Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning And Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developer says county changed RV-cover rule without notice; requests clarity for La Paz Valley projects
Summary
A La Paz Valley developer told the La Paz County Board of Supervisors that a neighbor’s permitted lot improvements are now being blocked by an unannounced rule change the developer described as prohibiting RV covers on vacant lots zoned SR-1.
Jim Cooneych, a La Paz Valley property developer, told the La Paz County Board of Supervisors during the Feb. 3 call to the public that a neighbor’s long-planned improvements had been permitted, permitted work was completed and the resident paid contractors to prepare a pad but was later told the county would no longer permit RV covers without a residence on the property.
Cooneych said the neighbor had prepared about a 13,000-square-foot pad on a 1.7-acre lot, installed power, water and a septic system and obtained county permits before being told she could not place an RV cover until a residence was on the lot. He said other residents in the area with similar SR-1 zoning had been allowed to build covers the same way in the past and that the change — “they don't want vacant RV covers on the land zoned SR 1,” as he recounted — was not explained to the property owner.
The developer asked how the resident could complete the project and how affected property owners could be notified and involved if zoning rules were being revised. The chair responded that officials cannot respond during the call to the public but offered to speak after the meeting and asked supervisors to follow up on the complaint.
The county presenter who discussed the assessor reorganization later said staff would meet with commenters after the meeting; no board action was taken on the RV-cover issue during the session.
Why it matters: if the county has revised its interpretation or enforcement practice for SR-1 zoning regarding RV covers, property owners actively developing lots could face unexpected financial losses or delays. Cooneych requested clarity and advance notice of rule changes that could affect ongoing developments.
Next steps: Cooneych and county representatives were invited to meet after the meeting to discuss the neighbor’s situation; the transcript does not record a follow-up resolution or staff direction beyond that offer.
