I hope we can find something to agree on in the future.

I have a background in hydrologic and hydraulic analysis. You can confirm all this by going to the Texas Board of Professional Engineers website and searching my name in the PE Search tool. It will detail the firm I work for and my P.E. licensing number which is 98442. All this is public information.

I’m a Vice President of the White Oak Bayou Association (WOBA). None of my views in these posts are meant to represent that of WOBA and WOBA’s board members.

I live in Cottage Grove in a rapidly changing neighborhood within the White Oak Bayou watershed.

I have no link to the Ashby Highrise project. All the plan sets and reports submitted to the city of Houston would detail all the firms that have worked on the project. You will not see the firm I work for on any project.

Need anymore information?

The true benefit to the city of Houston is increased property tax revenue.

I never said there are no negatives, what I have said is this project has done nothing wrong in order for it to exist other than piss off some home owners.

They have followed all the rules. If you want your neighborhood protected, move into one within the city that has taken the effort to get protected. Move to a suburban neighborhood that has strong deed and HOA rules.

What is happening here is that bordering neighborhoods are trying govern what happens outside of there neighborhood. The neighborhood is not being destroyed and any conclusion that is has is an opinion. I don’t think the highrises adjacent to River Oaks did much to hurt the property values in the area. In fact, it has raised them. The single family lots and houses are so much larger than the condo units that they get appraised higher.

FYI-the comments are not based on LONDON..he -a harvard phd.- just references the term “ancient lights” sorry i didn’t know i would have to clarify this???! because he doesn’t seem to reference england in any other part of what was quoted…. in fact in his study he references houston which is why i quoted him.
Why are you so dead set to say that there are no negatives to this development and attack my posts on the most meaningless (and misinterpreted) of levels… also why have you failed to offer any significant and HONEST benefits to this development? are the developers rights more important than the general public?

The problem if this ensues will not be just southhampton’s but every neighborhood like this… neighborhoods should be protected. period. protected so that people DON”T HAVE TO MOVE AWAY… this doesn’t mean not developed…(i feel like i have to restate this for you for some reason)
As i understand it, chapter 42 form based code doesn’t take into account that areas like this should not be classified as truely urban and should be amended as such…where it also defines areas like the galleria as suburban…it is clearly out of whack ?

You are right the city should not just make an exception for just this neighborhood but for all that have this situation… but i sure hope that by not making the exception that it doesn’t also pave an easy road for developers to take advantage (not saying not develop) of other neighborhoods.

The property is on a major thoroughfare. Residential and commercial properties adjacent (or even nearby, for that matter) to a major thoroughfare need to understand that roadway improvement and expansion are natural expectations for these transitways. An allowed by city code improvement to a property in a non-zoned or non-deed restricted property has to answer to no other property owner regarding it’s usage. I fail to see what’s do difficult to understand about this concept. Just because residents in these hoity toity communities don’t want a tower in an adjacent property (that has every right to be built there) doesn’t give any of you or the mayor the right to come in and change the property rights on that property that existed when the developer bought it.

The elitist attitude displayed is somewhat comical, but not really funny. It’s sad that people can be so naive, yet rude to someone that understands legal property rights.

I have absolutely no connection to the developer. In fact, I despise most developers. But, on the other hand, I understand property rights. I have also been a property owner’s association board member for years in a couple of different subdivisions. In addition, I live in one of the subdivisions you look down upon so…. Rice Military.

Previously I have lived on a busy street. I understood all along that my property values would be undervalued when compared to adjacent off-busy street properties due to my property’s street frontage. I also took this into account as I renovated the property unitl I sold it.

All along you’ve conveyed the attitude that it’s ok when those less fortunate have something built next to them that they may not want, but not ok when the right elitists are bothered by something that they feel infringes on their pristine neighboring subdivision.

We don’t have zoning, bottom line. You don’t get to tell others what they can and what they can’t do with their real property. West U has zoning. There, the city can dictate much more so that in Houston what can and can’t be built. This property in question is not in West U. They have complied with every aspect of what is required of them by the governing entity.

This has to be the longest thread of this blog so far.

None of these are guarantees nor should they be. If Houston has imposed these measures or a form of zoning, you would have a valid case against this project. The problem is that there are many existing cases in this city where a highrise blocks sunlight from a single family residence. These highrises are commercial and residential buildings and built after the establishment of the single family homes.

The city of Houston should be wary of making an exception for South Hampton and not for all the other neighborhoods that have experienced this.

In the end, if you dislike the result so much, you can move. You aren’t stuck in your home. People move all the time because their neighborhood and environment changes. I moved from the Kirby/Westheimer area out of a townhome I owned into a patio home in the Cottage Grove area. I didn’t like how the neighborhood was getting too dense and busy. The area I’m in now is dense with homes, but not as likely to foster development of a highrise, apartment complex, or large commercial development nor the bustling activity. In the end I’m still taking a chance and the neigbhorhood could change from my assumptions.

South Hampton is sandwich between two areas that are targets to become increasingly dense. If they do stop this building, more will try to build on their fringes. If you are worried about shadows, a 23 story building moved further east from the Ashby sight into what you make call a more appropriate area would still cast a shadow reaching South Hampton.

“Insufficient height regulation permits a property-holder to usurp his neighbor’s ” ancient lights,” as it is still termed in England and tends to produce a haphazard saw-tooth sky-line, … and usually a distinct loss to the community in land values taken as a whole.

Congestion in the streets near the building will result if too great a number of people are employed in or served by it; …Insufficient light and air in the street and in the building will result from too great height of the front elevation of the building on the street line. Loss of architectural effect will result when the building has such a great height that it cannot be viewed at a proper angle. … the limit of profitable height from the standpoint of the individual building-owner, however, at present appears to be well beyond that which would usually be imposed by these three factors; for height evidently effects several economies, such as that gained by dealing in large units, making the utmost use of the land, and saving in time due to the proximity of many offices and the relative ease of vertical travel over horizontal. Some limitation is therefore necessary for the protection of the general public.”

I don’t disagree with a community fighting for what it wants, but the community also needs to understand where it stands and what an achievable outcome is available to them.

The traffic argument has an answer that is very technical and has to meet city rules. Their concerns are valid, but also has a designated outcome base upon and engineering study.

The neighborhood aesthetic argument is something that can be addressed in the street level design. From the street, unless you just stand and look straight up, the building would seem to be any different than what is currently there now.

what i am saying is that any community has the right to fight for what they want and don’t want with whatever resources they may have…be it rich or poor.

I was merely pointing out inconsistency in Lu’s comments.

I haven’t shrouded anything and I’m being completely open in my views and basing them in reality.

Tell me how does the community get to decide what goes on this property? Where is that right prescribed to them? They even admit this on their website.

The project site is unrestricted and does not fall into a deed restriction. Just because you don’t like it is not a reason for it not being develop.

You and Lu haven’t yet set how you would alter this property or control it’s development other than name calling the developer and me (which there is no relation).

I’m not a blanket supporter of developers. I have work against many developers when they try to circumvent rules and build out of code. Particular in the volatile issue of placing fill in the floodplain and negative impacting drainage in older neighborhoods. I have work with civic organizations to help them formulate arguments against developers to city inspectors. We’ve stopped or halted many jobs because of this. I do this in my free time outside of work as part of the White Oak Bayou Association.

Fighting against this project because it doesn’t look or feel right to the neighborhood is soft grounds an argument.

The actual stopashby website is pretty funny especially the Q&A section. Their arguments are quite baseless against all known data and experience with projects of this scale and many larger ones (which is a lot).

Some of their concerns are issues that occur regardless if this project being built or not and should be taken up with the City of Houston.

I see why the media has now dropped any new coverage of the project because after their investigation the developer has done nothing wrong or unusual.