HoustonMidtown Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 Warehouses are almost gone 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_cuevas713 Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 (edited) Its funny because I was just in this area today and I was like why the hell don't they make this area more pedestrian friendly... it has some elements of that but man why doesn't this city go crazy with laying sidewalks? Like consistent sidewalks with the same width from downtown and everywhere expanding from the cities core. If you added more pedestrian friendly areas for people to simply cross the damn street, you'll get a denser city with higher quality. Instead all these developments are half ass, with sidewalks to nowhere or that end out of nowhere and so much landscaping that it becomes hard to maintain all that crap. Instead if you made everything simple and just have all sidewalks come to the edge of the curb, you would find a nicer city with less maintenance. I just don't get it. And all these lots that are empty or overgrown, man fence that crap off. Is the city that strapped for money that they can't section off eyesore lots? Edited April 4, 2016 by j_cuevas713 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angostura Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 13 hours ago, j_cuevas713 said: Its funny because I was just in this area today and I was like why the hell don't they make this area more pedestrian friendly... it has some elements of that but man why doesn't this city go crazy with laying sidewalks? Like consistent sidewalks with the same width from downtown and everywhere expanding from the cities core. If you added more pedestrian friendly areas for people to simply cross the damn street, you'll get a denser city with higher quality. Instead all these developments are half ass, with sidewalks to nowhere or that end out of nowhere and so much landscaping that it becomes hard to maintain all that crap. Instead if you made everything simple and just have all sidewalks come to the edge of the curb, you would find a nicer city with less maintenance. I just don't get it. And all these lots that are empty or overgrown, man fence that crap off. Is the city that strapped for money that they can't section off eyesore lots? It's largely because there's nowhere to walk from. As these large tracts became available, starting with the Target several years ago, instead of extending the street grid into these formerly industrial areas, they were/are being developed as standalone big-box centers. Imagine what kind of neighborhood would emerge if the entire area bound by Houston Ave, I-10, Studemont and Washington was laid out as a street grid with lots (of various sizes) sold off piecemeal, some for retail, some for multifamily, some for single family. You'd have a walkable neighborhood (with a built-in transit right-of-way) within minutes of downtown. Instead we'll get 4-6 large commercial developments, each with their own large surface parking lot. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_cuevas713 Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 2 hours ago, Angostura said: It's largely because there's nowhere to walk from. As these large tracts became available, starting with the Target several years ago, instead of extending the street grid into these formerly industrial areas, they were/are being developed as standalone big-box centers. Imagine what kind of neighborhood would emerge if the entire area bound by Houston Ave, I-10, Studemont and Washington was laid out as a street grid with lots (of various sizes) sold off piecemeal, some for retail, some for multifamily, some for single family. You'd have a walkable neighborhood (with a built-in transit right-of-way) within minutes of downtown. Instead we'll get 4-6 large commercial developments, each with their own large surface parking lot. And I totally get that, but even if an area is not on a grid, why can't the city at least develop it to meet the needs of the average walker? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgriff Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 (edited) 18 hours ago, j_cuevas713 said: Its funny because I was just in this area today and I was like why the hell don't they make this area more pedestrian friendly... it has some elements of that but man why doesn't this city go crazy with laying sidewalks? Like consistent sidewalks with the same width from downtown and everywhere expanding from the cities core. If you added more pedestrian friendly areas for people to simply cross the damn street, you'll get a denser city with higher quality. Instead all these developments are half ass, with sidewalks to nowhere or that end out of nowhere and so much landscaping that it becomes hard to maintain all that crap. Instead if you made everything simple and just have all sidewalks come to the edge of the curb, you would find a nicer city with less maintenance. I just don't get it. And all these lots that are empty or overgrown, man fence that crap off. Is the city that strapped for money that they can't section off eyesore lots? Does the city build or maintain any sidewalks? Around my house they've all been built by homeowners or businesses. The only time you get new or updated sidewalks is when the city forces a developer to build them. Edit: The Shepherd drive drainage project is putting in new sidewalks and fixing old ones so I guess there are at least some publicly funded sidewalks. Edited April 4, 2016 by jgriff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_cuevas713 Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 Just now, jgriff said: Does the city build or maintain any sidewalks? Around my house they've all been built by homeowners or businesses. The only time you get new or updated sidewalks is when the city forces a developer to build them. Yeah I know but the city pump so much money downtown and then neglects the neighborhoods around it. Why doesn't the city just take over all infrastructure. If business owners have to create their own sidewalk, then all you're gonna get is a bunch of patchwork sidewalks trying to fit together. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skooljunkie Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 The entire neighborhood between White Oak Bayou, Heights, Washington, and this development is receiving new public infrastructure because of Rebuild Houston. It's a Capital Improvement Project slated to begin at the end of 2017. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s3mh Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 Things are improving a lot in the city, but there is still a tremendous amount of pro-car bias in public works and safety. Residents in the Heights have been screaming for some pedestrian protection where the hike and bike path crosses Yale and W 11th. Thanks to Trammel Crow agreeing to pay for it, the city finally gave in and put in a TUCAN signal at Yale and the hike and bike path (still has not been activated). But the city resisted because there were no reports of accidents and the traffic counts did not justify it. The Walmart/Sprouts developments are another example. The city gave the developers 380 cash for infrastructure improvements, but the "upgrades" were crap. The city required wider sidewalks, but just let the developers pave over the grassy strips between the sidewalk and the street. Trees in the right of way were removed and mitigated with trees above the grade separation by the train bridge. And after a couple of years, there is still no sidewalk between the Yale St. Bridge and Koehler on the west side of Yale. When the City runs the show, they can do nice things, like the improvements on Navigation. But when it is just developers working directly with the city, there is endless deference to the developer and little vigilance for pedestrian issues. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 5 hours ago, j_cuevas713 said: And I totally get that, but even if an area is not on a grid, why can't the city at least develop it to meet the needs of the average walker? Be a little hard for the City to develop that as a grid, given the property was privately owned for the most part. Unless you think it's OK for the City to force a developer to put in a grid, rather than what the developer thinks will actually sell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_cuevas713 Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 13 minutes ago, Ross said: Be a little hard for the City to develop that as a grid, given the property was privately owned for the most part. Unless you think it's OK for the City to force a developer to put in a grid, rather than what the developer thinks will actually sell. No I'm not saying that nor am I saying it needs to be a grid. What I am saying is that when the city approves a particular development, they need to fully consider how it interacts with pedestrians. And unless the developer can meet those needs, then the project should be postponed, etc. The problem is every project is approved. Developers seem to run this city and the city does little to create a standard for development. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigFootsSocks Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 Nah I'm down with the City "forcing" (love that word) things like this. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angostura Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 20 hours ago, Ross said: Be a little hard for the City to develop that as a grid, given the property was privately owned for the most part. Unless you think it's OK for the City to force a developer to put in a grid, rather than what the developer thinks will actually sell. Very difficult. Especially since all these parcels came on the market piecemeal; the first one a decade ago. There's no incentive for a landowner to do it on their own, since they're basically giving away that square footage. The city would have had to acquire the right-of-way via eminent domain, then pay to put in the streets and associated infrastructure, either directly or via 380. An admittedly unlikely scenario. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mab Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 http://www.streetwiseretail.com/_files/Studemont-Junction-Marketing-Brochure-2016.pdf new brochure but sadly but nothing new to report 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted May 6, 2016 Share Posted May 6, 2016 6 hours ago, CrockpotandGravel said: Nothing new? I don't think so. The updated brochure shows a few more new renderings of phase 1's possible look and has an updated site map so this is awesome! Thanks @Mab for another great find! It would've been nice to see phase 2 but maybe we'll see that later this year. From the updated site map, it appears that there is no Phase 2. All in one phase now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angostura Posted May 6, 2016 Share Posted May 6, 2016 Looks like they ditched the apartments (ph 2) in favor of 1-1/2 new big box retailers and a bunch more surface parking. This entire area, from the cemetery to Sawyer St, will go down as one of the great missed opportunities in Houston real estate development. It's a huge area, smack in between the Heights, the Washington corridor, and 1st/6th wards, yet it's completely inaccessible from any of those areas other than by car. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted May 6, 2016 Share Posted May 6, 2016 51 minutes ago, Angostura said: Looks like they ditched the apartments (ph 2) in favor of 1-1/2 new big box retailers and a bunch more surface parking. This entire area, from the cemetery to Sawyer St, will go down as one of the great missed opportunities in Houston real estate development. It's a huge area, smack in between the Heights, the Washington corridor, and 1st/6th wards, yet it's completely inaccessible from any of those areas other than by car. You can use the bikepath. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nate4l1f3 Posted May 7, 2016 Share Posted May 7, 2016 How is this any different from a shopping center in Katy? Struck out on this one. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angostura Posted May 9, 2016 Share Posted May 9, 2016 On 5/7/2016 at 0:19 PM, nate4l1f3 said: How is this any different from a shopping center in Katy? Struck out on this one. Driving west on I-10 from downtown is like watching a video loop. You see the same big box retailers in identical-looking developments every 7-8 miles. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s3mh Posted May 9, 2016 Share Posted May 9, 2016 62k sq ft anchor and no rank HEB speculation? Come on people. The biggest problem with redevelopment along I-10 is that all the big plays have come just as the market falls back. Ainbinder had big plans for a mixed use development but quickly reverted back to his usual strip mall forte when the recession hit. The original plans for this one had a pretty significant multifamily plan (@400 units?). But now that multifamily is all built out (for now), we will probably get some big box retailer from the burbs. The sad thing is that there is some really great development going on along Sawyer St. (Ravinia, Sawyer Lofts) with the section of Washington Ave to the south also coming alive. This could have all been part of a contiguous group of development from the Walmart site all the way through 1st Ward, with good multifamily and retail density. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HAG Posted May 9, 2016 Share Posted May 9, 2016 Rumors that HEB is circulating a petition to get legislation on the ballot to repeal certain parts of the Heights dry laws. Below is a legal notice posted 5/5 in the Chron. Any idea what the Houston Heights Beverage Coalition PAC is? Any confirmation HEB is behind this? I didn't think dry laws applied just south of I-10 but I can't recall for sure. The Houston Heights Beverage Coalition Political Action Committee will submit an application to Anna Russell, City Secretary for the City of Houston in compliance with Section 501.023 of the Texas Election Code, in order to circulate petitions to the qualified voters of the area formerly known as the City of Houston Heights as it existed on February 19, 1918, now within the City of Houston, Harris County Texas, so that a local option election can be called on the following issue: For/Against "The legal sale of beer and wine for off-premise consumption only." This public notice was paid for by Houston Heights Beverage Coalition Political Action Committee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s3mh Posted May 9, 2016 Share Posted May 9, 2016 Very interesting. I do not see that PAC listed with the State, but it could be too new to be on the website. PACs do not have to disclose donors. There is no way to find out who is behind it absent the PAC making the disclosure or leaving behind circumstantial evidence. I would be surprised if HEB was behind this. There really isn't a suitable site for a HEB in the dry zone right now. They would just be helping Kroger get alcohol sales on W. 20th. I would think that it would be more likely that local developers holding prime retail spots in the Heights would like to see the dry zone go away so their tenants do not have to jump through the private club hoops. Repeal of the dry zone would be DOA in the Heights. There is already enough of a kerfuffle every time someone wants to put in a new restaurant that will result in spillover parking issues on residential streets. The private club license/dry zone regulations do a good job of keeping bars and liquor stores/convenience stores out. Only those who are committed to operating in the Heights will bother with the private club license. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angostura Posted May 9, 2016 Share Posted May 9, 2016 2 hours ago, s3mh said: Repeal of the dry zone would be DOA in the Heights. There is already enough of a kerfuffle every time someone wants to put in a new restaurant that will result in spillover parking issues on residential streets. The private club license/dry zone regulations do a good job of keeping bars and liquor stores/convenience stores out. Only those who are committed to operating in the Heights will bother with the private club license. I don't agree that a local option election would necessarily be DOA, especially if it was limited, as this application is, to beer and wine for off-premise consumption. From the point of view of the pearl-clutchers, with the private club licenses, we already get all the externalities normally associated with liquor sales. All this would change is that you might be able to get a bottle of wine to drink with dinner at home without having to drive outside the neighborhood. I, for one, would love to have a retail wine shop or three in the neighborhood, or be able to buy a 6-pack at the 20th St Kroger. This petition will fail for a different reason. The local option election would have to be for the entirety either of the City of Houston or (more likely) JP/Constable Precinct 1, since current law doesn't allow for local option elections in smaller jurisdictions. For that reason, the signature requirements to hold a local option election are unlikely ever to be met. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s3mh Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 Scott McLelland said in the chron yesterday that an announcement about HEB in the Heights is coming soon. I think this points to HEB coming to studemont. It is shovel ready. Waugh is not. It is not in the dry area. The recently shuttered Fiesta is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angostura Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 1 hour ago, s3mh said: Scott McLelland said in the chron yesterday that an announcement about HEB in the Heights is coming soon. I think this points to HEB coming to studemont. It is shovel ready. Waugh is not. It is not in the dry area. The recently shuttered Fiesta is. Could be. I still think Washington is at least as likely. (Shep & 23 is a long shot.) At 62k s.f. this site comparable but smaller than recent openings in Montrose (75k) and Tanglewood (91k). Adding in the "Jr Anchor" spot and it's about the same size as Montrose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avossos Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 1 hour ago, s3mh said: Scott McLelland said in the chron yesterday that an announcement about HEB in the Heights is coming soon. I think this points to HEB coming to studemont. It is shovel ready. Waugh is not. It is not in the dry area. The recently shuttered Fiesta is. Link? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s3mh Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 http://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/retail/article/H-E-B-No-plans-to-take-over-smaller-Fresh-Market-7423634.php?cmpid=btfpm It is behind the paywall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triton Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 I got scorched by people on Nextdoor and even some in the media for saying it's that Washington Ave. location but I am still convinced it's going to be there. I bet Midway and them finally came to some agreement. It's just much larger than Studemont Junction. You look at the parking amount there based on the most recent schematics and it just appears there's no way they can fit enough people, even with parking on the roof. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angostura Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 All it says on Heights is this: Quote McClelland said he couldn't comment on plans for a new Heights store but said an announcement soon will come. More intriguing was this: Quote He also said Shepherd Plaza, the once-bustling, now-forlorn shopping center just north of the intersection of Greenbriar and the Southwest Freeway, is moving closer to its destiny of becoming an H-E-B store. Much of the center at 2110 Portsmouth is vacant, but tenant Tuesday Morning apparently holds the longest lease of the remaining retailers. McClelland said he believes the store's lease expires in 2019. H-E-B has owned Shepherd Plaza for about 10 years. I had no idea HEB owned that property. By now, I'd think it's too close to their Montrose store (and Central Market) to be a likely location for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mab Posted May 11, 2016 Share Posted May 11, 2016 From the brochure phase 2 is still a go! Quote Phase 2 of the develoment will entail construction of a unique 400 upscale unit multi-family housing unit that will reinforce the urban character of the site and will encourage heavy pedestrian activity along the corridor 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angostura Posted May 11, 2016 Share Posted May 11, 2016 11 hours ago, Mab said: From the brochure phase 2 is still a go! The text doesn't match the site plan. The residential component was where the two retail spaces are now (in the SW corner). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.