![[Avatar]](/images/avatar26.png){kind=avatar}
errantking
2p
2 comments posted · 0 followers · following 0
13 years ago @ The Langar Hall - Save The Gurdwara · 2 replies · +1 points
The new Gurdwara was built on a property that does not allow a non-residential building. The old Gurdwara building - a mobile home - was a residential one by construction and so this was not an issue. If we want to go with what is legally right, the new Gurdwara should not have been built on this land without the legal modification on the permitted use of this property.
Whether the intent of the Boillers is founded in racism or any kind of bigotry, that is hard to prove as fact. It could be the case, or not. Things that are racially motivated generally leave room for doubt. Racism is often that insidious.
Emotionally, I do not wish a Gurdwara to be torn town. However, it is the fault of the Gurdwara's management to have built this Gurdwara on land that does not permit such use. Having done so, they themselves put the Gurdwara at risk and handed potential objectors the perfect justification.
They can choose to fight this, but they may also want to consider moving the Gurdwara to land that is appropriately designated for such use.
Whether the intent of the Boillers is founded in racism or any kind of bigotry, that is hard to prove as fact. It could be the case, or not. Things that are racially motivated generally leave room for doubt. Racism is often that insidious.
Emotionally, I do not wish a Gurdwara to be torn town. However, it is the fault of the Gurdwara's management to have built this Gurdwara on land that does not permit such use. Having done so, they themselves put the Gurdwara at risk and handed potential objectors the perfect justification.
They can choose to fight this, but they may also want to consider moving the Gurdwara to land that is appropriately designated for such use.
13 years ago @ The Langar Hall - Save The Gurdwara · 2 replies · +1 points
As much as I object the fact that the newly constructed Gurdwara is now being ordered to be torn down after its construction was allowed, I think a careful reading of the appeals verdict shows that the new Gurdwara was built on a gamble (that no one would object) and on a weak legal foundation. According to the appeals court ruling on page 11:
"As noted above, the Structure Restriction states, “No building shall be erected other than single family dwellings with garage.” The evidence at trial shows that the New Temple contains numerous features at odds with characterization as a single family dwelling, including a complete lack of planned bedroom space, separate men’s and women’s restrooms, separate hand and mop sinks, and a grease trap in the kitchen. While AGS argues that the New Temple looks like a residence from the outside and asserts that “internal structures could easily be provided to convert the New Temple to a residential use,” we do not read the Structure Restriction to permit the construction of any building that could conceivably be converted into a single-family dwelling."
"As noted above, the Structure Restriction states, “No building shall be erected other than single family dwellings with garage.” The evidence at trial shows that the New Temple contains numerous features at odds with characterization as a single family dwelling, including a complete lack of planned bedroom space, separate men’s and women’s restrooms, separate hand and mop sinks, and a grease trap in the kitchen. While AGS argues that the New Temple looks like a residence from the outside and asserts that “internal structures could easily be provided to convert the New Temple to a residential use,” we do not read the Structure Restriction to permit the construction of any building that could conceivably be converted into a single-family dwelling."
Contraption