Coming next April to this Studewood corner just across 8th St. from Antidote Coffee, according to My Table: a second, more food-focused location of the Sonoma Retail Wine Bar and Restaurant on Richmond that backs up to the art galleries on Colquitt. Venture Commercial’s leasing package for the property shows the existing 2,160-sq.-ft. building at 803 Studewood spiffed up, with this adjacent apartment building knocked down to make room for 24 parking spaces:
***
- Sidedish [My Table]
- NWQ Studewood and 8th [Venture Commercial]
- Sonoma Houston
Photos: Swamplot inbox. Renderings: Venture Commercial
cool,… can’t wait
Perhaps they will serve their wine in brown bags like the Quicky Mart across the street.
This looks like nice, and a visual improvement to Studewood, but I feel for the people who live on 8th.
Wow, the Heights restaurant scene is really picking up. All the new White Oak stuff now this, great time to be up north.
This is great, but I won’t go unless they put in a bike rack!
Can’t wait to walk there. Heights is picking up steam and I like it.
I feel there pain. Used to live on 8th st. Parking is horrible.
I love it that new businesses are coming to Studewood, I just hope they have plenty of parking. Each surrounding block has a different personality. 8th Street doesn’t seem to mind the constant overflow parking from Studewood. 10th Street got a permitted-parking-only ordinance. Woodland Heights will not tolerate overflow parking. Time will tell. New businesses — better get your parking in order.
“Woodland Heights will not tolerate overflow parking. Time will tell. New businesses — better get your parking in order.”
I want to make sure this is more visible, lest it get lost in your post.
Unless they get Permit Parking only passed, Woodland Heights can’t do crap about people parking in front of their houses. Won’t tolerate LEGAL overflow parking? That sure paints Woodland Heights Homeowners a bit self entitled… (btw I’m a woodland heights homeowner as well)
“Overflow parking” may be legal, in most cases, but it does not make it right. The parking ordinance currently does not require businesses to provide enough parking for its patrons– so the tax payers end up providing business with free/subdidized parking via *our* streets, to the benefit of the businesses and the detriment of the home owners. It is even worse with grandfathered businesses.
West of Studewood in the Heights has a lot of unpermitted off street parking facilities on public right of ways or parking pads on streets without curbs. These are ditches that are covered up with cars parked on them. Heights residents will tell you that you cannot park in front of their houses on their pads. That leaves the houses without parking pads open to all the parking. I forsee lots of problems with residents telling people they cannot park in front of their houses when these new places come in. And yes, I see my neighbors telling people to move their cars every day. The Parking Wars are coming.
wait… i thought we hated parking lots? I’m always confused which side of the parking lot debacle we Woodland Heights people are going to take… if it has adequate parking its a mc shopping strip center, if it doesn’t have adequate parking lot it’s stealing our tax dollars? To me the rendering looks like it has adequate parking, yes there will be overflow during peak business, but I definitely prefer that to giant parking lots.
Good call-out, caneco. Hypocrisy runs rampant in the Heights, everyone wants more restaurants… but not if it affects my street parking, they want old buildings preserved, but not if they’re ugly in their own interpretation, they want more parks, as long as it doesn’t cost them a dime.
Caneco, I hate parking ordinances that allow bars and restaurants to operate in residential areas by not requiring said bars/restaurants to actually provide enough parking to their customers, thus guaranteeing that businesses will be subsidized with free parking by the tax payers with the use of the streets and homeowners by the use of their front yards. Thankfully I don’t live anywhere near Studewood, but I couldn’t help but notice the little house smack dab against the parking lot in the artist’s rendering. If you go to googlemaps, you’ll see the HOUSE abutting the parking lot. The house was not built next to a parking lot (in fact, it was built next to a house, and had been for probably 80 years). If I lived in that house, I’d be beside myself. Do you live anywhere near any of these businesses? Although the WH is an awesome place full of awesome people (therefore you are surely an awesome person), I am not sure what special insight merely livin’ in the ‘hood provides. Surely you know that MOST of the WH is protected by Deed Restrictions which should prevent businesses and parking lots from setting up shop in most of the hood– so you are probably safe. And no, I am not going to move to the Woodlands or Katy, but thanks in advance to whomever provides that super helpful suggestion.
I lost the point I was trying to make. If a business is not able to provide enough parking to its customers, then it isn’t in the right location. I am tired of the city rolling over in complete submission to business to the detriment of homeowners. I am a property owner and I pay taxes, why is my property less deserving of protection? It does the city and these businesses no good if they alienate and run off the residents they are trying to attract.
commonsense, no one person speaks for the Heights, so when you say “everybody blah-blah-blah”, you apparently mean to include both you and me in your statement, and believe me, you don’t speak for me.
Mel – if the heights was as cool as it thinks it is…more of us would be riding our bikes to Sonoma. Heres to those 24 parking spots being enough.
I totally get the issue around the parking, but Studemont is absolutely evolving away from residential and more towards commercial. I can’t imagine many really wanting to live with Studewood as their front door. I wouldn’t. In fact, as an owner of more than one property in the Woodland Heights, the idea of living within earshot of Studemont does not interest me in the slightest. When I was buying properties, I needed at least a blocks worth of buffer from the major roads even though the properties were generally cheaper the closer you got to the big streets. My good friend lives on 11 1/2 in the shadow of the big 6 story going up and I 100% get his concern about traffic. This building has no grandfather…8 spots/1000sqft will be required on buildout. That is a fair amount I think, but the area is definitely ‘trendy’ now and as such that will always bring traffic. Antidote is constantly overflowing. I do hope they cater and encourage folks to visit by foot…offer a 10% discount for those that arrived without a car.
Screw you Heights whiners… for years you’ve been coming over to Montrose and using our neighborhoods as parking lots while you entertained yourselves at our neighborhood eateries, bars, and shops. Because Brasil and other businesses on Westheimer have no parking lots of their own, we residents have enjoyed the overflood of parking for the past decade and a half, or so.
I used to live behind Empire Cafe. In fact, my former home is now their back parking lot. I had no issues with people parking in front of my street. We parked in our driveway.
Markd, your comment made me laugh. If this isn’t the comment of the day, there is no justice.
reminds me of the old saying “that’s life in the big city”, which always followed with me telling my mom houston doesn’t count as a big city, it’s bunch of suburbs thrown together.
I don’t agree with the statement that businesses are using publicly paid for streets as if those same businesses don’t provide sales and income taxes to provide upkeep of those roads. Just look at the opposite argument here, since every home doesn’t have sufficient parking to accomodate their residents they’re freeloading off other taxpayers to pay for their own parking. If this is really a concern then why not ask the city install parking meters on all residential streets within 4 blocks of major thoroughfares? it would drastically reduce overflow parking (while decreasing consumer spending and reducing the cities revenues, probably not good) and allow the city to monetize underutilized resources and give fair use to everyone. the reality is homes get cheaper the closer you get to more commercial construction for a reason and has been this way since the beginning of time. however, commercial construction drives up residential property values so there is a tradeoff there. perhaps unfortunate, but if you can’t afford the nice quiet shady lane and that’s important to you then you should probably be shopping in the suburbs.
Just because Montrose rolled over and let businesses flood their streets with their customers doesn’t mean the Heights has to shut up and let businesses walk all over residents.
I hope 24 spaces is enough for Sonoma. And I am glad to see businesses interested in the Heights. However, I do see a very slow train wreck in progress around 6th/White Oak up Studewood. Tacos A Go Go and D’Amico have yet to open, and parking in the area is not keeping up with Christian’s Tailgate and BB’s, et al. Heights residents should be vigilant about making sure businesses coming in are providing sufficient parking for their customers and minimizing the impact on the neighborhood.
Mel is funny. Until he pays the property taxes on the street he feels so sure is his space to control, he should keep quiet. Can Houston (people) someday grow up on this issue? Have you been to NYC, Chicago or San Francisco? The best, most sought-after neighborhoods are packed with cars along every street. It’s the way a real city, and city-dwellers live, work and see to it that their neighborhoods have strong, healthy residents AND businesses. This “no one can park on my street” mentality is nuts.
Look for it to go the same way as Washington Ave where other people start providing the parking. Already restuarants like Zelko would not be able to be open if it wasn’t for the fact that the liquor store opposite has a bunch of available parking space behind them that they can lease.
Actually Mel the little house you are looking at on Google Maps has to come down to make way for the parking lot. Te house that will border the lot is the big contemporary next door. Is the argument for providing parking as strong when it involves the demo of an original bungalow?
I know, I am so dumb. Unless I buy 8th street, I really should not express any opinion about it. So stupid!
Mel – last time I checked (and its been some time) the COH requires the developer/operator to provide either 8 or 10 parking spaces per 1,000 SF of space if it is a restaurant use. Since the building is 2,160 SF it seems to me that they are actually over parked with 24 spaces!
They just built two huge, brand new lots next to & across from Fitzgerald’s, Onion Creek, etc. Walking a few blocks won’t kill anybody.
I will be visiting all of these new places via bicycle. As soon as the weather cools off, that is…
I declare PROGRESS being made! No one is complaining about the structures being destroyed in the Heights to make way for a new business.
Of course, the reasons for that are that said business is one of those lame wine bars that every self-respecting Heights snob MUST love (except me, obviously), and they are consumed with bitching about the parking, oh, and the structure is an apartment house (EWWWW!!!), but still…PROGRESS!
As the house that will be beside the parking lot I can say that although I am not thrilled to be next to a parking lot it could be a lot worse. It could be another beer island or a 7 story condo tower and until the city passes some sort or zoning or land use restrictions that is what we bought into. I rather like Sonoma and it adds one more restaurant within walking and baby monitor distance. I get aggravated about the lack of visitor parking for us but it also keeps lots of eyes on the street. We have left our garage open all night once and in the morning still had all of our bikes. That is a first for us as I have had my bike stolen in west u, Montrose and downtown. Now we just have to cut back on our antidote budget to afford Sonoma.
Jimbo, I noticed that. Apparently the neighbor house is fine living next to a wine bar. I am relieved for them. I am sad for the little bungalow, but I am more concerned about the traffic issues on Studewood and the cross streets.
I live within one block of this place on the Woodland Heights side and I’m thrilled. I don’t give a d##m about street parking and patrons would have as much right as I do to use it. I’d pack up and head to Katy if I was so freaked out about losing my peace and security to patrons of an upscale wine bar within walking distance.
I would worry about parking… but my neighbors garage apartment rentor is always parked in front of my house anyway…
it amazes me that when great news like this comes along…we b!tch anyways!
The street is a public right of way; it DOES NOT belong to homeowners. I understand why that might seem obnoxious, but, I’m sorry, that’s part of living in a city. I live inside the loop because I want the kind of commercial density that demands street parking for local businesses. There simply isn’t room for adequate parking in lots in a neighborhood that is walkable/bikeable.