Arizona Town Cracks Down on Project Cars with Single 'Inoperable' Vehicle Limit
thedrive.com
thedrive.com
Never understood it. Being older now and owning my own house, there's a house on the same street as mine with kids getting up to similar hijinks and it's honestly nice to see them getting into hands on hobbies. I stop by and chat with them about their ongoing projects every now and then. Crushing someone's passion hobby because of some perceived slight to neighborhood beauty just seems mean spirited.
Others are basically hoarders, and the junk simply accumulates.
It's hard to tell the difference from a single snapshot.
My current city doesn't allow you to have any non-functional vehicles anywhere on your property, unless garaged.
I had a neighbor attempting to sell their run down hovel for double the market rate. It wouldn’t sell, for obvious reason.
His solution was to call in Code Enforcement on every single neighbor every single day. Which meant I had to send a weekly photo of my lawn to my landlord to be sent to the Code Enforcement Officer to prove I had an orderly property to avoid him a ticket to avoid him a court appearance.
Turns out many (most?) cities and suburbs have laws on the books that meet or exceed virtually any HOA. In that case, they can ruin your life far more than any Boomer on patrol could ever dream of.
Municipalities across America have been implementing laws like this for decades.
•Grass must be <10"
•No indoor furniture on patios
•Address must be posted (near entrance) in 4" tall script
•All vehicles parked outside must be operable and registered ("projects" must be garaged)
•Cannot leave dropped branches on yard, nor piled up (except pile for pickup)
•Paint/roof must be watertight
Certain inspectors are eager for your disagreeableness, as they (in their minds) are god.
Awwww. Too bad. What an ugly thing for your neighbors to have to look at that most people just take out a trip or two a year.
> When "speech" and "nonspeech" elements are combined in the same course of conduct, a sufficiently important governmental interest in regulating the nonspeech element can justify incidental limitations on First Amendment freedom
So long as Gilbert has an "substantial" interest in preventing derelict cars and the regulation doesn't go beyond what's necessary, it would stand.