Jump to content

Krol

Full Member
  • Posts

    27
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Krol's Achievements

(5/32)

-2

Reputation

  1. Waiting on the estimate for the entire job, but preliminaries are $45 an hour with $20 to replace the ropes...said it should be about $65-80 per window, providing they are in good shape and just need weatherization, ropes, etc. He does cut a piece out to gain access to the weights and to redo ropes. It gets put back with screws so that you'll always have access to the weights for the future. He adds thin metal strip and wool for insulation. One window had rotted. He took that back to the shop for repairs on an emergency basis. The cost for that is $288. It involved construction of a replacement window for the interim while the other is being repaired, custom construction of a piece to replace the rotten portion and then all the other stuff above. He is backed up so rest of job will be couple of months down the road. He says once he's done the windows will be insulated and last another 200-300 years.
  2. Would like windows in old bungalow restored, including the addition of screens. Also looking for someone to repair drywall cracks and baseboards following house leveling. Any suggestions of reliable contractors for either job?
  3. No. That is not correct. PC simply doesn't exist anymore. That does not mean they become NC in any new districts. A property that has undergone some changes can still contribute to the district. The HAHC is monthly approving changes that do not endanger the integrity of structures or their classifications. Check out a;; that is getting approved.
  4. Under the old ordinance there were two classifications: contributing and potentially contributing. Contributing structures were pretty much as they were built. Potentially contributing structures may have undergone some changes. They may have dormers, a different porch railing, an enclosed porch or different windows. These are just some examples of the changes that might have resulted in a PC classification. There are many others. Having two different classifications was confusing and not consistent with federal criteria used by the NRHP. To achieve consistency and eliminate the confusion, the new ordinance contains just the one classification of contributing. No matter whether PC or C under the old ordinance, they are all now considered Cs and are important to the inventory and maintaining the historic integrity of the district.
  5. It seems that the approach here is to bully and call names like school kids. I really do understand your position. I just don't agree with it. Therefore we will have to agree to disagree. This can be done without resorting to lobbing of insults along the lines of "ignorant slobs", references to other neighborhoods as ghettos and accusations of propaganda. There are actually very few people who have been posting on this topic. It's a discussion of about five with entries here and there from others like me who usually monitor posts, but don't chime in. I now know why. It's not really a discussion as much as it is a bully forum where the approach is to quash an opposiing viewpoint with personal insults. I believe Houston has matured to the point of understanding the need for preserving its history through Houston style restrictions. Houston Heights is the one neighborhood in this city that is known for its history. The OSW and other neighborhoods have beautiful historical architecture worth preserving, but HH has the reputation of being Houston's "historic neighborhood." Many volunteers have put in countless hours over the last 30 years to make this neighborhood what it is. Restrictions and ordinances affecting our property change all the time and they may change again this time.
  6. "These people" include me and I also don't like the camel backs. Those are what builders think are easy ways to increase square footage. They are the ones who want to bulldoze your house and mine. Don't indicate that "all" people devoted to their homes are against this ordinance. I am like you in that I love our house and we take care of it. It is that love of our house that casues me to want to ensure that it is worth more than the land on which it sits. That will not happen unless the demolitions and incompatible construction by speculative builders cease. We are not focusing on the angry that don't want to discuss anything at all. The attention is on the more reasonable who are willing to work together to hash out disagreements and develop a better ordinance. Not everyone, including me, will be entirely happy with the final product. It is expected that there will also be people, like you, who won't be happy at all about it. Without stronger protections your 90+ year old house will be worth nothing but the land on which it sits. I have a right to not have that happen to my house. I also have a right to not have huge Mcmansions blocking the sun in the backyard and invading my privacy. Don't tell me your rights are more important than mine. That's not the Houston Heights I know.
  7. The supporters were definately better organized last night. The majority of them were also more rational. The opponents suffer from an angry disposition that doesn't play well in that type of situation. The property rights argument appears to be losing steam because the supporters have a point that they have the right to maintain their investments and what they bought into. My version of property rights may not be your version. It can be argued both ways. There's also growing realization among the Mcmansion types that no protection could mean that the little bungalow next door gets replaced in favor of density. The Heights has been lucky so far. However, take a little drive down west 15th street between the Blvd. and Shepherd...consider the townhomes being built over at the ole Ashland Tea House site or the condos currently planned for Studewood behind Someburger. Density is knocking on our door. That is the reality and it is probably a much greater threat than having your house burn down. The count last night was roughly 40/30 in favor of stronger protections. Among the 30 who stated their opposition, four were from one property on Kipling, one was from the Houston Property Rights Association (who said he is actually a renter), one was from the Houston Association of Realtors, two were part of the trio of realtors who have formed the anti-preservation website, one worked for one member of that realtor trio and at least one was a Heights builder. It seems as if the more the facts get out there, the more people are calming down. CM Lovell indicated at city council this week that a new draft is being compiled. I'll bet it will incorporate a lot of the suggestions that have been made. This is the sausage-making process that always occurs with the crafting of new legislation. Think about what might happen with no protection and instead of misinformation about paint color, air conditioners and front porch lights, grab a sausage link and take part in the messy process to create a better proposal?
  8. Maybe this will help. It's from the Houston Heights Historic District Guidelines that are available on the city's website. There are all kinds of ways to add on appropriately. http://www.houstontx.gov/planning/HistoricPres/Design_Guide_Heights_District/Historic_Districts_Design_Guide_5NewAdd.pdf
  9. Mayor Parker lives in the Westmoreland Historic District and owns property in the OSW. She has designated her house in Westmoreland as a protected landmark. Sue Lovell stated Tuesday night that she owns property in one of the historic districts. Randy Pace resides in Houston Heights East district.
  10. James, Indeed. Information is the key. We've heard of people who went to the Tuesday night meeting who went home and quickly removed the signs they had from that realtor group that is trying to derail the Heights South application. It seems someone has obtained the list of the members of that group. It's all realtors from the big realty firms (yep, all the names you would think of) and builders, including Tricon. Wonder if that list will go public...
  11. Right off the top of my head, there's a bungalow in the 1400 block of Arlington which is currently being expanded (width and total square footage). The plans were approved by the historic commission. There's another bungalow in the 1800 block of Arlington that is currently for sale that was also expanded. These plans were also approved by the commission. Go take a look. 80% of applications to the commission get approved.
  12. Wow! Lots of inaccurate information here and a seemingly lack of desire to have accurate information or, at the very least, to dismiss accurate information when it is offered. Here are some facts: additions will still be allowed, there's nothing about paint color, most requests get approved by historic commission, demolitions of dilapidated property get approved now and will continue to get approved, there are tax incentives for improvements and they will continue, new construction will still be allowed. That's just a start on the facts. There's a lot of discussion about property rights, but what about when an owner's right to do what he/she wants with his/her property infringes on my property rights to continue to enjoy my property and what I bought into, which was a historic neighborhood. A small group of builders and realtors who don't even live in Houston Heights are behind the inaccurate information and fear mongering. That is not surprising. BTW, Nicholson is not in any historic district.
  13. There was a lot of discussion with the developer about trying to find an alternative that did not involve another strip center on the boulevard. He turned a deaf ear to the warnings that his project may not do any better than the others on the boulevard that are currently not fully leased. There are examples all around including the building housing McCain's, the orphanage-like office structure next door and the beautifully restored building at 11th and Yale. The developer was sensitive enough to understand that demolishing another Heights National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) structure would cause neighborhood outrage along the lines of what we saw when the Doyle Mansion came down. Although this is not the best alternative, it does save the house and keep it on its original site. As for the strip center, only time will tell if this developer can somehow buck the trend that has left other commercial properties on the boulevard in constant search for tenants. On a somewhat related note, the old Ashland Tea House site is on the block again. If your recall, that NRHP house was demolished two or three years ago to make room for a condo project. Those developers have been hurt by the current credit crunch. They can't obtain financing.
  14. Does anyone know who purchased the David Adickes Studio on Summer street near the Target off I-10? Swamplot has a posting about it being sold and the artists told to move on within six months. There's nothing about whether the Deborah Colton Gallery will also be moving. There had been some rumors that Colton was interested in buying the building but I tend to think it probably went to developers who want condos or townhomes. Anyone have any more details?
×
×
  • Create New...