Houstonist: James: Doyle house was 'not a historic mansion'

pankajw

Thu, 19 Jul 2007 11:31:31 -0600

Another viewpoint for you to ponder: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7512030137262491766

blauvs

Thu, 19 Jul 2007 11:08:14 -0600

Jim - you're right, you can make a new cookie-cutter in any shape you like. If the whole Heights were torn down and rebuilt with those "new age" victorian homes it would be pretty silly.

lauren

Thu, 19 Jul 2007 10:53:52 -0600

what a crock - the Doyle family may not have taken good care of the estate allowing James to demolish because of neglect (i am sure they were in cahoots) but it wasn't all that bad - like i've said...i have seen good things happen from places in the same or worse condition

Jax

Thu, 19 Jul 2007 10:25:20 -0600

I agree, I expected the "Victorian Classics" to be much worse due to all the negative comments. I guess I come from Canada though so I have different standards. The city I come from isn't exactly known for it's architecture. If one of these were built in St. Catharines, it would be one of the nicest homes in the city.

Jim Parsons

Thu, 19 Jul 2007 10:15:50 -0600

You're right to some extent, blauvs. But if you look at the homes on James's website, a lot of them are just mirror images of the same plan, or the same plan with an extra turret here and gable there. So even though his designs are different than Perry's cookie cutter homes, they're cookie cutter designs in their own right.

blauvs

Thu, 19 Jul 2007 10:08:04 -0600

I am not in favor of tearing down every classic home in Houston or anything like that, but I do find it a little funny that the same people who complain about "cookie cutter" homes like Perry's that want something more unique and fitting to the neighborhood then make fun of the "victorian classics." Again, I am not advocating tearing down historical homes, but hey at least the new homes this guy builds are different from the norm, you know?