Text 11583, 218 rader
Skriven 2009-05-29 15:26:46 av Dan Ceppa (1:138/666.0)
Kommentar till en text av Ross Cassell
Ärende: Unfathomable
====================
-> On 29 May 09 05:58:36, Ross Cassell got back to Dan Ceppa
-> Re: Unfathomable
RC>> What the story elaborates on below is very scary if it can be
RC>> upheld..
DC> Why?
RC> It opens the door for Govt to be able to dictate whatever else one can
RC> do in their homes.
There arlready are laws against what you can't do in your home. Or, is it
legal in your state to run a meth lab?
RC> Maybe one cant carve wood figurines in the garage any longer?
It could be, if it is a business.
RC> Maybe you wont be able to restore that 57 Chevy in your garage anymore
RC> because you home isnt licensed as a repair facility.
Try shooting urethane paint in your neighborhood and see what happens.
RC> Myabe one would no longer be able to work/telecommute from home any
RC> longer unless they have a permit?
Depending on the business, that can be the case.
RC> Sound extreme, sure, but when one can rationalize openning pandoras
RC> box, it leads to other things..
No, it doesn't. There are zoning laws in most every community that
restrict all sorts of things.
RC>> Just think, on major holidays, one couldnt say grace over a meal
RC>> with family and friends without a permit!
DC> The story does not say that at all.
RC> Yes it does, on a basic level this is what they were doing, breaking
RC> bread and praying together.
No, it doesn't. The commentary makes that specious claim. At a basic
level, they were sitting around in the nude.
RC>> If this Pastors get togethers in his home disrupted neighbors,
RC>> caused traffic and parking problems, I could see the city getting
RC>> him on some ordinance violation.
DC> Could it be that that is exactly what the situation is?
RC> No, because the article elaborates that he needed to pay the city for
RC> a Major Use Permit, and the city could not justify that if indeed his
RC> gatherings were disturbing or inconveniencing the neighbors.
Because that's the way zoning laws often work. If you want a variance,
you'll have to pay for it.
RC> You cannot obtain a permit to legally disturb your neighbors in a
RC> residential area, except maybe a building permit for home construction
RC> or renovation and even so there are limits. Like no work after dusk or
RC> before dawn.
Care to bet on that? Such permits are often made for limited use that
goes against normal zoning usage. Try holding a picnic at your place of
business and see how fast the food inspectors show up to see if proper
sanitary food handling is being employed.
RC>> If the Pastor and his friends were getting in the faces of the
RC>> neighbors or otherwise disturbing the peace, I could see the city
RC>> getting him.
DC> There's not enough information on the "dastardly case" to make a
DC> judgement as to what is really going on. I can think of many
DC> scenarios where such gatherings of any nature, secular or sectarian,
DC> would be intrusive on the neighbors.
RC> Yes, but such article did elaborate on the Pastor being asked to pay
RC> for a Major Use Permit, which presumably if paid, that would be have
There's your answer again: "Major Use Permit".
RC> been the end of it. If the Pastors activities were disturbing the
RC> neighbors, there is no way in hell that the City would be asking for a
RC> fee or a permit to do so.
It's because the activity goes beyound what is proper under the zoning
restrictions.
RC> In Kirkland can you obtain a permit to hold a gathering at your house
RC> in which traffic and parking issues are presented and your guests are
RC> allowed to disturb or inconvenience your neighbors?
Who cares? The point of the matter is that the situation is against the
zoning codes. They have 2 choices: Pay for the needed variance or
move to another neighborhood where those restrivtions do not apply.
RC> So the article does contain enough information.
Yep, it has more than enough to show that the whole deal is trumped up
by the pastor.
RC> If it were simply a case of disturbing neighbors, such an article
RC> would not have made it beyond the San Diego newspapers much less into
RC> them.
Like where? A bunch of winger blogs? All you have is FOX News[sic].
RC>> But if all they were doing were getting together behind closed
RC>> doors to share a meal and Bible Studies and Prayers, who is
RC>> getting harmed, providing such gatherings arent disturbing or
RC>> inconveniencing the neighbors?
DC> You answered your own question with those last 5 words in the
DC> question.
RC> and the article would have mentioned that, and this article would not
The article is quite incomplete. It's not worthy to use as bird cage
liner.
DC> that had anything concrete to say about the matter, it was a fender
DC> bender that brought the police into the situation. My guess is hat
DC> thew complaint is about excessive traffic in a residential area as
DC> well as using too much parking.
RC> and how does a major use permit mitigate the traffic problem?
Haven't you ever seen where parking areas are especially deliniated
for private use on a public street? That's often done for parades, both
for staging of the parade itself as well as to where and where not
private vehicles can park.
RC> After all, if he pays, he carries on with no further interference from
RC> the city..
Wrong. He'll be most likely restricted to a particular number of set
days and times as well.
RC> You do reveal as to how the city found out about the gatherings, but
RC> fender benders can happen in neighborhoods for many reasons. Six
Yeah, something that a real reporter would have brought out in the
original story. Why do you think I'm questioning the validity of the
premise of the piece?
RC> months ago, we had a motorcycle versus Cadillac wreck, neither
RC> operator was enroute to any religious gathering.
How do you know? Where they questioned about their destinations? Perhaps
both were returning from religious services. In any event, that's a
strawman argment you gave.
RC> This isnt about the City using existing statutes to prevent the
RC> disturbing of the peace because they asking him to purchase a permit
RC> to allow it to continue.
Has it occurred to you that the disturbance is in the fact that there
is much more than normal traffic in the neighborhood? What about the
fact that other neighbors' guests are deprived of parking at their
friends homes?
RC> If I threw a pool party there is no permit I could buy that would
RC> allow me to inconvenience my neighbors or allow my guests to hoot and
RC> holler etc.. Maybe in the Left Coast states, they do have such
RC> things?? {SHRUG}
I got news for you, Ross. Such situations also occur on the Wrong Coast.
In most all states, fireworks are prohibited for private use. However,
permits can be had in many states for special events.
DC> All of the articles, the bulk of which are blogs, state "what if's".
DC> One is the "10's of thousands of dollars [that] would be needed for
DC> a permit". There are virtually no "whys" for the town's action
DC> against the gathering. Nor have there been any "hows" as to the how
DC> situation developed.
RC> Use common sense Dan, thats all it takes..
I did. Common sense tells me that the pastor is blowing the whole
situation far out of proportion.
RC> If the issue is disturbing thy neighbors, there is no permit that the
RC> city could require in order to allow one to do so.
You still haven't figured out the the extra traffic and usage of the area's
parking spots is a disturbance. It was, a perhaps still is, the law in
Troy, NY that the parking spot in front of one's house belongs unequivocally
to the owner of that house. You park in front of that house without
permission and the owner has the right to have your car towed at your
expense.
DC> BTW, the number one hit on my search: FOX News[sic]. I didn't notice
DC> any other network or newpaper picking up the story.
RC> So this isnt true then?
Based on what I've read on it, that is a possibility. It wouldn't be the
first time FOX News[sic] ran with a false story.
And, even if true, the zoning laws are the controlling authority. There
is absolutely nothing in the story to suggest outherwise. If the pastor's
meetings are breaking those rules, that's his problem and he has to deal
with the law. As I pointed out, it has noting at all to do with praying
for any reason. It's most likely that the excesive traffic and parking is
causing the problem. Further, the easy remedy is to have the regularly
scheduled activity that is causing the problem moved to pastor's church.
--- OMX/Blue Wave/DOS v2.30
* Origin: Soundly on the Fault Line (1:138/666.0)
|