HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.boa.19971016BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OCTOBER 16, 1997
Charlie Paterson opened the regular meeting at 4:05 p.m. Jim Iglehart, Ron
Erickson, Rick Head and Dan Martineau were present. Howard DeLuca and David
Schott were excused. City Staff present were John Worcester and Sara Thomas.
PUBLIC HEARING:
CASE # 97-10, NPJ PARTNERS, LLC - 930 KING STREET
Charlie Paterson opened the public hearing and asked the applicant for proof of
notice. John Worcester, City Attorney, stated the applicant was not present but
represented by his attorney, Herb Klein, who explained Larry Winnerman was called
out of town, but the contractor, Gary Carmichael, was also present. John Worcester
stated for the record the affidavit of notice was legal and the board could proceed.
Klein explained Mr. Winnerman was building 2 houses on Riverside Drive (Kastelic
Subdivision) adjacent to the Roaring Fork River and needed to move some dirt from
this property. Klein further noted that Mr. Winnerman was one of the owners of the
“no problem Joe property” on King Street. He said that the Riverside property had
specific site restraints therefore could not store the dirt on site. He commented that
Mr. Winnerman did not know there was a code violation when he instructed Mr.
Carmichael to temporarily store the fill on the “no problem” property. Klein stated
that when it came to Mr. Winnerman’s attention, he immediately went to Stan
Clauson to process this application. He said it was not his intention to do something
illegal and they just want this viewed as dirt being moved there now. He felt this a
reasonable request.
Klein said the “no problem” property was mostly vacant, with a couple of historic
structures on site. He said with the existing land forms on this site, you really have
to look to see any boulders. He stated the criteria for the board to consider for
granting this type of approval are specific. Klein noted 5 conditions of approval
with the second as the most reasonable to afford relief because the building site
cannot store the dirt. He said the unnecessary hardship would have to transport the
material to the dump (putting more traffic on the roads, from a public interest and
putting more burden on the county landfill as well as the cost to the applicant). He
said the only reason not to store the fill on the “no problem” property would be the
visual impact on the neighbors. He wanted the board to decide the reasonable
solution and they have only asked for 90 days. Klein thought the rest of the criteria
could be met with the 4 condition with the exception of the relocation of the fill in
the center of the property to minimize disturbance to the property. Klein wanted
1
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OCTOBER 16, 1997
condition #1 to include today’s date for any damage to King Street.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Bryce Maple, 927 Gibson, stated there was visual impact, an eyesore with rock in
front of her window, and no consideration of the neighbors as to when the trucks
moved the boulders onto the property. She said trucks were moving rocks today
and inquired as to when the 90 days began.
Jim Mickey, 931 Gibson, stated this was a problem (when people do this sort of
thing anywhere) without the common courtesy of contacting neighbors affected by
such activities. He said this applicant also ruined the riverbank by the bridge from
another one of their developments. He said their attitude was to take advantage of
the neighborhood for their development. Mickey stated the neighborhood would
become vocal to prevent what happened to the West End from happening here.
Jeffrey Shoaf, 117 Neale Avenue, noted what Klein said about construction being
stopped when they found out the legal problems, and asked why was there a loader
on the site today pushing rocks around. He thought a stop work order meant
stop
, until this board might have a chance to rule on this dirt storage. Shoaf said
work
the Winnerman’s had a house closer to the construction site, so why wasn’t this dirt
stored there. He commented the loaders came with boulders for days, which shook
the earth when dumped on this King Street property. He questioned the historic
grade of the property; the visual impacts are real and the dust problem of the
construction site. He said why not look at the Riverside construction site instead of
this King Street site for storage. He felt this was inconsiderate on the part of the
Winnermans, not to mention the truck traffic and hazards for children who rode their
bicycles on the “no problem property” prior to these piles of rocks and dirt. Mickey
asked for respect for the neighbors and neighborhood, and noted the hardship placed
on the King Street neighborhood. He asked when the 90 days began, because this
construction activity has been going on for at least 3 weeks, and questioned how
much more would be dumped onto this property.
BOARD COMMENT
Ron Erickson asked what financial security has been made to the city to insure the
conditions are met. Klein said that had to be determined by the board. Sara
Thomas commented that HPC’s main concern was to the structures and did not
make a recommendation to staff for financial bond. Erickson asked about the
2
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OCTOBER 16, 1997
neighbors concerns of grade and what happens to the left over dirt after the dirt is
returned to the Riverside property, and there is left over dirt from the excavation.
Thomas stated that the natural grade would be taken into account upon permits
pulled for building on the property, if there is additional build up it will be taken into
account at that time. Erickson asked the amount of dirt on the King Street property,
how high will it be when finished. Carmichael replied that they have stopped (about
6 or 7 truckloads of dirt, 60 yards, and about that many truckloads of boulders).
Klein said they had no intention of placing any more material on that property.
Erickson asked what was going on today. Carmichael said they wanted to find out
because there were several excavators working in the area and as far as he knew
maybe someone else came in and took some boulders. He said he was curious
about this. Paterson said if no more trucks were dumping any more rocks, it would
probably please the neighbors.
Carmichael said they could probably finish the dirt movement within 3 weeks.
rd
Erickson asked why 90 days was needed if this had been going on since Oct. 3 and
why was today’s date important for condition #3 since no more dirt would be move
onto the property. He said that resolving this might be a problem if road damage
had already been done. Rick Head noted that staff had been on a site visit. Thomas
said Jack Reid would make that determination. Klein said he did not know if there
was a determination made to recent damage and wanted to make a factual
benchmark for the date. Erickson said the material was dumped illegally and if road
damage was done it may have happened in those weeks, which may not be
ascertainable, but that fact remained. Thomas reiterated clarification from Jack Reid
might be necessary.
Jim Iglehart noted there were other construction projects in the area, and who could
ascertain which truck damaged the road now or in the future. Head asked if there
was a vehicle to obtain a permit without coming before this Board. Thomas
answered not for off-site storage.
Iglehart asked how does this board determine a hardship or practical difficulty in
this situation. He said the question remains why is it before this board. Thomas
said because it was off-site storage caused by a construction project.
Klein asked the board not to review this as a normal variance but a different section
of the code. Head said the hardship of costing the applicant $10,000 with the
argument of putting more trucks on the highway to transport the dirt, doesn’t seem a
hardship to the applicant. Klein stated there was a permit process for the off-site
3
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OCTOBER 16, 1997
storage of materials and this board had authority to issues these permits.
Paterson asked for other questions from the board. Iglehart asked the neighbors
(knowing the situation of the dirt having to be moved off the property) what would
be fair, what would make them happy, setting aside the applicant’s history, and
move towards how this board could now help the situation. Shoaf said personally
as a realtor in this town, when in doubt “get permission” to do anything. He asked
that people not be a rewarded who do not obtain proper permission to do what they
did, unless the board grants it to them. Shoaf answered that he would ask for
removal of the material from that site and that they be responsible for restoration, at
whatever the cost. He stated that would be appropriate. Maple said if they get
away with this, they will just run away with it. Mickey said the reason he came to
this hearing was because he felt they would run over them down the road and would
like to protect themselves. He said the dirt and boulders are not the problem, but
the manner in which the applicant did this, reflects their attitude.
Dan Martineau said from the recommended motion, objectively looking at dust
control and damage needs to be identified clearly in the conditions. He said that
should be changed to because the neighbors
building materials rocks and dirt
would be outraged with construction materials of plywood and 2x4’s. He said if he
were a neighbor, he probably would be upset also , but now
as to how this happened
that it happened, it will be gone in 3 weeks and has to trust Klein that there was not
a better site on the Riverside property for this storage. He said this was a
neighborhood, but maybe a construction fence should be placed around the dirt and
boulders (which would also deter stealing) to keep kids away from these huge
boulders. He said that this would be a short period of time.
Head stated the neighbors objections are real and now the damage is done, this
needs to be ended. He felt this could have been handled better with respects to the
neighbors and they should have been informed as to what was happening. Head
agreed with Ron’s idea on the bond to restore the property to the original way it was
prior to the placement of these materials.
Erickson commented that landfill is better placed at the dump as landfill rather than
old furniture, tires and construction materials, so there is no hardship on that aspect
from the applicant. His concerns were with the neighborhood. He would like to
see a large bond and wished the city could impose penalties while under notice of
violation. Martineau asked the mechanism. Thomas replied the recourse would be
court after the “red tag” was issued.
4
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OCTOBER 16, 1997
Paterson asked Worcester the recommended amount of the bond. Worcester
answered the applicant could decide whether it would be a letter of credit or an
escrow account. Thomas said that HPC required a $30,000.00 bond when a historic
structure was moved. Worcester said this was less than a building and indicated a
$5,000.00 bond. He suggested language for conditions included in the motion. The
board discussed these conditions for the motion.
MOTION: Rick Head moved to approve the request to allow for the
temporary off-site storage of rocks and dirt at 930 King Street with
conditions: #1. All rocks and dirt currently in place shall be stored on the
property to minimize disturbance of existing vegetation and ensure the
historic buildings will not be damaged and no additional fill and/or
material shall be located on the property. #2. Any necessary fugitive
dust control measures will occur at the expense of the Applicant. #3. Any
damage caused to King Street by the actions of the Applicant will be
repaired at the expense of the Applicant after today’s date, October 16,
1997. #4. Construction activity will be limited to the hours of 9 a.m. to 5
p.m. Monday through Friday. #5. Applicant shall place a security
construction fence around the rocks and dirt while the fill is in place. #6.
The Applicant shall post a bond or financial security of $5,000.00 to the
satisfaction of the city attorney to assure the site returned to original
condition no later than December 15, 1997. #7. The neighbors present
will be notified by the contractor 2 days prior to removal of all the
materials. Dan Martineau second. APPROVED 5-0.
Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
CASE # 97-10, NPJ PARTNERS, LLC - 930 KING STREET ................................ ................................ .......... 1
5