12/01/04  Preservation Nazis

Usually I agree with your opinion regarding issues in and around Dallas. In "Preservation Nazis", I find some things I like to have you consider, if you would.

You say:
I always oppose changing from single-family to multi-family, but as long as someone builds a single-family residence within side, front and back yard setback restrictions, they should be left alone to do just that.

And go on to say:
If you buy property in a neighborhood with deed restrictions and an existing conservation district, follow the rules you bought under.

And more:
...as well as multi-generations in one household.

And lastly:
...when they are not increasing density

Your first point is right on target. Increasing density is not a good thing. Your second point is also right on target.  Your third misses the point somewhat as having more people than a house and neighborhood was designed to hold does more than increase the density of population in that area.

There are guidelines on how many people should live in houses based on the number of bedrooms.  City guidelines may supercede Federal.  So, not only might it be against the law to have too many people in a home, but it also causes increased loads on the school system.  It increases the likelihood of accidents on the streets with too many cars parked on those streets and too much traffic for residential neighborhoods (and that includes the possibility of children being run over because of the limited sight lines afforded by having cars lined up and down those residential streets).  It increases the load on the electrical systems and sewer systems, and the list goes on and on.

That last point reinforces your first and I hope takes into account the concerns I've outlined above. When it comes to Urban problems, as you well know, most can be traced back to having too many people living in too small of an area.

In short, turning a single family residence into a de facto apartment building by having it house too many people, even if they are all in one extended family, does not help any neighborhood and it may indeed be against the law. Increasing density of population causes all the above mentioned afflictions as well as increased crime and everything that goes along with it.

This is not a racist point of view, merely reflections of what I've seen first hand. I don't care who lives where so long as they abide by the same rules and regulations as the rest of us by keeping their property up and comporting themselves with at least the minimum amount of dignity (ie, learning to live within the bounds of civil behavior-meaning abiding by the laws the rest of us live by as well.) The person you are making your points against in this piece may very well be racist, I don't know, but making this into a racist issue seems to me to not be the best way to drive home the fact that as long as someone is operating within existing legal, code, and zoning restrictions, he or she ought to be left alone to live life as s/he sees fit.

As for your point about a developer buying a piece of land and then wanting to re-zone it, well, the developer should have bought land that was already more to his liking in the first place or change his plans to fit within existing guidelines.