Maybe someone can advise me

[rancar]

Ranchman....

<font color="blue">"...I won't disagree that Houston has really bad traffic (I lived there for a number of years), however, I'm not as convinced as you that the zoning (or lack thereof) is the major culprit...."</font>

You're likely right. Traffic congestion is a problem prevalent in many American cities and some of it may be zoning related; a good majority of it though is likely associated with general growth in auto ownership, growth in VT (vehicle trips), and VMT (vehicle miles travelled) as a mobile conscious society continues to rely on the private automobile to an increasing degree for general transportation needs. The point I was originally making though was when zoning controls are not in place or when there is quasi-zoning of some degree, then there is the likely potential for transportaion networks to develop in an uncoordinated fashion that does not optimally take into full account potential future traffic growth.

<font color="blue">"...How a number of variables (including zoning) come together paint the picture as to what traffic patterns would/should be. To me, areas such as this are “fuzzy science,” in that while some mathematical models may be relatively accurate in predicting traffic patterns, they’re just that - models. Since there is more than one model out there, it suggests to me that various modelers weigh the variables differently (including zoning). Unfortunately there is no “perfect equation” (such as 1+2=3) when it comes to predicting traffic patterns..."</font>

Exactly....this is what we wrestle with all the time in our traffic models when we try to predict future transportation impacts. Variables are numerous and the magnitude or weight of these variables on known constants are debatable.

Ranchman.....you sure you weren't a transportation planner by profession? You use jargon very similar to what we planners use in the trade. If not, you are a very well read person. I do appreciate your contributions in these forums. /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif

....Bob

 

[Anonymous Poster]

RanchMan,

Like I said I generally agree with your position that we should all be able to use our property as we like. But I also strongly feel that we should all have some consideration for others that we live near. And I am not implying that you or anyone else here are not considerate or feel differently than I do to any great extent.

As a matter of fact I still remember going to a farm north of Pittsburgh and spending a weekend at a rural motorcross track while still in highschool...looking at the bikes and dreaming of having one some day...I'm sure at the time I had no concept of noise and loved every minute of it...the neighboring farms might have had a different opinion...never even entered my mind at the time /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

I think there are norms wherever we end up living. And I grant you that the hazardous waste example I made was kind of stretching things a bit...sometimes looking at the extremes helps one to see the less extreme more clearly.

Since the discussion seems to be about how one would use his property in the country, I think the norm would favor spraying pig dung on the ground [for any reason] over the establishment of a possibly roudy, noisy motocross track. I think the norm would also favor a chicken farm over a race track.

It is obvious that many people find reason to object to legal use of land. Look at the protests agains storage facilites for hazardous waste for example in the western states. Etc, etc, etc. We all find reasons to object against change...

As far as noise polution, you and I know there are laws against it in some places. These laws were put on the books as the result of a perceived need by the lawmakers. One that comes to mind is those cars that have super large sound systems in them...you can hear them coming a mile away...well, in some localities, the police will ticket them for excessive noise. Guess I'm rambling, cisco above gave a good example specific to the motorcross track question.

I see you did not like my using the example of the shooting range too much. But it does make the point. Granted, a bullet is a much greater concern than a sound wave. But both are examples something unwanted being pushed on the neighbor without his permission [sound yes, bullet probably not, but it could happen].

I can see where you are coming from in your statements and will admit without question we all are entitled to our opinions and feelings and I personally have no problem leaving it at that.

I would like to understand one position you have taken though. You seem to want to limit what the original poster wants to do with his land, while at the same time wanting to give free reign to the motorcycle tract builders.

How can you be against the poster putting pig dung on the ground? Regardless of the reason he wants to do it. It is his property and apparently his legal right to do that. If he is not breaking any laws putting that pig dung down, even if it to discourage the development of a race track, isn't that his right? [Not that he ever said he wanted to anyway, someone else suggested it...]

The smell of pig dung is probably more the norm out that way than the noise [and other possible associated undesirable activities] of a motorcycle race track.

Sound goes one way, smell goes the other...seems like a fair trade to me /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Now with my luck, if it were my situation we were discussing, the track would be on the up wind side of my property, and I would not realize it until after the fact, and I would be the only one to enjoy both sound and smell... /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

 

[raptor]

Good for you ranchman, you're a stellar example of tolerance, personal rights, and freedom. No, I certainly won't sabotage their business venture, directly or indirectly.

Hopefully, someone will buy the place next to you, and open a toxic waste center. Have a good'er.

 

[raptor]

Thanks Henro. I missed in the origin of this post, that I feel violated by a new neighbor (Yes, he bought after I did), that he/they did nothing to communicate to myself or other existing property owners the intended use of the ground next to all of us.

You hit it on the head prefectly, regarding the noise, my primary concern. Their schedule is to run time trials all week long, and race Saturday, and Sunday from 7am to 7pm. I doubt if even ranchman would be very tolerant of that.

Thanks for your reply.

 

[RanchMan]

Henro -

I'll try to address your points...

<font color="blue">But I also strongly feel that we should all have some consideration for others that we live near. </font>

I concur. I too wish more consideration was given to neighbors, even went as far as to say, <font color="red">Sounds like bad luck, and I don’t like motorcycles anymore than you </font> and <font color="red"> Believe me when I understand not wanting those folks as neighbors </font> in my previous posts.

<font color="blue">sometimes looking at the extremes helps one to see the less extreme more clearly. </font>

True, but the example needs to match. I see this particular "extreme" example as an "apple and orange" case because having hazardous goop running across one's property (in violation of law) is very different from having noise from a motorcycle waft across in the breeze (assuming no laws are being broken.)

<font color="blue"> see you did not like my using the example of the shooting range too much. But it does make the point. Granted, a bullet is a much greater concern than a sound wave. But both are examples something unwanted being pushed on the neighbor without his permission [sound yes, bullet probably not, but it could happen]. </font>

/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif Now we are talking apples and fish! Yes, both can provide someone sustenance, and both are living organisms, but to say they are really very similar examples??? PLEASE! And I DEFY YOU to find ONE, ***JUST ONE*** example (provable please, no urban legend stuff) of where some neighbor DIED or was SERIOUSLY INJURED by the noise of a neighbor running a dirt bike on weekends!!! /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

Again, I don't wish to re-open the other thread, but there is a very big difference - the risk of serious injury or death with one example vs. annoyance. There is no equivalence between the two. I won't go in to my opinions on what should/should not be done in the rifle range example, just reaffirm, that you're shooting yourself in the foot with this comparison. (pun intended)

<font color="blue">I think the norm would favor spraying pig dung on the ground [for any reason] over the establishment of a possibly roudy, noisy motocross track. I think the norm would also favor a chicken farm over a race track. </font>

Sounds reasonable on the surface, but you seem to suggest that only "normal" things for a given area should be allowed and anything that "defies the norm" should be eliminated - e.g. eliminate the minority. That seems to be a pretty dangerous slope you're going down. /forums/images/graemlins/ooo.gif

<font color="blue">It is obvious that many people find reason to object to legal use of land....We all find reasons to object against change... </font>

I agree that this is what happens, but just because something occurs, it doesn't make it "right." Never said Raptor should like what his neighbors are doing - but not liking something and taking action against people conducting themselves in a legal manner are VERY different things.

The next section is a bit lengthy, but I want to make sure I address your points.

<font color="blue">You seem to want to limit what the original poster wants to do with his land, while at the same time wanting to give free reign to the motorcycle tract builders...How can you be against the poster putting pig dung on the ground? Regardless of the reason he wants to do it.</font>

Not necessarily. If you re-read my earlier posts, although I have defended the cycle track folks right to do with their land as they wish, I never said I thought it was a "great idea" by any means. Heck, I even said **I** wouldn't want them as neighbors!

Taking it a step further, there is a ***HUGE*** difference between stating what I think someone should or should not do with their property (I would try and talk my neighbors out of building an amusement park beside my property) and telling them (by means of lawsuits or vengeful behavior) what to do. Call it "request" vs. "command" if you will.

But just because I wish to defend someone else’s property rights, how does that invalidate my opinion (or suggestion) on what someone should do? Let me give you an example. I absolutely defend an individual’s right to protest (see the U.S. Constitution, Amendments, Article I). Just because this is a right afforded to all the citizenry, and I’m willing to defend it, does that mean I must agree with the views put forth by the protesters? ABSOLUTELY NOT. See, being consistent in defending rights means that sometimes you have to defend someone that you don’t agree with. (Please look to my hazardous waste retort along with my amusement park example.) See, Article I gives me the right to disagree and voice my view - what it doesn’t do is afford me the “right” to infringe on another by sabotage.

One other point... You espouse "good neighborly consideration," yet sabotaging someone's business they may have worked very hard, perhaps even dumping in a large portion of their savings to start? How neighborly is that?!?! /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif No, not sure I’m the one putting forth inconsistent statements here.

<font color="blue">It is his property and apparently his legal right to do that. If he is not breaking any laws putting that pig dung down, even if it to discourage the development of a race track, isn't that his right? </font>

Please re-read my earlier statement:
<font color="red">I suspect you'd be opening yourself up to a potential lawsuit (e.g. on the basis of intent. - Not saying they'd win because you still should have the right to do whatever you want with your place, but you'll be out the cost of lawyers & such to defend yourself.) </font>

<font color="blue">Not that he ever said he wanted to anyway, someone else suggested it...] </font>

I'm well aware of that, and of the individual who made the suggestion. That doesn't negate the fact that Raptor specifically asked what he could do to "combat this." In other words, he requested feedback - he asked, the other individual answered - and so did I. I fail to see why this is an issue.

 

[RanchMan]

raptor -

<font color="blue">Good for you ranchman, you're a stellar example of tolerance, personal rights, and freedom. </font>

Although the context of your message is a cynical one, I'll go ahead and accept the complement, even if it isn't sincere.

<font color="blue">No, I certainly won't sabotage their business venture, directly or indirectly. </font>

Glad to hear it. I honestly hope that you don't have to put up with anything else (such as trespassers, etc. ) that may come with their operation. If you do, then law enforcement should be contacted to alleviate the problem. (Wait, am I being consistent on my feelings about trespassing from a looong way back too?!? /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif)

<font color="blue">Hopefully, someone will buy the place next to you, and open a toxic waste center. </font>

I'll give this mean-spirited comment the attention it deserves. (e.g. none)

<font color="blue">I doubt if even ranchman would be very tolerant of that. </font>

You obviously haven't read through my prior responses on this thread - or you're calling me a liar. For now I'll assume the prior as I don't take kindly to the latter, as I have expressed on TBN in the past.

 

[rancar]

Gentlemen....

You might want to refer to the following link that addresses some of these property rights and nuisance issues. It provides the broad legal context from which these issues could be investigated further if warranted.

Managing Neighborhood Problems

....Bob

 

[Anonymous Poster]

<font color="blue"> One other point... You espouse "good neighborly consideration," yet sabotaging someone's business they may have worked very hard, perhaps even dumping in a large portion of their savings to start? How neighborly is that?!?! No, not sure I’m the one putting forth inconsistent statements here. </font>

Hi Ranchman,

You know, there is a contrast of motivations here.

On one hand, someone is looking for a profit [this is an assumption, as it may be something a cycle club is doing just for the fun of it...really a non profit kind of thing] while the other hand is looking for a quiet, country-like existance.

The whole discussion boils down to an action-reaction situation. The party building the noise maker took action, the person who might dump the dung is reacting to that action.

The quest for profit [if it exists] or fun is driving the reaction decision by the second party. You or I may put more importance on the profit motive of the first guy. Others may put more importance on the desire to maintain the country-like environment of the second.

It all boils down to "pick the side you like best. "

Yes dumping pig dung just may be the neighborly thing to do in reaction to the action of the other guy. It may be that, or turn the other cheek...

An action was taken that prompted the question in this forum.

From what I can remember, the poster got a couple suggestions:

1. Check for any laws that apply to your area that might help control the situation...good example by cisco above.

2. Make the environment a lttle undesirable for the other guy, by smelling the place up...

3. Their might something I've forgotten...

I'm not sure that either of our last posts added anything to help answer the original question. It just does not seem productive to this thread to get into a debate over points that won't really help answer the original question. I might suggest a passive solution: ear plugs /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif

I can see another thread starting someday...My neighbor dumped a lot of pig dung at the edge of his property, right across the property line, in front of where I wanted to build my country home...what should I do?

Answer: Build a motocross track, and run time trials every day and racing events on the weekends!

I guess nose plugs would be the passive solution there /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

I wish I could contribute more...but don't have an ideas that would help...so...as that guy on TV says:

I'll give you the last word /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

[Chuck52]

Apples and oranges, oranges and fish, asparagus and red herrings. There's no need to invoke life-threatening situations. Property rights extend to the edge of said property. The point, again, is how much responsibility one owes one's neighbors. Since it has already been established that there are some situations subject to external control, the question then becomes how much control is needed. I bet the laws in rural Oklahoma are pretty loose. If you think that's a good thing, buy property there and take your chances. Of course, if you already have the property and weren't aware of the potential problems, you get the shaft. I don't think this is OK (pun?), but I don't know what to do about it except to accept more legal controls.

Chuck

 

[raptor]

Thanks Henro, I believe you have said what I can not. No I won't do anything mischievous to my new neighbor, or his business enterprise. I do consider the racetrack to be a grand intrusion to my peace and quite, but the world if full of inconsiderate people.
I truly love my place, and just wanted to enjoy peaceful solitude, when I moved there. Aw, such is life. Take care.