Slashdot Mirror


Officials Use Google Earth To Find Unlicensed Pools

Officials in Riverhead, New York are using Google Earth to root out the owners of unlicensed pools. So far they've found 250 illegal pools and collected $75,000 in fines and fees. Of course not everyone thinks that a city should be spending time looking at aerial pictures of backyards. from the article: "Lillie Coney, associate director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center in Washington, DC, said Google Earth was promoted as an aid to curious travelers but has become a tool for cash-hungry local governments. 'The technology is going so far ahead of what people think is possible, and there is too little discussion about community norms,' she said."

34 of 650 comments (clear)

  1. They collected $75,000... by Crudely_Indecent · · Score: 4, Insightful

    but how much did it cost?

    --


    "Lame" - Galaxar
    1. Re:They collected $75,000... by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes, you generally have to get a permit from the city in order to put in a pool. This isn't anything new nor is it some obscure thing. It's a pretty typical part of city zoning ordinances.

    2. Re:They collected $75,000... by Volante3192 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A swimming pool is a massive adjustment to the landscape, involving excavation multiple feet down. You don't know what pipes or wires might be down there. And what if you're on a hill and it breaks because it wasn't properly made, causing a landslide?

      Note, by the way, in the BODY of the article, the word 'license' never shows up. Instead they use variations on 'permit' which sounds much more logical. If you want a pool, you get an inspector, they ensure there's no rogue wiring or geographic problems, they tell the city, then you get your zone permitted to install a pool.

    3. Re:They collected $75,000... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Comparably, government employees typically have salaries a good bit below that in the private sector.

      Total bullshit. I used to work for the private sector at a museum that was then taken over by the federal government. When the takeover went through, I gained ridiculous pension and medical benefits, along with a $10,000+ increase in my annual salary.

    4. Re:They collected $75,000... by Critical+Facilities · · Score: 5, Informative

      If you want a pool, you get an inspector, they ensure there's no rogue wiring or geographic problems,

      On a slight tangent, sometimes a proper permit/inspection can prevent a tragedy.

    5. Re:They collected $75,000... by fyngyrz · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's called zoning and planning, but what it is, is malignant interference with your liberties.

      If it's your land, and what you do there does not physically affect anything beyond your land's boundaries (chemical, fire, high level sound waves, overhangs, undermining, water flow... the obvious things) then I really can't see the government having any role at all. Of course, I'm one of those crackpots that think land ownership should be meaningful, and that if you want to control something, you should have to own it first. Radical, I know.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    6. Re:They collected $75,000... by jythie · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Normally in cases like this the licensee fee (in theory at least) goes towards the local inspection framework. In most areas you need to have pools inspected so they meet both construction and safety guidelines.

      Much of this framework also comes from the assumption that one will not hold onto their property indefinitely.. and thus the next owners are assured that things were properly constructed to within certain guidelines. In the case of a pool this can be important since much of that information disappears once the pool is complete and a new owner can not verify without basically tearing up the pool again. Same with many of the regulations regarding home construction... without inspection and permits you really do not know if a house was built correctly without tearing into parts of it.

    7. Re:They collected $75,000... by Wonko+the+Sane · · Score: 3, Funny

      In the case of a pool this can be important since much of that information disappears once the pool is complete and a new owner can not verify without basically tearing up the pool again. Same with many of the regulations regarding home construction... without inspection and permits you really do not know if a house was built correctly without tearing into parts of it.

      Without mandatory permitting processes homeowners would maintain this documentation or else they'd be forced to sell their home at a discount.

    8. Re:They collected $75,000... by nomadic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A common myth that public sector employees believe so that they don't feel bad about agitating for automatic raises.

      You are really comparing ALL workers in the private industry--including Wal-Mart greeters, janitorial staff, part-time construction workers, farm workers, etc.--against public industry employees who probably skew heavily towards college-educated? Why would you think this is a valid comparison?

    9. Re:They collected $75,000... by h4rr4r · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, they would just lie. Like they already do about flooding.

    10. Re:They collected $75,000... by ryanov · · Score: 3, Informative

      That graph is so neat and clean; no citations mucking up the look of it. Nice work!

    11. Re:They collected $75,000... by dsoltesz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Since using aerial photography to spot permit violations (construction w/o a permit) is an common activity that's been going on for a very long time, municipalities are actually saving money by using freely available data instead of buying it, paying for overflights, paying for image processing and mosaicking, paying for software that can do all this, etc. Since Google provides data collected from previous years, folks doing the work can easily do a temporal change comparison to spot new construction. Brilliant way to work on a shoestring budget... of course, I don't have an illegal pool.

    12. Re:They collected $75,000... by toadlife · · Score: 5, Informative

      I don't really see how any form of pool malfunction could possibly damage a neighbor's property,

      Pools without gates tend to kill small children. Also pools without double drains tend to suck the innards out of people. Those are two things are usually required and checked as a part of the permit process.

      Truth is, you are just another liberal sado masochist

      Truth is you're just a self centered prick who does get the point of civilization.

      --
      I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
    13. Re:They collected $75,000... by commodore64_love · · Score: 4, Insightful

      >>>government employees typically have salaries a good bit below that in the private sector

      My engineering job with the FAA was the highest-paying job I've ever had ($55/hour). My second highest commercial/government contractor job was $7 an hour lower.

      I also made note that most of the government employees didn't actually do much work (surfing the net instead). It struck me that this FAA building's sole purpose was probably to help the Congressman/Senator get reelected every few years..... i.e. white collar welfare. In the private sector the building would have been closed and/or 75% of the staff laid off to more accurately match the human resources to the workload.

      Government is more efficient? Hardly.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    14. Re:They collected $75,000... by SpeZek · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What gives me the right to tell you what you can do over there, presuming you're not poisoning my grass or shining a 10 kw laser though my living room?

      Because we all live in a club, called "society", where we make certain sacrifices to personal freedom to help everybody. As a society, we've decided that you can't be a jerkass by building unsightly properties next to others, because it takes too much away from property values and deprives others' of their own enjoyment of their property. As a society, we've decided that you should need a permit to build a pool, because it needs to meet certain standards that aim to keep others safe. You enjoy the services that society gives you, like the right to own your own property, so society expects you to play by the rules.

    15. Re:They collected $75,000... by NiceGeek · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I love the libertarian answer for everything. Of course that answer doesn't prevent the problems from occurring or stop preventable deaths.

      Why don't we go ahead and trash the food safety regulations too? After a couple dozen deaths from E.coli the affected restaurant will be out business.

    16. Re:They collected $75,000... by AndersOSU · · Score: 3, Interesting

      A deed restriction tells you what kind of mailbox you need and what color to paint your front door, or in the past that colored people and china-men aren't allowed to inhabit the premises unless employed in domestic service. That last one's a direct quote from the deed to my grandfather's house.

      It's city ordinances that tell you that you can't have a chicken coop in downtown St. Louis, and that you can't run a junkyard from the 1/8 acre behind your McMansion, and it always has been.

      Deed restrictions don't say, "make sure you get a building permit before you build your deck, or your garage, or your pool." The reason we have building permits is so that urban Mr. Fix'it doesn't build a deck that collapses at a party injuring dozens, so that he doesn't build a garage that catches fire and spreads to the neighborhood, and so that the pool isn't a hole in the ground attached to a sensitive wetland into which Suzi Homeowner diligently dumps a 20lb bag of chlorine a week.

      All that said, while having actual engineers sign off on actual building projects is a good idea (and don't kid yourself, that pool is a building project), this is a money grab, pure and simple.

    17. Re:They collected $75,000... by toadlife · · Score: 4, Informative

      Overhead flights are also used by mosquito abatement districts is to spot "green" pools. When we moved into our house, the pool was a swamp, complete with water bugs and who knows what else living in it. About three weeks later, we got a visit from the mosquito abatement man to inspect our swamp. I had gotten the pool from greenish-black to turquoise by the time. He congratulated me on my progress (he had seen the pool before we moved in) and we never saw him again.

      --
      I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
    18. Re:They collected $75,000... by The+Spoonman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm one of those crackpots that think land ownership should be meaningful

      And not much else...yes, we know. You fail to think critically about things like "improperly installed pools can leak and your neighbor'ss basement" or "are you putting that pool directly under power lines" or " did you bother to make sure there were no gas lines buried under the area you're thinking of putting your pool" or "did you know your property once used a septic tank...which is currently under the area in which you wish to place a pool" or "making sure there's proper fencing with locks to keep the neighbor's kids out of your pool when no one's watching so they don't drown". Yes, I went with the "won't someone please think of the children argument" because there's too many people who feel they should be allowed to be in a society and benefit from it without contributing too much personal responsibility as they do so.

      There's a reason other people call people like you crackpots.

      --
      Which is more painful? Going to work or gouging your eye out with a spoon? Find out!
      http://www.workorspoon.com
    19. Re:They collected $75,000... by geekoid · · Score: 3, Informative

      People are required to get permits.
      The didn't get permits.
      They got caught.

      Not so much of a money grab. More like equal enforcement.

      Plus city infrastructure needs to be able to support it. Backflow device water quality, and so on. They want to be sure it was engineered correctly so you don't kill your neighbors.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    20. Re:They collected $75,000... by geekoid · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes, sue them, that bring you dead spouse back to life.

      Let me know how you feel when they poison a whole neighborhood, killing the young and elderly because they didn't install a proper backflow device.

      If ti was just about someone who flooded my house, you might have a point. It's not.

      Here is a clue, how about we ensure the meet some minimum standard to minimize the risk to people outside the persons property? Naw, lets just sue them until the dead are back.
      I know, maybe I'll build a coal fired plant and then make you wade through years of people work and legal cases until you can make me shut it off?

      twit.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  2. This is an appropriate use. by molo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It is the government office saving money instead of hiring a plane to fly over the neighborhood and take pictures. Or are you going to say that you have a right to privacy from the air? Get real. A $300 fine ($75,000 / 250) doesn't sound excessive for a permit violation either. Now all those pools also need to be inspected for possible code violations. That is where it might get expensive.

    -molo

    --
    Using your sig line to advertise for friends is lame.
    1. Re:This is an appropriate use. by Mastadex · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I agree. They are essentially DOING THEIR JOB but with the added efficiency of Google Earth. I don't see a problem here.

      --
      A morning without coffee is like something without something else.
  3. Oh no... by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...the government caught me in the act of doing something illegal using public information that's been available for years now! Bad Big Brother!

    Permits are hard to get around here to do anything though. Which sucks. But if you choose to break the law, you should be aware of the potential consequences and the chance of getting caught. Given the public images of homes it should not be too surprising that something like this would happen eventually.

  4. Interesting by MBGMorden · · Score: 3, Interesting

    While not Google Earth, as a county government we look at our own aerial photos (added to a GIS layer) to find unpermitted structures as well (mostly just to get them on the tax books - if someone builds without a permit we often have no idea that the structure exists, so it goes untaxed).

    While I'm sure it's a LONG ways off, at a recent conference I was at one of the larger city-level governments in the state was actually discussing the possibility of using a form of sonar to track this. I'm not sure if they're just in the brainstorming phase or what, but from what he said the idea was to use it to map out the structures in the city at periodic intervals. Then between intervals you compare to the previous sweep to see anything large that's been added or removed. You filter that against what parcels have not had a permit issued, and you get a good source of info to start following up on construction without permits.

    The same city had recently installed various microphones in spots around the city to auto-alert the police department when it detected gunfire (this is already in place, not conceptual). Apparently it is fine tuned enough to be able to tell the difference between an actual gun and things like fireworks and the like.

    --
    "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    1. Re:Interesting by goodmanj · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The tax you paid on the materials for your garage goes to the state, to ensure that you have a working highway and court system so you and the carpenter who built the garage can do business in peace and harmony.

      The tax you pay on the garage every year afterwards goes to the city or county, to ensure that when the garage catches fire, there's a fire department to save the rest of your house and the neighborhood.

      Stop looking at taxes as just "the Man wants my money", and look at what that money gives you.

  5. When a pool fails... by crow · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I had a friend who had a neighbor with an unlicensed above-ground pool. I'm not sure what went wrong, but one day it collapsed, sending all of the water into my friend's back yard, destroying everything there. Building permits are required for good reasons, and they're usually dirt cheap (less than 1% of the project cost). If you're hiring a contractor who doesn't get a building permit, then they're probably not doing it to save you money, but to allow them to skimp on important building code details that might end up costing you a huge amount.

    1. Re:When a pool fails... by DerekLyons · · Score: 4, Interesting

      So if the pool had been licensed then the water wouldn't have done as much damage to your friends back yard when it collapsed?

      Without knowing what went wrong, I'd wager the scenario could run like my what happened here a few years back...
       
      A guy decided to put in a new driveway, and to keep it level carved away part of the foot of a hill. The hill started to slide a little bit, so he built his own six foot tall, thirty foot long retaining wall out of concrete blocks and without benefit of a permit or inspection. Problem was, not only did he not tie the courses together, he also didn't anchor the wall back into the hill, and he didn't provide drains behind the wall. All of which are required by code, should have been specified on the plans submitted for the permit he didn't have, approved by the county engineer as part of the approval process he didn't go through, certified as performed by the licensed contractor he didn't hire, and inspected by the county after completion...
       
      Within a few weeks the county found out about this (I don't recall how) and yellow tagged the house. (Which means the house could not be occupied until the work noted on the tag, in this case replacing the wall, had been properly completed.) A few weeks later, in defiance of the yellow tag, the man moved back into the house because he "didn't want his family to spend Christmas in a hotel". Four days later, during a normal (for these parts) winter rainstorm, the weight of the hill and accumulated water collapsed the wall - and the ensuing mudslide wiped out the house and killed the man, his wife, and three of their children. The only survivor was a teen aged daughter who was at a friends Christmas party.
       
      So the issue isn't that the water wouldn't have done as much damage when it collapsed, but that the odds are if the pool had been properly built it would have been less likely (much less likely) to collapse in the first place.
       
      Not to mention, that most home insurance policies won't cover damages caused by un permitted construction. Nor are you left with any recourse - you'll be liable if you're party to a suit that arises subsequent to any damages caused by failures in such construction.

  6. Talk about google privacy at defcon by socz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The speaker moxie said basically, what the gov't had been trying to do but would never be able to is what google is doing now. To put it in perspective, he asked: "Who do you think knows more about the people of Iran? It's government, or google?"

    So for all the good google does, this is one small way that it hurts some. That's not to say though, that the people who have these pools are innocent. Yes, we're a capitalistic society as many think, but no, you don't pay to have the roads you drive on to be paved, you contribute like everyone else does in small amounts. And without those small amounts almost nothing would be possible as we get much more and further by working together than alone.

    http://www.defcon.org/html/defcon-18/dc-18-speakers.html#Marlinspike

    --
    My abilities are only limited by my imagination
  7. Reasonable expectation of privacy... by Defenestrar · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Do you have it in a fenced in back yard?

    What about the "traditional" points of view but at other wavelengths? If your house is transparent to spectrum X - should you have a reasonable expectation of privacy in say your bedroom?

    Some photography laws allow for pictures of private locations from the street, but not using telephoto optics - does that apply to satellites and airplanes use? Perhaps you could make the jurisdiction argument, but if your "camera" is located outside of the jurisdiction, but the person pulling the shutter is within the jurisdiction (e.g. programmed flight, camera, and receives images) does that muddy the waters?

    I don't think this excellent reference even addresses the issue at hand.

  8. Reminds me of Adam Smith by langelgjm · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This story reminds me of Adam Smith's reasoning of why properties in his time should have been taxed based on the number of windows, rather than hearths: both for privacy reasons (you can count windows from the outside, whereas hearths require entering the home) and to make evasion harder. When tax assessment time came around, people would brick up their hearths. Sure, you could brick up windows, but since they could be observed any time without you knowing, it makes it much harder to do.

    But yeah, maybe we have a problem with the fact that the pool requires a permit, but that's a different issue. Hopefully sitting in an office using Google Earth means they're not driving around wasting gas, or hiring a plane as you mentioned.

    --
    "Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
  9. Re:Should have got planning permission by IAmGarethAdams · · Score: 3, Interesting

    To someone who's got enough money to pay a contractor to install a pool in their backyard, a $300 fine is probably the right amount to not be prohibitively expensive but still make them think about their choice of contractor the next time they hire one.

  10. Re:TOS? by Loco3KGT · · Score: 4, Funny

    busy filling out the paperwork to get your (already built) pool approved by the city council?

    --
    Blessed be he who reads this post, Cursed be he who tells my boss.
  11. Drowning, disemboweling hazards by handy_vandal · · Score: 3, Informative

    Child falls into pool, drowns. Worse yet -- child playing in pool, pool drain unsafe, disembowels child by sucking out colon through anus -- not funny, happened in my home town recently, the girl died a couple of days later.

    Are towns on a money grab? Probably.

    Is it true that there is "too little discussion about community norms" ...? Of course not -- go surf blogs, tweet some tweets -- this world is not lacking for discussion.

    --
    -kgj