Boy, 9, creates library in his front yard. City, stupid, shuts it down.
boingboing.netSlightly misleading headline. The city has no issue with the "library", they take issue with the library being a free-standing little shack making it a building code violation.
Restricting where on a property one can erect structures is common in building codes across the world. And as always with laws and codes, once you allow for exceptions, everyone and their uncle will go to court to get an exception too.
What I think the city should have done is invite the kid over to city hall and offer their assistance in navigating the process towards getting permits or whatever is needed to continue running the "library". That would be a helpful lesson to learn and probably yield a nice photo op for the mayor in the local newspaper - win win. Instead they taught him that government and bureaucracy are soulless machines.
Do they consider dog houses to be free-standing buildings? Bird houses?
"Instead they taught him that government and bureaucracy are soulless machines."
I think that's a better lesson than how to "navigate the process towards getting permits" for a damn bookshelf.
Since we're being pedantic, many cities have different rules for what is allowed in a front yard vs. a back yard, which may actually be the problem... this often leads to the occasional news story about the town that forces someone to remove a garden in their front lawn, etc.
That comment was the true definition of apologist. It honestly made me laugh, it's been awhile since I seen anything like that.
Very slightly misleading.. I doubt anybody actually thought they wanted to have a book burning. We're not quite there yet.
- The 9 year old used his brain, his humanity and his creativity to make something nice for the community.
- We delegated power to a collection of mindless bureaucrats.
- Mindless bureaucrats caused problems for 9 year old.
Pretty accurate title.
This comment doesn't respond to its parent at all. It's like you read the first sentence and then stopped.
I read the entire comment, the initial point about the title being misleading irked me.
There was nothing misleading about it, it accurately conveyed what happened. IMHO we're beyond the point where micro-debating the various ins and outs of these things is helpful. Yes they should have done what he/she suggested, but yes - NONE of this should be happening. It's tiring and ridiculous.
The future is going to be tricky, we need to move faster and more efficiently than this.
The title is definitely misleading and does NOT accurately convey what happened. According to the article the city didn't ask him to stop sharing books, and as far as I can tell they are still sharing books. Just doing it from the garage instead of a free standing bookshelf (the real question is, what exactly is an "accessory structure.") Is a picnic table a free standing structure? What if you place a bread box on it?
> What I think the city should have done is invite the kid
It's quite probable that the city official did not even know it was a nine-year-old kid's structure, since the family was on vacation:
from article> When we got home from vacation, there was a letter from the city
The story is really about a piece of furniture being considered a detached house annex. The child and his books have little relevance as far as the city hall is concerned, only used to attract clicks.
I can't even imagine what the person reporting this must have been thinking. Indeed, America, land of the free.
The rule of law is a great thing. It's a shame when short sighted people enforce the letter instead of the spirit of the law as that undermines order in the long term.
Humanity is a great thing. Laws are simplified ideas, that can be both helpful or oppressive.
Small minded people are generally attracted to this kind of power, so we get far too much of the later.
What is the spirit of the law in this case?
Probably something along the lines of "Do not build dangerous things in your yard, were they could fall on people passing by. Also no ugly stuff." Which could or could not be relevant toward that bookshelf.
Mark Twain would have a field day in 2014
America, land of the free... Just wow!
I'm living in Vienna and these things are common here. We have local stores having a "take something, leave somthing" shelf. We even have a few "cupboards" installed by the city at public places installed for this kind of book exchange.
The city is not objecting to the book sharing. They are objecting to the container used to hold the books.
The reporter or the blogger could have turned this into an interesting story by investigating WHY outbuildings are not allowed by the city's building code. My guess is that there is a sound reason for this in the case of things like like 100 sq ft storage sheds [1], and so then the question would arise as to whether or not this makes sense for small buildings. Do they prohibit dog houses? Bird houses?
Another interesting question would be, if the code as written does indeed prohibit this structure, is whether or not that was intentional, or was the code too broadly drafted?
But no, they just go for the cheap "mean city bullies book sharing kid" approach.
[1] for instance! small detached buildings might be unusually dangerous in high winds, blowing apart and turning into shrapnel. This story is from a state known for tornados, so I'd be surprised if wind concerns were not a major factor in their building codes.
It's also common in America, it's just one stupid city that is complaining.
Don't forget just how large America is, you'll find every kind here depending on where you go. In some ways that's the draw: You can pick your perfect environment without having to deal with immigration or language issues.
Same in France, and they are always full of books. People like this kind of social experience and there are very few abuses. I have not checked if the overal quality of the books tend to go down after a few months ending up with yellow pages.
The books have nothing to do with the article. The issue is the bookshelf, not the books by themselves. The law prohibit to have that kind of structure in their front lawn.
Seriously, how cold-blooded do you have to be?
Land of the free ...