December 09, 2004

• I own my house and property and I'll do what I damn well please with them. The only times when the neighbours should have any say is when I want to change my property's zoning designation.
• A lot of this has to do with Berkeley. Some folks here in Berkeley feel surprisingly free to stick their noses in their neighbor's dishes. I know of other cases where neighbors have objected to expansion plans, causing years of delay and tens of thousands of dollars in increased costs, only to lose, and then move away in a huff. (I also know of people who have found notes on their cars, objecting to the manner in which the car was parked, as well as people who have found notes on their garbage cans, telling them they were throwing their trash out the wrong way. Very Berkeley.) On the other hand, I look at the neighborhood my parents live in, where the lots are fairly large but the houses, built mostly in the 1950's, are smaller, and now that part of their city is considered "central" developers are buying houses, dividing the lots into two or three lots, and putting big houses on each lot. Given that the zoning is most restrictive, and prevents multiple unit dwellings, it seems to me that putting three houses in a space where a three-unit building would be illegal is doing an end run around the zoning restrictions- the neighborhood has to deal with higher traffic either way. Cities need density to support public transit, but they should just be honest about it.
• I live in a landmark-designated property in Denver, and I can somewhat relate. I cannot make any changes to the facade of my house without approval from the Hysterical Preservation people, whatever they're called. So, I could not replace my thin, rattly large front window with a well-sealed double paned window. It would screw up the configuration. I finally had snow piling up inside on the sill, and cracks and mildew in the plaster walls beneath the window before I could get approval. And then, I had to make sure the window looked the same as it did before from the street, which required a weekend of back-breaking labor installing rubber stripping around the outside to keep out the hornets. This poor woman. I can only imagine what's in store for me when I can no longer make it upstairs to pee. Historic or landmark designation has some advantage. The area can't be rezoned to high-density or commercial, but the properties have to be maintained to a certain standard. It's almost like living with covenants.
• rocket88: Would you feel the same way if your neighbours built a fence so high you never had any sun in your backyard? Built an extension that covered up your bedroom window? Or placed their air-conditioning unit next to the patio where you most like to sit in the summer evenings? (The latter actually happened to my fiance's neigbours - they lived next to the worst neighbour in the whole area.) It's always a balance between the rights of individual and the need of the community. I would hope that every person has some respect for their community, and for the commonwealth of their neighbourhood (as well as the wider society). It is clear that in this case, the neighbours were acting unreasonably - no one would have forwarded it around the internet if it had been reasonable. That's the problem with "human interest" newstories - they can distort the issue through their unusualness.
• I don't get what you mean by "unusualness" as a descriptor. Sometimes the stranger things are the more interesting.
• What if you have a Redneck Neighbor?
• I'm having a hard time taking this at face value. People rarely do things without a good reason, and certainly not ones that involve years of fighting. WHY were the neighbors so strenuously against this addition? And "Because it's Berkeley" just isn't an acceptible answer to me. Plus, comments by the writer make it clear that he's not just saying, "look at my poor grandmother" but attempting to use her story as a vehicle for a larger agenda. (his comment about "promoting mediocrity" is especially Randian) This makes me even less likely to take his story at face value. So, I'm not saying it didn't happen or it isn't a ludicrous situation - I'm just saying that I cannot believe that there isn't more going on here that he's not telling us, especially in glossing over the motivations of the evildoers in this morality play. He's trying far too hard to make us believe it's evil. (and anti-life!)
• IT'S THE TECHNO-UTOPIST DUMBASS FROM WiReD. She's too old to live in her home. Keep her with you or move her to an old's people home. Case closed.
• (Oh, and it IS true that it's the first time I hear from Louis Rosetto since the demise of Wired Ventures -- what with avoiding the spotlight after that miserable failure and all that)
• cynnbad: Sorry, I was aware that "unusualness" isn't really a word, but I was tired and couldn't think of the right one. Unusual stories certainly are more interesting, that was my point. They get reported and told and spread more easily because they are more interesting, but it can distort our impressions of reality. We only ever hear of the terrible neighbourhood associations that stop the little old lady from building a room on her house. We don't hear of the 203 other ones that exist to keep their neighbourhoods functional. I don't know about this case at all - I mean, maybe the other neighbours are just mean. But that often there is a good reason for controls on building, for decisions to be made as a community.
• Time for some reasonable commenting. This is Louis Rossetto's mother. Louis happen to be the co-founder of W1r3d m4g4s1n3, a hotbed of dumbass techno-utopianism. The fact that it appears at boingboing is no suprise. Co-founder Carla Sinclair has worked at Wired under Rossetto's tenure and has even written a book about it. The poster and other co-founder, Mark Frauenfelder, Sinclair's husband, has been a contributor to the magazine as well. It's just some rich publisher throwing his weight around, spouting rhetorics. And notice how we never hear what the neighbors have to say. They're asshats for living in Berkeley. Coming from someone living there, it's kind of rich.
• Christ Richer, you don't like wired, we fucking get it already. Please stop shitting on the thread. The poster had a question, remember that? As for property restrictions and the like- they can be useful, as stated above. Some jackass bought the split-level house next door to me when I was growing up, and wanted to convert the garage into a home to rent to 3 families on a tiny lot. The zoning didn't allow it, so he got pissed and rented to low income families to piss everyone off. (One of the families was too nice. They owned a fish market and their truck stunk, but they gave people fish, so they got kicked out. Their replacements didn't speak to anyone, parked their cars on the front lawn, and left beer bottles and shit all over their yard.) He grew trees right on the fences and stuck an old ugly boat back there on cinderblocks. So I guess the point is, the problem isn't with the system so much- it's with the people. Douchebags will find a way to piss people off under any system.
• Bottom line on property restrictions. If the restrictions were in place when you moved in, you should have done the homework and known about it.. you're stuck with it...you made an agreement when you purchased the property, stop complaining. If legal restrictions are proposed with no grandfather clause, you have the right to campaign against it...if you lose, you're stuck. Welcome to the democracy... As for neighbors who are a pain.... been there, done that... 8 times out of 10 it can be solved through communication, 1 time out ot 10 it can be solved with a lawyer. There is, however, that one time when you just admit you're screwed and either learn to live with it or you move.....
• thinking about where the line between an individual's rights and the community's rights should be. I don't know about where the line should be, all I know is where it is now and how I feel about that. If it moves, then I should know if my tolerance has been exceeded.
• If I can't hear it, can't smell it, doesn't block out the sun, then I don't give a damn what the neighbors do and they shouldn't care about me.
• The restrictions can get a bit absurd at times. One of my neighbors had to petition City Council to get special permission just to build a carport. The reason? It's a couple of feet closer to the street than city ordinances allow. If it were going to in some way adversely affect their neighbors, that'd be one thing, but come on, it's a damn carport, and it's on their property. Same thing with the old lady's bedroom. Unless there's some specific harm being caused to her neighbors, they should pipe down and let her build.
• The problem, in my mind, is that zoning restrictions etc. are drafted under the idea that one set of rules (for fairness) has to apply to every situation (no matter how varied). We have neighborhood associations here that are virulently anti-everything. Though they're nominally liberals (on how they vote) they're conservatives in the truest sense of the word when it comes to their property and the property of their neighbors. And they're a pain in the ass. What's the solution? Get involved in local politics. It's not hard. And then you'll have a voice when things like this come up. (And c'mon, in techno-utopia, don't we recycle grandmothers for parts? Or at least build them cyber legs?)
• There are already building codes in place that restrict how high I can build a fence, and how close to my property lines I can build a structure or addition. As long as I don't violate those codes, my neighbours should have no legal say in what I do with my property.
• Christ, just put up whatever you want, draw a picture of the twin towers on it, and let the neighbor try and take it down... that's what I did. Restaurant next door opened his (previously windowless wall) so that these giant windows look out on to my backyard. He tore down the wooden fence that I had put up, and then proceeded to do all this yardwork to make it pretty for his customers. While I didn't really care (it did look nice) I figured I'd charge him a couple a hundred per month as it's now a "draw" for his business. He refused and after I took down his decorations, uprooted his plants, and started throwing old fridges and sheetrock back there he sicced his lawyer on me. So, I erected a giant cinderblock nasty looking wall right up against his windows, and had some neighborhood vandals paint me a mural featuring the Twin Towers and firefighters on the other side. He wanted it taken down, but no way was he going to bring this before anyone after he saw my side of the wall. (this was in early 2002). I've since taken it down, after he boarded up his windows. YAY!!!
• While $200-300 may seem excessive to some, this is the Village in NYC, his rent would be $12,500 per month, but he owns the building the restaurant is in.
• smallish bear: I was just pointing that the reason the thread started is not just some "poor grandmother can't get her autonomy". The poor grandmother isn't and has a rich, influential son who's pushing his weight around. I don't like it when people do that, especially, as InnocentBystander InnocentBystander pointed out, when they use Randian rhetoric to push the 'abolish all regulation' agenda. Sorry for the use of 'dumbass', that was unecessary wired-hate. Anyway, what jb said. I live in a place where there aren't enough rules and anyone is allowed to build anything anywhere. Our neighbors have kept a sand pit on their land. A sand pit! In a residential area with children all around. So some homeowners association seem to be abusive, and maybe the laws governing them ought to be reviewed. But rules and regulation have to stay.
• Keep your kids off their property.
• One area of "community" rights that gets used as a weapon in my neighborhood are the zoning codes. Feuding neighbors call zoning enforcement all the time to rat on each other. I like to think I maintain my property fairly well. However when I asked my neighbor to quit diriving through my yard to get to his garage, he started reporting me for everything from icy sidewalks to a few weeds in my yard. Then he moved out of his house and rented it out to utter slobs. They never cleaned up after their dog or took out the trash. So, I called immigration and had them deported ;) Bad absentee landlords are the bane of a neighborhood, and residents are absolutely right to use the system to hound them.
• Wow, for a thread about what's reasonable, it got pretty unreasonable. What the heck, a few stories of my own so InnocentBystander won't be so innocent any longer. Occasionally good landlords get it in the teeth too. My own replaced the wooden steps to the front door last year, then had to pay a fine and submit an architectural plan to the city because they were 1/2 inch higher than the 'step code'. We're not talking about a porch, it's about 8 boards making three steps, and obviously they can't be any higher than the door that's always been there. Luckily he had a relative who's an architect because he was a bit stymied when they demanded an 'architectural plan' for 3 wooden steps. Then the grumpy young neighbour got annoyed because when the steps were replaced my landlord didn't agree to replace her steps for free at the same time, even though the two entrances always had separate steps and she made it clear she wasn't interested in contributing to the cost. So she refused permission for my landlord to replace the fence falling down between the yards in the back, even though he was going to pick up all of that cost. Then there were the relatives who put on addition on their house. Very reasonable size, didn't noticeably change the house, was done in average time (certainly shorter than most home replacements in the area), didn't inconvenience the neighbours, etc etc. The work finished in the late fall. The yard was a mess of dirt at that point of course, so they decided to wait through to the spring to redo the landscaping. The ground was almost frozen. They couldn't have landscaped if they'd wanted to. However, one of the neighbours decided to complain about it and the city fined them $500 for having a yard full of dirt for longer than 6 months (which was highly debateable in itself). The officer made it clear he didn't want to fine them, but his hands were tied because a complaint had been filed. Sure, Huron, you have to live with the restrictions that were there when you moved in, but most of the restrictions in this thread were those involved in normal city living where you don't get to 'choose' unless you want to move to the wilderness. They serve as warning about how bad it can get even without the insane homeowner agreements involved with planned communities.