The Heights High-Rise Condominium Boom

[Freelander]

Have you heard about the proposed hi-rise condo development (again) in the Heights by Inner Loop Condos called Viewpoint at the Heights? This came up 2 years ago and they were chased away by neighborhood opposition, but they layed low like sneaky crocodiles and are rearing their ugly heads again. This absurd plan proposes to construct a 77-unit, 7 story condo at the dead end of 5th off of Oxford footsteps away from the upcoming hike and bike trail. They plan to raze this undeveloped land which is a tranquil green space over a ravine (a natural inlet from the bayou) with historical value to build upwards on about a 1.5 acre parcel of land. This land is home to numerous species of birds, butterflies and even rabbits and don't forget about the trees that will be coming down! If this ill-conceived project is allowed to go through, it will surely set the stage for further condo development in the Heights, if that is not already in the works? If you are as outraged as we are, join us and show your support by helping us picket one of their other developments (The Piedmont) on Sat, Feb 10 @ 11:00am on Waugh. We're meeting in the Luby's parking lot. If you've had enough of outside developers who have no respect for our historical, small-town-feel community, we'll see you on Saturday! It's not too late to put a stop to this nonsense (you have to see it to believe it)! If you want more information before then, come by Onion Creek this Thurs. night to sign a petition and pick up a flyer!

[heightsfan]

Good Afternoon All,

Wow . . . I am wondering was the city involved as well to hault the Hi Rise Condo development ?

[Freelander]

Good Afternoon All,

Wow . . . I am wondering was the city involved as well to hault the Hi Rise Condo development ?

Local neighbors and the Heights Association went before City Council and have met with the Planning Commission in the last month, all who seem powerless to do anything to stop this. We'll just have to make it difficult for them to sell this idea to potential buyers by picketing and protesting at the grass roots level. Hope you'll come join us or watch us on the news! Ideally we'd like the city to purchase the land and keep it as green space, which would be adjacent to the upcoming hike/bike trail.

[musicman]

Local neighbors and the Heights Association went before City Council and have met with the Planning Commission in the last month, all who seem powerless to do anything to stop this.

Yep! It's all about development, selling permits and gaining new revenue through property taxes. Where's councilmember peter brown who was going to revolutionize planning in houston? nowhere to be found.

[RedScare]

Maybe they are powerless to stop it because they cannot find anything wrong with it. Since when did 7 stories become a "HiRise"? And, how does a 7 story condo, built next door to a 300 unit apartment complex, overlooking a drainage ditch, and a block from the Katy Freeway ruin the integrity of the Heights? And what is so historical about the drainage ditch that you artfully call a ravine? And, best of all, why does building a condo next to a hike and bike trail a bad thing...that 150 extra cyclists might actually USE it? Oh, the horror.

As a neighbor of this property, I HAVE seen it, and frankly, have never understood what the uproar is about. But then, what do I know. I think the "ill conceived" prevailing lot line ordinance that my Heights neighbors shoved down our throats did more to ruin the character of the Heights than a 7 story condo that helps block the view and noise of a freeway.

[WesternGulf]

Is this it?

[HoustonMidtown]

Maybe they are powerless to stop it because they cannot find anything wrong with it. Since when did 7 stories become a "HiRise"? And, how does a 7 story condo, built next door to a 300 unit apartment complex, overlooking a drainage ditch, and a block from the Katy Freeway ruin the integrity of the Heights? And what is so historical about the drainage ditch that you artfully call a ravine? And, best of all, why does building a condo next to a hike and bike trail a bad thing...that 150 extra cyclists might actually USE it? Oh, the horror.

As a neighbor of this property, I HAVE seen it, and frankly, have never understood what the uproar is about. But then, what do I know. I think the "ill conceived" prevailing lot line ordinance that my Heights neighbors shoved down our throats did more to ruin the character of the Heights than a 7 story condo that helps block the view and noise of a freeway.

+1

I agree 100%.....

Is this it?

Yep - that's right near the area....

[Urbannomad]

I understand on some level people's dislike of new development\redevelopment.... BUT... at the same time I don't think it's unreasonable to build a 7 story building very near the core CBD of the 4th largest city in the nation. I mean, I understand the uniqueness of the Heights and all but Houston is still a major city and change is a way of life and higher density is a large part of living in the city. It really makes little sense to have, so close to the core CBD, single family homes on large lots.

Now if this was up near the 19th Street area I could understand the argument, I am in no way against all preservation but I feel this has to be balanced with the realities of urban life. After all, if we want things to never change, develop, or grow we could easily move to a far-out suburban cul-de-sac. Sounds like growing pains and people having a hard time accepting that Houston is becoming a true urban city.

[KinkaidAlum]

A 7 story condo tower is anything but a high rise. You'd serve your cause better if you weren't flat out stretching the truth. I agree with Redscare and others, what is wrong with building a 7 story condo building on that property? It is literally in view of the freeway and looks over a ditch. I'd much rather see one of these developments than another gated enclave of stucco townhomes!

This particular development company is one of the good ones. I personally love their projects like the Piedmont and the one in the 4th ward. They are also currently planning to build the Sorrento in the Med Center area. All 3 of these are better than 90% of the projects that rise in the Houston area.

[Guest Malvoe]

As long as the condo is a quality development, I don't have a problem with it. I wouldn't call anything that near I-10 "tranquil"

[RedScare]

For those who may have missed this tranquil piece of land while admiring the Victorian charm of the Heights, here is an overhead view of the property.

Note the tranquil 4 story apartment complex with parking garage that runs along the south and west sides of the property. Note also, the 3 story townhomes to the northwest. On the eastern flank of the future hike and bike trail, directly across from the planned Hi Rise, you will note the historic metal warehouses, whose bucolic views of the apartment complex are threatened by this eyesore. To the southeast, you will note the beautiful winding concrete lined White Oak Bayou, which provides an urban playground for birds, butterflies and even rabbits who are not run over by 18 wheelers on the scenic 10 lane freeway a block and a half to the south.

[heights_yankee]

Maybe they are powerless to stop it because they cannot find anything wrong with it. Since when did 7 stories become a "HiRise"? And, how does a 7 story condo, built next door to a 300 unit apartment complex, overlooking a drainage ditch, and a block from the Katy Freeway ruin the integrity of the Heights? And what is so historical about the drainage ditch that you artfully call a ravine? And, best of all, why does building a condo next to a hike and bike trail a bad thing...that 150 extra cyclists might actually USE it? Oh, the horror.

As a neighbor of this property, I HAVE seen it, and frankly, have never understood what the uproar is about. But then, what do I know. I think the "ill conceived" prevailing lot line ordinance that my Heights neighbors shoved down our throats did more to ruin the character of the Heights than a 7 story condo that helps block the view and noise of a freeway.

Another person in agreement. Let's focus preservation efforts on something real like the park on 11th, not this patch of land. They're not tearing anything down and it's not like they want to build another version of that place with the heli-pad on Allen Pkwy...

[musicman]

It really makes little sense to have, so close to the core CBD, single family homes on large lots.

I will have to disagree. if the neighborhood was orginally platted a certain way (i.e. with larger lots), changing this will change the character of the neighborhood, usually for the worse. Imagine River Oaks subdivided. It just wouldn't be River Oaks. But at the same time, if deed restrictions are not in place, then there really isn't much that can be done to deny their permit. The developer could be nice, but usually it's about making the buck.

Clear Lake proper is going through an ugly battle right now concerning the golf course. Developers are suing Exxon (who is control of the deed restrictions) so that the golf course can be developed as condos, etc instead of remaining a recreational area. The current residents are furious as you'd expect.

Edited February 7, 2007 by musicman

[bauhaus]

There is very little that is NOT wrong about this condo complex, and yes, a seven story structure IS in fact a high-rise as defined by traditional code.

The apartment complex facing I-10 is an example of what happens when a neighborhood is not tuned in to projects that the city is green-lighting. It should never have been allowed to be built, and it should serve as a warning

[ricco67]

I'd have to agree with Redscare on this (damn you for making me agree with you again!), 77 units assuming 2.3 people per unit doesn't have near the impact as the apartment complex just to the south.

Is that RR ROW still operational? If not, then perhaps you would be able to appreciate the other green space even more.

[heightsfan]

Good Afternoon All,

Question ? What long term effect could development , hi rise condos and another big apartment complex have

in the Heights ? Would this increase traffic ? Lower property value ? Increase crime and population ?

Also many people mention the character of the Heights . . . what exactly is defined as the characteristics in the Heights ?

Is it the drive time to downtown,the bungalow & victorian homes, living in the city , 19th street or the trees ?

Just curious on what people consider the Heights area unique to them ?

Thank You

[Freelander]

Thanks for the compliment RedScare. I never thought of my writing as "artful" as you say. Two points to clarify: we don't oppose all development and we do understand urban cities' needs for density. We are concerned about the addtional burden this multi-family project will place upon our already old and fragile infrastructure, i.e. sewer,drainage, and traffic on our narrow streets (which were burdened by the 300 unit complex built a few years ago). At some point, development reaches a point where it's too much.

Why do people live in the Heights? What attracts them to this unique community?

-old single family homes with character, history and mature trees

-homes with big porches where neighbors can visit with each other

-appreciation for the charming bungalows and Victorian architecture

-the nostalgic "feel" of old times (and perhaps simpler times)

-the narrow streets with ditches, not curbs, that remind you you're not in suburbia

-it's near where they work

-park-like areas within walking distance where you can walk your dog and actually see some wildlife (I notice the trees, not the darn freeway.)

Unfortunately, there are some trade-offs, which we accept:

-ditches that don't drain as they should and lead to flooding

-narrow streets that sometimes make it difficult for residents and emergency vehicles to get through when other cars are parked there

-small, but charming homes, with small closets and only 1 bathroom and crooked foundations

-small lots that only allow for narrow driveways and a 1 car garage

I am wondering, RedScare and others, if you moved into the Heights by mistake if you can't appreciate that. Since you don't seem to care about the negative impact of this project to the neighborhood, let me know what street you're on so I can let the developer know so they can route the +100 cars up and down your street daily and put the visitor parking in front of your house.

[RedScare]

Since you do not spend much time posting on this forum, perhaps you have not noticed the threads that I started chronicling the renovation of my 1920 Heights bungalow. It is in the Home Repair subsection. BTW, I live on Columbia Street, within walking distance of this project. There is no need to alert the developers to my street. As I noted in another thread, the developers have towed away a dozen homes on my street, only to replace them with 4,000 sf McVictorians, the only cost effective structure one can build on lots valued at well over $200,000.

You ask why people move to the Heights. The reasons are as varied as the neighbors. Some moved here for the reasons you suggest. Others have different motives. However, I do not demonize my neighbors who moved into the 4,000 sf homes across the street. I find them to be as friendly and accomodating as the guy in the 1100 sf bungalow next door. They just want more room to spread out than I need, I suppose.

Now, as for this project. Above all, I am a pragmatist. Before I complain about every piece of lumber brought into the Heights that is less than 100 years old, I look to see if it really is a problem. You mention our fragile infrastructure, yet you fail to acknowledge that new construction brings with it new infrastructure. You do not mention that the City replaced the water mains on Heights Blvd., adding capacity to support all of the new construction, or the repaving of Studewood, or the fact that the majority of the traffic coming to this new complex will only use Studewood, White Oak and the Katy Freeway feeder for access. You talk about White Oak Bayou, then complain of drainage problems, even though this project is at a lower elevation than the entire Heights neighborhood. Most of all, you complain of extra traffic from a 77 unit complex. The average condo contains 1.6 people, meaning an extra 125 vehicles on our streets, assuming they all drive at once, and further assuming they all drive through the Heights. I get more traffic than that on my street from construction workers, and I survive. After all, I am a pragmatist.

I looked through your 6 posts, yet I found no complaints about the traffic genrated by Onion Creek, Berryhill, 6th Street Grill, or Glass Wall. All of these establishments generate more traffic in a confined area than the condos will. Glass Wall is especially egregious, since their valet is in the middle of 10th Street, and they park cars all along the narrow street. I do not complain, as having a new restaurant down the street is worth the extra traffic. Traffic from this condo will be far less noticeable than any of these restaurants. In fact, I do not even notice the traffic from the 300 apartment complex. BTW, do you even KNOW what the current traffic counts on White Oak and Studewood are? If not, how can you make the argument that they cannot handle another 125 vehicles?

One last thing about density. When this neighborhood was settled, it was common to have 6 or 8 persons per household, as big families were common back then. As the Heights gentrifies, most of the homes now contain singles and couples. On my block, only two homes contain more than two people. Those homes contain 4. So, on a 24 lot block, where originally as many as 200 people lived, it now contains less than 50. Don't complain to me about density. I can do math.

Finally, rather than accuse me of not caring about negative impacts, try giving me actual FACTS as to what the negative impacts are. Screaming "CONDO!" by itself does not mean the Heights will be negatively impacted. In fact, if the 20 unit apartment building at Columbia and 9th were upgraded to condos, it would be a POSITIVE impact. I realize that in today's busy world, buzzwords have taken the place of actual debate. However, just as I do not make political judgments based on buzzwords like "liberal" or "conservative", I do not make neighborhood judgments on buzzwords like "developer", "condo", or even "Hi Rise".

I look forward to more informed debate on this project.

[musicman]

good post red.

I do know the glass wall has created problems for the people in its vicinity. a good friend has had to call police repeatedly due to the parking situation or lack of it. it seems access to her home has been repeatedly been blocked by customers. she's very feisty so the restaurant mgmt has had to address the concerns.

[RedScare]

If I lived across the street from Glass Wall, as opposed to 3 blocks away, I might have more concerns with the parking. As it is, it is only a slight annoyance (to me) on my way to the Valero corner store, something that I live with as a consequence of business coming to the Heights. The condo will not even impact Heights residents to that degree, hence my non-opposition to it's arrival.

[musicman]

If I lived across the street from Glass Wall, as opposed to 3 blocks away, I might have more concerns with the parking. As it is, it is only a slight annoyance (to me) on my way to the Valero corner store, something that I live with as a consequence of business coming to the Heights. The condo will not even impact Heights residents to that degree, hence my non-opposition to it's arrival.

yeah my friend lives on the side street from the GW. but i do agree with you that most (at least 95%) will never know that this "hi-rise" is there because it won't affect them. I saw a news report on this subj yesterday. one lady was complaining how she won't be able to walk her dog. I just think that this type of "whine" is a non-issue. There has to be a technical reason for a project such as this to be blocked, like deed restrictions prohibiting it.

[sunsets]

I can see where vistor parking along 5th street might be a concern, but heck, I can't even park in front of my own house when the neighbor kids have friends over - at least 3 times a week. It's a public street, what can I do?

I suspect most of the opposition to this project stems from residents on 5th who will lose "their" pocket park, er, ravine, and "their" view of downtown. They bought in the gentrifying neighborhood first, thus, no one is allowed to change anything without their express permission.

I lived in a neighborhood comprised of people like this in Ann Arbor. It was a great setup for them - oppose all high density development, ensure a little "park" (an undeveloped lot that happened to be next to their property) was set aside for perpetuity, and watch their property values rise. Made darn sure that no one without a high six figure income could ever afford to buy into the neighborhood.

[pachanga]

Yep! It's all about development, selling permits and gaining new revenue through property taxes. Where's councilmember peter brown who was going to revolutionize planning in houston? nowhere to be found.

peter brown is a fraud......

[nmainguy]

peter brown is a fraud......

Well that certainly adds a bit of wing-nut rhetoric to the "debate."

_______________________________________________________________________

The condos WILL add traffic-as all development does. It will also increase property values and as a born and raised Heights resident, I can honestly say I have no objection-as long as it's pretty.

[TheNiche]

I lived in a neighborhood comprised of people like this in Ann Arbor. It was a great setup for them - oppose all high density development, ensure a little "park" (an undeveloped lot that happened to be next to their property) was set aside for perpetuity, and watch their property values rise. Made darn sure that no one without a high six figure income could ever afford to buy into the neighborhood.

Funny how that works in places like Ann Arbor, Austin, and the Heights...

I couldn't agree more with Red. He made a very thorough and convincing argument.

[heights_yankee]

I saw a news report on this subj yesterday. one lady was complaining how she won't be able to walk her dog. I just think that this type of "whine" is a non-issue.

I saw that story and it just gives Heights residents that people-who-cry-wolf stigma. It completely destroys the credibility of the neighborhood when there is something we really do need to rally against. We look like a bunch of whining dog walkers when that isn't the case at all.

[plumber2]

I saw that story and it just gives Heights residents that people-who-cry-wolf stigma. It completely destroys the credibility of the neighborhood when there is something we really do need to rally against. We look like a bunch of whining dog walkers when that isn't the case at all.

I agree with you Yankee and you too Red Scare (wow!). My grandparents, who bought their home on Ashland in 1924, suffered through the decline of the Heights in the 50's, 60's & most of the 70's. I can remember when they were the only owner/residents on their block. They had to retreat to the inside of their home in later years because of the noisy neighbors & crime. (they survived there until 1991). New types of develpoment, like this one, are good for the area.

These cry babies who object are hippocrits. They want to close the gates behind themselves and not let anyone else in to enjoy. Did I just describe a republican?

[musicman]

These cry babies who object are hippocrits. They want to close the gates behind themselves and not let anyone else in to enjoy. Did I just describe a republican?

There are no party lines when it comes to cry babies.

[Tiko]

I'm not opposed to development, but I'm sympathetic to the argument that this should be opposed on general principal as it could be a hole in the dam. Witness the way that the NRA fights almost any gun control, or Pro-Choicers any restriction on abortion.

If I lived across the street from Glass Wall, as opposed to 3 blocks away, I might have more concerns with the parking. As it is, it is only a slight annoyance (to me) on my way to the Valero corner store, something that I live with as a consequence of business coming to the Heights. The condo will not even impact Heights residents to that degree, hence my non-opposition to it's arrival.

Pardon the melodramatics, but this brings to mind:

"First they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist so I did not speak out.

Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists, but I was neither, so I did not speak out.

Then they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew so I did not speak out.

And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me."

[buildingunbuildingrebuilding]

I fail to see how a condo development just off the freeway merits a comparison to the Holocaust, melodrama or not. Somehow that doesn't strike me as a way to increase the credibility of your position.