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 blowhard just needs to move if she doesn't like it.
After that story came out the first time, I had to drive by and look at the situation with my own eyes. In my opinion, the house the complainer lives in looks like nothing more than a suburban copycat house. At least the modern house is special, thoughtful and unique, something that the copycat house lacks in spades.
Interesting to read the court's opinion. Basically it said the the complainant (one house across the street) was not sufficiently injured by the building of the house. The effect on the neighborhood itself could not be considered. In a way, it put the whole thing back on the issuance of the permit. While I like the modern house a lot, I still agree with others that it does not really fit the tone of the neighborhood, primarily because it takes up so much of the lot. I'm afraid for the future of all the historic neighborhoods of this type, such as those in Five Points where sweet little houses are being torn down so that huge mansions can be built. The new homes are nothing like the other homes in the neighborhood and look totally out of place.
The blowhard just needs to move if she doesn't like it.
After that story came out the first time, I had to drive by and look at the situation with my own eyes. In my opinion, the house the complainer lives in looks like nothing more than a suburban copycat house. At least the modern house is special, thoughtful and unique, something that the copycat house lacks in spades.
I hope the hater stays and feels the stinging jealousy every time they look at that beautiful home.
What was on this lot before they built that home? They didn't knock down a historic home, did they?
I think it was just a small infill lot.
It is a beautiful home, but some might say it is too close to the street and too bulky compared to the neighbors homes. It is located on a narrow side street so its evidence is quite in the foreview. The owners let it be part of the Oakwood Christmas tour, and most folks thought the house itself was very well done architecturally.
It was a vacant lot. Basically the backyard of the house on the corner of East and Euclid that was sold off as a separate lot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by luv4horses
I think it was just a small infill lot.
It is a beautiful home, but some might say it is too close to the street and too bulky compared to the neighbors homes. It is located on a narrow side street so its evidence is quite in the foreview. The owners let it be part of the Oakwood Christmas tour, and most folks thought the house itself was very well done architecturally.
Thanks. I can't imagine a vacant lot was nicer to look at than this new home.
I agree, it doesn't "go" with the style of the area. But I wouldn't go so far to sue them for it, especially if there's no HOA or restrictions on what can and cannot be built.
I'd much rather see the vacant historic homes purchased and renovated. Walking around Oakwood was such a great experience but seeing the dilapidated homes for sale made me sad.
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.