would point to those places and say, "these places got it right...Metro should be more like them." SO, the goal was to show that even transit systems that apparently comparatively "got it right" have their issues in their own towns. THAT was the point. And furthermore, how would you rebuild Metro--given the parameters set by agencies like FTA and the State even before you contemplate such a move? Secondly, thanks for calling what you perceived as my observation as valid; however I think you missed some of that point as well. My point there was (and still is) that transit HAS to be looked at from a different pair of glasses because a lot of its measures of "efficiency" are in some ways diametrically opposed to other infrastructure. Face this, Niche, LRT measurements and observations in Houston are only 3 years old now. I know typical Houston nature is to expect results even before the improvement is completed, but we don't know everything locally yet. It just hasn't been long enough. Sure traffic is an issue with it today, but the question is, without it would traffic have become is issue on its own by 2025? 2035? I know, I know Niche--address it then, right? Well, what about the cost? A $300 Million line in 2004 would cost well above that in 2025 in hard capital costs as well as soft costs like lane rents, salaries for construction workers, and bought time from utilities to move their infrastructure. This gets even higher in 2035. At least the thing was built while traffic impacts would be comparatively low to the future potentially. SH6 probably seemed like a good idea when it was built, but years later it's a beast. Grand Parkway is gonna get built when it does because it has to beat the traffic chronologically--and it'll be cheaper now than later (even at $4B). Why should LRT be different? Thirdly, you like HCTRA--but you like it for the reasons that you don't like Metro and TxDOT, no stupid, uninformed, loud, messy public citizens to deal with. This is a serious issue. An agency with eminent domain powers SHOULD have to deal with the public. Do you not think that TxDOT and Metro would be more efficient and better agencies if they had HCTRA's power and money source WITH eminent domain power? Of course they would. TxDOT would have tolled everything by now (they've been building toll roads since the 60s with I-30 in DFW being the first) if they weren't so "handcuffed" by the public. I remember reading an editorial last year that said in the early 80s Metro had money IN PLACE from Congress (the late Sen. Benson) to build heavy rail with SUBWAY through downtown, but again the "stupid" local public got in the way and turned that money down, calling it unnecessary (interestingly enough, people keep asking why Metro won't build subway). The day HCTRA has to deal with the public (as they should with, I say again, EMINENT DOMAIN POWER) is the day their efficiency goes down. Debates like ours keep what may be good projects from happening because we armchair-quarterback the thing to death. Architects and planners in this forum wouldn't dare try to tell economists what's right or wrong about economic theories or whatever. Maybe economists should consider the same about planners and architects. Oh that's right, the forum is a place for an exchange of ideas and viewpoints. But according to you, transferring that to the process of building public projects is not ideal and should be avoided or ignored all together (just ask HCTRA).