ricco67 Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 So the general opinion is that the housing slump in Houston will remain confined to homes under $200K? Forgive me if this is a dumb question, but is the developer wagering that the target market will have no trouble selling their current houses by the time this is completed? I have no idea what the turn-around time on a housing market slump is - I wasn't of the mind to pay much attention when all the condos went vacant in the 80's and foreclosures were on every street. Of course, it's not like the facility will be an exclusive club open only to current area residents.Believe me, after a certain level on the economic food chain, they have a totally different view on money and their needs. They're definition of "short of cash" would make any working stiff vomit. with gusto. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skooljunkie Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 I support all tall buildings that have potential to bring out NIMBYs. I just love watching hypocrites in action. Haha...planning & development entertainment at its best. Bust out the popcorn! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdude Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 The project design has been chosen so that all building residential units will be above the tree line, ensuring the greatest level of privacy for the surrounding neighborhood and the maximum view of Houston Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
musicman Posted September 21, 2007 Author Share Posted September 21, 2007 The residents of Southampton may have tons of money, but they don't have the law on their side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jax Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 At leas they're not building a giant self storage warehouse in Southampton! Maybe if they did, more people would think about zoning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Native Montrosian Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 One bright spot is the luxury home market. Homes that sold for more than $500,000 saw a 26 percent increase in sales. Well, there's my job security. Our agency doesn't touch a home with a replacement cost of less than $500,000. Keep buying, folks! Believe me, after a certain level on the economic food chain, they have a totally different view on money and their needs. They're definition of "short of cash" would make any working stiff vomit. with gusto. Tell me about it. One of my clients has 2 Ferraris, a Lamborghini Gallardo and an Aston-Martin and doesn't bother with physical damage coverage for any of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
talltexan83 Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 I stopped by the neighborhood meeting last night at Poe Elementary. It was an impressive turn out. Standing room only.......I would guess close to 500 people. It turns out the developer is a resident of West U who grew up in the area. The group seemed intent on organizing and taking legal action. And the civic association has already started raising funds for a legal team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolie Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 I wish the developers all the luck. I think protecting property values is BS, at least when the structure is a high-quality, high-dollar building like this. But here's a hint for all the people who would like to live in 1950 forever: cities change, neighborhoods change, you don't have a deed on the character of a neighborhood. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jax Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 Are the people who are complaining about the proposed tower also against zoning? Or do these people think it's time for zoning in Houston? Just curious... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nate Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 (edited) The group seemed intent on organizing and taking legal action. And the civic association has already started raising funds for a legal team.What would be their cause of action?I agree this is better suited for Main Street. They could plop this on the Greyhound station site and nobody in Midtown would complain about it being 28 stories. Or it could be around the other high-rise buildings between Montrose and the Museum district.Probably no complaints if it were on Main, but I would rather live in Southampton, as would most people. Edited September 21, 2007 by nate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GovernorAggie Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 (edited) If the developer owns the property, let him build what he wants, right?!! Houston at its finest! Edited September 21, 2007 by GovernorAggie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jfre81 Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 But here's a hint for all the people who would like to live in 1950 forever: cities change, neighborhoods change, you don't have a deed on the character of a neighborhood.I can agree to this to a point, but tearing down old houses for McMansions when there's plenty of room in the burbs for that crap...oh anyway, I was gonna go into a big rant but... Are the people who are complaining about the proposed tower also against zoning? Or do these people think it's time for zoning in Houston? Just curious...They probably think so, but they probably came from somewhere else so they think so just because what they see *isn't like home.* The lack of zoning bothers me none at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
talltexan83 Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 (edited) Property values were not at the center of the discussion last night. These neighborhoods are already a gold mine, and the decreasing number of single family homes inside the loop will only increase their value. A high rise is not going to change that.Many of the speakers came from backgrounds in urban planning and design and spoke to quality-of-life concerns that this development would bring. A 23 story building is in direct contrast to its surroundings. Why not push for a development that will embrace its environment? Edited September 21, 2007 by talltexan83 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jax Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 (edited) The lack of zoning doesn't bother anybody, until somebody wants to build a huge tower or a self storage warehouse in the middle of an affluent residential neighborhood. Then it seems to bother a lot of people. Edited September 21, 2007 by Jax Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricco67 Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 <br />The lack of zoning doesn't bother anybody, until somebody wants to build a huge tower or a self storage warehouse in the middle of an affluent residential neighborhood. Then it seems to bother a lot of people.<br />like what??make it look like a giant tree with a bunch of treehouses on it?nothing is going to placate these guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jfre81 Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 The lack of zoning doesn't bother anybody, until somebody wants to build a huge tower or a self storage warehouse in the middle of an affluent residential neighborhood. Then it seems to bother a lot of people.Especially these days it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to put a self-storage warehouse on that land anymore. Now that the concept of *being close-in* is becoming cool they will command a lot more $$$ for places for *close-in* people to live and work. I can understand the traffic concerns, but then again if they would expand transit then you can build densely without necessarily having to expand road capacity. You know it's become a problem when people don't want major development just because a bunch of people are going to have to drive through there and park.This reeks of Afton Oaks and the rail...if not for then they would already be putting it down by now... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdude Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 The lack of zoning doesn't bother anybody, until somebody wants to build a huge tower or a self storage warehouse in the middle of an affluent residential neighborhood. Then it seems to bother a lot of people.Well I think a lot of people don't want zoning in general, except when it comes to their own neighborhood. Views change when your own property value or neighborhood quality seem threatened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricco67 Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 After driving through the area several times during the day yesterday, I honestly think it would be a mistake for this building come to pass. Reason being is that the road would require an extensive upgrade JUST for the construction itself. What made me come to the realization was driving by the Park one place earlier in the day. There was a procession of dump trucks and cement trucks to push up a new floor. The thought of all those trucks going through, mixing in with regular traffic would definitely be a nightmare for both those that use the road and the construction people. While the complete project would probably a plus (although the residents wouldn't see it that way), the increased traffic alone would make it problematic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolie Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 At one point in the past, people bragged about Houston having condo towers in the middle of (rich, white) single-family neighborhoods. This isn't terribly different from the towers in River Oaks. I think people are underestimating the traffic that Bissonet carries already... it's probably not going to be a major issue. There is already significant commercial development in the area, it's not quite as pastoral as people are claiming. Zoning is a terrible beast that must be slain every time it emerges from its lair... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdude Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 At one point in the past, people bragged about Houston having condo towers in the middle of (rich, white) single-family neighborhoods. This isn't terribly different from the towers in River Oaks. I think people are underestimating the traffic that Bissonet carries already... it's probably not going to be a major issue. There is already significant commercial development in the area, it's not quite as pastoral as people are claiming.Zoning is a terrible beast that must be slain every time it emerges from its lair... I'm not sure that was the case, but if it was, the people doing the bragging probably weren't the one with highrises in their backyards. The idea isn't that the neighborhood is "pastoral," it is that the proposal is out of proportion with the existing residences. They like the scale of the neighborhood as it is. I love highrises, but I don't see any particular advantage to scattering them into low-rise residential neighborhoods. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jfre81 Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 Well I think a lot of people don't want zoning in general, except when it comes to their own neighborhood. Views change when your own property value or neighborhood quality seem threatened.There are some deed restricted communities in Houston - I am guessing the restrictions are based on covenants that existed before the city annexed these neighborhoods.One thing to consider is that it's a big city and sometimes things have to change in certain areas for the better of a larger group of people in the city. This extends to Afton Oaks and other NIMBY criers concerning Metro. That said, this area will have light rail running near it soon, and possibly commuter rail nearby if they ever get around to making use of the Westpark corridor. So the possibility is there for this part of town to become more dense without having to necessarily add to road traffic capacity.At risk of going into something that might be another thread instead - so what if they introduce zoning? Developers with enough cash and leverage can simply get it zoned for whatever they want it to be if they want to. Developers have always owned this city and it's not going to change if there's zoning. Zoning is more likely to tighten their grip on this city and price everyone out of the city except the people coming from California and the northeast to come live here for "cheap." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdude Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 One thing to consider is that it's a big city and sometimes things have to change in certain areas for the better of a larger group of people in the city. This extends to Afton Oaks and other NIMBY criers concerning Metro. That said, this area will have light rail running near it soon, and possibly commuter rail nearby if they ever get around to making use of the Westpark corridor.True that sometimes things have to change for the benefit of the city as a whole, or at least a larger group of people. That is a good argument w.r.t. the rail through Afton Oaks. But that argument doesn't hold here. Plopping a highrise into the middle of Southampton, a stable low-rise neighborhood, simply doesn't benefit the city as a whole in the same way as a rail line can. I could be wrong, but somehow I suspect that the targeted buyers of condos in this building aren't going to be spending a lot of time on the train. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricco67 Posted September 23, 2007 Share Posted September 23, 2007 While I don't know what the exact distance to the proposed U-line station nearest to this location is, either way it's going to be a bit of a hike, and unless they want to use scooters to get to the line (even to the Main line), it's not exactly feasible to do this.After the construction, the street is able to handle the potential traffic (for a time) if the street has no changes, but considering the heavy traffic that's going to occur the various trucks for the construction alone are going to tear up the streets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolie Posted September 23, 2007 Share Posted September 23, 2007 I'm a big leftie on almost everything else, but zoning just makes my skin crawl like nothing else. Good quality housing at affordable prices is a human rights issue... and as far as I can tell, the main purpose of zoning is to artificially constrain the market to increase property values of those with enough political connections... and not foster the highest and best use of a property. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdude Posted September 23, 2007 Share Posted September 23, 2007 I'm a big leftie on almost everything else, but zoning just makes my skin crawl like nothing else. Good quality housing at affordable prices is a human rights issue... and as far as I can tell, the main purpose of zoning is to artificially constrain the market to increase property values of those with enough political connections... and not foster the highest and best use of a property.It's not just those with political connections - every property owner has a vested interest in protecting his property value. Lack of zoning regulations may allow individual property owners to attempt to foster the highest and best use of their property, but the problem is that optimization by individuals doesn't necessarily lead to the optimal outcome for the neighborhood as a whole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aferall Posted September 24, 2007 Share Posted September 24, 2007 Somebody's set up an anti-tower site at 1717bissonnet.com. Guess the developers won't be using that name for the tower now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strickn Posted September 24, 2007 Share Posted September 24, 2007 It's not just those with political connections - every property owner has a vested interest in protecting his property value. Lack of zoning regulations may allow individual property owners to attempt to foster the highest and best use of their property, but the problem is that optimization by individuals doesn't necessarily lead to the optimal outcome for the neighborhood as a whole.And elaboration of zoning regulations may allow individual neighborhoods to attempt to foster the optimal outcome for the current neighborhood owners, but the problem is that maximization by individual neighborhoods doesn't necessarily lead to the optimal outcome for the urban region and its newcomers as a whole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkD Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 While I don't know what the exact distance to the proposed U-line station nearest to this location is, either way it's going to be a bit of a hike, and unless they want to use scooters to get to the line (even to the Main line), it's not exactly feasible to do this.After the construction, the street is able to handle the potential traffic (for a time) if the street has no changes, but considering the heavy traffic that's going to occur the various trucks for the construction alone are going to tear up the streets.It looks like one of the more likely options for the U-line station would be Dunlavy and Richmond, which Google maps says is .7 miles away. In the alternative plans it looks like the closest station would be a bit farther (Shepherd and 59). The nearest Main line station is by Rice which is about a mile-long walk. This is Houston - hardly any of the people who can afford to live in this place will be willing to walk that far every day in the summer... So I agree, proximity to the light rail is definitely not an argument in favor of building this tower. And I'm just not sure how it makes sense to build this large of a building in a location where there isn't a single multi-lane road within a half-mile radius... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdude Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 I took this image from the website (I'm sure they won't mind). It really gives you an idea of the scale of the thing. No wonder the neighbors are unhappy. And elaboration of zoning regulations may allow individual neighborhoods to attempt to foster the optimal outcome for the current neighborhood owners, but the problem is that maximization by individual neighborhoods doesn't necessarily lead to the optimal outcome for the urban region and its newcomers as a whole. I suppose it depends on the area in which zoning is implemented. If you are talking about the entire urban region, then certainly there are places where a high-rise would make more sense than in the middle of the Southampton neighborhood. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricco67 Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 My only objection to this project is that it would be better suited closer to kirby, Montrose, Sunset, or even the village. the roads just doesn't seem like it would be able to support the construction traffic alone. other than that, I'm totally cool with the building, but they should have taken the current infrastructure into account, unless they plan on helping with those improvements.On the plus side, this might actually spur COH to upgrade that street a bit, lord knows it's already a bit of a shock and alignment killer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.