Walmart Supercenter At 111 Yale St.

[sevfiv]

Not sure what is going on with the file - here is an image of it:

[heights]

Not sure what is going on with the file - here is an image of it:

Thanks, the new pic works. I am going to cross post it in the "Non-Confrontational Wal-Mart Information" Thread if you don't mind.

It does look like they would be a little short on parking for a Wal-mart Supercenter.

[heights]

Here's a proposed drawing that was apparently done by Peter Brown as a suggestion for the developers. Remember, this is just the informational thread -- please post comments in the "other" Walmart thread. For some reason I have trouble posting attachments, but I'll give it a shot.

Edited August 3, 2010 by heights

[TheNiche]

Thanks, the new pic works. I am going to cross post it in the "Non-Confrontational Wal-Mart Information" Thread if you don't mind.

It does look like they would be a little short on parking for a Wal-mart Supercenter.

The drawing is not to scale...meaning, it has no bearing on reality. It's crap. In fact, in oh-so-many ways, the girth of this particular crap is anatomically improbable. It might be mistaken for a woodland critter that climbed up through the plumbing into the bowl, just in time to die and rot.

[dbigtex56]

The drawing is not to scale...meaning, it has no bearing on reality. It's crap. In fact, in oh-so-many ways, the girth of this particular crap is anatomically improbable. It might be mistaken for a woodland critter that climbed up through the plumbing into the bowl, just in time to die and rot.

Not quite sure I'm picturing this correctly - perhaps an animation would help.

The drawing is confusing, too.

[porTENT]

That's an expensive plan. It would require them to acquire the apartment complex on Heights blvd, demolish it, extend Koehler St, & then create a new block by cutting the newly acquired parcels with an avenue. Terminating the axis at the store. Apparently also according to the conceptual site plan posted above, the metal warehouses in the northwest corner of the site are going to remain as existing. I suppose if you were bored enough you could scale a transposition of his plan over an ortho google map.

Edited August 3, 2010 by porTENT

[tanith27]

It would require them to acquire the apartment complex on Heights blvd, demolish it, extend Koehler St, & then create a new block by cutting the newly acquired parcels with an avenue.

While the image may be considered 'crap', this part does seem true as I've read somewhere that these apartments are part of the sale and will be demolished as part of the project.

[dbigtex56]

While the image may be considered 'crap', this part does seem true as I've read somewhere that these apartments are part of the sale and will be demolished as part of the project.

Very interesting, if true.

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

[J008]

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.

[AtticaFlinch]

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.

Weird. So you two thought the low prices were intended only to benefit low income residents of just this one apartment complex? That's weirder than the idea that this Walmart is being built to service just Heights residents.

[DianeTX]

The apartments are already part of the development. Since that slice of land is already a plat they can extend the road through it without a traffic study and yes, they have asked the city to put a light at the intersection. This was directly from the developer/city after I called about the variance and plat notifications.

[bachanon]

posts not pertaining to thread subject matter have been removed. please stay on topic.

[sunsets]

Aw, I'm kind of sad to see the apartments go. I know they are low-income, but that place is always spotless. Flowers are always planted and several times I've observed management picking up the yard. Compared to the dreck that is Skyline on White Oak, they are very nice.

[dbigtex56]

While taking the #34 Heights bus I noticed a "Request for variance" sign on the apartment complex which is (I assume) scheduled for demolition as part of this project. Obviously, I couldn't read it in its entirety.

Although the hearing has probably already been held, does anyone know what issue was being addressed?

[Hartmann]

After seeing some of the posts about traffic and where exactly the Wal-Mart will be located, I don't think Yale north of 10 will be that much more inundated with traffic (originally I did). I wonder what they're going to do about the 1 lane headed north near Washington though. I no longer care if they put the Wal-Mart in, I've got more important things to worry about. Don't want to support their "tactics", just don't shop there.

The other thing I think is just ridiculous is the charge that people against the Wal-Mart are racists and don't like Latinos. That's as much of a stretch as Wal-Mart being put on this earth to stick it to the poor.

I wonder how people would feel if it was a Costco instead of a Wal-Mart?

[dbigtex56]

Weird. So you two thought the low prices were intended only to benefit low income residents of just this one apartment complex? That's weirder than the idea that this Walmart is being built to service just Heights residents.

Neither of said anything of the sort. How weird that our words could be misinterpreted so purposely.

[Angostura]

The variance request on the agenda for yesterday's (5Aug) planning commission meeting was to include a reverse bend in the extension of Kohler St (between heights and Yale) that is slightly tighter than the ordinance calls for. The reason for the reverse bend is so that Kolhler will line up with 2nd St east of Heights.

You can see the detailed request here:

http://ataps1.pd.ci....ng+Calendar.nsf

Based on the video available of the commission meeting, it looks like the decision was deferred for 2 weeks.

Edited August 6, 2010 by Angostura

[AtticaFlinch]

The other thing I think is just ridiculous is the charge that people against the Wal-Mart are racists and don't like Latinos. That's as much of a stretch as Wal-Mart being put on this earth to stick it to the poor.

Well it's either hipster elitism or racism. Or a combination of both.

Neither of said anything of the sort.

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

Or maybe you were trying to prove Walmart is evil and not concerned about the poor by drawing an analogy of no relevance whatsoever? I mean, you know, since Walmart isn't building this new supercenter to benefit just the people who live in that one single apartment complex.

Edit: Unless you're suggesting this Walmart will be mobile and sentient, wandering around the innerloop devouring any low-income housing it comes across.

Edited August 6, 2010 by AtticaFlinch

[Hartmann]

Well it's either hipster elitism or racism. Or a combination of both.

I don't think a majority of people in the Heights are either of those things. There certainly is a hipster element in the area but it's down in Montrose too.

For the most part, people here are "normal".

[AtticaFlinch]

I don't think a majority of people in the Heights are either of those things. There certainly is a hipster element in the area but it's down in Montrose too.

For the most part, people here are "normal".

Sorry. I should have been more clear. I was referring to the vocal opposition, not the majority of Heights residents.

[TheNiche]

I don't think a majority of people in the Heights are either of those things. There certainly is a hipster element in the area but it's down in Montrose too.

For the most part, people here are "normal".

I spent this last Monday sitting in a waiting room for five hours with about 30 freshly-recruited Marines, ages 18 to 20. No females were present. Every last one of them grew up in deep east Texas. Discussions of home life were difficult for me to listen to. Child abuse, drug abuse, and rampant misogyny were the norm. And you can be assured that the discussions frequently entailed circumstances that were anatomically unlikely...or just dumb. That these tendencies happen to be par for this particular course makes it no less unlikable or more defensible. It's not to say that there aren't exceptions, but...for the most part, people there were "normal". ...normal being relative, and all.

Edited August 6, 2010 by TheNiche

[Porchman]

I don't think a majority of people in the Heights are either of those things. There certainly is a hipster element in the area but it's down in Montrose too.

For the most part, people here are "normal".

An excerpt of comments on the HBJ....

We do not want Wal-Mart in the Heights. This area is undergoing a major redevelopment and Wal-Mart moving in will STOP this progress. The reason Target worked is because Target attracts a different type of buyer.

Let's hope we do not equate this sense of "progress" with a sense of "normal'.

[dbigtex56]

Well it's either hipster elitism or racism. Or a combination of both.

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

Or maybe you were trying to prove Walmart is evil and not concerned about the poor by drawing an analogy of no relevance whatsoever? I mean, you know, since Walmart isn't building this new supercenter to benefit just the people who live in that one single apartment complex.

Edit: Unless you're suggesting this Walmart will be mobile and sentient, wandering around the innerloop devouring any low-income housing it comes across.

Again, I said nor suggested no such thing. Please do not take my words out of context.

[Hartmann]

An excerpt of comments on the HBJ....

Let's hope we do not equate this sense of "progress" with a sense of "normal'.

Well I think it's a stupid quote and would argue that Target attracts a very similar audience to Wal-Mart. I wonder if the person quoted has actually gone to Target. I also wonder if they ever shop at Loews or Home Depot off the north loop.

[dbigtex56]

The variance request on the agenda for yesterday's (5Aug) planning commission meeting was to include a reverse bend in the extension of Kohler St (between heights and Yale) that is slightly tighter than the ordinance calls for. The reason for the reverse bend is so that Kolhler will line up with 2nd St east of Heights.

You can see the detailed request here:

http://ataps1.pd.ci....ng+Calendar.nsf

Based on the video available of the commission meeting, it looks like the decision was deferred for 2 weeks.

Thanks for the info. This appears to be item #50 (D -Variances ) on the agenda:

50 Washington Heights Koehler STD C3R

[AtticaFlinch]

Again, I said nor suggested no such thing. Please do not take my words out of context.

I'm pretty sure I didn't, but to be safe, perhaps you can give a little detail into what exactly you meant. The quote in question for ease of reference: "So, the building of this Wal-Mart is going to benefit low-income citizens ... by demolishing their affordable housing?"

Well I think it's a stupid quote and would argue that Target attracts a very similar audience to Wal-Mart.

There was an article posted previously that said Walmart's average customer earns $35k/year and Target's average customer makes $50k/year.

To me, this is clearly a class and race struggle, but those on the disgusting, offensive side of the struggle have been doing a pretty good job of maintaining the appearance of legitimacy by disguising it as being about traffic, property values and crime. As a student of nuance and of getting to the core of what drives human behavior, I can tell you almost invariably whenever the canards of property values and crime are brought up as reasons to oppose something, they're ALWAYS a guise for latent racism or classism.

[TheNiche]

As a student of nuance and of getting to the core of what drives human behavior, I can tell you almost invariably whenever the canards of property values and crime are brought up as reasons to oppose something, they're ALWAYS a guise for latent racism or classism.

"Guise" probably is not the right word. Try "symptom". And you should tack on "within our society" to the end of the sentence.

I'll give you an example that should hit close to (your) home. FM 1960 has become a demographic boundary, and some residents there feel threatened by an influx of brown-colored and/or poor students to the local schools. On account of that I can observe white flight from Spring before that, and Aldine before that--and the consequent impact on home values--I would not buy in your neighborhood. I might rent there if I worked close by, but I would sooner buy in Aldine (stable) than FM 1960 (in transition). And had I already bought in the FM 1960 area, I'd give some thought to selling in the near future. It's not about the neighborhood, class, or skin color; it's about my future consumptive power.

I suspect that there are far more people motivated by greed than there are out-and-out racists and classists. But in the housing market, it doesn't matter why you're selling and effectively tilting the balance of supply and demand, just that you are.

Now...having said this, I would never embarrass myself by railing against an affordable housing project on 1960 or a Wal-Mart in the Heights. Drawing attention to the issue would be counter-productive if it undermines market demand for housing or causes the neighbors to put their homes on the market. Actions speak louder than words, after all. I'm doubting, frankly, that anybody in the Heights is going to sell out because of a Wal-Mart opposite a freeway from their neighborhood. That would be dumb.

So it leaves me wondering what the true motivations are, here, for all this talk. Are particular neighborhood activists just being highly vocal to try and make themselves feel important, to gain standing in their social circles, or to try and break into municipal politics? Is the hipster subculture just that sheepish and/or oversensitive and/or melodramatic that they feel the need to blow every little thing out of proportion? Are these just cynics, curmudgeons, and otherwise crotchety people whom feel the need to complain about everything new? Or are there--in actuality--just a lot of educated and/or self-important dummies trying to engage themselves in a visceral community issue that they don't understand? I'm thinking that it's all of the above. I quoted 'Animal Farm' on another Heights thread recently, and I'm reminded of it again. Although the issue is very different here, the characters are present, it seems.

[AtticaFlinch]

"Guise" probably is not the right word. Try "symptom". And you should tack on "within our society" to the end of the sentence.

I'll grant you the word change to symptom. I actually struggled with what word to use, and at the time, guise seemed best. In retrospect, you're right about that. But, I don't think it's symptomatic of our society alone. I think the fear of the others and, to a lesser extent, the protection of our own are what's motivated all human social interaction for most of human history. I also think it wasn't until the Age of Enlightenment and the rise of individuality that we humans started learning to be motivated by ideas far less insular. However, that doesn't mean we're all at that point, or even that any one of us is at that point always. If we were conflict would disappear, and everybody would have a let and let live attitude about pretty much everything.

I quoted 'Animal Farm' on another Heights thread recently, and I'm reminded of it again. Although the issue is very different here, the characters are present, it seems.

If I remember correctly, I positive repped that post - mostly because I wish I'd thought of it first.

I also wonder how many of the pigs even caught the reference.

[s3mh]

So it leaves me wondering what the true motivations are, here, for all this talk. Are particular neighborhood activists just being highly vocal to try and make themselves feel important, to gain standing in their social circles, or to try and break into municipal politics? Is the hipster subculture just that sheepish and/or oversensitive and/or melodramatic that they feel the need to blow every little thing out of proportion? Are these just cynics, curmudgeons, and otherwise crotchety people whom feel the need to complain about everything new? Or are there--in actuality--just a lot of educated and/or self-important dummies trying to engage themselves in a visceral community issue that they don't understand? I'm thinking that it's all of the above. I quoted 'Animal Farm' on another Heights thread recently, and I'm reminded of it again. Although the issue is very different here, the characters are present, it seems.

Maybe the more relevant inquiry should be what are the true motivations for people who support cramming a suburban style big box retailer that has a proven track record of having a negative impact on the surrounding area in terms of crime, traffic and small business opportunity into one of the few neighborhoods left in the City of Houston that has not been consumed by big box retail and PUD hyperconformity? Is it class envy? Is it a bizarre schadenfreude to hope that unique character of the Heights and West End are crushed by the big box retailers and cookie-cutter residential developers? Is it a belief that democracy should simply bow down before deep pocketed developers and retailers and give them anything they want, regardless of what the community may think? Is it a hatred of all that has resulted from popular resistance movements in the US (racial integration, labor laws, abortion rights, gay rights, environmental protection, etc.)? Or is it that the evidence against a big box supercent smashed into the West End/Heights area is so overwhelming that the only tactic left is to personally insult people in the community who dare to speak out, dare to organize, dare to participate in their democracy, dare to stand in the way of corporate profits in order to protect their community?

I will tell you that the Wal-Mart opposition is nothing like the caricatue you have invented. The Wal-Mart opposition is made up of people of all ages and from all walks of life. Some have spent a lifetime working for the Heights and West End communities, and some are participating in their community for the very first time. You can put them down all you want, but that will not change a thing. While you think you have made a differene by bullying a few people who are against Wal-Mart on a message board with your insults, the thousands who are joining together are making a difference. It is no coincidence that the application for the reverse curve variance on Koehler was tabled for two weeks to require further study.

[usc619]

I'm am very glad we are getting a wal-mart in the Heights