Historic Preservation in Tulsa..

[Rico]

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

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.....?

[tulsa1603]

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.

[waterboy]

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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

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?

[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.

[waterboy]

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.

[pmcalk]

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.

[RecycleMichael]

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

[waterboy]

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!

[pmcalk]

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.

[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?" []

[waterboy]

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?" []

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.

[tulsa1603]

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??"