Treschark

How's the elementary school there Ross?

Thanks for this depressing information! It's hard to believe that the city council approved an ordinance that seeming intends to lock a neighborhood in time. Wow, it is really offending my sense of justice. It almost makes me wish that, instead of spending a ton of money to rehabilitate our distressed bungalow when we bought it, we had just bulldozed the house in 2007. I suppose the solution is to work to liberalize the ordinance through the city council. And in the meantime try to obtain approval or a variance. It's too bad we don't have a million dollars to just go out and buy a large home in the neighborhood, which I suppose is the other solution.

I apologize if this has been discussed before (and I assume it has). I live in a smallish 1100 square foot bungalow in one of the historic districts. The house is designated as a contributing property. With baby no. 2 on the way, we want to expand the house, and the initial thought was to add a second story. Unfortunately, we are not fans of the camelback look which is the suggested expansion method in the city ordinances. Does anyone have experience in modifying the front of a home in a historic district (in a way that is consistent with the look of the property and the historic and traditional look of the neighborhood)? Or is that something that cannot be accomplished in light of the historic district ordinance? Any information is appreciated.