Houston Archaeological and Historical Commission Meeting - July 16, 2026

The Houston Archaeological and Historical Commission (HAHC) met on July 16, 2026, to consider protected landmark designations, certificates of appropriateness, and a presentation on the Norhill Design Guidelines. Key actions included deferring a controversial demolition case and advancing discussion on the Norhill guidelines.

Consent Calendar

• Items A-D (Protected Landmark Designations): Approved unanimously. These included the Inns-Crane House (1914 Dunstan Rd.), Helen and Jesse O. Webb House (2232 Dunstan Rd.), Meyer-Jones House (2232 Tangley St.), and May and John Wallace Donaldson House (2306 Tangley St.), all in Southampton Place. Each met criteria for landmark and protected landmark designation. Staff recommendations were accepted.
• Items E3, E5, E6, E7 (Certificates of Appropriateness): Approved as a consent agenda per staff recommendations. These included alterations/additions in historic districts (310 W 13th St., 7923 Glen Alta St., 901 Commerce St., 3415 White Oak Dr.).

Public Comments & Testimony

• Item E1 (202 E 31st 1/2 St. demolition): Multiple speakers opposed the demolition. Tanya Wells (Executive Director, Independence Heights Redevelopment Council) argued the city failed to protect the historic resource and requested denial. Dr. Sabrina Norman, a descendant, stated the community wants no new construction on the lot and seeks to reclaim the property. Amy Den (Texas Community Law Partners) argued the application was incomplete and the owner should face a two-year moratorium. Darnell Peters (applicant) stated he was unaware of the historic district and apologized. Jeffrey Sturman (developer) acknowledged ignorance and expressed willingness to build a contributing structure.
• Item E2 (509 Euclid St.): Paul Whitehouse (neighbor) opposed the addition due to excessive size and risk to a historic live oak. Patrick Scales (neighbor) argued the addition would dwarf the historic structure and harm the tree.
• Item E4 (938 Harvard St.): Mike Shelton (design builder) supported the garage addition, stating the owner needed a home office.
• Item H (Norhill Design Guidelines): Several residents spoke in favor, emphasizing the need for clear guidelines to protect neighborhood character. Others expressed concerns about lack of due process and ambiguous language, requesting further community input.

Discussion Items

• Item E1 (202 E 31st 1/2 St. demolition): Commissioners discussed whether the demolition met criteria for a COA. Staff had no recommendation due to the complexity. Commissioner Davis presented evidence of the property's listing as historic. Commissioner Seidel noted the system failure that allowed the permit. After debate, a motion to defer was made to allow facilitated discussions between the applicant, community, and Councilmember Castillo's office. The motion passed.
• Item E2 (509 Euclid St.): Staff recommended approval with conditions after revisions, but commissioners expressed concerns about massing and the impact on a historic live oak. A motion to defer passed.
• Item E4 (938 Harvard St.): Staff recommended denial because the proposal exceeded FAR limits. Commissioner Davis argued the difference was only ~200 sq ft. An initial motion to approve failed (4-5). A subsequent motion to defer passed.
• Item G (Norhill Design Guidelines Presentation): Staff presented revisions based on conditions from the June 18 meeting. Commissioner Davis and others argued the revisions did not fully meet the commission's intent, particularly regarding FAR calculations for conditioned attics/garages. The director stated that since the agenda item was only a presentation, no action could be taken. The matter will be reconsidered at the August or September meeting.

Key Outcomes

• Deferred Items:
  • Item E1 (202 E 31st 1/2 St.): Deferred to allow stakeholder discussions facilitated by Councilmember Castillo's office.
  • Item E2 (509 Euclid St.): Deferred for further review.
  • Item E4 (938 Harvard St.): Deferred to allow applicant to revise plans to meet staff guidelines.
• Norhill Design Guidelines: No action taken. Staff will continue revisions and bring the item back for consideration at a future meeting.
• Consent Items: Approved as listed.
• Meeting adjourned at approximately 6:15 PM.