I really don’t se why this is a thing for front yards either. Growing vegetables are just as pretty as a lawn, and even if you don’t think so, surely productive use of the land ought to take priority.
I find it so strange that such restrictions only seem to exist in the US, where there is normally so much emphasis on individual freedom.
I've often wondered how much overlap there is on people who live in an HOA and people who are opposed to government regulation. I realize government regulation isn't quite the same as HOA regulations, but it's amusing to me how extreme some HOAs are (grass a certain length, no service vehicles, etc) and how the people that live in them are often politically conservative.
Why is that amusing? Government vs private is the distinction. You willfully associate with an HOA. If you don’t like the HOA you buy a house a mile away.
By that logic you willfully associate with a city too. If you don't like the city ordinances you can buy a house in a neighboring city or outside the city limits. Even moving in to a reasonable HOA is no guarantee. The board can change and your dream home can become a nightmare. Trying to find a property without a HOA in some areas can be nigh impossible or at the very least can significantly increase your commute.
There seem to be a lot of people who like the idea of willfully entering an HOA agreement that limits freedoms that they wouldn’t want their neighbors exercising. I can see both sides but it’s not really for me.
There is something to be said for being able to restrict negative activities. Someone piling up junk on their front yard for example. I own in a Strata title apartment building which comes with a lot of very similar restrictions but its all pretty reasonable imo. You are free to paint the inside of your apartment however you want but painting the balcony or the hallway side of your front door is not allowed as it compromises the visual image of the building.
Similar issues in a suburb. One person with rusted out cars on the front compromises the entire street. No one will care if the rusted cars are inside a shed though.
> You are free to paint the inside of your apartment however you want but painting the balcony or the hallway side of your front door is not allowed as it compromises the visual image of the building.
Sounds monotonous with a lack of free expression and personality.
Can you imagine a high rise where its all following a consistent design except one balcony which is painted red? It would look like crap. And for little gain since its only really something you can see properly from the street.
I know HN loves the muh freedoms angle but surely its easy to understand how forgoing the freedom to paint a very small portion of the property is largely beneficial.
>No one will care if the rusted cars are inside a shed though.
Not necessarily true. Some HOAs will prohibit you from building the shed in the first place and some even go so far as to regulate the contents of your garage.
I should fess up that I actually do own one property in an HOA, so my declaration that it’s “not for me” is a little dishonest. It’s definitely a place that I don’t care about as much as my “real” house, so I’m a little more able to tolerate the silly rules. It’s a condo, and for example I’m not allowed to change my exterior blinds in any way. Gotta keep the exterior look of the building uniform, right? :eyeroll: It does have its advantages though. The place is very well kept and its resale value reflects that.
I am part of the minority that would not mind at all if my neighbor had a rusted out car in their lawn. I recognize that this isn't a very common opinion though.
I find it so strange that such restrictions only seem to exist in the US, where there is normally so much emphasis on individual freedom.