property rights

[bobhenry]

I have posted this on my caboose thread but feel it is an important issue. If you read the entire article you should be as incensed as I am.

Anyone out there willing to help ?

I am not alone these folks need our help.

Please take a minute and reply to their plea for help.

Sign in and take credit for helping we will all give you a big

http://www.change.org/petitions/routt-c ... rty-owners


" It is horrifying that we have to fight our own government to save the environment.”-Ansel Adams

[jstrubberg]

If it never moves, it doesn't meet the definition of a motor vehicle. Even tiny houses are on axles for a reason.

I'm not saying it's the way things should be, but the author of the piece is not being entirely truthful when she says they are abiding by the county's rules.

Considering the constituency in Steamboat, I doubt a petition is going to go anywhere, either.

[MtnDon]

Not to start a flame war but there are 2 sides to every controversy.

The rules were in place before those folks bought the property. The petition makes it sound like the county officials are moving the goalposts after the game started, but perhaps it is the protagonists who are trying to move the goalposts. Maybe the goalposts should be moved, but there are ways to better go about that.

Routt County camping definition: The use of temporary living accommodations such as tents, teepees, yurts, motorhomes, and trailers.

Does not the word temporary in the county definition of camping preclude the (more or less) permanent parking of the bus? Karen and I were camping in CO recently; a some one night stands and a couple of times we didn't move the trailer for 3 - 4 days. Even the FS and NPS campsites have a maximum stay limit in one location.

~~~~~~~

The Routt County definition of Motor Home is...
Any wheeled vehicle that meets State Highway regulations, either pulled by
another vehicle or self propelled, which is designed and commonly used for
occupancy as a temporary residence on temporary locations.

"Temporary locations" seems to reinforce the idea that the converted bus must be moved between occupancy on the site.


After reading more carefully I would say the situation is yet another case of a landowner interpreting published rules to suit their own wants and desires. The county has evolved the rules to suit the wants and desires of the existing tax base and much of the time it is going to be an uphill battle to change the system. It's not impossible but may take too much time and effort.

On that note I'll close with a recent real life event where a "little guy" won a victory. My brother in law and partner moved into a townhouse a year or so ago. Then they bought a travel trailer. They found there was an HOA rule that prohibited the overnight parking od an RV on the property. The HOA voted and changed the rule to make that possible. Now they can load the RV up for a trip and leave it overnight to make an early morning departure easier.

~~~~~~~~

As for the 35 acre minimum Routt County is divided up into zoning districts and some have large size restrictions for development. Like any Colorado building / zoning rules I have looked at online, Routt County does have a lot of rules published. Thanks to Google they are not all that hard to find, but once found many folks will find many of the rules too restrictive. But that is another story.


BTW, the Routt County zoning regulations take up 191 pages. Perhaps excessive on the surface, but there it is.

[doris s.]

Bobhenry,

I have camped near Steamboat Springs and it is a beautiful place! I agree that young folks are being priced out of their own neighborhoods. I support this couple and wish them the best in their endeavors.
Doris

[Redneck Teepee]

I have no idea who is right and who is wrong on this issue, we only are getting one side. I can equate to their frustration as I have dealt with the U.S. Forest service many times over the years and you may as well talk to a tree...extremely frustrating.
On the other side of the coin though we had a local fellow who passed on about 10 years ago who spent his whole adult life battling and suing the county over petty things. If you drove by his place it looked like the county dump...and he may have well liked it that way, but the ordinances were and still are in place to prevent that type of stuff from accumulating, the neighbors had complaints of non stop, rat's, mice and other health hazards associated with that mess.

This is probably not that type of situation with filth, but I'm sure another property owner complained of the bus or motor home being left on the property and rules are rules, and this petition would be a start to change things if the majority feels it needs changing. I don't live there so I do not concern myself with it.

[Woodbutcher]

It seems to me that the County has a certain Image it wishes to have. They prefer wealthy people with big wallets. That brings more tax dollars into the county for the powers that be to spend. These average people are not going to be welcome because they don't contribute enough revenue to the system. This seems to be a problem that the "Tiny House " people run into in many areas. Mostly because it's never been done before. Municipalities say NO because they don't want to see if they can make it work.

But with that said, the zoning rules in the 60's were well written and covered everything that was present at the time. Single family homes on minimum size lots, maybe one of those new duplex units that some young kids wanted. After all, why would you want to share a wall with someone? Well then someone approached a zoning board somewhere and wanted to build a large condo complex. All of a sudden someone wants to stuff triple the number of people in the same square footage. That can't be good.....

My point is at all times laws are written to regulate how and what people can do inside city/county limits. Those laws are based on normal and customary traditions. Well these little homes, both mobile and stick built tiny homes now are challenging those zoning laws just as the condo people did in the past. I applaud these people for trying. My experience with small town building and zoning is not good. They tend to only see the written word. Things are Black or white, that's it! This will be an uphill fight but I hope they prevail.

[kirkman]

well they would all get mad in them thar towns if slowcowboy walked out on the front porch of the house in the morings at 5 am and went bathroom woulding they? thats slows 2 cents!

[wincrasher]

Well I can certainly understand the concerns of the other property owners. Obviously this mess started based on complaints by neighbors.

I'd not like a hippy farm to spring up down the street from me either. I'm sure the "farm" in this article looks quite the mess, not the quaint little house and red barn than most folks wouldn't mind.

My neighborhood has rules about RV's parked on the property. I can get away with the occasional couple of days with it sitting in my driveway during the camping season (load-up, clean-up, etc). My neighbors tolerate it because we all try to get along. I have one neighbor though, who thinks because I sometimes have my RV at the house, then he has the right to permanently park his trailer alongside his garage. Needless to say, people are starting to take sides and it's being very disruptive to the previous peace we all enjoyed.

I've offered to him that I don't much care if he parks it at the house during the camping season, but if he wants a place to store it, he can use a space for free at my commercial building where I store my RV and boats. Hopefully he'll take advantage of that and not ruin it for the rest of us.

[48Rob]

Re: property rights

by wincrasher » Fri Jul 04, 2014 12:55 pm

Well I can certainly understand the concerns of the other property owners. Obviously this mess started based on complaints by neighbors.

I'd not like a hippy farm to spring up down the street from me either. I'm sure the "farm" in this article looks quite the mess, not the quaint little house and red barn than most folks wouldn't mind.

My neighborhood has rules about RV's parked on the property. I can get away with the occasional couple of days with it sitting in my driveway during the camping season (load-up, clean-up, etc). My neighbors tolerate it because we all try to get along. I have one neighbor though, who thinks because I sometimes have my RV at the house, then he has the right to permanently park his trailer alongside his garage. Needless to say, people are starting to take sides and it's being very disruptive to the previous peace we all enjoyed.

I've offered to him that I don't much care if he parks it at the house during the camping season, but if he wants a place to store it, he can use a space for free at my commercial building where I store my RV and boats. Hopefully he'll take advantage of that and not ruin it for the rest of us.

Interesting...

If I'm reading this right, you bend the rules at your house a few times a year, but are bothered because your neighbor bends them more than you do, and you would only be happy if he bent the rules the same amount as you?

I can understand how the neighbors might be getting upset, since the rule bending has gotten out of control.
Perhaps the HOA should consider re-grouping, have regular meetings with the entire community it controls, and review the existing policies.
Once done, they need to put someone in charge who has the b*lls to enforce the covenants.
People who look the other way because they don't want to confront anyone encourages those who don't understand, or care that they agreed when moving into a controlled community that they would follow those rules.
Someone has to be in charge, and the rules must be enforced for the system to work.


As for the people in Colorado, the rules were clear when they chose to buy there.
Now they are crying because the rules are being enforced
The rules may or may not be fair, but they were there first, and the couple agreed to them.

Rob

[wincrasher]

Well I think reasonable people would agree that there is a big difference between something that happens now & again and something that is there everyday.

It's a small neighborhood and everyone knows each other. You tolerate the small stuff and get worked up over the big stuff.

Frankly, I could care less if he parks his trailer over there. I'd be the last to complain about it and am not now. I just don't want this thing to turn into a big deal and a resulting crack-down on this issue.

[48Rob]

Well I think reasonable people would agree that there is a big difference between something that happens now & again and something that is there everyday.

I agree with you.
Some infractions are minor, some major.
If everyone in the HOA, or the majority, determine that the minor ones aren't an issue, then they need to change the rules to allow them.

My point though was that if there are rules in place, it doesn't matter if someone breaks them just a "little", or "a lot", they are still broken.
Once a rule is broken and no one corrects the violation, the door is left open for everyone to break whatever rule they want, anytime they want, which leads to confilct over who is breaking a rule more than someone else (sounds like this is the case in your neighborhood).

This leaves everyone in the same boat again as having no rules because they aren't being enforced.

Rob

[bdosborn]

As for the people in Colorado, the rules were clear when they chose to buy there.
Now they are crying because the rules are being enforced
The rules may or may not be fair, but they were there first, and the couple agreed to them.

Yup, I have zero sympathy for them. They knew the rules and tried to side step them. Now they're running to public media to try and strong arm the county. Glad they aren't my neighbors.

Bruce