Nate99

Full Member
  • Content count

    2,261
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    79

Nate99 last won the day on July 24 2017

Nate99 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

6,320 Excellent

About Nate99

  • Rank

  1. I just came here to say I really like the word "mollycoddle" but not the concept.
  2. There is a lot of money around the world chasing real estate to have something of value in a jurisdiction where it can not be easily confiscated from you. There are 25,000 empty homes in Vancouver, BC by some counts. People owning that sort of property don't pick cities for the reason that most of us picked Houston (access to good jobs). South Florida seems to be the best analog to Houston climate/geography wise, and it's obviously a different ball game over there.
  3. I think the idea being 200 acres on a natural(ish) waterway. It would be interesting to hear more of the sales pitch, presuming that no one would go through the trouble that these folks have already gone through just to make some fancy renderings. My guess is that it goes something like this: Waterfront development is cool Houston is expected to continue to grow 59N isn't that bad, and its close to the airport. The Woodlands is full, and this would cost 60% of what it would up there if it had the room. My equally bonkers counterproposal would be to create a massive flood control reservoir in the San Jacinto West Fork/Spring Creek/Cypress Creek basin and sell the surrounding waterfront property to people that build stuff like this. Call it Lake Harvey.
  4. The Regalia at the Park: 100 Crawford

    The old elevated and covered loading docks of the warehouse part along Jackson St. used to be a serious homeless camp before they put up fencing.
  5. Twinsanity has it. There is a park owned by the Kingwood neighborhood association and a soccer field complex that I believe is privately owned down there. I always figured that it was too low to be developed. Cotswold Boulevard was the cross street mentioned in the article, that's really just an entrance road into a subdivision, not a proper boulevard by the usual understanding. They could possibly expand Hamblen road and extend it into the development.
  6. This is certainly ambitious, and as another Kingwood resident, I mostly concur with the skepticism. That area was completely underwater during Harvey, so there's that. If you look on Google Maps, the entire (I think) Barrington subdivision at Costwold/Woodland Hills had water in the homes. When they pre-drained the lake before the last rain event a month or two back, the silting of the area that would be the marina was pretty astonishing. So, if they have the momentum to fix the huge access issues (I'm thinking triple the size of Woodland Hills Drive and build another bridge over the San Jac, which would fire up the pearl clutchers), and dredge the river/lake around the area, more power to them, but building something of this scope and scale seems difficult in the best of circumstances. I guess the appeal of building a development along a waterway might outweigh these issues, and I hope it does, but I'll file this one in the same drawer with the big development job that was supposed to go down just South of Lone Star College and North of the river west of 59. Stepping in to normal development concerns, there is pent up demand in Kingwood. The new/flooded/reopened Torchy's tacos could double their prices and they would still have a line out the door, so I think there would be some initial tailwinds that could help spur some stuff along, but we're talking a whole new universe of demand out on an island separated from the big money non-industrial real estate by Humble/Aldine, Porter, and NE Houston. If it was built, I would not want to own property in the Deerbrook Mall area.
  7. The building they took out (the rectory, I think) looked to be in only slightly better condition than the Foley House. All of these seemed to be victims of many grand plans deferred.
  8. This approach seems to have the downside of preservation without any of the upside. They will be able to tell people that the frame of their office was built 100 years ago, despite everything that you see, touch, and smell being brand new. Preservation is not really high on my own list of things to pay extra for, but I can completely understand why people like it and I appreciate that many people and organizations spend the extra money to do it. This approach doesn't seem to do anyone any good.
  9. I agree, the framing that is left does indeed look fine. I suppose I meant to say, if they weren't of a mind to salvage as much as they could on this project for the sake of preservation, they wouldn't have left the framing either. Modern quality aside, I'm fairly sure they could have replicated the structure that is left for much less cost than they have in the project thus far. They did add some new temporary framing on the interior to shore things up. Will be interesting to see how they work around the old structure.
  10. Perhaps. Doesn’t seem like enough is left to have bothered at this point. Maybe the columns are being restored off site, but they looked very rotten, along with the rest of the exterior wood.
  11. Work is underway. Doesn't look like much of the old house was salvageable.
  12. St.Arnolds Expansion

    Quick release interior paneling and cabinets pay for themselves in one event! In all seriousness, I've been in neighborhood houses with the lower level dedicated to garages, mud rooms, and what in other regions would be "basement" stuff. After Harvey, I think the custom build market could make some money with these types of designs.
  13. I'll give a dollar to whichever one of you paints "I think you meant to take 290 West, about 3 hours - thanks, HOU" below that.
  14. It does sound interesting, I do still wonder who gets to choose who benefits from the subsidized real estate that they couldn't otherwise afford. Or perhaps I'm misreading it and its more of a co-op situation where they all share the costs, but no one else has made such an arrangement (or at least not enough)commercially viable privately. In any case, there still needs to be a gatekeeper.