Walmart Supercenter At 111 Yale St.

[s3mh]

So long as it was closer over there with "those people" and not in the Heights, wanyway. He'd prefer they axe the WalMart portion on this pristine tract which was destined for high density glory.

 

It was until the developer got spooked by the market crash.  The original plans floated were for a mixed use development with hotel, movie theater, office, retail, etc.  The developer bailed and cashed out with a Walmart and strip malls.  Meanwhile, everywhere else in Houston, developers held on for the long haul and are doing great things.  Regent Square could have been another big box retail thing.  But they held on and are going to do one of the best new developments inside the loop in decades.  Even the Hardy Yards project is back on the table.  They are going before the planning commission for variances this month.  Huge mixed use project just north of downtown in an area that, other than being next to downtown, is pretty run down and far less desirable than the Walmart location.

[RedScare]

No amount of restating your point in different ways will make an intelligent statement out of your hypocritical stance. For me to debate you is to suggest that there may be merit to your posts. There is not. The fact remains that you are a hypocrite in your stance. The nicest thing that can be said is that you believe that SOME Walmarts have value...for poor Black people.

[JJxvi]

The original plans floated were for a mixed use development with hotel, movie theater, office, retail, etc

 

Never heard of these plans.

 

There actually is a tract in the Heights area that is roughly 50 acres or more that I really have seen these types of long term plans for though.  Of course Im not sure how that fits in with your "Woe is us, this was a huge opportunity wasted, where will the mix used glory land come from now that WalMart has taken this glorious site from us!"

[s3mh]

No amount of restating your point in different ways will make an intelligent statement out of your hypocritical stance. For me to debate you is to suggest that there may be merit to your posts. There is not. The fact remains that you are a hypocrite in your stance. The nicest thing that can be said is that you believe that SOME Walmarts have value...for poor Black people.

No amount of name calling and insults will change the fact that you have no substantive point to make.  There is nothing hypocritical about what I am saying.  All you do is toss out wise cracker one liners because you are afraid to engage me on any substantive point because you know I am right and cannot debate me on the merits.

[s3mh]

Never heard of these plans.

 

There actually is a tract in the Heights area that is roughly 50 acres or more that I really have seen these types of long term plans for though.  Of course Im not sure how that fits in with your "Woe is us, this was a huge opportunity wasted, where will the mix used glory land come from now that WalMart has taken this glorious site from us!"

 

Funny how you won't tell us the location of the magic 50 acre tract in the Heights that can be readily assembled for redevelopment.  Probably because it does not exist or is closer to Beltway 8 than the Heights. 

[JJxvi]

I did not say it was within the Heights, merely in the area. It is probably closer to 19th and Yale than the WalMart development is as the crow flies, though.

[august948]

In Houston, the City is making a tax gift to a development that is putting in the lowest possible use of the land.

Exactly how are you determining what the highest and lowest possible use of that land is? The lowest possible use would have been to let it sit vacant. The highest possible use would be to put a skyscraper on it. Both Walmart and mixed use fall in between.

[august948]

You didn't read the article or my comments.  Typical HAIF oversimplification to avoid any intelligent discussion of a complicated issue.  DC spent 70 mil to get rid of a derelict shopping center, buy out over a dozen different property owners, bring in new investment that would never touch that area without government intervention and get a landmark development that will spark development in an area that would otherwise get passed over and that was in desperate need for grocery and big box discount stores.  If it goes well, a neighborhood that is potentially in transition, will get a huge economic boost instead of stagnating and probably decaying.  And DC got more than just a Walmart.  They got twice as much retail SF and 475 residential units all in an acre and a half smaller space than the property the Walmart in the Heights sits on.

 

By contrast, Houston spends 6 mil to get a half the retail SF, no residential units on a property that was cleared, assembled and ready to be developed in an area that was bursting at the seems with new development and in an area that already had two Walmarts, four Krogers, a Whole Foods and a Target within the trade area.  The property was the subject of a bidding war between Walmart and HEB and was going to be developed with or without tax dollars being given to the developers. 

 

DC gets a great development in an area that would normally see no new development and gets to replace a derelict property that was a drain on the area.  Houston makes a gift of 6 million and gets about half the retail SF, no multifamily on a piece of property that everyone was fighting over to develop.  If you cannot see the difference, you are not looking. 

Ok...so help me out here then...DC spends 12 times as much as Houston to get half the square footage of developed space? Is that correct?

[s3mh]

Ok...so help me out here then...DC spends 12 times as much as Houston to get half the square footage of developed space? Is that correct?

 

If you think that you can just look at 70 mil v. 6 mil in a vacuum, then there is absolutely no hope for you.  The circumstances and goals of each project are radically different.  The bottom line is that it is totally pathetic that a low to lower middle neighborhood in DC can get a landmark mixed use development when a thriving area in Houston only gets strip malls.  Houston shouldn't have to pay a penny to get quality development in the middle of one of the most economically thriving areas in the country, if not the world.  All Houston needs is some planning and we could actually see the kind of high quality development that even lame ass Dallas gets.

[RedScare]

HaHa! Now, you're going to try to shame us that Dallas does better? Go look at all of the threads about Dallas' 30% downtown vacancy, empty Victory highrises, and empty ground floor retail that Dallas city planning forced developers to add to their projects. Then get back to us.    

[s3mh]

I did not say it was within the Heights, merely in the area. It is probably closer to 19th and Yale than the WalMart development is as the crow flies, though.

 

You know the streets have names in Houston.  People have been known to identify tracts of land by reference to street names.  It is a fairly effective way to show that you are not making things up to try to prove a point.

[s3mh]

HaHa! Now, you're going to try to shame us that Dallas does better? Go look at all of the threads about Dallas' 30% downtown vacancy, empty Victory highrises, and empty ground floor retail that Dallas city planning forced developers to add to their projects. Then get back to us.    

 

So, I am talking about mixed use developments and your retort is downtown office space?  Planning=better land use.  Just look at what is going up in Frisco:  http://www.dallasnews.com/business/commercial-real-estate/20130626-cinema-complex-will-kick-off-huge-frisco-mixed-use-project.ece

 

I have dealt with Frisco's planning and zoning.  It is as restrictive and controlling as it gets.  But here we are.  Giant project that is many times the size of anything in the Houston area.

[RedScare]

Oh, it gets even better! Suburbs! He uses Dallas suburban planning to shame us on inner city Houston!

 

Dude, stop! My sides are splitting!         

[JJxvi]

You know the streets have names in Houston.  People have been known to identify tracts of land by reference to street names.  It is a fairly effective way to show that you are not making things up to try to prove a point.

Your problem is that I am not making it up. That means I can pretty much name it at any point, but after you came out so strongly against the notion that such a "magic" piece of land could possibly exist, I decided to keep giving you rope.

[JJxvi]

Also I used "as the crow flies" reference as a nod to the poll at the top of the thread, which I guess might pre-date your appearance here to argue against all things Wal Mart.

[august948]

If you think that you can just look at 70 mil v. 6 mil in a vacuum, then there is absolutely no hope for you. The circumstances and goals of each project are radically different. The bottom line is that it is totally pathetic that a low to lower middle neighborhood in DC can get a landmark mixed use development when a thriving area in Houston only gets strip malls. Houston shouldn't have to pay a penny to get quality development in the middle of one of the most economically thriving areas in the country, if not the world. All Houston needs is some planning and we could actually see the kind of high quality development that even lame ass Dallas gets.

Dollars vs square footage and Walmart are about the only commonality to be found in your apples-to-oranges comparison. What's pathetic is to try to argue that this Walmart is somehow the "lowest possible use of the land". Only a very contrived set of criteria would lead to that conclusion.

[livincinco]

3200 posts and still going strong! This thread truly is the gift that keeps on giving!

[s3mh]

Your problem is that I am not making it up. That means I can pretty much name it at any point, but after you came out so strongly against the notion that such a "magic" piece of land could possibly exist, I decided to keep giving you rope.

You either cannot name it because it does not exist or do not have the guts to name it because you are afraid of the collective laughter that will pummel you at the idea that the property could support a mixed use development. You may not like what I have to say most of the time, but at least I have the guts to come out and say what I believe without hesitation and deal with the fruit thrown from the peanut gallery.

Last chance. Man up and name your magic 50 acres.

[JJxvi]

Back in the early 2000's there were plans to redevelop the Eureka Yards into a large mixed use, and possibly transit oriented site, since its situated on right of way that METRO would like to use for both light rail and a possible commuter rail to the planned Burnet intermodal station. Some of the property on the south side has been sold for redevelopment, and townhome communities have been built that connect into cottage grove, but over 50 acres remain, plus the remaining portion on the south that has not been redeveloped closest to TC Jester and a piece of land adjacent on north line of the property that was platted for a subdivision called Stanley Park that connected out of Timbergrove, which never happened that is probably also about 10 acres or so. I think there is also many acres of vacant land on west side that could potentially connect to a Eureka Yard redevelopment also, but the main unsold portion is about 50 acres.

Edited July 5, 2013 by JJxvi

[JJxvi]

Anyhow, I never heard of any plans for a large scale mixed use development for the Trinity Steel site, even though it was potentially situated on the long term (and now really, really long term) plans for Metrorail expansion (hard to see a Yale orientation now anyway with the new access road and bridges)

Edited July 5, 2013 by JJxvi

[RedScare]

You seem to have left him speechless.

[samagon]

What if they had done mixed use here, except the Walmart would be the retail portion of mixed use?

That would still be bad right?

[TGM]

Update:

More man hours have been wasted to protest this thing than to actually build it.

[Ross]

What if they had done mixed use here, except the Walmart would be the retail portion of mixed use?

That would still be bad right?

 

Yes, because WalMart is inherently evil, and there is nothing that can change that other than total destruction of the company, with its stores demolished and the earth they sit on converted to mixed use development with "approved" retailers, chef driven restaurants that remain open regardless of economics, and cute little boutiques that will be subsidized to help them remain open, despite not carrying anything the general public wants to buy. Plus, senior management, their wives, children, grand children, and anyone they've ever spoken to, is to be hanged, drawn, and quartered, and their body parts strewn for the jackals to consume.

 

(for the humor impaired, this is sarcasm. No hipsters were harmed during its writing)

[RedScare]

Ross, you are wrong. Walmart has its place...in low income minority neighborhoods, apparently.

 

 

 

 

Oh, and isn't hanging AND drawing and quartering a bit of overkill, so to speak?

Edited July 5, 2013 by RedScare

[JJxvi]

Yeah would have been great if the city had spent 60 million more to make it mixed use and make sure it was in more of a transitional neighborhood, er, I mean more transitional than this one was.

[august948]

You either cannot name it because it does not exist or do not have the guts to name it because you are afraid of the collective laughter that will pummel you at the idea that the property could support a mixed use development.

Do you mean like the collective laughter that is pummeling you at the idea that the Walmart space would support a mixed use development?

[Ross]

 

Oh, and isn't hanging AND drawing and quartering a bit of overkill, so to speak?

 

No, because to do it properly, the victim isn't hanged until death, just until almost dead, thus prolonging the entire ordeal.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanged,_drawn_and_quartered

[samagon]

You either cannot name it because it does not exist or do not have the guts to name it because you are afraid of the collective laughter that will pummel you at the idea that the property could support a mixed use development.

Do you mean like the collective laughter that is pummeling you at the idea that the Walmart space would support a mixed use development?

I was thinking it would have been at least 8 stories, Walmart on the first floor, of course. The rest of it would work itself out from there.

[RedScare]

No, because to do it properly, the victim isn't hanged until death, just until almost dead, thus prolonging the entire ordeal.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanged,_drawn_and_quartered

 

Well, I stand corrected, then.