|
Post by beeyotch on Apr 22, 2024 15:54:20 GMT
I don't even like MCM houses, but if I had $12.5 million to spend I would also just, I dunno, BUY A DIFFERENT HOUSE instead of razing a historical "architecturally significant" house. I'm sure they could have found another one within blocks of Maria Shriver if that was truly the most important selling point (I doubt it.)
And the previous owner was in the process of getting historic designation but she died before it could go through. Assholes.
|
|
|
Post by no1novice on Apr 22, 2024 16:26:00 GMT
I don't even like MCM houses, but if I had $12.5 million to spend I would also just, I dunno, BUY A DIFFERENT HOUSE instead of razing a historical "architecturally significant" house. I'm sure they could have found another one within blocks of Maria Shriver if that was truly the most important selling point (I doubt it.) And the previous owner was in the process of getting historic designation but she died before it could go through. Assholes. What a set of cunts. They should have been refused permission to raise in in the permit. Wtf was the municipal thinking?
|
|
sputnik
OGs
Posts: 3,704
Member is Online
|
Post by sputnik on Apr 22, 2024 16:54:28 GMT
in one of the articles it mentions that LA city government doesn't even have a designated historical preservation person in. it's been up to residents to basically nominated places for designation. the city's really dropped the ball on this for years.
i hope crisp rat and his idiot wife get shamed to hell for this.
|
|
|
Post by no1novice on Apr 22, 2024 19:24:11 GMT
|
|
sputnik
OGs
Posts: 3,704
Member is Online
|
Post by sputnik on Apr 22, 2024 20:00:48 GMT
^^^^ I'm pretty sure they got all the necessary permits. that's not the issue. Legally I don't think they did anything wrong because the house wasn't designated? unless i'm missing something?
the issue is that while yes, the city dropped the ball by not having a better historical preservation structure in place, ethically they're philistine monsters for going ahead and demolishing a house they knew full well should have been designated (down to its landscaping) to build a modern farmhouse basic bitch monstrosity just because it's conveniently across the street from MIL.
|
|
|
Post by czb on Apr 22, 2024 22:25:17 GMT
yeah it sounds like the city doesn't have any designation for the house so they probably didn't do anything illegal.
am surprised that they don't have code in place for this house. because around here, even if a house isn't declared to be a historic structure, there are a zillion codes in place that mandate what you can do with your property and what houses you can tear down.
|
|
|
Post by MsDark on Apr 23, 2024 2:46:43 GMT
I don't even like MCM houses, but if I had $12.5 million to spend I would also just, I dunno, BUY A DIFFERENT HOUSE instead of razing a historical "architecturally significant" house. I'm sure they could have found another one within blocks of Maria Shriver if that was truly the most important selling point (I doubt it.) And the previous owner was in the process of getting historic designation but she died before it could go through. Assholes.Wow. This makes them even bigger assholes than I already thought. I'm pissed on her behalf. She's probably rolling in her grave. I hope her poltergeist haunts this lot and runs their asses away.
|
|
|
Post by no1novice on Apr 27, 2024 0:26:31 GMT
^^^^ I'm pretty sure they got all the necessary permits. that's not the issue. Legally I don't think they did anything wrong because the house wasn't designated? unless i'm missing something? the issue is that while yes, the city dropped the ball by not having a better historical preservation structure in place, ethically they're philistine monsters for going ahead and demolishing a house they knew full well should have been designated (down to its landscaping) to build a modern farmhouse basic bitch monstrosity just because it's conveniently across the street from MIL. So they couldn't just refuse to issue a permit?
|
|
|
Post by anamishana on Apr 27, 2024 10:21:49 GMT
Entitled twats. What is the point of demolishing a house like this when they could easily buy one in the same neighbourhood that doesn't have a historic significance and rebuild it there.
|
|
sputnik
OGs
Posts: 3,704
Member is Online
|
Post by sputnik on Apr 27, 2024 15:12:48 GMT
^^^^ I'm pretty sure they got all the necessary permits. that's not the issue. Legally I don't think they did anything wrong because the house wasn't designated? unless i'm missing something? the issue is that while yes, the city dropped the ball by not having a better historical preservation structure in place, ethically they're philistine monsters for going ahead and demolishing a house they knew full well should have been designated (down to its landscaping) to build a modern farmhouse basic bitch monstrosity just because it's conveniently across the street from MIL. So they couldn't just refuse to issue a permit? Not if there aren’t any legal grounds to refuse it and they meet all the legal requirements.
|
|