Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
WDYT? (Since it's slow)
There's a neighborhood in DM that's pretty upper-crust and full of huge, old, expensive houses.
Last week, one of those houses was torn down and a new house will be built on the property. To my knowledge, there wasn't anything wrong with the home that was razed. It was bought by a private trust, along with a few other homes in the neighborhood. The plan is to tear those down and build new, as well.
Now, the neighbors are all up in arms. They're all wealthy businesspeople or homemakers, and they're all pissed that this house was torn down. They are petitioning the city to try and stop the future demolitions. The reason they're giving is that there was nothing wrong with the house and that it's "historic" (i.e. old).
I say who cares? These houses aren't on a national historic registry. They're not significant. They aren't anything but big, old (albeit nice) homes. It's not like the city's coming in with a bulldozer and destroying the whole neighborhood.
What say you? None of their business, or a valid argument?
Re: WDYT? (Since it's slow)
If it bothered them so much why didn't they say something before the first one got razed? Usually the developers will post signs or have a meeting before something like this happens.
I can see being annoyed if I live in a neighborhood of pretty old victorian houses and someone came in and started building McMansions. But if I felt strongly enough to protest after the fact I'd probably have made sure there was some kind of easement or homowners' agreement in place before I moved.
Crap...I Mean Crafts
Valid in the way of it's a waste of money, materials, trees to tear down a perfectly good house and rebuild (At the very least salvage what you can and donate to Habitat for Humanity or something...)
I don't understand the wanton destruction of history. I just don't get it, at all. If you want to live in a new house, go find a new house. Don't tear down something perfectly good because you don't like it - that's immature and dumb, IMO.
That said - the neighbors should have gotten involved when the developer started buying up the lots, yes? And they may be building houses in the same style, just more energy efficient or with more modern conveniences that are difficult to retrofit.
But also - my land is mine, as that developer's land is his, to do with as we please. And that's really the end of the story.
I really dislike the aesthetics of teardowns, at least when they obviously don't match the rest of the neighborhood. I guess the developer can do what they want, but it makes me sad when beautiful old historic homes are replaced with McMansions (or mini McMansions). I hope that's not the case here.
I'm puzzled by why no one said anything until after the fact, though.
I can see their annoyance if the new houses aren't in keeping the architecture of the neighborhood. A bunch of Victorian houses with the occasional McMansion would put me out.
However, petitioning after one house has been torn down is silly. The deed is done and they don't live in a true historic area, just a neighborhood with old houses. And it wouldn't surprise me if they had no idea that most of those houses were up for sale to begin with.
I'm also a little curious as to which DM neighborhood it is, but I'm nosy.