[Luvvarkansas]

All areas have good and bad sections. Here in BV, there are some parts of town that are total trash. Most do not realize that. Then there are those areas with the older, original 60s and 70s homes that are selling for about $80 to $90K, some are townhouses.

This brings up a topic I've been wondering on, concerning Hot Springs Village.

In another thread, someone mentioned that someone they knew said there were sections of HSV that they would NOT live in. As I've looked at property in HSV to get a feel of what I could get for my money, I've noticed that there are a good many reasonably-priced smaller homes that are, as Nita said about the ones in Bella Vista, the original 60s and 70s homes. There are also a good many condos that are selling pretty cheaply, some completely furnished and on golf courses.

These kinds of properties would be within my budget (and I actually think the "vintage" houses are cute as can be)....but, I do NOT want to live around trashy people. I want to live where people keep their homes and yards neat and clean even if they are not "upscale", and, of course, are not cooking meth for supper.

Seriously, then....my question is, if I bought one of these lower-priced homes or condos, would I be living around bottom feeders? The person who brought up their friend's comment about "there are parts of HSV that I would not live in" responded by saying there was NO part of HSV that he wouldn't live in.

I guess it could mostly depend on what you are used to living in....I guess people who are used to living in homes in subdivisions where the houses start at $200,000 (um....that would not be me) might find the inexpensive home and condo sections of HSV a little seedy. But are they, actually?

Argh, I sure wish google street view went all through HSV like it does Bella Vista and Fairfield Bay!

I hope no one takes offense at my question. I'm not a snobby person, just a clean, quiet one who has had the unfortunate experience of living next to some filthy people who constantly kept at least 3 dogs in the back yard yapping their heads off day and night (until the police chief had a word or two with them). They still have filth on their porch and under their carport and in their back yard, though.

[jimnelson1]

The idea at there are bad neighborhoods in HSV is ridiculous.

Nearby outside the village, yes. In the village, not at all.

[msmith7113]

I own a small home in the older part of the Village and use it as a weekend getaway because I still work and live in the Little Rock area.

The older areas are simply older, smallish wood frame homes. Prices got overheated when everything else did and has resulted in some foreclosures. You can find a modest older house for 10-15k more than a condo and your monthly POA fee will be cheaper.

The locals won't let you get away with much as far as a trashy property....you will get turned in to the POA. In the older neighborhoods; you may occasionally see a boat parked by a house which is against the rules....but not often. There are also home owners that will leave their lots "natural"....meaning they bought the house not wanting to do strenuous yardwork on tree-covered hill-sides as they grow older.

There is no way I would classify any part of Hot Springs Village as being "bad". People move here to retire and enjoy life. They keep their eyes open for potential threats. I consider the community much safer than average; offering a lot of amenities and value.

[nmnita]

Originally Posted by Luvvarkansas

This brings up a topic I've been wondering on, concerning Hot Springs Village.

In another thread, someone mentioned that someone they knew said there were sections of HSV that they would NOT live in. As I've looked at property in HSV to get a feel of what I could get for my money, I've noticed that there are a good many reasonably-priced smaller homes that are, as Nita said about the ones in Bella Vista, the original 60s and 70s homes. There are also a good many condos that are selling pretty cheaply, some completely furnished and on golf courses.

These kinds of properties would be within my budget (and I actually think the "vintage" houses are cute as can be)....but, I do NOT want to live around trashy people. I want to live where people keep their homes and yards neat and clean even if they are not "upscale", and, of course, are not cooking meth for supper.

Seriously, then....my question is, if I bought one of these lower-priced homes or condos, would I be living around bottom feeders? The person who brought up their friend's comment about "there are parts of HSV that I would not live in" responded by saying there was NO part of HSV that he wouldn't live in.

I guess it could mostly depend on what you are used to living in....I guess people who are used to living in homes in subdivisions where the houses start at $200,000 (um....that would not be me) might find the inexpensive home and condo sections of HSV a little seedy. But are they, actually?

Argh, I sure wish google street view went all through HSV like it does Bella Vista and Fairfield Bay!

I hope no one takes offense at my question. I'm not a snobby person, just a clean, quiet one who has had the unfortunate experience of living next to some filthy people who constantly kept at least 3 dogs in the back yard yapping their heads off day and night (until the police chief had a word or two with them). They still have filth on their porch and under their carport and in their back yard, though.

Like Bella Vista there are no really bad areas in HSV. Well maybe a couple, but you would recognize them immediately. I don't think there is anywhere in the country that doesn't have a few questionable neighborhoods, but truly bad I doubt. of course you haven't mentioned your actual budget or if you did I missed it. What is right for one person isn't always right for someone else. Yes, those old homes can be fun and charming, but remember, if they haven't been updated the cost of maintenance can be very costly. Now, as for the yapping dogs, that is another matter. You can get that almost anywhere. yes, reporting them to the authorities is the only way to keep this from happening.

[saxondale351]

HSV has very restrictive Home owners laws, some complain but it does one thing, it keeps the idiots from making a redneck dump out of it. Every home is nicely kept and its park like inside.

[Teddy52]

Originally Posted by saxondale351

HSV has very restrictive Home owners laws, some complain but it does one thing, it keeps the idiots from making a redneck dump out of it. Every home is nicely kept and its park like inside.

I sure wish Cherokee Village was a lot stricter.

Seems like ever since the housing market crashed ( resulting in lots of houses for sale ) many are being used as rentals and realtors are handling the rentals and telling the Cherokee Village authorities to........back off.....with enforcement.

Hope that never happens in HSV !

[Luvvarkansas]

Originally Posted by saxondale351

HSV has very restrictive Home owners laws, some complain but it does one thing, it keeps the idiots from making a redneck dump out of it. Every home is nicely kept and its park like inside.

That's what I'm looking for....a place where every home is nicely kept and the whole "town" is park like. As for the "natural" yards....well, the woods in Arkansas are as beautiful as landscaping to me! I can certainly understanding not wanting to have a lawn to keep up, and would probably be one of those "natural" homeowners also....although I do love flowers and shrubs and probably would slowly add them here and there (in a "natural" way) as my fibro would allow me to.

I do see in some of the realtor photos of some of the condos that the outsides of the buildings can sometimes be slightly grungy. Not filthy, just a little bit shabby.

As msmith said, I've had the thought that one of the small houses, while probably costing a little more, would probably be better, more private, than a condo....besides the lower POA fee. It didn't dawn on me until recently that there would be an extra POA fee to live in a condo complex.

[Old Geezer]

We bought our lot in HSV back in 1991 and the place has grown considerably since then, but there is no "bad place" in HSV. Some of the older houses may need a little TLC, but the Village admin makes sure places still look pretty good. Some areas are more upscale, but then you pay for that too. We are looking forward to HSV within this year (if all goes well) and I'm looking forward to the nice quiet pace (well except for getting in and out of the gates sometimes), but it's more laid back, very secure, very nice community. There are a tremendous number of clubs and activities for people, but you don't have to be a part of that if you don't want. All in all, we've lived in several states during our careers, and we chose HSV, like several thousand others have.

[Caladium]

I agree with the others that all the sections of HSV have a nice appearance. Some sections do look wealthier than others, some sections have houses that have more of a "worn" appearance (yet still look tidy and presentable).

Having said that.... the feedback I hear about the recent dog mauling story makes me wonder if there are some sections of HSV that attract a somewhat trashier group of people. (For those who don't know, the dog was running loose and killed someone walking on a trail.)

I hear comments along the lines of "don't worry about walking the trails in our part of the Village, that happened in another part." The inference being that there are some parts where you're more likely to encounter vicious dogs and the people that go with them.

[btoverdrive]

Originally Posted by Caladium

I agree with the others that all the sections of HSV have a nice appearance. Some sections do look wealthier than others, some sections have houses that have more of a "worn" appearance (yet still look tidy and presentable).

Having said that.... the feedback I hear about the recent dog mauling story makes me wonder if there are some sections of HSV that attract a somewhat trashier group of people. (For those who don't know, the dog was running loose and killed someone walking on a trail.)

I hear comments along the lines of "don't worry about walking the trails in our part of the Village, that happened in another part." The inference being that there are some parts where you're more likely to encounter vicious dogs and the people that go with them.

The last two paragraphs are totally incorrect. The lady was not walking on a trail, she was walking on a street (cul-de-sac) that only has one house on it, the dog owner's house. I know this as the street is less than a mile from where I live.

This street is pretty remote so I can only guess that the owner felt it was safe to let the dog out unsupervised and the unfortunate lady happened to be walking by and the 130 pound dog mauled her. Both the owner and her mother have been charged with manslaughter and harboring a vicious animal but have not yet gone to trial.