From: LAWRENCE TIGHE (larryradio@worldnet.att.net)
Date: Fri Dec 12 2003 - 18:54:51 PST
Bill,
In NJ, the neighbor councilperson and any relative on that council would
have a distinct conflit of interest....investigated by a state board called
the Local Finance Board. In NJ, they would have had to recuse themselves
from voting.
Of further interest, who introduced the ordinance? Who seconded it? Bet I
can guess.
Hire an attorney who does local zoning law.
Lar
M151A2
M998
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill & Bonnie Prestin" <bprestin@chartermi.net>
To: "Military Vehicles Mailing List" <mil-veh@mil-veh.org>
Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 8:20 PM
Subject: [MV] Is this the land of the free??
> I live on Main street, in a small town (Village) just off I75 in
> Michigan. My lot size is 75 ft. wide by 160 ft deep. I own a 2 1/2 ton
1952
> Studebaker(M342) and a 5 ton 1953 Diamont T(M51)
>
> I built a very large garage to house my trucks. In fact it approached
> the maximum height allowed for "accessory structures" in our town which
was
> 25 ft tall. My garage is 24 ft. eight inches tall.
> I also maxed out the square feet of coverage rule on my lot which
> allows for 25% coverage. I have 24.98% coverage. My garage is 34 ft. wide
> by 46 ft long.
> My neighbor is one of the 5 council members in our town. Her
brother,
> who also lives on main street, is another of the five council members. My
> neighbor was not happy at all about the size of my garage. So they made an
> amendment to the allowed height of accessory structures. The new maximum
> height allowed is 17 ft. six inches tall. luckily my garage was already
> done.
>
> I recently saw in the paper (you have to read the fine print) that
there
> was a proposed ordinance to restrict all vehicles with more than two axles
> from driving on any street in town (excepting main street) lucky me, I
live
> on main street. But the ordinance also restricts vehicles with more than
two
> axles from parking on all streets in town including main street.
> Now, my trucks are stored in my garage at all times. In fact I only
get
> one of them out, about 10-12 times a year. They are also licensed and
> insured as "historic" vehicles.
> Now occasionally, when family comes up to visit, I will get one out
> and give the kids rides around the block, stopping in the parallel parking
> in front of my house to let the kids swap out & take turns. I also use my
> trucks in the local 4th of July parade. This new ordinance would prevent
me
> from doing both of these things.
> So I thought I would go to the meeting and talk to them about it. To
say
> anything at our towns council meetings you have to get on the agenda. So I
> filled out the form the required week ahead of time. At the meeting, I ask
> If they could make an exclusion to the ordinance for licensed "historic
> vehicles". They said "we can't make an exclusion for just one person." I
> said " No I don't mean just me, it would be anyone with a historic vehicle
> with more than two axles." They said "that could be thousand of vehicles"
> "Doing that would defeat the purpose of the ordinance"
> Then they told me that they don't think I should be allowed to
keep
> trucks of that size on residential property in the village, and they were
> going to approach the zoning board to ask If they could make me remove
them.
> I am not really sure what action I should take? Should I wait
until
> I get a letter saying I have to get rid of my trucks? Or is there
something
> I could do pro-actively. It makes me wonder what is becoming of "The land
of
> the free"
>
> Bill
>
>
>
> ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
> To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
> To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to <mil-veh-digest@mil-veh.org>
> To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 07 2005 - 20:26:57 PDT