LookyHere

I had the City Counsel meeting streaming on line to hear the Heights Walmart speakers and Lovell brought up a couple of these other topics. I couldn't tell you exactly what it was because I was only half paying attention at this point but I definitely heard her say that repairs would not be cause for the city to make you bring your house up to the new standards. She mentioned set back as an example, saying that if you had to do repairs or make changes this would not force you to meet the set back requirements if your house was not in compliance before the ordinance is passed. I believe she also mentioned "not" and "landscaping."

I have been to a couple variance hearings and I can tell you that the builder in question is well known for siding with new development. I know that's only one vote but I thought it was worth mentioning.

I wonder the same thing. I have been following this to a degree and feel pretty informed but I have never heard anything about this. Oak Forest and Garden Oaks? I doubt it, plus those neighborhoods are 100% outside the loop.

I wouldn't call myself a preservationist, certainly not by your definition. However, houses like this were here when we bought our house and are part of what we like about the Heights. It will be a sad day when the old or eclectic residents that made the Heights desirable for the rest of us are gone.

My partner and I discussed this and we feel the City is starting at the extreme end because they know there will be opposition and this gives them wiggle room for negotiating. I know many die hard preservationists and the thing that most of them want to see is an end to the 90 day rule and adoption of a "No Means No" for tear downs. I don't think anyone who supports preservation really want to control their neighbors' paint color but they also want to save buildings like Ashland Tea House and the historic homes on Heights Boulevard that were torn down in the last few years. We do not think this will go forward as proposed and that the current proposition is as much a smoke screen as anything.

I think the one at Carter & Cooley on 19th is surprisingly good. A lot has certainly changed since this thread first started.

For those of you who like studies, here are the results of several. http://www.newrules.org/retail/key-studies-walmart-and-bigbox-retail#1

It's all so Holier-Than-Thou to think the arguments against Walmart are all about "appearing affluent" or that anyone against it is being disingenuous. Perhaps it's even more plausible that people who support it are doing so only to be contrarian. Many people in the Heights just plain ARE affluent. Apparently this is some grave sin in the forum. The guy who started the Facebook page lives on one of the streets where the Walmart may be built. Surely it's more for him than the appearance of affluence; than trying to impress others. Frankly, if people were really only in it for the looks they would welcome the Walmart purely so they could snub it.

This rationale is tired.

Funny that you say this because far earlier in this thread, some people against Walmart were being criticized for being too affluent and superficial.

Point taken. Still, individuals don't have to be "All in" or "All out" on issues. It sounds as if MarkSMU was using one person's stance on one issue to belittle their opinion on another. To believe that everyone has to fall only in to one camp at all times seems short sighted and even a misunderstanding of the complexity of the human condition (There. I have satisfactorily added my own hyperbole to the thread).

I hope they rebuild with a drive thru. That was the only reason the Main Subway was worth going to over the Heights Blvd location.

I could not agree more. My sister, bless her heart, lives in Humble. We go out there a lot because she has a pool but I nearly grind my teeth flat every time. There are some areas where the feeder road is 5 lanes wide but every commuter needs to go right and you can only turn from one lane. It takes 3-5 red light cycles to make a right hand turn. That has never happened to me in Houston, even in the worst Galleria rush hour traffic.

It may seem like a small difference but the location is not the same at all. I would bet my bottom dollar that if this Walmart was going to be built where they tore down warehouses on Studewood, back by Arne's, there would be a lot less resistance. Studewood is a pretty big, busy street and the Taylor/Sawyer exit was barely used by neighborhood residents before the Target was built. In contrast, this development will be right in the middle in an area with noticeable, existing congestion issues relative to the rest of the area. North bound at Washington, Yale is only one lane. There are several different factions at work here: I hate everything Walmart-ers; I don't want any big box development in the neighborhood-ers, and I don't like the idea of that development in this location-ers.

Did Mango's reopen? It was closed for a while and I never saw if it reopened again. The building is still the same.

No, it hasn't. It isn't true. I gave you the facts of what happened in the Garden District and I do not believe from reading this forum topic that you were a part of that effort. My partner was involved with the project and, therefore, I can tell you with certainty Walmart did not come to the table with a compromise in mind. It would be foolish to proceed as though they will in this case.

I live in the Heights and found this forum linked on the Facebook page. My initial thought was "Cool, a forum about the Heights." Then I read it. There is going to be a Walmart in the Heights area. This is probably a given. This is not a good thing for many reasons beat to a pulp in this forum. It does have some redeeming qualities for many reasons beat to a pulp in this forum. When the New Orleans Garden District fought Walmart, they had significantly stronger protections and zoning in place then SuperNeighborhood 22 does in Houston. New Orleans lost. They did end up with a building much more suited architecturally to their area, but hey had to start by wanting to keep them out completely and the better building was the compromise. We can't start by asking for what we may actually want because Walmart will negotiate us down from whatever point that is. Never start a negotiation resigned to failure. We have to start at one extreme if we expect them to meet in the middle.