From: william f cox (grntrks@juno.com)
Date: Sat Dec 13 2003 - 02:47:11 PST
You may be able to grandfather you location since you have been there
awhile. How long have you had your trucks at that location?
This may also fall into selective harrassment by neighbor and you may
have recourse throught the courts.
Is "Main Street" a main thoroughfare or a residential side street. In
some small towns "main street" is a state or U.S. highway in which case
the council may not be legally able to restrict your use.
How about contacting the group(s) that have used your trucks in the past
and see if you can muster some support from them?
Just some thoughts that came to mind as I pondered you situation tonight.
Good Luck. The $20.00 is yours if you need it.
Frank Cox (grntrks@juno.com)
Vietnam 1966
'45 GMC 353 DUKW
'66 M35A2 w/w
'68 M105A1
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 01:21:18 -0500 "Bill & Bonnie Prestin"
<bprestin@chartermi.net> writes:
> Ok, here are the particulars for those of you who are interested. The
> town
> (Village) I live in is less than 2000 people. There were two
> ordinance
> sections I had questions about, and ask the council. Here they are:
>
> 40.03 Sec. 3.1 Parking of vehicles greater than (two) axles that are
> not
> owned by the village is prohibited on all paved streets and village
> owned
> parking lots. The council may permit and designate parking at the
> aforementioned locations by resolution.
>
> 40.07 Large over the road trucks: prohibited in residential areas.
> Sec. 9.
> the operation of large double bottom trucks, 16 wheel trucks, all
> semi-
> tractor trailer trucks, and all other large over the road vehicles
> are
> prohibited on residential streets of the village, at all times, and
> signs
> shall be erected on the effective residential streets.
> The use of these large trucks is prohibited unless they are
> emergency
> vehicles, repair and service vehicles, repair vehicles for public
> utilities,
> and / or moving and delivery vehicles.
>
> Here is how the meeting went. I had previously filled out the form
> so I
> could speak at the meeting. Each council member had a copy. On the
> form I
> said:
> "Bill Prestin, Main street, seeking a vote for an exception to the
> proposed
> ordinance 40.03 & 40.07 for licensed historic vehicles."
>
> I made out a handout showing two photos of my truck in the previous
> 4th of
> July parade and attached a copy of the definition of "historic
> vehicles"
> from my states Secretary of state(the licensing office in Michigan)
> to show
> how the use of "historic vehicles" is restricted to events and club
> activities. Each council member also got a copy of these,
>
> The meeting goes like this: I will write these off the copy of
> minutes I
> have from the meeting I attended. I'll skip the extra stuff:
>
> 1) call to order.
> 2) They approve the meeting minutes from the previous meeting
> 3) Roll call
> 4)safety protocol (I don't know what this is)
> 5) Public comment, time limit of 5 minutes each.
> Then I said this: (I had typed it earlier, so as to be prepared)
> "I came tonight because I had some questions about proposed
> ordinance 40.03
> & 40.07. Can you tell me how they would be applied and if they would
> apply
> to my vehicles? What I have is: two antique trucks with more than
> two axles.
> One is a 1952 Studebaker, the other is a 1953 Diamond T. They are
> both
> licensed as Michigan Historical vehicles. I show them in car shows
> and drive
> them in parades. * See attached flyer from the Michigan secretary of
> state*
>
> If these don't apply to me, great! Can it be documented in the
> minutes and
> can I have a copy?
> If they do apply I would like to ask for an exception for Licensed,
> Michigan
> Historic Vehicles. As I am concerned that I will no longer be able
> to pursue
> my hobby with my son.
>
> :Here is where they said: "they do apply". and "why would we give
> an
> exception to just one person."
> :Here is where I pointed out that: "it would not be for just one
> person but
> for everyone with a licensed historic vehicle with more than two
> axles."
> :Then they said "they could not do that, it could be thousands, well
> maybe
> hundreds of people" (I am quoting here)
> :Here is where I pointed out that "I doubt that there will be a
> sudden surge
> in the numbers of historic vehicles with more than two axles roaming
> the
> village streets" (I couldn't help myself)
> Then they said "We cannot make an exception, as the parking
> ordinance is to
> address a safety issue with large vehicles parallel parking on the
> streets"
> and the driving on residential streets ordinance " is because the
> streets
> are not constructed to handle that much weight"
>
> The brother of my neighbor, also a council member said:
> "As I read the rules I don't think you should even own vehicles of
> that size
> on residential property. We will have to approach the Zoning
> Committee at
> the next meeting and see if you will be required to get rid of
> them."
>
> About that time my 5 minutes were up. I had the impression, all in
> all, that
> their concept was "how dare you tiny insignificant person come here
> and
> question our all knowing and godlike decisions" (I was very polite
> about the
> whole thing.)
>
> They then went on to financial matters,
>
> After the financial stuff they said:
> "NEW BUSINESS"
> 1)"Second reading and adoption of proposed ordinance # 03-02, street
> &
> parking regulations"
>
> And then that was it. It was the law.
>
> What kind of surprised me, is that they did not actually read the
> ordinance.
> They just said. "second reading" and that was it. The only reason I
> knew
> what the ordinance was, is because I had a copy of the paper. There
> was no
> handout for the public as far as I could see. And I was the only
> person of
> the three people in public attendance who even cared enough to
> comment.
>
> Also:
> I also have a copy of the rule books, though they are now out of
> date. I
> always follow the rules but Have skirted close enough to the edges
> that I
> think they might not like me. The problem is that "He must be crazy,
> he has
> that huge garage and those army trucks"!!!
>
> This is interesting too: while I was building the garage I got a
> registered
> letter from the building inspector saying that I could not have a
> business
> in the garage. I think the council member neighbor next door (who is
> a
> business owner) was afraid that was my plan. I then got another
> letter
> saying they thought I might have hooked up to city sewer without
> permission
> and would shut off my water unless I let them come and inspect. I
> sent them
> a letter in return saying they had to come and inspect, and that I
> wanted a
> letter in return saying I had made no violations. They did
> inspect, and
> there were no violations, but I never did get my letter.
>
> Bill
>
>
> ----- 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>
> >
>
>
>
> ===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>
>
>
Frank Cox (grntrks@juno.com)
Vietnam 1966
'45 GMC 353 DUKW
'66 M35A2 w/w
'68 M105A1
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 07 2005 - 20:26:57 PDT