[Larrikin]

>I will just be pickier about who i sell it to.

Honestly this kind of mindset is a huge problem in the US. You built the oven, you enjoyed the oven, and you decided to sell the house. Why do you feel the need to dictate what the owner does with the house after? If you wanted to keep the pizza oven as some kind of monument to yourself you could have kept the home.

This kind of mindset leads to stale neighborhoods, where some locals feel the need to dictate neighborhood look and feel. You end up with regulations that don't allow new construction and can even dictate dumb things like paint color. All to preserve a memory of something that is only important to the people that got to enjoy it when it was new.

This is not say nothing should ever be preserved if there is actually something of historical importance that happened there, but it seems like there's a mindset to preserve things that are trivial to the many and important to the few. Then there are places with actual historical significance [1] people are willing to just rot.

1: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/mar/30/rosa-parks-h...

[dataengineer56]

Why keep a complex thing in your garden if you know you'll never use it? All of the infrastructure around it sounds like it needs a lot of maintenance. It's arguably more efficient to remove it rather than risk any of it going wrong.

If OP loved it so much then he should have moved it. Once he's sold the house then it's not his business anymore.

[mgsloan2]

Whoah, that interpretation seems pretty wild to me. They put a lot of effort into building a pizza oven and someone else tore it down, and they should feel nothing about this?! If an artist sells their painting they shouldn't care if the new owner paints over a section?

Beyond the sentimental attachment to the pizza oven, I'd be bothered by the sheer inefficiency of it.

[delecti]

It's totally reasonable to be sad someone tore it down, but you also have to accept that you lose any say over a house when you sell it.

[nerdponx]

> I'd be bothered by the sheer inefficiency of it.

This is the part that hurts me the most. I don't like when good things go to waste.

[taude]

You're assuming they like pizza and want an 8x8' pizza oven taking up space in the back yard....

[bombcar]

Reminds me of the tale of the guy who was told by his realtor that he could put $20k in new windows and sell the house for $50k more. He did and it sold, and was immediately torn down.

[mozey]

Been renovating an old house with a large garden for almost ten years now. I tell myself this is better than building something from scratch, but it definitely doesn't always feel more efficient. It helps that I didn't have the option back then, but now maybe I do? Sometimes it's also hard to tell, in the moment, which things to keep and what to rip out.

[hoseja]

You are allowed to be inefficient with things you own. Again, shouldn't have sold the house if they wanted to keep control of it.

[bombcar]

Or be a rat bastard and tie a covenant to the land forever muahahahaha

[28304283409234]

But why buy a house if younger going to tear everything down or change it? Why not buy something that you already like? Why not accept that tearing down and rebuilding is expensive, for you and for the planet? Why not just accept “good enough”?

[toast0]

The house I want isn't available, so I'm going to buy the closest thing and make the changes I want... building a pizza oven is a lot of time and effort, but tearing it out isn't. I'm not sure how much a pizza oven adds to the price of a home, but I'm guessing, not that much because most people aren't going to understand its value ... anyway, as a buyer it's not like I'm getting a list of features I can refuse some of, the house is being sold with the pizza oven and I'll deal with it when it's mine.

[bombcar]

Exactly. One person bought a house and added a pizza over because he wanted it, another bought it and removed it because he didn’t want it.

It’s nice to think we might do something that lasts a long time but the more nonstandard it is, the more likely it will be changed someday.

A similar effort on a fancy “outdoor kitchen/barbecue” in a more outdoorsy state than WA may have lasted a long time.

[nostrademons]

You're buying the land and location. There's always someone willing to make you a new house for the right price, and you can get it done exactly the way you want it. There's nobody that can make new land, particularly not in the place you want it. You can change anything about a house except its location.

[Fatnino]

Because the land under the house is worth so much more than the "improvements" on top of it that the improvements might as well not exist.

[mavhc]

It's too cheap to pollute the planet, the solution is to price in the externalities, tax everything the amount it costs to clean up the pollution it causes, then spend that money cleaning up the pollution

[Terr_]

> Honestly this kind of mindset is a huge problem in the US.

It sounds like less of a problem than its opposite: "Nothing matters but how much money I can make."

[Larrikin]

Whatabout something else that is a problem in the world? Your post history seems like you exist to be an example in a Wikipedia article

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

[allknowingfrog]

You extrapolated "I will just be pickier about who i sell it to" into an argument about regulations. If your contention is that sentiment obstructs progress, it seems totally fair to argue that the opposite is also true. Accusing someone of "whataboutism" isn't doing much to move the conversation forward.

[Larrikin]

They made a snarky single sentence comment. There is no argument about any thing else.

I have a quote from the OP, but address matters from the entire comment.

You are arguing about two sentences.

[Terr_]

> Whataboutism

"The polar-opposite behavior is a bigger problem" is not "whataboutism", the relation is direct and practical.

> Your post history seems like you exist to be an example in a Wikipedia article.

Thinly-veiled personal insult, check.

[YeBanKo]

This kind of mindset is why many parks and landmark exist, in the US and Europe. Someone owned a land or a castle, etc and then donated or sold it with strings attached to keep its purpose. Muir Woods is one example, private purchase with the intent to preserve it.

[peebeebee]

Things can have sentimental value. We need more of this sentiment in the world, not less. Certainly for architecture. It’s that detached mindset that is also partially responsible for all the horrible empty architecture nowadays. Just a box to live in.

[Larrikin]

I actually agree with this statement, but people should be allowed to build the sentimental value. They shouldn't have the sentimental value of someone else's past ideas dictate the new.

An awful local law may have dictated that the OP should not have been allowed to build a pizza oven in the first place, because people want to preserve the look and feel of the neighborhood when they moved in. But I also view it as equally bad if the new owner couldn't tear it down because of some HOA regulation saying that structures built before some arbitrary date, conveniently a time after they moved in and did their renovations, can't be torn down. The only real reason being the sentimental value they have to that past.

[bombcar]

The latter can happen with historic designated buildings, and can often be applied widely in unexpected ways. Some will basically say you can’t modify the exterior look, others will say everything up to and including bulb changes must be approved by the historical society.

[ajkjk]

What's wrong with minding? A person does something they're proud of, they obviously care about its future. Just because you completed some financial transaction doesn't mean any of that emotional attachment goes away.

Honestly it is kinda depressing that anyone thinks otherwise! like somehow we should respect capitalism and $business$ more than, like, feelings.

[cinntaile]

The person that put time and effort into building it obviously cares, but the new homeowner most likely doesn't give a shit. Why would they? They bought the house without the emotional attachments. It's like inheriting a house from a relative. You dump most of it in a huge container but when they were alive they probably had a lot of emotional attachment to some of the stuff you just dumped in there. It doesn't have to do with capital or business.