Comments

  • Looks to me that this parking lot is only near the restaurant. There is nothing else around. The zoo is the closest and its a far stretch.

    November 11, 2010 at 9:54 a.m.
  • MotherNature said: "Why would a business person in their right mind try to do anything in this town and risk the negativity that is written in these on-line comments?"

    Because the public hand-outs are worth it.

    November 11, 2010 at 1:33 a.m.
  • Public Pumphouse Parking:
    www.victoriaadvocate.com/weblogs/para...

    November 11, 2010 at 12:44 a.m.
  • ohh, and now i know why a crew was working on this piece of land last month

    kind of funny how they knew the outcome of the vote ahead of time

    November 10, 2010 at 7:48 p.m.
  • for that price, im guessing it's a concrete parking lot

    November 10, 2010 at 7:44 p.m.
  • Beside all the comments... is the parking lot going to be gravel or asphalt? That is missing in the article.

    November 10, 2010 at 6:13 p.m.
  • Goags I do not know where you get your facts about the water park, the majority of the people were for it the ones that were talking negative about it were people who condemn any type of minority business like your self. The city and the investor could not come to terms on a tax break which seems that the city gives to every other major business that comes into the city. I smell something fishy on the banks of the river.

    November 10, 2010 at 5:23 p.m.
  • ElvidiaGonzolez: The land was sold publicly, was written up in the advocate that there was going to be a bidding process. The highest bid won. If you thought it was a good deal then how much was your bid?

    November 10, 2010 at 4:04 p.m.
  • 117 parking spots <<<< how did they come up with this number ?

    what is going to be the capacity of the new 'pumphouse' ?

    November 10, 2010 at 2:40 p.m.
  • Hay yai yai...this makes me loco. I said this was a compadre deal from the very start when public property was purchased for a song, and now the Council just proved my point with the 'porking' lot.

    November 10, 2010 at 2:36 p.m.
  • Other than the new restaurant, what is this parking near? That doesn't require a hike.

    November 10, 2010 at 1:34 p.m.
  • I have an idea and I want opinions. What if we cleaned up the river and made accessible to the public...for picnics,fishing, ect, the way it is now you can't hardly see the river. I have an idea, we ask the Sheriff to use some of his prisoners to do river bank clean up duty, in turn they would get good time on their sentences, other counties use trustee's to do community improvement, why can't we?
    Am I on the right track?

    November 10, 2010 at 1:24 p.m.
  • pat b, the children's playground on the other side of the park is heavily used, lots of traffic 7 days a week. the running / walking path is also busy, 7 days a week. the playground closer to the duckpond is usually busy on weekends and weekday afternoons, with the picnic tables in this area normally occupied. the duck pond is busy on weekends and weekday afternoons.

    November 10, 2010 at 12:39 p.m.
  • we all know you would never buy a pair of $300 boots kyle... ;)

    November 10, 2010 at 12:26 p.m.
  • Anyway, the parking could be used for the folks who are on adult probation that are working their hours off at the zoo. Talk about awesome. Take your kids to see all kinds of animals. Just saying...

    November 10, 2010 at 10:04 a.m.
  • Southtexas - We have hunting and fishing lol. You know redneck stuff...

    November 10, 2010 at 10:02 a.m.
  • I blog in my birthday suit and a $300 pair of boots.

    November 10, 2010 at 9:55 a.m.
  • I'm wondering if the majority of the negative bloggers spend their days sitting at their computers, in their jammies, thinking up things to complain about.

    Really people... think about it. We need to be thankful that we have innovative thinkers and risk takers like the Patillos who are willing to invest in this community. Anyone who has visited the future location of The Pump House can see that they have their work cut out for them in rennovations and remodeling costs. This is not a cheap project and I commend Dennis and Louise for their committment to our community and the desire to start a new business here.

    Before you all start complaining about the investment (notice the word INVESTMENT) that the city is making for much needed parking, let's instead think about the amount of money that a successful business will not only add to the tax rolls, but the new money it will bring into our community from out of town visitors.

    Additionally, anyone who has visited the park recently will agree that there are parking issues on that side. We have nearby facilities for disc golf (not traditionall golf as was reported), a pump track, canoe trails and more on that side and limited parking at best. This is a much needed improvement and I commend our city officials for taking this opportunity to make it.

    Bottom line: It's a win-win situation for everyone! Let's think positive people and stop wasting time looking for the conspiracy in everything.

    November 10, 2010 at 9:49 a.m.
  • Our city park is never going to be a tourist attraction people!! The river in this area is muddy and ugly....hardly a New Braunfels or a Gruene. This whole "Bring our Boot" thing is a total waste of money and is ridiculous to "boot".....pun intended. I can rent a hotel at Mandalay Bay in Vegas for what a room here costs and flights to Vegas are cheap. Why in the world would I want to come to Victoria for anything touristy.....there is nothing touristy here. We have some great doctors and some good shopping.....but no one is going to spend their vacation here. There is no money right now....but all we hear is spend more and tax more. I am still trying to figure out why my housing appraisal went up when the value of my home went down on the real estate market.

    November 10, 2010 at 9:13 a.m.
  • On another note...why in the heck is it okay for PatB to post a comment with "richwhitepeople" in it, and not be removed?!? I am pretty sure I could post the opposite of that and be removed.

    November 10, 2010 at 9:09 a.m.
  • Instead of griping on here...get out there and do something about it. If you are not happy with the things that are "decided" by the city/officials/whoever...then get involved. Heck, wasn't it less than 40% of Victoria that showed up to vote in this last election. When there is only a small percentage of Victorians making decisions for the whole city, of course there are going to be people that don't agree with those decisions...but until you go out and get involved these decisions will be made without you, and you will just be left to sit and gripe about it AFTER the fact on VA website. Plus, any improvement to the city is usually better than no improvement (except for maybe those weird Magnolia looking bushes that they just put at the corner of the square downtown, someone needs to "bring their boots" and kick whoever's butt it was that made that call).

    November 10, 2010 at 9:07 a.m.
  • I am excited, this type of venue is exactly what this town needs.

    November 10, 2010 at 8:58 a.m.
  • The city council voted unanimously for this, and its hard to get them all to agree on anything.

    November 10, 2010 at 8:46 a.m.
  • Instead of being excited for new businesses that are coming, it seems some people have sour grapes that the city didn't support a water park that most of the public thought was a terrible business idea.

    November 10, 2010 at 8:34 a.m.
  • Glad to read that I'm not the only person who thinks this is a "sweetheart deal" for the owners of the Pumphouse. I have to agree that Riverside Park is in sad shape from years of neglect probably from lack of funds. I remember when the place was solid cars on Sunday afternoons. Then the "richwhitepeople" the lived on and near Stayton St. started complaining about the traffic and that's when the traffic flow was changed to reduce the flow of traffic. I don't think a lot of people go to the park other than golfers and to the zoo.
    With this lot on the Stayton St. entrance are we starting the whole thing over again?
    The owners should have bought enough property for a parking lot. The wsy this is,if there is some event that might fill the new lot,there still won't be places for the customers. Then what? Do they get to have "reserved for Pumphouse customers" signs on a certain number of the slots?
    Patrick Barnes

    November 10, 2010 at 6:37 a.m.
  • so some waitstaff jobs should offset a 200k tax payer paid gift from the city ?

    November 10, 2010 at 2:14 a.m.
  • This is for goags/mothernature/surffree: The city shot down a major tourist attraction when they refused to work with the local investor to build a water park that eventually would of have grown to a bigger amusement park. There would have been more than enough parking for all. That is if the city would of have worked with the investors. If you think this is negative you are reading it all wrong, the city is making like it was said before "Good ole Boy" decisions. What the owners of the pump house is offering is a drop in the bucket of the actual expenditures after all is added up. The use of city labor will run into the the thousands, and after the lights who is going to pay the electric bill. I for one would rather have a place to take my family to have fun rather than go drop major money to go eat. Now the water park would of have generated major income for area business community. Who is going to travel miles to come eat we already have quaint eating places in Victoria I do not see people flocking from out of town to come eat in them. Before you go calling people trolls do your homework. One other thing the water park in New Bruanfels makes it a tourist attraction not the dance hall.

    November 10, 2010 at 1:47 a.m.
  • I guess no one drove through the park 1-2 weeks ago to see all of the roads jammed with parked cars while people were canoeing. The space is needed.

    The owners of the pumphouse are suggesting changes that could revolutionize a city. Instead of people in Houston making fun of the people that live in Victoria, and comment on their websites, they could be talking about what a great place it is to have a beer and eat on the river. Did you ever notice that Victoria is about the only place on the Guadalupe that no one talks about the Guadalupe?

    November 10, 2010 at 12:49 a.m.
  • Why would a business person in their right mind try to do anything in this town and risk the negativity that is written in these on-line comments? Seems like the best thing for Victoria would be a little encouragement to people willing to invest in our community.

    November 9, 2010 at 11:54 p.m.
  • This restaurant is going to bring jobs to this city and start making something that should become a tourist attraction. The business has never asked for any tax abatements like other companies that the owners are not even from Victoria. The city putting in, already needed, parking is minor when compared to what other businesses receive.

    November 9, 2010 at 11:28 p.m.
  • Gruene Hall makes New Braunfels. Its about time the city started to support home town people with great ideas. The trolls on this site need to have vision.

    November 9, 2010 at 11:20 p.m.
  • The Golf Course needs more parking? Ok. Give us some more bull butter to spread on our bread.

    Best of luck to the Pumphouse, but a better solution would have been to sell a small portion to the PRIVATE investors to build their parking.

    Is Halespaska now the official spokesman for the City of Victoria? Or just a "friend" of those affected?

    November 9, 2010 at 9:46 p.m.
  • not sure if this really a park improvement project though

    November 9, 2010 at 9:29 p.m.
  • little far for golf course parking

    but, im in favor of projects improving that lovely park

    November 9, 2010 at 9:28 p.m.
  • It was even said at the meeting that the zoo had been asking for additional parking for years. But the zoo could never get it. $32,000 seems cheap for a parking lot. Seems if they are the primary users (the restaurant customers), they should pay more toward it.

    November 9, 2010 at 8:55 p.m.
  • I think this is a prime example of cronyism at its finest. Isn't one of these people (Patillo or Hull Patillo) on the planning commission? How many times has the city partnered with a private business in the past to do anything?

    Wasn't there a private business owner earlier this year that was impacted by the median on Laurent? The city didn't step up to partner with him to do anything even with his offer to pay to have the median removed.

    How deep in the capital projects list was a parking lot for the park or was it even on the list before these people realized they didn't have enough space to build parking on the property they purchased from the city. How many other much more pressing capital projects (like a training facilty for the fire fighters) are going to be jumped over to approve spending tax payer money to build parking for the benefit of a private business.

    Can anyone say Good Ole Boy!

    November 9, 2010 at 7:32 p.m.
  • Another thing this park would have bought several hundred more parking spaces if the city would of have worked with the developers. It would have been at the entrance of Riverside park where a lot of events are held. I would like to know why the city is willing to work with some and not with others.

    November 9, 2010 at 7:23 p.m.
  • I think it is interesting that the City didn't see a need until the Patillos did.

    How old is Riverside Park?

    November 9, 2010 at 7:22 p.m.
  • Well seems the city can work with a business located in the flood zone but did not want to work with a business that wanted to bring a much needed recreational park to the city. There are enough eating establishments in the city but to little recreational things to do. Hmmm could it be a color barrier involved? Come on city officials start looking at the recreational needs of the people instead of being bias towards minority businesses endeavors. That is all we need make Victorians fater than they already are.

    November 9, 2010 at 7:19 p.m.