Likely, none of us want to see work trailers all over the place... but on a case by case basis ...with a good plan of screening, I do not see WHY it cannot be worked out. 

Nancy,

Who would be the "decider" on what is adequate screening?  And, would those who want to park such trailers agree to screening?  That's not what this test case is about.  It's about the allowing of trailers for the poor working stiffs.  Period. 

And, would the trailer be required to be kept in the driveway or anywhere in the property? 

Then, who will judge what the limits in size might be?  Just any "box" trailer, or any trailer of any "reasonable" size?  Some of the trailer violations have been for very large trailers.   

And, must it be "plain" or can it have a certain amount of "advertising"?  How much?  Are rusty trailers not allowed?  Or just those in good condition?  Who is the judge? 

And, if we allow this for poor "working stiffs" do we allow it for hobbies?  How about when a member decides that he needs more storage space, does not want to purchase a shed, but decides to purchase an old, rusty box trailer and uses it for in lieu of a shed to store his "junk"?  Do we limit approval to ...... what? 

I believe, but can in no way know, that the majority of our members do not want someone to park their trailer for any more than a few days on a property next to theirs.  At what point does the number of trailers become one too many?  How many on one street?  How many within "view"?  There is no outcry from many members to change the Guidelines to allow trailers.  

What you are advocating is case-by-case approval, but that is not what is being challenged.  Removal of the restriction in the Guidelines for trailers is what the issue here is all about.

As for the ugly boat argument, IMO the precedent has been set for years.  Could we win on ridding ourselves of boats and boat trailers?  I do not think the majority wants to even try.  Where is the outcry?

Bill