The Great Hizzy!

The HBJ refers to this as a downtown location but its actually located in Midtown according to the address given.

http://houston.bizjournals.com/houston/sto...ml?surround=lfn

I just drove past that intersection during my lunch break and didn't really notice. I'm assuming that it's probably in the retail center on the left side of San Jac, facing north, although I could be wrong.

When in doubt, panic!

The HAIF creed: When in doubt, fear the worst.

LOL!

Disney World is not in Orlando proper. In fact, until recently, its mailing address was technically Lake Buena Vista, Florida. However, I think Disney World now has its own mailing address. And for the record, very few of the Orlando area attrations are located in Orlando but mostly in the smaller towns surrounding the core city.

I thought I read in either the HBJ or the Chronicle a few months back that a retail center was to go on the cleared land just south of the parking garage and that that section of Bunker Hill Blvd was going to be widened.

Maybe the parking garage is in anticipation of the retail center?

Dal,

Some people are thin-skinned while others posses skin of concrete. However, if you've offended anyone in the past and have apologized, then that's all you can do. Not that I have any inkling of any personal squabbles you might be having but just making a general statement.

The problem with the internet, and specifically with message boards, is that it is often difficult to gauge when someone's being playful or to determine what type of sense of humor a particular person may have. You do the best you can.

That said, you're a douche.

The fire station looks more warehouse than fire station. I know it's just an opinion, unquantifable and all, but does anyone else get that same impression?

That design looks like it would be cooler for a Fed Ex distribution center than for a fire station. I imagine that it's functional but the asthetics "are the most lack."

I don't know if replying to my own reply is against the rules,

Hey, sometimes those are the best replies you could hope to get.

Some changes but not much of course. Still, you also have to remember that they probably lost 3-4 days over the last week-plus due to the heavy rains.

And building a 500-footer isn't done in just a few weeks. They won't be finish for another year-plus.

I agree with Heights Guy on this one.

1) Environmental standards should be improved with regards to Houston. Whether or not the Sierra Club is behind this latest article is unimportant. This has been documented by the EPA itself in the past. I realize that we have politicians who like to skate the fine line of holding people accountable and pissing off potential corportate figures who could potentially take ther x amount of dollars and run off, but you have to be willing to sacrifice a certain amount of SOMETHING in order to improve your living areas.

2) The Sierra Club, like many special interest groups, is not above using rhetoric or perhaps exaggerating certain "situations" in order to push its agenda across. I don't begrudge them that. However, I do think that when they fall in line with a misconstrued notion, it's detrimental to the overall cause, because that focus is nearly wasted on something that's not as troubling as the bigger issue (the bigger issue is the particulate matter that's extremely heavy in industrial midwestern cities such as Detroit, Chicago and Pittsburgh as well as California, but I digress).

3. But I agree with Kinkaid in that just because statistically (or realistically) there are numerous U.S. cities that have more pressing enviromental concerns than does Houston, that's no reason to not call for better standards for Houston when raising them would make sense and yield better results both long term and short term. The latter is basically a failure of area government, IMO. That needs to change over time.

4. But also let's not forget that prior to 1970, environmental standards in Houston were almost non-existent (heck, they were lacking in most U.S. cities). There has been some improvement but I feel like some of that has waned a bit over the last 10 to 15 years, regardless of presidential adminstration. Again, this may more be a failure of state government. I'm not sure.

5) I hope this doesn't turn away from being a potentially compelling discussion into the typical political party rhetoric that retards any meaningful discussion of the issues. I'm not political and hate politically-based discussions.

6) The Cowboys suck!

METRO wouldn't guarantee a specific level of service (you just don't put routes any and everywhere; the route has to be justified on some level with ridership projection data and service that won't cost an arm and a leg).

I don't know of it's me or what but Kimberly's link doesn't seem to be working.

This wasn't a shock at all. This is a New Orleans event, sponsored and produced originally by New Orleanians, and like their love for the city, felt it was "their baby." The idea that Houston had any real chance of keeping this event was kind of naive, IMO.

It would've been a nice economic and social boost to the city (agreeing with Velvet J) but I hardly think not having it is going to be such a monumental loss, especially when any rationally thinking person understood that it was 99.9% likely to return to the Big Easy anyay.

I do, however, agree that unfortunately you had some really snooty people attending this event from out of town (and they weren't Orleanians but a people visiting from places like Charlotte, Washington, D.C and Atlanta). Not all, thankfully, and, in fact, not the majority, but still enough to where you really was disappointed in the impact that they had on the social environment.

I can't stand irrationally snooty people. You're not that impressive, regardless of what you think.

Frankly, I'm surprised I didn't see any more complaints about this thread. Oh well. I think some of the factoids might be a little off but the general idea remains. But what do I really know? I don't keep enough statistical data of this stuff to be in a position to positively refute any of it.

I think Laura should just be satisfied when they don't need the police to keep the city council from getting into fist fights during council meetings. That's usually a good start.

But at the end of the day, I agree with C2H: what is she supposed to say? "We'd be great if not for our goofy mayor and council."

A few people screw that area up for everyone.

I think that's IF's biggest problem. While the majority of its residents are fine people, there is just enough of the trouble makers around to make it an at-risk area, particularly in those low rent apartments.

Cool. A decent amount of absorption. While the big space grabs are notable and exciting, it's also those handful of smaller, less notable moves that will help bring the vacancy rate down to the magic 12.5% mark.

Quite impressive. Quite extensive. I had fun going through these, Boris.

Thanks for sharing, Sun King. Good work.

Azuma is really getting aggressive, and that's a great location given the shifting demographics (read: disposal income). I'll be interested to see what other joints open in the renovated plaza.

It would help, as a start, if the City of Pasedena reconstructed some of the roads in the immediate area (and when I say streets, I mean the sidewalks, too), including Shaver Street, Southmore and Pasadena Blvd. The core of Pasadena, just like the core of all cities, should display a certain level of asthetic pride because, presumably, this is where visitors are the most likely to congregate for whatever purpose. Hard to shop revitalization to outsiders (read: the private sector) when the public sector isn't willing to invest in it themselves.

Just my take...

The area south of 610, west of 288 and Almeda Rd, and east of Hiram Clarke has a checkered history. For openers, it was the scene of a fairly large oil field in the 1920s. That oil field was on both sides of what is now Almeda Road and Hwy 288, and extended east most of the way to Mykawa Rd.

Remember the lawsuits filed in the early 90s by the people in the Kennedy Heights neighborhood? Kennedy Heights is east of Cullen and south of Selinsky. People there claimed living on top of former oil field sludge pits was making them sick and causing birth defects. They never produced a shred of evidence to back up their claims of deformed babies with brain damage, and it was all so bogus that even the most famous ambulance chaser in the country -- Houston's own John O'Quinn -- dumped them when it became clear the lawsuits were going nowhere. Unfortunately, memories of Kennedy Heights and houses built over sludge pits still resonate all over that end of town.

Evidence of the oil field is still visible west of Almeda Rd, and to the east to a lesser extent. There was also a very large landfill on Holmes Rd. I think it's closed now, but in any event, nobody is building anything on it, and most of the area we're talking about looks like a wasteland because that's what it is.

As for why no one has developed this area, I've read all the postings on this thread and I have to disagree with those who say it's because the area is mostly black. There are just too many areas around Houston where people of all races live side by side and get along just fine. The area east of 288 has developed, and, sadly, it has become a ghetto that's in a serious state of decline. I will agree that race is probably a factor in the way this area has been allowed to decay, but I don't think race figures in the lack of new development in the undeveloped area. Look at the success of the loft apartments on the edge of Freedmen's Town in the 4th ward near downtown.

West of Almeda, I can't help but observe that development picks up as you get farther away from the "wasted" looking area. Almeda Plaza to the south, and the area west of there around Madison High School, and north to Allum Rd. Looking at the map, that former oil field and landfill looks like a large undeveloped island in the middle of a sea of development.

I think it's because, so far, no developer has had the guts to take a chance on it. I also think that at some point, a brave developer with a lot of cash will step up and spend whatever it takes to clean it up, and when he or she succeeds, others will follow. It will happen fairly soon, and I predict the area will be completely developed within 20 years. I also think people with money to invest long term could do a lot worse than buy land in that area today, because it's going to be worth a lot more 10 and 15 years from now.

I actually agree with much of this. Granted, I don't have the history here in Houston that many of you have but everything I've read and heard concerning "the Black Hole" suggests that there are just as many (if not more) environmental concerns as there are social concerns as to why this area never saw any type of significant development up until the last couple of years. Frankly, even when you consider Pearland and Manvel, there wasn't much development south of the Beltway either until about 2000. Shadow Creek Ranch has spawned lots of residential development in the Pearland area along 288 but it was pretty barren too relative to other Houston area suburbs.

I wonder how much it would cost for a developer to go through the requisite environmental abatement associated with a new housing development? There are probably quite a few "hot spots" of toxic activity in many of those former oil fields.

And I agree that west of 288 and, more to the point, west of FM 518 (Almeda Road), the areas aren't spectacular but pretty average. Certainly not the worst of areas of the city but not blue ribbon communities either. Unfortunately, however, east of 288 has Sunnyside, which has never been a wealthy or bustling area, and South Acres, which has seen better days. Still, there are plenty of new development in town that's taken place near once struggling areas. Even Acres Homes itself, particularly on the western fringe, is seeing new home development, some retail infusion and even an upgrade in public works projects such as street and sewage repair, parks and so forth.

I just think that largely, the "Black Hole" has its costly environmental concerns and then the area itself isn't asthetically pleasing--perhaps the most treeless and barren landscape in the city limits, IMO.

Man, I didn't even see this one. Some alleged "Dallas" hater spawns a thread crapping on Houston architecture. If ever a more blatant effort to troll and still seek validation exists, I'd be impressed to see it.

Jesus. The internet is freakin' awesome.

Just a thought (spawned by this morning's rain), if HP is going to be an open-air type of deal with a central walkway and so forth, I wonder if they'll include in its design an overhang that will sort of shelter people from the elements while they're out. It certainly would make the project more appealing year round. This is Houston of course; when it rains, it's usually a pretty good shower.

Again, just a thought.

Always seemed like an odd location for a big box grocery store anyway. 11th isn't all that busy relative to other streets in Houston, and that's where most of the big box grocers seem to prefer to locate.

Thanks for keeping us on the hook, Red.