Yeah it is all pretty gross. If I wanted diarrhea, I would just eat at The Varsity
FIFY
Yeah it is all pretty gross. If I wanted diarrhea, I would just eat at The Varsity
Don't even get me started on that garbage placeFIFY
We are a nation hooked on caffeine, fat and salt.I will never understand the fascination with this glorified McDonalds for the west coast.
Correct, but you missed the biggest addiction: sugar.We are a nation hooked on caffeine, fat and salt.
yeah,just try bread in another country, you will notice a difference right awayCorrect, but you missed the biggest addiction: sugar.
I ate at an In-N-Out once. The fries tasted remarkably like cardboard, and I've never been back. I've never had less-tasty fries. If you're gonna be a fast food joint, you better get the fries right.Not a high bar to cross.
We are a nation hooked on caffeine, fat and salt.
i went there once after a cypress hill concert ('93 iirc) and it still suckedYou guys are crazy. I love The Varsity. I stop at one of them almost every time I go through Atlanta.
Najee went after a workout in Atlanta based on what he had been told about the Varsity. He spit it out and threw it into the garbage can. One can only hope that young people who eat this stuff live long enough to realize how much damage this crap does to their bodies.i went there once after a cypress hill concert ('93 iirc) and it still sucked
Come on man it is way better than McDonalds.
I mean, if something isn't appetizing after THAT concert, it never is, hahahai went there once after a cypress hill concert ('93 iirc) and it still sucked
i went there once after a cypress hill concert ('93 iirc) and it still sucked
reason.com
So the Christians sued, arguing the view impacts of their second story were not significant. Pointing to its approval of taller buildings near other coastal trails and parks, they also argued that the commission was applying subjective and ad hoc standards on view impacts.
In November, a state appeals court rejected the Christians' arguments, finding instead that the commission had wide discretion to determine which view impacts were significant. The court also ruled that the commission was under no obligation to establish objective criteria on view impacts.
![]()
California officials force elderly couple to dismantle home, citing blocked ocean views
For over a decade, the local commission has been arguing that the couple's addition of a second story to their home obscures ocean views from a nearby walking trail.reason.com
It also argued the couple added that second story without getting the required permits from the commission.
...
The Christians got approval to expand their home in 2011 from the California Department of Housing and Community Development, which regulates mobile home construction. At the time, the Christians thought that was the only approval they needed.
In 2014, the Coastal Commission sent the Christians a letter of violation saying that the already-completed renovations were unlawful without their approval.
The couple applied for an after-the-fact permit, which the commission approved in 2016 only on the condition that they cut the size of their house down from 22 feet to 16 feet to avoid "significant" view impacts from nearby walking trails.
"Bizarre", indeed.
Maybe they should have gotten legal advice prior to moving ahead and in doing so could have avoided the whole problem they face now.
The Christians got approval to expand their home in 2011 from the California Department of Housing and Community Development, which regulates mobile home construction. At the time, the Christians thought that was the only approval they needed.
I'm reasonably certain many people would have made a similar mistake. Bureaucracy at its finest here.
Ignorance is not an excuse. If it were, everyone could just claim ignorance and do whatever they want.
So going by a letter of approval from a government body is ignorant?