Walmart Supercenter At 111 Yale St.

[sonic0boom]

I just feel the need to link this after s3mh's comment.

http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/151029/you-hate-children

[JJxvi]

I don't think the laissez faire, bohemian attitudes were meant to attract big box suburban retailers to the area.

It was never "meant" to attract anything. In fact one of the negatives is that it seems to attract folks like you...

[Marksmu]

I don't think the laissez faire, bohemian attitudes were meant to attract big box suburban retailers to the area. And the arbitrary geographical distinction is the worst argument I have heard, second only to the elitist/racist one. So what if it isn't in within the plat for the heights as recorded in the Harris County real property records. And if you are so laissez faire, bohemian, you would equally support people's rights to speak out against what they consider to be a nuisance and detriment to their community. But you are not really Mr. Heights laissez faire/bohemain. You are just another right wing conservative who favors the rights of giant corporations to suck money out of a community over the right of the community to have some influence over the quality of life in their area.

Wow - you really believe that too....that is what is funny, or sad...or both....It's just hard to believe people really think this stuff!

The Chupacabra is probably part of the evil elite right wing conservatives plan to pilfer local money off into the pockets of giant bloodsucking corporations who plan to use that money for more evil bloodsucking....

[20thStDad]

I don't think the laissez faire, bohemian attitudes were meant to attract big box suburban retailers to the area. And the arbitrary geographical distinction is the worst argument I have heard, second only to the elitist/racist one. So what if it isn't in within the plat for the heights as recorded in the Harris County real property records. And if you are so laissez faire, bohemian, you would equally support people's rights to speak out against what they consider to be a nuisance and detriment to their community. But you are not really Mr. Heights laissez faire/bohemain. You are just another right wing conservative who favors the rights of giant corporations to suck money out of a community over the right of the community to have some influence over the quality of life in their area.

I thought the mayor who signed the deal with the devil was a Democrat?

[Scott08]

His/her's latest comments had me almost rolling on the floor. I guess we have different definitions of laissez-faire/bohemian, because mine is living and letting others live as they wish, and keeping the liberal, yeah I said it, spirit that was alive in the Heights 20 years ago, hell it still is. The Walmart won't change my way of life at all I suspect. The NIMBYism that the Anti's have brought in from the 'burbs are what's right wing to me.

[samagon]

His/her's latest comments had me almost rolling on the floor. I guess we have different definitions of laissez-faire/bohemian, because mine is living and letting others live as they wish, and keeping the liberal, yeah I said it, spirit that was alive in the Heights 20 years ago, hell it still is. The Walmart won't change my way of life at all I suspect. The NIMBYism that the Anti's have brought in from the 'burbs are what's right wing to me.

the NIMBY attitude is a scourge that affects both Liberal and Conservatives, it is an affliction that can't tell the difference between red or blue.

people forget their morals, beliefs and things they stand for when something threatens their back yard.

which is why I hate NIMBYs and I do everything I can to keep myself from being one, they are so hypocritical, and I dislike hypocrites.

Edited November 4, 2010 by samagon

[RedScare]

people forget their morals, beliefs and things they stand for when something threatens their back yard.

That's some pretty serious NIMBY, considering that this proposed store is over 2 miles from the poster's back yard, on the other side of a hideous freeway overpass, on the site of a former steel mill, and fronting not one, but TWO 4 lane thoroughfares.. I guess some NIMBY's eyes are bigger than their back yards, to butcher a phrase.

[samagon]

That's some pretty serious NIMBY, considering that this proposed store is over 2 miles from the poster's back yard, on the other side of a hideous freeway overpass, on the site of a former steel mill, and fronting not one, but TWO 4 lane thoroughfares.. I guess some NIMBY's eyes are bigger than their back yards, to butcher a phrase.

Not Within a Two Mile Radius of My BackYard Even if it is an Improvement Over the Current State of the Property and None of My Arguments Against it are Valid.

NWTMRMBYEIOCSPNMAAV just doesn't have the same ring to it as NIMBY though.

Edited November 4, 2010 by samagon

[s3mh]

If anyone here thinks the word "bohemian" belongs in the same argument as "Walmart", then there is absolutely no point in arguing with you. You have gone completely outside the realm of all sensiblity. Walmart represents the corporate homogenization of all things consumer and the death of any connection between producers, retailers and consumers. Walmart is the antithesis of the anti-bohemian.

And, for those who were wondering how the apartments would be cleared for chef driven restaurants (apparently if you are against a Walmart you are elitist, but if you destroy affordable housing for retail space for boutiques and chef driven restaurants, you get a free pass), the developer is going to non-renew their leases. http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/local&id=7765524

This is how it played out at Allen House and is generally the way it is done, unless the developer has enough cash to pay people off and get an agreement to vacate early. Aside from the irony that the developer is kicking out the very people who are in the heart of Walmart's demographic, why doesn't the City use 380 agreements or other development assistance to build affordable housing inside the loop? Instead, the city is using development tools to kick low income people outside the loop and build expensive homes inside the loop (see Frank Liu's 20 million dollar 380 agreement to build homes in the 300-500k price range inside the loop). Now who is the elitist?

[JJxvi]

Walmart is the antithesis of the anti-bohemian

O rly? I do not think it means what you think it means.

[JJxvi]

Perhaps you can get those apartments declared a historical landmark to commemorate the 70s-80s craptastical nature of the neighborhood.

[Jesse]

Not Within a Two Mile Radius of My BackYard Even if it is an Improvement Over the Current State of the Property and None of My Arguments Against it are Valid.

NWTMRMBYEIOCSPNMAAV just doesn't have the same ring to it as NIMBY though.

Can someone please explain to me what is so terrible about caring about what goes on in my neighborhood?

I hate how the anti-Walmart or anti-developers on this thread are being attacked and forced to defend themselves about traffic, construction, etc etc etc.. Shouldn't the burden of proof be on the developer to prove how their proposed impact will be mitigated? Traffic studies, drainage studies, input from the nearby residents and businesses, etc. This information should be INDEPENDANT from any 380 agreements, tax incentives, etc.

Furthermore, many of the pro-Walmart or pro-developer comments recently reek of hypocracy (not calling you out specifically samagon, just continuing a thought here). They're calling people out on NIMBY. Ok, so say I wanted to build a 30 story highrise literally next door to you. I'm guessing you probably wouldn't like that. Ok, so how about 2 houses away? Still no? How about 10 houses? What is the exact distance at which I'm allowed to call you a snob since it's no longer in your backyard? If we can establish that, then I'll draw a circle around the proposed Walmart site, and everyone outside of that area can leave the discussion. Does that work for you? I have a funny feeling many of the more vocal folks on this board would be outside of that radius.

[TheNiche]

Now who is the elitist?

You are. You're taking a "live like I say or get the ____ out!" perspective on the matter.

Whatever happened to "live and let live"?

Kumbayah, dammit! Kumbayah!!!

[TheNiche]

Can someone please explain to me what is so terrible about caring about what goes on in my neighborhood?

I hate how the anti-Walmart or anti-developers on this thread are being attacked and forced to defend themselves about traffic, construction, etc etc etc.. Shouldn't the burden of proof be on the developer to prove how their proposed impact will be mitigated? Traffic studies, drainage studies, input from the nearby residents and businesses, etc. This information should be INDEPENDANT from any 380 agreements, tax incentives, etc.

Furthermore, many of the pro-Walmart or pro-developer comments recently reek of hypocracy (not calling you out specifically samagon, just continuing a thought here). They're calling people out on NIMBY. Ok, so say I wanted to build a 30 story highrise literally next door to you. I'm guessing you probably wouldn't like that. Ok, so how about 2 houses away? Still no? How about 10 houses? What is the exact distance at which I'm allowed to call you a snob since it's no longer in your backyard? If we can establish that, then I'll draw a circle around the proposed Walmart site, and everyone outside of that area can leave the discussion. Does that work for you? I have a funny feeling many of the more vocal folks on this board would be outside of that radius.

I wouldn't think that anybody would want to live next to a Wal-Mart (although the good people living at Sawyer Heights Lofts, sandwiched between a Target parking lot and an interstate freeway apparently think otherwise).

I can understand how a change in circumstances could piss off people in a neighborhood. But that's desperation and catharsis, not a political philosophy.

When a group of people don't get upset the first several times that big box retailers have built at the periphery of their neighborhood (or the hundreds of times that they've built in neighborhoods throughout the city) and then are suddenly up in arms only when it is convenient for them...yeah, that's hypocrisy. I understand where it's coming from. But it makes for crappy policy (and for lawsuits brought against the City). It's a big, dumb, angry, reactionary movement of otherwise disagreeable people without a common intellectual underpinning. Basically, it's like the TEA Party.

[s3mh]

I wouldn't think that anybody would want to live next to a Wal-Mart (although the good people living at Sawyer Heights Lofts, sandwiched between a Target parking lot and an interstate freeway apparently think otherwise).

I can understand how a change in circumstances could piss off people in a neighborhood. But that's desperation and catharsis, not a political philosophy.

When a group of people don't get upset the first several times that big box retailers have built at the periphery of their neighborhood (or the hundreds of times that they've built in neighborhoods throughout the city) and then are suddenly up in arms only when it is convenient for them...yeah, that's hypocrisy. I understand where it's coming from. But it makes for crappy policy (and for lawsuits brought against the City). It's a big, dumb, angry, reactionary movement of otherwise disagreeable people without a common intellectual underpinning. Basically, it's like the TEA Party.

what is dumb is the attempt to discredit the anti-Walmart points by questioning why there wasn't a similar opposition to an entirely different development. Target is not a supercenter. It is not open 24/7. It is not abutting residential neighborhoods. It is not on a major artery that serves as the main connector between the Heights and Downtown/Upper Kirby/River Oaks. It is on a road that can be widened enough to have a signalized intersection to the entrance with dedicated left turn lanes, while still having two lanes of through traffic in each direction. It will eventually have direct driveway access to the new feeder rd. It is not on a main commuter route to downtown from I-10. It does not send overflow traffic throw residential neighborhoods on 21 ft streets. It did not recieve 6.05 million in tax payer dollars, including 300k for onsite stormwater detention on private property. And it was not the third Target to be built within a five mile radius.

And a lot of people who did not fuss when Target went in are making their voice heard now because a lot of the promises about the Target development were BS. Traffic inside Woodland Heights is much worse. Watson is now a steady stream of traffic where it used to be a quiet neighborhood street. The developer also promised boutiques and nice restaurants, but delivered payless, radio shack and ATT store. Promised mature shade trees on the site gave way to parking lots of solid concrete.

So, if anything the Target has taught the community to be more involved and more vigilant.

[JJxvi]

It is not on a major artery that serves as the main connector between the Heights and Downtown/Upper Kirby/River Oaks.

I can't keep up. Are you suggesting that commercial developments should be put on quiet side streets? I cant figure out if Yale is too small or too large and important for this store.

[OutfieldDan]

what is dumb is the attempt to discredit the anti-Walmart points by questioning why there wasn't a similar opposition to an entirely different development. Target is not a supercenter. It is not open 24/7. It is not abutting residential neighborhoods. It is not on a major artery that serves as the main connector between the Heights and Downtown/Upper Kirby/River Oaks. It is on a road that can be widened enough to have a signalized intersection to the entrance with dedicated left turn lanes, while still having two lanes of through traffic in each direction. It will eventually have direct driveway access to the new feeder rd. It is not on a main commuter route to downtown from I-10. It does not send overflow traffic throw residential neighborhoods on 21 ft streets. It did not recieve 6.05 million in tax payer dollars, including 300k for onsite stormwater detention on private property. And it was not the third Target to be built within a five mile radius.

And a lot of people who did not fuss when Target went in are making their voice heard now because a lot of the promises about the Target development were BS. Traffic inside Woodland Heights is much worse. Watson is now a steady stream of traffic where it used to be a quiet neighborhood street. The developer also promised boutiques and nice restaurants, but delivered payless, radio shack and ATT store. Promised mature shade trees on the site gave way to parking lots of solid concrete.

So, if anything the Target has taught the community to be more involved and more vigilant.

A few inaccuracies above. Target may not be a "supercenter," but it's very big and close enough to be a good comparison. I believe if you google Target in Houston, you'll find that there are already four that exist inside the Loop 610. Wal-Marts? - Zero. So much for the five mile radius statement above. Incidentally, most of the Targets abut residential neighborhoods. Regarding the 24/7 argument, CVS on 20th St. is open 24/7 now; I believe the new Walgreens at Heights and 20th will also be open 24/7. I live within two blocks of the CVS and I don't fear for my life because of the business hours.

A work colleague of mine lives in Jersey Village about one block from a Wal-Mart. He loves the convenience and says that they keep their pantry less stocked because they can always get what they want when the need arises. Also, he doesn't fear for his life either.

I find it hard to believe that Woodland Heights traffic was made much worse because of the Target store. I don't know what deal the city struck with Target regardinig tax breaks for improvements. Do you know the specifics?

[s3mh]

I can't keep up. Are you suggesting that commercial developments should be put on quiet side streets? I cant figure out if Yale is too small or too large and important for this store.

Really. I have to spell everthing out?

Target is on Taylor. Taylor had enough capacity to support the additional traffic because it was not a major commuter route. Walmart is going to use Yale as its main access. Yale does not have enough capacity to support the additional traffic because it is a major commuter route and cannot even be expanded to add a dedicated left turn lane.

come on. That really isn't that hard to understand.

[JJxvi]

I long for the days (ie a year or so ago) when my neighbors were bitching incessantly that Yale was not a major thoroughfare, was not amajor traffic problem, and usually was a faster route than others such as Heights, and thus did not need to be widened, and that therefore some trees would not need to be cut down.

Edited November 5, 2010 by JJxvi

[JJxvi]

We could do a little analysis of the mind of the Heights HAIFer, its like a computer program.

Situation-COH wants to cuts down some trees to widen Yale.

Thought-But I like the trees.

Solution-The trees should not be cut down.

Argument-Yale does not need to be widened.

Supporting Fact-Traffic is not a problem on Yale.

Situation-WalMart is building a store on Yale.

Thought-But I dont like WalMart

Solution-WalMart should not be built.

Argument-WalMart will bring gridlock to Yale.

Supporting Fact-Traffic is already a huge problem on Yale.

[RedScare]

Watson is now a steady stream of traffic where it used to be a quiet neighborhood street.

Liar.

Watson and Taylor have always served Woodland Heights and Norhill, due to the exit and entrance ramps to I-10 that feed the street. Since you just moved here, I seriously doubt that you know what traffic used to be like on those streets, but I can say that when I drove down Watson yesterday at 6 pm, it wasn't bad.

[RedScare]

Target is not a supercenter. It is not open 24/7. It is not abutting residential neighborhoods. It is not on a major artery that serves as the main connector between the Heights and Downtown/Upper Kirby/River Oaks.

Oh, but you are right that the Target does not abut a residential neighborhood. It REPLACED it.

[aggie92]

Living in Woodland Heights prior to and after the construction of Target, my opinion is that the traffic hasn't changed and the traffic within Woodland Heights is still minimal. I go to Target all the time and regularly use Watson/Sawyer/Taylor for cut-thrus and I can't remember ever waiting in any significant traffic.

[WAZ]

Can someone please explain to me what is so terrible about caring about what goes on in my neighborhood?

I hate how the anti-Walmart or anti-developers on this thread are being attacked and forced to defend themselves about traffic, construction, etc etc etc.. Shouldn't the burden of proof be on the developer to prove how their proposed impact will be mitigated? Traffic studies, drainage studies, input from the nearby residents and businesses, etc. This information should be INDEPENDANT from any 380 agreements, tax incentives, etc.

Furthermore, many of the pro-Walmart or pro-developer comments recently reek of hypocracy (not calling you out specifically samagon, just continuing a thought here). They're calling people out on NIMBY. Ok, so say I wanted to build a 30 story highrise literally next door to you. I'm guessing you probably wouldn't like that. Ok, so how about 2 houses away? Still no? How about 10 houses? What is the exact distance at which I'm allowed to call you a snob since it's no longer in your backyard? If we can establish that, then I'll draw a circle around the proposed Walmart site, and everyone outside of that area can leave the discussion. Does that work for you? I have a funny feeling many of the more vocal folks on this board would be outside of that radius.

You have a very good point. I've said it time and time again.

We can either flee undesirable development, and sprawl out to ever-further suburbs. Or we can stop and make a stand for our neighborhoods.

[JJxvi]

Agreed, nobody ever built anything undesirable like a WalMart in the suburbs.

[TheNiche]

We can either flee undesirable development, and sprawl out to ever-further suburbs. Or we can stop and make a stand for our neighborhoods.

What kind of stand did you have in mind for our neighborhoods? A nightstand? A stand of bamboo? A deer stand? Stand-up comedy? A one-night stand? I think that those are all great things; some more than others, but to each his own.

Whatever kind of stand you'd like to add to the fabric of our neighborhoods, I'll support it. Perhaps you'd be so kind as to kindly reciprocate in your acceptance of other people's preferences and lifestyles.

[samagon]

Most of those stands will be available at walmart. This is a win for anyone wanting to make a stand.

[WAZ]

Agreed, nobody ever built anything undesirable like a WalMart in the suburbs.

What's undesirable to one neighborhood, might be perfectly desirable to another neighborhood.

What kind of stand did you have in mind for our neighborhoods? A nightstand? A stand of bamboo? A deer stand? Stand-up comedy? A one-night stand? I think that those are all great things; some more than others, but to each his own.

Whatever kind of stand you'd like to add to the fabric of our neighborhoods, I'll support it. Perhaps you'd be so kind as to kindly reciprocate in your acceptance of other people's preferences and lifestyles.

It's really not up to me to decide what's right for your neighborhood. Nor is it up to you to decide what's right for my neighborhood. It's certainly not up to a corporation from Bentonville, Arkansas to decide what's right for The Heights - or whatever the neighborhood technically is where they're trying to put the WalMart.

In other cities, developers do zoning studies before they buy land for development. In Houston, they should meet with the neighbors. Our lack of zoning should NOT be viewed as a green light for developers to do whatever they want. Instead, it should give Houstonians unprecedented control over their own neighborhoods' destinies.

So let me turn the question around: what kind of stand would YOU put in YOUR neighborhood? And to the people around the "Heights Walmart" - how would you rather see that site redeveloped?

Edited November 6, 2010 by WAZ

[heights]

It's really not up to me to decide what's right for your neighborhood. Nor is it up to you to decide what's right for my neighborhood. It's certainly not up to a corporation from Bentonville, Arkansas to decide what's right for The Heights - or whatever the neighborhood technically is where they're trying to put the WalMart.

Oh, I get it now. You believe that businesses wishing to open in an area should first have to get the approval of the residents of that area. Perhaps each neighborhood could elect members to serve on a Development Review And Citizen Oversight for New Initiatives in A Neighborhood (DRACONIAN) board. New businesses would submit an application which would be reviewed and voted on by the DRACONIAN board to decide if that business would be allowed to open in (or even near) a neighborhood.

Hell, why don't we just let the HAHC control new businesses as well as residential stuff?

Remember, if it weren't for crybaby NIMBY's, we'd have a nice Starbucks at 19th and Heights instead of an abandoned bank building.

Edited November 6, 2010 by heights

[WAZ]

Oh, I get it now. You believe that businesses wishing to open in an area should first have to get the approval of the residents of that area. Perhaps each neighborhood could elect members to serve on a Development Review And Citizen Oversight for New Initiatives in A Neighborhood (DRACONIAN) board. New businesses would submit an application which would be reviewed and voted on by the DRACONIAN board to decide if that business would be allowed to open in (or even near) a neighborhood.

Hell, why don't we just let the HAHC control new businesses as well as residential stuff?

Remember, if it weren't for crybaby NIMBY's, we'd have a nice Starbucks at 19th and Heights instead of an abandoned bank building.

I've never proposed applications or formal approvals. I have called for common sense, and a willingness to reach out to neighborhoods on the developers' part. And neighborhoods have a huge responsibility in it, too. Instead of diddling themselves until something bad comes along, and then screaming at the top of their lungs - they need to come up with realistic ideas of what they actually want; and communicate those ideas in a consistent way.

So I ask again, to the people who live around the "Heights WalMart" site: what do you actually want that abandoned factory to become, if not a WalMart?