DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**WebDocMan** · 06-01-2007, 11:37 PM

I must say I was surpised. I would have thought non conforming rights, or non conforming use would have been applicable in such circumstances. I am aware of one case where new neighbours have protested over pre existing activities on health grounds, and STILL the existing business was able to draw on this.

If however there already has been a precedent set for a religious building as somebody suggested above, then perhaps there are special cases allowed in the case of places of worship?

If so, this is a bit scary IMO - because it enables religious groups (of all stripes) to forcibly shape a neighbourhood.

I was editing my post after I posted it so I apologise but the changes are not material to what you quoted. I was just adding more factual tidbits to it.

Both businesses, IMO, are safe because they are legal land uses under any existing zoning code, if any code exists. If there is no zoning code, then people can pretty much do as they please with their property within the general law. Once a zoning code goes into place, any existing uses on a piece of property that do not conform with the new zoning code are 'grandfathered.' They are called 'nonconforming uses.' So long as the 'nonconforming use' continues without cessation on the property, the use is allowed indefinitely until someone stops using it as such. The reason for this is grounded in property rights. If the government would stop such an ongoing use, it would constitute a 'taking' without compensation under the US Constitution. Private land owners cannot tell others what uses they may do with a property so long as they conform with the law.

06-01-2007, 11:37 PM	#12
WebDocMan Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 513 Senior Member	I must say I was surpised. I would have thought non conforming rights, or non conforming use would have been applicable in such circumstances. I am aware of one case where new neighbours have protested over pre existing activities on health grounds, and STILL the existing business was able to draw on this. If however there already has been a precedent set for a religious building as somebody suggested above, then perhaps there are special cases allowed in the case of places of worship? If so, this is a bit scary IMO - because it enables religious groups (of all stripes) to forcibly shape a neighbourhood. I was editing my post after I posted it so I apologise but the changes are not material to what you quoted. I was just adding more factual tidbits to it. Both businesses, IMO, are safe because they are legal land uses under any existing zoning code, if any code exists. If there is no zoning code, then people can pretty much do as they please with their property within the general law. Once a zoning code goes into place, any existing uses on a piece of property that do not conform with the new zoning code are 'grandfathered.' They are called 'nonconforming uses.' So long as the 'nonconforming use' continues without cessation on the property, the use is allowed indefinitely until someone stops using it as such. The reason for this is grounded in property rights. If the government would stop such an ongoing use, it would constitute a 'taking' without compensation under the US Constitution. Private land owners cannot tell others what uses they may do with a property so long as they conform with the law.
	Quote