Jump to: site navigation, content.

Local stuff that matters to you.
News & events for
Saturday, December
5

Tuesday, April 21, 2009

Dallas orders homeowner to take down treehouse

Bret Foreman, a homeowner in the Swiss Avenue Historic District, built a treehouse for his children in their front yard. A few days later he received an order from the city to take down the treehouse because it is a violation of city code for a historic district. In peaceful protest of the ordinance, Foreman has hung a sign where the treehouse was reading "Taking away little girls' treehouse? Shame on you! This is a neighborhood. Not a museum."

Posted by Laura S.



  • Staff
  • Verified User
  • Anonymous

CitizenKane, says:

Tree houses in the front yard?

Come on Mr. Foreman, who do you think you are?

Somehow, feeling sorry for this guy is outside of my realm.

Anonymous

7 months, 2 weeks ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

alexander troup, says:

Some kid's have the right to grow up mean, because they were met with mean...what is a tree house anyways.....grow up big brother....A/T,...Lets build a fort...

Verified

7 months, 2 weeks ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

Travis Bush, says:

Who does he think he is? A homeowner and obviously one who has to put up with stuffy rules imposed by people who live inside a bubble, while directly outside their little bubble is abject poverty. Of which one is quite certain they could care less about. The least of the homo-owner association's worries is a silly tree house, but one imagines that they are just as douchey as Avi and his merry gang of whiners.

Maybe it was the only tree he had in his yard that would safely support a tree house, which one assumes is the only reason you would put it in a front yard. This is just more proof that the "associations" are nothing more than a bunch of snobs and people who want to meddle in the affairs of others.

Verified

7 months, 2 weeks ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

Pavel Lishin, says:

Clearly the solution is to buy an antique treehouse from somewhere else, and claim that it has historic value.

Verified

7 months, 2 weeks ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

Alex Bentley, says:

Travis, according to the story, the city made him take it down, not a homeowners' association.

Staff

7 months, 2 weeks ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

Jason Rice, says:

And well, yes, it IS a museum.

Verified

7 months, 2 weeks ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

Travis Bush, says:

Alex..my bet is that it was someone who lived around there...but you are right. I saw it was the city, but just figured it was someone with nothing better to do but call 311 and start in complaining. Mea culpa.

JRice..a museum you say? Kind of like a ghetto Smithsonian maybe...

Verified

7 months, 2 weeks ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

Jason Rice, says:

::ghetto Smithsonian
Nah - historic districts are museums. Plain and simple. This stuff happens all the time in ... gasp... Downtown Plano

And how'd this article get classified as "Africa" ? More Neo-django fun? Or am I just not cool enough to get it.

Verified

7 months, 2 weeks ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

Alex Bentley, says:

I'm guessing it was just a misclick by Laura, Jason -- those two tags are right next to each other in our system. Thanks for the heads-up.

Staff

7 months, 2 weeks ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

CitizenKane, says:

My experenice tells me that the people who think it is "cool" to build a tree house in your front yard, are probably the one's complaining the loudest, when it is built right next door to their home.

I am reminded of the Smithsonian Institute which recently did a retrospective glorifying/documenting/presenting a show on urban graffiti - collectively showing how this is an "art form."

But when one of the artist wanted to do his thing on the front of one of the museum buildings, the directors of the Smithsonian said "absolutley not."

It was OK for them to glorify and embrace graffiti thrown on others property, but not their own.

Anonymous

7 months, 2 weeks ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

dallas_diner, says:

  1. A tree house does not belong in the front yard of any house. That's what a back yard is for.

  2. He knew, or should have known, of the code when he bought the house or at least before he built the tree house.

I agree that he's "...probably the one's complaining the loudest, when it is built right next door..."

Anonymous

7 months, 2 weeks ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

dallas_diner, says:

"This is just more proof that the "associations" are nothing more than a bunch of snobs and people who want to meddle in the affairs of others."

First of all, this comment is nothing more than a knee-jerk reaction from someone who didn't thoroughly read about and/or and understand the facts of the story.

Furthermore, homeowner's associations exist because these is always an element of irresponsible people who refuse to maintain their property as is typical of the neighborhood to which they were attracted and moved into.

Lastly, those people who necessitate the existence of homeowner's associations are typical of those who have the attitude exhibited by the comments above - that is to say, they need rules.

Flame away...

Anonymous

7 months, 2 weeks ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

Travis Bush, says:

LOL yeah..it was knee jerk. Already admitted that one Captain Obvious, but thanks for playing anyways....I simply cannot stand to see the life sucked right out of everything.

In your mind, homeowners associations may be necessary, but more often than not they come up with a bunch of rules that only serve the purpose of telling other people what to do on their own property. Furthermore, I wouldn't live in a neighborhood where people made it their business to tell me what to do. Sure fire way to get tossed off my property right along with your notion that I needed your rules in the first place.

Verified

7 months, 2 weeks ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

Pavel Lishin, says:

dallas_diner - I'm fine with homeowners' associations in theory. I just hate reading stories about them being hijacked by some holier-than-thou jerk and using that position to play sovereign.

It doesn't happen often, I'm sure - the news will report a HA abuse story before a story that reads "Homeowners' Association doing fine, draws no complaints". But still.

Also, I still don't understand why a tree house must be in the back yard. But what do I know, I'm a furrnur.

Verified

7 months, 2 weeks ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

dallas_diner, says:

"Already admitted that one..."

Sorry, I didn't read anywhere in your messages that you admitted your post was a knee-jerk reaction, but only that you were wrong about it not being a homeowners association issue.

"..Captain Obvious, but thanks for playing anyways" - your wit is no more clever than your conclusions, juvenile at best.

Anonymous

7 months, 2 weeks ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

Scott Miller, says:

Damn. When I read something like this thread it makes me feel very fortunate to have grown up when and where I did. Another place in a very different time.

Some of my best childhood memories are from my best friend's awesome treehouse his dad built him in the giant tree in their front yard.

Verified

7 months, 2 weeks ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

alexander troup, says:

Let see if the Mayor and City Council have any kid's or tree house's in their area....HAAA.A/T, It takes one to know one, beside's arrogance is the cause of death...blind arrogance..

Verified

7 months, 2 weeks ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

Pavel Lishin, says:

You know, I bet that child-loving jerk even dares to park non-historical cars in front of his house sometimes. Some people should just be shot, you know?

Verified

7 months, 2 weeks ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

ch0, says:

He probably drives a pickup truck, the scumbag. We don't want your African treehouses sullying our view!!!

Anonymous

7 months, 2 weeks ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

rinea, says:

Personally, I feel that home owners should be able to put whatever they damn well please on their property as long as it doesn't directly negatively affect their adjacent neighbors. And in my opinion, 'directly' does not include some namby-pamby BS like 'lowering of property value.'

Then again, it's the guy's own fault for moving into a historical neighborhood.

On a side note, we used to have our homeowner's association on our case all the time for owning a 1988 chevy suburban with rusted paint and keeping it parked at the side of our house when not in use. It still ran just fine, but we didn't use it very often anymore so they took offense to it's presence. We should have used the argument that we were contributing to the historical value of the neighborhood. However, I'm not sure that would have gone over any better than my dad's default response of flipping them the bird.

Anonymous

7 months, 2 weeks ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

Rick Yost, says:

rinea- "Then again, it's the guy's own fault..." -I agree. And your dad communicates just like I do.

Verified

7 months, 2 weeks ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

Jason Rice, says:

Frankly, if you look at the pics, the tree has been so cut back as to be a tad of an eyesore. This was possibly the final straw to someone.

The utility companies just demolished a whole street of beautiful trees in my neighborhood. So that might not even be his fault.

I do like his construction. Coupla nice tricks I'd steal if I had a big enough tree.

Verified

7 months, 2 weeks ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

Scott Doyle, says:

*Coupla nice tricks I'd steal*

Keep it to yourself, heathen!

Can't believe this guy was so quick to take down the treehouse, btw. On top of a classic opportunity to make a huge media ordeal of "the man" throwing his weight around, just seems like something too trivial to bother with in the end.

Verified

7 months, 2 weeks ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

Travis Bush, says:

Didn't look finished to me Scott...he probably had the choice of spending more money on it, paying the fine and then raising hell..or just nix it. One imagines paying property tax on a "museum" is rather costly..especially when they keep building over priced town homes so dangerously close.

And for you knobs that think he would complain if it were next door..do you have children? I doubt it, because I would be delighted if I didn't have to build one myself. You intellectual peens who can't figure that one out should stick to restaurant reviews and complaining about said subject around here.

Verified

7 months, 2 weeks ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

Robert Kelly, says:

Scott, its easy to write off as trivial many things, until they happen to you. Inane rules and selective enforcement are never too small or seemingly innocuous- you be the next victim.

Verified

7 months, 2 weeks ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

JStoning235, says:

Unfortunately, I know this guy. "Who does he think he is" describes most situations Mr. Foreman is involved in. He bought the house in the historic district because he was raised dirt-poor and it has given him a sense of accomplishment. Just lay off the comments. One day he'll mature.

Anonymous

2 months ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

What do you think?

:

:

Email Print 26 Comments Contribute

See more stories in:


Quantcast