Saturday, June 4, 2016

Pissed Off and Ready to Fight

I expect that I may be left alone to complete the boat at home here. However, if I am pressed further by the city I'm prepared to fight it. 

The grounds are that the law is overlooked in the vast majority of cases - probably well over a thousand instances throughout Mission by virtue of over length motor homes and RVs. 

Therefore I am being discriminated against and my rights are being violated under Section Fifteen of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms of Canada.

 Some person - or persons - are offended by my self admitted counter cultural take on modern society well demonstrated by my building a wooden boat in my driveway. That puts me in a 'group' of non-conformists and social critics who are not breaking any other laws than those that are selectively enforced to ensure conforming behaviour and acceptance of social norms. 

If I had a big fiberglass boat or an RV it would arguably be far more tolerable to the bigoted complainants who take no issue with my direct neighbour's oversized RVs. 

I won't be bullied or picked on in this manner.

11 comments:

  1. What is your time line until launching? When I built my house, the bylaw only gave me a year to finish. I asked and was informed that the bylaw was written to prevent house construction from stretching into decades, and being an eyesore in the meantime. This has been a problem in the area, but was linked to other shady behaviour. Anyways, the point is that if the bylaw officers are being reasonable, and there is steady progress being made, they will probably ignore you as long as they see that the problem will go away on it's own given some time. Maybe modify your shelter to keep out little dogs and nosy walkers, so they don't have any information to make complaints with on your progress. As a back up plan, go and write up a list of RV's in the area over the length, and demand that every one be served with notice before you are harassed any further, and if there is another visit, let the bylaw officer know that you will make it a mission to report each and every violation, and demand follow up work in every case. As it is a complaints driven system, let them know you will work to swamp their department if you are picked on. This last strategy I would hold in reserve, let them ignore you first.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Everything you suggest is in my strategy Dennis. The bylaw officers here are nice people and I think that in all honesty they will give me the room I need. I can have Autarkia in the water here in Mission by the fall in all likelihood, and as you say the problem will go away on its own. However, they suggested that the mayor will be called and a stink made should the boat not be moved fast enough. In that case, I am prepared to make a stink of my own. But yes, let's just see what happens. I have left the ball in their court, but felt compelled to state my case within my own community based on my legal research. It is part of our charter that laws apply equally to everyone.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Based on past experience, I planned to suggest what Dennis said regarding making a list of other non-compliant properties. Or in place of a list, take a camera with you on your next walk / drive and casually take some sample photos. About 10 should do the trick. Those could be slightly modified to easily mask/block addresses or tag numbers in case you want to be that cautious/neighbor-friendly. Your point could still be made by providing them if any further action is taken in your case, with the accompanying comment that you prefer this to all be handled quietly and naturally in good time, but you are willing to confront it directly if needed. Dennis' idea of turning each non-conforming case into a formal complaint and drowning them in paperwork and follow-up status requests is inspired! That might be the best leverage of all.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "Some person - or persons - are offended by my self admitted counter cultural take on modern society well demonstrated by my building a wooden boat in my driveway. That puts me in a 'group' of non-conformists and social critics ..."

    Wow, if they can deduce all of that just from seeing a wooden boat in your driveway, Canadians are either much more clairvoyant or much more conformist than I thought. ;-)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not clairvoyant Yoda, but in urban areas I believe them to be very conformist. When I was working in the Tar Sands the conformist idea of success and the proper way way to spend one's high wages was to buy a) an expensive pickup truck whether you needed a truck or not, b) an SUV for the wife, c) a quad, d) a newly manufactured boat, d) a travel trailer or 5th wheel and e) a snowmobile. The fact that I was not interested in these things and touted saving money, living simply and that the money orgy in Alberta could end quite suddenly (as it has) made me very unpopular. Suggesting anything different from mainstream expectations, or worse - demonstrating them - is very threatening to the average person if not on a conscious level then certainly on a sub-conscious level. Now, ALL Canadians are not that way of course. But you can bet your bippy that in a typical suburban neighbourhood such as this, where pickups, SUVs, RVs are in the driveways, grass and shrubberies in the yards instead of nice veggie gardens, and big screen TV boxes put out regularly on recycling day, that a wooden boat project in the driveway is threatening on some level. So I guess I stand by my albeit cynical statement :-)

      Delete
  5. "... tout[ing] saving money, living simply ... made me very unpopular. Suggesting anything different from mainstream expectations, or worse - demonstrating them - is very threatening to the average person if not on a conscious level then certainly on a sub-conscious level."

    Preachin' to the choir there, Reverend! ;-)

    I think your analysis is exactly right. According to the non-PC definition of the word, it may be cynical, but not unduly so.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Dmitry Orlov has apparently secured a farm to build his Quidnon on. This may be the only solution anymore in the land of 18 thousand gazillion laws. Or locating out of the western world to build. Or, as postied here already, put wheels on it and call it one funky cool radical RV.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So here in BC, agricultural land must be used for agriculture. Some farmers have gotten into shit for hosting weddings on their property. Not building venues or anything like that - just setting up a tent and using the rural picturesque setting for photos and such. Where I built the hull for Autarkia is zoned agricultural. If challenged our plan was to say it was a joint project among friends with no money changing hands. Even then the law could have been pressed.

      Now, with the present real estate orgy in the Lower Mainland, renters are being displaced by speculators. They are now tenting for the summer in Provincial campgrounds, farmland and so on. I don't think that the authorities can do much about it. Like in the USA we are now growing a population of homeless who are not drug addicts or mentally challenged. They are employed, smart and resourceful. Frankly, I don't think the governments know what to do. All the better in my opinion.

      Delete
    2. Yes, may they collapse inwardly in ignorance. Meanwhile, out on the salt..... it's lovely.

      Delete
    3. Agricultural. Eh? Obviously, you are building a 'planter box'!

      One strategic thought... All those RV owners are, at present, allies. Organizing the opposition may be more effective than directly turning their names over to the Man, which might produce some blowback?

      Good luck in any case.

      VIVA LA REVOLUCION!

      Delete
    4. It's not in me to hurt someone who has not done anything to us. So I won't be turning anyone over to the Man :-) But I will point out - if challenged - that Section Fifteen of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms says that the law must be applied equally to everyone. They cannot enforce it against me, and then no one else. Even if they enforce based on complaints alone, there is no legal platform that supports this. It is an administrative decision based on practical restraints but with no legal guts to it.

      Delete