Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have no problem with restricting the number of cars that can be parked within public view on one's property. But I do have a problem with basing the regulation on pavement. As I read this article, it seems to be OK to park three cars in one's front yard, so long as it's on pavement, but it's not OK to park any cars in one's front yard if there is no pavement. I imagine the paving lobby has something to do with proposing this law.
I find pavement to be uglier than God's natural Earth, and it is unquestionably worse for the environment. It increases runoff into our streams, it decreases the amount of plant life, which helps absorb our carbon dioxide production.
Pavement is "neater." But neatness is not the same as beauty, and I prefer beauty to neatness.
This is an excellent point!
If this legislation is based on pavement, what's to stop someone from paving their entire front yard? Don't laugh. I've seen it done in many neighborhoods in my hometown, where half the houses have paved the yard, and yup, lots of cars parked on their big ole driveways!
Plus, I have noticed that there are many gravel driveways in this area, even in some very nice neighborhoods. In most cases they are well maintained and are used the same as a paved driveway, with no cars parked on the lawn. Does that mean that those homeowners would have to install a paved driveway just to be able to park on their property??
Another thing is that newer neighborhoods rarely seem to have curbs (let alone sidewalks) anymore! The neighborhood I grew up in (in what's now called "Midtown") was curbed and there were sidewalks on at LEAST one side of the street, often both, everywhere. I recently even heard that it's still considered one of the most "walkable" neighborhoods in town.
My current 'hood has no sidewalks or even curbs, and so you do see people parking on the grass since it goes right to the street. I bet having more curbs would help this a lot.
ugh. I have no desire to park in the front yard, but I can't stand this law. They enacted something like this in Columbia when I lived there, telling people where they can and cannot park.
if it was a safety issue, I would understand. However, it is purely an aesthetic issue, so it just strikes me as elitist and snobby. you get enough snobs active in government, and sooner or later they will begin to devise ways to ensure that every Joe Sixpack must have the same taste they do, or else be fined.
Besides, why would you encourage people to replace vegetation with concrete? Besides the stormwater problems you are needlessly creating, I think concrete and asphalt are ugly. i'd much rather see a grass and dirt parking area.
If this legislation is based on pavement, what's to stop someone from paving their entire front yard?
A law stating that you can't pave over that much of your property. In Chapel Hill, at least, there are strict rules governing how much of your property can be covered with an impervious surface.
Quote:
All those against the HOA...this is what you get!!!
Yes, you get a democratically elected government enacting laws. Sounds good to me!
If this legislation is based on pavement, what's to stop someone from paving their entire front yard? Don't laugh. I've seen it done in many neighborhoods in my hometown, where half the houses have paved the yard, and yup, lots of cars parked on their big ole driveways!
Plus, I have noticed that there are many gravel driveways in this area, even in some very nice neighborhoods. In most cases they are well maintained and are used the same as a paved driveway, with no cars parked on the lawn. Does that mean that those homeowners would have to install a paved driveway just to be able to park on their property??
Local zoning can and often does manage the maximum square footage of building footprint, and conceivably can also manage the footprint of paved lots/drives, number of curb cuts, locations, dimensions, etc. So that may be part of the ordinance Raleigh should consider if not already in place for residential zoned areas.
Pavement or designated parking areas can indeed be of a variety of types such as pierced concrete block or "Hollywood" drives which allows for grass to grow, or even gravel as well as traditional concrete. So I would be very surprised if the Raleigh ordinance required concrete or asphalt pavement specifically. That would be potentially considered punitive and expensive for many property owners.
But in general I agree with this ordinance. Most urban and suburban developments have limited lot space and neighboring properties can directly impact one another from health/safety perspectives and from aesthetic and property valuation concerns. With that in mind, reasonable limitations on maintaining the property such as lawn control, livestock/pet limits, building maintenance, and yes.... storing or parking of vehicle location and quantity are reasonable to consider.
As long as the ordinance is fair and reasonable I think many residents of neighborhoods suffering from large numbers or non-traditional parking of vehicles would find an ordinance managing the problem to be attractive.
Now for rural residents this doesn't really apply given that one is dealing with "wide open spaces" and varied use property by definition, except perhaps if someone is essentially running an unlicensed wrecking yard
Or to the other side of Cary? Check out the cars parked on the lawns of some of houses on Maynard between Chatham and Kildaire. Last time I checked this was part of Cary. Have you been to the other side of the tracks in Cary?
Yes, I have seen it. It looks awful and is a complete embarrassment. That's why I hope the town would consider adopting the same type of rule, if they don't already have it. If they do, then I need to start lodging some complaints. I try to stay on the other side of the tracks.
Does that mean that those homeowners would have to install a paved driveway just to be able to park on their property??
Possibly...
This article (http://www.garnerclayton.com/news/story/106.html - broken link) concerns Clayton, but I imagine the rules are similar:
"In keeping with town rules, the Planning Board wanted Harmych to pave her driveway and a parking area in back of the house. But Harmych said paving the gravel parking area could keep her from getting the historic designation. 'It is all about the historic look,' she said."
~~~
By the way, the house in this article had a -for sale- sign out front for ages and ages. Before I even moved here I saw that it was for sale when I visited my mum. After I moved here and was living in Clayton I passed that house twice a day, every day and wanted it so badly that I could taste it! Reason prevailed though. It is surrounded by low income multi-unit housing and small homes that don't "go" with it at all. ~Sob~
"Raleigh, N.C. — The City Council on Tuesday asked City Attorney Tom McCormick to draft an ordinance designed to limit where people park in front of their homes."
Now this I love and I absolutely agree with. I don't know if Cary even has this rule. If they don't, I hope they adopt this plan. Nothing worse than seeing yards with cars parked on them. Reminds me of why I left the town I used to live in. Way to go Raleigh.
And it's not even an "HOA" deciding this.
I think they are talking about cars parked IN FRONT of the yard not ON the yard. Like those parked along the street...etc. I don't know how they will police this when they don't penalize people for parking on the street and blocking their own driveways.
I think they are talking about cars parked IN FRONT of the yard not ON the yard. Like those parked along the street...etc. I don't know how they will police this when they don't penalize people for parking on the street and blocking their own driveways.
The article isn't really clear, but I think it's about cars being parked on non-paved or grassy parts of a yard. If it was about parking in front of the yard, then it'd be an issue with on-street parking, and I think it would reference on-street parking in particular.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
