Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHDC1998-020 Letter From Cary Tyson To Anne Guthrie And More 10/17/2000Guthrie, Anne From: Cary Tyson [Cary@dah.state. ar.us] Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2000 12:48 PM To: Anne Guthrie; Brian Borne; Gail Mundt; Heather McBride; Marjorie Armstrong; Sandra Taylor Smith; Wayne Bledsoe Subject: FW: RE: [Certified LocalGovernment] Fwd:Re: HISTARCH I'm forwarding email from the CLG listserv. I don't know how many of you are subscribed. I just added Anne & Sandra per their request in Fayetteville. If anyone else would like to be added and can't seem to get it to work, let me know. This email follows the one I sent out earlier regarding the situation in LR. It made the news at least as far as Texas, as you saw earlier. Cary > I was actually more interested in this piece from the perspective > of how one can > protect one's historic property and feel safe in a historic > district that might > also be in a high crime area. Is this an up-and-coming issue for CLGs? There are solutions to security issues other than exterior bars. Quality storm windows. Sash pins. Interior bars if you must. Big barking dogs. Audio recordings of big barking dogs. Neighborhood watch. Community policing. The psychological import of adopting a garrison image for a community is an important one. If you communicate these "security" issues to the world in such an overt way, it will pose long-term challenges to community improvement. In other words, you are what you think you are (this is a corollary to the old "perception is reality" saw). Preservation is but one community improvement tool that is best employed in concert with other community improvement tools, especially in high crime areas. I think security bars do more damage to the community's chances for improvement than they do to the historic character, but they certainly _do_ help undo the positive environmental qualities that preservation can bring to a community. It is one thing to have one person's individual response to security issues damage the overall community's revitalization strategy; it is quite another if the entire community is not discussing a unified approach to community revitalization that will alter the climate that breeds crime, which then yields individuals that must take security onto their own hands on a vigilante basis. Preservation commissions should be a partner in developing overall community revitalization strategies; if your only role in the community comes down to design review for bars, you're not likely to be able to counter what most lay people would view as a reasonable response to critical safety concerns by a resident. But if you can point to a cohesive strategy with many community partners, then you are in a better position to say why this individual's bars are a poor solution to the issue ... as well as being incongruous with the historic character of the district. Also, do not underestimate the personal safety issues of bars in the event of fire, especially for bedroom windows. People have died because they could not escape from their dwelling. Regards, Dan Becker, Executive Director "Conformists die, but Raleigh Historic heretics live on forever" Districts Commission -- Elbert Hubbard dbecker@rhdc.org <mailto:dbecker@rhdc.org> ----------------- --------- eGroups Sponsor ----------------------------> eGroups eLerts It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free! http://click.egroups.com/l/9698/5/_/_/_/971799294/ <http://click.egroups.com/1 /9698/5/_/_/_/971799294/> Jerry Raetz; Kim Dickens; LJ; Digest - Guthrie, Anne From: Cary Tyson [Gary@dah.state.ar.us] Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2000 8:31 AM To:'CertifiedLocalGovernment@egroups.com' Subject: RE: [CertifiedLocalGovernment] Fwd: Re: HISTARCH Digest - 15 Oct 2 000 to 16 Oct 2000 (# 2000- I just got back in the office today after a great week at the Southeast SHPO conference, so sorry about the delay. There is much more information about this case than has been reported in that newspaper article and on our local television news. won't comment fully until after Wednesday and her appearance before a judge, but I will mention a few things not reported in our local newspapers. The website listed below is 404 Not Found so I can't comment on anything other than what I read below. For example, the Historic District Commission (HDC) Coordinator advised me that she has been trying to work with and has been communicating with this individual for over six months. The resident was informed from the outset that with her application for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) to alter her windows she would have to remove her "burglar bars" as they do not comply with design guidelines of this Historic District. She agreed to this condition and also agreed to replace her windows with historically appropriate windows. She then proceeded to replace with something other than she agreed to do when receiving a COA. The position of the commission is that she violated the agreement she had made. She also declined to remove her "burglar bars" as she promised. Violation #2. Let me also mention that removal of inappropriate items is only dealt with when an applicant request to alter a exterior aspect of their home. That is, when the want to replace windows they need to be "historically appropriate". The commission does not go door-to-door telling people what is wrong with their exterior, rather they ensure that when the exterior is altered it is done in compliance with design guidelines every resident is provide upon purchasing their home. So each resident knows of the restrictions of living in a Historic District. They go into this with their eyes wide open, or at least they are provided with the proper information and their Realtor is instructed to advise them of said restrictions. The commission has been trying to work with her to resolve this problem for as I said, over six months. She has refused to live up to the law and her agreement. Therefore, the only resolution the coordinator felt she had was to issue a summons. Her court appearance is tomorrow. As I understand it, she was advised by a code official of the outstanding summons and was requested to "come down and work it out". She did not and when she showed up at the HDC meeting to speak on an issue other than the one we are discussing, she was taken to the police department and issued a summons to appear in court Wednesday. The story appears as if she were jailed with a variety of unsavory scallywags. To answer the three questions: 1. Are these actions really needed? Again, after six months of attempted resolution the commission felt this was the only option left. 2. Is the neighbor out of line? I have an opinion on this, but with the additional information I will let you form your own. 3. Is the commission overstepping it's bounds? Again, they have this authority which they have never used in over 18 years. The punishment for violating the ordinance is a $10 - $500 fine a day, for as long as the violation occurs, so unless she has a large amount of outstanding fines, as I understand it, she will not serve time behind bars. Let me just say that I am amazed at the amount of coverage this story has gotten. The article in our local paper for the most point covered both sides, but I have learned that there is always much more to the story than you read. And that is definitely the case here. I will be observing the case Wednesday and will report back to you. It will be interesting for all of us "CLGers" to witness enforcement take its final steps and see what the court decides. Sorry so long winded, but you asked. I'll keep you informed. Cary This message and its referenced news item came over one of my archaeology listserves-I thought you might find it interesting and thought -provoking as perhaps an enforcement extreme (of course, one should not rely only on the brief paragraph below; read the article at the web site). Can our Arkansas colleague offer some background information? Sue Henry Renaud, RPA Senior Resource Planner Heritage Preservation Services National Park Service Forward Header Subject:Re: HISTARCH Digest - 15 Oct 2000 to 16 Oct 2000 (#2000-261) Author: Lee <lee@POST.COM <mailto:lee@POST.COM> > Date: 10/17/00 1:10 AM Hello - I usually lurk, listen and learn - but the snippet below from Got Caliche? has me curious as to a HistArchers general thinking about the preservation commission's actions in this situation?.Is there anything potentially missing here that would explain to me this isn't overdoing it a tad on the comission's part? 1) Are actions such as these really needed? 2} Is the neighbor out of line? 3) Is the comission overstepping it's bounds? Just wondering, and thinking of starting a letter writing campaign to defend this woman. Thanks, Lee Hamovitz UC Berkeley American Studies >>http://www.dallasnews.com/texas southwest/191356 arbars_14tex.A.html70 >>year old Betty Deislinger attended a historic commission meeting in Little Rock and was arrested, then taken to the police station and fingerprinted. >>Her crime? She had refused to remove burglar bars from her 1870s house, in violation of an ordinance governing the historic district where she lives. >>The warrant was issued on the complaint of Anne Gutherie, the city's >>historic preservation administrator, who works with the commission. Mrs. >>Gutherie, who lives next door to Mrs. Deislinger, did not return phone >>calls on Friday. >>Southwestern Archaeology, Inc. (SWA) >>"Got CALICHE?" Newsletter >>Archaeology, Anthropology, and History of the Greater Southwest! ><Sunday October 15, 2000 »SWA invites you to redistribute SWA's "Got CALICHE?" Newsletter, but >>please, redistribute "Got CALICHE?" in it's entirety or note that you >>have edited out or clipped articles for re -transmission. >>Free subscription @ <http://www.swanet.org/news.html <http://www.swanet.org/news.html> >. >>Thanks for reading today's edition! >>Southwestern Archaeology, Inc. (SWA) - A 501©(3) not -for -profit >>corporation dedicated to electronic potlatch and digital totemic increase >>rites that focus and multiply historic preservation activities in the >>Greater Southwest. Our goal is to create and promote an environment in >>which archaeologists can develop their talents and take the risks from >>which innovation and productivity arise. >>WWW Address: <http://www.swanet.org <http://www.swanet.org> > >>Mailing Address: Southwestern Archaeology, Inc., >>P.O. Box 61203, Phoenix AZ, USA 85082-1203 >>Newsletter Editor: Brian W. Kenny >>E-mail: <swa@dogyears.com <mailto:swa@dogyears.com> > >>Telephone: 602.882.8025 / Fax: 603.457.7957 »Toll -free VM Messaging: 1.800.699.2466 »(SWA VM mailbox # is 272.436.5649 or'ARCHEOLOGY) --- ---- eGroups Sponsor ----------------------------> eLerts It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free! http://click.egroups.com/l/9699/5/—/—/­/971785646/ <http://click.egroups.com/l/9699/5/­/—/­/971785646/> -------------------------------------------------- -> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: CertifiedLocalGovernment-unsubscribe@egroups.com < mai Ito: Certified Loca lGovern ment-u n su bscri be@eg rou ps. com>