Houston19514

From the web site advertising the available retail space: Additionally, there will be a 4,200 SF “pocket park” for that will open out onto Main street, which will offer restaurant patrons an exceptional urban restaurant experience. On the other hand, the Aris residential website also includes a "private park with direct access to Metro Rail" on their list of amenities. It may end up depending on the response they get from potential restaurant tenants. And I suppose there is no reason it can't be both a "private park" (in developer-speak) and al fresco restaurant dining space.

The 1114 Texas building is 47' 6" wide. And the alley is 10' 10" wide. http://www.houstontx.gov/planning/Commissions/docs_pdfs/hahc/App_Materials_2017/March_MATERIALS/1114_Texas_Alt_Windows_APP_Materials.pdf

I don't think it looks any wider on the Capitol end. (and yes, I'm not at all sure a dumpster would fit in either end.)

Wouldn't it make more sense to go in the alley from Texas?

Not a stupid question at all. I don't think we really know. At least at one point there was some information suggesting it would be primarily outdoor dining space for a ground floor restaurant.

They just need a couple of well-marked and signaled crosswalks with a safety island in the middle of the street, maybe with some shade structures, and well-marked and shaded paths from the street corners to the shop buildings. A bigger waste of money than pedestrian overpasses in Highland Village is hard to imagine.

The walking in this area takes place on the sidewalks that are adjacent to the shops and restaurants, not adjacent to the street. Putting this tower on the street corner would have made the connection to the shops in the Kroger building (and Kroger) less convenient. As designed, this will make the pedestrian connection to those shops significantly better than it is today. I completely understand the desire to do away with setbacks. But at the same time we want to preserve this "historic" shopping center. We need to be cautious of letting the perfect (or dogma) be the enemy of the good.

That sounds reasonable. If so, that would seem to favor IAH as well. This Weather Channel analysis says DEN is the 4th worst airport for weather delays. IAH is 8th. https://weather.com/travel/news/america-worst-weather-delayed-airports#/9

Yeah, I think you're overstating. I don't see this as being an example of getting the density with none of the benefits. Quite the contrary. This is a dense walkable area, filled with a great variety of shops, restaurants, movie theaters, grocery store, book store, bank, etc. etc. This is exactly where we get the benefit of density.

Sorry dude. You seem to have slipped from fallacious arguments right into total irrational incoherence. Your time might be better spent getting away from the keyboard and out of the house so you can get to know the city in which you live. Buh-bye.

ROFL. Actually, I have noticed. I'm not sure what difference it makes. Can we not be a successful downtown until each and every restaurant is open for lunch and dinner 7 days a week? Or is it just Chipotle we need open on Saturday and Sunday in order to be successful? Or is it every retail business on the ground floor of The Rice? In any case, neither I nor anyone else I'm aware of has claimed our work is done or that we have a perfect downtown (as if there is such a thing). We are just now beginning to populate the thousands of new residences; those residents will no doubt have a good effect on the restaurant and bar scene. Keep on eye on that Chipotle! If the whole chain doesn't go out of business first, you might be surprised! ;-) I'm not sure what your point is, and judging by your accelerating descent into fallacious arguments, neither do you.

And, if you remove the apartments, we'll lose those residents. If we removed the office buildings, we'd lose those office workers. So what? That doesn't make any of those people or businesses any less a part of the downtown fabric. And the fact we'd lose visitors if we removed entertainment venues doesn't make those visitors any less a part of the downtown fabric. (BTW, You exaggerate the impact of the Astros schedule on Irma's hours; perhaps it has changed since you lived here. She is open every Thurs-Fri-Sat night until 10 pm. M-W only for lunch, but stays open until 7 if there is an Astros game. Even then, so what?) You clearly have not noticed, but we are changing it. As the new residential developments fill up (and as we add more in future years), ballpark area bars and restaurants will not be as dependent on Astros games, and more bars and restaurants will be able be developed, stay open nights and weekends and benefit from business from the residents, entertainment venues, and office workers, all part of the downtown fabric. (See, e.g., Osso-Kristalla: M-Th 7am – 10pm; Fr 7am – 11pm; Sat 10am – 11pm; Sun 10am – 9pm Potente: M–Th 5-10pm; Fr & Sat 5-11pm ) Nice strawmen. And four of them in only 2 sentences. Good work. Where did anyone suggest that we should speak only to people drinking tequila shots and beer, throwing up then going home to Sugar Land? Where did anyone suggest we want to make downtown like a Times Square venue, push out local residents or add more "bars for Astros games"? Anyone wanting to have a serous discussion about how to make the downtown neighborhood better must speak to everyone who is part of the downtown fabric. That includes residents, potential residents, patrons of entertainment venues (even those who do tequila shots), office workers, visiting business people, convention goers, tourists, church-goers, etc., etc., etc.

I don't know when you lived in downtown Houston, but if it wasn't in the past six months, it's almost irrelevant. You clearly do not know downtown Houston. And your attempts to draw imaginary lines around what is and is not part of the downtown fabric is ridiculous. What sense does it make to claim that tourists, convention goers, visiting business people, Astros fans, Rockets fans, etc etc. are not part of the downtown fabric? Of course they are part of the downtown fabric. That is what makes a vibrant, active downtown so compelling (and worth a little extra effort to create and nurture).

Understood. Of course there are many factors beyond geographical location to consider: weather delays, costs of operations, o&d traffic, and interconnection with international traffic. The last one obviously weighs in IAH's favor. I not sure about the others.

What makes you think that?

Not to mention, there are over 100 open on weekends now.

Could you be more specific? Maybe a link? I can't find anything on the Rebuild Houston website that suggests that either project is fully funded. I do find that the first portion of Lower Westheimer (Montrose to Main) is supposed to start construction in 2020. The construction schedule for the Shepherd to Montrose portion is TBD. Planning is ongoing for both segments, with design of the first segment expected to begin this year. There appear to be appropriations targeted to the West Alabama project (from Spur 527 to Shepherd) for Fiscal Year 2021.

Royal Blues are great! So excited to see we might be getting one downtown... At least someone has it on their radar.

I think only the portion of Alabama between Weslayan and Buffalo Speedway was ever expected to start construction in 2016. May I ask your source for the claim that both the West Alabama and Lower Westheimer projects are fully funded?

^. Not at all.

^ Yeah, IF Hines said it (and that's a big IF), he was almost certainly referring to downtown retail. And he very likely was referring to downtown retail more globally (or nationally), not just Houston.

If it's eye-catching features face west, wouldn't they be equally obscured by 717 Texas ?

You were apparently looking at their office concept leasing brochure. Here is their general leasing brochure.

As is made clear in the first sentence of your linked article, that study is about lanes that end or are closed by accidents or construction. But the Spur 527 lanes don't end and are not merge lanes; they continue on to Spur 527. That study is inapplicable to this situation.

Oh, yes. (I don't really think it's completely fair to say it reduces traffic from six lanes to three; there are in fact 5 lanes continuing on; it's just that two of them are on the Spur.) Nevertheless, I'm very familiar with that constant backup. It's an excellent example of a lot of needed capacity being added by this project. In fairness, it should be recognized that the smooshing exists at this point not because anyone had a master freeway plan that called for this smooshing; it's because the six-lane section to the west has been upgraded and expanded, and we've had to wait for the portions to the east to be expanded to match. These sort of mismatches are pretty unavoidable unless someone finds a magical pot of money to allow us to rebuild an entire freeway all the way through town in one project (and imagine the screaming about the traffic nightmares such a massive project would produce).