(no subject)
Jun. 26th, 2005 04:18 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
the_siobhan![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
the_axel just pointed this article out to me as an example of a couple of really stupid people.In case you can't read it, it tells the story of a couple of people who moved into a house next to a golf course, and have had high-speed golf balls pelting their million-dollar retirement property ever since. They want the club to close down because it is a danger.
Get this. The club was built in 1923. The house was built in 1999. Developers lobbied to be allowed to build houses on the adjacent land, going to court against both the golf course and the city planning committee.
And now it's the golf course's fault that the house has been damaged by flying golf balls?
WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH THESE PEOPLE?
I read an article a few months ago about a farmer who is no longer allowed to use a certain kind of percussion cannon to scare birds off his fruit trees. A bunch of people from the city moved next to his working farm and managed to get a judge to rule that against him in a noise complaint. He's expecting to have a shitty harvest this year.
When I used to work at the biomed company there were people in the neighbourhood who complained that a facilities that dealt with pathogens should not be located in the middle of a residential area. A residential area that didn't exist when the company was first located there. A residential community that sprang up after developers bought land off of the company in order to build houses on it.
Toronto has a three-terminal airport just outside of town. It's the biggest city in Canada, so of course the terminal is insanely busy. Planes are not allowed to fly after a certain time at night because of the noise. Because you know, people who move next to an airport don't know that planes are going to be noisy.
ldot bought a house that is located near a railway line. Shortly after she moved in she told me some guy had come to her front door with a petition - to get the railway line shut down. Because it's loud and dirty and bad for the neighbourhood.the_axel and I bought property that is bounded at the back by a railway line. Commuter trains go by about once an hour during the week and the much louder and dirtier freight trains go by a couple of times a day. We knew that when we moved in. We knew there were trains going by when we bought the place. And we damn well knew there were going to be more trains going by once we had moved in.And you know what? If we hadn't wanted trains going by outside of our backyard, WE WOULDN'T HAVE FUCKING MOVED HERE.
Jesus, people. Give your head a shake.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-26 08:44 pm (UTC)ALL THE TIME I have to deal with complaints from neighbours about noise from clubs and gigs - and 9 out of 10 times our event has been there before the flats they're living in...
People's stupidity never fails to amuse me
Date: 2005-06-26 08:47 pm (UTC)FFS, even I know that sheep are noisy buggers.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-26 09:05 pm (UTC)Then? The same woman went to the city council with a complaint. They came to my dad and asked if he could receive his deliveries (from UPS trucks and the like, no 18 wheelers) at another location, because the noise of the trucks driving down the street DURING THE DAY upset the neighbor.
He told them to go ahead and buy him a warehouse in another location, to pay the rent and utilities. Once that was done, he'd be more than happy to receive his deliveries there. Of course, the city council left it alone.
*shakes head*
(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-26 09:35 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-26 09:38 pm (UTC)i'm totally in agreement about people who move in next to a working farm and then complain about the noise or the smell, or people who buy a house next to an airport then complain about the planes. but i've got plenty for people who buy a house next to a vacant block of land, and then have a major battery egg farm built there...
(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-26 09:40 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-26 09:53 pm (UTC)There's also the people who purchased condos downtown right by the abbatoir. ...screams from dying pigs were terrifying children and giving the new owners nightmares about unsaleable properties.
I remember the article and apparently the majority of the purchasers didn't even notice (and had not been told) that there was an abbatoir there which had been there since the early 1900s, if I remember correctly.
Some people need to have a bit more reality shaken into them.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-26 10:25 pm (UTC)The Lounge Axe (featured in High Fidelity) was closed for this reason a few years ago, and The Metro (where C10 was held) has to fight often to keep from being shut down due to all the yuppies in their now-expensive homes. (Funny that they never seem to complain about the noise, pollution and men peeing in their gardens when it's baseball fans coming from night games in nearby wrigley Field!)
A venue here in Bristol is having a problem with a family who recently bought a house near it. The venue has been around for around 2 decades, but the couple now have a baby and are whining about the noise. They should have moved to our quiet cul-de-sac rather than next door to a club for fucks sake!
(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-26 11:22 pm (UTC)loud clubs
Date: 2005-06-26 11:28 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-26 11:29 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-26 11:37 pm (UTC)I'd really like to see that farmer I mentioned go after the original complaintants and the judge who made the decision for his lost revenue.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-26 11:54 pm (UTC)Re: People's stupidity never fails to amuse me
Date: 2005-06-27 01:03 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-27 03:53 am (UTC)Actually, you can if you bother to take the initiative. And since you are likely going to be spending a a good bit of money it is worth a person taking that iniative. You just need to come to the area at night, during the day, on different days, etc and see what it is like.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-27 04:02 am (UTC)You and I have had this conversation about Chicago before. And looking at girfan's comments it doesn't look like it has been any different in they last 30 years.
My latest 'favorite' is a bunch of condo owners not far from me who are trying to have a mural (on private property mind you) painted by a local puerto rican artist that says "knowledge is power" among some other images removed. Apparently they don't think it is 'aesthetically' pleasing. Mind you that mural has been there for a long time before that condo.
Since the owner won't remove it and the alderman is so far unwilling to support them in their removal efforts, their current solution is to have poorly painted Monet's (one of haystacks and one of water lilies) painted on garages on either side of the mural put up.
The multitude of accidental and purposeful messages in this is near mind boggling.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-27 04:08 am (UTC)And oddly enough, a bar (this time catering to trixies and the local hospital employees) was put in the space. ;P
Chicago is currently having the same problem with condo owners on Rush Street complaining about the noise. They would have had to have been dumb and blind to have missed it before they moved in. Or the small, and incredibly ineffectual, coalition who are trying to turn the district in which Boys Town lies dry. Never changes, huh?
(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-27 04:38 am (UTC)Hey, there's yuppies, gentry and noveau rich who move into St. Kilda and then complain that the streets are full of prostitutes and junkies.
It's not just stupid, but self-centred and stupid.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-27 04:52 am (UTC)And people wonder why I hate humanity to the core of my blackened heart.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-27 11:23 am (UTC)M.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-27 11:26 am (UTC)M.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-27 01:26 pm (UTC)Last time I talked to the department in charge of such things - which was probably 8-9 years ago now, it was when we were buying the manor - permits for extensions were granted pretty easily. It had to be within a certain percentage of the total square footage of the house. And there was a cap on how many permits were granted a year, although I recall that it was a very generous number. However, if it's something that changes the footprint or appearance of the house, you have to go through the hearing process. So it's a good idea not to piss off the neighbours too much if you have big construction plans.
Your best bet is to call the city when you have some idea what kind of work you want to do. They can tell you what the current requirements are.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-27 01:27 pm (UTC)I'd be really seriously pissed if they succeeded in getting it removed.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-27 01:33 pm (UTC)I have a real problem with people who move into the neighbourhood and then want to "clean up" the soup kitchens and half-way houses.
Axe and I were invited to some community meeting on Monday, and I really want to go. I'm very curious to get a read on the local politics. (Apparently there is a crackhouse just down the street. Who knew?)
Re: People's stupidity never fails to amuse me
Date: 2005-06-27 01:35 pm (UTC)There used to be a rooster (kept illegally) agross the street from my house. I kind of miss it, actually.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-27 02:42 pm (UTC)I think it is safe for the moment.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-27 03:50 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-27 05:27 pm (UTC)i don't really see the point in any case - the clubs are subject to the same noise regs as everyone else, and if they're flouting them, why *shouldn't* they be shut down? it's not the same thing as air traffic, trains, or farms at all. it's easy enough to install air con and sound insulation, and/or keep the levels low enough not to bother anyone. our local pub has simply had to install air con, an automatic decibel sensing volume limiter, and keep the back door shut. everyone wants a break for their own industry, but as average sound levels in clubs and pubs have increased, and opening hours have been extended, so has the need for new spending on sound isolation increased. we have a club 4 doors down from us, and since actually making an effort, it's no trouble at all. there's no excuse for being a bad neighbour.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-27 07:23 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-27 10:41 pm (UTC)I don't see any reason why farmers can't just go to Canadian Tire and use the same fertilizers I put on my roses. There's no excuse for being a bad neighbour.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-28 12:26 am (UTC)The first year was setup. The second year was maintenance and tweaking. The third year was reading case histories on mental health act violations to keep myself from going insane. Anyway, in the third year (it was a summer job, so although I was sort of 'on call' the rest of the year, I'm speaking of summers here rather than actual years) the city people, who shared a building and also hadn't computerized yet but thought that they wanted to, decided to start making use of me, since I was obviously going bored out of my skull. They had me do the city budget in Lotus 1-2-3 to see if it could be done, and then looked at it working (complete with printing payroll cheques onto cheque stock) and went, "Wow. Okay." and never used it again. Anyway, I'm digressing wildly, obviously. One of the things they had me do was tabulate the city survey.
Mostly this involved my entering yes/no or 1/2/3/4 into a database about six hojillion times. I nearly clawed my eyes out. The one saving grace was the freeform "Anything else?" blank at the end. They wanted to know if people wanted a bus into "the city" (it was a small, affluent suburb), but they didn't want to give people the idea if people weren't thinking it already, so they left that big space and on the survey database had me put an element to store whether the person mentioned bus service or not. That was it. Anything they wrote there, no matter how long or short, got compressed down to "Did they mention wanting bus service? [Yes | No]"
One of the respondants wrote a three-page essay and stapled it onto the back in answer to that section. They did not mention bus service. They did give a moving description of the life of terror they'd lived ever since moving into a house that backed onto a golf-course. They used phrases like, "missiles of doom," and spoke of living in constant fear of them or their children being brained by a flying golf ball. They were outraged, and eloquently and colourfully so.
I have to admit that I passed it around to all the police and city staff to read. We all had a good laugh and agreed that they were a bunch of nutcases who should have thought a little before buying a house the backed onto the golf course. I then sat down at my computer, scrolled to "Did they mention wanting bus service?", entered, "No," and tossed the whole thing in the circular file.
You know, I guess one likes to think of government as being more sympathetic, but ultimately there seem to be *some* limits.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-28 12:35 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-28 12:36 am (UTC)Do you really believe that is reasonable?
Re: People's stupidity never fails to amuse me
Date: 2005-06-28 01:42 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-28 04:01 pm (UTC)really, there are guidelines for noise. they make allowances for occasional noise (ie, occasional live performances in a venue not usually used for them), and there are times during which almost any level of noise is allowable. and even a very loud performance is not a nuisance if it's in a building with some limited soundproofing (ie, anything other than a single sheet of plywood), and the doors and windows are closed. honestly, we have a club at the end of the road that caused really severe problems for a while. they now keep their back door shut, and there is no more problem. there is not enough space in any city to have large areas of the inner city uninhabitable, and the noise guidelines are not unduly strict. and it's not by any means impossible to run a club while adhering to them. i've had a wee look at the well known clubs which have shut down recently, and it occurs to me that they were all worth more as real estate than businesses. do you *really* think that they are driven out of business solely by people complaining about noise?
i'm actually on the side of the people who live near the golf course, too. the balls would be dangerous even if there were no house there - they could as easily hit a cow on the head. the golf course has no god-given right to send projectiles out all around its property. that's like saying that if you're neighbours son throws a baseball through your window he shouldn't pay for the glass, since he threw the ball from his own yard. i think they're just being arseholes about the tall fence, mind. and the people with the farmer with the bird scarers - our friend Joel says the bangers are totally useless for keeping birds away, and he just uses them for fun, and occasionally to drive out a problem tenant. there have been plenty of cases of people in rural areas complaining about smells from fertiliser and such, and plenty of them have been told to suck it up - it's only a few weeks a year.
i *do* think the planners have seriously fucked up by allowing development in many areas, mind. you can't have homes right next to a sewage treatment pond, or a landfill, or a battery egg unit - they stink all the time and you can't stop it, even if you try. and airports are noisy, and there's nothing you can do about that, either.
but you can't have one law for people who can afford houses in posh neighbourhoods, and another for people who can't. if you allow noise severe enough to be a risk to health and wellbeing just because "the houses are cheap", you're really just unfairly failing to protect the most needy.
Re: People's stupidity never fails to amuse me
Date: 2005-06-28 05:12 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-28 05:16 pm (UTC)There were 2-3 crackhouses on my old street in Parkdale. Never bothered me none.
Was the community meeting last night, and if so, did you end up going?
(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-29 12:38 am (UTC)It's in the Entertainment District.
Nobody could sleep there much before 4am.
That was the reason the neighbourhood was designated such.
That hasn't stopped people who bought condos there in the last 5 years from trying to get the clubs there shut down.
i'm actually on the side of the people who live near the golf course, too. the balls would be dangerous even if there were no house there
There wasn't a problem with the golf course for 70 years (the golf club was founded in 1923).
The city planners denied the developers planning permission because it was not a sensible place to build houses.
The developers used the OMB (which you may emeber was instituted by Harris to prevent local government from being able to control development) to bypass the regional plan.
These people chose to spend $1 million buying a house in an area, where had they done a small amount of research they would have seen that this was an identified issue.
but you can't have one law for people who can afford houses in posh neighbourhoods, and another for people who can't.
Where on Earth does that come from?
$1 000 000 is a fucking expensive house in Canada, even in T.O.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-29 11:57 pm (UTC)It's one of the multi-story clubs in the entertainment district. IIRC, it's one of the ones with a rooftop paito.
Note the name - "Entertainment District". It's clearly labelled for anybody moving into the area. If for some reason they thought that by "entertainment", the city meant mimes, a single pass through the area on a Friday or Saturday night would quickly disabuse them of that notion.
there is not enough space in any city to have large areas of the inner city uninhabitable
First of all, there are no golf clubs in the inner city. The one in the article is in Etobicoke.
And secondly, if you want the inner city to be devoted solely to habitation, that means ripping out sports centres, factories, parking lots, malls and highways. Not just loud clubs.
the golf course has no god-given right to send projectiles out all around its property.
...
Do you know how golf is played?
and the people with the farmer with the bird scarers - our friend Joel says the bangers are totally useless for keeping birds away, and he just uses them for fun, and occasionally to drive out a problem tenant.
Oh well, guys Joel must be the authority then. I take it all back.
The point is, it doesn't matter what particular methods are farmer uses. Farms use machines and make noises. And they have animals. And they smell like shit. And if you don't like the prospect of having to deal with any of those things, don't move next door to a farm.
Seriously, I've been out in the woods when the frogs and insects and night birds were so loud we had to yell to be heard above them. Louder than a club. What do you tell the morons who moved to the country for "peace and quiet"? Do your fucking research first? Or do they get to sue the wildlife to shut them up?
i *do* think the planners have seriously fucked up by allowing development in many areas, mind. you can't have homes right next to a sewage treatment pond, or a landfill, or a battery egg unit - they stink all the time and you can't stop it, even if you try. and airports are noisy, and there's nothing you can do about that, either.
The planners didn't fuck up. The planners tried to prevent building next to the gold course. The developers took them to court and won.
If anybody should be held responsable, it should be the developers and the judge who decided in their favour.
However it doesn't excuse the current owners who are moaning about "Why should we have to move when they are perfectly willing to close down a business that has been there for 75 years longer than they have.
but you can't have one law for people who can afford houses in posh neighbourhoods, and another for people who can't. if you allow noise severe enough to be a risk to health and wellbeing just because "the houses are cheap", you're really just unfairly failing to protect the most needy.
If you take away the reason the houses are cheap, what do you think happens to the poor people?
They don't get to enjoy their "protection" because they can no longer afford to live there.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-30 12:10 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-06-30 05:52 pm (UTC)yes. if the city wished to change the noise by-laws around that area, it could. The Entertainment District is just a signing exercise, like Little Italy. it doesn't mean that clubs are allowed to cause suffering to residents anymore than Italians are allowed to drive out Germans in Little Italy. it just describes the characteristics of the area. there are minimum standards of protection to which every one is entitled. that doesn't mean silence. it doesn't mean no loud noises ever. it means that *everyone* has to be reasonable.
Do you know how golf is played?
yes. do you know how much a golf club makes? do you really think that they have a right to send projectiles *off* their property? most golf clubs are designed so that they have either an area of trees around the outside, or tall fences. asking for a fence is not remotely unreasonable. we've had at least one recent case of a farmer forcing a golf club to have a fence erected because of deaths of sheep.
And if you don't like the prospect of having to deal with any of those things, don't move next door to a farm.
yes. the law is in agreement with this. however, some farmers are also assholes. they will be deliberately unpleasant. the law protects people from having to put up with things which are more than annoying, and into the dangerous.
However it doesn't excuse the current owners who are moaning about "Why should we have to move when they are perfectly willing to close down a business that has been there for 75 years longer than they have.
no one has the power to "close down a business". they have the power to enforce laws that the businesses should *already* have complied with. if the business decides it's not worth doing that, that's their problem, not the one of the people who ask for enforcement.
If you take away the reason the houses are cheap, what do you think happens to the poor people?
there are no laws which prevent noise during certain hours, and certain parameters. within those parameters, it's still bloody irritating. the houses stay cheap. i live in one.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-07-05 03:30 am (UTC)> anybody moving into the area. If for some reason they thought that by
> "entertainment", the city meant mimes, a single pass through the area on
> a Friday or Saturday night would quickly disabuse them of that notion.
yes. if the city wished to change the noise by-laws around that area, it could. The Entertainment District is just a signing exercise, like Little Italy. it doesn't mean that clubs are allowed to cause suffering to residents anymore than Italians are allowed to drive out Germans in Little Italy. it just describes the characteristics of the area. there are minimum standards of protection to which every one is entitled. that doesn't mean silence. it doesn't mean no loud noises ever. it means that *everyone* has to be reasonable.
Unlike Little Italy, which existed before the name, The Entertainment District was set up right from the start to be loud. It's zoned for a mixture of nightclubs and residential.
Prior to it's current use, it was strictly warehouses. There was nobody to be "driven out". Anybody who moves into the area now knows that it's loud. Moving in and then complaining that it does exactly what it says on the tin is like moving into Little Italy and complaining that there are too many pizza shops.
yes. do you know how much a golf club makes? do you really think that they have a right to send projectiles *off* their property? most golf clubs are designed so that they have either an area of trees around the outside, or tall fences. asking for a fence is not remotely unreasonable. we've had at least one recent case of a farmer forcing a golf club to have a fence erected because of deaths of sheep.
To pick nits, the gold club is not sending projectiles off their property. The customers are using an established fairway, and some of the shots go wide. That's well within normal use.
Since the developers are the idiots who built a house right next to a fairway, I'd be inclined to tell that I'd build a fence but that I expect them to pay for half of it.
there are no laws which prevent noise during certain hours, and certain parameters. within those parameters, it's still bloody irritating. the houses stay cheap. i live in one.
Then it's not the reason the house is cheap then, is it?
(no subject)
Date: 2005-07-05 06:36 pm (UTC)Prior to it's current use, it was strictly warehouses. There was nobody to be "driven out". Anybody who moves into the area now knows that it's loud. Moving in and then complaining that it does exactly what it says on the tin is like moving into Little Italy and complaining that there are too many pizza shops.
i think that where we are disagreeing is that you think that the noise laws are being enforced too zealously. i don't know if they are, but i tend to think that there's nothing wrong with asking them to be. who was there first is largely irrelevant, IMO. neighbourhoods and businesses change. lots of places have started out with unamplified live music, and now have thumping bass disco tunes. clubs moved into warehouse districts, houses move into club districts, and so on. you can't ask the city to stay exactly the same forever.
To pick nits, the gold club is not sending projectiles off their property. The customers are using an established fairway, and some of the shots go wide. That's well within normal use.
Since the developers are the idiots who built a house right next to a fairway, I'd be inclined to tell that I'd build a fence but that I expect them to pay for half of it.
that argument does have its appeals, but what if the neighbouring farmer had demanded one? i think that golf is a dangerous game, and in the same way as factories can't just dump chemicals unrestricted into the nearest watercourse, a golf club can't fire balls about unrestricted. obviously, in both cases, we don't ban them completely, but they have to be reasonable...
Then it's not the reason the house is cheap then, is it?
well, we have bands using it as a rehearsal space every day from about 4-11, and all day on weekends. entirely legal, but how annoying would you find hearing the same foo fighters song *most* of the way through for 7 hours? it *definitely* keeps prices down. and yet, the club *has* already had to take soundproofing measures to comply with the law. the houses are still cheap, but the residents do all get a chance to sleep.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-07-09 06:11 pm (UTC)Its a recent post in the Toronto Community... I thought of your post when I saw this...