Whose Rights Are Right?

Last night I went to the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting. A performance space on the other side of the village had applied to continue the variance granted 5 years ago for them to put up a tent to have shows in, while they raised funds to put up the building they hope to have. This summer will be the last of the 5 years, and they wanted to continue the variance as they are not even close to getting the building built. Yup, we know how that goes, we’ve been talking about a new building for about 40 years that I remember.
I put on my Chatham Business Alliance hat and went to read a letter of support for the place, PS21. Yeah, individually they might be considered competition, but they do different kinds of things than we do, and it’s a fact that arts bring arts audiences to an area, so we get some run-off from them.
What a process the whole hearing was, and this was part 2, there was another last month. Some of the neighbors didn’t want the variance continued, because they hear noise from the tent when performances are going on. A decibel level was set when the first variance was granted and numerous tests have been done to show that the noise is below that, but these people can still hear it. Which brought up the question “What is considered objectionable?” The town lawyer said they had to go with the dictionary definition: ob•jec•tion•a•ble: –adjective 1. causing or tending to cause an objection, disapproval, or protest. 2. offending good taste, manners, etiquette, propriety, etc.; offensive: objectionable behavior.
Without going into details on who said what at the meeting, this brought up the old: ‘beauty in the eye – or ear in this case – of the beholder’. ‘one man’s pleasure ---‘ and so on debates.
Which makes me wonder, again, where do one person’s rights begin and another’s end? Does the Zoning Board deny the variance, and close down PS21 after this summer because of two people (well, three, one was a couple) objecting? They claimed there were many more but those others were ‘afraid to come and say anything because they might have a request of the board at some point and it would be used against them’. There were many more there in support, and the owner claims an audience of thousands over a season. So if the space is closed, what happens to their rights?
The objectors said they wouldn’t mind the noise from the 20 houses that could be built on the acreage that PS21 occupies. It’s zoned residential/rural. I wonder what they’d say to a tractor running from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m., if it was turned into some type of farm?
Noise is a fact of life, unless you’re camping at The Goosenecks on the San Juan River in Utah. I can hear people in the trailer park next to me, the loudspeaker and cheers from the football field at the school, and in Chatham of course there are always the trains. But these neighbors didn’t mind any of that sort of thing, what they mind is the music from The Tent.
Seems to me, as I said in the letter I read, that all should try working together to find a solution. There could be one. There should be ways to baffle more of the noise, I would think, and I think it is PS21’s responsibility to look into this.
The wife of the couple objecting asked what the Zoning Board was going to do for HER, because in effect her life is ruined by this noise. A reasonable question. Is there a way to mollify, to throw a bone to the losers in this case? Where do their rights start and PS21’s stop?
And this whole discussion could continue into so many other things that there’s not space to list – and I got work to do. But think about it. Where do your rights end and someone else’s begin? And who decides?
Asides: When we went to the town board (different town) for the variance to operate our theatre, the owner of the trailer park next door said he didn’t think we should be there because, among other things, our audience might come down into the park and steal people’s lawn furniture.
The Board voted to allow the variance, with one nay vote. I want to know why there are no women on the Board.