Real Housewives of Miami's Lisa Hochstein Slams Miami Design Preservation League: "This Minority Group Needs a Hobby"

lisa_hochstein.jpg
As we reported earlier, Real Housewives of Miami cast member Lisa Hochstein really doesn't appreciate it when you say nasty things about her on the Internet. But that hasn't stopped her from trashing preservationists seeking control over Hochstein's Star Island home, which they say is historic.

Hochstein, with her husband, have clashed with the Miami Design Preservation League since December, when the league submitted a proposal to designate the Hochstein's 1920s home at 42 Star Island as a historic building. The measure would foil proposed renovations by the Hochsteins.

Lisa Hochstein's remained relatively quiet about the whole ordeal -- until now. Earlier this afternoon, the housewife went off on the MDPL, posting a series of angry tweets:


Much of Hochstein's anger stems from the fact that she owns the building:

Someone should maybe tell her that buildings of all sorts can be granted (or, uh, pushed into) historical status. Preservationists would argue that historic buildings, public or private, deserve to be saved.

She also seems to think MDPL's trying to ride her coattails of sweet, sweet Bravo fame:

"Hilarious," in passive-aggressive Housewives-speak, means "infuriating," or, in this case, "cut-a-bitch-worthy."

But then she drops a bomb. Maybe.

"Soon to be family home"? Is Lisa pregnant? That would be a huge deal for the star, whose fertility troubles were featured on the last season of RHOM. And it would also explain these rather, um, mood-swingy Internet missives.

If that's the case, congratulations are in order! Unfortunately, they probably won't be coming from the MDPL.

Follow Ciara LaVelle on Twitter @ciaralavelle.

Follow Cultist on Facebook and Twitter @CultistMiami.


Advertisement

My Voice Nation Help
13 comments
fewpopb2
fewpopb2

the home was not purchased by the Hochsteins on the open market. They bought the mortgage from underneath the 79 year old woman who had fallen behind on her mortgage. Then when the woman tried to reorganize by declaring bankruptcy, they swooped in to foreclose on the home. Check out the court case for the details... It's unfortunate that the Hochsteins may not be getting the investment return that they desired - however, when you purchase a home site-unseen in a foreclosure, without doing due diligence regarding the historic significance of the house, these things can happen. The entire process is happening as it is supposed to, with the MDPL merely making sure that the criteria set by the City of Miami Beach are being considered - if the home is not deemed to be structurally defective, then the Hochsteins won't be able to build as big as they wanted... this criteria is set to help protect historic homes in Miami Beach. The Hochsteins do not get special treatment. Furthermore, the rudeness displayed by Mrs. Hochstein at the DRB was incredibly offensive - she yelled at the MDPL volunteers: "go find another f**cking hobby".

Anthonyvop1
Anthonyvop1 topcommenter

She is right.


Property right supersede anyone else right to tell us what we can or cannot do with our property

snookie
snookie

You should get your facts straight.  The home was on the open market for years.  Most recently alex shay was the broker.  Nobody bought it or cared about it for that matter.  The 79 year old woman did not fall behind, she simply stopped making payments.  The bankruptcy was in response to chase foreclosing on her.  There was never any attempt to reorganize.Your comment about historic significance makes no sense.  Are you aware the home is not considered "historic" and certainly was not historic when purchased?  If you have apoint of view feel free to air it but being dishonest to make a point never works out well.

Anthonyvop1
Anthonyvop1 topcommenter

@fewpopb2  

 Just because some lady defaulted on her mortgage does not mean it wasn't purchased in the open market.  

Where did you learn economics?  Public School?

fewpopb2
fewpopb2

@Anthonyvop1 actually that is not true. Please read up on the laws of the land. The idea of requiring owner consent has been found as unconstitutional in many court cases. The point of historic preservation is to preserve what is deemed as historically significant by the citizens. No individual owner should have the right to make that decision. Imagine what would have happened to South Beach in the 80s had each individual owner been given that right... it would have become like Brickell is now. Yuck!

fewpopb2
fewpopb2

@snookie what years was it on the open market? 

You obviously need to read the case - your comment is full of factual errors.

fewpopb2
fewpopb2

@Anthonyvop1 the open market means that the home was listed, people were able to look at it, and then the home was purchased. It's not open market when someone discovers a distressed property, purchases the note, then forecloses. Had the home been on the market truly open, it would have had several more million dollars to its price, which would have reduced the threat of demolition by investor flippers.

Anthonyvop1
Anthonyvop1 topcommenter

@fewpopb2  

Who the hell are you to tell me what I or cannot do with my property.  Do I tell you to take off your skinny jeans and Obama T-Shirt?


I have successfully fought fascist zoning laws for years.  Courts be damned.

Anthonyvop1
Anthonyvop1 topcommenter

@fewpopb2 @Anthonyvop1 You are wrong.  The Open market means a free and open market.  Nobody was restricted or prevented from attempting to buy the property.  

Just because they were smarter buyers does not mean it was an clear and open transaction.   typically it is only business dealing with the Government that aren't open.

Anthonyvop1
Anthonyvop1 topcommenter

@fewpopb2 @Anthonyvop1 Conspiracy?  How is it a conspiracy?  Even you have admitted that the Government tells people what they can or cannot do with their property.  

    Of.  I forgot.   Liberals will always through out personal insults and allegation when confronted with logic and facts that destroy their beliefs. 

fewpopb2
fewpopb2

@Anthonyvop1 I'm glad we know where you stand. Thank you. Good luck with your self-hating conspiracy theories.

Anthonyvop1
Anthonyvop1 topcommenter

@fewpopb2 @Anthonyvop1  

Screw case law.  The rights of the free man supersedes any repressive law.   The Nazi's used the rule of law to oppress the people.  You are in fine company.  

So get with the program.  Not everyone believes they should tell other people how to live.  Not everyone needs to spend other people's money to boost their self esteem.  Not everyone thinks more government is the answer.

The only thing the Hochsteins did was wrong was to ask for permission.   They should have just torn down that monstrosity and built their McMansion.

fewpopb2
fewpopb2

@Anthonyvop1 based on your comments on other articles you are obviously not the sharpest lawyer in the drawer. Please go review case law regarding the issue. If you have time to spare from calling people poor, democrat, non-english speakers, as your comments in other articles show, I would suggest that you open a book and read.

Now Trending

Miami Concert Tickets

Around The Web

From the Vault

 

Clubs

Loading...