For all of the Astros' current problems - they've lost eight out of their last eleven games, and once-dominant, now-struggling closer Brad Lidge has been demoted - the local media seems more interested in San Francisco Giants slugger Barry Bonds, who is in town for a three-game series against the Astros.
I know it's a great storyline for the media: here is one of baseball's most dominant players, one home run away from tying Babe Ruth with 714 all-time career home runs, who is currently battling considerable controversy regarding his alleged steroid use.
But I've become tired of hearing about him. For one thing, I just don't care about him very much, the same way I really don't care too much about anybody who doesn't play for the Astros. Secondly, even when he does break Babe's home run record Bonds will still be several gopher balls away from the all-time career home run leader, Hank Aaron, who has 755 homers. Is second place really worthy of all the attention it's getting? Finally, I just don't care about his alleged steroid use. Major League Baseball didn't test for performance-enhancing drugs at all before 2002, meaning that the league didn't really care about it until recently, either. So why should I be upset that he might have used steroids in the past? He wasn't the only one.
In short, Barry Bonds bores me. I'll be glad when the series with the Giants is over and Bonds leaves town and takes his media circus with him.
Tuesday, May 16, 2006
Denton's new mayor
Continuing my coverage of the goings-on in Denton, Texas: congratulations are in order for Perry McNeill, a professor of engineering at the University of North Texas who has emerged victorious in a three-way race to replace term-limited Euline Brock as mayor of the rapidly-growing city.
McNeill was appointed to the city's Planning and Zoning Commission shortly after I began working there in 1999. In 2001, he ran for city council and, riding a wave of voter discontent regarding a perception that the existing council was elitist and "anti-business", defeated his district's incumbent with relative ease (more about that May 2001 election here). He served on city council for five years, becoming mayor pro tem in the process, and, having avoided a runoff with either of his two challengers by winning almost 57% of the vote, now moves over a couple of seats to the mayor's chair.
Two other incumbent councilmembers, Bob Montgomery and Joe Mulroy (who himself is an alumnus of the city's Planning and Zoning Commission), withstood challengers as well. McNeill's unexpired council term was filled by retired businessman Guy McElroy, who ran unopposed. He represents the only new face on Denton's seven-member council.
Thus, it would appear that the oftentimes-volatile Denton electorate doesn't really desire to see a major change in the city's direction right now. There does not appear to be overwhelming dissention caused by the city's proposed property maintenance code, nor does it appear that the recent controversy surrounding proposed redevelopment on Fry Street had much of an effect on voters, either.
Not everybody is happy with the outcome of Saturday's ballot. Local businessman Bob Clifton, a longtime critic of city government who finished third in the mayor's race, said that "the incumbents rode in on a lame-duck mayor’s well-oiled machine, and those voters tell me they’re satisfied with mediocre tax-and-spend government.”
McNeill, of course, disagrees: “[voters] say things are going in the right direction and they were pleased with that. The fact that two incumbents were elected and I was elected as mayor … I think it’s really very exciting.”
All Denton elected officials are limited to three two-year terms of office, so McNeill will have at least two years and as many as six at the city's helm.
McNeill was appointed to the city's Planning and Zoning Commission shortly after I began working there in 1999. In 2001, he ran for city council and, riding a wave of voter discontent regarding a perception that the existing council was elitist and "anti-business", defeated his district's incumbent with relative ease (more about that May 2001 election here). He served on city council for five years, becoming mayor pro tem in the process, and, having avoided a runoff with either of his two challengers by winning almost 57% of the vote, now moves over a couple of seats to the mayor's chair.
Two other incumbent councilmembers, Bob Montgomery and Joe Mulroy (who himself is an alumnus of the city's Planning and Zoning Commission), withstood challengers as well. McNeill's unexpired council term was filled by retired businessman Guy McElroy, who ran unopposed. He represents the only new face on Denton's seven-member council.
Thus, it would appear that the oftentimes-volatile Denton electorate doesn't really desire to see a major change in the city's direction right now. There does not appear to be overwhelming dissention caused by the city's proposed property maintenance code, nor does it appear that the recent controversy surrounding proposed redevelopment on Fry Street had much of an effect on voters, either.
Not everybody is happy with the outcome of Saturday's ballot. Local businessman Bob Clifton, a longtime critic of city government who finished third in the mayor's race, said that "the incumbents rode in on a lame-duck mayor’s well-oiled machine, and those voters tell me they’re satisfied with mediocre tax-and-spend government.”
McNeill, of course, disagrees: “[voters] say things are going in the right direction and they were pleased with that. The fact that two incumbents were elected and I was elected as mayor … I think it’s really very exciting.”
All Denton elected officials are limited to three two-year terms of office, so McNeill will have at least two years and as many as six at the city's helm.
Friday, May 12, 2006
Fry Street redevelopment in Denton
As some of you might remember, I worked for and lived in the City of Denton between 1999 and 2002. More recently, as a consultant for the Denton County Transit Authority, I have been assisting with modifications to the rapidly-growing city's bus network. I've also been involved in studies related to a commuter rail line that will one day link Denton to Dallas.
(Denton, Texas is like my own, personal Hotel California: I can check out any time I want, but I just can't ever leave...)
Anyway. For those of you unfamilar with Fry Street, it is a collection of restaurants, bars and stores located along Oak Street, Hickory Street, Avenue A and, of course, Fry Street on the north side of the University of North Texas campus. These businesses are generally oriented towards college students and are similar to the types of businesses you might find adjacent to other college campuses around the nation.
As the Denton Record-Chronicle reports, however, a developer based here in Houston has recently purchased several buildings that are part of the Fry Street district and has plans to tear them down to create a new development. The project, which would likely include national chains like CVS, Borders and Starbucks, would replace the existing businesses, which include well-known Fry Street establishments such as The Tomato pizzeria and Uncommon Grounds coffee shop. It's unlikely that any of these existing businesses will reopen in the new structure, because, as the article reports, rents are likely to be much higher than they are now.
Reaction to news of this new development is mixed. Some people think that redevelopment of the tattered area is a good idea that will make Denton more attractive, bring in more upscale businesses and expand the local tax base. Others see it as regrettable corporate homogenization that will destroy the area's unique culture and character by replacing a bunch of small, independent businesses with a bunch of bland chains. (There's been a lot of discussion about the topic on gomeangreen.com, the UNT athletics discussion board; see threads here, here and here).
Opponents of the proposed development have started a myspace.com site which suggests that people take action against the project by voting for certain candidates in this weekend's local elections (which I will be covering) and attending future planning and zoning commission and city council meetings. As a former planner for Denton, however, I'm afraid that there's really nothing that P&Z, council or city staff could do to stop this development. The property is already zoned DC-G, which allows retail, restaurants, clubs and apartments. No rezoning will be necessary and that means council will have no say in the project. The developer will probably need to file a replat in order to combine the various existing lots into one new lot before construction begins, but if the plat meets the requirements of the Denton Development Code, P&Z is required to approve it per state law. Likewise with building inspections - if the development meets all the regulations, they can't legally keep it from being built.
Although I really didn't spend a lot of time on Fry Street when I lived in Denton, I do think it's a bit sad that a lot of local businesses are going to be lost in favor of a bunch of big chains. I also agree that the character of the neighborhood will likely be altered by this project (to what extent remains to be seen). But Denton is growing, as is UNT's enrollment. Land around campus is becoming increasingly valuable. To be sure, most of the property on which this project sits is parking, and the buildings themselves are generally old, small and not in great repair. Redevelopment of the area was simply inevitable.
(Denton, Texas is like my own, personal Hotel California: I can check out any time I want, but I just can't ever leave...)
Anyway. For those of you unfamilar with Fry Street, it is a collection of restaurants, bars and stores located along Oak Street, Hickory Street, Avenue A and, of course, Fry Street on the north side of the University of North Texas campus. These businesses are generally oriented towards college students and are similar to the types of businesses you might find adjacent to other college campuses around the nation.
As the Denton Record-Chronicle reports, however, a developer based here in Houston has recently purchased several buildings that are part of the Fry Street district and has plans to tear them down to create a new development. The project, which would likely include national chains like CVS, Borders and Starbucks, would replace the existing businesses, which include well-known Fry Street establishments such as The Tomato pizzeria and Uncommon Grounds coffee shop. It's unlikely that any of these existing businesses will reopen in the new structure, because, as the article reports, rents are likely to be much higher than they are now.
Reaction to news of this new development is mixed. Some people think that redevelopment of the tattered area is a good idea that will make Denton more attractive, bring in more upscale businesses and expand the local tax base. Others see it as regrettable corporate homogenization that will destroy the area's unique culture and character by replacing a bunch of small, independent businesses with a bunch of bland chains. (There's been a lot of discussion about the topic on gomeangreen.com, the UNT athletics discussion board; see threads here, here and here).
Opponents of the proposed development have started a myspace.com site which suggests that people take action against the project by voting for certain candidates in this weekend's local elections (which I will be covering) and attending future planning and zoning commission and city council meetings. As a former planner for Denton, however, I'm afraid that there's really nothing that P&Z, council or city staff could do to stop this development. The property is already zoned DC-G, which allows retail, restaurants, clubs and apartments. No rezoning will be necessary and that means council will have no say in the project. The developer will probably need to file a replat in order to combine the various existing lots into one new lot before construction begins, but if the plat meets the requirements of the Denton Development Code, P&Z is required to approve it per state law. Likewise with building inspections - if the development meets all the regulations, they can't legally keep it from being built.
Although I really didn't spend a lot of time on Fry Street when I lived in Denton, I do think it's a bit sad that a lot of local businesses are going to be lost in favor of a bunch of big chains. I also agree that the character of the neighborhood will likely be altered by this project (to what extent remains to be seen). But Denton is growing, as is UNT's enrollment. Land around campus is becoming increasingly valuable. To be sure, most of the property on which this project sits is parking, and the buildings themselves are generally old, small and not in great repair. Redevelopment of the area was simply inevitable.
Thursday, May 11, 2006
The march of the seasons
Wednesday's cold front brought pleasant late-spring weather to Houston today, with clear skies, low humidity and moderate temperatures (into the 50s overnight). We should see the same weather Friday and perhaps Saturday.
I'm enjoying it, because I know that this is probably it as far as pleasant weather is concerned, at least until October (and I'm not the only person who believes this, either). We might get lucky and get another cold front or two before the month is over, but, as everybody in Houston knows, the oppressive, muggy, hazy heat that is summertime in Houston usually begins to set in during the latter days of May. The fact that summer doesn't "officially" begin until the solstice in late June is irrelevant.
And this summer is going to suck. Not merely in the way every Houston summer sucks, either. It's going to *really* suck. I can tell just by how hot it's gotten already; temperatures have been above normal for most of May. We had hardly any mosquito-killing freezes over the winter, which means that the virus-carrying bloodsuckers are going to be swarming with apocalyptic vigor. The hurricane prognosticators are predicting another rough season in the tropics, too. All signs point to a Houston summer that is even more unbearable than normal, if that were possible.
I noticed another sure sign of the arrival of summer today as I was driving home from work: dozens of cars and trucks, with trunks open and tailgates down, were parked alongside the dormitories at the University of Houston. The school year is offically over - commencement is this weekend - and the students (yes, there are actually a handful of UH students who live on campus) are packing up their worldly belongings and moving out.
Speaking of the end of the semester at the University of Houston, earlier this week my father administered his last final exam. Ever.
This August, after well over 35 years as a professor in the Department of Biochemical and Biophysical Sciences, my old man is retiring.
I'm enjoying it, because I know that this is probably it as far as pleasant weather is concerned, at least until October (and I'm not the only person who believes this, either). We might get lucky and get another cold front or two before the month is over, but, as everybody in Houston knows, the oppressive, muggy, hazy heat that is summertime in Houston usually begins to set in during the latter days of May. The fact that summer doesn't "officially" begin until the solstice in late June is irrelevant.
And this summer is going to suck. Not merely in the way every Houston summer sucks, either. It's going to *really* suck. I can tell just by how hot it's gotten already; temperatures have been above normal for most of May. We had hardly any mosquito-killing freezes over the winter, which means that the virus-carrying bloodsuckers are going to be swarming with apocalyptic vigor. The hurricane prognosticators are predicting another rough season in the tropics, too. All signs point to a Houston summer that is even more unbearable than normal, if that were possible.
I noticed another sure sign of the arrival of summer today as I was driving home from work: dozens of cars and trucks, with trunks open and tailgates down, were parked alongside the dormitories at the University of Houston. The school year is offically over - commencement is this weekend - and the students (yes, there are actually a handful of UH students who live on campus) are packing up their worldly belongings and moving out.
Speaking of the end of the semester at the University of Houston, earlier this week my father administered his last final exam. Ever.
This August, after well over 35 years as a professor in the Department of Biochemical and Biophysical Sciences, my old man is retiring.
Tuesday, May 09, 2006
A new park for downtown Houston
Hey, I think this 12-acre park, which will be built on land currently occupied by surface parking in front of the George R. Brown Convention Center, is a good idea.
But I've gotta be honest: when I hear the phrase "downtown Houston park," the first thing that comes to my mind are a bunch of homeless people sleeping under trees, digging through garbage cans, relieving themselves in public and asking passersby for spare change.
Given the number of homeless people circulating around downtown Houston - especially the east end of downtown - what's going to be done to keep this park from going the same way as other downtown green spaces like Root Memorial Square or Sesquicentennial Park and becoming another big campground for the indigent? Is the understaffed Houston Police Department finally going to begin enforcing the city's civility ordinances? Are soup kitchens and church groups going to be be disallowed from their regular "feed-and-preach-to-the-homeless" activities here (and how could you legally and constitutionally structure such a restriction, anyway)?
It’s hard not to feel sorry for the homeless, especially since an overwhelming number of them suffer from mental problems or drug and alcohol addictions that keep them from living a normal life. But the unfortunate fact is that they make other people uncomfortable. As nice as this park might be, families aren't going to want to visit if the place develops a reputation as another downtown homeless hangout.
But I've gotta be honest: when I hear the phrase "downtown Houston park," the first thing that comes to my mind are a bunch of homeless people sleeping under trees, digging through garbage cans, relieving themselves in public and asking passersby for spare change.
Given the number of homeless people circulating around downtown Houston - especially the east end of downtown - what's going to be done to keep this park from going the same way as other downtown green spaces like Root Memorial Square or Sesquicentennial Park and becoming another big campground for the indigent? Is the understaffed Houston Police Department finally going to begin enforcing the city's civility ordinances? Are soup kitchens and church groups going to be be disallowed from their regular "feed-and-preach-to-the-homeless" activities here (and how could you legally and constitutionally structure such a restriction, anyway)?
It’s hard not to feel sorry for the homeless, especially since an overwhelming number of them suffer from mental problems or drug and alcohol addictions that keep them from living a normal life. But the unfortunate fact is that they make other people uncomfortable. As nice as this park might be, families aren't going to want to visit if the place develops a reputation as another downtown homeless hangout.
Houston's Olympic Dreams
Yesterday United States Olympic Committee members visited Houston as part of a week-long trip to five potential host cities for the 2016 Summer Olympics. The USOC will also be visiting Chicago, Philadelphia, Los Angeles and San Francisco before deciding whether to submit an American bid to the International Olympic Committee. New York, the USOC's failed 2012 entrant, is not on the list this time around.
Houston, along with New York, Washington DC and San Francisco, was a finalist for the 2012 bid, and I'm glad to see that the USOC is giving Houston another chance to make its case for hosting the Games. However, I expect the city to be passed over, just like it was in 2012.
This isn't because the city is functionally incapable of hosting the Olympics; much of the infrastructure is already in place, it was widely reported that Houston had the best technical package of the four USOC finalist cities in 2012, and there's no reason to believe that local citizens, politicians and business leaders couldn't effectively organize themselves for the challenge.
But, on the international stage, it's all about perception. Houston's international perception ranges anywhere from "poor" to "non-existent." Moreover, the city has its summer climate working against it: it's hot, humid and vunerable to hurricanes. Last but not least, it was rumored that anti-American sentiment among some members of the IOC was working against the Big Apple's 2012 bid, which, if true, isn't exactly encouraging for any American bid for 2016.
By 2016, it will have been twenty years since the last Olympics in the Americas and it will probably be time for the Summer Olympics to return to this side of the planet. But IOC president Jacques Rogge has already indicated that he'd like to see South America host a future Olympiad, and Argentina, Brazil and Chile are all rumored to be preparing bids of their own. Even if the Olympics did return to North America, wouldn't it be more likely that they'd go to a city with a more temperate summer climate and more international recognition, like Chicago or Toronto?
Don't get me wrong. I'd love to see Houston host the Olympics. But let's be honest: Houston has about as much chance of hosting the Olympics as a snowball has of surviving Houston's August heat.
Houston, along with New York, Washington DC and San Francisco, was a finalist for the 2012 bid, and I'm glad to see that the USOC is giving Houston another chance to make its case for hosting the Games. However, I expect the city to be passed over, just like it was in 2012.
This isn't because the city is functionally incapable of hosting the Olympics; much of the infrastructure is already in place, it was widely reported that Houston had the best technical package of the four USOC finalist cities in 2012, and there's no reason to believe that local citizens, politicians and business leaders couldn't effectively organize themselves for the challenge.
But, on the international stage, it's all about perception. Houston's international perception ranges anywhere from "poor" to "non-existent." Moreover, the city has its summer climate working against it: it's hot, humid and vunerable to hurricanes. Last but not least, it was rumored that anti-American sentiment among some members of the IOC was working against the Big Apple's 2012 bid, which, if true, isn't exactly encouraging for any American bid for 2016.
By 2016, it will have been twenty years since the last Olympics in the Americas and it will probably be time for the Summer Olympics to return to this side of the planet. But IOC president Jacques Rogge has already indicated that he'd like to see South America host a future Olympiad, and Argentina, Brazil and Chile are all rumored to be preparing bids of their own. Even if the Olympics did return to North America, wouldn't it be more likely that they'd go to a city with a more temperate summer climate and more international recognition, like Chicago or Toronto?
Don't get me wrong. I'd love to see Houston host the Olympics. But let's be honest: Houston has about as much chance of hosting the Olympics as a snowball has of surviving Houston's August heat.
Monday, May 08, 2006
The weekend in sports
Good news: the Houston Cougars swept the UCF Golden Knights at Cougar Field. The nationally-ranked Houston Cougar baseball team is now 37-14 overall and 17-4 in conference going into the big showdown against crosstown rival Rice this weekend.
Bad news: the Houston Astros got swept by the Colorado Rockies in Denver. The Astros have lost six out of their last ten games.
Oh, and a tip to the FC Dallas fan who held up the "HOUSTON SUCKS" sign during Saturday's soccer game at Robertson Stadium: if you're going to toss weak smack, at least try not to do it when your team is down 3-0.
Bad news: the Houston Astros got swept by the Colorado Rockies in Denver. The Astros have lost six out of their last ten games.
Oh, and a tip to the FC Dallas fan who held up the "HOUSTON SUCKS" sign during Saturday's soccer game at Robertson Stadium: if you're going to toss weak smack, at least try not to do it when your team is down 3-0.
Thursday, May 04, 2006
No martyrdom for wanna-be terrorist
Have fun spending the rest of your natural life in a concrete cell, scumbag.
Tuesday, May 02, 2006
Website Update
I've updated my page of aerial photos to include pictures of the Hoover Dam and Humphreys Peak that I took while flying back from Vegas a couple of years ago.
I'll be in Dallas for the rest of this week. Look for new postings when I return this weekend.
I'll be in Dallas for the rest of this week. Look for new postings when I return this weekend.
Monday, May 01, 2006
The Houston Texans and their first round draft pick
Unlike just about everyone else who lives in Houston and has an internet connection (or so it seems, at least), I just can't get myself too riled up about the Houston Texans' decision to use their first round draft pick on North Carolina State defensive end Mario Williams, as opposed to USC running back Reggie Bush or Texas quarterback (and hometown favorite) Vince Young.
For one thing, I'm just not a huge fan of the Texans, or of NFL football in general. I am a college football fan first and foremost; for me, pro football runs a distant second in terms of my interest. Yeah, I'll watch the Texans on TV sometimes - I've even been to a couple of their games at Reliant Stadium - and I'll hope they do well. After all, they are the local franchise. But I just don't have my emotions so heavily invested in them that I have strong feelings about who they draft.
However, I did follow the Texans closely enough to know that quarterback and running back just weren't dire needs for this team. The Texans sucked mainly because their defense was poor and their offensive line was abysmal. In 2005, the Texans had the worst offensive line in the nation, by far, in terms of sacks allowed. They also had the second-worst defense in the league in terms of yards per game allowed and were the worst in terms of yards per play allowed. Given those facts, the Texans' decision to use their number one pick on the top defensive player makes sense, even though Reggie Bush might have been the best overall athlete in the draft. The Texans, in fact, spent their first four picks on a defensive end, a linebacker, and two offensive linemen, which cleary indicates what the Texans staff perceives are areas of need.
Finally, the process of drafting college kids into the pros is no different than the process of signing high school kids into college: it is fundamentally a hit-or-miss affair. You never know exactly what you're getting or how well a player is going to develop and perform. Mario Williams could be a total bust in the NFL; he wouldn't be the first top draft pick to disappoint. But there's no guarantee that Reggie Bush will pan out for the Saints, either. So while some of the "experts," such as the Chronicle's Richard Justice or ESPN's Len Pasquarelli, are denouncing the Texans' choice, and others, like MSNBC's Mike Celizic, are praising the move, the fact is that all the fury surrounding the Mario Williams decision is, at this point, little more than speculation. We won't know for sure about Mario Williams until he actually spends time on the field, and until that happens I'm just not putting a great deal of stock into the discussion.
By the way: I agree with USAToday.com's Joe Saraceno: the NFL draft is the biggest and most overhyped "non-event" of the year. I'm glad it's finally over.
For one thing, I'm just not a huge fan of the Texans, or of NFL football in general. I am a college football fan first and foremost; for me, pro football runs a distant second in terms of my interest. Yeah, I'll watch the Texans on TV sometimes - I've even been to a couple of their games at Reliant Stadium - and I'll hope they do well. After all, they are the local franchise. But I just don't have my emotions so heavily invested in them that I have strong feelings about who they draft.
However, I did follow the Texans closely enough to know that quarterback and running back just weren't dire needs for this team. The Texans sucked mainly because their defense was poor and their offensive line was abysmal. In 2005, the Texans had the worst offensive line in the nation, by far, in terms of sacks allowed. They also had the second-worst defense in the league in terms of yards per game allowed and were the worst in terms of yards per play allowed. Given those facts, the Texans' decision to use their number one pick on the top defensive player makes sense, even though Reggie Bush might have been the best overall athlete in the draft. The Texans, in fact, spent their first four picks on a defensive end, a linebacker, and two offensive linemen, which cleary indicates what the Texans staff perceives are areas of need.
Finally, the process of drafting college kids into the pros is no different than the process of signing high school kids into college: it is fundamentally a hit-or-miss affair. You never know exactly what you're getting or how well a player is going to develop and perform. Mario Williams could be a total bust in the NFL; he wouldn't be the first top draft pick to disappoint. But there's no guarantee that Reggie Bush will pan out for the Saints, either. So while some of the "experts," such as the Chronicle's Richard Justice or ESPN's Len Pasquarelli, are denouncing the Texans' choice, and others, like MSNBC's Mike Celizic, are praising the move, the fact is that all the fury surrounding the Mario Williams decision is, at this point, little more than speculation. We won't know for sure about Mario Williams until he actually spends time on the field, and until that happens I'm just not putting a great deal of stock into the discussion.
By the way: I agree with USAToday.com's Joe Saraceno: the NFL draft is the biggest and most overhyped "non-event" of the year. I'm glad it's finally over.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)