How'd They Build That?

[Montegriffo]

Claiming ownership of the rain which falls on a person's property is as dumb as claiming ownership of the air we breathe.

What Is The Legal Situation In The UK?

Scare stories like these from abroad may have planted seeds of doubt in the minds of UK citizens regarding the legality or otherwise of rainwater harvesting here in Britain. In fact, it is perfectly legal and actually encouraged by most water companies, especially in the drier south eastern counties where rainfall is significantly less than along the west coast.

However, whilst there is nothing to prevent householders from collecting rainwater, there are standards and regulations that apply, especially if a cross-connection is made to the mains water supply. There are also regulations governing the supply of water for consumption, as well as general health and safety rules as one would expect.

https://rainharvesting.co.uk/collecting ... need-know/

[Speaker to Animals]

Your urban lefties have just not thought of it yet.

This is what happened in several states here in America:

Some U.S. states have laws restricting collection of rainwater, making it difficult for the average homeowner to set up a rainwater harvesting system.

Strict regulations and restrictions have been put in place over the last century. Currently, nine states have laws restricting the collection of rainwater, but the severity of those laws differ.

The issue of illegally harvesting rainwater went viral in 2012 when a 64-year-old man, Gary Harrington, was sentenced to 30 days in jail in Oregon.

In the western U.S., any use of rainwater is subject to legal restriction of some sort. In the 1860s, miners in Colorado experienced water shortages and developed a system to divide water based on a priority system.

This system developed into the prior appropriation system, which is basically calling dibs on water.

“Stream flow is supplied by precipitation in the form of rain and snow, so if the supply is taken away, stream flow will decrease,” Jeff Deatherage, water supply chief in Colorado, said.

However, this issue has nothing to do with the environment. In fact, a number of independent studies proved that letting people collect rainwater on their property actually reduces demand from water facilities and improves conservation efforts.

https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather- ... s/61586739

It really exposes them for the fuckheads that they are. There is no good reason for it.

Where it is regulated in most states is in agriculture. If you collect rainwater to feed into your irrigation system, the rainwater at least where I live must run through a drip line irrigation system and the water only reach the roots (never the leaves and especially not any fruit or leaves that are the actual produce people consume).

[C-Mag]

This one from the 60s recently received protected status as a listed building.
The canopy was designed by American Eliot Noyes and the single column supporting each of the overlapping parasols carries away the rainwater. Once used all over the world this is thought to be the last of its kind in the UK.
Not a patch on your art deco one though.

Damn the 60s were goofy, looks like the Jetsons.
But I guess they deserve preserving too.

You know what time it is ?




Cabin Porn Time

[Montegriffo]

Turns out the design is from much earlier.

The Skovshoved Filling Station, in operation since 1935, in Copenhagen, Denmark.


If we're talking log cabins, what you want is a little privacy. This one in Serbia says ''fuck off world, leave me alone''.

[C-Mag]

If we're talking log cabins, what you want is a little privacy. This one in Serbia says ''fuck off world, leave me alone''.

That's kinda awesome, not terribly practical but who could turn it down.

[Montegriffo]

If we're talking log cabins, what you want is a little privacy. This one in Serbia says ''fuck off world, leave me alone''.

That's kinda awesome, not terribly practical but who could turn it down.

Some people will do anything to avoid Jehovah's Witnesses.

[SuburbanFarmer]

Your urban lefties have just not thought of it yet.

This is what happened in several states here in America:

Some U.S. states have laws restricting collection of rainwater, making it difficult for the average homeowner to set up a rainwater harvesting system.

Strict regulations and restrictions have been put in place over the last century. Currently, nine states have laws restricting the collection of rainwater, but the severity of those laws differ.

The issue of illegally harvesting rainwater went viral in 2012 when a 64-year-old man, Gary Harrington, was sentenced to 30 days in jail in Oregon.

In the western U.S., any use of rainwater is subject to legal restriction of some sort. In the 1860s, miners in Colorado experienced water shortages and developed a system to divide water based on a priority system.

This system developed into the prior appropriation system, which is basically calling dibs on water.

“Stream flow is supplied by precipitation in the form of rain and snow, so if the supply is taken away, stream flow will decrease,” Jeff Deatherage, water supply chief in Colorado, said.

However, this issue has nothing to do with the environment. In fact, a number of independent studies proved that letting people collect rainwater on their property actually reduces demand from water facilities and improves conservation efforts.

https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather- ... s/61586739

It really exposes them for the fuckheads that they are. There is no good reason for it.

Where it is regulated in most states is in agriculture. If you collect rainwater to feed into your irrigation system, the rainwater at least where I live must run through a drip line irrigation system and the water only reach the roots (never the leaves and especially not any fruit or leaves that are the actual produce people consume).

That’s... concerning. They know something we don’t?

[Fife]

Don't make your property too pretty. The loafers and banditos at city hall will take it away from you.

Neighborhood Activists Would Rather Preserve Tom's Diner Than Let Its Owner Retire in Peace

[Speaker to Animals]

If I can't have Kenny Roger's Roasters then nobody can have anything. Burn it down.

[Montegriffo]

For Messina, the issue boils down to the fact that this is his building, and he should get to decide what happens to it, not a city council or neighborhood activists.

Bollocks.
This was privately owned until 100 years ago, should the owner have had the right to pull it down and build an apartment block?

Preservation of old buildings is important unless you want everywhere to look the same and towns and cities not to have any character.
Personal greed is no reason to destroy history.