jgriff

Here’s some info on 3550. I don’t know if it sold yet. If anyone has any info I’d love to hear it. I love very close to this site and am looking forward to its redevelopment.

https://www.loopnet.com/Listing/3550-W-Dallas-St-Houston-TX/9376936/

There are several different parcels of land and organizations in the area North of West Dallas and West of Tirrel. 3540 West Dallas fronts West Dallas and has been sold to Hanover. The plot at the corner of West Dallas and Shepherd has been sold for a new apartment development also. The plot referenced in the first post on this thread faces Allen Parkway, it is behind the Hanover property. I’ve heard that it was damaged in Harvey and has been for sale but haven’t heard that it has sold. 

I havent looked at the variance sign closely but I assumed it was in reference to the Hanover plot. 

A variance request sign went up this morning on the site.

Does that 10’ dimension from the building line to the W. Dallas right of way mean we are getting a building that will come up almost to the sidewalk?

This must have been an expensive piece of land to buy considering that the 4.5 acres near it went for over $30 million. Could a wrap make sense here or would you need a high rise to make the investment worthwhile? 

3 hours ago, dbigtex56 said:

 

Can't speak for everyone (I don't know everyone), but I've known plenty of people who were thrilled to move into high-rises, and even more thrilled to move out.
Among the reasons: that spectacular view, with its ever-changing tapestry, is a novelty that can wear off rather quickly. I've heard people say "Hell, after the first month, I barely even looked out the windows."
High-rises are buildings in which people commute. After a day of dealing with Houston traffic, many people just want to go home. Instead, there's the parking garage to deal with, the waiting for elevators, the unpredictable stopping and starting on other floors. You're home - but you're not really home. Those extra few minutes can be frustrating.

Then, there's the whole elevator etiquette question. Not everyone enjoys being cheek-to-jowl with strangers who use too much perfume (or not enough, if you get my drift). Awkward silences and awkward conversations aren't for everyone. Situations where multiple people are transporting dogs or armloads of groceries are amusing on sit-coms, but sometimes annoying in real life. Having to make two trips is maddening if it means riding an extra 30 or 40 (or more) floors. If you forget your sunglasses or Chap-Stick, often it's easier to buy replacements than to make that trek again. 
In other words, I'd qualify that "yes".

And at about twice the cost of a house in the same area. There are people who have money to burn. I could afford it but I need a lot more money than I have before I start throwing it away.

On 11/16/2018 at 0:47 PM, s3mh said:

It's Honker the Goose's house.  My kids have had their picture taken with Honker.  And we got a hollowed out goose egg from Honker.  So sad to see Honker and his lovely owner move out.  

 

https://www.har.com/723-w-12th-street/sale_30672358

 

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/local/gray-matters/article/A-jungle-paradise-in-the-Heights-10798099.php

 

Love this story. 

28 minutes ago, UtterlyUrban said:

And herein is the problem:

 

“The city says they will all be given the opportunity to go to shelters with the help of The Way Home Coalition, but only a handful of people appeared to be taking the city up on that offer.”

 

I am tired of the term “homeless” to describe addicts and the mentally ill.  As a society we need to stop using the euphemism “homeless” and start referring to folks as what they are:  mentally ill and/or addicts.  I have been told by the good folks at Star of Hope during one of my volunteer days that “the vast majority” of the folks on the street are addicts or mentally ill.  Star of Hope  deals with it daily.  They get that there are the occasional “mother and child” or nuclear family fallen on hard times and the shelters around the City marshal resources to help these folks.  But increasingly, i understand, they are seeing addicts and mentally ill.

 

“Homelessness” in America is only marginally about “folks hitting a rough patch after losing a job and having a medical bill too”.   It’s really about addicts and mentally ill.  Once society starts talking in that language, society can begin to create viable programs and enact viable laws, that deal with the problems of addiction or mental illness rather than the outcome.

 

I agree.

 I would consider most of what we hear about the homeless to be fake news. 

5 hours ago, bobruss said:

 

I think eventually people that work in uptown will be offered parking in the transit lots on the transit centers at Katy and Bellaire and then catch the buses into the post oak blvd. freeing up the streets for shoppers and through traffic. Similar to what is done in the med center. 

You just have to remember that Rome wasn't built in a day. This will be a positive in the long run.

 

 

I rode the bus from the Northwest  transit center into the galleria every weekday for several years. It was very slow due to all the traffic. This BRT lane will not just be an improvement in the long run, it will be a huge improvement as soon as it is complete.

49 minutes ago, Luminare said:

 

Well if its North Montrose I think they should get to that part of the district next cycle. I live in Southeast Montrose and they are just about done with street improvements here. The worst offenders in my opinion is the Heights. That infrastructure up there is god awful. I'm amazed its so far behind.

  Montrose is still a great neighborhood. We might have some busted up sidewalks but we’re lucky to live here. It’s changed a bit but there’s still a lot of the old Montrose and not all the new Montrose is bad. We still have #s and now we also have a nationally recognized culinary scene.

7 hours ago, Luminare said:

 

If you think we are in a nice building boom now? Just think what it would be like if the city unloaded the burden of reconstructing right of way and parking. This place would be bananas!

 

Where do you live though? I would understand if its a neighborhood that has yet to be touched by the city, but if its further in town then thats a bit unacceptable. A lot of times this is the city's way of cover their butts for past negligence. Especially when it comes to ADA. The city could get into a lot of trouble if people report unsafe sidewalks and lack of ramps. The city has a limited budget to make these improvements and it often gets laid upon the feet of the developer.

I live in North Montrose. It’s a good question... public vs private funding of things like sidewalks. The city doesn’t have an unlimited budget and you can only raise taxes so

much. In a city with the square mileage of Houston the cost would be enormous. Maybe they could fund infrastructure like this for only certain areas. Of course I want it to

be my area.   Right now they use variance approvals to strong arm developers into paying for it. Bottom line though it’s paid for by all

of us. The system we have now makes rents a little higher for new buildings and doesn’t raise taxes on old ones.

We have our share of what some people would

consider “people who don’t look like me” around here. Almost all of them are harmless. There’s very little crime. There is a guy who lives in the College Park Cemetary but he’s quiet and keeps to himself. I say hi but he doesn’t say much. There’s also the person I’ve named the “College Park Cemetery Weirdo”. Not sure what he’s up

to but he kneels on the shell road for hours at a time facing North towards the bayou. The kids who walk through the neighborhood to go to MHMR are very nice. One was digging through my garbage once and was terrified when he saw me. He apologized profusely. The cemetary really is the best thing about the area. It’s facinating to walk through and like having a private park.

I've had lots of new construction around my house. Not only did the city require the developer to upgrade the sidewalks around their development, they made them upgrade sidewalks around the area that weren't adjacent to their property. They also had to widen our street and curb & gutter it. It worked out great for us.  The drainage in our neighborhood was upgraded significantly also. The construction manager talked with me often since I am in a similar business. He said the owner of the building was very upset that all the improvements he had to do cost far beyond what they thought it would. He went back to the city to argue that he shouldn't have to pay for some unexpected things that were discovered and lost. 

1 hour ago, LBC2HTX said:

Not sure why there's so many tears about not having a path along the bayou. If you want that, then go to BBP or one of the other many bayou paths around Houston. Plus, its not like the bayou is eye-pleasing. 

I walk BBP a lot. Sometimes the Bayou is "eye pleasing". The main issue with the trails that are close to the bayou for me is that they are often closed or impassible. They get washed away over and over again.  I probably wouldn't use them much except they are needed to get away from all the people on bikes that don't appear to have brakes. 

2 hours ago, CREguy13 said:

From what I am hearing, Hanover is planning a project that is close to the scale of Regent Square.  We shall see, but certainly adds pressure to GID.

Wouldnt they have to buy more land? This site isn’t near as big as Regent Square. Some of the adjacent land is for sale though.

8 hours ago, Triton said:

Are there any plans to make a better connection from Shepherd to Memorial Park? The side walk is rather small in most places and I usually have to get off the sidewalk on my bike to let people pass me. 

I agree. I’ve walked it many times and fear for my life on foot. I’d be even more worried on a bike. It’s so close to the road that if cyclist falls they could possibly go into traffic.

Tower crane looked complete today.

Surely this won’t be a wrap at almost $7 mil an acre, right? This is VERY close to my house. I hope it’s something good.

I should be able to provide construction pics anytime. If it’s taller than about 7 stories I’ll be able to see it from my couch.

Smith & Wollensky just wasn’t that good in my opinion. I went once and never went back. B&B and even Ritual have better steaks.

23 minutes ago, Luminare said:

 

Sometimes. Sometimes its completely valid. Especially when buildings get tall. Then we are getting into things like sunlight, views, and a general feeling of people stacking themselves on top of one another. This is exactly why New York has setback requirements at certain stages of a building so light can pass through, etc... I'm also fine with opposition doing these for selfish reasons especially if its for the rational reasons stated previously (although all of them are quite subjective in nature). The only thing I'm not fine with is if its for completely irrational reasons.

I agree. It’s not always used for selfish or corrupt reasons but it sure is a good setup for graft.

36 minutes ago, ADCS said:

 

Why would anyone oppose the setback variances?

Because they want something from the developer or just generally oppose the development and will use any means to stop it. 

34 minutes ago, Moderators said:

You rather see guys with beer bellies

instead lol.

We deserve some respect! This is Upper Kirby, it should be rich guys with beer bellys flirting with beautiful girls. That’s how Brassiere 19 stays in business.

12 minutes ago, H-Town Man said:

Of course, such zoning is done with the intent that a low-rise or single-family neighborhood remains low-rise forever.

I don’t want that kind of elitist thinking in Houston. Keeping certain people out of a neighborhood is something that we should be well behind by now.

9 minutes ago, wilcal said:

And is 100 additional apartments/condos going to affect traffic that much? 

 

 

No, not at all.

On ‎9‎/‎3‎/‎2018 at 11:12 AM, thedistrict84 said:

 

That’s a fairly low bar to set. There will always be somebody to oppose virtually any new development, no matter what the justification of their opposition may be. I’m not sure such people should be deemed “truly evil” though. 

I stand by it. They are "truly evil". I don't believe that they are intellectually honest in anyway and they want to trample on the rights of others. Lying to get your way and destroying some of the foundational rights that makes the U.S. what it is rises to the level of "evil". 

I like it because it pisses off the "What about the drainage?", "What about the traffic?", "It's out of scale with the neighborhood.", "Think of the children.", "I live in a bungalow." crowd. There's already a group of them trying to stop this. These people are truly evil.