IronTiger

Well, Fiesta and Food Town are going independent since GSC is selling itself to C&S and that won't include their supermarkets.

It seems to list a service, based on the URL and the check cashing place at Airline, probably Airline, explains why it neglects HEB Pantry and its ilk (too small!) and Rice Epicurean and Whole Foods (too upscale!) It's before 2003 because Auchan is still there but barring that (could be a mistake) before 2005 since Randalls had more stores, but more recent that it may suggest. That's because 8620 Stella Link is Sellers Brothers--which it still is, by the way, but until mid-1997, that store was still an AppleTree. That became a Food City later but it blows a hole in my previous assertion that SB came in 2008. Either way, that's a huge indicator of when it was written, as by 1997, Albertsons had landed in Houston (also likely most neglected). There's also no former Albertsons addresses later (many went to Kroger). It still has Randalls at 11071 (now 11077) Northwest Freeway where Academy is, and when that came in I think was 2004, but Randalls may have been vacant by then. There's another thread where this is explained a bit better. So...2000 maybe?

heh.

What do you have against rice pudding?! I think it's good, especially with a bit of cinnamon. That's what I would probably go for at HEB next time, if I wasn't faced with a bout of suspected food poisoning.

I think it's a matter of ass-covering for all parties involved. If there's an incident involving Lyft/Uber cars and a lawsuit develops that won't be immediately thrown out by any sane judge, then whatever city that let Lyft/Uber cars run will be involved. Why take the risk?

Yes, and any "bipartisan committees" usually result in a mix of safe districts for both parties.

[deleted]

I'm not entirely sure how sarcastic that was supposed to be, but I'm sure some women would disagree with you either way.

Well, Lyft is calling it quits in Houston... http://www.bizjournals.com/houston/blog/2014/11/lyft-to-halt-operations-in-houston-due-to-city.html

The H-E-B Pantry stores served their purpose. They entered the market in 1992 by bombing the market with dozens of stores (some weren't successful and closed within a year or two), beating Food Lion to the punch, and starting a price war that would take down the cash-strapped AppleTree (which spun off from a cash-strapped Safeway). By advertising low prices and being found everywhere, they were able to capture consumer mindshare, and because they were so cheap to operate, they were able to enter the market cheaply (breaking into an urban grocery market is usually an expensive endeavor). By 2000, they had put in their roots deep enough to create "real" supermarkets that could effectively compete on equal grounding with Kroger, Randalls, and Albertsons, and the Wal-Mart Neighborhood Markets were starting to push in for the Pantry's ground (something Business Journals noted, but WMNMs are much larger than the Pantry stores). It wasn't enough to kill the concept, but it was clearly time for a change. The Central Markets had been developed for years, and was independent of the concept. The star at Randalls began to fall at the right time for the rise of H-E-B, a consequence of being acquired by Safeway (and had no idea to run a regional operation anymore, and failed merchandising). Albertsons first time around was in the same boat, but unlike Safeway's Randalls, they had no chance to build up a name for themselves, and the pressure from Albertsons' ill-advised acquisition of American Stores made the Houston market the first to be cut. Four years later, the situation at Albertsons Inc. had gotten bad enough to split the company into two parts: New Albertsons Inc. (SuperValu-owned) and Albertsons LLC (Cerberus owned). The LLC had the lesser performing divisions and was expected to basically sell it off. Instead, they made brutal cuts that ended up saving the company, even re-opening stores, and outperforming SuperValu's divisions. SuperValu choked on New Albertsons and sold it back to Cerberus. And despite some variable store experiences and the store brands decimated, I've heard some nice things about the reunited company, including better prices, a renewed commitment to store heritage like Acme, and a better store experience overall. There's a lot of pessimism about the merger, and I think some of it is valid, some not. Some consumers worry about store closings, but that's up to the FTC to decide. Some consumers worry about higher prices, but the merger will strengthen buying power and allow them to offer cheaper products. Much will remain to be worked out. The United Supermarkets family remains a shining star in the system as Albertsons LLC has cultivated it instead of killing it, and of course, integrating Safeway and Albertsons will be a challenge, even at a logistics level. It won't match up with Kroger in terms of integration anytime soon, and will be a process to watch as the new "Albertsons Safeway Corporation" or whatever forms and grows. The future isn't secure for Randalls, but moribund it is no longer. Pay attention to it--I can't guarantee it won't be bumped off by Kroger, H-E-B, Walmart, or even Fiesta, but a new chapter is beginning, and it's likely going to be better than the last. http://www.bizjournals.com/houston/stories/2000/07/31/story4.html?page=all other source like the Houston Chronicle

I think putting in firewalls and a bit of a setback from the cemetery would be nice.

Sorry. Probably should be cleaned up.

And Sheila Jackson Lee was also safely reelected. It doesn't matter who these people are, they can stay in for years if they're popular with their part of the city. Might be corrupt, but not worth crying yourself to sleep over.

It was a cheap and low cost way to get into the market. And it worked--in a little more than two decades, they hijacked the grocery market, even overtaking Kroger just very recently.

Perhaps rebuilding the Dillard's parking garage as something else, though.

They dropped the "Preferred Customer" card (something Kroger has yet to pick up on), and did improve other divisions like Jewel or Acme (post-SuperValu), plan to have the divisions operate more independently (Randalls being one). It seems that the stores under the "United Family" have pricing similar to H-E-B, and the idea is that the combined Safeway/Albertsons will have more buying power. I understand that some stores won't be up to snuff--some H-E-B stores still lack even a pharmacy...

Buc-ee's owner endorsed Dan Patrick, not the company itself. Yes, I know that the SC ruled something contrary to that, but it's still the owner, not the corporation.

I admit, I was kind of surprised. Usually in elections, the whole state's red except for a rather distinctive triangle of blue counties, including Dallas-Fort Worth, Houston, Austin, San Antonio, and the odd county out west.

Looks like it was for a cigar shop.

Well, transportation infrastructure and planning is a small component of the functions of a real city. Since you seem to be against the ideas of "fiefdoms", you seem to be against the idea of annexation by suburbs or incorporations, therefore the idea of annexation seems to be in your favor. The ETJ allows the city to enact certain rules, possible taxes disguised as "fees", and to take that commercial tax. However, the ETJ won't allow people to vote in city elections, and so forth. Therefore, it would make sense to annex the suburbs, and we can have things like Cinco Ranch Super Neighborhood 91. But that would mean the city would have to repair roads and allow voting. It would seem you want to hold the ETJ in place, because it gives the city lots of benefits without allowing any representation by the people living there.

If nothing exists, nothing will be done. If incorporation exists, there's at least a CHANCE that something could be done.

Of course they'll still be regional systems and chances to work together, but your "fiefdoms" is clearly based on the assumption that it will be just like Dallas, with suburbs stacked onto suburbs. Problem is, the ETJ prevents the existing suburbs from growing at all. For instance, if Katy, TX was allowed to grow, then it would probably annex Cinco Ranch, with Katy growing, Richmond growing, Cypress and The Woodlands being incorporated, etc. Do you really think places like New Territory would incorporate themselves? OK, let me put it this way--do places like Bellaire and West University Place disrupt transportation planning and infrastructure like you think the fringe suburbs would?

I think you're confusing two different issues. The suburbs need to have their own leadership and make decisions for their community instead of letting subdivisions run amuck. As for "metro mobility" I assume you mean mass transit, and in that case, it was originally brought up because if the suburbs were annexed, a political shift would occur to favor suburban interests, and some top-down changes would likely mean that mass transit might be focused more toward linking suburbs (and letting inner-transportation stagnate) or do the Culberson method of trying to starve it. That's an argument for NOT annexing the 'burbs, but they do need SOME sort of leadership beyond Harris County.

Functionally, they already do. I've seen some annexation maps of Houston and that's what's marked (such as that Target-anchored center in Cypress built about a decade ago, you know, on 290)--it isn't technically part of Houston but it is to get that tax money. While that's fine for the time being (because where else would it go?), it's kind of cheap. Personally, I think that in those cases, there should be some sort of special district, where some tax money would go to the new suburb but Houston gets to keep others (METRO money, for instance). I'm not sure why Interstate 10 became a lightning rod for new development, even back in the 1980s it was getting way more developed in terms of big amenities miles out of downtown. Not to the extent of today, of course, but still something to keep in mind. As for mass transit, there's no reason why any potential suburbs couldn't work together on Houston on a system-wide mass transit plan. It's what kept DART working. Good point, but there is a BIG difference between planned sprawl and unplanned sprawl. If you have good leadership, you could build a competent system of roads and zoned areas--part of the huge sprawl problem is not so much sprawl but the fact that they have no planning whatsoever except for developers, and thus roads are either former rural roads that have been widened, or roads that were clearly meant to be subdivision collector roads trying to be forced into major throughfares (as an example, look at the Kirby Road segments between Beltway 8 and the "real" ending of the road. By incorporating, they have a chance to get real leadership that could develop a workable master plan and better planning. Trying to stop sprawl is a fool's game, and it often ends up just overvaluing existing property values or potentially wrecking the local economy, but you can do something about bunches of cul-de-sacs built onto each other.