Should this home be demolished?

[HarveyDarkey]

Article, video and more photos: http://www.naturalhomes.org/save-charlies-house.htm

[NYC_SKP]

1. This architect says "no."

Living roof, thick thermal mass walls, this is the home of the sustainable future.

[liberalmike27]

87. Christ Man

This is just typical of local ordinances. The guy who writes the garden column this week, said the city came around citing a "weed" ordinance, complaining that the "weeds" need to be cut back. Apparently the idiot had no idea they were his tomato plants!

Many places don't want you to even collect rain in a barrel.

I had a guy complain about some old garbage cans of aluminum I collect, sitting on my front porch, citing some sort of refuse law. Aluminum isn't refuse, and had he looked closely, he'd have known that. I cleaned it up, and moved it to the back.

It is as if the City and State regulators are trying to keep people from doing good things, by laws. Ed Schultz just mentioned how law enforcement more than ever aren't really about protect and serve, but have been re-purposed as revenue generators. I'm not sure if they weren't always that.

And this is just the kind of crap people will just go along with, like blithering idiots. Tax me! I hate Weiner too. Spy on me. MSNBC (or FOX) said it, so it must be true--it's my team.

[maxsolomon]

104. This architect says maybe

the article is fairly baised, and doesn't give a good accounting of the issues before the council. all of it could have been solved by getting a permit, and there's no good info on WHY charles thought he wouldn't get one.

besides the cherry-picked quotation, there could be legitimate issues:

1. is the land his father gave him subdivided to comply with local zoning?
2. was there structural design done by a licensed architect or engineer?
3. is there a clear, required design review process charlie chose to ignore?

Perhaps the reason is spelled out here, in a document studied, written and passed by his local government, and available to Charlie for the asking BEFORE he built a home:

http://www.naturalhomes.org/img/one-planet-development-guidance.pdf

AT LEAST TRY to get a permit.

[Just Saying]

2. It's a work of art!

Very cool and interesting. It's sad and short-sighted to force him to destroy it.

[beevul]

3. Absolutely not.

I wish I were able to make our house like that.

[msanthrope]

4. Let me guess--homeowner didn't get the permits upfront, did they? nt

[struggle4progress]

6. "... Charlie felt he had no choice but to build his house without the approval

of the planning authorities, convinced permission for his home would be refused ..."

from the link in the OP

[msanthrope]

9. You know, the lawyer in me recognizes that without people like Charlie, my profession

would not be a lucrative one.

However, the homeowner in me--who is currently fighting with a neighbor over their 'greenhouse' really understands why Charlie's house just might go bye-bye.

[struggle4progress]

13. Legend about a town in the old West: a fellow moved there and put out his shingle to practice law;

few years went by and he had hard times of it; then a second lawyer moved to town, and within a year they were both rich

[msanthrope]

15. You have it right, my fellow DUer! nt

[Jesus Malverde]

22. Whats wrong with the greenhouse? Junky? Too Big?

I've always wanted to plant one in our back yard. Why does it annoy you?

[msanthrope]

25. Well, beyond the fact that the poorly-concealed grow operation attracts all sort of miscreants

looking for their own private harvest, every time it rains, the storm water drains into my yard, damaging my fence and deck. It's a pretty junky greenhouse, but the problem is the run off water.

I've tried being reasonable. I don't really want to take my neighbor to court. You'd think they'd be smart enough to NOT draw attention to themselves, but there you go.

[Jesus Malverde]

27. makes sense...thanks..nt

[westerebus]

31. You might need a lawyer.

[msanthrope]

32. Funny.....nt

[JDPriestly]

36. A truly sustainable greenhouse would not have run-off water to annoy the neighbors.

Your neighbor's greenhouse is not comparable to the lovely house in the photo.

[msanthrope]

57. These are teabaggers on the dole who are making a little side

money. Sustainable isn't a word they can pronounce.

I agree with you... the house in question is absolutely lovely. That has nothing to do with the application of planning laws.

[n2doc]

64. It's a cool house, but rules are there for a reason

Would all of you be so supportive if it were a metal recycling yard? How about a pig farm? How about a poorly constructed firetrap with no sewage treatment? Without building and zoning rules you open yourself up to having god knows what next to you.

I'm all for letting the guy keep it, if it meets code and all health and safety regs. But I am not for a blanket exemption just because it looks cool.

[1monster]

90. Have you considered entering into an mutual use of drainage pipe? My former

neighbors had a problem with water that pooled in their back yard and came off their driveway into my front yard. While we could live with the front yard "lake" every time it rained, their backyard rain "lake" was causing them some problems. So, with our permission, they placed drainage pipe (covered up by sod) from their backyard through our front yard into the drainage ditch. Their backyard drainage problem and our front yard drainage problem were both fixed to our mutual satisfaction.

For the other problems, "Good fences make good neighbors."

Good luck.

[msanthrope]

95. Call me crazy, but I have no interest in putting money into my neighbor's illegal pot grow. nt

[1monster]

96. Not to solve his problems, but yours...

I missed the part about an illegal pot crop in the earlier post.

So build an earth berm between your property and his, and place a very tall fence on top of it. The water will stay on their property and you won't be able to see their green house.

[msanthrope]

97. I wish I had the space---this is backalley Philly. nt

[Egalitarian Thug]

8. As always, living up to your username.

"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread." - Anatole France

[msanthrope]

11. “C'est la nature humaine de penser sagement et d'agir bętement."

I have no doubt that Charlie thought his house was a very good idea. And I think it looks lovely. But to deliberately build without a permit because you think you will be denied permission is foolhardy.

I hope he can appeal further up the line. The pictures of the interior are beautiful.

[Bay Boy]

105. Apparently the old adage...

..."It's easier to seek forgiveness than seek permission" isn't always true.

[msanthrope]

107. C'est vrai. nt

[Skink]

5. As a kid walking to school once we were playing in a home like this and...

bulldozers started doing there thing before eight am. We were inside the house but split when we heard /saw walls falling.

[newcriminal]

7. I think it's beautiful.

[hobbit709]

10. "harmful to the rural character of the locality" WTF???

Is this their definition of citified?

[struggle4progress]

19. The region is agricultural, with traditional stone country houses. I'm guessing the locals like that

look and want to preserve it

Not every place is like the American city I grew up in, where the general view was that anything more than about forty years old was an eyesore and should best be replaced with whatever the latest fad was

His little cottage is cute, but it's not at all consistent with the regional ambience: it may look natural and rustic to someone unfamiliar with the area, but if it's visible from the one of the little lanes folk drive on, it may seem to be a jarring incongruity in comparison to what's around there

"Charlie felt he had no choice but to build his house without the approval of the planning authorities, convinced permission for his home would be refused" probably doesn't win him lots of sympathy from locals who want their planning laws upheld

[hobbit709]

20. I'd say that house looks closer to traditional than those stone houses

if you go back more than 200 years.

[struggle4progress]

21. Try touring the area near Glandwr, Wales, with a tool like GoogleEarth

I pick Glandwr, because it's the last village mentioned in the directions to Lammas ecoVillage, which is supposedly adjacent to this house

If it's visible from the lane, the effect may be jarring to some people. I'd guess the planning authority has some population density limits in its plans, since the lanes seem rather narrow and couldn't support much capacity without widening

[rhett o rick]

37. Yeah, I guess you would be first in line to bulldoze it down. Shaking your finger at him for not

blending in with the status quo.

[struggle4progress]

39. I'm not a Libertarian. Local planning and local zoning laws are what keep regions from turning

in dense packs of rental condos or McFood take-outs

The locals IMO have every right to demand that construction occur only when permitted: it helps them preserve community aesthetic values and property values. It's their choice, not yours or mine

They do seem to be permitting such structures at the adjacent sustainable off-grid Lammas ecoVillage -- which is also their choice, not mine or yours

My own artsy preferences don't run either towards traditional stone country houses or turf-topped hobbit cottages: I like Bauhaus. And I think the folk in Wales would be perfectly entitled to refuse me a permit to erect a 20th century Bauhaus structure in a rural landscape where they want to preserve a certain traditional ambience; and I certainly think they would entitled to condemn and remove such a structure, if I built it unpermitted

[rhett o rick]

40. I am not a libertarian either but I think we can go overboard make people fit the mold. nm

[Enthusiast]

53. Me too! nt

[bvar22]

89. "not consistent with the regional ambience"

Who gets to decide what the "regional ambiance" is?
(Let me guess. The Richest MFs in the area?)


I'm glad we don't live around people like that.
If we want to build something, we build it.
No permits or inspections.

[Posteritatis]

91. The richest or most aggressively nosy/busybody neighbors, generally. (nt)

[bvar22]

92. I simply could NOT live anywhere there is a HOA or Condo Board,

...or a committee who decides what the "Regional Ambiance" is,
and how far is extends from their house.


"The richest or most aggressively nosy/busybody neighbors, generally."

[awoke_in_2003]

100. +1000. nt

[X_Digger]

12. Is it safe? Was it inspected as the electrical, plumbing, and HVAC were installed?

I read the article, and since they asked for a permit after being built, I'd imagine the answer is.. "Maybe, but who knows?"

[Egalitarian Thug]

68. Cobb homes have been standing in Britain for hundreds of years.

It is unlikely that plumbing or electrical had anything to do with this (there is no HVAC, that's one of the major reasons for using this technique). What is entirely likely is that the local counsel consists of snobbish wannabes more interested in exercising their authority than any potential defects in the house itself.

[X_Digger]

71. So there could be hidden junction points buried in a wall, or an unglued drain line leaking waste..

And an inspector would never know (now) since it's all closed up?

Mkaaay...

[ceonupe]

79. No

This was a guy that built a home without permits.

Had he tried to get permits its Likly the local governing would have blocked him.

Do you it want local communities to control zoning and building/appearance standards.

It's all a moot point because he never got a permit so his house will go bye bye unless he want a to move it or bring it into compliance with a settlement and making changes.

[X_Digger]

80. It's funny.. when the explosion at West, TX occurred..

.. people were up in arms about inspections and zoning.

When it's a pretty house that they like? How dare they! (I know, I know, Wales, UK is not TX, but still..)

[liberalmike27]

88. It's the

Ms. Cravitz syndrome, nothing better to do that gaze at it, and lament.

[A Simple Game]

109. There is HVAC, two of the pictures clearly show a heater with an

exhaust pipe, and said pipe looks kind of crooked in one of the pictures. And I certainly hope there is ventilation! There probably is no AC or need for it.

[Xithras]

14. Pretty house, but knock it down anyway.

The UK has some of the best written rural preservation laws in the world, and for good reason. As an island with limited land for development, Britain, Wales, and Scotland have drawn hard lines between "developed" areas where homes can be built, and "rural" areas where development is nearly frozen. In designated rural areas, homes can ONLY be built if they're replacing another structure, or if many hoops are jumped through to demonstrate why a waiver is justified. These laws were created specifically to prevent the kind of sprawl that has overtaken countries like the US, and to prevent the wealthy from turning the countryside into a sea of private estates.

While the home may be pretty and eco-friendly, it doesn't change the fact that it's contributing to sprawl by building in a preserved area where development is prohibited, and increasing the human population (with it's pollution and traffic) in an area where there is an active effort to keep population numbers to a minimum, and only minimal municipal infrastructure to support them.

Sprawl doesn't stop being sprawl simply because we like the design of a particular house. It may be an unpopular opinion, but it's the environmentally correct one.

[Kaleva]

16. All is not well in the Shire

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

45. ... "one ring to empower Home Owner Associations ... "

... that they may crush creativity and force conformity ...

Now, what did I do with that damn "one ring to rule them all"...

[Skittles]

17. I'd be proud to have that in my neighborhood

it would give it some character!!!

[jmowreader]

18. Sad to say...

...this is what happens when you build without getting permits first.

It's a shame because it is a pretty house, but Planning and Zoning is full of dickheads no matter where you go. (This house is in Wales.)

[blackspade]

23. "harmful to the rural character of the community"

Last edited Sun Aug 4, 2013, 11:16 PM - Edit history (1)

as opposed to what?
A fucking mcmansion?
It looks pretty cool to me.

After looking at the google maps street views, I would say that this house is much more in character for the area that some of the other crap buildings that the council has seen fit to permit.

[Jenoch]

24. While this house is in Wales and I know none of the

details of the construction with the exception of the description, several years ago a house made of straw bales was built in Minneapolis. It was supposed to be the eco-house of the future. It was cheaper to build, insulated well so the heating and cooling costs would be lower. The only problem was the house started to mildew, mold, and rot from the inside out. It lasted maybe seven years.

[Nye Bevan]

30. I'm surprised that the big bad wolf didn't blow it down sooner.

The straw house was first on his list.

[JHB]

72. From what I read, you have to keep them dry...

...and either they didn't do a good job of controlling sources of dampness, or else the climate in Minnesota just makes it impossible to do so.

[Jenoch]

73. There must have been problems

with the vapor barrier. I also remember something was wrong with the stucco.

[Dreamer Tatum]

26. No...where else will the Keebler elves live? nt

[TlalocW]

28. Damn Hobbits... They move into the neighborhood

And property values start dropping what with the wizards and Nazgul that inevitably follow.

TlalocW

[AtheistCrusader]

99. WOW, I was beaten to that joke by a country mile.

I am ashamed.

[TlalocW]

103. Hobbits don't use miles

They used leagues in the books.

TlalocW

[awoke_in_2003]

101. Don't get me started on the dwarves. nt

[Nye Bevan]

29. Libertarians would say "no".

Because they are opposed to things like building permits, Government safety regulations, and so on. Do we really want a system where everyone ignores building codes and permit requirements and asks for permission after the fact based on how pretty their structure looks?

[JoeyT]

33. Authoritarians would say "yes".

Because goddamnit, it doesn't matter if the house is sound and meets code, what's important is asking permission to develop your own property. What the hell use is a government if we can't arbitrarily order people around for no good reason?

They're not demanding it go because it doesn't meet code. So that strawman won't fly. They're demanding it go because they don't like the look of it. Of course what city planning boards like the look of is almost always directly correlated to how much money the person doing the building has.

[Jamastiene]

48. So, the people who deliberately broke the laws of the pre-Civil War south and helped

slaves escape north were Libertarians too? Some laws are absurd and need to be broken. As long as the house is structurally safe and not causing any physical problems to the neighbors, I don't see the problem. A house that looks that interesting would be the least of my concerns if I was a neighbor.

At least he doesn't have a Confederate flag hanging in front of the house, a dead deer rotting on the roof of a truck, and a huge junkyard full of rusted cars in the yard like so many houses in my hometown.

[Nye Bevan]

50. On reflection, I guess that people who simply build what they want regardless of building codes

and safety regulations, are indeed very similar to participants who helped free slaves in the Underground Railroad.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

34. It's fabulous! I want it!

You can imagine Hobbits living there

[Blue_In_AK]

35. That's a gorgeous home.

It absolutely should not be demolished.

[Rex]

38. Planners?

What do they plan? How to fuck up other peoples lives? I don't see anything wrong with the house, billions of people around the world would give their leg to live there.

Is it because of the water?

[Ohio Joe]

41. I'm sorry but that is one dumb ass house...

wtf? You gotta mow the roof? How the hell do you get the mower up there?

It's their house though so let 'em keep it.

[Major Nikon]

44. goats

[MADem]

52. When I lived on a UK farm, I mowed the lawn with sheep.

Close one gate, open another, they'd come in and eat and poop, then I'd shoo them back to the field and open the driveway gate.

They did a good job.

[Ohio Joe]

60. Animals on the roof...

This is still seeming wrong to me

[Major Nikon]

62. That's because you don't live in Wisconson

[HarveyDarkey]

75. I have photographs of that, no video

Didn't eat at the restaurant though. Door County is one of my favorite vacation destinations, especially in cherry season.

[cali]

55. seriously? you've never seen or heard of sod roof houses before?

they've been around since, well, since before recorded history is all likelihood. No, you don't mow it.

[Ohio Joe]

59. I've seen them,,,

I've seen many things and not known how they work.

[formercia]

113. A couple of Goats

Goats are what they use in many Ammunition storage areas to keep the vegetation trimmed on and around the Bunkers. They would feel right at home up there.

[Raine]

42. NO, that house is super COOL! nt

[Boudica the Lyoness]

43. No

It's lovely.

[Shankapotomus]

46. Beautiful house

But that is one heavy roof to put on top of anything where people are going to live without the proper permits.

However, I suppose the roof weight could be scaled down without destroying the house.

[Jamastiene]

47. Nope.

As long as it is structurally safe, I see no reason to tear someone's house down around them. That is absurd. Even if a house is not structurally safe, modifications could be made to make it safe. There is nothing wrong with that house. It's beautiful.

[B Calm]

49. How does he mow his roof? Weed wacker?

I think the house looks cool.

[cali]

61. he does not mow it. sod roofs aren't generally mowed.

[Sheldon Cooper]

51. That's an enchanting little house.

Charlie is a total dumbass for building it without the permit, though. Better luck next time.

[Enthusiast]

54. Enchanting is the word.....nt

[tridim]

56. It's beautiful. I wish there was a place in this country where I was free to build what I want.

Instead of being restricted to what society allows.

I quit architecture because of the nasty restrictions. It was like being a painter with access to only black, white and brown paint.

[cali]

65. there are lots of places.

My state is filled with quirky handmade houses- including sod roofed ones. And they exist all over the country.

Enjoy these lovely pics:

https://www.google.com/search?q=handmade+houses&hl=en&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=96D_UYbGO63D4AP5q4GIBQ&ved=0CEgQsAQ&biw=1280&bih=519

[toby jo]

114. Great link, Cali, muchos gracias.

[awoke_in_2003]

102. I toyed with the idea...

of buying 20 acres in Texas Hill Country. There are plenty of places you could build this with zero problems.

[tridim]

111. Wish I could afford land, but it's just not in the cards.

[awoke_in_2003]

112. $2k an acre where I am looking...

my house is paid off in two years, so I may buy some for retirement. Then again, I may just return to Ohio- the summers are killers here.

[bvar22]

110. We live in a BIG No Permits/No Codes/No Inspections area.

If you want to have your house/cabin appraised for Sale with bank financing,
then the bank will send out one of their inspectors who is good with rural inspections, but most places are either Owner Financed,
or Cash Outright,
[font size=3]do your own inspection[/font]
when it comes to sales.

If we have a problem with a neighbor doing something that affects OUR property or quality of Life, we first take it to our local constable,
and then, if it isn't resolved, go from there to County, State, or Federal resources.

All Federal/State hunting, health, and environmental regulations still apply,
but if we want to build a shed or add on a room to our cabin,
we just draw it out in the dirt, and start hammering.

Most of the structures here are built Over Code as far as structural integrity, but I've seen some creative solutions to Wiring.
Most people tend to do it right, especially if their lives are at stake.

My Wife and I LOVE living here,
and have been renovating the remains of a Red Cedar Log cabin that was 1/2 built and then abandoned as a goat shed for 5 years when we bought this place in 2006.
At first, it looked so bad that we were going to just Burn it Down,
but we started cleaning it up, and feel in love.
7 years later,we now live in it comfortably.

No Permits, No Inspections.

[dembotoz]

58. sometimes codes protect

safe electoral
safe plumbing
safe structure

outside of the this house looks really cool

[JustAnotherGen]

63. Oh hell no

If this is their reasoning -

"benefits of the development did not outweigh the harm to the character and appearance of the countryside".

F. L. Wright would have been pleased. It will quickly be taken back into it's natural environment. If there are code issues that hook into public utilities - give the man a chance to correct those - but what an adorable home. Definitely it should be allowed to stay.

[Chan790]

66. I'd be prone to agree.

Nothing to do with the sodden roof, the structure under looks like it was built by amateurs working only from materials they could reclaim from other people's demolitions or find lying around. It's visibly not structurally-sound, the windows do not match (and one, along with the door, is crooked)...it's a 21^st-century pseudo-environmentalist's unpermitted construction of a 19^th-century clapboard shack.

If it were in my neighborhood, I'd be suing to tear that unsafe property-value-obliterating eyesore down too.

[Fawke Em]

67. Can't they just say it's a prop from

"Troll," "The Hobbitt," the Harry Potter series or some fairy movie?

That way the neighbors will become mesmerized by the "Hollywood-ness" of it and leave it alone.

[pipi_k]

69. Hah...in my rural

community I would rather see this home than the one some dimwits at the top of my hill have that looks like a Redneck Rodeo Circus because they've added lots of ridiculous things to it after winning the lottery.

Then there are the ones in town, on a main road, who keep buying a new mobile home every few years, which isn't the problem...the problem is that they shove the old one aside on their land to rust and rot away. Right now there are three...one good, and two old ones falling apart.

So yeah...this one is way more preferable

[marions ghost]

70. Only in America

such ridiculousness. As long as it doesn't violate fire codes I have no problem. There needs to be much more leeway in what can be built. Regulate the mud wall earth-covered houses for safety issues, but allow them.

Meanwhile they throw up the fugliest McMansions everywhere, IMO a blight on the landscape. (They will be condos in the future when the idea of them as single family homes becomes even more absurd). And look at the difference in footprints and power usage. The small house movement needs support.

[bunnies]

76. The house is in Wales. nt

[marions ghost]

82. Thanks

but I'm sure it would never even get built in America before somebody would scream that it ruined their property values. At least in most areas. The homogenization of the American built landscape has many more supporters than not.

[GreenStormCloud]

77. Actually, that is not in America, it is in the UK.

They are much more authoritarian than we are. You would think that the Germans won WWII.

[marions ghost]

81. Thanks

OK. But American codes can be extremely restrictive also.

[LWolf]

74. It's rural enough, anyway.

I can see it having problems without the necessary permits, but "harmful to rural character" it is not.

[bunnies]

78. Hell no.

The place is right next to an ecoVillage. Its beautiful and fits in perfectly. Leave the guy alone for crying out loud.

[KamaAina]

83. Not just No but HELL NO!

[liberal N proud]

84. Looks pretty rural to me

Not sure what anyone's complaint is except it doesn't meet some hoyty-toydy idea of what a house should look like.

[AndyA]

85. No--this house looks like it was designed to be efficient and it blends in to its surroundings

This is an example of what should be demolished:



In fact, it shouldn't have been built in the first place. Too big for the neighborhood, doesn't fit in, not green because no doubt another structure was torn down to build this one, which reset the cycle of damage to the Earth. Fossil fuels used to build original house, then again to remove it and build the new one. The damage to the planet from the original house had mostly long been corrected by Mother Nature, but building a new house begins the cycle all over again.

The greenest house is the one that already exists. Waste.

[malthaussen]

86. I think this house is closer to the original "rural" nature...

... of the locality than the local authority thinks.

-- Mal

[4_TN_TITANS]

93. Except for the porch with no rails around it for safetly,

I think it's very quaint. That code violation I would have issue with - it's nothing more than a drunk-trap!

[proReality]

94. It's a work of art done with love.

It's wonderful!

[AtheistCrusader]

98. if you don't get rid of those hobbits early and fast, you'll never get them gone.

An extremely stubborn folk. Worse than dandelions or scotchbroom.

[Liberal Veteran]

106. And next thing you know, Wizards and Nazgul visiting at all hours of the night.

Best to stomp them out before they ruin the neighborhood.

[midnight]

108. I like the fact that this type of housing doesn't create so much mortgage debt.... I understand that

this family had land provided to them, but the building materials seemed to be reclaimed and or more affordable than the status quo building materials...