Personal Stories

 If you would like to submit your story, please send your story in an email to: contactus@landusecoalition.org

Real People Real Stories - 
These are a series of advertisements paid for by the LUC 
about land use abuses in Boulder County.

Merger - Read about how the Boulder County "merger" regulation affects land owners.  Two new stories, Two more stories. (pdf) (2004)

9/9/99

The attached file is an excerpt from the 9/9/99 Boulder County commissioners meeting. The meeting had to do with a site plan review for a home on the Nancy Mine road.

In the course of the hearing the commissioners made it clear that no matter what happened with this review that access to other properties would not be allowed. As a result Jane Kraft who also owns land on this road and paid property tax on this road for years was moved to appeal to the commissioners. The other voice is none other than County Commissioner Ron Stewart, who after a nine month nationwide search found himself and was appointed by the other two commissioners to the head of Open Space.

By eliminating access, the property becomes unbuildable and worthless. In effect the owners have contributed their retirement to the Boulder County open space without being compensated. It seems to be a conflict of interest for Stewart to be involved in this decision. Perhaps it is time for the commissioners, in a show of sincerity, to sign over their retirement to the open space department as well.

If after listening to this you are concerned with the behavior of our elected representatives please pass this on to others, friend, members of the press, your elected city , state and federal officials. (By the way the commissioners have refused to televise their hearings unlike the more progressive city council.) You may forward this letter if you wish.

Voice of Jane Kraft (wav format, 1.5 minutes, 1.9 MB)

4/24/99

To Whom It May Concern,
I was born in Boulder, paid my property taxes for twenty three years. I have worked and saved very hard all my life in hopes to one day build my family a small home in which to live. I never got the chance. The city of Boulder has effectively taken my property without due compensation in the name of open space, under the guise of sound planning. The slopes issue is a blanket policy to deprive the private property rights of all that haven't already been stripped by some other egregious process. I'm just a little guy with limited resources trying to raise a family. My dreams have been destroyed and it is going to be hard to start over at my age.

Martin McLennan

4/23/99

There is such a thing as "Civil Disobedience". Back in June of 1996 I told  the Land Use and Building department that after waiting almost six months for a Permit to build, that "the digging starts Monday so you'd better get your act together". At that point I was issued a permit. You see, I just read some of the letters on the Coalition web site (nice site by the way). It appears that people writing the letters seem to think that the Commissioners and Land Use have some sort of power and control over private property - and their retirement land or house site. They do not. Property purchased under a set of rules is grandfathered to those rules - which was my argument to Land Use during Site Plan Review. I would suggest that anyone owning land in Boulder County who is not trying to subvert the building codes, to submit an application for approval and tell them they have two weeks to get a permit completed or the digging starts then. The County cannot tell you you cannot build - period. Lots deeded and taxed are buildable. If the county can collect taxes on private property, then the property has value and standing. In 1991 the county wanted me to build a two story garage (parking on the second floor!) because they wanted it moved over towards the house in the hole now filled by the addition. But I told them hell no. The garage was going where I wanted it, not them. I prevailed. Besides, they don't live there, I do (or did). My point is this, these Land Use rummies haven't a clue, but simply impose their ideas onto others projects and lifestyles as if they have a right to. It is wrong and unacceptable, and people need to tell them to bug off. If Boulder  wants to impose such idiotic requirements onto previously decent land to make it unbuildable, then they need to purchase it at fair market value. Simple.

Sometimes we lose perspective when the emotions get too high, but I assure you I told these people to get out of my life. It was my property and because they couldn't figure out their own code requirements (I tested their knowledge) how was it possible for me to trust their judgement. I couldn't and didn't.

So Civil Disobedience must be weighed carefully.  Property cannot be harmed forever, but those that own it have a right under the Constitution to do with it as they please as long as they are not harming anyone else and are being reasonable (as in, not trying to build a McDonalds on top of the hill).

The term "Civil Disobedience" sounds heavy and uncivil - almost like it advocates criminal activity. Make no mistake, from the perspective of certain individuals (i.e. the recipients) when acting in this fashion they believe one is acting criminal, but I assure you this is one of the tools used to build this Country (e.g. Boston Tea Party). And I don't mean disruptive. Take a look at Charlton Heston's February 16th speech to the Harvard Law School Forum (titled: Winning the Cultural War). It is easily found using a search engine. He speaks on this subject as a way to combat the idiots out there who create laws for their self-serving agendas as well as a way to combat our moral decay. Think about this for a second, how many jobs have you worked at where there was always some person sucking off everyone else, or who did nothing but cause issues, or came up with weird ideas? That is the type of people you are dealing with at bureaucracies. They create these concepts or codes for no apparent reason other than they believe they're a good idea - even if the idea stinks or causes problems.

I am not advocating disruption, but rather, respectful, polite, peaceful, civil disobedience. No shouting, no activism, no hate, no violence - none of that. Simply put: you ignore them if they're idiots.

Name withheld upon request.

Our situation is similar to many others. We already live in the mountains but bought property around us as an investment and to create some space around us. At least one of the adjacent lots we purchased looks like it will be affected by the regulations and will become worthless. Since my husband is retired and I will be soon, we have a relatively fixed income and were planning to use the lots to help finance our retirements which could be pretty lean if the issue passes.

We will be out of state on the 17th. but will be happy to pitch in after that. Please let us know what needs doing and we'll be happy to help.

Thanks for your efforts

Sincerely,

M.E.

I am a builder specializing in the mountains west of Boulder so I feel that I have a fairly good feel for the increase in costs associated with the Boulder County Land Use Department.

I have built roughly 10 houses in Boulder County since the inception of the Land Use rules and regs. I amortized all of my increased costs solely created by land use over all of the houses and came up with a figure of over $30,000 per house. This does not include added expenses and lost time due to the length of time for the issuance of a building permit due to being forced to go through as much as 3 months cycle to receive the blessing of land use.

One example of land use's egregious abuse of power was a driveway I was forced to install on a house in Pine Brook Hills for which I had originally received a bid of $20,000 to construct. By the time I had finished constructing said driveway I had spent over $150,000 on the driveway. Needless to say, I lost my shirt on that house.

However, this is exactly what Ron Stewart is trying to achieve. He created the Land use department after first trying to declare a moratorium on any building in the mountains. After being informed that the county would be looking at a mountain of lawsuits, the commissioners decided to accomplish the same thing by setting up such a Byzantine set of rules and regs that the only people that would able to build in the mountains would be the wealthy with years to burn fighting the county.

They also relied on the fact that they would be dealing with a series of individual homebuilders who for the most part would not be willing to litigate to protect their rights for the sake of one home. This strategy has been very successful. From what I have been told only around 50 building permits were issued for mountain homes last year. So we are talking about a miniscule amount of building compared to what goes up at Rock Creek every year for example, which makes the latest brainchild of the county even more incredible. They essentially want to create open space with millions of dollars of private landowners property with their proposed slope regulations.

What is their reasoning? Building in the mountains is inherently dangerous. When was the last time you heard of anybody dying due to their house sliding down a hillside in Boulder? Or drowning due to sheet runoff from rainstorms? These reasons are patently absurd.

I sued the County about ten years ago over their attempt to steal land from me and won the case. The case involved two lots which I bought at the same time. To save one piece of paper, the title company put the legal description for both lots on one sheet of paper. The county then informed me that despite taxes having been paid on both lots for over thirty years, and their acknowledgment of the fact that there were two lots, they refused to issue more than one building permit. When I appeared before the commissioners to plead my case, Josie Heath said I was a builder and I could afford to absorb the loss. I was then, and am still now, a small builder who cannot move on to his next house until his last one has sold. However, it took a year of my time during which I couldn't sell the house on the adjacent lot, and cost $30,000 in legal fees which would have been higher if the county had decided to appeal the decision. They were informed by their attorneys that I would probably win on appeal and that the decision would be precedential and hurt their rights to pull this same stunt with someone else. It turned out good for them because a few years later, they did the same thing to hundreds of landowners when they "merged " lots. If I had owned adjacent lots at that time I certainly would have been forced to sue again for the same thing. Anyway, I guess the reason I am telling you this is there are plenty of people that had this done to them, and the courts have ruled that in my case and one other that I have heard about, the county's actions were illegal, and we got our land back.

Needless to say, my feelings about the land use department are not kind. When the city of Boulder spends millions of tax dollars on creating low income housing so that there can be a diverse economic population, you would think that the county would be on the same page. However, at this point the only people that can afford to build in unincorporated Boulder County are the extremely wealthy. So we are going to end up with the Aspenization of Boulder County - an enclave.

Sincerely,

Jon Thacker

I am not sure that my tale is unusual but here goes. My wife and I put all our resource into one pot we call our mountain home (yet to be built). We refinanced our Boulder home, took out all our retirement capitol and moved it into my place of business so as to rent out our Boulder house for the cash needed to start the Boulder County Land Use review process. You know all the little expenses that are "minor and just a part of the land use review," like land survey, topo map of building site, revegetation plan, building design, Colorado geological survey, (to show no slope or rock fall problems) soils survey, access survey and so many more.

I thought that by being a veteran of the Special Use review Process twice that the Site Review would be a manageable thing. Well let's hope that this is the case, other wise my wife and I have a nice picnic site that all who own land around me can enjoy at my continued Taxed expense. Thanks for letting me vent. If I can be of service please call me. I own a motel and have many skills so just ask.

Bret Gibson
Owner, Boulder Mountain Lodge

I bought a 2+-acre parcel on a hillside between the town of Salina and Sunshine Canyon in 1992. It adjoins a 9-acre mining claim that my mother and aunt had owned since 1965. The 2 acre parcel is fairly sloping but the price was right and it was the first piece of real estate I had ever owned in my own name in my 45 years. My elderly mother and aunt saw that I was having a lot of fun with the land and knew that I dreamed about building a house there. On the eve of my wedding they presented me with the deed to their 9 acres as a wedding present in May of 1993.

My joy and happiness of receiving the 9-acre gift lasted approximately one week. In late May of 1993 the Boulder County Commissioners unilaterally declared that contiguous parcels like mine in the mountains that were owned by the same person would be stripped of all but one building right. If I had only known what the commissioners were up to ahead of time, I would have graciously declined my mother and aunt's well-intentioned and generous gift. I had hoped to sell one parcel so I could use the money to build a house on the other, but the commissioners stripped me of my building rights with no compensation. I would not be honest if I did not say that I have been bitter and distrusting of the Boulder County commissioners ever since.

Recently, when I heard that the commissioners were now going to prohibit people like me from building on sloping lots, I sensed that the nightmare was beginning again. Now I fear that I will be left with nothing but a tax bill for some beautiful land I will never be able to use. It's not fair. I'm trying to get a building permit before May, but I wouldn't be rushing to do this if I didn't fear that Boulder County is about to rob me again if I don't act now.

I'm sure the commissioners see themselves as the good guys who are saving the environment. They seem to have been encouraged by a shrill and vocal minority of people who already have their mountain house and who think the sky will fall if any more houses are built in the mountains. I hear people say that if we don't stop building now, the mountains will look just like Orange County, California in a few years. They think we must defend Boulder County against the army of pot bellied, cigar chomping developers who are determined to pave over our fair mountains. What the commissioners and the ardent no-growth advocates don't seem to see is that it is small land owners, many of whom have been in the county for decades, who are the victims of this environmental jihad. What they also don't see is that they are generating an aura bad feeling and mistrust that is pitting neighbor against neighbor and destroying the spirit of mountain living here in Boulder County. The policies of the commissioners are adding fuel to the fire of a mean spirited cultural war between those who already have their dream house and those who own their land but haven't yet fulfilled that dream.

Let me say that I am completely supportive of the concept of open space, and have supported Boulder County's open space programs since it began in the late 1960's. As long as a fair price is paid for land between willing sellers and buyers, there is absolutely nothing wrong with preserving our natural environment. However, the dishonest tactics of the commissioners to cheat people out of their property rights is just plain wrong, even if it is done in the name of open space.

I am encouraged that there are brave people out there who are willing to stand up to the arrogance of the commissioners.

Sincerely,

Joe Kellogg

I'm Michael Current, Marshall Coon's son-in-law and I'm speaking for Marshall since he has no computer. I'm former Foreign Service having served in the Middle East and Europe. I've been personally involved in some of the peace negotiations in the Middle East and was stationed in Saudi Arabia during the Gulf War.

Marshall is now 86 years old and has lived in his current home (1788 Timber Lane) for about 36 years. He was the 4th home in Pine Brook Hills. He purchased the lot directly below his a couple of years after he moved into his current home. Marshall originally purchased the second lot for his in-laws who could never make it out due to their poor health so Marshall in turn has kept the land. Marshall did this to not only keep his pristine view, but also to pay for any health failures he may have that may not be covered by any of his insurance companies. Marshall's land represents over 75% of his assets. Reducing the property value of his land by creating slope regulations where there is no geological or topographical reason for it is not only unconstitutional, but un-American. Owning land is a fundamental right in this country given to us by our fore-father's in the Constitution who were much more insightful then most of us living today.

An example of governments taking land happened to my own grandfather in Cuba. He was a landowner with over 1200 acres. He not only worked for an American company, but eventually became a Cuban citizen and a self-made millionaire. Then in walked Fidel Castro and Nationalized all companies and took the land from my grandfather. My grandfather eventually died in New York City in July of 1975, on welfare and without a penny to his name.

This same thing is happening now in Boulder County, only under the disguise of slope regulations. By regulating everything in sight and doing it over a number of years is doing exactly the same thing Castro did in one fell swoop. When will it end? I will not stand by and watch Marshall's entire life be regulated to death and everything he owns become worthless. The sadness I've seen in his eyes is exactly the same as was in my grandfather's eyes.

Marshall has been very upset by these proposed new rules and sees all these hard years of work go flying away with the wind. Marshall worked with NIST for over 20 years. He was instrumental in ordance design and testing with the Naval Ordance Lab in Washington during WWII. He also helped in the design of the B-47 bomber which was of the highest National priority in the mid-1950's. Marshall worked with the Navy on the Bikini Atoll during the atomic bomb tests of the late 1940's/early 1950's and personally put his life on the line during these tests. His work has assured peace and stability in our world. He has given his taxes and many years of sweat to his country and to Boulder in particular where he has been an active member of Boulder Society for over 30 years.

Now Boulder has turned their back on many of the citizen's it has relied upon for it's current policies and the millions of dollars it has received in taxes over all these years. Do I dare say that the current County Commissioner's regulatory views are in the same league as Aldrich Ames? Traitor's to those who they're supposed to serve?

We all want open space and the preservation of land not just in Boulder County, but in Colorado as a whole. I hope the County Commissioners will review these illogical and unjust regulations and withdraw them completely for as Yamamoto, Commander of Japanese Naval Forces, said after Pearl Harbor, "We have just awoken a sleeping giant". Millions of dollars are at stake here and we have a say and a voice to what is done with our own land.

Sincerely,

Michael A. Current

IN TWELFTH WEEK OF PROCESS OF GETTING BUILDING PERMIT FOR A RESIDENCE ON INTERIOR IN TOWN LOT. THERE HAVE BEEN NO VARIANCES REQUESTED, NOR ANY REAL REASONS FOR THIS EXTRAORDINARY AMOUNT OF TIME. WE STILL DON'T HAVE OUR PERMIT. I BELIEVE THAT THE SITE PLAN REVIEW PROCESS IS ABSURD FOR AN INTERIOR IN TOWN LOT. I HAVE OTHER INTERESTING STORIES AVAILABLE ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR LOT. SINCE WE DON'T HAVE OUR PERMIT YET, AND REALLY WANT ONE, PLEASE WITHHOLD MY NAME FOR NOW. THANKS

THIS A NECESSARY MOVEMENT

I have been a resident of Boulder County during 1975-1992. Initially, the Import Service manager for Arnold Brothers Subaru, then a British car rebuilder; first in Boulder then in Longmont. Now compiling books for British Car Rebuilders. Strictly a "Blue collar" person with a limited retirement income. Started paying on land near Lyons in 1981. Now free and clear. Lovely site with highway frontage, across from South St. Vrain River and southeast facing. In 1998 I obtained a letter from Boulder County Planning stating it was a buildable site, but we put off building due to my wife's family situation; assisting with home care of her elderly parents in Arvada.

The terrain varies from a gently sloping and easily buildable area near the highway to a steep hogback at the rear of property. Unfortunately, this results in a slope average over 30%, which is physically meaningless as no one would be stupid enough to build up the front of a hogback. Therefore, we can see no reason why this is not buildable property. There are already many new homes built nearby on much steeper terrain. In fact, the home we planned to build for our retirement might be the last home built in this area due to the rest of the undeveloped property adjoining ours being owned by Boulder County. However, since we have not yet applied for a building permit due to being needed elsewhere, we really don't know if our application will be refused. Unfortunately, the impending slope restrictions seem to all but guarantee that no permit will be allowed.

Recently, we considered selling this property due to our commitment to care for parents who want more than anything to stay in their family home as long as possible. We were stunned to discover that even selling is no longer an option due to just the threat of a restriction on building on slopes. Currently, our property is effectively worthless even though we were offered $50,000 for it two years ago. We would probably realize much more today if the Planning department's slope restrictions had been based on proven factors instead of being so totally unprofessional and scientifically illogical. Now we are fearful that the present Commissioner's past successes at promoting the wishes of an elite few, largely non-property owning voters over the rightful needs of tax paying property owners may have cost us at least $60,000 to $75,000 in land value. We are very worried that we will have no way to recover our lost land value or to ever be able to build elsewhere. Meanwhile, just the possibility of a building permit rejection due to an illogical slope proposal has turned our retirement dream into a nightmare of suspense and extreme anxiety.

Best Regards,

Charlie Odend'hal

Thanks so much for carrying the flag on this issue. Here is our story...

My wife and I bought a 2.4-acre lot in the Red Hill subdivision of Old Stage rd (3 miles from Broadway) in March of 1994. It is a steep lot with a small building envelope due to the existence of a community leach field on the much of the lot. The building envelope has a 25% grade and is accessed through a short extension to the neighboring lot's driveway. The views to the East and South are spectacular. In 1995 we engaged an architect and had plans drawn up. At about the same time we got pregnant with our first child and realized that we had enough changes going on that we should delay construction. Well, 4 years have passed and we now have two daughters. We decided that we will stick it out in Table Mesa for the duration of our children's growing up years so that they can walk to school, friends houses, etc and to simplify overall logistics. We shifted our focus on the Red Hill lot to be that of a home to build closer to our retirement years.

We have lived in Boulder since 1988. For a long time, I have told all my friends and family that we would NEVER leave Boulder - that it was the perfect place to live, work, recreate and raise a family. You couldn't find much more of a loyal Boulderite than me. I hike and climb extensively around Boulder and always treat the environment with the utmost respect, always cleaning up other's litter as I pass. I used to be so loyal to KBCO that I would listen to the ads between songs instead of changing stations. I have missed two home CU football games in 9 years. We take the Skip whenever possible to the Downtown area. I loved this town!!! Things have obviously changed over the years. Boulder has become busier, more high-end commercialized and we have lost some of the community feel. I am outraged at the current single homeowner building restrictions and proposed changes to building on sloped lots. We have put most of our savings into our lot over the last 5 years. How can the county do this to us and to other landowners? I used to read stories about families being displaced for highway construction and think 'how could that happen?' Now I know.

Alex North

My name is Jill Gibbs. You can use my story, name etc. to help the cause in any way.

Twenty-six years ago I bought two lots next door to each other in Pine Brook Hills. On one I built the house where I now reside. I have kept the one next door to sell to help me get through the "golden years" of retirement. Which, by the way, are coming up very soon. During this 26 year period I have paid 29% of the appraised value of the land each year and that has added up to a very considerable sum. The County, I might add, had no trouble at all taking my money each year.

Now the County is telling me I can not build on this lot as my lot exceeds the 20% slope limit that they have set - this came from who knows where???? Most of the houses in this area are on a slope greater than 20%. In actuality my lot is more than 30% which really seems quite buildable as my house next door is just fine. No problems. A house built on my empty lot would be the same degree of slope. I can't understand it???? My lot is platted as a buildable lot. Has a letter from the County that it is a buildable lot. Was sold to me as a buildable lot and was taxed as a buildable lot.

When the County says I can perhaps build a house with a ground disturbance of around 2000 square feet that is a joke. I measured the driveway of the house where I live and the driveway alone is over 2000 square feet. If they build a house next door it would be similar. Now you tell me - who would buy a lot when all they could have is a driveway??? If this goes through, my land is valueless and if this isn't a Takings I don't know what is.

I do know it is a disgrace to have such irresponsible County Commissioners and I would like to see them recalled!

That's my story. Thank you and Ann so much for your help!

JILL GIBBS

In early August 1998 I bought my retirement home which was a 1,200sq.ft one bedroom home with no garage. I planned on expanding the original 20yr old home which was located at the end of the road on 4 acres. I submitted my plans in August to add on an additional l,920sq.ft (half of which was my garage & workshop). I had hoped that with some good luck I might have it under roof by late November. Ha, Ha.

Since the new addition was over l,000sq.ft, it had to go through a site plan review process which takes several months. Because of one neurotic neighbors objection to the size of my new addition, my plans were called up for review by the Boulder County Commissioners in October. On December 1st The Boulder County Commissioners arbitrarily determined that my new construction should be limited to an additional 1,100 sq.ft. limiting me to a total of 2,600sq,ft . even though the average home in my neighborhood was over 3,400sq.ft.

There was no apparent rationale given nor any standards or guidelines used in making their decision to limit my new home addition. Their decision was final and cannot be appealed. My only recourse was to file a lawsuit within 30 days of the decision which I did. Our brief was seven pages, the county’s reply was over l00 pages. They sure make it hard on simple folks to do ordinary things around here. How would you like something like this to happen to you?

This is why I support HB991192 or any other bill that would give ordinary property owners like me more legal avenues to fight the kind of unwarranted trouble I have had with the Boulder County Commissioners.

Would you consider supporting HB1192? I would really appreciate your support.

Respectfully yours,

Darrell Newton

Hello Patty and Ann, First of all let me thank you for fighting for us on the issue of building rights in Boulder County. I own a 7 1/3 acre parcel of land in Four Mile Canyon.

While I was still doing graduate work at CU, my family and I spent much time locating a plot of land in Boulder County upon which we could build our home. We finally found just the spot along Four Mile Canyon. One of the contingencies that we placed on buying the land was that it be a buildable lot. We were assured by the Boulder County Land Use Office that the lot was buildable and it was as a result of assurance that I purchased the land.

Since I heard about the proposed new legislation, I have become ridden with the fear that one of the most important dreams and hopes held by my late husband and me could be utterly destroyed. My husband was a native of Colorado and I consider Colorado my home. We lived there for several years and four of our five children are still there. We had, and I still have, plans to return to Boulder County and build on the land that I own there.

As a matter of fact, my husband ( a civil construction engineer who had very vast experience and was extremely well respected in his field) designed a house to be built on our lot. We had intended to start building in 1993/4 but our plan (which not only complied with but far exceeded the requirements set down by the Boulder County Land Use Office) was turned down by the County for what seemed like a very questionable reason.

The County would not allow us to build on the flattest part of the land, which was elevated above the road, but suggested that we build on a far less suitable part of the property. The unsuitability of the location, chosen by the County, was not merely a matter of it being contrary to our preference but it was technically, and perhaps legally under the County's own rules, a very poor site. It appeared that under no conditions did they want us to build on our land in spite of the fact that it was legally classified as buildable. I can provide further details if this becomes necessary.

We had intended to appeal the decision and fight to the bitter end. However, at that point my husband became very seriously ill (he had brain cancer.) The next few years were spent trying to get him re-established and we moved to Kansas in response to my job offer.

My husband seemed to be doing remarkably, in fact miraculously, well and we planned to re-start our efforts to build in the Spring of 1998. Unfortunately, my husband died from pneumonia in early February 1998, so we didn't get around to doing any more with the land.

At this point, I am ready to start again, to revise and submit plans to build a relatively small home on this property. Should the land be converted to "unbuildable" status, not only would I suffer financially (think of what the investment would have produced on the stock market!) but it would cause my family great emotional trauma and disapointment. The land is part of our family identity and its aspirations for the future. Even our beloved dog is buried there so that he will always be near us. I would find it devastating to give up the dreams that we have held onto for so long and throughout so many hardships.

Name withheld at request of author

Send your story to contactus@landusecoalition.org