Icon M Tower: Condominium High-Rise At 1209 Montrose Blvd.

[wilcal]

31 minutes ago, NoMoHouTx said:

As a concerned property owner, I'm just hoping to have a say in what the final product looks like and a say in minimizing its impact on my property and overall quality of life as I'm also concerned about the traffic this thing will generate in an already very congested area of North Montrose.

 

 

 

We've had a few other nearby homeowners come by and I at least applaud your light-hearted understanding of the situation.

 

The part that I've quoted above is kind of interesting to me. I'm not a lawyer or an arborist, so I have no idea what the ramifications are for your tree, but what changes would you even be happy with on a project like this?

 

You've said that you don't want to look at a 20 story building, but wouldn't anything more than a few stories provide the same result?

 

 

And is 100 additional apartments/condos going to affect traffic that much? I'm thinking that the additional retail would provide more walkable options for everyone, so might end up with it balancing out a bit.

 

You have to think that the car washes won't be too long for life either. 

[jgriff]

9 minutes ago, wilcal said:

And is 100 additional apartments/condos going to affect traffic that much? 

 

 

 

No, not at all.

 

[dbigtex56]

2 hours ago, NoMoHouTx said:

This is my first post ever on this site although I've been a lurker for years. 

Welcome to HAIF, and thanks for sharing your thoughts.

 

2 hours ago, NoMoHouTx said:

I'll be staring at the backside of a 20 story apartment building and I just cannot get excited about that. 

I know an old woman who lives atop a hill and has a commanding view. One day, a neighbor who built a house a little further down the hill twenty years ago came to her complaining that someone was building next to his house, and how it would ruin his unspoiled view of the valley. 
She smiled, and said "Dear, now you know how I felt when you built your house."
Ever think about how your home may have affected neighbors when it was built? I imagine they weren't crazy about it either.
This is one of the hazards of living in Houston, and why many of us have a strong love/hate relationship concerning its unfettered development.

[H-Town Man]

4 hours ago, NoMoHouTx said:

So, just a quick intro.  This is my first post ever on this site although I've been a lurker for years.  I like keeping up with what's happening in Houston, particularly inside the loop, and this is a good place for getting information and what I consider great insight from people that know way more than I do about architecture and construction projects.  That being said, I'm following this thread and project very closely because I just happen to share a property line with Khun Kay Thai.   I'll be honest, if I lived anywhere else in Montrose, I'd be thrilled with this project.  It's a mixed use building with ground floor retail and I'm a huge proponent of this in close-in neighborhoods like Montrose and Midtown...I think we need way more of it.  However, the shared property line has dampened my enthusiasm considerably...LOL.  I'll be staring at the backside of a 20 story apartment building and I just cannot get excited about that.   I'm also not sure what's going to happen to what vegetation I have in my backyard.   This building will block most of the afternoon sun.  In the summer time, I'll get a few hours of sunlight.  In the winter time, probably zero.  I have a very large tree (~40 feet tall) and I don't know what lack of sunshine will mean for its overall health.  This being Houston, the project will likely move forward.  As a concerned property owner, I'm just hoping to have a say in what the final product looks like and a say in minimizing its impact on my property and overall quality of life as I'm also concerned about the traffic this thing will generate in an already very congested area of North Montrose.

 

I did notice this for sale sign go up at the car wash directly across West Clay from Khun Kay Thai.  Any thoughts on what this might mean?  My initial thought is that maybe the lot is needed initially as a laydown yard for all the construction equipment and material and that after the 20 story tower is built something else will be put in on this corner.  But that's based on my assumption that because of the small lot size for the 20 story project, a separate lay down area will be needed.  Any thoughts on this??

 

 

 

I am a bit more sympathetic than the other posters because this sort of thing would not be allowed in most parts of the civilized world. A typical zoning ordinance would have minimum side and rear setbacks, with increased setbacks if bordering a residential zone. In high rise areas, some cities would have an inclined plane beginning from the border of any low-intensity residential zone, and you could not build a building that broke the plane.

 

Of course, such zoning is done with the intent that a low-rise or single-family neighborhood remains low-rise forever. In Houston, we want it all to someday be towers.

 

[jgriff]

12 minutes ago, H-Town Man said:

Of course, such zoning is done with the intent that a low-rise or single-family neighborhood remains low-rise forever.

 

I don’t want that kind of elitist thinking in Houston. Keeping certain people out of a neighborhood is something that we should be well behind by now.

[thedistrict84]

2 hours ago, H-Town Man said:

In Houston, we want it all to someday be towers.

 

I mean I certainly don’t. Certain areas, sure, but not the whole inner loop area. I like having a yard. And a garage. And valets are the worst.

 

2 hours ago, jgriff said:

I don’t want that kind of elitist thinking in Houston. Keeping certain people out of a neighborhood is something that we should be well behind by now.

 

How on earth is wanting to retain historic bungalows in Montrose, or keeping a single family neighborhood single family, an “elitist” idea? 

 

Now if you’re talking about pricing people out of the neighborhood, then you’re just wrong. High rise apartments/condos are very expensive. How cheap do you think the condos are going to be in this particular tower?

[NoMoHouTx]

So to the question of what changes I'd like to see...well, first of all, it would be great if no changes were needed due to the developers being diligent and respectful of their neighbors and the neighborhood as a whole. I'm doubtful that will be the case.  So, my concerns center around things like traffic flow - how will the entering and exiting traffic be directed.   Things like lighting...since this behemoth will be my new backyard neighbor, what kind of intrusive lighting will they stick on the outside portion of the building that faces my property?  The parking garage is a concern...will it have a covered facade at least on the backside for privacy and so that i don't get bombarded with the headlights of cars in the garage?  What will the exterior wall look like - if all I"m going to be looking it is the monstrous building it better be something at least pleasant to look at.  What about the trash and dumpster locations - a building that size will generate a lot of trash.  Fence locations and material of construction are a concern.   Locations of all the utility stations and equipment.   Also, the developers are asking for approval of variances....what are they willing to give in exchange as far as improvements....an improved pedestrian experience?   What is the landscape plan?  Anyway...those are some of the items I hope all get worked out favorably.

 

As for a 20 story monster in my backyard vs a 3 story townhome or townhome complex?  A 20 story wall will completely, and I do mean completely, cover any view i have of open space/sky and my guess is that in the summer time the backyard will go dark around 4 pm.  in the winter time, there will never be any direct sunlight.  With a townhome development or something half the size of a 20 story building, the impact on light, sun, sky etc would not be nearly as severe.

 

And as for traffic impact, maybe a 20 story building with only 100 units in and of itself will have a minimal impact.  But it's not an isolated development.   1308 is being replaced with an 8 level apartment building...Wharton Elementary has just been tripled in size....Gibbs boat shop is being redone into some sort of restaurant/entertainment destination...the car wash directly across West Clay from Khun Kay Thai is for sale and so there'll be new development there.  All these things need to be considered so that wise decisions are made.  I'd venture to say that the redevelopment at the corner of Washington/Heights/Montrose will also lead to increased traffic in this portion of North Montrose.....

 

There's still the question I've got of whether a separate laydown yard will be needed during the construction of this project for material, equipment, construction trailer, etc.

 

 

 

Edited September 13, 2018 by NoMoHouTx

[Angostura]

9 hours ago, thedistrict84 said:

 

Now if you’re talking about pricing people out of the neighborhood, then you’re just wrong. High rise apartments/condos are very expensive. How cheap do you think the condos are going to be in this particular tower?

 

And if those people aren't buying expensive condos in high-rise buildings, what ARE they buying?

 

If the number of people who want to live in a given neighborhood goes up (which is the case in Montrose), either we build more housing to meet the demand, or the price of the existing housing stock goes up, which absolutely prices people out of the neighborhood.

[Angostura]

9 hours ago, thedistrict84 said:

How on earth is wanting to retain historic bungalows in Montrose, or keeping a single family neighborhood single family, an “elitist” idea? 

 

 

Because it's essentially saying that if you want to live in a particular neighborhood, you must have enough money to buy (an increasingly expensive) single family home, or have had the good sense to be born a few decades earlier, when those homes were affordable. So if you're not one of those entrenched elites, you're out of luck.

 

Policies that restrict the housing supply increase the price of housing, which enriches the (older, richer) existing owners at the expense of potential (younger, poorer) newcomers. If you're sitting on half-a-million dollars in home equity due to rampant housing price inflation (not uncommon in cities with restrictive zoning), you're already in the top quintile of the wealth distribution in this country. Restrictive zoning is a very effective mechanism to transfer money from younger, poorer people to older, richer people, and we should be ashamed it's lasted as long as it has in most of the country.

 

[Angostura]

17 hours ago, NoMoHouTx said:

I did notice this for sale sign go up at the car wash directly across West Clay from Khun Kay Thai.  Any thoughts on what this might mean?  My initial thought is that maybe the lot is needed initially as a laydown yard for all the construction equipment and material and that after the 20 story tower is built something else will be put in on this corner.  But that's based on my assumption that because of the small lot size for the 20 story project, a separate lay down area will be needed.  Any thoughts on this??

 

 

Whether the high-rise project needs a laydown area wouldn't have much bearing on whether this particular landowner decides to sell.

 

There's about $1M worth of dirt under that car wash, so I suspect it's just a reflection of the fact that a car wash is a pretty low-value use of pretty high-value land. Whatever income the car wash is generating is probably lower than the opportunity cost of not selling or developing the land, especially if property taxes keep increasing.

 

[thedistrict84]

2 hours ago, Angostura said:

And if those people aren't buying expensive condos in high-rise buildings, what ARE they buying?

 

I might be underestimating the number of people that will be “cross-shopping” 1930s bungalows and a condo in a new high-rise tower. Those are near opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of property type.

 

I would think that if someone cannot afford the type of housing they would prefer in a certain neighborhood, they would look at other nearby neighborhoods instead of completely changing the criteria on the type of property they want to purchase.

 

2 hours ago, Angostura said:

If the number of people who want to live in a given neighborhood goes up (which is the case in Montrose), either we build more housing to meet the demand, or the price of the existing housing stock goes up, which absolutely prices people out of the neighborhood.

 

I get that. Economics 101. Supply and demand.

 

However, if the goal is to provide more affordable property for the area, this particular high rise tower with what will almost invariably be “luxury” condos with a high sale price and the added bonus of an insane monthly maintenance fee (if it’s anything like other towers in Montrose) is probably not the best way to go about it.

[H-Town Man]

13 hours ago, thedistrict84 said:

 

I mean I certainly don’t. Certain areas, sure, but not the whole inner loop area. I like having a yard. And a garage. And valets are the worst.

 

 

How on earth is wanting to retain historic bungalows in Montrose, or keeping a single family neighborhood single family, an “elitist” idea? 

 

Now if you’re talking about pricing people out of the neighborhood, then you’re just wrong. High rise apartments/condos are very expensive. How cheap do you think the condos are going to be in this particular tower?

 

The "wanting it all to be towers" comment was tongue-in-cheek.

 

[thedistrict84]

9 minutes ago, H-Town Man said:

The "wanting it all to be towers" comment was tongue-in-cheek.

 

I know. My response was a playful jab at those people who do.

 

And valets are universally awful. I’ll stand by that comment.

[wilcal]

12 hours ago, NoMoHouTx said:

Also, the developers are asking for approval of variances....what are they willing to give in exchange as far as improvements....an improved pedestrian experience?   What is the landscape plan?  Anyway...those are some of the items I hope all get worked out favorably.

 

 

As an FYI, I think that they have already "struck" a deal to get their variances based on the revisions of these plans. The only big change I can see is that the footprint is now larger (no surface parking like in original plans) and a reduction in the number of parking spots/levels. 

 

 

[Angostura]

2 hours ago, thedistrict84 said:

 

I might be underestimating the number of people that will be “cross-shopping” 1930s bungalows and a condo in a new high-rise tower. Those are near opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of property type.

 

I would think that if someone cannot afford the type of housing they would prefer in a certain neighborhood, they would look at other nearby neighborhoods instead of completely changing the criteria on the type of property they want to purchase.

 

 

It doesn't have to be the same people for the effect to happen.

 

Home buying/renting choices are influenced by a lot of things: location preference, home type preference, and, perhaps most of all, budget. While the people priced out of Montrose bungalows may not opt for high-rise condos, some portion will opt for a townhouse in Montrose over a bungalow in the Heights, for example. Those priced out of townhouses in Montrose may opt for an apartment in Montrose over a townhouse in Shady Acres. And so on. 

 

 

2 hours ago, thedistrict84 said:

I get that. Economics 101. Supply and demand.

 

However, if the goal is to provide more affordable property for the area, this particular high rise tower with what will almost invariably be “luxury” condos with a high sale price and the added bonus of an insane monthly maintenance fee (if it’s anything like other towers in Montrose) is probably not the best way to go about it.

 

New buildings usually come in at the top of the market because it's expensive to build new buildings. It's also relatively cheap to build with "luxury finishes". See this analysis of an apartment project, which indicates that high end finishes only account for $52 of a $2000 monthly rent check: https://www.sightline.org/2018/08/30/what-makes-portlands-new-apartments-so-expensive/

 

The reason why adding new supply at the top of the market still improves affordability is a phenomenon called filtering, where adding new supply prevents those buyers from bidding up older properties, keeping those properties affordable. (Provided overall density increases. Replacing high density housing with low density housing has the opposite effect.)

 

I know of no market where failing to add supply in the face of increased demand causes prices to not go up.

 

 

[Angostura]

10 minutes ago, wilcal said:

 

As an FYI, I think that they have already "struck" a deal to get their variances based on the revisions of these plans. The only big change I can see is that the footprint is now larger (no surface parking like in original plans) and a reduction in the number of parking spots/levels. 

 

 

 

The planning commission has been pretty receptive to granting setback variances, usually in return for wider sidewalks and other improvements in the pedestrian realm beyond what's required in the ordinances.

 

Parking variances, on the other hand...

 

 

[wilcal]

3 hours ago, Angostura said:

 

The planning commission has been pretty receptive to granting setback variances, usually in return for wider sidewalks and other improvements in the pedestrian realm beyond what's required in the ordinances.

 

Parking variances, on the other hand...

 

 

 

I'm not sure if I was clear re-reading my post. The developer isn't asking for a parking variance. Planning Commission asked them to bring the parking down closer to the minimum in exchange for their setback variance request. 

[Triton]

On 9/12/2018 at 3:13 PM, dbigtex56 said:

This is one of the hazards of living in Houston, and why many of us have a strong love/hate relationship concerning its unfettered development.

 

And just one more reason this city, at least in the loop, needs zoning. That's why a rather large indoor/outdoor music hall (WOMH) was able to be built in my neighborhood... because there's no zoning and developers can build whatever they want wherever they want. I also have a feeling that if we had zoning, we'd have more walkable commercial areas.

[CREguy13]

13 minutes ago, Triton said:

 

And just one more reason this city, at least in the loop, needs zoning. That's why a rather large indoor/outdoor music hall (WOMH) was able to be built in my neighborhood... because there's no zoning and developers can build whatever they want wherever they want. I also have a feeling that if we had zoning, we'd have more walkable commercial areas.

We'd also have less development.

[thedistrict84]

10 minutes ago, CREguy13 said:

We'd also have less development.

 

I think I would trade less development overall for a more cohesive approach to developing inner-loop areas. 

[cspwal]

Lack of walkable areas is more to blame on setbacks, parking requirements, and other code requirements.  You can have zoning and it not be walkable, and not have zoning and it be walkable.  

[Angostura]

53 minutes ago, Triton said:

 

 I also have a feeling that if we had zoning, we'd have more walkable commercial areas.

 

Evidence from the past several decades would indicate the exact opposite. 

 

The most walkable places in the country and around the world were developed organically, usually on small lots, without any central planning (other than laying out rights of way and platting lots, if that). While it's theoretically possible to urban-plan your way into walkability, in practice zoning is pretty good at sewing the seeds for car-dependence, by implementing use segregation, density limits, minimum setbacks and parking requirements.

 

 

 

 

[samagon]

On 9/12/2018 at 11:16 PM, NoMoHouTx said:

As for a 20 story monster in my backyard vs a 3 story townhome or townhome complex?  A 20 story wall will completely, and I do mean completely, cover any view i have of open space/sky and my guess is that in the summer time the backyard will go dark around 4 pm.  in the winter time, there will never be any direct sunlight.  With a townhome development or something half the size of a 20 story building, the impact on light, sun, sky etc would not be nearly as severe.

 

I applaud your reasonable expectation that they allow neighborhood feedback. Unlike so many that just go straight to the "fight against it with all of your being", it's refreshing. 

 

I personally would miss the sun, but the lowering of my energy bill during the summer thanks to the shade this thing will create would be very welcome. And the ability to sit in my backyard in the shade on an August afternoon enjoying a summery beverage without getting a massive sunburn would be awesome. 

 

what kind of tree do you currently have? it will still have direct sunlight for a portion of the day, and perhaps that will be enough, and maybe, if it's in the shade during the hottest parts of the day as you suggest, it might flourish in those conditions. 

[H-Town Man]

On ‎9‎/‎14‎/‎2018 at 0:55 PM, Angostura said:

 

Evidence from the past several decades would indicate the exact opposite. 

 

The most walkable places in the country and around the world were developed organically, usually on small lots, without any central planning (other than laying out rights of way and platting lots, if that). While it's theoretically possible to urban-plan your way into walkability, in practice zoning is pretty good at sewing the seeds for car-dependence, by implementing use segregation, density limits, minimum setbacks and parking requirements.

 

 

 

 

 

Well, it gives you the power to encourage walkable development and it gives you the power to prevent it. Many cities (e.g. Austin and Dallas) have fostered walkable development by identifying certain roadways as pedestrian commercial corridors, requiring zero setbacks and GFR, and prohibiting incompatible uses, parking garage entrances, curb cuts, etc. There are also certain soft tactics like giving extra FAR or density credits for doing things like adding public spaces or awnings to a project. Think how much different West Gray would look if there had been some way of preventing the big public storage building, forcing the CVS at Bagby to be built up to the hard corner, requiring Dolce Living to have GFR, etc. Then other developers would feel confident putting a high quality product along that street and not fearing that it would be ruined by more public storage, etc. As it stands, I doubt it develops into a great walkable street, despite the early promise of Post Midtown Square.

 

Of course, zoning can also be used against walkable development for the reasons you mention - setbacks, minimum parking, etc. But then, Houston went ahead and created ordinances for those anyway. It also can work against an organic mixture of uses, slows (or stops completely) the process of densification/urbanization, and prohibits organic changes in the cityscape. Would the Galleria area have developed the way it did if we had zoning, the most dramatic suburban skyline in the U.S.? Or would it have been much more bland, like Tyson's Corner or Addison?  

 

Edited September 18, 2018 by H-Town Man

[NoMoHouTx]

2 hours ago, samagon said:

 

I applaud your reasonable expectation that they allow neighborhood feedback. Unlike so many that just go straight to the "fight against it with all of your being", it's refreshing. 

 

I personally would miss the sun, but the lowering of my energy bill during the summer thanks to the shade this thing will create would be very welcome. And the ability to sit in my backyard in the shade on an August afternoon enjoying a summery beverage without getting a massive sunburn would be awesome. 

 

what kind of tree do you currently have? it will still have direct sunlight for a portion of the day, and perhaps that will be enough, and maybe, if it's in the shade during the hottest parts of the day as you suggest, it might flourish in those conditions. 

The tree in my backyard is a very mature Japanese Blueberry.  It's tall (I'm guessing about 40') and does a great job of shading the back side of my townhome in the summer time while also shading the yard.  The tree is listed as full sun to partial shade so I'm not sure what it's severely limited direct sunlight exposure will mean once this 20 story development goes up.   While a reduced electric bill in the summer time may be nice, it's not nearly as nice as being able to look out of my kitchen window/back door window and see greenery/sky/sunsets etc.  I'll be staring at the backside of a parking garage.  Let's see if the developer cares enough to at least make the backside of his building not a 100% eye sore.

 

 

 

[wilcal]

1 hour ago, NoMoHouTx said:

The tree in my backyard is a very mature Japanese Blueberry.  It's tall (I'm guessing about 40') and does a great job of shading the back side of my townhome in the summer time while also shading the yard.  The tree is listed as full sun to partial shade so I'm not sure what it's severely limited direct sunlight exposure will mean once this 20 story development goes up.   While a reduced electric bill in the summer time may be nice, it's not nearly as nice as being able to look out of my kitchen window/back door window and see greenery/sky/sunsets etc.  I'll be staring at the backside of a parking garage.  Let's see if the developer cares enough to at least make the backside of his building not a 100% eye sore.

 

3

 

I think it's also fair to note that you built your house (or the previous resident did) as tall as the blueberry tree preventing any sunlight from reaching in during the first half of the day. 

 

Granted, if the 20 story building was to your east that wouldn't matter, but owning a lot doesn't mean you get guaranteed unfettered sunlight coverage for your backyard. 

 

The renderings posted above did have a glass veneer on the parking structure, so I would hope that stays!

[NoMoHouTx]

The proposed 20 story building is directly to my east.  I'm hoping the tree survives as due to its size and branching out the way it does, it will serve as nice foreground to the parking garage that will rise directly behind it on the adjacent lot where the restaurant currently sits

[wilcal]

4 minutes ago, NoMoHouTx said:

The proposed 20 story building is directly to my east.  I'm hoping the tree survives as due to its size and branching out the way it does, it will serve as nice foreground to the parking garage that will rise directly behind it on the adjacent lot where the restaurant currently sits

 

Ohhhhhh. I thought you were in one of the townhomes with a tree in the backyard bordering to the west where the tree is boxed in on all 3 sides already. 

[skwatra]

50 minutes ago, NoMoHouTx said:

The proposed 20 story building is directly to my east.

Is your Japanese Blueberry in the Montrose median?

I used to own on the block just south and was a regular at Khun Kay through when she retired (food went downhill after that IMO though some items were still good).

 

It does seem like a small block to fit this size in but as far as the area, but this is the direction things are going. Every apartment going up or proposed in the area are in the 8 story range. I for one look forward to the density.

 

 

[NoMoHouTx]

6 hours ago, skwatra said:

Is your Japanese Blueberry in the Montrose median?

I used to own on the block just south and was a regular at Khun Kay through when she retired (food went downhill after that IMO though some items were still good).

 

It does seem like a small block to fit this size in but as far as the area, but this is the direction things are going. Every apartment going up or proposed in the area are in the 8 story range. I for one look forward to the density.

 

 

Oops..I misspoke.  The 20 story building will be directly to my WEST!   The sun sets in the west...duh! My bad.  It's the afternoon and evening sun that will be almost totally blocked out during the summer months by this building.