fwki

Whoa, I dreamed we had this thread going yesterday.

More details: ..."Just thought I should provide a few more details about the incident for anyone interested. First of all, they were in a car waiting for us - according to the couple that was walking home down Euclid. ... View more They ran up behind us, both had revolvers, hoodies and bandanas though my guy pulled his down when he spoke to me. At first they didn't say anything and just pointed the guns at us. They were young, 18-25, 5 foot 2 or 5-5, I'm 5' 7 and they were shorter than me. My husband thought the men were Hispanic, mainly because he actually spoke to one more than I did. I was screaming and yelling because I thought a neighbor might hear us though no one did - even though I could see a tv on in someone's window. My husband asked his robber to keep his ID from his wallet and the guy said yes, then Holger handed over his wallet. I was sort of freaking out and shouting at my guy, telling him I didn't have a wallet, etc. That was when he said he would shoot me. What's weird is we both had our iPhones on us and I had cash, ID, credit cards etc in my pockets but my guy didn't come near enough to me - maybe because I was screaming at him so much - I don't know? My husband was so calm that it looked almost like a friendly interaction. He also thought maybe it was a gang initiation type of thing because they seemed so inexperienced and young. And they didn't pat Holger down for his phone, etc. Anyway, then they ran back to their car and drove off (small red sedan, broken tail light). They were parked at the corner house on Euclid and Norhill Esplanade (north side of the street), facing studewood. It's dark and shady there. I did get angry and run after them, which in retrospect was the wrong choice. We chose to walk to dinner and Fitzgeralds because it was a beautiful night, we are mindful of our fellow neighbors and frankly, parking is ridiculous over off of White Oak. It was only 10:30 at night and there were other people out on Studewood - it just seemed so out of place. Anyway, everyone be mindful of your surroundings and be safe! And thanks for all the emails and thoughts!"

Time to get a crime thread going again....posted on Nextdoor last night: "Just to let you know (sadly) - my husband and I were walking home around 10:30 from Fitzgerald's tonight and two african american males with hoodies, and guns, held us up - at Norhill and Woodland. Luckily they only stole my husband's wallet. But two men on foot, who said, "delicate flower, I will shoot you," is a very scary thing - I screamed, ran, and shouted back as loudly as I could - but my very Zen husband was calm enough to save both of our lives and gave the men what they wanted. After dialing 911, the police came within a few minutes. Another couple (walking a few minutes behind us) saw the two men run to their car and drive away, eastward towards Michaux and turn left, towards Pecore. They also gave their statement. Everyone - please be very safe - we did not even see them! They took us completely by surprise, scared us to death, held us both at gun point and demanded money or wallets, etc. And Norhill is very well lit!" This is the first ambush robbery I remember in a long while this deep in the gentrified Heights. This pair will strike again, maybe a car-exit ambush in a driveway.....be alert and to those who can, lock and load.

Doesn't even look like the same tract of land...probably just some photo-shopped stock pic their publicist found.

HAHC on the run, Planning Commission getting fed up with having to clean up after them. HAHC gets house-broken or they get relegated to the dog house....nice legacy Phoebe, hate to see ya go just when it was getting fun.

There's a hidden agenda at play to twist the original intent of the ordinance that was sold to the citizens and to City Council into a form resembling severe back door-zoning. Watch the video of the first appeal to Planning wherein they deferred the decision and then read the agenda for Thursday's re-hearing. The Director of Lies was forced to admit to the PC that they sold this PoS ordinance based on window replacement, for one, because Sue Lovell was there as a witness ready to rat her out. It went downhill from there for the Director. She even propped some "citizens" of the Heights to speak of their love for old, crappy windows. One guy was Deed Restrictions enforcer for the fake Norhill up north. The other was, get this, a professional urban planning consultant who lives in a 1996 construction near the home at risk and will absolutely kill himself if those dear windows are even washed. Yeah, no conflict of interest there Marlene, future client. So it's clear the PC is very concerned about what was sold to the Council and what is now in play. They talked about the original intent of the ordinance when it was voted and that the HAHC was setting a new precedent. Then look at the new game plan for the Director of Lies: she goes right at the precedent-setting theme and says if they allow these windows, the whole ordinance is toast....it won't be long before we are taking our weather vanes and putting new houses underneath. She has raised the stakes with a big gamble, because if she wins, we become a radically zoned neighborhood with her calling the shots. Is she loses she will have lost because of her lies, stuck with the flexibility she promised years ago but obviously loathes now.

Half truths are whole lies. - Yiddish Proverb Gafrick emphasizes visual compatibility from the street is the metric, not condition of the existing element. She says it's ok to use different materials but does not say doing so is automatically an alteration and needs COA wherein they will tell you you need to repair it unless it's been stolen. Her statements then were intentionally misleading and that is a lie.

Oliver Stone's JFK won the Oscar for Best Film Editing, we have to hook him in for that one.

Here's the one I promised back in post #1046, The Design Guidelines Lie.

In this video you can see Gafrick's & her staff's dishonest Modus Operundi with regards to window replacement. She lies on a regular basis to saps in the Districts; now that I figured out simple editing, more videos to follow demonstrating The Big Lie as it unfolds. I'm going to the Planning Hearing and tell her to her face.

I just got the latest DVD from the kangaroo court's March meeting. Houston Planning Director Marlene Gafrick opened the meeting by formally repudiating the published Heights Design Guidelines formerly used by her staff to assess Heights CoA's. Heightstonians are now officially flying blind on property investments with the worse yet to come. I'll post a YouTube tonight.

I'm changing my nick to SlumAlum.

All this bashing of drunks, nightowls, metal heads and bikers is upsetting me. And where we congregate shouldn't be an issue as long as it's closer to your house than my house and I have a back route home. But seriously, this is squeezing a balloon, with development somebody gets hosed to benefit the rest. Just buy location wisely and hope the City doesn't change the important rules midstream.

Ever since I bought a black car, been at that car wash several times per week...4-8 work trucks are parked there daily, electricians to glazers...car wash dude making a killing selling space to GC.

Welcome to HAIF Brie! And not long from now I hope to also welcome you to 1207 Harvard St in your beautifully restored home, just as you designed it. I drove by the other day and there are many beautiful homes right on the street that yours will complement nicely. Also great job with the faux historical commission. Your composure and class contrasted the spineless leadership and arbitrary actions of that political body, owned and appointed by our mayor. Your coup de grace was after your $/sf arithmetic baffled Commissioner Elliot, self-proclaimed preserver of smallness, and he recommended you go the demolition route.....astonished Brie responds "But I don't want to demolish it, I want to keep it." That says it all about the failure of the Ordinance and this Committee to serve the best interests of the citizens who bear all of its costs and must live among the far-too-numerous architectural mistakes of its misguided script.

It sounds like the Kelmans are appealing the HAHC denial of CoA to the City Council. From their petition on Change.org: "...We appeal to the City of Houston Feb 14, so the more signatures we get, the merrier. Please send the petition along if you care about historic preservation and restoration for growing families." Or if you more generally care about the history, culture and Charter of Houston, Texas write an email to your Councilman, especially if you are represented by Ellen Cohen in the HD. This is a chance to expose the ordinance for the toilet tissue it was predicted and now is shown to be.....a poorly crafted zoning ordinance that simply transfers power and money from citizens to government and accomplishes nothing of lasting value for our City.

Flame away dude....the HAHC video says it all and you have no rational defense for the words and actions of your friends in their echo chamber.

Judge for yourself. I think the HAHC has completely lost the plot. Any Houston politician who enables or in any way supports this type of zoning control over one's domicile needs to be thrown out of public service. Vote with your vote: 1207 Harvard gets toasted by the zoning commission.

Speaking of Germantown, they had no choice but to deal with the devil.....that or TxDoT eats their livers with fava beans. Yeah that's a good example of how popular these HD's are.

Breaking news from the HAHC! Attention all potential buyers of HD homes, attention all potential sellers of HD homes....the peak is in, prepare yourselves for market adjustment.....3,000 sf is too big to get CoA, adjust property value to accommodate life how it was in 1929 when we packed 6 kids into 1200 sf.

Got the video...The HAHC voted 7-3 against approval. Douglas Elliot played the fool and did all the talking....."the overall scale and scope of the house is out of character"....."I know you can't even see the house due to the apartment complex next door, but"......"we've been having a lot of complaints from the Heights about large structures"....."the addition is large compared to the original house"....it was pitiful to watch them all fiddle with their ipads refusing to make eye contact with the owner while she spoke. This is a 1700 sf addition to a 1300 sf house, smaller than the scale of houses up and down the street. 　 　 The addition complied with the requirements of the ordinance and Elliot acknowledged that was not the problem. The owner implored them for recommendations and Elliot got all twisted up and told her to go the demolition route, adding "I know that sounds silly" and the owner pushed back that she wanted to preserve as much as possible. The owner showed that the house was surrounded by large additions and the only thing out of character is her current run down shack next to a hideous apartment complex. The next door neighbor on the other side wrote a letter begging for approval because the current structure devalues the neighborhood. 　 　 Phoebe Tudor said NOTHING, collected her check and left.

I have a copy of the application and the staff recommendation to deny along with reasons...not sure I know how to upload from my phone....

Right, the staff recommended denial last week after reviewing the application, but it was still on the agenda for 24Jan. The hahc could have concurred and denied, concurred and deferred final action with recommendations or gone against staff and approved. I don't know the outcome.

I think so. The Subject line of my email was "HAHC political liability", the District H fool didn't even respond, at least not yet. I cc'd the Executive Director of the GHPA, maybe it will be a conversation piece next time the crumpets get together, and she can ask Phoebe "WTF? Over!"...."Bad for business! Over!".

It's on the agenda for the January 24th meeting, warts and all. Ellen Cohen sent me the application for COA with all the staff comments recommending against approval. So it's up to the HAHC and Phoebe Tudor to show whether or not they have lost their minds. A deferral or rejection and the applicant can take it to the City Council for vote. That's when it gets political and the gloves come off because we can all show up at council meetings. Edit: I also received a letter response from the mayor: "I have encouraged the Kelmans to make their own case before the Houston Archeological and Historical Commission. The Commission is an independent body, and it is not appropriate for the Mayor to intervene. However, as I have told the Kelmans, while the Commission takes into account staff recommendations, it also listens to the homeowners and then weighs all the information it has received." So just because staff recommends reject, the HAHC can keep it in house if they concede enough or accept to the Kelmans' pleasure.