The Heights Historic Districts

[20thStDad]

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?

[20thStDad]

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.

[20thStDad]

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/

The current district doesn't go north of 16th St. I didn't see a link to future/possible extended boundaries.

[Porchman]

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.

[TheNiche]

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 July 27, 2010 by TheNiche

[Marksmu]

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.

[chester77008]

There is now a website posted by a group opposed to the new ordinance. They have a good Q&A section regarding the changes.

www.responsiblehistoricpreservation.org

If you previously signed the petition and do not agree with the proposed changes please sign the petition-retraction form.

There are also yard signs available to help generate debate.

[LookyHere]

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.

[Marksmu]

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.

[AtticaFlinch]

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.

[chester77008]

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.

[LookyHere]

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.

[chester77008]

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.

[Marksmu]

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.

[SCDesign]

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!

[sevfiv]

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?

[SCDesign]

I was at a meeting where it was said, as were a number of other people (about 20, 12 of which worked for the City). It is not on the record anywhere that I know of but it is well know in many circles. Nobody has to believe me just look at the ordinance and the power it gives and the Historic Districts that have been added in just the last year. Heck, just since June 1. If you have any doubt that the City is playing games with this just look at how they have moved on this to date:

1) The Request for Action to put the temporary suspension of the 90 day waiver was submitted on the Friday afternoon before Memorial Day to go on the Council schedule for the following Wednesday

2) The dates of the public meetings to debate the changes were released 4 days before the biggest meeting was scheduled

3) The mailed notice only included the meeting for the specific area af the addressee and the largest, and probbaly most important meeting, was not inculded

4) The push by the Mayor NOT to repetition to enact these changes when they are completely different than what people had originally agreed to.

Does the City have a track record of openness and honesty? Or does it have a record of reaching, grabbing and taking regardless of what the citizens want or agree to?

One of the biggest arguments people make against making the Heights a Preserved District is that it is too late, it should have been done 30 years ago. If the Heights is Protected wouldn't you expect that development will move to those areas that are not protected? If those areas are now going to be in the position the Heights was in 30 years ago doesn't it make sense for them to step in now to preserve them so they don't make the same "mistake" that was made in the Heights? You MUST look at the "Worst Possible Scenerio" when you give the City this kind of power, and worst case is that EVERYTHING INSIDE OF THE BELTWAY WILL QUALIFY AS HISTORIC WITHIN THE NEXT 10 YEAR! Think about that.

[LookyHere]

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?

I wonder the same thing. I have been following this to a degree and feel pretty informed but I have never heard anything about this. Oak Forest and Garden Oaks? I doubt it, plus those neighborhoods are 100% outside the loop.

[LookyHere]

One other thing I just noticed is who would make up the 13 member HAHC panel. This is straight from the proposed amendment:

1. Professional achaeologist

2. Professional historian

3. Achitectural historian

4. Representative of a cultural history organization

5. Registered architect

6. Landscape architect or an urgan planner

7. Professional real estate appraiser certified to perform appraisals for the city.

8. Remodeler or builder registered withthe TRCC, with knowledge of and interest in restoration, historic building renovation and compatible new construction.

9-13. Citizen representatives

If you didn't think this was weighted in any way, read on....

Positions 1-9 shall be appointed by the MAYOR, subject to confirmation by city council.

Postions 10-13 shall be appointed by city council.

If you need 7 votes, good luck.

I have been to a couple variance hearings and I can tell you that the builder in question is well known for siding with new development. I know that's only one vote but I thought it was worth mentioning.

[Marksmu]

I have been to a couple variance hearings and I can tell you that the builder in question is well known for siding with new development. I know that's only one vote but I thought it was worth mentioning.

I do not want to stake the value of my house, my largest single investment, on the HOPE that somebody is going to side with me, or that we can finally get a competent mayor. I have complete control over my home now and I want to have complete control over my own home tomorrow.

I will fight the ordinance, but at the same time I will ignore it if it does go into effect. It is a sad day that we even have to have a discussion whether or not some politician can tell me what type of siding I can have on my house or what color I am allowed to paint it.

Its a sad day indeed.

[20thStDad]

The more I read about it the more this feels like a really bass ackwards way to get around the lack of zoning.

[Marksmu]

The more I read about it the more this feels like a really bass ackwards way to get around the lack of zoning.

These are deed restrictions, not zoning. The Heights has businesses located throughout it. The poultry plant, the solar screens, the gutter places.....they are everywhere...I suspect some folks are nostalgic about those too, but this is not zoning where they don't let you use your home as a business, or vice versa...this is the city actually controlling what your home looks like, not just what you do out of it.

I dont care for zoning much either, but arbitrarily placing after the fact restrictions on peoples homes who did not have them when they were purchased is just Wrong!

Zoning can actually serve a purpose, as much as I hate it....deed restrictions only restrict you from having your home look the way you want...what type of siding, color, etc. Not just that you cant sell cars out of your front yard.

[AtticaFlinch]

I dont care for zoning much either, but arbitrarily placing after the fact restrictions on peoples homes who did not have them when they were purchased is just Wrong!

Precisely. With HOA deed restrictions you have the ability to opt in or out of it by choosing whether or not to buy within a particular neighborhood. If the Historic District laws included a clause exempting grandfathered home owners (from the time legislation was passed), it probably wouldn't bother anyone.

[sevfiv]

From the GHPA:

A great deal of misinformation is circulating about what the proposed changes will mean to property owners in Houston's historic districts. GHPA is determined to clear up these misrepresentations:

* The amended ordinance will not dictate paint colors.

* The amended ordinance will not govern the type of air conditioning units that can be used in historic buildings.

* The amended ordinance will not govern interior remodeling. In the United States, preservation ordinances do not govern the interiors of privately owned residences.

* Routine maintenance and emergency repairs do not and will not require the approval of the Houston Archeological and Historical Commission.

* The ordinance does not require a minimum $50,000 investment in rehab projects for historic houses.

* The ordinance allows and will continue to allow the construction of additions to expand the size of historic houses. Houston Archeological and Historical Commission has approved many such projects; some of these projects have been recognized with Good Brick Awards from GHPA.

GHPA is developing a Web page to further address these other misconceptions. We will provide a link when the page goes live online.

[Marksmu]

From the GHPA:

it did not say:

The GHPA will not tell you what your house must look like

The GHPA will not tell you what materials you may use on your house

The GHPA will not tell you what size your home may be

The GHPA will not tell you what landscaping is required

The GHPA will not make you bring up to their "standards" before issuing any permits to do work

The GHPA will keep their not intrude upon individual homeowners private property rights.

The GHPA will not change their mind and add hundreds of new restrictions at a later point.

There are alot of things they did not say....those are just a few....its safer to keep them out of your business from the get go.

I still cant believe there is actually a discussion on whether or not a POLITICIAN, gets to decide for YOU, what YOUR house should look like. ITS INSANE!

[Porchman]

From the GHPA:

A great deal of misinformation is circulating about what the proposed changes will mean to property owners in Houston's historic districts. GHPA is determined to clear up these misrepresentations:

* The amended ordinance will not dictate paint colors.

* The amended ordinance will not govern the type of air conditioning units that can be used in historic buildings.

* The amended ordinance will not govern interior remodeling. In the United States, preservation ordinances do not govern the interiors of privately owned residences.

* Routine maintenance and emergency repairs do not and will not require the approval of the Houston Archeological and Historical Commission.

* The ordinance does not require a minimum $50,000 investment in rehab projects for historic houses.

* The ordinance allows and will continue to allow the construction of additions to expand the size of historic houses. Houston Archeological and Historical Commission has approved many such projects; some of these projects have been recognized with Good Brick Awards from GHPA.

GHPA is developing a Web page to further address these other misconceptions. We will provide a link when the page goes live online.

Thanks, sev. However, what might help further dispel misconceptions is to state what is being sought in the ordinance. What is the vision? Because the way this reads (and, BTW, the draft does leave a great deal to interpretation), it's a lot about restriction of individual homeowners. The reason I'm concerned is that the sense of such restrictions is going to undo and undermine the greater good. On this thread, we're hearing about recission of the petitions which create historic districts in the first place.

I think most people here in the Heights have a sense of the neighborhood they want. They may personally engage in that neighborhood in different fashion. They might beautifully preserve a bungalow. They might enjoy cocktails on the porch of their new Tricon. However, I don't think the vision of the neighborhood is really not that different for people.

One other issues that muddies the ordinance is it also addresses landmark status. I think that creates some of the misconception on the ordinance, itself. It also potentially waters down the ordination of landmarks.

There has been a lack of clarity in presenting this and agility in responding to concerns. I hope GHPA and other groups dedicated to preservation can develop that common vision of what is being sought. People buy into vision not restriction.

it did not say:

The GHPA will not tell you what your house must look like

The GHPA will not tell you what materials you may use on your house

The GHPA will not tell you what size your home may be

The GHPA will not tell you what landscaping is required

The GHPA will not make you bring up to their "standards" before issuing any permits to do work

The GHPA will keep their not intrude upon individual homeowners private property rights.

The GHPA will not change their mind and add hundreds of new restrictions at a later point.

It's HAHC which would make decisions about such things. GHPA is an independent preservation group. They advocate in a balanced manner unlike AWBA (Angry White Boys of America).

Edited July 28, 2010 by Porchman

[Ross]

I do not want to stake the value of my house, my largest single investment, on the HOPE that somebody is going to side with me, or that we can finally get a competent mayor. I have complete control over my home now and I want to have complete control over my own home tomorrow.

I will fight the ordinance, but at the same time I will ignore it if it does go into effect. It is a sad day that we even have to have a discussion whether or not some politician can tell me what type of siding I can have on my house or what color I am allowed to paint it.

Its a sad day indeed.

The problem with ignoring the ordinance if passed is that violations are misdemeanors punishable by fines. Every day a violation exists is a separate violation. That's right folks, painting your house without approval will make you a criminal. and, with the increased criminalization of trivial crimes, and increased penalties for multiple offenders, you may find yourself in jail at some point for having 50 misdemeanors related to your home.

[LookyHere]

it did not say:

The GHPA will not tell you what your house must look like

The GHPA will not tell you what materials you may use on your house

The GHPA will not tell you what size your home may be

The GHPA will not tell you what landscaping is required

The GHPA will not make you bring up to their "standards" before issuing any permits to do work

The GHPA will keep their not intrude upon individual homeowners private property rights.

The GHPA will not change their mind and add hundreds of new restrictions at a later point.

There are alot of things they did not say....those are just a few....its safer to keep them out of your business from the get go.

I still cant believe there is actually a discussion on whether or not a POLITICIAN, gets to decide for YOU, what YOUR house should look like. ITS INSANE!

I had the City Counsel meeting streaming on line to hear the Heights Walmart speakers and Lovell brought up a couple of these other topics. I couldn't tell you exactly what it was because I was only half paying attention at this point but I definitely heard her say that repairs would not be cause for the city to make you bring your house up to the new standards. She mentioned set back as an example, saying that if you had to do repairs or make changes this would not force you to meet the set back requirements if your house was not in compliance before the ordinance is passed. I believe she also mentioned "not" and "landscaping."

[chester77008]

I am pleased that the Greater Houston Preservation Alliance finally chimed in on the discussion here on HAIF.

The GHPA is currently sponsoring a class at Rice to determine how to make the following neighborhoods historic districts.

- Westmoreland

- Garden Oaks and Oak Forrest

- Broadacres, Shadow Lawn and Shadyside

- Independence Heights and Magnolia Park

- Country Club Place and Idylwood

- Courtlandt Place

Have fun if you live in these neighborhoods!

Check out their advertisement on swamplot if you think this is misinformation.

[Krol]

Wow! Lots of inaccurate information here and a seemingly lack of desire to have accurate information or, at the very least, to dismiss accurate information when it is offered.

Here are some facts: additions will still be allowed, there's nothing about paint color, most requests get approved by historic commission, demolitions of dilapidated property get approved now and will continue to get approved, there are tax incentives for improvements and they will continue, new construction will still be allowed. That's just a start on the facts.

There's a lot of discussion about property rights, but what about when an owner's right to do what he/she wants with his/her property infringes on my property rights to continue to enjoy my property and what I bought into, which was a historic neighborhood.

A small group of builders and realtors who don't even live in Houston Heights are behind the inaccurate information and fear mongering. That is not surprising.

BTW, Nicholson is not in any historic district.