dbigtex56

Don't forget "tribal hut" was located on the corner of California and Lincoln street.

Tribal Hut is now Tribal Grounds 2404 Montrose. Still a cool place for authentic hippie products.

Not a gentlemans bar?? For leboneses only?

Ironic, isn't it? that a cheesy strip club was taken over by a women's bar. They've hosted some great live music acts, and I've always been treated with respect on my rare visits.

That's weird. I just searched har.com for 1000-15000 bungalows in the Houston Heights. 14 are listed. The most expensive one just reduced the asking price $115,000. Why would they do that if people were fighting like hell to buy it? The only other house priced above $275 psf ($276) also had a price reduction. Why is that?

You aren't making up crap again, are you?

Seems like I've seen some price reductions in McMansions too. Welcome to the 2010's

Who wants to buy a 5-year old pseudo Victorian, when new ones cost no more?

Lawyer joke time! And to complete this circle of humor originality, wait'll you hear the joke I've got about a blonde who walks into a bar! It's a doozy!

Do you not find it interesting that both regular professed lawyers on this board, both of opposite ends of the political spectrum, dislike this ordinance?

In answer to the first: they ask for her ID.

In answer to the second: no.

Is this what's known as a veiled threat? I'm no lawyer ...

Clearly.

Now that's a veiled compliment!

Oxymoron.

The best Starbucks is the one you avoided on your way to the Inversion/Brasil/Empire Cafe/Rice Coffee House/etc...

In principle, I agree.

Have to admit that I usually run into old friends or new ones at the Hawthorne - Montrose location. And the people-watching isn't bad, either.

I still have trouble with using euphemisms for 'small', 'medium' and 'large'.

I'd definitely rather be offended by something static that is ugly than by something that is human and evil.

I'm guilty of both, yet we seem to get along.

Thanks. I won't.

I plan to print your post to let my South Heights neighbors know what you think of their property rights. Thanks for putting it in such glaring terms.

Is this what's known as a veiled threat? I'm no lawyer ...

I don't know if you are intentionally lying, or perhaps simply ignorant. I suspect the latter, since you stated much earlier in the thread that you are new to the Heights. I suggest that you investigate this claim. You can check with a fellow HAIF poster and fellow preservationist, heights yankee, who is on the board of Proctor Plaza Historic District. She stated in this very forum that only 3 homes were demolished in the 10 years of historic district staus WITH the 90 day waiting period. That is irrefutable proof that the old ordinance worked. [emphasis added]

Well, don't do anything primitive such as specifying the post in which she made this statement. And much as I like and admire the fellow HAIFer, are her statements 'irrefutable'?

In the early forties to mid fifties it was an auto service/repair place. HCAD lists the building as built in 1954 but who knows what was what and when since there are multiple buildings (1955 directory lists "Tower Auto Service and Repair," 1942 lists "Romeo's Service Station").

The only listing I could find for 1976 was 2715 Waughcrest (the back end of Chances now) - it was an American Legion post..

I remember going to Charlie's once in a while. I think the bar behind it (on Waugh - the American Legion space) was called Bacchus (II?) in the 1990s..

In 1942 Angelo's Cafe was at 1012 Westheimer (about where the Burger King parking lot is located).

1981 recollection: the Chances building was covered under a sort of shingled A-frame, and was called the Booby (Boobie?) Rock (seriously), and was a .... , well, not a gentlemen's club. It was a tittie bar.

Across Waugh Dr, the parking lot next to (east of) Mary's (1022 Westheimer) was occupied by an abandoned carwash. The site now occupied by Burger King was Dorsey's Auto Glass, and appeared to be a converted 1920's-30's gas station, in the Spanish Mission style. East of Lincoln St (present site of Velero) was Prince's Hamburgers.

Might Angelo's Cafe have been located on Mary's parking lot?

Some previous posts on this topic:

[facepalm] I'm going to quote you on this until the end of days.

Dallas has zoning. Like most cities with zoning, they granted variances liberally. New townhomes were built, were purchased, and were occupied. Complaints from the purchasers and residents of the new townhomes were instrumental in deflating the Deep Ellum scene, which existed before the townhomes did and made the area attractive for developers of townhomes in the first place. (Which is to say, it's a lot like the Washington Ave. scene, except nobody takes townhome owners seriously here. We give them lip service.)

Dallas' politicians are also renowned for grafting and cronyism. One is in prison because he double-crossed a developer with whom he had been cutting back room P&Z deals.

I don't think that any of this materially impacted the music scene in Dallas. It just moved on.

I understand. The problem is the variances, and lack of enforcement.

Can we get an "or work" added to the first set of poll questions after the phrase, "Do you live"?

God, I hope not.

Because following that refinement, issues will arise which will involve the distance you're willing to deviate from your usual home-to-work route, and expected savings to be realized by doing so, and the gas milage of your vehicle and the number of passengers, and their individual discretionary income.

After which, we're left with the same thing: a flawed model.

Fiesta's shopping carts are an unspoken amenity to your neighborhood's pedestrian shoppers. They will let you take them home. It's not even that they don't care. It's how they compete.

In some European cities, bicycles are provided for the public to use without penalty (or so is my understanding - look it up, yerself), with the understanding that things sort themselves out.

Such seems the case with Fiesta. Whenever the vacant lot next door contained more than a couple of abandoned carts, I'd give them a call, and eventually a truck would stop by and pick them up.

houston is boring unless a tourist knows someone who lives here. as much as i enjoy positive attention aimed at houston and equally dismayed at the negative, i do not wish houston to be a tourist destination or a trendy place to be/live.

It's the anti-NYC; "A nice place to live, but I wouldn't want to visit there."

Could the lack of zoning in Houston be partially responsible for the lack of a local music scene?

In other cities there are streets or districts where it seems entertainment is given some protection. Here, any cranky neighbor can shut down a club, citing the noise ordinance. No wonder people are reluctant to invest in live-music venues. And the city, as a whole, suffers.

I've given up on this thread and decided to read War and Peace instead.

It's shorter and the writing is better.

I believe that what was noteworthy here, was that Foley's Downtown was the first departments store of its kind.

Designed by Raymond Lowe, it had a tunnel or backstage area that surrounded each floor. The idea was that much like Disneyland which is supplied through underground corridors, merchandise, meaning products being stocked and some goods sold, would not go through the normal customer entrances and exits. They would come in through the loading docs, up to the appropriate floor, and then around the floor in the tunnels poping out only when they reached the destination department. The newsreel seems to be featuring the state of the art shopping experience at Foley's including showing purchases being made, the packages then being dropped down a chute, eventually making it to the shipping department for home delivery OR being sent to the parking garage across the street where they would be placed in your car when you departed. It really was most civilized.

I've always been fascinated by Raymond Loewy's influence on post WWII taste. I wonder how much of his original design remains in present day Macy's, and what's been discarded or altered beyond recognition.

To clarify: People have made the argument that Walmart will benefit low-income people in the Heights area.

In the context of that argument - which, I assumed, was understood - I made a remark that people who live in an affordable apartment complex on Heights Blvd might feel that this development was not beneficial to them, as it involved the demolition of their homes.

How this statement came to be so misunderstood is a mystery to me.

I'm pretty sure I didn't, but to be safe, perhaps you can give a little detail into what exactly you meant. The quote in question for ease of reference: "So, the building of this Wal-Mart is going to benefit low-income citizens ... by demolishing their affordable housing?"

Weird. So you two thought the low prices were intended only to benefit low income residents of just this one apartment complex? That's weirder than the idea that this Walmart is being built to service just Heights residents.

No. We're not doing this. You continue to quote out of context, then distort our meanings.

Go quote yourself.

The variance request on the agenda for yesterday's (5Aug) planning commission meeting was to include a reverse bend in the extension of Kohler St (between heights and Yale) that is slightly tighter than the ordinance calls for. The reason for the reverse bend is so that Kolhler will line up with 2nd St east of Heights.

You can see the detailed request here:

http://ataps1.pd.ci....ng+Calendar.nsf

Based on the video available of the commission meeting, it looks like the decision was deferred for 2 weeks.

Thanks for the info. This appears to be item #50 (D -Variances ) on the agenda:

50 Washington Heights Koehler STD C3R

Well it's either hipster elitism or racism. Or a combination of both.

Yeah, you did: "So, the building of this Wal-Mart is going to benefit low-income citizens ... by demolishing their affordable housing?"

Or maybe you were trying to prove Walmart is evil and not concerned about the poor by drawing an analogy of no relevance whatsoever? I mean, you know, since Walmart isn't building this new supercenter to benefit just the people who live in that one single apartment complex.

Edit: Unless you're suggesting this Walmart will be mobile and sentient, wandering around the innerloop devouring any low-income housing it comes across.

Again, I said nor suggested no such thing. Please do not take my words out of context.

Is Lanier a de facto Democrat? Some of his policies seemed more in keeping with those associated with the Republican platform.

Weird. So you two thought the low prices were intended only to benefit low income residents of just this one apartment complex? That's weirder than the idea that this Walmart is being built to service just Heights residents.

Neither of said anything of the sort. How weird that our words could be misinterpreted so purposely.

It's not like this city has an apartment shortage. If anything, this land is more attractive to developers now that there aren't any destruction costs.

I never understood why so many Houstonians get worked up over some 1950s or 1960s apartment complexes that are torn down for something new. Most of these aren't architecturally significant and for the most part they are dumps.

Several of the properties on this lot were very nice early 20th century houses which contributed to the historic feel of the neighborhood. The less architecturally significant muli-unit dwellings were part of the dwindling stock of afforable apartments in the Montrose area.

Forgive me if I don't get on my knees and join those who live their lives to kiss developers' asses. How about a little consideration for the people who, you know, live here?

Kinda makes for a decent green space to be honest. Those old apartments had squatters if i recall correctly.

No; they had tenants.

It would seem that you guys had learned your lesson about use things, already. Hopeful wishes for hotel/condo projects, illustrated in renderings, will not produce an actual building being the name of that hotel.

Thank you for your elucidation. Your ideas could not have been more clearly expressed.