'73bird
Well-Known Member
Lol camouflaged like pavement?Get one of those camouflaged tarps that way nobody will even know it's there.
Lol camouflaged like pavement?Get one of those camouflaged tarps that way nobody will even know it's there.
What he said.This is why I could never live in a town. I live 25 miles from town and that isn't really far enough.
Well its his house not mine. I get in my car and leave not look at my neighbors front yards. When I spend time outside i spend it in my back yard by my pool not staring at my neighbors house
I have seen many simple situations turn ugly quick and I have seen them work out. I understand your "butt hurt" because he didn't confront you and you got a letter from the city. I get that and had it done to me in the past. Did I throw around excuses and get angry at my neighbor? Not at all...I did exactly what the letter stated and here is the key...LET IT GO it is not that serious......Ok i apologize but i dont understand what you are saying here? Im not an *** and if he would have spoken to me we could have come to a resolution on the situation and if the only way to make him happy would be to move it in I'd do it as soon as I recover from my upcoming surgery.
Did you read the code or just post you interpretation of the code. This is copied and pasted out of the code you put in you post,Inoperable vehicles
Phoenix City Code Chapter 39, Sec. 39-7H
Inoperable vehicles must not be visible from beyond the bounds of the property. An inoperable vehicle is one that is not equipped with all parts that are required to legally and safely operate on public streets and/or cannot be driven under its own power. Car covers, tarps, bamboo, shades and other similar types of materials are not acceptable screening.
That was straight from the city of Phoenix website???Did you read the code or just post you interpretation of the code. This is copyed and pasted out of the code you put in you post, "A single inoperable vehicle in combination with any of the above described conditions shall be deemed a violation of this subsection." It does not say just the car there has to be more.
The epitome of being neighborly The same situation like that is here in my neighborhood. It is like our own little world in a big city!I got everyone around me trained they leave me alone I keep it decent looking if it is crappy looking no doors ect. I cover it up . I am respectful of people and help everyone when they ask and likewise we actually all get along really good this hurricane just hit and it showed how our hood is the elderly help the younger stupid people out with supply s the young help fix things for the old . They call me the king of the hood here . Everyone knows me I know everyone I help everyone and ask for nothing in return I literally gave away my plywood that I needed to someone who needed it more I made do (old rusty b body hood does wonders ) there was a group of us going around right after the storm passed to check on everyone see if anyone needed anything .
And for my good will I can do whatever I want
It says more than one inoperable car is a violation, right? He said he had one car in the driveway. He can then have said car in the driveway for up to 15 days. If he was past the 15 days then he in violation. I did not see where he had more then one car. In my post earlier I was just pointing out that it was not a mess. So it's not a big deal in most people's lives. Some people just need something to complain about to justify there own misery.That was straight from the city of Phoenix website???
Maybe you should read back where the OP got a letter from the city.......You interpreted it as "More" So if thats the case the city would not have sent a formal demand letter.....BUT......Apparently, they did! So your are "Incorrect" on your interpretation....
Guess I did read that, lol
I did not interpret "more" the more in the code refers to one car and a list of trash items in the yard. So the code says if you yard is a trash dump and you have a inoperable car on your property then you are in violation with the car as well.That was straight from the city of Phoenix website???
Maybe you should read back where the OP got a letter from the city.......You interpreted it as "More" So if thats the case the city would not have sent a formal demand letter.....BUT......Apparently, they did! So your are "Incorrect" on your interpretation....
Guess I did read that, lol
Section H #3 subsection b has been violated......Formal letter sent to the property owner....That is proper legal course of the city.....I did not interpret "more" the more in the code refers to one car and a list of trash items in the yard. So the code reads if you yard is a trash dump and you have a inoperable car on your property then you in violation with the car as well.
I'm not arguing that he is not in violation, I was stating that he had only one car and no trash so he would be ok for 15 days. He had the car out there for 6 months, yes a violation letter.Section H #3 subsection b has been violated......Formal letter sent to the property owner....That is proper legal course of the city.....