The Heights Restaurant And Bar Scene - More Coming

[JCR]

Mozelle's on Heights Blvd. is done.

[BullMan008]

Mozelle's on Heights Blvd. is done.

Parking? Their food was pretty good.

[Angostura]

Parking? Their food was pretty good.

 

Location and signage. That's a very heavily traffic piece of road, but most people had no idea there was a restaurant there. 

[s3mh]

The food at Mozelle's was really good.  But the seafood market concept was probably the downfall.  Houstonians are generally not big consumers of seafood at home and tend to eat out for seafood or look to the big grocery chains to buy seafood.   I know a lot of people who ate there and were big fans of the food, but not a single person I knew bought seafood there to bring home to prepare. 

The location was also probably an issue.  They were too close to too many chains and other restaurants.  It is tough to be the new kid on the block and build a customer base when you are surrounded by so many other options.  I think they would have done better if they had opened up in an area that was underserved, like GOOF, Lazybrook/Timbgrove or along N. Main.  People are really ready to embrace new restaurants out there.  Hughie's is packed even though it is very hit/miss in terms of food and service (but the beer list has a way of making everything ok as long as the waiter keeps the suds coming). 

I hope they are not gone for good and try again with a better location and more of a restaurant concept.

Edited June 12, 2014 by s3mh

[Andy_S]

I've purchased fish from Mozelle's, and I really liked the idea of a neighborhood seafood market.  In general, though, I find it surprising that the residents of a city so close to the ocean don't buy/prepare more fish.

[s3mh]

Table 19 closed.  Building sold. 

[BullMan008]

I saw that they are opening a Skinny Ritas on N.Main street. It is across the street from Shipleys at the old Ricos Triangle building. Was told it will be an early July opening. Going to give them a try. 

[SilverJK]

Isn't Skinny Ritas the same people as Ruggles Green?

[s3mh]

Isn't Skinny Ritas the same people as Ruggles Green?

 

That is what I have heard.

 

Red Desert Dive on Studewood is open a few hours a day for their soft opening.

[BullMan008]

Isn't Skinny Ritas the same people as Ruggles Green?

 

I was told this also.

[s3mh]

Boil House is closed until next crawfish season.  Boo.  I thought they had pretty great non-crawfish options that could have kept people coming in until next season.

[SilverJK]

Not sure if it is true or not, but I heard they got shut down by the city... anyone know anything about that?

[tomv]

Is it possible (or advisable) to change the name of a topic? It seems to me that this one, "Lack Of Restaurant Diversity In The Heights," (now over 8 years old), is a bit out of date. Surely there is some diversity by now! Just a thought.

[SilverJK]

I would argue that there is still a lack of diversity... but a fair amount of choices for similar genres.  We still have no Indian or Sushi places... it was be really nice to see something like an Ethiopian restaurant.

 

I also like this thread as a reminder as to how far the restaurant scene has come for the 'hood.

[Angostura]

Not sure if it is true or not, but I heard they got shut down by the city... anyone know anything about that?

 

 

Heard something about being non-compliant with parking minimums. Can't confirm.

[s3mh]

Heard something about being non-compliant with parking minimums. Can't confirm.

 

There has been a lot of fuss in the neighborhood about that issue recently.  Gelazzi got grandfathered on parking.  Neighbors got upset about that and about the TABC application.  Gelazzi just wants to serve gelato made with booze, but someone claimed that they were opening a bar.  Ruckus with the city ensued.  I think Boil House claimed to be take out, but set up a bunch of picnic tables. 

 

The real parking problem is mostly the streets and partly the patrons.  There are boneheads out there who will actually park right in front of someone's driveway or so close to the driveway that it is impossible to get out.  With minimal parking enforcement, this happens all the time.  But the real issue is that the streets are only 18' with open drainage ditches.  And the streets that are curbed and guttered are not wide enough for parking on both sides.  But the City sits on their hands when people ask for parking to be limited to one side and won't be improving any streets until the year 2047 when a few pennies left from the drainage fee trickle down to our neighborhood streets (pun intended).

 

If the streets feeding into the commercial corridors were curbed and guttered for a few blocks on each side and had parking limited to only one side of the street, there would be plenty of room for parking for restaurant patrons. 

 

Of course, I have no sympathy for people living near Coltivare, etc. who are just upset that people park on their street.  But, I have seen these streets get so clogged up that emergency vehicles could not get through and residents cannot get out of their driveways. 

 

[Ross]

Is it possible (or advisable) to change the name of a topic? It seems to me that this one, "Lack Of Restaurant Diversity In The Heights," (now over 8 years old), is a bit out of date. Surely there is some diversity by now! Just a thought.

 

Not until there's a place to get decent bagels North of I-10.

[Angostura]

There has been a lot of fuss in the neighborhood about that issue recently.  Gelazzi got grandfathered on parking.  Neighbors got upset about that and about the TABC application.  Gelazzi just wants to serve gelato made with booze, but someone claimed that they were opening a bar.  Ruckus with the city ensued.  I think Boil House claimed to be take out, but set up a bunch of picnic tables. 

 

The real parking problem is mostly the streets and partly the patrons.  There are boneheads out there who will actually park right in front of someone's driveway or so close to the driveway that it is impossible to get out.  With minimal parking enforcement, this happens all the time.  But the real issue is that the streets are only 18' with open drainage ditches.  And the streets that are curbed and guttered are not wide enough for parking on both sides.  But the City sits on their hands when people ask for parking to be limited to one side and won't be improving any streets until the year 2047 when a few pennies left from the drainage fee trickle down to our neighborhood streets (pun intended).

 

If the streets feeding into the commercial corridors were curbed and guttered for a few blocks on each side and had parking limited to only one side of the street, there would be plenty of room for parking for restaurant patrons. 

 

Of course, I have no sympathy for people living near Coltivare, etc. who are just upset that people park on their street.  But, I have seen these streets get so clogged up that emergency vehicles could not get through and residents cannot get out of their driveways. 

 

 

 

I have a passionate hatred for blanket parking minimums. They are a pox on our city, and, together with our minimum setback requirements (albeit now relaxed somewhat), have contributed to making most of the inner loop look like low-density suburbs. We can't have walkable urban neighborhoods if we also require huge parking lots and 25-ft setbacks. Those regulations incentivize unattractive strip-mall and big-box development.

 

There is no earthly reason to require, say, Whole Foods and Home Depot to have the same number of parking spaces per 1000 s.f. And requiring bars to have 14 spaces per 1000 s.f. is basically subsidizing drunk driving. 

 

I also have very little patience for people who complain against the Yale St. Walmart as being too suburban, but at the same time place those mini-boulders in the right-of-way in front of their house to keep strangers from parking there. 

 

 

Here's my modest proposal. All blocks are by default free parking, but if 50% or more of the homeowners on a block agree, allow residents to opt for one of the following options, on a shall-issue basis (i.e. unlike current ordinance, no requirement that x% of cars during y% of the day be non-residents):

 

1 - Resident-only parking. Residents must pay for the signage.

 

2 - Metered parking. Residents pay for the meter station, but keep, say, 70% of the revenue, distributed pro-rata based on frontage. 

 

 

I live pretty close to 19th St. There are a couple of times a year when my street fills up with parked cars, but most of the time, I'm happy to have free parking on my block for myself and my guests.  If I lived near White Oak, and it was a daily occurrence, I might think differently.

[SilverJK]

why should residents get free use of the public street, or be paid for others use of it? 

 

If someone is blocking your driveway... call a tow truck.  (they will be more than happy to tow the person).  I think a lot of this is people whining because they don't know how to drive/backout of their driveways.  (which to be fair can be difficult with as narrow our entrances can be).  This happens to me all the time, and sometimes because of traffic I have to wait upwards of 30-45 seconds (traffic nightmare!!!!!!) before I can safely back out of my driveway.  Inner Loop Problems.

Edited June 26, 2014 by SilverJK

[s3mh]

http://houston.culturemap.com/news/restaurants-bars/06-27-14-steakhouse-from-houston-meat-masters-fizzles-chef-plans-new-orleans-style-cafe-instead/

 

The Killen/Craig steakhouse in Shady Acres is not going to happen.  Craig is going to move forward on his own project at the same site next to Hubcap.

 

Meanwhile, the old Stella Sola site which was first eyed by Ronnie Killen for a high end steak house is still empty.  It was announced a year ago that Yucatan Taco Stand was going to replace the Killen venture as a tenant.  The interior has been taken down to the studs.  But no sign of any build out.  That prime restaurant location has now been vacant for over two years.  

[Angostura]

 That prime restaurant location has now been vacant for over two years.  

 

 

Yeah, this makes no sense. One has to assume that the property owner has some unrealistic price expectations.

[JCR]

Yeah, this makes no sense. One has to assume that the property owner has some unrealistic price expectations.

 

That.  And that the layout of the place it terrible and is too large overall.  I know restaurateurs that know the building well and they won't touch it.  Vacancy for that long in the Heights tells you something. 

 

[s3mh]

That.  And that the layout of the place it terrible and is too large overall.  I know restaurateurs that know the building well and they won't touch it.  Vacancy for that long in the Heights tells you something. 

 

 

Killen was quite vocal about being driven off by terms from the landlord.  No idea what is happening with Yucatan.  Stella Sola's lease was up for renewal when they quit.  They were in the middle of a change in their executive chef and probably seeing a peak in popularity when they decided to throw in the towel instead of trying to move forward with a steep new rent bill. 

 

The layout is odd, but I liked it whenever I went to Stella Sola.  It was a big place, but felt like a couple of small private rooms.  But I can see how it would be a difficult fit for most restaurant concepts that needs faster table turnover than a high end place. 

 

[Angostura]

Parking minimums may also be an issue. Since Stella Sola closed, CoH increased the parking requirements for restaurants of this size from 8 to 10 per 1000 s.f. This means that any new tenant will have to find 20+ additional parking spaces. That basically means 6000-7000 square feet of land, which doesn't exist sufficient close to this building to fulfill the requirement.

 

 

This is why we can't have nice things, CoH.

 

 

 

[SilverJK]

would two smaller restaurants need the same parking requirements of 1 large one?  If not maybe they could engineer a Haymerchant/Underbelly type layout.

[s3mh]

Parking minimums may also be an issue. Since Stella Sola closed, CoH increased the parking requirements for restaurants of this size from 8 to 10 per 1000 s.f. This means that any new tenant will have to find 20+ additional parking spaces. That basically means 6000-7000 square feet of land, which doesn't exist sufficient close to this building to fulfill the requirement.

 

 

This is why we can't have nice things, CoH.

 

I heard that the landlords would not give Killen parking for his staff because they needed to keep some spaces reserved for the office tenants.  They wanted to make the staff park offsite down the street somewhere.  Probably one of many straws on the camel's back in that deal.

 

However, I am pretty sure that the new tenant would be grandfathered on parking if they did not increase the sq ft. 

 

[kylejack]

 

Here's my modest proposal. All blocks are by default free parking, but if 50% or more of the homeowners on a block agree, allow residents to opt for one of the following options, on a shall-issue basis (i.e. unlike current ordinance, no requirement that x% of cars during y% of the day be non-residents):

 

1 - Resident-only parking. Residents must pay for the signage.

 

2 - Metered parking. Residents pay for the meter station, but keep, say, 70% of the revenue, distributed pro-rata based on frontage. 

 

 

I live pretty close to 19th St. There are a couple of times a year when my street fills up with parked cars, but most of the time, I'm happy to have free parking on my block for myself and my guests.  If I lived near White Oak, and it was a daily occurrence, I might think differently.

 

No. They are public streets paid for by all taxpayers. Leave all blocks as free parking. The few that have been switched to resident only parking (like behind Anvil) should be switched back.

[kylejack]

 

Here's my modest proposal. All blocks are by default free parking, but if 50% or more of the homeowners on a block agree, allow residents to opt for one of the following options, on a shall-issue basis (i.e. unlike current ordinance, no requirement that x% of cars during y% of the day be non-residents):

 

1 - Resident-only parking. Residents must pay for the signage.

 

2 - Metered parking. Residents pay for the meter station, but keep, say, 70% of the revenue, distributed pro-rata based on frontage. 

 

 

I live pretty close to 19th St. There are a couple of times a year when my street fills up with parked cars, but most of the time, I'm happy to have free parking on my block for myself and my guests.  If I lived near White Oak, and it was a daily occurrence, I might think differently.

 

No. They are public streets paid for by all taxpayers. Leave all blocks as free parking. The few that have been switched to resident only parking (like behind Anvil) should be switched back.

[Angostura]

would two smaller restaurants need the same parking requirements of 1 large one?  If not maybe they could engineer a Haymerchant/Underbelly type layout.

 

 

Potentially. Less than 3000 s.f. it's 8 spaces per 1000 s.f., and less than 4500 s.f. it's 9 spaces per 1000 s.f.

[Angostura]

 

However, I am pretty sure that the new tenant would be grandfathered on parking if they did not increase the sq ft. 

 

 

As long as they need a building permit (which they will, since the interior was gutted), they'll need to re-approve the parking plan.