RedScare

Call the Planning Department at 713.837.7701. Tell them you never received a ballot or "survey" form and need another. Remember, this must be postmarked prior to December 22, so make sure they send it out immediately. Let me know if you have any problems.

Several of us attended yesterday's City Council meeting to point out the many flaws in this re-vote. The re-vote has been mailed to everyone in advance of tonight's meeting at the high school. It is important for everyone to realize that the ballot to vote out of the historic district is in fact an 8.5 x 11 inch sheet of paper that looks just like the petition we signed last month. However, this one says "survey" on it. This "survey" must be filled out, signed and mailed back to the City within the next 14 days to be counted. I urge everyone to look out for the "survey and fill it out. Also, remind your neighbors to do the same. The "survey" came in a white City of Houston Planning Department envelope with no markings to indicate what it was. If you lost your survey ballot, or inadvertantly threw it away without realizing its importance, a new one can be issued. Let me know, and I'll tell you how to contact Planning for a new one. BTW, did anyone make the propaganda meeting tonight? Because I took off a half day yesterday to protest at Council, I was unable to leave early enough today to attend. Not that I wanted to hear Sue Lovell's misstatements again anyway.

Nash D'Amico has been around for over 30 years, and has been in the Village since at least the mid-80s. I used to hang out there when I tended bar around the corner. In fact, Nash pre-dates the Village that Houston newcomers believe has always been there. Nash was there when Rice Village looked and felt more like 19th Street. I would think that a local guy rehabbing a crappy Heights building to open a restaurant would be in keeping with the Heights "vision", but, admittedly, the last 6 months have convinced me that the overwhelming majority of us in the Heights have no idea what the Heights "vision" really is. Luckily, the Heights "visionaries", with the help of the Mayor and a few council people, are shoving their vision down our throats...for our own good, of course! I welcome Nash to the neighborhood, and look forward to having his food nearby again.

This is actually well known. Several of the preservationists are on the staffs of the mayor and our councilman. They do not even attempt to hide it. We've known what we are dealing with all along.

Panorama Village is on I-45.

The mortgage company doesn't get to take your equity, but if the bid is only as high as what is owed, you lose all of the equity. And the mortgage company could be the only bidder, in which case they WOULD get all of your equity.

It's not as rough as the part of town you live in.

Guess we just proved s3mh a liar once again. poyea, there is a number at the bottom of your ballot. Keep track of it. They appear to have mailed sequentially numbered ballots.

Funny to see HAIF's most infamous creator of false 'facts' accusing others of making things up. Even funnier that the poster who accuses the City of a grand conspiracy in the Walmart thread dismisses any talk of conspiracy in the historic districts, even though one need only read how the vote is taken to see the conspiracy. The fact is, we DO have good reason to believe that the vote will commense immediately after the meeting, because we have been told so. The fact that the City has not created a ballot yet means nothing. They started our 30 day petition process before they even had a petition to sign. This is nothing new. Those who have not signed our petition to disband the historic districts, please contact me. This is not the City's revote petition, but a petition to disband the hd's altogether. Remember, the people who run the HAHC think and act like s3mh. Failure to vote will subject you to their will.

HISTORIC DISTRICT RECONSIDERATION MEETING The meeting schedule for the reconsideration hearings has been posted. This is the schedule. As predicted, the city intends to conduct these meetings and the ballot process during the holidays. 15 days from the 8th of December is December 22nd. Avondale West and Boulevard Oaks: December 7, 2010, at 600 p.m. at Montrose Counseling Center, 401 Branard Street. Heights East, Heights West and Heights South: December 8, 2010, at 6:00 p.m. at Reagan High School, 413 E. 13th Street. First Montrose Commons To be determined Norhill To be determined http://www.houstontx.gov/planning/HistoricPres/docs_pdfs/HPO_Reconsider_Meetings.pdf

Yes, but why would you let them foreclose and run up a tab? Plus, the foreclosure sale will likely not get close to what your house is worth, so you are liable not to get much, if anything from the foreclosure. You should have that house on the market tomorrow. Set the sale price a bit less than it's worth for a quicker sale.

Sadly, in most cities, police do randomly patrol, at least when they are not running from house to house taking reports of crimes already committed. Only in the last few years has HPD been able to both invest in the software capable of identifying "hotspots", as well as hire enough personnel to input the data needed to make the software work. They have a saturation squad that hits the hotspots, arresting drug users and dealers, as statistics show that an overwhelming number of burglaries and thefts are committed by drug users looking for enough money to buy their fix...at least they were. One of the tactics used involved arresting users found with crackpipes or meth pipes containing residual amounts of cocaine or meth, as any amount of these drugs is illegal. However, the District Attorney's Office announced that they would no longer accept so called "trace cases", as they were clogging the court dockets. While I am confident that HPD's saturation squad still operates, I do not know what effect the DA's policy has had on its effectiveness. Video can be very useful when it provides a clear enough picture to identify the perpetrator. But, someone must retrieve the video, or else it is of no use whatsoever. In this sense, it is no better than the detective who looks (or doesn't look) for it. London studies seem to suggest that the criminals are undeterred by their camera system, likely because they've found that the cameras do not result in actual ARRESTS and CONVICTIONS. When this occurs, the cameras will begin to deter crime. Until then, they are akin to a hood ornament.

As a general rule, felony comvictions cannot be expunged. Charges that have been dismissed or found Not Guilty can be expunged. Additionally, felony deferred adjudications...which are not convictions, but a form of probation wherein the finding of guilt is deferred...can be sealed from public view 10 years after the probation is successfully completed. But, convictions are public, and by and large permanent, except for the rare pardon.

A search of the Houston Police Department crime statistics website reveals 1 robbery at a grocery store in the 1000 block of Shepherd on October 25. Obviously, this location would be the Kroger. Further, it occurred at 12:20 pm, so it is very possible that the victim was a mother. Looking at all of 2010, there have been no other robberies in the 1000 block of Shepherd. There was a robbery in the southern portion of that shopping center (900 block) in June, August and November, but none at Kroger, other than the single robbery in October. Based on this information, I would flatly state that there is no evidence that moms with children are being targeted for robbery, as one incident does not a trend make. I have also heard nothing from the Heights grapevines. However, as the numerous robbery victims at Woodlands Mall can attest, no retail establishment is immune from robbery, and no person is immune, either. Pay attention to your surroundings. Tell your husband that you are hanging up the cell phone, as you are entering the parking lot and you must pay attention. If you see young men simply sitting in a vehicle, pay particular attention, as young men do not normally sit in shopping center parking lots and are also the most common robbers. If you feel you are being followed, do not leave the store, and alert management. I believe Kroger also employs a parking lot security guard. Have them escort you to the car. I know this sounds cynical, but most crime victims could have prevented the crime by paying attention, locking their doors, etc. Criminals are opportunistic. Take away their opportunity, and they move on.

Only in the City of Houston Planning and Development Department.

Considering that I and my neighbors will drive down Heights, turn right on Koehler, and drive into Walmart without ever getting on Yale, I suspect Heights will help traffic flow a lot. Further, shoppers from Montrose will travel north on Waugh, which turns into Heights, turn left on Koehler, drive into Walmart. AGAIN, no traffic on Yale. Some shoppers from the west will exit I-10 and get to Walmart via Bonner. Some will exit Walmart to the feeder via Bonner. But don't let reality stop your fight against Walmart. It hasn't yet. You make this too easy. The new Walmart at Crosstimbers is not on the feeder road, even though the mailing address is I-45. Best access is via Crosstimbers, coincidentally, a 4 lane road, just like Yale. There is also a Walmart on Sawdust Road in the Woodlands that sits on a 4 lane road just like Yale, that is about a mile from any freeway. It does just fine. Isn't this cute. The guy who has lived here a year is telling the guy who has lived in the area for 11 years (and lives closer to the site than he does) that he needs to actually drive around the area and look at Yale Street. You crack me up! How many miles from this site did you say you live, newbie? I can walk to it from my house. Umm....the fact is clear. They already ARE going to put in a Walmart Supercenter.

I would've thought that someone who nitpicked my post so much in post #1330 would have paid just as much attention to my other posts. Note that I said "development", a term that includes the entire Ainbinder project. If you had spent a few seconds looking at the site plan before typing, you'd have realized that the development will front both Yale AND Heights, both of which are 4 lane streets. But, I guess since you decided to side with sm3h, you have also decided to adopt his tactic of ignoring pertinent information, such as access to a second 4 lane thoroughfare. And, why would TxDOT add full frontage roads if they did not also plan to install entrance and exit ramps to them? And what are these buildings up to the edge of Yale that you describe? Every building on that stretch of Yale has been demolished for the impending development. I'm sure that if a few feet of ROW is needed, Ainbinder will happily donate it for access to his property. So, two 4 lane thoroughfares with access to a third thoroughfare (Washington), brand new feeder roads and a massive freeway, and you want to join the 'there's no room' crowd? Knock yourself out. We need new arguments to make fun of.

Nice try, but I was using his words. While sm3h is certainly entitled to his (tainted) opinion, the fact is, he, and virtually all other Walmart opponents, are not opposed to development of the site, and further, are not opposed to retail development of the site, or even big box retailers, such as Target. They only want to oppose Walmart. The more reasonable among us recognize that there is no practical difference between an acceptable Target and an unacceptable Walmart. We also recognize that a development fronted by 2 4 lane roads with a freeway next to it is a perfect location for a retail center. Every land use regulation in the country would zone this parcel for retail development. There is no need for you to throw out vague generalities when we have a specific site to look at. This development will improve the area, regardless whether a few dozen protesters don't like it. I'm still wondering why any Heights resident would join forces with a group of people who razed a single family neighborhood so that they could build a 3 townhome per lot development in its place. I'm further amazed that these townhome residents can claim Walmart ruins the neighborhood with a straight face.

This is a great example of the intellectual dishonesty of the anti-Walmart crowd, and sm3h in particular. He claims that a "giant" Walmart will kill investment as dollars go to Arkansas, yet a Target was not a problem, even though the dollars go to Minneapolis. Neither would be a HEB or Whole Foods, though those corporate dollars go to San Antonio and Austin. Even a Kroger would be OK with this crowd, with their Cincinnati bound dollars. The fact is these people live in denial. Houston has one of the most competitive grocery markets in the country. Every grocer that operates here is building larger and more complete stores with more selection. No one is getting smaller. Why? Because the consumer demands it. HEB closed their small Heights store because business was going to Kroger's Signature store. What would happen if the 152,000 square foot Walmart was not built? There would be 152,000 square feet of stores that sell the same things. It would take up the same space, require the same parking, and draw the same traffic. Would the anti-Walmarters oppose that? No! In fact, they are proposing that as an alternative. Just look at the post I quoted. Sm3h proposes "mixed use/smaller grocer". What does that mean? It means he is proposing even more square footage, drawing more traffic into the same space. He calls that "responsible development". And perhaps it is. But, it makes clear that he is not worried about traffic on Yale so much as a Walmart on Yale. This is what happens when people do not know why they are opposed to something. Sm3h doesn't like Walmart. That is his prerogative. The problem is, it is illegal to deny Walmart the right to operate just because he doesn't like them. So, he must come up with a legal justification. So, the traffic, crime and other Trojan Horses appear. These claims might have merit if sm3h was consistent in his objections. But, he isn't. He supports traffic and crime inducing alternatives to Walmart. He supports denser development, just like the townhomes crammed on former single family lots behind the Walmart. He labels the Walmart "suburban", as if that means something bad. The problem is that a suburban Walmart uses more land, meaning less square footage on the available land. This results in LESS traffic, not more. Dense development would cause more traffic, as there would be more stores attracting more people. This is why the intelligent posters enjoy sm3h's posts. It is fun to pick them apart, exposing his hypocritical argument. The only constant is that sm3h does not like Walmart. This is fine, except that dislike of a retailer does not prevent its coming to the neighborhood. Speaking of killing off investment in a neighborhood, wait til sm3h sees what his little historic district does to investment in the Heights.

This can't be possible, as crime only occurs at Walmarts, and there isn't one in the Heights, yet.

Yeah, this is what I said about the historic districts. However, a few of my neighbors are advocately exactly that.

Actually, Marksmu is correct. He stated that all of the Heights historic districts met the threshold for a revote. That would be Heights East, West and South. Additionally, Norhill also gets a revote. Unknown at this point is whether Woodland Heights, which was not created under the new ordinance, has enough signatures to become a district. There was a big push there to rescind the signatures already submitted. Now, the hard part begins. Since the mayor and CW Lovell saw fit to rig the revote against the will of the residents, we must urge the procrastinators and the apathetic to sign the vote card and mail it in. It can be done, but this is akin to a football team playing against the opposing team AND the refs. You have to work twice as hard as the opponent. Tell your neighbors to be on the lookout for the vote card. Anyone who wishes to help put out flyers on doors let me know.

My next door neighbor attended the meeting. Apparently, it was put on by the preservationists, or the City of Houston Planning Department. It was a Q&A about the ordinance. Surprisingly, according to my neighbor, they were fairly neutral, especially compared to the other meetings we attended in the summer. Several questions that were asked regarding whether minor alterations would require rather major remediation to comply with the wording of the ordinance were answered, "yes, you will have to do all that". One issue that I have received conflicting answers on is regarding "remuddling", or remodels that put the wrong architectural elements on a house. A prime example (and a pet peeve of mine) is putting colonial columns on a craftsman house. Craftsman homes generally have tapered square columns. My understanding is that the ordinance will not allow you to replace those columns if they are already on the house. My neighbor said that they WANT you to go back to the original columns. However, it is still unclear whether the wording of the ordinance states that. It is also unclear how the HAHC will act.

I am still trying to find out what this meeting was. Was it the City mandated meeting required once the petition process achieves a re-vote, or some other meeting? Did anyone go?

Like I said, if they ever try to put one in a neighborhood, let me know.