GoAtomic

At that price, let's hope it's not going to be torn down. The one next door to this looks like it's day's are numbered, and several months back they tore down the one caddy-corner to it (a perfectly kept Wrightian ranch) because the dirt's worth so dang much.

A bit of advice to everyone in Houston who feels passionately about preservation: I have a good friend who is very involved in community affairs, and who also happens to work for a department in the City of Houston. She is very in tune with current redevelopment trends, as well as up and coming challenges. Her words: "If your subdivision doesn't have good, strong deed restrictions (with respect to redevelopment), you're done". How this translates: if your subdivision doesn't have good Deed Restrictions AND a review process/committee (aka the Architectural Review Board) who will ENFORCE rules about approval for add-ons, rebuilding, etc., your subdivision has a problem. Love it or hate it, the ARB idea is the only thing that is going to give your subdivision a tool that may prevent another Moonlight from happening. The City isn't going to do it for you - they want the Tax revenue, nevermind their public posturing about 'concern'. What you can do: there is strength in numbers, but it's a challenging road. Attend your Civic meetings, ask questions, GET INVOLVED. The Civic clubs are there for YOU as a concerned homeowner. You have a right to request minutes of meetings, etc. to find out what decisions are being made, what changes are being discussed, or what rules are/are not being enforced. If your Deed Restrictions need updating, be a catalyst for change - push for the addition of an Architectural Review Board or equivalent when changes are made. There is a fine line between growth and stagnation of property values; most people side for growth. But most people today are uneducated about the value of some preservation. If you care about preserving some semblance of the past and about managed growth, it's your job to teach them about it.

Not to take sides, but these points are dead-on. Sure there are some benefits to teardowns, ... but, there are definitely negatives.

My reservation would be the risks of backing up to a floodway as this one does. I wouldn't think the Pawn shop view would be that big of a deal, given that the only front facing windows appear to be in the kitchen, and given that the atrium fencing minimizes that view anyway.

I'm usually a purist about mid-century houses and like them original, but I really like what they've done with this one. Not so much the individual choices of textures and paint, but how they work together as a whole. Oddly, one of my favorite points is the moonscape finish in the hallway - anyone have an idea how they did that?

I thought that the first time I saw an HCAD value of $100, but learned differently when I started protesting my taxes. That value is simply a placeholder on the Improvement numbers due to the way Harris County assesses land value first, Improvement second. If the land is worth, say $300K (teardown value), but the Tax value is capped (can go up no more than 10% a year for a Homestead) at say $250K, they apply the capped value to the Land first, then to the Improvement if any is left over. But even if there is no leftover for the Improvement they can't zero out that number, so they call it an even $100. It's really confusing, I know. But in a nutshell, if you see a $100 Improvement value, you know you're in a neighborhood with rapidly increasing Land values. Which in Houston, generally means a Teardown neighborhood. Blecch.

You know, I just have to say - as a native Houstonian who saw the aftermath of the 80's real estate bust (after a big building boom, hello?), I think that recent real estate sale prices closer into the city are completely out of whack. I mean, good economy aside, we're NOT in some 'have-to-live-there' place like San Fran or Seattle or NYC ... and IMO the economy outside our little bubble really isn't that good, lots of job and industry losses, etc. Plus, when you add in the property taxes here, the prices look even more ridiculous. I just think it's emotion buying driving the prices up to artificially high levels. Am I alone in this opinion?

Now that's a cool house .....

I just received this by way of a screenwriter friend of mine (not sure who wrote it): "Houston Film Industry Alert Distressing news! It is confirmed that the historical Alabama Theater/Bookstop will close. Ironically, the new location for the bookstore will be in the historical River Oaks Center which will have buildings demolished to make way. A double whammy for preservationists of the two "last picture shows" in Houston. What will happen to this bookstore's authentic movie theater interior that was so carefully preserved back when it was transformed into the Bookstop? The Houston film community needs a theater for our films, film festivals, dailies, workshops, visiting filmmakers/ speakers, and related events. Other theaters are too expensive to rent. The old Alabama/ Bookstop could be the perfect venue and gathering spot for filmmakers and film lovers. Imagine a coffee house with short films screening. Could even be the spot for my dream, a Reel Stars of Texas Museum. Won't someone out there help save this gem from the wrecking ball? Please read the following article from the Greater Houston Preservation Alliance and pass it onl Buy a SAVE THIS LANDMARK tee-shirt on the WIFT website, www.wift-houston.org. It's only $13.99 (our cost) and helps to advertise this movement. Women In Film & Television/Houston's president and vice president will be meeting with Sarah Gish (former Houston Landmark Theaters manager), City Council Member Michael Berry, the Greater Houston Preservation Alliance, and others next week, hoping to convince City Council that there are some things more important to a community than money. You know, like history? Barnes & Noble confirms plans to close Alabama Theater/Bookstop Barnes & Noble has confirmed the company intends to close Houston's Alabama Theater/ Bookstop in favor of a "state of the art" facility. The confirmation came in an article by Thaddeus Herrick in today's Wall Street Journal. A spokesperson for Weingarten Realty, which owns the Alabama, told the Journal the future of the Alabama Theater (1939) is a "challenging situation." According to tenants of the River Oaks Shopping Center (1937), Weingarten Realty plans to demolish the portion of the shopping center on the northeast corner of Shepherd and West Gray to construct a three-story building for the new Barnes & Noble store. The bookseller says the fate of the architectural landmarks is up to Weingarten Realty. In recent days, the future of the River Oaks Center, River Oaks Theater and Alabama Theater has attracted national media attention. Yesterday, the National Trust for Historic Preservation's online magazine posted a feature that includes the online petition begun by Greater Houston Preservation Alliance (GHPA) volunteer Jim Parsons. The petition currently contains more than 22,000 signatures. The New York Times published an article about public reaction to the proposed projects on Saturday. GHPA members are encouraged to write Weingarten Realty and Barnes & Noble regarding the proposed projects and copy the letters to Houston's elected officials. Names and addresses are on the GHPA Web site. Your membership in GHPA allows our staff to advocate for historic preservation and influence public opinion. Please forward this e-mail to interested friends, family and colleagues, and ask them to support this effort by becoming members of GHPA. Thank you for your continuing support of Greater Houston Preservation Alliance and its efforts to preserve Houston's irreplaceable historic resources. Greater Houston Preservation Alliance 712 Main Street, Suite 110 Houston, Texas 77002" Maybe the council meeting will bring about some positive developments toward saving these buildings.

In the spirit of preservation, I'm posting an interesting article from CNN.com explaining how South Beach, Florida (a collection of Art Deco buildings) came to be the hot property it now is. http://www.cnn.com/2006/TRAVEL/DESTINATION...e.ap/index.html Key to this is the fact that the whole area was put on the National Register of Historic Places early on, and subsquently couldn't be altered OR DEMOLISHED. And yet, the properties are worth a fortune now. Why can't this be done with the River Oaks Center? To me there is no reason it couldn't happen here, as well.

Er, what? Would someone please explain to me how ' ... the public would also benefit from a condominium tower .... ' built to replace a public access venue like the RO Theatre ??? I am live in the city (not the suburbs), own a home that I pay full city taxes on, and make what I recently read is right at the average US salary; therefore I consider myself a decent representation of the Houston 'public' referenced here. But, exactly how will a new condo building in which units will likely be priced in the 400-700K range (about 4 to 7 times more what I, the average salaried public, can afford to buy and which I will likely never set foot in) BENEFIT ME ? How will it benefit anyone besides the upper income residents who will inhabit it ??? I would really like to know, so that I can be sure I'm not on the wrong side of this argument (the side trying to wake up Weingarten to the travesty they are planning to commit, and simultaneously wake Houston up to the fact that we'll never be a world-class city if we don't start somewhere to preserve the most iconic examples of our illustrious past ...).

The article mentioned people signing up to speak at Tuesday's (next?) City Council Meeting. Does anyone know how this works? I would like to check into being a speaker. After reading the Chron story I am really worried the demolition actually will happen.

FWIW ... I've just sent a quick recap of this issue, as well as the Petition link, to the Los Angeles Conservancy (a well organized architectural preservation group) asking for their advice on this issue. A long shot but it can't hurt ... http://www.laconservancy.org/ SAVE THE RIVER OAKS !!!

Yes, Houston has no zoning, which constitutes a certain freedom to do what you will with the land. But there is a rapidly vanishing element to this freedom that I'm certain our city fathers had in mind when they chose to avoid zoning -it's something called SOCIAL REPONSIBILITY. 'Social responsibility' means that, although you don't exactly let your neighbor dictate what you do on or with your property, you DO consider their wishes and needs before doing something you KNOW is going to piss them off. Then you try to work it out so everyone feels that they have a win. It's an unspoken oath that applies whether you own residential or commercial property, and no amount of Deed Restrictions, zoning or land use codes can quite duplicate it, because it relies on the good common sense of humanity to make it work. I will argue that for the owners of the properties in question (which I will also argue have attained their 'highest and best use' FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC in their present form) to consider razing the theatre for another high dollar high rise is the absolute antithesis of Social Responsibility, in that this would allow realtively few Mr&Mrs Megabucks to live a lavish life at the top in exchange for depriving countless future theatregoers the rare treat of seeing the likes of 'White Christmas' in an original-condition venue that probably showed it when it was first released in 1954. I have absolutely no interest in a wordsmithing fight with you, UncertainTraveler, you are entitled to your opinions - but the instincts of this lifelong Houstonian tell me that you CAN be certain of one thing ... the River Oaks Theatre isn't going down without THE biggest, most public preservation fight you've ever seen in the history of this city. SAVE THE RIVER OAKS !!!

Do you work for Weingarten ???