AtticaFlinch

Probably in the name of preserving the neighborhood's character. You know, since that... er... neighborhood has so much... uh... character?

I don't even like tourists when I'm traveling. Whenever I'm abroad and asked "You speak English?" by some fannypack-wearing, overweight Midwesterner, my answer is always, "Nein." I assume we've met in real life because you stole my line. I totally invented dropping the "and me".

I think you'll find Houston's situation is rather unique. As such, my opinion is based on educated guesswork more than anything else - just like everyone else here. We can be drawn to any number of possible conclusions in order to support our preconceptions. The only thing we know for certain about this ordinance is that it will arbitrarily impose regulations upon homeowners who had purchased their property without the restrictions already in place and without giving them the ability to opt in or out. As to how exactly it'll play out over the decade or so following, we've yet to see. However, another couple things we do know about human behavior is 1) Power corrupts, and 2) Whenever humans panic, we tend to do it as a mob. If a handful of people feel the board start to overextend their power, then you can pretty much guarantee those homeowners will cut their losses and sell. Whether it'll cause a wave of similar activity from other homeowners has yet to be seen. I will say this though, I'm glad I don't have a horse in this race and don't own in the Heights. I'd hate to be a guinea pig in this little experiment.

It'll never truly be Washington, at least not in the Sixth Street, Bourbon Street or Beale Street sense of urban, pedestrian-only scenes. Houston's best bet for something like that is the Island in Midtown or the northen parts of Main in Downtown, not Washington.

North of I-10 will never happen. Heights isn't a through street there and is hardly the most convenient north/south street. Plus, in order to do that, street parking and the median park would have to be bulldozed. There's an obvious reaso NOT to do that. South of 10 is a completely different story though. I'm personally more inclined to support added rail, but Heights as a six lane road isn't without precedent. It's already six lanes just north of Memorial (and down south to W Dallas as Waugh Street). Primarily, Heights Boulevard is a connector street from Allen Parkway and Memorial Drive to Washington, and soon to I-10. Traffic on that road will still be light through the Heights proper.

Or you get a real estate panic when a bunch of stock is dumped on the market at the same time, inevitably driving down total values of all homes in the area.

If not, 97.1 will inch up into the first six on my presets.

You would? Really, you? How would Atlanta rank in your comparison? Which mattered in 1985. We live in the time of Back to the Future II, not the first Back to the Future. We have hoverboards and Jaws 10 now; the TV show Dallas couldn't be less important. Who gives a squirt? Even when they won championships, they were one of the most boring teams to watch. I'll take the run and shoot anyday over the flawless yet utilitarian performances of Aikman and Smith. I really don't think that's as big a draw as you think it is. Six Flags isn't a destination theme park, like Disney or Seaworld. Six Flags is one of those places you say, "Yeesh, I'm in Dallas and bored out of my skull. There ain't naught to do in this town but piddly around in some microscopic arts district and ride some trains out to the 'burbs. I guess I'll go to Six Flags since it's not as if I can go to the beach or do anything else worthwhile." Where? What is this Times Square in Dallas? Who visits Dallas' Time Square? What are you even talking about? This is a positive? So impressive is this place, the name totally slips my mind. The sixteen square blocks that houses all the theaters and museums in Dallas? That Arts District? The one that's roughly 1/10 the size of Houston's two combined arts and museum concentrations? That one? Youth in Dallas are known as trendsetters? This just gives me another reason to dislike teenagers. I don't think a single person who posts here won't believe it. We all know Houston is the epicenter of dirrty south - or whatever the kids these days are calling it. People are lame.

Or near Marksmu's investment property in the Heights if the historic district ordinance passes.

Not where I was going with that, but I like where you're going with it nonetheless. Metahumor rawks the internet. Why not? I'm not saying they're better able to read than you or I, but surely, at least during their training, they've been exposed to the acrimony cause by the ambiguity of certain written laws. And speaking of which, how many tax payer dollars do you think will be spent defending this ordinance in courts if it's passed? I'm betting at least one million dollars. Anyone want to take the over/under?

So... having all these goods in one place will reduce the amount of time spent driving, thereby reducing your carbon footprint?.. This, plus Walmart's efficient distribution network should be Earth postive reason enough to want this place. I bet Walmart's distribution network is greener than many of the mom n pops on 19th.

First, Target is in a nearly identical area. Calling it "completely different" is disingenuous at best. Have you seen the place where Walmart wants to build? Fuh realz. Second, you made up your mind before Walmart had an opportunity to interact with anyone. Wasn't your first post about this on HAIF made before the announcement was even officially made? You've crucified Walmart before they even committed the crime you think they've committed. I guess you come from the shoot-first-and-ask-questions-later school of thought. You are more like George W Bush than you could ever realize, especially in light of the tenacity to which you hold onto your arguments despite the evidence to the contrary. I'm sure W is sitting in Crawford right now expecting the news of newly discovered WMDs in Iraq too. Geezus. 1) An abatement is not a shakedown. Perhaps you should familiarize yourself with the terminology and learn how this particular project will be affected. 2) There is no cramming. It's a big empty lot with plenty of space for a large development. 3) You have no clue what form of development will take place. You have done nothing to communicate with Walmart and have no idea what this place will look like, have you? You don't know if it's suburban or maybe some new faux urban concept that'll be sure to generate cream in at least a few pairs of shorts. You have no idea. None. You're speaking entirely off conjecture, and you're calling it fact. Why do you have such a blatant disregard for logic when trying to debate something logically? We're not falling for emotions. Good! We're agreed! Let's allow the poor folk decide what's best for themselves and not the landed money in the neighborhood decide what's best for them?

Lawyer joke time! And to complete this circle of humor originality, wait'll you hear the joke I've got about a blonde who walks into a bar! It's a doozy! Do you not find it interesting that both regular professed lawyers on this board, both of opposite ends of the political spectrum, dislike this ordinance?

Say what you want, but your vision of the future has no basis in reality. There are already a number of other fringe communities surrounding the city core with as equally viable housing stock as the Heights, and they're less expensive and have fewer restrictions. If someone were looking to purchase property to build a monster house that ultimately brings up all property values, would you really think they'd do it in an area where they weren't allowed to carry through with their plans? And, if it's as you suggest, and these McVic owners didn't give a turd about the quality of the schools, what's to stop them from going elsewhere? If it doesn't return the Heights to an urban ethnic ghetto, it will at least stem the growth that's so necessary to keep property values rising. It's not about supporting monied interests, as you couldn't have pegged me less accurately. It's about smart growth and compromise. The Heights is still valuable to potential buyers because of the lack of restrictions, and throw a wrench in that, and you've destroyed the single greatest thing about the place. You will have turned it into Woodland lite, and frankly, that's an odd group of people to pursue in the inner city. They add no cultural value to the neighborhood. They suck the life out of it.

It may have been glorious had the poll been conducted of a representative sample. As it is, many of the people who voted against the Walmart on the original poll had signed up to HAIF the day they voted simply to vote. Oh, and they were directed to do so via the Facebook anti-Walmart page. No equal consideration was weighted for the opposition, and no demographic considerations were used to ensure equal weight was given to everyone in the various neighboring communities. The poll is/was useless. As is this one. It doesn't reflect public opinion in any quantifiable way. On this thread, it acts more as a distraction than anything else. It artificially bumps this thread to the top of the New Content page even when no new content has been contributed - and frankly, I doubt any new information will be forthcoming in the future either. This discussion has trod old ground several times over. There will be no fresh arguments, there will be no fresh discussion. This topic has been beaten into the dirt. Everything has been discussed ad infinitum, and the various sides are now entrenched in their opinions and will not be swayed no matter what. All that can possibly happen now is someone will stumble across this thread, and without reading through it, repeat something that's been said five times previously.

I'd argue we've lost more great buildings to neglect than special interests. And, if the cost of maintenance becomes more than the property is worth, people will stop maintaining the properties. At a certain point, it becomes cheaper to demolish the structure or simply let it sit idle and rot than to preserve it. If this historic preservation ordinance passes, I can see how many landowners in the Heights would just say screw it and allow the Heights to return to the ghetto it once was. The whole positive intent of the ordinance relies on the property in the Heights retaining some sense of exclusivity and desireability. If you tell those well monied interests they can't do with their property as they please, you'll start to see those folks spend their money elsewhere, where the restrictions aren't as imposing. I don't have a crystal ball to guarantee this outcome, but when I asked my magic eight ball how accurate my predition was, it replied, "Signs point to yes."

Also, they act as a good buffer between the shoreline and the tar balls. I'm just doing my part.

You're showing your age here. Hollywood tells me the cool kids call it "E" nowadays.

Yeah, but this has pretty much become the norm in every big or mid-sized city with a music scene. As Crunchtastic noted about New Orleans' French Quarter, you can also see similar trends on Sixth Street in Austin, Deep Ellum in Dallas and Beale Street in Memphis. In part, I'd argue that the lack of a concetrated scene in Houston should actually be strengthening our draw. If one area becomes too cool and the yuppie laws become too restrictive, the scene can just migrate. That's not true in a place like Austin. Sixth Street will always be the epicenter of hip there. No, I think Houston's problem is the fans. This is, of course, not to say all the fans suck, but enough do to be a problem. The wife and I don't get out a ton these days due to the kid and another on the way, but we'd seen a show at the House of Blues as recently as about a year ago. The crowd basically ignored the band and treated the show as an annoyance to be spoken over. My experiences are different at places like Ruds or Fitzgeralds, but still it reflects badly on the city when our moderate sized venues can't pull decent and appreciative crowds for national or regional acts. I think it's a self-defeating cycle at this point. Bands aren't too eager to play in Houston and put on mediocre shows as a result. Fans expect mediocrity from bands and don't get too excited, not giving much love back to the bands. And so on.

I dump mine in Galveston Bay.

Why? So we could be more like Manhattan? There is only one Manhattan, and the people of Houston would do well to remember that and not try to emulate everything Manhattan does. Let Dallas continue to do that, and let Houston continue to be Houston. Houston's a quirky and irreverent city. I would hate to see it change its identity to fit into some soon to be outdated urbanism mold.

You've just described Hermann Park, which is the antithesis of Times Square. By the way, Times Square is lame. Manhattanites avoid it like the plague... because of all the tourists.

"I live outside a 3 mile radius (as the crow flies) and am FOR this Walmart" You have this one twice - with no "against".

Texas has some pretty cool music styles associated with it, but none are, in my opinion, anywhere as unique as Tejano. It's about the most Texas-y fusion of music that's even possible. I love its uniqueness, and I'd gladly spend many evenings of my life listening to it.

Ruh-roh. Marksmu and I have been getting along lately. Let's not ruin it. No way, man. Don't you recognize the clean lines of superior design? Doesn't it scream to you Hugo Boss? The Russians, even the officers, were running around in recycled potato sacks. Them's Nat-zees.