The Heights Observations From 1st Time Poster

[PureAuteur]

I have been reading this message board for a couple weeks now, and today I have finally decided to get involved in the posting itself.

Anyways, I am thinking of moving into Houston from the Jersey Village suburb, where I grew up. So far my first pick is the Heights. I am very familiar with it, despite having lived in the Suburbs my whole life, as my grandparents lived there and I would visit often. Here in 2005, the Heights is turning into exactly what I foresaw in the 90s: transformation without losing its class or identity. A mixture of restoration and gentrification is fine.

The increasing land value should improve alot of the blight that developed in scattered amounts throughout the Heights in the 80s and 90s. I am only concerned that the land value will rise to such a degree that the neighborhood will lose its character and charm. The key should not be to make it super upscale, but rather nicer and safer. I am very impressed with the housing boom so far, minus some Perry Homes condos near the Heights Annex which are so ugly I had to laugh when I saw what they were trying to do.

Anyone see the Heights being a really great place 5 years down the road? I think that's where it's going; like a return to the quality of life it had in the 50s and 60s. I really think its identity and class can preserve itself while demolition of homes and gentrification take place.

[nmainguy]

I have been reading this message board for a couple weeks now, and today I have finally decided to get involved in the posting itself. 

Anyways, I am thinking of moving into Houston from the Jersey Village suburb, where I grew up.  So far my first pick is the Heights.  I am very familiar with it, despite having lived in the Suburbs my whole life, as my grandparents lived there and I would visit often.  Here in 2005, the Heights is turning into exactly what I foresaw in the 90s:  transformation without losing its class or identity.  A mixture of restoration and gentrification is fine. 

The increasing land value should improve alot of the blight that developed in scattered amounts throughout the Heights in the 80s and 90s.  I am only concerned that the land value will rise to such a degree that the neighborhood will lose its character and charm.  The key should not be to make it super upscale, but rather nicer and safer.  I am very impressed with the housing boom so far, minus some Perry Homes condos near the Heights Annex which are so ugly I had to laugh when I saw what they were trying to do. 

Anyone see the Heights being a really great place 5 years down the road?  I think that's where it's going; like a return to the quality of life it had in the 50s and 60s.  I really think its identity and class can preserve itself while demolition of homes and gentrification take place.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Welcome, PureAuteur. I don't forsee the Heights going anywhere but up. It's a great, friendly area with some pretty nice people. My grandparents grew up and lived here for 93 years. I grew up in Oak Forest but now I live here-it feels like I finally came home. Thank goodness Perry has not been visited by the welcome wagon. I comend the Heights Association for making it as difficult as possible to erect their future slums in my neihborhood.

PS. I think it's a really great place now-in my biased opinion.

[MidtownCoog]

future slums

Yea, but your current slums aren't going anywhere.

If you think they'll be gone if five years, please let me have some of what you are smoking, becase it must be good stuff.

[segovia]

I agree with MidtownCoog. There are a lot of variables that can affect the current development, i.e., economy, interest rates, etc. My area is booming with new houses by Tricon and Allegro. But...I still a lot of pockets of dilapidate homes and apartment complexes that are not going anywhere in the next 5 years. You don't have to go far to see this...Heights Blvd. is a prime example.

[RedScare]

Yea, but your current slums aren't going anywhere.

If you think they'll be gone if five years, please let me have some of what you are smoking, becase it must be good stuff.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Maybe not completely gone in 5 years, but well on the way. In fact, the problem with the Heights is that there are too many tear downs available. On my street alone, there are 4 new monsters going up in a 3-4 block stretch. They may look nice with their faux Victorian look, but the sheer size of the homes is changing the whole look of the neighborhood. In 10 years, it will be an attractive gingerbread community of 3500 sf homes.

Compare this to Woodland Heights, where street after street has restored one story bungalows. The difference in look is amazing.

The prevailing lot size ordinance is keeping out the townhomes, but instead we get a single family the size of 2 townhomes. Many people think that is an improvement. Many people think West U and Bellaire are an improvement over what was there previously, also.

[MidtownCoog]

The "Heights Rats" still need somewhere to live. The natives will know what I am talking about.

We thought Midtown was on it way as well.

[RedScare]

Midtown is a different animal altogether. They are waiting for the builders to build something to live in. Heights is already a community, and worse, it has a reputation. So, the buyers are picking off the little houses one at a time and putting up...dare I say it...McVictorians.

[lcman]

After living in the Heights for just over a year, I have to agree that it's only going to get better. In the one year time frame I've lived there, I can't even count how many renovations and new homes have gone up in my immediate vicinity. With that said, there are several rundown apartment complexes all over the Heights and those are likely there for the long haul. The people that live there though are very nice, and I have to say that I like that I live somewhere where everyone isn't the exact same (i.e. some of the cookie cutter suburban communities). As far as I'm concerned, the new construction, although not completely ideal with regards to preserving history, is bringing in a great mix of young professionals, young families, and empty nesters. Everyone is happy to be in the neighborhood and friendly, which is what I find to be charming. The Heights is definately a wonderful place to live right now. I love it so much that I'm getting ready to extend my house so I can stay there a good 10-15 more years.

[PureAuteur]

The one story bungalows are really cool and classic Heights. They should be restored if possible. If they cannot be saved, then lets hope that good developers or custom builders replace them with equally neat homes. I like the gingerbread homes, but I don't want the tall, skinny, townhouses to be the only option in the Heights years down the road.

Now that I think about it, I recall seeing some brick framed houses somewhere in the Heights that had just been built. They look very out of place, like suburban homes, but making I'm not looking carefully enough at the architecture. Maybe they work. But bottom line, community organizations need to work together to encourage custom/private builders and make it difficult for corporate developers that typically build in the suburbs to come into the Heights. I'd rather live next door to a dilapidated shack than a Perry eyesore. Corporate builders care nothing for community. They will build with the cheapest possible materials and workmanship. The Heights is all about quality, so they should not let those guys in there. I am living in a 10 year old Ryland home right now in Jersey Village and the quality or lack of is apparent throughout the home. I am 24 by the way, so it was my parent's decision to buy it 10 years ago, not mine. I would know better.

[MidtownCoog]

One story bungalows - as cute and charing as they may be, I could barely fit alll my computer equipment in one.

But I do like the Heights.

But if I were a slum lord with some of those complexes and rent houses, I am going to just sit back and keep counting my money.

Why sell for a one-time profit, when I can keep watching it roll in?

Nobody is saying things are going down hill in the Heights, but this truly does remind me of the "Third Ward is Not For Sale" campaign.

[nmainguy]

The one story bungalows are really cool and classic Heights.  They should be restored if possible.  If they cannot be saved, then lets hope that good developers or custom builders replace them with equally neat homes.  I like the gingerbread homes, but I don't want the tall, skinny, townhouses to be the only option in the Heights years down the road. 

Now that I think about it, I recall seeing some brick framed houses somewhere in the Heights that had just been built.  They look very out of place, like suburban homes, but making I'm not looking carefully enough at the architecture.  Maybe they work.  But bottom line, community organizations need to work together to encourage custom/private builders and make it difficult for corporate developers that typically build in the suburbs to come into the Heights.  I'd rather live next door to a dilapidated shack than a Perry eyesore.  Corporate builders care nothing for community.  They will build with the cheapest possible materials and workmanship.  The Heights is all about quality, so they should not let those guys in there.  I am living in a 10 year old Ryland home right now in Jersey Village and the quality or lack of is apparent throughout the home.  I am 24 by the way, so it was my parent's decision to buy it 10 years ago, not mine.  I would know better.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Glad you've been looking around the Heights...take your time. We bought a one storey bungalow in late 2000 for 75K. It was in good shape bones-wise but needed a new inside. We spent around 50K to bring up to our standards-new kitchen and added a new full bath. We appraised out at 215K this year-but we're not going anywhere. The investment was in our HOME-not a house to flip. Keep looking and don't be afraid to put in a little sweat equity-and find a good contractor to do the really hevey lifting.

[Guest danax]

The McVics (good one, Red) are the real danger. At least they're architecturally pseudo-conforming. That's about the best you can hope for here. I've seen some signs in the Heights for Prevailing Lot Size applications, which I think is good for townhome prevention at least.

By the time they ever getting around to passing a real preservation ordinance, the tear downs will have already taken huge bites out of all pre-1950 neighborhoods , except the ones in currently less-desirable locations.

[RedScare]

One story bungalows - as cute and charing as they may be, I could barely fit alll my computer equipment in one.

But I do like the Heights. 

But if I were a slum lord with some of those complexes and rent houses,  I am going to just sit back and keep counting my money.

Why sell for a one-time profit, when I can keep watching it roll in?

Nobody is saying things are going down hill in the Heights, but this truly does remind me of the "Third Ward is Not For Sale" campaign.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I didn't say "not for sale". I was pointing out that gentrification has its ugly side, too. Rising land prices tend to force people to build the big houses. A big house can be just as out of place as a townhouse, maybe more so. But, I have decided what the "solution" to the "problem" is yet...or even if it is one.

[MidtownCoog]

All I am saying is one persons "blight" is another persons home.

Wishing, willing, thinking and hoping is great, but there is also reality.

[RedScare]

I agree on the blight vs. home statement. And, after a night of alcohol induced deep thought, I am more willing to agree that there are some "Heights is not for sale" vibes running through here, as well.

These are the inevetible growing pains of gentrification. The more I watch it, and the more we debate it here, the less sure I am of my opinions about it.

[HeightsGuy]

While the Heights is experiencing a certain level of redevelopment, it was one of the first inner-loop neighborhoods that was "gentrified" (I don't count areas that never experienced a downturn like West U). Due to that your not going to see a wholesale redevelopment of Heights proper IMO, the land values are too high for most developers to make the kinds of profit they can make elsewhere in the area such as my neighborhood Shady Acres with its 10k sq ft plats.

So, if you want my crystal ball prediction of the area's look a decade from now, I think the Heights will probably level out at about 20% new/80% existing, Shady Acres almost the oposite at 70% new/30% existing, and Timbergrove Manor, Lazybrook, and areas north of 610 will continue to see very little redevelopment. I just wish there were more people like me willing to renovate the mid-century "ranchalos" that make up much of Shady Acres. They aren't the prettiest of houses, but they all have good bones.

I don't know enough about points east and south of the Heights to make predictions, maybe others can fill in the blanks.

[NYC Texan3]

I can't understand the "blight" comments appearing here. Obviously, if houses are being torn down and "McVictorians" being built, it is the low-hanging properties in the poorest condition that give way. There are at least 9 houses under construction within two blocks of my house, and they are definitely changing the character of the area. And you can pick out which ones are likely to be next. While there are definitely some apartments mixed in, most are moderate income and stable properties that do not have more than a visual impact on the neighborhood. There is one instance of a large, "blighted" complex that is definitely impacting development on 6 1/2 between Oxford and Studewood, but there is also blighted land for sale on that same block.

For anyone that has been around awhile and watched the evolution of West U, the Heights is just repeating all of those trends. Certain builders are concentrating on the area (and have been a long time), the reconstruction has been steady for a long period (over 10 years), and the problem properties are being picked off (the just demolished an eyesore ranch on 7th ).

The trends will most likely continue in the same direction over the long haul. Without West U's deed restrictions or zoning (the lack of which I blame for Heights Blvd becoming infested with lawyers ), the redevelopment will be more varied, and the population will probably always be more transitional than a status neighborhood like West U. It also would help considerably if the city would continue to curb and gutter remaining streets.

That said, the broad swath of the neighborhood's resurgance is pretty exciting.

[RedScare]

Actually, NYC, it is city ordinances (zoning, so to speak) that contributed to the proliferation of law firms on Heights Blvd. Because a law firm is an office, it requires fewer parking spaces to serve the building, allowing boutique offices, such as lawyers and architects to set up shop in these old homes. Any other type of business, such as retail, would require large amounts of land to be cleared for parking. This would be expensive and unsightly. While you may not like the lawyers, their offices save many of the old mansions, and the new construction has stayed pretty consistent with the old style, all without adding huge parking lots to the boulevard.

As for the apartment buildings, as rents rise, or the properties change hands, you will see these dwellings gentrify also. Some of them have been in the same hands for years, with no money invested in upkeep or improvement. This keeps the landlord from charging more rent. Eventually, as taxes on appreciating land increases, they will either invest the money to garner higher income, or sell out to someone willing and able to do so.

These small 20 and 30 unit complexes are very attractive to those renters that don't want to be walled off from the neighborhood by a mega complex like Alexan. I have friends in some of the small complexes in the Richmond/Westheimer area who love them. As they are bought and refurbished, they typically see rents rise $100 to $300 a month. That will quickly run off "undesirables", who are looking for the cheapest rent, regardless of the condition of the complex. And the Heights is nowhere near saturated with apartments.

[rps324]

I have been reading this message board for a couple weeks now, and today I have finally decided to get involved in the posting itself. 

Anyways, I am thinking of moving into Houston from the Jersey Village suburb, where I grew up.  So far my first pick is the Heights.  I am very familiar with it, despite having lived in the Suburbs my whole life, as my grandparents lived there and I would visit often.  Here in 2005, the Heights is turning into exactly what I foresaw in the 90s:  transformation without losing its class or identity.  A mixture of restoration and gentrification is fine. 

The increasing land value should improve alot of the blight that developed in scattered amounts throughout the Heights in the 80s and 90s.  I am only concerned that the land value will rise to such a degree that the neighborhood will lose its character and charm.  The key should not be to make it super upscale, but rather nicer and safer.  I am very impressed with the housing boom so far, minus some Perry Homes condos near the Heights Annex which are so ugly I had to laugh when I saw what they were trying to do. 

Anyone see the Heights being a really great place 5 years down the road?  I think that's where it's going; like a return to the quality of life it had in the 50s and 60s.  I really think its identity and class can preserve itself while demolition of homes and gentrification take place.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The Heights is a diverse, funky, urban place and that is what makes it fun and interesting. I hope it doesn't evolve into some "pleasantville" suburb.

[KevHeights]

I can't understand the "blight" comments appearing here.  Obviously, if houses are being torn down and "McVictorians" being built, it is the low-hanging properties in the poorest condition that give way.  There are at least 9 houses under construction within two blocks of my house, and they are definitely changing the character of the area.  And you can pick out which ones are likely to be next.  While there are definitely some apartments mixed in, most are moderate income and stable properties that do not have more than a visual impact on the neighborhood.  There is one instance of a large, "blighted" complex that is definitely impacting development on 6 1/2 between Oxford and Studewood, but there is also blighted land for sale on that same block.

For anyone that has been around awhile and watched the evolution of West U, the Heights is just repeating all of those trends.  Certain builders are concentrating on the area (and have been a long time), the reconstruction has been steady for a long period (over 10 years), and the problem properties are being picked off (the just demolished an eyesore ranch on 7th ). 

The trends will most  likely continue in the same direction over the long haul.  Without West U's deed restrictions or zoning (the lack of which I blame for Heights Blvd becoming infested with lawyers ), the redevelopment will be more varied, and the population will probably always be more transitional than a status neighborhood like West U.  It also would help considerably if the city would continue to curb and gutter remaining streets. 

That said, the broad swath of the neighborhood's resurgance is pretty exciting.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I live across the street from that blighted apartment complex on 6 1/2...according to my neighbor, the "Mrs. Cravitz" of my street, it is owned by a consortium of doctors and lawyers in California who make far too much money off of it to ever let it go. If the shades are open when you drive by, you'll see that some of the units have between 6 and 9 bunkbeds in their living rooms (and, presumably, every room in the apartment). My neighbors across the street (who share a fence with the complex) have been robbed, vandalized and assaulted by some of the teenagers in the apartments. Onion Creek has a parking attendant in the lot behind the complex because of problems they've had with its residents. I don't know enough about the city codes to be certain, but I can't imagine that the building is up to code. The walls lean, air conditioning units are haphazardly installed (and I've seen one fall out), and I've seen rats running through the courtyard at night. Does anyone know what I can do to start the ball rolling on getting inspectors in there?

[RedScare]

Call 311 and make a complaint. Frankly, the more complaints they get, the faster they move. If there are noise or crime issues, call police. There are numerous neighbors around town who have used the system to torment restaurants or bars that the neighbor deems a problem. There is no reason you can't do the same, if that is in fact the case.

[west20th]

Just wanted to get everyones opinion on the row of new Perry homes on 20th near Shepherd. What do you all think of them? I think they did a nice job as far as maintaining the proper setbacks and proper first floor elevation to fit the neighborhood. They are a little on the plain side but historically that part of the heights always had more modest housing. Yes I own one. I never did like Perry but when they were offering those houses for a little over 100 per sq. ft. I had to jump on it.

I've been there a year now and the house seems solid. A few problems but Perry took care of them right away. As you can expect (at that price) the homes are a little plain on the inside. Replacing the cheap builders fixtures, some paint and crown molding and the place looks as good as the more expensive homes in the area. For a lot less money.

I have to admit Perry Townhouse projects are horrible but I don't think you will see many of them in Heights proper. Our saleslady mentioned Shelia Jackson Lee keeps a close eye on the builders. Townhouses are a definate no-no according to Shelia. Technically she really has no say in what a builder does. I guess she can create enough of a stink as to where the builders listen to her.

I'm just really grateful that I was finally able to find something I could afford in the Heights. I've always loved this part of Houston and it is so nice to be finally able to live there.

[MidtownCoog]

Shelia Jackson Lee and STINK.

Two things that go together well.

All bow down to Queen Showboat Shelia.

[RedScare]

One thing about a Perry home. It is inexpensive enough to keep the younger more lively homeowner inside the loop. Let's face it. Some of the wealthier types are boring pricks. So, Perry's developments help keep the neighborhoods affordable.

[west20th]

Shelia Jackson Lee and STINK.

Two things that go together well.

All bow down to Queen Showboat Shelia.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If Shelia keeps out the townhouses I'll put up with her showboating. Just make sure you don't get between Shelia and a TV camera.

[kjb434]

I don't understand how people who buy a Perry home and like it still say Perry's development aren't good?

Wouldn't you be contributing to something you don't like by buying a house there?

It's one thing if you don't like Perry because of his politics, but that doesn't mean the development is bad. He probably is not that involved anymore in the developments directly.

As for Shelia, I think her talents rely on raising stinks.

[west20th]

I don't understand how people who buy a Perry home and like it still say Perry's development aren't good?

Wouldn't you be contributing to something you don't like by buying a house there?

It's one thing if you don't like Perry because of his politics, but that doesn't mean the development is bad.  He probably is not that involved anymore in the developments directly.

As for Shelia, I think her talents rely on raising stinks.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I didn't say all Perry development is bad. Their single family detached houses are OK. There townhome projects leave something to be desired in my opinion. Mr. Perry is still involved in the buisness. The Perry people I dealt with gave me the impression he is somewhat eccentric. His politics do suck but they don't seem to have any place in his business.

[wordgirl]

We wanted to move to the Heights six years ago, but even then it was getting too expensive, so we chose Garden Oaks to the north. The neighborhood is changing a lot too. Anyone want to look in their crystal ball and ponder on what the future holds for your neighbors to the north?

We keep going back and forth on whether to move, now that we have an 18-month old daughter, and may have plans for more kids.

[jgs1419]

WordGirl

I have lived in the Heights since 1994 and in my current house for six years. When we moved in at Arlington St. in '94, we were the youngest folks on the block, by far. When we moved to Harvard in 1999, we were one of 6-8 young (ish) couples on the block. There were only two kids on the block. In the last six years, that number has grown to 15 or so. I don't think our block is atypical. There is at least one builder (me) that is designing houses in the Heights specifically for young professional parents with young kids.

I say all this so you'll give careful consideration to moving just 'cause you have kids. Garden Oaks will continue to evolve and more folks will continue to move into your neighborhood that are young too. Garden Oaks Elem is pretty good and you have other good options close-by (Travis) and a couple of more that are reasonable distances away (River Oaks, Poe).

Don't underestimate the value of how close you are to The Children's Museum, Hermann Park, Downtown Aquarium, et al. I frequently use the Zoo as a relief valve when my two year old gets a mood about him.

Good luck with your decision.

[wordgirl]

jgs1419,

Know what you mean! We were just at the Children's Museum today. I agree it is a wonderful place when you run out of ideas. Better than the mall anyway.

Our challenge is being patient in our small and falling apart house, until we can save up money to remodel or move to a bigger house. Every time the inlaws come, My mind starts dreaming of that big house in the burbs.

Posts like yours help me keep my resolve.

Do you have a website for your homebuilding business? Do any work in GO?