briekelman

I'm not trying to detract from the recent PC post. However, seeing it made me realize that while I posted the Culture Map article, I forgot to post the Houzz article on our house. It was written by one of the Houzz editors who specializes in Historic Preservation. Enjoy! http://www.houzz.com/ideabooks/28613889/list/Houzz-Tour--From-Shocker-to-Stunner-in-Houston

Our house was featured in Culture Map http://houston.culturemap.com/news/home-design/06-14-14-defying-recommendation-to-tear-down-eyesore-houston-couple-pulls-off-an-incredible-restoration/?utm_source=sf_facebook

Thanks! Yes, i designed every inch of everything in the house - from the built-in's to the lighting fixtures to the hardware, plumbing, everything. All of my interior lights are antiques from various antique stores, but the exterior lights are not expensive - $33 each from Home Depot. I noticed later that Coltivare has the same ones outside, but in "Brick Patina" (mine are "brushed nickel"). If you PM me your email address, I'll send you my spreadsheet which has the link / prices to everything. http://www.homedepot.com/p/Hampton-Bay-Brushed-Nickel-1-Light-Outdoor-Cottage-Lantern-BOA1691H-BN/202022740?keyword=BOA1691H-BN Through the process, I found that you can spend a fortune on everything....or NOT! Rehabbing these old houses is so expensive, that when I could save money on selections, I tried to get good quality as inexpensively as possible. The rain shower head is American Standard and cost $65 (now it looks like it's $79), and you need another piece that's $30. Below are the links to those. The plumbers did all the rough-in fixtures, so I'm not sure how much they cost, as it was embedded in the bigger plumbing bill. I did chrome throughout the house, which surprisingly is the cheapest finish these days (very rare that my personal preference is the cheapest option!!!). http://www.homedepot.com/p/American-Standard-Easy-Clean-10-in-Single-Function-Rain-Showerhead-in-Polished-Chrome-1660-610-002/202099436?keyword=1660.610.002 http://www.homedepot.com/p/American-Standard-12-in-Ceiling-Mount-Shower-Arm-in-Polished-Chrome-1660-190-002/202099421?keyword=1660.190.002

if anyone wants to see a before/after of my house. anyone who thinks i am not a historic preservationist is crazy! thank you again to everyone who helped me along the way! https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10101657054246971.1073741826.17004695&type=1&l=79af547c8b p.s. hopefully the link works? I tried to make the photo album public, but I don't know how to test it for people that i'm not FB "friends with". Can someone let me know?

Wait a minute..... I thought the Ordinance was pitched as already having design guidelines? Simply click on the youtube video below, listen to Marlene's words, and look at Marlene's Powerpoint. "Already in place for the Old 6th Ward, Houston Heights, etc...." It is pretty clear to me that Design Guidelines were in place. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWf-f9JRh4g This is also why my Preservation Planning staff contact sent me the Design Guidelines linked on the Houston Preservation website. It wasn't until my appeal that they decided to start calling them "educational material." I have copy/pasted my back and forth with my Preservation Planning Staff contact below (removing her name with XXXX for privacy sake). I even asked if these were the latest DG's since they were dated 2008, when the Ordinance was dated 2010. She said very clearly - yes. This is pretty clear to me, and I'm not sure what changed or why these DG's are not used anymore. Date: Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 11:09 AM Subject: RE: 1207 Harvard To: Brie Kelman No, for the Heights design guidelines 2008 is the most up to date version. They were put together after Heights West and East historic districts were created. XXXX, City of Houston Planning & Development Department From: Brie Kelman Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2013 10:48 AM To: XXXX Subject: Re: 1207 Harvard Ok - cool - thanks. This is the document I was using originally. I noticed that it's dated 10/13/2010, where the guidelines are dated December 2008. Since you sent them to me, I assume they are correct, but I just wanted to double check that there isn't anything newer than 2008? Thanks again! On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 10:43 AM, XXXX wrote: No problem. I’ve attached a PDF, the section on Certificates of Appropriateness starts on page 21 and section 33-241 covers additions. XXXX, City of Houston Planning & Development Department From: Brie Kelman Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2013 10:35 AM To: XXXX Subject: Re: 1207 Harvard No problem! I can only imagine how hectic it is over there...it's hectic over here getting ready! Thanks for your email and the guidelines. They are good for me to have as well, but if you could forward the ordinance as well, that would be helpful. On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 10:31 AM, XXXX wrote: Sorry, I know I just sent you the design guidelines. Did you mean the guidelines or a copy of the Ordinance? Sorry it’s been a bit of a hectic morning. XXXX, City of Houston Planning & Development Department From: XXXX Date: Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 10:24 AM Subject: RE: 1207 Harvard To: Brie Kelman Hi Brie, At this point I think that it may be best to move forward with the original proposal. Even though staff will be recommending denial, it is just a recommendation the Commission has the final say and they do not always support staff recommendations. I would recommend that you come to the Commission meeting and present all of the reason that you’ve stated below and that we’ve talked about to the Commissioners, by doing this you’ll be providing them with information and the personal reasons behind your proposal. This can make a difference in their decision. If you’re going to send in any other supporting documents they will need to be submitted by Friday morning. Here is a link to the Heights Design Guidelines- http://www.houstontx.gov/planning/HistoricPres/houston_heights_design_guide.html Best, XXXX XXXX, City of Houston Planning & Development Department From: Brie Kelman Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2013 9:29 AM To: XXXX Subject: Re: 1207 Harvard Hi XXXX, Sorry, I forgot to ask one more thing. Can you please email me a copy of the historic guidelines? I want to make sure we are using the correct document . Thanks!

in case the link for the Chronicle didn't work....here is the article: By Mike Morris January 19, 2014 In October 2010, an emotional Sue Lovell, then a city council­woman, lauded the passage of a strengthened historic preservation ordinance for Houston after a long, complex and divisive battle she and Mayor Annise Parker had led. In recent months, however, Lovell has appeared before the commissions tasked with implementing the ordinance to lobby on behalf of builders and homeowners seeking to remodel historic homes. What changed? Not her support for preservation or for the ordinance, Lovell said. What has shifted, she and others said, is the Houston Archaeological and Historical Commission's interpretation of the rules. "I fought for this ordinance," the former councilwoman said, "and I'm going to continue to fight to improve this ordinance." The rules passed in 2010 prevent property owners from demolishing or altering the exterior of historic buildings in 20 designated districts without the approval of the historical commission. Previously, owners simply had to wait 90 days - even if the commission denied their request. The topic is divisive, in part, because the restrictions are some of the only land use controls in Houston, the nation's largest unzoned city. Initially, Lovell and others said, homeowners were told to preserve a historic home's façade by not adding rooms onto the front half of the structure, only to watch the starting point for building restrictions creep toward the back of the house; the historical commission now prefers additions affect only the rear wall. "Then they come to the commission and the commission says, 'Well I don't want it set all the way back; it's taking up the whole back yard,' " Lovell said. "It's like trying to nail down Jell-O." Heights resident Brie Kelman said more predictability is needed. Kelman applied last year to renovate a dilapidated bungalow by adding on to the back half of the house to fit her growing family. She has kept the home's original siding, windows, porch and many furnishings, and has repurposed materials removed during the renovations. The commission voted no, saying Kelman did not follow its staff's suggestion to push the addition farther toward the back of the house and that the design dwarfed the home. Pushing the addition back would only increase the square footage, take away her yard and increase the cost, Kelman said. She thought her design had satisfied the only clear numbers she could find in the ordinance. Kelman showed the city's Planning Commission a chart comparing her design to a similar but much larger addition that was approved the same day hers was denied; the denial was overturned. Sam Gianukos, a builder who had 14 of his clients' applications denied or deferred on the first try last year, said "the commission, basically, is changing the ordinance at the commission." Mayor not content Both sides use data to make their point. Of the 361 projects presented to the historical commission last year, Parker said 84 percent won approval outright; another 8 percent were approved after revisions. Critics, however, say appeals to the planning commission highlight the problem. Last year, 15 historical commission denials were appealed to the planning commission, which ended up reversing decisions in 11 of those.

I don't ever look at haif unless I get an email saying that someone has updated this specific thread. I heard that the recent Leader articles on the topic had been posted on another thread. Therefore, in case others are like me and only check this specific thread, I thought I'd post here too since the subject matter is pertinent to this topic. http://www.theleadernews.com/?p=15142 (Note: there are 7 different articles in this series. You will see a blue box on the middle right section that has links to all 7 different articles) Separately and similarly, yesterday on the cover of the Sunday City and State Section of the Chronicle, there was another article on the topic: http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/politics/houston/article/She-fought-for-historic-preservation-ordinance-5156481.php

http://houstontx.swagit.com/play/10312013-616 Click on Roman numeral v on right. 2 were overturned and 2 were upheld (both of Bungalow Revival's projects were denied coa's - Houston's best and most famous historic preservationist) A - bicycle bungalow - overturned Hahc B - bungalow revival - upheld Hahc (my new next door neighbors who are only adding 835 SF by removing a bad 90's addition C - creole new construction - overturned Hahc D - Bungalow Revival - upheld Hahc and denied a dormer A lot of emotion and exhaustion right now, and I sincerely hope that this doesn't result in my new neighbors moving.

My new next-door neighbors are trying to remodel their house. Bungalow Revival is their designer/builder, and even HE, as the most well-known Historic Preservationist in Houston (if not TX), cannot get through the HAHC - crazy. They are only adding ~800 SF for a total square footage of 2,624, which is less than their whole block's average. The appeal is this Thursday, Oct 31 @ 2:30 pm. Click here to see a photo album that shows the shoddy 1990's addition, which is the ONLY thing that they are removing and replacing with a much better, more cohesive addition. The new space will actually be safe (unlike the current 1990's addition) and will make their house function (their 2nd daughter spent the first year of her life in a closet!). Can you please each send the email that I have drafted below to show your support for these wonderful neighbors of ours? We don't want to lose to the suburbs! Feel free to embellish as much as you would like, but in case you are busy, feel free to copy/paste/send. I left several things in red at the bottom, so you would remember to modify/personalize for you. Many thanks! To: Delaney.Harris-Finch@houstontx.gov,historicpreservation@houstontx.gov cc: jzucker@yettercoleman.com, triciazucker@hotmail.com Subject: Support letter for 1213 Harvard COA I am writing to show my support of the Zucker's renovation project at 1213 Harvard and encourage the Planning Commission to grant them a Certificate of Appropriateness. I am unable to attend the Planning Commission meeting in-person to show my support; therefore, this letter must suffice. Their project complies with the Ordinance and will be a great improvement to the neighborhood. Please respond to confirm that you will include this letter in the packet you will provide the Planning Commission on Oct 31. Thank you, Name The Heights (if applicable) Address (if applicable) Historic District Heights East (or whatever HD you are in if applicable)

Hi all, I've gone a bit quiet after the whole unintentional window drama. I know I don't need to further explain myself to 99.5% of you, but in my defense to the 0.5% of you who still think I'm evil, I will say that I posted 2 extra times on Nextdoor: in response to person 1, I know that George does wonderful work. That is why I promoted him at the historic preservation fair as well as why I gave him a compliment in my original post. The only reason I even mentioned him was because every other post I've seen on next door about old window repair has recommended him (again this is a tribute to his good work), and unfortunately for me, he does not want to work on my windows, so I need to find an alternative and was asking for help. He has spoken for why he does not want to help us (actually in more appropriate language than to us originally). In terms of your clarification as to what I am doing, of course I want to restore them and make them as functional and energy efficient as possible. I know this is something that he specializes in, and it would be great if I could find someone who can do it as well as him too. in response to person 2 later who was asking if I had found anyone: Hi Jimmy, Thanks for asking; I sent all of the great recommendations to my builder while I was out of town last week. I know he's started talking to them and feels like we have many great options. I haven't talked to him since I've been back in town (late Friday night - I try to leave him alone on weekends as much as possible!), so I'm not sure if he's chosen anyone yet. Separately, I did not intend for my question to cause drama, and I called George to apologize. I thought "unwilling to help" was pretty PG, but apparently others disagreed. Also, to those who thought it was inappropriate for to ask for help on a public forum, please know that before posting on Nextdoor, I asked everyone I knew possible if they had any recommendations: the Historic Preservation Staff, Lynn with Historic Houston, neighbors, etc. They all recommended George - again a tribute to his great work and fabulous reputation, but unfortunately for me, this didn't help get me anywhere in restoring/fixing my historic windows. I waited for ~2 months after talking to him before posting on Nextdoor b/c I thought that maybe we'd be able to find someone. I also tried to think of the best way to ask the question b/c every other post I've seen in the past recommended him. I know he's busy and has a long waiting list, so I assumed that if I said something like "can't help us," it would lead people to say: "he's busy but worth waiting for" or something similar, which again speaks very highly of him, but doesn't help get all of my windows restored, now that it's time for us to get moving on the windows. Alas "unwilling to help" was the best I could come up with, which didn't seem bad or rude to me! Thanks again to everyone for your recommendations!

Thank you for the legal clarification; I did not know how this works legally (I am being serious, not sarcastic). I haven't seen the meeting yet b/c it is not posted, so I did not see the other 11 approved additions, nor the 3 new construction applications. Did you go or do you have a copy of the dvd? If you have a copy of the dvd, can you post it on youtube? I am anxious to watch the whole thing when it is posted. Did any of the 11 approved additions have 2nd stories? If so, where did they start? I know you are hoping to do an addition eventually per another older post; do you want to put on a 2nd story? I sincerely hope that you are able to do it and you don't get told no b/c I know what you do will be thoughtful and preserve the character of your house. I work with 3 people who are looking to buy in the Heights recently/now. I am not saying that this is everyone by any stretch of the imagination, but this is my personal knowledge of "the market". As one mere example, the first thing that one of them said to me when showing me a listing on Harvard was: "we'd of course put in energy efficient windows." I said, you can do that, but you will have to go through a process and have the potential to be denied like several other people where you might have to appeal, even though the legal document says that you can as long as you use "like" materials and it doesn't specify condition: (6) New materials to be used for any exterior feature excluding what is visible from public alleys must be visually compatible with, but not necessarily the same as, the materials being replaced in form, design, texture, dimension and scale; I told her that I LIKE my old, rotten windows, so I am choosing to keep them, so I did not have this issue. This is only one example of one small conversation...I don't have time to type more. All this said, I want you to know that I have tried to talk all of them into buying in the HD, but none of them want anything to do with it. I am not trying to scare anyone away from HD's - quite the contrary! I have said over and over again that I like them in principle but think the details of enforcement could be improved.

I agree - nowhere does it say 67% or 75%, nor does it say rear wall, nor does it say that you cannot have a 2nd story no matter where you start it. Your direct copy/paste from the Ordinance says "front half", which is exactly what I was referring to in my post with 50%. All of this said, the further back you push the 2nd story, the bigger the house becomes b/c the 2nd story has to sit on top of something. Them telling me to push my 2nd story back 10 ft would have made it 350 sqft bigger for no reason. You are right - as someone who has/is going through the process: it is incredibly expensive! I bought our property Nov 14, and we didn't have our permit in-hand until late May, and we are just in the process of framing now (finally, which is very fun). We are hoping/doubting that it will be complete in February, which is slightly less than convenient b/c we are expecting our 2nd child Feb 2nd. I had no idea that I would own 2 homes for 1.5 years, and likely would not have done this if I knew that from the beginning. I simply cannot afford it, especially now that there will be 4 of us, and I will be unpaid on maternity leave for several months. AND I'm probably in a better place than most b/c I'm an extremely decisive, type-A personality that makes decisions on design/materials/etc. a lot faster than your normal person. I have been absolutely "on-it" every step of the way (e.g. I bought my countertop material before I had even chosen a designer, less than one week after I bought the house). All this said, I'm still having fun with my project and will not let this get me down....not to say that it hasn't made me question my investment recently...

Wow. I looked at the Planning Commission Agenda online, and it appears that both projects had Staff's recommendation for approval, but they still got denied! The July HAHC meeting is still not posted online, so I have not seen it yet....did anyone see it and/or know what the Commission said as the basis for denial? It looks like 2nd story additions are no longer allowed if someone starts it at the rear wall of the original structure and still gets denied. Here is what this looks like to me (please correct me if I'm wrong): The Ordinance says you can start a 2nd story 50% back.One of the Historic Commissioners always says that he prefers to see the 2nd story begin 67% or 75% back.The Preservation staff encourages applicants to begin their 2nd story at the rear wall to get them through the process easily (alas ridiculous looking houses like 163X Cortland shown in a previous post with zero back yard) because it will preserve 100% of the original structure.The HAHC still denies additions that begin at the rear wall.If you can't add a 2nd story addition on any portion of the original house, nor at the rear wall, does this mean that you just simply cannot have a 2nd story addition? Unfortunately the actual Ordinance and countless examples of precedent-setting houses disagree (right, all you lawyers?). This is very disappointing and disheartening. It is the first time that I have started to question my investment (which by the way is my life savings plus, plus, plus), which is a bit scary for me. Most people I know that either have kids or want kids eventually want/need a 2nd story (yes people can do it without it e.g. me right now in my 1300 sqft 1-story cottage while waiting for construction on the "new" house to be complete, but very few choose to). If they can't have this (and other things that might be important to them like replacing rotten windows with energy efficient windows), then they will say: forget looking in Historic neighborhoods, we are moving to another neighborhood or the burbs!

I went to see progress on my house over lunch, and guess who I ironically ran into on the 1600 block of Harvard!? The surveyors! I stopped to ask them a few quick questions. They are only measuring Contributing Structures. I forgot to ask the logic why, but my guess is that this is because new construction is supposed to be in character with the existing contributing structures. I have not seen any alterations to non-contributing structures (other than siding) in the 7 months I've been watching this, so I'm not sure how the HAHC and staff looks at those projects. I'm not sure if there just aren't very many alterations to non-contributing structures or if they just get passed on the Consent Agenda?? They started first measuring German Town b/c they were in the process of creating Design Guidelines and then moved to HH East, starting first on Harvard Street. Someone from the City staff is with 2 interns, for a total of 3 people. This made me feel better b/c I assume that someone with more experience will know what they are donig and be able to lead the interns. (to be clear, I like intern learning experiences, since I was one for 2 summers, but think it's important that they have some supervision to ensure accurate data).

(tone clarification here: I'm not arguing) Can you send the address of the 2900 sqft house you are referencing? I would like to see it, to make sure I understand what you mean by telescoping roof lines. I think most would consider my rennovation/addition as a camel back (right?), which would not have been my first choice by any stretch of the imagination. The attached photo is my favorite house in the Heights @ 16th and Harvard. Our house could/would never have looked exactly like this, but it would have been nice to use some of the design elements from it (p.s. Creole did this remodel years ago, and it's on the National Register). Creole was my designer, and trust me, our house WAS designed from scratch through MANY, MANY brainstorming sessions with both us and the Preservation Staff. They are not cranking them out from a design book.

good question - sorry, I don't know the answer! I'm also not 100% sure if they are measuring only the contributing structures or all structures...I was just guessing. Sorry, I should not post if I'm guessing. Someone could ask the Preservation Staff if they wanted to know for certain. If I hear anything more concrete, I will post.

Definitely specific to historic areas and likely specific to contributing structures only (I can't remember specifically, but I'm 95% sure that's the case). They only have so many resources, and there are a LOT of historic districts, so I would assume they need to have a narrow focus.

At the Historic Preservation Fair, I was talking to the Director of Planning, and she said they were going to have a couple of interns this summer to take measurements of the houses around the neighborhoods to create a database. I think having data will be great; I just hope that the interns will know what they are doing to make sure that the data is accurate.

You have hit the nail right on the head with those 2 examples. The way the ordinance is being enforced (not written), you cannot do anything to the front 2/3 - 3/4 of the house (yes, I am intentionally saying 2 numbers b/c that is what is said by a Historic Commissioner over and over again). The legal document says you can go up at 50% and out at 30%, and nowhere are 67% or 75% written. I did not want/need my house to end up being 3000 sqft; frankly it will make me house-poor with less green space, which I do not like. I originally planned our budget on ~2500 sqft, but was not allowed to do this. I want an upstairs' master bedroom with 2 small kids rooms connected with a jack-and-jill bathroom, so that we could be close to the kid(s) if things happen in the night (even though a realtor told me the market prefers a downstairs' master). The furthest forward I could start my 2nd story when I read the Ordinance (50%) made the house ~3,000 sqft. However, Staff recommended me for denial b/c I wouldn't push the 2nd story back 10 ft, making it 350 sqft bigger to 3,350. That is why I appealed - I wanted to keep it smaller and didn't think I should be forced to make it bigger when it is not written anywhere. The attached photo is of a Brickmoon project at the corner of Highland and Studewood in the Woodland Heights - just outside of a Historic District. It is a modest, side addition (maybe ~10 ft out to the side? with no 2nd story) that comes to the front of the property. Because the addition comes to the front wall, it would not have been allowed in a HD. However, I think it looks seamless and definitely keeps in character with the original house....hard to remember how the original house looked any different?

As someone who is in the middle on this topic - both a preservationist who LIKES the ordinance in principle while thinking the enforcement of this legal document could be improved with more consistency: Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right, here I am, stuck in the middle. (my first attempt to be funny on a blog )

See answers to s3mh’s questions in red below. So, is your goal to reform the HAHC so that all bad projects can get approved? No. I know you do not like it that people wrote CM Cohen to let her know that they did not support you getting nominated to HAHC. But the reason people are concerned is that no one has any idea what you actually want to do or what you stand for when it comes to the historic districts. I wish they would have asked me directly vs making untrue assumptions. That said, thank you for asking now; I will try to answer as thoroughly and thoughtfully as possible. I apologize in advance b/c this has resulted in a novel…if I have failed to answer a specific question, it was not intentional, and please point it out to me. Not answering direct questions is my pet peeve, so let me know if you interpreted anything below as such. What we do know is that you wrote a letter to the Leader stating that you are friends with your builder. Yes, I am and have been very good friends with my builder, his wife and their son who is 4 mo older than mine for several years. He and I were engineers together before he left a very secure company to take exorbitant risk starting his own company fixing houses with a 5-month old baby at home. He redid his own house in the Heights ~7 yrs ago while still working as an engineer. It was a severely neglected 1 story bungalow on Yale Street, and he turned it into a beautiful 1-story bungalow, even though he was not in a historic district, and it was before historic districts came into the Heights. His now wife thought he was absolutely crazy. He saved an old, dilapidated now gem on a terrible-to-live-on street that most people wouldn’t touch, and you would be very impressed with his work as a preservationist. He kept the original windows, siding, floors, etc. by choice – not obligation. He is doing my project for me as a favor for his friend. It is not his typical business model b/c he typically stays in the existing footprint of the house, and has not had another project in the “Heights proper” yet due to the expensive cost of entry. Also, every single one of us has used a builder’s service at one point, whether we hired him/her or bought his/her work from a previous owner…we all live in homes and work in buildings that someone built. They provide a critical service to all of us, whether we choose to appreciate it or not. I never thought about or realized this until my close, personal friend became one. You hired an architect who has been an opponent of the historic ordinance. I did not have any idea if he supported or opposed the ordinance when I hired him. When comparing him to Brickmoon (I thought they were both the most experienced local designers b/c they had the most signs in the neighborhood), the ONLY reason I chose him was that he charged based on a fixed fee vs an hourly rate. I was/am very uncomfortable with an unknown fee when both of them (who are experts vs a novice like me at the time) said the process is very unpredictable. For the record, I don’t know what his opinion used to be, but he does not want to repeal the ordinance. He wants Design Guidelines. If the Design Guidelines that he and the whole neighborhood were told were “the Guidelines” are now NOT "the Guidelines" anymore, but they are now only “educational material” that no one looks at (despite the fact that my Preservation staff contact emailed me them linked on their website here), then he wants new Guidelines that are agreeable to both preservationists as well as the local professionals who make their living designing homes in Historic districts. Click for a video of this unfolding or an old post I just found #22 here for a letter directly from the Mayor to understand why people are confused. It is difficult for both everyone working in Historic Districts or arguing against people who are trying to renovate historic structures without Design Guidelines. Have you ever talked to Sam? He is very experienced in historic renovation and probably has more projects on the agenda than anyone else each month. This is because people LIKE his work and CHOOSE to hire him. He and all other designers, architects and builders are service providers for the owners of property, so if someone doesn’t like their work, it’s not really them they don’t like…they don’t like what their clients have asked them to draw/build. Also, I have attached 2 photos from his kitchen: one of his original stove and one of his original sink. These are in the kitchen of his 1915 original (beautiful) house that he has chosen to keep original, despite the fact that it is not technically in a historic district by one block. Would someone who hates old stuff choose to have an old sink and an old stove? I’m a preservationist, but I need/have a modern stove! You are out advocating for an appeal of a denial of a COA from a project that was designed by the same architect's firm. I was supporting/advocating for the family that is going through the same headache as I went through...not the design firm. They have a 3-mo old baby who doesn’t sleep through the night yet, and I really feel for them. At least when I went through the process, my baby was ~8 months old, so he was sleeping through the night. I also support the staff’s original opinion of this project which was that it satisfied all 11 criteria and had staff’s recommendation for approval b/c the owners made every, single change they asked for. When I spoke at their appeal Thursday, the ONLY presentation material I used was directly copy and pasted from Staff’s reports that came from an open record’s request. Some of the Starr’s friends were originally encouraging them to move to the suburbs, but they were convinced by another friend in the Heights that they CAN have closets and 3 bedrooms upstairs with a guest room downstairs for their growing family. They are a very nice couple with an adorable baby who will provide great contributions to our neighborhood and schools. I wanted to let them know that they ARE welcome to the Heights and to thank them for spending their life savings restoring a dilapidated structure who’s previous owner severely neglected and who literally fed rats inside her home (yuck!). Talk to the family who has lived next door for 38 years and see what their opinion is of the condition of this historic home. Most would be too scared to take on a project like that, and I commend the Starr’s for doing it (especially while learning how to be parents and working full-time so they can afford their new home while paying for their other house's mortgage to live). I’m glad they chose the Heights and look forward to sharing beers with them on our old front porches and new back porches. Tera had a great idea to re-purpose one of my old desperate-to-be-restored clawfoot tubs into either a cooler/veggie garden on the screened-in porch, which I think will be fantastic…historic preservation (of an item) at its finest. You mounted a very public campaign against the HAHC to try to get your plans approved on appeal with the Planning Commission. I had no idea how public my story would become. I created an online petition on change.org, which originally seemed like it might turn out to be a bit of a joke with only 3 signatures: my husband and my parents. I am a mom and an engineer and am not trained/experienced in anything public. Clearly I had no idea of how big of an issue this issue is to a lot of passionate people! I had never been on a blog like this (hence my very transparent, uncreative, rookie screenname choice). I wanted to have another baby but needed to get some sort line of sight on a physical place to put him/her before I started trying (or stopping preventing actually). My 1920 1,300 sqft 2/2 on a 5000 sqft lot with original, painted-shut windows simply wouldn’t cut it anymore for 4+ people whose families live in New Zealand and Kansas City. I had thought about adding on to it first, but decided that it just wouldn’t be appropriate. The lot is too small, and the little cottage is not only extremely livable, but it is just perfect and adorable as-is. Plus, it is in fantastic shape b/c the previous owner did a great job fixing it up (we haven’t even painted a wall the whole time we’ve been here). I didn’t even realize that it was NOT in a historic district, while sandwiched in between Norhill HD and Heights East HD by 1 block in both directions. This meant that yes – I COULD have done whatever I wanted with my house including leveling it, but I CHOSE not to. The only reason that I appealed was because I could not get any compromise from Staff. Trust me – I tried b/c I am a nice, non-confrontational person who can always find a middle ground. Two days before the HAHC meeting, on the phone, Staff told me that they would recommend me for approval if I would push my 2nd story 9 ft back. I went and walked the lot and my thoughts were - will I be able to get into my garage anymore and will the stairs/layout still work 9 ft back? Will there be any yard left? I pondered this on my drive home to find an email stating that unless I pushed my 2nd story now 10 ft back, I was going to be recommended for denial. These 2 numbers were both arbitrary, and I met the ordinance as it was. I pushed it back 1.5 ft, and resubmitted. Pushing it back 10 ft would not have been easy or possible; here were the consequences: I would have zero yard, and yard is important to us for our kid(s) and my New-Zealand-farmer husband. Where would a sandbox and our compost bin go? I would not have been able to get into my garage b/c there would not have been enough turning radius with how far back the house went The house would have been 350 sqft bigger than I wanted (costing $50k+ more for extra “dead” sq footage I do not need, let alone want) It would have looked more similar to the big-boxes-on-the-back-of-houses that just look strange and out-of-place The stairs would not still fit in the same place, so we would have had to redesign the whole house, which is impossible in 2 days before the HAHC meeting In my HAHC meeting, the primary Historic Commissioner that spoke, said that my house was too big. For clarity, it was 3,069 if you count 140 sqft of converted attic space that has a 6 ft at-the-tallest-point-of-the-triangle ceiling, going down to 4 ft on the sides. However, if I would have taken staff's recommendation, my house would have been 350 sqft bigger, and I would have likely been approved with no discussion. Therefore the two pieces of advice I received conflicted! The staff told me to make it bigger, and the Commission told me it was too big. When the HAHC Commissioner said that the house was too big when my ONLY disagreement with staff was that I wanted to keep it smaller – this was confusing. You can understand why, right? When I asked the commissioner for guidance b/c the house was in such bad shape that in order to make it livable in the current size, it would cause “economic hardship”. This means that because I paid $285k for the house and lot, and you cannot sell a 1300 sqft house for $500-600k+, which is what it would have cost to make the existing structure livable (it was in REALLY bad shape and had been neglected for years). My new neighbors were ecstatic that a family was going to return it to a nice place b/c it was the ONLY house on the block in bad shape. The commissioner suggested the demolition route b/c the rules are different there, and I could potentially get what I wanted this way. I pleaded: "I don't want to demolish it - that's why I'm here!!" (PLUS, I read the demolition section of the ordinance in detail later, and the demolition route would take months; it is extensive and would cost money/time that I did not have). The ordinance clearly states that you can appeal a decision by the HAHC to the Planning Commission and then on to the City Council. Therefore, I followed the ordinance and appealed to Planning. To be clear, it was MY decision to appeal – not my designer, Creole. I learned later that appeals do not happen very often, so this has made a lot of people not like me (hence the previously posted email). However, I don't know why because I simply followed the law. If they like the Ordinance, then why do they not like someone who only chose to follow it the whole time? At the Planning Commission, they overwhelmingly supported my design plans because I met the Ordinance and overruled the HAHC. Also, if you are still wondering why I appealed, of course I tried to do everything possible to get it approved as-it-was, utilizing the procedure explicitly outlined in the ordinance. If I went back to the drawing table, what would I have changed? My 2 pieces of advice conflicted. Then I would have been back at square one, and it is physically impossible to make something bigger and smaller at the same time. I had already invested 2-3 months of time, and I could not afford further delays – both monetarily and most importantly, another baby for who knows how long? These are all things that suggest that you do not support the historic ordinance. Do the aforementioned items as well as the items listed below help clarify? On the other hand, you have told us that you like historic homes; own and are renovating one, and go to antique stores. That is all great, but some of the most vocal opponents of the historic ordinance have said and done the same thing. So, in all fairness, this is you chance to let us know where you really stand. 1. Would you support a repeal of the Historic Ordinance? No. 2. Do you think the Historic Ordinance should be strengthened to prevent the projects like the one on 1600 Cortland? Or should it be weakened to just set a few objective standards for height, size, preservation of original structure, etc. and have no say in the subjective elements? Or something in between? There are a lot of the subjective elements now explicitly explained in the new Preservation Web Manual found here. Have you had a chance to look through this yet? I think this is a great document(s), and I like that it is specific to each historic district (Woodland Heights is different to HH East to Montrose to Glenbrook Valley, etc.). The main thing that it lacks is the specific numbers for height, width etc and more real neighborhood picture examples. At the Historic Preservation Fair in May, I went to a session about this new manual. I asked about Design Guidelines, and the presenter said more-or-less that this was supposed to take their place. I asked how can that be b/c the Ordinance clearly states that COA’s shall be approved pursuant to “Design Guildlines” not a “Web Manual”? She said that was a question for the Mayor and later that it takes 2 full people a full year to create Design Guidelines for each district. I think that if applicants were allowed to follow the ordinance as-written (begin 2nd stories at the 50% mark and side additions at 30%), then you wouldn’t need to change the ordinance to prevent every addition from turning into homes like the one at 1630 Cortland. When prices of lots with severely dilapidated structures on them like 1630 Cortland are $300k+ (I’ve been told that I was lucky at $285k even with a massive apt complex next door), no one can afford to spend $200-$300k fixing it up, keeping it in the existing square footage. The housing market is currently booming, but it’s not booming THAT much where a 1100-1300 sqft bungalow will sell for $600k+. The house/construction loan would not appraise, and there are only SO many cash buyers that would/could afford that, let alone want to pay that much for a small house, no matter how much character it had. Therefore, that leaves us with people needing to add on to the structure to get their money out of it (“economic hardship” as described in the Ordinance). This is better than demolition, subdividing lots and building townhomes! It also allows modern people and families to come live in Historic Districts. 1100 sqft is ok for one person and a cat, but my new nextdoor neighbor was only ok for so long keeping his 2nd daughter in a closet for 1 year due to lack of space. If the only way people can get through the system with as little delay as possible b/c time=money (it is expensive to carry 2 mortgages for a year and a half to get through a project – trust me I know!) is to start the 2nd story at the back of the house, then they will do it and take up the entire yard. Hence 1630 Cortland. I don’t think they should have to take up their entire yard and start their addition at the back wall b/c this is not written ANYWHERE in the Ordinance and neither is size. A 6600 sqft single lot is big for the Heights, but we all know 6600 sqft is actually very small. 1630 Cortland is the perfect example. I have no idea who the builder/designer/owner is, but I just assume that this was their logic and why they chose the design plan they did. I went to its open house, and the resulting layout is very bizarre. I doubt this house would be shown publicly as a great example of Houston’s Historic Preservation either b/c that would be embarrassing to our fine city. I was not around for the creation of the Heights Historic Districts (~2007?); I was apartment-living in Midtown and had just moved to Houston, fresh out of college due to a job offer and the great economy that has done nothing but skyrocket since. I was also not involved in the Amendment process (~2010?) b/c I was not technically in a HD, although sandwiched by 2 one block in both directions. BUT, I gather from talking to people and reading this blog that it was a VERY, VERY ugly fight. Therefore, my opinion is that opening the ordinance would likely be a long, ugly battle that is not necessarily necessary if the ordinance is simply followed unarbitrarily and as-it-is-written today. That said, I do not see how me being on the HAHC would have anything to do with changing the ordinance in any way whatsoever. I would be only 1 of 13 votes, and I don’t want the Ordinance to go away. Why would a Historic Commissioner fight down a Historic Ordinance? I’m an engineer, not a lawyer like most of you seem to be, but wouldn’t that be a conflict of interest? 3. What specifically would you do if selected to serve on the HAHC to try to reform the process (specifics, not "I would be fair and consistent, yada yada")? Well, to start, I would try to be fair and consistent . I know several of the commissioners DO try to do this too, which I appreciate. I would take a copy of the ordinance, any Design Guidelines (hopefully more get created) and the web-based manual with me to every, single meeting, so I could reference it if I forgot something or was less familiar with a district, even if I had been on the HAHC for years and thought I was a pro. I would listen to the thought and logic that owners/designers put into their design plans and take it into account. 419 Eulid in June was the perfect example where the HAHC DID this…the couple was doing a modest 2nd story addition that started 3 ft before the 50% line, but did not change any of the walls of the house - not one. They did not have Staff’s recommendation for approval due to this one item, but the Commission heard their case and granted them a COA. I would like to applaud the Commission for this, and I would have voted in favor of their project as well. And, NO – I would not vote to approve everything. And, NO – I would not be biased or favor Creole. I believe that this entire country is at least designed on fair and equal treatment. I would vote to approve projects if they met the Ordinance, and vote against them if they did not meet the Ordinance – plain and simple. The Ordinance is a legal document, and the HAHC is obligated to enforce this legal document – not more and not less. 4. If you could make amendments to the ordinance, what would you change? See bottom of #2 above. I don’t think it necessarily needs changing, but more consistent application as it is written. What if people knew they had some sort of clarity on what was ok and what was not ok? The legal document has not changed now for 3 years, but it is being enforced VERY differently, even within the same meeting (e.g. 1811 Harvard vs 415 Arlington in June). What if people knew that they could go up at 50% and out at 30% like the "shall approve" section dictates? I have never seen one project "qualify" for the "shall approve" section, and I sincerely doubt that the intent of having a "shall approve" section was to never have anyone ever utilize it. Why would the original Ordinance writers spend the time writing this section if no one could ever use it? The "shall approve" section also does not have critical words like "OR" stating that you can only do one of the "shall approves"...not multiple. If the aforementioned items were the case, then I don’t think there would be nearly as many aggrieved homeowners. Designers would know what to do and could get their owners through the system with more clarity and less wasted time (without forcing people to build 1630 Cortland). I have also been through the process, which I do not know if any of the other Commissioners have actually been through it? Because of this, I would be able to empathize with the home owners and understand the effort that they have put into their project in our Historic Districts. Finally and most importantly, I would thank people more for their contributions to our historic neighborhoods and commend their significant investment/contribution. Some people DO get thanked, but it is not nearly enough. It is usually someone with a lot of clout, not your average John Smith like me. I realize this is not a specific change to the Ordinance like you have specifically asked in #4 above, but in general, I think thanking owners could/should happen a lot more.

Thank you Eggplant for your post. I agree that this is a complex issue and is not blue/yellow or black/white...it, like most things in life: it is green or gray. I have one slight clarification that I think is worth mentioning. I am not running for a public position. All HAHC Citizen positions are appointed by City Council. I was originally appointed by Council Member Ellen Cohen and then vetted through the Council Committee on Ethics, Elections and Council Governance. At this time, my appointment became public, and whoever wrote that email made noise to CM Cohen's office. This email confirmed that Doug Elliott had chosen to resign, which is why the position was open to begin with. Then, (the rest of this is my best guess and is not confirmed) I think those that don't like me realized that the only way to block me was to ask Doug Elliott to stay on the Commission. Since there is no precedent to not allow an eligible Commissioner to continue serving if he/she wants to, CM Cohen withdrew my nomination and renominated Doug Elliott, the incumbent. CM Cohen said that she will nominate me when the next citizen position becomes available. She told me that she said this publicly, on-the-record. However, I have not been able to see it yet b/c the video hasn't been posted. When it is posted, I will post the link on this site. I'm not sure when this will be. I believe that Doug Elliott is the longest-serving Citizen rep (of the 4 Citizen rep positions), so he won't become "term limited" until early 2015. Anyhoo, I thought it was worth clarifying my motivation at following this topic...I'm not trying to campaign or run for anything...I just care about our neighborhood like the rest of you. Which leads me to the answers to s3mh's answers! Apologies for the delay. Life got in the way. My husband is out of town, so I've been on my own for baby duty. One of the things that got in the way was meeting a new neighbor across the street from our "new" house while out on a walk. I gave him a tour, and he couldn't have been nicer, more welcoming and more excited for what we are doing to restore the house. His house is on the State registrar, so this meant a lot to me. Here it goes!

Hi there, I had to bolt out of there after the Starr's appeal to pick up my son. His daycare closes at 6, and I got there at 5:57. He was the last kid in his class there, which has NEVER happened before...it was so sad! But worth it. I was busy at work all day, so I haven't had a chance to watch any videos yet. Kinda dreading watching my part...I hate seeing myself on camera... Sam always introduces himself as a "designer," as does Mark VanDoren with APD design b/c they are not licensed architects (at least, I think that is the correct way to describe it? but I'm no pro...just learning). They definitely employ architects though. I'm not sure how APD works, but Sam does all of the physical hand drawings while you talk through brainstorming sessions of your needs/wants, and then he hands it off to a younger, better-on-Autocad architect to do all of the dirty work (e.g. code compliance, specific dimensioning down to the fraction of inches, etc.). There is a lot of recycle on this - ours took 2 months of that, not including the electrical and lighting plan that we had to wait to start until after the COA approval. S3mh, I have finished my reply to you, but I want to sleep on it. I have re-read it a zillion times and continue to find typos. I also want to make sure that it is as complete as possible, and I didn't leave anything out. It unfortunately turned out to be a novel, so hopefully you don't mind reading for while! Apologies in advance to everyone for that! Hoping to post early tomorrow morning.

I have started writing a very thoughtful, thorough response to s3mh's questions. Thank you for asking; I'm happy to provide the answers. I'm sorry if my motivations weren't clear before; I wish I would have been asked earlier if that was the case...I guess I'm not one to really put out my opinions unless they have a specific purpose or are in response to something (Side-note: The Leader article was a short what-I-assumed-was-private email I wrote the writer, and I had NO clue that it would/could be published, let alone that it WAS published until a week after when I heard from an old colleague from 7 yrs ago! I learned my lesson though - 1) duh - emailing a newspaper employee is fair game for publishing 2) they don't ask you if you are ok with them publishing anything before they publish it 3) check who the editor is before you email a writer to see if the writer is in fact the editor 4) don't email a writer b/c it will get published). I have been in meetings all morning and then went to the appeal. I don't know how to post from an iphone (can someone PM me how to do?), so apologies for my delayed response. To be clear, I went and spoke to support the Starr's (not Creole), and the Starr's won unanimously. I'm very happy that they can stop worrying about this now and get back to the headaches of sleepless nights with their 3-mo old vs sleepless nights worrying about their life savings and ability to provide shelter for their growing family. Thank you for all that wrote in for them. They had over 30 support letters, which is a much nicer welcome to the Heights, and shows them that it IS a great neighborhood, full of nice/welcoming people. Again, I will post specific answers tomorrow (I promise that I am not avoiding the question). I started a detailed response, but I want to sleep on it to make sure my words are carefully chosen and mean what I want them to mean without unintentionally offending someone.

sorry! I thought I was clear that I was NOT accusing anyone of anything...i was asking. That's why I typed these lines and used "he/she" vs "you": "To be clear, I am NOT accusing you, but asking. I don't think it is right to accuse anyone of anything if you don't know for certain if it's true. For the record, whoever sent this really hurt my feelings, and he/she clearly does not know me"