Jorge Valenzuela and his wife, Lisa, had a building permit and thought they did everything right in preparing to build a new $330,000 home in Central El Paso’s Austin Terrace Historic District.
But because of a mistake by City Hall their future dream home has become a very real nightmare.
They have spent more than $100,000 so far, but the city stopped construction a month ago, and as a result of City Council action Tuesday, their partially built house at 111 Pennsylvania Place may never be finished.
City regulations will prevent the Valenzuelas from doing anything with the property for a year, and they may even have demolish the unfinished frame structure themselves at a cost of $65,000.
But not without a fight, Jorge Valenzuela vowed angrily after the 5-2 vote on a motion by West-Central Rep. Susie Byrd.
“We’ll be suing the city,” he said. “It’s cut and dried.”
The Valenzuela house was one of two in Austin Terrace that the same group of neighbors thought were just too big and appealed the Historic Landmark Commission’s approval of the certificates of appropriateness that the owners needed to build their homes.
Such appeals are extremely rare but both cases landed in City Council’s lap Tuesday.
The other owner, Polish-born Adam Baginski, was luckier than the Valenzuelas. He persuaded the council to deny the neighbors appeal and will be allowed to go ahead with the construction of his two-story, 4,000 square foot house at 19 Cumberland Circle.
An El Paso native who spent seven years working in advertising in Dallas, Jorge Valenzuela said he had a hard time persuading his wife that life would be better in his old hometown in a new home just a few blocks down the street from the house where he grew up.
He said he came back to join his father in the cement business. The vacant lot in the historic neighborhood was a gift from his father, who lives nearby.
Valenzuela’s application for a building permit clearly showed the property was in a historic district.
But, the head of development services, Larry Nichols, said the city’s computer system failed to flag the application as needing approval by the Historic Landmark Commission.
“When this project came forward, we were not identifying vacant lots,” Nichols said, adding the problem has since been corrected. “It’s not going to happen again.”
Valenzuela’s building permit was approved and work on the house began.
“Having experience in construction, I see the building permit as a green light,” Valenzuela said, adding he was unaware that the project lacked landmark commission approval.
Construction was well under way until the city’s historic preservation coordinator, Troy Ainsworth, happened to notice the construction while driving through the neighborhood one day in March.
The city issued a stop work order pending a March 15 hearing before the landmark commission.
Over objections from neighbors, the commission gave its approval to some revisions in the house’s design that Valenzuela was told to return with on April 7.
Valenzuela’s architect made the revisions, and they were good enough for the commission, Nichols said, but it could not give final approval because the neighbors filed an appeal, sending the case to City Council.
Five of the landmark commission’s seven members are architects, and on April 7, Nichols said, they “determined they could approve it.”
One of the complaining neighbors, Michael Towne, said he and others collected two petitions with the same 130 signatures opposing the Baginski and Valenzuela houses.
“The arguments I have on this house are the same as the last one,” he told the council. “It’s too much house and too little lot.”
With a large, two-car garage closest to the street while other garages in the 1930s era neighborhood are in the rear of most of the other homes in the area, he said, the Valenzuela house is typical of West Side homes but has no business in Austin Terrace.
“If that’s the direction we’re going in, we do not need an historic district,” Towne said.
Eastridge/Mid-Valley Rep. Ortega replied, “The city dropped the ball. I’m going to have a real hard time penalizing him for our mistake.
“We screwed up, and may have to swallow the pill.”
Northeast Rep. Castro agreed, and asked how the city is going to resolve the situation.
Robert Estrada, a neighbor of Byrd’s, said Valenzuela is just the kind of El Paso expatriate the city needs.
“I’m concerned about the message this is sending to people who come back,” he said.
Valenzuela’s wife, Lisa, tearfully said their three small children have been cooped up in an apartment with no back yard for months.
“I’m just asking you to make this right for us and not require us to make this right for ourselves,” she said.
But another neighbor, Todd Southern, said the Valenzuela’s two-story house would be like a huge “Tibetan monastery” on a street with small, one-story homes – a $300,000 castle next to his modest $74,000 house.
“My solution? Make it conform. Move the garage and compensate the Valenzuelas. Take off the top story,” he said.
Byrd agreed that the house doesn’t fit the neighborhood.
“I know we made a mistake,” she said. “But I cannot support the certificate of appropriateness.”
With that, she offered the motion to approve the appeal.
***
David Crowder can be reached at dcrowder@epmediagroup.com and (915) 351-0605.


















LisaT
April 30, 2008
So why is this neighborhood Historic.
Omar Silva
April 30, 2008
While unfortunate for Mr. Valenzuela, I think City Council made the right decision. A home of that style does not belong in a historic district. However, the city should be prepared to somehow compensate him for his trouble.
Marty
April 30, 2008
It's real simple:
The city needs to pay for all expenses associated with their approval of the building permit.
Pay for removal of everything built and pay all costs incurred to
build the building.
Pay for any cancellation fees for building contracts and any interest
on the building loan.
Plus, pay 10% for causing the mistake.
Then, the property owner can resubmit new building plans
or if the house cannot be built big enough, sell the property
and build elsewhere.
One option is to build the house with a HUGE basement to
replace the 2nd story space that is apparently needed.
That way, the house will look the same as the historic district wants
but will have twice the space.
HOME OWNERSHIP 101:
However, in general, it is not a good idea to build the largest house on the block or neighborhood anyway.
You will always lose money doing that.
Whatever house you build or buy anywhere, it should be equal to, or smaller than, or less in value, than the houses around it.
That way, you will always be able to sell your home when you want to.
Yes, it's real "prestigious" to have the largest house in the area but that is
a sure fire way to lose money, as the smaller houses, of lesser value, drag the appraisal price down when you want to sell.
The reverse is also true:
When you own the smallest house on the block, or area, the higher values of the other houses, will make a sale very fast and at top dollar.
Ken G
April 30, 2008
Troglydites. This home will increase the value of the whole neighborhood. Small minded thinking. If the City (meaning us the taxpayers) made a mistake, they (we) should pay for it.
Alonso
April 30, 2008
I like how Susie Byrd basically said, "It was our mistake, but I don't care, screw you anyway" to Mr. Valenzuela. How can these city council members be swayed by a group of "neighbors", when "five of the Landmark Commission’s seven members are architects, and they determined they could approve" the revised home design. If city council will not even consider the "opinion" of the Landmark Commission, then why have a Landmark Commission? Better yet, if Mr. Valenzuela received a building permit from City Hall, giving him a green light to begin construction on his home, and now they say, "sorry, but that means nothing", why have a City Hall. The result he received would have been the same if he had simply begun construction without ANY permit. It would have taken a "neighbor" complaint, or a chance observation by the city’s historic preservation coordinator, Troy Ainsworth, while driving through the neighborhood one day in March, to bring this home's construction to someone's attention and call for a stop work order from the city. In my opinion, Marty (one of the posters below) is pretty dead-on about how this matter should be handled, and I'd even go further in compensating the Valenzuelas, maybe up to 20% compensation.
Sara L.
April 30, 2008
I too live in this historic district and noticed the house some time ago while driving home, although i most definately empathize with the Valenzuela family the house simply does not fit into the beautiful and historic neighborhood. The city is at fault and should reimburse the family for the building expenses incurred thus far. It was a horrible mistake to allow the permit for this structure, but to allow an eyesore of this size into one of the few remaining historic neighborhoods in the city would be the greateast mistake of all.
In addition i resent the implication that by not allowing this neighborhood to be ruined is somehow making our city unfriendly to ex-El Pasoans. The fact that this family is returning to the city has no bearing on the situation at hand.
referee
April 30, 2008
City owes them $400,000 and should pay for the mistake. Applicant did everything he was asked to --- by the book-- and should not be punished.
Other point-- why is a group of nondescript, small houses in a historical protected district? The only unique part of the neighborhood is the part with grand, large houses.
RickD
April 30, 2008
City of El Paso take Marty's suggestion, negociate with the home owners it's cheaper than loosing a law suit at tax payers expense, computer glitch they happen all the time. Marty congradulations on your clear and direct thinking. Valenzuela family get yourself a great lawyer, attempt to negoicate your best deal consider only damages suffered for building the house. Basement concept great idea. Don't get emotional, stay calm & collective this could very well be your your Ace, GOOD LUCK
Mike
April 30, 2008
Its TOO LATE!!!
The home that was allowed to stay was a white family, the people protesting were anglos as well. The owner of the home that was told to tear down despite the fact that he had ALL the proper paper work and approval from the city, is an Hispanic family. Only two Hispanic city councilors voted for the family (Ortega and Castro)(Byrd, Lilly, O'Rourke(anglo) Quintana(alleged criminal and Holguin "I only care about Lee Trevino extension"
Hmm, I'm not saying this is prejudice, but I'm just sayin....The city screwed up and should not have allowed the residents to push their rules. At least both homes should have been voted down
george saucedo
April 30, 2008
In the private sector, this would not have been an issue. The city should accept its mistake and let the house move forward. PERIOD!!!!!
DJ
April 30, 2008
Just one minute! There is actually someone here in El Paso that looks at the architectural merits of houses before approval? Holy Cow! Where the hell have they been the last forty years?
There seems to be little question that the City has the ultimate liability in this case and selective administration of these laws smacks of the neighborhood malcontents flexing their political clout with a certain member of Council.
I look at some of the abominations that have been constructed in neighborhoods like Alexander and Kern lately, ones on tiny triangular lots with barely a sidewalk space between the house and street, and ask "Who approves this garbage?". Or just take a walk through Sunset Heights and ask where the hell the do-gooders on City Council are to force some compliance there.
Marty's response above is right on as to what the city needs to do to fix this....and you can bet if I'm sitting on that jury in a lawsuit the Valenzuelas will get every penny they invested back with interest, costs for time and trouble and a written apology from the City.
Don't get me wrong, I hate McMansions made of foam board and sprayed-on stucco. I particularly hate modern houses that hide behind garages. Why the Valenzuelas and their architect (if you can call him that, really) did not place the garage of the house on one of the property's two alleys is beyond me....just go take a look at the place and you wonder why the commission didn't make them fix that glaring aberration. It may have actually passed muster with the neighbors if that had been done.
Being the nosy sort I am, I just had to take a quick drive and see the neighborhood. Nice yes, I'd live there, but I'm asking why it's listed as historic when so many of our true historic treasures go without the protection of this designation.
Rugby Player
April 30, 2008
I am familiar with the neighborhood, the Valenzuela home would be one of many gigantic homes in the area. Now as for the owners comments of the one story bungalow next door to the Valenzuela's, who said "the macmansion coverd their view" Even if you put an equipment shed next to their window there view would be skewd. I think this woman was used to having an empty lot next to her home. If she liked it that way she should have bought the property when it was for sale.
Ammor8
May 1, 2008
Well, after reading everyone's comments, I would like to put my 2 cents in!
The Valenzuela's submitted the PROPER paperwork to the city. Once they got an approval, and let us not forget, this paperwork must have gone through AT LEAST 20 hands, they began construction. Yes their house is big, yes the neighbors who spoke up have a house that is much smaller and worth "$74,000" but why would you complain? They are bringing more value to their home. My sister and I drove by as well, the house across the street is selling for $255,000.00 and is the same size as the lady who was complaining about the Valenzuela's. I can literally stand next to the neighbors house and block their view! What an ignorant comment to say they should move to the cotton fields! Does that mean she should move across UTEP on the other side of the border where her house might fit better? (J- town???)
To the people who have negative comments, its so easy to pass judgment, not once taking into consideration what this family is going through, much less their children... Let's see you shell out over $200,000 by fault of the city and not put up a fight. Try taking a walk in these peoples shoes. I bet everyone would be singing a different tune. What the city did was horrific, now the tax payers (us) will have to severely pay for the fault of people not doing their job. Again, this family went through the proper procedures. In my opinion, the lady who walked around collecting signatures has nothing better to do with her time then to stir problems. She isn't camera friendly anyways, she should consider investing all this extra time in doing good for others instead of doing the opposite and LEAVE this family alone. I'm not sure what can happen now, but I say let them build!
expat Al
May 1, 2008
Hurray for Rep. Susie Byrd!!! I applaud her courage and commitment to making El Paso better. The Landmark Commission must have been out to lunch to approve for Austin Terrace anything even resembling this kitsch house. In fairness to them however, their hands may have been tied by inadequate historic preservation laws. No surprise here.
Didn't know about the Historic District? Puleez!...don't let's plead ignorance. Mr. Valenzuela should have known he needed design approval..."Having experience in construction...." Give me a break!
The city does however owe Mr. Valenzuela something for pain and suffering, but more importantly El Paso owes its neighborhoods protection from such stucco-foam monuments to poor taste. Rep Ortega may not want to penalize the owners for the City's mistake, but don't penalize Austin Terrace and El Paso. And if you are really serious about Preservation, City of El Paso, you should bite the bullet in any ensuing court battle and see this as a chance to show your commitment to protecting El Paso's heritage and built environment. So many times in the past has any threat of litigation made the city back down. Let's see what happens here.
Ammor8
May 1, 2008
Hurray for Susie Byrd? What courage? What commitment? How is this making El Paso better? Oh, it must be using tax payers money to front up this bill when it was NOT this couples fault but the city itself. Yes, that must be it! Way to go Susie! You sure called one heck of a vote. How do you explain allowing another residence to build the same size of home, right up the street? What, all of a sudden you cannot legally have a 2 story home next to a one story? If I were the Valenzuela family, I sure know who I would be campaigning against…
Now, lets touch on Mr. Valenzuela pleading ignorance. When a city provides a permit, what exactly does that mean? Lets think on this one…. MUST mean build. Isn’t that what a permit is? I wonder who is ignorant in this subject…. People, lets look at the big picture here. This city messed up. I’m not sure where it went wrong, obviously only the city, Valenzuela fam, City Council know. We aren’t informed as much as them. Bottom line, compensate this family. Also, get better Council members on board who know what they are doing.
Miguel Gomez
May 1, 2008
This is so typical of of our inept city government. Let the Valenzuelas's build their home. "Swallow the pill", and make it cyanide if at all possible.
Will
May 2, 2008
People like Michael Towne REALLY need to get lives. There are more important things to worry about than messing up your silly historic neighborhood. Really, I like historic neighborhoods, except for one thing-the crotchety old farts who have nothing better to do than to meddle in every single affair that goes on in your little fiefdom.
And yes, the City screwed up, so guess what, they have either two choices 1) let him build his gigantic house OR 2) make him adjust the plan, but pay for every penny of it.
Cristin Morfin
May 2, 2008
I believe the city should be honorable to themselves and to the citizens of El Paso and back up their first decision. The Valenzuela family should not suffer because of this mistake and should be allowed to continue to build their home.
amy s
May 2, 2008
Man....the city messed up bad here! Nevertheless, they should stand behind thier decision from the "get-go". How insecure the city officials look by "flip-flopping" their desicion back and forth. I don't think this is a question of being built in a historical district or not! ~ The way I see it is the neighbors seem to complain because of the threat of their property taxes going up. Sounds petty to me. If the city won't let them continue the build..the city should be responsible not only for the money they have invested thus far, but the cost of tear-down and additional funds for the relocation for this family.
Cristina G.
May 2, 2008
I agree w/ one of the other responders, how odd that all the protesting neighbors are anglo and the the other family who got to keep their home was anglo too. And that was even pointed out by the news media. The city should honor their mistake and let them keep building. And besides some of the houses in that area don't even look historic, they look as if they were built in the 1970s, then those should be demolished.
Janet Monteros
May 10, 2008
Sounds like the city needs a new historic preservation coordinator and the complaining neighbors should have been more alert before allowing Mr. Valenzuela to continue his sentimental building journey.
DJm
May 10, 2008
When I go to the bank and the teller mistakenly give more money that I have in my account, I can not keep that money.
Mr. V, a construction professional, knew he was building in a historic district (i.e., if everyone lives in a shack, only shacks are allowed).
Mr. V sought to take advantage of the situation (given a free lot, he wanted more house than allowed; the wife should double check to see if her rinig is real).
There is not an approriate case to discuss how much we have to do to bring our brother and sisters back home; some folks need to reside at Huntsville.
Mr. V should "man up" and bring back the money to the bank and get the teller off the hook.