Montrose1100 Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 (edited) EDITEDAt the risk of being warned for feeding the trolls, all of these projects were financed before the oil slump, whether there was dirt moved or not is irrelevant.Sure a few projects will get off the ground moving forward, but the rich tend to stay and continue getter more rich regardless of the economy. That and along with foreign investors buying and funding condos left and right.The developments that "got off the ground" after the prices sank were already years in the pipeline.I know about this process as much as you, but I've been paying attention to what those who do know have had to say.If Chevron moves forward with this tower, it would likely be completed when prices are better. They could also take advantage of cheaper construction prices as more and more buildings get completed and no longer need crews.Chevron bought the YMCA years ago. They will plan something here eventually. Edited October 16, 2015 by Montrose1100 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post bachanon Posted October 16, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted October 16, 2015 Taking a break from Will & Grace reruns to clean this up. Thanks...deleting everything off topic and issuing warnings for anyone who continues off topic after my post. 10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockmat Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 Chevron putting a two year hold on their Australian tower too https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/wa/a/29832619/chevron-wants-two-year-delay-on-elizabeth-quay-tower/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astros148 Posted October 24, 2015 Share Posted October 24, 2015 put a axe on this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infinite_jim Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astros148 Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 whats the point of posting that pic? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie21love Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 whats the point of posting that pic?To compare with the HSPVA site. If you don't have a ready to go plan yet, at least make it clean and neat. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H-TownChris2 Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 To compare with the HSPVA site. If you don't have a ready to go plan yet, at least make it clean and neat.lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astros148 Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 With chevron leasing space in downtown its safe to say this is dead Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mollusk Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 To compare with the HSPVA site. If you don't have a ready to go plan yet, at least make it clean and neat. Which is what we are likely to see for a few more years yet. Nice lawn. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
houstontexasjack Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 Do they let folks play frisbee on the lawn? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mollusk Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 They might let your play frisbee with the proper Chevron ID and area clearance. Seriously, though, this is at least better to look at than a surface parking lot. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texasota Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 You know, if this is going to sit for a while, I wonder if the downtown district couldnt convince chevron to use it as a short term park. As soon as the new residential buildings start coming on line, it would be cheap and easy to throw up some temporary volleyball nets, fencing for a dog park etc. I suppose its usefulness would depend somewhat on what (if anything) actually gets purchased for use as a permanent south downtown park 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cspwal Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 ^^^^^ yes this please ^^^^^^^^^ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H-TownChris2 Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 (edited) With chevron leasing space in downtown its safe to say this is deadWe still have 6 more months to find out. Edited February 29, 2016 by H-TownChris2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mollusk Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 With chevron leasing space in downtown its safe to say this is dead We still have 6 more months to find out. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkultra25 Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swtsig Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 With chevron leasing space in downtown its safe to say this is dead chevron has been leasing space downtown for years and years... totally irrelevant. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparrow Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 You know, if this is going to sit for a while, I wonder if the downtown district couldnt convince chevron to use it as a short term park. As soon as the new residential buildings start coming on line, it would be cheap and easy to throw up some temporary volleyball nets, fencing for a dog park etc. I suppose its usefulness would depend somewhat on what (if anything) actually gets purchased for use as a permanent south downtown park I wonder if Chevron can convince the City to "lease" the grass lawn for a symbolic $1/year to allow the city to use the land as a temporary park. One would think Chevron would reap the benefits of either reduced property tax exposure or perhaps an in-kind donation allowing use of the land would provide a tax break. Perhaps someone more versed in corporate tax law would be able to lay out any tax advantages of a temporary Chevron Green Park. The benefit to the city--more succinctly the people of the city--is rather straightforward. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tangledwoods Posted March 1, 2016 Author Share Posted March 1, 2016 I wonder if Chevron can convince the City to "lease" the grass lawn for a symbolic $1/year to allow the city to use the land as a temporary park. One would think Chevron would reap the benefits of either reduced property tax exposure or perhaps an in-kind donation allowing use of the land would provide a tax break. Perhaps someone more versed in corporate tax law would be able to lay out any tax advantages of a temporary Chevron Green Park. The benefit to the city--more succinctly the people of the city--is rather straightforward. The problem with turning this into a park is PR. While it would be a nice gesture, 4 years from now the headlines would read "CHEVRON DESTROYS CITY PARK" and all of the environmental folks would jump on and turn it into a negative for Chevron. These companies are allergic to any perceived or real environmental incidents and I would be really surprised to see them do anything that encourages the use of this land other than "FUTURE OFFICE BUILDING" 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texasota Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 I think they can ameliorate that by making it very clear that its temporary. Literally put up a billboard in the middle of the block showing the future tower. I feel like similar temporary use has been done before, though I can't think of where and don't have time to research it right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmitch94 Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 The problem with turning this into a park is PR. While it would be a nice gesture, 4 years from now the headlines would read "CHEVRON DESTROYS CITY PARK" and all of the environmental folks would jump on and turn it into a negative for Chevron. These companies are allergic to any perceived or real environmental incidents and I would be really surprised to see them do anything that encourages the use of this land other than "FUTURE OFFICE BUILDING" I agree, good PR now terrible PR later. Yall have to remember you can't reason with the general public, it is not smart enough. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgriff Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 (edited) The problem with turning this into a park is PR. While it would be a nice gesture, 4 years from now the headlines would read "CHEVRON DESTROYS CITY PARK" and all of the environmental folks would jump on and turn it into a negative for Chevron. These companies are allergic to any perceived or real environmental incidents and I would be really surprised to see them do anything that encourages the use of this land other than "FUTURE OFFICE BUILDING"I was thinking the same thing. There are too many stupid people out there that would protest if they wanted to build on it. Wasn't there a lot that someone allowed people to garden on for a while that had the same issue? Once he decided to sell people gave him grief for kicking out the gardeners. Edited March 1, 2016 by jgriff 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparrow Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Okay then, if not a park or a garden, how about getting handful of cows to munch on that green grass and seeing a lower tax bill on their "agricultural land"? Are there regulations in Downtown against livestock? It could be a tourist attraction for the out-of-towners who miss the Rodeo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texasota Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 anybody want to read a paper?http://www.rudi.net/node/22225 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samagon Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 I was thinking the same thing. There are too many stupid people out there that would protest if they wanted to build on it. Wasn't there a lot that someone allowed people to garden on for a while that had the same issue? Once he decided to sell people gave him grief for kicking out the gardeners. yeah, and that land is still sitting vacant. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
houstontexasjack Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Okay then, if not a park or a garden, how about getting handful of cows to munch on that green grass and seeing a lower tax bill on their "agricultural land"? Are there regulations in Downtown against livestock? It could be a tourist attraction for the out-of-towners who miss the Rodeo. The rollback bill would get 'em if they ever wanted to sell the land or change its use. An effort at an ag exemption would only make sense if they intended to keep this vacant for a very long time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgriff Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 yeah, and that land is still sitting vacant.The point is still valid. No good deed goes unpunished. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triton Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 (edited) People will hate me for bumping this but it's just fascinating where this city has been and where it's going now... https://joshburdick.smugmug.com/Architecture/Historic-Houston/i-SvkpfvN/A Edited March 25, 2016 by Triton 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdude Posted March 25, 2016 Share Posted March 25, 2016 That is an awesome picture. Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.