Yeas ago, I was the Zoning inspector for a very rural township.
Their zoning regulations were covered by a 300+ page document . . . 300+ pages!
Anyway, a person came to me who wanted to build in the middle of her 15 acre parcel . . . dab smack almost the exact middle . . . a minimal of about 300' from any lines.
I checked our regulations for dwelling sizes and having found none, I gave her a permit to build a 1200 square foot house, for herself. She's single, Amish, has no car and uses no electricity . . . simple.
Months later, another person came and wanted to build a barn on his 1 acre parcel, so for him, I had to check setbacks and sidelines.
In the "sideline" regulations, someone decided to place building size requirements . . . maybe 50 pages from where the regulations pertaining to buildings was placed.
The regulations required that a building, if used for a residence, must be a minimal of 1800 square feet of living space.
I'm not in trouble or anything, but this is a very rural township that chose to incorporate regulations of a very populated and built-up township near Cleveland, Ohio.
So, what he had, was poorly written, poorly indexed and very restrictive regulations from an area much different, for a 25 mile square township with about 300 or so voting residents.
I often wonder, how we as a society became so extremely restricted, by the powers that be, to the lifestyle that the powers that be live?
There are so many rural places(what they hey . . . include urban places too), that restrict quality of a simple life, almost out of legal existence.
I was always in awe of tiny houses that a single spinster or hermit might live in back in the 40's and 50's . . . even into the 60's and 70's.
Someone lived a very simple, probably very frugal, but often very satisfying life in these . . . what we's call today . . . substandard housing.
These regulations have been tolerated in "good" times, but must be tolerated, in less than "good", times when people often need to find an alternative to a $1000-$2000 a month payment or even a $500-$1000 rental with utilities.
Of course, maybe welfare or other programs will help to fill the gap, but why should the government need to fill a "gap", that was artificially created by out of control regulations?
Sorry . . . just kind of a rant about how society always wants to fit a square peg(dreams and aspirations) in a round hole(reality and regulation), at any cost.
I think this borders on tyranny.....
I may get sentenced to P&R purgatory for posting this, but, AMEN!
well . . . I hope
this doesn't get P&R, cause it's probably ripe to, if someone wanted to use it that way.
But in reality, this is more a human nature question about how people with, often rule people without, not about specific politics or politicians.
How the idea of live and let live doesn't seem to apply when people have some degree of power over other people and see their own way of living as being the ideal for everyone else.
I know a lot of surveyors actually live in the boonies and I'm willing to bet many of them do some very inventive, innovative . . . and very "green" things to live day to day.
Things that other people, also in rural areas wouldn't even be allowed to do . . . because it seems inventiveness, innovative thinking and even "green", thinking may have been virtually regulated out of permissible activity for various reasons.
life in the "buddy" lane & simple living>Tiny Houses
There is a whole "Tiny house" movement Tiny House News
> I gave her a permit to build a 1200 square foot house, for herself.
...
> regulations required that a building, if used for a residence, must be a minimal of 1800 square feet of living space.
oops!
But seriously, my home is about 2500 square feet. I have lived here alone for more than 5 years. I only occupy 3 large rooms, about 1000 square feet... I use part of the rest for storage, and I sometimes have guests.
A cousin in NYC deals in real estate, and says many homes/flats/units are "double car" size... (about 500 sq.ft.). Many here live well in homes of that size.
> I often wonder, how we as a society became so extremely restricted, by the powers that be, to the lifestyle that the powers that be live?
>
> There are so many rural places(what they hey . . . include urban places too), that restrict quality of a simple life, almost out of legal existence.
...
> I think this borders on tyranny.....
:good:
It is a huge waste to Demand a minimum size beyond the desires of the occupant.
Over regulation is proving to be a major cause of the fall of many communities.
Well . . . to my defense, I had no reason to check for side yards and such on her situation.
It was just that the regulations were so large and that the regulations for building sizes, weren't in the area(of the regs), where everything else related to actually building was at.
Everyone was evidently so quick at making regulations, that the paid little attention to what they actually wrote and how they placed it in the regulations.
Since all these regs came at about the same time . . . in a hurry . . . I think everyone worked off of a "master", catch-all sample regulations.
Believe you me . . . if one can find it, the 300+ pages caught E-V-E-R-Y-T-H-I-N-G, one way or another, and of course the regs often were in conflict with themselves.
Places where someone can live a truly simple life seem to be quickly disappearing and I fear the regulations of today will have to be almost completely dismanteled for the real life situations of tomorrow.
I consider myself to be very
fortunate right now. The county I live in has no zoning for the county only in the city limits. Unfortunately, there is a movement by some butt-inskies to enact zoning for the county.
The reasons put forth for wanting county zoning:
1. There is a subdivision development of very small (0.25 acre) lots that was built up around the lake. There are hundreds and hundreds of lots. The actual lake front lots have been built on and usually have some decent houses - some plain nice homes and some mcmansions. The lots along the roads going into those houses are either not built on and getting over grown or have mobile homes on them in various states of repair. No covenants and restrictions that would stop the mobile homes from being on the lots.
People have bought the lakefront houses (after driving to them and seeing the neighborhood). Now they are concerned about their property values and the appearance as they drive to their houses and they think they should have a say in other people's property. Even though the other people were there first.
2. There have been complaints about how some people are not keeping their lawns trimmed or maintained as 'nicely' as others in some areas might like them to.
For item one, I say tough s*&t to those folks. They knew what they were buying when they purchased. If they were that concerned about the properties leading in, they could have spent an additional $300K and bought in other nearby areas. They also could have purchased in some of the developments that had C&R in place on what was to be built. The funny thing is some of those complaining would not have the proper square footage to fit into other neighborhoods and would not be happy if they were told to conform to a larger footprint.
The second item should be addressed only if the lawn provides a hazard to the community - not because of appearances. If someone has junk all over the yard that becomes a mosquito breeding ground - it should be cleaned up. If they like their grass to grow out for bunnies to live in - leave them alone.
On my drive home, I pass some places that I would like to see cleaned up. One is an old house that a tree fell on a long time ago. It is just falling down. However, it is not my business to tell others what to do with their property.
I consider myself to be very
Back into the late 1800's and into the 1900's only truly rich people had lawns and evidently, most of them had wheatfields or some other plant.
When we visit old stately homes of the past, today, we get a truly warped idea of how they really lived.
ANYWAY . . . today everyone is expected to have a planted grass lawn which is truly and completely un-natural . . . to me . . . well, I really don't like planted grass lawns. Give me gravel, weeds, trees or bare ground . . . but I really don't like a planted grass lawn.
It is mostly a part of the culture of America, in my humble opinion.
I believe most of it is about perceived property values, either sales value or refinance appraisals. I don't blame them for that effort.
You can never get the best return on your investment if your home is the "very best" in the neighborhood, a simple fact.
Here in Baja people usually buy a home, pay it off (if they ever owed money in the first place), and stay in it... and no thought of selling, ever. The result is a tiny house on a tiny lot in a government housing project evolving into a Mc Mansion. Makes for some real interesting neighborhoods as many of the original owners never change anything, and some don't even do minimal maintenance.
It is interesting to observe, and usually difficult to see the different mind set of others.
Tyranny, darn straight. You have people on food stamps in this country, but they can't convert their lawn to a garden. There is something fundamentally wrong with that. I built my own house and it's only 1200 square feet, but extremly efficient and paid for. Sustainability is not something that gets much encouragement these days.
Interesting.
I can't have a backyard garden because of outbuildings and my dogs. Currently my wife has a front porch garden in pots. I wouldn't mind a front yard garden but I am not home enough to help her with it(currently working 450 miles from home and living in my travel trailer) and I don't think my wife wants that much work added to what she already has to do.
I have a cousin who is a proponent of gardens over lawns too.
B-)
Minimum House sizes
It angers me when towns force people to build houses that are bigger than what they need. They are forcing people into more taxes, more heating costs, more cooling cost, more envoronmental impact, and use more resources to build and maintain.
Here in California, the very rural towns/counties adopt the state building codes (probably required to by law). What ends up happening is law makers see multi-million dollar homes sliding off the hillside in Southern California. Truth is, they built on an active landslide to get a good view of the ocean and paid the price.
Well, now we have to hire a Geotechnicial Engineer to study the foundation material, even if you are building on a pad cut into solid bedrock.
They see multi-million dollar homes burning in Southern California with the huge forest fires. Truth is they built their homes in the middle of a brush patch and never cleared a safe zone around the roads and homes (because they worship the earth).
Well now we have to have fire sprinkler systems in every new home.
I could go on and on. In the 1970's a building permit was about $125. It's right up there around $10,000 now.
End result is a single guy with an average income cannot afford to build a home, even if he has already paid his property off. It's BS if you ask me. I feel having shelter on your own land is a god given right. If you want to build a small home, you should be able to build it ANY way you feel.
I really appreciate
the fact that this didn't become a political bomb
I guess I better quit complaining.
>. In the 1970's a building permit was about $125. It's right up there around $10,000 now.
>
.
Here in northern NH, for the spec house I just built, I think I paid $50 to get a building permit. No foundation plan, no house plans were required, no building inspectors, no survey required, no plumbing or electrical inspections. The only thing I had to do was get a septic design and have the system approved befor backfill.
Also, the house was completely built with ungraded lumber from trees I cut on the property.
I guess I better quit complaining.
Quit rubbing it in. I know Calif. is a messed up place in many aspects.
I think what happened with the building permit costs...in the 1970's housing was booming, lots of houses to inspect.
Now there are few houses being built (gee I wonder why?). They are financing the inspectors salary through the permit process.
No political talk intended...this crap has evolved under the watch of many governors from both sides. There is a huge natural diaster and someone wants to show off their leadership by "solving" the problem.
Anyway this is a general non-surveying topic. As long as nobody jumps in and starts throwing out personal insults...we'll be fine.
I guess I better quit complaining.
imaudigger
that's what I'm getting at.
I don't think anyone(hardly) intends to stifle dreams of us that want to live the simple life . . . I know maybe some do, but certainly not most.
But, the days of Davy Crocket being being a senator(or rep), are far gone. I think also, that the days of live and let live are also gone or fading quickly.
I can't imagine stifling regulations not eventually working their way into the remotest of locations in years to come.
It's not necessarily that politicians are "bad", but they are different and the essence of what makes a person to want to be a "leader", seems to go with a deep belief of knowing what's best for everyone else.
When all this is further encumbered by the need to be a full-time campaigner, somewhat lazy in thought and very much open to "help", from the higher echelons of the political theater in way of suggestions and sample or example regulations, it seems that citizens who tend to like to be somewhat "under the radar", are the first to suffer from prohibitive regulations. This means, someone like me, who would really like to be a nearly invisible nobody, living a really simple life, on the fringe of life.
Dinosaurs were wiped out by an asteroid and people who seek the simple life are wiped out by regulation
"End result is a single guy with an average income cannot afford to build a home, even if he has already paid his property off. It's BS if you ask me. I feel having shelter on your own land is a god given right. If you want to build a small home, you should be able to build it ANY way you feel."
Exactly why I left California and moved to Alaska 20 years ago. Smartest thing I ever did.
I guess I better quit complaining.
> When all this is further encumbered by the need to be a full-time campaigner, somewhat lazy in thought and very much open to "help", from the higher echelons of the political theater in way of suggestions and sample or example regulations, it seems that citizens who tend to like to be somewhat "under the radar", are the first to suffer from prohibitive regulations.
The example regulations were apparently an issue in the community I live in. While the county has no zoning, there are subdivision regulations. From what I am told about the creation of these regulations:
A "planner" was hired to formulate the regulations before being voted on. The "planner" pulled material from various cities around the state with populations of 300,00 to 600,000 (note that the county I am in has a population of about 13,000 and holding pretty steady).
The original suggested regulations were fortunately whittled down somewhat, but we still have a requirement of a 70' radius cul-de-sac right of way. For perspective, a nearby city with a 40,000 population has the much more sensible for this area requirement of a 50' cul-de-sac. I can go out to one of the very few cul-de-sacs that was not granted a variance and is built to 70'. There is room to spare in doing a figure 8 turn in a full-size pickup truck on just the gravel portion with out even getting near the required 70' right of way.
It makes no sense to me to require that much right of way for a cul-de-sac yet not require the road be finished with anything more than a gravel base on a new road being built.
And one of the most interesting things...
Is that very often(especially in less populated townships), the zoning inspector doesn't even know what's in the rules, until someone points it out.
In other words, just like our state and federal legislators, they often pass things and they don't even know what they're passing.
Regardless... something in human nature takes over and people in power evidently feel they have an obligation to exercise power for whatever reason.
I have to say, of all the animals on earth, humans are the most complicated of all.... we're probably the only animal that doesn't understand why we are compelled to do most of the things we do.
