Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I for one am contacting the home owner and referring them to a good attorney who will help. There is such a thing as "spirit of the law." These folks are entitled to have gatherings, with festive music in their living room anytime they please! They simply need to restructure the venue, call it something different and leave the money exchange private. Business as usual after that. All the nayers and judgmental types can stick it! People should be allowed to enjoy their homes. 3 acres with the event being indoor is plenty of space!
They have 9 of these events per year. All my old neighbors have get together's at least that many times per year. I once lived across the street from a Mormon who had the entire church over every month for a potluck. They played music and sang, had huge barbecues and such. It's what people do!
But this is not a "get together". They are selling tickets. Although they have recently changed it to "donations" on their website, at past events, there have been tickets. That is a business. It is my understanding that the musicians are playing there not for the mere party, but because it is a big house and can bring them enough people to make money to make their showing up. I have been to house concerts before. They are great, but they make money for the musicians. I am all for supporting artists, but they should stay within the zoning laws. I live near this house and, yes, it is quite a mess when it breaks up and all the people and cars leave. I would hate to live next door. The house concerts I have been to, though, the host only do a couple a year, not this regularly.
All my old neighbors have get together's at least that many times per year. I once lived across the street from a Mormon who had the entire church over every month for a potluck. They played music and sang, had huge barbecues and such. It's what people do!
Yeah, and if that's what this couple was doing, it would be fine. But it's not. They're taking MONEY from people in exchange for those people attending a concert. They're doing it 9 times a year -- 3 times the amount allowed by the zoning ordinance. It's a business.
As an aside, I *knew* this thread was going to turn into another series of rants against the big, bad gubmint coming to take away everyone's freedom. It's so predictable, it's laughable.
Last edited by Green Irish Eyes; 12-17-2009 at 01:42 PM..
Reason: Not necessary -- thanks.
3 acres with the event being indoor is plenty of space!
For that many cars? Hardly. But the key to me is whether neighbors are complaining or not. If not, IMO it's stupid to waste time of this. But if so, I agree that that's another story. It is reasonable (at least in many areas) to expect not to have your street totally lined with cars nearly every month and for it to be quiet in your neighborhood.
This reminds me of some people on the other block who apparently had some "pre-wedding celebration" a few months back at their house. This included some kids setting up some HUGE speakers and playing some rock/pop music - at RIDICULOUS noise levels. I mean it was literally like a rock concert, and they went well into the night. I called the cops and complained, and finally, a long time later (cops busy getting dougnuts I guess), it was turned down - barely. And still obscenely loud. I would have pressed it further but was leaving town. Fortunately, this is rare, but still....
Neighbors are NOT complaining. The Padgetts know the neighbors, and the neighbors are fine with it. It's been going on for YEARS, with no problems.
The Padgetts are politically active (working tirelessly to make the community a better place), and so one suspects that the anonymous call that started all of this nonsense was from someone who didn't share their political views.
Either this violates the law or or it doesn't. (I don't know enough to answer whether it does.) I just don't see that it's all that relevant as to whether neighbors complain or not. That may be a source of information about a violation, but beyond that I don't see where it becomes a factor in judging compliance with a law.
Either this violates the law or or it doesn't. (I don't know enough to answer whether it does.) I just don't see that it's all that relevant as to whether neighbors complain or not. That may be a source of information about a violation, but beyond that I don't see where it becomes a factor in judging compliance with a law.
Because the spirit of the law is more important than the letter of the law, ie it's not as simple as "it violates the law." I know this is a big generalization/oversimplification, but if nobody complains about a law being broken and it's not doing any harm, often nothing will happen, and often nothing should. A simple example would be jaywalking.
The spirit of the law is more important than the letter of the law
I'm getting confused in this debate which side the conservatives are taking vs. the liberals. It has seemed like the conservatives were the ones arguing for the "absolute property rights," but I'd be shocked if the conservatives would be the same ones arguing that we should be governed by the "spirit of the law" rather than a strict construction. (Not labeling you one way or the other Joey - just a general observation about the exchanges here.)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
(Not labeling you one way or the other Joey - just a general observation about the exchanges here.)
