Neighborhood Conservation Districts - Thoughts?

[AVERAGE JOE]

quote:Originally posted by Steve

My subdivision Lortondale, between 26th St. & 27th Pl., Yale to Darlington, would be a prime candidate for a conservation district. All homes were built in the ultra-modern 1950's style by a single Tulsa builder, Howard Grubb.  Grubb also expanded into Lortondale 2, west of Darlington to Hudson, but those homes have suffered some major bad revisions over the years, while the majority of houses in the original Lortondale still remain structurally original, a prime conservation district candidate or NHR candidate.

It amazes me that Ranch Acres in Tulsa recently obtained National Historic Registry listing, while my neigborhood Lortondale is still waiting for such designation.  Lortondale has much more architectural and historic significance than Ranch Acres, was the very first subdivision in the entire U.S. built with entirely centrally A/C homes, featured in multiple national magazines such as Better Homes & Gardens, Parents, etc., awarded with over 10 national design awards to builder Howard Grubb and architect Donald Honn, the very first neighborhood in Tulsa with a private developer-built swimming pool, and the list goes on and on.  The reason for Ranch Acres preference for NHR listing over Lortondale totally escapes me; I guess money talks.
   

You assume there is a preference or one was selected over another. The paper said Ranch Acres has been working on this for 3 years. How long has Lortondale been pursuing NHR listing? Maybe they just started earlier?

[Steve]

quote:Originally posted by AVERAGE JOE

quote:Originally posted by Steve

My subdivision Lortondale, between 26th St. & 27th Pl., Yale to Darlington, would be a prime candidate for a conservation district. All homes were built in the ultra-modern 1950's style by a single Tulsa builder, Howard Grubb.  Grubb also expanded into Lortondale 2, west of Darlington to Hudson, but those homes have suffered some major bad revisions over the years, while the majority of houses in the original Lortondale still remain structurally original, a prime conservation district candidate or NHR candidate.

It amazes me that Ranch Acres in Tulsa recently obtained National Historic Registry listing, while my neigborhood Lortondale is still waiting for such designation.  Lortondale has much more architectural and historic significance than Ranch Acres, was the very first subdivision in the entire U.S. built with entirely centrally A/C homes, featured in multiple national magazines such as Better Homes & Gardens, Parents, etc., awarded with over 10 national design awards to builder Howard Grubb and architect Donald Honn, the very first neighborhood in Tulsa with a private developer-built swimming pool, and the list goes on and on.  The reason for Ranch Acres preference for NHR listing over Lortondale totally escapes me; I guess money talks.
   

You assume there is a preference or one was selected over another. The paper said Ranch Acres has been working on this for 3 years. How long has Lortondale been pursuing NHR listing? Maybe they just started earlier?

Lortondale and its neighborhood assoc. has been persuing NHR designation for equally as long, at least 3 years, and we expect to be the next district/neighborhood in Tulsa to be so designated.  Possibly the last.

Ranch Acres is a beautiful Tulsa neighborhood and very worthy of preservation efforts.  I don't deny that.  But speaking strictly from a historical significance standpoint, I think my subdivision of Lortondale has more architectural/historical points in its favor for NHR inclusion.  In the articles that have been recently published about the NHR and Ranch Acres, all they have mentioned is the luxury aspect, large lots, and homogeneous 1950's ranch house style.  Seems rather insignificant to me given Lortondale's well published and honored past.

I suppose a big factor driving the inclusion of Ranch Acres on the NHR is the "tear down/infill rebuild" problems.  Due to the typical large lot size in Ranch Acres and the higher than average prices there, the tear down problem is more imminent in Ranch Acres.  Lortondale on the other hand has yet to see this problem.  The only tear downs in my subdivision so far have been due to extreme gross owner neglect or irrepairable structural failure, not greedy developers.

[mac]

There seems to be a few people giving negative feedback about Conservation Districts. I think it is great that Councilor Barnes has spearheaded this project to give residents a tool to maintain the character of thier neighborhood.

[mac]

Councilor Barnes listens to her constituents' cry for help, how novel, and this is how she is treated.


City officials join to fight infill building

by: P.J. LASSEK World Staff Writer
2/15/2008  12:00 AM


But some people question how the proposal is being handled.


City Councilor Maria Barnes and Michelle Cantrell, a member of the city's Planning Commission, are spearheading an effort to put further restrictions on infill development in older residential areas.

pu,UFslams Barnes is having her staff craft an ordinance that would allow for the establishment of neighborhood conservation zoning overlays for residential areas built before 1970.

Cantrell, who also is Barnes' campaign manager, has put the proposal on the Tulsa Metropolitan Area Planning Commission's work session agenda for Feb. 27.

In its current draft form, the proposed ordinance provides for a conservation zoning overlay that would dictate the type of development in a neighborhood if 50 percent of the residents who live there agree to the zoning.

"It's not historic preservation zoning," Barnes said. "It doesn't address aesthetics; just setbacks, scale and style of homes."

Fighting 'McMansions': She explained that in a neighborhood where houses all have flat roofs, the conservation zoning would require any new development to have a flat roof.

Or, it would curb large homes on small lots, commonly called "McMansions," in a neighborhood where there are smaller houses on large lots, she said.

Barnes said the ordinance is still evolving and could change quite a bit before the final draft is ready.

Cantrell said a growing number of infill developments have upset neighborhood residents because they believe that the new residences harm the character of their areas.

Residents 'don't trust INCOG': She said the approach she and Barnes have taken in drafting an ordinance bypasses Indian Nations Council of Government personnel, which deals with the city's plan ning, because the neighborhood residents "don't trust INCOG."

Cantrell said she doesn't think her participation creates a conflict, even though she will be voting on the proposed ordinance.

But former Planning Commission members question that opinion.

The Planning Commission code of ethics states that "the possibility, not the actuality, of a conflict of interest" should govern decisions.

"Obviously, I won't have made a decision until I hear the input of public hearings on the ordinance," Cantrell said.

Public hearings: The ordinance will go through a process that includes public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council.

Although the Planning Commission will vote on a recommendation to support or oppose the ordinance, it is up to the council to approve it or not.

Brandon Jackson, a former Planning Commission member and homebuilder, said a commissioner "shouldn't be involved in the drafting of an ordinance. We're not there to make policy; we're there to conduct policy."

The city's administration is not prepared to take a stand now on whether the city should implement conservation districts.

Susan Neal, who oversees neighborhood issues for Mayor Kathy Taylor, said that before Thursday, the administration had not been informed about the effort other than hearing from a few residents.

Homebuilders' concerns: Paul Kane, CEO of the Home Builders Association, who has been involved in Barnes' effort, said a significant number of the association's members are very concerned.

"The biggest issue is the infringement on private property rights," he said.

"One of the things I've tried to do is to make sure that this thing doesn't get overreaching. Some of the members in my association think we shouldn't have it at all, and others who think if it is inevitable say we need to make sure it is not unduly burdensome."



P.J. Lassek 581-8382
pj.lassek@tulsaworld.com

[White Choc Hot Choc]

"It's not historic preservation zoning," Barnes said. "It doesn't address aesthetics; just setbacks, scale and style of homes."


Contradiction?  Anyone? Anyone?

[akupetsky]

quote:Originally posted by mac


Brandon Jackson, a former Planning Commission member and homebuilder, said a commissioner "shouldn't be involved in the drafting of an ordinance. We're not there to make policy; we're there to conduct policy."

Homebuilders' concerns: Paul Kane, CEO of the Home Builders Association, who has been involved in Barnes' effort, said a significant number of the association's members are very concerned.

"The biggest issue is the infringement on private property rights," he said.

"One of the things I've tried to do is to make sure that this thing doesn't get overreaching. Some of the members in my association think we shouldn't have it at all, and others who think if it is inevitable say we need to make sure it is not unduly burdensome."

It would help to read the statute:

"§11?43?109.  Appointment of zoning commission.
In order to avail itself of the powers conferred by this article, the municipal governing body shall appoint a commission to be known as the zoning commission to recommend the boundaries of the various original districts and to recommend appropriate regulations to be enforced therein.  The commission shall make a preliminary report and hold public hearings thereon before submitting its final report.  The governing body shall not hold its public hearings or take action until it has received the final report of the commission.  Where a municipal planning commission already exists, it shall be appointed as the zoning commission."

Beyond the legislation, it's crazy to think that the TMAPC, appointed generally by elected public officials, is not the proper organization to propose regulation changes related to zoning.  It's also crazy to think that they shouldn't be trying to facilitate a compromise "win/win" solution for all private property owners that allows but does not require establishment of Conservation Districts.  I understand that INCOG may have some knowledgeable people, but they have no authority or legitimacy without a contract with the City.

[inteller]

quote:Originally posted by White Choc Hot Choc

"It's not historic preservation zoning," Barnes said. "It doesn't address aesthetics; just setbacks, scale and style of homes."


Contradiction?  Anyone? Anyone?

no contradiction.  by aesthetics she is talking about the overall character of the neighborhood, not whether individual home designs are ok for the lot they are on.

[White Choc Hot Choc]

I have yet to see a neighborhood in Tulsa with a singular 'style'...I don't see how you can do this.

Furthermore...if it requires 50% approval from the neighborhood, isn't that in effect retroactively applying a condition on those who oppose the overlay?

[Double A]

Brandon Jackson has absolutely no credibility. Conflict of interest(a completely groundless charge, BTW)? Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. He was always a reliable puppet to do the bidding of the home builders and developers during his tenure. The public outrage over this played heavily into the fact that he no longer serves.

[Steve]

quote:Originally posted by PonderInc

My current neighborhood was built mostly in the 50's...lots of single-story brick ranch houses.  I can't tell you how weird it looks when someone sticks a south-Tulsa "Big Garage/Big Roof" house in the middle of this neighborhood.

I second that opinion.  I live in Lortondale at 26th & Yale.  All the homes were designed by architect Donald Honn and built 1954-1956 by a single builder, Howard Grubb, in the ultra-modern 1950's ranch house style with very low pitched or flat roofs, single story contemporary homes.  I would be appalled if there was a tear-down and McMansion built next to me.  Fortunately in Lortondale, the lots are small enough (7,000-9,000 sq. ft.) and land prices are not so high that we have not yet experienced this tear-down and infill problem.

The conservation district ordinance seems very logical to me, at least until the City of Tulsa can adopt form-based zoning codes to preserve the architecture and feel of our historic neighborhoods.

[Steve]

quote:Originally posted by White Choc Hot Choc

I have yet to see a neighborhood in Tulsa with a singular 'style'...I don't see how you can do this.

You obviously have not been through the Lortondale or Lortondale Second additions, from 26th Street to 27th Place, Yale Avenue to Hudson Avenue in midtown Tulsa, all homes built in the ultra-modern 1950s style with low pitched roofs and exposed beam architecture.  The whole Ranch Acres development from 31st to 41st streets, Harvard west towards Lewis is also an example of the homogeneous 1950s ranch house style.  Form-based codes or conservation district ordinances are desparately needed to preserve these historic neighborhoods.

[PonderInc]

I was out browsing through the TMAPC website and saw this "work session" document related to Conservation Districts.  From what I can tell, this is a first draft being used to begin the discussion.  It's not a final/formal policy.  However, I think it's interesting.  This may prove to be a good tool for neighborhoods that want some assurance that infill development will be in harmony with the existing 'hood.  I want to learn more, and figured that others would be interested as well. http://www.tmapc.org/tmapcworksession/Conservation%20District%20complete%20info..pdf

[booWorld]

There's an article about conservation districts in the Tulsa World today (March 9th).

I did not attend the TMAPC work session on Feb 27, and I haven't heard about much opposition to this proposed ordinance.  Did the opponents mentioned in the article show up at the Feb 27 work session to argue against the proposed ordinance?

[FOTD]

This country has continued to break our constitution at every turn during the past 8 years.

People have property rights. That is the backbone of our laws. Over many years, continuity must give way to new technology. New technology will mean new design.

Old neighborhoods will give way to new ideas unless preservation fanatics block advancements.
Many in Tulsa like myself have learned to live with major changes in our adjoing landscapes and building design. It's the old non maintained properties in decent areas that irk me. And especially the ones who fail to follow BOA directions after a change. Code enforcement is in over their heads .....

[TheArtist]

If a group of people get together and decide they want something for their shared community, like having new construction follow some sort of guidelines, then the law should not stand in the way of them being able to do that.

Dont know if the 50% rule is all that fair in this instance. But one way or another half would be getting their way over the other half. Perhaps it should be a supermajority of 60-75% of the people agreeing.

Its not as though this is an alien concept, its as old as living in cities itself. People have to come to some sort of agreed on standards. What you do to your property affects my property and vice versa. There are shared rights and responsibilities and individual rights and responsibilities, and as always where those intersect there often must be compromise. In our country, precisely because of our constitution, we arent told by some princely authority what to do, we are able to work out compromises ourselves.  Its also not as though it would be citywide. Only a few places would likely adopt these Conservation Districts, and again, it should be because the majority of the people were allowed to do what they wanted. There will be plenty of places where "anything goes" type developments can occur. But there should, imo, be places in already built areas where people can get together and create, improve or maintain the type of community the majority agrees upon. Otherwise you are completely denying them any opportunity to have the liberty and pursuits they wish to have. Having a variety of options is what makes a city a great place to live for all kinds of people and communities. Not everyone can have their way, all the time, in every location. But the more people that can have the options they want, the better.