Dallas residents may soon have a tool to stop ‘teardowns’ and McMansions in their neighborhoods. The zoning committee has approved a plan that would allow the creation of ‘overlay districts’ by a simple majority vote of the residents. If approved then all new homes in the district would have to match existing homes. The restrictions would last a year and then permanent restrictions could be put into place through a zoning request. The size of the overlay district could be as small as 3 acres - about the size of a city block.
The zoning committee has sent the plan to the planning commission and if it is approved there it will go before the city council. So far the debate has seemed fairly low profile. As expected developers and real estate agents have lined up against it. Some are suggesting that homeowners might have to get their neighbor’s approval for something as trivial as painting their front door. They are also playing on fears that the plan could put a damper on rising home values.
Most homeowners in my experience have mixed feelings. Even ones who have lived in a neighborhood for years and don’t want it to change are reluctant to tell their neighbor he can’t cash in and sell to a developer who is going to tear the house down. Then of course there is the certainty that the new house is going to raise values again and make it all the more profitable for the next guy who decides to sell.
Comments (7)
OH I hate those things. Big monster houses on tiny lots. What’s the point other than to have a castle amid the huts?
P.S. I will be in Fort Worthless in October just in case you didn’t see the notes on my blog or read your email.
Funny, some of my neighbors and I were just talking about that happening here in Midland now that the real estate market is hot again. I’m familiar with that in Dallas decades ago. Many of my friends in Highland and Univerity Park sold their quaint old 30’s bungalows to folks who bought two lots and built one humongous home on the property.
A simple majority vote seems too low a hurdle to impose control over another person’s property. How about two-thirds majority plus a grandfather clause for existing homeowners and their families (in the event of inheritance).
The fact is neighborhoods shift in character over time. When they become static they loose part of that makes them attractive to live in in the first place. That said the McMansions that are popping up everywhere isn’t an attractive alternative. So there has to be some happy medium.
Usually this is accomplished by setback requirements, height restrictions, resource limitations, color requirements, etc.
Hmmm, this is getting long. I guess it deserves a post on my blog.
We’re looking to buy a home in a neighborhood where there are NO mcmansions. I can’t stand the sight of those things. They are just big and ugly, cheaply built homes, with no character, no class. Even if I see a house I like, if its sitting next door to a McMansion, its value drops in my eyes. I won’t consider it for purchase.
This is the silliest thing I have ever heard of! Why would you want to keep a neighborhood from improving? Larger homes mean increased property values for everyone.
I invite anyone interested in the Teardowns issue in Dallas to go to the above website. Join the group if you’d like. Then you can check out the links for related URLs, view the Files on the site for resources and read the messages.
Help out if you can.
Improvement is in the eyes of the neighbors and often the neighbors do not feel their area is improved when a home twice the height is built facing off with their lot towering over them to the point of a total loss of privacy. In Austin, Texas this is not only happening - it is happening in charming historic neighborhoods and it is literally sucking the charm right out. I used to feel the other way - I used to feel landowners were “entitled” to do what they wanted. I’ve since changed my mind as they started doing it in MY neighborhood and I can’t afford to compete with the size or the tax increases.
My choice will be to “head for the suburbs” I guess. That’s really not a good alternative for me and my neighbors.