1. The KillerFrogs

Is this [ Arschloch] the TCU “drug bust” cop?

Discussion in 'Killingsworth Court, Formerly The General Forum' started by Brevity Frog, Mar 17, 2019.

  1. IIRC Jimmy Williams was the detective for the 2012 drug deal. You may recall his tactics were suspect to put it nicely. Now this [ Arschloch] (if IIRC) is ruining Fairmount.

    Are millennials killing Fairmount? Why the historic neighborhood’s pioneers are worried
    https://www.star-telegram.com/latest-news/article227465799.html
     
  2. Yep same guy. Interesting article. The homes his company does look incredible IMO. The complaints logged in the article mention some fairly petty things like installing a different type of front porch post or painting over some brick.

    It’s not like they’re bulldozing these old homes and installing a Moudy Building lookalike.
     
    jake102 likes this.
  3. Yeah the complainers in this article sound like cartoon characters. When you have mazes of regulations interacting and overlapping there are bound to be mistakes....I’m navigating a similar situation in a highly regulated neighborhood in another state...it sounds like these developers are acting in good faith
     
    tcumaniac, jake102 and SnoSki like this.
  4. Proceeding with construction without permits generally is not a "mistake". It's deliberate.
     
    Brevity Frog likes this.
  5. I don’t disagree, but the general permitting system in Fort Worth is ridiculously slow and expensive which can lead to this type of behavior.

    Not to mention that you need permits for pretty much anything you could do to change your home’s appearance or structure. If Fort Worth homeowners got permits for everything they’re supposed to then Home Depot and Lowe’s would have a lot slower business.
     
    BrewingFrog likes this.
  6. Off the main topic here but I’d be ticked if I still paid the ridiculously high property taxes in TX only to find out someone can buy a home for $500k Fairmount and pay property taxes based on the pre-renovation value for 10 years. Also, if they are blaming millenials then charge taxes based on the market value and I doubt many of them will be able to fork over $1k a month or more in taxes.
     
    jake102, tcumaniac and SnoSki like this.
  7. Regarding the article, it seems like one of those “letter of the law” vs “spirit of the law” things.

    Are some codes being broken or ignored? Probably. Are the finished homes wildly different, unattractive or inappropriate for the area? Not at all.
     
  8. They have taken a bunch of deteriorating houses and turned them into great places to live. I say good for them.
     
  9. “Ice”

    [​IMG]
     
    BABYFACE likes this.
  10. Normally I would say this is an overreaction by Fairmount residents and the preservation board there, but are keywords in the article that make think maybe just a little overreaction with valid concerns.

    Painting over brick is huge no no in terms of preserving historical integrity to a house’s exterior. That isn’t a little mistake per Ice’s words. That is ignorance mixed in with poor taste.

    Blaming contractors seems a stretch. A builder/remodeler does not pay a sub for inferior or incorrect work until the problem work is fixed. I get the sense that
    I agree with most you said, but 6th Ave Homes has to be idiots to not understand that painting the brick is not maintaining the historical integrity that was put in place by that preservation group. I also didn’t like they tried to pass the buck to the subs, 6th Ave is running the show, not the subs. Even in brand new neighborhoods, builders have to follow guidelines that were put in place by the developer.
     
    AroundWorldFrog and Brevity Frog like this.
  11. #11 BABYFACE, Mar 17, 2019
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2019
    I guess where I don’t have much sympathy for 6th Ave not securing permits is because all home builders are required to do this in a city.

    As for someone’s sister and brother in law adding on back porch to their house. I don’t expect them to permit because they be unaware unless they live in a HOA and then they might know it is required.
     
  12. I’m no expert on the subject but while I understand preserving original brick look, our soil is very hard on foundations both slab and P&B. The only alternative to painting for hiding cracked brick and mortar is new brick and mortar as far as I know (which isn’t much)
     
    jake102 likes this.
  13. Unfortunately I have great experience in historical neighborhoods in DFW and I can tell you that dealing with the historic districts is a total and complete nightmare. It’s slow, disorganized and petty. Mainly run by people who have been living in the neighborhood for 20+ years and bought in at $100k or less (had a neighbor who paid $30k in the 80s). For whatever reason they are pissed that their property values have increased 4x or more depending on neighborhood.

    A certain historical district almost killed the sale of our home two days before closing due to $100 of “improvement” I did in our backyard that nobody can see. It was freaking bizarre and a total value killer

    I can’t recommend never buying in a DFW historical district enough. The only way I’d do it is with a 100% already remodeled home that won’t need any work for the foreseeable future
     
  14. The local central appraisal district would likely disagree. Adding on just about anything triggers a duty to permit, so the appraisal folks can take notice.
     
  15. These guys are liars. No sub “accidentally” paints brick. That’s no mistake. And everybody knows you can’t paint brick in Fairmount. If they don’t want to comply with the historical regs then build elsewhere.

    Williams was an [ Arschloch] in 2012 is an [ Arschloch] now.
     
    AroundWorldFrog and BABYFACE like this.
  16. I agree. What I am saying in response to Ski, is that I expect many home projects that are minor and noticeable from the street, they probably skirt permitting. Not saying it is right. It was a point making a bigger point that a home builder or a remodeler knows better. They know they have to permit whereas as John and Suzy Homemaker may not.
     
  17. From what I read of the article, 6th Avenue was providing lip service and passing the buck. On the flip side, the Fairmount Historical group went beyond legitimate concerns and did sound petty.

    Bottom line, build out in the country and self finance your home out of pocket, and you can build damn thing you want. Nobody will tell you no, with the exception of a soon to be new ex wife.
     
  18. i don’t have knowledge of all the facts of every build these people have done. The article mentions one time the city stopped construction for lack of a permit. I can easily envision a case where that could be an honest mistake as well as something deliberate.
     
    jake102 likes this.
  19. #19 AroundWorldFrog, Mar 17, 2019
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2019
    I have a hard time believing there is a licensed contractor in this country that doesn't know when a permit is needed. If so, they probably shouldn't be licensed. It's part of the experience knowledge required to be licensed in every state that I know of.

    I guess my point was more to the fact that shutting a project down over lack of permits is generally done when it is a grievous error such as foundation, plumbing, electrical work, etc. I have first hand knowledge of two cases in Arizona where home owners lost their ass after contractors failed to get permits and the dollar value of the work was so much the contractors choose to file bankruptcy. The homeowners had zero recourse except for the recovery fund which is hard to recover from and limits the amount of the award. One was a case when the entire plumbing was replaced and none of it was permitted or up to code. Homeowners had to pay to replumb the entire house as well as retile every shower and bathtub. The other was a stem wall foundation not up to code and not permitted that had to be repaired at a huge cost. Granted they were smaller contractors, but still contractors,

    A builder with as much experience as these guys should not be working without permits or approval from the historical committee.
     
    BABYFACE likes this.
  20. This isn't the case. A project on my house got shut down because a historical inspector came out and determined the new skirt siding on the bottom of our house was lapped at 8" instead of 6". Got a big notice sign on our door to stop work. We had gotten the project approved but the contractor didn't realize the overlap had to be perfectly precise (of course, neither did we).

    We got a violation for adding a 4'x2' flower bed in the front yard.

    I'm telling you, the historical districts are a total joke. We found multiple contractors who wouldn't consider working on our house due to it. They know proper city permitting, but they don't have time to know all the different historical district code.

    Edit: and we should be perfectly clear, there is a HUGE difference in city permitting and historical district permitting. Two separate items. Every house in a city needs standard city permits, but only historical homes need special historical permitting through the designated process. Usually involves obtaining "certificates of appropriateness" and then going to historical council.
     

Share This Page