Dollar Tree At 1000 Elgin St.

[VicMan]

IMO, even the low-rise, flat stores are welcome for Midtown, since, as a rail passenger, I can easily walk to the said stores.

Though, CVS should try to have the store somewhat cater to rail passengers by placing a fa

[77017]

So much for pedestrian friendly Main Street! Now everyone can walk down Main or ride the rail and see the back of a new CVS. The entire building is oriented to the car and traffic on Fannin, the front door and parking lot will face Fannin.

What does everyone think of this new development in Midtown? How does everyone feel about rail now? Is this a huge setback for Main Street and Midtown? Why is so much of Main street retail vacant? Where are all of the businesses that are supposed to come to Main with the train? Why are national retailers/CVS ignoring the train and huge 10 to 12 foot sidewalks on Main street and facing their businesses away from Main? Will rail fail? Should Midtown keep spending public money to keep the pretty flowers and plants along Main Street or start investing money on marketing this stretch of vacant real estate?

I believe in rail for Houston but seeing things like this make it very difficult to for me to understand or see the value of Main Street light rail to date.

Dream

[TheNiche]

You mean high quality as in a more expensive project but even a mid or high rise building can be cheaply built, like perhaps Tremont Towers.

Are you familiar with the problems endured by the owners of Tremont? Is that what you want for Midtown???

Projects like Tremont are atypical anyway. If they were repeated too many times, the bad press would be sufficient to keep people away from condo mid/highrises entirely.

[Guest danax]

Are you familiar with the problems endured by the owners of Tremont? Is that what you want for Midtown???

Projects like Tremont are atypical anyway. If they were repeated too many times, the bad press would be sufficient to keep people away from condo mid/highrises entirely.

I see that the way I wrote that could have double meaning and be misinterpreted. What I meant was that, just because land values warrant only larger projects in Midtown at this point, that is not a guaranty of high quality, and Tremont is an example of just that. If the rents or sales don't allow much profit after paying loads of money for the land, there could be some corners cut, meaning flashy looking buildings that are poorly built. Or, maybe just not much gets built until land goes down or rents/sales prices go up. Maybe that's where we're at today.

[TheNiche]

I see that the way I wrote that could have double meaning and be misinterpreted. What I meant was that, just because land values warrant only larger projects in Midtown at this point, that is not a guaranty of high quality, and Tremont is an example of just that. If the rents or sales don't allow much profit after paying loads of money for the land, there could be some corners cut, meaning flashy looking buildings that are poorly built. Or, maybe just not much gets built until land goes down or rents/sales prices go up. Maybe that's where we're at today.

The market value of land is equal to the present value of all expected future cash flows that can be generated by its use by the highest bidder. This is true of all competitive land markets, whether they be urban, suburban, subsidized, or unregulated/unincorporated. Barring extreme and very specific kinds of subsidy, the key factor upon which land prices will rest are expectations of consumer demand.

Equilibreum pricing based upon demand throughout the broader market is important because it forces cost control. Cost control is important because it forces firms within an industry to continually innovate to remain competitive; in the long term, industry-wide cost reductions get passed on to consumers. However, there are always extreme cases where developers go too far with cost-cutting in order to be able to afford to be the high bidder for a parcel. Such was the case with Tremont. But this practice is not unique to urban condo midrises. There are countless builders of single-family homes and townhomes that cut corners excessively. When land prices are in equilibreum, this occasional tendency is inescapable.

[Watch4Snakes]

I tend to agree with those that believe that plots of land will be redeveloped in a decade or so. The neighborhood must fill in with working businesses first. The delapidated buildings and empty lots must be occupied by something. I don't think that Midtown will initially look like everyone hopes. But "box stores" such as this CVS will be replaced. We just won't be able to enjoy the neighborhood we want just yet.

Someone also mentioned that there is no rail stop at Main@Elgin. I would agree that we should be most concerned, in the short future, of ensuring that "pedestrian friendly" retail/development occurs in clustered formations around the rail stops.

[Guest danax]

Someone also mentioned that there is no rail stop at Main@Elgin. I would agree that we should be most concerned, in the short future, of ensuring that "pedestrian friendly" retail/development occurs in clustered formations around the rail stops.

The Ensemble Station isn't too far and my fear is that without any protections, those sidewalk-hugging historic retail strips that are currently along Main and Fannin near there will get bulldozed for more "place holders". That would be a double tragedy and one that couldn't be reversed.

[torvald]

...my fear is that without any protections, those sidewalk-hugging historic retail strips that are currently along Main and Fannin near there will get bulldozed for more "place holders". That would be a double tragedy and one that couldn't be reversed.

hear hear!

[Subdude]

From "The Houstonist"

New Main Street CVS exposes planning problems: When Midtown planners heard that CVS intended to build a new store at Main and Elgin, they asked the drugstore chain to make some changes to the store's design, including orienting the building to face the corner of Main and Elgin and adding a second story above the store with several loft apartments. But CVS would have none of it, which means there'll be a suburban-style store on Main

[WesternGulf]

WOW. I am actually surprised they asked for lofts on top! If building up to the sidewalk and not taking up the whole block for a single use development was too much, the former would have been a hassle. Very sad.

Edited May 25, 2007 by WesternGulf

[Subdude]

Upstairs apartments may have been asking too much. CVS presumably isn't interested in being residential landlords. I think a more realistic request would have been to put parking in the back and the store close to the street. Not that CVS would listen anyway.

[Jax]

Has anybody confirmed that there won't be an entrance from Main street and that it will be "suburban style" ? Last time I drove by it was really hard to tell what it was going to look like.

[CSOM]

Has anybody confirmed that there won't be an entrance from Main street and that it will be "suburban style" ? Last time I drove by it was really hard to tell what it was going to look like.

It appears that way, all of the curb demolition for driveways appears to be on Elgin. I'll try and snap some pics this weekend.

[lockmat]

Upstairs apartments may have been asking too much. CVS presumably isn't interested in being residential landlords. I think a more realistic request would have been to put parking in the back and the store close to the street. Not that CVS would listen anyway.

I agree. Albuquerque has actually done a decent job of doing this - putting parking behind the building, away from the street.

The Chronicles article didn't say anything about parking either.

I'm in favor of a public protest. Or can't we at least get some kind of online petition going and then send it to them? I'm sure we can get plenty of signatures from here and I'm sure we all know people who would be in favor it too. Should I get it started? Anyone?

Edited May 25, 2007 by lockmat

[Subdude]

I'm in favor of a public protest. Or can't we at least get some kind of online petition going and then send it to them? I'm sure we can get plenty of signatures from here and I'm sure we all know people who would be in favor it too. Should I get it started? Anyone?

I'm sure a public protest or petition would be as effective as that trying to save the River Oaks shopping center. Let's face it, the developers couldn't care less.

[lockmat]

I'm sure a public protest or petition would be as effective as that trying to save the River Oaks shopping center. Let's face it, the developers couldn't care less.

Then lets just throw rocks through their windows.

Just Keeding.

[Ethanra]

Drove by today.... The frame is going up and all four sides of the building are surrounded by parking. Basicly a suburb style CVS in the middle of the block surrounded by concrete. A sighed letter or petition needs to be put together and let CVS know who and why their is a protest and boycott of CVS..... At least the Walgreens in MT had two sides facing the street as well as nice landscaping. Walgreens did a good job with the one in the heights as well.

I just don't understand , why they couldn't have CVS run the length of the block facing main and have the back half of the block parking....

[musicman]

I just don't understand , why they couldn't have CVS run the length of the block facing main and have the back half of the block parking....

i don't understand why it matters. the parking lot is still the same size. if you cant walk the extra 50' to the front door then there's a problem..

[Ethanra]

i don't understand why it matters. the parking lot is still the same size. if you cant walk the extra 50' to the front door then there's a problem..

It is not walking the extra 50; it is making it look nice and having the the entrance street side and not having a ugly suburb style structure in the midlle of an area that is trying to be redevelop and create an urban indentity...

[musicman]

It is not walking the extra 50; it is making it look nice and having the the entrance street side and not having a ugly suburb style structure in the midlle of an area that is trying to be redevelop and create an urban indentity...

so if it looks good on ONE side that is enough? i personally don't think that's an "urban" structure.

let's examine a real urban structure across main street. come out the front door and stare at a parking garage with space for stores on the first floor but no businesses have moved in yet. is this the kind of urban indentity you're going for?

Edited May 30, 2007 by musicman

[houstonmacbro]

Fannin has a higher traffic count because most people know better than to drive on Main Street. People in vehicles also tend to be significantly wealthier than people on the LRT because the LRT is basically a glorified bus-replacement system.

The value of LRT should be as a rapid transit option, but that is not how it has been implemented. If it doesn't save time, the people who will most frequently use it are those relatively few for whom it is the most direct path and the majority who are forced to transfer on/off of it because of bus rerouting. And these people are disproportionately poor. The wealthy that must build up the LRT corridor don't want to ride with poor people...and certainly not when they can get most places faster in their cars.

Yes, but couldn't they have a decorative main street entrance as well?

[musicman]

Yes, but couldn't they have a decorative main street entrance as well?

well....more entrances mean more personnel to watch them.

[Mr. Chenevert]

You dont build buildings to serve a mass transit system.

You build a transit system to serve buildings.

If CVS believes that the majority of their business will come from people driving cars, then why in the world would they face the entrance to a light rail line that doesnt even have a stop in the immediate area.

As far as I am concerned, any development to the south of Elgin, even if it is just another CVS is good development. Which way they face the door is irrelevant to me.

[lockmat]

Why should it matter if it's near a transit stop anyway? Do people only walk around those and not other places?

Edited May 30, 2007 by lockmat

[bachanon]

although this cvs will, again, be a disappointment to the midtown ideal (for some), its presence symbolizes retail demand in the area. if cvs does well, other businesses (perhaps those who are more sensitive to the goals of the midtown district) will follow. i'll simply consider it a growing pain, much like an annoying construction zone.

[musicman]

You dont build buildings to serve a mass transit system.

You build a transit system to serve buildings.

If CVS believes that the majority of their business will come from people driving cars, then why in the world would they face the entrance to a light rail line that doesnt even have a stop in the immediate area.

As far as I am concerned, any development to the south of Elgin, even if it is just another CVS is good development. Which way they face the door is irrelevant to me.

METRO's redevelopment along main has all to do with building around the rail stations. that is why they have condemnation power 1500' around each station. because stops are limited that's what ends up happening vs a bus system where stops can be frequent.

i will have to agree that a new development in the area is better than nothing. CVS has the funding to develop a store and stay in the hood while developers are just there to make a buck and move on. with inflated land prices, they aren't willing to do it.

Edited May 30, 2007 by musicman

[Guest danax]

i'll simply consider it a growing pain, much like an annoying construction zone.

It's not just a growing pain, but also an awakening splash of water on the face of those of us who entertain dreams of Houston being "pedestrian friendly" anytime soon. Pedestrians are an extreme minority, and we've discussed the many reasons why here so much; including rainy weather like today that can turn a briefcased businessman into a long jumper at the flooded crossings.

We really can't expect those funding development to put the cart before the horse. When density really arrives in Midtown, then streetscape retail might follow.

[houstonmacbro]

Why should it matter if it's near a transit stop anyway? Do people only walk around those and not other places?

No one walks in Houston ... didn't you know that?

[GovernorAggie]

so if it looks good on ONE side that is enough? i personally don't think that's an "urban" structure.

let's examine a real urban structure across main street. come out the front door and stare at a parking garage with space for stores on the first floor but no businesses have moved in yet. is this the kind of urban indentity you're going for?

You know, I've seen this parking garage referred to quite a bit here. Has anyone ever given thought to why the spaces haven't been filled? There could be a ton of issues, such as: maybe the space isn't configured well, maybe the lease options are not very good, or maybe--just maybe there has been interest and attempts to fill the space, but for whatever reason it isn't. I mean, come back if HCC (or whoever owns it) says, "hey, we never got any calls about this space" and then go off on how its a waste and not a good example of urbanity and a bad omen to pedestrian development in Midtown and so on and so on.

[musicman]

You know, I've seen this parking garage referred to quite a bit here. Has anyone ever given thought to why the spaces haven't been filled? There could be a ton of issues, such as: maybe the space isn't configured well, maybe the lease options are not very good, or maybe--just maybe there has been interest and attempts to fill the space, but for whatever reason it isn't. I mean, come back if HCC (or whoever owns it) says, "hey, we never got any calls about this space" and then go off on how its a waste and not a good example of urbanity and a bad omen to pedestrian development in Midtown and so on and so on.

because of inflated land prices, rents will most likely be high. that is the biggest hindrance IMO. METRO (and their planners) have said this is why new development isn't occuring.