I don't understand the appeal of sameness. We talk a lot about the virtues of diversity, but when it comes to our daily living environments, most of us seem to crave homogeneity. Throw in the outside chance of a threat to something like property values, and the craving takes on a frantic tone.
I moved to an eclectic little mountain community called Summit Park primarily because of its diversity. I refer more to the houses than the people who inhabit them, since I haven't met many of the actual residents. But I assumed that because there were so many different kinds of houses, there would also be a diversity among the people and an appreciation for differences.Now, I find perhaps I am wrong.
I chose Summit Park despite (or perhaps because of) my son's comment that the roads through the area and the way the houses were situated reminded him more of a campground than a subdivision. He joked that one morning I would probably come outside to find people in tents on my front lawn. I countered that I wouldn't mind that, but if it got too crowded, I'd simply put up one of those "Campground Full" signs.
But wouldn't you know it, now there is a group of Summit Park homeowners who want to start turning our lovely little area into another tract-home, Plat B, everybody-in-a-row subdivision. They have proposed a set of Amended and Restated Restrictive Covenants that will require everybody who builds a new home or adds anything onto his existing home to get his plans approved by a committee designated to make sure nobody colors outside the lines.
I don't consider myself a rabid property-rights advocate. I'm willing to abide by rules and tone down my behavior so I don't offend my neighbors. My house is well-kept and tidy; there are no weeds over a foot or so tall in the summer, and I don't collect junk cars or old sofas in the front yard.
But I take offense at a set of rules that would have kept me and my house out of Summit Park if they had been enforced 18 years ago when my home was built. My little house, which I love specifically because it is small, is judged TOO small by the proposed rules. Though the preamble written along with the new rules states (all in capital letters) WE HAVE NO INTEREST IN MAKING SUMMIT PARK AN UPSCALE COMMUNITY LIKE SOME OF OUR NEIGHBORS, Article III of the proposed rules sets size parameters that my house wouldn't meet.
Obviously, the rules committee isn't interested in including single people in its "non-upscale" community, because there is also a "garage rule" that excludes single-car garages. Again, my house would be disqualified. But, you also couldn't have a four-car garage under the new rules.
Not too small, not too big. "Just right" is preferred, but just right for whom?
Why is there such an overwhelming urge to make our neighborhoods fit the three-bedroom, three-car garage format, excluding anyone who doesn't fit that mold? This type of cookie-cutter mentality is a Utah curse that has permeated the valley and now is spreading its tentacles into places where individuality once was a matter of pride.
The committee also wants to make sure you have a landscaping plan "within one year of the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy." Landscaping in the mountains? A committee has to tell me when I can move in and what I can plant? Who's coloring outside the lines now?
Right now, I love my mountain community; I think Utah should have more of them. But if we're not careful, we'll end up with hillsides covered with "ticky-tacky" little boxes that all look alike. I love the lack of landscaping, the small houses with or without garages right next to the big log mansions with accommodations for two or three cars and a couple of trucks and snowmobiles. I love the wildflowers in summer and don't at all miss the rows of neat lawns that I left behind in Davis County.
I'm not crazy about the modular brown house around the corner. It's ugly and doesn't exactly exude pride of ownership, but I'm willing to put up with it in order to claim a few property rights of my own.
If the rules-committee members want sameness, let them move back down to the valley. I'm voting NO on their proposal.
Deseret News features editor Marilyn Karras may be reached by e-mail at karras@desnews.com