Font ResizeLAS CRUCES - City Council could need at least the next five months to determine where the rights of Las Cruces recreational vehicle owners end and property rights of residents begin.
What initially started as an ordinance intended to regulate parking, storing and occupation of recreational vehicles within the city limits has apparently become a complex issue.
Joe Blow keeps his RV on his property when not in use, and parks it on the street in front of his residence right before hitting the open road. John Doe, who lives next to Joe Blow, argues that the RV blocks his views and that Blow is leaving his RV parked on the street too long, snarling traffic for Doe and other neighbors. Or, Doe and his neighbors are annoyed because Blow is allowing people to stay in the RV for extended periods of time.
While these are all hypothetical cases, there are some residents who say the circumstances are pretty close to reality because of some "bad apple" RV owners who try to circumvent the rules. Conversely, city officials recognize there is a large number of RV owners in Las Cruces, and they don't want to make the rules too restrictive.
"This has become a delicate issue," Mayor Ken Miyagishima said Tuesday. "On one side, there are concerns about individual property rights, and people who want or need to store their RVs on their properties. On the other hand, there are residents who feel their right to privacy is being invaded because these vehicles are parked just feet away from
"It's been difficult to get our hands around."
Gary Gallegos, a retired federal government employee, said has seen first-hand where the "good neighbor" practice is being strained.
"I live next to one of those RVs and my neighbor hasn't come to talk to me once about it being parked right next to my property line," Gallegos said. "I know (the neighbor) has a right to park it there, but it does block some of the view from my dining room. I mind my business and don't bother my neighbor; I've hardly spoken to them in the six years they've lived next to me."
But Carl Dalton, an RV owner who has lived on the city's East Mesa for almost five years - and doesn't live near Gallegos, said he is beginning to feel like he's being made a scapegoat.
"I've tried to work with my neighbors," Dalton said. "I've asked them if my RV is causing any problems to just come and let me know, and we'll work together to straighten it out. I'm not trying to have an advantage over anyone, but I've started getting unsigned notes left in my mailbox and on my (front) door complaining about me parking it too long on the street, or it being parked in my front side yard. I've tried to make the effort to reach out to my neighbors, but they won't come see me face to face."
The city's RV ordinance was adopted on March 1, 2010 and stipulates that RVs cannot be stored on any street or sidewalk, but can be stored in a garage or private driveway. RVs with four wheels or more can be parked on a city street for a maximum of 14 days, and living in an RV is allowed for a maximum of 14 days if parked in the garage, driveway or on the right or left side of the back yard of a private residence.
Also, if the owner can prove an emergency exists they can be granted a 30-day extension to live in an RV.
But within months of the ordinance going into effect, there were claims from some residents that some RV owners were skirting around the ordinance by keeping their RV parked for 13 days on a street, moving it somewhere else for a day or two, and then returning for another 13 days. There were other accusations that people were living in RVs longer than the ordinance allowed.
In December, amendments to the ordinance proposed to the council included: that no RV could be parked within five feet of a right or left side lot line; that a RV not be allowed to park on a street or alley for longer than three days; that living in an RV would be allowed for no more than five days, and with the provision the RV was not parked within five feet of a right or left side lot line; and that city codes officers would have the authority to enforce the ordinance.
But Miyagishima said some RV owners have expressed serious concerns that the proposed amendments could be too restrictive, and would unjustly penalize them.
"There's no reason to rush it," said Miyagishima, of any changes to the ordinance. "We just need to do it fairly."
Steve Ramirez can be reached at (575) 541-5452
ONLINE EXTRAS
(A copy of the current city ordinance regulating recreational vehicles: http://extras.mnginteractive.com/live/media/site557/2011/0104/20110104_042626_RV_ordinance.pdf; Good Sam RV Club website: www.goodsamclub.com)
Tabled indefinitely
• Amendments to a city of Las Cruces ordinance governing recreational vehicles has been tabled indefinitely.
• A copy of an RV ordinance in San Antonio, Texas, was informally submitted Monday to City Council members as a possible guide in drafting new amendments to Las Cruces' ordinance.
• A council work session is planned in February to discuss the new information and determine a course for follow-up action.
• At least two public meetings to get input on proposed changes to the ordinance are expected this spring.
• Formal consideration of changes to the city's RV ordinance could go to the council in May.
