J008

hmmm...

there's a HEB on Scott/OST (2.2 miles from Elgin/Cullen)

there's a Kroger on Cullen/Polk (0.9 miles from Elgin/Cullen)

there's a Randalls on Louisiana/Hadley (2.9 miles from Elgin/Cullen)

there's a Fiesta on San Jacinto/Wheeler (2.9 miles from Elgin/Cullen)

Yeah I completely missed the one on Cullen/polk I usually turned south by Scott. That is certainly close.

For comparison...

there's a Kroger on wGray/Woodhead (2.5 miles from 6th/Heights)

afaik the closest Randall's is the same as above, Louisiana/Hadley (4 miles from 6th/Heights)

Fiesta on Allgreg/Studewood (1.4 Miles from 6th/Heights)

HEB on TC Jester/18th (2.9 miles from 6th/Heights)

so yeah, unless there are closer places in the Heights that I can't see on Google maps, they are both serviced about the same currently.

Add:

1 Texas Kroger on 11th at Shepherd (1.4)

2 Another Kroger on 20th at Yale (1.6)

3 Even DiscoKroger on Montrose sneaks in the 2.9 Mile perimeter used above

4 Fiesta at Shepherd and 23rd (2.5)

5 Fiesta at Quitman and Fulton (2.5)

So your 3 above that are under 2.9 miles plus the above five will get you 8.

then you add

9. New whole foods at waugh and w. Dallas (1.7)

10. New Wal Mart at Koehler and yale (0.6)

So that will get you a ratio of about 2:1 in the grocery comparison using exsisiting stores. WalMart + Whole Foods will get you up to 2.5:1.

Plenty of no Walmart signs.

I did see a 1-800-GOT-JUNK sign on the fence surrounding the future wal mart which I thought was oddly appropriate.

Article regarding the walmart on swamplot.

http://swamplot.com/west-end-walmart-developer-promises-more-browns-and-greens/2010-08-20/#more-21106

This is exactly what the NIMBY's want to avoid -- providing a place for poor people to congregate, lest it might wear off on them!

Yet, Heights Blvd from the art car museum to 2nd street is one big social services center catering to the poor, who often congregate there on the weekends.

I suspect that you do not really know what Walmart's plans are regarding the east side. If I were a betting man, I'd wager that Walmart's long term plans include stores on the east side as well. They simply are currently building on the north side, west side and central Houston. But...and I know that you aren't suggesting to the contrary...this isn't about the best location for a Walmart, but whether Walmart has a right to build in this location. And, assuming they account for the drainage and traffic concerns, Mayor Parker has stated pretty clearly that they do.

I agree that they have a right to build on the yale site, I only object to them altering multiple streets to fit it in.

Your complaints notwithstanding, the City has designated the Waugh/Heights/Yale streets as a major thoroughfare. It is the City's intention that traffic use these streets, as opposed to the smaller ones nearby. Walmart is planning to build exactly where the City traffic planners want them to. If the City intends for larger developments to locate along the major thoroughfares, it seems a bit of a stretch to believe that they would then block what they planned to happen...that high traffic developments locate on major thoroughfares.

I will concede that Heights Blvd being a major thoroughfare is a much bigger quality of life issue than a Wal Mart on Yale. I'd think many more heights residents would be against this if they knew that Heights is going to be a 'major' thoroughfare. It would be only appropriate to take one of the best streets where cars and bikes coexsist safely and turn it into a major vehicle thoroughfare. I am still puzzled as to how adding traffic lights helps create a thoroughfare I would think it would add congestion.

I was in New Orleans last weekend and went to the St. Mary St. Wal-Mart in the Lower Garden District, although technically it was in the industrial waterfront. Place was packed. The area around it was blighted before and was perceivably still blighted but provides the poorer areas of Central City, the Treme, and anybody else in the city with affordable wares.

I guess the opposition should ask themselves If New Orleans can do it, why can't Houston?

New Orleans and Houston are really too different to compare site locations, but I do remember there was a lot of opposition to that wal mart. I can't remember exactly, but I think that Wal Mart only has one traffic light on Tchoupitoulas. Additionally, I don't think Tchoupitoulas has the traffic that Heights\Yale have and is only two lanes at that spot.

My main complaint about this one is the need to use heights blvd as some sort of feeder to the site and the result will be trafic lights at I-10, Koehler, Center, and Washington on both Heights and Yale all with in maybe a half mile.

On another note, there are much poorer areas of Houston that actually don't have a grocery store (same can be said for New Orleans) if wal mart's customers and business model really revolved around serving the disadvantaged there are plenty of parts of town that would be a better fit for them. When I took some classes at UH I only saw a couple convenience store "food marts" around there never a grocery/ pharmacy supercenter. Especially considering that Wal MArt is planning on having one every 5 miles or so on the west side of Houston but has no plans for poorer east side.

Crime statistics are based on actual incidents and arrests. If a store catches more shoplifters, the stats reflect more theft. By comparison, those stores that do not have good security will show less theft in the stats. And, while there is some crime in any parking lot, it is dwarfed by the shoplifting occurring inside the stores. All one needs to do for proof is look at the percentages of crimes committed citywide. Property crimes account for 83% of all crime, and Theft accounts for 60% of all property crime.

There was an interesting article a while back about wal mart's exceptional prosecution of even the most petty thefts and their subsequent realization that there should be some threshold for prosecution.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/13/business/worldbusiness/13iht-wal-mart.2190898.html

This article was pretty exhaustive in the New Yorker about Target's theft prevention, which states that roughly half of retail crime is by employees.

(you need a subscription to view the whole article but the abstract is pretty good)

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/09/01/080901fa_fact_colapinto

I agree that most of the crime associated with wal mart is against wal mart itself and Wal Mart is probably way more efficient at catching people.

This is Wal-Mart's prepackaged PR campaign that they launch when they face resistance.

I read the terms of usage part and it is as folksy as a civil procedure textbook.

Though I am in no way refering to anything anywhere at anytime for anyreason.

based on that, I make the inevitable conclusion that this means that people believe the walmart shoppers will attract crime, or even are responsible for the increased crime themselves.

a few alternative conclusions

Wal Mart itself appears as an easy target due to uderstaffing / less security in the parking lot (even if this is only a perception)

Criminals can rationalize stealing from Wal Mart because they are so big it won't really hurt them.

Wal Mart is so busy that it is easy for criminals to get away or go unnoticed.

Wal Mart is so cheap that if you are caught you will be charged with a lesser offense.

Wal Mart has the things people want

Wal Mart's return policy is so generous that people can more easily return stolen items for cash.

Nonetheless I don't think wal mart shoppers are more criminal than any other retail shoppers.

The development of Sawyer Heights required changes to the street grid. Nobody complained then.

I agree and I personally don't think the Sawyer development is that great either. Instead of just one big box there are also 2 medium boxes with petco and staples right there. The only traffic control I see is still on sawyer which is still an alteration, but dragging Heights and Yale into the Wal Mart site will be twice the alteration that is on Sawyer.

I would hate to see that development repeated one mile down the street (or now on one continuous feeder road). Still sawyer does not cross washington as a through street and more importantly when sawyer turns into Watson their are some vicious speed bumps on the two lane road which calm or divert any through traffic, Yale and Heights won't have that benefit.

I do silently agree that the comparisons of target as good (or their just different) and wal mart as bad is sort of silly and probably hurts the wal mart opposition as much as anything. In the Mayor's quote she spends as much time addressing concerns as dissmissing the idea that a costco or target should go their instead.

It is strange to look at some of the other Wal Marts in Houston and not see some elitism.

This one on Eldgridge and 1960 is backed up against what appears to be a grand gated community with the nice fountains and lakes. There is no connecting road leading from the wal mart into the neighborhood it might as well be considered on the other side of the green zone.

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Walmart+Supercenter+1960+eldridge&sll=29.733657,-95.510116&sspn=0.00859,0.019205&ie=UTF8&hq=Walmart+Supercenter+1960+eldridge&hnear=&ll=29.921799,-95.595903&spn=0.008648,0.019205&t=h&z=16

This one in pearland is less drastic but at least from google maps you can see most people have to travel quite a few sleepy hollow drives to find there way to the one road that will lead you to wal mart.

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&q=Walmart+Supercenter&sll=29.549007,-95.230522&sspn=0.008605,0.019205&ie=UTF8&t=h&radius=0.69&split=1&rq=1&ev=p&hq=Walmart+Supercenter&hnear=&ll=29.548876,-95.231144&spn=0.009072,0.019205&z=16

Even the dunvale location that backs up against several houses, has no streets directly connecting the neighborhood to the wal mart zone even though they are only yards apart.

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Walmart+Supercenter,+2727+Dunvale+Rd,+Houston,+TX+77063-4401&sll=29.550911,-95.231938&sspn=0.018144,0.038409&ie=UTF8&hq=Walmart+Supercenter,&hnear=2727+Dunvale+Rd,+Houston,+Harris,+Texas+77063&ll=29.733471,-95.506618&spn=0.009055,0.019205&t=h&z=16

I didn't look at many others, but from just these three you can see how drastically different the street grid is in the heights from these wal mart neighborhoods.

Again my main complaint against the development isn't wal mart but the alterations to the street grid, dragging Heights Blvd into the whole mix being the most burdensome part.

No, I'd venture to guess that most of the people who are against this walmart are against it because they don't like people who wear spandex when shopping.

682 posts and only yours includes any reference to spandex. What is the fixation with spandex? I have seen more spandex at the river oaks kroger than at the Mississippi wal mart I recently visited. I am sure there are plenty of hipster elitisits in spandex right now who are against the wal mart (the petition at antidote being by reference).

But the simple fact is they don't owe you anything. They paid their money, it's their property, they can do what they want with it as long as they follow the law. From here, it looks like they have.

I do agree that to a large extent you should be able to build whatever you want on your land, but when it comes to rearranging the street grid and adding extensive traffic controls I think the neighborhood \ city government should be consulted if they aren't already required to be.

Not to mention the tax subsidy.

Otherwise I'll stop paying my property tax and install a traffic light in front of my house.

There was an article this morning on KUHF about the opposition.

http://app1.kuhf.org/houston_public_radio-news-display.php?articles_id=1281740045

I'm defending Walmart's right to build where they please.

Just as long as it isn't at Teotihuacan.

I wish the Walmart had been there when I lived there.

I can now see where you are coming from, you have conceded that you are spending between $10 and $20k at WalMart. You love Wal Mart ! I would think anyone in your same situation would be right with you. But there are many people in the neighborhood who would simply like to see the neighborhood develop in a different way.

I don't think their preference in asthetics is any less irrational than yours is for sam's choice.

I don't get why you don't get it. Walmart is evil, but now that I do my grocery shopping there, I save far more than $200/year. I'm likely to save at least half that every month. Only the superwealthy and the superstupid make all their financial decisions based on their politics.

Your numbers are wrong, but in this economy, every little bit of savings helps.

I can see why you have so much Wal Mart love. If you're saving $100/mo and WalMart is 5% less than Fiesta you are spending $24K a year at WalMart. Even at say a 20% discount (which I think is near impossible on stuff like rice and beans) you are dropping $500/mo at Wal Mart, which is pretty close to covering my mortgage.

I have a much better understanding where you are coming from since I just don't spend that much money on anything much less at one store.

Agreed. I'm not a fan of Walmart. On a macro level, I have a huge problem with Walmart. Their blatant disregard for valuable archaeological sites is like a knife in my archaeologist heart. Then again, I recognize this isn't entirely Walmart's fault. (Hell, this article lists the Tennessee Titans, the state of Georgia and Whole Foods (?!) as also being bad corporate stewards to important American Indian burial and other heritage sites.) Our lax laws, our disregard for our past and the ridiculously high cost of living makes Walmart and its practices an inevitability. If you want to protest Walmart as a company, I'm right there with you. If you want to protest our values as a nation, I'm on board. If you want to protest our paucity of corporate restrictions, I'll join the picket line with you. But, on a micro level, I appreciate my Walmart. Having one nearby sure has freed up my disposable income. If you were smart, you'd let it free up your disposable income too.

Edit: I can't think of a better selfish reason than that. Can you?

I just don't get the Mirco\ Macro split, They may be destroying things I hold dear but I get tube socks for 58 cents cheaper than target?

I don't see it liberating that much of my income maybe a couple hundred bucks a year which is a lot in total, but that is around $1 a day which if it were that important I'd have cut my internet service by now. I'd probably save more money by The Dirt Bar being torn down.

I do think the connecting roads that drag Heights Blvd into the mix will have an adverse affect on the bike route, this part is already scary and I don't trust that they will make it safer. If I were to start driving to work it would be a dramatic increase in costs.

The diversion of tax revenue is another aburdity to me, If Wal Mart can't pay their own way then how do you expect anyone else to?

Your goal is selfish.

So what! What is wrong with advocating for ones own self interest? That is the only reason Wal Mart exsists is to promote their self interest.

The only altruistic argument I have heard is the one that WalMart will somehow help the low income folks and that residents should shut up and support this greater good, less they be called elitists.... or worse yet HIPSTER elitists.

Seriously, Are there really that many Hipsters? In the Heights? against Wal Mart? and that are "elite"?

Well, how about this? I'll admit to exacting a little bit of pleasure out of seeing some prissy, hipster elitists squirm because their vision of utopia is being forced to allow other inferior people in.

Are you referring to Wal Mart Co as the inferior people? They are the fortune #1 company; collectively the Waltons dwarf all other living human accumulations of wealth; We are all economically inferior relative to wal mart.

No one should take a way from their success, but in my opionion actual residents should be able to determine what they want there neighborhood to look like (most of the ones I know are against it), especially if they are being asked to subsidize it.

Very interesting, if true.

So, the building of this Wal-Mart is going to benefit low-income citizens ... by demolishing their affordable housing?

Yeah I have been thinking the same thing for a while. There is a big variance sign in front of the apartments. Good luck finding a couple hundred apartments in that area on the bus line and accross the street from the public health facility that is on heights at a similar rent.

It will be odd when they tear down affordable housing and build a panera bread / starbucks / nail salon and act as if that is somehow helping poor folks.

Saw this posted on the chronicle. It looks like good news to me.

http://blogs.chron.com/peep/2010/07/fitzgeralds.html

It annoys me tremendously...3-6 cars line up there and frequently only 1 gets through...if you have an old foagy who is scared of his shadow in the front, he may not make it through in a light cycle....I have recently been going straight and cutting through on 12th with all its dang stop signs b/c its still faster than waiting out the left turn there.

If your too high strung to sit through it, you need to move to the country where there is no traffic.

Since they don't own homes in the area, they don't pay property taxes in the area.

Renters pay their share of property taxes through the rent they are charged without the benefit of homestead exemptions or tax deductibility.

Unless of course the landlord negotiated some walmart style exemption.

Crossing under I-10 on the hike & bike trail is way easier, unless you aren't heading toward downtown.

Agree, I am heading to Greenway and previously to Galleria so no luck for me.