htownproud

A few from my walk around Herman this evening.

You're right. It seems, as I mentioned earlier, they are building a UT-Dallas type of campus. I'd recommend folks reading up on UTD as that is something that would be very beneficial.

 

However, it does beg the question as how the state views UH and it's goals. Does UT support UH in the Big 12? What role will UH play in research? It would certainly be smart of the UT system and the state of Texas to explicitly state the goals and plans for a UT expansion and UH's place in the future. 

I'm confused.  The post you replied to said that it was not going to be a full degree-granting campus and not a UT-Houston.  You agreed, and then said it would be like UT-Dallas, which is a full degree-granting campus.  In other words, you seem to say it will be exactly what the original poster said it would not be.  

Perhaps I had too much eggnog over the holidays . . . .

I don't see this in any way as "worse than UT-Arlington" (and for the record I never noted that UT proposed anything "worse than UT-Arlington"). They have proposed something entirely different from UT-ARLINGTON,

Further, if, as you claim, they are indeed proposing something worse than UT-Arlington, what does UH have to worry about? Do all you Cougs really think so little of your school that you think it can't hold its own against an institution worse than UT-Arlington?

Again, I didn't go to either school -- all I care about is how this affects TMC3.  If putting in a school worse than UT-Arlington kills TMC3 then I am against it.  

Seems like a lot of posters need to take a look at what UT Is actually proposing. Hint: it's not UT-Houston or any other sort of full degree-granting campus.

Fair point. I was being charitable. I should have said I would rather have TMC3 than something even worse than UT-Arlington, which as you note is what is being proposed.. If it won't affect the funding of TMC3, then let's hear that from UT officials.

As someone that went to neither school, my two cents are that if this new campus threatens TMC3 then I am firmly against it. With no disrespect, I would much rather have (and think it would be much better for the city to have) TMC3 than another UT Arlington or insert other sataleite UT campus. Those UT satellites are fine schools, but it would not be a "game changers" here in Houston. TMC3 might not be either, but it's got a chance. I would like to see a clear statement from UT on TMC3.

I'm really surprised that this is actually happening. I was told that the City of Houston would not issue any further permits on these properties unless the developer paid for the purchase of the Burger King property at the end of Travis, so that the street could be opened up through to Holcombe Blvd.

 

Guess that was untrue.

Do you mind my asking where you heard this?  As someone that lives in Southgate (i.e., the west say of Travis), I would be very interested in plans to open it up at Holcombe.  Would the city need to give public notice of any such plans?

Having a differing opinion is naïve? To not jump to the same assumption that this is automatically going to be a bad area is naïve? No, you know what's actually naïve? To complain about the homeless issue in downtown, but making the group that wants to address the issue at the source move off of a street that can only be used by well-off people. Why should we reward the people who want to get off the streets, to fight and overcome their addiction, with an inconvenience?

I already addressed that in my comment responding to the person who claimed that this is going to make "drug addicts and bums" infest the area.

Just because they have an addiction or are not well-off does not mean they are lesser human beings and shouldn't have access to the same things we enjoy, especially if they are making all attempts to rid themselves of this stigma.

Yes it is naive to believe that people other than you won't think that a homeless shelter and soup kitchen in the middle of a trendy part of town is an eyesore and/or dangerous.  

There are certain areas of town that I think we should be proud of, and we should not plop a magnet for homeless people down in those areas.  For example, I also don't think we should move the Greyhound station to the middle of the Galleria or line Discovery Green with nothing but halfway houses.   This part of midtown along the rail is becoming one of those areas that we could be proud of.  

So ignoring the fact that you couldn't read well enough to notice the differences between the two phases for just a second, I find it hilarious that you somehow think the needy and the less fortunate should be denied access to area simply because of their situation; that sweeping the issue under the rug, out of sight out of mind style, somehow solves the issue of homelessness.

Now, back to the reading comprehension, or lack thereof; you should know that the facility going up on the rail line is for the offices and for those who are already seeking help for their addictions. You get that, right? It's not for "drug addicts and bums" although I love the sweeping generalization. It's for the former drug addicts and bums.

It's hilarious that, on a forum that complains about the homeless issue in downtown, you would also complain about facilities that are trying desperately to solve this issue at "ground zero", if you would. The only other option I see is loading all the homeless drug addicts and bums into trucks and shipping them off to a camp devoted to these groups, and that, my friend, is why I would like to introduce to you a man who is this close to doing such a thing; Donald Trump. Make America Great Again!*

*by way of internment camps

The press release says that it will also be a detox center for people just entering recovery.  It also says that it will provide meals for the homeless still living on the streets.  To suggest that this won't be an eye sore and/or dangerous is naive.  No doubt these services are needed, but i agree with the point that perhaps the best place for this is not along the rail across the street from new "luxury" apartments, class a office space, and new retail/restaurants.  They could have sold the land and moved just a few blocks off the rail -- with the money they saved, they could have offered much more in services.  

Does anyone know what the plans are for the track at University and Main?  They tore down the bleachers there in August.  I assume they are going to rebuild something nicer, but I haven't seen any renderings.  

Fingers crossed we get a mattress store there. It's so inconvenient to drive to Mattrose or the stores on Sunset/Kirby.

My biggest issue with the homeless downtown is the drug problem, and in particular Kush.  I would say that every third time I catch the Red Line going south after 8:00 pm at Central Station I am offered drugs.  Last week there were cops there running people off for smoking Kush on the platform, but they are back the next day.  Over the holiday, I took the train to the UH game, and there was a completely deranged woman that got on yelling at everyone.  Most people got up and moved to the other end of the train.  The conductor eventually stopped the train and said he would call the cops if she didn't get off.  She got off at the next stop, and then jumped in front of the train to scare the conductor.  She then walked over to the SE corner of Herman Park, which I understand is now affectionately referred to as Kush Park.  My brother-in-law visiting from New York got the pleasure of explaining to my 6-year old nephew what drugs are, why people abuse them, etc.  

The drug/homeless problem along the rail line in downtown, wheeler station, and the SE corner of Herman Park needs to be addressed if the city wants to continue to take steps forward to be seen as a world class city.  

Go check out the Magnificent Mile in Chicago. Lots of high end stores, and plenty of panhandlers. All cities deal with this problem, and there's no law you can pass to prevent people from asking someone a question on a public sidewalk. We have the First Amendment, after all.

After reading this, I don't believe that you have been to Chicago.  To suggest that the homeless problem along Main Street in Houston is in anyway similar to the homeless problem along Michigan Ave is ridiculous (hint -- there isn't a problem along the Magnificent Mile unless you include human statues that go home every night).  

so which finishes first? this or block 33.... never mind, we all know the answer

I'm fairly certain that cartoon building in river oaks gets built before this.

Let's hope they build faster than the Rice Village Hungry's location :/

No joke.  Why is that taking so long?

Let's hope the repave Fairview as part of this and put in better sidewalks.  

I would love to see several of these built in downtown. For the resident, they have a "walkable environment" that allows them independence without the need for a car.

Hopefully some day that will be true, but I think it would be pretty difficult today for them to suffice downtown.  Between the homeless everywhere, lack of grocery stores, and lack of more than one pharmacy, I think it would be hard for them (and the construction would make it difficult for them as well).  

I'm with you though.  In 10 or 15 years when there is a more urban environment in downtown, it would be great to see several of these downtown.  

With the sole exception of the Exxon mobile campus, I've never been or heard of a project where every variety of employee or visitor is made to have steel toed boots.

Typically work boots are what the field staff uses and visitors and office staff at bare minimum are required to have close toed shoes.

Every gas plant and refinery construction site I've gone to require steel toed boots for all visitors that step outside the office.  The commercial and residential construction sites I have been to have not required them (although it's been 15 years since I've been to one of those).  

I'm all for new density and mid/high rises, but this seems out of place.  Maybe in 50 years there will be some mid-rises over by Fannin, but right now this seems more out of place than the Ashby High Rise.  

https://www.bisnow.com/houston/news/retail/houston-surpasses-dallas-in-retail-appeal-50916

 

Houston Surpasses Dallas in Retail Appeal

 

Houston is becoming a regular second market for companies looking to expand beyond their home base, and it’s typical for Houston to be a brand’s third-best location behind New York and Los Angeles. And it’s not because Houston’s a discount play, Nick says—the rents at the River Oaks District prove that, and he says the team’s about to take those to a whole new level there.

Good find, although I'm a bit skeptical of this claim.  I would think other more urban cities would be the third choice.  Chicago in particular, but also San Fran and Boston.  Then again, I don't operate in this area, so I defer to these guys.  

Seems like this has been the view from my office since the beginning of the year.  

I see one potential practical problem with this. Constant ambulance sirens.

 

Are there other true medical districts that have residential woven into the district itself? I could envision it on the outskirts, but woven within? I have my doubts but I could be wrong.

Good point, although I've seen it work in other cities.  For example, Chicago's medical district in the Gold Coast/Streeterville area (i.e., Northwestern, etc.).  Residential, hotels, shopping, and hospitals all together (I don't know if they have a trauma center there though),  In my experience, if you're in a hospital room in the TMC, you don't hear the sirens, so I suspect the same would be true of apartments and hotels.

Not going to happen with that occupancy threshold unless something medicine related decides to set-up shop there (it's close to halfway between DT and the med center).  

Missing from the depiction is the army of homeless that hang out around there.  

I like it, but agree that it will seem out of place.  I will say that I had just assumed they were making a larger surface parking lot on this space (as crazy as that seemed to me), so this is at least better than that.  

I'm not sure what part of town people think is more walkable than the village (putting aside the city centers in sugarland, memorial city, and woodlands).