Rules and regulations

[geo in mi]

If you had your way about it, what building codes/zoning ordinances would you do away with, and why?

[Forerunner]

Given the fact that people have had all common sense bred out of them, that's a tough one.
Just like the economy, though, it's not more spending nor coddling that's going to solve the problem. It's letting people make their own choices and learn from the consequences.
That concept works, on the grandest scale, for centuries on end.
Then the pendulum swings the other way for a time, and people happily surrender their right to choose, and with it their obligation to take responsibility, to a small group of basically malignant benefactors who hate the idea that men can be self governing.

There are no easy answers, and that is the answer.....
There are no easy answers.

Give me freedom and the right to suffer for my own mistakes every time.

[Beeman]

Keep all of the ones that benefit me and raise my property valuse, get rid of all of the rest.

[Kris in MI]

Originally Posted by Beeman

Keep all of the ones that benefit me and raise my property valuse, get rid of all of the rest.

Beeman, I would basicly agree w/you except that what benefits you/me and raises our property values isn't necessary the best in the long run.

Specific example: the township I live in wants to stay rural, so they put a minimum lot size on all "new" parcels of property. Great. Perfect, since I want to live in a rural area and was looking to buy a large piece of land (we bought 40 acres here in 2002). Except now if I wanted, or more realistically in these finance times needed to sell of a piece of my property, I am very limited. Can't sell a 1 acre corner because of the minimum dimension requirements applying to both the current piece and the acre I would be selling. Our depth and width have to be at a certain ratio. I could sell a 5 acre piece, but not a one, because of how it affects the shape of the remaining parcel. Wouldn't be a problem except those extra 4 acres happen to be where my pasture and barn are. Don't want to sell those! Also no 'tagged' lots (ie big chunks with only a narrow roadfrontage at the driveway) in our township.

Another example is minimum square footage of houses. The bigger the better, right? Don't want no trashy trailers here! How about a 1000 sq ft very tasteful and cute stick-built home? Nope, can't have it, it's not big enough! Don't want a basement? Too bad. In this township, slabs are not allowed because the value of a house on a slab is lower than that of a house on a basement.

I could go on and on, but really, what forerunner said sums it up.

[whistler]

Originally Posted by Forerunner

Give me freedom and the right to suffer for my own mistakes every time.

I agree wholeheartedly with this statement.

However, in regards to building codes, a person's construction mistakes may cause suffering to someone else, i.e. the next owner. Caveat emptor some might say, but this seems inadequate when modern houses are complex systems that even experts don't totally understand. To expect that Joe Blow can critically evaluate a house for hidden errors (e.g. Chinese drywall, improperly installed/insulated windows, substandard plumbing) before purchase is silly.

For better or worse, the building codes are a good thing. Sometimes they are overkill, sometimes they are a royal pain in the posterior, and sometimes they are costly. But in the long run, and it goes against my grain to say this, they are for the better.

Whistler

[salmonslayer]

Lack of zoning and government intrusion is why I bought my farm in Missouri. The road is a little rough, virtually no county services (which means taxes are very low), and as forerunner said you have the right to suffer your own mistakes.

[Beeman]

Originally Posted by Kris in MI

Beeman, I would basicly agree w/you except that what benefits you/me and raises our property values isn't necessary the best in the long run.

Specific example: the township I live in wants to stay rural, so they put a minimum lot size on all "new" parcels of property. Great. Perfect, since I want to live in a rural area and was looking to buy a large piece of land (we bought 40 acres here in 2002). Except now if I wanted, or more realistically in these finance times needed to sell of a piece of my property, I am very limited. Can't sell a 1 acre corner because of the minimum dimension requirements applying to both the current piece and the acre I would be selling. Our depth and width have to be at a certain ratio. I could sell a 5 acre piece, but not a one, because of how it affects the shape of the remaining parcel. Wouldn't be a problem except those extra 4 acres happen to be where my pasture and barn are. Don't want to sell those! Also no 'tagged' lots (ie big chunks with only a narrow roadfrontage at the driveway) in our township.

Another example is minimum square footage of houses. The bigger the better, right? Don't want no trashy trailers here! How about a 1000 sq ft very tasteful and cute stick-built home? Nope, can't have it, it's not big enough! Don't want a basement? Too bad. In this township, slabs are not allowed because the value of a house on a slab is lower than that of a house on a basement.

I could go on and on, but really, what forerunner said sums it up.

I basically was playing to the question but actually giving the general opinion of the American people. It's the old NIMBY deal.

As I sit here typing I am surrounded by things I must suffer for my mistakes as I live in an area with no restrictions,codes or zoning. I am not complaining, just informing. I belive in the freedoms to do what you like on your land so I will suffer for my beliefs.

[seagullplayer]

If I can't see it, hear it or smell it from my house you can do whatever you like...

[NCLee]

Do away with all of them and start over, again.

(1) A person has the right to do as they please on their own property. They take responsibility for their own actions on their property. A short list of exceptions that include sewage and water contamination. Changing the primary use of the property without consent of neighbors. (I can't put in a go-kart track, beer joint, landfill, etc.)

(2) New buyers of property have the obligation to inspect surrounding properties (look, not enter without permission) before purchase. After purchase they can't complain to authorities about what's on the neighboring land. (Can't complain about roosters, goats, pigs, kudzu, campers, or compost piles, for example.) New buyers of property have the obligation to inspect said property for defects and/or write a contract with the seller regarding possible problems.

(3) New buyers must conform with the use of the land by surrounding property owners or receive written consent from neighbors to change the use. (See item #1. Can't move in beside me and setup a chemical recycling storage site.)

(4) Affecting property values is no longer a reason for a complaint. This is my home, not an investment. I don't flip houses. I don't buy to live there a few years to get better and better. I could care less about what my neighbors do on their own land as long as it doesn't contaminate my water supply, contaminate the air I breathe, or disturb my peace and quiet with noise pollution. If they want to build a junky shed in their backyard, I could care less. If they want to fence their front yard and add a flock of chickens, I'd enjoy watching them.

(5) Changing the 4 items above requires a county wide vote during routine elections.

IMHO, it's time that people take personal responsibility for their property. It's the only way people will start to put common sense back into the picture.

I can't imagine the signers of the Declaration of Independence having someone tell them what they could and couldn't do on their own property.

Lee

[ronbre]

we are not zoned here..but we do have building codes..i think some of them are a bit outdated..or too restrictive..but am sure they were put in for safety ..

one thing i don't think people should have to buy a permit to do minor changes to their buildings and property..that is over regulation and makes a small project cost twice as much sometimes

[whistler]

Originally Posted by NCLee

New buyers of property have the obligation to inspect said property for defects and/or write a contract with the seller regarding possible problems.

Here is the crux of the issue. How do I know, as a buyer, that you didn't use that chinese drywall? Or that the insulation was done incorrectly and the studs are slowly rotting? Perhaps someone took real shortcuts and the studs are low grade 2X3'?s There is no way to know those things until they become critical.

Since I, as a buyer, have no shred of guarantee about the quality of construction I have an incentive to pay very little for a house. On severe problems the cost of repair can exceed the cost of replacement (see stucco problems in modern houses build it cold climates). Therefore, without a minimum guarantee, the value of your house approaches the value of salvagable goods.

That is a bad situation for everyone.


Whistler

[TurnerHill]

I wouldn't make any changes to the codes.

I wouldn't mind seeing zoning pretty much completely eliminated.

[MushCreek]

I get annoyed when communities require a minimum size house. I looked at properties that required 2500 square feet! That's not very green. In designing the house i'm going to build, I find things such as stair dimensions to be limiting. My 83 y/o mother has stairs that have a greater rise than run (the opposite of what code requires) and she successfully navigates them several times a day. Oddly enough, if you have a loft, you can use a ladder, but for closed bedrooms, the stairs must meet code. Most places also require a central heat system, including where we currently live in FL. Why? I haven't run my heat in years.

Many of the structural codes are there for good reason, but are no less frustrating. I can't build my house with the wood on my land unless I pay someone to inspect and grade it. That would actually make it more expensive than buying the junk they sell at lumber yards these days. I also can't use used lumber unless it is similarly inspected and graded. Wouldn't it be 'greener' to cut my own timbers on my own land and use them for my house?

I know why they have codes, and I believe they are for the bigger good, but they are frustrating and expensive for the homesteader. It's my property- if I want to live in a death-trap, why can't I? Make me get it inspected when it changes hands. If it's not code, I could either upgrade it, or knock it down. Another odd rule is that I can build a barn 'for agricultural use only' with no inspection or permit. I guess if the barn falls on my head, it won't hurt as much as a house would......

[TurnerHill]

One thing that people do need to keep in mind is that if government doesn't take care of these issues, in the form of building codes and zoning ordinances, the market will.

"Great!" you say. "The Free Market at work!"

But how would the free market account for the issues addressed by building codes and zoning?

Well, if there were no building codes, mortgage lenders would have to assume the worst about the quality of the construction. So they would place all sorts of new rules in place. It is very likely that they would insist on, effectively, building codes. Just ones they select. And any homes not built to these new, private codes would be essentially unsellable.

If there were no zoning regulations, I would expect to see developers placing even more restrictions in place. HOA's gone wild.

[Freeholder]

Originally Posted by NCLee

Do away with all of them and start over, again.

(1) A person has the right to do as they please on their own property. They take responsibility for their own actions on their property. A short list of exceptions that include sewage and water contamination. Changing the primary use of the property without consent of neighbors. (I can't put in a go-kart track, beer joint, landfill, etc.)

(2) New buyers of property have the obligation to inspect surrounding properties (look, not enter without permission) before purchase. After purchase they can't complain to authorities about what's on the neighboring land. (Can't complain about roosters, goats, pigs, kudzu, campers, or compost piles, for example.) New buyers of property have the obligation to inspect said property for defects and/or write a contract with the seller regarding possible problems.

(3) New buyers must conform with the use of the land by surrounding property owners or receive written consent from neighbors to change the use. (See item #1. Can't move in beside me and setup a chemical recycling storage site.)

(4) Affecting property values is no longer a reason for a complaint. This is my home, not an investment. I don't flip houses. I don't buy to live there a few years to get better and better. I could care less about what my neighbors do on their own land as long as it doesn't contaminate my water supply, contaminate the air I breathe, or disturb my peace and quiet with noise pollution. If they want to build a junky shed in their backyard, I could care less. If they want to fence their front yard and add a flock of chickens, I'd enjoy watching them.

(5) Changing the 4 items above requires a county wide vote during routine elections.

IMHO, it's time that people take personal responsibility for their property. It's the only way people will start to put common sense back into the picture.

I can't imagine the signers of the Declaration of Independence having someone tell them what they could and couldn't do on their own property.

Lee

I agree with most of what you said, but I think one of the problems we have in this country is that the majority are allowed to vote away the rights of the minority. I think the laws should basically protect us from harm by one another, but at the same time, the majority shouldn't be allowed to do harm to the minority by being able to take away their rights, such as the right to do as they please on their own land (the protection from harm clause would include fouling the air or the water). I think we need a 'castle' law, in that a man's home is, and ought to be, pretty much inviolable.

I also don't like uniform neighborhoods -- all rich people here, all poor people over there, that kind of thing. I think that community life would be much better if people weren't segregated by building codes and homeowner association restrictions. Of course people will segregate themselves to some extent, but I think it's wrong to encode that segregation.

There ought to be different codes for homeowner builders who plan to live in their home for a period of years (owner-builders may be building specifically to sell and in that case ought to have to follow contractors codes) and for commercial contractors who are building houses for profit. Normally, a homeowner builder will do the best job they can afford to do, while a contractor is going to cut as many corners as he can get away with. The codes prevent too many corners being cut (at least in theory!).

Kathleen

[ChristieAcres]

We can build as many 10 X 20 buildings as we want (no permit required). There is a height restriction and you aren't supposed to install wiring, heat, or water to that building (?!). Okay, so work hard to build something and let it rot? This is a wet climate...

When we bought this property, we had criteria to meet:

1- Stick built shop on property for DH's business (Got it & there is a wood stove & it exceeded Code standards)
2- Over 2.5 acres (got 6.68 which is plenty for us)
3- A farmhouse (settled for a remodeled mobile home)

We were pleased there was a double carport (DH will finish that into a garage next year), a 16 X 16 Office (not on our list) with its own little wood stove, and extra storage in the attic above the shop. DH built the chicken house and my garden cabin. We have some more building to do and want to enlarge the shop. That requires a permit

Now, DH wanted to remove the mobile home and build us a log cabin. When we looked into it, it is a lot easier & less expensive to work with L & I to get a permit to remodel our existing mobile home. I have seen some remodels that are incredible! Our reasoning is to increase the energy efficiency & improve what is here to last longer.

We don't need a permit here to completely remodel the interior of our home. We will if we add on to it.

I share the frustration over not being able to use our own lumber! Here, we have the same issue. Our 83 yr old neighbor up the road- Larry, built every single home from lumber he milled himself (close to a dozen homes he built himself). The County became so hard to work with, that he decided to quit building homes 2 years ago. His lumber was superior to most of what you can buy, but the inspections and grading requirements frustrated ol' Larry just a bit too much. All of his homes are ABOVE CODE!

What to change? Streamline the Permit process & widen the scope to include Universal Building Codes for many different types of homes. Homes should only have to be structurally sound...why does it matter what they are made of (if safe), how big they are, in the trees, or underground (?!)

DH's brother built a large tree house 30 feet up in 2nd growth trees (1,200 sq feet). This was engineered to move with the trees, and also account for differing growth rates. It was incredibly well built. The County condemned it and ordered it torn down right after he died unexpectantly. His parents were further heart-broken. They told the guy, who was logging for them, of this awful situation. That man, God bless him, got his Contractor's License for the sole purpose of "dismantling" the tree house. The trees weren't harmed and the house was taken apart board-by-board, stacked, and neatly organized! All of it was reclaimed and used in projects around here and for my in-laws. What a shame that was.

I am mighty glad we don't have CCR's here that limit us using our property how we choose. We had to actually get more than 2.5 acres to avoid close regulatory restrictions (animals, etc...).

[Gary in ohio]

Originally Posted by geo in mi

If you had your way about it, what building codes/zoning ordinances would you do away with, and why?

Every one that has nothing to do with health and/or safety....

There are to many rules that force a home to a specific size and price range all due to zoning. Next county over you cant build a home unless the outside walls are 2x6.. No 4x4 walls permitted.

[NCLee]

Originally Posted by whistler

Here is the crux of the issue. How do I know, as a buyer, that you didn't use that chinese drywall? Or that the insulation was done incorrectly and the studs are slowly rotting? Perhaps someone took real shortcuts and the studs are low grade 2X3'?s There is no way to know those things until they become critical.

Since I, as a buyer, have no shred of guarantee about the quality of construction I have an incentive to pay very little for a house. On severe problems the cost of repair can exceed the cost of replacement (see stucco problems in modern houses build it cold climates). Therefore, without a minimum guarantee, the value of your house approaches the value of salvagable goods.

That is a bad situation for everyone.
Whistler

Have a qualified person inspect the property. No different than doing a title search to make sure the title is free and clear. If the inspection turns up a material problem, then you have the choice to walk away from the sale and/or try to get compensation for the problem.

And, even if the home is built today, meeting all building/zoning codes, there's no guarantee that a new problem won't turn up down the road. Where will the next problem crop up? (An approved material or construction method turns out to be hazardous or fails under xyz stress.)

Knob & tube wiring used to be OK.
Formaldehyde used to be used in paneling.
Lead paint used to be OK.
Arsnic (sp) based pressure treated wood used to be OK.

Lee

[Yvonne's hubby]

Zoning and building codes on privately owned property should all be done away with. If a developer wants to restrict his privately owned property, fine and dandy, and folks who like those restrictions are welcome to buy it with those restrictions. I personally believe that if I buy a piece of property, it should belong to me, not my nosy neighbors.

[TurnerHill]

Originally Posted by BlueJuniperFarm

There ought to be different codes for homeowner builders who plan to live in their home for a period of years (owner-builders may be building specifically to sell and in that case ought to have to follow contractors codes) and for commercial contractors who are building houses for profit. Normally, a homeowner builder will do the best job they can afford to do, while a contractor is going to cut as many corners as he can get away with. The codes prevent too many corners being cut (at least in theory!).

Kathleen

I believe exactly the opposite.

Intent aside, many owner-builders don't have the skill level or experience necessary to build safely without reference to "the book" and input from inspectors.