Forum Discussion
- It was a variance to the zoning regulations, the kind that are granted all over this country every day when someone requests it. I am so glad I don't have to deal with the HOA fanatics. Those of you who like living under the thumb of them are welcome to do it. I would never choose to live that way as I value my liberty way to much, a concept few Americans understand these days.
rk911 wrote:
MickeyBrennan wrote:
dodge guy wrote:
HOA`s should all be banned!
Ours is great. We chose this development because of a tremendously picky HOA. They are fussy as anything, just the way we want it.
No colored christmas lights, no company (marked) vehicles in the driveways after business hours, parking is strictly regulated, window treatments must be white on the side facing the common areas and Gnomes.... forget about it. We are allowed to have a properly displayed American flag.
had an employee whose HOA regulated the size, shape AND color of the garbage cans. super control freaks.
The big city of San Antonio also regulates everything about garbage cans. However, they allow RV's to park in side yards and backyards. Plus, they allow Walmarts to invite RV's to overnight in their parking lots.
If I had plenty of money I would live in a gated community(with HOA),....the one that allows you to have a large backyard garage suitable for a 45 ft Newell.
The reality is that I live where(and how) I live due to financial limitations.- I am confused...is this about Home owners associations or zoning ordinances. Two separate topics..
fla-gypsy wrote:
It was a variance to the zoning regulations, the kind that are granted all over this country every day when someone requests it. I am so glad I don't have to deal with the HOA fanatics. Those of you who like living under the thumb of them are welcome to do it. I would never choose to live that way as I value my liberty way to much, a concept few Americans understand these days.
And this is where the article fails to inform. Did the owners request a 2.5 ft variance to fit their RV and were denied? Or did they just ignore the regulation and park their RV there anyway?
Did they sue because they were denied the requested variance? Or did they sue because they were told they were in violation of zoning regulations and/or HOA rules?
Yes, getting a variance is commonplace. But, you do have to REQUEST one. You can't just ignore the rules and then cry foul when you get caught. Again, everyone is making assumptions to justify their personal opinion because the article has left the important factors out.bid_time wrote:
The variance is 2'. I agree if they now apply for a 3' variance to get a larger RV it could be denied.smkettner wrote:
2' variance does seem reasonable.2012Coleman wrote:
If 2' is reasonable then why not 3', and if 3' is reasonable why not 4', and if 4' is reasonable .... etc., etc., etc. That's why zoning administrators never make an exception for "reasonable". It's a never ending street. If the code says 6', then 6' it is, not 6' 1". And let's not forget what someone else mentioned, they could have bought a shorter RV.
This doesn't say that RV's are not allowed to be parked at homes, it states that they must be 5 feet from a certain point - AKA setback. Their RV extended into that area by a mere 2.5 feet and some curmudgeon complained. So while I agree that they could have gotten a generator, the issue was about 2.5 feet which IMO is where the total BS is coming from.- A couple of observations: if you view the article that is one HONKING BIG rig. I *think* they could have got a shorter one.
However..... maybe all this happened AFTER they bought their house. They bought the RV, stored it offsite, no problem. Son got MS, THEN they decided to retrofit the RV (which they already had) for Son's illness and THEN found out about the 2.5' problem of parking it at their house.
AND.... whole house generators are frequently NOT usable during hurricanes or the aftermath. If the gas is shut off for broken/flooded/whatever lines -- no whole-house generator.
I'm also "assuming" they would load everyone up and evacuate the area in the RV if a hurricane was coming. I would NOT want to deal with one stored somewhere else in the panic that was Katrina, and Rita in Houston. I was here for that one. smkettner wrote:
The variance is 2'. I agree if they now apply for a 3' variance to get a larger RV it could be denied.
But, did they ever apply for that 2ft variance? Or did they just ignore it and choose to park their RV beyond the 5ft set-back and then cry foul when they got in trouble?happybooker1 wrote:
A couple of observations: if you view the article that is one HONKING BIG rig. I *think* they could have got a shorter one.
However..... maybe all this happened AFTER they bought their house. They bought the RV, stored it offsite, no problem. Son got MS, THEN they decided to retrofit the RV (which they already had) for Son's illness and THEN found out about the 2.5' problem of parking it at their house.
AND.... whole house generators are frequently NOT usable during hurricanes or the aftermath. If the gas is shut off for broken/flooded/whatever lines -- no whole-house generator.
I'm also "assuming" they would load everyone up and evacuate the area in the RV if a hurricane was coming. I would NOT want to deal with one stored somewhere else in the panic that was Katrina, and Rita in Houston. I was here for that one.
Yes, in theory your argument makes sense, but no where in the article are any of those concerns mentioned. There is no mention of their seeking a variance. There is no mention of the zoning commission denying a variance.
Again, the article is missing the most important factors in the case: did the owners seek a variance and were denied; did they just ignore the rules and do what they wanted to do; did the zoning commission approve other variances in the subdivision but deny theirs: and so on.- I live in a planned community with a HOA. The developers were new to the game and used boilerplate regulations. As long as they had title to more than half the lots, they had a voting majority.
No vehicles visible from the street. Not even a car. So no RVs unless you parked them behind the house in your yard. They even required prior approval to add a screen door to the front door. How ugly can a screen door be? As soon as the actual residents had ownership of more than 50% of the lots, the residents took over all the positions on the HOA board at a special meeting. The developers not only left town, they left the state.
There are still regulations, but they're voted on by the people that actually live here, and they're livable and sensible. toedtoes wrote:
Quoted from the article:happybooker1 wrote:
A couple of observations: if you view the article that is one HONKING BIG rig. I *think* they could have got a shorter one.
However..... maybe all this happened AFTER they bought their house. They bought the RV, stored it offsite, no problem. Son got MS, THEN they decided to retrofit the RV (which they already had) for Son's illness and THEN found out about the 2.5' problem of parking it at their house.
AND.... whole house generators are frequently NOT usable during hurricanes or the aftermath. If the gas is shut off for broken/flooded/whatever lines -- no whole-house generator.
I'm also "assuming" they would load everyone up and evacuate the area in the RV if a hurricane was coming. I would NOT want to deal with one stored somewhere else in the panic that was Katrina, and Rita in Houston. I was here for that one.
Yes, in theory your argument makes sense, but no where in the article are any of those concerns mentioned. There is no mention of their seeking a variance. There is no mention of the zoning commission denying a variance.
Again, the article is missing the most important factors in the case: did the owners seek a variance and were denied; did they just ignore the rules and do what they wanted to do; did the zoning commission approve other variances in the subdivision but deny theirs: and so on.
"The zoning board wouldn't let the family slide and denied its request for a variance."
