"Tent" in Competition with Aquatic Center?

Why has the city of Greensboro been harassing the operator of the Sherwood Swim & Racquet Club?

One commenter hypothesizes it is because the business is in competition with the aquatic center. (HT: Jack)

Comments

[Mick]

So why then the two restaurants? Any hypothesis there? Just a cover for the real plan to shut down the "competition"? Not even a nice try, Joe. Weak. Very weak. Though a perfect example of government, red tape, stupidity... that's about it.

Does anyone here think a $40,000 dome that is only open for a few months and is not open to the public is truly in competition with The GAC? Additionally, I would also think as far as renting lane time to swim clubs The GAC is at capacity.

[Billy Jones]

What I can't understand is how the city can justify giving the club a permit to erect something that is deemed illegal.

Of course, that never stopped the City from 100 years of issuing building permits on NCRR railroad right-of-ways either. Which, by the way, the City won't even discuss.

[bubba]

And, of course, we see above the standard knee jerk response whenever his beloved swimming pool is concerned.

We all understand the the paranoia and the lack of an ability to understand the actual post are standard operating procedure for a certain someone when it comes to supporting corrupt pet projects.

[Harold Milner]

City's have got to have strict governance over tent structures. Strong winds can knock them down on top of people if not put up correctly. There are just as many fire hazards with a tent than a permanent structure. The city's policy on the erection of tents is pretty standard for most localities. Coming on the heels of the "community swimming hole" opening, makes you wonder if there isn't an attempt to get rid of some of the competition. They had been granted 180 day permits prior. Now the permit is apparently being re-considered. Don't mess with City Hall and Matt Brown.

[Mick]

Though I agree that overseeing semi-permanent structures, tents, domes, bubbles, etc (BTW the city used to have a bubble at Barber Park years ago) the permits for 180 days, etc seems a good way of doing just that.

As far as govt sillyness... you should see the guidelines/regs involved with the tents we had City Meet at Lindley? Unbelivable!

And again Harold... how does this explain the two eating establisments and the tents... collateral damage, cover for the real deal... C'mon Man. This is everyday, typical government stupidity, red tape, too many chefs, etc.

Please Bubba, explain to me the actual meaning of the post.

[Harold Milner]

Absolutely Mick. Bringing the eating establishments in line as well was just cover for their main purpose to put pressure on the tent/bubble structure at Sherwood and force more fees for the "community swimming hole". Have the competition delcared in violation of city codes and ordinances.

[Mick]

Riiiiight. So you think that is a more plausible theory than typical gubmint idiocy? Okey Dokey. Fits in your box I do suppose. Rational thought and facts rarely enters the discussion from you in regards to The GAC anyway. I am glad you have a new toy.

[bubba]

"Please Bubba, explain to me the actual meaning of the post."

Hint: It was Joe's post that was referenced.

Your have the mental focus capabilities of a dead gnat.

[Harold Milner]

Here's some rational thought with respect to the "community swimming hole" and how the project was presented to the public as a bond under Parks and Recreation on the ballot. Now when folks, like me, see something presented as a swimming facility associated with the parks and recreation department the herd thinks yippeee, year round swimming for the kids just like we get to at the neighborhood facility which helps to keep the natives cool during the summer months, and FREE. Little did we know, little did we know. For the benefit of a select few, the average voter got bamboozled.

[Mick]

Bubba,

Do you ever add anything to any converstion other than proof of your xxxxxxxxxxxxxx? It isnt really necessary you know. We all get it.

Here's a hint for you... do you think I comment here because I think I am going to win over anti-GAC types? Hmmmm?

I'll help you. I do this in part because it pisses you (and others) off to hear anything other than your own opinion about anything. Which is amply proven by your posts here, elsewhere, today and everyday. I do this to interrupt the amen chorus thought processes. I also do it just in case any more open minded readers are present.

Of course there are many days it simply isnt worth it... which reminds me... click!

[bubba]

"I'll help you. I do this in part because it pisses you (and others) off to hear anything other than your own opinion about anything."

Role reversal at it's finest on display in that comment, folks.

He keeps ending comments with "click", yet he comes back for more everytime. He just can't help himself.

I believe the description for that sort of behavior is "masochism". Such behavior fits definitions two, three, and four listed here:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/masochism

It's entirely possible his behavior fits the first definition, too.

[Mick]

Sorry if this is a double post... mine disappeared or more likely I didnt "click" on something.

Harold,
The very idea that you thought the pool facility would be FREE to use proves the lack of any rational thought process. Which FREE neighborhood pools were you referring too? I would love to know of these pool facilities (then and/or now).

GOOGLE the issue and tell me how much info you missed in the various papers (opinion and news), TV and blogs. I really dont see how you missed it. Plus, as I have proven to you and others before even the bond language said "suitable for regional competitive purposes" or something very similar.

Now, to be clear, I too think bond language should be clearer (then, now and future) no matter the context or issue. I also did not like P&R getting the boot. We are in agreement there.

Matt Brown and Co are doing a good job with the competitive side but I would love them to be more aggressive on the community/rec side.

Now please explain to me why you and others cannot go swim at The GAC now or in the summer. There is room for folks. Also, while you are at it, please explain to me how the kids, master swimmers, water polo dudes and dudettes, divers, lap swimmers, aerobic participants, kayak class participants, swim lesson types, folks in the work out room, etc are not community members?

[Axelskater]

Totally 100% on the wrong track.

[Triadwatch]

so theresa the right track on this tent issue is the residents of roy carroll's center point high rise want to shut down the roof top parties at greene street bar and found this outdated ordinance to shut down other establishments like sherwood because the city had to do a complete review of all the tent applications. Am sure the noise booms off of the buildings and make for a noisy center point till the wee hours of morning. So is this the right track?

[Joe Guarino]

Keith, are you suggesting that Roy Carroll might be at the root of what happened against Sherwood?

[Mick]

Makes more sense to me but The City needs to fix this. ASAP.

Is your info based on fact or supposition, rumor, etc?

[Triadwatch]

This is based on my feeling of the situation . Greene street was the problem and Sherwood is a casualty till the powers to be change the ruling. Let's see if Theresa agrees since she is a resident of center point .

[Mick]

Your "feeling".. sigh... I guess we shall see if you are correct. Far more plausible than the earlier theory. But still just a guess.

Axelskater? (assuming the above "outing" is accurate) Have you and your neighbors created a problem where none previously existed? Do you and your neighbors want to live in downtown but not with downtown? What's up?