Jump to content

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


musicman

Recommended Posts

Serious question...why did the Karens scream over this project? There are many examples of mid rises in the Rice University area, and surrounding area. Many over looking residential. This is not out of character for this district.

 

The do need a stop light at Dunlay @ Bissonnet, with or without this building.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, shasta said:

Serious question...why did the Karens scream over this project? There are many examples of mid rises in the Rice University area, and surrounding area. Many over looking residential. This is not out of character for this district.

 

The do need a stop light at Dunlay @ Bissonnet, with or without this building.

I get why they went up in arms, but this is Houston, and it's getting increasingly dense by the day. It's a beautiful neighborhood (personally I think the most beautiful in the whole city). 

Capture.JPG

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, shasta said:

Serious question...why did the Karens scream over this project? There are many examples of mid rises in the Rice University area, and surrounding area. Many over looking residential. This is not out of character for this district.

 

The do need a stop light at Dunlay @ Bissonnet, with or without this building.

I have not spoken to anyone who lives in the area. I suspect they feel an invasion of privacy and a dislike in standing on ones land and staring up at a highrise.  I believe the neighborhood is called Broadacres. It is quiet, leafy, peaceful,and very beautiful. I do not live anywhere to it,  I do not have a dog in this fight and do not care either way, but I do understand their annoyance.

Fortunately, it is quite an elegant highrise, so they could have done much worse.

Edited by Twinsanity02
addtion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, shasta said:

Serious question...why did the Karens scream over this project? There are many examples of mid rises in the Rice University area, and surrounding area. Many over looking residential. This is not out of character for this district.

This is a high-rise, not a mid-rise. Twenty plus floors. And there is not anything like this in the area. That's what they were complaining about. Plus the added traffic.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never imagined HAIF would ever be NIMBY central lol.

It's totally normal to have highrises with homes in most places in the world. Traffic is not bad on Bissonnet/Sunset Blvd. It's transit rich and will be a great addition. My parents live around the corner so I frequent the area. People here want the benefits of density without any actual density lol. 

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, iah77 said:

I never imagined HAIF would ever be NIMBY central lol.

It's totally normal to have highrises with homes in most places in the world. Traffic is not bad on Bissonnet/Sunset Blvd. It's transit rich and will be a great addition. My parents live around the corner so I frequent the area. People here want the benefits of density without any actual density lol. 

never mind that the site had apartments on it before. I'm not sure how many units there were, or will be, but the difference cannot be so great as to have warranted the backlash.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, samagon said:

never mind that the site had apartments on it before. I'm not sure how many units there were, or will be, but the difference cannot be so great as to have warranted the backlash.

It has always been apartments and god knows this tower is better than an ugly garage "wrap" apartment complex like they build in most places. If it was purely about the money building that would have been much less headache for them and probably been pretty profitable. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Montrose1100 said:

I get why they went up in arms, but this is Houston, and it's getting increasingly dense by the day. It's a beautiful neighborhood (personally I think the most beautiful in the whole city). 

Capture.JPG

I agree, I kind of think its the most beautiful within the loop. If I ever made enough money I think this is where I'd want to live first, as opposed to west U or memorial or bellaire or whatever compared neighborhood. I think its cuz the location is so nice.

This is larger than most of the items in the area, but in terms of comparable areas [in terms of home prices] is this mostly about expectations and location of the neighbors when compared to something like the tower going up in Tanglewood? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is so disingenuous. There will be ZERO added traffic on Wroxton Court, and I really have a hard time believing that the traffic on Bissonnet will be significantly worse, especially considering there were apartments here before (as has been frequently noted in this thread). I don't know if it's a property value issue, or that they just don't want a high rise in their backyard because of privacy or views or whatever... but this is almost right in the center of Houston, there's going to be density whether they like it or not. I can see several high rises from my backyard (in a significantly less dense area of town), and you don't see me crying about it.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 4 months later...
On 6/24/2022 at 7:32 AM, aachor said:

I get the sentiment. The solution is quite simple, really: don't live in the dead-center of the nation's fourth-largest city.

If you can afford to live near Bissonnet and Ashby, you can afford to live just about anywhere else. People have a right to control their own property. But they don't also have a right to control everything else within their eyesight. Especially when they are surrounded by seven million other people who also have their own interests.

If property owners consistently come back to car traffic, unshadowed views, unobstructed views, noise level, local character, air quality, drainage, and water quality -- roughly in that order -- when these things arise, then that's a useful hierarchy.  If they tend to organize in groups in order to try to externalize those costs in order to get the added market value without being contractually obligated for it, then two solutions present themselves.  
 

Concerned citizens might be willing to pay surcharges for offloading each of the local development nuisances to another part of the city, up to the point at which it's not worth it to them to pay another benjamin rather than just accept a little more traffic or high-rise construction in the neighborhood.  Those payments will not be spread out over the whole city's tax base, however.  They will accrue to the neighborhoods that are accepting the increases in square footage.


On the other hand they might acknowledge that they want these resources/nuisances wastefully allocated rather than responsibly allocated because they thought there was a political mechanism to step outside the property value system and game it.  
 

If they don't want the allocation management to be rigged, then people who buy property shouldn't expect control over through traffic easement unless some offsite control of it is explicit in the title deed of the property they bought, and expect to explicitly pay more for it in the bidding process.

In the long run, whether it's priced in in that way or on an annual basis, this "MAX Lane" approach would streamline and make things simpler in the development process than "move out if you don't like change cuz cities change."  In particular, it would directly erase the informal, invisible fee transfers that annually raise the market valuation of access to property in a quiet (but politically vocal) wealthy enclave in the form of offloaded nuisances.  It would continue to encourage the property value gains that come from sheer prime location and local growth, without damaging those.  And it would lower the lure of free-riding since it uses the development nuisance offset payments to 'net out' that ownership incentive with every other part of the local city or county at the same time.

 

Edited by strickn
Clarification of free-rider investment gain, at the end
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/29/2022 at 10:14 AM, Paco Jones said:

Project:

The Langley

 

Architect:

EDi

 

Information:

134 units with a total SF of approx. 388,000 (excluding garage). Construction to begin in February with a 32-month duration.

 

SiJ7Sxb.png

 

sUyQDhK.png

Wow those are some giant units!

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

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...