La Manzanilla.info Message Board Archives

La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Shaun on March 6, 2015, 6:10 pm
189.164.251.162

Just questioning the maximum height a building in town can be. I was told years ago it was two stories + a palapa roof. But this new building must have a approved building permit for what is now over four stories (construction has begun on now 4 foot high walls above the 4 story structure)


The "basement " is completely above grade. Meaning the ceiling of basement is within inches of the ceilings or roofs of buildings on both sides of it. Currently 3 full floors on top of this + now more new construction going up.

Just looking for info on how this was approved and by whom?

If this is the new standard a lot of our views are in danger of disappearing.
------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Neal on March 6, 2015, 6:32 pm, in reply to "La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
201.133.154.39

Shaun it is in fact a two story house measured from the high point of the lot. It is about the same height as the two houses up the hill from it. And yes every bodies view is in danger all you need is a developer to come in with steel beam construction and put up a big hotel.
------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Shaun on March 6, 2015, 6:58 pm, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
189.164.251.162

Sorry but not 2 stories that is why I included a picture taken from Up the hill . Unless my retinas are playing tricks on me I count Three floors ABOVE roof of blue and white house which is uphill from construction site . Vertical walls on all four exterior walls exceed three stories. I am sure a tour could be arranged to confirm , but building is now exceeding four stories.
------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Neal on March 6, 2015, 7:18 pm, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
201.133.154.39

Shaun I have been in the house. It is two stories with the up hill side of the house sitting on the highest part of a steep lot. There is also some stuff on the roof. More then I expected.
------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Shaun on March 6, 2015, 8:04 pm, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
189.164.251.162

Stuff on the roof? Sorry again but 8 foot high walls with a poured concrete roof with 4 foot high walls on top of "roof"

Again this stuff is my definition of a story . All of this "stuff" is on top of 3 stories . The "basement" is full height on three sides that I can see. But even if this floor is disregarded because of a sloped lot, there is clearly three stories above it and above ANY possible grade on the lot.

I will agree there is 2 Full stories between the "basement" and "the stuff on the roof" LOL

------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Dave on March 6, 2015, 9:21 pm, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
189.164.203.136

There are several houses or actually rentals located all over town that exceed the 2 story with a palapa roof.
Maybe you should go to office that issues the permits and take them with you before the construction goes much further.
------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Daniel H on March 6, 2015, 9:26 pm, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
201.133.153.237

Good answer Dave. La Huerta.
------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Shaun on March 7, 2015, 12:04 am, in reply to "La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
189.164.251.162

Thankyou for your insight I am guessing my answer lies in La Huerta . Just thought someone local would know.

I am not complaining about this project specifically just wanted to know what the rules were, if any. I have seen a couple three story buildings in town just none stood up on top of a hill like this one does. It is quite a sight standing on the street looking up at 5+ stories. Not where I want to be standing when the big quake hits.
------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Neal on March 7, 2015, 6:47 am, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
201.133.154.39

A couple of good points are raised here.
First the guy building the house in question used to work in commercial infrastructure construction and that house is probably one of the best built in town. He has all kinds of earthquake safety design elements in it. I hope we never have a big enough quack to find out which buildings stand up.

Second point is how would you write a regulation about building height? Height above what? The lowest part of a lot. Since many lots in the hills are over three stories in height that would mean a down slope house might be below street level. The average of the lot. This would punish people with narrow deep lots. The top of the lot. In that case the house is question would pass.
I have a vested interest in preserving views, I have a good one, I'm just not sure how you do it.
------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Daniel H on March 7, 2015, 8:15 am, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
201.133.153.237

If you are buying a view lot or home and the lot in front of you has the
potential to block your view you should buy that lot. There are some
pretty expensive homes that still have the chance to protect their view
(investment) but refuse to do so. They bring disappointment on
themselves, it is strange to watch.

The guideline is two levels and a palapa from road level.

The common courtesy is don't be a jerk. I am surprised at the number
of people who move to a small community like La Manzanilla and first thing
they do is be a jerk to one of the community.

If someone is violating the guideline you can go to La Huerta and file a
complaint (I think). I would start with a talking to the local Ejido
and maybe even the Delegado just so you don't step on anyone's toes.
Oh, and perhaps to the person who is planning on blocking your view.
------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Neal on March 7, 2015, 9:01 am, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
201.133.154.39

Thanks Daniel, nice to know what the guide lines are, though many do not meet those criteria. Even being under those guide lines can adversely affect others view.
------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Daniel H on March 7, 2015, 9:20 am, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
201.133.153.237

People have a right to develop their property and sometimes shit happens
that is dissappointing. Unblockable view is one of the criteria that
makes a property valuable, for most it is not a problem. The steeper the
hill the more the view is unblockable.
------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Ron Smith on March 7, 2015, 9:46 am, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
187.148.173.121

I'm an architect on an island in WA State where views of the water are very important. I've been a technical advisor for several Home Owner Associations, and have been an expert witness and have written opinions dealing with height issues. Unfortunately this is a NOB perspective and may have (probably has) no relevance here?

Many regulations are often contradictory, and the basis for determining height is in the details. Here are a few of methods of determining heights that I've seen, including one that had very specific requirements and ended with a statement that says you can't block someone's view?

LOT ELEVATION DETERMINATION
Highest point of the lot.
Average of the lot elevation across the front property line.
Average of the lot elevation at the front setback line.
Average of the lot elevation across the front of the residence.
Average of the lot elevation for the entire footprint of the residence

ROOF ELEVATION DETERMINATION
Highest point of roof
Average of roof height

It appears that some limit to maximum height exists, which hopefully clarifies the issue. Enforcement might be another issue?

What I like to encourage is a meeting of the affected parties during design and before construction. Daniels's suggestion of buying the lot in front you to preserve your view is the most secure option. This is too much like work, good luck, and stay friends.
------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Shaun on March 7, 2015, 10:41 am, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
189.164.251.162

Dont want to be a skeptic Neal but you keep insisting this house is 2 stories and would pass any bylaw allowing you to build 2 stories "above the highest point on your lot"

But it is obviously 3 stories "above the roof" of the neighbor on the high side (away from the ocean) Not including any basement. This top floor is only covering 25% of the floor below but has walls the entire width of the building on the back.Construction still continues above this roof as well. Not sure how one could argue that this top floor does not exist or is not included in the height of the building. I would suggest this "stuff on the roof" does not exist on the plans submitted to La Heurta .



------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Neal on March 7, 2015, 11:52 am, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
201.133.154.39

Shaun, what I believe you are calling a third floor is the cover over the stairway to the roof area. If that is a "third floor" I can see three others from here. Does appear that they are building a water tank stand on top of the stair well.
I have spoken to the owner and he said he got full approval and all his permits and engineering before he started.
By the way he is somewhat blocking my view, though not much.
Personally I would love a rule that one can not block somebody else's view though those rules are hard to write and hard to enforce. From here I can see several properties about which others have complained. All hose properties are below the guide lines Daniel mentioned. Still one should have the right to develop ones own lot.
I hope the house you first referred to is not adversely impacting your view
------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Erin on March 7, 2015, 12:09 pm, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
187.148.135.222

Having built several years ago in LM with a fully approved and permited house and what we were told at the time of design was: Two stories and a palapa from the point where the street is at your front door. We are one of those houses that from the front door (upper side) is two stories but from the lower side down the hill including the garage, we are four stories. There was no definition as to height only stories. Unfortunately we did block the lower level of the home behind us but we had little choice and for this I was sorry but it could not be built any other way. So I guess it is all about definitions.

In Victoria where I built another house, we dealt with average mean point above sea level as our starting point, then we were able to go up 27 feet above that point to the mid point of the cable end of the roof, these points were all more difficult to determine as the lot was sloping, there had been an existing house on the lot and there were several cables. With help we were able to satisfy the building department whilest leaving a view corridor to the ocean for the neighbour behind us, but it was not easy.

I like the two stories from the street where the front door is as a definition.
------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Shaun on March 7, 2015, 2:10 pm, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
189.164.251.162

Facts

1) This house does not interfere with my view
2) My concern is with the average building above grade, and if this is a new standard?
3)Both Daniel and Erin quote 2 stories above street entrance , as the approved "bylaw".
4) This home under construction has its access only from the Lowest floor. (this must be called the street)although the street is another 20 feet below this level.
5) There is four stories above this so by Daniel and Erin's definition this is a four story building.
which I believe is the first four story building in town , hence my inquiry into bylaws and maximum height of buildings in town.
6)I believe It is in LM best interest to be diligent in controlling Building heights to avoid a PV and or Manzanillo waterfront.


Although a Developer and General Contractor I still believe not all development is good development. The money invested in wages and material in town will soon be gone. But Everyones view of this building will continue for the unforeseen future.
------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Rob Boyes on March 7, 2015, 2:50 pm, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
187.148.184.111

Here's another view of the house in question just for the sake of discussion.
------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Jean on March 7, 2015, 9:25 pm, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
187.148.169.17

I believe there is also a set back. Many homes on the hill are built right on the street.
------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Neal on March 8, 2015, 8:18 am, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
201.133.154.39

Yet another view



------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Scott on March 8, 2015, 10:14 am, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
24.56.202.43

Just a thought and not meant to criticize anyone in particular - I always wonder why so many ex-pats build such large houses. I guess it is one thing if you have a big family who comes and visits a lot for extended periods of time and/or if you are renting part of it, but honestly does anyone really need a 3+story 2,000 + square meter house? I understand the initial rush of being able to afford something so awesome that one could never afford to build in other countries. But think it through. Yes, you have the right to develop your own property, but what is the effect of building such a giant house with a massive impermeable footprint on both the environment and the community? What is the motivation for the decision to build a massive house? A need to impress? An unrealistic dream? Or do you really, honestly need that much house? Smaller houses seem to be the way of a sustainable future. And don't forget all of those stairs that you will have to climb as you get older!

I am not saying all giant houses are always bad, but unnecessarily large houses beyond one's realistic needs probably are wrong for the future older you, the community and the planet as a whole...
------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by David on March 8, 2015, 10:24 am, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
189.164.250.10

On a scale of 1-10, that comment, Scott, was a ten.
------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Judy H on March 8, 2015, 11:21 am, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
50.117.41.147

What a honest, well thought out response and questioning Scott! Thank you for expressing what I imagine many think but don't express. May the charm and humility of La Manzanilla and her people continue to be at the heart of her development as well-for the good of ALL in her community, now and for years to come.
Judy H (soon to be a full time resident of La Manz)
------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Neal on March 8, 2015, 11:39 am, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
201.133.154.39

Great questions.
In our case there where a couple of reasons we ended up somewhat bigger than we wanted. I did not say needed as the definition of that word could open a whole other thread.
A. Wanted to maximize the view.
B. Designing the house was a huge amount of fun.
C. Room for people to visit.
Third reason is pretty funny as it turns out many of our stateside friends are so freaked by Mexico they don't want to visit any way. On well their loss.

I am glad we decided the third floor was too expensive as we sure don't need it unless we turn the lower level into a rental.
------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by s.schiffmacher on March 9, 2015, 10:14 pm, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
187.148.174.5

Totally amazing how many people are criticizing and commenting on this building, and even more amazing once we realize that none of these people have any connection to that building and do not have any impact from it. Must be that to those people the message board is their main source of entertainment, and maybe that is what message boards are for ?!
As to the building itself, it is a regular house of regular size and regular height, but it is built on top of a big peaked rock, so ground “zero” is fairly high. Hardly anyone is actually suffering any disadvantage from that house. I do love daniel’s suggestion, if you like the view you have buy the lot or lots in front of you so no-one can block your view later and that would give the real estate market lots of activity.
Some-one mentioned 2000 sq meters – I very much doubt that that person knows what 2000 m2 really look like.
------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Scott on March 10, 2015, 6:24 am, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
24.56.202.43

Being condescending is not helpful. Yes I know what 2,000 square meters represents. I chose a high number so nobody would think I picked them out individually.

But here is my concise opinion - over-the-top conspicuous consumption in a world of limited resources and in a country where many people can not meet their daily needs is the very definition of selfish.
------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Erin on March 9, 2015, 9:51 am, in reply to "La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
187.148.135.222

In your posting, you failed to mention that the adjacent structures are approximately the same height and the impact for other surrounding houses is not really impacted. I can see where a permit would have been issued taking those issues into consideration. I think each and every new home or structure must be judged on its own merits. There are rules of thumb and exceptions, this one is the latter.
------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Ron Smith on March 10, 2015, 8:06 am, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
187.148.173.121

This is Bill Gates house at 6,100 M2 (66,000 SF), and most of it is underground. I've spent time with his architect Jim Cutler who didn't have a computer in his office until after he began work on Bill's residence.

------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Larry F on March 10, 2015, 8:14 am, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
189.164.250.10



In Vancouver, a lot of people are building " monster" houses like these in the photo attached. That they are ugly and don't into the architecture of the city is a matter of personal opinion. Most of these houses are built by recent immigrants who have a lot of money and who now want to "express" themselves by demonstrating that they own this house and the two BMWs outside simply because they can.

Others, of course, look at these houses and wonder why, in a world of dwindlng space and resources, why any two people would need a 5000 square foot house with six bedrooms and five bathrooms.

Sometimes my visiting friends to La Manzanilla ask me why some foreigners build such large houses here.

"Because they can", I answer.
------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Neal on March 10, 2015, 9:10 am, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
201.133.154.39

I have a suggestion for the owner of the "skyscraper". Have a mural painter on the large wall and then your house will become a community treasure to be loved and cherished by all
------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Anna on March 10, 2015, 9:28 am, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
189.164.226.208

The house that you all are commenting on as the "skyscraper" is owned by a Mexican woman and I don't think she would appreciate being called a foreigner and selfish for building her dream home.
------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Neal on March 10, 2015, 1:07 pm, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
201.133.154.39

Good point Anna
------------------------

Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper

Posted by Mariann Oxford on March 10, 2015, 2:19 pm, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
74.61.55.181

Think Wyland! It could really be a draw to the pueblo....

http://www.wyland.com/

www.wyland.com/
Robert Wyland
Renowned marine life artist Wyland changed the way people think about our environment when he started painting life-size whales on the sides of buildings.


I visited the pueblo as a guest of Mary "Shanti" and I love the "board" and the beach cam. I don't usually post here but while I am at it I want to thank everyone who posts the lovely sunset and other photos. I will come back and visit again soon.

Our little neighborhood is experiencing the same over growth of building. Where there was one small house with a large yard is now being built into a "development" of 10 or more homes. Patches of land that were deemed unbuildable 20 years ago now have huge 4-5 story houses perched on them. As my whole area is glacier mush I hope I will be in Mexico when the next big one hits.

:O)

Mariann for Kirkland
------------------------

Land of Kirk

Posted by daniel c on March 10, 2015, 2:31 pm, in reply to "Re: La Manzanilla Skyscraper"
216.81.81.80

Ah I remember it well when it was a small burg in 1980 in a far off place called the Land of Kirk!
------------------------