A man who erected a covered carport for this motorhome in West Sacramento, Calif., is getting nothing but grief after the city told him it was illegal because he had not obtained a building permit for it. He claimed, rightfully so, that many others in the neighborhood had erected similar shelters without building permits, with no issues.
A proposal to allow such RV carports in residential neighborhoods in the northern California community sparked a contentious three-hour public hearing at the City Council on Wednesday evening in which the “illegal” carport owner, Mark Reyes, presented his case to the city council.
Reyes’ supporters argued that many residents with RVs lack adequate covered storage, and that allowing carports would help alleviate problems of outdoor exposure, wear, and neighborhood clutter.
They noted that in some cases, existing zoning rules leave homeowners little practical options for protecting expensive recreational vehicles. For them, the carport measure represents a pragmatic accommodation that balances individual property rights with reasonable regulations.
Opponents voiced worries about visual impacts, muffling property values, and slippery slopes toward more relaxed enforcement. Some feared that approving carports would open the door to other non-residential structures creeping into residential zones, gradually eroding neighborhood character. Others questioned how the city would fairly administer and monitor compliance, especially in tight, compact neighborhoods.
Councilmembers appeared split. Some emphasized the need for compromise—allowing carports under design guidelines, setback requirements, or aesthetic controls—while others warned that any loosening could lead to contentious enforcement disputes. The debate underscored larger tensions between regulation and flexibility, and between uniform standards and discretionary judgment.
Ultimately, the council did not reach a final decision that night, instead agreeing to revisit the issue with more community input and perhaps refined zoning language.
Reyes has already invested $20,000 in the RV carport, and he told the local CBS TV affiliate that without warning the city had billed him $7,422 for its planning commission’s time.
RELATED
- Why storing your RV outside can be a bad idea
- Everything you need to know about storing an RV
- 5 steps to keep mice out of your RV during storage
- Should you cancel your RV’s insurance while storing it?
- Checklist for deep-cleaning your RV before storing it
RVT1229b
This is not even worth a discussion. He did not get, or determine the need for approval or a building permit. He built it, no permit, now fined. End of story.
It’s also built right next to the sidewalk, which is against the building codes, and inside of the mandated setbacks.
You’ll also notice that the next door neighbor won’t be able to see oncoming traffic on the street while backing out of his driveway, or coming from around the corner..
I was going to say the same thing. If he had said he just crawled out from under a rock and never heard of permits, it would have been a better excuse than saying he was aware of the requirement for permits but failed to accept the necessity.
Exactly. You can’t build or do anything in California without a permit. If somebody else in the neighborhood built something without a permit, it still doesn’t mean that you can. It just means the neighbor ignored the law, just like you did. I don’t feel sorry for him.
If the city had not fined other home owners for putting up similar then they should not be able to pick and choose who they go after, I would believe in a court of law it could be an issue.
It flouted the zoning laws as stated, sort of like Lemonis does with flying his oversized flags in some places.
I am a zoning administrator in a rural area with housing developments: The problem I see here is lack of enforcement on the other similar structures. I presume he talked to the neighbors who said the city doesn’t care. However, he has violated an ordinance in more than one way – sidewalk, site restrictions for traffic, over-height structure and his lack of respect for the known rules. He probably would have gotten away with it – for awhile – had a neighbor not complained about it. Ah, high-density living……. Hi end home and area too……
He falls into the don’t ask so that you don’t get turned down. Most jurisdictions have set-back requirements, structural requirements that need to be plan checked to make sure they meet code. And yes all of this has a cost involved. And when it comes to other structures in the area, the building inspectors are generally required, if they notice something being constructed and they haven’t had the permit put on their desk then they investigate and cite. So, if there are others they too should be cited. Otherwise, you are just eroding the codes and creating chaos. He did, why can’t I… and so on and so on.
As Mike demonstrates for so many people like him it’s not even worth discussing. Government says, I have to do. Thousands of pages of government regulations and not any of them are worth discussing the merits of? That is absurd.
Thank you for the news, RV Travel! Looks as though this is too congested an area for adding a structure of this size. Perhaps nothing larger thsn a doghouse would be appropriate, given the tiny lot sizes. Have a great weekend and safe travels!
Interesting….. Several years ago my SoCal brother-in-law started adding a 2nd story bedroom to their home in a stylish semi gated community on a cul-de-sac style street – until a neighbor complained and the inspector arrived! Made him take it all down – which he did. I don’t recall if he was also fined or not. Ignorance of the law or not – it is incumbent on us to dig out the rules……
Besides the deliberate ignoring of the codes, the thing is a monstrosity!
it’s just plain ugly, where does he think he lives?? I would have turned him in
Would there be any difference if he parked his RV or car there without a cover?
The 1st problem is the location on the property. Parallel to the street next to the sidewalk? Wouldn’t that be a sight hazard & eyesore if every homeowner did that. Many complain about HOAs but this is why they exist.