3 ms·
"skipping permitting" is probably better described as "breaking the law" if you can't afford to meet construction requirements then you can't afford to constru
by preseinger 4y ago
"skipping permitting" is probably better described as "breaking the law"
if you can't afford to meet construction requirements then you can't afford to construct, i guess
- catiopatio 4y agoIt doesn’t matter what you call it, or whether you agree with the choice, the end result of overly burdensome requirements like these is a decrease in the safety of housing.
- preseinger 4y ago"overly burdensome" isn't an objective measure, and certainly isn't whatever you judge to be beyond your own level of acceptability
- catiopatio 4y agoForty-two years ago, homes here didn’t have to be permitted at all. Building codes and related permitting regulations were established to ensure safety, and accepted by the public under those auspices. The addition of novel, non-safety related political requirements exceeds this original remit and undermines the entire telos of residential building codes. This inescapably leads to reduced compliance with the regulatory process, and thus, less-safe housing. So, yes, “overly burdensome”.
- preseinger 4y agoYou're asserting that there exists a set of "non-safety related political [building] requirements" which are significant enough to substantiate your conclusions. This is in no way self-evident.