What Type Of Home Would You Have Purchased

[LLLegalien]

I have been reading the posts here for a number of months. People have differing opinions on many topics. However, everyone seems to agree on one thing - the newer construction built to look like old victorians is despicable. Well, I finally got to visit one and I must say that I was impressed. I would love to hear why you all dislike these homes so much. First, though, allow me to paint the picture of my new friends.

- Young couple (31 years each)

- 18 month old toddler

- Trying for a 2nd child

- Moderate income - definitely in budgeting mode (one car)

- One of them is a native Houstonian, other is from a Southern state

- Neither has the TIME, MONEY or SKILL to devote to renovating an older home

- Both will only consider living in the Heights due to the diversity of people, walkability, etc

I visited their house and must say that I was really pleasantly surprised. After reading all of the negative comments here I really felt that I was going to walk into something that felt cheap and tacky.

They have a beautiful front porch, nice back patio and fenced in yard - keeping the toddler safe with minimal landscaping or property upkeep. Inside, there were hardwood floors throughout, fireplace, crown mouldings, modern baths, modern kitchen, adequate closet space and nice windows. Their home is two stories. They have two air conditioners (one for upstairs and one for downstairs) and they spend their daytime downstairs so as to keep the energy bills low.

I asked them why they didn't buy a bungalow or something which seems more acceptable per this forum. They said that they couldn't go through all of the work of a renovation - especially not with the baby and one (hopefully) on the way. I asked them why they didn't buy a bungalow which was already renovated. They said that they looked at many. All were a lot more $ per square foot. They were able to purchase 500 extra square feet of living space for less money.

Across the street from their home a new home is being constructed. They said that an old house used to sit on the lot when they moved in. Broken out windows, a hole in the roof and beer cans in the yard led to a number of neighbors calling the police for many years. Visible drug activity and taunting of their child was a weekly occurance. Thankfully, the homeowner stopped paying property taxes. I guess the city will allow many things except someone not paying his/her property taxes. The place was beyond repair and now a new home - with presumably safer residents will take its place. As an avid supporter of bungalow renovations, I guess not all old homes in the Heights are worth saving. By the way, this crumbling house allowed my friends (or at least they believe it to be the case) to buy the home below market value).

So now I am confused. They are prefectly happy and I can not imagine them in another place. They are conscientious neighbors and love all that Houston has to offer. I left wondering what all of the fuss is about.

I put the question out to you all.....considering their criteria - where would you have suggested they live in the Heights? If this type of home is so unacceptable - what would have been acceptable? Are they unwelcome in the Heights because they can't afford a true bungalow?

[tanith27]

Are they unwelcome in the Heights because they can't afford a true bungalow?

Not by me. I welcome them to the area. I have no animosity towards anyone buying a new construct. I think many of the new homes are stunning. New construction is inevitable and I'm glad most of the new work going up isn't the Frankenfluff you see in other areas. Personally I have more of an issue with developers that tear down a perfectly good bungalow rather than renovate or add-on, but I would never have ill will towards the residents that purchase that place.

[sunsets]

To be fair, I don't think anyone is suggesting that a couple who wants to live in the Heights HAS to purchase a bungalow or be shunned forever. I think most of the complaining comes from those of us who were charmed by the little houses, intentionally purchased a little house, and are now dismayed that they are disappearing, only to be replaced by huge, overpowering "faux" Victorians or what have you. They really do change the look of the neighborhood. If the builders were throwing up more 'craftsman' looking, scaled down houses I don't think we'd complain as much. Or maybe we would, who knows?

And you're certainly right when you say that not every bungalow can be saved - some of them are too far gone for anything but scraping. OTOH, it's heartbreaking to see a well-maintained elderly couple's home get sold and towed right off the lot, just because it was "dated".

My husband and I were in similar sitation to your friends (moderate income, looking to get into the Heights). However we don't have kids so that made us more flexible in terms of what we could live with. I'll admit, the Tricon patio home we looked at was really tempting. But we found a recently renovated bungalow for the same price, with a nice landscaped yard, a garage and apartment, and a really great kitchen. We were definitely in the right place at the right time - it was a good deal. Has it had "old house" issues? Why, yes it has, but even a new build can have problems.

And most likely, your friends could have afforded a "true" bungalow. But it would have been smaller, and probably only had one bathroom, and a tiny living room, and well, a family these days wants more room than that. To renovate an old house into a bigger, updated, more livable place will take some bucks, and that's why it's cheaper to buy the new build of the same size then it is to purchase the nicely renovated and expanded old house.

Another thing you'll read here is that the new builds just aren't as quality as the old bungalows. I happen to think that's true. I checked out an open house on a new "McVic". Yes, it had shiny hardwood, granite countertops, etc, but the finishing was terrible! The banister wasn't aligned properly, the grout in the fireplace was messy and uneven, I could see nail holes everywhere. I had to wonder what the guts of the house looked like if I could see crap like that on the inside.

Just my opinion, of course. I don't fault anyone for buying the best house they can afford in the neighborhood they want to live in, but when those houses are pretty much changing what made the neighborhood attractive in the first place, well, you can see where some of the complaining comes from.

[goastros]

Well, frankly there are plenty of neighborhoods I want to live in but can't afford to. I'm not going to go in and buy a lot and build a house that is totally out of character for the rest of the neighborhood just to satisfy my needs. I don't blame your friends--after all, build it and they will come. I blame the developers. I do think that the people who buy them have no common sense and really don't care what their house looks like as long as they are living where they want to.

The new build next to me hired an architect that sidelines as some type of karate teacher. The design is so poor that it's dragging my home value down every day it sits on the market. It has some of the worst design principles I've ever seen. But, some poor sap that just has to live in the Heights whether they can afford it or not will buy it, so they will keep building crap. Every once in a while you come across a responsible builder, but it's not often in the Heights. There is one gentleman nearby, Mr. Rollins, that is rehabbing the Heights one bungalow at a time and is doing a wonderful job working with the area. We need more people like him helping to revitalize the area without destroying it.

[sheeats]

Well, frankly there are plenty of neighborhoods I want to live in but can't afford to. I'm not going to go in and buy a lot and build a house that is totally out of character for the rest of the neighborhood just to satisfy my needs. I don't blame your friends--after all, build it and they will come. I blame the developers. I do think that the people who buy them have no common sense and really don't care what their house looks like as long as they are living where they want to.

The new build next to me hired an architect that sidelines as some type of karate teacher. The design is so poor that it's dragging my home value down every day it sits on the market. It has some of the worst design principles I've ever seen. But, some poor sap that just has to live in the Heights whether they can afford it or not will buy it, so they will keep building crap. Every once in a while you come across a responsible builder, but it's not often in the Heights. There is one gentleman nearby, Mr. Rollins, that is rehabbing the Heights one bungalow at a time and is doing a wonderful job working with the area. We need more people like him helping to revitalize the area without destroying it.

We need pictures. Stat.

[RedScare]

I don't fault your friends for buying what they wanted. I don't even fault the developers for doing what they do. I do however, have the right, as do others, to voice my opinion, and occasionally do so.

I doubt that the house next door to goastros is dragging down his values, either. I live next door to a faded blue metal WAREHOUSE, and I have to fight HCAD every year on my appraisal. Realtors have told me that my value is up nearly 75% in 4 years, even with a warehouse next door. The value of my dirt is already more than I paid for the entire house.

I think you will find the derision most Heights residents direct at new construction is directly tied to the love they have for their own old house. It is hard to buy one of these old homes and bring it back to life without developing a fondness for all of the other old homes around it. While I try to temper my affection for my 90 year old pile of sticks, I understand the emotion that others display. And that emotion does not transfer to the owners of the new homes. I enjoy all of my neighbors, the ones in the remodeled old homes, the ones in the oversized big homes, and most especially, the couple living in the faded blue metal warehouse.

[Urbannomad]

There is nothing wrong with the new victorian homes. Some are constructed cheaply and feel that way but the majority are not. The reason it seems that everyone feels negatively towards the new construction is because only unhappy people complain vocally. Thousand of people like and even live in these homes, but they have no reason to rant about how much they like them. Really it just boils down to change, and the fact that most people can't handle it. This isn't an issue specific to just the heights you can see it in most neighborhoods or developing areas around Houston. Things change and one day these homes will be old and appreciated; just like the once generic, cheap and practical housing that was bungalows are now admired and cherished as gems. And for the haters, when that day comes these "new" victorian homes will get demolished to make way for the the next development phase. I'm all for trying to keep some history, but pretending that there will not be development in the ever-evolving urban landscape is just plain silly. And it seems Houston has a tougher time preserving its old buildings because they were not built with a dense, urban mega-city in mind like some other areas (ie Boston, DC, etc) that can more easily preserve older buildings.

[goastros]

I'd love to post pictures of the hideous eyesores I get to view on a daily basis. Does this forum host pictures? Let me know how to post them or I can email them to you to post. I don't want to link them to my photobucket account.

It does directly affect my property value when they started out priced at $550K for a 3000 sq ft house and has now dropped to $399K. I see a direct relation to price/sq ft that will register as comps for my area. I think shoddy construction of the townhomes is more the norm than the other way around. I've watched one diagonally across from me fall apart before my eyes--the thing is just rotting away. I have no problem with quality construction. The last poster was right in that these will eventually be torn down and the next construction phase will begin. The problem I have with that is that if they built them to last in the first place they wouldn't need to be torn down. The only reason the old bungalow houses that are beyond repair right now got that way is from owner neglect--not shoddy construction.

[heights_yankee]

i have to say, i can't stand this "i don't want to do renovations" argument. i hear this *a lot* and all i can say is "really? do people think every bungalow in the heights is a redo? is that why a 2/2 can command upwards of $300k in some parts?"

we live in a 3/2. we painted 2 bedrooms and a bathroom, but that's it. otherwise, our home was move in ready. i have many friends in the area and i don't know anyone who bought a house that had to be renovated to live in. sure, after living in them for several years, people have added on or changed layouts, but this was never something that had to be done to make the house livable.

i also don't get this cost paradox. if bungalows are so expensive that you have to buy a huge, zero lot line new contruction, how come they are dropping like flies? i walk the heights almost daily. there are some blocks that have more new homes than old. it's sad. why? b/c the old homes are part of houston history and part of the character of the neighborhood. there are many new homes that i love (some of the more modern ones are so cool and interesting), but there are so many that look the same. so many that add 500 extra square feet of nothing useful on the back when they could have a yard. many are built two to a lot. then there are the townhomes. oy. i just think the development has gotten out of control and the character of the area is being lost. again, sad.

[musicman]

i have to say, i can't stand this "i don't want to do renovations" argument. i hear this *a lot* and all i can say is "really? do people think every bungalow in the heights is a redo? is that why a 2/2 can command upwards of $300k in some parts?"

we live in a 3/2. we painted 2 bedrooms and a bathroom, but that's it. otherwise, our home was move in ready. i have many friends in the area and i don't know anyone who bought a house that had to be renovated to live in. sure, after living in them for several years, people have added on or changed layouts, but this was never something that had to be done to make the house livable.

it depends how picky you are. no you don't need central air, your wood floors redone, a plug in the restroom, a water valve to feed your refrigerator, a large enough circuit to power a microwave, etc however they sure make life a little easier/nicer for some of us.

[Dan the Man]

The design errors in some of the faux Victorians drive me nuts, but my biggest issue with all the new construction is the amount of waste that is generated. In many cases, a well-built livable house that needs aesthetic work is demolished. Sometimes building materials are salvaged. The lot is cleared and old shade trees are cut down or killed by the construction activity. The construction of the new house generates a massive amount of waste, practically none of which is recycled.

[RedScare]

i have to say, i can't stand this "i don't want to do renovations" argument. i hear this *a lot* and all i can say is "really? do people think every bungalow in the heights is a redo? is that why a 2/2 can command upwards of $300k in some parts?"

we live in a 3/2. we painted 2 bedrooms and a bathroom, but that's it. otherwise, our home was move in ready. i have many friends in the area and i don't know anyone who bought a house that had to be renovated to live in. sure, after living in them for several years, people have added on or changed layouts, but this was never something that had to be done to make the house livable.

i also don't get this cost paradox. if bungalows are so expensive that you have to buy a huge, zero lot line new contruction, how come they are dropping like flies? i walk the heights almost daily. there are some blocks that have more new homes than old. it's sad. why? b/c the old homes are part of houston history and part of the character of the neighborhood. there are many new homes that i love (some of the more modern ones are so cool and interesting), but there are so many that look the same. so many that add 500 extra square feet of nothing useful on the back when they could have a yard. many are built two to a lot. then there are the townhomes. oy. i just think the development has gotten out of control and the character of the area is being lost. again, sad.

I didn't have to do a thing to my home when I moved in. However, like musicman mentioned, the window units did not bother me. It was two and a half years before I decided to renovate...then I went crazy.

The answer to your question is actually in the original post. The poster's friends frankly liked the Heights, but not the homes. They wanted to live in new while looking out on old. They are not unusual. And, though I may not like that approach, I cannot blame a couple of 31 year olds for being swayed by the constant bombardment of "trendy" "must have" new construction propaganda that passes for entertainment on HGTV and a myriad of other cable channels, whether as a program or in the commercials.

[TJones]

There are some GREAT examples of newer construction around Red's area. One in particular that I like is right across the street from him, but it is a clash from the norm of the area. I am having the same problem here in Austin, in the Crestview/Brentwood neighborhood. The new thing is to tear down the 1940's and 50's pillbox homes and build two story MOD duplexes. Very stupid in my opinion, but the values are skyrocketing because of them. I will take pics and post.

[Panhandle78]

The answer to your question is actually in the original post. The poster's friends frankly liked the Heights, but not the homes. They wanted to live in new while looking out on old. They are not unusual. And, though I may not like that approach, I cannot blame a couple of 31 year olds for being swayed by the constant bombardment of "trendy" "must have" new construction propaganda that passes for entertainment on HGTV and a myriad of other cable channels, whether as a program or in the commercials.

Yes, people buy new homes because they were brainwashed by tv and commercials. Get real...

[sheeats]

Yes, people buy new homes because they were brainwashed by tv and commercials. Get real...

Quote tags are your friend. Learn them; love them.

[sevfiv]

It just stinks to watch a solid neighborhood with older homes where either: 1. a developer thinks it's better to clear away perfectly decent existing homes to build new, and 2. property owners let homes fall into disrepair to the point it is deemed that the house is not salvageable.

Demolition by greed, demolition by neglect - either way, a tremendous waste of resources.

On the other hand, I have an affinity for older homes and history, and would most certainly research homes, neighborhoods, and builders' habits anywhere I was a prospective buyer.

[Panhandle78]

Quote tags are your friend. Learn them; love them.

clown.

[sunsets]

Demolition by greed, demolition by neglect - either way, a tremendous waste of resources.

On the other hand, I have an affinity for older homes and history, and would most certainly research homes, neighborhoods, and builders' habits anywhere I was a prospective buyer.

If only there were more buyers like this woman. I live up the street from this place. When it went up for sale, we all sighed and waited for the inevitable lot line to lot line monstrosity that was going up in its place. After all, it was a run down old house (containing an obscene number of dogs) on a really nice corner lot. But it got renovated instead - and look at it! You can't tell me that a new McVic would have been an improvement on that. It's original to the neighborhood, too.

But also note how the new owner had to fight to get that place. Not many go to those lengths, and the Heights suffers as a result.

[lwood]

I have been reading the posts here for a number of months. People have differing opinions on many topics. However, everyone seems to agree on one thing - the newer construction built to look like old victorians is despicable. Well, I finally got to visit one and I must say that I was impressed. I would love to hear why you all dislike these homes so much. First, though, allow me to paint the picture of my new friends.

- Young couple (31 years each)

- 18 month old toddler

- Trying for a 2nd child

- Moderate income - definitely in budgeting mode (one car)

- One of them is a native Houstonian, other is from a Southern state

- Neither has the TIME, MONEY or SKILL to devote to renovating an older home

- Both will only consider living in the Heights due to the diversity of people, walkability, etc

I visited their house and must say that I was really pleasantly surprised. After reading all of the negative comments here I really felt that I was going to walk into something that felt cheap and tacky.

They have a beautiful front porch, nice back patio and fenced in yard - keeping the toddler safe with minimal landscaping or property upkeep. Inside, there were hardwood floors throughout, fireplace, crown mouldings, modern baths, modern kitchen, adequate closet space and nice windows. Their home is two stories. They have two air conditioners (one for upstairs and one for downstairs) and they spend their daytime downstairs so as to keep the energy bills low.

I asked them why they didn't buy a bungalow or something which seems more acceptable per this forum. They said that they couldn't go through all of the work of a renovation - especially not with the baby and one (hopefully) on the way. I asked them why they didn't buy a bungalow which was already renovated. They said that they looked at many. All were a lot more $ per square foot. They were able to purchase 500 extra square feet of living space for less money.

Across the street from their home a new home is being constructed. They said that an old house used to sit on the lot when they moved in. Broken out windows, a hole in the roof and beer cans in the yard led to a number of neighbors calling the police for many years. Visible drug activity and taunting of their child was a weekly occurance. Thankfully, the homeowner stopped paying property taxes. I guess the city will allow many things except someone not paying his/her property taxes. The place was beyond repair and now a new home - with presumably safer residents will take its place. As an avid supporter of bungalow renovations, I guess not all old homes in the Heights are worth saving. By the way, this crumbling house allowed my friends (or at least they believe it to be the case) to buy the home below market value).

So now I am confused. They are prefectly happy and I can not imagine them in another place. They are conscientious neighbors and love all that Houston has to offer. I left wondering what all of the fuss is about.

I put the question out to you all.....considering their criteria - where would you have suggested they live in the Heights? If this type of home is so unacceptable - what would have been acceptable? Are they unwelcome in the Heights because they can't afford a true bungalow?

Builders build what the public buys. If more people wanted the older homes, they would not be replaced with new ones. IF someone wants to save an old home, buy it. Opinions and taste vary. If you want a new home, go for it.

[sevfiv]

For the spec home market, or "custom" non-custom homes (which is dominant), the public buys what the builders build (even if it's crap, from what I've witnessed).

[LLLegalien]

I understand that many think that the purchase is fine. I believe we all agree that truly salvagable homes should not be replaced. For those who find this purchase of the Victorian-themed home (which is 5 years old and is really looking like it is in perfect shape) was a bad one, the question remains. What type of home purchase would you have condoned for this couple? Please don't forget the time, skill and money limitations which they have. Also, please remember that they have a toddler, another child on the way and a budget which limits them from the price per sq foot costs of most of the renovated bungalows in Heights proper. One poster was quite clear - they are not welcome in the Heights if they can't afford a renovated bungalow (since they can't update one on their own time and $). I don't really see other suggestions from the "haters" as one put it. The one poster was definitely correct - they did want a/c, power for the microwave, at least 2 baths and very low maintenance inside or out. Having a yard is not important to them as they utilize the Heights' parks continuously. This isn't a question to start a war of words between those that like the neglected homes going away and those that want only neighbors with the time, skill and money to renovate them or the purchasing power to buy one that is already renovated. I just wanted to know, for those of you who still want this neighborly couple in your neighborhood, but don't like what they purchased - what would have been acceptable to you and still met their needs? This is about putting yourselves in their shoes and applying your vision for what would be acceptable within their time, skill and money parameters. Is the only solution that is acceptable to "look elsewhere and we'll wait for neighbors with more time and money?" Buying a renovated bungalow with 2 bathrooms and updated throughout within Heights proper was outside of their price range. I have watched a lot of bungalows get renovated near to my house. The new owners who are moving in have Land Rovers, etc. Those new neighbors are also very nice people with young families. I welcome them. However, that is not the income power of this couple. They are not poor but they are what may be considered the working class. They are not upper middle income. I just wanted to see if those that are against this can come up with a solution or if the only solution is that they would not be welcome in the Heights. I have to be honest, while I totally disagree with the poster who felt that they shouldn't move to the Heights in the first place, I did appreciate the honesty. It was shocking and reads very differently than the Heights' attitude which I know and practice but at least it offered a solution. If you can't afford it, despite your qualities, don't come. Yikes.

[jm1fd]

This couple, in buying a McVictorian, is helping to destroy the very essence of what draws people (and probably drew them in as well) to the area in the first place.

[sheeats]

I understand that many think that the purchase is fine. I believe we all agree that truly salvagable homes should not be replaced. For those who find this purchase of the Victorian-themed home (which is 5 years old and is really looking like it is in perfect shape) was a bad one, the question remains. What type of home purchase would you have condoned for this couple? Please don't forget the time, skill and money limitations which they have. Also, please remember that they have a toddler, another child on the way and a budget which limits them from the price per sq foot costs of most of the renovated bungalows in Heights proper. One poster was quite clear - they are not welcome in the Heights if they can't afford a renovated bungalow (since they can't update one on their own time and $). I don't really see other suggestions from the "haters" as one put it. The one poster was definitely correct - they did want a/c, power for the microwave, at least 2 baths and very low maintenance inside or out. Having a yard is not important to them as they utilize the Heights' parks continuously. This isn't a question to start a war of words between those that like the neglected homes going away and those that want only neighbors with the time, skill and money to renovate them or the purchasing power to buy one that is already renovated. I just wanted to know, for those of you who still want this neighborly couple in your neighborhood, but don't like what they purchased - what would have been acceptable to you and still met their needs? This is about putting yourselves in their shoes and applying your vision for what would be acceptable within their time, skill and money parameters. Is the only solution that is acceptable to "look elsewhere and we'll wait for neighbors with more time and money?" Buying a renovated bungalow with 2 bathrooms and updated throughout within Heights proper was outside of their price range. I have watched a lot of bungalows get renovated near to my house. The new owners who are moving in have Land Rovers, etc. Those new neighbors are also very nice people with young families. I welcome them. However, that is not the income power of this couple. They are not poor but they are what may be considered the working class. They are not upper middle income. I just wanted to see if those that are against this can come up with a solution or if the only solution is that they would not be welcome in the Heights. I have to be honest, while I totally disagree with the poster who felt that they shouldn't move to the Heights in the first place, I did appreciate the honesty. It was shocking and reads very differently than the Heights' attitude which I know and practice but at least it offered a solution. If you can't afford it, despite your qualities, don't come. Yikes.

Whoa.

Okay, first of all? Find the "Enter" key on your keyboard. That's a lot of text, my friend.

Second, it's really not up to us to "condone" anything that anyone says or does. We are not the housing police. You asked for peoples' opinions on your friends' choice in housing in an area that's notorious for raising peoples' hackles due to the constant teardowns/rebuilds. So of course you're going to get some responses that aren't what you wanted to hear.

At the end of the day, all that matters is that your friends are in a location where they're happy and secure, with amenities that work for them and their growing family. So maybe they aren't keeping the spirit or history of the neighborhood alive. That's their issue to deal with. Asking a bunch of random people on a bulletin board to "condone" that choice is asking for trouble.

[sevfiv]

Re: neighborhood history - you could tell your friends that they are helping create the "future history" of the Heights (Harry James, I do believe).

[Arivechi]

If only there were more buyers like this woman. I live up the street from this place. When it went up for sale, we all sighed and waited for the inevitable lot line to lot line monstrosity that was going up in its place. After all, it was a run down old house (containing an obscene number of dogs) on a really nice corner lot. But it got renovated instead - and look at it! You can't tell me that a new McVic would have been an improvement on that. It's original to the neighborhood, too.

But also note how the new owner had to fight to get that place. Not many go to those lengths, and the Heights suffers as a result.

I've been in that house that was renovated. It's AMAZING. The bathroom (it's actually pretty big), the kitchen cabinets, the beams in the dining room. WOW. And mostly it really is inspiring to me and my husband as we search and search for a house in the Heights area to buy and love - a house that has a long history and a soul that we can add to.

In the end I agree with "sheeats" - I can say "I hate that house" from the outside. But that doesn't mean that I'm not going to welcome people to the neighborhood or throw tomatoes at them or something. Clearly everyone should have a home that works for them - old OR new. But what I love about the Heights are the older homes. That's my opinion. Can't wait to buy one. And what I'd love most is to live on a block with lots of bungalows/cottages and original character.

[tmariar]

People have differing opinions on many topics. However, everyone seems to agree on one thing - the newer construction built to look like old victorians is despicable.

So now I am confused. They are prefectly happy and I can not imagine them in another place. They are conscientious neighbors and love all that Houston has to offer. I left wondering what all of the fuss is about. I put the question out to you all.....considering their criteria - where would you have suggested they live in the Heights? If this type of home is so unacceptable - what would have been acceptable? Are they unwelcome in the Heights because they can't afford a true bungalow?

The Heights posters here do have a wide variety of opinions, and I don't claim to speak for anyone else. But if you're asking about a seeming consensus of opinion with regard to neo-Vics in particular, my guess is that it's less an objection to the style itself (which many people find treacly) and more to do with the fact that neo-Vics are being built on non-Victorian streets, in the middle of a row of arts-and-crafts bungalows. It seems odd to want further emphasize the incongruity of a house that probably already sticks out like a sore thumb.

Beyond that, if you really do want to understand why some might not welcome your friends to the Heights, I'll take a stab at explaining. Many Heights residents, like many non-Heights residents, believe that Houston and Houstonians should be working toward preserving, not destroying, our few remaining historic neighborhoods. Which generally means preserving, not destroying, old houses. Your friends may not have torn down an original Heights home with their own hands, but may as well have in many people's eyes. They and others creating a market for new constructions in the Heights are the reason that builders are doing what they're doing to this neighborhood - they won't stop until/unless people stop buying their product. Your friends may not personally believe that individual desires should sometimes be sacrificed for the communal good, or (more likely) don't believe that the historic characteristic of the Heights is something worth preserving, but they have many neighbors who do. You describe your friends as "conscientious neighbors", but that's a subjective concept. Surely they knew before they bought how strongly many in the Heights feel about the destruction of original homes in the neighborhood?

All that said, have your friends been made to feel unwelcome? I'm guessing not. Not because there aren't many people in the Heights who feel as I've described, but because people here - like people most places - generally believe being a good neighbor involves being considerate of those around them.

I wrote the above before your more recent post... I was attempting above to summarize a common view, and not my own views, but mine are generally along those lines. If someone can't afford to buy in the Heights without buying a new construction, yes, I'd generally prefer they not buy in the Heights. Because I think buying a new construction in the Heights supports and encourages the further destruction of original Heights homes.

[goastros]

My thought is that if they want to commit to the Heights and own a bungalow, then they also need to commit to the work. It doesn't take a lot of money. My hubby and I live in what used to be the black sheep of the Heights, Sunset Heights. We bought a fixer upper and since we don't have the money to actually hire someone to fix it, we learned how to do it ourselves. We don't drive hummers--we have pick up trucks because that's what we need to haul plywood and supplies from the lumber yards.

I'm sorry if they don't want to commit their time to preserving and working on a house in a neighborhood that they like (because of the quaintness and history and old houses). I too would rather sit on my can surfing the internet instead of painting, framing doorways, installing plugs, digging up concrete in the yard, tearing down our shack of a garage, etc. but I know to live where we want in a house we can afford, we have to put forth some effort.

We have a toddler as well and so we split up the work. When I'm painting, hubby entertains the kiddo. When hubby's installing stuff, I entertain kiddo. We take breaks between projects to enjoy ourselves and enjoy our toddler's childhood.

We feel our work is a commitment to the character of the neighborhood. We can't all be Disney Land all the time and spend all our time at the park. Heck, even if I bought a house in the burbs, it's not always going to be maintenance free. It's the attitude of the newbie couples that they don't want to be bothered doing yard work, working on their house, etc. that is going to end up leaving the Heights with a bunch of crappy, falling down blight of townhomes from a generation that doesn't want to take the responsibility to care for the legacy they leave behind. If they truly only wanted a place to sleep and enjoy all the amenities without working for it, they should join the thousands of other people affectionately known as "apartment dwellers." Then they could live in any neighborhood they want and only have the responsibility of handing over a rent check each month.

I have no outward ill will towards any of my townhome dwelling neighbors--heck, for people who want to enjoy the neighborhood I never even see them outside. I pity them and hope they don't lose their shirts too badly when they try to sell.

[Panhandle78]

The old bungalows wont last another 100 years. The new construction will. 100 years from now the large "Mcmansions" (you people are sooo lame for those terms) will be torn down, and replaced with townhomes or whatever, and my kids will be complaining like you all are now. Its the circle of life. Get over it.

[sunsets]

Why wouldn't the bungalows last another 100 years? They have to be maintained, but they should last just fine. There are houses and barns on the east coast that have been in existence since the 1700's.

[Panhandle78]

Are you crazy? For every one bungalow that is restored or kept up in the Heights there are 100 that are TERRIBLE. Dont make me drive down my block and take pictures. We are not talking about barns on the east coast. We are talking about crumbling bungalows/duplexes in the Heights. Dont sell me hamburgers and tell me its filet mignon.