Routt County, Colorado Petition

[hpinson]

I don't usually get involved in petitions, but this one raises some issues about appropriate land-use:

http://www.change.org/petitions/routt-county-planning-department-stop-the-routt-to-elitism-ask-routt-county-colorado-to-stop-harassing-dalton-reed-and-other-pine-springs-property-owners

In summary:

"My name is Brittany LeTendre, my profession involves protecting the land and natural resources. I've lived in Steamboat Springs for about 6 years now with my boyfriend Dalton Reed who was born and raised in the county. Dalton has built up a reputation over his 30 years of life in Routt County as "the guy who can fix and repair anything" and save it from the landfill.

We were actively looking for property in the community that was affordable and would allow us to create an off the grid organic hobby farm and we were fortunate enough to find a 5 acre parcel zoned "Agricultural Forestry" in Routt County. We bought this land knowing it is an "unbuildable lot" due to it being under 35 acres. Dalton and I had done our research before we bought this property knowing that things were going to be done a little differently. We asked Routt County planning director, Chad Phillips if we could have goats and chickens on the property and he confirmed that we can and that we can build a structure for these animals. Agricultural Forestry is a very open ended zoning in Routt County and allows many "uses by right".

The zoning states that you are allowed to camp on any property zoned AF with no time limit as well as build structures that are related to an agriculture application. Routt County camping definition: The use of temporary living accommodations such as tents, teepees, yurts, motorhomes, and trailers.

Before we purchased this property we bought a 1964 International school bus that had already been converted into a motorhome in hopes of using it as a simple and unobtrusive way to enjoy our property.

On our property we have, a beautiful garden with potatoes, onions, and rhubard growing (use by right), chickens (use by right), a motorhome (which is stated as a use by right) and we plan on getting goats for milk and cheese . Our farm is completely off the grid. We are using solar panels (use by right), we're hauling water, we're using a composting toilet, and we're hoping to build a wind generator (use by right). We've been abiding completely by the County's standards.

One week after we drove the bus onto the property, Routt County sent us a letter in the mail. Therefore we called them and invited them to do a site visit so that they could see that we weren't doing anything wrong. They visited and within a few hours they called us and informed us that we were in violation of the county regulations. They said that our motorhome needed to be moved everytime that we were not staying in it. They then proceeded to say that if we leave the motorhome on our property that it's considered motor vehicle storage. We have other places to keep the motorhome in town, but this is where we will be using it – therefore, why would we need to remove it. They also stated that camping is "what any normal person would define as camping".

I know that we're not all real estate lawyers and county planning directors, but Routt County is asserting non-applicable regulations even though we're in compliance. If the County's intentions are now different from what is outlined in the purchase agreement, then who is at fault? We are simply trying to enjoy our new property under the terms of the purchase agreement."

[MountainDon]

I usually don't either, partly as the case may not have all the facts presented. Funny thing is I read that same thing this AM as it came up on the teardrop and tiny trailer forum. It does sound like rules were being interpreted or being bent to suit the purposes of the governing body.

[hpinson]

Yes, and via the Tiny Home Blog. 

So if I understand this, there is a 35 acre minimum for residential building in Routte County, CO?  That seems to be the implication, and it seems excessive. Or is something else going on?

[Dave Sparks]

In my experience with offgrid homes, one has to fit the norm of the area.  I did not take alot of time reading and so forgive me if I just say that if a 1964 bus conversion is near parcels with homes on them it can be a problem.  The county wants tax dollars and property values to go up. They may take actions that seem unreasonable and just back down if one can make the case stick.  It also could be a neighbor who has binoculars and knows the phone numbers.

[MountainDon]

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 few 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 without moving to another 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.

[hpinson]

There are some recent legal definitions of camping:

"The term “to camp” is defined as "to set up, or to remain in or at a campsite, for the purpose of establishing or maintaining a temporary place to live." Anderson v. City of Portland, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67519 (D. Or. July 30, 2009)"

36 CFR 261.2:

"Camping means the temporary use of National Forest System lands for the purpose of overnight occupancy without a permanently-fixed structure."

When I originally saw this I was more questioning the validity of a county imposing a 40 acre minimum on residential dwellings.  I know in the Boston area, some of the really wealthy suburbs have imposed a 2-5 acre minimum.  What's the process for a county to impose such prohibitive restrictions? Or is this some means to preserve the rural agricultural nature of the area?

[MountainDon]

The 35 acres falls into the AF, Agriculture and Forestry, classification. Section 5.2.1. Dimensional Standards Tables, in the zoning.  And there are are exceptions to that which I never bothered to pursue. Other classifications have 160 acre limits (AC, Agriculture Conservation).

[Patrick]

When we where looking at land we also found out there where minimums of lake shore you must own to build on  lakes I think its up to 175' minimum on a class 2 lake.We where grandfathered in with 150' because of when the land was parceled.When I was talking with planning/zoning before we bought he said he just hung up with someone else telling them they could not build because they only had 60' of lake shore but 2 acres of land. We would also need an annual permit on our land to park an rv and its RR-1. 60 bucks a year I think.

[hpinson]

Ah, Rio Arriba County has similar extensive agricultural and other zoning restrictions that precludes residential building. 
I believe the idea is to preserve traditional and historical agricultural land usage to some extent, and to actually keep some of the older farms and ranches intact. 

http://www.rio-arriba.org/pdf/departments_and_divisions/planning___zoning_/yellow_book_revisions.pdf

Rio Arriba would not be considered a wealthy county by any means.

So we are maybe not getting the entire story here-- just someone's public appeal for a non-traditional variance to established ag/ forest usage zoning.

[rick91351]

I guess I have gotten pretty worn smooth when it come to so much of this he said - she said - they said stuff.  I do know that there are place that the counties are trying to pry people off there land for their own gain.  Or so it would seem.  i.e. Antelope Valley Calf ....  The BLM and the USFS seem to when they want a person off a ranch or parcel find a way to force the issue.  Be it taking away grazing permits - allotments or cutting them back to worthless headaches.  Or they play the wetland issue to the point of making a once productive working farm or ranch a haven for not much more than West Nile infected mosquitoes, a few ducks who mostly will use no matter who owns it.  I have also know them to come knocking and explaining what they want and often times making a negotiable offer for a trade of lands or cash.     
 
But I also see people pushing the laws of the land to the point where those in power just get enough of it.  Then after the 'tax man commith' they commence howling at the moon and doing all sorts of slide of hand tricks.  When all the howling calms down basically it is we want no laws to encumber us.  The way to accomplish that is changing the law - or expunging the law.  Not setting yourself up to be a target in a midway shooting gallery.  Get involved - get yourself elected - heaven forbid one would actually go to a meeting of the county commissioners if they are rubbing you the wrong way.  You do not abolish slavery over night but you can get it done.

It does seem that they are doing such with the petition - yet when I look at it for a few seconds I see people on it from MD, HI, CA, WA.  one from Co.... WOW.  This triggers another aspect I do not like.  People from other states telling my home state or county just how it should be run. 

[hpinson]

Yes!  That's why when I see people ignorant of things like wetlands regulations I push back so hard here - because I know they are just setting themselves up for a very expensive fight that they will not win.  You may not like what your - local - state - federal government has in terms of legislated rules, but you either live with it, or try and change it.  Petitions almost always seem like very naive wishful thinking.