Property rights under attack (society, against, own, business)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The only historic designation that have teeth are the ones at the local level...I have read quite a bit about this. So before you go around calling people "ignorant" you should take a look in the mirror. I am also not saying every historic property should be torn down. You mentioned that there were a handfull of a specific type of house left in the whole country. Would I be for protection of a property that rare? Of course.
But what we are seeing are historic districts made that cover thousands of houses. It seems more and more clear that the "butterfly" example in my original post is true.
Different states have varying degrees of "teeth".
For example, this was in the paper of the town I live in this morning. Owner of historic Ocala home applies for demolition permit | Ocala.com
Prime example of demolition by neglect.
Whatever is built in place of this house, whose historical importance is only lightly touched on in this article, will only serve to lessen the character, not to mention the beauty, of the particular neighborhood that it is in.
BTW, I was not responding to you in the post about the handful of houses in Sainte Genevieve.
Different states have varying degrees of "teeth".
For example, this was in the paper of the town I live in this morning. Owner of historic Ocala home applies for demolition permit | Ocala.com
Prime example of demolition by neglect.
Whatever is built in place of this house, whose historical importance is only lightly touched on in this article, will only serve to lessen the character, not to mention the beauty, of the particular neighborhood that it is in.
BTW, I was not responding to you in the post about the handful of houses in Sainte Genevieve.
Here is what you don't seem to get or understand. Beauty lies in the eye of the beholder. HOAs think that what they are doing is creating "beauty" as well.
Here is what you don't seem to get or understand. Beauty lies in the eye of the beholder. HOAs think that what they are doing is creating "beauty" as well.
I'm an interior designer.
I have the feeling I have forgotten more about the whole beauty thing than you know.
Just so you know, I dont think much of HOAs, which by the way, have nothing to do with historic preservation.
I'm an interior designer.
I have the feeling I have forgotten more about the whole beauty thing than you know.
Just so you know, I dont think much of HOAs, which by the way, have nothing to do with historic preservation.
Well you don't seem to get the point do you? People in favor of HOAs also believe they are doing for the good of the community. You just don't seem to get it.
Well you don't seem to get the point do you? People in favor of HOAs also believe they are doing for the good of the community. You just don't seem to get it.
The point I get is that you are taking 2 things that have nothing to do with each other and trying to cram them in the same box.
You are the one that doesnt seem to get it.
No one forces anyone to live anywhere there is an HOA.
The point I get is that you are taking 2 things that have nothing to do with each other and trying to cram them in the same box.
You are the one that doesnt seem to get it.
No one forces anyone to live anywhere there is an HOA.
I have no problem with a homeowner who wants to be a part of a HD. What I am saying though is leave it up to the individual property owners. If some like giving up much of the freedom they have with their property that is their business. I am saying to leave people like myself out of it though. My property belongs to me, not to you, not to other preservationists, not to the government.
BTW The point was don't be critical of HOAs. You are very much the same!
I have no problem with a homeowner who wants to be a part of a HD. What I am saying though is leave it up to the individual property owners. If some like giving up much of the freedom they have with their property that is their business. I am saying to leave people like myself out of it though. My property belongs to me, not to you, not to other preservationists, not to the government.
BTW The point was don't be critical of HOAs. You are very much the same!
This is going to be the last reply on my end until you can debate me on substance instead of asinine remarks like "please child" that bring nothing to the debate. I posted the definiton of liberty below and although most know what it is, it might help to get the definition in your head.
Liberty-The state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life.
Keep in mind that I don't throw around that you should move to N Korea or China just to throw it out there. I honestly think that you, other preservationists, and HOAs should because you would fit in well there. In your head you seem to think you are right. But the fact is you are un-American in mine and others opinions. It is not enough for you to preserve property you own. You instead have to try and force others with their property to do as you wish instead of minding your own business.
This is going to be the last reply on my end until you can debate me on substance instead of asinine remarks like "please child" that bring nothing to the debate. I posted the definiton of liberty below and although most know what it is, it might help to get the definition in your head.
Liberty-The state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life.
Keep in mind that I don't throw around that you should move to N Korea or China just to throw it out there. I honestly think that you, other preservationists, and HOAs should because you would fit in well there. In your head you seem to think you are right. But the fact is you are un-American in mine and others opinions. It is not enough for you to preserve property you own. You instead have to try and force others with their property to do as you wish instead of minding your own business.
When you stop throwing ad hominems in, perhaps we can have a civil debate.
I rather doubt that, as you were slinging strawmen around from your initial post.
Your second paragraph is highly amusing in a pitiful sort of way.
Perhaps instead of whining, you should get yourself to a local preservation meeting or 3 to actually understand what it is you are so vociferously whining about.
When you stop throwing ad hominems in, perhaps we can have a civil debate.
I rather doubt that, as you were slinging strawmen around from your initial post.
Your second paragraph is highly amusing in a pitiful sort of way.
Perhaps instead of whining, you should get yourself to a local preservation meeting or 3 to actually understand what it is you are so vociferously whining about.
I have no interest to go to a preservation meeting. It does not interest me. I "preserve" my house how I want. Now if you and others wish to do that it is your business to attend these meetings. I can not tell you how many people I have talked to who have stated they wished they never would have bought a house in a local Historic District and I wanted some to see the other side of this debate.
At the very least States should be passing laws to make individuals in charge of rather or not their property gets a historic designation. Many times if 5% of the population in a proposed HD are against it, they still will be included in the HD. This does not happen in Arizona as everyone has to agree to a proposed HD or the property owners not in favor will be left off.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.