Can I start a controversial topic(probable) and most likely play devils advocate?

Hm is the reasoning for that something like if I plant a garden, but Bobs building a bigger barn then it’ll block the sun? As an example.
The reasoning iss usually that the property is "zoned" to a particular purpose, and the building rules are in support of that pourpose. On properties intended primarily residential, zoning encourages the building of residences (and residence-like buildings) to which it often permits ancilliary uses - construction of a "pool house", a "garden shed", a one room detached "home office" or detached garage - but as the purpose of the zone is residential, code usually prohibits construction of more than one or two accesory buildings, and usually dictates that they be considerably smaller than the house.

Doing otherwise, it is claimed, "destroys" the nature of the community.

One would not expect to see a bunch of quarter acre lots with 3k to 5k sq ft homes, then a one room mobile "house" on the next property with a detached 20 car garage or three story 10,000 sq foot barn... Zoning is intended to stop such things, rightly or wrongly.
 
The reasoning iss usually that the property is "zoned" to a particular purpose, and the building rules are in support of that pourpose. On properties intended primarily residential, zoning encourages the building of residences (and residence-like buildings) to which it often permits ancilliary uses - construction of a "pool house", a "garden shed", a one room detached "home office" or detached garage - but as the purpose of the zone is residential, code usually prohibits construction of more than one or two accesory buildings, and usually dictates that they be considerably smaller than the house.

Doing otherwise, it is claimed, "destroys" the nature of the community.

One would not expect to see a bunch of quarter acre lots with 3k to 5k sq ft homes, then a one room mobile "house" on the next property with a detached 20 car garage or three story 10,000 sq foot barn... Zoning is intended to stop such things, rightly or wrongly.
Ah it’s aesthetic.
 
Right! So let’s say you ask your neighbor, and he’s cool with chickens. Until 6 months later oh sorry the noise bothers me now. Then what? It just seems like once you ask you’re saying, they can control what I can and can not do.
The point is, if your ownership is dictated by nuisance law, they have ALWAYS been able to control your ownership.

I'm starting to think you aren't particularly familiar with the US legal system, and the law of nisance in particular. Unfortunately, remnants of it are embedded in zoning code throughout the nation, particularly with respect to animal ownership. and while it derives from the Common Law, our Founders almost certainly would not recognize its current boundaries.

Bob building Taj-Ma-Barn so high it blocks the sun on your garden is an intrusion (a trespass, if you will) on your "right to light". Which you may, or may not, have. Our friends across the pond in England wrote that into their law in the late 1800s - there is no equivalent guarantee here in US Federal law, though you may have an easement over your neighbor's property or the right secured at the state level.

and no, I'm not an attorney, this isn't legal advice, I simply have strange reading habits.
 
Ah it’s aesthetic.
Largely. It also, allegedly, helps with infrastructure planning and development by assuring that uses with similar needs are cluistered together for the provision of similar services (water, power, sewer/septic, road access, education) and with a (again, theoretical) eye towards locating emergency services (fire, police, etc) as well.

Nothing is ever that well planned - or if so, not for long - but that's the theory.
 
The point is, if your ownership is dictated by nuisance law, they have ALWAYS been able to control your ownership.

I'm starting to think you aren't particularly familiar with the US legal system, and the law of nisance in particular. Unfortunately, remnants of it are embedded in zoning code throughout the nation, particularly with respect to animal ownership. and while it derives from the Common Law, our Founders almost certainly would not recognize its current boundaries.

Bob building Taj-Ma-Barn so high it blocks the sun on your garden is an intrusion (a trespass, if you will) on your "right to light". Which you may, or may not, have. Our friends across the pond in England wrote that into their law in the late 1800s - there is no equivalent guarantee here in US Federal law, though you may have an easement over your neighbor's property or the right secured at the state level.

and no, I'm not an attorney, this isn't legal advice, I simply have strange reading habits.
First of all I WANT a Taj-Ma-Barn!
Secondly.. I thought my reading habits were odd lol. At least your knowledge may help someone. I doubt if the Canterbury Tales will do much good in a court of law:)
 
Hey everyone.... :frow Just wanted to pop in and introduce myself. I'm Jim... Pretty friendly and neighborly guy here and trying to make new friends. Anyways, I'm having a huge party this weekend and your all invited.... :celebrate
Oh and if anyone has some extra garbage cans your not using, bring them. No worries if they're full, I've got plenty of space here. :thumbsup
 
Hey everyone.... :frow Just wanted to pop in and introduce myself. I'm Jim... Pretty friendly and neighborly guy here and trying to make new friends. Anyways, I'm having a huge party this weekend and your all invited.... :celebrate
Oh and if anyone has some extra garbage cans your not using, bring them. No worries if they're full, I've got plenty of space here. :thumbsup
Hey look it’s Kongs owner!!!
I can’t tell if you’re being facetious?
 

New posts New threads Active threads

Back
Top Bottom