Apparently, California requires you to have a pretty yard by law.

in b4 "the UK isn't racist like those Americans"

I realize that the UK's experiences with suburbs and racism are different from the US's, but I can just see this whole thing toppling off a cliff into "whose country is the most racist" wank like that Australian blackface thing.

Cyberwulf wrote:

Ezri Dax wrote:

Quote :

This isn't something draconian and unworkable. 40% of the garden has to be covered with living plants. This couple had two years to do that and they either didn't do it or didn't submit the proper documents proving they'd done it.

This still doesn't change the fact that this law is unnecessary

It isn't unnecessary.

Quote :

I'd bet a ludicrous amount of taxpayers money has been spent on prosecuting this poor couple

Who were given two years to comply with the rules and didn't bother.

Quote :

If I was in their shoes I'd be fighting this law.

Because you're a fucking dumbass.

Penguin wrote:

HEY

I'M A STUPID FUCKHEAD WHO THINKS THIS IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS RACISM

BRB HUFFING AIRPLANE FUEL AND THEN LIGHTING MATCHES

Ezri Dax wrote:

That said, a dead tree with meat hung on it isn't exactly what I'd call a nice garden...

In your ideal world, there'd be plenty of things you wouldn't call "a nice garden". And you'd get to deal with all the vermin, stink, and general nastiness with absolutely no recourse.

Cyberwulf, let me introduce you to a concept called planning permission. It is generally enough to maintain a nice neighbourhood and ensure that the neighbours rights to "not have a fucking eyesore across the road from them" are respected, without needing to tell them how much of their front garden should be covered in grass. The city ordinance may not be "unnecessary" but it is excessive and overly controlling.

I think property values need to be lowered. Then housing would be more affordable and there'd be fewer homeless people.

I don't think we should live in houses anymore PROBLEM SOLVED

Anon wrote:

Cyberwulf, let me introduce you to a concept called planning permission.

OH MY GOD I NEVER KNEW THAT IT'S NOT LIKE I MENTIONED EARLIER THAT I WORK WITH PLANNERS, YOU KNOW, FOR THE LOCAL AUTHORITY AND EVERYTHING AND EVEN CITED REGULATIONS HERE RELATED TO WHAT COLOUR ROOFTILES AND TYPE OF MASONRY ARE ACCEPTABLE IN RURAL HOUSING

MOMMY I DON'T WANNA READ IT'S THE WEEKEND

GOD GAVE ME EYES BUT I DON'T USE THEM BECAUSE IT RUNS THE BATTERY DOWN

Cyberwulf wrote:

Anon wrote:

Cyberwulf, let me introduce you to a concept called planning permission.

OH MY GOD I NEVER KNEW THAT IT'S NOT LIKE I MENTIONED EARLIER THAT I WORK WITH PLANNERS, YOU KNOW, FOR THE LOCAL AUTHORITY AND EVERYTHING AND EVEN CITED REGULATIONS HERE RELATED TO WHAT COLOUR ROOFTILES AND TYPE OF MASONRY ARE ACCEPTABLE IN RURAL HOUSING

MOMMY I DON'T WANNA READ IT'S THE WEEKEND

GOD GAVE ME EYES BUT I DON'T USE THEM BECAUSE IT RUNS THE BATTERY DOWN

Obvious troll is obvious.

Lady Anne wrote:

I think property values need to be lowered.

Welcome to the housing market crash.

Lady Anne wrote:

Then housing would be more affordable and there'd be fewer homeless people.

Welp, that didn't go as expected.

Ezri Dax wrote:

Obvious troll is obvious.

Ezri Dax wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

Anon wrote:

Cyberwulf, let me introduce you to a concept called planning permission.

OH MY GOD I NEVER KNEW THAT IT'S NOT LIKE I MENTIONED EARLIER THAT I WORK WITH PLANNERS, YOU KNOW, FOR THE LOCAL AUTHORITY AND EVERYTHING AND EVEN CITED REGULATIONS HERE RELATED TO WHAT COLOUR ROOFTILES AND TYPE OF MASONRY ARE ACCEPTABLE IN RURAL HOUSING

MOMMY I DON'T WANNA READ IT'S THE WEEKEND

GOD GAVE ME EYES BUT I DON'T USE THEM BECAUSE IT RUNS THE BATTERY DOWN

Obvious troll is obvious.

Isn't that the pot calling the kettle black?

Lady Anne wrote:

Ezri Dax wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

Anon wrote:

Cyberwulf, let me introduce you to a concept called planning permission.

OH MY GOD I NEVER KNEW THAT IT'S NOT LIKE I MENTIONED EARLIER THAT I WORK WITH PLANNERS, YOU KNOW, FOR THE LOCAL AUTHORITY AND EVERYTHING AND EVEN CITED REGULATIONS HERE RELATED TO WHAT COLOUR ROOFTILES AND TYPE OF MASONRY ARE ACCEPTABLE IN RURAL HOUSING

MOMMY I DON'T WANNA READ IT'S THE WEEKEND

GOD GAVE ME EYES BUT I DON'T USE THEM BECAUSE IT RUNS THE BATTERY DOWN

Obvious troll is obvious.

Isn't that the pot calling the kettle black?

Maybe, but at least when I troll I do so with style, and usually without resorting to ranting in CAPSLOCK. [/unintentional thread hijack]

Back on topic; people should be allowed to have their own garden however they like it without having draconian and unnecessary laws dictate to them.

Ezri Dax wrote:

at least when I troll I do so with style, and usually without resorting to ranting in CAPSLOCK. [/unintentional thread hijack]

Back on topic; people should be allowed to have their own garden however they like it without having draconian and unnecessary laws dictate to them.

Ok, point 1: Cyberwulf wasn't trolling. She was actually making a point. You may have noticed she often makes points via hyperbole and allcaps.

Point 2: You said it wasn't actually trolling, but the truth. In any case, I'd really, really hoped you wouldn't give us the ol' I KNOW HOW ITS DONE LOOKIT MEE I'M SO GOOOOD shit again.

I can't believe Cyberwulf is a big enough hypocrite to call people classists because they don't want the amount of salt in foods regulated, but will support blatant classism like this.

Oh wait, I totally can believe it.

I don't know how it is in Ireland, but in America, we have property rights. If you aren't doing physical harm to someone else, you can do pretty much whatever you want with it. If you don't like it, I'm going to tell you the same thing you say about people who whine about fatties, turn your head so you don't have to look at it.

Oh, and stop being a cunt.

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

I can't believe Cyberwulf is a big enough hypocrite to call people classists because they don't want the amount of salt in foods regulated, but will support blatant classism like this.

Oh wait, I totally can believe it.

I don't know how it is in Ireland, but in America, we have property rights. If you aren't doing physical harm to someone else, you can do pretty much whatever you want with it. If you don't like it, I'm going to tell you the same thing you say about people who whine about fatties, turn your head so you don't have to look at it.

Oh, and stop being a cunt.

This thread continues to astound me. Now I agree with Mikey. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I don't know why everyone is surprised when they agree with me. I get the "I can't believe I agree with Mikey [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] " line every month or two.

Even a broken clock shows the right time twice a day.

My point is people are surprised it shows the correct time twice a day.

Also, what if it's a twenty-four hour clock?

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

Also, what if it's a twenty-four hour clock?

Then you need to go back to school and learn rudimentary math and logic. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Cyberwulf wrote:

Anon wrote:

Cyberwulf, let me introduce you to a concept called planning permission.

OH MY GOD I NEVER KNEW THAT IT'S NOT LIKE I MENTIONED EARLIER THAT I WORK WITH PLANNERS, YOU KNOW, FOR THE LOCAL AUTHORITY AND EVERYTHING AND EVEN CITED REGULATIONS HERE RELATED TO WHAT COLOUR ROOFTILES AND TYPE OF MASONRY ARE ACCEPTABLE IN RURAL HOUSING

MOMMY I DON'T WANNA READ IT'S THE WEEKEND

GOD GAVE ME EYES BUT I DON'T USE THEM BECAUSE IT RUNS THE BATTERY DOWN

You didn't say you worked with planners. You said that where you came from authorities decided to control what colour roof tiles can be used when building houses. You never said anything about being on the local planning committees.
 
My point is that while some laws governing property development are necessary, the city ordinance in question goes above and beyond that. The development shown in that photograph wouldn't even have needed planning permission.

Anon wrote:

You didn't say you worked with planners.

Go back to page One, do not pass Go, do not collect $200, read her first post again.

grmblfjx wrote:

Anon wrote:

You didn't say you worked with planners.

Go back to page One, do not pass Go, do not collect $200, read her first post again.

*Reads it carefully.* Oh, yeah. She does make a remark on it at one point, towards the end of her post. Never mind. Some kind of laws for the protection of the local environment are necessary. The law under discussion isn't. If that development had been done in Cyberwulf's county, it wouldn't even have been brought to her attention as it wouldn't need planning permission. This was the point. You can't just claim that any random law that local authorities come up with for this purpose is automatically justified. A law requiring that 40% of your garden be covered with plant life, when you're located in the middle of a desert, is sheer stupidity regardless of what you were trying to achieve.

Maybe they should have just installed a fucking drip system instead of ripping up the lawn and making it look like ass for the next unfortunate who had to buy it.

e: also orange county isn't desert and that couple put down wood chips instead of grass do you even know what goes under the wood chips it's fucking sheets of plastic why didn't they just salt the earth and finish the job

Anon wrote:

grmblfjx wrote:

Anon wrote:

You didn't say you worked with planners.

Go back to page One, do not pass Go, do not collect $200, read her first post again.

*Reads it carefully.* Oh, yeah. She does make a remark on it at one point, towards the end of her post. Never mind. Some kind of laws for the protection of the local environment are necessary. The law under discussion isn't. If that development had been done in Cyberwulf's county, it wouldn't even have been brought to her attention as it wouldn't need planning permission. This was the point. You can't just claim that any random law that local authorities come up with for this purpose is automatically justified. A law requiring that 40% of your garden be covered with plant life, when you're located in the middle of a dessert, is sheer stupidity regardless of what you were trying to achieve.

If you're located in the middle of a dessert, you should cover 40% of it with chocolate.

Mafiosa wrote:

Maybe they should have just installed a fucking drip system instead of ripping up the lawn and making it look like ass for the next unfortunate who had to buy it.

e: also orange county isn't desert and that couple put down wood chips instead of grass do you even know what goes under the wood chips it's fucking sheets of plastic why didn't they just salt the earth and finish the job

Sorry, my mistake. I assumed that it was because no one bothered to correct Majin Gojira when s/he said the same thing earlier on in the thread. Also, from the product descriptions of landscaping fabric, it doesn't have to be that bad.

Either way, given that Orange county is prone to water shortages and there are other ways to maintain a nice environment, the city ordinance in question is a stupid law. Yes some laws for this purpose are necessary, but they should also be drawn up using a degree of common sense, which doesn't appear to have happened here.

The problems aren't all related to water usage either. Yes, the fact that Orange county has laws under which a grass lawn maintained using large amounts of water is fine, despite its problems with water shortages, means that the law in question isn't doing its job properly. The bit where that eyesore they currently have would also be fine if they could provide proper documentation showing that 40% of it was covered with plant life is another failing of that particular law.

They could cover 40% of it in cacti. They seldom need watering, they make pretty flowers in the spring (and sometimes other times of year), and, if planted strategically, make potential burglars and stalkers think twice about hiding near the house.

Anon wrote:

Either way, given that Orange county is prone to water shortages and there are other ways to maintain a nice environment, the city ordinance in question is a stupid law. Yes some laws for this purpose are necessary, but they should also be drawn up using a degree of common sense, which doesn't appear to have happened here.

The problems aren't all related to water usage either. Yes, the fact that Orange county has laws under which a grass lawn maintained using large amounts of water is fine, despite its problems with water shortages, means that the law in question isn't doing its job properly. The bit where that eyesore they currently have would also be fine if they could provide proper documentation showing that 40% of it was covered with plant life is another failing of that particular law.

If what Anon says is true about water shortages in Orange county... this. It just smells of stupid bureaucratic shit to me.

Lady Anne does have a good suggestion about cacti, though. Since they're not an imported species living unnaturally in an environment they were never intended to live in without human assistance, anyway.