Re: Attention Dave Head: Here's What Happens When You Don't Use a Turn Signal
Michael R. Kesti
When you think there is nobody who will see them is the time you might
most need to use them.
And use them early. By the time you're 90% down the left turn lane
others have pretty much figured out what you're going to do. The time
to have used them was before you reached the turn lane.
Forget world peace. Visualize using your turn signals!
Finally, remember that, if you do it correctly each and every time, then
you will have done it correctly the times that matter.
--
========================================================================
Michael Kesti | "And like, one and one don't make
| two, one and one make one."
mrkesti at hotmail dot com | - The Who, Bargain
Dave Head
wrote:
No, that's what happens when both drivers are total fucking morons - one
driving left to turn right, the other being a total dim-bulb by passing someone
where there's a curb-cut for a driveway.
DUH!
DPH
>As I'm walking back to my office after lunch today, I see a woman in
>an SUV driving down a side street. Behind her is a man driving a small
>Mercedes sedan. The woman slows down in order to make a right turn
>into a driveway; there is nothing on the left side of the road except
>a curb for maybe a hundred feet.
>
>As she slows, she pulls over to the left about a car width, apparently
>to make her turn a little wider and less sharp. She does not have a
>turn signal on. At this exact moment, genius in the Mercedes floors it
>and passes her on the right just as she cuts the wheel hard over and
>begins her turn.
>
>Fortunately for both of them, she sees the moron out of the corner of
>her eye and stops in time to avert a collision. The Mercedes MFFY
>clearly has the poo-poo scared out of him, and he came to a dead stop
>a few feet up the block. The SUV driver blithely completed her turn
>and entered the parking lot, leaving Mr. MFFY sitting there in the
>middle of the street, shaking like a leaf (and, perhaps, contemplating
>the cost of cleaning excrement off of his leather seating surfaces).
N8N
> As I'm walking back to my office after lunch today, I see a woman in
> an SUV driving down a side street. Behind her is a man driving a small
> Mercedes sedan. The woman slows down in order to make a right turn
> into a driveway; there is nothing on the left side of the road except
> a curb for maybe a hundred feet.
>
> As she slows, she pulls over to the left about a car width, apparently
> to make her turn a little wider and less sharp. She does not have a
> turn signal on. At this exact moment, genius in the Mercedes floors it
> and passes her on the right just as she cuts the wheel hard over and
> begins her turn.
>
> Fortunately for both of them, she sees the moron out of the corner of
> her eye and stops in time to avert a collision. The Mercedes MFFY
> clearly has the poo-poo scared out of him, and he came to a dead stop
> a few feet up the block. The SUV driver blithely completed her turn
> and entered the parking lot, leaving Mr. MFFY sitting there in the
> middle of the street, shaking like a leaf (and, perhaps, contemplating
> the cost of cleaning excrement off of his leather seating surfaces).
> Drive right. Pass left.
Had a better one yesterday; I rolled up to a 4-way stop, the cross
street was empty. A motorcyclist had just come to a stop facing me a
fraction of a second before I did. I was just about to hit the gas
and go when he cut across my path... yup, he was turning left.
Was faced with almost the situation you describe yesterday - idiot in
front of me simply rolls to a slow stop in front of me with no signal;
driver was kind of twitching back and forth so I couldn't pick up any
clues as to which way she was turning. Turns out she was making a
left; took me a while to figure it out though.
I *LOATHE* people who make unsignaled right turns, seems I always end
up missing an opportunity to pull out in traffic because these idiots
are too lazy to flick the little lever and I don't like pulling out in
front of someone who's apparently going straight, no matter how slow
they're going.
nate
Brent P
> I *LOATHE* people who make unsignaled right turns, seems I always end
> up missing an opportunity to pull out in traffic because these idiots
> are too lazy to flick the little lever and I don't like pulling out in
> front of someone who's apparently going straight, no matter how slow
> they're going.
THe impact on traffic flow is something non-signalers will never
understand. Their lack of a signal means being unable to plan ahead
appropiately which leads to delay. With enough traffic those delays
become congestion.
Dave Head
Scott en Aztlán wrote:
> Dave Head <rall...@att.net> said in ca.driving:
>
> >On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 20:16:29 -0700, Scott en Aztlán <scotte...@yahoo.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> >No, that's what happens when both drivers are total fucking morons - one
> >driving left to turn right, the other being a total dim-bulb by passing someone
> >where there's a curb-cut for a driveway.
>
> day when you are making an unsignalled turn...
As I said, I've been waiting for such an occurrance for 44 years, and
it hasn't happened yet. That's 'cuz I'm cognizant of the morons (Hint:
assume everyone else is a moron, and you'll be right more than you're
wrong), and act accordingly.
Dave Head
Steven J. Sobol
> I *LOATHE* people who make unsignaled right turns
Occasionally I do it by accident, but 98% of the time I do use my
signals. Around here, however, that's a sign to the other drivers that
it's time to act like MFFY's. :(
--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek ** Java/VB/VC/PHP/Perl ** Linux/*BSD/Windows
Victorville, California PGP:0xE3AE35ED
It's all fun and games until someone starts a bonfire in the living room.
Arif Khokar
> Was faced with almost the situation you describe yesterday - idiot in
> front of me simply rolls to a slow stop in front of me with no signal;
> driver was kind of twitching back and forth so I couldn't pick up any
> clues as to which way she was turning. Turns out she was making a
> left; took me a while to figure it out though.
If someone starts slowing without any apparent reason, I let them know
my displeasure through liberal use of my car's horn, or by shouting at
them when cycling.
Drunken Driver
>
>THe impact on traffic flow is something non-signalers will never
>understand. Their lack of a signal means being unable to plan ahead
>appropiately which leads to delay. With enough traffic those delays
>become congestion.
I believe this level of ineptitude results in an increased chance
those drivers will check themselves out, proving Mr. Darwin's theory.
I say no loss whatsoever. Society improves with the removal of such
incompetent individuals.
--
Ask me about drunk driving for fun and profit!
A nice .CMD for the group's spammers, for the broadband based regulars (requires wget):
:loop
@wget -m http://fat-pussy.aileenkeith.com/
@rd /s /q fat-pussy.aileenkeith.com
goto loop
Drunken Driver
>"N8N" <njn...@hotmail.com> said in ca.driving:
>
>>Had a better one yesterday; I rolled up to a 4-way stop, the cross
>>street was empty. A motorcyclist had just come to a stop facing me a
>>fraction of a second before I did. I was just about to hit the gas
>>and go when he cut across my path... yup, he was turning left.
>
>motorcycle so stupidly?
Perhaps he just started riding?
>>Was faced with almost the situation you describe yesterday - idiot in
>>front of me simply rolls to a slow stop in front of me with no signal;
>>driver was kind of twitching back and forth so I couldn't pick up any
>>clues as to which way she was turning. Turns out she was making a
>>left; took me a while to figure it out though.
>
>Sometimes this happens because the driver herself doesn't know which
>way she's going. Believe it or not, some people have yet to learn that
>the even numbered addresses are on one side of the street and the odd
>numbered addresses are on the other side, so when they're looking for
>an address they drive like snails with their heads frantically
>rotating from side to side because they don't know which side of the
>street their destination is going to be on.
The Real Bev
> "N8N" <njn...@hotmail.com> said in ca.driving:
>
>>Had a better one yesterday; I rolled up to a 4-way stop, the cross
>>street was empty. A motorcyclist had just come to a stop facing me a
>>fraction of a second before I did. I was just about to hit the gas
>>and go when he cut across my path... yup, he was turning left.
>
> I wonder how he has managed to survive for so long driving a
> motorcycle so stupidly?
>
>>Was faced with almost the situation you describe yesterday - idiot in
>>front of me simply rolls to a slow stop in front of me with no signal;
>>driver was kind of twitching back and forth so I couldn't pick up any
>>clues as to which way she was turning. Turns out she was making a
>>left; took me a while to figure it out though.
>
> Sometimes this happens because the driver herself doesn't know which
> way she's going. Believe it or not, some people have yet to learn that
> the even numbered addresses are on one side of the street and the odd
> numbered addresses are on the other side, so when they're looking for
> an address they drive like snails with their heads frantically
> rotating from side to side because they don't know which side of the
> street their destination is going to be on.
That's probably not the problem. The problem is that few businesses display
the street number near their doors (or anywhere else), requiring LOTS of
head-jerking by drivers to try and get at least SOME kind of clue about
where they are. This is especially bad in Monterey Park and other Asian
areas where the business-name signs are in Chinese. If it was up to me I'd
require every home or business to display its street number in foot-high
numbers at eye-level right next to the door.
--
Cheers, Bev
-----------------------------------------
"Not everyone can be above average so why
shouldn't we be the ones to suck?"
--Anonymous School Board Member
Fred G. Mackey
That seems a bit onerous to me. Why not let the city put addresses on
street signs to help people narrow it down. Businesses often DO
prominently display their addresses - there's enough incentive for them
to do that. Then again, if you know that Joe's Garage is located at
4011 Mockingbird Lane, all you really need to do is find the 4000 block
and look for the big sign that says "Joe's Garage".
The Real Bev
When there are numbers on the street signs they're generally too small to
read easily. They may display their names prominently, but it's a real pain
and not exactly safe to read EVERY sign and watch the road at the same time,
especially in crowded business districts with a lot of small shops. I may
know that Joe is at 4011 Mockingbird Lane, but if I haven't seen a number
for several blocks that's of minimal help. Yeahyeahyeah, Mapquest has
improved matters, but Mapquest isn't always available.
If cities can regulate signs, and all of them do, why not regulate for
safety as well as appearance?
--
Cheers,
Bev
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
This is Usenet. We *are* the trained body for dealing
with psychotics. -- A. Dingley
Fred G. Mackey
> Fred G. Mackey wrote:
>
>>
>> That seems a bit onerous to me. Why not let the city put addresses on
>> street signs to help people narrow it down. Businesses often DO
>> prominently display their addresses - there's enough incentive for
>> them to do that. Then again, if you know that Joe's Garage is located
>> at 4011 Mockingbird Lane, all you really need to do is find the 4000
>> block and look for the big sign that says "Joe's Garage".
>
>
> When there are numbers on the street signs they're generally too small
> to read easily.
If you can't see well enough to read them, I have concerns about your
ability to see well enough to drive.
> They may display their names prominently, but it's a
> real pain and not exactly safe to read EVERY sign and watch the road at
> the same time,
You don't have to read every number. It's perfectly acceptable to miss
it the first time around and have to circle back to get to your
destination.
> especially in crowded business districts with a lot of
> small shops. I may know that Joe is at 4011 Mockingbird Lane, but if I
> haven't seen a number for several blocks that's of minimal help.
When going to a place I think I may have trouble finding, I check
mapquest first and at least make sure I know the cross-streets. Sure
mapquest has its quirks that can throw you off, but it's better than
crawling around at 1/10th the speed limit looking for your destination.
> Yeahyeahyeah, Mapquest has improved matters, but Mapquest isn't always
> available.
It's always tehre when I need it, but then again, I don't find out the
address to a place in the middle of an excursion.
>
> If cities can regulate signs, and all of them do, why not regulate for
> safety as well as appearance?
>
Because they already regulate too much. The town I grew up in had very
few regulations on signs. I'm sure they weren't allowed to let them
extend into the street or obstruct the sidewalk, but it worked quite
well. I never had a problem finding anything.
Nate Nagel
> The Real Bev wrote:
>
>> Fred G. Mackey wrote:
>>
>
>>>
>>> That seems a bit onerous to me. Why not let the city put addresses
>>> on street signs to help people narrow it down. Businesses often DO
>>> prominently display their addresses - there's enough incentive for
>>> them to do that. Then again, if you know that Joe's Garage is
>>> located at 4011 Mockingbird Lane, all you really need to do is find
>>> the 4000 block and look for the big sign that says "Joe's Garage".
>>
>>
>>
>> When there are numbers on the street signs they're generally too small
>> to read easily.
>
>
> If you can't see well enough to read them, I have concerns about your
> ability to see well enough to drive.
>
Obviously you must be from somewhere that the street signs are large and
easily legible, but that's not always the case around here. The street
signs themselves are barely readable (and they are *not* readable after
dark) and if they do have the block number on them, it's in a font about
1/8 as high as the street name.
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
Nate Nagel
> The Real Bev <bashley1...@gmail.com> said in rec.autos.driving:
>
>
>>The problem is that few businesses display
>>the street number near their doors (or anywhere else), requiring LOTS of
>>head-jerking by drivers to try and get at least SOME kind of clue about
>>where they are. This is especially bad in Monterey Park and other Asian
>>areas where the business-name signs are in Chinese.
>
>
> themselves difficult to find. If enough people follow that rule, the
> "hidden" ones will go out of business and hopefully their replacements
> will be run by smarter people.
Unfortunately, when it comes to hardware stores, auto parts stores, etc.
the only ones worth patronizing are usually hard to find. Not sure why
this is.
Nate Nagel
> "Fred G. Mackey" <nos...@dont.spam> said in rec.autos.driving:
>
>
>>>The problem is that few businesses
>>>display the street number near their doors (or anywhere else), requiring
>>>LOTS of head-jerking by drivers to try and get at least SOME kind of
>>>clue about where they are. This is especially bad in Monterey Park and
>>>other Asian areas where the business-name signs are in Chinese. If it
>>>was up to me I'd require every home or business to display its street
>>>number in foot-high numbers at eye-level right next to the door.
>>
>>That seems a bit onerous to me.
>
>
> construction. Every new house must have the house number, complete
> with backlit illumination, at a certain height on the street side of
> the house. Apparently this is so that the police and fire departments
> can find your place when you call 911.
>
> The problem is that older structures are grandfathered out of this
> requirement. Sometimes they stencil the address in reflective paint on
> the curb, but that's no help if a car is parked in front of the
> stencil.
I always thought that house numbers hand painted on the transom were
attractive, but transoms seem to have been out of fashion for nearly a
century.
Nate Nagel
> Nate Nagel <njn...@roosters.net> said in rec.autos.driving:
>
>
>>>If you can't see well enough to read them, I have concerns about your
>>>ability to see well enough to drive.
>>
>>Obviously you must be from somewhere that the street signs are large and
>>easily legible
>
>
>
>
>>The street
>>signs themselves are barely readable (and they are *not* readable after
>>dark)
>
>
> streets usually have illuminated signs.
Wow. Just wow. That actually makes sense, but I've never seen it.
One thing that I *have* seen that I also never see around here is a sign
with something like "Central Ave. 800 ft." in the middle of a block.
That makes sense, too.
>
>
>>if they do have the block number on them, it's in a font about
>>1/8 as high as the street name.
>
>
> <shrug> That's why God invented GPS navigation systems: so people with
> failing eyesight could forestall the day when they have to hang up
> their car keys for good.
It's got nothing to do with failing eyesight; *you* try to read type
less than an inch high at 30 MPH.
The Real Bev
> Nate Nagel <njn...@roosters.net> said in rec.autos.driving:
>
>>> If you can't see well enough to read them, I have concerns about your
>>> ability to see well enough to drive.
>>
>> Obviously you must be from somewhere that the street signs are large
>> and easily legible
>
> You mean like SoCal (where Bev lives)?
It's dependent on the city, you know that. Some seem to deliberately make
it difficult.
>> The street signs themselves are barely readable (and they are *not*
>> readable after dark)
>
> Around here, the street signs are printed in a large font, and major
> streets usually have illuminated signs.
Yeah, that's the signaled cross streets, though. Mostly you know what
street you're on (although not necessarily in some places, even at major
intersections with real signals) and just want to know the number. The rest
of the street-corner signs are small and frequently located on fewer than
all 4 corners.
>> if they do have the block number on them, it's in a font about 1/8 as
>> high as the street name.
>
> <shrug> That's why God invented GPS navigation systems: so people with
> failing eyesight could forestall the day when they have to hang up their
> car keys for good.
God's gonna get you for that.
--
Cheers,
Bev
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
"I read somewhere that 77 per cent of all the mentally ill live in
poverty. Actually, I'm more intrigued by the 23 per cent who are
apparently doing quite well for themselves." -- Emo Philips
The Real Bev
Some places depend on walk-in rather than drive-in-from-the-outback traffic
and could probably get by with a business card stuck to the door.
--
Cheers,
Bev
The Real Bev
> "Fred G. Mackey" <nos...@dont.spam> said in rec.autos.driving:
>
>>> The problem is that few businesses
>>> display the street number near their doors (or anywhere else), requiring
>>> LOTS of head-jerking by drivers to try and get at least SOME kind of
>>> clue about where they are. This is especially bad in Monterey Park and
>>> other Asian areas where the business-name signs are in Chinese. If it
>>> was up to me I'd require every home or business to display its street
>>> number in foot-high numbers at eye-level right next to the door.
>>
>>That seems a bit onerous to me.
>
> Actually, where Bev and I live it's a requirement - at least for new
> construction. Every new house must have the house number, complete
> with backlit illumination, at a certain height on the street side of
> the house. Apparently this is so that the police and fire departments
> can find your place when you call 911.
Huh? I think there are put-it-here regulations, but I don't think there are
regs requiring illumination. Gotta look at some new houses...
> The problem is that older structures are grandfathered out of this
> requirement. Sometimes they stencil the address in reflective paint on
> the curb, but that's no help if a car is parked in front of the
> stencil.
Here the city requires some number of feet on each side of a driveway (maybe
just on main streets, but maybe not) to be painted red (effectively cutting
down the number of useful parking spaces) and that's where the numbers are
painted. Red background, white background, black numbers, and a flag or
something if you want one enough to pay for it.
Painting street numbers should properly be a City (or County) function, but
here they farm it out to some charity that gives you a written sob story a
few days before the painters come around. No, I don't pay up. One year I
did it myself.
The Real Bev
> I always thought that house numbers hand painted on the transom were
> attractive, but transoms seem to have been out of fashion for nearly a
> century.
Not quite. They're putting several on garage doors now.
Fred G. Mackey
> Scott en Aztlán wrote:
>
>>
>> Around here, the street signs are printed in a large font, and major
>> streets usually have illuminated signs.
>
>
> Yeah, that's the signaled cross streets, though. Mostly you know what
> street you're on (although not necessarily in some places, even at major
> intersections with real signals) and just want to know the number. The
> rest of the street-corner signs are small and frequently located on
> fewer than all 4 corners.
>
And none of the businesses or homes have addresses on them?
Fred G. Mackey
> Scott en Aztlán wrote:
>
> Painting street numbers should properly be a City (or County) function,
> but here they farm it out to some charity that gives you a written sob
> story a few days before the painters come around. No, I don't pay up.
> One year I did it myself.
>
Is there nothing you don't want gov't to do for you?
Hey, let's shift the cost to the taxpayers! Yeah!
N8N
Apparently it is not required where I live; especially businesses seem
to do a fairly poor job of having legible street numbers. I have no
idea how the FD would respond to an emergency, unless the drivers are
all local and just carry around with them a mental map of the area.
My house does have numbers on it, although I live on a dead end
street, so my little gesture is largely meaningless (and the UPS
drivers seem to be unable to read them anyway.)
nate
DYM
news:1176735197.9...@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com:
I can shed a little light here. Organizations like first responders
(police, fire & ambulance) are dispacthed from a central (usually county)
dispacth ctr. They have access to the tax assesment maps which are
usually the most accurate available, they show each plot with a house
number.
Finding the right entrace once to get there is left to those at the
scene.
Doug
John Lincoln
You mean to tell me that you cannot recognize the Chinese, or Kanji, if
you prefer, characters for the numerals 0-10??? Actually, I agree with
you about requiring businesses to have foot high (make that 30 cm)
numbers prominently displayed; make those high contrast also, eg. no
silver numbers on a light gray background.
For those Chinese characters, the following website may well suffice:
http://www.mandarintools.com/numbers.html
jl
--I'm melting, I'm melting... -- Hillary
John Lincoln
Scott en Aztlán wrote:
> Nate Nagel <njn...@roosters.net> said in rec.autos.driving:
>
>
>>>If you can't see well enough to read them, I have concerns about your
>>>ability to see well enough to drive.
>>
>>Obviously you must be from somewhere that the street signs are large and
>>easily legible
>
>
> You mean like SoCal (where Bev lives)?
>
>
>>The street
>>signs themselves are barely readable (and they are *not* readable after
>>dark)
>
>
> Around here, the street signs are printed in a large font, and major
> streets usually have illuminated signs.
>
>
>>if they do have the block number on them, it's in a font about
>>1/8 as high as the street name.
>
>
> <shrug> That's why God invented GPS navigation systems: so people with
> failing eyesight could forestall the day when they have to hang up
> their car keys for good.
Unfortunately, GPS maps, MapQuest, Google Maps, etc. and even paper maps
don't point out a business buried inside a large strip mall set WAY back
from the street.
-jl
--If only I had a brain! -- Al Gore and The Scarecrow
The Real Bev
Not my idea and I don't care if the numbers are there or not. I'm certainly
not going to pay someone to paint them, no matter how sad the story.
--
Cheers, Bev
**********************************************
"I've had a Lucas pacemaker for years and have
never experienced any prob
The Real Bev
Businesses. Yes, that's what I'm ranting about.
The Real Bev
>
> The Real Bev wrote:
>>
>> That's probably not the problem. The problem is that few businesses
>> display the street number near their doors (or anywhere else), requiring
>> LOTS of head-jerking by drivers to try and get at least SOME kind of
>> clue about where they are. This is especially bad in Monterey Park and
>> other Asian areas where the business-name signs are in Chinese. If it
>> was up to me I'd require every home or business to display its street
>> number in foot-high numbers at eye-level right next to the door.
>>
> You mean to tell me that you cannot recognize the Chinese, or Kanji, if
> you prefer, characters for the numerals 0-10??? Actually, I agree with
> you about requiring businesses to have foot high (make that 30 cm)
> numbers prominently displayed; make those high contrast also, eg. no
> silver numbers on a light gray background.
And no fancy written-out ("Twenty-four-fifty-nine") script either.
> For those Chinese characters, the following website may well suffice:
>
> http://www.mandarintools.com/numbers.html
Thanks so much.
Fred G. Mackey
> Fred G. Mackey wrote:
>
>> The Real Bev wrote:
>>
>>> Scott en Aztlán wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Painting street numbers should properly be a City (or County)
>>> function, but here they farm it out to some charity that gives you a
>>> written sob story a few days before the painters come around. No, I
>>> don't pay up. One year I did it myself.
>>>
>>
>> Is there nothing you don't want gov't to do for you?
>>
>> Hey, let's shift the cost to the taxpayers! Yeah!
>
>
> Not my idea
Maybe not, but you're espousing it above by saying it "should properly
be a City (or County) function".
> and I don't care if the numbers are there or not.
I care about having my home marked, but I don't care if yours is.
> I'm
> certainly not going to pay someone to paint them,
If you let the city or the county do it, you're going to pay for it -
unless you don't pay taxes.
necromancer
that the Apocalypse is upon us, someone calling themself Scott en
Aztlán said this in rec.autos.driving:
> >here they farm it out to some charity that gives you a written sob story a
> >few days before the painters come around. No, I don't pay up. One year I
> >did it myself.
>
> numbers right on the front of my house; the ones on the curb are
> redundant. This year the homeowners' association paid some guy to
> paint house numbers on all the curbs. The litterbug left his
> crumpled-up stencils on top of the curb when he was done.
Makes me glad I live on a street with no curbs. And no home owners
association.
--
"You cheated, Picard? I'm impressed!"
-- Q
Fred G. Mackey
> necromancer <55_sux@worldofnecromancer_nospam_noway.org> said in
> rec.autos.driving:
>
>
>>>This year the homeowners' association paid some guy to
>>>paint house numbers on all the curbs. The litterbug left his
>>>crumpled-up stencils on top of the curb when he was done.
>>
>>Makes me glad I live on a street with no curbs.
>
>
> built your tract was a cheap bastard; I wonder what other corners he
> cut? :)
>
>
>>And no home owners association.
>
>
> prevents my neighbor from painting his house day-glow purple and
> parking broken-down pickup trucks on his front lawn.
And when they tell you that your wreath you hung for Xmas is
inappropriate, what will you do?
Nate Nagel
Yup, I'll take neighbors with character over neighbors with uptight
attitudes any day of the week.
Nate Nagel
> The realitry is you cannot control the character (or the race, or any
> other factor) of the people who purchase a house next door to yours.
> At least if the neighborhood has CC&Rs (and an HOA to enforce them)
> you can stop the scumbags from lowering YOUR property values with
> their poor taste and/or inconsiderate behavior.
>
> But hey, if you want to live next door to "people of character" like
> these:
>
> http://www.joespc.com/carlos/redneck.htm
>
> that's entirely up to you. :)
I live 10 miles outside of DC. I literally live three houses from a
repair garage, and it seems to have little to no effect on property
values. There are also at least three old cars on my block that I have
never seen move, and I'm totally OK with that.
The link you posted is a perfect example of what I'm talking about...
yeah the guy apparently needed a little gentle guidance with the
stealing and the loud music, but honestly - covenants about what kind of
fence you can put up? Complaining about someone having a Rottweiler? I
mean, WTF?
N8N
> Nate Nagel <njna...@roosters.net> said in rec.autos.driving:
>
> >The link you posted is a perfect example of what I'm talking about...
> >yeah the guy apparently needed a little gentle guidance with the
> >stealing and the loud music, but honestly - covenants about what kind of
> >fence you can put up?
>
> end of the world if you have to paint your house in a conservative
> earth tone instead of Screaming Day-Glo Purple?
If the house is a Victorian, Screaming Day-Glo Purple might actually
be historically correct...
>
> >Complaining about someone having a Rottweiler?
>
> I'm more concerned about the irresponsible people who let their dogs
> bark all day and all night (irrespective of what breed the dog is).
Agreed. My point was that i happen to have a it of a soft spot for
Rotts and if I ever get a place large enough there just might be one
following me around someday - I've found them to generally be a pretty
mellow, friendly breed and maligning it simply because they're large
dogs is silly.
nate
Brent P
> N8N <njn...@hotmail.com> said in rec.autos.driving:
>
>>> That kind of stuff is pretty benign. I mean come on, is it really the
>>> end of the world if you have to paint your house in a conservative
>>> earth tone instead of Screaming Day-Glo Purple?
>>
>>If the house is a Victorian, Screaming Day-Glo Purple might actually
>>be historically correct...
>
> CC&Rs.
Historical preservation groups that rule over such older neighborhoods
can be as bad or worse.
What? You want a motion sensor electrict porch light? That's not era
appropiate, you must have a gas lamp on a post, in cast iron, painted
black!
Matthew T. Russotto
Scott en Aztlán <newsgroup> wrote:
>
>You are obviously reacting emotionally rather than rationally here.
>The realitry is you cannot control the character (or the race, or any
>other factor) of the people who purchase a house next door to yours.
>At least if the neighborhood has CC&Rs (and an HOA to enforce them)
>you can stop the scumbags from lowering YOUR property values with
>their poor taste and/or inconsiderate behavior.
Only if you control the board. If you don't, you may find that YOU
are the one with poor taste (which is of course subjective) and
"inconsiderate" (in their authoritiarian opinion) behavior.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.
Matthew T. Russotto
>>yeah the guy apparently needed a little gentle guidance with the
>>stealing and the loud music, but honestly - covenants about what kind of
>>fence you can put up?
>
>end of the world if you have to paint your house in a conservative
>earth tone instead of Screaming Day-Glo Purple?
My house, my color. Is it really the end of the world if your
neighbor paints his house purple instead of brown?
Matthew T. Russotto
Brent P <tetraethylle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Historical preservation groups that rule over such older neighborhoods
>can be as bad or worse.
>
>What? You want a motion sensor electrict porch light? That's not era
>appropiate, you must have a gas lamp on a post, in cast iron, painted
>black!
And make sure it burns water gas, not natural gas!
Fred G. Mackey
>>yeah the guy apparently needed a little gentle guidance with the
>>stealing and the loud music, but honestly - covenants about what kind of
>>fence you can put up?
>
>
> end of the world if you have to paint your house in a conservative
> earth tone instead of Screaming Day-Glo Purple?
How about this case?
<quote>
Years ago, my then-wife and I bought a home and moved in. The previous
tennants had a color palette of chocolate brown and navy blue, so we
thought maybe a little lighter would be a nice change. My wife went down
to the Association HQ, looked at the approved colors, selected a main,
an accent and a trim color and filed the paperwork for Architectural
Rules Committee approval.
A week or two later, we were given the OK and painted the house.
A couple of months after the work was done, I was sitting in the living
room on a Saturday morning and saw a person pull in front of the house,
take a photo of our house from the driver's side of the car, and drive off.
A week later we were served with a notice obligating us to paint our
house again because we supposedly used unapproved colors. These folks,
unfortunately, didn't know how unwise it was to piss off my ex-. She
gathered together all the paperwork we had filed, went to the next
meeting and showed them how the colors were all on the approved palette
and had been approved by the same people she now faced.
They agreed and rescinded the notice.
A week later, we received a note from them that the colors we had used
were no longer on the pallette of approved colors, and at such time as
we had to repaint we would have to go with different colors.
</quote>
http://talk.ocregister.com/archive/index.php/t-17077.html
>
>
>>Complaining about someone having a Rottweiler?
>
>
Brent P
> By living in an association neighborhood, I have the right to not have
> my property devalued by your poor taste. I'm truly sorry that
> reasonable limitations on your rights upset you so much.
Nice nebulus excuse to control your neighbors.
Maybe they think a yellow corvette devalues homes in the neighborhood and
change the rules retroactively to force you to sell it or move.
Brent P
> Really, I don't give a rat's ass about stupid little shit like this.
> It's a non-issue as far as I'm concerned. I suspect most people agree.
Maybe they'll take yellow cars off the approved list.
Fred G. Mackey
> "Fred G. Mackey" <nos...@dont.spam> said in rec.autos.driving:
>
>
>
> BFD. If it was OK with them to go down to the association and pick out
> colors the first time, what possioble objection can they have for
> going down and picking out some new colors in 10 years
Because it wasn't going to be in 10 years. The HOA changed their own
rules after these homeowners painted their house and now they are going
to have to paint it again, at their own expense or face fines.
> when they have
> to paint the house again? Especially since the first set of colors
> they picked were chosen because they wanted "a nice change?"
>
>
> Really, I don't give a rat's ass about stupid little shit like this.
> It's a non-issue as far as I'm concerned. I suspect most people agree.
And when they decide your christmas wreath is a violation?
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/10399793/detail.html
What's next? They decide all holiday decorations "devalue" other homes?
Or when they decide that you planted too many roses in your front yard?
"A man from Rancho Santa Fe, Calif., lost his home because he planted
too many roses on his four-acre site."
Or they fine you without telling you.
"A couple from Lawrenceville, Ga., found they had a $3,500 lien on their
house when they tried to sell it. The homeowners association had been
fining them every day they left pink flamingos on their lawn but didn't
tell them. The association got the money, but the couple have filed suit
to get it back."
http://www.bankrate.com/brm/news/real-estate/HOA-horrors1.asp
There's no shortage of stories like these, and rarely do they involve
someone trying to paint their house purple.
Fred G. Mackey
Seriously - who wants a neighborhood full of cars that look like taxis.
Dave Head
Never, _ever_, move into a place with a homeowner's association. Its bad
enough to have to put up with the inane rules of the three regular government
entities - local, state, and federal, without voluntarily adding yet another
one.
Dave Head
Nate Nagel
> russ...@grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew T. Russotto) said in
> rec.autos.driving:
>
>
>>In article <cotd23pc6mikrd94i...@4ax.com>,
>>Scott en Aztlán <newsgroup> wrote:
>>
>>>Nate Nagel <njn...@roosters.net> said in rec.autos.driving:
>>>
>>>
>>>>The link you posted is a perfect example of what I'm talking about...
>>>>yeah the guy apparently needed a little gentle guidance with the
>>>>stealing and the loud music, but honestly - covenants about what kind of
>>>>fence you can put up?
>>>
>>>That kind of stuff is pretty benign. I mean come on, is it really the
>>>end of the world if you have to paint your house in a conservative
>>>earth tone instead of Screaming Day-Glo Purple?
>>
>>My house, my color. Is it really the end of the world if your
>>neighbor paints his house purple instead of brown?
>
>
> swing your fist stops at my nose. Your right to free speech stops
> short of yelling "fire!" in a crowded theater. Your right to liberty
> can be taken away if you commit certain crimes; certain other crimes
> will cause the loss of your right to life.
>
> By living in an association neighborhood, I have the right to not have
> my property devalued by your poor taste. I'm truly sorry that
> reasonable limitations on your rights upset you so much.
Scott, now is one of those times when I feel obligated to point out that
your usually reasonable self is sounding like a complete ass. I am
truly thankful that you are not my neighbor, with a piss poor attitude
like that.
Nate Nagel
> "Fred G. Mackey" <nos...@dont.spam> said in rec.autos.driving:
>
>
> colors the first time, what possioble objection can they have for
> to paint the house again? Especially since the first set of colors
> they picked were chosen because they wanted "a nice change?"
>
> Really, I don't give a rat's ass about stupid little shit like this.
> It's a non-issue as far as I'm concerned. I suspect most people agree.
It's the principle of the thing. I should not have to have my house
paint colors approved by anyone not living in the house. If I want to
paint my house primer black with hot rod flames, I should be able to do
so without interference.
Brent P
> tetraethylle...@yahoo.com (Brent P) said in
> rec.autos.driving:
>
>>In article <kffg235kvag8036u8...@4ax.com>, Scott en Aztlán wrote:
>>
>>> By living in an association neighborhood, I have the right to not have
>>> my property devalued by your poor taste. I'm truly sorry that
>>> reasonable limitations on your rights upset you so much.
>>
>>Nice nebulus excuse to control your neighbors.
>
Translation: If they only thought like you....
N8N
> Nate Nagel <njna...@roosters.net> said in rec.autos.driving:
>
>
>
>
>
> >Scott en Aztlán wrote:
> >> russo...@grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew T. Russotto) said in
> >> rec.autos.driving:
>
> >>>In article <cotd23pc6mikrd94ii1rs5860u0fdti...@4ax.com>,
> >>>Scott en Aztlán <newsgroup> wrote:
>
>
> >>>>>The link you posted is a perfect example of what I'm talking about...
> >>>>>yeah the guy apparently needed a little gentle guidance with the
> >>>>>stealing and the loud music, but honestly - covenants about what kind of
> >>>>>fence you can put up?
>
> >>>>That kind of stuff is pretty benign. I mean come on, is it really the
> >>>>end of the world if you have to paint your house in a conservative
> >>>>earth tone instead of Screaming Day-Glo Purple?
>
> >>>My house, my color. Is it really the end of the world if your
> >>>neighbor paints his house purple instead of brown?
>
> >> As you're well aware, your rights are not unlimited. Your right to
> >> swing your fist stops at my nose. Your right to free speech stops
> >> short of yelling "fire!" in a crowded theater. Your right to liberty
> >> can be taken away if you commit certain crimes; certain other crimes
> >> will cause the loss of your right to life.
>
> >> By living in an association neighborhood, I have the right to not have
> >> my property devalued by your poor taste. I'm truly sorry that
> >> reasonable limitations on your rights upset you so much.
>
> >Scott, now is one of those times when I feel obligated to point out that
> >your usually reasonable self is sounding like a complete ass. I am
> >truly thankful that you are not my neighbor, with a piss poor attitude
> >like that.
>
> of shape over this issue.
>
> I didn't invent CC&Rs, or homeowners' associations. I just happen to
> agree that they perform a necessary function. How tht makes me "a
> complete ass" I fail to understand.
> --
> Drive right. Pass left
Because they don't "perform a necessary function." Your county,
township, whatever already has zoning regulations in place. Anything
more is not necessary and is simply a vehicle for busybodies to make
peoples' lives unnecessarily difficult.
Is driving, say, a slightly beat-up old Studebaker "poor taste?" Some
people think so, even if the vehicle is properly tagged, registered,
inspected and insured.
Is painting one's house a color you don't like "poor taste?" Probably
in *your* opinion but it is not your property.
Is paving one's driveway in brick instead of concrete or asphalt "poor
taste?" See above...
I just don't see any need for any HOA's etc. and am truly thankful
that I live in a neighborhood without them.
nate
Brent P
> tetraethylle...@yahoo.com (Brent P) said in
> rec.autos.driving:
>
HOA's have all sorts of insane rules. Some have rules about pick up
trucks... no reason they couldn't find sports cars just as unsightly.
Brent P
> Nate Nagel <njn...@roosters.net> said in rec.autos.driving:
>>> Really, I don't give a rat's ass about stupid little shit like this.
>>> It's a non-issue as far as I'm concerned. I suspect most people agree.
>>It's the principle of the thing. I should not have to have my house
>>paint colors approved by anyone not living in the house.
> That's very interesting. You accept much more aggregious limitations
> on your rights without protest, but you go apeshit over something as
> benign as this?
Where did you get that idea? I certainly don't get that idea from Nate's
posts.
N8N
> Nate Nagel <njna...@roosters.net> said in rec.autos.driving:
>
> >> colors the first time, what possioble objection can they have for
> >> going down and picking out some new colors in 10 years when they have
> >> to paint the house again? Especially since the first set of colors
> >> they picked were chosen because they wanted "a nice change?"
>
> >> Really, I don't give a rat's ass about stupid little shit like this.
> >> It's a non-issue as far as I'm concerned. I suspect most people agree.
>
> >It's the principle of the thing. I should not have to have my house
> >paint colors approved by anyone not living in the house.
>
> on your rights without protest, but you go apeshit over something as
> benign as this?
>
I'm not "going apeshit" however, I am merely stating that such
limitations on what one can do with one's own property are wrong. It
is not the property of the HOA, it is the property of the owner. I
don't see this as "benign" at all, but another face of the same
controlling mentality that has invaded both government and the general
populace. As long as my house is not in disrepair, I'm not creating
disturbances for my neighbors, and don't have piles of trash building
up, what's the big deal?
> Methinks you need to step back and take another look at the forest.
Which brings up another example. The previous owner of my house
decided that he didn't want a yard. The entire "yard" area is planted
with trees, ferns, various native wildflowers, etc. with the non-
intentional plants kept at bay by wood-chip mulch. It sounds weird
but it's actually quite nice esp. for someone who grew up surrounded
by woods. This year especially it's great because we bought the house
last fall, so all of the plants now appearing are quite a surprise -
"oh, look, a white trillium" etc.
The PO also installed several cisterns to catch runoff from the roof
gutters, one of which is visible from the road. I actually think that
this is rather unsightly, but the utility of it outweighs the
unsightliness, to me. I have planted some shrubs in front of it to
try to hide it, but they're not doing a very good job yet.
I can only imagine what conniptions my "yard" would cause to the
average HOA committee, but I wouldn't trade it for a bland golf course
for anything.
Oh, and to go back to a long-ago disagreement, up until recently I'd
been parking on the street every night, as I'm still uncovering the
driveway. Apparently the PO spent the better part of 18 years
covering it over and letting it turn into part of the yard. I've got
about another car-length to go...
nate
(need some topsoil?)
Fred G. Mackey
> "Fred G. Mackey" <nos...@dont.spam> said in rec.autos.driving:
>
>
>>Scott en Aztlán wrote:
>>
>>>"Fred G. Mackey" <nos...@dont.spam> said in rec.autos.driving:
>
>
>>>BFD. If it was OK with them to go down to the association and pick out
>>>colors the first time, what possioble objection can they have for
>>>going down and picking out some new colors in 10 years
>>
>>Because it wasn't going to be in 10 years. The HOA changed their own
>>rules after these homeowners painted their house and now they are going
>>to have to paint it again, at their own expense or face fines.
>
>
>
I read it twice before I posted it.
I suggest YOU read it again.
> [Remaining strawman arguments omitted.]
>
Don't care to address reality, I see.
> Seriously, you guys are totally irrational on this issue.
Not at all. There are abuses and injustices with HOAs.
Frankly, I'd rather take the risk that my neighbor would want to paint
his house day-glo orange than take the risk that I would be fined
because they didn't like the type of bushes I choose to landscape my
front yard with.
> Here's a bit
> of advice: don't ever move to SoCal,
Not to worry - aside from New Jersey and a few other places, it's one of
the last places I would ever want to move.
> because nearly EVERY neighborhood
> built since the 60s has CC&Rs and homeowners' associations.
>
> Yeah, yeah, I know: we're all morons and/or control freaks.
Note, I never called you a moron or a control freak, however the people
who run HOAs often are both.
> All 8
> million of us.
Fred G. Mackey
>>
>>
>>>By living in an association neighborhood, I have the right to not have
>>>my property devalued by your poor taste. I'm truly sorry that
>>>reasonable limitations on your rights upset you so much.
>>
>>Nice nebulus excuse to control your neighbors.
>
>
A friend of mine recently moved into a house that had been vacant for
nearly a year. The house next to his, though occupied, barely had a
lawn, and what little lawn it had was mostly weeds that weren't mowed.
Within a month of him moving in, he was informed that he was required to
have a tree planted in his side yard and he had 2 weeks to comply.
Funny - the HOA didn't care about his neighbors's lawn, nor did they
care about the lack of a tree in the side yard until he moved in.
Selective enforcement and unreasonable timelines to comply with HOA
demands are but 2 major problems with HOAs.
He hadn't even had time to finish unpacking before he was told he needed
to plant a tree that complied with HOA regs.
Brent P
> Funny - the HOA didn't care about his neighbors's lawn, nor did they
> care about the lack of a tree in the side yard until he moved in.
> Selective enforcement and unreasonable timelines to comply with HOA
> demands are but 2 major problems with HOAs.
> He hadn't even had time to finish unpacking before he was told he needed
> to plant a tree that complied with HOA regs.
It's about showing the new guy who is in charge, who has the power.
It is not about what makes sense, or home values, or anything of the
sort, it's about power. The selective enforcement was a message to your
friend not to oppose the HOA and to be submissive.
Brent P
> tetraethylle...@yahoo.com (Brent P) said in
> rec.autos.driving:
>
>>>>> It's a non-issue as far as I'm concerned. I suspect most people agree.
>>>>
>>>>Maybe they'll take yellow cars off the approved list.
>>>
>>> And maybe monkeys will fly outta yer butt.
>>
>>HOA's have all sorts of insane rules.
>
Just because you share the same insanity or the one imposing it, doesn't
make it any less insane.
Fred G. Mackey
> N8N <njn...@hotmail.com> said in rec.autos.driving:
>
>
>>Your county, township, whatever already has zoning regulations in place.
>
>
>
> Why is zoning OK but CC&Rs are not?
Actually, I'm a bit anti-zoning as well. I'm not completely against all
zoning, but IMO it goes way too far too often.
> Both tell you what you are and are
> not allowed to do with your property. Why does one piss you off so
> much while the other does not?
Brent P
> tetraethylle...@yahoo.com (Brent P) said in
> rec.autos.driving:
>
> restrictive than the CC&Rs to which my houses have been subject. For
> example, I might want to run a business out of my house, but
> residential zoning prevents that. It prevents me from building a
> 3-story house or addition. It requires setbacks from my various lot
> lines, wasting valuable building space.
> Nate accepts all of this and much more without complaint, but bitches
> because he can't paint his house Pepto-Bismol Pink.
Maybe it is because running certain businesses out of your house will place
demands on streets, make noise, etc, and have a real effect on property
values because of it. Maybe because building an addition that blocks the sun
from your neighbor's property has a real impact on the use of his
property, as does building right up to the lot line.
Meanwhile, the color of your neighbor's house has no real impact on your
property.
The former is about real impact on livability, the later is simply
control freakism based on personal opinion of what looks nice.
Fred G. Mackey
>
>>Nate accepts all of this and much more without complaint, but bitches
>>because he can't paint his house Pepto-Bismol Pink.
>
>
> Maybe it is because running certain businesses out of your house will place
> demands on streets, make noise, etc, and have a real effect on property
> values because of it.
What if you own an investment corporation and have very limited traffic?
It's basically that you are a private investor, but have a corporation
set up with offices in your home. You may have visitors from time to
time, but no more so than say your neighbor who likes to hold sewing
parties or prayer meetings.
Oops, prayer meetings have already been challenged - Apparently, you're
not allowed to have too many guests over in certain neighborhoods.
Nate Nagel
>
>
>
> Why is zoning OK but CC&Rs are not? Both tell you what you are and are
> not allowed to do with your property. Why does one piss you off so
> much while the other does not?
Zoning is generally much less restrictive than the ticky-tacky
requirements of HOAs. Also zoning can be challenged in court. This is
not to say that people have not been harassed by zoning over bullcrap,
however, generally it is more fair and less of an imposition on
individual rights.
The Real Bev
> N8N <njn...@hotmail.com> said in rec.autos.driving:
>
>>Your county, township, whatever already has zoning regulations in place.
>
> Good point.
>
> Why is zoning OK but CC&Rs are not? Both tell you what you are and are
> not allowed to do with your property. Why does one piss you off so
> much while the other does not?
Actually, a lot of the zoning regs piss me off too. If I want to put up a
fence for my own safety, why should the city prevent me from doing so?
Especially since there are 8-foot walls in the wealthy neighborhoods that
just happened to be built before the 4-foot regulation was passed. Why
should I NOT pave my back yard but may leave it as bare dirt? Why am I NOT
allowed to pave whatever part of my yard I please?
I can see regulations involving safety -- the house shouldn't fall down or
blow up or have plugged sewers -- but why is it proper that APPEARANCE be
regulated?
--
Cheers, Bev
============================================================
If trees could scream, would we be so cavalier about cutting
them down? We might, if they screamed all the time, for
no good reason. - Jack Handy
The Real Bev
> tetraethylle...@yahoo.com (Brent P) said:
>
>>Scott en Aztlán wrote:
>>
>>> By living in an association neighborhood, I have the right to not have
>>> my property devalued by your poor taste. I'm truly sorry that
>>> reasonable limitations on your rights upset you so much.
>>
>>Nice nebulus excuse to control your neighbors.
>
> If they would only control themselves it wouldn't be necessary.
Perhaps your definition of control differs from theirs.
Hey Nate, I LIKE the black-with-flames idea. I've never seen a house like
that, but it would be cool. When you do it, post a picture. The google
picasa web thing isn't half bad.
The Real Bev
> tetraethylle...@yahoo.com (Brent P) said:
>
>>>>> Really, I don't give a rat's ass about stupid little shit like this.
>>>>> It's a non-issue as far as I'm concerned. I suspect most people agree.
>>>>
>>>>Maybe they'll take yellow cars off the approved list.
>>>
>>> And maybe monkeys will fly outta yer butt.
>>
>>HOA's have all sorts of insane rules.
>
> That hasn't been my experience.
Jess Ranch got pissed at our friend because she put up security doors made
by THE WRONG COMPANY. Right color, wrong brand. She also had a choice of
trees for her front yard -- liquidambar or Asian pear. Her car had to be
parked inside her garage at all times. If she had visitors they had to get
a permit to hang from the rear-view mirror if they were going to park in
front of her house. All the houses had to be painted the same beige color.
A cypress tree (nasty stupid things) in her back yard grew so tall that
tree-crap fell into her patio and the tree itself obscured the view, but it
took her two years to get permission to cut it down. There may have been a
regulation about lawn furniture because I never saw any in any of the houses
-- OTOH, you don't really want to spend a lot of time outside in summer in
the Mojave desert.
I'd rather open a vein than live like that.
Brent P
> tetraethylle...@yahoo.com (Brent P) said in
> rec.autos.driving:
>
>>property.
>
> nutjobs who paint their house in eyesore colors or do other obnoxious
> things.
Having grown up in a neighborhood where a number of homes were some
strange color (by todays standards anyway) or another I can say it
didn't have any effect what-so-ever. Of course the subdivison was built
in the 70s which might have had something to do with it. Although with
the siding the developer used, almost everyone now has had to convert to
vinyl siding so the odd colors are practically gone.
> That has a direct impact not only on the value of my property,
> but on the amount of hassle that I will have to endure to sell it.
only to people who think like you do.
N8N
> The Real Bev <bashley101+use...@gmail.com> said in rec.autos.driving:
>
> >>>> By living in an association neighborhood, I have the right to not have
> >>>> my property devalued by your poor taste. I'm truly sorry that
> >>>> reasonable limitations on your rights upset you so much.
>
> >>>Nice nebulus excuse to control your neighbors.
>
> >> If they would only control themselves it wouldn't be necessary.
>
> >Perhaps your definition of control differs from theirs.
>
> tract development comes complete with CC&Rs and an HOA to enforce
> them? Surely if everyone felt as Nate and Brent do nobody would buy
> those houses, and yet they sell as fast as they are built.
> --
> Drive right. Pass left.
It's certainly a puzzlement to me. I can't imagine that anyone would
willingly choose to live in a neighborhood with a HOA unless there
were no other alternative available.
nate
Fred G. Mackey
It's simple - people tell themselves that the HOA won't bother them
because they don't want to paint their house day-glo orange, so they buy
it, but later they find out they can't paint it forest green either.
> nate
>
RG
"N8N" <njn...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1177171924....@n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 21, 12:07 pm, Scott en Aztlán <scottenazt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> The Real Bev <bashley101+use...@gmail.com> said in rec.autos.driving:
>
> >>>> By living in an association neighborhood, I have the right to not
have
> >>>> my property devalued by your poor taste. I'm truly sorry that
> >>>> reasonable limitations on your rights upset you so much.
I have seen a purple house with bright red trim. Uggh. Good thing that the
house is located on the other side of town.
>
> >>>Nice nebulus excuse to control your neighbors.
>
> >> If they would only control themselves it wouldn't be necessary.
>
> >Perhaps your definition of control differs from theirs.
>
> Perhaps. But how do you account for the fact that virtually every new
> tract development comes complete with CC&Rs and an HOA to enforce
> them? Surely if everyone felt as Nate and Brent do nobody would buy
> those houses, and yet they sell as fast as they are built.
I think this is what happens: gated or delimited subdivisions are more
expensive and gives you a false sense of security (still thiefs break in).
In any case, gated communities have to have HOA or CC&Rs to "colllect" and
pay for illumination, water and care for the common areas. And someone has
to control it and, people "looove" to have control. Then, they start making
all this stupid rules and you end up living in a cage (no fancy colors, this
type of flower in the front yard, no satellite dish visible from the front,
etc.). Developers want to get top dollar for the houses, thus they add these
extras and your HOA is born. Now, this is what I see in my area (NorthernCA)
and in my city. I don't know in other areas. This is MHO.
Thanks God I live about 1/2 mile from them. Police even make rounds more
often around my subdivision (not gated) than theirs. :D
And I can fart out loud and stinky, and there's NOT a regulation for it. LOL
Fred G. Mackey
>>>but on the amount of hassle that I will have to endure to sell it.
>>
>>only to people who think like you do.
>
>
> think like I do than who think like you do.
The majority is generally wrong. By your logic, speed limits are set
properly and are wonderful things.