Memories Of The Heights

[LTAWACS]

Our timeline is the only one we know (at least for now). Unless he's got some way to travel to other timelines.

[fwki]

Our timeline is the only one we know (at least for now). Unless he's got some way to travel to other timelines.

We must find the portals to alternate realities. Obviously some of our members spend time there and must know the locations.

[LTAWACS]

We must find the portals to alternate realities. Obviously some of our members spend time there and must know the locations.

Correct. These alternate realities can't be too far.

[Subdude]

I hope it's not just me going mad, but does anyone else remember statues of dinosaurs in a yard in - I believe - the Heights? This would have been in about 1982. I thought I had photos but they seem to have been lost along the way.

[neuman]

You're not crazy, at least no more than I am. I remember them as well. By my recollection, they were between 20th and 610, near the old RR tracks. My grandparents used to take my by in the late 70's.

[marmer]

Google Earth has b/w historical imagery from 1978 and 1989 which is fairly clear; maybe you can find them there.

[refereebrent]

I remember them. I also remember the old space capsule that was in the front yard of a house in Bellaire, right off the loop (the west side of the loop). I think it was the grand prize of a model company. I still look for it when I drive on the loop even though I know it has probably been gone for at least 30 years.

[RonB]

there are dinosaurs now at travis elementary school.  for other dinosaurs in houston, see https://picasaweb.google.com/112511098505327888298/Dinosaurs?authuser=0&feat=directlink

some have been demolished, see the captions

[IronTiger]

I found out very recently that I do have some family connection to the Heights. My father lived there for a period of a few years in elementary school (went to Harvard Elem. School) in the 1960s. It was in this era that his dad (my grandfather) took him down to what was the middle of nowhere to see the Astrodome, which was still under construction.

 

The crazy thing to me is that we DID drive through the Heights a few years back, (trying to get to Penzey's Spices) and he didn't even seem to recognize the area, probably because the area had gentrified so much since then (compared to a Baton Rouge neighborhood where he had lived also, which had conversely grown rougher, even by the 1980s--it's probably even worse now).

 

I just never knew that for all the Heights-related discussions we've had, my father was part of it.

[houston082004]

http://www.theleadernews.com/?p=14414

[august948]

There's another very long thread concerning this, but it can be summed up by this from the article...

 

"According to an increasing number of homeowners and builders in the Heights, the guidelines are not true guidelines. The HAHC utilizes subjectivity in criteria, meaning a homeowner can do everything in his or her power to follow the rules, only to be told they don’t apply in certain instances."

[Texasota]

It really needs to be repeated that, even according to that article, the HAHC has a 90% approval rate.

[Marksmu]

Its only 90% because the homeowners have been forced to compromise over and over and over again PRIOR to the actual hearing day.  They meet with people at the HAHC to TRY to get everything lined up for approval prior to the actual hearing....Its also 90% because many people are withdrawing their applications because they won't be permitted to do what they want.

 

Do not confuse statistics with a job well done.  The government tells us this month that we are down to only 7% unemployment!!!  That is great, except that 23-25% of the country is not working because they have now been on unemployment so long that they are not considered unemployed any longer....My point is that the 90% statistic is as pointless as the unemployment statistic. 

[J008]

 

 

 The government tells us this month that we are down to only 7% unemployment!!!  That is great, except that 23-25% of the country is not working because they have now been on unemployment so long that they are not considered unemployed any longer....

 

 

Your statement is complete nonsense.

 

Here are the stats for those not participating in the workforce.  The bulk of these people choose not to work because they are retired (the stats provided will show that more than half of these people are 55+), stay at home moms (stats are also dominated by women), or perhpas idle rich, but the number who fit the category you describe i less than 1% of the population, and completely irrelevant. 

 

http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat35.htm

 

Additionally, participation in the labor force is the highest it has been since 1978.

http://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea01.htm

Edited December 10, 2013 by J008

[august948]

Your statement is complete nonsense.

 

Here are the stats for those not participating in the workforce.  The bulk of these people choose not to work because they are retired (the stats provided will show that more than half of these people are 55+), stay at home moms (stats are also dominated by women), or perhpas idle rich, but the number who fit the category you describe i less than 1% of the population, and completely irrelevant. 

 

http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat35.htm

 

Additionally, participation in the labor force is the highest it has been since 1978.

http://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea01.htm

 

Apparently, the unemployment statistics are determined by survey each month.

 

http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm

 

The process leaves wiggle room for someone in the BLS (or elsewhere, perhaps) to determine what constitutes "unemployment" from the government perspective.

[Marksmu]

Your statement is complete nonsense.

 

Here are the stats for those not participating in the workforce.  The bulk of these people choose not to work because they are retired (the stats provided will show that more than half of these people are 55+), stay at home moms (stats are also dominated by women), or perhpas idle rich, but the number who fit the category you describe i less than 1% of the population, and completely irrelevant. 

 

http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat35.htm

 

Additionally, participation in the labor force is the highest it has been since 1978.

http://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea01.htm

 

While off topic, I cant allow it to go without response - the "Not in the labor force" number are people who ARE employable but have quit looking for a job.  That number is driving the unemployment number down.  After the 99 weeks of unemployment ran out they are no longer considered to be in the labor force, regardless of age....I do not trust any statistic that removes people who otherwise can and should be working from their roles because they have been without a job too long.  The number of people not in the labor force is up 3% or more than 10,000,000 people since 2008.  Some of those retired because they could, others cant find a job b/c they are older, demand more money, and are competing against a younger healthier work force.  Most are not retired by choice, and the number of idle rich is statistically so low as to be insignificant....10,000,000 people is not an insignificant, irrelevant number.

 

To tie it back to the topic - The number of people who are applying and getting to do what they want to do to THEIR house is not 90%....the 90% number reflects people who also just compromised whether they wanted to or not because they needed to get something done and did not have the energy or the desire or the money to fight the HAHC

[s3mh]

 

 

To tie it back to the topic - The number of people who are applying and getting to do what they want to do to THEIR house is not 90%....the 90% number reflects people who also just compromised whether they wanted to or not because they needed to get something done and did not have the energy or the desire or the money to fight the HAHC

 

Assumption 1:  all approvals are the result of painful compromises by owners.  Most go through the process with little if any changes.

Assumption 2:  All denials resulted in abandonment.  Some have come back with revised plans and been approved.  The majority who went to the planning commission have prevailed.

Assumption 3:  There are hordes of people who do not even try because they are so afraid of the big bad wolf HAHC that they do not even submit an application.  The reality is that there is a long line of investors/builders and individuals looking for property in the Heights.  The chicken plant and warehouse on Ashland were both bought out for new construction in the Western HD, while the warehouse on Waverly (outside the HD) remains standing.  The main reason people are not able to buy/build in the Heights is that it is just too expensive.  Lots and existing bungalows are extremely expensive and builders want to do 3000+ sq feet so they can sell for 900k-1mil +.  That gets to a very select demographic that can afford that kind of home.

 

The reality:  the adults in the room are addressing complaints about predictability with HAHC.  No government regulatory scheme is without problems.  The relevant CMs are working to address them with HAHC.  No one supports throwing out the baby with the bath water because of problems that can easily be solved.  Most everyone is fine with the fact that you will not get everything you want when working within a regulatory system because you will, in the end, get to build in a neighborhood that has some architectural integrity and not marred with shoulder to shoulder faux New Orleans boxes, odd ball moderns, and other architectural duds.  You have to give a little to get a little.

 

[SilverJK]

It is hard to give a little when the entire thing was taken from you in the first place. 

 

I also like how your "assumption 1" ends with your own assumption.  Nice.

 

 

 

 

 

[Heightsite]

Interesting article about the downfall of the Heights depending, of course, on your point of view. What makes this subdivision so charming is being whittled away inch by inch.

http://www.houstonpress.com/2013-12-19/news/coming-down-from-the-heights/

[august948]

From the article...

 

At that time, there was still regular gunfire nearby. I saw a car chase right on my block complete with one car blowing out the back window of the other with a shotgun in a drug deal gone bad. About 2 a.m. one New Year's Eve, I heard the familiar sound of a machine gun — yes, fully auto and everything

 

I'm sure that less gunfire, fewer car chases, and fewer machine guns have really brought the neighborhood down from where it was.  Of course, there's always the Heights arsonist.  Did they ever catch that guy?

Edited December 19, 2013 by august948

[fwki]

Here's the editorial summary:
http://www.theleadernews.com/?p=15142
 

[JJxvi]

Time for retribution against the Leader.

[august948]

Time for retribution against the Leader.

 

Why?  For pointing out that it's broken?

[Marksmu]

Its broken....The Leader did its JOB, that is to report news in an unbiased way.  If their facts are wrong, people are going to have the chance to rebut.  That is what news is, that is what it is supposed to be.  Unfortunately, some people, usually those who are very left leaning and support government intrusion in their daily life, think so emotionally on every topic that they are unable to ascertain the difference between reporting, and disagreeing with their personal belief...thus anytime someone disagrees with them, its clearly biased, or political.  For once a news organization did its job!  I for one say good job leader!

 

 

[august948]

Its broken....The Leader did its JOB, that is to report news in an unbiased way.  If their facts are wrong, people are going to have the chance to rebut.  That is what news is, that is what it is supposed to be.  Unfortunately, some people, usually those who are very left leaning and support government intrusion in their daily life, think so emotionally on every topic that they are unable to ascertain the difference between reporting, and disagreeing with their personal belief...thus anytime someone disagrees with them, its clearly biased, or political.  For once a news organization did its job!  I for one say good job leader!

 

Yes, we should applaud them, though it's a little weird that they felt it necessary to write a whole article explainig why they were writing the article and how they expected to get a lot of backlash.

[s3mh]

Yes, we should applaud them, though it's a little weird that they felt it necessary to write a whole article explainig why they were writing the article and how they expected to get a lot of backlash.

 

Probably because the front page of the Leader had an advertisement from Boulevard Realty.  That would be like the New York Times doing a piece on how safe deep water drilling is with a front page advertisement from BP.

 

The reporting was actually not biased, even though the Leader gets tons of advertising dollars from builders and realtors.  It was just bad.  The Leader provided no context to the story.  The Leader did not discuss the rampant demolitions prior to the ordinance or note the hundreds of structures saved from the wrecking ball.  Nor did the Leader note that one of the reasons for accusations of double standards is that many in the community have complained to HAHC that additions were out of scale and needed to be reigned in.  The Leader relied 100% on interviews with the City of Houston for view points in support of the ordinance.  While the City certainly needs to go on the record to discuss what they have been doing, the failure to seek out any other voices that support the ordinance is bad journalism.  The Leader should have spoken to the people at Preservation Houston, Bart Truxillo and others who have frequently stood up in the community as supporters of preservation.  The "legal" reporting is so bad that I won't even bother to discuss it, except to note that the current lawsuit on file in Harris County does not seek to void the ordinance for vagueness.  It has been trimmed down to only challenging the moratorium on demolitions put in place before the amendments and asserts some election code violations, which are probably untimely.

 

 

[Marksmu]

yes, just some tiny election code violations, lets just sweep that itsy bitsty insignificant elephant under the rug - translation - you mean the outright fraud that was committed to pass something that did not have the support that they purported to have...that counted votes of public and city land, that did not allow landowners with multiple properties, multiple votes, unless of course it was the city.....I wont comment on whether or not its timely b/c frankly I dont know and have not researched it - but the election code violations are, in my opinion, the most egregious and dishonest of all of the things that took place.

 

But, of course, it does not matter, what I think - it will all come to a trial that will determine the legality anyway.

[s3mh]

yes, just some tiny election code violations, lets just sweep that itsy bitsty insignificant elephant under the rug - translation - you mean the outright fraud that was committed to pass something that did not have the support that they purported to have...that counted votes of public and city land, that did not allow landowners with multiple properties, multiple votes, unless of course it was the city.....I wont comment on whether or not its timely b/c frankly I dont know and have not researched it - but the election code violations are, in my opinion, the most egregious and dishonest of all of the things that took place.

 

But, of course, it does not matter, what I think - it will all come to a trial that will determine the legality anyway.

 

Or the fact that despite stuffing mailboxes with flyers full of crazy talk about the ordinance and putting anti ordinance signs up on properties that were not occupied or on the market, the opponents could not get anywhere close to the 50% needed to de-certify the districts. 

 

[BBLLC]

Bastian Builders is trying to re-develop a quarter of a city block containing a 17,000 sqft poultry packing plant at 12th and Rutland in the Heights West Historic District. We have been active renovating and building over 130 homes in the Heights area since 1993. We did the first remodel in Norhill after it became a designated historic district.  Kelly Thomas-Frater was the architect and former member of the HAHC.  We supported what we thought was a historic ordinance to “save the bungalows”. It was sold as such, however it was sold under false pretenses. This ordinance is not about history. It is being applied to preserve the existing stock as is with little consideration given to improvements. Our original concept was to use plans from George Barber (the original architect for the Heights development) and DECREASE the density of lots forming larger homesites. We had a picture of a house 5 blocks away on the same street that was an original Barber home. We thought how cool would it be to model a grand home after one that had been torn down to build.....several bungalows. When we were told by the staff on the planning commission that “you can't recreate history AND it is too big for that street”, I knew our concept was doomed.

 

In the ordinance the words “compatible” and “typical” are interpreted as“average” by the Planning commission staff that make recommendations to the HAHC to either grant approval or not. These weren’t defined in the ordinance and are therefore applied with a great deal of subjectivity. Additionally, the data they collected using unpaid interns to determine what “average” is, contains unacceptable errors and bad assumptions.

 

In order for this ordinance to survive, guidelines and definitions need to be developed by ALL stakeholders, not just city appointees.

[Marksmu]

Or the fact that despite stuffing mailboxes with flyers full of crazy talk about the ordinance and putting anti ordinance signs up on properties that were not occupied or on the market, the opponents could not get anywhere close to the 50% needed to de-certify the districts. 

 

 

See, there you go again, making up things that cant be proven or dis-proven.  What we all know to be an absolute fact is that the ballot did not look like a ballot.  It came during Christmas, had to be returned within 15 days...it arrived unmarked, in an every day envelope in the mail, on the same day that an identical envelope came from the mayor's office telling people not to return the envelope...It was not called a ballot, it was called a survey, and only the informed took it seriously....By not returning the ballot you were voting in favor of keeping the ordinance...we have hashed this out...its not even remotely fair.  How not voting for something is supporting it is absurd on every level.

 

If its a fair process, lets take a vote again, I will even fund the printing and the mailing and hire a 3rd party to count the ballots.... - Ill even wager the entire greater heights area...  We will send a "survey" out December 19th requiring return by January 4th.  If you can get 50% of homeowners, excluding city owned property and parks, to opt into the historic districts, we will certify everything between Shephard and Studemont, I-10 and 610 as historic.   If they dont vote to keep the ordinance, then its ALL repealed and gone. 

 

I will sleep well knowing you can't get 50% of anyone to do anything, especially if its done by US mail....Its ridiculous that you think the process was fair, regardless of whether or not you support the ordinance, the process of instituting was wrought with fraud and BS....only a true idiot, I mean a complete and total $%^&*(^$ moron, would think that process is a fair one.