s3mh

The hike/bike trail that is proposed to connect the hike and bike trails at Stude Park to the trails along TC Jester are supposed to be on the south side of White Oak bayou. But I did not think that they had funding for that segment yet. However, it does look like they are clearing a path for a connection of a new segment of trail on the south side of the bayou to connect with the existing MKT trail just before it crossing Studemont.

Thought so. It did not make sense for the mortgage brokers to use their business entity to develop residential property. And their current digs on Heights Blvd are pretty tiny.

The TC Jester store is right in the floodway/floodplain. They may do a modest upgrade to try to bring in more of the neighborhood, but the floodplain issues will prevent them from doing anything ambitious in that area. Without a really aggressive land acquisition (buying out multiple lots) and possibly doing structured parking (just not enough land in the area for a full sized HEB + parking), there just isn't an opportunity for HEB to build in the area.

It depends on the shape of the lots. There are some that are built facing the street and not in a townhome cluster because of the lots are not as deep. Also, some of those homes were built earlier in the redevelopment of the neighborhood before townhome clusters were the way to maximize the ROI. And a few of them are people who were pioneers and bought into the neighborhood before the townhome developments got rolling. They got cheap land and large lots in exchange for moving in when the neighborhood was on the front end of the transition. Doing a single family in Shady Acres will require paying a substantial premium on the land unless you luck out and find an odd shaped smaller lot that is not suitable for a townhome cluster.

The city is pledging to put $250k towards a third bio scrubber and has hired a consultant to look at design imporvements. This area of town has the ear of city government now thanks to property values taking off in a big way. They got a great upgrade to Jaycee park. It is easy to ignore an area when houses are selling for $120k. It is a different ballgame when the dirt alone is pushing $300k.

The city is working on the sewer odor. See second item: http://www.timbergrovecourt.org/#a3 Those are HCFCD buyouts. While not always maintained well and upgraded, the housing stock in Lazybrook and Timbergrove has generally been inhabited and kept in livable/saleable condition. Vacant properties are rare. Teardown is the way to go, subject to HCFCD issues, if you are looking to build new in that area.

Here you go: http://search.har.com/engine/dispSearch.cfm?mlnum=79197645&v=s Lots do go up on HAR. If you have $330k (or much more as this will probably be a bid up sale), you can build in Shady Acres. The problem is that you will probably end up surrounded by townhome developments after paying a huge premium on the land to beat out the other builders who can put in a bunch of townhomes on that lot. In a hot market, builders get land by any means necessary. There are builders who will go up to a homeowner and offer cash on the spot. This has happened a lot in Oak Forest. Builders will also send offers in the mail. Realtors will also stuff mail boxes, claiming to have a buyer ready to go. Larger lots and commercial properties may skip har and get listed with a commercial brokerage. It is a really, really tough market. Even in Lazybrook, there are bidding wars on properties. I have friends who are renting, had kids and want a yard. They are priced out of the new construction in Oak Forest and the Heights and are all looking in Timbergrove/Lazybrook. Lots of multiple offer sales and bidding. Get a realtor who knows the area and is agressive and be ready to fight for the property you want.

It is a bizarre process. On my block, land values were unchanged, but most everyone had their improvements value go up, even a house that has not seen anything other than basic maintenance done on it for over 30 years. The total hike in tax assessments averaged about 8-9% (this is about what was reported to be the average market appreciation reported for Harris County), but the increase in the assessment for the improvements were over 25%. Strange way to make that sausage. The most recent sales near me were all ridiculous bidding wars. So, I am not sure whether I can get very far with a protest when the actual data from the neighborhood shows appreciation far in excess of 8-9%. Based on what I have seen in the neighborhood, I would put my market value appreciation at @25% over the past three years. But, I have only had a bump up in tax assessment for just this year.

http://www.davidweekleyhomes.com/new-homes/tx/houston/houston/park-place So, this is going to be another Weekley development inside the loop. On a related note, Frank Liu/Intown Homes is developing the old elementary school lot on 27th and Harvard in Sunset Heights.

Word is that the variance was granted for Coltivare. Do not know whether they will have to compromise and build a few spaces on the lot for the garden or be allowed to keep the entire lot a garden. Either way is wayyyy better than having to pave that entire lot for a parking lot. Can't wait for this restaurant to open.

Latest from the folks at Coltivare. It sounds like the City staff is doing their usual drill of keeping their recommendation under wraps until the day before the planning commission meeting. But it sounds like the City staff will support cutting the garden by a 1/3rd to get an additional few spaces. It also sounds like the Coltivare folks would agree to do that, but are trying to push forward with "plan A" of keeping the entire lot a garden and not adding any parking. I hope the planning commission will go for Plan A. The email from Coltivare: COLTIVARE PARKING VARIANCE The Home Stretch First, thank you to all for the overwhelming support for our parking variance that we have received over the last two weeks. When we fired off that email, we never expected the responses to flow in with such abundance and positive enthusiasm. So thanks for A) putting up with these laborious and tedious emails and being such an amazing community and neighborhood in which to live and work. Hopefully, everything will be wrapped up tomorrow afternoon. The Planning Commission Hearing is upon us. Last week, we received a response from Dipti Mathur and Brian Crimmins that the Commission understood the "uniqueness of the situation" and were running the traps to make sure they make the right decision was made for the community. As it stands, the Commission is seemingly more comfortable with the idea of turning one-third of our proposed garden into parking spaces, as well as adding bike parking, which we were, of course, planning to do anyway. They also would require planting trees along the sidewalk. Twist our arms. We were planning on doing that as well. We love the idea of both those requirements/suggestions. The obvious issue is that by adding parking adjacent to the proposed garden, it takes the garden from 3,000 square feet to 2,000 square feet (1/3 less yield on delicious fruit and vegetables, no?) and they still want us to ADD PARKING WHEN PARKING EXISTS ACROSS THE STREET. We need as many people as possible to show up to tomorrow's Planning Commission Hearing to support the idea of the variance AND using 100% existing parking. And the bottom line is this: irrespective of whether the City counts those existing parking spaces for our code requirement, they will be used, as they have been used for 60 years. Here are the details: The Commission hearing starts at 2:30 pm in the City Hall Annex Building, City Council Chamber, Public Level: 900 Bagby Street Houston, TX 77002 We are at the end of the agenda, so they probably won't get to us until a little after 3:00. Our variance will begin with a two-minute introduction from our parking consultant, after which the floor will be opened for public comment. Anyone wishing to speak will have to sign in before our variance request is heard. Each person will be given one minute to voice their support for the variance. From past experience, one minute flies by and often times it is better to write your commentary beforehand and read it or have a few talking points jotted down--just to make sure you get all your points across. If you have any further questions, please feel free to email Morgan at morgan@revivalmarket.com And if you want to re-iterate your stance to the Commission or will not be able to attend tomorrow's meeting, shoot them another email. marlene.gafrick@houstontx.gov Dipti.Mathur@houstontx.gov mayor@houstontx.gov pd.planning@houstontx.gov Brian.Crimmins@houstontx.gov Again, thank you all for your support. We hope to see as many of you at the hearing tomorrow as possible and understand what a sacrifice it is to make time in the middle of the day to do something this tedious. We cannot thank you enough for that. -Morgan Weber & Ryan Pera Owners, Revival Market & Coltivare

There is a difference between the practical problem of a parking space being flush with the sidewalk and the permitting problem of having a parking space that is cut off by the encroaching right of way making the space to short for the City's standards. The former exists on Arlington. The latter exists on White Oak. The former is not a permitting issue. The latter is.

Go on the DRC and see what they submitted. They do not intend on parking cars on the sidewalk along Arlington. They have measured 17' parking spaces on Arlington. The lines were probably painted for a point of reference as the parking is on gravel.

There is no sidewalk issue on Arlington. The sidewalk is right where it is supposed to be and is not affected by the parking. You would have to get rid of all the parking along 19th if that kind of front in parking was a problem. In fact, most new urbanism planners prefer that kind of front in parking over strip mall surface lots as they are more pedestrian friendly. The parking on white oak does go where the sidewalk is supposed to be, but should not be an issue as there is still a sidewalk that has been built around the spaces.

Looks like Coltivare is offering up a baby splitting compromise if the Planning commission does not let them use the spaces along White Oak. They will put in 5 spaces on the east end of the lot that will be the garden and keep a little more than half of that lot as their garden space. Those five spaces plus the eight along the warehouse on Arlington that do not have ROW issues (only the spaces along White Oak have the ROW issues). That would meet the 13 space minimum and still let them have a big garden.

Only relevant to the extent a prior post used the old Heights snob argument to claim that people would oppose the parking if it was a waffle house. My retort was that people on this message board showed little concern about the sidewalk issue on Yale. The sidewalk was eliminated in order to widen Yale per the 380 because no one anticipated that the utility poles were in the way. The sidewalk was supposed to be part of the 380. Only relevant to parking requirements to the extent it shows selective enforcement of ROW all over the place by the City. Thus, it is unfair for the City to come down hard on Coltivare while at the same time giving the big project soaked in free tax dollars a pass on their ROW foulup.

It would be the same situation as if a restaurant satisfied their parking requirement through leased off-site parking and lost the lease. They have to find new parking or close up shop. In the case of Coltivare, it would just mean that they would then have to pave over the garden if they could not secure other parking. So, there is no risk in granting the variance as they will have a permanent back up plan should the warehouse parking ever become unavailable. Some in the neighborhood have expressed concerns about the parking variance as they do not want to see a westward expansion of the parking situation around White Oak and Studewood. It is a fair concern for folks on Arlington as their street is not curbed and guttered. However, there are very few good opportunities for further restaurant development on that stretch of White Oak that the parking intrusion on the neighborhood should be minimal in comparison to what is going on down the street. As for the Waffle House/Heights snobbery comment, the Walmart development failed to build a sidewalk along the west side of Yale St. between the White Oak bayou bridge and Koehler. I do not recall anyone here advocating for denying the development their cert of occupancy until the sidewalks were completed. The fact of the matter is that redevelopment in the Heights is going to be a messy affair. The original design of the commercial areas did not anticipate the need for the kind of parking that is now required. The commercial streets (White Oak/6th, 11th, 20th, Yale) should have plenty of restaurants and shops and will need some bend in the parking rules to get that done. The lots that are ripe for redevelopment just are not big enough to do much other than a little strip mall here and there. The Heights already has plenty of those and they are of little benefit compared to something like Coltivare.

Kraftsmen has a row of spaces along 22nd that are all over the right of way with no sidewalk access. Chilosos has a row along Gostic that are identical to the row along Arlington in the photos above. Cedar Creek has pull in diagonal parking that has the tail end of big trucks hanging over the sidewalk. Coltivare is going to be relatively small. 3000 sq feet for kitchen and dining room with a sliver of outdoor terrace seating. This should be a no-brainer for the City.

No, I believe that there is substance in the Historic Ordinance and there is no substance in the application of the ROW to exclude the availability of parking spaces to Coltivare.

That is just realtor-speak for bad architecture.

I know he is trolling. But he is only doing so because he cannot stand to admit that I am right about anything. And there is nothing comparable between the City not wanting to let someone count a parking space that the City has already permitted to be a parking space with a Historic Ordinance that has made a substantial difference in stopping the systematic tear down of historic architecture and has also stopped the new construction of out of scale and character faux-orleans boxes, and "what the ????" moderns and Woodlands-esque "custom homes". For all its flaws, there is a ton of substance in the Historic Ordinance. There. I took the bait, but not from Red Scare. Partial credit.

I was just needling Red Scare. And variances are also rules with a set of standards that are supposed to be satisfied. In fact, while some scoff at variances as just being a way for the politically connected to avoid the rules everyone else has to follow (there is definitely some truth to that, but it is not a rule), variances are actually a very important function of real estate law. Even the most positivist of positivists will conceded that there are infinite combinations of problems and solutions in the world of real estate that can not ever be predicted by even the best thought out set of regulations. Variances give government the opportunity to respond to unforseen circumstances and mitigate the problem of one size fits all regulation.

So, you went from hurling invective at the folks opposing the condo tower to joining them because doing so somehow supports your opposition to the Historic Ordinance all at precisely the same time I post something about the Coltivare folks. Correlation may not always equal causation, but you aren't fooling anyone here. And from a principled standpoint, it is hard to reconcile now supporting people who petition government in order to impeded private development in order to show that people should not be able to petition government to impede private development. It is like voting for your political opponent in hopes that they win and do so badly that their ideas are discredited (although this sort of tactic actually was employed by the majority of the US Supreme Court in the infamous snail darter case, so maybe you are onto something--or maybe not).

How rich. You are completely whipsawed by this, but won't admit it. You would normally rail against the City for taking this kind of position but know that doing so would align you with my position. I guess you are then going to admit that you were wrong about the variances sought for the condo tower on E 5th and Fraiser and for the Trammel Crow project on Yale and 6th? And you will run down to the Planning Commission to oppose the variance sought for the setback for the new construction on Tulane and 11th? Without it, they will probably be forced to build only 5 of 6 planned homes and lose out on a $500k+ sale. They should play by the same rules as everyone else, right? (even as much as I do not like that development, I will readily admit that they should get the variance as the new setback is inappropriate for that project and the immediate area). And you will also get down their asap to call out the City for supporting the variance for Town in City's brewery and tasting room on Cavalcade? Rules are rules.

Here is the email appeal sent around to those on the Revival Market email list: COLTIVARE NEEDS YOUR HELP! The Plea: As many of you know, we are in the process of opening Coltivare, our interpretation of an Italian-inspired, American, neighborhood restaurant, at the corner of White Oak and Arlington Streets. Undoubtedly, one of the most unique aspects to Coltivare, is the potential to have a 3,000 square foot, fully-functioning vegetable garden, directly to the East of our building. From day one, we envisioned the green space as having the potential to become that, but knew we faced a few hurdles with the City of Houston, fulfilling our parking code requirement. We didn't let ourselves get our hopes up just yet. Many of you have probably noticed a lot of "not much" going on with the construction process. This is because we've been going through the variance process with the City of Houston Planning Department. The variance that we are seeking is one allowing us to utilize parking lots that we have leased adjacent to Coltivare, as spaces to count towards our code requirement. Across Arlington Street on the North side of White Oak, sits a warehouse space that has been in existence since 1938, best we can tell. Dating back to the 50's, via Google satellite images, those same spaces have been used for parking. They are used for parking today as they will continue to be used for parking tomorrow. Over the last 80 years, as White Oak's right-of-way has widened, it has slowly encroached on the depth of these spaces. They sit between 15'-16' deep now. The City likes 19'. However, there is another 13' from the back of the spaces to the actual street, leaving plenty of room to maneuver safely. These spaces are already legally being used by the warehouse during they day; we simply want to use them at night. These spaces are what we are trying to get the Planning Commission to approve regarding our variance. Spaces that are already in existence and being used for parking. We have historically had a very good relationship with the Planning Commission and do not envy their jobs. Given everything that is thrown at them, they do a phenomenal job keeping the City moving in the right direction. The idea of turning existing green-space into another parking lot does seem counter intuitive to Mayor Parker's green initiatives though. Regarding our variance, they have afforded the Heights community an opportunity to voice your support in their approving our parking plan. In a perfect world, we would love for you to inundate their emails with a quick note saying you support our variance to utilize existing parking, rather than turn one of the few green-spaces the community has, into another ugly parking lot. Contact Planner Dipti Mathur Dipti.Mathur@houstontx.gov Dipti has been graciously reading through all of these emails, but she needs to hear from you. Also wouldn't hurt to cc: pd.planning@houstontx.gov Marlene.Gafrick@houstontx.gov We also would like to invite you to the Planning Commission hearing, March 28th, at 2:30pm, to verbally support the variance. We will send a follow up email as that date approaches, with more details. Thank you all in advance for your support. We at Coltivare look very forward to serving you for years to come, and cannot imagine doing this in another neighborhood in Houston. The Heights is our home too. Best Regards, Morgan Weber & Ryan Pera Owners, Revival Market & Coltivare Houston