River Oaks District: Mixed-Use Development At 4444 Westheimer Rd. & 4702 Westheimer Rd.

[HoustonIsHome]

i call it Highland Village area all the time because its not part of the Galleria or River Oaks area as it really is it's own stand alone place/area in my opinion! anyway...wow one whole page on what to call an area...geez haha!

Ha ha, we haven't had an update on a rendering in a while.

But I'm like you. I don't think of it as uptown and it certainly is not River Oaks.

Plus I think a River Oaks district would cause too much confusion. people would just think the two are the same thing.

Once ROD stores open people shopping at HV will certainly cross the tracks to ROD and vice versa. It will be just like shopping at the galleria mall and Running across to Dillards or catching a meal at Grand Lux.

[HoustonIsHome]

it isn't actually "high" in elevation - price maybe, but not elevation!

With all of the taller buildings in relation to Afton Oaks across the street, it certainly going to be higher

[Houston19514]

^I've heard it called Highland Village area quite often too.  Its not the Galleria or Uptown, and it isn't River Oaks, so the nearest landmark is Highland Village itself.

 

Why not call it "The Highlands"  it isn't actually "high" in elevation - price maybe, but not elevation!

 

Because there is already an area named "Highlands".

[Subdude]

Well, since "Lower Westheimer" seems to have stuck for Lower Westheimer, this could be "Upper Westheimer," in which case the elevated price analogy also holds.  

 

[HoustonIsHome]

Well, since "Lower Westheimer" seems to have stuck for Lower Westheimer, this could be "Upper Westheimer," in which case the elevated price analogy also holds.

that's funny because the elevation of the land dips in that area

[HoustonIsHome]

Ok, all the different development have gotten me all confused

Azalea Court

River Oaks District

West Creek

Are three different developments right?

[arche_757]

Because there is already an area named "Highlands".

 

Hadn't a clue.  I will have to look it up.

 

 

What if we did "Azalea River West" since that's a mass-up of all three major new developments in that area?  One could even add heights to the name if they so desired!

[monarch]

an additional opinion here gents. actually, i believe that the current moniker RIVER OAKS DISTRICT is a bit foreboding / militaristic / industrial.  imo, there is simply nothing that is "inviting" as per this particular moniker.  as per their utmost experience, i was a bit surprised that oliver mcmillan, even chose such a name in the first place.

 

LA - RODEO DRIVE - an instant classic

 

CHICAGO - MAGNIFICENT MILE - an instant classic

 

NEW YORK - FIFTH AVENUE - an instant classic

 

MIAMI - WORTH AVENUE - an instant classic

 

...catch my drift.  new orleans, lay's claim to the "garden district" , but that is an enclave of old and yet stately homes etc.  i just think that houston can do much better that this.  below, are a few of my ideas:

 

HOUSTON - RIVER OAKS PLACE

 

HOUSTON - RIVER OAKS CIRCONDARIO

 

HOUSTON - PROVINCIA RIVER OAKS

 

...the latter two offer a bit of an italian flair.  

[arche_757]

How about Westheimer Crossing?  Since it crosses two pairs of train tracks.

[Gary]

an additional opinion here gents. actually, i believe that the current moniker RIVER OAKS DISTRICT is a bit foreboding / militaristic / industrial.  imo, there is simply nothing that is "inviting" as per this particular moniker.  as per their utmost experience, i was a bit surprised that oliver mcmillan, even chose such a name in the first place.

 

LA - RODEO DRIVE - an instant classic

 

CHICAGO - MAGNIFICENT MILE - an instant classic

 

NEW YORK - FIFTH AVENUE - an instant classic

 

MIAMI - WORTH AVENUE - an instant classic

 

 

 

 

 

  

Uh, you might want to check your facts. None of those were "instant classics." They took time, effort and planning. Michigan Avenue for instance took a couple of decades to get the Magnificent mile slogan to become a somewhat national name.

 

Liking the names of these streets (districts) is fine, but let's not go overboard. Names mean nothing. It's the substance of the area.

 

[monarch]

pardon me pal, i never once stated that i was offering any facts, upon the "origins" as per the moniker's that you pointed out.  upon my "opinion"..  those particular moniker's were "instinct classics".  each one of the aforementioned moniker's were elegant upon there approach, and not as foreboding as "river oaks district".  once again..  just my opinion!

 

Uh, you might want to check your facts. None of those were "instant classics." They took time, effort and planning. Michigan Avenue for instance took a couple of decades to get the Magnificent mile slogan to become a somewhat national name.

 

Liking the names of these streets (districts) is fine, but let's not go overboard. Names mean nothing. It's the substance of the area.

 

 

[Gary]

pardon me pal, i never once stated that i was offering any facts, upon the "origins" as per the moniker's that you pointed out.  upon my "opinion"..  those particular moniker's were "instinct classics".  each one of the aforementioned moniker's were elegant upon there approach, and not as foreboding as "river oaks district".  once again..  just my opinion!

 

You stated the "moniker's" as fact. It's obvious. I'm also not sure what an "instinct classic" is. Not trying to be rude, but maybe the constant attempt at trying to sound poetic in every post through me a little.

 

[TowerSpotter]

That's just his way of posting dude. 

[Texasota]

*sigh*

 

Anyway, I wonder if this area truly needs its own name. Highland Village and (now) Uptown both have their own distinct identities, and we're talking, what, half a mile between the two?

 

This is a transitional space between two very demographically similar neighborhoods. I think most people will just end up calling it one or the other.

[towerjunkie]

Lets just call it those fancy shops on that road and stuff. 

[ArchFan]

"Highland Oaks" has a good ring to me.  Which probably means it would never be adopted by any developers :-)

 

I think its good for place names (or nicknames) to to tell people something.  In this case, it would tell people that its adjacent to 2 areas that are already well-known and well-established.  

 

To me, the name "River Oaks District" fails because it seems to imply that its located farther east, like San Felipe @ Kirby.  I think OliverMcMillan and their branding consultants goofed a bit on choosing that name, but its only a minor goof.

Edited May 11, 2014 by ArchFan

[glisson1007]

Taken: Friday, May 12, 2014

[Luminare]

hmmm never got to see all the renderings until I landed on here.......front of store parking *sigh* WHY!? ughhhhhh This is the biggest problem with Westheimer is all the front of store parking! Yuck.

[arche_757]

hmmm never got to see all the renderings until I landed on here.......front of store parking *sigh* WHY!? ughhhhhh This is the biggest problem with Westheimer is all the front of store parking! Yuck.

 

Quite a few places simply do not have the space for parking any place else.  At this point I would rather simply get these developments even if they have a few negative design conditions than not get them.

 

I think some well done landscaping can beautify much of this stretch of Westheimer.

 

[Luminare]

Honestly, once the city has to redo all of Westheimer, you know that they will also tie the streetscape, pedestrian pathways, and possible district signage as one unit. It's just disappointing that this mentality is still there. It's not really a space issue. It has always been a staple of retail in the US to have "exclusive" frontage parking. Making your shop seem like it's "busy". This mentality was further pushed by the advent of strip malls and now large retail chains. it's a heavily outdated retail model and very inefficient. It clutters up the street environment pitting people against cars for space. The worst offender is University Place on Rice Blvd. and Kirby!

[arche_757]

...it's a heavily outdated retail model and very inefficient. It clutters up the street environment pitting people against cars for space. The worst offender is University Place on Rice Blvd. and Kirby!

I wouldn't say its outdated.  This is being done nationally, not just in Houston.  And, despite the majority of people on here wishing we had a truly walkable street in Westheimer - we do not.  Eventually is a long time; and while I share your optimism that some day the city will "get it right" with regards to the redesign of this street, I doubt it will be easy to accomplish.  We must start slowly, and in small areas.  Highland Village would be the first location to start this on Westheimer.  These new developments are largely self-contained urban lifestyle centers and focus inward away from the main thoroughfare.

 

What exactly is inefficient about it (playing devils advocate)?  I can't think of anything more convenient than parking directly in front of the loan store you wish to visit.

 

Besides that issue, Westheimer (lower/upper/middle) is not quite the pedestrian paradise we wish for it to be.

 

Rice Village (the whole area not just along University) has problems with this as well... but that's off topic.

[Luminare]

There is a difference between efficiency and convenience

 

Yeah I know its a ways off. Curse my boundless optimism!!!

 

I actually like the fact that they are self contained mini urban cores. Yeah some of these going up might not tickle the fancy of everyone, but it certainly is a start! Houston for a long time has struggled with creating real defined spaces that give a sense of place in a true urban context. Main thoroughfares should always be addressed and respected with good frontage almost like the whole buildings become giant marquis for the whole development. I much rather get a few of this mini cores/squares/parallelograms whatever might work and define those urban places and then everything can start connecting around them.

 

As far as Westheimer in general. Yeah i pretty much sucks as a pedestrian space. Lots of wasted space. To much prime frontage lot space given to cars.....because they should totally be the showcase right? lol. But because that space is there it leaves a lot of room for creative ideas in the future.

Edited May 12, 2014 by Luminare

[HoustonIsHome]

Besides that issue, Westheimer (lower/upper/middle) is not quite the pedestrian paradise we wish for it to be.

Houston is not your typical city.

It is a patch work of once walkable cities woven together to form a massive taxable glob.

Westheimer, like Addicks-Humble Road (1960) was an old, dusty dirt road connecting the Farms out west to the Markets near downtown.

To sustain that much development for so long along what was once a farm road is phenomenal.

Westheimer is about 30 miles long. Things that long are never walkable, but it will evolve to have walkable pockets. A nice mass transit system along that street would help a lot. Montrose to me is walkable. Sidewalks would help it along though.

Westheimer and Kirby could transform into another nice pocket. So could the area around this project. I used to walk up and down that area between Hilcroft and Gessner back in the day and it is packed with amenities. A good mass transit in that area again would do wonders.

To bad these things are not going in right now but there are about 4 or 5 areas along Westheimer that could develop into nice transit oriented areas to Live

[arche_757]

Indeed, however, Westheimer has been a road of major importance in the area for long enough that earlier studies could have been done to adequately address some of the issues we have currently.  Perhaps the next big phase of the streets development will be in the realm of public access to it - pedestrian upgrades, transit access (even if it is BRT or even just standard Metro bus), or "livability".  Should be nice to watch our grandest road transform from the poorly developed farm to market that it is, into a true urban road that is considered one of America's most important.  If only original planners had done something more interesting at the intersection of Main and Westheimer/Elgin... perhaps a large (maybe several blocks across) traffic circle?  Obviously this would have had to come about long ago.  If only.  Oh well.

[HoustonIsHome]

You have to keep in mind too, that Houston isn't the under 50 sq mile city that san Francisco and Others are.

Micromanaging 600 sq miles pf flood plone swamp isn't easy.

They can barely keep the city from flooding or littered with potholes let alone conjure up impovements for miles and miles of road.

Fact is these improvements have to be undertaken in fragments and by sub agencies. These things are just too much for the city to do on its own and do a good job at it.

Look at the improvements on Gray in midtown.

[arche_757]

You have to keep in mind too, that Houston isn't the under 50 sq mile city that san Francisco and Others are.

Micromanaging 600 sq miles pf flood plone swamp isn't easy.

They can barely keep the city from flooding or littered with potholes let alone conjure up impovements for miles and miles of road.

Fact is these improvements have to be undertaken in fragments and by sub agencies. These things are just too much for the city to do on its own and do a good job at it.

Look at the improvements on Gray in midtown.

 

I was aware.  We can still address 2-4 miles of heavily traveled road - our signature street if you will.

 

I'm not advocating that all 54 (some odd) miles of Westheimer be this grand urban boulevard, just that parts of it could have been developed better.  Now - like a lot of other ideas in this town - things that should have been done 30-40 years ago are finally beginning to be be addressed.  It will take time (as you pointed out) to address these issues.  And not all of Houston is a flood prone swamp, nor are all the roads pot holed.  In fact I would venture to guess that a good percentage of Houston infrastructure is in fact in better condition than cities like Boston or Philadelphia where roads and bridges were built decades before those in Houston were.  Growing big in the 1950s - 1970s may have had its advantages in that one area if anything?

 

[HoustonIsHome]

Now - like a lot of other ideas in this town - things that should have been done 30-40 years ago are finally beginning to be be addressed.

So you thing Westheimer was the same street 40 years ago that it is now? I left town for a few years and came back and westheimer had drastically changed. So I know 40 years ago that street would have been completely different.

Fact of the matter is if we wanted a cross between urban and suburban that looks nice we would have been copying LA ages ago and tightened building codes.

[arche_757]

So you thing Westheimer was the same street 40 years ago that it is now? I left town for a few years and came back and westheimer had drastically changed. So I know 40 years ago that street would have been completely different.

Fact of the matter is if we wanted a cross between urban and suburban that looks nice we would have been copying LA ages ago and tightened building codes.

 

Yep.  Things never change.  Westheimer is the exact same it has always been, always will be.

 

Of course not!!!!  I was only saying that 30 years ago (in 1984!!!!!) city planners should have been some what more forward thinking and outlined a growth plan for major thoroughfares such as Westheimer, Kirby, Main Street, Memorial etc.  Things were not done back then despite the massive growth we had and the sudden downturn - which would have allowed us time to "catch up" if you will.

 

Of course I'm looking at things from the present day, so my glasses are very rosy.  We know things don't work out that way - but we can always sit there and Monday Morning QB it.  Its the American Way!

 

Edited May 12, 2014 by arche_757

[HoustonIsHome]

How do you know they didn't outline a growth plan. Iy might have been different from what you imagined, ot May have been shot down/ opposed by stubborn politicians or nimbys

[Timoric]

-

Edited July 8, 2019 by Timoric