Jump to content
HAIF - Houston's original social media

1014 Prairie To Be Renovated Into GFR/Apartments


Recommended Posts

I love that this developer is from New Orleans, it means that this will be done right and not used as a billboard or have the cornice taken off or torn down for parking or all the other stuff the local yokels have been known to do (just naming incidents from the past 5 years).

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Very cool development.  But those are going to be very small apartments.  The article says it's 13,500 square feet on 3 floors. 4,500 per floor.  First floor will be for retail.  That leaves a total of 9,000 square feet on the apartment floors.  If all 9,000 square feet could be used for apartments that would be 450 square feet per apartment.  And they obviously cannot use all 9,000 square feet in the apartments; hallways, elevators, stairways, service areas will be required. That will take at the very least 1,000 square feet out, taking us down to 400 square feet per apartment.

Edited by Houston19514
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Honestly true studio efficiencies like that would be great to have downtown. For context, a traditional 1930's era studio is around 370-390 square feet. There aren't very many I know of in Houston, but there's a set of three buildings off of Holman between Almeda and the freeway that have their originalish floorplans.

 

They're much more common in midwestern cities and LA. I've lived in a few, and as affordable housing goes I'm a big fan, especially if you're a fulltime student or something.

Edited by Texasota
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...

I'm not sure how they expect to make this project work when the Episcopalian Health Foundation has allowed a homeless encampment to develop under their canopy, right next door at 500 Fannin.  It's amazing that nobody seems to object to the lack of social distancing among those who live on this sidewalk, or to the lack of restroom facilities (other than a porta-can that's been installed on Fannin).  The sidewalk along Prairie is virtually impassable.  With this encampment being allowed to happen, I guess that "love thy neighbors" doesn't really apply to those of us who actually are the neighbors, or to those who may become their neighbors if this project does happen.  I sure wish this wasn't the case.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, ATH said:

I'm not sure how they expect to make this project work when the Episcopalian Health Foundation has allowed a homeless encampment to develop under their canopy, right next door at 500 Fannin.  It's amazing that nobody seems to object to the lack of social distancing among those who live on this sidewalk, or to the lack of restroom facilities (other than a porta-can that's been installed on Fannin).  The sidewalk along Prairie is virtually impassable.  With this encampment being allowed to happen, I guess that "love thy neighbors" doesn't really apply to those of us who actually are the neighbors, or to those who may become their neighbors if this project does happen.  I sure wish this wasn't the case.

I’ve complained about this corner. You see drug deals happen in broad daylight.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, ATH said:

I'm not sure how they expect to make this project work when the Episcopalian Health Foundation has allowed a homeless encampment to develop under their canopy, right next door at 500 Fannin.  It's amazing that nobody seems to object to the lack of social distancing among those who live on this sidewalk, or to the lack of restroom facilities (other than a porta-can that's been installed on Fannin).  The sidewalk along Prairie is virtually impassable.  With this encampment being allowed to happen, I guess that "love thy neighbors" doesn't really apply to those of us who actually are the neighbors, or to those who may become their neighbors if this project does happen.  I sure wish this wasn't the case.

 

Not entirely certain about this, but I'm not sure it's Episcopal Health Foundation that has "allowed" the homeless encampment.  My understanding is that they have tried to get the city to take action, but the city has not been cooperative.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Houston19514 said:

 

Not entirely certain about this, but I'm not sure it's Episcopal Health Foundation that has "allowed" the homeless encampment.  My understanding is that they have tried to get the city to take action, but the city has not been cooperative.


I wonder exactly how that works. The city has been successful in keeping encampments out of some places, but clearly have given up in others. What's the deciding factor?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Episcopal Health Foundation "owns" the sidewalk under their canopy because their property line is actually the back of the curb on Prairie, since their basement is located under the sidewalk.  As such, they have the say over how the sidewalk is used by way of an encroachment agreement with the City of Houston.  May of the buildings in the Historic District have similar ownership of the sidewalks at their building.  If the Episcopal Health Foundation wanted these people gone, they would ask the police to enforce the trespassing ordinance.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, ATH said:

The Episcopal Health Foundation "owns" the sidewalk under their canopy because their property line is actually the back of the curb on Prairie, since their basement is located under the sidewalk.  As such, they have the say over how the sidewalk is used by way of an encroachment agreement with the City of Houston.  May of the buildings in the Historic District have similar ownership of the sidewalks at their building.  If the Episcopal Health Foundation wanted these people gone, they would ask the police to enforce the trespassing ordinance.

 

Even if your characterization of the ownership of the sidewalk is accurate, (a) it is nevertheless almost certainly still in the public realm by virtue of city right of way or easement and (b) even if a trespassing charge was available, if the city police won't cooperate in enforcement, it's not worth much.  (FWIW, again, a trespassing charge is probably not tenable, given that it is a public sidewalk, nominal ownership notwithstanding).

 

To add further clarity, the encroachment agreement referenced above is to allow for the encroachment into the city's right-of-way (below grade, and probably also allowing for the canopy). It would have no impact on the treatment of the surface as public domain.

Edited by Houston19514
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This building's vacancy contributes to the problem though. Occupying it will put pressure on the City, the Episcopal Health Foundation, etc, to find a better solution for the unhoused community that has congregated here. 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

a good solution is one-way Greyhound tickets to cities that are better equipped to deal with them and or more accommodating to them. Most are on the streets because shelters have too many rules they don't want to obey, or they have been ripped off in the shelters

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 9/2/2020 at 3:00 PM, HouTXRanger said:


I wonder exactly how that works. The city has been successful in keeping encampments out of some places, but clearly have given up in others. What's the deciding factor?

 

The more recent "successes" have been moreso due to the State for the areas under the highways and private entities enforcing their rights via the method outlined by @ATH. But you are right, the city does sometimes get aggressive with certain encampments through HPD and their outreach officers either citing trespassing or helping the individuals find the shelter thats right for them. Also, the more the "successes" there are the more the transient people will find their ways into unusual parts of neighborhoods that didn't typically have such people walking around. For example, some of the individuals I got to know by Wheeler/the Ion are now panhandling deep in Montrose, almost near Kirby. So its kind of a cascading issue.

 

The city did the impossible and helped the homeless find either shelter or helped them move on from the area by the courthouse compared to what it was in 2012-2013. If they can do that, I'm sure this development will be fine when the time comes. 

Edited by X.R.
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/8/2020 at 2:24 PM, Tumbleweed_Tx said:

a good solution is one-way Greyhound tickets to cities that are better equipped to deal with them and or more accommodating to them. Most are on the streets because shelters have too many rules they don't want to obey, or they have been ripped off in the shelters

WOW 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Think of the homeless problems as a three fold . You have your homeless who genuinely are just down on luck. These are the ones that accept  housing  and lodging. 

 

. You have your mentality ill or those who have social problems. They are often chronic homeless.  They will get back on their feet for awhile but fall back off.. sadly they will bounce between the two for most of their life. 

 

.Then you have the criminal elements, these are people who can't get housing outside of half ways housing because of violent backgrounds.. Your sex offenders,  and other violent  crimes that get flagged in background checks

 

. The majority of people around the greyhound  station are not really homeless, they are drug dealers who use the homeless to hide in plain sight.( these can be dealt with by simply cracking down on them) The city does this all the time when there a big event in town. 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, X.R. said:

 

The more recent "successes" have been moreso due to the State for the areas under the highways and private entities enforcing their rights via the method outlined by @ATH. But you are right, the city does sometimes get aggressive with certain encampments through HPD and their outreach officers either citing trespassing or helping the individuals find the shelter thats right for them. Also, the more the "successes" there are the more the transient people will find their ways into unusual parts of neighborhoods that didn't typically have such people walking around. For example, some of the individuals I got to know by Wheeler/the Ion are now panhandling deep in Montrose, almost near Kirby. So its kind of a cascading issue.

 

The city did the impossible and helped the homeless find either shelter or helped them move on from the area by the courthouse compared to what it was in 2012-2013. If they can do that, I'm sure this development will be fine when the time comes. 

 

from a standpoint of getting the homeless to stop living under freeways it can't even be considered a success. there is a new encampment under i45 just east of downtown, and there is a smaller encampment farther down i45 at the Cullen overpass. 

 

I expect the Cullen one will be 'cleaned up' sooner rather than later due to the proximity to UH and students. parents and UH aren't going to be happy when one of the main entrances to the campus has a bunch of homeless living right across the street.

 

anyway, as per this specific space, once the police end up getting enough nuisance calls it will be worth their time to move them away from the area.

 

  

4 hours ago, Moore713 said:

. The majority of people around the greyhound  station are not really homeless, they are drug dealers who use the homeless to hide in plain sight.( these can be dealt with by simply cracking down on them) The city does this all the time when there a big event in town. 

 

for a while there was a pair of guys that worked on scott and i45. both had buckets and things to wash windows, but it was pretty clear one was a lookout and the other wasn't at all interested in washing windows, just chatting with people at the light and 'shaking hands'.

Edited by samagon
  • Like 2
Link to post
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...