Jump to content

The Langley: Residential High-Rise At 1717 Bissonnet St.


musicman

Recommended Posts

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.

Enough people clicked "Like" that I'm tempted to actually do it.

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.

Aren't there some "Thai Massage" places just down the street along Shepard? Maybe they can move in... hahaha.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

I think I will do the same thing when the Heights Walmart opens. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Um, I don't have a dog in this fight but today there were lots and lots of parked cars pinching off Bissonnet (much like Dunlavy all the time actually) near the dreaded hi-rise site, and I wonder if this is part of the new "dirty tricks"---I mean "you ain't seen nothing yet" campaign.....

Must be a beech not to get traction in district court and have to take it to the streets.....

Edited by innerlooper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like to drive up and down Bissonet whenever I can to help increase the traffic count. I'll even go out of my way to use Bissonet as my crosstown street. Fortunately my car has "stealth mode" and looks like every other car in the neighborhood. I might even put a "Stop Ashby" sticker on it for further cloaking.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Second, the proposal allows for retail use in multi-family neighborhoods like those on parts of already dense areas like Capitol Hill. The low-rise zones in the proposal aren’t required to have retail, but could if there was demand."

Well which is it? Is the retail allowed or required? That's a huge difference!

Also, the author of the article refers to a local activist as "A Saul Alinsky-style organizer".

Seriously...as a compliment?

And this "How did earnest, liberal, Birkenstock-wearing activists pushing for parks, play equipment, sidewalks, and kiosks turn into affluent, highly motivated saboteurs of new development, change, and density?" Could that sentence be any more charged?

There's something very off-putting about this article. It comes off as very manipulative and reprobate. We don't need people like Roger Valdez making any decisions about Houstons future.

BTW I'm pro Ashby highrise, pro densification, and I think the neighborhood residents (at least the ones involved) are being ridiculous. But I also think extremists like Roger Valdez and Jim Diers whose common beliefs seem to be "single-family home owners are evil scum who must be destroyed" (my interpretation) are far worse!

If the market demands increased densification it will happen, if not, it won't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

It's just an article I came across today, from Seattle. It's not the specifics of the situation there, but I think development in Houston will be more and more regulated by neighborhood associations in the absence of zoning and land use regulation. Afton Oaks, Ashby, etc. As the city becomes more dense, the once loosely defined boundaries of neighborhoods are starting to harden as they become real political entities staking out space to protect their interests. As in this article about Seattle, Houston's nicer single family neighborhoods in close-in areas are coming under much stronger pressure for multi-family development. Informal groups will become formal as a reaction to this pressure, start defining themselves as in opposition to developers. Some of Houston's "pro growth, developer friendly" attitude might shatter.

Edited by woolie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's just an article I came across today, from Seattle. It's not the specifics of the situation there, but I think development in Houston will be more and more regulated by neighborhood associations in the absence of zoning and land use regulation. Afton Oaks, Ashby, etc. As the city becomes more dense, the once loosely defined boundaries of neighborhoods are starting to harden as they become real political entities staking out space to protect their interests. As in this article about Seattle, Houston's nicer single family neighborhoods in close-in areas are coming under much stronger pressure for multi-family development. Informal groups will become formal as a reaction to this pressure, start defining themselves as in opposition to developers. Some of Houston's "pro growth, developer friendly" attitude might shatter.

We must not let opposition congeal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That whole "park-in" thing was the most ridiculous thing I've seen in awhile. Are they trying to show that the highrise will cause everyone to park their cars in the street?

How dumb.

That, and the fools continue to make their own neighborhood less and less desirable. As I've said before, their ugly huge yellow signs and now their childish behavior are going to do more damage to their property values than the apartment tower.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That, and the fools continue to make their own neighborhood less and less desirable. As I've said before, their ugly huge yellow signs and now their childish behavior are going to do more damage to their property values than the apartment tower.

Well, I was going to say it'll only last until they're finished building it, but didn't they say they would make it a bad experience for patrons too? They're miserable and are trying to do the same for everyone else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I was going to say it'll only last until they're finished building it, but didn't they say they would make it a bad experience for patrons too? They're miserable and are trying to do the same for everyone else.

yes, they said patrons, contractors, investors, lenders, tenants, restaurateur, etc.

http://houston.culturemap.com/newsdetail/04-25-12-09-30-stop-ashby-high-rise-group-lays-out-plans-to-stop-construction-tells-developers-weve-only-begun-to-fight/

if I had ever wanted to live in that area before, that desire stopped a while back.

Well, now I want to live in the Ashby high-rise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't feel strongly one way or another about the merits of the Ashby tower. That said, I don't see where there's any harm in local neighborhood activists trying to get involved to influence the development. After all, one can't reasonably expect them to just roll over and play dead when they think a development will be harmful to the neighborhood. They are just doing what they think is best to protect their housing investment and the quality of the community. With any luck some local civic involvement will lead to an outcome that both sides can live with.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also think it's funny to assume that yard signs, collective action, and a new contract to extend the deed restrictions for another 50 years in Boulevard Oaks and Southampton will hurt property values more than a 20+ story apartment tower whose scale will dwarf everything around it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also think it's funny to assume that yard signs, collective action, and a new contract to extend the deed restrictions for another 50 years in Boulevard Oaks and Southampton will hurt property values more than a 20+ story apartment tower whose scale will dwarf everything around it.

Perhaps, but again speaking out beats apathy on their part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Funny, but the bigger part of the story to me was that they chose to settle the case and give up some cash to the Minneapolis based architecture firm from which they are accused of stealing from and now they're having to credit that firm on all materials moving forward.

Class acts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny, but the bigger part of the story to me was that they chose to settle the case and give up some cash to the Minneapolis based architecture firm from which they are accused of stealing from and now they're having to credit that firm on all materials moving forward.

Class acts.

What do you suppose their holding costs would've been for enduring each additional month of litigation? Sounds to me like they just needed to remove this additional barrier to the project getting financed and moving forward.

And besides, how many of these kinds of lawsuits actually go to trial? I'm betting, not many. Trials are extraordinarily expensive and the outcomes can be risky and unpredictable for both parties, with the outcomes subject to appeal by either party and creating situations wherein there exist contingent liabilities for many many years. Coming to a negotiated settlement is usually preferable to that, whether guilt is an issue or not. (If that offends your sense of justice, BTW, then you're certainly not alone. But the alternatives suck, too.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • We will identify your tenants and send regular communications to them at their units and their places of business to let them know that they are not welcome in our neighborhood.
  • When your tenants walk in or through our neighborhood, we will let them know that they are not welcome.

Isn't this on the verge of harassment?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...