Alamo Heights - myAlamoHeights.com

...
written by Fred , January 16, 2010

Can we please stay on topic and get back to the discussion of demolitions? Lack of care and upkeep is not a big issue in Alamo Heights.

...
written by Common Sense , January 16, 2010

An HOA would not have the authority to stop demos or regulate the care and upkeep of homes unless it was in force at the time of the purchase of your home and with deed restrictions at that time.

I for one do not believe we need that kind of Nanny State. For homes in need of repair, perhaps you should try assisting your neighbors instead of complaining about them. There may be circumstances you are unaware of that are causing the problem. And if not, what business is it of yours what other people do with their property?

...
written by Mule Dookie , January 14, 2010

Bud, stop hitting on Katee (porn name), she is not interested in your double wide and friends.

But she makes the right and very unpopular suggestion, we need an HOA in AH. This will control the demos and poor conditions of some homes. But, I fear this will never happen and AH will fade away slowly. Sad.

...
written by BUD , January 13, 2010

Why do people assume I would live in a dump? I didn't let on but your comment Katee shows that you have your nose a little too high in the air. You'd be surprised to see my place and my neighbors.....

...
written by BUD , January 13, 2010

Just for you sweetie, I can move the couch to your place with no problems but would my burglar bars be allowed?

...
written by Katee , January 13, 2010

Bud, no, but you will need to remove the sofa from your front porch.

...
written by BUD , January 12, 2010

So Katie, are you suggesting that if I don"t water my lawn ( upkeep) because I don't want a high water bill that I might get a fine from an HOA?

...
written by Katee , January 11, 2010

I think AH needs a strong HOA with building, remodeling and upkeep guidelines.

...
written by AZ to AH , January 09, 2010

Ok, not on the demo topic but close, Paul's mention of the "pride" incentive and the new group actions made me think of this. My retired parents moved to Sun City, AZ and got involved in a group called "Prides." They would go around in their golf carts every Saturday morning and clean, care for plants and generally take care of all the common areas of the community. It look beautiful all the time. How nice would it be if Alamo Heights has something like this. Who knows, maybe the city would be able to help with carts and tools.

...
written by Isosceles , January 09, 2010

Sorry I meant CAAH it is difficult to remove AHCHOO from my brain.

...
written by Isosceles , January 09, 2010

Paul, I agree wholeheartedly with your observations of homes needing better care, and I wonder how many of them have elderly residents that could use some help.

The AHCHOOs are meeting next week, I'll bring this up, perhaps there is a way we can quietly identify which homeowners need assistance with maintenance.

...
written by burra , January 09, 2010

Many of the homes in question were not of the highest quality construction when they were originally built and are prohibitively expensive to update (asbestos siding, lead paint, etc.). I like the idea of new, energy efficient homes and it is possible to reuse materials and even build them to look just as beautiful and fit in with the surroundings. The problem is that people, in order to justify the expense and the price of the land, squeeze the most square footage out of the lot as they can and often skimp on the quality and architectural features of the exterior. Many don't seem to care that an italian villa has no place on a street full of bungalows. Until you can regulate taste, I don't know what the answer is :)

...
written by TaxpayerVoter , January 09, 2010

Good comments Paul. Also, I think the permits and fees are a disincentive for maintenance. Every time a permit is issued, bexar co adds to market value.

...
written by Paul , January 09, 2010

I think AH suffers not only from demos, but also from the lack of care of some homes. You can go up and down any street and you'll have the four or five homes that need better care of the structure and landscape.

First I think the city needs to have some type of "pride" opportunity for residents, maybe tax incentives for upkeep.

If we can't stop demos, maybe set standards for preserving distinctive features, finishes, and craftsmanship, etc. Perhaps even where deterioration requires replacement, the new features could match the old in design features.

...
written by Sarah , January 08, 2010

Bringing these in from the earlier article..

ah resident, the Inslee house is still there, I think you mean 301 Alta which is being wiped out as we speak. I just sent before/after photos to Robert and suggested this be the Question of the Month. I hope you will persevere and continue to wear us out with your comments regarding demolitions. Perhaps we can form an independent group concerned about demos and then come up with examples for the City Council and local architects, providing contractor names that do re-use demolitions, provide a list of sources, examples of other city codes, etc.
...

written by ah resident , January 07, 2010
It would be great! but with another perfectly great house demolished @ Inslee, the interest to perserve our rich history just isn't of interest to the majority of alamo heights residents or the city council. There are NO preservation measures set-up for reuse of the materials (solid 1930 solid wood doors, hardwood floors, fixtures,etc) I think city council should start selling tickets to ah residents who want to salvage the 1930 materials from demolitions. Fact: eventually the 1920-1930 houses will all be gone.This is the last post I make regarding a now "worn out" conversation.

...
written by TaxpayerVoter , January 08, 2010

I voted for all the comments. We need constructive community input. I hope as many will make comments on the proposed revisions to building code. One change that makes me uncomfortable is that the City Manager is the last appeal on remodel and building permits. City Council should be the final appeal. Rheey are elected; city managervis not elected.
As far as demolition, until there are incentives to restore/remodel, there will be more tear downs. Bringing old homes up to date for wiring and plumbing is very costly. I agree that property rights are supreme. Historic value is subjective. People move into AH for many reasons; over regulation is not one of them.

...
written by Common Sense , January 08, 2010

Deconstruction only adds to the costs of rebuilding which is why it is not popular. Cities cannot and should not mandate what we do with our personal property. I bought it, paid for it and I'll do with it as I please. Could we make information more available about alternatives when a project is coming up for demolition? Sure but it is not the City's responsibility to dictate homeowner rights.

If I rent my home ( because I might be upside down on the note and cannot afford to take a loss at this time), that is no ones business but mine. Frankly, I found the suggestion that renters are somehow undesirable a bit on the high and mighty side. Being a renter does not automatically mean you don't care about where you live. Many who rent in Alamo Heights do so because they DO CARE for the community. Many of those renters are our children who cannot afford the housing prices but want to live near where they grew up.

It would be a perfect world if every one would donate their home to a charity but that isn't going to happen.
And sometimes that even backfires. Ask Manhcke Park about the house removed from the 09 high rise site at Hildebrand and dumped on Natalen in their neighborhood - still sitting on its rudders more than 2 years later. It is a complete eyesore and a danger to the public - but by George, it was saved!

I agree with the AHDude - not every house is worth saving.

...
written by Comment from myAlamoHeights Facebook page , January 08, 2010

"I'm shocked every time I return to San Antonio to see that beautiful places are gone. In CA, most demolitions are subject to a law that requires an analysis of the impacts of a proposed development. It doesn't stop development; it just requires that you acknowledge the changes you're making to give people time to raise a reasonable objection. Those objections can be mitigated, by the way.

Most current construction standards are for 75 years. This is why newer houses seem cheaper than old ones -- they are. So when you tear down a home from the 1880s to build to current standards, you are simply ensuring more construction (which generates most of the trash sent to landfills now). And once that home is gone nothing like it will replace it.

I know that many Texas are ultimately utilitarians: if they can't use it, it's not worth anything. But when 09 looks like a Dallas suburb, you'll miss it."

...
written by ah dude , January 08, 2010

I moved this from an earlier article.

We need to be clear on our nomenclature and data if a solid position is to be made to other residents and the city govt.

First is that reusing materials is not historic demolition protection. Reusing materials is a great idea and one, like Sarah, points out, needs to be explored and maybe encouraged through a program to get other to use the reclaimed materials. It is a good environmental idea.

Second is that total demolitions are different than partial demolitions in that total demolitions are more dramatic but are a lot less in number. Bill Kiel calculated the total demolitions at an average of 5.78 single family house per year from 2004 to mid 2008. This is from the North San Antonio Times in July 08. How many of these were “nice” houses that should have been saved I am not sure. Total tear downs amount to a slow change in our community.

Third is that Bill Kiel’s finding show that the biggest changes in our community are from additions and remodels. This is where the rapid change is coming from and where I think the effort should be focused on how to make these fit our community better. I don’t think the 1920’s 30’s house will be gone they will be remodeled, often with shoddy additions.

I think the big dilemma that residents and the city have tried to deal with is how we allow new houses, and remodels to happen, and protect our valued historic houses at the same time. For instance not every house that is demolished is worth saving.

Sarah has pushed for, and I agree, a complete historic house survey to have working database of our best historic assets. This kind of data allows for a rational discussion of how are community is changing.

This subject is current as it relates to the new code changes happening now and in the spring.

...
written by cinsanantonio , January 08, 2010

I don't like to see perfectly good homes go to waste.
It upsets me to see the pictured home torn down as so many people need homes for their families. I'm all for reuse, recycle, and hope that these people with too much money on their hands do the right thing and donate these homes to organizations that can provide affordable housing for people or at the very least donate to charities like Catholic Ministries to help people pay their rent and prevent eviction in these cold winter months. The economy is not to blame, it's the Majority Congress. btw anyone need their house/apt cleaned?

...
written by cleareyes , January 08, 2010

The City of Alamo Heights is falling apart right in front of our eyes and your blind if you can't see it. It has its charm but it also has its eye sores. Some of the old home need to be torn down. Urban renwal I call it. Plus it will bring in more money to the city that is land locked. I agree there should be restrictions and permits but if its done right the city and the citizens are going to benifit. I don't want to see the city to turn into Windcrest and loose its charm. The area and class of Austin Highway are creeping in to these old run down homes.Homes for rent are even on the rise and we don't want that (no pride in ownership ) Plus while we are demoing the homes we need to take out all off the slum-lord owned apartments.