Montrose1100 Posted October 11, 2011 Share Posted October 11, 2011 It looks like Randy Locke (running for city council) is wanting to pay off the developers to try and keep them from building the highrise.Swamplothttp://swamplot.com/paying-the-ashby-highrise-away/2011-10-11/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+swamplot+%28Swamplot%3A+Houston%27s+Real+Estate+Landscape%29Yes, let's do it politician style, just pay em off!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infinite_jim Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 (edited) To relieve congestion and provide for improved regional mobility.As much of a canned answer as this is, it hits at the real crux of the situation.Why has Bissonett not been expanded already? Why was only a portion of 59S trenched?These questions lead to answers people really really don't want to hear. Edited October 12, 2011 by infinite_jim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Utinga Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 As much of a canned answer as this is, it hits at the real crux of the situation.Why has Bissonett not been expanded already? Why was only a portion of 59S trenched?These questions lead to answers people really really don't want to hear.Money speaks? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatesdisastr Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 They have been fighting to build on this property this long, I can't imagine them wanting to jump ship now over money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockmat Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 They have been fighting to build on this property this long, I can't imagine them wanting to jump ship now over money.Maybe so. I'm not sure what the long term return is and if it can equal, but they're in business to make money. Money is the most important thing to most people, sadly. But it is a business, so if they can receive more money in a handout than they can to build it, I think they take it, no? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samagon Posted October 14, 2011 Share Posted October 14, 2011 Yes, let's do it politician style, just pay em off!!so long as it isn't the cities money (ie mine), it's none of my business.however, bring city money into it, and watch me turn into a raving lunatic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Montrose1100 Posted October 14, 2011 Share Posted October 14, 2011 so long as it isn't the cities money (ie mine), it's none of my business.however, bring city money into it, and watch me turn into a raving lunatic.Well aren't they suing for $40mil already? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simbha Posted December 7, 2011 Share Posted December 7, 2011 Just saw this today... The news is about two weeks old, apparently...http://www.yourhoustonnews.com/river_oaks/news/architects-file-copyright-suit-against-ashby-high-rise-developers-seek/article_52a93540-b7b6-533d-8af2-273a693d1ff2.htmlA Dallas architecture firm has sued the developers of the proposed Ashby high-rise for allegedly stealing its design and is seeking an injunction to block construction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoninATX Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 Seems pointless to sue someone because of it being identical. Every building is different not just the exterior but the interoir of the building as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asubrt Posted March 2, 2012 Share Posted March 2, 2012 (edited) Today, The West University Examiner reported that Mayor Annise Parker sent a letter to residents of the Southampton neighborhood saying the city has no legal basis to stop developers from building the tower as it was outlined in 2009.http://blog.chron.co...shby-high-rise/Don't know how important this is, but it sounds like it's a step toward this getting built. Edited March 2, 2012 by asubrt 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockmat Posted March 2, 2012 Share Posted March 2, 2012 http://blog.chron.co...shby-high-rise/Don't know how important this is, but it sounds like it's a step toward this getting built.holla! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KinkaidAlum Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 Should be interesting to see if they can get funding... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 Should be interesting to see if they can get funding... If the City had known what was good for them, they'd have approved it in mid-2009. Too late! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTAWACS Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 the taller the better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jax Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Glad to hear it'll have retail. I always like the chance to have new places I can walk/bike to! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfastx Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 (edited) Glad to hear it'll have retail. I always like the chance to have new places I can walk/bike to!Agreed. I live near the area and would much rather have a good street level integration than the bland high rise that was approved in 2009. Glad they are approving the original design, it will be much better for the neighborhood. Edited March 5, 2012 by mfastx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texasota Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 Oooh, street level retail. I think I love Ashby Highrise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urbannizer Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 Ashby Highrise Agreement Is Final, Mayor Says Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 Live by the sword. Die by the sword. Those who loved it when the mayor strong-armed the historic districts in against the majority opposition probably never imagined that the strong arm that overwhelmed their neighbors could also overwhelm them when it comes to Walmarts, 380 agreements and high rise residential towers. Forgive me my schadenfreude, but I am more than a little amused at this turn of events. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samagon Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 I enjoyed reading some of those comments on swamplot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highway6 Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 Nimby tormenting is fun. We should go replace all the yellow signs with "If you build it, They will come" 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockmat Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 (edited) I posed a question on swamplot that has not been answered.Based off the sales price, if available, if not hcad's appraisal, is it feasible for the developer to build anything smaller?Related to that question is, how old is that complex anyway? I'm guessing it's old and I'm sure in 5, 10 or 15 years it was going to be close to unlivable and I seriously doubt anyone who owned or bought it would simply renovate the current space, right?My basic premise is this, it seems like the developer probably had no choice in terms of the finance side. I could be totally wrong, just seeking some input.edit: I did look at other properties like Gables on Bering and Post Oak Place apartments and the appraised values were very similar to 1717. Not sure if that's comparing apples to apples or not. Edited March 14, 2012 by lockmat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samagon Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 (edited) Hell, the developer is showing more restraint than I would, if I were in his/her shoes.I would have kicked all the current tenants out, slapped up a less than permanent chain link fence with a big chain and lock on an akimbo gate and left it to disrepair for years.in my minds eye, I kind of imagine it having begun to eventually look like the old holiday inn downtown, nice weeds and other things growing, plywood boards covering the windows that had been broken out. gosh it would be glorious in its disrepair!oh, and when local homeowners tried to go in and clear out the brush, I'd call the cops for trespassing.Within a year, I'd bet they'd be begging me to build anything on the site. Edited March 14, 2012 by samagon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marmer Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 I posed a question on swamplot that has not been answered.Based off the sales price, if available, if not hcad's appraisal, is it feasible for the developer to build anything smaller?Related to that question is, how old is that complex anyway? I'm guessing it's old and I'm sure in 5, 10 or 15 years it was going to be close to unlivable and I seriously doubt anyone who owned or bought it would simply renovate the current space, right?My basic premise is this, it seems like the developer probably had no choice in terms of the finance side. I could be totally wrong, just seeking some input.edit: I did look at other properties like Gables on Bering and Post Oak Place apartments and the appraised values were very similar to 1717. Not sure if that's comparing apples to apples or not.It was there, and old, in the mid-80's. It was renovated pretty thoroughly around 1995. I wouldn't assume it would be anything close to unliveable (even by Montrose standards) in 5 or 10 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockmat Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 It was there, and old, in the mid-80's. It was renovated pretty thoroughly around 1995. I wouldn't assume it would be anything close to unliveable (even by Montrose standards) in 5 or 10 years.Sorry, a poor choice of words on my part. I was also assuming it was already unsightly, which based on these photos that I just found, it is not. http://www.hettig-kahn.com/mm.htmI'm just trying to see it from a developers point of view, too. I mean, neighborhood residents can't expect, in this imperfect world, for someone to see the opportunity that Buckfund did and not do something about it. It would have been wise for area residents to consider the economics and opportunity a developer might see in that site and get it's future use restricted somehow (would that have even been possible?). It's not as if this is totally unprecedented in Houston and you know there are not any zoning laws. Of course, this is easy for me to say in hind sight, but then again I never considered buying into that neighborhood either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 Sorry, a poor choice of words on my part. I was also assuming it was already unsightly, which based on these photos that I just found, it is not.http://www.hettig-kahn.com/mm.htmI'm just trying to see it from a developers point of view, too. I mean, neighborhood residents can't expect, in this imperfect world, for someone to see the opportunity that Buckfund did and not do something about it. It would have been wise for area residents to consider the economics and opportunity a developer might see in that site and get it's future use restricted somehow (would that have even been possible?). It's not as if this is totally unprecedented in Houston and you know there are not any zoning laws. Of course, this is easy for me to say in hind sight, but then again I never considered buying into that neighborhood either.Maryland Manor is unsightly and I think that it smells odd. But that's only because it is surrounded by decadence. If it were in Montrose, it'd be a decent-enough complex...but still a teardown. To my mind, a highrise with street level retail at this location will look better, smell better, and provide a neighborhood amenity that is better integrated with the charm and elegance of the neighborhood.To the question of whether a commercial property, a multi-family property, a property with minimal setbacks, or a property with a tall building should have been a concern of area residents, I think that the fact that original and revised deed restrictions in those neighborhoods have specifically restricted all of those building elements speaks volumes. Yes, people were previously aware and concerned regarding these issues. And yes, it is perfectly legal and permissible to pay a property owner in exchange for them agreeing to a restrictive covenant.The developer's perspective is fairly straightforward. This existing complex is functionally obsolete, yet the site is only large enough to allow for the feasibility of townhomes (similar to "Cheyne Walk") or a residential highrise. A midrise cannot achieve the density or efficiencies of scale that would be necessary to make it feasible as an apartment complex; and new condos are just...stupid. The highrise is the highest and best use due to the visibility and access afforded by a major thoroughfare; it helps to generate leasing traffic. And that is why this is highrise land rather than townhome land. That is a developer's perspective. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolie Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 I think this weekend I will make some poster signs and go have a Pro-Ashby celebration on the sidewalk. I'll bring a video camera to get the license plates of people who yell obscene things at me. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTAWACS Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 I just hope there's a bar included in this supposed street-level retail. This way everyone who drives by can see the bar patrons drinking and getting plastered. Cool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 I just hope there's a bar included in this supposed street-level retail. This way everyone who drives by can see the bar patrons drinking and getting plastered. Cool.Too close to the entrance of a school for a bar, I think, but let's not rule out a 24-hour game room such as exist further down the way along this major thoroughfare. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryDierker Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 Too close to the entrance of a school for a bar, I think, but let's not rule out a 24-hour game room such as exist further down the way along this major thoroughfare. My girlfriend won 120$ a couple weeks ago down there. And they let us smoke. 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.