Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

HIGH HOPES for Hi Mount???


  • Please log in to reply
72 replies to this topic

#1 Fire-Eater

Fire-Eater

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 335 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Soon-to-be-Historic Wedgwood
  • Interests:Historic buildings and landscapes, local history, current events, coffee, hard liquor, and arguing!

Posted 06 March 2005 - 10:21 PM

Tomorrow Jennifer Vasquez and I will do a windshield survey of North Hi Mount. She is a vigorous individual intent on gaining local designation for North Hi Mount as a historic district. She's distressed about the tear-downs and is leading the charge. I will follow along, willingly, with drawn saber.

She's held two meetings thus far -- one in FEB and one last THURS at Arlington Heights UMC. She was disheartened by the hostile throng at THURS' meeting.

Stay tuned for results -- the survey will begin at my home at 3700 Clarke Ave: A lovely dwelling with a Kip-Wright 3-Star Rating for HP.

Next neighborhood meeting will be at Four-Star Coffee Bar on SAT MAR 19 at 10AM.


DOWN WITH TEAR-DOWNS!!!
Stop the Insanity!!!
WWSPFD?*

History is but the record of the public and official acts of human beings. It is our object, therefore, to humanize our history and deal with people past and present; people who ate and possibly drank; people who were born, flourished and died; not grave tragedians, posing perpetually for their photographs. ~Bill Nye, History of the United States

For me there is no greater subject than history. How a man can study it and not be forced to become a philosopher, I cannot tell. ~George E. Wilson




*What Would Susan Pringle Frost Do?

#2 Fire-Eater

Fire-Eater

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 335 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Soon-to-be-Historic Wedgwood
  • Interests:Historic buildings and landscapes, local history, current events, coffee, hard liquor, and arguing!

Posted 06 March 2005 - 10:25 PM

Has anyone heard?:

North Hi Mount Elementary School's tennis courts have been sold to a developer who will alledgedly contruct more of those 3-story full-lot townhomes.

STOP the STUPIDITY
WWSPFD?*

History is but the record of the public and official acts of human beings. It is our object, therefore, to humanize our history and deal with people past and present; people who ate and possibly drank; people who were born, flourished and died; not grave tragedians, posing perpetually for their photographs. ~Bill Nye, History of the United States

For me there is no greater subject than history. How a man can study it and not be forced to become a philosopher, I cannot tell. ~George E. Wilson




*What Would Susan Pringle Frost Do?

#3 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,620 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 06 March 2005 - 10:41 PM

Has anyone heard?:

North Hi Mount Elementary School's tennis courts have been sold to a developer who will alledgedly contruct more of those 3-story full-lot townhomes.

STOP the STUPIDITY

View Post



What???? <_< :roflol:

#4 Urbndwlr

Urbndwlr

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 962 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 07 March 2005 - 05:19 PM

Has anyone heard?:

North Hi Mount Elementary School's tennis courts have been sold to a developer who will alledgedly contruct more of those 3-story full-lot townhomes.

STOP the STUPIDITY

View Post


Please elaborate on the stupidity you mentioned in your last post.


I was thrilled to hear the news. The developer who bought it has a legacy of constructing very high quality homes that are very sensitive to the surrounding neighborhood. I suspect they will be tastefully designed and built.

#5 Fire-Eater

Fire-Eater

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 335 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Soon-to-be-Historic Wedgwood
  • Interests:Historic buildings and landscapes, local history, current events, coffee, hard liquor, and arguing!

Posted 08 March 2005 - 05:30 AM

Perhaps "stupid" is an inadequate word to describe the shortsighted foolishness displayed by the Fort Worth ISD in selling a piece of the school's irreplacable property. Hmmm . . . nope, that's a stupid move, no doubt about it.
:huh:
WWSPFD?*

History is but the record of the public and official acts of human beings. It is our object, therefore, to humanize our history and deal with people past and present; people who ate and possibly drank; people who were born, flourished and died; not grave tragedians, posing perpetually for their photographs. ~Bill Nye, History of the United States

For me there is no greater subject than history. How a man can study it and not be forced to become a philosopher, I cannot tell. ~George E. Wilson




*What Would Susan Pringle Frost Do?

#6 Buck

Buck

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 397 posts

Posted 08 March 2005 - 07:20 AM

The only "stupid" idea here is turning Hi-Mount into a historic district.

#7 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,620 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 08 March 2005 - 08:37 AM

Buck, would you mind explaining your opinion?

#8 Buck

Buck

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 397 posts

Posted 08 March 2005 - 05:05 PM

I was mocking the tone of the original post.

Seriously, Hi-Mount and the neighborhoods west of the Cultural District might need a design overlay, but not historic-district restrictions.

#9 Urbndwlr

Urbndwlr

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 962 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 08 March 2005 - 06:19 PM

Perhaps "stupid" is an inadequate word to describe the shortsighted foolishness displayed by the Fort Worth ISD in selling a piece of the school's irreplacable property.  Hmmm . . . nope, that's a stupid move, no doubt about it.
;)

View Post



I am with you on that one. Open space is virtually irreplacable.
Yes, each unit can be acquired on the open market to recreate the open space, but realistically the toothpaste will be out of the tube.

At least it isn't Academy Homes or Shaw Sites. Those two companies' buildings are designed in very poor taste and the construction quality appears low.

#10 Fire-Eater

Fire-Eater

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 335 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Soon-to-be-Historic Wedgwood
  • Interests:Historic buildings and landscapes, local history, current events, coffee, hard liquor, and arguing!

Posted 08 March 2005 - 08:11 PM

How does a design overlay work?
WWSPFD?*

History is but the record of the public and official acts of human beings. It is our object, therefore, to humanize our history and deal with people past and present; people who ate and possibly drank; people who were born, flourished and died; not grave tragedians, posing perpetually for their photographs. ~Bill Nye, History of the United States

For me there is no greater subject than history. How a man can study it and not be forced to become a philosopher, I cannot tell. ~George E. Wilson




*What Would Susan Pringle Frost Do?

#11 Buck

Buck

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 397 posts

Posted 08 March 2005 - 08:36 PM

Maybe I have the term wrong. Dallas uses "conservation districts" to regulate design.

What I meant is that Hi-Mount needs some rule that preserves the appearance and style of the neighborhood. It does not need a historic district designation that discourages new construction.

#12 Fire-Eater

Fire-Eater

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 335 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Soon-to-be-Historic Wedgwood
  • Interests:Historic buildings and landscapes, local history, current events, coffee, hard liquor, and arguing!

Posted 08 March 2005 - 09:52 PM

Whether it's a "design overlay" or "conservation district" or "historic district," I'm sure it will provide some sort of restrictions to new construction.

A historic district is something that "preserves the appearance and style of the neighborhood." I don't believe a historic district "discourages new construction" any more than a design overlay or conservation district would.

I imagine that the main difference is that a historic district focuses on the protection of the integrity of the historic buildings -- a conservation district or design overlay might allow alteration of historic buildings as long as the alteration conserves the overall design of the house -- whereas a historic district would not.

What I would like to see is the end of:
1. Tear Downs (a sign of the "End Time," something ordained by the Antichrist).
2. Those stinkin' townhouses (and any other incompatible dwellings they can come up with) in historic neighborhoods.
WWSPFD?*

History is but the record of the public and official acts of human beings. It is our object, therefore, to humanize our history and deal with people past and present; people who ate and possibly drank; people who were born, flourished and died; not grave tragedians, posing perpetually for their photographs. ~Bill Nye, History of the United States

For me there is no greater subject than history. How a man can study it and not be forced to become a philosopher, I cannot tell. ~George E. Wilson




*What Would Susan Pringle Frost Do?

#13 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,620 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 08 March 2005 - 10:34 PM

I think someone on this thread should download the city's latest Zoning Ordinance. All of the terms and definitions are included. That would help everyone get on the same page. There is a link to the download on both the city's web site and here on the forum.

#14 normanfd

normanfd

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 354 posts
  • Location:Fort Davis

Posted 09 March 2005 - 02:20 AM

I don't see how any of these distinctions would protect mere tennis courts. Yes, as open, recreational space in a neighborhood that is in sore need of them, I see why they should be kept. However, ordinances aimed at providing historic protection seem to be aimed at physical buildings rather than painted concrete sport courts.

#15 Fire-Eater

Fire-Eater

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 335 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Soon-to-be-Historic Wedgwood
  • Interests:Historic buildings and landscapes, local history, current events, coffee, hard liquor, and arguing!

Posted 09 March 2005 - 06:50 AM

Were the tennis courts built before 1955? If so, they would be considered historic according to most historic regs. I doubt they're that old, and even if they were FWISD is not effected by local historic regs.
WWSPFD?*

History is but the record of the public and official acts of human beings. It is our object, therefore, to humanize our history and deal with people past and present; people who ate and possibly drank; people who were born, flourished and died; not grave tragedians, posing perpetually for their photographs. ~Bill Nye, History of the United States

For me there is no greater subject than history. How a man can study it and not be forced to become a philosopher, I cannot tell. ~George E. Wilson




*What Would Susan Pringle Frost Do?

#16 Urbndwlr

Urbndwlr

    Elite Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 962 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 09 March 2005 - 10:28 AM

Whether it's a "design overlay" or "conservation district" or "historic district," I'm sure it will provide some sort of restrictions to new construction. 

A historic district is something that "preserves the appearance and style of the neighborhood."  I don't believe a historic district "discourages new construction" any more than a design overlay or conservation district would. 

I imagine that the main difference is that a historic district focuses on the protection of the integrity of the historic buildings -- a conservation district or design overlay might allow alteration of historic buildings as long as the alteration conserves the overall design of the house -- whereas a historic district would not.

What I would like to see is the end of:
1. Tear Downs (a sign of the "End Time," something ordained by the Antichrist).
2. Those stinkin' townhouses (and any other incompatible dwellings they can come up with) in historic neighborhoods.

View Post



To what townhouses do you refer? Do you dislike that type of dwelling unit entirely? Are there certain types (or designs) of townhouses you dislike? Are you saying that townhouses should never be built among a neighborhood consisting primarily of single-family dwelling units?

How about detached town houses (zero-lot line with a few feet of space between each building's wall)?

Do you think that the townhouses down at 6th and Arch Adams are an inappropriate use for that site?

#17 Fire-Eater

Fire-Eater

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 335 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Soon-to-be-Historic Wedgwood
  • Interests:Historic buildings and landscapes, local history, current events, coffee, hard liquor, and arguing!

Posted 09 March 2005 - 04:57 PM

I just now got home from the Official North Hi-Mount Windshield Survey. We looked at houses between Clover Lane and Haskell and from 7th Street to Camp Bowie. And to think, I always thought that was all Arlington Heights!

We ranked the buildings from 1 to 3 in levels of integrity and ranked buildings as NC if they were noncontributing. Jennifer and I have not really taken a hard look at the map for historic density, but I'm impressed with what is in the area. There are a couple of really bad spots with tear-downs, but the area would really make an excellent historic district.
WWSPFD?*

History is but the record of the public and official acts of human beings. It is our object, therefore, to humanize our history and deal with people past and present; people who ate and possibly drank; people who were born, flourished and died; not grave tragedians, posing perpetually for their photographs. ~Bill Nye, History of the United States

For me there is no greater subject than history. How a man can study it and not be forced to become a philosopher, I cannot tell. ~George E. Wilson




*What Would Susan Pringle Frost Do?

#18 Fire-Eater

Fire-Eater

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 335 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Soon-to-be-Historic Wedgwood
  • Interests:Historic buildings and landscapes, local history, current events, coffee, hard liquor, and arguing!

Posted 09 March 2005 - 05:07 PM

To what townhouses do you refer? --All of them.

Do you dislike that type of dwelling unit entirely? --Not in a new subdivision or if its the historic housing type -- like in Savannah, Charleston, New Orleans, or Galveston.

Are there certain types (or designs) of townhouses you dislike? --No.

Are you saying that townhouses should never be built among a neighborhood consisting primarily of single-family dwelling units? --People can build whatever they like in new subdivisions, as far as I'm concerned, but I don't like them going into a historic area if that's not the historic housing type.

How about detached town houses (zero-lot line with a few feet of space between each building's wall)? --Absolutely not, in a early Twentieth Century residential subdivision! It's GOTTA have a YARD!

Do you think that the townhouses down at 6th and Arch Adams are an inappropriate use for that site? --Are those townhomes? I thought it was like a condo block thing. Those that overlook the 7-11 parking lot? Since it's near the edge, I don't have too much of a problem with them. Actually, I like them from an aesthetic standpoint. I do have a problem, however, with the commercial/institutional creep from the east that threatens the residential character of North Hi Mount.
WWSPFD?*

History is but the record of the public and official acts of human beings. It is our object, therefore, to humanize our history and deal with people past and present; people who ate and possibly drank; people who were born, flourished and died; not grave tragedians, posing perpetually for their photographs. ~Bill Nye, History of the United States

For me there is no greater subject than history. How a man can study it and not be forced to become a philosopher, I cannot tell. ~George E. Wilson




*What Would Susan Pringle Frost Do?

#19 mosteijn

mosteijn

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,908 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:FW/Cincy
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Swimming, Soccer, Spanish

Posted 09 March 2005 - 09:41 PM

Were those tennis courts even in use? Also, North Hi Mount had a block and a half worth of property, that seems adequate to me (but then, what do I know?) I actually wish the district would sell off some of Paschal's property for townhomes...this school takes up too much land, and God knows the neighborhood could use a townhome or two.

#20 Fire-Eater

Fire-Eater

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 335 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Soon-to-be-Historic Wedgwood
  • Interests:Historic buildings and landscapes, local history, current events, coffee, hard liquor, and arguing!

Posted 09 March 2005 - 11:12 PM

Lord knows we use the tennis courts at North Side High School: we have about 16 portables located on them!
WWSPFD?*

History is but the record of the public and official acts of human beings. It is our object, therefore, to humanize our history and deal with people past and present; people who ate and possibly drank; people who were born, flourished and died; not grave tragedians, posing perpetually for their photographs. ~Bill Nye, History of the United States

For me there is no greater subject than history. How a man can study it and not be forced to become a philosopher, I cannot tell. ~George E. Wilson




*What Would Susan Pringle Frost Do?

#21 pnewburn

pnewburn

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 35 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 10 March 2005 - 01:20 AM

"Are you saying that townhouses should never be built among a neighborhood consisting primarily of single-family dwelling units? --People can build whatever they like in new subdivisions, as far as I'm concerned, but I don't like them going into a historic area if that's not the historic housing type."

"What I would like to see is the end of:
1. Tear Downs"

This is where the 'preservation' movement baffles me. Are you really suggesting that once a piece of property has been developed it should retain its original appearance till Judgement Day? Before the North Hi Mount neighborhood was developed, I presume the land was part of the Van Zandt ranch. Some might consider this use to be more historically significant than an early 20th century low-density residential neighborhood, so why not create a historic district in the shape of the old ranch and require all new construction in the area to reflect the character of the neighborhood in the 1860s? (All that native prairie grass should satisfy everyone's love for lawns.)

What I'm trying to get at is most of the notable buildings in Fort Worth (almost all of downtown, the Kimball, the Modern,) were built on the site of what was once single-family residential neighborhoods. To suggest that once a building type has been established in an area, it must be forever maintained is short-sighted at best.

I think our criteria for 'historic' around here need some serious rethinking. Thanks to realtors the word has become interchangeable with 'old.' "No, I don't live in old house. It's HISTORIC!" The National Register has some specific criteria for a building or district to be listed. Which of these criteria does this neighborhood meet? It is not associated with a historic event or person. It does not yield any important historical information, and it does not embody a type, the work of a master, or high artistic values. It is simply a nice, old neighborhood where property values warrant increased density.

And as far as historical significance is concerned, I would consider the fact that Fort Worth is attempting to become a more dense and urban city to be more worthy of note than the fact that there were once some nice old houses here.

That having been said, I do believe significant buildings should be recognized and that if they should ever be replaced, the new building should reflect the highest standards of the community.

#22 Fire-Eater

Fire-Eater

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 335 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Soon-to-be-Historic Wedgwood
  • Interests:Historic buildings and landscapes, local history, current events, coffee, hard liquor, and arguing!

Posted 10 March 2005 - 06:01 AM

"This is where the 'preservation' movement baffles me. Are you really suggesting that once a piece of property has been developed it should retain its original appearance till Judgement Day?"

One of the reasons that people love to go to Europe is because, in some areas, it has retained its appearance, somewhat, for the past several hundred years. Change is inevitable, to some degree, and historic preservation is about managing and planning that change with respect to historic character.

"Before the North Hi Mount neighborhood was developed, I presume the land was part of the Van Zandt ranch. Some might consider this use to be more historically significant than an early 20th century low-density residential neighborhood, so why not create a historic district in the shape of the old ranch and require all new construction in the area to reflect the character of the neighborhood in the 1860s? (All that native prairie grass should satisfy everyone's love for lawns.)"

Historic preservation is not about changing something back to what is was. It's about preserving what currently exists. The ranch is gone. And what was created as North Hi Mount in the early twentieth century will be gone, too, like the ranch, unless people take an interest in preserving it.

"What I'm trying to get at is most of the notable buildings in Fort Worth (almost all of downtown, the Kimball, the Modern,) were built on the site of what was once single-family residential neighborhoods. To suggest that once a building type has been established in an area, it must be forever maintained is short-sighted at best."

If you want to preserve an area's historic character and its connectivity to the past, then historic preservation is farsighted. If you have little regard for standard, historic residential housing types, then historic preservation in North Hi Mount is a bother and a waste of time.

"I think our criteria for 'historic' around here need some serious rethinking. Thanks to realtors the word has become interchangeable with 'old.' "No, I don't live in old house. It's HISTORIC!" The National Register has some specific criteria for a building or district to be listed. Which of these criteria does this neighborhood meet? It is not associated with a historic event or person. It does not yield any important historical information, and it does not embody a type, the work of a master, or high artistic values. It is simply a nice, old neighborhood where property values warrant increased density."

It depends on what you consider "historic." Within NRHP guidelines, Noth Hi Mount is definitely historic on a local level. During my windshield survey I saw several types and styles of architecture. Additional research will probably identify the former homes of prominent LOCAL merchants and community leaders who helped Fort Worth become what it is today.

"And as far as historical significance is concerned, I would consider the fact that Fort Worth is attempting to become a more dense and urban city to be more worthy of note than the fact that there were once some nice old houses here."

I think that a community that charges head on into the future with no regard for the historic built environment is nowhere I want to live. You may not see it and may disagree, but I believe the charm and allure of this area is its historic character. Once this has been destroyed you can move out to Arlington or Mansfield and the only difference will be location.

"That having been said, I do believe significant buildings should be recognized and that if they should ever be replaced, the new building should reflect the highest standards of the community."

We'll just have to agree to completely disagree. With your viewpoint nothing should be preserved if someone can come up with a better design. This is where I frequently disagree with some architects -- historic preservation is not necessarily about "good design" -- it's mostly about HISTORY.

With your viewpoint there is no history.
WWSPFD?*

History is but the record of the public and official acts of human beings. It is our object, therefore, to humanize our history and deal with people past and present; people who ate and possibly drank; people who were born, flourished and died; not grave tragedians, posing perpetually for their photographs. ~Bill Nye, History of the United States

For me there is no greater subject than history. How a man can study it and not be forced to become a philosopher, I cannot tell. ~George E. Wilson




*What Would Susan Pringle Frost Do?

#23 Buck

Buck

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 397 posts

Posted 10 March 2005 - 04:27 PM

And with the above viewpoint, there is no First Amendment and no right to choose orderly development.

#24 Fire-Eater

Fire-Eater

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 335 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Soon-to-be-Historic Wedgwood
  • Interests:Historic buildings and landscapes, local history, current events, coffee, hard liquor, and arguing!

Posted 10 March 2005 - 11:51 PM

Since when do viewpoints negate the First Amendment or take away people's rights?

I won't comment any further on your last comment, Buck, because I'm not really sure what it means or at whom it's directed, pnewburn or me.
WWSPFD?*

History is but the record of the public and official acts of human beings. It is our object, therefore, to humanize our history and deal with people past and present; people who ate and possibly drank; people who were born, flourished and died; not grave tragedians, posing perpetually for their photographs. ~Bill Nye, History of the United States

For me there is no greater subject than history. How a man can study it and not be forced to become a philosopher, I cannot tell. ~George E. Wilson




*What Would Susan Pringle Frost Do?

#25 pnewburn

pnewburn

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 35 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 11 March 2005 - 12:05 AM

I disagree about Europe. I think its appeal lies in the fact that old and new are allowed to butt up against one another. Ancient ruins, medieval castles and modern buildings coexist peaceably in European cities. It is the same quality that attracts people to places like Manhattan, San Antonio, and to an extent, downtown Fort Worth. It is also the exact situation that historic districts were designed to prevent. All new construction must defer to the preexisting conditions.

Regarding your reasoning that North Hi Mount is historic because "Additional research will probably identify the former homes of prominent LOCAL merchants and community leaders who helped Fort Worth become what it is today." If the fact that someone who contributed to the development of Fort Worth lived in said neighborhood makes it 'historic', then EVERY neighborhood in town is historic, which of course means that NO neighborhood is truly historic. This is exactly what I was referring to in my previous post when I said that we as a community need to rethink what we consider historic. Why should the homes of prominent local businessmen of years past be worthy of preservation at the expense of the homes of today's prominent local businessmen? Why should the new be forever subservient to the old? It seems that all those great European cities managed to become great without the aid of historic districts.

You say that in my point of view there is no history. My view allows that history is not finished. There is a good possibility that better things are still to come.

#26 Fire-Eater

Fire-Eater

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 335 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Soon-to-be-Historic Wedgwood
  • Interests:Historic buildings and landscapes, local history, current events, coffee, hard liquor, and arguing!

Posted 11 March 2005 - 05:57 AM

For guidelines on eligibility for National Register of Historic Places please see
http://archnet.asu.e...cs/36CFR60.html

You don't agree with American guidelines for historic preservation? You really wouldn't like what the Europeans do! Yes, they DO have historic preservation laws over there! Besides, "new" to Europe is hundreds of years old to us. The fact that you advocate the demolition of "old" if a better design comes along puts you at odds with the Europeans. Your reasoning puts the Parthenon and Eiffel Tower at risk! You may like Europe, but its current appearance is not because they think like you do.

New York City and San Antonio have much stronger local support for historic preservation that is reflected in their local historic preservation regulations that are much stronger than Fort Worth's.

By the way, can you figure out what Buck meant in his references to the First Amendment?
WWSPFD?*

History is but the record of the public and official acts of human beings. It is our object, therefore, to humanize our history and deal with people past and present; people who ate and possibly drank; people who were born, flourished and died; not grave tragedians, posing perpetually for their photographs. ~Bill Nye, History of the United States

For me there is no greater subject than history. How a man can study it and not be forced to become a philosopher, I cannot tell. ~George E. Wilson




*What Would Susan Pringle Frost Do?

#27 tcole

tcole

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,006 posts
  • Location:Texas

Posted 11 March 2005 - 07:50 AM

I think Buck may be thinking of the 4th ammendment.

#28 tcole

tcole

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,006 posts
  • Location:Texas

Posted 11 March 2005 - 07:53 AM

Also Kip:

Is that the cover art for Physical Grafitti in your "signiture?" It looks like it to me but the picture is pretty small.

#29 Fire-Eater

Fire-Eater

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 335 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Soon-to-be-Historic Wedgwood
  • Interests:Historic buildings and landscapes, local history, current events, coffee, hard liquor, and arguing!

Posted 11 March 2005 - 11:28 AM

YES IT IS!

I love the album and cover art.

SEE: I got nuthin' against historic townhomes (or new ones, if they're actually built in town).
WWSPFD?*

History is but the record of the public and official acts of human beings. It is our object, therefore, to humanize our history and deal with people past and present; people who ate and possibly drank; people who were born, flourished and died; not grave tragedians, posing perpetually for their photographs. ~Bill Nye, History of the United States

For me there is no greater subject than history. How a man can study it and not be forced to become a philosopher, I cannot tell. ~George E. Wilson




*What Would Susan Pringle Frost Do?

#30 pnewburn

pnewburn

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 35 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 11 March 2005 - 04:45 PM

The Parthenon managed to stick around for the first 2400 years or so of its life without any help from 'historic preservationists.' And thank God there weren't preservationists around in 450 BC because at least two previous temples to Athena were demolished on that site before the Parthenon was built. Furthermore, I'm willing to bet that about 99% of the great 'historic' architecture of the world was built on previously developed sites. Preservation tries to arbitrarily stop the natural process of redevelopment.

The fact that you would bring up a building like the Parthenon in a discussion about North Hi Mount proves my point. There is absolutely no comparison in the historic value of the two. Are you seriously proposing that the neighborhood is worthy of stricter protection than the Parthenon ever had? Because that's what a historic district entails. All new construction from now until the end of time must defer to a group of old houses.

If you feel so strongly about the quality of your own house that you think people will still be marveling at it millennia from now, then by all means apply for it to be designated. It just doesn't make sense to force this view on an entire neighborhood.

#31 Fire-Eater

Fire-Eater

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 335 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Soon-to-be-Historic Wedgwood
  • Interests:Historic buildings and landscapes, local history, current events, coffee, hard liquor, and arguing!

Posted 11 March 2005 - 05:48 PM

Actually, the Parthenon is a ruin because the Athenians didn't take care of it. At one point they were actually burning marble sculptures to make lime for stuccoing new buildings in Athens. Hence the entablature is in the British Museum. The British saved it in spite of the Athenians.

I think the Parthenon is an excellent example for comparison. An excellent example of people hell-bent on destroying their own culture.
WWSPFD?*

History is but the record of the public and official acts of human beings. It is our object, therefore, to humanize our history and deal with people past and present; people who ate and possibly drank; people who were born, flourished and died; not grave tragedians, posing perpetually for their photographs. ~Bill Nye, History of the United States

For me there is no greater subject than history. How a man can study it and not be forced to become a philosopher, I cannot tell. ~George E. Wilson




*What Would Susan Pringle Frost Do?

#32 pnewburn

pnewburn

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 35 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 11 March 2005 - 06:24 PM

Again, I think that the comparison is ludicrous. If North Hi Mount contained the last examples on Earth of houses from that era, then maybe. But its not even the last or best example in town. I think Oakhurst and other neighborhoods have far higher quality individual examples and is are considerably more intact.

Are you implying that opposition to the idea of historic districts on principle is being hell-bent on destroying one's culture? Or am I misreading your last post?
And incidentally, a large coponent of the culture (that I presume you think is embodied in a few old houses) that you claim to want to save, deals with the sovereignty of personal property rights, which are trampled on when people are forced to comply with the requirements set forth by those appointed members of historical commissions.

And I think the Turks deserve the bulk of the blame for the current state of the Acropolis.

#33 Fire-Eater

Fire-Eater

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 335 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Soon-to-be-Historic Wedgwood
  • Interests:Historic buildings and landscapes, local history, current events, coffee, hard liquor, and arguing!

Posted 11 March 2005 - 07:08 PM

A-Ha! So finally we get to the bottom line: the sovereignty of personal property rights.

I think that's what it's all about with you, pnewburn. If you'll carefully reread my previous post on the Eiffel Tower and Parthenon, you'll realize that I never intended to compare the cultural value of those two World Landmarks with a local historic district. My point was that "Your reasoning puts the Parthenon and Eiffel Tower at risk!"

Your last post confirms it.

If you owned the Eiffel Tower or Parthenon, those properties would be at risk because you're a person who believes folks should be able to do ANYTHING with their personal property. Furthermore, if someone came up with an idea to subdivide the Parthenon into luxury condos, and if you thought the plans looked good (an improvement, if you will) you just might go for it!

YIKES! I think you're about as dangerous to historic properties as you think I am dangerous to personal property rights!

We should sit down sometime, drink a beer, and laugh about it!
WWSPFD?*

History is but the record of the public and official acts of human beings. It is our object, therefore, to humanize our history and deal with people past and present; people who ate and possibly drank; people who were born, flourished and died; not grave tragedians, posing perpetually for their photographs. ~Bill Nye, History of the United States

For me there is no greater subject than history. How a man can study it and not be forced to become a philosopher, I cannot tell. ~George E. Wilson




*What Would Susan Pringle Frost Do?

#34 Buck

Buck

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 397 posts

Posted 11 March 2005 - 11:33 PM

The freedom to build as we wish -- or demolish, or not build, or whatever -- is part of our First Amendment freedom of expression.

The courts have upheld zoning as a way to prevent disorder, just as you can't yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater and then claim freedom of speech.

When we restrict demolition or development, we restrict the landowner's personal freedom of expression.

I'm not against zoning, and I'm not against protecting some truly historic properties.

But they should be exceptionally historic before we use the power of the city to restrict the owner's freedom.

I don't think Hi-Mount is a museum piece.






From what I know of the

#35 Fire-Eater

Fire-Eater

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 335 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Soon-to-be-Historic Wedgwood
  • Interests:Historic buildings and landscapes, local history, current events, coffee, hard liquor, and arguing!

Posted 12 March 2005 - 08:47 AM

Well, there you have it. Both pnewburn and Buck believe local historic preservation ordinances are unconstitutional. Any attempt by a democratically elected government to regulate an owner's use of a historic property, with regards to its historic character, is a violation of the owner's rights, no matter how historically significant a property it is.

It's hard to argue with that, and I certainly respect their opinions.

I think it's a sin, though, that they think it is OK for the owner to demolish

http://www.fortworth...com/knights.htm
http://www.fortworth...west/messer.htm
http://www.fortworth.../willrogers.htm
http://www.fortworth...om/flatiron.htm

Speaking of sin, I'd like to bring in an authority higher than the U.S. Constitution. As evidenced in Proverbs 22:28, God is a historic preservationist:
"Remove not the ancient landmark, which thy fathers have set."

Anyone who demolishes a Fort Worth landmark is disobeying one of God's commands!
WWSPFD?*

History is but the record of the public and official acts of human beings. It is our object, therefore, to humanize our history and deal with people past and present; people who ate and possibly drank; people who were born, flourished and died; not grave tragedians, posing perpetually for their photographs. ~Bill Nye, History of the United States

For me there is no greater subject than history. How a man can study it and not be forced to become a philosopher, I cannot tell. ~George E. Wilson




*What Would Susan Pringle Frost Do?

#36 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,620 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 12 March 2005 - 12:19 PM

There are so many things in this thread on which I would like to make comments, but I also want to do some research before I make them. I did look up one thing. Earlier in the thread there were discussion of "conservation districts" and "historic districts". Fort Worth does have both districts included in the city's Zoning Ordinance.

Here is the entire portion regarding Conservation Districts:

ARTICLE 4. CONSERVATION (“CD”) OVERLAY DISTRICT
4.400 Purpose and Intent.
1. The City of Fort Worth has many unique and distinctive residential and commercial areas
that contribute significantly to the overall architectural and cultural character and identity
of the city. The City Council recognizes the need to preserve, protect, and enhance the
value of these areas and wishes to provide a means of conserving the distinctive
atmosphere or character of areas by protecting or enhancing their significant architectural
or cultural attributes through the establishment of Conservation Districts.
2. Section 211.003, Texas Local Government Code authorizes the City of Fort Worth to
regulate and restrict the construction, alteration, reconstruction, or razing of buildings and
other structures in “designated places and areas of historic, cultural, or architectural
importance and significance.” The Conservation District provides for the establishment
of regulations concerning the conservation of existing buildings and new construction
and their settings in designated places of architectural or cultural importance and
significance. It is recognized that there are areas in the city where the application of
conservation district zoning could assist in the conservation of architectural and cultural
attributes and thereby contribute to the stability or stabilization of these areas:
3. The provisions of this Article are intended:
a. To protect and strengthen desirable and unique physical features and design
characteristics of an area;
b. To protect and enhance the livability of the City;
c. To reduce incompatible development and promote new compatible development;
d. To encourage, foster, and strengthen civic pride;
e. To encourage the stabilization of property and property values; and
f. To ensure the harmonious, orderly and efficient growth and development of the
City.
4.401 Zoning Classification.
1. Designation is a means for property owners to initiate and implement programs for the
conservation or revitalization of neighborhoods and commercial areas. The overlay
district and its regulations shall be applicable to each property within the district in
addition to the regulations of the base underlying zoning classification where the property
is located.
2. Any zoning district may be followed by the suffix “CD,” indicating that such zoning
district is subject to the use and development regulations of both the designated district
and the Conservation District guidelines.
3. Designation of an area by the City Council as a conservation district (“CD”) is intended
as a zoning overlay which supplements the primary underlying zoning district
classification. The permitted uses of the property shall be determined and controlled by
the use regulations set forth for the primary zoning district classification for the property.
4. The height of structures and minimum dimensions of lots and yards shall be determined
by the regulations set forth for the underlying, primary zoning district classification
except where height and area regulations are specified in Conservation District design
guidelines adopted by the City Council.
5. If there are any conflicts between the adopted guidelines of the Conservation District and
any provision of the Zoning Ordinance, the provisions of the adopted guidelines of the
Conservation District shall apply.
Chapter 4. District Regulations
Article 4. Conservation (“CD”) Overlay District
FORT WORTH, TEXAS
printed 09/08/04 ZONING ORDINANCE
4-20
6. If there are any conflicts between the provisions of this Article and any other provision of
the Zoning Ordinance, the most restrictive regulation shall apply in the absence of a
specific directive to the contrary.
4.402 Criteria for Designation.
1. The proposed Conservation District must have consistent and definable physical
characteristics that can be conserved by protecting or enhancing it architectural or
cultural attributes;
2. The majority of the housing stock within the proposed Conservation District must be
composed of consistent building types;
3. The proposed Conservation District area must contain at least one adjoining block face
that includes both sides of the street; and
4. At least fifty-one percent (51%) of the land area in the proposed Conservation District
must be presently improved.
4.403 Procedures for Designation of Property.
An application for a Conservation District Overlay (“CD”) zoning may be initiated at the direction of:
1. The request of the owners who collectively own more than fifty (50) percent or more of
the individual tracts, parcels, or platted lots, to be located within the boundaries of the
proposed district; and the request of the owners who collectively own fifty (50) percent or
more of the land area, excluding streets and alleys, to be located within the boundaries of
the proposed district. Two or more platted lots developed together shall be counted as
one lot. Each vacant platted lot of sufficient size to be developed under the current
zoning designation for the property shall be counted as one lot.
2. The City Manager, the Zoning Commission, or the City Council.
4.404 Application.
1. An application for a “CD” zoning initiated by the City Manager, the Zoning Commission,
or the City Council shall be processed by the Planning Department. The Planning
Department shall develop the Conservation District Guidelines for the proposed district
as outlined in this Article.
2. An agent of a group that satisfies the requirements of Section 4.202 may file an
application for “CD” zoning with the Director of Planning on a form furnished by the
department. Each owner representing fifty (50) percent or more of the individual tracts,
parcels, or platted lots and (50) percent or more of the land area must sign the application.
A copy of the proposed district guidelines must be provided to each property owner
before the owner signs the application. Acknowledgement of the receipt of the proposed
guidelines by each property owner must be indicated on the application.
3. An application for “CD” zoning must include the following:
a. An application fee equal to that required for “HC” historic and cultural landmarks
district applications.
b. Maps, including streets, alleys, lots and blocks at the scale of at least 1 inch= 200
feet, indicating the area to be covered and 200 feet beyond.
c. Graphic and written materials identifying and describing the distinctive
neighborhood and building characteristics of the proposed district, including:
i. A description of the prevalent architectural and cultural attributes of the area;
ii. The common building height, size, roof line and principal elevation;
iii. The common lot size and open space;
iv. The prevalent front and side yard setbacks;
Chapter 4. District Regulations
Article 4. Conservation (“CD”) Overlay District
FORT WORTH, TEXAS
ZONING ORDINANCE printed 09/08/04
4-21
v. The prevalent fences, entrances, driveways, windows, garage placement and
entry;
vi. Other common prevalent characteristics of the proposed district; and
vii. An explanation of how and why such a classification would be in the best
interests of the city as a whole.
d. A list of all neighborhood associations and/or other organizations representing the
interests of the property owners in the proposed district. This list should include the
name, address, and telephone number of a contact person for each organization.
e. Proposed guidelines for the District.
4. Applications deemed incomplete by the Planning Department shall be returned to the
agent for the applicants within fourteen (14) calendar days of the initial application
submission. An application shall be considered submitted when it is received by the
Planning Department. The returned application shall include a letter prepared by the
department with adequate instructions to inform the applicant of additional information
required to complete the submission of the application. No action will be taken by the
City on an incomplete application.
4.405 Conservation District Guidelines.
1. The Planning Department shall work with the applicants to prepare the Conservation
District guidelines for the proposed district. The guidelines will include, at a minimum, a
written and graphic description of the goals, objectives, policies, and proposals for
guiding the development of the area.
2. The guidelines shall establish the significant physical characteristics for structures and
properties in the district and shall include at least one of the following elements
governing the physical, characteristics and features of all property within the proposed
district:
(a) Building height and number of stories;
(:mad: Building material;
© Building size;
(d) Principal elevation;
(e) Lot size
(f) Front, side, and rear yard setbacks;
(g) Off-street parking and loading;
(h) Roofline and pitch;
(i) Paving;
(j) Accessory buildings;
(k) Driveways;
(l) Garages;
(m) Density;
(n) Square footage;
(o) Signage;
(p) Architectural style;
(q) Window dormer and door size;
® Landscaping;
(s) Fences;
(t) Street layouts;
Chapter 4. District Regulations
Article 4. Conservation (“CD”) Overlay District
FORT WORTH, TEXAS
printed 09/08/04 ZONING ORDINANCE
4-22
(u) Parks, greenbelts or other natural characteristics; and
(v) Land use patterns.
3. The proposed guidelines shall be permitted with the application to the Zoning
Commission and the City Council. No Conservation District may be established in the
city unless the City Council first approves the design guidelines for the district in
accordance with this Article.
4. Copies of the approved guidelines shall be on file in the Development Department and in
the Planning Department.
5. Design guidelines may be reviewed and modified by the City Council when requested by
a property owner within the district or by the City staff. Any modification of adopted
design guidelines must be approved by the City Council following the same procedures
used for promulgation of the original guidelines. The Board of Adjustment shall not have
jurisdiction to grant any variance from design guidelines. Invalidation of any portion of
the guidelines shall not affect the validity of any other portion.
4.406 Public Hearings.
1. At least fifteen (15) days prior to submission of the application to the Zoning
Commission for consideration, the Planning Department shall hold a public meeting for
the purpose of informing property owners in the proposed district of the submitted
application for a Conservation District overlay and the proposed guidelines for the
district. At least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing, notices of the time and place of
the meeting shall be mailed to all addresses of property owners and residents shown on
the application, to any additional addresses of properties in the proposed district as shown
on the last approved city tax roll, and to any registered neighborhood associations located
within the proposed district. Notice may be served by depositing the same, properly
addressed and postage paid, in the United States Mail.
2. Zoning Commission Hearing. No area shall be designated as a Conservation District
without the recommendation of the Zoning Commission. The Zoning Commission shall
conduct a public hearing on the proposed designation within forty-five (45) days after
receipt of the application for designation and the proposed guidelines by the Planning
Department, or as soon thereafter as is reasonably practicable. The hearing shall be in the
same manner and according to the same procedures for amending the zoning map as set
forth in Chapter 3, Article 5.
3. City Council Hearing. The City Council shall give notice and conduct its hearing on the
Zoning Commission’s recommendation concerning the proposed designation and
guidelines within forty-five (45) days of receipt of the recommendations of the Zoning
Commission, or as soon thereafter as is reasonably practicable. The Council shall review
the design guidelines and shall approve the same, with or without modifications, at the
public hearing on the proposed designation. The City Council shall give notice, follow
the publication procedure, hold the hearing, and make its determination in the same
manner and according to the same procedures for amending the zoning map as set forth
in Chapter 3, Article 5.
4. If the owners of at least twenty (20) percent of an area nominated for designation as a
Conservation District protest such designation by submitting a written, signed protest, the
affirmative vote of at least ¾ of all members of the City Council is required in order for
the designation to take effect.
4.407 Recording of Designations on Zoning Map.
Upon designation of an area as a Conservation District, the City Council shall direct that the designation
to be recorded on the official zoning maps of the city. All zoning maps shall indicate the property in the
district with the suffix “CD” in addition to the marks indicating the primary underlying zoning district
Chapter 4. District Regulations
Article 4. Conservation (“CD”) Overlay District
FORT WORTH, TEXAS
ZONING ORDINANCE printed 09/08/04
4-23
classification indicating the such zoning district is subject to the use and development regulations of both
the designated district and the Conservation District.
4.408 Filing of Designation and Guidelines in Property Records.
Record of designation of an area as a Conservation District and the corresponding district guidelines shall
be recorded in the official property records of the county in which the property is located by the Planning
Department.
4.409 Enforcement.
1. Upon receipt of a building permit application for property within a Conservation District,
the Building Official shall forward a copy of the building permit application to the
Director of Planning for review and comment. No building permit shall be issued by the
Development Department for any new construction or any alteration or addition to the
exterior of an existing building or structure within a designated Conservation District
without the submission and approval of design plans and issuance of a Certificate of
Appropriateness by the Director of Planning.
2. All work performed pursuant to a Certificate of Appropriateness shall conform to any
requirements included herein. It shall be the duty of the Planning and Code Compliance
Department to assure compliance. If work is performed that is not in accordance with the
Certificate of Appropriateness and verification by the Building Official, the Building
Official shall issue a stop-work order and all work shall immediately cease. No further
work shall be undertaken on a project while a stop-work order is in effect.
4.410 Appeal, Penalties.
1. Any owner dissatisfied with any action of the Planning Department, Code Compliance
Department, or Building Official relating to the enforcement of the district guidelines
shall have the right to appeal to the City Council within ten (10) days after receipt of
notification of such action, by filing a written notice of such appeal with the City
Secretary and the Planning Department. Such appeal shall be a de novo hearing
concerning the matter in question. The City Council shall schedule a hearing on such
appeal within thirty (30) days after receipt of the notice of appeal, or as soon thereafter,
as is reasonably practicable. Notice of such hearing shall be published by the City
Secretary in the city’s official newspaper not less than the 15th day before the date of the
hearing. Written notice shall be given to all property owners within the Conservation
District no later than ten (10) days before the date set for the hearing by depositing the
same in the United States Mail. At the hearing, the owner and all interested parties will
have the opportunity to be heard. The City Council shall uphold, reverse, or modify the
decision of the Planning Department or Building Official within thirty (30) days of the
appeal hearing unless the owner agrees to a continuance.
2. Any person, firm, or corporation who violates, disobeys, omits, neglects or refuses to
comply with the provisions of this Article shall be fined not more than $2,000.00 for each
offense. Each day that a violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate offense.
3. The provisions of this section shall apply in addition to other enforcement procedures or
penalties, which are available at law or in equity.
Chapter 4. District Regulations
Article 5. Historic Preservation Overlay Districts (“HSE”, “HC”, “DD”)
FORT WORTH, TEXAS
printed 09/08/04 ZONING ORDINANCE


#37 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,620 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 12 March 2005 - 12:28 PM

The passages for the Historic Districts are much longer, so I'm only going to put a small portion of the ordinance here.

Fort Worth Zoning Ordinance regarding Historic Districts:

ARTICLE 5. HISTORIC PRESERVATION OVERLAY
DISTRICTS (“HSE”, “HC”, “DD”)
4.500 Purpose and Intent
As a matter of public policy, the protection, enhancement and perpetuation of landmarks or districts of
historical, cultural, architectural or archeological importance and significance are necessary to promote
the economic, cultural, educational and general welfare of the public. It is recognized that the City of Fort
Worth represents the unique confluence of time and place that has shaped the identity of generations of
citizens, collectively and individually, and produced significant historical, cultural, architectural and
archeological resources that constitute their heritage. The provisions of this Article are intended to:
1. protect, enhance and perpetuate landmarks and districts of historical, cultural,
architectural or archeological importance which represent or reflect distinctive and
important elements of Fort Worth’s historical, cultural, architectural, archeological,
social, economic, ethnic and political heritage;
2. foster civic pride by recognizing accomplishments of the past;
3. protect and enhance the attractiveness of the City to tourists and visitors and support and
stimulate the economy;
4. ensure the harmonious, orderly and efficient growth and development of the City;
5. promote the economic prosperity and welfare of the community;
6. encourage the stabilization, restoration and improvement of property and property values;
and
7. maintain a generally harmonious outward appearance of both historic and modern
structures, which are compatible and complementary in scale, form, color, proportion,
texture and material.


The criteria to be applied in order to determine whether sites or structures qualify for
designation as Highly Significant Endangered, Historic and Cultural Landmark, Historic and
Cultural Landmarks District and Demolition Delay are as follows:
1. Is distinctive in character, interest or value; strongly exemplifies the cultural, economic,
social, ethnic or historical heritage of the City of Fort Worth, State of Texas or the United
States.
2. Is an important example of a particular architectural type or specimen in the City of Fort
Worth.
3. Has been identified as the work of an important architect or master builder whose
individual work has contributed to the development of the City of Fort Worth.
4. Embodies elements of architectural design, detail, materials or craftsmanship which
represent a significant architectural innovation.
5. Bears an important and significant relationship to other distinctive structures, sites or
areas, either as an important collection of properties of architectural style or
craftsmanship with few intrusions, or by contributing to the overall character of the area
according to a plan based on architectural, historic or cultural motif.
6. Possesses significant archeological value, which has produced or is likely to produce data
affecting theories of historic or prehistoric interest.
7. Is the site of a significant historic event.
8. Is identified with a person or persons who significantly contributed to the culture and
development of the City of Fort Worth, State of Texas or the United States.
9. Represents a resource, whether natural or man-made, which greatly contributes to the
character or image of a defined neighborhood or community area.
10. Is designated as a Recorded Texas Historic Landmark or State Archeological Landmark,
or is included on the National Register of Historic Places.

E. Designation as Highly Significant Endangered (“HSE”)
A site or structure may be designated as Highly Significant Endangered if it satisfies the
following qualifications:
1. It meets five or more of the criteria set out in Paragraph D above; and
2. It is determined by the City Council to be threatened by deterioration, damage or
irretrievable, irreplaceable loss due to neglect, disuse, disrepair, instability, lack of
financial resources and/or impending demolition.
A structure designated Highly Significant Endangered shall be deemed to be a historically
significant site in need of tax relief to encourage its preservation, in accordance with Section
11.24 of the Texas Tax Code.
F. Designation as Historic and Cultural Landmark (“HC”)
An individual structure or site may be designated as a Historic and Cultural Landmark if it
meets three or more of the criteria set out in Paragraph D above. An area which includes two or
more structures or sites which satisfy three or more of such criteria may be designated as a
Historic and Cultural Landmarks District.
G. Designation as Demolition Delay (“DD”)
1. Designation. A structure may be designated Demolition Delay if it satisfies one or more
of the following qualifications:
a. Designated as a Recorded Texas Historic Landmark;
b. Designated as a Texas State Archeological Landmark;
c. Designated as an American Civil Engineering Landmark;
d. Listed on the National Register of Historic Places; or
e. It meets two or more of the criteria set out in Paragraph D above, and is identified as
a resource within a defined survey district of the historic resources survey or within


#38 Buck

Buck

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 397 posts

Posted 12 March 2005 - 01:21 PM

I didn't know we had Conservation Overlay Districts.

Generally, my understanding is that a Conservation Overlay District preserves the neighborhood appearance, but doesn't prevent teardowns or updated construction as long as the look and character are maintained.

A Historic District preserves the structures themselves -- no changes.

From the original comments in this thread, it sounded as if the writer wanted to keep the look and character of Hi-Mount. A Conservation District would allow new townhomes or multi-family that matched the original look and character.

I notice that one poster above misread ny comment about the First Amendment.

I didn't say that historic preservation ordinances are unconstitutional. I support preserving all the examples listed.

But I also think the city government must use its power gently and respect personal freedom.

#39 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,620 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 12 March 2005 - 01:33 PM

From what I can tell that is available online, the City has only one conservation district called the Circle Park Conservation District. Unfortunately, the map is missing from what is available without going to City Hall. I'm guessing the boundaries are the rear property lines of all properties facing Circle Park Blvd. for the entire length of the street. Circle Park Blvd. is on the North Side and it runs from Grand Avenue at Oakwood Cemetery north to NW 20th Street and Park Avenue.

#40 Fire-Eater

Fire-Eater

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 335 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Soon-to-be-Historic Wedgwood
  • Interests:Historic buildings and landscapes, local history, current events, coffee, hard liquor, and arguing!

Posted 12 March 2005 - 04:01 PM

The freedom to build as we wish -- or demolish, or not build, or whatever -- is part of our First Amendment freedom of expression.



But they should be exceptionally historic before we use the power of the city to restrict the owner's freedom.




I don't think Hi-Mount is a museum piece.

View Post


OK, Buck, if we have a constitutional right to "demolish, or not build, or whatever" and a historic preservation ordinance does not allow us to do those things, then the historic preservation ordinance violates our constitutional rights: it is unconstitutional. Now, just what do you believe?

And what do you define as being "exceptional?"

I don't think North Hi Mount is a museum piece either, and I'm not against new construction in the area. I do believe that it is a good example of an early 20th century neighborhood whose contributing historic features should be preserved. Agree or disagree?
WWSPFD?*

History is but the record of the public and official acts of human beings. It is our object, therefore, to humanize our history and deal with people past and present; people who ate and possibly drank; people who were born, flourished and died; not grave tragedians, posing perpetually for their photographs. ~Bill Nye, History of the United States

For me there is no greater subject than history. How a man can study it and not be forced to become a philosopher, I cannot tell. ~George E. Wilson




*What Would Susan Pringle Frost Do?

#41 Buck

Buck

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 397 posts

Posted 12 March 2005 - 04:31 PM

I gave the example -- you can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater. That's the law -- the need to maintain social order and prevent disruptive speech is balanced against individual freedom.

In the same way, maintaining orderly development and preventing disruption are legal reasons to restrict landowners' constitutional freedom of expression.

As far as whether Hi-Mount has a few features worth preserving -- I agree.

As far as whether the entire neighborhood should be preserved intact -- that should not be done without overwhelming support from the landowners themselves. If I lived there, I would not support a historic district.

#42 Fire-Eater

Fire-Eater

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 335 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Soon-to-be-Historic Wedgwood
  • Interests:Historic buildings and landscapes, local history, current events, coffee, hard liquor, and arguing!

Posted 12 March 2005 - 05:07 PM

Landowners must approve the historic designation: an absolute must. I would prefer a 75% approval rating before submitting any paperwork.

I totally support your disinterest in the historic district -- once it was designated you could move out and make a profit on the area's increased prestige, desirability, and real estate values.

So, then, you're not like pnewburn, who believes nothing should be saved if a new and better idea comes along.
WWSPFD?*

History is but the record of the public and official acts of human beings. It is our object, therefore, to humanize our history and deal with people past and present; people who ate and possibly drank; people who were born, flourished and died; not grave tragedians, posing perpetually for their photographs. ~Bill Nye, History of the United States

For me there is no greater subject than history. How a man can study it and not be forced to become a philosopher, I cannot tell. ~George E. Wilson




*What Would Susan Pringle Frost Do?

#43 jvasquez

jvasquez

    Newcomer

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts

Posted 12 March 2005 - 07:26 PM

I gave the example -- you can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater. That's the law -- the need to maintain social order and prevent disruptive speech is balanced against individual freedom.

In the same way, maintaining orderly development and preventing disruption are legal reasons to restrict landowners' constitutional freedom of expression.

As far as whether Hi-Mount has a few features worth preserving -- I agree.

As far as whether the entire neighborhood should be preserved intact -- that should not be done without overwhelming support from the landowners themselves. If I lived there, I would not support a historic district.

View Post


Oh HAPPY DAY Buck does not live in North Hi-Mount...One down-J Vasquez

#44 pnewburn

pnewburn

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 35 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth

Posted 13 March 2005 - 01:02 PM

Landowners must approve the historic designation: an absolute must.  I would prefer a 75% approval rating before submitting any paperwork.

I totally support your disinterest in the historic district -- once it was designated you could move out and make a profit on the area's increased prestige, desirability, and real estate values.

So, then, you're not like pnewburn, who believes nothing should be saved if a new and better idea comes along.

View Post


I thought that higher property values were the problem. Too many landowners are cashing in on higher-density development at the expense of the old houses, right? Wasn't that the genesis of this thread? The historic district as money-making scheme doesn't really apply here. In fact, you want to take away some of the potential profit available to the property owners.

Your probably thinking, "but it's for the greater good that we want take some of your rights." And again, if we were talking about the Parthenon, I would agree. But the fact that you equate the two is still the problem. I think 99% of the people on Earth would agree that we should afford the Parthenon special protection against harmful development. I would think that the percentage of people in town who think we should protect the neighborhood from what many consider beneficial development, would be an extremely small minority. Your target of 75% of the property owners is even way too low in my opinion.

I do not say that nothing should be saved, just not every tract house in a neighborhood from the 20s/30s that is the same as several others in town, and that examples of exist in almost every town in the country. Our standards for 'historic' are ridiculously low in this town. Given enough time, we will accumulate more and more properties worthy of preservation. This historic district would make it harder for these future properties to ever be built.

#45 Fire-Eater

Fire-Eater

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 335 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Soon-to-be-Historic Wedgwood
  • Interests:Historic buildings and landscapes, local history, current events, coffee, hard liquor, and arguing!

Posted 14 March 2005 - 07:48 AM

I'll reply under the topic "Historical Preservation or Hysterical Perversion -- You Decide."

I'd like to get this topic to be more oriented towards the new North Hi Mount Historic District.
WWSPFD?*

History is but the record of the public and official acts of human beings. It is our object, therefore, to humanize our history and deal with people past and present; people who ate and possibly drank; people who were born, flourished and died; not grave tragedians, posing perpetually for their photographs. ~Bill Nye, History of the United States

For me there is no greater subject than history. How a man can study it and not be forced to become a philosopher, I cannot tell. ~George E. Wilson




*What Would Susan Pringle Frost Do?

#46 Fire-Eater

Fire-Eater

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 335 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Soon-to-be-Historic Wedgwood
  • Interests:Historic buildings and landscapes, local history, current events, coffee, hard liquor, and arguing!

Posted 28 March 2005 - 07:31 PM

HEY KREPANIE! Who are you and where are you? Are you mobilizing to save Historic Hi Mount!?!

I'm hoping Jennifer Vasquez and the Preservation Faithful will rally a large pro-preservation crowd at the next meeting. Please let us know when and where Jennifer . . . and please don't invite Charles to the next one!
WWSPFD?*

History is but the record of the public and official acts of human beings. It is our object, therefore, to humanize our history and deal with people past and present; people who ate and possibly drank; people who were born, flourished and died; not grave tragedians, posing perpetually for their photographs. ~Bill Nye, History of the United States

For me there is no greater subject than history. How a man can study it and not be forced to become a philosopher, I cannot tell. ~George E. Wilson




*What Would Susan Pringle Frost Do?

#47 tcole

tcole

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,006 posts
  • Location:Texas

Posted 29 March 2005 - 07:00 AM

Buck:

Again: right book; wrong chapter. Your argument holds more weight if argued from a 4th Amendment stance - not 1st. The issue is not "free speech”; something rather specifically defined in court precedence, but rather the notion that some aspects of historical preservation may constitute "unreasonable seizure" of personal property.

#48 Fire-Eater

Fire-Eater

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 335 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Soon-to-be-Historic Wedgwood
  • Interests:Historic buildings and landscapes, local history, current events, coffee, hard liquor, and arguing!

Posted 29 March 2005 - 11:28 AM

“The Turks twice besieged Vienna, in 1529 and 1683. After the second siege was raised by King Jan Sobieski of Poland, the Catholic powers attempted to drive the Turks out of Europe. The greatest Venetian general, Francesco Morosini (1618-94), overran the Peloponnesos with his army of mercenaries and besieged the Acropolis of Athens. His field commander, Count Königsmark, placed his artillery on the Hill of the Muses. There had been a Turkish powder magazine in the Propylaea before it exploded after being struck by lightning in 1645. A new powder magazine was placed in the Parthenon. On 26 September 1687 a mortar bomb landed in the Parthenon, which exploded.”

From http://www.parthenon...ugh_whitlam.php
WWSPFD?*

History is but the record of the public and official acts of human beings. It is our object, therefore, to humanize our history and deal with people past and present; people who ate and possibly drank; people who were born, flourished and died; not grave tragedians, posing perpetually for their photographs. ~Bill Nye, History of the United States

For me there is no greater subject than history. How a man can study it and not be forced to become a philosopher, I cannot tell. ~George E. Wilson




*What Would Susan Pringle Frost Do?

#49 Fire-Eater

Fire-Eater

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 335 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Soon-to-be-Historic Wedgwood
  • Interests:Historic buildings and landscapes, local history, current events, coffee, hard liquor, and arguing!

Posted 29 March 2005 - 12:10 PM

Concerning the Parthenon,

“Unfortunately, today the East Pediment is rather poorly preserved. The central figures of the pediment were probably removed in Early Christian times in order to make way for an apse when the Parthenon was converted into a church.”

From http://www.willamett...slides.cgi?pp30
WWSPFD?*

History is but the record of the public and official acts of human beings. It is our object, therefore, to humanize our history and deal with people past and present; people who ate and possibly drank; people who were born, flourished and died; not grave tragedians, posing perpetually for their photographs. ~Bill Nye, History of the United States

For me there is no greater subject than history. How a man can study it and not be forced to become a philosopher, I cannot tell. ~George E. Wilson




*What Would Susan Pringle Frost Do?

#50 krepanie

krepanie

    Newcomer

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 21 posts

Posted 29 March 2005 - 12:56 PM

HEY KREPANIE!  Who are you and where are you?  Are you mobilizing to save Historic Hi Mount!?!

I'm hoping Jennifer Vasquez and the Preservation Faithful will rally a large pro-preservation crowd at the next meeting.  Please let us know when and where Jennifer . . . and please don't invite Charles to the next one!

View Post


Kip,

I live on the border of North Hi Mount and Monticello, and my husband and I are just people who plan to stay in the neighborhood and don't want to see the destruction of the neighborhood continue. We would love to help with the mobilization to save Hi Mount...

My husband had already sent letters to about 5-7 different people regarding this...we had no idea there were others that cared.

I hope to see you at the next meeting.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users