Your house is ugly, said your neighbor
People living in single family houses like looking out of their backyard into open space. It's a feature I would love to have for my own house. When someone has had that amenity, like any other luxury, it's tough to let it go. The problem is that someone's right to a view ends where another's property rights begin. That someone likes their view out their backyard does not mean the person who owns the lot behind that person should not be able to build a house on their own property.
We designed a small community outside a large gated community in the East Bay and held a few community meetings where we invited neighbors to discuss the development. This land was a horse ranch and was situated alongside the main road into the gated community. On the other side of the road was a row of backyards inside the gated community. The new houses would not have been close to the existing houses so the impact was not significant by any means in context with Bay Area housing. They would have been approximately a football field's length away and the existing houses would be elevated above the proposed houses.
One lady spoke to me during one of the neighborhood meetings and said something along the lines of how she liked her current view and she didn't want to now look out and see a bunch of "ugly houses". I don't think she was trying to be nasty. I just don't think she was very aware of what she said, given her emotional level. That's fine. We've all been there. I didn't think we were building anything aesthetically ground breaking, but we weren't designing something I'd be ashamed of. Besides, I didn't personally design the concepts so no real skin off my back. I was just there to defend the architecture, which I usually find awkward, like if a doctorate student had to defend someone else's thesis. I represented my firm and my client the best I could. I talked a bit about articulation, proportions, and materials. I asked for her input on what she would like to see changed. I joked around a bit, trying to ease the tension. She seemed to relax a bit when she saw that I was open to dialogue. I learned that she lived in one of the houses across the street from the new development. In my opinion, I didn't think those houses were exactly shining bastions of exemplary architecture. They were pretty similar to what we were doing. Of course, I didn't tell her that. My job there was to extinguish flames, not stoke them.
I learned later that the house she was living in drew fierce opposition from the residents already living there because the houses were...you guessed it...ugly. I wondered if she knew her neighbors thought her house was ugly. I wondered if they would be willing to say it to her face. I wondered if she would understand the irony that if her line of reasoning is deemed legally acceptable to successfully stop development, her own house would not have been built either.
These emotional responses to lash out simply reveal that we are human. Humans tend to latch on to existing comforts and we fear change. I'm sure the lady I talked to would prefer to see a horse ranch than twenty other houses. I'm sure the people complaining about her house would have preferred to see a rolling hill rather than her house. But we also need to respect other people's rights to their own property. If everyone was able to halt any development because their rear yard aesthetics declined a little bit, society would not be able to advance. We need to avoid thinking that I got my (ugly?) house; I don't want someone else to get their (ugly?) house. Not only does this fight against development intrude on property rights, it restricts supply of housing and causes prices to go ever higher.
We designed a small community outside a large gated community in the East Bay and held a few community meetings where we invited neighbors to discuss the development. This land was a horse ranch and was situated alongside the main road into the gated community. On the other side of the road was a row of backyards inside the gated community. The new houses would not have been close to the existing houses so the impact was not significant by any means in context with Bay Area housing. They would have been approximately a football field's length away and the existing houses would be elevated above the proposed houses.
One lady spoke to me during one of the neighborhood meetings and said something along the lines of how she liked her current view and she didn't want to now look out and see a bunch of "ugly houses". I don't think she was trying to be nasty. I just don't think she was very aware of what she said, given her emotional level. That's fine. We've all been there. I didn't think we were building anything aesthetically ground breaking, but we weren't designing something I'd be ashamed of. Besides, I didn't personally design the concepts so no real skin off my back. I was just there to defend the architecture, which I usually find awkward, like if a doctorate student had to defend someone else's thesis. I represented my firm and my client the best I could. I talked a bit about articulation, proportions, and materials. I asked for her input on what she would like to see changed. I joked around a bit, trying to ease the tension. She seemed to relax a bit when she saw that I was open to dialogue. I learned that she lived in one of the houses across the street from the new development. In my opinion, I didn't think those houses were exactly shining bastions of exemplary architecture. They were pretty similar to what we were doing. Of course, I didn't tell her that. My job there was to extinguish flames, not stoke them.
 |
| The backyard view from the second story of a house in Danville. In the East Bay, people would love a view like this from their backyard. The new development in question would be 3 times farther away than the house shown in the above picture, and lower by about 15 feet. Not a disaster by any stretch of the imagination. |
I learned later that the house she was living in drew fierce opposition from the residents already living there because the houses were...you guessed it...ugly. I wondered if she knew her neighbors thought her house was ugly. I wondered if they would be willing to say it to her face. I wondered if she would understand the irony that if her line of reasoning is deemed legally acceptable to successfully stop development, her own house would not have been built either.
These emotional responses to lash out simply reveal that we are human. Humans tend to latch on to existing comforts and we fear change. I'm sure the lady I talked to would prefer to see a horse ranch than twenty other houses. I'm sure the people complaining about her house would have preferred to see a rolling hill rather than her house. But we also need to respect other people's rights to their own property. If everyone was able to halt any development because their rear yard aesthetics declined a little bit, society would not be able to advance. We need to avoid thinking that I got my (ugly?) house; I don't want someone else to get their (ugly?) house. Not only does this fight against development intrude on property rights, it restricts supply of housing and causes prices to go ever higher.
Comments