The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

There was an interesting article in the Sunday edition of the Tulsa World...
The article can be read in it's entirety at the following link..

Tulsa World (//%22http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=070331_7_G4_Tulsa57076&breadcrumb=Article%20Search%22)

The article consists of a brief history of the formation of the Preservation Commission, and also references a Board of Adjustments case that was heard recently...
So that everyone is almost on the same page.... I happened to see the Board of Adjustment hearings that day and watched the entire case referenced in the article..

Essentially; the case revolved around someone in Maple Ridge that had installed replacement windows without first procuring a "Certificate of Appropriateness"....

The resident, of Maple Ridge, went before the Preservation Commission after the fact and was denied a "COA"..

They hired an Attorney and took their case to the BOA...

The Ruling, issued by the Board of Adjustments, overturned the Preservation Commission denial.

The resident received permission to keep their windows and so forth and so on...

One small side note.... One of the BOA members cited a letter, that was written by John Brooks Walton regarding this case, as proof that the replacement windows installed were appropriate.

---

This area, of the culture, that makes up Tulsa is one that is very troubling.....

Here you have John Brooks Walton... A premier architect and what many call the Grandfather of Historical Preservation in Tulsa.... at odds with Susan McKee, Founder and current President of COHN >"Coalition of Historic Neighborhoods"...

I guess the most ironic thing about all of this... It is published in the Tulsa World.. The Giant that brought down the Skelly Building.  

---

Sometime in the near future... people need to realize that this sort of thing can do no good for any cause...



Comments.... Thoughts..... Ideas.....?

I was there for the meeting (for a different reason), and I was horrified that they let it go.  The homeowner claimed they didn't know they had to get permission - I call this hogwash.  The windows could not have been more different from the originals.  I understand the board's desire not to be complete a**holes and have people throw away thousands of dollars worth of windows, however, this has set a very dangerous precedent.  I think a compromise of at least replacing the windows on the front of the house to match the originals would have at least given the preservation commission a little respect.

And the letter from John Brooks Walton that made such an impression on the BOA?  What authority is he?  Is he on the preservation commission?  NO!  Is he the city's architectural God?  Other than writing some books, what makes him the end-all, be-all of architecture in Tulsa?  I'm sure the Preservation Commission could have found another architect to write a letter saying the exact opposite....I think this was a friend of John Brooks Walton kind of thing.

It was very likely a friend of the family sort of thing. Rico, did you notice who the owners of that house are? None other than the partners of the Warrens in the Channels proposal. They didn't know they lived in a historically protected neighborhood? Maybe thats why it made it into the World. The same audacity and elitist attitude they brought to river development.

I live a couple blocks from the house. The windows are attractive but from a historical preservation perspective they are abysmal. Windows on these homes are the eyes of house. They are integral to the period look of the home. Every once in a while someone tears out the old wooden multi-light windows with the warbled glass and replace them with vinyl clad mobile home style windows thinking they are going to increase energy efficiency. I am skeptical that it has much effect but it makes the home more salable to the tastless suburbans who expect it in their homes and are rapidly moving in. Usually it is done quite quickly, in a day or less, to keep from attracting the wrath of the preservation folks. They might as well go the whole route and put on aluminum siding to totally botch their home.

I may sound like a hypocrite on this one, but, I think they should have stood their ground. The thing is, I actually thought this article was in reference to the proposed Mc Birney Mansion addition when I first read it.  I am for that addition btw, and while I was reading it I was thinking that there must be exceptions made for unique circumstances for any rules and regulations, that they shouldn't be completely inflexible and etched in stone.

However, I suppose the one commonality for my opinion in both cases would be that I think things should "look the part". The mansion addition looked like the old mansion, but the new windows on the home did not look like the old ones.

I find it interesting that this homeowner, and many other people, often do not recognize that those homes are historic or in a historic neighborhood having preservation concerns.  However one can not always tell whether a home is considered historic or not.  Do all homes regardless of age require a "certificate of appropriateness"?  Is each home "labled" as historic in some way?  Are you informed when you purchase the home? I would think you should be, it wouldnt be right to buy a home in the area thinking one thing, only to find out you couldn't do what you expected you could do and would have comply with historic preservation concerns. I find it odd that there isn't some legal procedure in place to let people know when they are considering buying the home? It would almost seem that you would have to in order to make things legally binding.

I was at the meeting as well.  Here are some of my observations:

1.  The TPC is required to adopt and follow guidelines to remain a Certified Local Government (and hence receive money), which they did in this circumstance.

2.  The guidelines that they followed are based upon the Department of the Interior's guidelines.  Failure to follow the guidelines can jeopardize National Register Status.  The neighborhood agreed upon the guidelines when HP zoning was put into place.

3.  Fifteen volunteers comprise the TPC.  In addition to the hours they spend doing the commission's work, they are devoted to educating themselves about historic preservation.  They have training, reading materials, discussions, etc....  As far as I know, Mr. Walton has no expertise in historic preservation, has never attended (until now) a TPC meeting, and has never read any of the neighborhood guidelines.  That the BOA would take one man's opinion over the hard working volunteers of the TPC is a slap in their face.

4.  The BOA ruled that it would be an "undue hardship" to force the homeowners to remove their windows.  First, this was an appeal of a decision, not a variance--they were suppose to determine whether the TPC was in error.  Second, even if it was a variance, hardships cannot be self imposed.  That they replaced all of their windows without permission was their own fault.

My hope is that the BOA will at some point seek to learn more about historic preservation, what it means, and the tremendous economic asset it can be for our city.

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheArtist

I may sound like a hypocrite on this one, but, I think they should have stood their ground. The thing is, I actually thought this article was in reference to the proposed Mc Birney Mansion addition when I first read it.  I am for that addition btw, and while I was reading it I was thinking that there must be exceptions made for unique circumstances for any rules and regulations, that they shouldn't be completely inflexible and etched in stone.

However, I suppose the one commonality for my opinion in both cases would be that I think things should "look the part". The mansion addition looked like the old mansion, but the new windows on the home did not look like the old ones.

I find it interesting that this homeowner, and many other people, often do not recognize that those homes are historic or in a historic neighborhood having preservation concerns.  However one can not always tell whether a home is considered historic or not.  Do all homes regardless of age require a "certificate of appropriateness"?  Is each home "labled" as historic in some way?  Are you informed when you purchase the home? I would think you should be, it wouldnt be right to buy a home in the area thinking one thing, only to find out you couldn't do what you expected you could do and would have comply with historic preservation concerns. I find it odd that there isn't some legal procedure in place to let people know when they are considering buying the home? It would almost seem that you would have to in order to make things legally binding.

---

Yes, there should be exceptions made for unique circumstances.  This was not one.  This homeowner could have followed the rules and gotten new windows.  They could have replaced the windows with windows matching the mullion pattern, gotten permission from the TPC, and everythign would have been dandy.  Instead, they got rid of a double hung windows and replaced them with casements.  You can't be more different.  And the ignorance of the BOA members was perhaps the most disheartening.  One member said "When I have a toothache, I go to a dentist, and when I want to know about architecture, I'd ask John Brooks Walton."  Well, THAT is a complete slap in the face to the 15 members of the TPC!  Is he implying that they don't know what is or isn't historically apppropriate?

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheArtist

I may sound like a hypocrite on this one, but, I think they should have stood their ground. The thing is, I actually thought this article was in reference to the proposed Mc Birney Mansion addition when I first read it.  I am for that addition btw, and while I was reading it I was thinking that there must be exceptions made for unique circumstances for any rules and regulations, that they shouldn't be completely inflexible and etched in stone.

However, I suppose the one commonality for my opinion in both cases would be that I think things should "look the part". The mansion addition looked like the old mansion, but the new windows on the home did not look like the old ones.

I find it interesting that this homeowner, and many other people, often do not recognize that those homes are historic or in a historic neighborhood having preservation concerns.  However one can not always tell whether a home is considered historic or not.  Do all homes regardless of age require a "certificate of appropriateness"?  Is each home "labled" as historic in some way?  Are you informed when you purchase the home? I would think you should be, it wouldnt be right to buy a home in the area thinking one thing, only to find out you couldn't do what you expected you could do and would have comply with historic preservation concerns. I find it odd that there isn't some legal procedure in place to let people know when they are considering buying the home? It would almost seem that you would have to in order to make things legally binding.

---

BTW, every house in that neighborhood, regardless of age, requires a certificate of appropriateness.  You can change roofing (as long as it's the same material) and paint colors without permission.  But major changes such as doors, windows, and siding, have to be approved!  This homeowner knew damn good and well where they lived and chose to ignore it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by tulsa1603

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheArtist

I may sound like a hypocrite on this one, but, I think they should have stood their ground. The thing is, I actually thought this article was in reference to the proposed Mc Birney Mansion addition when I first read it.  I am for that addition btw, and while I was reading it I was thinking that there must be exceptions made for unique circumstances for any rules and regulations, that they shouldn't be completely inflexible and etched in stone.

However, I suppose the one commonality for my opinion in both cases would be that I think things should "look the part". The mansion addition looked like the old mansion, but the new windows on the home did not look like the old ones.

I find it interesting that this homeowner, and many other people, often do not recognize that those homes are historic or in a historic neighborhood having preservation concerns.  However one can not always tell whether a home is considered historic or not.  Do all homes regardless of age require a "certificate of appropriateness"?  Is each home "labled" as historic in some way?  Are you informed when you purchase the home? I would think you should be, it wouldnt be right to buy a home in the area thinking one thing, only to find out you couldn't do what you expected you could do and would have comply with historic preservation concerns. I find it odd that there isn't some legal procedure in place to let people know when they are considering buying the home? It would almost seem that you would have to in order to make things legally binding.

---

BTW, every house in that neighborhood, regardless of age, requires a certificate of appropriateness.  You can change roofing (as long as it's the same material) and paint colors without permission.  But major changes such as doors, windows, and siding, have to be approved!  This homeowner knew damn good and well where they lived and chose to ignore it.

---

I have to agree. It is not plausible that these well heeled, well educated owners somehow missed out on the status of this neighborhood and their responsibilities as an owner. Every realtor knows and informs the buyer, every contractor is or should be knowledgeable when working here. Don't think for a moment that I could have done the same thing and got an exception.

The preservation district was constructed to protect the very investment most people covet most, their homes. You can walk across the street from this home and see the result of "improvements" made prior to TPC and compare. Aluminum siding, double hung windows replaced with what looks like storm windows and front porch design alterations. All acceptable in the 60's and considered wise investments. However, they decreased the value of the home as a new generation moved in looking for the quality and beauty of older construction.

Once a homeowner realizes that he pays extra to have double hung multi-pane windows glazed and painted, that front porches need attention when they leak, and that scraping and painting wood siding is ongoing and expensive they tend to look for cheaper solutions. Over time the character of the neiborhood and its resell value starts to diminish.

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheArtist


I find it interesting that this homeowner, and many other people, often do not recognize that those homes are historic or in a historic neighborhood having preservation concerns.  However one can not always tell whether a home is considered historic or not.  Do all homes regardless of age require a "certificate of appropriateness"?  Is each home "labled" as historic in some way?  Are you informed when you purchase the home? I would think you should be, it wouldnt be right to buy a home in the area thinking one thing, only to find out you couldn't do what you expected you could do and would have comply with historic preservation concerns. I find it odd that there isn't some legal procedure in place to let people know when they are considering buying the home? It would almost seem that you would have to in order to make things legally binding.

---

For those who don't know, there are five neighborhoods with HP zoning overlay--Gillette, Yorktown, Swan Lake, North Maple Ridge, and Brady Heights.  This is different from National Register status, which does not limit what you do to your house.  When purchasing a home, the realtor is required to give the purchaser a disclosure statement that indicates that the property is HP zoned.  Unfortunately, it is simply one of many documents, which often are not read.  Some realtors make a special effort to notify their clients--Walter and Associates goes so far as to provide new homeowners with copies of the guidelines for the neighborhood.  Neighborhood associations also do a good job of notifying their homeowners of the COA obligation, and recently the TPC has sent out notice reminding people. There is only so much you can do to inform people, and some people will chose to conveniently not know the law when it suits them.

As Tulsa1603 says, all homeowners in hp neighborhoods must obtain COA; however, the guidelines are geared towards individual houses.  If the house is "non-contributing" or new construction, there is a lot more flexibility allowed in what can be done to the property.  This is important to keep in mind, since the BOA seemed persuaded by the fact that some houses in the neighborhood did have casement windows.  The guidelines require preserving the historic character of the individual houses as the were originally built--not just in keeping with the rest of the neighborhood.

I want to go by and look at this hideous abomination. Where is it?

quote:

---

Originally posted by recyclemichael

I want to go by and look at this hideous abomination. Where is it?

---

We don't let just anyone into this neighborhood. You know someone?

BTW its not hideous, just not conforming to standards. Sort of like taking a 64Chevy and adding spinners, bling and hydraulics. You won't get into as many car shows!

quote:

---

Originally posted by recyclemichael

I want to go by and look at this hideous abomination. Where is it?

---

20th & Madison, west of the house that has been under construction for around 20 years or so.

........"all homeowners in hp neighborhoods must obtain COA; however, the guidelines are geared towards individual houses. If the house is "non-contributing" or new construction, there is a lot more flexibility allowed in what can be done to the property. This is important to keep in mind, since the BOA seemed persuaded by the fact that some houses in the neighborhood did have casement windows. The guidelines require preserving the historic character of the individual houses as the were originally built--not just in keeping with the rest of the neighborhood."


That interesting to know.  I had never heard the term "non contributing" used before.  And the "guidelines preserving the historic character of the individual home" is important as well.  

There are quite a few homes in that neighborhood that were built in the 70s and such that do not fit in the neighborhood at all.

However there are homes that do not exactly fit, but are none the less historic.  I remember driving by this little salt box type home near Philbrook and thinking,  "That little thing doesn't quite fit here, it looks out of place."  But then discovered the home dates to the mid 1700s!  There were actually 2 New England farmhouses that were going to be razed and a wealthy Tulsa lady bought them, shipped them here, recreated one authentic "salt box" home from the best parts. In a way its probably more historic than many of the homes in the area. But still does not really "fit in" lol.  

But I do like driving by it now with someone who is visiting.  I tell them that home was built in the 1700s.  It usually takes them a few minutes, then they look at me with a puzzled look and go "What?" [:P]

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheArtist

........"all homeowners in hp neighborhoods must obtain COA; however, the guidelines are geared towards individual houses. If the house is "non-contributing" or new construction, there is a lot more flexibility allowed in what can be done to the property. This is important to keep in mind, since the BOA seemed persuaded by the fact that some houses in the neighborhood did have casement windows. The guidelines require preserving the historic character of the individual houses as the were originally built--not just in keeping with the rest of the neighborhood."


That interesting to know.  I had never heard the term "non contributing" used before.  And the "guidelines preserving the historic character of the individual home" is important as well.  

There are quite a few homes in that neighborhood that were built in the 70s and such that do not fit in the neighborhood at all.

However there are homes that do not exactly fit, but are none the less historic.  I remember driving by this little salt box type home near Philbrook and thinking,  "That little thing doesn't quite fit here, it looks out of place."  But then discovered the home dates to the mid 1700s!  There were actually 2 New England farmhouses that were going to be razed and a wealthy Tulsa lady bought them, shipped them here, recreated one authentic "salt box" home from the best parts. In a way its probably more historic than many of the homes in the area. But still does not really "fit in" lol.  

But I do like driving by it now with someone who is visiting.  I tell them that home was built in the 1700s.  It usually takes them a few minutes, then they look at me with a puzzled look and go "What?" [:P]

---

Cool story. I would like to see that house.

Remember that the house in question is in one of the 5 neighborhoods with HP overlay zoning. Specifically the North Maple Ridge area. That now generally includes several developments including South Side & Morningside- 15th to 21st, the railroad path to Peoria.

The house actually sits in the original Maple Ridge which only encompasses from 18th to 21st, Detroit to Peoria. It has few homes built outside of the era.

quote:

---

Originally posted by recyclemichael

I want to go by and look at this hideous abomination. Where is it?

---

I'm not saying it's hideous or an abomination.  The windows are quality windows, and would look great on any house.  But if we are going to go through the trouble of having Historic Zoning, then we should follow the rules, especially on such a major factor as windows.  I'm all for replacing the windows, just make them match!  Heck, if they had made them match, they would have probably been cheaper anyway!

What really ticks me off about it is when I go before the HP board, follow the legal method of doing things, and try to do everything right, I can get hammered on something as relatively minor as sidewalk material.  Going before the board can be a major PITA.  But this guy can come in and completely ignore major rules in the guidelines, plead ignorance, adn get away with it.  I guess the lesson is that from now on I should encourage my clients to just go ahead and do whatever they want and say "But it cost us $xx,xxx to do this you can't make us rip it out??"

Historic Districts Are Good For Your Pocketbook (//%22http://www.state.sc.us/scdah/propval.pdf%22)

"Historic district designation provides protection from negative externalities. The economic value of this protection far outweighs the negative value of any use, maintenance or other restrictions placed by the ordinances. We know that the protection far outweighs the restrictions because the value jump is both economically and statistically significant."


Economic Impacts of Historic Preservation in Florida (//%22http://www.law.ufl.edu/cgr/pdf/historic_report.pdf%22)

"FINDINGS: Comparative Property Values Analysis

* Historic preservation helps to maintain property values in Florida.

* In at least fifteen of the eighteen cases studied, property in the historic district appreciated greater than in the non-historic comparison neighborhoods.

* No instance was found where historic designation depressed property values."


Planning for Historic Preservation (//%22http://www.plannersweb.com/wfiles/w191.html%22)

* Creation of local historic districts stabilizes, and often increases residential and commercial property values.

* Increases in property values in historic districts are typically greater than increases in the community at large.

Here are some resolutions adopted into the platform of the Tulsa County Democratic Party involving historic preservation:

A. We Support:

1. Establishment of prior review processes such as conservation districts, historic preservation districts, and neighborhood stabilization zoning, before demolition or development occurs in historic neighborhoods and places.

9. Preservation of the McBirney Mansion and open space in its historic state.

B. We Oppose:

1. Any destructive influences or actions in and around historic places.

quote:

---

Originally posted by pmcalk

I was at the meeting as well.  Here are some of my observations:

1.  The TPC is required to adopt and follow guidelines to remain a Certified Local Government (and hence receive money), which they did in this circumstance.

2.  The guidelines that they followed are based upon the Department of the Interior's guidelines.  Failure to follow the guidelines can jeopardize National Register Status.  The neighborhood agreed upon the guidelines when HP zoning was put into place.

3.  Fifteen volunteers comprise the TPC.  In addition to the hours they spend doing the commission's work, they are devoted to educating themselves about historic preservation.  They have training, reading materials, discussions, etc....  As far as I know, Mr. Walton has no expertise in historic preservation, has never attended (until now) a TPC meeting, and has never read any of the neighborhood guidelines.  That the BOA would take one man's opinion over the hard working volunteers of the TPC is a slap in their face.

4.  The BOA ruled that it would be an "undue hardship" to force the homeowners to remove their windows.  First, this was an appeal of a decision, not a variance--they were suppose to determine whether the TPC was in error.  Second, even if it was a variance, hardships cannot be self imposed.  That they replaced all of their windows without permission was their own fault.

My hope is that the BOA will at some point seek to learn more about historic preservation, what it means, and the tremendous economic asset it can be for our city.

---

If the BOA ruled improperly, i.e. a variance instead of finding that the TPC was in error, then somebody could appeal to District Court.  If the court agrees, the judge would likely return the case to the BOA for the proper type of decision.  Not sure what that would accomplish...

I really like the proposed new addition to the Mc Birney Mansion.  Any word on how thats progressing?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chicken Little

quote:

---

Originally posted by pmcalk

I was at the meeting as well.  Here are some of my observations:

1.  The TPC is required to adopt and follow guidelines to remain a Certified Local Government (and hence receive money), which they did in this circumstance.

2.  The guidelines that they followed are based upon the Department of the Interior's guidelines.  Failure to follow the guidelines can jeopardize National Register Status.  The neighborhood agreed upon the guidelines when HP zoning was put into place.

3.  Fifteen volunteers comprise the TPC.  In addition to the hours they spend doing the commission's work, they are devoted to educating themselves about historic preservation.  They have training, reading materials, discussions, etc....  As far as I know, Mr. Walton has no expertise in historic preservation, has never attended (until now) a TPC meeting, and has never read any of the neighborhood guidelines.  That the BOA would take one man's opinion over the hard working volunteers of the TPC is a slap in their face.

4.  The BOA ruled that it would be an "undue hardship" to force the homeowners to remove their windows.  First, this was an appeal of a decision, not a variance--they were suppose to determine whether the TPC was in error.  Second, even if it was a variance, hardships cannot be self imposed.  That they replaced all of their windows without permission was their own fault.

My hope is that the BOA will at some point seek to learn more about historic preservation, what it means, and the tremendous economic asset it can be for our city.

---

If the BOA ruled improperly, i.e. a variance instead of finding that the TPC was in error, then somebody could appeal to District Court.  If the court agrees, the judge would likely return the case to the BOA for the proper type of decision.  Not sure what that would accomplish...

---

True, but who would take it to court?  Not the TPC--you would then have two boards at odds.  Who would the city attorney be instructed to represent?  Perhaps Maple Ridge neighborhood, but it is a lot to ask a neighborhood to hire an attorney and go to court.  At this point, I believe it is too late to file an appeal, and I think the best course is to simply hope that people learn something from this.

Originally posted by the Artist.

quote:

---

That interesting to know. I had never heard the term "non contributing" used before. And the "guidelines preserving the historic character of the individual home" is important as well.

---

Within an "Historic District"; during the inventory process done by the "National Trust", certain houses because of modifications are deemed "non-contributing", others because they have been retained in pretty much their original state are "contributing"..., and the third category is what is known as "stand-alone".... These structures are so unique that they would be considered "Historic" with or without the others in the District.

One item I have never understood about "HP Overlay"; the guidelines as they pertain to the Districts are written by the representatives from the Districts along with the assistance of the Preservation Commission.... Therefore.... what is OK in one District may or may not be OK in another.

the latest twist in the tale is that as it turns out, it may not have been simply a case of ignorance...

somebody needs to check the date on the lambert's first application for a COA, not the one after the windows were installed... word on the street is they were actually rejected on more than one application before they installed the windows... but they did it anyway...

It's too late to appeal the Board's decision to district court.  You, and any citizen or organization could file the appeal, would have to file with the court within 10 days of the decision; actually been there done that before and 10 calander days was the magic number.

quote:

---

9. Preservation of the McBirney Mansion and open space in its historic state.

B. We Oppose:

1. Any destructive influences or actions in and around historic places.

---

So would that include neglect?

I read the World article about the BOA overruling the Preservation Commission and found it quite interesting.  Myself and my neighbors are having a meeting tomorrow night (Thursday) with Ed Sharrer of the City Planning Department.  Mr. Sharrer has been doing an architectural survey of my neighborhood (Lortondale) for the Preservation Commission towards our application for inclusion on the National Historic Register.  I understand Mr. Sharrer is also involved in surveying Ranch Acres and Riverview for the same goal.

I will raise the subject at tomorrow's meeting and ask Mr. Sharrer for his opinions.  I can already assume what his opinion is, but it should make for some interesting discussion.

Ed Sharrer is a smart guy...way smarter than average.

Let us know what he says.

I agree. Ed is one of the good guys.

Originally posted by OurTulsa.

quote:

---

It's to late to appeal the Board's decision to district court. You, and any citizen or organization could file the appeal, would have to file with the court within 10 days of the decision; actually been there done that before and 10 calander days was the magic number.

---

This another part of the process that I have trouble with....

Even if you file an appeal..

And your appeal is upheld..

It goes back to the BOA and they rule in favor of the Preservation Commission.

Then what.?

What enforcement measures are in place to uphold the "HP Overlay Rules"..?

I know you would be able to have the Historic Trust remove their "contributing" status...

What else...?

Let's take the point one step further...

Originally posted by brunoflipper.

quote:

---

the latest twist in the tale is that as it turns out, it may not have been simply a case of ignorance...

somebody needs to check the date on the lambert's first application for a COA, not the one after the windows were installed... word on the street is they were actually rejected on more than one application before they installed the windows... but they did it anyway...

---

Bruno's post brings out a very strong point...

There are many loopholes to a set of rules that are not law

What exactly could be done to straighten this mess out...?

Anyone have a suggestion?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rico

Originally posted by OurTulsa.

quote:

---

It's to late to appeal the Board's decision to district court. You, and any citizen or organization could file the appeal, would have to file with the court within 10 days of the decision; actually been there done that before and 10 calander days was the magic number.

---

This another part of the process that I have trouble with....

Even if you file an appeal..

And your appeal is upheld..

It goes back to the BOA and they rule in favor of the Preservation Commission.

Then what.?

What enforcement measures are in place to uphold the "HP Overlay Rules"..?

I know you would be able to have the Historic Trust remove their "contributing" status...

What else...?

Let's take the point one step further...

Originally posted by brunoflipper.

quote:

---

the latest twist in the tale is that as it turns out, it may not have been simply a case of ignorance...

somebody needs to check the date on the lambert's first application for a COA, not the one after the windows were installed... word on the street is they were actually rejected on more than one application before they installed the windows... but they did it anyway...

---

Bruno's post brings out a very strong point...

There are many loopholes to a set of rules that are not law

What exactly could be done to straighten this mess out...?

Anyone have a suggestion?

---

This is a topic that really gets me fired up...

Is it NOT law?  Is it not part of the zoning code?  Whenever I turn in a set of plans for work to be done in one of those areas, I don't get a building permit without a Certificate of Appropriateness as part of my package.

But you still pose a very good question.  I tried to get a screening wall excpetion for a client along Peoria.  Despite the fact that there are at least 10 examples of walls that are taller, closer to the road, and more line-of-sight obstructing than what we were proposing, we had to compromise and scale it back quite a bit to please the BOA.  I'm fine with that now that it's all said and done, because I believe in the process.  But my question is, what about all those other walls that were built either without permits, without special exceptions from the BOA, etc?  Who enforces?  Who says "You have to tear this wall down!"  Seems like no one.  If that's the case, what's the point of having rules at all??  Just to cause headaches for those of us that follow them?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rico

Originally posted by OurTulsa.

quote:

---

It's to late to appeal the Board's decision to district court. You, and any citizen or organization could file the appeal, would have to file with the court within 10 days of the decision; actually been there done that before and 10 calander days was the magic number.

---

This another part of the process that I have trouble with....

Even if you file an appeal..

And your appeal is upheld..

It goes back to the BOA and they rule in favor of the Preservation Commission.

Then what.?

What enforcement measures are in place to uphold the "HP Overlay Rules"..?

I know you would be able to have the Historic Trust remove their "contributing" status...

What else...?

Let's take the point one step further...

Originally posted by brunoflipper.

quote:

---

the latest twist in the tale is that as it turns out, it may not have been simply a case of ignorance...

somebody needs to check the date on the lambert's first application for a COA, not the one after the windows were installed... word on the street is they were actually rejected on more than one application before they installed the windows... but they did it anyway...

---

Bruno's post brings out a very strong point...

There are many loopholes to a set of rules that are not law

What exactly could be done to straighten this mess out...?

Anyone have a suggestion?

---

It's law (//%22http://tulsapreservationcommission.org/zoning/ordinance/%22)

^Since obtaining a COA is required by the zoning code, failure to obtain one can result in penalties:

quote:

---

Section 1502:
Any person, firm or corporation violating any provisions of this Code or failing to comply with any of its requirements, including violations of conditions and safeguards established in connection with grants of variance of special exceptions, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than $500.00 or by imprisonment not exceeding 90 days, or by both such fine and imprisonment. Each day that a violation continues shall be deemed a separate offense.

---

However, once a party files a BOA appeal, that prevents the city from imposing any penalty until the BOA decides the appeal.  The TPC understandably attempts to work with homeowners, even when they fail to follow the law.  But it may be necessary for them to start looking towards enforcement methods, when people choose to ignore the law.

quote:

---

Originally posted by pmcalk

^Since obtaining a COA is required by the zoning code, failure to obtain one can result in penalties:

quote:

---

Section 1502:
Any person, firm or corporation violating any provisions of this Code or failing to comply with any of its requirements, including violations of conditions and safeguards established in connection with grants of variance of special exceptions, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than $500.00 or by imprisonment not exceeding 90 days, or by both such fine and imprisonment. Each day that a violation continues shall be deemed a separate offense.

---

However, once a party files a BOA appeal, that prevents the city from imposing any penalty until the BOA decides the appeal.  The TPC understandably attempts to work with homeowners, even when they fail to follow the law.  But it may be necessary for them to start looking towards enforcement methods, when people choose to ignore the law.

---

Could you cite any case that this penalty has been enforced....

I was told recently... By a Lawyer that was connected..

"If you file for a demolition permit, in an Historic District, and the COA is denied...
I know of no action the City would take if you failed to wait the mandated 60 days..."

Demolition, strikes me, as a tad bit more serious of an offense...



From the Preservation Commission website

quote:

---

Historic Preservation Zoning

Historic Preservation Zoning districts are different from National Register districts, although they often overlap. Think of historic preservation zoning as local protection, whereas National Register listing is nationwide recognition. Local HP zoning provides limited protection to historic resources in local development matters, while National Register status provides limited protection only when Federal dollars are used.

Historic neighborhoods seek out historic preservation zoning to provide extra protection from inappropriate alterations and unsympathetic new construction. Generally, the neighborhoods that would qualify for HP zoning are those that would be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. For example, all of Tulsa’s HP-zoned districts are also National Register-listed districts. However, listing in the National Register does not require that the neighborhood pursue local HP zoning.

---

I am not one that believes there should not be a method of protection for such Districts and buildings....

I think the system in Tulsa is in dire need of some serious attention. The direction it is heading is an "us vs. them" non functioning impasse.

"I am not one that believes there should not be a method of protection for such Districts and buildings...."

So are you saying we should allow all the historic areas and buildings of town to be replaced by  developments like the Metro lofts and One Utica Place, Stillwater Bank and Arvest bank? Is this the true look of Tulsa? Does it reflect who we are and from where we have come?

^janie, I do not believe anything I have written is promoting any of the above mentioned things....

What I am attempting to do is to promote a dialogue that will bring about change...

The system, that is now in place, is not that different than many other communities throughout the country..

It needs to be improved upon...

The resources on this board are some of the most intelligent people in their fields..

We need to come up with some sort of a plan to make this system work better...

Once again.....

Ideas... Thoughts..... Suggestions....

quote:

---

Originally posted by janle

"I am not one that believes there should not be a method of protection for such Districts and buildings...."

So are you saying we should allow all the historic areas and buildings of town to be replaced by  developments like the Metro lofts and One Utica Place, Stillwater Bank and Arvest bank? Is this the true look of Tulsa? Does it reflect who we are and from where we have come?

---

I think he's IN FAVOR of the preservation districts if you read his statement closely.  But he, like me, is frustrated that it really has no teeth.  You can do what you want.  I haven't ever heard of a penalty being dealt, a non-conforming structure being modified, etc.  It simply has no enforcement as it is.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rico

^janie, I do not believe anything I have written is promoting any of the above mentioned things....

What I am attempting to do is to promote a dialogue that will bring about change...

The system, that is now in place, is not that different than many other communities throughout the country..

It needs to be improved upon...

The resources on this board are some of the most intelligent people in their fields..

We need to come up with some sort of a plan to make this system work better...

Once again.....

Ideas... Thoughts..... Suggestions....

---

Well, one solution would be to actually enforce the rules that exist.  I think the board as it is, is fine.  It's the enforcement of their decisions that is lacking.  Who enfroces, who is accountable?  If someone builds something that violates zoning code, rather than letting it go, you make them tear it down, you fine them, you do something to penalize them rather than just say "Oh well!"

Rico, I completely read over the "not".

quote:

---

Ed Sharrer is a smart guy...way smarter than average.

Let us know what he says.

---

Way smarter than the last guy who worked there. He was an idiot.

quote:

---

Originally posted by recyclemichael

Ed Sharrer is a smart guy...way smarter than average.

Let us know what he says.

---

We had our neighborhood (Lortondale) meeting last night with Ed Sharrer concerning Lortondale and the National Register application process.  Turnout was about 30 people, which was great for our 3-yr old group.

Towards the end of the presentation, I raised the issue of the BOA/Preservation Commission controversy.  It wasn't directly pertinent to Lortondale at the present time, but I felt it was not too off-topic and wanted to hear his opinions.  I feel I may have put Mr. Sharrer on-the-spot so to speak, as he was there as an official representative of the Preservation Commission, not a private citizen, and he probably felt he was limited in what he could comment.  Anyway, he confirmed the basic facts of the case and that the BOA did in fact, have the legal authority to overturn the TPC decision.  I said I thought that appalling, and that I think the BOA should defer to the judgement of the TPC in matters of historic zoning enforcement, because the historic expertise lies with the TPC, not the BOA.  I asked Mr. Sharrer why the TPC did not pursue the matter through the courts, and he said that they considered it, but it would amount to the "city suing itself" and they decided the potential problems were not worth the effort in this case.  I then remarked that the violating homeowner may have "inside connections" with the BOA or friends in high places, to which we both shared a nervous laugh and then moved on.

Mr. Sharrer said that the TPC and BOA are scheduled for one of their ongoing joint meetings next week.  Apparently they are aware of each others duties and goals, and do not work in total independent isolation from each other.

quote:

---

Originally posted by tulsa1603

QuoteOriginally posted by Rico

^
Well, one solution would be to actually enforce the rules that exist.  I think the board as it is, is fine.  It's the enforcement of their decisions that is lacking.  Who enfroces, who is accountable?  If someone builds something that violates zoning code, rather than letting it go, you make them tear it down, you fine them, you do something to penalize them rather than just say "Oh well!"

---

I am aware of two cases involving my neighbors (maple ridge). One was for removing the overhang of a roof and its supports. The owner honestly did not know of HP status and was elderly and poor. Her home was probably a "non contributing". They pressured her but it was never restored.

The other was a home near the subject house. The owners were forced to remove exterior shutters they added that were not approved. They were angry about it but they did it and then sold the house.

From first hand discussions with both owners I got the impression that they first try to enlighten and encourage. If that fails they begin to threaten. The stories begin to spread throughout the area then people take note. The "approved" signs in front of remodels are very powerful.

quote:

---

Originally posted by waterboy



I am aware of two cases involving my neighbors (maple ridge). One was for removing the overhang of a roof and its supports. The owner honestly did not know of HP status and was elderly and poor. Her home was probably a "non contributing". They pressured her but it was never restored.

The other was a home near the subject house. The owners were forced to remove exterior shutters they added that were not approved. They were angry about it but they did it and then sold the house.

From first hand discussions with both owners I got the impression that they first try to enlighten and encourage. If that fails they begin to threaten.

---

And that my friend is exactly the response you will typically get from the majority....

I am afraid that the "Preservation" thing, in Tulsa, has become one of exclusivity.... rather than inclusive in nature.

I would like to know what is so exclusive about having an appreciation of Historical Architecture...?

You mean that if I live in South Tulsa in what many term a "McMansion".... I would not be able to grasp the concept of "Historical Preservation"...?

A friend gave me a copy of the "Coalition Of Historic Neighborhoods" by-laws....

Unless this has been changed....? You are required to live in a minimum of a National Trust Recognized Historic District.... To be a member...

Do they have a secret handshake as well..?  [;)]

I could understand Officers being required to have a vested interest in an Historic District....

But other than that this is textbook isolation by choice.

For example.... Take any number of people in Tulsa that have an avid interest in Historic Architecture and the Preservation there of.....

They are not involved in the process because of it's exclusivity...

That my friend is a very sad statement..

That is the "us vs. them" mentality that will continue to be the broken cog in the wheel.

---

p.s. the copy of the info I saw on COHN was some time ago... If it has changed I apologize in advance...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rico

And that my friend is exactly the response you will typically get from the majority....

I am afraid that the "Preservation" thing, in Tulsa, has become one of exclusivity.... rather than inclusive in nature.

I would like to know what is so exclusive about having an appreciation of Historical Architecture...?

You mean that if I live in South Tulsa in what many term a "McMansion".... I would not be able to grasp the concept of "Historical Preservation"...?

A friend gave me a copy of the "Coalition Of Historic Neighborhoods" by-laws....

Unless this has been changed....? You are required to live in a minimum of a National Trust Recognized Historic District.... To be a member...

Do they have a secret handshake as well..?  [;)]

I could understand Officers being required to have a vested interest in an Historic District....

But other than that this is textbook isolation by choice.

For example.... Take any number of people in Tulsa that have an avid interest in Historic Architecture and the Preservation there of.....

They are not involved in the process because of it's exclusivity...

That my friend is a very sad statement..

That is the "us vs. them" mentality that will continue to be the broken cog in the wheel.

---

p.s. the copy of the info I saw on COHN was some time ago... If it has changed I apologize in advance...

---

So what you're saying is that anybody should be able to belong to any neighborhood association they want, regardless of where they live? If I live in Jenks, I should have the right to belong to the Maple Ridge Neighborhood Association and vote on their actions?

That's probably not what you meant, but that's in effect what you're saying in your post above. COHN is a coalition made up of representatives from each of the neighborhoods listed on the National Register. That's espressly why COHN exists - to represent those National Register listed neighborhoods in a collective fashion. That probably does make them "exclusive" because there are only a handful of those neighborhoods in town.

It's not like there's any false advertising going on. Read the name again: Coalition of Historic Neighborhoods.

If you're interested in preservation in general, then Tulsa Foundation for Architecture is a wonderful non-profit preservation advocacy group who would love your participation and support.

My understanding of COHN is that it is not limited to those living in neighborhoods with historic designation (either HP or national register).  Those neighborhoods that have such a status are entitled to a board position, but membership is open to anyone.  The president & vice president must reside in a historic neighborhood, but the other officers do not.  The thought was to ensure that the coalition be represented by those who truly have historic preservation as their motivation, while still being inclusive.  Its not a perfect system, but nothing is.

^ p.m. I am very pleased to see that membership in COHN is not limited to Historic Neighborhoods...

By the way I have never seen this link on Tulsa Now... At least not in a post.

http://www.historicneighborhoods.net/

I meant no harm nor disrespect by the above post...

Sometimes things are hard to express .. semantics and all......

All I am trying to say is this.. Their is power in numbers..

There are many in Tulsa that think they can have no effect on something like the "Preservation of Historic Neighborhoods and Buildings"...

Again "No Disrespect" ^ A.J. ... but I would feel rather silly sending someone to the Tulsa Foundation for Architecture if I had a need for them as a comrade in a cause..

One thing that needs to be at the forefront, of this sort of project, would be the education of the potential allies...

The more that are involved in this the better the outcome will be..
IMHO...

[:)]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Steve

quote:

---

Originally posted by recyclemichael

Ed Sharrer is a smart guy...way smarter than average.

Let us know what he says.

---

We had our neighborhood (Lortondale) meeting last night with Ed Sharrer concerning Lortondale and the National Register application process.  Turnout was about 30 people, which was great for our 3-yr old group.

Towards the end of the presentation, I raised the issue of the BOA/Preservation Commission controversy.  It wasn't directly pertinent to Lortondale at the present time, but I felt it was not too off-topic and wanted to hear his opinions.  I feel I may have put Mr. Sharrer on-the-spot so to speak, as he was there as an official representative of the Preservation Commission, not a private citizen, and he probably felt he was limited in what he could comment.  Anyway, he confirmed the basic facts of the case and that the BOA did in fact, have the legal authority to overturn the TPC decision.  I said I thought that appalling, and that I think the BOA should defer to the judgement of the TPC in matters of historic zoning enforcement, because the historic expertise lies with the TPC, not the BOA.  I asked Mr. Sharrer why the TPC did not pursue the matter through the courts, and he said that they considered it, but it would amount to the "city suing itself" and they decided the potential problems were not worth the effort in this case.  I then remarked that the violating homeowner may have "inside connections" with the BOA or friends in high places, to which we both shared a nervous laugh and then moved on.

Mr. Sharrer said that the TPC and BOA are scheduled for one of their ongoing joint meetings next week.  Apparently they are aware of each others duties and goals, and do not work in total independent isolation from each other.

---

In addition, Mr. Sharrer remarked that Tulsa currently has 9 residential districts on the National Historic Register, and the TPC is working on adding 3 more: Ranch Acres, Lortondale, and Riverview.  He said that the goal of the TPC is to have approximately 15 Tulsa districts placed on the Register, and then that would be all for many, many years to come.

quote:

---

Originally posted by pfox

quote:

---

Ed Sharrer is a smart guy...way smarter than average.

Let us know what he says.

---

Way smarter than the last guy who worked there. He was an idiot.

---

Wow. Not one protest.

lol.

quote:

---

Originally posted by pfox

quote:

---

Originally posted by pfox

quote:

---

Ed Sharrer is a smart guy...way smarter than average.

Let us know what he says.

---

Way smarter than the last guy who worked there. He was an idiot.

---

Wow. Not one protest.
lol.

---

I am not sure of the intent of your posting pfox, but I find Mr. Sharrer to be an informed, intelligent city employee, sincerely interested in historic neighborhood preservation.  I assume your remark is just referring to the lack of argument here on TulsaNow, not Mr. Sharrer's qualifications.
He may be young, but his sincerity, knowledge, and dedication to historic preservation are unquestionable, IMO.

They are both smart fellers...

Pfox had that job before Mr Sharrer...it was a good joke...

The Preservation Commission has been blessed with excellent staff...all fine idealists who are working to protect our neighborhoods.

^fact remains....
Until the mindset of the Tulsa Developer changes..
Or is shown a new way to make "Mucho Dinero"$$...

Whatever one has the $money$ to do with real estate in Tulsa... It can be done.....

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rico

^fact remains....
Until the mindset of the Tulsa Developer changes..
Or is shown a new way to make "Mucho Dinero"$$...

Whatever one has the $money$ to do with real estate in Tulsa... It can be done.....

---

That what folks were saying about the Channels, how's that working out?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Double A

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rico

^fact remains....
Until the mindset of the Tulsa Developer changes..
Or is shown a new way to make "Mucho Dinero"$$...

Whatever one has the $money$ to do with real estate in Tulsa... It can be done.....

---

That what folks were saying about the Channels, how's that working out?

---

Now Aa you know that was not their money... They wanted to spend our money..

"How's that working out..?"

Let me call one of them and see... You know I have them all on speed dial.[:o)]

True dat. But they are big money swingers. IVI might be a better example, although when you get right down to it they want our money too.