The Heights Historic Districts

[OutfieldDan]

Agreed. The section containing the 15 day provision is specific to the 3 pending historic districts, including South Heights. I have sent an email to CM Gonzalez asking that he push for a longer...and preferably permanent...opt-out provision, but I am not hopeful. He appears to be attempting to curry favor with the small number of preservationists pushing for government control of our homes. Still, reminding him of the 60% opposition can't hurt.

Regardless what the time limit is, I believe that we can blanket the neighborhood quickly. The overwhelming number of anti-ordinance signs in South Heights suggests that we will be well received.

What's worse is the language (see p.13 at bottom) that an application for a historic district can be made with only 10% of lot owner signatures, and poof! the applied for district is immediately and completely restricted as if it were already approved. It will take about 6 months for the process to occur that may return the neighborhood to normal. This can be repeated a year later!

Do I believe that this will happen? Yes, absolutely. I currently do not live in a historic district, but I’m very close and there is an active minority that wants my neighborhood to be one. It’s almost a certainty that they will apply for historic district status if this new ordinance is passed by city council.

Edited September 18, 2010 by OutfieldDan

[SCDesign]

I have a recording of Sue Lovell at the Heights meeting where she SPECIFICALLY says that the Heights WILL have a re-survey.

Quote, after the hand vote, (time stamp 1:34:45 on my recording) "Pretty much as we thought, we will be doing a re-survey in the Heights. We will be sending you your ballots and we will be getting the correct information to you." Nothing ambiguuous about that statement to me.

We need to get that out. Nothing is better than her lying to us in her own words. If anyone wants the recording of that meeting I'm happy to send it to you.

[Marksmu]

Agreed. The section containing the 15 day provision is specific to the 3 pending historic districts, including South Heights. I have sent an email to CM Gonzalez asking that he push for a longer...and preferably permanent...opt-out provision, but I am not hopeful. He appears to be attempting to curry favor with the small number of preservationists pushing for government control of our homes. Still, reminding him of the 60% opposition can't hurt.

Regardless what the time limit is, I believe that we can blanket the neighborhood quickly. The overwhelming number of anti-ordinance signs in South Heights suggests that we will be well received.

If help is needed in getting out and getting signatures, I am volunteering my time. Send a message to me on HAIF and I will go garner signatures. This whole ordeal is a joke.

[chester77008]

We need to start getting signatures now for the Heights districts to force a re-vote. I personally doubt the ordinance will pass with the current 15 day BS and/or the lack of a threshold for returned cards but we need to start preparing just in case. It is my understanding that ResponsibleHistoricPreservation.org will have the needed petition forms very soon. A meeting hosted by the same group is tentatively scheduled for September 30th at 6:30 PM at the United Way on Waugh to get signatures to enable the re-vote, and to discuss further ordinance changes.

The Mayor and Lovell have made some good changes to the ordinance, but many feel it is still very restrictive for new construction and renovations. We need to be prepared to opt-out if they prove unwilling to compromise further.

[chester77008]

FYI...

The Chronicle printed a correction in regards to the article mentioned above....

"A story on Page B1 Saturday incorrectly characterized how existing historic districts will be affected by the changes to the city’s historic preservation ordinance. The districts will keep their historic designation unless 25 percent of property owners within the boundaries petition the city for reconsideration"

[SCDesign]

Well, I sent the recording to Swamplot, the Chronicle, and Council Members Lovell and Gonzalez. I asked Councilmember Lovell to clairify that the Heights would get a re-vote regardless of the new guidlines since she promised it at a public meeting in front of about 800 people. If anyone reacts I'll let you know.

[OutfieldDan]

It's troubling that so much misinformation has been distributed about the revised ordinance. Yesterday we received our copy of the Leader and it has a cover page article with the same false report that historic districts will all be required to re-vote for their historic designation. Bill Baldwin is quoted as favoring the new ordinance. I'm not a conspiracy freak, but the misleading articles in the Chronicle and the Leader might have been created to purposefully diminish the neighborhood's reaction to the ordinance.

There is a public meeting tonight where everyone can have one minute to speak. I predict that plenty of the historic activists will be there just like the last one. I fear that the misleading articles in the Chronicle and the Leader might serve to reduce my neighbors to participate and thereby reduce the voice of reason and dissent about the detriments of the new ordinance.

If you care about your neighborhood and want your freedoms preserved about how you can remodel your home, I suggest you plan to attend the meeting tonight and plan to speak. It's our last chance for public comments. All Houston neighborhoods are affected because of the new language in the ordinance that provides for immediate historic designation when an application is made with only 10% homeowner signatures. It will take at least six months for the process to occur to return the neighborhood to normal and those same 10% activists can do it again one year later. This will happen.

If you live in a newer home and think that it's not important to you personally, think again. Your neighborhood will stagnate and decay if the new ordinance becomes law. Please be there tonight and speak up.

[OutfieldDan]

Here's what they're planning to do. The key is that the neighborhood has to petition to OPT OUT.

1. Heights South scrambles for 25% signatures for reconsideration in 15 days - success!
2. Cards are mailed out to all owners of record in Heights South
3. Most cards are returned - perhaps 60% vote for removing historic district status
4. OOOPS! Guess what! The 60% voting to opt out are less than 50% of all recorded owners
5. The recommendation to City Council is to leave the neighborhood status unchanged because less than half of the neighborhood voted to get out

There is no language in the new ordinance or the Transition Provisions about how the Director of the Planning and Development Department must interpret the vote.

Heights South - Welcome to Historic District Status!

[RedScare]

And the preservationists wonder why heretofore old house lovers have been turned into hardcore anti-preservationists seemingly overnight. The level of animosity I now harbor toward preservationists can hardly be described. Any elected official who goes along with a plan like that should be prepared to spend a lot of money on his or her next campaign, because as long as these people hold control over my property, I intend to make their political lives hell...as well as short.

[chester77008]

I know this is short notice but it's I got as well.

There is a meeting Thursday September 30th at 6:30 PM at Anderson Properties, 741 E 11th.

Members of the neighborhood are going to discuss how to amend the proposed ordinance, sign re-vote petitions, and get organized.

We only have another week to lobby City Council Members for changes to the current draft.

Please show up if you care to affect this issue!!

[RedScare]

I got the identical email from Ms. Lovell. I cannot think of a nice word for it, so I'll simply have to say she lied to us. She has not kept her word. She apparently does not realize how much effort we will expend to right this wrong, including voting her out of office. My email reminded her that the overwhelming majority of voters is opposed to this ordinance. We may have to prove it to her at election time.

In the meantime, I plan to show up tomorrow night, though I may be late. I look forward to meeting my neighbors who oppose this draconian and expensive restriction of our rights to maintain our homes.

[What_the_what?]

Unfortunately, I think I recall Lovell saying (at the Heights Town Hall meeting) that either she isn't running or is term limited and can't run for re-election again. So she is a perfect candidate to head up this cram-down ordinance. She has NOTHING to lose.

That's the kicker! But we CAN vote against anyone she endorses. This has become quite a drama of dirty politics - who needs the movies when we have this engaging battle? We WILL get the 25% votes and we WILL fight the each step of the way. I made a plea to the Houston Press to come to the GRB since they write opinion pieces but I don't know if they were in the audience or not. I spoke to Rich Connolly. I think if they dug through these posts they would have a great report. I'm picturing the nasty illustration on the front cover right now...

[OutfieldDan]

I got the identical email from Ms. Lovell. I cannot think of a nice word for it, so I'll simply have to say she lied to us. She has not kept her word. She apparently does not realize how much effort we will expend to right this wrong, including voting her out of office. My email reminded her that the overwhelming majority of voters is opposed to this ordinance. We may have to prove it to her at election time.

In the meantime, I plan to show up tomorrow night, though I may be late. I look forward to meeting my neighbors who oppose this draconian and expensive restriction of our rights to maintain our homes.

I'll be there tonight. I'm itching to get to work!

[OutfieldDan]

Here are a few new homes that will not be alowed in the Heights. The Heights which is soon to become less of what it was - less freedom, less diversity. Thanks a lot, Annise Parker.

http://www.nytimes.c...ef=design-issue

[What_the_what?]

Just another endorsement:

Please attend the Council meeting on Tuesday October 5th (see Poyea's entry).

We want a HUGE presence - this is making a positive impact on council members in attendance. BRING OTHERS YOU KNOW WHO CARE ABOUT THIS ISSUE!

Important*** If you want to speak you MUST call BEFORE 11:00 am on October 5th to reserve a right to speak.

If anyone from the City Government contacts you after you have scheduled, ASK FOR THEIR NAME. Council members and their staff have called people who are going to speak to "inquire" about their views in the name of "grouping" opinions before the meeting (more BS). If they ask what your position is simply say that you are undecided and that you prefer to give your feedback AT the meeting.

If you hate public speaking you can still make an impact keeping it short with a simple "I don't support this" statement.

I've heard a lot of encouraging information and if we remain organized and driven we will get whatever percentage of votes/signatures/retractions/whatever that this BS Council tries to impose.

[s3mh]

Here are a few new homes that will not be alowed in the Heights. The Heights which is soon to become less of what it was - less freedom, less diversity. Thanks a lot, Annise Parker.

http://www.nytimes.c...ef=design-issue

The Heights needs homes like these about as much as the Heights needs a Walmart.

[mkultra25]

Chronicle endorsement of revised ordinance

[OutfieldDan]

The Heights needs homes like these about as much as the Heights needs a Walmart.

The problem with your comment and the Chronicle's Sunday editorial is that both of you deny that the Heights homes that were built in the 1920's are obsolete. They're too small, they're built with obsolete materials, they have obsolete designs, and they have obsolete energy efficiency. The list goes on and on. Forcing my neighborhood to not evolve is stupid. It's like forcing motorists to drive 1950's autos, forcing them to replace tires with obsolete bias ply designs, and forcing the use of leaded gas. All this so some arrogant snobs can have their pleasure to stop progress, and live in their personal definition of utopia.

All the remodels before historic district rules were forced upon us used modern materials such as Hardiplank, new energy efficient windows, and modern designs including some very nice second stories. All new construction has been creative and replaced the worst old homes. New construction and freely administered remodeling brought the Heights out of the gutter. After "no means no", the HAHC routinely denies use of modern materials, the HAHC denies demolition permits for even the most dilapidated cases, the HAHC absolutely denies widening your home, the HAHC absolutely denies adding a second story in the front, and the HAHC makes everyone seek their permission to do any structural modification to the outside of the home at all - including minor structure changes despite the misinformation published by the Chronicle.

Since the Heights has been around for 100 years and has preserved its historical character on its own, it's a very safe bet that the Heights will preserve its historical character over the next 100 years on its own. More remodeling will happen that is necessary, and that remodeling will continue to be in the character of the Heights, just like it has been in the past decades. Government permission for normal structure and building decisions has not been necessary before and it's not necessary now.

If anyone cares, I live in the Heights, I'm not a builder, and I have no business relationship with any builder, realtor or home designer. I'm a Houston citizen who has lived in Metro Houston for 25 years and I moved into the Heights because I appreciate the diversity of my neighbors and all the homes - both old and new. If my neighborhood had been under government control, I would not have in the least considered moving here. I'm sorry that you're so against new two story new homes being constructed. I happen to own one of those and I resent your prejudice. It's jerks like you that are ruining the neighborhood, not my new construction.

BTW, you may have noticed that I've been persistent in this thread and elsewhere. I'm not going away. I had a sign in my front yard for Annise Parker last year. I will not vote for her again unless she starts supporting my freedoms instead of taking them away for the "greater good."

[SilverJK]

The Heights needs homes like these about as much as the Heights needs a Walmart.

Removed my post because it isn't relevant to the topic.

I will say that this attitude is not very neighborly, and seems generally offputting as well as not in line with what the neighborhood is about. The neighborhood has an accepting feel to me, and the random modern or weird homes just add to the flavor.

To keep the "integrity" of the neighborhood, you kill its personality.

Edited October 4, 2010 by SilverJK

[RedScare]

Chronicle endorsement of revised ordinance

This editorial was not written by the Chronicle editors. It has the antagonistic tone that only the preservationists and their leader Sue Lovell can mimic. If the Chronicle is going to lend its considerable clout toward an issue, the least its editors can do is educate themselves on the issue, and form their own opinions and write their own editorial.

This is political patronage. And, it will not work. The tactics of Lovell and the preservationists have galvanized opposition to them and the ordinance. They've made our job much easier. Those who can appear at City Hall tomorrow, please do. Those who cannot, please contact me. We are organizing to defeat the historic districts.

[heights]

I won't be able to make the meeting, but I just fired off my e-mail to the mayor and all council members. Like poyea, I have already made an addition to my bungalow and I don't plan any more, so the ordinance would probably not affect me. Furthermore, there's a vacant bungalow on a giant lot next to me that would probably be "forever preserved" by the new ordinance, likely preventing my home from being overshadowed by a McVic. But property rights are property rights and I won't let someone take them away without a fight!

If the ordinance passes and someone starts going door to door with a petition for a re-vote, I've got my blue sign up so you'll know I'm on your side!

Edited October 5, 2010 by heights

[heights]

Received one reply so far:

Thank you for your email comments regarding the proposed historic preservation ordinance. The Mayor is very aware of all the issues, opinions and facts regarding the proposed amendments and has posted the items for consideration by City Council this week. We do expect some of the council members will offer amendments, including one extending the 15 day time frame, and will ask for a week’s delay of these items. If you have any questions, please let me know.

Sincerely,

Diana DuCroz, AICP

Senior Planner, Historic Preservation

Edited October 5, 2010 by heights

[SilverJK]

My major concern is the need for only 10% to apply for historic district status. Was this issue touched any? From what I understand, once your neighborhood is under review for historic district status, you are "temporarily" forced under the rules immediately. This could essentially strong-arm any section of the heights to be under the rules for ~6 months of EVERY year.

[sevfiv]

From the GHPA:

Houston City Council has voted to delay consideration of the amendments to the historic preservation ordinance until next week. During spirited debate this morning, council members submitted additional changes to the proposed amendments.

District C Council Member Anne Clutterbuck offered what appears to be the most workable compromise. Council Member Clutterbuck’s amendment would provide for a two-tiered system of historic districts. Existing historic districts would continue to be governed by the current preservation ordinance unless a majority of property owners in the district petitioned the City for protected district designation. Property owners in new districts would decide which level of protection they wanted when they petitioned for district designation. The two-tiered system is already in place in Houston’s Old Sixth Ward Protected Historic District.

The tape of this morning’s city council meeting can be viewed online later today on the Houston Television website (formerly the Municipal Channel). [Click here] to access Houston Television’s online tape library.

[RedScare]

Chronicle article on the Council meeting.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/7235336.html

Thanks to all who were able to show up and voice their opposition. And a big thanks to Councilwoman Clutterbuck. Sounds like she may be offering a proposal to let the homeowners decide what is best for their neighborhoods, as opposed to the mayor, who seems to know better than we do what is good for us.

[SilverJK]

Clutterbuck seems to actually have listened to the homeowners. I wonder if they will accept her ammendment proposition.

[Marksmu]

I just watched the meeting from yesterday and I felt like several of the council members really are listening to our complaints.

I really enjoyed when the mayor attempted to interrupt Clutterbuck, and she spoke over her and said what she wanted. I dont really care if it was out of order or not, I dont like Parker, I dont like that she thinks she knows better than I do what to do with my own property, and I think that Clutterbuck thought it was disrespectful, and let it be known by just not stopping when she opened her mouth.

I am interested to see what happens. The two tier system is a big improvement, and increasing to 30 or 60 days to get a petition out for a re-vote would make it much easier to do. Also I like the 75% majority idea for adding restrictions to property not currently restricted, that was floated by the short haired black council member ( I dont know her name) but I really liked the idea.

Even the tone of the meeting seemed different. Almost like they were losing and they knew it. I would sure love to win on this issue.

Clutterbuck seems to actually have listened to the homeowners. I wonder if they will accept her ammendment proposition.

[RedScare]

Here is a quick rundown of the options being suggested by certain Council Members:

1. The amendments offered by Oliver Pennington will require that all districts be re-considered by the city. We think this is a great option. We will still have to work towards educating the community about what a "yes" vote will mean to them. This is real due process, the most straight forward, and will mean that if there isn't a super majority response to become a district, we will have a year break from this to see how this works in the districts that do get this protection.

2. The amendments from Ann Clutterbuck will keep all existing historic districts under the rules we had before the moratorium. If a district wanted to become a protected district, they would have to petition under the new rules. We would still have the 90 day waiver and still have to get a certificate of appropriateness for renovations or new construction. The downside is that we still will have to deal with the HAHC who has been a difficult group to deal with for some homeowners but we would have protection that worked 85% of the time. We also will likely have a push by the same group that got us into an historic district to get signatures to be an historic district with the new protection. They will only need to get 10% to start the process again. This option offers every district due process.

Either of these options mean the battle over this issue will be significantly less contentious and require less work on the part of our group. We won't have to jump through hoops and spend the next month, and into the holiday season, and into next year actively working on this. It means there is an end in sight, which we all welcome!! both of these options eliminate the transition process and give us either a straight-forward vote or the proponents have to petition everyone again and we can say no by not signing.

3. This is the worst of the three. The number of days in the transition will likely change from 15 to at least 30, and perhaps 60. The 25% threshold may or may not be lowered to 10% but we aren't counting on it as we have heard that the mayor is not willing to yield on that. In this option, we have to go get the signatures on their petition. The city will then allow us to reconsider being a district by sending out cards for us to vote. Then they record that vote and decide whether we remain a district or if our district boundary shrinks. It means we really have to step up and will be very busy for an undetermined length of time.

I stole this from an email I received, but I don't think she'll mind.

VERY IMPORTANT: Please email ALL members of Council, telling them which option you support! Those not in a current historic district may be satisfied with CW Clutterbuck's amendment, but I recommend that you support your neighbors in historic districts by supporting CM Pennington's amendment. Make sure you say specifically that you do not support the current amendment. The members of council are likely counting 'yes' and 'no' emails, so your email is VERY important. Ask your friends to write in also.

Scroll up a few posts for every council member's email address.

[RedScare]

Here are the email addresses of Council.

districta@houstontx.gov; districtb@houstontx.gov; districtc@houstontx.gov; districtd@houstontx.gov; districte@houstontx.gov; districtf@houstontx.gov; districtg@houstontx.gov; districth@houstontx.gov; districti@houstontx.gov; atlarge1@houstontx.gov; atlarge2@houstontx.gov; atlarge3@houstontx.gov; atlarge4@houstontx.gov; atlarge5@houstontx.gov; historicpreservation@houstontx.gov

Simply copy and paste the entire 3 lines into your email address bar.

Edited October 8, 2010 by RedScare

[OutfieldDan]

Unfortunately there was no specific discussion about the 10% minority that can abuse the ordinance and force historic district rules on their entire neighborhood every year or nearly every year. Therefore I plan to present this topic to City Council next Tuesday. I think we need another good turnout to support our opposition position.