The Heights Historic District Guidelines & Ordinances

[fwki]

I think the time for opposing the ordinance has come and gone. If one really wants to right the ship, it's time to oppose (and expose) the comissioners themselves. Are they really idiots or are they corrupt? I don't know given just the evidence cited here, but even random abuse is unacceptable. Bring public pressure on the commissioners to perform professionally and consistently or expose them for what they are. Who are these people? What are their qualifications and background? Start threads on each of these public figures, and if one gets hot, a journalist will pick it up.

Edit: HAHC Members

Ann Collum, Citizen Representative

Debra Blacklock-Sloan, Cultural History

Organization, Representative

David Bucek, Architect

Venita Ray, Citizen Representative

Dr. William H. Kellar, Historian

Doug Elliott, Citizen Representative

John Cosgrove, Real Estate Appraiser

Rob D. Hellyer, Remodeler/Builder

Jorge Garcia-Herreros, Archaeologist

Romulo Tim Cisneros, Commercial

Business Representative

Charles Stava, Citizen Representative

Phoebe Tudor, Chair, Architectural

Historian

Maverick Welsh, Citizen Representative

[RedScare]

I was amused reading the minutes of the last meeting. During public comments, HAHC members expressed surprise that virtually all of the complaints and problems were coming from the Heights HDs. Really? Imagine that. You impose a highly restrictive ordinance on a neighborhood overwhelmingly opposed to the ordinance, and then act surprised when that overwhelming opposition manifests itself at your meetings? In your efforts to soothe animosity toward your ordinance, you promise that you will be reasonable, but feign surprise when people find that you are just as unreasonable...or more so...after the ordinance is in place?

Yes, they are morons. And, yes, it should come as no surprise that they favor those who are on their side. That is why most of us complain about the capricious and arbitrary rulings of the board, but those who sit on their neighborhood's deed restriction committee never seem to have any problem with them.

[fwki]

Now that we live under the spectre of the HAHC, it is important to know the rules. Unfortunately the Commission has no publicly available guidelines. Luckily the HAHC chair published some guidelines when she worked under the Napoleonic Code for the New Orleans Historic District Landmarks Commission. For those wondering about HardiePlank, I will quote Phoebe Tudor, architectural historian and Chair of the HAHC:

"The general principle to keep in mind is to strive to use historically appropriate materials in architecturally appropriate ways. Correct proportions on everything - from the spacing of balusters in a railing to the height of the railing itself to the to the dimensions of doors and windows - are vitally important to the success of a project and to achieving a good restoration."

Source: New Orleans Preservation In Print, October 1985

http://www.prcno.org/programs/preservationinprint/piparchives/1985%20PIP/October%201985/14.html

We're hosed.

[s3mh]

Now that we live under the spectre of the HAHC, it is important to know the rules. Unfortunately the Commission has no publicly available guidelines. Luckily the HAHC chair published some guidelines when she worked under the Napoleonic Code for the New Orleans Historic District Landmarks Commission. For those wondering about HardiePlank, I will quote Phoebe Tudor, architectural historian and Chair of the HAHC:

"The general principle to keep in mind is to strive to use historically appropriate materials in architecturally appropriate ways. Correct proportions on everything - from the spacing of balusters in a railing to the height of the railing itself to the to the dimensions of doors and windows - are vitally important to the success of a project and to achieving a good restoration."

Source: New Orleans Preservation In Print, October 1985

http://www.prcno.org...%201985/14.html

We're hosed.

Sure they do: http://www.houstontx.gov/planning/HistoricPres/houston_heights_design_guide.html

[fwki]

Sorry S3mh, I don't live in either of those 2 districts, but that propaganda brochure on the Houston Heights sure was slick and it even had more photos than words, which is better for me and probably most of the HAHC. Maybe I can just send in some photos with my application....here's what it looks like now, and here is one down the street with the look I'm shooting for.

[heightslurker]

so, just for future record, here....and for anyone curious..

we have a contributing property, with original 117 siding....

we wanted hardi to replace our (from outside appearances) non rotted, partially original, 117 siding...

at first hearing, HAHC deferred us (for a month until the next hearing) so they could send out an inspector to see how much was rotted (their condition for letting us replace the siding they considered historic and precious)

hahc found little rot and led us to believe that they would not approve of any siding replacement (except for the few rotted ones) with new 117, hardi or otherwise....

in an effort to move the hell on and not have possible months more of appeals...we just cried uncle on the whole deal and agreed to keep the original siding...and on that note, we finally got a COA to do the rest of the stuff we want...addition, etc...

ofcourse, we never pushed them to actually deny us (were they bluffing? i guess i'll never know)

For all the cases i've heard where people get hardi? have not mirrored my case at all.....

everyone has a unique set of circumstances and you therefore get a unique answer from the HAHC......(i guess)

[OutfieldDan]

I saw Bill Baldwin about a month ago in front of one of the Heights homes on tour. He said that there is a lawsuit that should be happening now that is considering the disingenuous designation of Heights Historic Districts in the first place on the basis of the City voting common areas for historic designation [i guess without City Council Approval].

Anyway, I wonder if there is any news about this.

[Another Heights]

@Heights Lurker

The HAHC meetings can all be found at:

http://houstontx.city.swagit.com/Specialty/?q=Houston+Archaeological+and+Historical+Commission&yy=

They are under Specialty, then search for Houston Archaeological and Historic Commission to find them in the future. They are worth watching. What a kangaroo court!

[heightslurker]

Another Heights- thanks for that! I knew it must be somewhere out there.....

[woolie]

Glad I live in ahistorical bliss.

[Heights Homeowner]

The first lawsuit has been filed against the City of Houston. The fili hng can be seen online here:

http://www.hcdistrictclerk.com/edocs/Public/Search.aspx

Perhaps this lawsuit will get things done the way they should have been done. Time to hold our government accountable.

[Heights Homeowner]

The lawsuit has been filed. Check it out here:

http://www.hcdistric...lic/Search.aspx

[RedScare]

The lawsuit has been filed. Check it out here:

http://www.hcdistric...lic/Search.aspx

Plaintiff? Defendant? Cause #?

Thanks.

Found it.

Sostak v. City of Houston

Cause #2012-36113

215th District Court

[heightslurker]

The lawsuit has been filed. Check it out here:

http://www.hcdistric...lic/Search.aspx

do you have a cause # ?

[Heights Homeowner]

http://www.hcdistrictclerk.com/edocs/Public/Search.aspx

Sostak v. City of Houston

Cause #2012-36113

215th District Court

[Heights Homeowner]

Cause #2012-36113

[RedScare]

Thanks for posting that Heights Homeowner. I'll see if I can get a pdf of the pleadings posted somewhere. Anyone know how to host a pdf? I doubt Wayne wants it posted verbatim in a post on this thread.

[Heights Homeowner]

To post the pdf, go to the bottom right corner and click on more post options. It lets you upload a document.

[RedScare]

Original Petition

Historic District Lawsuit Petition.pdf

[longhorn]

I haven't read the claims in the Petition yet, but Judge Kirkland is pro-historic preservation. Check out the judge's bio:

http://www.justex.net/courts/civil/CourtSection.aspx?crt=17&sid=281

[RedScare]

I haven't read the claims in the Petition yet, but Judge Kirkland is pro-historic preservation. Check out the judge's bio:

http://www.justex.ne...?crt=17&sid=281

He has an opponent in November. Ken Shortreed's bio...

https://sites.google.com/site/kenshortreed/biography

[fwki]

Thanks for the link to Ken Shortreed. I just Paypal'd a donation and I want a yard sign.

[SilverJK]

^{That didn't take too long...}

[Marksmu]

I read the complaint....its pretty well got the facts and timeline 100% correct, which is great... When you really lay out the method that was taken to shove this ordinance down our throat it reeks of bad politics....Without doing more research Im not sure about all of his causes of action, and I am far from up to speed on how/when you can sue the city...I know there is a level of immunity which has to be overcome and the complaint did not address that....but I could VERY easily be wrong, as I have done absolutely zero work in litigation against a city....I may have a couple other causes of action that I could think of...I wonder if they need more properties to join the suit to have additional COA's? Ive still got a house that would fit nicely into this timeline...

I also think that the judge this case was assigned to is likely to have to recuse himself from the issue since he has taken a stand on historic preservation in his court bio.

Just b/c it was assigned to his court does not mean that he will be the judge who ultimately hears the issue.

[fwki]

...I also think that the judge this case was assigned to is likely to have to recuse himself from the issue since he has taken a stand on historic preservation in his court bio.

Just b/c it was assigned to his court does not mean that he will be the judge who ultimately hears the issue.

If he doesn't recuse himself, Ken Shortreed could cite it as an example of legislating from the bench, which is a hot campaign issue.

From Shortreed's bio: "His political philosophy is straight forward. Judges should not legislate from the bench. They are to interpret and enforce the law not make it up!"

[JJxvi]

Thats a really historic looking 5 house stretch that this house sits in the middle of, it would have been a shame to lose that one (eyeroll)

[RedScare]

Thats a really historic looking 5 house stretch that this house sits in the middle of, it would have been a shame to lose that one (eyeroll)

Heh heh. That's the house that s3mh was bragging about in the 14th Street Variance thread.

http://search.har.com/engine/1643-Arlington-Houston-TX-77008_HAR35148664.htm

[Marksmu]

Heh heh. That's the house that s3mh was bragging about in the 14th Street Variance thread.

http://search.har.co...HAR35148664.htm

Still not sold....148 days on the market....must not be quite the gem that everyone makes it out to be....most of the properties that don't suck are less than 40 days right now.

[JJxvi]

I particularly like how the empty lot next door serves to frame this home when viewed from the north and give you a true appreciation for its historic nature.

[s3mh]

Heh heh. That's the house that s3mh was bragging about in the 14th Street Variance thread.

http://search.har.co...HAR35148664.htm

Yes it is. That is some deprivation of due process when the historic ordinance causes your home to be flipped into a $895k, 3800 sq ft renovation/addition. At lot of people in this country wish they had their due process rights violated like this.

Kirkland will be recused. He also got drawn for the firefighter's pension lawsuit. The City did not oppose the motion for recusal. Kirkland may also have a duty to volunteer for recusal as he owns property in the 6th Ward that are subject to the ordinance. And, absent a royal Romney implosion, he will get swept out in November thanks to party line voting. But I do not think that a Republican will be any better than a Democrat in this kind of fight. State court judges do not like having to jack with the City.

I am surprised that there is no constitutional takings allegation. I can only assume that is because the plaintiffs ended up with a profit when they sold, just not as good a profit as they thought they would get with a tear down. Any claim that they lost money as a result of the ordinance will be very difficult to support as they bought at the height of the real estate bubble and sold at the bottom of the bust. A similar old bungalow on Courtlandt that needs updating is on the market for $310,000 and is already under contract within days of listing:

http://search.har.com/engine/1630-Cortlandt-St-Houston-TX-77008_HAR7731949.htm

At best, the plaintiffs were damaged more by market timing than the ordinance.

There is no substantive due process issue here. There is no right to be heard prior to the enactment of a municipal ordinance regulating residential construction.

The election code allegation is also totally off base. There was no election. The City set up a process to allow homeowners the opportunity to create and disband historic districts. The City has absolute discretion to carry out its business and cannot be challenged just because someone thinks that they have a better idea.

There is also the issue of standing. There are a lot of complaints about Heights South and other HDs, but the plaintiffs lived in the Heights East. They have no standing to complain about what happened in other districts.

Then, there is sovereign immunity. No attorney's fees or damages outside of the weak constitutional claim. Sovereign immunity is not waived.

As for the remainder, it will essentially be the City saying that their actions (notices, meetings, etc.) were sufficient, and the plaintiffs will have the burden of showing that the City's actions were completely arbitrary and a clear abuse of municipal discretion. That means that the City just has to come forward with any reason for what they did and they will win. The court can only rule against a municipality if the municipality is unable to come up with any basis for their actions. Even the City of Houston can meet that burden. Arguments that the City's reasoning was bad, unfair, etc. do not cut it. You cannot just air your greivances against the municipality in a lawsuit. And that is all this lawsuit is doing. They would do better by picking one or two issues and narrowing the lawsuit instead of throwing everything up a against the wall to see what sticks.

At the end of the day, the judge will boot this case on summary judgment because it is the easy thing to do. The court of appeals defer heavily to the judgment of municipalities and rarely interfere with municipal decision making. Thus, a trial court plays it safe by standing by the muncipality.