One Man's House is another Man's Disagreement

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

One Man's House is another Man's Disagreement

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> One Man's House is another Man's Disagreement

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

One Man's House is another Man's Disagreement - 5/1/2014 11:23:53 AM

joether

Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline

So a couple built their dream house; but neighbors want it torn down as it doesnt 'fit' with their viewpoints.

The article gives much of the background and understanding of the neighborhood. I personally don't see anything wrong with the house. Nothing on the law books in Massachusetts state you have to build a home according to a past period's housing laws (or lack there of). The homeowners got the permissions and permits 'ok' before building the structures.

Maybe the couple under assault, could demand that other Victorian house in the article be repainted purple with pink shutters and sidings. With yellow lightning bolts all around it. And if the owner says 'no', then just point out to the hypocrite, that they should not have to tear their house down to appease him/her.

What are you views? Should the owners have their house torn down?

Profile

Post #: 1

RE: One Man's House is another Man's Disagreement - 5/1/2014 11:47:15 AM

freedomdwarf1

Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline

We have had similar things happen over here and people have been forced to destroy their own homes.
The argument being, that the new building is 'not in keeping' with the neighbourhood.

To a point, I can agree with that.
If you have an area that is well-known for its style and that's what keeps the prices up, having something so grossly out-of-character could devalue the adjacent properties.
That, in itself, could be reason enough to have it torn down.

That said, if they haven't broken any laws or regulations, why shouldn't they be allowed to keep it?

Over here, we often have what they call local 'covenants'.
Which is basically local planning laws that forbid certain things on new buildings or alterations.
We have a period of time to evaluate any new buildings and voice any objections prior to anything being allowed to be built.
This sort of thing would be very common (ie, keeping new buildings 'in vogue' for the area).
Sometimes, it even dictates what colours or materials you are allowed to use!
At times, the covenants are a nuisance. Other times, they are a boon in keeping up the appearance of an area/neighbourhood.
Maybe the US should have something similar in their planning laws to avoid such conflicts of interest.

Some you win, some you lose.
C'est la vie!

_____________________________

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”

George Orwell, 1903-1950

(in reply to joether)

Profile

Post #: 2

RE: One Man's House is another Man's Disagreement - 5/1/2014 11:59:32 AM

stef

Posts: 10215
Joined: 1/26/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

Nothing on the law books in Massachusetts state you have to build a home according to a past period's housing laws (or lack there of).

What do Massachusetts laws have to do with this? The house was built in North Carolina.

_____________________________

Welcome to PoliticSpace! If you came here expecting meaningful BDSM discussions, boy are you in the wrong place.

"Hypocrisy has consequences"

(in reply to joether)

Profile

Post #: 3

RE: One Man's House is another Man's Disagreement - 5/1/2014 12:26:42 PM

joether

Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: stef

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
Nothing on the law books in Massachusetts state you have to build a home according to a past period's housing laws (or lack there of).

What do Massachusetts laws have to do with this? The house was built in North Carolina.

Its used as a reference point. That in this state, someone wishing to build a structure (be it a house, barn, external garage, etc.) that the plans have to be submitting for review by the town/city's planning board. Depending on circumstances, be also submitting to other town/city groups/agencies for approval as well. For example a house being converted into a bed & breakfast catering to handicap individuals must go through certain agencies beyond the planning board.

Also, the final look of the structure is also submitted. I'm going to take the educated guess that Architect Louis Cherry would have known what the house would look like, and have several images of it from different perspectives.

That none of the neighbors or 'abutters' established concerns at the planning board of the review for the structure tells me they don't really care about what is built in their neighborhood. When one house in my neighborhood was going to be demolished and a new house built on it, there must have been 80 of us crowding the planning board meeting just to see what the new house would look like. It was an old colonial style house with two car garage attached in the back (driveway looping around the side to the front of the house). Even before the old house was demolished, we knew and agreed with the plans. That's the difference!

(in reply to stef)

Profile

Post #: 4

RE: One Man's House is another Man's Disagreement - 5/1/2014 1:10:39 PM

stef

Posts: 10215
Joined: 1/26/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

Its used as a reference point.

It's an irrelevant reference point.

_____________________________

Welcome to PoliticSpace! If you came here expecting meaningful BDSM discussions, boy are you in the wrong place.

"Hypocrisy has consequences"

(in reply to joether)

Profile

Post #: 5

RE: One Man's House is another Man's Disagreement - 5/1/2014 2:06:05 PM

joether

Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: stef

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
Its used as a reference point.

It's an irrelevant reference point.

To you it is, to others it is not. I live in a neighborhood that has houses dating back to before there was a nation! Some built in the 18th, 19th, 20th and 21st centuries. The laws, rules, regulations, and processes have changed over the course of time. A house, is an extension of freedom of speech in much the same way as a installation is in artwork.

Since it was built by someone that performs artwork, I'm sure an architect could easily say his house is an art installation. He had all the permissions and permits before building there. He didn't rip down an existing structure. It was an empty lot before hand. Now he throws in the 1st amendment, and that pretty much destroys those opposing his argument. They didn't pay for the land, nor the materials, nor the labor. They had plenty of time to argue before hand. All in all, they don't have a legal leg to stand on (if the architect throws the 1st amendment card down).

< Message edited by joether -- 5/1/2014 2:10:05 PM >

(in reply to stef)

Profile

Post #: 6

RE: One Man's House is another Man's Disagreement - 5/1/2014 2:30:46 PM

stef

Posts: 10215
Joined: 1/26/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

To you it is, to others it is not.

To this situation, it is irrelevant.

quote:

I live in a neighborhood that has houses dating back to before there was a nation!

Bully for you and bonus on the exclamation point. That really rams your point home, so to speak. I lived in Boston for over 20 years myself, so you don't get a cookie based on your zip code, nor does living there grant you any special insight into the laws regarding designated historic districts in North Carolina.

quote:

The laws, rules, regulations, and processes have changed over the course of time. A house, is an extension of freedom of speech in much the same way as a installation is in artwork.

Nonsense. "Freedom of speech" has nothing to do with this. Houses built or renovated in historic districts must comply with certain aesthetic guidelines. Since he had initial approval, he went forward in good faith and started construction. Should the injunction stand against him, the community will likely have to reimburse him for construction and property costs based on that. It'll be interesting to see how this all turns out in the end.

_____________________________

Welcome to PoliticSpace! If you came here expecting meaningful BDSM discussions, boy are you in the wrong place.

"Hypocrisy has consequences"

(in reply to joether)

Profile

Post #: 7

RE: One Man's House is another Man's Disagreement - 5/1/2014 2:50:20 PM

DesFIP

Posts: 25191
Joined: 11/25/2007
From: Apple County NY
Status: offline

If the neighbors believed that their neighborhood qualifies to be a designated historical district, then they need to go through the legal process to have it so designated. However, they must also then abide being told what color they can and cannot paint their homes.

The fact is that most of those neighboring homes probably have had additions over the years that would not be permitted under such a classification. You think any of them would be happy to be told to remove their decks and patio doors? Because I don't. And it's because they've wanted to be able to do things that are not in line with the age of their homes that at no time has there ever been a movement to have the neighborhood given such a status.

Sorry folks, you don't get it both ways.

_____________________________

Slave to laundry

Cynical and proud of it!

(in reply to stef)

Profile

Post #: 8

RE: One Man's House is another Man's Disagreement - 5/1/2014 3:07:26 PM

metamorfosis

Posts: 1132
Status: offline

It's the city's call, depending on what the regional laws are. Although it's hard to imagine they would make them tear it down if it meant reimbursing them. Considering the construction is as far along as it is, I suspect they will permit the house.

P.S.- That house is fucking beautiful.

< Message edited by metamorfosis -- 5/1/2014 3:14:59 PM >

_____________________________

Pam (aka gungadin09)

Forum Freak

(in reply to stef)

Profile

Post #: 9