Development Dilemma In Neartown Neighborhoods

[Lectro]

Amid all the noise, all the construction, all of a sudden, midrises are popping up all over Montrose.

"I have never seen this kind of development," said Houston City Councilmember Sue Lovell. "I mean, 10 midrises going up, pretty much within a half-a-mile area."

http://www.khou.com/topstories/stories/kho...ma.d271f3c.html

[musicman]

so what is the dilemma? if there was a real problem, the city wouldn't be giving them a permit....hopefully. i think the REAL problem is that montrose is going mainstream now, the eclectic hood of the past is gone forever.

[TheNiche]

so what is the dilemma? if there was a real problem, the city wouldn't be giving them a permit....hopefully. i think the REAL problem is that montrose is going mainstream now, the eclectic hood of the past is gone forever.

On behalf of the 77023 zip code, I'd like to hereby welcome culturally-displaced Montrosians into our eclectic low-priced neighborhood. Wander not to the Heights, Shepherd Forest, Independence Heights, Acres Homes, the Near Northside or other pathetic locales. Eastwood is your home now.

[sevfiv]

if there was a real problem, the city wouldn't be giving them a permit

yeah, i wonder how much goes into the permit issuing process

i think the REAL problem is that montrose is going mainstream now, the eclectic hood of the past is gone forever.

that, unfortunately, is true - i know that changes in the streetscape are inevitable, but sometimes they're a real downer

[musicman]

On behalf of the 77023 zip code, I'd like to hereby welcome culturally-displaced Montrosians into our eclectic low-priced neighborhood. Wander not to the Heights, Shepherd Forest, Independence Heights, Acres Homes, the Near Northside or other pathetic locales. Eastwood is your home now.

gotta house 4 sale? LOL

[KinkaidAlum]

is anyone else confused by this?

Where are there TEN mid-rises going up in or near the Montrose?

[Guest danax]

is anyone else confused by this?

Where are there TEN mid-rises going up in or near the Montrose?

From a few tin townhouses to a mass of midrises...........this should be what will finally kick Midtown into gear as a viable community with lots of retail, which is what we've been waiting for around here for the past few years.

[nmainguy]

is anyone else confused by this?

Where are there TEN mid-rises going up in or near the Montrose?

Encarta defines midrise as "moderately high: relating to or consisting of buildings that are of moderate height, about five to ten stories" I would more or less agree with that definition.

I know of a few that meet this criteria but I don't know that I could rattle off 10. That aside, there are going to be quite a few new apartments, condos and tin cans in Midtown/Montrose in the next two years. I don't view this as a dilemma-more like another opportunity for city services to catch-up with new high density developement. While I welcome this, I'm not sure it's wise for the city to wait for it to be built and sold-out before they upgrade city services.

[Guest danax]

From a few tin townhouses to a mass of midrises...........this should be what will finally kick Midtown into gear as a viable community with lots of retail, which is what we've been waiting for around here for the past few years.

You need to read more carefully, pal. The topic is on Montrose, not Midtown .

[KinkaidAlum]

There's the 1419 Montrose that would qualify as a midrise (I think it is 7 floors) that is relatively new. Then there's the Tremont Tower on Westheimer. They mention the Allen Parkway development but as an aside and not part of the ten they are talking about. Are the new apartments going up on Richmond near Dunlavy going to be taller than 5 floors?

Seriously, where are the other 8 or so projects? Maybe they are including the development in Upper Kirby/River Oaks (the old River Oaks Tennis Center property)? Even then, that leaves about 6 mystery buildings out there.

[OkieEric]

Hmm....yeah, 10 seems a bit high - perhaps they're confusing the count with commercial, as well? Isn't there a mid-rise office building going up near Richmond and Montrose? Even with that, I guess we're still at least 5 buildings short...

And no, I don't think the new apartments at Richmond/Dunlavy will be more than 3 or 4 floors... I think the real answer to all of the new construction is to build a light rail line down Richmond, constricting it to two lanes of traffic OK, cheap shot...I'm honestly undecided on THAT topic, but I don't want any more congestion on my W Alabama!

[HtownWxBoy]

so what is the dilemma? if there was a real problem, the city wouldn't be giving them a permit....hopefully. i think the REAL problem is that montrose is going mainstream now, the eclectic hood of the past is gone forever.

I don't know if I would say gone forever... it's not as eclectic as it used to be, but it's still a great neighborhood. As a gay man, I know I have heard people talk about how Montrose is just not as "gay" as it used to be, and that upsets some of them. I realize one reason is because the people who live or used to live in Montrose (including much of the gay community) transformed it into a "cool" place to live... so other people followed, including those who are more mainstream. Another reason I believe many in the gay community no longer live in Montrose is b/c (and this is a good thing) gay people are more accepted in society than they used to be. Many gays lived in Montrose b/c they felt safe there... they felt more comfortable. Well, today, you get that same feeling living in Downtown, Midtown, The Heights, Uptown and The Medical Center/Museum District... just to name a few areas. My boyfriend and I bought a home last year in the Heights... we are very comfortable... our neighbors all know we are a couple and they never treat us any differently than they do other straight couples. I have a gay coworker who lives in Kingwood... in the suburbs. Him and his boyfriend live in a typical suburban home in a suburban neighboorhood... their neighbors all know they are gay and they have absolutely no problem with it. My coworker even says he thinks them being open makes them CLOSER to their neighbors, even the straight, middle-aged men!

The gay community has been for years fighting for equality... and we are getting it. Being openly gay is slowly becoming, at least in big cities, more "mainstream".

[musicman]

I don't know if I would say gone forever... it's not as eclectic as it used to be, but it's still a great neighborhood. As a gay man, I know I have heard people talk about how Montrose is just not as "gay" as it used to be, and that upsets some of them. I realize one reason is because the people who live or used to live in Montrose (including much of the gay community) transformed it into a "cool" place to live... so other people followed, including those who are more mainstream.

quite a few of the "cool" residents of montrose i know/knew left in the last 2 or 3 yrs. I can think of several who lived on Avondale, who said the neighborhood isn't the same anymore. too many children at restaurants, etc. They told me that they felt that it is less of a community than it was in the 90's because of the new residents. i know the restaurant patrons sure have changed in the places i frequent.

[Guest danax]

quite a few of the "cool" residents of montrose i know/knew left in the last 2 or 3 yrs. I can think of several who lived on Avondale, who said the neighborhood isn't the same anymore. too many children at restaurants, etc. They told me that they felt that it is less of a community than it was in the 90's because of the new residents. i know the restaurant patrons sure have changed in the places i frequent.

The so-called "gay neighborhoods" might become relics, just like so many other "ethnic" nabes of the past. Once sexual, racial and language barriers fade, the common thread the held the neighborhoods together is snapped and the fabric frayed and the urban quilt becomes more like a comforter from Wal-Mart.

That would be the downside of going "mainstream" as described by HtownWxBoy. The sense of community, even if partially due to collective societal alienation, gets lost. Another example might be the old 4th Ward.

The one characteristic that is likely to resist homogenization is income level.

[musicman]

The so-called "gay neighborhoods" might become relics, just like so many other "ethnic" nabes of the past. Once sexual, racial and language barriers fade, the glue the held the neighborhoods together is disolved and the urban quilt becomes more like a comforter from Wal-Mart.

The one characteristic that is likely to resist homogenization is income level.

very good point danax. i guess i never thought about it like that. once a group is "accepted" then what keeps them together is no longer predominant.

[ricco67]

Montrose is going to be changing over the next couple of decades, I just hope it changes in a way that make sense. Ideally, Montrose/Westheimer would be lined with Midrises (with homes and/or offices) with first floor retail. I'm afraid that that's the future of montrose, I just hope that further away from the major streets the homes will survive the McMansion onslaught.

[musicman]

Montrose is going to be changing over the next couple of decades, I just hope it changes in a way that make sense. Ideally, Montrose/Westheimer would be lined with Midrises (with homes and/or offices) with first floor retail. I'm afraid that that's the future of montrose, I just hope that further away from the major streets the homes will survive the McMansion onslaught.

not sure how well the infrastructure would support lining montrose/westheimer with midrises. the traffic situation on westheimer in the area is pushing it as it is and more traffic would start spilling into the nearby hoods which wouldn't be good for quality of life.

[Guest danax]

not sure how well the infrastructure would support lining montrose/westheimer with midrises. the traffic situation on westheimer in the area is pushing it as it is and more traffic would start spilling into the nearby hoods which wouldn't be good for quality of life.

I'd guess that W. Dallas and W. Gray will get hit with midrises at some point, which will unfortunately mean the loss of many of those old Foursquare homes from the 1920s.

[ricco67]

not sure how well the infrastructure would support lining montrose/westheimer with midrises. the traffic situation on westheimer in the area is pushing it as it is and more traffic would start spilling into the nearby hoods which wouldn't be good for quality of life.

You're right, it is almost on the edge of being a critical mass, the same result will happen with the amount of town homes in the interior of the Montrose.

Mass transit or traffic modification needs to be a major priority.

It is my hope that a small light rail segment can be built from Washington to Richmond to help alleviate some of the congestion that rush hour and the club scene brings in. As more people move into the area (and they will Regardless of Mid rises on the main streets) I wouldn't be surprised if that particular part of Westheimer eventually gets closed to all but transit/pedestrian traffic. The only dead time that the city street/intersection seems to have is 4am-6am and from 2pm-3pm, so I'm sure this would be a possible solution within the next decade.

[musicman]

You're right, it is almost on the edge of being a critical mass, the same result will happen with the amount of town homes in the interior of the Montrose.

Mass transit or traffic modification needs to be a major priority.

It is my hope that a small light rail segment can be built from Washington to Richmond to help alleviate some of the congestion that rush hour and the club scene brings in. As more people move into the area (and they will Regardless of Mid rises on the main streets) I wouldn't be surprised if that particular part of Westheimer eventually gets closed to all but transit/pedestrian traffic. The only dead time that the city street/intersection seems to have is 4am-6am and from 2pm-3pm, so I'm sure this would be a possible solution within the next decade.

concur on the townhomes in the interior. definitely takes away from the neighborhood atmosphere.

westheimer won't be closed in our lifetime. one thing that could help the traffic situation is to ban parking on westheimer so that both lanes can be utilized. i know the westheimer/dunlavy interesection can be nightmarish during peak traffic times.

[HtownWxBoy]

concur on the townhomes in the interior. definitely takes away from the neighborhood atmosphere.

westheimer won't be closed in our lifetime. one thing that could help the traffic situation is to ban parking on westheimer so that both lanes can be utilized. i know the westheimer/dunlavy interesection can be nightmarish during peak traffic times.

Ugh I hate when that gets all backed up! Why do they let cars park on the road there! I know it's b/c of all of those shops, but would it be so hard to have them park a block or two away and just walk?

[ricco67]

Ugh I hate when that gets all backed up! Why do they let cars park on the road there! I know it's b/c of all of those shops, but would it be so hard to have them park a block or two away and just walk?

I hear ya'. The city should ban parking on that street, it's the only section where there is such street parking. I think a loading zone would be more than enough.

[Subdude]

Beg to differ. I think a lot of those businesses survive in part because of on-street parking. People want walkable urban neigbhorhoods. Well, one of the best things you can do for that is to promote street parking. It slows down traffic, visually narrows the street, and reduces the reliance on parking garages and lots, both of which detract from the neighborhood feel. Yes, Westheimer/Dunlavy can be tough during peak hours, but good neighborhoods are about more than efficient movement of traffic. I think street parking should be allowed over as much of Westheimer as possible through the Montrose.

[musicman]

Beg to differ. I think a lot of those businesses survive in part because of on-street parking. People want walkable urban neigbhorhoods. Well, one of the best things you can do for that is to promote street parking. It slows down traffic, visually narrows the street, and reduces the reliance on parking garages and lots, both of which detract from the neighborhood feel. Yes, Westheimer/Dunlavy can be tough during peak hours, but good neighborhoods are about more than efficient movement of traffic. I think street parking should be allowed over as much of Westheimer as possible through the Montrose.

Well the area was never designed for on street parking. that is the problem with many areas where some high density developments are going up. the new townhomes and increased population has resulted in a noticeable increase in traffic. unfortunately the city is now trying to "plan" after the fact. adding street parking at the expense of a lane of traffic in a busy area is poor planning.

of course if the city bans parking, then the businesses will be upset. if they don't then traffic is a nightmare. in the end, what benefits the most should prevail, and IMO that will be to ban parking.l

[KinkaidAlum]

Well the area was never designed for on street parking. that is the problem with many areas where some high density developments are going up. the new townhomes and increased population has resulted in a noticeable increase in traffic. unfortunately the city is now trying to "plan" after the fact. adding street parking at the expense of a lane of traffic in a busy area is poor planning.

of course if the city bans parking, then the businesses will be upset. if they don't then traffic is a nightmare. in the end, what benefits the most should prevail, and IMO that will be to ban parking.l

Here's the deal, if you don't own a business there or you don't own a home in the neighborhoods that are directly affected, then you shouldn't get a say. I lived in Cherryhurst Park on Missouri St. and also on Elmen St. two blocks up from the Empire Cafe. I LOVED the on street parking for every reason Subdude stated. All of my neighbors did as well. Just because a neighborhood is located close-in doesn't mean it should fall victim to the wants of people who live outside of it. I couldn't have cared less if through traffic had a tough time getting by my neighborhood. In fact, I liked that fact. One of the WORST things to happen was the changing of traffic patterns on West Alabama that took the middle turning lane away so that people who didn't live there could wizz on by. People couldn't make left turns onto their OWN streets anymore. That's crazy and is reflective of the backwards thinking that goes on in Houston. I never heard ANYONE complain about West Alabama that lived near the street.

[Pumapayam]

is anyone else confused by this?

Where are there TEN mid-rises going up in or near the Montrose?

And what will the Allen House project do to be such an issue?

[musicman]

Here's the deal, if you don't own a business there or you don't own a home in the neighborhoods that are directly affected, then you shouldn't get a say. I lived in Cherryhurst Park on Missouri St. and also on Elmen St. two blocks up from the Empire Cafe. I LOVED the on street parking for every reason Subdude stated. All of my neighbors did as well. Just because a neighborhood is located close-in doesn't mean it should fall victim to the wants of people who live outside of it. I couldn't have cared less if through traffic had a tough time getting by my neighborhood. In fact, I liked that fact. One of the WORST things to happen was the changing of traffic patterns on West Alabama that took the middle turning lane away so that people who didn't live there could wizz on by. People couldn't make left turns onto their OWN streets anymore. That's crazy and is reflective of the backwards thinking that goes on in Houston. I never heard ANYONE complain about West Alabama that lived near the street.

You better talk to the Mayor. He was just on the news this past weekend and mentioned Alabama specifically as the "future" of urban Houston. he mentioned repeatedly how it keeps traffic moving. i personally hate it because left turns are a challenge during rush hr.

as for neighborhood parking, i'm all for parking in the street. on major thoroughfares, that is another story particularly if they weren't designed for that. when the parking from a business on a major thoroughfare starts affecting parking in the neighborhood, i am against that. i have a friend who lives by the glass wall and she describes it as a nightmare at times.

[sidegate]

KinkaidAlum's point is well made. The City slipped W Alabama in through the back door under the pretext of alleviating traffic flow to downtown while Spur 527 work was going on. Now that Spur 527 is finished, the stretch of 59 from Shepherd to 527 is even more of a train wreck than it ever was at peak times (I see it crossing Woodhead every day), so there is little prospect of the City returning W Alabama to what it was. That said, I doubt it ever intended to in the first place, cyclists and residents be damned.

They've also significantly lengthened red light times on roads intersecting Westheimer and Alabama - again residents getting shafted in order to keep E/W traffic moving - most of which is commuter traffic....

[TheNiche]

Here's the deal, if you don't own a business there or you don't own a home in the neighborhoods that are directly affected, then you shouldn't get a say.

Very provincial...

[sidegate]

is anyone else confused by this?

Where are there TEN mid-rises going up in or near the Montrose?

don't forget Shepherd & Westheimer (under construction) and Dunlavy & West Alabama (later this year)