15-HOME WESTMORELAND PLACE DEVELOPMENT CLEARS HURDLES, MORE TREE SPACE 
When last we left the 0.83-acre lot tucked up against Spur 527 between Marshall and Alabama St. (catty corner from the Broadstone at Midtown second block), developer Carnegie Homes was seeking city approval for a variance for reduced setbacks from the spur and Alabama St. The variance was approved last November; the site plan, which lays out space for 7 homesites within the Westmoreland Historic District (on the north portion of the property) and another 8 tighter townhome lots on the free-range southern end, has been adjusted slightly to allow a 5,000-sq.-ft. promenade and private park area leading up to and surrounding the enormous live oak tree (branches visible in the above photo) near the property’s northwest corner. A new sign announcing the development went up last week. It’s been renamed a couple times too. The former Carnegie Oaks at Westmoreland — described on the company’s website as The Oak at Westmoreland — is now Masterson Oaks at Westmoreland, Carnegie’s Arpan Gupta tells Swamplot, after the Masterson Mansion that stood on the site as recently as the 1950s, but was torn down after the spur bisected its grounds. Gupta is still seeking approvals within the Westmoreland historic district for a reduced setback along Marshall St. [Previously on Swamplot] Photo: Swamplot inbox
Sign up for the Newsletter
Tag: Westmoreland Place
Your votes are in! And the winners weren’t: Eastwood (with 3 guesses), Woodland Heights, the Heights (2 guesses), Winlow Place, West University, Midtown, south Midtown, between Midtown and the Third Ward, around Elgin and 288, Montrose (3 guesses), Temple Terrace, “close to University of St. Thomas and the Menil,” Tanglewood, Southmore area, Riverside Terrace, Audubon Place (3 guesses), Sixth Ward near Houston Ave., the near Northside (2 guesses), Binz, Eastside, Avondale, Timbergrove, San Felipe/Briar Hollow, Mandell Place, Lawndale, or Lindale Park.
The correct answer was . . . the Westmoreland Historic District. Congratulations to reader tcpIV, who figured it out!
Four honorable mentions this week! The first goes to MariaO, who didn’t seem to make any mistakes . . . until she climbed too high:
Feels like a Montrose duplex to me, built in the 1930s but (mostly) renovated in the early 80s. I remember my grandma having that mediallion tile pattern from the second bathroom in her kitchen around that era.
Could be the north end of Montrose close to Allen Parkway — I’ll go out on a limb and say Temple Terrace.
The next goes to Cathy, who wasn’t too far away either:
1920’s or 30’s: tall ceilings and plenty of pre-AC windows. The kitchen could be an add-on — no original windows — but the door to the pantry makes you think it is in the original location. And I’d guess that the 2nd bathroom is new, or was new in the 70’s.
How many neighborhoods did Houston have in the 30’s? I’ll guess Avondale.
Also JT:
This has the earmarks of a home built around 1928-1935. Lots of remodelling evident from the 1970s kitchen to the garish Spanishesque floor tile in bath number two. The front door looks to be less than ten years old.
Judging from the size of the rooms and footprint, this seems too large for the standard 50′ lot in much of the Heights.
My guess is Mandell Place in Montrose.
Oh, and karen too:
I agree with JT about the timeframe for this house. It’s not quite bungalow style, and the interior fireplace puts it later in the 20th century….high ceilings, too. And it’s built on a pretty high crawl space foundation – see how the fence looks low from the windows! But the narrow moldings say late ’20s or early ’30s to me. Later ’30s had much smaller rooms.
I think it’s weird that the butler’s pantry has a space heater while the kitchen has forced air. What’s that about?
The last time anyone spent any serious money on this house was in the 80s or early 90s when they put in new kitchen cabinets. So this is likely in a neighborhood that’s seen some tear down pressure in the last decade or so, making many of the above guesses reasonable. On the other hand, the place is in good shape, telling me that the sellers aren’t sure if it’s a teardown or a remodel. Perhaps the previous owners simply lived on a budget and couldn’t afford the excesses of the ’90s and ’00s.
There was more than met the eye with this one:
