Jump to content

thedistrict84

Full Member
  • Content Count

    253
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by thedistrict84


  1. 16 hours ago, JBTX said:

     

    Drive by this strip today. Sign for Allegiance Bank is up, but no signs for Corky's. Bad news for them...


    Good news for me though. I’m just a few blocks away but couldn’t see myself going to Corky’s and wasn’t super excited about it. Hopefully something with a more diverse menu goes in here.

     

    But knowing my luck, it will probably be a Chipotle. 

    • Like 1

  2. I understand your position @chrispy, but I think you generalize a bit too much. I’m one of those East End townhome-dwelling yuppies you don’t seem to like, but it was my only practical choice within my budget. I love the area and would love to have bought an old bungalow, but I needed a garage for my project car, tools, bikes, etc. and—as someone else mentioned—most of the old bungalows never had garages and if they did, they were converted to apartments long ago. I routinely frequent the older businesses such as Villa Arcos, Champ Burger, Harrisburg Country Club, D&W, etc. because I prefer those types of establishments to anything pretentious and inauthentic. At the same time, I appreciate the new(ish) businesses that pop up in the area and seem to respect the history, like Sigma.
     

    Being a native Houstonian and having family here since before my grandfather grew up in The Heights in the 1920s, I have tremendous respect for the history of the city and the East End in particular. Just because I bought and live in a townhome (which was built on a former commercial site) for the sake of a garage and so I had something turnkey that didn’t need a bunch of repairs—that I did not have the time to do myself and didn’t want to pay anyone to do—doesn’t mean I cannot appreciate the history of the area.
     

    I would also disagree regarding the new construction townhomes being built in the area. Like is the case with my townhome, most of the new construction is limited to former commercial sites, and I think even you would agree that there is an over abundance of empty lots and abandoned warehouses in the area to where this kind of development can only be appreciated. We don’t have the same “tear down a bungalow, shoehorn three town homes onto a 5,000 square foot lot” issue they have in Montrose and even parts of The Heights. Most of Eastwood has recently become protected by Minimum Lot Size restrictions by proactive residents, so you will not see that type of development there anytime soon, if ever.

    • Like 2

  3. Yes. We need more quality developments like this in the immediate area to help counteract the proposed affordable housing developments (one of which will be right to the east of this, if I’m not mistaken).

     

    Speaking of which, whatever happened with that proposal for the multi-family building on Fox and N. Nagle? The renderings for it looked very similar to this.

    • Like 1

  4. 3 hours ago, j_cuevas713 said:

    Yeah but bars come and go. This is good for the neighborhood and the kids that live in it. 


    I know. And again, I’m glad that they are renovating the building instead of tearing it down and putting up new construction. But these types of old commercial buildings work well as restaurants and bars. Just look down the street at Tout Suite (which will unfortunately be a casualty of the freeway reroute project).

     

    As it stands, I now need to (1) have a kid; and (2) hope that he/she really enjoys soccer to be able to enjoy the space in any capacity. It’s a bit disappointing, that’s all.

    • Like 1

  5. On 2/15/2020 at 12:09 PM, j_cuevas713 said:

    This is awesome for the area!


    It would have been awesome-r if it was a bar or restaurant (or really anything open to the public). The layout of the building with the upper patio area would have been an interesting setup, and there aren’t too many options in that immediate area on that side of BBVA Stadium/MMP. 

     

    Regardless, it is nice that this is being re-developed. It’s a beautiful building.

    • Like 1

  6. 11 hours ago, Montrose1100 said:

    Would also love to see 2524 McKinney turned into a lounge bar/restaurant.


    That building and the smaller warehouse at the southwest corner of McKinney and Emancipation would both be good candidates to be renovated into either a bar or restaurant.

    • Like 2

  7. 1 hour ago, midtowndweller said:

    Dominos Pizza coming to this development. Sign is up.


    Yep, saw that coming. Suburban-style strip center leads to suburban tenants. Ugh.

    • Haha 1
    • Sad 1

  8. 6 hours ago, ljchou said:

    Found a company "White Rhino Cantina" registered with active sales permits for the co-located address (319 Milby St.). They have a Facebook and an Instagram, but neither have been updated in a few years. Curious if the same company is still planning on this location. Looks to be a Mexican restaurant with a beer garden. The land owned is the current building and the lot next door with the Winnebago in it.


    I believe there was an old TABC notice in the window of that building (before the renovations started) from maybe 2017 that alluded to White Rhino. Whatever that was intended to be, I imagine it was canceled and this construction is for something different.

    • Like 1

  9. 1 hour ago, Houston19514 said:

     

    Pretty sure it's in the area that no longer has parking minimums.  But the elimination of city-imposed parking minimums does not eliminate the need for parking.


    Right, I was just clarifying whether it was required or not. @Luminare suggested it might be required, and I was just pointing out that it might be inside the zone in EaDo that has had parking requirements lifted.

     

    In my earlier comment just a few minutes prior to the one that you quoted, I acknowledged that parking was necessary for the Lovett redevelopment of the Post building, and that the indication of retail parking on the Alliance Broadstone site plan—which otherwise doesn’t seem to include GFR—indicates that the two developers have apparently come to an agreement regarding providing parking for the Post building.


  10. 1 minute ago, Luminare said:

    Good question. If Lovett let them build on the south end of the block then my guess is they stipulated that they incorporate the future parking requirements for whatever is going to happen with the existing building on the north part of the block. Smart move if they did this. So probably not for this specific development, but whatever Lovett does with the north building later.


    I think you beat me to this point by about 15 seconds lol

     

    I would agree about the move to have this parking count towards the required parking for the Lovett redevelopment of the Houston Post building, but isn’t this property within the area of EaDo recently excluded from parking minimums? Or does that end at Emancipation?

    • Like 1

  11. 17 minutes ago, cspwal said:

    I thought they were the same thing for some reason


    This Alliance Broadstone project is only utilizing the southern half of the lot. The northern half of the lot where the old Houston Post building remains will presumably still be redeveloped separately by Lovett.

     

    A site plan for Alliance Broadstone posted in the neighborhood forum excludes the northern part of the lot.

    • Like 5

  12. 1 minute ago, JBTX said:

     

    Do we know if these are supposed to be "aesthetic" pillars, or structural?


    At this stage in the project I would assume they are structural. They’ve been steadily banging the pillars further into the ground over the last few weeks, probably to help reinforce the land at the edge of the bayou to help protect against subsidence or washout. I can hear the sound fairly clearly about 0.75 miles away, it was kind of creepy until I found out what it was.

    • Like 5

  13. 3 hours ago, iah77 said:

    I think it looks amazing, this area has literally almost no traffic to the point where over the last few years that have been removing stop lights instead of adding them. The on street parking will actually reduce average speed on the street making it safer for pedestrians and activating the street. Many towns have this parking configuration on their main streets. Excited for this!


    “Amazing” is a bit of an overstatement, it could certainly be better than this.

     

    Angled parking definitely has its place and is useful when used on one-way streets, but is less than ideal on a two-way street such as this.


    I take it you don’t spend much time trying to park on W 19th between Ashland and Rutland in The Heights? Between the dumb drivers blocking traffic while waiting for someone to back out of a spot and others pulling across traffic to park in spots angled away from their direction of travel, it’s an exercise in frustration. Granted, the volume of traffic won’t be as bad here for the reasons you state, but it doesn’t mean we should welcome a subpar site plan and parking arrangement with open arms.

     

    As far as I am concerned nothing benefits walkability (or “activates the pedestrian realm” *eye roll*) as well as buildings fronting the street and parking in the back.

    • Like 2

  14. The site plan shown in the brochure is horrible, and not very pedestrian friendly. People walking will not only have to dodge two driveways but also parked cars that hang over into the sidewalk (such as large trucks with trailer hitches backed into parking spots).


    Also, angled parking spots fronting a two-way road is sure to make for bad parking jobs and blocked traffic as people engage in the dumb and nonsensical parking maneuver of pulling across opposite lanes of traffic to pull into a parking spot angled away from their direction of travel.
     

    New retail in this area is welcome of course, but they need to think through the details better than this half-baked site plan.


  15. 1 hour ago, Texasota said:

    This particular building isn't proving housing for "the poor" *at all.* It's geared toward people making 80% of area median income, so around $50,000 for a couple (regionally at least): http://houstontx.gov/housing/flyers/Area-Median-Income-AMI-19.pdf


    It’s technically providing housing for those “at or below” the 80% AMI figure. There is an income ceiling, but some leeway in terms of allowing for people with lower incomes. 

    • Like 3

  16. 20 hours ago, thatguysly said:

    But there is no reason to push the poor to the worst areas of town. Many poor people live in this area now and have jobs in this area. To push them away can cause some to no longer be able to access their jobs and assume they could find a new one. There are low paying jobs in this area and they need work staff that can fill those jobs. This allows that to happen.


    Exactly this. These types of developments need to be established all throughout the city instead of just concentrated in one area.

     

    It’s also important to note that this isn’t just housing for “the poor.” This is intended to be affordable housing for people such as teachers and first year HPD and HFD cadets, and people working other similar jobs that otherwise meet the income limits. Those jobs exist all throughout the city and it makes sense to allow the opportunity for people to live close to where they work.

    • Like 7

  17. 2 hours ago, Houston19514 said:

     

    I think it's more like 16 blocks, half of which are surface parking.

     

    Funny thing:  freeway opponents often tell us that nothing worthwhile can be developed adjacent to an elevated freeway.  Here, freeway opponents tell us we must not replace an elevated freeway because it would destroy all of the wonderful development adjacent to the elevated freeway.


    It’s about 19 or 20 blocks total, all the way to the historic Ford dealership where Tout Suite is. The entire area of EaDo is around 270 blocks, so it’s about 7% of the total land area. My estimate was a bit high, but the blocks being taken are either developed or more prime for future development due to the proximity to downtown. There are only about three or four blocks of surface parking near MMP—certainly not half of the total lots though. 

    2 hours ago, Houston19514 said:

     

    False.


    I believe there are only two HOV-type lanes being added to I-45 as an increase from current capacity. One of the main reasons for the reroute given by those that have developed the plans is not the addition of outright capacity but to streamline the exits and other ramps and have traffic flow more smoothly and require less lane changes through that section.

    • Like 2
×
×
  • Create New...