Posted on 11/19/2007 8:35:32 AM PST by nannystate
So the fact that they own two lots makes it okay?
Perhaps they choose to build on the unaffected lot. If their other lot had not been disrupted it was a buildable lot which they or their heirs could choose to sell in the future. It was still an asset (ever appreciating in this neck of the woods). Just because they have two of these assets does not make the rendering one unusable any less egregious.
In working as a Civil Engineer, most of my projects involve eminent domain (or condemnation). I also have to be familiar with easement and “adverse possession” law. A lot of people claim adverse possession, but few actually obtain it.
Usually, it is claimed (unsuccessfully) by individuals against the government (alleys, parks, or street ROW) instead of against other individuals like here. I would suspect that the persons here who find this so upsetting would not mind at all if someone stole from the government — even though that is stealing from all of us.
> “Who is now going to pay to improve that because the neighbors took their land?”
I don’t know how they do that in Colorado, but most of the places I know require the adjacent property owner to pay to pave a road for access. That is why lots in suburban subdivisions usually cost so much.
The cost to bring in water, electricity, communications, gas, sewers, etc, is included in the cost. It sounds like this was built out of any planning zones so that the lot owners could “pay as they go”.
What that usually means in real life is that the property owners don’t want to pay for the final improvements and ask the politicians to tax their brethren (meaning you and I) to pay for it.
“Second, this is BOULDER, who is surprised that a lib dim takes advantage of the little guy?”
They’re ALL rich, lib Dims.
“”It sounds like this was built out of any planning zones so that the lot owners could “pay as they go”.””
Check out the map, if it is accurate, all the neighbors look like they are building on each others properties.
Parcel # 157717226004
http://map.co.boulder.co.us:8080/basemap/default.jsp
I just wonder how much of Lot #50 still has access to the road after the neighbors ‘stole’ over 30% of the property.
That’s a good example (what you mentioned) of this law at work. However, I doubt the neighbor having parties (hey look, see our firepit?)constitutes the necessary legal framework for adverse possession. I will learn some more about this case, it is interesting and at a surface glance either a total outrage or complete un-American behavior. At it’s core, America is becoming rotten and legalistic. The fix is Christ and the principles/morals this nation was originally built upon.
I see a sad remnicience Pastor of our country being bought up and torn apart by foreigners similar to other nations that faced correction. Any ideas for the church to reach out to educate the public on the benefits of morality?
On the back side of my property, there is a perfect place for my neighbor to put his firewood. I currently have no use for this small area. Each year, I require him to write me a check for $1.00 for use of that property. I make a copy of that check before I cash it.
What? and not be invited to any more parties? Are you KIDDING?"
Why people go to church sometimes bewilders me. But I do know, from my own experience, that you don't hear what's being said until you're ready to.
One of the most articulate non-clerical speakers on moral issues of my acquaintance demonstrates no practical understanding of fiduciary responsibility, or, for that matter, of keeping his word. Clearly God's gone have to smack him up 'side the haid before he's ready to learn.
And that just makes me worry about which of my sins are obvious to all who know me while I think I'm doing pretty well in that part of my life ....
Perhaps they choose to build on the unaffected lot. If their other lot had not been disrupted it was a buildable lot which they or their heirs could choose to sell in the future. It was still an asset (ever appreciating in this neck of the woods). Just because they have two of these assets does not make the rendering one unusable any less egregious.
No, I didn't say it was okay.
What I said was that I suspected the Kirlins were exaggerating the damage done to them by the court's decision.
The claim that the court's decision has rendered the Kirlins' property "worthless" is just flat out false.
Obviously it's nicer to have 2.0 lots, than 1.67. But the fact is, the Kirlins can still build on, or sell, their combined two lots (just as it appears other homeowners in that subdivision have done in the past --if you look at the aerial photo with lot lines superimposed, you'll see other double-lot sized properties).
And as I said before, I've been sympathetic to the Kirlins, as it's understandable they didn't know about the law.
However, the more I find out about this story, the less sympathy I feel for the Kirlins. It looks to me as if they're cynically manipulating the story (with the aid of the DBM) to inflame the public against
(a) the retired judge who prevailed in the case (who is now getting threats of arson against his property, as well as death threats), and
(b) the judge who decided the case.
This tactic is a pretty dumb move on the part of the Kirlins, since they're appealing the case. Inflaming the public against the judges --on no rational, factual basis that I can see-- isn't going to help an appeals court to see their case in a more favorable light.
See my tag line.
Carolyn
“What? and not be invited to any more parties? Are you KIDDING?”
Why people go to church sometimes bewilders me. But I do know, from my own experience, that you don’t hear what’s being said until you’re ready to.
One of the most articulate non-clerical speakers on moral issues of my acquaintance demonstrates no practical understanding of fiduciary responsibility, or, for that matter, of keeping his word. Clearly God’s gone have to smack him up ‘side the haid before he’s ready to learn.
And that just makes me worry about which of my sins are obvious to all who know me while I think I’m doing pretty well in that part of my life ....”
Good response. That you worry about this at all demonstrates the kind of accountability that I believe God desires and expects from us. All we can do is try, all fall short of the glory of Christ. But then again, if we didn’t there would have been no reason for the redemption of man.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.