New homeowners find loophole in strict HOA policy forbidding them from renovating 'historic' home: 'No variance was required if we tore [it] down'

Advertisement
  • 01
    Cheezburger Image 10372187136
  • 02
    We were prohibited from renovating two "historic", but very primitive and neglected 1890 cottages on a lakeside lot. A complete renovation of 2 homes on one lot required a zoning and septic variance, which the town refused. The town really didn't want us to make any exterior
  • 03
    renovations, and we wanted to join the two houses by installing bathrooms between them, making one house from two. The board said they were not prohibiting the renovations,
  • 04
    we were just limited to renovating no more than 20% of each home each year, as limited by town law, requiring 10 years to complete. Insane.
  • 05
    Our attorney pointed out that no variance was required if we tore down the 2 old houses and built just 1 new house (regardless of size) if we stayed within the footprint of the original buildings.
  • 06
    Neither of the permits to demolish and build new required town board approval. The town compliance officer had no choice but to grant both permits, much to the annoyance of the town board, which wanted the "historic" buildings to stay.
  • 07
    To top it off, by forcing us to build a new home used 12 months of the year, the town was forced to improve the town owned road so that it could be plowed in winter. Revenge.
  • 08
    PoppysWorkshop ⚫ 4 hr. ago I hope at least you'll be able to reuse some of the beams and such. They might make some nice architectural features.
  • 09
    Skaneateles Man OP 1 hr. ago This was all 10 years ago.... and nope. Nothing was worth keeping....
  • 10
    joppedi_72 2 hr. ago A friend of mine had his sewage (dishwater only) permit denied with the motivation that he couldn't have sewage tank because the sewage truck wouldn't be able to come emptying the tank because the house was up in the woods on the other side of a 1km wide mire with no road to it.
  • 11
    But it was ok for him to lead the kitchen sewage to a bucket and then emptying the bucket in the woods.
  • 12
    Skaneateles Man OP. 1 hr. ago When we got our septic system approved the code was that we had to increase the size of the septic tank if we had a disposal in our kitchen. Logic: more solids will fill the tank faster. Of course the disposal went in after the house was completed.... It's been 10 years and we empty the septic every three years, as required by local law. Now that's some MC?
  • 13
    Coolbeanschilly. 1 hr. ago This is why I would never want to own a building designated as historical, too many regulations around its use.
  • 14
    Mapper9. 37 min. ago As an urban planner from the government side: I freaking hate the inflexibility of regulations sometimes. They weren't at you, but at their own annoying code manual. I've had situations like that before and the feeling of being unable to help do what's clearly the right thing was infuriating.
  • 15
    HogwartsismyHeart .5 hr. ago So you destroyed two historic homes for a crer?
  • 16
    dsikkema. 5 hr. ago Just because something is labeled "historic" does not automatically make it nice. The OP clearly stated that it was "very primitive and neglected"
  • 17
    sungor 4 hr. ago too many people equate old with historically significant.
  • 18
    SpecialistAd6403 5 hr. ago Its funny that half the time these historic buildings wind up torn down because no one can fix them because of "preservation" rules. Self defeating idiocy.

Tags

Scroll Down For The Next Article