What to expect from small minds in a small town
Well, this posting is a bit late, but I wanted to take a moment to show what you may be up against. I live in a small town in Ohio. I also live in a part of town where my lot is zoned industrial! Behind me is an active railroad track, and a former one that was converted to a walking path after I moved in.
It seems a city councilman was walking there and took exception with my "box". To be clear, I not only have the "box" detailed here, but I also have a 40' unit that I plan to also work on in the near future. Currently I am just using it for storage until I decide how I wish to proceed. The only improvements I have made to the 40' is a coat of paint the same color as my current unit.
Below I present the city council meeting minutes that pertain to what has been said. I do this so you may have some idea what you may come up against should you decide to "try this in your own home". I have put the main part of this section of the minutes in bold font. My comments (not presented to council as I was not even aware of this until it made the local shopping paper) will be in bold italic font. So here it is in its entirety:
Workshop
a. Discussion of Accessory Structures
City Manager Boggs advised one of our Council Members pointed out that they felt at one
time the zoning regulations stated that there could only be one accessory building and requested it be
brought for discussion. He indicated the current language for an accessory use were included in your
packet and he advised he felt it was plural in nature and he didn’t see anywhere (in the regulations)
where it states only one accessory building permitted. Boggs advised an accessory use is described as
many different things including garages, sheds, tennis courts, swimming pools, etc. He advised he
wasn’t sure what they (Council) would want to do, if anything, to regulate them (accessory
structures). Boggs advised he believes the concern was over how many sheds should be allowed on
private property. He advised he didn’t know if Council wanted to discuss it further or have it brought
up at a future meeting.
Council Member Lynn Beaumont advised if you drive around town and you look at the
condition of a lot of the residential properties and the abandoned properties he felt this was the least
of our problems. He advised there are a number of abandoned properties and dilapidated properties
and he has talked about this a number of times with (City Manager) and he felt at some point they
have to do something. Beaumont advised he didn’t know if this was the start or whether we devise a
program, but over the years that he has served on Council this is what most of the calls he receives are
about the dilapidated properties in town. He advised it is just awful right now. Beaumont advised but,
someone who has 2 structures on their property and their property is otherwise in good shape he’d
have a hard time going after them when we have junk everywhere and junk is a nice word. He
suggested others to just drive around and look.
Mayor William Robertson advised some houses that were previously some pretty nice houses
have fallen into pretty bad disrepair. Beaumont advised right. He advised we have people living in their cars. Beaumont advised it
is ridiculous. He advised he doesn’t have a problem with this (topic) if it is our ordinance then we
should enforce it, but there are some serious issues that we really got to deal with when it comes to
properties and it was just a matter of putting it in place. Beaumont advised Rick (Hanlon) worked
really hard on the Property Maintenance Code and we don’t do anything about it. He advised that is
not a criticism of Larry (Boggs) as he understands it is a personnel issue and it is implementation of
our policy. Beaumont advised there are a lot of issues and if we start here then that is fine, but he
would have a hard time lowering the boom on somebody that may be technically in violation of this
ordinance when we’ve got people that own properties that are uninhabitable.
Robertson advised the list of things included (as accessory uses) are a garden, a swimming
pool and a garage etc.
Council Member Darrell Carey advised he felt as long as they (accessory structures) are
maintained well he doesn’t have an issue and doesn’t care how many they have. He advised they own
the property and they should be able to put buildings on it.
Council Member Dave Williams advised the issue he has is that while walking along the trail
he saw a particular residence that had a shipping container on their property converted into a living
unit. He advised there was electricity run to it and an air conditioning unit. Williams advised there are
public safety concerns if (any of the safety services) were called out to this location if it would be the
main residence by the road or would they be (dispatched) to a shipping container. He advised if it
were in the middle of the night and trying to find addresses and he felt there was a certain public
safety aspect for our safety services. Williams inquired if this is a taxable habitat on top of the main
residence.
So, they are concerned for my "safety". Its funny how often this excuse is used to justify government meddling in our lives. You may also see from the rest of this that this individual knows absolutely nothing about it, its purpose, whats inside, NOTHING other than it has an electric cord going to it, windows and an "air conditioner". The REAL reason however for his "concern" is made evident at the end....MONEY! This last statement makes plain what the main resistance is to affordable housing. Not only did I not pay "tribute" to the building department and banks, but they cannot TAX it. Remember, the more expensive the "dwelling" (NOT implying this is a "dwelling") the more tax money the government gets. Think about this the next time you look at the lack of affordable housing!
Beaumont advised it is amazing what you see from the trail that you don’t see from Sterling
Avenue.
Robertson advised he believed that was illegal to have a second residence on the property.
Boggs advised he sent the police department out to check on that and they didn’t see what
you (Williams) saw, but they (PD) better double check it.
They sent the POLICE to check it out! I should note that not ONE SINGLE TIME was I contacted in all of this. Also note that none of my neighbors has complained in any way. All of this was started by someone who came down from on high, and didnt like what they saw!
Carey advised he felt that was an entirely different type of issue than sheds, swimming pools
and gardens.
Robertson advised if someone put up a garage and moved into it then…
Beaumont advised he didn’t feel it was fair to people who really try to make their properties
nice. He advised there are people trying to make their property’s look nice and then others who (it
appeared) they just don’t care. Beaumont advised he doesn’t think it is fair to the people who care.
Williams inquired if they were looking to be more definitive with the rules.
Boggs advised he was asked to bring it in front of Council. He advised at this point he
wouldn’t know what to change it to.
Boggs advised he felt the concern was how many sheds and he
hasn’t done any research with neighboring cities on this particular issue. He advised he didn’t know if
the answer was for structures with a roof to allow a maximum square footage total per lot. Boggs
advised when he started working on the other workshop item and was doing some preliminary studies
on streets looking at GIS mapping data, there were a lot of properties with more than one shed. He
advised to go back and try to enforce it (to allow only one shed) would be a nightmare. Boggs advised
it might be better to attack it on the property maintenance (end of it). He advised he could do more
research and see if neighboring cities have anything different and bring it back at a future meeting.
Just a side note here. What this means is that they look for you and what you are doing via areal photographs. Be aware that if you put something up, no matter where it is, it WILL be found and questioned.
Robertson inquired if there was any desire among Council to have Larry (Boggs) look at it
further. He advised it sounded to him like they were okay with the way it is (currently).
No additional comments were made.
