samagon

No mention of Agora, Great atmosphere, imo, coffee is a step below others though.

Southside has the best espresso in town, that's got a lot to do with the espresso machine they have though (LaMarzacco Strada), I am so jealous of that machine. I really like that place. If I didn't own my own coffee shop, and lived in Montrose, I would be there nearly daily.

Catalina is great. 

I'm eager for Siphon to open, they have a long way to go from the last time I saw the building though, they must be in permit hell right now. I just want to see how their siphon compares with the siphon we do at the nook. I do know their machines they will be using for siphon are top notch though.

Brazil though, go for the food, not the coffee, it is less than special.

I miss the Diedrichs on Westheimer and Hazard. Really nice place. I lived in Alief at the time, so I only got by there when I had another reason to come into the loop.

Likely your Realtor doesn't know the east side that well, and Idylwood is well known throughout Houston as having always been a really nice enclave in the east end that has always had great home values and such.

Depending on what you're looking for, you may want to expand your search to include Eastwood, Broadmoor, EaDo, and a few others. If you already live in Houston, just hop in your car and drive around the neighborhoods to get an idea of what they feel like, and whether that is what you want.

Makes sense. What do you think is going to happen?

what do I think is going to happen? Nothing. at least not until people who live on Richmond complain enough about the quality of the road. Then (hopefully) they'll talk about doing LR at the same time, or they'll just redo it.

There's a conspiracy theory that I believe that COH is going out of its way to not make any effort to rebuild Richmond as punishment for culberson blocking rail.

Probably not, if it is on a list to get redone (which the list is short due to funds) they probably defer because of the impending rail project (whether it will happen or not).

Culberson (and/or his voters) aren't anti-rail, they're NIMBYs. If I didn't want, say, a freeway, or a gas station right behind my house (or in front of my house), that doesn't mean that I hated freeways or gas stations.

So that's some of my thoughts, some clarified, on the issue. Sorry if I insulted anybody.

That's a fair point, other than the inconvenience when it is built, and finding alternate methods of crossing the streets once it is built, there aren't many downsides to it. Upsides include long term reduction in traffic, long term land value increase, additional convenience by having multiple modes of transit available.

basically, a few short term distractions, and really good long term upsides.

whats wrong with crossing 59 if youre in an enclosed a/c skybridge with moving sidewalks, or underground, again in the comfort of a/c, with moving sidewalks, since walking all the way across a couple hundred foot wide freeway is such a hassle? heh. im not sure how extensive the greenway tunnel system is, but i hear one exists, so an underground tunnel below 59 connecting into GWs tunnel system sounds ideal. people wouldnt even know they were "crossing a freeway".

It's more of a food court between the renaisance hotel, GW 15 and one of the other bigger buildings. It's not that impressive.

If it was AC, I could see it, maybe. I'm not thinking of my own use, I'm thinking of business people who would ride from midtown/montrose/galleria area to their job in greenway, walking across a freeway on a typical pedestrian bridge. I just can't see a guy in a suit (or even business casual) using one of those over a freeway. If it were enclosed and climate controlled, sure.

again, yes a line straight down Richmond (though preferably submerged) would have the highest ridership, but Culberson is forcing the route to be redirected AGAIN, this time jumping across 59 at or before Shepherd, so Greenway and Upper Kirby will have to utilize crosswalks or tunnels to get to the north side of 59 either way.

Maybe I'm seeing it wrong, but I just don't see how cutting off most of the destinations by having a freeway in the middle makes it a useful proposition. In my mind, I think Culberson is suggesting something that is purposefully idiotic as a solution because he knows that it's such a bad idea no one wants to waste money on it. If he were really pro-rail, and not veiled deceit his message to his constituents would not be saying that they're paying for something they'll never use, he would point out that for every rider that's one less car on the road they have to sit next to in traffic. That is what the benefit is. and that's why they need to find the money to pay to elevate the rail, or put it below grade on Richmond.

More hyperbole about how it's "critical" it must be done that way. Would people really commute from TSU to Greenway Plaza? Probably not. But I'm not arguing if the line should be built or not, I just think that running it on Richmond is a bad idea.

Complains of hyperbole, makes own hyperbole.

No, people probably wouldn't travel from TSU to Greenway. They'd probably travel from TSU to the Galleria. They'd probably travel from Midtown to Greenway, or the Galleria. They'd probably travel from the Galleria (galleria area) to Greenway. They'd probably travel from anywhere to a stop near mandell to see the menil. They'd probably travel from anywhere to go to the westlayan movie theater. They'd probably commute to school at UH, or TCU.

Personally, I'd travel from the east end transit center to midtown, mandell, galleria, or the theater near greenway.

Would any of these people travel the university line if they had to cross a freeway to get to those locations?

That's the question you've got to ask yourself. I see the answer being no. even if they put in pedestrian bridges to cross the freeways (which I would see not happening). 

So yes, westpark would be more attractive from a lower impact build, but would people ride the rail to destinations on the other side of the freeway? I see the answer to that being no, and for that reason alone it makes the westpark corridor a waste of land use, a waste of money, and a waste of all the studies that have already been done showing that going straight down Richmond would provide the best benefit, and no, that's not hyperbole, that's from the study that they did. Richmond in the best impact for ridership going east/west.

edit: Is (effectively) making Richmond a 1 lane in each direction road, and cutting off access for street crossings as was done on main, and as is being done on the other lines the solution? I don't think it's the best solution, but I also think it is better than moving it over to westpark.

Personally, I think the best solution would be a mix of street level, elevated, and underground depending on the area. east of 59 (TCU and UH) street level, elevate from there all the way down to greenway, then go sub through afton oaks, and bring up to street grade again on the other side of 610. cost? yeah, right.

Thanks for the info, that makes the data much more interesting

This is irrelevant without knowing comparative numbers.

I mean, if ridership of metro rose 4% last year, but trips via cars increased by 10% that would kind of make the rise for metro a bit shallower.

This discussion has been had plenty of times on here. The fact is we have established in this country that such laws are constitutional, and if people are still backward enough to tear houses like this down, I say full steam ahead.

I typically find more fault in the seller for not putting some form or protection on the house prior to sale.

They didn't do it because they were as greedy as the developer and wanted to maximize their profits.

The developer may be a heartless B because he just sees the dollars and cents, not the hearts and wants of the neighbors who thought of the house as a nice structure.

The seller is more of a heartless B, typically they know exactly what the house means to their neighbors, but they just suppress that and start counting the dollars and cents.

 

Those Mopar sixes were practically indestructible. My first car was a '76 Duster with a six and a four-speed which someone had previously upgraded with a Hurst shifter. I bought it intending to eventually swap out the six for a 340 (or something bigger), but came to appreciate the stone reliability, smoothness, and economy of the six while I had it. Unfortunately, the frame developed a big crack after about a year, and that was the end of the Duster. 

It was probably the engines torque that tore the chassis. One of my buddies had a duster with the straight 6 and we replaced more motor mounts in that thing.

My fun car lineage isn't over, but the cars I've owned till now were a 78 Datsun 510 station wagon, 74 bug, 85 s10 blazer, 97 integra gsr, 04 subaru wrx wagon, and my current car is an 08 subaru sti. I've already ordered a new 15 subaru wrx.

No reason to not keep enjoying the drive!

The bug is probably the one I wish I still had, I had lucked into a 2.0 type 4 from a Porsche 914. Of course, time makes you forget all the problems you once had. I remember once the clutch cable broke about 50 miles from home. 50 miles with 3 years of driving experience and no clutch was a challenge, to say the least...

This thread has given me pause to having planted a tree between the street and sidewalk. Thanks for the awareness, I am going to go remove it before people realize it's an actual tree.

Where are the larpers going to go while it's being renovated?

I'd opt for the front loader, but with a very large 2nd story balcony.

Of the 3, I find the 3rd to be the most "stay off my yard" as the approach to the front door is so small (no large staircase there), and the hedges/fences are so high. It's not inviting. Not to mention the windows are small.

The second at least doesn't hide the first story, even though it's just a garage door.

The first does have a much more inviting appeal to it, big windows, big stairs leading to the entry. 

Buried power lines would really transform our landscape. It would really amplify the beauty of our town and people would get a charge out of the change. As others have mentioned, there's a lot of resistance. People with that thinking would need to be discharged before we could overcome that impedance. Myself, I am somewhat neutral on the subject. 

Sorry, for all the puns, I hope my post doesn't make anyone short circuit.

Anyway, Tesla did a lot of testing for transmitting electrical current over the air, the biggest problem with this is there's no real way to measure how much electricity someone is using, and as I recall, it was only useful for really high voltages. 

Best of luck to you.

Thanks for the thoughtful and cordial response. In the particular case of replacing a non-historic commercial development with new construction based on the original designs of the neigborhood, this is not an either or with removing bungalows. Also, in our particular case we are NOT making it more dense we proposed decreased density.

My question is, if a 4000 sqft home is set back like the surrounding homes and is not lot line to lot line, what makes that incompatible with a similarly situated 1500 sqft home. Compatible and typical have not been legally defined and therefore are in the eyes of the beholder.

The wording in the HD ordinance doesn't say anything about SF of the house:

 

Sec. 33-242. Same--New construction in historic district. 

 

The HAHC shall issue a certificate of appropriateness for new construction in an 

historic district upon finding that the application satisfies the following criteria: 

 

 (1) The new construction must match the typical setbacks of existing 

contributing structures in the historic district; 

 

 (2) The exterior features of new construction must be compatible with the 

exterior features of existing contributing structures in the historic district; 

 

 (3) The proportions of the new construction, including width and roofline, must 

be compatible with the typical proportions of existing contributing 

structures and objects in the historic district; 

 

(4) The height of the eaves of a new construction intended for use for 

residential purposes must not be taller than the typical height of the eaves 

of existing contributing structures used for residential purposes in the 

historic district; and 

 

(5) The height of new construction intended for use for commercial purposes 

must not be taller than the typical height of the existing structures used for 

commercial purposes in the historic district. 

 

Nothing in the foregoing shall be construed to require or impose a single 

architectural style in any historic district. 

 

Criteria 3 seems to be the most fitting that could limit SF. Otherwise the establishment of proportions is fairly vague. A literal person might calculate the average, mean, or other mathematical measurements of homes in the HD they are building to come up with some middle of the road number and build around those numbers, or go no bigger than the biggest example in the HD. As it is vague, it's left to interpretation, and well, argue your case if you can, see how far you get. Leaving it vague works in both directions, you know. Of course, it's a matter of how much time/money you have to invest in the property.

Certainly s3mh's interpretation of the vague rules, and neither the interpretation by the HAHC shouldn't be taken as the final word, if you really want to challenge it.

I think most schools closed.

I didn't make the call till right at 5pm yesterday, and my call was that my department was open barring an email sent the next morning, I told my team that they obviously had to use their best judgment, regardless.

Ours closed. I came in anyway, as power was out and I had to make sure when it came back on everything was online so people could work from home.

My assessment of the road situation is that there was no ice on the roads. Even still, they were creeping along at a snails pace on the freeway, I guess they don't know how to tell the difference between rain/ice. Anyway, good on them, better to be cautious than dangerous.

Even though I didn't see any, there were still 4 accidents on my 12 mile drive to work. Weird. I'm going back home after lunch and working the rest of the day there.

*insert John Madden commercial here*

So, the people drafting the ordinance should have been able to guess what would make people opposing the ordinance happy.  And the people who opposed the ordinance and did not participate in the process can now cry injustice because they did not get design guidelines that they never asked for when the ordinance was amended.  Or maybe instead of filling mailboxes with flyers claiming that HVAC placement and paint would be controlled by HAHC and that the Heights would turn into a slum when no one would renovate, the builders should have come to the City and participated in the process to ensure that their voices would be heard.  There is definitely a credibility issue when you complain about the ordinance but refused to participate in the process to draft the ordinance.  But this is all more than likely just pretext to try again to get rid of the ordinance. 

 

I think the people drafting the ordinance knew precisely what would make the opposition happy, not passing the ordinance in the first place, but since the will of the people was not the main order of business, it wasn't meant to be. Furthermore, it's there in black and white, without the help of any outside influence, the city knew that guidelines were needed, but did nothing, maybe because as you pointed out, the design guidelines already existed and were being recommended by the city!

Anyway, the opposition did participate, you can go back and read meeting notes, you can read this thread, you can see exactly what they were complaining about, yes, a good number did just say no, but an even better number provided reasons why they were saying no, such as examples of things that the ordinance was unclear about. And not just paint.

If you felt they could have done differently at the time, you should have reached out to them, rather than threatening to rat out your neighbors. (ref: http://www.houstonarchitecture.com/haif/topic/23402-historic-districts-in-houston/?p=377604)

I went there yesterday afternoon, upon seeing the fresh garlic, I bought it all.

In all seriousness, I went to HEB in Gulfgate on Sunday at about 7 to buy some vegetables and see if it was the typical madhouse, there were a lot of cars in the parking lot, but once I grabbed everything I needed I only had to wait for 2 or 3 minutes in line, rather than the 15-20 it usually takes.

Walmart, even if you don't go, is a positive for the area. Hopefully it stays this way, enough people in HEB to keep it busy, but not so busy that I choose to drive farther for a shorter line.

"When we crafted the ordinance, there was a great deal of discussion about whether there should be proscriptive design guidelines," said Parker. "And, frankly, a lot of the people who are coming in today asking for those design guidelines were completely and totally opposed to the historic districts, and did not want those guidelines at the time."

Her conclusion: "If some of these individuals had worked with us more in the beginning, we might not be having these problems now." 

Her conclusion is BS.

If there was a great deal of discussion about whether design guidelines should be included or not, then it should have been done, regardless what other people did or did not do.

That is not the fault of people who opposed the ordinance.

She knew, they all knew it was a problem, or they wouldn't have discussed it, but they passed it anyway, and are now choosing to blame someone else for something that was ultimately their responsibility. Thank you for pointing this out, S3MH.

I can only imagine the discussion that person is having with their insurance...

I would say that is EaDo right now.....lots of building....the esplanade on Navigation....art installations being installed....Light Rail....etc....

This isn't where the artists are moving to, at least not so close to downtown. There's very few cheap places in the "eado" area, you have to drive a mile down navigation, harrisburg, polk or leeland to get into the rents that are affordable to artists. eado is terrific (silly name aside), and I consider it as an east version of midtown, townhomes everywhere, upscale bars and restaurants, no starbucks yet, but assume that will change sooner rather than later. 

Besides, you can't drive a block without seeing a for sale sign on a huge lot, and I can promise you, it won't be bohemians buying, it will be developers building townhomes and apartment complexes.

Basically, imho, the ground floor of EaDo was over 10 years ago, not today.