No, that’s my house! It’s period too and I’m keeping it that way. I don’t like modern architecture.
This area used to be a swamp where people with no money could buy themselves a bunch of land and build a summer cottage on the cheap. No permits required - or they just brought a bottle of hooch to the local official and got the permit for anything and everything
Then the area became attractive for main residences because it’s not too far from the city, and the land was still affordable for a big house. So a lot of people built their houses next to their existing summer cottages. Again, not too much trouble to get a permit for anything you wanted.
That’s what the previous owners of this place did: they built the big cottage right next to the lake (which is a big no-no today) for the summer, then the house next to it 20 years later when they moved here permanently - with zero restrictions on the building permit, which is still in force today.
Then the area started gentrifying. Most of the old houses have been destroyed and replaced by all-white-all-grey, soulless mansions. But most kept the old cottage, because it would be forbidden to rebuild this close to the water’s edge if the old one disappeared.
That’s what my neighbor did. To each his own I guess. Me, I’m keeping the place as-is. Just renovating, insulating, improving… It’s a nice 80s wooden house with a nice big 60s wooden mökki, both in perfect condition and with zero problems, and they’ll stay that way until I snuff it.
Oh. My apologies; I can’t really see much of the house other than it’s very close, but this explains it.
Again, going back to my time in Espoo, I have seen places where people got their building permits before the beaches-are-for-everyone-rule, often the cycling/walking path has to go around them.
It’s not so much that beaches are for everyone here. All the land is occupied by private owners all around this lake, and it’s been that way for many decades. There are only 4 public access points around the entire lake. It’s quite sad actually.
The reason they won’t let new constructions take place close to the water’s edge has something to do with nature conservation, pollution and whatnot. I’m not sure I understand. All I know is, when this cottage is gone, it ain’t never coming back. So it’s worth keeping in good condition.
No, that’s my house! It’s period too and I’m keeping it that way. I don’t like modern architecture.
This area used to be a swamp where people with no money could buy themselves a bunch of land and build a summer cottage on the cheap. No permits required - or they just brought a bottle of hooch to the local official and got the permit for anything and everything
Then the area became attractive for main residences because it’s not too far from the city, and the land was still affordable for a big house. So a lot of people built their houses next to their existing summer cottages. Again, not too much trouble to get a permit for anything you wanted.
That’s what the previous owners of this place did: they built the big cottage right next to the lake (which is a big no-no today) for the summer, then the house next to it 20 years later when they moved here permanently - with zero restrictions on the building permit, which is still in force today.
Then the area started gentrifying. Most of the old houses have been destroyed and replaced by all-white-all-grey, soulless mansions. But most kept the old cottage, because it would be forbidden to rebuild this close to the water’s edge if the old one disappeared.
That’s what my neighbor did. To each his own I guess. Me, I’m keeping the place as-is. Just renovating, insulating, improving… It’s a nice 80s wooden house with a nice big 60s wooden mökki, both in perfect condition and with zero problems, and they’ll stay that way until I snuff it.
Oh. My apologies; I can’t really see much of the house other than it’s very close, but this explains it.
Again, going back to my time in Espoo, I have seen places where people got their building permits before the beaches-are-for-everyone-rule, often the cycling/walking path has to go around them.
It’s not so much that beaches are for everyone here. All the land is occupied by private owners all around this lake, and it’s been that way for many decades. There are only 4 public access points around the entire lake. It’s quite sad actually.
The reason they won’t let new constructions take place close to the water’s edge has something to do with nature conservation, pollution and whatnot. I’m not sure I understand. All I know is, when this cottage is gone, it ain’t never coming back. So it’s worth keeping in good condition.