Lakeshore Property with illegal fences & walls on beach

[hutton]

@Hutton, since you don't seem interested in phoning the ministry but are fond of Google - look up the definition of "existing non-conforming" - and then get back to us.

yeah, like their open on the weekend swifty.

and 'existing non-conforming' is fine but by now the all would have and should have been brought up to current 'conforming' status as 'The building or structure may only be repaired, altered, or extended to the point that no
further contravention of the bylaw will occur."

so your trying to tell me in all your greatness that none of these old, pre-policy, structures have never been repaired??? From my experience most structures in water will tend to repair eventually.

[hutton]

Sure, whatever, it is there in black and white, written in plain English, no point arguing semantics with some who just doesn't get it. The docks may have been legally built in the sense that they were allowed, but the majority were built in a way that doesn't legally comply as they don't allow access and the walls the extend past the high water are just straight up illegal and hopefully something is done to change it.

You should really try Google sometime, you might even come across some good solid info and facts.

But I guess the the desires of a few FAR out weight the Rights of the rest in your eyes

It's not only semantics and, while I appreciate your need to try to justify your silliness on this matter, it doesn't mean that you have the slightest idea as to whether something is legally in existence or not.......and, therefore, you couldn't hope to justify your vandalism spree.

You may think it isn't worth arguing semantics, but that is how the law and regulations work. I can look up all sorts of current regulations that many things do not fit within but are still perfectly legal. That is the entire concept of grandfathering.

Try moving beyond google and try gaining some real knowledge about the subject......it may help you out in the discussion and in life in general.

And it has nothing to do with desires of anyone "outweighting" the rights of others. Go learn about these things and come back and comment after that. Otherwise, your meaningless justification of your position is just a waste of time for all concerned.

Again, never said I have or am going to vandalize anything, despite your constant insistence.

Apparently you need to brush up on your own knowledge as your argument is weak and yes there is such a thing as "Grandfathered" and "Existing non-conforming" but that doesn't mean those structures are above the law or untouchable, they TOOOO have rules and policies attached to them.

Sounds like I may have touched a nerve with a couple illegal dock owners who are now trying to justify themselves by sounding smarter than they truly are........................................

[Fancy]

just take a hammer and a pair of side cutters on your next stroll along the beach, if you come to an illegal barrier, just snip or pry a hole in it, go thru and just keep on truckin'.

Seems to me that's advocating destruction of property.

[Fancy]

simply suggested that opening could be made to these walls,

How is that not damaging property?

[LANDM]

Again, never said I have or am going to vandalize anything, despite your constant insistence.

Apparently you need to brush up on your own knowledge as your argument is weak and yes there is such a thing as "Grandfathered" and "Existing non-conforming" but that doesn't mean those structures are above the law or untouchable, they TOOOO have rules and policies attached to them.

Sounds like I may have touched a nerve with a couple illegal dock owners who are now trying to justify themselves by sounding smarter than they truly are........................................

No, no, of course you aren't saying anything about vandalism. Your cutters and hammer that you carry to cut holes is going to have no effect on the property.

One again, you cannot even understand what you quote or say.
It has nothing to do with "above the law" or "untouchable". It has everything to do with you simply not knowing if the property that you advocate vandalizing is there legally or not.

Any nerve touching is on your part only. It's called discussion and, just because you are being corrected on an obviously flawed argument, it doesn't mean anything other than you are wrong and are being corrected.

Once again, perhaps stick to defending subjects that you know something about......it will go better for you.
Or, keep banging your head against the wall on this one.....you will simply be corrected.

[tsayta]

I guess this is why many cities have designed their waterfronts to be a road next to the beach, then other side of road is the houses. No risk of encroaching public land. Free movement for all. Here in Manhattan Beach the outcome is a vibrant community with access to beaches for everyone

[Fancy]

Where exactly are you talking about? The Manhattan Drive beach have houses with docks as well.

If you are talking California, keep in mind the terrain and what the community is built on. Apples to oranges.

[hutton]

No, no, of course you aren't saying anything about vandalism. Your cutters and hammer that you carry to cut holes is going to have no effect on the property.

One again, you cannot even understand what you quote or say.
It has nothing to do with "above the law" or "untouchable". It has everything to do with you simply not knowing if the property that you advocate vandalizing is there legally or not.

Any nerve touching is on your part only. It's called discussion and, just because you are being corrected on an obviously flawed argument, it doesn't mean anything other than you are wrong and are being corrected.

Once again, perhaps stick to defending subjects that you know something about......it will go better for you.
Or, keep banging your head against the wall on this one.....you will simply be corrected.[/quote]


once again, I never said I carry anything or that I have damaged anything, but nice try.

Apparently, you need to sit down and some reading yourself as you are a bit confused, but if you keep going in circles with your weak and inaccurate argument.

The structure may legally be able to be there, but the structure it self or how it was built is not, it is that simple.

Now as far as my knowledge on the subject, all I can say is that all of the FOUR docks I have been a part of constructing/installing, were all 100% LEGIT and the process with the Ministry is not that complicated, with the exception with the last dock we did. It was a bit more of a hassle due to the size (could hold up to 6 boats) but even then, the homeowner didn't have too much trouble, just took a bit longer on the admin size.

But think, believe, do, tell yourself what ever you want, doesn't change the fact that hopefully something will be done with this situation to return access to the shoreline to ALL the people not just a few who feel entitled.

Have a nice day!!!!

[Fancy]

once again, I never said I carry anything or that I have damaged anything, but nice try.

No, but advocating it isn't the way to solve anything.

[WalterWhite]

@Hutton, since you don't seem interested in phoning the ministry but are fond of Google - look up the definition of "existing non-conforming" - and then get back to us.

yeah, like their open on the weekend swifty.

and 'existing non-conforming' is fine but by now the all would have and should have been brought up to current 'conforming' status as 'The building or structure may only be repaired, altered, or extended to the point that no
further contravention of the bylaw will occur."

so your trying to tell me in all your greatness that none of these old, pre-policy, structures have never been repaired??? From my experience most structures in water will tend to repair eventually.

They're open now: Call toll free at 1-877-855-3222
- and no they all shouldn't have been "brought up to conforming by now", and that statement in itself tells me you didn't even take the time to Google existing non-conforming as suggested.

[WalterWhite]

once again, I never said I carry anything or that I have damaged anything, but nice try.

Apparently, you need to sit down and some reading yourself as you are a bit confused, but if you keep going in circles with your weak and inaccurate argument.

The structure may legally be able to be there, but the structure it self or how it was built is not, it is that simple.

Now as far as my knowledge on the subject, all I can say is that all of the FOUR docks I have been a part of constructing/installing, were all 100% LEGIT and the process with the Ministry is not that complicated, with the exception with the last dock we did. It was a bit more of a hassle due to the size (could hold up to 6 boats) but even then, the homeowner didn't have too much trouble, just took a bit longer on the admin size.

But think, believe, do, tell yourself what ever you want, doesn't change the fact that hopefully something will be done with this situation to return access to the shoreline to ALL the people not just a few who feel entitled.

Have a nice day!!!!

Uh - are you forgetting that you're the one that opened this silly can of worms advocating vandalism back on page 3 with this opening post:

"just take a hammer and a pair of side cutters on your next stroll along the beach, if you come to an illegal barrier, just snip or pry a hole in it, go thru and just keep on truckin'."

[hutton]

They're open now: Call toll free at 1-877-855-3222
- and no they all shouldn't have been "brought up to conforming by now", and that statement in itself tells me you didn't even take the time to Google existing non-conforming as suggested.[/quote]

try quoting the entire statement, you can cut and paste all you want to try to make a point. Existing non-conforming would apply to grandfathered docks only and as such, if and repair or alteration were to take place, at that time the dock would have to be brought up to conforming standards(code). Are you saying that NONE of these grandfathered docks will never or have never need repair????
Follow you own advice and look it up.

Plus, not sure if you are aware but there have been amazing breakthroughs in Technology, including a mind-blowing thing called the Internet!!! On the Internet you can look up and see thing like "the ACTUAL policy in question" that you can read for your self, word for word, right there!!! in your own living room!!!!! it is pretty amazing, so you no longer need to call Ethel down at the post office switchboard to patch you thru to someone to get simple info.

[Fancy]

Are you saying that NONE of these grandfathered docks will never or have never need repair????
Follow you own advice and look it up.

How's Ethel? I understand that grandfathered docks can be repaired as long as they don't further contravene bylaws.

[hutton]

Are you saying that NONE of these grandfathered docks will never or have never need repair????
Follow you own advice and look it up.

How's Ethel? I understand that grandfathered docks can be repaired as long as they don't further contravene bylaws.

Which is my point, a Grandfathered (legal non-conforming) docks being repaired must at the time of repair bring it up to par with current code, by-laws, policies. So if they have been repaired, then at that time they would have/should have been made so as NOT to impede movement along the shore line, or if any future repairs are to be made moving forward. Which would mean that of time this would solve the issue on it's own, but only if these owners are doing so properly, which I highly doubt.

[Fancy]

Which is my point, a Grandfathered (legal non-conforming) docks being repaired must at the time of repair bring it up to par with current code, by-laws, policies

That's not what I said - "further" was the key word there.