Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Staff Contacts | Affiliates | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Rough road for RV ordinance

April 15, 2014

GLADSTONE — While the future of Gladstone’s recreation vehicle parking ordinance is still uncertain, concerned residents, business owners, and city staff are all working towards developing solutions......

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(25)

Whizzywhig

Apr-21-14 4:12 PM

Frog,

Are you feeding the residentII

just enough for him to shoot his tongue out and grab to correct, make his day, and show his intelligence for what it is?

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ResidentII

Apr-20-14 11:46 AM

I suppose "thot" is a politically correct moniker for thought?

I thought you had to be of sound mind to file your own lawsuit? That's why I wondered who was filing on your behalf.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

frogleggs

Apr-20-14 10:09 AM

Thank YOU!

I can understand your being easily impressed about thinking out of the box,

indeed, an original thot!

"I'm impressed by your cr.ap about not misspelling junk but instead claiming to be politically correct."

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

frogleggs

Apr-20-14 10:06 AM

ME !

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ResidentII

Apr-19-14 7:14 PM

So I guess the question is, who are you going to get to file the lawsuit on your behalf?

I'm impressed by your cr.ap about not misspelling junk but instead claiming to be politically correct.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

frogleggs

Apr-19-14 1:05 PM

BTW res#2,

In the interest of being polite, etc.,

i reserved calling your cra.p, cr.ap,

but instead used the more poltically correct version of cr.ap,

and gave it the monkiker

"junck".

Notable is the fact that you took notice of my attempt to be polite and politically correct.

- thank you for you highlight and testimonial.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

frogleggs

Apr-19-14 12:59 PM

Here’s a petition of ignorance:

. . . “yet you claim you would sue any neighbor who parked theirs anywhere near your property.

So apparently you may be the one who doesn't understand zoning?”

FYI #2

The legal system is such, that most people of sound mind can institute a law suit for any reason, any time, and in those instances were minds are reputed to be “less than sound”, law suit’s can be instituted on their behalf.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

frogleggs

Apr-19-14 12:59 PM

Since the city has knowledge

- that there has been,

- that there is today a “problem” with regard to residential zoning,

what is:

- malfeasance ?

- misfeasance ?

- nonfeasance ?

Yes,

- you would,

- the city would,

- have your and their

day in court defending respective pleadings, damages not withstanding.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ResidentII

Apr-18-14 7:22 PM

BTW, since you brought up grade school teachers, have you learned to spell "junk" correctly yet?

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ResidentII

Apr-18-14 7:10 PM

As far as you feeding me, I could never swallow that load of crap that you're spouting. I actually do understand zoning and currently there isn't a zoning ordinance to prevent parking of RV's or boats in the city limits, yet you claim you would sue any neighbor who parked theirs anywhere near your property. So apparently you may be the one who doesn't understand zoning?

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

frogleggs

Apr-18-14 9:04 AM

I’m not going to bottle feed you.

I'm not going to spoon feed you either.

I’m not your mother.

I’m not your grade school teacher either.

You’ve been presented with an idea and a few details

- what to look for,

- where to look,

- and if you’re incapable,

- you can pay your attorney for the answers.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

frogleggs

Apr-18-14 9:03 AM

As for stooping. . .

it wasn’t much of a stoop at all, just standing up and saying what is readily obvious from your questions.

Don’t feel insulted because you only have a very fuzzie idea what zoning is about,

neither do a great many like you, and in the same boat

paddling and drifting,

without a place to go,

let alone the sense and direction of how to get there!

Since you’re a ships captain, you’ve no doubt heard about the ship owner who was up the creek without a paddle. ..

If all of you collectively,

had oars,

guaranteed you’d all be rowing in opposite directions,

partly because half of you wouldn’t know enough to put your oars in the water . .

- but wait,

- that’s another story.

Perhaps too many city residents, the city of Gladstone, are attempting a trip in a sinking skiff,

- little wonder that they should be stumped or stymied by the definition of what constitutes “residential”, and

- have tak

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

frogleggs

Apr-18-14 8:57 AM

No I didn’t insult you,

but merely indicated that it was your lack of knowledge that provides you with wrong answers and unanswered questions.

Hopefully you don't always feel “insulted” when someone tells you to go research the meaning of everything you don’t know.

- Home school yourself, - do the work yourself,

- find out how to get to the answers yourself,

- then when you have an epiphany about understanding zoning and its concepts,

- you’ll have the resources with which to answer your own questions.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ResidentII

Apr-16-14 8:53 AM

I see that you need to immediately stoop to insulting me instead of using facts to bolster your point of view. Apparently you are the one who doesn't understand the definition of residential. You called all the prohibited items "non-residential" My question to you was, since we are allowed to park cars & trucks on the street does that make them residential somehow? Since campers & motorhomes are meant for people to reside in they should clearly be considered residential. You also stated "Proper storage in a residentially zoned area should never be tolerated." So according to your logic, or lack of it, residents shouldn't even be able to store their "toys" inside their garages. It's funny that you can't even spell "junk" when it's what you're trying to define.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ResidentII

Apr-16-14 8:24 AM

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

frogleggs

Apr-15-14 9:13 PM

If you like junk, clutter and the yooper-ville experience, look about you, you'll be living the good life of junck clutter and the run-down look guranteed to all but the discriminating, in gladstone, mi, usa!

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

frogleggs

Apr-15-14 9:09 PM

Proper storage of your toys outside of a residential area should be cheaper for you.

Proper storage in a residentially zoned area should never be tolerated.

I pay to have my toys stored out of sight from my neighbors and off my property.

Little wonder that you should be stumped or stymied by the definition of what constitutes

“residential”, as it is a term unfamiliar to most people, yourself included.

Avail yourself of home study, by reviewing the history of zoning, and division of land use into zones, “plans”, and activities.

Each land use zone in a community governs and should enumerate the classes of activities and other encumbrances limiting and permitting the use under each class of zoning.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

frogleggs

Apr-15-14 9:07 PM

Especially in residentially zoned areas,

activities, and encumbrances regulating structures, and a myriad of items are meant to preserve the atmosphere and environment that contributes to peace of mind, freedom and well being from disturbances as well as the protection and preservation of residential property values.

Obviously, you have a limited scope and understanding what constitutive various land use standards, and you should conduct yourself accordingly, seek help from the city and read the ordinances regarding land use restrictions, a realtor, or your lawyer.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

frogleggs

Apr-15-14 9:06 PM

Zoning can be simple or as complex as a community should require.

A city as old as Gladstone should really have community and neighborhood preservations standards down pat by now, to do or say otherwise is ludicrous as you say.

If you were to place your junck next to me, I’d be the first in line to sue the city and you for removal.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ResidentII

Apr-15-14 7:25 PM

What defines a boat or trailer as non residential? Why is a car or truck defined as residential? Your arguments don't make sense. These are items owned and legally licensed by residents, they aren't commercial or business property. How would you know if someone can or can't afford "proper" storage? According to your logic, a resident that owns a boat worth $5,000 should have to pay $12,000 every year for storage. That's ludicrous!

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

frogleggs

Apr-15-14 10:45 AM

The city of Gladstone and its city commissioner’s should be ashamed of themselves.

Here is reference to a “problem” that has been duly noted since 2008 …

“It was brought up in 2008, it's now brought up again so something needs to be done to correct that."

2008 !

and the "problem" of defining what a residential area, neighborhood, tax base, is, is still being "debated"?

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

frogleggs

Apr-15-14 10:44 AM

For at least five (5) years

and now we are into the sixth year,

and the city hasn’t done its job, to enforce areas designated as residential.

When should residential areas become inundated with non-residential materials, items and whatever to accommodate those that can certainly

afford to buy their toys, and they should also be a good neighbor and pay for proper storage.

Certainly if every business owner started

storing business and commercial equipment,

bulldozers, semi-trucks,

graders and pay loaders,

SOMETHING WHOULD BE DONE.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

frogleggs

Apr-15-14 10:42 AM

BUT,

to take nearly

SIX YEARS

to come to terms with obvious wrong-headed thinking,

is itself abhorrent, and incomprehensible.

Let the city make money off the storage of these toys.

CHARGE EACH TOY OWNER a fee of $1000.00 A MONTH,

for plopping their toys down, and divide the proceeds with the neighbor’s.

At least that would get the city off of square one.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

frogleggs

Apr-15-14 10:41 AM

Aren’t there zoning regulations and laws on the books that define

what a residential area is,

what a commercial area is,

what a industrial area is?

Clearly, it shouldn’t be rocket science to define a single-family, living, sleeping, quiet, multi-family residential area?

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

frogleggs

Apr-15-14 10:40 AM

If enough people “table” the right for residential areas to exist,

they could perhaps stretch any meaningful decision until the year 2018,

fully ten years from the original “complaint”.

Citizens should unite and sue the city for reduced taxes because of obvious inability by the city to uphold residential zoned areas.

Or better yet,

citizens in residential areas should unite, and create a class-action civil law-suit against the city for failure to perform its duty.

what is:

malfeasance ?

misfeasance ?

nonfeasance ?

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 25 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web