Jump to content

Historic Districts in Houston


Recommended Posts

I too come form an area where preservation of homes was so honored that being the President of the Preservation & Restoration Society came with a very high social status. Preservation was not remodeling the kitchen to have granite countertops and slap some paint on it - but to actually restore the buildings to their original state ( i.e. by gas torching the old paint off to the bare wood, finding original light fixtures, stained and leaded glass windows, sinks etc.) These buildings were built in the 1700's & 1800's (and early 1900's) with great care, detail, to last a long time, with great materials, attention to detail and designed by architects (including Frank Lloyd Wright). I understand that bungalows have some historic value (I live in one), but if they are falling apart due to not being maintained properly, too costly to restore (due to previous owners neglect) or does not have any significant architectural merits how is that in relation to historic...? ...more like run down.

Not to mention, a poorly-built woodframe house is a bit tough to get sentimental about. It's not just that Houstonians are a bunch of troglodytes who aren't concerned with their history. Just because it's old doesn't mean it needs to be preserved. An area like the Heights needs to judge these on a case by case basis. Or better yet, let the owner of the house decide.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I was here before you "preservationists". It is because of people like me that you thought the Heights was worth moving to. If I were to tell you to go f yourself, would you find that offensive? Becau

This is not a bully and name calling situation so much as forcefully pointing out the callousness of your position. You and others claim that your position and this ordinance protects the character a

http://swamplot.com/houstons-historic-districts-will-remain-as-they-are/2011-01-04/ It is over. All districts surveyed failed to muster the 51% needed to opt out. Yes, I know. You all are going

Posted Images

You're preaching to a largely deaf choir. I've tried to explain to the locals, with little success.

They're incapable of learning.

Nobody is incapable of learning, but what people do not want is some idealist with impracticable ideals telling them what they can and can not do with the single largest investment in their life....I think that is what these preservationist, dont seem to get. Half of them dont own a historic home, and are just trying to keep new builds out so their property values stay low....the other half - those who do own a historic home, seem to think that because they enjoy something, and really love it, and want it to stay just the way they like that everyone else should too. They are a loud minority trying to cram their beliefs down everyone elses throats...they dont care about the repercussions to others, because it is what they want. You dont get to decide what I get to do with what I own, because its not what you want - I dont care what you want. its not your property - you have no say if there are no deed restrictions. You dont get to change the rules later because you are not winning. If you want to live in deed restricted areas, do so, but don't come here and try to change the rules in the middle of the game.

But, thats the great part about America - you get to do what you want with your own property, and if others dont like it, they can either buy it from you, or you can tell them to sod off. I own a rental property that is in one of these districts, and I can guarantee that when the time comes to bring it down, (its not a historic home of any value) if some stupid preservationist or city ordinance trys to stop me, I will bulldoze it on a Sunday and within an hour of dropping the equipment off. The house, the rubbel, and the equipment will be gone as fast as it showed up. Ill say I have no idea who did it, but I am sure glad they did!

Will I get a ticket, or something for not doing it up to code? Probably so, Ill play dumb, they will slap me on the wrist with some $1000 fine or something and I will build the largest monstrosity you have ever seen just to piss em off. If they wont permit the monstrosity because some preservationist does not like the design I will turn the lot into the largest eye sore the heights as ever seen. Ill park old cars there, and let people put their boats there for storage....Ill put up a sign that says why I am doing what I am doing, and Ill circulate petitions and buy more lots to do the same thing until the ordinance is repealed. I think a bunch of junk inside a large see through chainlink fence with a couple big ugly dogs and hundreds of stray cats is great for property value. I would probably even dump daily bags of dog/cat food to attract more possums, coons, and cats.

If I can afford it, I can do it. Thats the great thing about a capitalist society. The person who can afford to do things he wants to do, gets to do them. If you dont like it, you can either pony up, or shut up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're preaching to a largely deaf choir. I've tried to explain to the locals, with little success.

They're incapable of learning.

What a terrible attitude. Do you think everyone who disagrees with you is incapable of learning?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and that house - the modern Victorian on 22nd at Harvard...I had heard it was a modern interpretation of the Cooley mansion (rebuilt on the SE corner of Heights & 18th.)

Pretty sure it was based on the original house on the NE corner of Harvard and 18th.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What a terrible attitude. Do you think everyone who disagrees with you is incapable of learning?

Of course he doesn't. In person, he's an interesting and thoughtful guy--not at all aggressive or unlikeable--that has complimented me on at least communicating thoughts and ideas unambiguously so that whether he agrees with me or not, at least there's a basis for personal respect. This instance reminds me of one of George Carlin's bits, that the extent to which a person is a jackass is proportional to their distance from you at the time that you take notice of that particular flaw. ...and the text-based format of HAIF imposes quite a bit more distance than is actually the case.

EDIT: But yeah, to be clear, bigtex's and marksmu's comments were both asinine.

Edited by TheNiche
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Just got this email (not sure if this is new to y'all or not):

From: Thorp, Laura - CNL [mailto:Laura.Thorp@houstontx.gov]

Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 10:15 AM

Subject: Ordinance Changes, Summary of Changes, Public Meeting Notice

The information has now been posted.

Draft of Ordinance

http://www.houstontx.gov/planning/HistoricPres/hist_pres.html

Summary of Changes

http://www.houstontx.gov/planning/HistoricPres/docs_pdfs/HPO_SummaryAmend.pdf

Public Meeting Notice

http://www.houstontx.gov/planning/HistoricPres/docs_pdfs/HPO_publicnotice_20100719.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Mayor released the proposed new guidelines for the Historic Districts. The key points are:

1) The petition process will be eliminated. Now property owners can fill out a card if they support becoming a Historic District. The Historic Commission reserves the right to name historic districts.

2) Changes to the definitions of what falls under the Commissions approval requirements including material

3) New construction must comply with compatibility guidlines

4)Expand the reasons for applying for a certificate of appropriateness.

5) Eliminate the 90 waiver for demo and new construciton

I'll try to get the pdf online so that those interested can read the actual text.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Mayor released the proposed new guidelines for the Historic Districts. The key points are:

1) The petition process will be eliminated. Now property owners can fill out a card if they support becoming a Historic District. The Historic Commission reserves the right to name historic districts.

2) Changes to the definitions of what falls under the Commissions approval requirements including material

3) New construction must comply with compatibility guidlines

4)Expand the reasons for applying for a certificate of appropriateness.

5) Eliminate the 90 waiver for demo and new construciton

I'll try to get the pdf online so that those interested can read the actual text.

No petitions, just a mayor appointed board to name historic districts? No process to canvas the neighborhood for discovery?

Expand the reasons for applying for the Commission's approvals? Does the Mayor mean paint color, or maybe [in practice] the resident's race, income, religion, etc., etc.

Race, prejudice: THAT'S WHAT IT'S ALL ABOUT, ADMIT IT. At least that's the pratical consequence of this disaster.

Do you think a modest income Hispanic neighbor will want to apply to a stupid Commission for permission to put up a fountain somewhere on their property? For that matter, how about anyone of modest means who may want to change something on their home? This historical district movement is absolutely disgusting.

Sounds like fascism to me.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

No petitions, just a mayor appointed board to name historic districts? No process to canvas the neighborhood for discovery?

Expand the reasons for applying for the Commission's approvals? Does the Mayor mean paint color, or maybe [in practice] the resident's race, income, religion, etc., etc.

Sounds like fascism to me.

Yes, since the self-anointed arbiters of taste and history have decided that the process of actually getting their neighbors to agree that a neighborhood should be designated historic is too much work, they are changing the rule to ONE PERSON living in the neighborhood may start the application process. No collective wish of the neighbors, no sense of community...one person starts it, and the rest get a postcard.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, since the self-anointed arbiters of taste and history have decided that the process of actually getting their neighbors to agree that a neighborhood should be designated historic is too much work, they are changing the rule to ONE PERSON living in the neighborhood may start the application process. No collective wish of the neighbors, no sense of community...one person starts it, and the rest get a postcard.

You make a valid point. Not only can one person start it, the HAHC can also start it. In my mind thats the same as 0 (zero) home owners starting it.

I am still curious as to why home owners in support of the historic district designation dont organize Minimum Lot Size for their block, and or create deed restrictions for their own homes. I believe a home owner in the Heights can very easily record their own deed restriction on their individual property, I have seen these recorded in the past and I believe it is a very simple process. Granted they are only valid for 20 years but that is long enough in my book.

Given that only 53% of the Heights is considered historic according to the HAHC, if this same 53% individualy filed deed restrictions on their own properties the problem would be solved. Those properties could not be demolished, turned into McMansions, or whatever else they want to write into their own restriction.

Problem solved, no money spent by the tax payers and no headaches.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a series of meetings scheduled for residents of existing and proposed historic districts....the first one is this Tuesday (27th), with other meetings set up for the individual districts.

I attached the letter I received in the mail on Friday (nothing like a 3-day notice), as well as a link that has the details.

From what I've heard, if the City believes that there is ample support for the ordinance in the existing Districts, there will not have to be any new petitioning to get this passed. I would expect the preservationists to be out in full force.

http://www.houstontx.gov/mayor/press/20100720.html

HPO_publicnotice_20100719.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are in the one of the Historic Districts and signed the petition but are against these changes please sign the signature recision form. Also, show up at one of these meetings and SPEAK becuase unless there is a HUGE outcry in opposition this will go through without any kind of re-petition. At this point they say they will do a mailed ballot if there is enough opposition. The catch is going to be that they will only count the ballots that are returned so there must be a huge outcry in opposition to get the ballot and there must be an even larger response via ballot.

Read the ordinance! Everyone seems to think that this onle affects future work and older homes, but if you own a recently constructed home you will have to submit plans for Certificates of Appropriateness to change the paint color of your home, build a new fence and even repair your house after a storm! This ordinance makes everything visible from the street subject to oversight from the HAHC regardless of whether the house is considered historic or not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are in the one of the Historic Districts and signed the petition but are against these changes please sign the signature recision form. Also, show up at one of these meetings and SPEAK becuase unless there is a HUGE outcry in opposition this will go through without any kind of re-petition. At this point they say they will do a mailed ballot if there is enough opposition. The catch is going to be that they will only count the ballots that are returned so there must be a huge outcry in opposition to get the ballot and there must be an even larger response via ballot.

Read the ordinance! Everyone seems to think that this onle affects future work and older homes, but if you own a recently constructed home you will have to submit plans for Certificates of Appropriateness to change the paint color of your home, build a new fence and even repair your house after a storm! This ordinance makes everything visible from the street subject to oversight from the HAHC regardless of whether the house is considered historic or not.

Where is this signature rescission form? I did not sign the petition but the person who owned the home before me did. I now own it, so I should have the power to retract any damage done by the previous owner.

This is a huge power grab, its sickening. I am thinking of making yard signs that look identical to the historic district signs, that read:

Stop snobby neighbors

Say no to Government intrusion on Private Property Rights.

Say no to Historic Districts

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are in the one of the Historic Districts and signed the petition but are against these changes please sign the signature recision form. Also, show up at one of these meetings and SPEAK becuase unless there is a HUGE outcry in opposition this will go through without any kind of re-petition. At this point they say they will do a mailed ballot if there is enough opposition. The catch is going to be that they will only count the ballots that are returned so there must be a huge outcry in opposition to get the ballot and there must be an even larger response via ballot.

Read the ordinance! Everyone seems to think that this onle affects future work and older homes, but if you own a recently constructed home you will have to submit plans for Certificates of Appropriateness to change the paint color of your home, build a new fence and even repair your house after a storm! This ordinance makes everything visible from the street subject to oversight from the HAHC regardless of whether the house is considered historic or not.

I read the ordinance and I'm shocked that the HAHC has so much authority over how we even maintain our homes. The restrictions being considered go far beyond the deed restrictions we have now. There is language that the HAHC can require maintenance if they decide that the property has fallen into "...disrepair so as to result in the deterioration of any exterior architectural feature." That means that it is within their subjective authority to tell us when to paint our homes, etc "No person shall conduct any mandatory repair of a landmark, protected landmark, or of a building, structure or object within an historic district or archaeological site without a certificate of appropriateness."

If you care about our neighborhood and want to stop this movement to impose HAHC authority over your decisions concerning your property, please come to the public comment meetings and speak up.

I stand by my earlier post that the proposed amendments are designed to run off modest income families. It is snobbery, elitism and racism we have to fight, as well as our freedom and property rights.

Edited by OutfieldDan
Link to post
Share on other sites

Where is this signature rescission form? I did not sign the petition but the person who owned the home before me did. I now own it, so I should have the power to retract any damage done by the previous owner.

This is a huge power grab, its sickening. I am thinking of making yard signs that look identical to the historic district signs, that read:

Stop snobby neighbors

Say no to Government intrusion on Private Property Rights.

Say no to Historic Districts

You can get one at Boulivard Realty on Heights Blvd, or Susan Anderson at 11th. I'll see if I can get a scanned one to post. Also, if you want a sign you can get on at Boulivard Realty, there are a couple of hundred that we are trying to get out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I read the ordinance and I'm shocked that the HAHC has so much authority over how we even maintain our homes. The restrictions being considered go far beyond the deed restrictions we have now. There is language that the HAHC can require maintenance if they decide that the property has fallen into "...disrepair so as to result in the deterioration of any exterior architectural feature." That means that it is within their subjective authority to tell us when to paint our homes, etc "No person shall conduct any mandatory repair of a landmark, protected landmark, or of a building, structure or object within an historic district or archaeological site without a certificate of appropriateness."

If you care about our neighborhood and want to stop this movement to impose HAHC authority over your decisions concerning your property, please come to the public comment meetings and speak up.

I stand by my earlier post that the proposed amendments are designed to run off modest income families. It is snobbery, elitism and racism we have to fight, as well as our freedom and property rights.

"Certificate of appropriateness" - what a joke. Too many people have this mythical notion of the Heights. It's too late for this to work the way the historic district freaks want it to. Something like this should have been put in place 75 years ago to have their desired effect, because at this point the definition of "appropriate" has a world of difference from one house to the next, not even one block to the next. Why don't they just open up a fascist hardware store and sell Heights-approved fencing, paint colors, and plants. I just don't understand the oxymoron, this is the utmost attempt at control, and when I think of Heights residents someone who responds well to that doesn't come to mind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So what happens if someone in one of these districts does NOT get the certificate and instead, just goes ahead and paints their house whatever color they want?

If it's not an approved color, and the HAHC does not like it, then who pays to have it repainted??

Link to post
Share on other sites

So what happens if someone in one of these districts does NOT get the certificate and instead, just goes ahead and paints their house whatever color they want?

If it's not an approved color, and the HAHC does not like it, then who pays to have it repainted??

I imagine it would work like an HOA and the owner would be responsible for all the costs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What true enforcement do they have? What if someone just says no, and also refuses to pay a fine or something?

HOAs can sue for breach of contract, as you have to sign one of those contracts when you move into a neighborhood with an existing HOA. I have no idea how this historic district thing would work since it would not only affect new residents. If someone opted not to sign a contract, and because that wasn't a condition upon moving into the neighborhood, it would seem that civil courts wouldn't have much say in this. Perhaps criminal fines (or jail time) could be levied. I don't know. It all sounds so draconian that way, and I think this is yet another one of those ideas that sounds better on paper but falls apart with the details.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the district you have to have a CoA to get a permit issued by the City. Working without a permit in the City can result in a fine of $2,000 per day. The enforcement would be through Planning Department Inspection Division which has about 20 inspectors whose sole job is to find unpermitted work. Normally they will put up a "Stop Work" order on your property and give you the chance to get a permit. If you continue working without a permit the fines will start to add up. Eventually it will result in a lien on the property for the amount of fine which will be collected when the structure is sold.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok so fines and liens, that's what I figured.

I'm assuming that if this passes they still can't force people to change what is already on their property, it would only affect new work. What does it accomplish then? If something gets built it has to be some kind of neo-craftsman? Meanwhile, the old codger who lets vegetation grow up to where you can't see how dilapidated his house has become continues to be a worse problem, IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a homeowner in my neighborhood who is having an outbuilding built, like a little cottage behind the house. There is no permit for it, according to the COH permits web site.

Would one of these 20 inspectors be interested in this?? The homeowner is well aware of the requirements, having run into problems in the past with putting up a new structure. This particular home has an unusually large lot for the neighborhood.

Or, are certain sized buildings exempt from permitting?

Also, in my original question, I was talking about changing the outside paint color. Is there a permit required for this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can get one at Boulivard Realty on Heights Blvd, or Susan Anderson at 11th. I'll see if I can get a scanned one to post. Also, if you want a sign you can get on at Boulivard Realty, there are a couple of hundred that we are trying to get out.

What do the yard signs at Boulivard say? I'm really looking for something that will really upset the snobby historic folks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the district you have to have a CoA to get a permit issued by the City. Working without a permit in the City can result in a fine of $2,000 per day. The enforcement would be through Planning Department Inspection Division which has about 20 inspectors whose sole job is to find unpermitted work. Normally they will put up a "Stop Work" order on your property and give you the chance to get a permit. If you continue working without a permit the fines will start to add up. Eventually it will result in a lien on the property for the amount of fine which will be collected when the structure is sold.

If you start and finish a job without getting caught, I don't think (key word think) that they can make you undo what you have completed even if they find out. I believe they can only make you stop what you are doing or try to issue a fine. It would be mighty hard for them to prove that you changed something without proof if it having been the other way.

I would tell any inspector who came by that he was trespassing and that he needed a warrant to enter. I would love to see him come back with a warrant.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like hte idea of making them get a warrant. I wonder if that would work with HCAD appraisers. You can only really get into trouble if they catch you building without a permit, once it is finished they would have a pretty hard time proving that it wasn't there before. As for a neighbor building something without a permit there are certian things you can build without one and an outbuilding or storage shed that wasn't living space, under, I believe it's 140 sq.ft, wouldn't need one. I heard that the City will actually pay a reward if you turn someone in that is working without a permit but that could very well be a rumor. You do't typically need a permit to paint your house but in the Historic Distric under the new ordinance you would. I think there will be a thriving business in weekend painting and contracting in the future.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What do the yard signs at Boulivard say? I'm really looking for something that will really upset the snobby historic folks.

Sorry, it's not really offensive. It jst says "Yes to Preservation, No to (something)" and gives a list of why it's bad. It's something though, and if we can get a number of them up and down a street we may have an impact. BTW, the South Heights District does not appear to be on the Council Adgenda for this week so if enough people go to the meetings and protest there may still be a chance to keep it from being adopted right away. I don't know what good it does to delay it but I guess that as long as it isn't officially voted as a District there is always the chance of stopping it from happening.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard that the City will actually pay a reward if you turn someone in that is working without a permit but that could very well be a rumor.

Bahahaha!

I really hope the Walmart gets built now. It may be the only thing that can prevent the Heights from becoming a police state.

I may go join the pro-Walmart Facebook page now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone explain why the email I received today from the HHA regarding the HAHC meetings only lists the one meeting designated for the Heights Historic Districts, but NOT the one for all of the districts? Maybe I'm reading too much into this, but shouldn't this email also show the date for the primary meeting for ALL of the districts, which is tomorrow (27th). And, generally speaking, am I the only one ticked off about the 3-4 day notice on the primary meeting for tomorrow. I imagine they've had these places/times reserved for more than 3 days. This just smells wrong.

Meeting

Public Meeting for Proposed amendments to Houston Historic Districts Ordinance Including Heights East, West, & South

Tuesday, August 10, 6-8 p.m.

United Way, 50 Waugh Drive

Click HERE for proposed admendments.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is an email I just received from one of the supporters of the new proposed changes. Not my views, just passing along the information as it came across.

"The meeting is tomorrow night Tuesday, July 27 at 6:00 p.m. at Houston Community College, Central College, San Jacinto Auditorium, 1300 Holman Street.

The meeting is about Protected Historic Districts. Protected Historic Districts protect your investment in your home and in your quality of life living in Houston's history by keeping your historic district safe from demolitions of historic buildings (like the Ashland Tea room) and safe from incompatible new construction (like the massive project at W. 15th and Rutland) when the Houston Archaeological and Historical Commission rejects the project.

The meeting is for all the historic districts in Houston and will be a question and answer session. We understand that cards will be passed out for you to write questions on. We suggest that whether or not you have a question, take the card and write on it "I support Protected Historic Districts" and then write some question on it. The idea is to show the Mayor and City Council there is huge support for Protected Districts. If we do, it will head off the possibility that the City will require us to petition for it".

Finally, preservationists from all historic districts in Houston have formed a Coalition of Historic Districts and historic preservationists to work for the passage of the Protected Districts Ordinance. The Coalition has a website which is a really good resource and has a lot of information that may answer most any question you have. www.preservehouston.org <http://www.preservehouston.org>

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone explain why the email I received today from the HHA regarding the HAHC meetings only lists the one meeting designated for the Heights Historic Districts, but NOT the one for all of the districts? Maybe I'm reading too much into this, but shouldn't this email also show the date for the primary meeting for ALL of the districts, which is tomorrow (27th). And, generally speaking, am I the only one ticked off about the 3-4 day notice on the primary meeting for tomorrow. I imagine they've had these places/times reserved for more than 3 days. This just smells wrong.

Meeting

Public Meeting for Proposed amendments to Houston Historic Districts Ordinance Including Heights East, West, & South

Tuesday, August 10, 6-8 p.m.

United Way, 50 Waugh Drive

Click HERE for proposed admendments.

I didn't see the part that said they would/would not be targeting my house for having to submit an application and post a sign if I want to change the address number style on my house. Is that published yet?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't see the part that said they would/would not be targeting my house for having to submit an application and post a sign if I want to change the address number style on my house. Is that published yet?

Maybe starting around page 20....it just references exterior changes, but it could easily be taken to include paint colors, etc. Unless you have a photo showing there were numbers on your house in 1925 in the same style, color, size, etc. (sarcasm rears its' ugly head).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe starting around page 20....it just references exterior changes, but it could easily be taken to include paint colors, etc. Unless you have a photo showing there were numbers on your house in 1925 in the same style, color, size, etc. (sarcasm rears its' ugly head).

Sorry I'm vague lately - probably due to insufficient bourbon consumption. I meant I'm looking for any boundaries of proposed districts. I did take a decent read through, vegetation seems to be safe for now, I can plant or dig up whatever I want.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry I'm vague lately - probably due to insufficient bourbon consumption. I meant I'm looking for any boundaries of proposed districts. I did take a decent read through, vegetation seems to be safe for now, I can plant or dig up whatever I want.

Go to this site, and at the top they have all of the districts listed. If you click on them, a map pops up. Based on your screen name and past posts about Mam's, my guess is you're in Heights West.

http://www.preservehouston.org/

Link to post
Share on other sites

Go to this site, and at the top they have all of the districts listed. If you click on them, a map pops up. Based on your screen name and past posts about Mam's, my guess is you're in Heights West.

http://www.preservehouston.org/

He's not. He and I are the bastard children of the Heights. And we get to act out here. If the ordinance passes, our property values will increase because people will be able to modify their property the way they want.

Block people from building homes that look like Jiffy Lubes. However do not tell people that they cannot modify the crown molding above their door, that they cannot use Hardiplank, that they cannot modify the color of their house, or that they cannot replace the windows on their porch with French doors. This ordinance feels like an over-reach. As others have suggested ,it could do more harm than good. The perspective I would seek is preserve the front-porch aspect of the neighborhood, not the specifics individual buildings.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bahahaha!

I really hope the Walmart gets built now. It may be the only thing that can prevent the Heights from becoming a police state.

I may go join the pro-Walmart Facebook page now.

Some people secretly hope for a decriminalization of pot. I secretly hope for a decriminalization of arson. ...but only in historic districts. Maybe I should start a social-media-based petition to that effect.

Edited by TheNiche
Link to post
Share on other sites

I like hte idea of making them get a warrant. I wonder if that would work with HCAD appraisers. You can only really get into trouble if they catch you building without a permit, once it is finished they would have a pretty hard time proving that it wasn't there before. As for a neighbor building something without a permit there are certian things you can build without one and an outbuilding or storage shed that wasn't living space, under, I believe it's 140 sq.ft, wouldn't need one. I heard that the City will actually pay a reward if you turn someone in that is working without a permit but that could very well be a rumor. You do't typically need a permit to paint your house but in the Historic Distric under the new ordinance you would. I think there will be a thriving business in weekend painting and contracting in the future.

A little searching on the city web site, and I came across the historic district agenda. There is a place where you can send an email to comment on the current proposal if you cannot attend.

Everyone who opposes this measure but cannot attend the meetings should send a strongly worded email to this address: historicpreservation@houstontx.gov

I sent a strongly worded, yet polite email.

I believe a case can be made that this historic district ordinance as it is currently worded, that requires certain styles, certain materials, etc, is a taking of private property development rights.

I think a case could be made, that by imposing a set of restrictions that so severely limits property owners in their ability to utilize their property, that is not for the express purpose of promoting the health, safety, or welfare of the citizens, is essentially a form of condemnation without just compensation. The question will be whether or not the rules are so restrictive as to amount to a taking.

I think if you can show that the additional costs imposed by the ordinance essentially makes the property worth less, then you have succeeded. Very few people can truly afford to build within the ridiculous confines set forth in this ordinance. Even fewer will be able to repair their existing homes within the guidelines.

Send emails opposing the measure...it is important that the silent majority be heard. We need to stop letting the very loud minority of people take control of everything because they make more noise. Stand up and be heard. Oppose the measure...use your real name, and address, and go on record.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He's not. He and I are the bastard children of the Heights. And we get to act out here. If the ordinance passes, our property values will increase because people will be able to modify their property the way they want.

Block people from building homes that look like Jiffy Lubes. However do not tell people that they cannot modify the crown molding above their door, that they cannot use Hardiplank, that they cannot modify the color of their house, or that they cannot replace the windows on their porch with French doors. This ordinance feels like an over-reach. As others have suggested ,it could do more harm than good. The perspective I would seek is preserve the front-porch aspect of the neighborhood, not the specifics individual buildings.

My partner and I discussed this and we feel the City is starting at the extreme end because they know there will be opposition and this gives them wiggle room for negotiating. I know many die hard preservationists and the thing that most of them want to see is an end to the 90 day rule and adoption of a "No Means No" for tear downs. I don't think anyone who supports preservation really want to control their neighbors' paint color but they also want to save buildings like Ashland Tea House and the historic homes on Heights Boulevard that were torn down in the last few years. We do not think this will go forward as proposed and that the current proposition is as much a smoke screen as anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My partner and I discussed this and we feel the City is starting at the extreme end because they know there will be opposition and this gives them wiggle room for negotiating. I know many die hard preservationists and the thing that most of them want to see is an end to the 90 day rule and adoption of a "No Means No" for tear downs. I don't think anyone who supports preservation really want to control their neighbors' paint color but they also want to save buildings like Ashland Tea House and the historic homes on Heights Boulevard that were torn down in the last few years. We do not think this will go forward as proposed and that the current proposition is as much a smoke screen as anything.

I have talked with many of these historic preservationist people. They oppose almost all new builds in the neighborhood. There are many beautiful new construction homes that fit perfectly in the neighborhood, even with their large size. The people who are supporting this ordinance, do not want ANY new construction. Look at Nicholson between 12th and 13th as a good example of new/old mixing well. You have the worst house on the street Corner of Nicholson/12th proudly supporting the historic ordinance....while the house is nothing more than a bunch of garbage that the owner thinks is art...rebar with winebottles, a stack of rocks still in the metal packaging it came in growing weeds out of it, an overgrown sidewalk, and 20' tall bamboo sticking straight out of the back.

Then look down Nicholson towards 13th...you have a older home, then one huge home that takes which looks nice, but could have done more to fit in, then 2 smaller old homes, and 2 new homes that look great and fit in perfectly, followed by a small home, and then a tear down.

This block is an attractive block with the exception of the ugly old support the historic district home on the corner.

These people want to pass all of their dream ordinances/laws/restrictions before the public wakes up and realizes what has happened and then votes them out. It is ugly politics, but I believe that they truly do want to control every aspect of everything they have proposed.

These people are losers with nothing better to do than waste their time imposing their beliefs on everyone else.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Some people secretly hope for a decriminalization of pot. I secretly hope for a decriminalization of arson. ...but only in historic districts. Maybe I should start a social-media-based petition to that effect.

Now that you mention it, the Heights arsonist will probably make a huge comeback should this preservation thing be enacted. If a property owner wants to do a teardown/rebuild but the red tape is too costly and problematic to allow it, you can bet the arsonist will resurface, and this time he'll have graduated from sheds and garages to the entire house.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My partner and I discussed this and we feel the City is starting at the extreme end because they know there will be opposition and this gives them wiggle room for negotiating. I know many die hard preservationists and the thing that most of them want to see is an end to the 90 day rule and adoption of a "No Means No" for tear downs. I don't think anyone who supports preservation really want to control their neighbors' paint color but they also want to save buildings like Ashland Tea House and the historic homes on Heights Boulevard that were torn down in the last few years. We do not think this will go forward as proposed and that the current proposition is as much a smoke screen as anything.

Don't kid yourself. The City is in a perfect position to pass this thing. They managed to do it in the Old 6th Ward and the Heights is next.

They are using the public meetings as another subjective measure of support. City Council can and will pass this if there is not enough opposition.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have talked with many of these historic preservationist people. They oppose almost all new builds in the neighborhood. There are many beautiful new construction homes that fit perfectly in the neighborhood, even with their large size. The people who are supporting this ordinance, do not want ANY new construction. Look at Nicholson between 12th and 13th as a good example of new/old mixing well. You have the worst house on the street Corner of Nicholson/12th proudly supporting the historic ordinance....while the house is nothing more than a bunch of garbage that the owner thinks is art...rebar with winebottles, a stack of rocks still in the metal packaging it came in growing weeds out of it, an overgrown sidewalk, and 20' tall bamboo sticking straight out of the back.

Then look down Nicholson towards 13th...you have a older home, then one huge home that takes which looks nice, but could have done more to fit in, then 2 smaller old homes, and 2 new homes that look great and fit in perfectly, followed by a small home, and then a tear down.

This block is an attractive block with the exception of the ugly old support the historic district home on the corner.

These people want to pass all of their dream ordinances/laws/restrictions before the public wakes up and realizes what has happened and then votes them out. It is ugly politics, but I believe that they truly do want to control every aspect of everything they have proposed.

These people are losers with nothing better to do than waste their time imposing their beliefs on everyone else.

I wouldn't call myself a preservationist, certainly not by your definition. However, houses like this were here when we bought our house and are part of what we like about the Heights. It will be a sad day when the old or eclectic residents that made the Heights desirable for the rest of us are gone.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't call myself a preservationist, certainly not by your definition. However, houses like this were here when we bought our house and are part of what we like about the Heights. It will be a sad day when the old or eclectic residents that made the Heights desirable for the rest of us are gone.

Everyone agrees that we like the old homes. The issue is how do we move forward with protecting them. The proposed ordinance aims to halt new construction and SERIOUSLY limit what can be done to remodel a bungalow. The HAHC desires that all additions to bungalows be done to the rear of the home, and that the addition be able to be removed at some point in order to return the home to its original state.

This means that you will not be allowed to do tasteful additions to your home even though they may be attractive and in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. You will not be allowed to widen the home, add to the front porch, or add to the height. I see a lot of additions going on that look great, the HAHC has a different agenda.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't call myself a preservationist, certainly not by your definition. However, houses like this were here when we bought our house and are part of what we like about the Heights. It will be a sad day when the old or eclectic residents that made the Heights desirable for the rest of us are gone.

Well they will be gone more quickly when the ordinance passes because I am certain that the house and its "improvements" will not meet the boards definition as historic. First time they need a permit to fix an air conditioner or a roof or a window, they will likely be required to bring the rest of the house into accordance with the restrictions, or they wont issue the permit.

While I think the house is ugly, and the person an idiot for supporting the ordinance, I understand your like of that weird eclectic look, and I also support THEIR right to have a weird ugly art yard. With deed restrictions, and historic ordinances, this would not be allowed at all...Its probably a reason they moved there in the first place. There is not a suburb out there that would allow this monstrosity to stand...but its cool in the Heights.

I may not like it, but I support others rights to like it, and their right to do it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

LOOKHERE & Porchman: What everyone who is not in a current Historic District needs to realize is that the ultimate objective of the HAHC is to make ALL OF THE INNER LOOP A HISTORIC DISTRICT. If they get this ordinance passed they have stated, publically, that they will immediately extent the Heights East District to the north limit of the Heights proper, which is 22nd Street. They will also name Sunset Heights, Oak Forest, Garden Oaks and Timbergrove Manor as Historic within the year. I'm not making that up, it has been stated publically and if you read the ordinance you can see that they have included the language that they need to make it as easy as possible to do it. If you think because you are outside of the Historic District this is going to be good for you, you need to wake up becuase you are going to find one day soon, without any prior notice, that you are subject to these regulations.

For everyone who thinks that what is proposed is just a negotiation start point please look at the history of the Historic Distric debates from the time they were first enacted 8 years ago. It started with a 30 day wait period, then a 90 & 90 period, now they want "no means no". It started with only contributing and partially contributing structures having to comply to the Guidlines, then it went to new construction on non contributing lots having to comply, now with no means no it will mean everything must comply, even changes to non contributing existing structures. The City has a history of taking what they want bite by bite, little by little. If they back off of something in the proposed ordinance now you can be SURE they will TAKE it later, and that will be at a time when they feel there will be little or no opposition. They will take your property rights bite by bite unless you stop it NOW!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
LOOKHERE & Porchman: What everyone who is not in a current Historic District needs to realize is that the ultimate objective of the HAHC is to make ALL OF THE INNER LOOP A HISTORIC DISTRICT.

Was this said and gone with the wind, or can you point us in the direction of a source for this information? Or is this just hyperbole?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...



×
×
  • Create New...