Original Timmy Chan's

As chairman of the Board of Regents, I want to say this to prospective students, parents, teachers, and guidance counselors: as with some Texas universities, we are experiencing an enrollment lull that many experts think is partially caused by the vibrant Houston economy and the availability of jobs. But the most important story at the University of Houston has to do with our progress and evolution.

Either Leroy has been reading The Niche's posts, or Leroy IS The Niche!

Seriously, though...nice writeup by Leroy. I'm glad we have someone like him getting our message out. The message still needs to be louder and clearer, though. UH and its alumni still suffer from some kind of inferiority complex.

I know I worked every bit as hard to get my engineering degree as did anyone from UT-Austin or Texas A&M. I certainly don't feel inferior in any way to graduates of those schools.

Does anyone know what they are doing to the street in the middle of Calhoun?

My understanding is they're transplanting mature oak trees from the new dorm site on Calhoun to the median of Calhoun. Very nice, in my opinion...those are nice oaks that would have normally been lost. It's much cheaper to just knock 'em down, but UH cares...

And in response to Kyle, my understanding is that there will be ground-floor retail in the new dorm that's breaking ground on Calhoun. I believe the same goes for the new engineering building that will be started next year (sniff, goodbye Y building...)

I think new parking garages will also be in the works under the master plan. They'll have to be, if UH is going to double the square footage of it's educational buildings in the next 10-20 years without expanding the campus, while also increasing green space. Existing surface parking lots will be turned into dorms, teaching facilities and parking garages.

I was just responding to kw_uh7's #125 and timmy chans #127 posts. kw_uh7 said A&M regularly receives funding, insinuating that it gets more money because Perry is an alumni. That may or may not be true. All I wanted to see was some evidence.

Then Timmy Chan brought up the PUF, which really contains no bias unless you argue that he hasn't done anything to change it. And really, Timmy Chan's argument was not even based off the same premise as kw_uh7's anyway, so it was invalid.

Regardless, I agree with yall that number one, the PUF is totally unfair and not right, and that it also sucks and is not right that TT and UH don't get as much funding as UT and A&M.

OK, this is silly, but here goes:

My #127 argument was a response to your #126 post: "Unless I see a complete list of funds given to different Texas schools, I think it's a little unfair to point that out and come to that conclusion." "That conclusion", meaning (from my interpretation of #125), that our state government FAVORS the UT and A&M System schools.

You asked for a complete list of funds given to different Texas schools, which I didn't provide, but I did provide the BIG fund that separates UT and A&M System schools from the "orphans" of state higher education funding.

My argument is not that Perry by himself is anti-UH, although his actions in 2001 were certainly questionable, but just that the PUF/AUF is patently biased.

I think we're arguing different things. I jumped into an argument I shouldn't have, to protest the unfair funding of both A&M and UT schools to the detriment of UH and TT (and other state schools).

The whole issue of UH losing state funds because of declining enrollment wouldn't be an issue at all if we were getting an extra $100-$250 million EVERY YEAR like UT and A&M.

For that matter, look at UT-Austin's declining enrollment from 2002-2005:

Fall 2002 enrollment: 52,261 (record)

Fall 2003 enrollment: 51,426

Fall 2004 enrollment: 50,377

Fall 2005 enrollment: 49,696

Is UT-Austin in trouble?!? Maybe the Houston Chronicle should get right on that story...nah, they could just disparage UH instead.

Oops, I guess I misspoke earlier. I said that each system gets somewhere around $100 million per year from the PUF. Funds from the PUF are actually put into the AUF (Available Universities Fund), and then distributed to UT and A&M Systems. In any case, the $100 million per year was a little underestimated.

http://www.utsystem.edu/CONT/Reports_Publi...AUF/2006AUF.pdf

In FY 2007, the UT is budgeted to recieved over $281 MILLION from the AUF, and A&M will get over $136 MILLION.

In FY 2006, the UT system recieved over $255 MILLION and A&M recieved almost $123 MILLION. Those are ACTUAL figures, not budgeted.

Contrast that to UH and TT. Remember the "Excellence Funding" that both schools worked hard to get funded through the state legislature back in 2001? UH and TT lobbied for several years to get some additional "excellence funding" to try to catch up to UT and A&M. In the end, the state legislature did give UH all of about $13 million over 2 years, and TT about half of that, I believe. UH and TT were thrilled to get that paltry sum.

Of course, Rick Perry immediately line-item vetoed that funding, claiming budget problems...so no excellence funding for UH or TT. Then he immediately turned around and found $50 million from a discretionary "economic development fund" and gave it to UT-Dallas.

But I'm not bitter....nah...

Unless I see a complete list of funds given to different Texas schools, I think it's a little unfair to point that out and come to that conclusion.

Here's a start...the PUF. Most UT and A&M System schools share in this fund, which is given over and above the equal "per-student" allotment from the state that each school gets. The University of Houston and Texas Tech Systems are prohibited by law from recieving funds from the PUF. According to the article below, UT and A&M now get something less than 10% of their budgets from the PUF. Increase UH's and TT's budgets by 10% a year like UT and A&M get, and you'll see a reduction the tuition increases and an increase in the quality of the schools, both in bricks and mortar and in the academic output.

I think UH and TT do a hell of a job without the tremendous subsidies that UT and A&M get. As I understand it, the PUF give each system something on the order of an extra $100 million per year that UH and TT don't get.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent_University_Fund

The Permanent University Fund (PUF) is one of the methods the State of Texas funds its universities.

In 1876, the Texas Constitution formed the PUF, into which proceeds from leases and royalties on state land would be deposited. The discovery of huge oil reserves in the early 1900's dramatically increased the size of the PUF.

The PUF principal in fall 2005 was approximately $15 billion, second only to Harvard University's endowment. The PUF primarily serves The University of Texas System, which receives two thirds of its proceeds. The remaining third goes to the The Texas A&M University System. As of 2006, the University of Texas System received the fourth largest endowment in the nation, and the Texas A&M System received the tenth largest.

Other Texas public universities outside these two systems, notably University of Houston and Texas Tech University, are prohibited by law from sharing the income from this endowment. At one time, the PUF was the chief source of income for Texas A&M University and The University of Texas at Austin, but today its revenues account for less than ten percent of the universities' annual budgets. This has challenged both schools to increase sponsored research and private donations.

In 1984 voters amended the state constitution to expand the number of UT- and A&M-system schools benefiting from the proceeds of the PUF bonding program. The schools receiving help from the PUF thereafter included the University of Texas at Arlington, the University of Texas at Austin, the University of Texas at Dallas, the University of Texas at El Paso, the University of Texas of the Permian Basin, the University of Texas at San Antonio, the University of Texas at Tyler, the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, the University of Texas System Cancer Center, the University of Texas Health Center at Tyler, Texas A&M University, Prairie View A&M University, Tarleton State University, and Texas A&M University at Galveston.

I remember that Kinkos/Chili's/Starbucks center coog is talking about but looking at the other developments by Lovett, I was a little uninspired. The drawing looks nice on the surface though.

The drawing does look nice...but I just don't see that happening.

I'm curious if they'll be required to build on-site parking, since this is right next to an immense parking lot.

I noticed last night that a new development is breaking ground at UH on University Drive near Calhoun, across the street from the Campus Recreation and Wellness Center. They just started stripping the site sometime between Tuesday and Thursday of this week.

Anyone know what's coming?

This is the same site that's had a "coming soon" sign up for months (maybe a year or so?) It's the site with the Lovett Commercial Realty sign.

HCAD shows it's owned by "Calhoun UH Ltd", but the mailing address is Lovett Commercial Realty's. It's about a 1/2-acre site (23,000 sf).

There's also undeveloped land between the new Lovett site and the Catholic Student Center, but it's owned by the Houston-Galveston Diocese...obviously part of the Catholic Student Center property. I wonder if the Catholic Church would consider selling or developing that land?

It's interesting to me that new retail is breaking ground by a private developer...not just UH. There is retail in the bottom of the new UH parking garage (right now just Sonic and McAlister's Deli), but it seems to me it's easier for UH to subsidize development if necessary. A private developer has to have the project stand on its own merits (it has to be profitable to develop). I think it's a good sign that a private developer is taking the initiative to develop this sign. Maybe we're finally reaching that "critical mass" necessary to attract more development on and around campus.

Does anyone know if Galveston has ever seriously considered just bringing in sand to build up the beaches? I know other coastal communities do that. I'm sure it would be expensive, but I have no idea how expensive. However, all of the pricey construction should be raising the property tax revenue of Galveston - in theory. Perhaps they could use some of the windfall to invest in the beaches. That way they could plow up the seaweed to beautify the beaches since the beach would be replenished with imported sand.

They did that back in the 90's...dredged a bunch of sand offshore and pumped it onto Galveston beaches. I think tens of millions of dollars were spent, and if I recall correctly, it was all washed away within a year by a couple of storms in the Gulf.

Big, big waste of money to try and beat Mama Nature.

This would be one of the drawbacks of having such facilities on campus.

It could also be considered just one of the drawbacks of having Aggies on campus.

So what's the "shelter" thing on the roof of Mosaic? Is it a shelter to provide shade for a rooftop pool or something?

I just noticed it for the first time this weekend...

brains?? i don't think barbacoa is suppose to have any brains in it at all.....

Not too much brains, at least...but a little brain never hurt nobody! (Actually my grandpa always told me that the best part of slaughtering a calf when he was growing up was that they'd get "brains and eggs" for breakfast...)

...for those that don't want to drive to pasadena, the owners of mamacitas are the owners of el jardin on harrisburg too.

Thanks for the info, but who wouldn't want to drive to Pasadena?!?

I'll have to check out El Jardin...it's definitely closer to my house.

If you're ever in the Deer Park/Pasadena area, try Don'key. It's on Spencer Highway, between the Beltway and Preston.

Great food, great prices, and low maintenance atmosphere.

The Don'Key was our family's official meeting place for many years...for one reason or another (probably space limitations), we've migrated down Spencer Highway to Mamacita's. I always liked Don'Key...especially the "border" atmosphere as you pull into the parking lot. Haven't been there for probably 10 years now.

However, I do like Mamacita's a lot. I like the fact that you can get cochinita pibil instead of cheese enchiladas if you're in the mood. If you're ever at Mamacita's and see a table of 30, that would be us!

For Father's Day we ended up across the street at the Border Grill, and while it was OK, it didn't match Mamacita's for quality in my opinion.

My wife was a steady customer of the Edwards Grand Palace, but gave up on them because of their steadily increasing parking price. Last time she went it was $3.00 just to park...plus $7.00 or $8.00 for the movie...plus $10.00 for a coke and a box of candy. It cost her $20.00 for an afternoon at the movies...$35.00 when I go! We can get a nice meal for $35.00, and it's a lot more entertaining than anything in the theater...

I can understand why people don't go to the movies as much as they used to.

* There were few patrons, and the patrons seemed like they mainly came from apartments.

You'll have to explain that one...how do you tell who comes from apartments and who comes from detached single-family homes?

Yep, Hofheinz Pav is old and it does look dated. Still recall when we dropped my big sis and friends off to see a live concert of America/Seals & Crofts around 1972. Its stuck in a time warp. Raze, start again.

Problem with either razing or substantial renovations to Hofheinz is ASBESTOS. Apparently that's a multi-multi-million dollar issue.

Personally I love Hofheinz as-is. It's a great place to watch a game.

I do think the concessions areas could be improved, and there's a lot of wasted space outside of the seating area, but inside the "pit", it's an awesome place. The acoustics make 9,000 people sound like 20,000.

And as far as the endzone facility for Robertson Stadium...

I understand that the 3rd floor of the facility will be all glass, so supposedly you can still see the downtown skyline either over or through the facility.

I agree the exterior of the end zone is a bit bland...it would be very nice if the architect could enhance the existing art-deco facade of the WPA-built stadium. There are hints of art-deco there today, but you could really improve on that...maybe tie it in with the old original limestone buildings on campus (E Cullen, etc.)

OK, I got the story this morning from the planner for the site. Unfortunately (or fortunately, maybe) it's nothing as exciting (or as frightening) as I had envisioned.

The glass company wants to build some overhangs for their garage, but in order to get their permits the City is requiring the site to be platted. The City's platting ordinance requires the public streets that dead end into the glass company's property to either be extended into the glass company site or terminated in a cul-de-sac.

The glass company is requesting a variance so that they don't have to do either one, but just leave our streets status quo. I'm fine with that...I don't see that cul-de-sacs onto the glass company's site are going to do anything positive for our neighborhood. I'm happy with the barricade we've got now.

Funny side story about our dead end street that's only marginally related to the topic...my wife's family has owned our house since it was built in the 40's. She has older step-brothers (triplets) who grew up in the house about 15-20 years before she was born. One of the older neighbors who grew up with her brothers was relating a story to me, since I've never met her step-brothers.

He says the brothers were smart, very smart, but crazy as hell. When they were about 10 years old they made their own go-cart from scratch with a lawn-mower engine. The neighbor says it went fast as hell...but they forgot to put on brakes. So on the test drive, they got the thing going, hauled a$$ down the street towards the dead end. Only thing is, back then there was no wooden barricade...only a barbed wire fence separating the neighborhood from the pasture next door. The crazy brothers hauled a$$ straight into the barbed wire fence!!!

They didn't use the go-cart too much after that.

Contact Suzy Hartgrove with the City of Houston's Planning Department. It may take her a few days, but she can get you an answer.

From the sign, I also have the name and number of the engineer/planner for the subdivision. I'm going to start there, but thanks for the contact name at the City. I may check there just to get the story from both sides.

Original Timmy--

Plaza del Oro was originally purchased by Shell Oil back in the 1970's. Their thought process was to have a commercial/residential/cultural center at the NW corner of 610 and 288. Basically bounded by Fannin on the west, OST on the north, 288 on the east, and 610 on the south. I can remember a huge billboard between Fannin and Almeda back when they first purchased the area. At Greenbriar and OST is a huge white building which used to be Shell's credit card and IT building. Not sure what it functions as now. If you are traveling south on Fannin at OST and you look behind the shell station there is a sign that says Plaza del Oro bank.

I've looked for history on the area, but can't find anything more than my recollection. So I don't know why Shell bailed on the property. Back in the early 1990's I lived in Scotland Yard apts on Holly Hall.

Good luck on finding out what the plans are for the area by your house.

Yes, I'm aware of the "Plaza del Oro" name around the area. I'd forgotten that it's also attached to some of the buildings around Fannin/OST.

There's also a Plaza del Oro Townhomes on Holly Hall. That's why I found it curious that the same name would be attached to a new development on the east side of 288. Maybe they're trying to tie the east side of 288 to the west side now, instead of keeping it separated/segregated? Maybe not.

Just double-checked the HCAD website again...interesting, I didn't catch this the first time: Binswanger is protesting their property valuation. Their taxable value went from $4.0 million in 2006 to $5.6 million in 2007. Ouch. Sucks for them...then again it sucks for us too. Our market value (per HCAD) has increased 232% in the last 5 years. Nice to know our area is heating up a little...sucks about the taxes.

Variance request notifications were just posted this weekend in South Union at the ends of Nathaniel Brown, Mount Pleasant, and Seabrook streets. These are all dead end streets that terminate at the 11.6-acre Binswanger Glass site on the east side of 288 at Holly Hall. See aerial photo here: Plaza del Oro/Binswanger Glass - Holly Hall at SH 288

The variance notification sign references "Plaza del Oro" as the proposed subdivision name. If I'm not mistaken, Plaza del Oro is also the name of a townhome complex on the west side of 288 at Holly Hall. There will be a variance hearing in a little less than two weeks (June 21, 2:30 pm).

Does anyone have any insight into this development? I live on one of the streets that has a notification sign. Please feel free to PM me if you'd rather not make this information public.

I'm assuming this will be some kind of residential development, but we're curious. The existing Binswanger Glass warehouse takes up about 75% of the 11.6-acre tract, leaving about 3 acres of undeveloped land. So...is the entire warehouse site going to be redeveloped? The only two streets that dead end into the undeveloped portion of the 11.6-acre tract are Corder and Nathaniel Brown Streets. If this will only be a new development of the 3-acre portion of the tract, then why the variance signs on Mount Pleasant and Seabrook?

We're not necessarily opposed to development of the site, but we'd like to know what it will be and how it will impact our neighborhood. Hopefully the variance request is to remove the requirement to tie into our public streets. As it is, our streets are tight...probably 20' wide asphalt streets with open ditches, and cars parked along both sides of the street (thanks to single-wide driveways). We can't take any traffic into a major development through our narrow streets.

I'm also curious about drainage. Will the development drain to 288? Certainly it won't drain through our 1'-2' deep roadside ditches...at least we hope not.

I'm sure someone here knows SOMETHING about the site. With some of the recent developments along 288 in the area (Alexan apartments, Urban Lofts, Parkside Point Apartments), I'm assuming this site that fronts on 288 will be more of the same. We're not thrilled to have apartments next door, but the big question is what quality of apartments will these be? Will they resemble the tax-credit Parkside Point apartments (which haven't yet shown themselves to be a problem), or will they bring in the high-rent residents of Alexan or Urban Lofts? I have my assumptions, based on geography and demographics, but I'd like to know the facts.

Here are some renderings of UH's proposed end zone facility (Leo Daly Architects). There were released in April 2007. Funds are not in place yet for this facility, but I think it will be part of the upcoming +/- $700 million capital fund drive for UH.

As I've read it will add +/- 8,000 seats to Roberson (bringing the total capacity near 40,000).

1st floor - locker rooms, weight rooms, football offices, meeting rooms

2nd floor - alumni meeting rooms, retail (probably gift shop)

3rd floor - luxury suites

I thought at one time I had heard about a restaurant going in as well, but maybe that's out the window.

I'm all for the improvement of Robertson, but I think it's a jewel as it is. No, it doesn't have all the bells and whistles of Reliant Stadium, but that's a positive in my book. There's no better place in Houston to see a FOOTBALL GAME than Robertson Stadium. I'm there for the game on the field, not the amenities. I know not everyone feels that way, and many people that go to games at Reliant or Toyota Center or Minute Maid could care less about what's happening on the field, but I'm there for the action. I think most Coog fans agree with me on that.

Robertson has everything I need in a stadium: seats, beer, and restrooms. Everything else is just gold-plating.

I totally agree with you there. Once of the nice things about walking around Rice is that there are actually people around! And the way the buildings are designed, you can walk just about everywhere in the rain with a roof over your head (those archway things) and still not be underground. I know some grad students who are in a lab in the basement of Hertzstein Hall with no windows and no natural light. That's gotta suck. At least they have to come outside to walk to other buildings.

TS Allison showed us another reason not to connect every building underground: flooding. UH already has a massive system of underground tunnels connecting all the buildings, all for utilities and heating/cooling, I believe.

Unfortunately, those tunnels led to massive flooding on campus during TS Allison...although water didn't completely inundate the campus, 90 out of 105 buildings on campus flooded due to the tunnels that interconnected all the buildings.

I believe UH undertook a big floodproofing project shortly after TS Allison, like that of the Texas Medical Center, which suffered similar problems.

I don't think you'll see any pedestrian tunnels at UH anytime soon. They just wouldn't make sense...look at the pattern of sidewalks on campus. They go everywhere. There are so many different destinations that you couldn't build a tunnel to go to and from everywhere people wanted to go.

As far as the elements go, I just always packed an umbrella...otherwise you run in the rain. One good thing about the size of the UH campus is that kept me in good shape. I figure I walked an average of 5 miles a day crossing the campus back in the day. I'd park over by the Quad or at Cambridge Oaks, where I could hang out with friends in the dorms, then walk over to the engineering buildings, then back to the dorms between classes, then back to the engineering buildings, and repeat this several times every day. And of course, the walks were always at a brisk pace due to my habit of running late...

Houston has more students than Texas Tech? If it is the third largest in Texas then I thought wrong about UH.

UH had 34,334 students enrolled in Fall 2006.

Texas Tech had 27,996 students enrolled in Fall 2006.

UH has been the 3rd largest school in Texas for many years...in fact I believe it's been the 3rd largest for at least 30 years. According to the uh.edu, enrollment at UH first exceeded 30,000 in 1980. Texas Tech's record enrollment was 28,549 in 2003...they've never hit 30,000 enrollment.

Add in the enrollments of UHCL, UH-D, UH-Victoria, UH-Sugar Land, etc., and the total enrollment of the UH System is over 54,000 students.

A recent study showed that UH has a more than $3 BILLION impact annually on the Houston economy. In fact, according to the study, the UH System produces an annual economic impact that is roughly 1/3rd that of the Texas Medical Center, more than 1/2 the economic impact of NASA and its contractors, and an annual economic impact that is roughly double that of Compaq Computers at its peak (before the HP buyout).

Not bad for little ol' Cougar High...

Because Houstonians are fat and lazy, that's why. If the parking spot ain't right in front of the strip center, I ain't getting out for donuts. I'll just find a drive-thru.

There is no way the GRB is having parking issues unless an issue involves someone actually having to walk a block or three. Heaven forbid!

I'm always amazed at the number of people who pay to park near Minute Maid. People will pay $5, $10, even $20 to park, when there is tons of free parking nearby.

I've never had to park as far as Dowling to get free parking (just have to watch for "No Parking" signs).

Dowling is all of a 4 or 5 block walk. It's all of 1/4 mile, or 1300 feet. That's about 520 steps. That's about 5-10 minutes depending on how slow you walk.

I've actually seen people pay to park in the grass lot at Dowling and Capitol, while there's free parking on the street on the same block! Don't understand it...

When beers are $7.50 a piece, you gotta be prudent on parking.

Oh my god. They can't be serious with those presidential heads.

I think that's kicka$$!!!

don't know why Texas Southern doesn't get in on this and come up with some type of design concept so they can get a stadium out of this also....

Probably the same reason that the Dynamo want to get out of Robertson Stadium...too many conflicts with other events. The Dynamo want complete control over the facility.

How is TSU's on-campus football stadium working out? I remember when I was at UH, TSU played their home games at Robertson.