
The Permission We Already Have - blasdel
http://bldgblog.blogspot.com/2010/09/permission-we-already-have.html
======
3pt14159
Fun fact about the permission Canadians have: on federal owned land that is at
least a certain distance of owned land, and isn't a park or plot for a federal
structure, you can just build a small shack without permits or anything. Just
live in nature for free. If loggers come, you get 60 days to relocate your
shack. And yes, some guys have built a series of shacks. Of course you don't
get easy (legal) hydro access.

~~~
electromagnetic
Simply reducing and using solar or a small wind turbine would be adequate. I
know when I'm out in the country, I prefer reading than ever even looking at a
TV.

Honestly Kindle + Laptop + LED Lighting would be the bare minimum I could get
away with. Get a good spot and you could get 3G-wireless for your shack,
especially if you're 'shacking' in an elevated area.

I would be interested in the definition of 'small shack', because IIRC the
Iroquois frequently built longhouses out of poles and woven bark that could
stretch hundreds of meters long and a good dozen wide. If not length, does
height count? Does a hunting hide count as a shack? If a 20+ft hunting hide
counts as a shack, does a multi-story shack count as a 'small shack' by the
ground space it occupies?

Furthermore, is there any legal restriction on how many shacks can be put on a
small location. IE would a shantytown be fully legal here in Canada?

Finally, I wonder if Canada still has the common-law practice that prolonged
use of a property means its ownership will default to you and does this apply
to just unused private land or federal too.

~~~
pquerna
you are forgetting that most of canada is quite 'north' and therefore cold.

i like being inside a real building, with heating. YMMV.

~~~
electromagnetic
Heating /= electricity. Most houses are heated via propane or oil, you could
take a small propane or oil heater and bring the largest portable propane tank
you can muster, or bring your own oil supply. Finally, living surrounded by
forest would provide a great supply of firewood for a wood stove.

I work in siding, we use expanded polystyrene foam as insulation. 1" provides
an R-value of 5.0 (fiberglass, which is in the majority of homes is only
between 3.1 to 4.3) add a silvered side over an air gap (IE place it over a
stud wall) adds R1 and if you take your time you can get an air gap in front
and behind of the insulation making it an R6. Which is a considerable R-value
boost with very little material.

You could literally flat-pack build your house. Plywood, baton, insulation,
baton, plywood. This would get you about an R-11 wall within 4-5". The 4
walls, ceiling and floor made this way would get you a 6" cube that you could
easily fit it in a truck bed. You wouldn't have to abandon your shack should
loggers come by.

Given that I've worked on houses that were literally drywall onto stud with
drywall + aluminum siding exterior. You'd do better in winter in my shack than
that house lol.

~~~
3pt14159
That is pretty awesome, I took a building science course while studying
structural engineering and I learned a ton about R values. There are these
crazy building blocks with just astronomical levels to the point where it is
silly. They don't even consider the numbers comparable because the ratio of
heat that you lose when you open and close the door more than makes up the
marginal difference.

As for the original point (free land!) I plan to build a very small cabin up
north, but I really would prefer easy road access and electricity so I've
ruled out the federal land route, at least for now.

------
jfager
When this is good: when the bounds of permission are set by an entity which
has no legitimate right to restrict an action. See: Rosa Parks sitting at the
front of the bus.

When this is bad: when the bounds of permission are set by an entity that has
all legitimate rights to restrict an action. See: Police officer tasering
someone in a case where it's not necessary.

Bringing down the level of seriousness a few notches, it's interesting to
think of what these brightlines are and how wide the gray area is between
them. For instance, was Google's launch of Buzz an abuse of the permissions
users had granted it for email? What about Facebook's feature rollout earlier
this summer? When does a service provider cross the line when it provides new
functionality that its users may not have explicitly asked for or agreed to
when they signed up?

------
adolph
Sure, in most places you can build anything that isn't outlawed. Scott Adams'
column about green building speaks to how the building and construction trades
are geared toward building to permits. In most places I'd bet a person would
have a hard time finding a builder to make "storage chimneys."

[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870486860457543...](http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704868604575433620189923744.html)

~~~
brudgers
It's not just finding someone to build them, it's getting permission.

The first question the bulding department is going to ask, is, "what are you
going to be burning that requires a chimney?"

And fire marshalls are generally not predisposed toward cumbustible storage in
chimneys.

The example is based on a misunderstnding that when a term like "chimney"
isn't explicitly defined in a code, it doesn't have a legal meaning.

However, most codes have a default reference for any undefined term (such as a
specific dictionary), and ultimate interpretation lies with the code official
not the applicant anyway.

