User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 12/10/2013 10:05:28 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You know, they worded this statement totally bassackwards. The absolute minimum necessary to achieve my goals, are five (5) 100 foot tall towers, with a Yagi on top of each one. Plus, a number of different wire antennas. I just can't do it with anything less.  Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Village also must make sure that the antenna structure is the minimum necessary for the operator to achieve his/her goals. You know, they worded this statement totally bassackwards. The absolute minimum necessary to achieve my goals, are five (5) 100 foot tall towers, with a Yagi on top of each one. Plus, a number of different wire antennas. I just can't do it with anything less. If I have to pay $1000 to apply for a wire antenna might as well shot for the stars... errr aaaa... minimum necessary to achieve my goals... |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/10/2013 11:56:01 AM EDT
[#2]
"Generally speaking, this will pertain to HAM operators seeking to install a free-standing antenna on their property, or an antenna structure on an existing building"
This phrasing suggests a free-standing antenna structure with an antenna mounted on that structure is OK? :) Personally, I don't see how an antenna mounted so that it cannot fall over on anyone else's property poses any safety concern - same for power levels healthy for the homeowner to live under. I'd sure find out what business are owned or supporting the politicians and start raising a LOT of complaints about the impact of their business on the community and insist that those owners pay for independent consultants to be hired by the city to confirm any of their self-made claims. Failure to handle the diverse permit issues in an even-handed way would open them up to corruption charges and a lot of potential negative publicity. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/10/2013 12:20:08 PM EDT
[#3]
Please note that the Village, prior to passing this law, had no regulations pertaining to HAM operators, and such antenna structures were prohibited by local law. This local law represents the Village’s efforts to expand the rights of HAM radio operators. "Everything is verbotten, and what is not verbotten is mandatory!" The Nazis are alive and well in Kenmore! And this sounds like those gun control bills that claim "while at the same time protecting the 2nd Amendment Rights of hunters." |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/10/2013 4:56:24 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: "Everything is verbotten, and what is not verbotten is mandatory!" The Nazis are alive and well in Kenmore! And this sounds like those gun control bills that claim "while at the same time protecting the 2nd Amendment Rights of hunters." Quote HistoryQuoted: Please note that the Village, prior to passing this law, had no regulations pertaining to HAM operators, and such antenna structures were prohibited by local law. This local law represents the Village’s efforts to expand the rights of HAM radio operators. "Everything is verbotten, and what is not verbotten is mandatory!" The Nazis are alive and well in Kenmore! And this sounds like those gun control bills that claim "while at the same time protecting the 2nd Amendment Rights of hunters." Yup. Disgusting. And so many other things, if this were in GD. I can see a legitimate use for some sort of permitting process for large towers. But their wording in emails, and their overall appearance, is just so far beyond reality it's almost hard to remember it's a real situation. Were I there, I would thumb my nose at them and do whatever I wanted. Woe be on any NY bureaucrat who opposes me. Thank God I live in Oregon  Liberal, but not THAT liberal - and yet still inching closer day by day  |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/10/2013 5:23:58 PM EDT
[#5]
So if you want to find out do you need to put in the $1000 fee with the application? And how does $1000 cover the expenses for the that but it's substantially cheaper for everything else. They contracting out an Engineer or something? Sounds like they are in over their head and figured that no one would make a stick about it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/10/2013 6:04:39 PM EDT
[#6]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/10/2013 6:38:36 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryThe Ventenna sucks on 80 meters. And 40 meters. And 20 meters. And 17 meters. And... you get my drift. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/10/2013 6:50:14 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So if you want to find out do you need to put in the $1000 fee with the application? And how does $1000 cover the expenses for the that but it's substantially cheaper for everything else. They contracting out an Engineer or something? Sounds like they are in over their head and figured that no one would make a stick about it. thats what I do not know... normally you pay for the permit when you apply... the clerks response was that I would need to apply to find it if my antennas needed a permit... screw that... my two antennas have been up for two years... there was no law on the books (I checked) when I put them up... as far as I am concerned they are grandfathered in (and thus any work that needs to be done to them is as well) they have a problem they can take me to court... "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing" |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/10/2013 6:55:33 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yup. Disgusting. And so many other things, if this were in GD. I can see a legitimate use for some sort of permitting process for large towers. But their wording in emails, and their overall appearance, is just so far beyond reality it's almost hard to remember it's a real situation. Were I there, I would thumb my nose at them and do whatever I wanted. Woe be on any NY bureaucrat who opposes me. Thank God I live in Oregon Liberal, but not THAT liberal - and yet still inching closer day by day
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Please note that the Village, prior to passing this law, had no regulations pertaining to HAM operators, and such antenna structures were prohibited by local law. This local law represents the Village’s efforts to expand the rights of HAM radio operators. "Everything is verbotten, and what is not verbotten is mandatory!" The Nazis are alive and well in Kenmore! And this sounds like those gun control bills that claim "while at the same time protecting the 2nd Amendment Rights of hunters." Yup. Disgusting. And so many other things, if this were in GD. I can see a legitimate use for some sort of permitting process for large towers. But their wording in emails, and their overall appearance, is just so far beyond reality it's almost hard to remember it's a real situation. Were I there, I would thumb my nose at them and do whatever I wanted. Woe be on any NY bureaucrat who opposes me. Thank God I live in Oregon Liberal, but not THAT liberal - and yet still inching closer day by day
I totally agree... we live in a dense area... my lot is 130 feet by 50 feet give or take... power lines running in the back yard... If I wanted to put up a 200' tower I can see there might be some concern... a collapse would go over 4 lots... but requiring a $1000 permit for all antennas that is absurd... and what irks me the most was their attitude that something is illegal unless a law exist allowing you to do it... what kind of gaul they have... |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/10/2013 6:58:44 PM EDT
[#10]
The Village also must make sure that the antenna structure is the minimum necessary for the operator to achieve his/her goals. Actually, it is just the opposite. The ham's activities should have the minimum restrictions necessary to ensure safety in the community. PRB-1, which has the backing of numerous governmental agencies (DOD, Civil Defense, etc) and others (Red Cross), states: "Nevertheless, local regulations which involve placement, screening, or height of antennas based on health, safety, or aesthetic considerations must be crafted to accommodate reasonably amateur communications, and to represent the minimum practicable regulation to accomplish the local authority’s legitimate purpose." Also, the $1000 fee, as compared to less than $100 for a home construction permit, or commercial building, is absolutely indefensible. The fee was placed that high with the purpose of preventing you from getting the permit... just as in 1935 when the NFA put a $200 tax on machine guns. The fee was intended to not be affordable. The "village" will tell you you have to pay the $1000 application fee, they will not even look at your proposal, find against you, and keep your money. Word will get around and no one else will apply. That's the intent. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/10/2013 7:29:43 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Also, the $1000 fee, as compared to less than $100 for a home construction permit, or commercial building, is absolutely indefensible. The fee was placed that high with the purpose of preventing you from getting the permit... just as in 1935 when the NFA put a $200 tax on machine guns. The fee was intended to not be affordable. Exactly. This law needs to be challenged in court if the municipality does not back down. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/10/2013 8:07:25 PM EDT
[#12]
The Village. Everytime I read that I kept hearing Number Six asking, "Who is Number 1?".
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/10/2013 8:15:20 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You live in a "village?" Is that like a town, or a city? Sort of, but the Village People are different. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/10/2013 11:23:05 PM EDT
[#14]
2 things pop out to me. They keep saying HAM/ham/Ham operator…we are Amateur Radio Operators licensed by the Federal Communications Commission. They also keep mentioning freestanding towers…by engineering definition a freestanding tower is a self supporting tower (no external supports). Therefore a guyed tower, is not freestanding.
If you had stuff up already. Leave it up. Are you a county/State RACES/ARES member? That can actually help out as Villages tend to only have constables (if even) and usually fall under the Sheriff's jurisdiction. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/10/2013 11:40:04 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
2 things pop out to me. They keep saying HAM/ham/Ham operator…we are Amateur Radio Operators licensed by the Federal Communications Commission. They also keep mentioning freestanding towers…by engineering definition a freestanding tower is a self supporting tower (no external supports). Therefore a guyed tower, is not freestanding. If you had stuff up already. Leave it up. Are you a county/State RACES/ARES member? That can actually help out as Villages tend to only have constables (if even) and usually fall under the Sheriff's jurisdiction. It is best to say things like "I am a Federally Licensed Amateur Radio Operator" and "The Federal Amateur Radio Service", etc I prefer to use the terms "Amateur Radio", "Amateur Radio Operator", " The Amateur Radio Service" etc. Using the terms "Ham" and "Ham Radio" when talking to non amateur radio people can Dumb You Down in their eyes. Most people don't have a clue what Amateur radio is about, it is best to paint it in a positive light. "I am a Federally Licensed Amateur radio operator who strives to keep my skills and equipment prepared so I may be of benefit to my community and even my government in times of emergency or disaster." And Yes Show them (the officials) that you are willing to aide them if needed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2013 1:26:21 AM EDT
[#16]
Seems to that if the intent is to discourage cell towers, they could write the law to read: "Any antenna, or structure whose main purpose is to support an antenna, over 'xx' feet (what's a ham antenna, 50 feet max? - disclaimer, not a HAM) will require permit CB1234, the cost for which shall be $1000.
Or do they want to limit the erection of ALL antennas? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2013 10:25:30 AM EDT
[#17]
I know this is not the point of this thread, but you could put a "flagpole" and build a wood bench to cover the tilt base. 10-80M antenna pictured below, and no one would know.. F a $1000.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2013 11:03:01 AM EDT
[#18]
So whats the fine if you get caught?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2013 11:46:01 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So whats the fine if you get caught? Here in lies the problem. It could be anything from a warning, to a lien on your house. Or perhaps a dollar amount fine for each day ($100/day, or whatever) you continue to violate the ordinance. No telling what the power hungry nuts in a position of authority, are likely to do. Take them to court? Only if you get free legal council from someone like the ARRL. I doubt if many people go into court without an attorney, and win. And it doesn't make much (financial) sense to pay an attorney $10000 to attack the legality of a $1000 fee. I seriously hope the ARRL can help, because without them, it's going to be hard to fight city hall. 
Good luck. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2013 12:05:10 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Here in lies the problem. It could be anything from a warning, to a lien on your house. Or perhaps a dollar amount fine for each day ($100/day, or whatever) you continue to violate the ordinance. No telling what the power hungry nuts in a position of authority, are likely to do. Take them to court? Only if you get free legal council from someone like the ARRL. I doubt if many people go into court without an attorney, and win. And it doesn't make much (financial) sense to pay an attorney $10000 to attack the legality of a $1000 fee. I seriously hope the ARRL can help, because without them, it's going to be hard to fight city hall.
Good luck. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So whats the fine if you get caught? Here in lies the problem. It could be anything from a warning, to a lien on your house. Or perhaps a dollar amount fine for each day ($100/day, or whatever) you continue to violate the ordinance. No telling what the power hungry nuts in a position of authority, are likely to do. Take them to court? Only if you get free legal council from someone like the ARRL. I doubt if many people go into court without an attorney, and win. And it doesn't make much (financial) sense to pay an attorney $10000 to attack the legality of a $1000 fee. I seriously hope the ARRL can help, because without them, it's going to be hard to fight city hall.
Good luck. I just wonder if it's worth the gamble. If it is a $100 a day and you go a year with a wire not getting noticed then oh well, live to fight another day. I would just go with a flag pole with a SGC coupler and a ed fong pvc strapped to a vent pipe. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2013 1:23:06 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Here in lies the problem. It could be anything from a warning, to a lien on your house. Or perhaps a dollar amount fine for each day ($100/day, or whatever) you continue to violate the ordinance. No telling what the power hungry nuts in a position of authority, are likely to do. Take them to court? Only if you get free legal council from someone like the ARRL. I doubt if many people go into court without an attorney, and win. And it doesn't make much (financial) sense to pay an attorney $10000 to attack the legality of a $1000 fee. I seriously hope the ARRL can help, because without them, it's going to be hard to fight city hall.
Good luck. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So whats the fine if you get caught? Here in lies the problem. It could be anything from a warning, to a lien on your house. Or perhaps a dollar amount fine for each day ($100/day, or whatever) you continue to violate the ordinance. No telling what the power hungry nuts in a position of authority, are likely to do. Take them to court? Only if you get free legal council from someone like the ARRL. I doubt if many people go into court without an attorney, and win. And it doesn't make much (financial) sense to pay an attorney $10000 to attack the legality of a $1000 fee. I seriously hope the ARRL can help, because without them, it's going to be hard to fight city hall.
Good luck. The part of this that scares me is that if someone loses against them, it's a template for other HOAs to ban antennas. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2013 3:03:28 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So whats the fine if you get caught? Any punitive action that could be taken for violating the ordinance should be explicitly listed in the ordinance. At the very least referenced in it. What are the penalties for not obtaining a build permit within the village limits? How are they structured? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2013 3:40:01 PM EDT
[#23]
When I bought my house, I put up a 20' mast attached to my chimney to hold the center of my dipole. Overall, it's about 35 feet high. Within a month, someone called the zoning Nazis. Some dyke wrote me a ticket and hung it on my front door. Told me I couldn't have anything extending over 12' above my ridgeline. Game on. I called her boss and ask him how I could be cited while PRB1 and the Texas antenna statute, which has about the same verbiage as PRB1, exist. I further informed them that while I was indeed an Amateur Radio Operator - I was also a licensed Department of Defense Emergency Communications Station operating at the behest of, and in the interest of, the US Army, FEMA Region 6, Department of Homeland Security, Texas Military Forces and the Texas State Operations Center. About a week later I received a letter asking that I disregard the citation. Game, set, match bitches. If you want to side step antenna restrictions, consider joining MARS. No politician wants to be exposed in the media as being adverse to the military and national security. I'm just sayin'...  |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2013 5:32:14 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
When I bought my house, I put up a 20' mast attached to my chimney to hold the center of my dipole. Overall, it's about 35 feet high. Within a month, someone called the zoning Nazis. Some dyke wrote me a ticket and hung it on my front door. Told me I couldn't have anything extending over 12' above my ridgeline. Game on. I called her boss and ask him how I could be cited while PRB1 and the Texas antenna statute, which has about the same verbiage as PRB1, exist. I further informed them that while I was indeed an Amateur Radio Operator - I was also a licensed Department of Defense Emergency Communications Station operating at the behest of, and in the interest of, the US Army, FEMA Region 6, Department of Homeland Security, Texas Military Forces and the Texas State Operations Center. About a week later I received a letter asking that I disregard the citation. Game, set, match bitches. If you want to side step antenna restrictions, consider joining MARS. No politician wants to be exposed in the media as being adverse to the military and national security. I'm just sayin'...
Well played, sir! THIS is the way to do it! 
"In this Post-911 Era we must do all we can to provide emergency assistance to our community in times of need. This antenna ordinance aimed strictly at FCC Licensed Amateur Radio Operators adversely affects our ability to provide this service." |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2013 6:32:00 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well played, sir! THIS is the way to do it!
"In this Post-911 Era we must do all we can to provide emergency assistance to our community in times of need. This antenna ordinance aimed strictly at FCC Licensed Amateur Radio Operators adversely affects our ability to provide this service." Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
When I bought my house, I put up a 20' mast attached to my chimney to hold the center of my dipole. Overall, it's about 35 feet high. Within a month, someone called the zoning Nazis. Some dyke wrote me a ticket and hung it on my front door. Told me I couldn't have anything extending over 12' above my ridgeline. Game on. I called her boss and ask him how I could be cited while PRB1 and the Texas antenna statute, which has about the same verbiage as PRB1, exist. I further informed them that while I was indeed an Amateur Radio Operator - I was also a licensed Department of Defense Emergency Communications Station operating at the behest of, and in the interest of, the US Army, FEMA Region 6, Department of Homeland Security, Texas Military Forces and the Texas State Operations Center. About a week later I received a letter asking that I disregard the citation. Game, set, match bitches. If you want to side step antenna restrictions, consider joining MARS. No politician wants to be exposed in the media as being adverse to the military and national security. I'm just sayin'...
Well played, sir! THIS is the way to do it!
"In this Post-911 Era we must do all we can to provide emergency assistance to our community in times of need. This antenna ordinance aimed strictly at FCC Licensed Amateur Radio Operators adversely affects our ability to provide this service." Yeah. A little good marketing goes a long way. So does bad publicity. "City hall won't support the troops, says MARS amateur radio operator" |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/12/2013 4:48:03 AM EDT
[#26]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/12/2013 6:33:04 AM EDT
[#27]
The clerk got back to me about my question
One last question. The second part of my last email
One further clarification. In your last paragraph it sounds like you are saying that if there is not a law that permits something that it is illegal. I'm not a lawyer but I always thought something was legal unless it prohibited by law not the other way around. You said : Please note that the Village, prior to passing this law, had no regulations pertaining to HAM operators, and such antenna structures were prohibited by local law. So your / the village's contention is that were no law permits an action / activity it is thus illegal… That seems a little broad and overstepping what I understand our laws to be. Again not being a lawyer could you please clarify this for me. thank you again for taking time to respond. Her response First, to answer your question, what I previously said is correct. Unless a use or structure is specifically permitted by the zoning law, it is not allowed. This is standard zoning law. See, for example, Village of Kenmore Code § 25-91(a), which provides “[n]o building, structure or premises shall be created, remodeled or used within the restricted business use district which are intended, arranged or designed to be used for other than one or more of the following . . . .” See also Village of Kenmore Code § 25-67(a). I responded Thank you this has been very enlightening. I just re-read section 25 article I and section 25 article III. Not being a lawyer I am a bit confused again. Can you please point me to the provisions the permit backyard swing sets to be placed in a residential back yard?
Thank you for continuing to answer my questions. I know these types of things probably get tiresome when dealing with someone such as myself who has limited knowledge of the law. The above articles are hot linked to our municipal code. She provided the contact info for the Village's counsel which I forward to the ARRL's general counsel. I am just waiting for the wording of the ordinance. The full municipal code is viewable here : http://library.municode.com/HTML/11075/level1/MUCO.html |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/12/2013 7:20:30 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I would contact the FCC to see if this is legal. Ham radio operators are the backbone of the emergency network system. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/12/2013 8:27:24 AM EDT
[#29]
If you search Lubbock and ham on YouTube…you'll probably find two news clips from a few years ago when people started complaining about 2 towers. Very interesting videos since both towers and houses were owned by the same operator (he got tired of people complaining at one place sold and dismantled and moved and erected).
When I was moving into my current residence a neighbor started going apeshit on me when she saw me unloading tower and putting it in the back yard. She called Lubbock PD who showed up, ran my information talked to me, called the county Sheriff who basically said I wasn't in a HOA, I was licensed, one of his more active RACES guys, and there isn't actually a law that forbids me from putting up a tower. It was the talk of the cold-de-sac when I moved in…how that neighbor came out threatening me and complaining while I was unloading stored tower from my old house to my backyard, behind a fence and got completely embarrassed. All for 70ft of tower I had no intention of setting up (she called LPD before she gave me a chance to tell her that little bit of information). |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2013 8:51:25 PM EDT
[#30]
I was sent a copy of the law. Just glanced at it but it doesn't look good. I sent it off to the ARRL but am still waiting for the official version.
http://wp.me/p41cVo-f1 |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2013 5:20:32 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I was sent a copy of the law. Just glanced at it but it doesn't look good. I sent it off to the ARRL but am still waiting for the official version. http://wp.me/p41cVo-f1 Not seeing it on your site... |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2013 5:46:58 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not seeing it on your site... Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I was sent a copy of the law. Just glanced at it but it doesn't look good. I sent it off to the ARRL but am still waiting for the official version. http://wp.me/p41cVo-f1 Not seeing it on your site... Nor am I - on a side note, that site is nearly impossible to use from an iPhone. And at home my script blockers are having a lot of fun Not sure what is going on, but I think that site needs to go on a diet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2013 8:04:49 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nor am I - on a side note, that site is nearly impossible to use from an iPhone. And at home my script blockers are having a lot of fun Not sure what is going on, but I think that site needs to go on a diet.
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I was sent a copy of the law. Just glanced at it but it doesn't look good. I sent it off to the ARRL but am still waiting for the official version. http://wp.me/p41cVo-f1 Not seeing it on your site... Nor am I - on a side note, that site is nearly impossible to use from an iPhone. And at home my script blockers are having a lot of fun Not sure what is going on, but I think that site needs to go on a diet.
Fixed the missing images and front page... stupid caching engine was screwed up... I will look at the iPhone rendering... I can test it on my wife's when she gets home and the script blockers are probably blocking my Adsense and Amazon scripts... I make just enough money from the scripts to host the site on the Amazon cloud servers verses the crappy shared hosting servers :) |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2013 9:57:56 AM EDT
[#34]
You're screwed
$1K for a $50 wire antenna. Which will no doubt be denied. My recommendations are, in no particular order: flagpole vertical, end-fed wire, move. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2013 10:03:50 AM EDT
[#35]
If all of this hasn't sparked an interest in moving yet, think of it this way:
You're paying the taxes and probably HOA type fees to allow them to rule over you like this.  I don't even live there and it makes me want to move further away from them.
The end result is what they are doing may not be legal, but until someone breaks the law and pays the legal fees it won't get changed. I'm pretty sure this has been said before in this thread but it bears repeating. You are defacto screwed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2013 10:46:32 AM EDT
[#36]
That doesn't address a GMRS station tower…does the law mention anything about that?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2013 11:14:58 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That doesn't address a GMRS station tower…does the law mention anything about that? Quote HistoryQuoted:
That doesn't address a GMRS station tower…does the law mention anything about that? you forget that the clerk says that anything not permitted by the code is forbidden.... First, to answer your question, what I previously said is correct. Unless a use or structure is specifically permitted by the zoning law, it is not allowed. This is standard zoning law. See, for example, Village of Kenmore Code § 25-91(a), which provides “[n]o building, structure or premises shall be created, remodeled or used within the restricted business use district which are intended, arranged or designed to be used for other than one or more of the following . . . .” See also Village of Kenmore Code § 25-67(a). |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2013 4:10:25 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
you forget that the clerk says that anything not permitted by the code is forbidden.... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
That doesn't address a GMRS station tower…does the law mention anything about that? you forget that the clerk says that anything not permitted by the code is forbidden.... First, to answer your question, what I previously said is correct. Unless a use or structure is specifically permitted by the zoning law, it is not allowed. This is standard zoning law. See, for example, Village of Kenmore Code § 25-91(a), which provides “[n]o building, structure or premises shall be created, remodeled or used within the restricted business use district which are intended, arranged or designed to be used for other than one or more of the following . . . .” See also Village of Kenmore Code § 25-67(a). When I read the quote, I get it is for commercial application in business district. If it reads how I'm reading it, what defines the business district? Also, how do the zoning laws apply to storage sheds (pre-fabbed)? I can literally be a smart ass and get extremely technical and point out a ton of flaws in the zoning laws as they are being quoted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2013 4:37:56 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I can literally be a smart ass and get extremely technical and point out a ton of flaws in the zoning laws as they are being quoted. Doesn't mean you can escape the wrath of the code enforcement jackboots  Doesn't sound like the people running the .gov there are very realistic about things anyway. They probably have some law hidden away where they can double the fine if you point out the flaws in their code. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2013 7:51:54 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
When I read the quote, I get it is for commercial application in business district. If it reads how I'm reading it, what defines the business district? Also, how do the zoning laws apply to storage sheds (pre-fabbed)? I can literally be a smart ass and get extremely technical and point out a ton of flaws in the zoning laws as they are being quoted. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
That doesn't address a GMRS station tower…does the law mention anything about that? you forget that the clerk says that anything not permitted by the code is forbidden.... First, to answer your question, what I previously said is correct. Unless a use or structure is specifically permitted by the zoning law, it is not allowed. This is standard zoning law. See, for example, Village of Kenmore Code § 25-91(a), which provides “[n]o building, structure or premises shall be created, remodeled or used within the restricted business use district which are intended, arranged or designed to be used for other than one or more of the following . . . .” See also Village of Kenmore Code § 25-67(a). When I read the quote, I get it is for commercial application in business district. If it reads how I'm reading it, what defines the business district? Also, how do the zoning laws apply to storage sheds (pre-fabbed)? I can literally be a smart ass and get extremely technical and point out a ton of flaws in the zoning laws as they are being quoted. They quoted the commercial section but 25-67a has the same verbiage for residential... |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
.jpg)
