I’m told the Dallas City Council voted against making Little Forest Hills a conservation district, yes? So what do we think about this?
3 Comments to “Little Forest Hills”
el_putzo@ January 22nd, 2009 at 6:22 pm
Most of “LFH” was built as fishing cabins. Many of the 70+yr old homes don’t even have proper foundations. The construction needs to be done responsibly. These homes are not architecturally significant.
C.R.@ January 23rd, 2009 at 2:27 am
Just to state the obvious: the more restrictions on land / property, the less valuable that land / property is. Basic principle of property.
While Dallas needs to read the memo on architectural preservation/restoration (not EVERYTHING needs to be torn down every 20 years), I don’t think it makes much sense to demand a conservation district that only limits the size of future homes that can be constructed in the area: that doesn’t conserve anything, or preserve anything existing. It just keeps big houses out. Last time I checked, “small” wasn’t recognized as a significant architectural style or movement.
Since when do “funky” “artistic” “free-thinking” people demand that their neighborhood be controlled and regulated by “the man,” anyway?
In an effort to stay “funky,” Little Forest Hills, has taken an interesting approach: trying to limit the ability of independent homeowners to control the improvement of their own property…something that seems to fly in the face of the fundamentals of the neighborhood: appreciation for individualism and non-controlled, non-homogenous manifestations of residential architecture.
While bigger, new homes might be publicly abhorred and criticized in this ‘hood, irony goes quietly unnoticed.
A Builder@ January 24th, 2009 at 3:53 pm
After nearly 3 years it is over, the Community has spoken! Over 42% of the neighborhood did not want the proposed CD! As staff said, what was being proposed was not even a CD! We all want to protect the trees and keep the homes to a decent scale, but this was the wrong avenue to go about it and some of the folks leading the charge were way to far left!!
As most of the Council quickly realized, this was not the “M Streets” or Belmont!
This is a great neighborhood and will continue to be one. Now let’s move forward and let folks who want to sell there property freely and those that want to build have the ability to do so without further regulation!
Leave a Reply
DallasDirt is a daily discussion of the Dallas-Fort Worth real estate market, led by D Home Real Estate Editor Mary Candace Evans with contributions from real estate experts and aficionados. Topics include house porn, hot neighborhoods, hot agents, hip pockets, celebrity listings, second homes, vacation homes, real estate trends, data analysis, tips for buying, selling, or staying put. If DallasDirt were a house, it'd be a three-bedroom, two-and-a-half-bath ranch transitional on a quarter acre lot with stainless kitchen and granite countertops: sophisticated with designer touches, room for expansion. Make an offer.
Most of “LFH” was built as fishing cabins. Many of the 70+yr old homes don’t even have proper foundations. The construction needs to be done responsibly. These homes are not architecturally significant.
Just to state the obvious: the more restrictions on land / property, the less valuable that land / property is. Basic principle of property.
While Dallas needs to read the memo on architectural preservation/restoration (not EVERYTHING needs to be torn down every 20 years), I don’t think it makes much sense to demand a conservation district that only limits the size of future homes that can be constructed in the area: that doesn’t conserve anything, or preserve anything existing. It just keeps big houses out. Last time I checked, “small” wasn’t recognized as a significant architectural style or movement.
Since when do “funky” “artistic” “free-thinking” people demand that their neighborhood be controlled and regulated by “the man,” anyway?
In an effort to stay “funky,” Little Forest Hills, has taken an interesting approach: trying to limit the ability of independent homeowners to control the improvement of their own property…something that seems to fly in the face of the fundamentals of the neighborhood: appreciation for individualism and non-controlled, non-homogenous manifestations of residential architecture.
While bigger, new homes might be publicly abhorred and criticized in this ‘hood, irony goes quietly unnoticed.
After nearly 3 years it is over, the Community has spoken! Over 42% of the neighborhood did not want the proposed CD! As staff said, what was being proposed was not even a CD! We all want to protect the trees and keep the homes to a decent scale, but this was the wrong avenue to go about it and some of the folks leading the charge were way to far left!!
As most of the Council quickly realized, this was not the “M Streets” or Belmont!
This is a great neighborhood and will continue to be one. Now let’s move forward and let folks who want to sell there property freely and those that want to build have the ability to do so without further regulation!