Amendola's Neighbors Are Mad at Him

[SLGDEV]

You either did not read the story, or you didn't understand what you were reading.

Really? I think my reading comprehension is pretty darn good. I said I read it and, if nothing else, I am an honest person. I don't understand what you are getting at. What is wrong, in your opinion, with any of the following:

1. It is an historic district
2. There is an association that oversees the abiding by the rules
3. There is a loophole that allows a "temporary" structure. (Usually this is for construction or emergency purposes, which is why it is there.)
4. The carport is considered a temporary structure.
5. It was implied that he got approval because of that loophole, though it was not explicitly stated that he did.
6. They, the association and the neighbors, want to close or tighten that loophole.
7. Danny has agreed to take it down by the end of February
8. Its appearance does not fit in well with the general appearance of the historic district
9. Danny, if he bought must have been made aware of the rules. It he rented, then the landlord knew the rules and was required to inform tenants of the rules.

So, just what didn't I understand? I am a total loss as to just what that is.

 

[vyrago]

Amendola has good taste by living in that prestigious neighborhood.. the neighbors getting their "depends in a bunch" is predictable..

Clearly not many of you have served on your local ZBAs. These local law enforcement boards may seem to be busy bodies to some of you, but many neighborhoods would be toxic junk heaps without them. Being a member of one of these boards is thankless task, believe me.

 

[Deus Irae]

Really? I think my reading comprehension is pretty darn good. I said I read it and, if nothing else, I am an honest person. I don't understand what you are getting at. What is wrong, in your opinion, with any of the following:

1. It is an historic district
2. There is an association that oversees the abiding by the rules
3. There is a loophole that allows a "temporary" structure. (Usually this is for construction or emergency purposes, which is why it is there.)
4. The carport is considered a temporary structure.
5. It was implied that he got approval because of that loophole, though it was not explicitly stated that he did.
6. They, the association and the neighbors, want to close or tighten that loophole.
7. Danny has agreed to take it down by the end of February
8. Its appearance does not fit in well with the general appearance of the historic district
9. Danny, if he bought must have been made aware of the rules. It he rented, then the landlord knew the rules and was required to inform tenants of the rules.

So, just what didn't I understand? I am a total loss as to just what that is.

You're *****ing about the rules and talking about people need to know the rules before they move to an area. He didn't violate the rules.

Basic stuff here.

 

[Deus Irae]

Clearly not many of you have served on your local ZBAs. These local law enforcement boards may seem to be busy bodies to some of you, but many neighborhoods would be toxic junk heaps without them. Being a member of one of these boards is thankless task, believe me.

Local ZBAs are a bunch of slime ball busybodies.

 

[vyrago]

Local ZBAs are a bunch of slime ball busybodies.

And you are intimately acquainted with them all? ZBAs are guided by state and municipal codes.

 

[SLGDEV]

You're *****ing about the rules and talking about people need to know the rules before they move to an area. He didn't violate the rules.

Basic stuff here.

IOW, you are saying I didn't get anything wrong. I also said in my original post that he didn't "technically" violate the rules -- just the spirit by exercising a loophole that was meant for other things (See my #3).

Anyway, I am not *****ing about the rules. I don't care one way or the other as I live 1,300 miles away from there. What you are saying is akin to saying it was OK for Belicheck to tape from the sidelines as he really wan't violating a rule, just a memo. Well, Danny violated the spirit (memo), if not the letter (rule), of the rules. That is all I am saying.

 

[Galeb]

IOW, you are saying I didn't get anything wrong. I also said in my original post that he didn't "technically" violate the rules -- just the spirit by exercising a loophole that was meant for other things (See my #3).

Anyway, I am not *****ing about the rules. I don't care one way or the other as I live 1,300 miles away from there. What you are saying is akin to saying it was OK for Belicheck to tape from the sidelines as he really wan't violating a rule, just a memo. Well, Danny violated the spirit (memo), if not the letter (rule), of the rules. That is all I am saying.

A legal circumvention of laws created to control human behavior for purely aesthetic reasons is a worthwhile endeavor. If you can't appreciate the ironic beauty of such a thing, you have my pity.

 

[SLGDEV]

Local ZBAs are a bunch of slime ball busybodies.

Where I live there is a requirement that 75% of the grounds (excluding house) must be lawn as viewed from the street. This is to keep up the appearance of the neighborhood. We all knew this when we bought. One guy decided he wanted a huge circular driveway in from of his house and so he went ahead an had it done and it left less that 40% as lawn. Upshot? He had to have it removed and re-sod, and rightfully so.

Another restriction is that you have to keep your lawn in reasonably good condition. One guy let it grow rather high, was given a warning, and did nothing. The association came in, hired a service, and they mowed it. They then billed the guy, and if he didn't pay there would be a lien placed on his home.

Bottom line: These ZBAs are there to keep up the appearance of the neighborhood so that the property values don't sink into the toilet. Have you never heard the story of the one rotten apple?

 

[Deus Irae]

IOW, you are saying I didn't get anything wrong. I also said in my original post that he didn't "technically" violate the rules -- just the spirit by exercising a loophole that was meant for other things (See my #3).

Anyway, I am not *****ing about the rules. I don't care one way or the other as I live 1,300 miles away from there. What you are saying is akin to saying it was OK for Belicheck to tape from the sidelines as he really wan't violating a rule, just a memo. Well, Danny violated the spirit (memo), if not the letter (rule), of the rules. That is all I am saying.

No, I'm saying that you are either trying to play a rousing game of "let's move the goalposts", or you didn't understand what you read. Your earlier post:

When you buy into an area there are a set of rules and restrictions provided to you at or before closing. I has such when I bought a condo (association rules) and my last home (district rules). He had to know what the reaction would be. To me it is the same as people who buy a house in Winthrop and then complain about the airport noise. If you don't want the restrictions or the noise, then don't buy there. Do you know that in the historic area on Martha's Vineyard you can paint your house any color you want -- so long as it is white? You want yellow? Buy somewhere else.

Again, it's not claimed that he violated any rules. It's not claimed that he violated any restrictions. You're now down to arguing the "spirit" of the rules.

The "loopholes" argument is typical of people who scream about following the rules and then don't like it when the rules are followed.

 

[Deus Irae]

Have you never heard the story of the one rotten apple?

Yes, I've heard lots of stories.

 

[SLGDEV]

No, I'm saying that you are either trying to play a rousing game of "let's move the goalposts", or you didn't understand what you read. Your earlier post:



Again, it's not claimed that he violated any rules. It's not claimed that he violated any restrictions. You're now down to arguing the "spirit" of the rules.

The "loopholes" argument is typical of people who scream about following the rules and then don't like it when the rules are followed.

Then I guess if you lived in my neighborhood you would have a rusted out junker car on your lawn because "technically" it is not a statue nor an ornament. Well, all I can say is that I am glad you are not my neighbor. My neighbors and I take pride in the appearance of our neighborhood.

 

[Deus Irae]

Then I guess if you lived in my neighborhood you would have a rusted out junker car on your lawn because "technically" it is not a statue nor an ornament.

No, I wouldn't. Cars on the lawn aren't my thing. Freedom, individual rights, property rights and the like, however, are very much my thing.

The irony of you whining about "technically", when you were the one talking about people knowing the rules before they move somewhere, is noted, though. It's comedy gold.

Well, all I can say is that I am glad you are not my neighbor. My neighbors and I take pride in the appearance of our neighborhood.

Another way to look at this is to say that you're a person who doesn't respect the property rights of other people, and that your neighbors are similarly dismissive of the rights of others.

 

[SLGDEV]

No, I wouldn't. Cars on the lawn aren't my thing. Freedom, individual rights, property rights and the like, however, are very much my thing.

Another way to look at this is to say that you're a person who doesn't respect the property rights of other people, and that your neighbors are similarly dismissive of the rights of others.

In a word - whatever.

 

[Pyerardi]

DA shouldn’t even be mentioned in this article. He is only a renter, not the owner. It is more probable than not that he asked his landlord who knew the laws or researched them. Permission was granted stipulating that it comes down after the season. All are in agreement, end of story. Those saying he should take it down before then are wrong. Bring it up at the next district meeting and move to close the loophole. It also appears that there is a bush wrapped in plastic in the picture. Where is the outrage that it is not wrapped in burlap?

 

[IllegalContact]

 

[Galeb]

In a word - whatever.

Read what he actually wrote. Many people simply equate the "price of freedom" to soldiers lost in war, but that isn't the only cost. The cost of freedom that we all share is the tolerance we must have for others who chose to express their freedom in ways that we disagree with. There are few things worth such a great cost, but true freedom is certainly one of them.

 

[IllegalContact]

Read what he actually wrote. Many people simply equate the "price of freedom" to soldiers lost in war, but that isn't the only cost. The cost of freedom that we all share is the tolerance we must have for others who chose to express their freedom in ways that we disagree with. There are few things worth such a great cost, but true freedom is certainly one of them.

 

[Galeb]

Is there a raised sledge hammer right above the boundary of the pic?

 

[h0c2000]

Imagine if he grew up in a subdivision with a restrictive HOA like those found in the Woodlands near Houston. The horror! If Amendola's parents did this at their home in Houston, the reaction would be 1000X worse.

 

[SLGDEV]

Read what he actually wrote. Many people simply equate the "price of freedom" to soldiers lost in war, but that isn't the only cost. The cost of freedom that we all share is the tolerance we must have for others who chose to express their freedom in ways that we disagree with. There are few things worth such a great cost, but true freedom is certainly one of them.

I agree completely with that statement. However, my comment about ZBAs still stands. When one buys into an area, and that area has a ZBA, one is agreeing to abide by those rules. It isn't any more a "loss of freedom" or "property rights" than not being allowed to falsely yell fire in a crowded theater is a loss of freedom of speech. Yes, here, he did not technically violate the rules and as a previous poster wrote, they should bring it up at the next meeting where rules can be modified to restrict "temporary structures" to specific instances.