Gooch

Thanks for posting that Emme! I noted earlier in this thread, but it may have gotten lost in the bike vs. driver feuding... I also heard from Peter Brown's office, who forwarded the information to both HPD and the Houston Bikeways cooridnator. HPD also followed up. All around a very nice response. It should be appreciated!

As crazy as it sounds now... I moved into the Heights because it was cheap. and my neighbors were freaks and musicians. Oh, and the homes had yards with trees! My how the neighborhood has changed!

#6 ! ! ! Very proud of this team! Love that a starting football player Chad Jones came into pitch in middle relief. Pontiff in at the end. And Coleman icing it with 3 strike outs.

A lot of the airstaff have stalkers, too. And not just the females!

I replace a window unit in my rental unit. Where can I bring the old one, preferrebly to a recycler?

This team really reminds me of the '91 team. Has a good vibe.

Willowick @ San Filipe. This is much clearer as to who goes where compared to the vague marking on Heights. Any opinions of adding marking like these to Heights Blvd? Worth it? Not?

If scanning far enough in front of you for your speed, you will see supposed-mega-long backup of cars, or the cyclists long before they "suddenly" appear in front of you. They are in your lane. They aren't jumping out of nowhere. And shouldn't be surprising you as you approach them. If you can't anticipate them, perhaps try looking further up the road as you drive? Even if you consider it foolish... for you... it isn't a foolish activity because cyclists are following the rules. It's foolish because some drivers are too impatient and self-important to follow the rules of the road. Be careful where you place your fools ;-) As a biker I accept some reasoned risk of being hurt. What's the alternative? Sit at the house and eat bon-bons all day? By that logic we should all quit driving our cars because some drunk may be out there waiting to cause an accident.

Or a problem for riders. Your way is the correct way to do it. If I'm on the bike I hug the line just inside of the bike lane, giving room for traffic to advance and make right hand turns on my right-hand-side. I split the lane between, which is legal in TX. I'll take a picture of what the correct markings should look like if I get a chance this afternoon. N.Post Oak where it crosses I-10 has a well marked right-hand-turn bike lane interface. This is going to sound wierd... but drivers that are too timid to pass make me more nervous than those zooming by on the side. Most of the time drivers have plenty of room to pass on and keep their vehicle within the lane. Especially if they time it where there is a gap between cars to the left. If you are looking ahead you should never get stuck behind a cyclist more than a few seconds. Most of the Houston bike lanes are so rough you can hardly ride them. The lane on Weslayan between 59 and Richmond comes to mind. Morningside through West U is a beast too. I think they designated that one a bike lane so they wouldn't have to maintain it to grade. You almost need a 6" travel mountain bike on parts of it!

UPDATE: I received a call from HPD this morning. The officer I spoke with was very professional, helpful, and interested to hear of the issues. As I told him, I'm more concerened because this is happening so often, more than I'm concerned with just one driver. Sometimes we tend assume that HPD won't responsive to our concerns. That is not the case at all. That's commendable given their workload and the sheer size of their patrol areas. I usually just ignore them, too. But this guy tacked himself on my wheel like he was drafting me. That brought me out of passive mode. Agree. It's poorly marked too. No one seems to know what to do when making a right turn too. All understandable. All drivers/riders make mistakes. That's not such a big deal. It's the folks using like a passing lane that's going to get someone hurt. Driver's should know passing on the right isn't correct in the first place. Crossing a solid line to do it is pretty obvious. There'd be a lot more traffic and at higher speeds with 4-lanes. Yale-like, where it's not hard to find folks doing 60+mph? Bad ju-ju with the pedestrian traffic up and down the neutral ground.

http://www.houstonarchitecture.info/haif/gallery/1237377429/gallery_6478_124_12778.jpg Thats me on my bike. That's a car behind me, driving in the Heights Blvd. bike lane, about 6-inches off my back wheel. What you cannot see is that he's honking and even went so far as to accelerate towards me in threatening manner. Why was he in the bike lane? Because he couldn't wait for 2 cars that were queued up at the red-light and was using it as a passing lane. I got the guy's plates, picture, and mug shot. So will HPD by the morning. I ride a lot. And I see cars using the Heights bike lane for passing on the right almost daily. I'm not talking about turning right, parking, etc. But, full on making a 2nd lane where none exists. Its becoming more and more common. What can we do about this, other than the obvious filing a police report. And I've written Mayor White, Cheif Hurtt, and Jack Abercia. No city council member at the moment, so I copied the at large members. Any others ideas?

When snoballs are banned, only the criminals will have snoballs!!

One must remember that tone and intonation are completely lost upon going from spoken to written word. A conversation with facial expressions and proper intonation is far superior to anything we could ever type here.Just sayin'.....

With all of the music blaring from vehicles, the cars zooming by at 80mph, and the semi-regular ambulance and fire truck traffic from the Main St. firehouse going down Studewood... someone compained about a snowball stand? Seriously? Is this a joke? The snoball stand is disrupting someone's peace? really? THANKS FOR THE MAMories! I hope you come back.

Timely. I rode up onto this building recently and wondered what it was. It is a fantastic building with some intricate details! I'd love to see the insides. Sad to say I couldn't figure out why it was still standing. Being a historic building in Houston is like being a caribou on the Serengetti. Comforting to see there are no current plans for demolition.

It listed right at or below $200k before the rehab.

Does this mean the inspection requirements in unicorporated areas is no mas?

First, Scalia delivered the opinion of the court, but is not necessarily the sole author of the words. It is not a direct quotation of his words. They are the opinion of the majority of the court, with the exception of Justice Ginsburg who appears to have written a dissent. Second, unlike the Sotomayer quote, the above is in reference to state judges not Federal judges in reference to a state constitution, not the US Constitution, in reference to state law, not federal law. Without any knowlege of Minnesota's state constitution; I have no idea if judges are empowered to make law or not. But clearly the quotation was not meant to apply to federal law. Finally, it appears that the power to make common law in the context of this case was established by a previous court case See, e.g., Baker v. State, 170 Vt. 194, 744 A. 2d 864 (1999). and the opinion is merely referencing that case. I read serveral of Sotomayor's opinions over the last few days. Generally, the few I've read are sound. However, her overturned rulings were complete smackdowns by the reviewing courts. In my opinion she's qualified; but perhaps has a wobbler here and there. The best possible appointment? Not by a long shot. But Senate confirmation isn't for selection. That's the President's power. Unfortunately for all recent nominees the Senate has forgotten that. I'm about to go on a training ride. Should I shower now or when I get back?

By some. Ginsberg is as villified as Thomas in Conservative circles. I'd wager that most haters have never read an opinion or a transcript of oral arguments where each shine in differing ways. (trying to keep on topic...) I cannot name one justice univerally approved of by liberal and conservative talking heads. Past or present. No reason believe Sotomayer would be the first.

Indeed. Justice Souter, who she is to replace if confirmed, often sided with the liberal side of the court, and was appointed by President Bush. A proper judge will not have a predetermined bent. However... any nominee will be labeled as having a bent -real or not- as part of our political process of bickering. No nominee can escape being labeled as too (liberal/conservative) by the opposite side that appointed him or her. It is the thought process that makes a good justice. Justice Thomas and Justice Ginsberg are known to be close personal friends and often consult at length on court opinions. Although they are known as too "conservative" and too "liberal" by the respective opposition. Justice Thomas (I'm paraphrasing) cites Ginsberg as one of his most respected peers in his book. Both have turned out to be excellent justices. It's a bit of a crap shoot, uncomfortable as that may be. Nice!

EMME thanks for that. Many Heightsians (myself included) are guilty of coming across as snooty and even a militant because we are so protective of our neighborhood. But people are people. And good neighbors (people) can reside in small bungalows, townhomes, and McVics as well. I cant' speak for everyone. But, most of us aren't working to keep any stereotype in or out of the neighborhood. Just preserve the uniqueness of the neighborhood. We are working to protect our neighborhood from becoming just like West U or Rice Military. Not that there's anything wrong with those neighborhoods. Not at all! They are unique in their own regards. I wouldn't (economics aside) expect them to be enthralled if people were tearing down their uniquely-defining houses to put up bungalows. There's room for all.

Some action going on this afternoon...munch, munch, munch.

A couple of snaps from today's ride. From the Bat Crap Bridge... A little closer...

I can't offhand recall any new one story houses being built either. I also see lots of multi-story-to-the-lot-line homes, built on spec, that are empty and unsold. I'm sure there's more than one spec-McMansion bulider holding onto houses in the Heights wishing they built something smaller right now. Can we say that's what consumers demand? Just because it's the only hometype developers are building on spec doesn't mean that's the only hometype the market demands. To some extent people buy what's available. Bungalows sell at a premium. Is that because there's no market for that type of house? I don't think they sell at a premium because they are old, but in spite of it. Regardless. Two, three, four, ?? stories could be perfectly appropriate with a decent set back. With an 18-in. setback; a single story is going to put a squeeze on some properties. There are many strategies to mitigate intrusiveness without imposing draconian size limitations. For example, many blocks in the Heights have driveways all on the same side of each house, creating a natural set back while minimizing the unused lot space. When a new builder comes along and builds a wide width front elevation centered on the lot, it eliminates that natural setback. The builder could build the same sized house, just moved over ten feet and the garage on the side instead of the front. It just takes a bit of thought to choose the right stock plan to rubber stamp onto the siteplan. Is it such a burden for builders put some thought into it? That's why I posed the question -when does it become intrusive to the builder or neigbhors? I'm interested in hearing ideas on how to delineate it (another thread perhaps?) It's hard to define in objective terms. It IS a slippery slope. One I don't want regulators to go down. But as builders construct without consideration of their impact onto their surroundings, people will get more and more motivated toward regulation.

10-4. But consider that the effect of an oversize structre, by virtue of its size, extend past the property line as well. It can block the sun. It can block the breeze. The view from the 3rd story can overlook the neighboring yard, opening it to prying eyes. That would suck if you were a shy sunbather! Or have a Mrs. Kravitz next door! Perhaps it doesn't keep you from sleeping, but from enjoying yourself when awake. I realize that in any dense urban environment there's no practical way to have zero-impact on the neighbors. But a small amount of consideration can go a long way to reducing the intrusional effects. Is it too much to expect a little self-restraint by builders? A lot of the new-builds display contempt more than consideration. That's poor design and leads to ill will and calls for regulation. That's not good for anyone.