5 ms·

I would, until the neighbors started threatening to sue me in planning meetings and the local authorities demanded $30,000 of architect's drawings and then I wa

I would, until the neighbors started threatening to sue me in planning meetings and the local authorities demanded $30,000 of architect's drawings and then I was told I had to have two parking spaces for some reason and that my house was too small for any decent individual.

dsfyu404ed 8y ago
That's to be expected when you live in a "nice" neighborhood. By being industrious and efficient and building outside the box you violated the norms of the community and they take issue with that.
- WorldMaker 8y ago
  Which is the biggest shift from when Sears catalog homes were most sold: most of the were clustered together in neighborhoods where that sort of kit home, or similar DIY projects, were precisely the norm. Most major cities you can sort of tell which ones were the "Sears catalog neighborhoods". (It's funny now how some of those very neighborhoods have grown increasingly conservative in their old age by nature of gentrification and often being closer to urban centers than the exurbs that replaced them in people's minds as "suburbs".)
  - dsfyu404ed 8y ago
    >It's funny now how some of those very neighborhoods have grown increasingly conservative in their old age by nature of gentrification and often being closer to urban centers than the exurbs that replaced them in people's minds as "suburbs". Yeah, no. It's not that simple. In the US the liberals tend to generally be more in favor of government management of what you do on your own property because of how the existing battle lines are drawn with regard to big government/regulation vs small government/deregulation. The situation is flipped in SV where the slightly older and slightly less left leaning/liberal existing property owners want slightly more regulation (specifically zoning) than the slightly more liberal and slightly younger renters. Rights of property owners isn't really a specific part of either party's platform. Desire for government micromanagement of what you do on your own property follows wealth much more closely than any ideology. A bunch of rich conservative jerks in a suburb of NYC will agree with bunch of rich liberal jerks in a suburb of SF when it comes to using regulation to prevent people from building things they don't want to look at.
    - WorldMaker 8y ago
      Yes, :s/conservative/wealthy-NIMBY/ there if need be. It was not at all in reference to the (supposed) political spectrum but the wealth spectrum, and also the "tradition" spectrum (conserving the current state of the neighborhood, rather than allowing for change).
    - someguydave 8y ago
      I'm interested to see what happens in Colorado if Amendment 74 passes: https://ballotpedia.org/Colorado_Amendment_74,_Compensation_to_Owners_for_Decreased_Property_Value_Due_to_State_Regulation_Initiative_(2018) https://ballotpedia.org/Colorado_Amendment_74,_Compensation_... It is an experiment in rolling back the administrative state, if done properly.
EADGBE 8y ago
...you live in the wrong area...
- CalRobert 8y ago
  No, I left. Which no doubt delighted my neighbours. The same ones who wonder why their kids live so far away.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
namdnay 8y ago
> I had to have two parking spaces for some reason The reason for that is that in ten years' time, you may have moved on and sold your house, and the next tenants will probably own two cars (this being the US), and so will end up parking on the street. If everyone does this, it's a nightmare Enforcing a number of parking spaces per dwelling is very common even here in France
- pc86 8y ago
  And these are exactly the kinds of things the home buyer should take into account. But if the builder doesn't need or want something, they shouldn't be forced to build it for the sake of a theoretical buyer decades in the future. If the builder doesn't put in something that is in high demand it will negatively impact their ability to sell the home or they'll have to price it accordingly. Seems like a pretty good system without having a government commission tell someone they need an arbitrary number of parking spaces that they have no use for.
  - namdnay 8y ago
    The problem is that the impact is also external. Maybe the future buyer doesn't mind parking in the street, but the neighbours definitely do. The government isn't telling anyone anything - it's a purely municipal decision
    - pc86 8y ago
      Municipalities are governments.
- CalRobert 8y ago
  So charge for the street parking. I don't get to store my junk on the street for free, why can others?
  - namdnay 8y ago
    I completely agree, the best solution is those meters where you put in your license plate number, with 1h free per car per day. The problem is that charging for street parking is trickier politically than setting rules for construction. Builders will build apartment blocks with not enough parking spaces, people will buy the apartments because they're cheaper, and then complain that the municipality is extorting them by making them pay to park in the street... It's a lot easier to just fix the problem at the source, even if it's not as fair

dsfyu404ed 8y ago

That's to be expected when you live in a "nice" neighborhood. By being industrious and efficient and building outside the box you violated the norms of the community and they take issue with that.

WorldMaker 8y ago
Which is the biggest shift from when Sears catalog homes were most sold: most of the were clustered together in neighborhoods where that sort of kit home, or similar DIY projects, were precisely the norm. Most major cities you can sort of tell which ones were the "Sears catalog neighborhoods". (It's funny now how some of those very neighborhoods have grown increasingly conservative in their old age by nature of gentrification and often being closer to urban centers than the exurbs that replaced them in people's minds as "suburbs".)
- dsfyu404ed 8y ago
  >It's funny now how some of those very neighborhoods have grown increasingly conservative in their old age by nature of gentrification and often being closer to urban centers than the exurbs that replaced them in people's minds as "suburbs". Yeah, no. It's not that simple. In the US the liberals tend to generally be more in favor of government management of what you do on your own property because of how the existing battle lines are drawn with regard to big government/regulation vs small government/deregulation. The situation is flipped in SV where the slightly older and slightly less left leaning/liberal existing property owners want slightly more regulation (specifically zoning) than the slightly more liberal and slightly younger renters. Rights of property owners isn't really a specific part of either party's platform. Desire for government micromanagement of what you do on your own property follows wealth much more closely than any ideology. A bunch of rich conservative jerks in a suburb of NYC will agree with bunch of rich liberal jerks in a suburb of SF when it comes to using regulation to prevent people from building things they don't want to look at.
  - WorldMaker 8y ago
    Yes, :s/conservative/wealthy-NIMBY/ there if need be. It was not at all in reference to the (supposed) political spectrum but the wealth spectrum, and also the "tradition" spectrum (conserving the current state of the neighborhood, rather than allowing for change).
  - someguydave 8y ago
    I'm interested to see what happens in Colorado if Amendment 74 passes: https://ballotpedia.org/Colorado_Amendment_74,_Compensation_to_Owners_for_Decreased_Property_Value_Due_to_State_Regulation_Initiative_(2018) https://ballotpedia.org/Colorado_Amendment_74,_Compensation_... It is an experiment in rolling back the administrative state, if done properly.

EADGBE 8y ago

...you live in the wrong area...

CalRobert 8y ago
No, I left. Which no doubt delighted my neighbours. The same ones who wonder why their kids live so far away.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

namdnay 8y ago

> I had to have two parking spaces for some reason The reason for that is that in ten years' time, you may have moved on and sold your house, and the next tenants will probably own two cars (this being the US), and so will end up parking on the street. If everyone does this, it's a nightmare Enforcing a number of parking spaces per dwelling is very common even here in France

pc86 8y ago
And these are exactly the kinds of things the home buyer should take into account. But if the builder doesn't need or want something, they shouldn't be forced to build it for the sake of a theoretical buyer decades in the future. If the builder doesn't put in something that is in high demand it will negatively impact their ability to sell the home or they'll have to price it accordingly. Seems like a pretty good system without having a government commission tell someone they need an arbitrary number of parking spaces that they have no use for.
- namdnay 8y ago
  The problem is that the impact is also external. Maybe the future buyer doesn't mind parking in the street, but the neighbours definitely do. The government isn't telling anyone anything - it's a purely municipal decision
  - pc86 8y ago
    Municipalities are governments.
CalRobert 8y ago
So charge for the street parking. I don't get to store my junk on the street for free, why can others?
- namdnay 8y ago
  I completely agree, the best solution is those meters where you put in your license plate number, with 1h free per car per day. The problem is that charging for street parking is trickier politically than setting rules for construction. Builders will build apartment blocks with not enough parking spaces, people will buy the apartments because they're cheaper, and then complain that the municipality is extorting them by making them pay to park in the street... It's a lot easier to just fix the problem at the source, even if it's not as fair