There’s a qualitative difference between your examples and mine. My examples were not meant to illustrate the conservative dogma that they should be able to do whatever they want free of government interference; they were meant to illustrate the opposite, that there are good reasons for government regulations, particularly at higher levels of government, but at municipal levels, too. I’ve already cited the vital role that federal regulatory agencies play in ensuring public health and safety. Libertarian types just don’t see that, or they don’t care.
Municipal regulations can be worthwhile, too. Playing loud music at 3 AM is very bothersome to others. It’s a tangible problem, just like uncared-for dogs cruelly left in the back yard at all hours who incessantly bark for attention. “Cars up on blocks”, obviously abandoned cars, or abandoned appliances on the front yard, are such extreme examples of neglect that they’re practically iconic symbols of a dissipated, decayed neighbourhood that no one would want to live in.
Whereas those other things affect no one. The poor lady who had spent thousands on artificial grass had to spend thousands more to have it all ripped up again and natural grass installed, for absolutely no good reason except the city said so. And no, drainage isn’t an issue; artificial turf drains just fine. Likewise my hedges were well maintained, lush and attractive and bothered on one. On the matter of aesthetics they were attractive greenery, and only when trimmed to municipal specifications did they look like shit, because the lower branches had sparser leafage than the upper ones. It was pure bureaucratic bullshit.
You’re right that some of these things sound like HOA bullshit, but in these cases it was municipal. In keeping with my principle about more local governments being potentially more oppressive, HOAs are even more local than municipal governments, and consequently can be even worse and more petty – often a plague on the community, run by pestilent busybodies engaged in petty power trips that make everyone else’s life miserable.
I don’t actually see that cars on blocks inconvenience anyone, even if they are ugly. Tall hedges can be a hazard when they obstruct visibility around corners, but otherwise, like cars on blocks, are just a matter of taste.
I think that’s too expensive. Who has time to be outraged or care about every regulation? Especially since most regulations only affect a small minority.
My local supermarket used to hire workers to take your grocery cart to your car, load the bags into your car, and then bring the carts back. As a result, they didn’t design the parking lot to have cart carrols. But since the pandemic, they haven’t been staffed to that level. They still sometimes help with the carts, if things are quiet or if a shopper looks elderly or otherwise burdened. But mostly, shoppers take their own carts and often leave them scattered around the lot. The store would like to build some cart parking, but to do so, they need to get approval from the town, and that’s a long and bothersome prices, involving plans and meetings and… It’s not a crazy regulation, but it’s also expensive to comply with, and takes a long time. And i only know that’s why the shop hasn’t added cart carrols because my daughter worked there. No one is going to avoid moving to a town because of something like that. No one is even outraged but the regulation. Still, i suspect the owner would like government off his back. (It’s part of a small chain owned by a handful of family members, it’s not part of one of the big national chains.)
Except they do need a permit to alter their parking lot. Because local government regulations.
When this little shopping center was built, there were endless town meetings discussing exactly where the footpaths would be, how much parking was required for each retail establishment, how access between the parking and the main street would work, etc. and apparently, they aren’t allowed to just change details willy nilly, they need town approval.
My guess is they need approval to reduce the number of parking spaces, but my daughter didn’t tell me the details, just that the store has been trying to get permission to do it.
Ok. And I certainly see the requirement for handicap spots. I thought you where talking about some sort of structure that needed built.
A cart corral will save parking spaces because of lazy people not returning them. This should be a slam dunk. The arguments for it are quite a few. If I was the store manager I would just do it. There is no code enforcement officer that is gonna count parking spaces.
I work for county gov. If someone came in and asked if they needed a permit for this, I guess it would be appreciated, but the answer would be - Just what do you intend to do? And then, no, of course you don’t need a permit for that.
The point being made is that apparently there are jurisdictions where adding cart corrals to a parking lot requires some degree of buy-in from some type of authority. Not that your jurisdiction requires it. Counterexamples aren’t helpful here, since they don’t invalidate the reported existence of the opposite.
The cart corral may need approval because the store is just at the minimum number of parking spaces and installing the corral would put it below that. But, yes, many of the cart corrals take up only one space (or perhaps two facing ones).
I live on the border of two counties. I work in one and live in the other (by a 1/4 mile). A person building across the road asked for a variance. Build into the road setback and the wetlands set back. His house will be lower than the road, and he wants to build in the setback.
Oh sheese. We get a LOT of snow. And his house will be below the road. In the set back. All snow is plowed downhill. So pushed off the edge of the road. This is gonna end up on his house.
My wife and I fought this. Yes NIMBY is a large part of it, but my god, this person gonna have problems with snow piling on his house. Not to mention the spring run off.
His recently installed septic apparently does not meet code I guess. I saw the drainage field dug up and one tank lifted out of the ground.
This property would be good for a three room cabin as a ‘get away’ not a two story house with a garage. I’m rather stunned that the variance was approved.
I fear I’m going to be constantly rescuing these people. They are from Florida.
Sure - likely most of us could come up with some example: this market should be able to alter their parking lot; my hedges aren’t bothering anyone; what’s the harm from astroturf. But I, for one, can see the value of SOME regulations requiring that businesses provide sufficient parking, and that certain plantings be of limited height (as you suggest, to not restrict sightlines). Not sure what legitimate community interest there is WRT astroturf, other than just disfavoring the look. But if you look around you and EVERY SINGLE OTHER PROPERTY has natural plantings, hmm… Maybe you should check before installing astroturf.
I’m thinking of one recent instance in our town, where a developer bought and tore down a house and a 2-story building, and wanted to erect a several story residential tower w/ (IMO) insufficient parking and access that would overcrowd an already crowded intersection. They sought a variance and (IMO fortunately - and unexpectedly) were denied.
Just stating my opinion, but so far no one has offered an example that suggests overburdensome regulations. If someone whining about getting government off their back is complaining about nothing other than trimming hedges and restrictions on paving stones and astroturf, IMO, they don’t have much to complain about.
“Parking” doesn’t have to mean “motorized conveyances intended for the use of humans,” you know. A cart corral or four could expand the available parking capacity immensely.
I saw an episode of The Big Bang Theory where it was pointed out that ambiguities were required to be resolved in the favor of the party who did NOT cause the ambiguity to become possible.
The fundamental difference between subjective matters of taste like the style of shrubbery and blatant signs of neglect like abandoned cars is that the latter tends to depress property values, causing real and tangible financial harm to other homeowners.
And most developers, IME, cut that all the way to the bone. Parking doesn’t usually generate income; leasable space does.
Which is why these parking requirements also usually tie in with minimum sizes for each space, and why some municipalities also allow for smaller “compact car” spaces, which – again – many developers will push as far as possible.
Underparked can hurt the property, obviously, but it also pushes cars into neighborhoods and on public streets, often to the detriment of others.
It’s another case where – absent regulations – developers would surely privatize the profit and socialize the cost.
Which is a theme that should be central to this thread: how regulation decreases the degree to which individuals and business shift their costs (ie, externalities) onto the rest of us.
You’re forgetting about the very real, and underappreciated, cohort of home buyers who actively look to live in close proximity to unkempt properties, overgrown lawns and shrubberies, meth labs, vicious, barking dogs, “Sanford & Son” front yards, loud music, and car alarms that sound frequently and for no apparent reason.
Then, there’s that other cohort that wants to live next door to the serial domestic violence drunk guy.
Well, i suppose if they paid enough, they probably could. But there does seem to be a local shortage of unskilled labor. At least, all the places that hire high school kids are advertising that they have openings. Some of the local supermarkets advertise their starting wages and benefits at the check out line.
Presumably, that market wants to reduce its competitive disadvantage with other places that aren’t staffed to the same level.
Exactly. And i live in a town full of busy bodies, and the supermarket is very prominent. It would be a huge deal if they illegally altered the lot.
Naw. I almost never see spaces that can’t be used due to misplaced carts. A lot of customers return them, they send staff out regularly to collect them, and the parking spaces are large enough (and also have some “green space” intermixed) that most of the carts lying around aren’t actually blocking a spot.
Also, on busy days, there aren’t a lot of empty spaces. So they probably are sitting at their minimum required parking spaces, and are looking for a variance.
