Houston19514

Dillard's has done that at quite a few malls.

St. Louis is water-based as well.

Understood, but what they give us is not news at all. It's just tired old cliches repeated ad nauseum.

Here Here!! And why, oh why, does the Chronicle have to coax negative comments from visitors EVERY time there is a significant event in Houston? That paper does more damage to Houston than the oil bust or Enron collapse. It's like they have forms for writing articles: Dateline: Houston. The [fill in name of event] was held in Houston this past weekend, drawing [fill in number] visitors from around the world. Vistors were heard to complain about the traffic, the humidity, and how spread out everything was. Some visitors commented that they prefer the thicker, more aromatic humidity of New Orleans. Others said they prefer their humidity with mouse ears. Still others said they prefer the traffic of midtown Manhattan. Nobody seemed to enjoy their time in Houston.

First, as you can see by reading my post, my "don't be an idiot" statement was regarding your complaints about her statements in Dallas, statements which were correct and appropriate in every way. Second, regarding her support or actions for rail in Houston, what, exactly,would you have had her do at this point that she has not done? (After all, it's not her fault that Houston's local politicians and populace has taken this long to get on the rail program... do you want her to come to Houston and starting laying rails down Richmond herself, or what?)

My point is.... why should efforts be made to attract more nightlife (as you suggested), when that is what has been developed and is being developed WITHOUT any special effort to attract it?

Don't be an idiot. She said nothing untoward or inappropriate AT ALL. Her home is in Dallas, for crying out loud. So why should she not be able to refer to it as "our area"? And her other comments were just statements of fact (eg, Dallas has taken the lead in rail development) She has also been strong and consistent supporter of rail for Houston.

What in the name of Sam Houston are you talking about? Most of the "retail' development that has occurred downtown on street level has been all about nightlife, with very little else.

Why would it need to be mentioned in a thread about St. Martin's? There is an entire multi-page thread about the new Catholic Co-Cathedral... and you don't have to look too far; it's immediately below this thread ;-)

Interesting, except of course you said nothing like that at all. Far from acknowledging that the downtown park will have any positive impact, you in fact suggested that we should "not pretend 4 square blocks of grass on the wrong end of downtown is going to make any significant impact." You seem unduly obseessed with the word premiere (and for that matter with NYC's Central Park, while simultaneously telling us you are not comparing anything in Houston to Central Park). Is there a reason downtown Houston cannot have two outstanding parks, serving different purposes and different "communities", one at the front door and one at the back door, so to speak? After all, the Buffalo Bayou Plan is proceeding at the same time as the new downtown park is being developed. (Would it make you happy that the Downtown Park Conservancy actually refers to the park as Houston's "backyard"? By implication that makes your hallowed Buffalo Bayou Park the "frontyard", maybe even the "premiere park" ;-) I guess I'm still trying to understand your point, and I'm thinking I'm not alone.

After all of your rambling in several posts, I can honestly say I have no idea what your point is.

Chill, man. I merely posted a plain fact that was recently posted on the park's website. No criticism, no emotion, and certainly no shooting of messengers... ;-)

All Foley's stores are becoming Macy's stores. So the current Foley's in The Galleria will become a Macy's. The current Macy's store at The Galleria will be closed. That's it.

Have you looked at the plan for the park? It is decidedly not "4 square blocks of grass". In fact, most of the criticism of the plan seen on this board consisted of complaints about how little grass, and, conversely, how many activities were planned for the park. The comparisons to Central Park are tiresome and ridiculous. A more apt comparison is to Bryant Park, which is smaller than our new park and has at least as many activities packed in it. No knowledgeable person would suggest that Bryant Park is unsuccessfull or has no siginificant impact in its area. Furthermore, if one is planning a park in part to have a positive impact on the development of an area, the "wrong end of downtown" is exactly where one should put it, not in the areas that are already developed. And honestly, you look a little silly claiming that the park will have no significant impact, when it has sparked one high-rise apartment building soon to be under construction, and plans (and the purchase of property for) two additional high-rise residential buildings, all before construction of the park has even started. If that's "no significant impact," I say bring it on. We need more of that kind of non-impact.

According to the park's website, groundbreaking and the start of construction of the park is scheduled for October 16.

No further information about your theological studies needed, thank you very much. But I do have a question for you. My (Anglican) church just went through the entire Easter season (sometimes referred to as Eastertide) with six candles on the alter (3 on each end). Are we all going to hell? ;-)

Highway 6, there certainly is mention of where the University Line ends. It is planned to end at a new Transit Center on South Rice. There is nothing in the works for it to turn back north after crossing 610. BTW, I don't currently live in Houston. Otherwise, I would definitely be at the meetings. (I have, however, sent a message to Metro with my thoughts on the Westheimer routing.)

From the Metro news release regarding the Westheimer routing: "Although Westheimer has been eliminated from further study at this time, METRO would be willing to reconsider the alignment if a large segment of the corridor community were behind it."

La Branch will not be affected. Crawford, however, will be replace with the Crawford Promenade. Here's the Site Plan

I hate to see them settle for what I believe is clearly a "second-best" routing. It may be more easily doable in the short run, and pretty clearly cheaper. But in the medium and long run, I'm afraid we and metro and the city, etc. will regret a decision to avoid Westheimer. It seems pretty clear to me that the system would have much higher ridership with that routing, as opposed to turning south and taking the westpark route; for two reasons: (1) Riders would be able to get from downtown to Uptown with only one change of trains, rather than two, and (2) The university line would serve the core of Uptown, plus Highland Village, some relatively dense housing areas along that stretch of Westheimer, plus the new mixed-used developments that have been announced along that stretch of road. They need to bite the bullet and make it happen. This reminds me so much of the discussions about locating the new baseball stadium a few years back. All of the momentum was behind building a new stadium on the Astrodome grounds because it was easier, cheaper, the county already owned the land, yadda yadda yadda. Many of the same reasons we are hearing today for running the rail line along Westpark. Thank God someone (and I'm pretty sure it was Ken Lay) came along with the vision and leadership to say "No, we need to build this stadium downtown. Let's do it right or not do it at all." I keep hoping for someone to pop up in a similar fashion on this rail line issue.

The park naming contest begins August 21.

Do you have a source for that? Every source I can find says the downtown Dalls vacancy rate for Class A buildings is in the 15-20 % range (80-85% occupancy). Here's one.

Understood, but I also thought Editor might not be aware that out-of-staters can subscribe.

New additions to the downtown park website: Groundbreaking ceremony and construction to begin October 16, at which time they will also announce the name of the park. The entire park is scheduled to be open January 2, 2008, with the parking garage and main restaurant scheduled to open in the fall of 2007.

Editor, They will certainly be kind enough to send you a copy if you subscribe ;-) A subscription is pretty minimal... something like $15 per year.