OutfieldDan

Heights Bridge was rehabilitated in 1997 - I believe the Yale St bridge was also rehabilitated in the same project. So why is the Yale bridge being destroyed and not the Heights bridge?  Answer - politics.

Yes Walmart is here, and a critical neighborhood bridge is being demolished.  Professional engineers all recommended rehabilitation, not demolition and construction of a new bridge. The motivation to destroy the bridge is suspect and smacks of revenge, and another attempt to drive Walmart away.

Heights Boulevard  Bridge rebuilt 20 years ago?  I don't think so.  The lamp posts were replaced in 1991, that's all.  The Heights bridge was built in 1922 and has not been rebuilt.  Who says bridges are designed to last only 50 years? You think all Houston bridges built before 1966 are obsolete?  The bridge should be refurbished, not replaced, and not require a two year shut-down.  But, thanks to the political storm created by anti-Walmart fanatics we have a mess...thank you very much.

On 4/5/2016 at 11:46 AM, s3mh said:

From the chron article:

"The federal Highway Bridge Program will cover 80 percent of the costs; the state will pay the remaining 20 percent."

Last I checked, 80 + 20=100, meaning the City of Houston pays nothing to replace the bridge.  The stuff about the bridge being ineligible for funding due to historic some historic designation is pure fiction.

But you are right that we should thank the anti-Walmart campaign.  They found out that the bridge was not structurally sound and worked hard to get plans in place to replace the bridge.  TxDOT and that City were completely asleep at the wheel as far as keeping track of the bridge's condition and planning for needed repairs and eventual replacement, despite TxDOT knowing that the bridge would see greatly increased traffic with the feeder road expansion and the City knowing that Walmart and the other development in the area would mean increase semitrailer traffic.  But for the civic activism, the issue of the bridge would not have come to light for years and then only when it became an emergency situation due to continual over load use.  Instead of keeping the bridge open with temporary repairs while planning for replacement, the bridge could have been subject to an emergency shutdown and taken years to scramble the funds and construction to replace it. 

The real fault in all of this lies with TxDOT and the City.  They pushed the feeder and Walmart development and hoped to sweep the issue of the condition of the bridge under the rug.  It should have been replaced when the feeder was expanded and there were closures of Yale St. in place or, at the latest, as part of the Walmart 380 agreement.  But the City and TxDOT at best were oblivious to it and at worst hoped to sweep it under the rug.  The facts are that the bridge is falling apart and must be replaced. 

Why is it the Yale St bridge is declared unsafe, but the Heights bridge is OK?  The two must be the same age, at least they look the same and they have the same design. Maybe the city overreacted to  complaints about the bridge and chose to replace it because of publicity created by the Walmart nimby's. It's more political than structural.  Of course all bridges eventually need replacement - Unfortunately the Yale street bridge is getting it earlier than necessary.  I do believe the anti-Walmart zealots are to blame for this. It isn't even an unintended consequence, The anti-Walmart's would burn down the city to stop Walmart.  The end justifies the means with them.

I think this sign is much too large and completely obnoxious.  Is it legal?

Good analysis.

 

And it's only getting worse.

Since you're such an expert, Do you have information about income inequality in Houston?  What are the numbers?

The Houston area and much of Texas is booming, do you mean that there has been little effect except to the upper class?  For instance, what about all the construction, who builds that stuff? In the oil industry has there been hiring of only upper class? Do you think there has been a decline of the middle class in Houston, a loss of construction jobs, a loss of manufacturing jobs, a loss of service jobs?

I walk in the Heights all the time. We live near Heights and 20th, so walking to Shade, OH!, CVS, Becks Prime, Wells Fargo, McDonalds,and Krogers is easy (the wife won't go in that Krogers though). I also ride my bike around the Heights, even to Home Depot to get a bag of fertilizer every spring.

No one is actually doing a camel back design anymore.  The camel back design can work if you do a telescoping roof line.  One in my HD is @2900 sq ft.  You cannot tell that it has a second floor from the sidewalk until you look around the side of the building.  What they are doing now is just building a second house with the original house being used as an entryway.  That allows them to just cut and paste designs out of the faux creole design book from new construction instead of actually having to design the renovation from scratch.  And the whole reason the ordinance is there is because the new construction looked terrible and was ruining the historic character of the neighborhood. 

A big addition behind an "entryway" that's the original small house is precisely a camelback.  Camelbacks are disfigured with disproportioned large lurking rear ends.  A well designed symmetrical two-story is vastly superior.  Camelbacks in the Heights were rare until this stupid ordinance.

It's time to face up to it. The problem with the ordinance is that it's forcing very ugly restorations upon the neighborhood.  The ordinance and HAHC are ruining the Heights. There are lots of larger new homes in the Heights that fit in nicely with our look and feel.  Some new homes aren't craftsman and they look good too. After all, the Heights has evolved to be diverse in many respects. I would much rather see some of these obsolete dilapidated bungalows torn down and replaced by nice new two story homes instead of having new construction being forced into ugly camelbacks.  I despise the camelback design.

I have recently noticed 4-5 pieces of art installed on the heights esplanade just behind the entrance. I have not stopped to look, but just driving by I think it looks terrible. Who is responsible for this? I have always thought the esplanade looks great with the trees and benches but this was a swing and a miss. I'll hang up and listen.

Some of the art is interesting, some is terrible.  I think the jaw gaping [dog?] with human teeth is amateurish and ugly.

He's there most of the time. I see him lots of times taking out his trash for pickup and he occasionally has parties. I believe he is a surgeon. The pool is pretty much just decoration. He hosted a fundraiser for Ellen Cohen last fall. [bTW, she's essentially useless as far as I can tell. She must spend all her time in West U.]

His home is a signature feature of my block. It's controversial with some of us really liking it, and others despising it. I'm in the first category.

We're falling behind. Now by 462 votes.

I personally appreciate all the new development on Studewood (Studemont is south of 1-10 and there is no such place between Heights and Studemont), including the parking that makes the development work/happen. We now have a place to go, to be proud of, to enjoy. It's been for the "better good." I also enjoy the newer homes in the Heights, and all the architechural variety. Unfortunately more of them are now forbidden, at least temporarily.

Congratulations on your new venture! One question, will the bicyclers have to wear regular clothes or can they wear their costumes?

Ha! You mean the Lance Armstrong costumes I see all these bikers wearing?

I saw Bill Baldwin about a month ago in front of one of the Heights homes on tour. He said that there is a lawsuit that should be happening now that is considering the disingenuous designation of Heights Historic Districts in the first place on the basis of the City voting common areas for historic designation [i guess without City Council Approval].

Anyway, I wonder if there is any news about this.

I haven't seen them on. Are they too bright? Do you object to the way they look?

It sounds safe to me. I live in the Heights near Hamilton Middle School and we park our car outside all the time. I don't see why the Harvard St. apartment complex you refer to would be any higher risk. Why not ask the residents?

... just as in the United States, only wealthy victims matter. The poor somehow deserve there fate. An example of this rule in action can be seen in the Michael Berry thread, where some believe the lawbreaker (Berry) is the victim.

This is drivel. I can't believe you wrote that. There is much more crime in poor neighborhoods, true, but it all matters, it's all reported, and it's the bigger problem. Police devote many more resouces to crime ridden areas. I demand you back up this rediculous claim.

Leave Michael Berry out of it. He's toast and he's suffering the consequences of his action.

Urban gun owner myth. Burglars target homes precisely because the believe valuables, such as cash, jewelry, and GUNS will be located inside. Far from dissuading the burglar, it encourages them. Fear of confrontation, whether armed or unarmed, IS a big reason that most burglaries are committed during the day, when the burglars expect the home to be unoccupied, however. Given that Marksmu's well armed fortress was burglarized, and my unarmed, unalarmed shack has not, I would suggest that a gun in the house is not a precursor to lower criminal activity. But, again, that's all part of the fantasy of owning guns. Since it makes you feel better, I support your right to own one...or more.

It does make me feel better, thank you. I'm not so sure personal gun ownership reducing crime is a myth - for me, it makes sense to carry. I used to be anti-gun and argued against the concealed carry law for Texas. I really did. I was sure that these concealed weapons were going to result in more gun accidents, more road rage killings, more stolen guns, more murders of all types. I argued vigorously on the Internet - at that time with usenet. Then I got a dog that needed to be walked at night; then we moved into the Heights and experienced the gang activity; then there was no gun armageddon - I was flat out wrong about that.

The fact that I'm armed when I'm out at night makes me more aware of my surroundings - it's my responsibility. BTW, you're welcome that I'm out there. I've called the police a couple of times about suspicious activity and once interrupted some thugs who were defacing the playground equipment in the park with grafitti. They ran away - I did not shoot them.

I don't think that statistics bear out that the most common outcome of having a gun in the house is shooting yourself or a family member. I live near Halbert Park where gangs hang out all the time. Well, lately it's been less of that since the Heights 8 gang was mostly all arrested a couple of months ago; caught burglarizing nearby homes. When I walk my dog, I'm always armed. I often keep my gun on my person after I get home with the dog. So far I haven't shot myself or my wife, and I feel safer when I'm outside after dark on the sidewalks. I feel safe at home too. Incidentally, two doors down a neighbor's front door was kicked in about a year ago for a robbery attempt during the daytime. The homeowner scared off the thief and I plan to do the same, [at least].

The thieves know that there are lots of residents like me who are armed and I believe that despite the frequent break-ins, there would be many more if they knew we didn't have guns to protect ourselves. The most common outcome of having guns in the home is peace of mind and lower criminal activity. I worry about hurricanes too, and I admit that a gun doesn't help much except during the aftermath like after Ike when the entire neighborhood went dark.

I used to leave my garage unlocked, but behind a locked gate of the fence around the back yard. A couple of years ago someone got inside the fence, maybe they climbed the fence, dunno. Anyway, they stole my bicycle, a mid-priced Giant and some tools out of the garage. They went out via the alley by opening the garage door that faces the alley. Since then, I lock the garage and my new bike is locked inside the garage to my workbench with a cable lock. I've had no incidents since then.

The cars are great! I haven't seen any of them blocking bike lanes. That's BS. Anyway they would have to be double parked for that to happen. What's wrong with a Lamborgini? It's a cool car. I drive a fast car too, just not that fast.

I also ride my bike on Heights regularly, and yup, I run the red lights, especially at Heights and I-10. I figure since there's no bike lane there anymore, I'm doing everyone a favor by getting out of the way. I also run on the Heights trail and cross 11th St. without waiting for the light or going around the intersection on the walk signs like Ed Gonzalez wants us to do.

All these rules suck. There are a lot of uptight jerks who don't want anyone to enjoy life.

Now that the election is over, I'm going to contact Ellen Cohen to see if she's any good at her job. I'll ask her about repealing this stupid rule that makes the neighborhood dry. Maybe she can't do it herself, but she should be willing to help.

The comments - I don't think they could even be real...they have to be planted for entertainment. Nobody, not even a complete moron incapable of feeding themselves, could possibly be that stupid....sadly though, I think its just part of the *thug* lifestyle. Remember though that thug life....its a culture - you need to respect the culture, else you be a racist!

One of them called me a racist when I was talking to them in the tennis court. The sad thing is that a few times when the gang has been on the basketball court, there have been younger kids hanging around them.

Lately there is diminished activity at Halbert Park. Maybe it's because many of them got arrested, but it's probably mostly because of the construction that's made the park less desirable for a hang out.

Can you share the gang sign with us? Maybe we can use it to ward them off.

I think gangs consider their hand sign very private, and I don't want to publish it on the Internet. You can email me through Haif if you really need that information.

The black guy Octavius sure looks like the guy in the black shirt from the surveillance video above....if it is him, then it appears there is a 5th suspect they have not apprehended yet. This video should be about all they need to get their stumbling bozo off the streets.

EDIT - the comments are priceless!

I know these criminals! I confronted them at Halbert Park about 6 months ago when a 6-7 of them were gathered in the tennis court on a weekend evening. It looked to me like a gang meeting and I told them to go home. They proudly said that they were the H8s gang and the one named Nathaniel Cook said that he works at Krogers - he also showed me his tatoos by lifting his shirt. I scolded them for about 15 minutes like I was their parent. Some of them harassed me as I went on my way walking my dog by following me on their bikes and calling me names. I've seen them at Halbert Park in the basketball court a few times since then, and now they respect me [it seems], by being friendly and flashing me the gang sign occasionally.

Yes, I know, kinda stupid on my part walkiing up to a gang meeting. I had a couple of Margaritas from ElTiempo earlier. I guess my advice for them to get jobs didn't exactly work.