Heights Mercantile At 714 Yale St.

[s3mh]

Variance sign is up at the property seeking off street parking variance, building line and something else.  They will go to the planning commission on Feb. 8.  We should probably be able to see some info on the site when the agenda is released at the end of the month.

[Angostura]

Building-line variance is a good sign (I'm generally in favor of zero front setbacks for commercial developments). In this case it may indicate that they plan to build close to the street.

 

The off-street parking variance could be a couple of things:

 

- Plan to take advantage of the head-in spaces along 7th.

 

- Plan to use the mixed-use nature of the development to consider parking minimums of the development as a whole (i.e. take advantage of office parking for restaurants).

 

- Plan to use the proximity to the bike path to substitute a higher proportion of car spaces with bike spaces.

 

 

I'm generally in favor of much lower parking minimums, and given that this site is located across the street from 500 or so apartments and sits at the intersection of a shared-use trail (MKT) and a popular pedestrian trail (Heights Blvd esplanade), I fully support making this less car-centric. It also sits between two major thoroughfares, both of which offer a lot of on-street spaces.

 

 

That said, the planning commission generally takes a much harder line on parking minimums than it does on setbacks.

 

 

[HeightsPeep]

The request to reduce parking in an area that already lacks available street parking will almost certainly be opposed?  Two proposed restaurants?   The imminent completion of 500 plus apartments on Yale will not help the parking situation.  The streets are already pretty narrow when people park along 7th and Heights to access Revival Market, the bike trail, the jogging trail, Donovan park etc.  Forget the inconvenience to residents, how will emergency vehicles respond? 

 

Look at the situation on Arlington St. with Coltivare; the residents are very upset.  Coltivare received a reduction in parking from the City when they added 40 bicycle spaces.  Unfortunately, no more than two bikes are ever parked there.  Rather, for every table that is occupied you see multiple cars.  Gelazzi does not have enough bathrooms so their guests have urinated in yards on Harvard St.  And Revival Market at 550 Heights is a tiny place, but it is packed to the gills with tables and standing patrons that often exceeds its occupancy permit.  Now Revival also wants to start a dinner service with a bar license,  Diners at Revival already occupy the parking lot and much of White Oak and Heights Blvd. 

 

Heights Blvd in particular has a lot of nice homes.  I feel so sad for those residents on Heights and nearby streets who will experience the noise from the thumping bass from the proposed rooftop restaurant late into the night, the lack of parking, elevated crime and emergency vehicle problems. 

[jstigall]

Oh boo hoo.  Emergency vehicle problems? Give me a break, 7th street is more than wide enough for cars parked on both sides and I never have a problem finding space along the street for parking at Revival and Gelazzi.  Two great local businesses that add a lot to the community.  Sorry that you don't own the parking in front of your house, people park in front of mine all the time, I don't get upset because that's their right and there is plenty of space.

 

Coltivare is the single greatest restaurant addition to the Heights in years, I hope it stays in business for a long time.  I'm glad it has ample space inside and out because it didn't need a 20 car parking lot.  I personally walk there, but if I lived nearby I'd be happier about being so close to great food than bitching all the time about customers parking around the neighborhood.

 

Houston needs more great places to eat along its walkable streets and I can't think of a better place for them.

[west20th]

The request to reduce parking in an area that already lacks available street parking will almost certainly be opposed?  Two proposed restaurants?   The imminent completion of 500 plus apartments on Yale will not help the parking situation.  The streets are already pretty narrow when people park along 7th and Heights to access Revival Market, the bike trail, the jogging trail, Donovan park etc.  Forget the inconvenience to residents, how will emergency vehicles respond? 

 

Look at the situation on Arlington St. with Coltivare; the residents are very upset.  Coltivare received a reduction in parking from the City when they added 40 bicycle spaces.  Unfortunately, no more than two bikes are ever parked there.  Rather, for every table that is occupied you see multiple cars.  Gelazzi does not have enough bathrooms so their guests have urinated in yards on Harvard St.  And Revival Market at 550 Heights is a tiny place, but it is packed to the gills with tables and standing patrons that often exceeds its occupancy permit.  Now Revival also wants to start a dinner service with a bar license,  Diners at Revival already occupy the parking lot and much of White Oak and Heights Blvd. 

 

Heights Blvd in particular has a lot of nice homes.  I feel so sad for those residents on Heights and nearby streets who will experience the noise from the thumping bass from the proposed rooftop restaurant late into the night, the lack of parking, elevated crime and emergency vehicle problems. 

What you describe is called "Urban Living". You can move you know.

[s3mh]

There is a parking problem, but it is really a public infrastructure problem.  When the Heights was built, 18' wide roads next to commercial streets like  White Oak were no problem because most everyone hopped on the trolley or walked to get where they needed to go.  No one needed to park on the residential streets.  Now, people do need to park on the residential streets.  Even if every restaurant met the City parking minimums and then some, people would still be parking on the residential streets.  The problem is that many of the streets are only 18' with open drainage ditches.  The streets that are curbed are often not wide enough for parking on both sides of the street.  So, people get trapped in their driveways and it is difficult for emergency vehicles to get through.   Of course, I have no sympathy for people who build a lot line house with a two car garage on the alley a few doors down from White Oak and expect to have exclusive domain over the parking spot they built over the drainage ditch in the public right of way.   

 

The solution is to widen and curb/gutter all the residential streets that feed into White Oak and that will be affected by the new apartment complex and retail development.  Parking should be restricted to one side of the street so people can get out of their driveways. 

 

Restricting development is really not a viable option at this point.  We cannot unring the bell of poor development decisions in and around the Heights.  The apartment complexes should have had ground floor retail.  Everything south of I-10 should have been built up instead of stripmalled and suburban big boxed.  The result is that we are going to squeeze about 1200 multifamily units into the Heights in the next two years and possibly another few hundred if some proposed developments got their funding before the recent red light on multifamily in Houston.  The Heights desperately needs more restaurants, especially near the new multifamily development.  Most restaurants in the Heights are already packed to the gills on Friday and Saturdays.  I do not want to the Heights to be one of those hot areas where restaurants just phone it in once the get a location because they know that all the restaurants are packed and people will take whatever they can get.

[HeightsPeep]

I was just trying to point out that in the instances in which the city overlooked its own requirements (parking, occupancy, bathrooms) there have been negative repercussions.    The residents expect the city to regulate as it is authorized so nuisances can be mitigated.  Granting a variance on parking at this location ultimately hurts the community so I doubt it will be supported.

[mcook2002]

Granting a variance on parking at this location ultimately hurts the community so I doubt it will be supported.

Please keep in mind this is not a fact, but an opinion.  

[s3mh]

I have seen the application.  The city requires 145 spaces.  The developer wants to provide 58 spaces on site and get credit for the 97 existing head in parking spaces on 7th between Yale St. and Heights Blvd.  The shopping center will have 35k sq ft of retail space.  I believe they will demo the warehouse, but keep the building on the 600 block of Yale. 

[Texasota]

That seems reasonable. I wonder if it will just be a strip mall or something better.

[mollusk]

Everything south of I-10 should have been built up instead of stripmalled and suburban big boxed.  

 

I suspect it eventually will be, just as the architecturally significant old Micro Center got bulldozed for Amegy once the dirt became precious enough.

[HeightsPeep]

Does the city granting a variance for a credit of 70% of the parking requirement seem reasonable?  Is there even a precedent for such numbers anywhere in the city?   If so, where?  If not, why is it justified here?

 

Someone needs to take pictures of the current usage of the street parking the developer wants to claim to assess whether those spaces are actually available.  On a recent Saturday afternoon I did not see ANY empty spaces.

 

And then there is the live example of how this plays out: Coltivare.  40 bike spaces used to obtain a variance to reduce the parking requirement.  The last time I was there I saw a handful of people come in on foot, two people on bikes, but mostly young people driving in from all over the City so a table of six means six cars.   Great restaurant, but poorly planned by the city.

 

You can look at the plans for the 7th Yale/ Heights development.  Not sure how to attach it here but I saw them.  The proposal is a glorified strip mall with all the onsite parking visible from the street (very different from 19th Street which has much parking oriented in the rear so the area is pedestrian friendly).   I am still making sense of it all, but it looks like 3 or possibly 4 restaurants with additional outdoor patio seating. 

 

Imagine. 3 or 4 restaurants.  Coltivare is one restaurant and Arlington is a disaster.  I doubt a HFD truck can get through. 

 

In my mind the real question is whether the neighborhood will push back?  I suspect they do not want to be another Montrose and they city will be under pressure to respond appropriately after the embarrassment of the Coltivare fiasco.

[bedmondson]

Does the city granting a variance for a credit of 70% of the parking requirement seem reasonable?  Is there even a precedent for such numbers anywhere in the city?   If so, where?  If not, why is it justified here?

 

Someone needs to take pictures of the current usage of the street parking the developer wants to claim to assess whether those spaces are actually available.  On a recent Saturday afternoon I did not see ANY empty spaces.

 

And then there is the live example of how this plays out: Coltivare.  40 bike spaces used to obtain a variance to reduce the parking requirement.  The last time I was there I saw a handful of people come in on foot, two people on bikes, but mostly young people driving in from all over the City so a table of six means six cars.   Great restaurant, but poorly planned by the city.

 

You can look at the plans for the 7th Yale/ Heights development.  Not sure how to attach it here but I saw them.  The proposal is a glorified strip mall with all the onsite parking visible from the street (very different from 19th Street which has much parking oriented in the rear so the area is pedestrian friendly).   I am still making sense of it all, but it looks like 3 or possibly 4 restaurants with additional outdoor patio seating. 

 

Imagine. 3 or 4 restaurants.  Coltivare is one restaurant and Arlington is a disaster.  I doubt a HFD truck can get through. 

 

In my mind the real question is whether the neighborhood will push back?  I suspect they do not want to be another Montrose and they city will be under pressure to respond appropriately after the embarrassment of the Coltivare fiasco.

 

You keep on bringing up Coltivare but I believe you are incorrect. If I remember correctly, they received a variance to be allowed to use parking that was not allowed by PWE because the spaces were not wide enough and resulted in cars blocking the sidewalk.  It was granted because the parking already exists and not granting the variance will not stop anybody from parking there and continuing to block the sidewalk.  Also, it is written into the parking ordinance that business owners can use bike racks to reduce their overall parking requirement by a few spots.  Coltivare did not need or get a variance for the bike racks and did not get a variance to lower the total number of required parking spaces. Please correct me and attach the variance if I am wrong.  

Edited January 28, 2015 by bedmondson

[HeightsPeep]

See: https://twitter.com/briancrimmins/status/317378158229852161

Maybe you can ask this person for the variance?  I think he is the planning director who approved and recommended this variance.

[Texasota]

There's something appropriate about HeightsPeep now being a "parking lot."

 

[s3mh]

bedmondson is correct.  Coltivare leases the pull-in spaces from the laminating company next door.  The city would not give them credit for the spaces along the Arlington side of the building because they were partially in the ROW.  They wanted to use those spaces so they could plant the garden and would have had to use that part of the property for parking without the variance.  The variance allowed them to get credit for the spaces in the ROW.  The variance did not reduce the off street parking requirement.  I cannot recall anyone getting a variance to reduce the number of spaces required.

 

The CoH parking minimums are not sufficient to keep people from having to park in the neighborhoods.  They are just mitigation of the issue.  Unfortunately, a lot of people in Houston are not used to dealing with parking in an urban area and will block driveways and ignore other parking restrictions just to keep from having to walk a few blocks.  Even if everyone follows the parking minimum rules, there will always be spillover when you have a very popular restaurant. 

 

 

Edited January 28, 2015 by s3mh

[HeightsPeep]

I am sorry but that is not correct.  There is no onsite parking at Coltivare due to the variance.  There are only onsite bike spaces.  Usually bike spaces can only be used for 10% of the allotment.  However, Coltivare received a variance to pump up that allotment.  They have also obtained some leased spaces, but the variance was largely to reduce parking requirements due to increased bike racks.  See the tweet above from the Planning Department.

 

Well,  I needed to post something to get rid of that "parking lot" on my profile!  So here is picture of what is proposed for Heights Blvd.  http://www.heightsmercantile.com/#!look-book/c1ppg  It says more than I ever could!   I am really curious what the Historic Commission will say when they see it?  Do these structures need to go through HAHC?

[Texasota]

Hmmm, it depends on exactly what the boundaries are. It looks like the entirety of the 700 block of Heights is in a historic district.

[Texasota]

Overall I really like this, but its hard to tell exactly whats going on without a site plan.

[bedmondson]

It appears to be nothing more than a glorified pintrest board at this point but I like the direction they are headed. Based on the boundaries in the link below, they are not subject to HAHC review. 

http://www.finialgroup.com/properties/flyers/pappas-yaleflyer.pdf

[Angostura]

I am sorry but that is not correct.  There is no onsite parking at Coltivare due to the variance.  There are only onsite bike spaces.  Usually bike spaces can only be used for 10% of the allotment.  However, Coltivare received a variance to pump up that allotment.  They have also obtained some leased spaces, but the variance was largely to reduce parking requirements due to increased bike racks.  See the tweet above from the Planning Department.

 

 

The ordinance doesn't require on-site parking, it requires off-street parking. The variance was to allow the head-in spaces (which Coltivare leases) to be counted despite not meeting CoH's minimum depth requirement.

[Angostura]

The request to reduce parking in an area that already lacks available street parking will almost certainly be opposed?  Two proposed restaurants?   The imminent completion of 500 plus apartments on Yale will not help the parking situation.  The streets are already pretty narrow when people park along 7th and Heights to access Revival Market, the bike trail, the jogging trail, Donovan park etc.  Forget the inconvenience to residents, how will emergency vehicles respond? 

 

Look at the situation on Arlington St. with Coltivare; the residents are very upset.  Coltivare received a reduction in parking from the City when they added 40 bicycle spaces.  Unfortunately, no more than two bikes are ever parked there.  Rather, for every table that is occupied you see multiple cars.  Gelazzi does not have enough bathrooms so their guests have urinated in yards on Harvard St.  And Revival Market at 550 Heights is a tiny place, but it is packed to the gills with tables and standing patrons that often exceeds its occupancy permit.  Now Revival also wants to start a dinner service with a bar license,  Diners at Revival already occupy the parking lot and much of White Oak and Heights Blvd. 

 

Heights Blvd in particular has a lot of nice homes.  I feel so sad for those residents on Heights and nearby streets who will experience the noise from the thumping bass from the proposed rooftop restaurant late into the night, the lack of parking, elevated crime and emergency vehicle problems. 

 

 

This is why we can't have nice things.

[Angostura]

 

The CoH parking minimums are not sufficient to keep people from having to park in the neighborhoods.  They are just mitigation of the issue.  Unfortunately, a lot of people in Houston are not used to dealing with parking in an urban area and will block driveways and ignore other parking restrictions just to keep from having to walk a few blocks.  Even if everyone follows the parking minimum rules, there will always be spillover when you have a very popular restaurant. 

 

 

The parking minimums are a blunt instrument at best. The average Houston parking space probably spends 16-20 hours per day empty, yet we continue to require more every time someone builds anything.

 

It's possible to manage the situation. Try parking where you shouldn't in Montrose and see how fast your car gets towed.

 

Additionally, HFD is fully and unilaterally empowered to limit street parking on one or both sides of the street if they conclude that emergency vehicle access is a problem.

[Angostura]

Some info on the development planned for the former Pappas warehouse on 7th between Heights and Yale:

 

http://www.heightsmercantile.com/

 

http://www.finialgroup.com/properties/flyers/pappas-yaleflyer.pdf

 

 

 

The developer is requesting an off-site parking variance to count the head-in spaces on 7th as part of the minimum required.

[s3mh]

I would by 100% in support of the variance if they irrevocably committed to building street fronted shops as they appear in the renderings.  My only fear would be that they get the variance and then back pedal on the plans and put up a cheap strip mall instead of the slick two story building in the renderings.  The benefits of this kind of development (assuming it is what they say it will be) outweigh the parking burdens on the neighborhood, which as noted above can be mitigated by strong enforcement from CoH and HFD.  More pedestrian friendly development along Yale St. will help slow down the expressway that Yale St. has become.  The intersection of 11th and Yale will have a new Weber/Pera restaurant and more than likely additional retail development where the post office is.  A block to the north, the redevelopment of the property across the street from the firehouse will probably have a retail element.  The more retail we get on Yale St., the more people will be slowing down to pull in and go out of each establishment and slow down just to look at what is going on.  The alternative is more junk strip centers that will still have spill over parking issues and do nothing to create any street life. 

[Angostura]

^^^^Agree with this.

 

Parallel parking along Yale will also calm traffic on this stretch, and probably mitigate the issues w/ crossing Yale on the bike trail at 7th.

 

 

[HeightsPeep]

The scale and style seem more like Washington Ave or Midtown and incongruous for this historic district. What will that look like next to the bungalow that is being remodeled to the south?

The pictures in the "lookbook" look like urban streetscapes, but the parking site plan still looks like a cheap strip mall with much of the parking visible from the street.

Still, how excited are you to see hipsters, barefoot, but wearing suits and briefcases traversing the Boulevard in grass sod-lined hamster wheels! It is a bizarre fiction, much in the way it is a fiction that you can hold the developer to renting to local businesses. They will rent to the highest rent paying option.

Is there any real reason to let over 90 spaces be given gratis on a city street absent a serious benefit to the community?

The local businesses that are already there do not have any parking credits, other than Coltivare which has had a dubious parking outcome at best. This project will kill the true local businesses like Barrio Antigua. But maybe the guy in the hamster wheel will come out. That would make my day!

[mcook2002]

Still, how excited are you to see hipsters, barefoot, but wearing suits and briefcases traversing the Boulevard in grass sod-lined hamster wheels! It is a bizarre fiction, much in the way it is a fiction that you can hold the developer to renting to local businesses. They will rent to the highest rent paying option.

The local businesses that are already there do not have any parking credits, other than Coltivare which has had a dubious parking outcome at best. This project will kill the true local businesses like Barrio Antigua. But maybe the guy in the hamster wheel will come out. That would make my day!

 

What you have written here is pure, bizarre, fiction.

[s3mh]

It is not in a historic district.  I would agree that it would look better if it tried to emulate the original commercial architecture (like the property at Yale and 12th that will be renovate).  But, absent the historic district, anything goes.  And if I had a second choice, it would be what they are doing.  It is a modern warehouse/loft style that is attractive, has lots of big windows and is very open to the street.  It does not at all look like a strip mall.  The parking that is shown in the renderings is the existing parking on 7th street, which is either a single row of head in or parallel parking.  That is what we have on 19th street. 

 

The complex is going to be across the street from about 700 units of apartments.  I take the hipster in the hamster wheel with a grain of salt.  It is just marketing BS directed at younger people.  But, that market segment is definitely going to be there and is probably a significant reason why this development is happening. 

 

There is no guaranty that this won't fill up with national chains.  However, the typical strip mall denizens are not likely to go near an unusual development like this due to the fact that there is no parking in front of the retail pads.  Many of the typical strip mall lessees will not rent unless there is parking in front.  That is why so many developers in Houston are chicken of ground floor retail. 

 

Your claim that Barrio Antiqua will be adversely affected is silly.  Would you rather have your store across the street from a busy development with nice restaurants and retail or a food distribution warehouse with 18 wheelers coming and going all day?  For every customer that skips over the store due to parking another dozen will walk across the street after having a nice lunch to do some shopping. 

 

Coltivare would have had to add about 8 spaces had they lost their variance.  People would still be parking on Arlington even if they had 50% more than the required city minimums.  The problem is not Coltivare.  The problem is that people have built huge houses over driveways, fill their garage with junk and expect to have exclusive domain to the right of way on the street for their parking.  I looked at a couple of houses a block from Studewood and White Oak when I was looking to buy.  I passed on them because I knew that there wood be spill over from the commercial areas.  If you bought on a street that is close to one of the commercial corridors in the Heights, you are going to have people parking their cars on your street no matter what.  Limiting development will not solve the problem.  It will just mean that the existing retail will become so overcrowded that it won't be worth it to try to go out to eat in the neighborhood. 

[swtsig]

i've seen the site plans and detailed renderings - this is a great project. you will NEVER please everyone, especially in the heights, but as an amenity for the community as a whole it will be fantastic. besides they are talking to some really interesting potential tenants. on top of that the owner is passionate and committed to making this thing a true success. it will be a little more austin than heights (michael hsu is the architect) but very cool.