October 22, 2013 E-mail From Me To City Council And Code Enforcement About The Illegal "Handyman" Vendor Business Being Operated Out Of A Rental Home In A Residential Neighborhood.

From:   Bev Beaufait <bbeaufa@beaufait.com>   

     [ add to contacts ]

 To:  Council, City <CityCouncil@LouisvilleCO.gov>
 Cc:  Bruce Goodman <bruceg@louisvilleco.gov>
 Date:  Tuesday, October 22, 2013 07:56 am
 Subject:  Over 40 Days District Categories Illegal Business
 Text version of this message. (7KB)
 handyman1019.JPG (70KB)
 handyman1022.JPG (50KB)

Over 40 Days.  The renter is still there running an illegal "Handyman" vendor business out of the rental house.  The "Handyman" truck came at 7:00 a.m. this morning.  

On October 19 this renter had an employee with a "Handyman" truck park in the renter's driveway for the day.  The renter and his employee leave in the renter's commercial vendor truck for the day for "Handyman" work. 
This employee of the renter does not need to park his "Handyman" truck anywhere in our neighborhood, as our neighborhood is not a commercial vendor district category for the parking of this renter's employee's truck. 
We in the neighborhood do not want to see a renter's employee's "Handyman" commercial vendor truck with advertisements for his company on the side of the truck parked in our residential neighborhood all day long.  Commercial vehicle with ads are not allowed parked/stored in our neighborhood.

With Code Enforcement allowing this illegal vendor activity in our neighborhood, it also suggests that others in our neighborhood can run an illegal commercial vendor business in a District Category, which is specifically for residents only, per our City Codes.
When added with the illegal commercial dumpster being allowed to be able to be parked/stored in our neighborhood, this renter has been operating an illegal commercial vendor business out of our residential neighborhood for over 40 days.  Enough is enough!!!!

With Code Enforcement allowing this illegal vendor activity in our neighborhood, it also suggests that others in our neighborhood can run an illegal commercial vendor business in a District Category, which is specifically for residents only, per our City Codes.
The renter's "Handyman" truck comes very early in the morning so nobody can see that this renter is operating an illegal business out of his renter residential house in a residential neighborhood.  That is exactly what the Mr. Rooter business did.  

As City Council and Code Enforcement allow this illegal activity in our neighborhood, our property assessment values go down.  What a horrible way to run a City government that needs $$$ to fix roads and our golf course after the September floods.  These people who run our City are horribly corrupt, in my humble opinion.
This renter needs to rent an office in our commercial "District Categories" from which to operate his commercial vendor business.  Businesses are not allowed anywhere in our City in residential neighborhoods.

From our Municode 

Sec. 17.12.010. District categories.permanent link to
                                          this piece of content

4.  Residential low density R-L. The residential low density R-L district is comprised of typical urban density single-family residential areas.


   7.  Commercial neighborhood C-N. The commercial neighborhood C-N district is comprised of areas to accommodate mixed residential and commercial uses. Uses in this district shall be strictly reviewed to ensure compatibility.


Commercial community C-C. The commercial community C-C is a district comprised of areas to provide for a restricted range of retail sales and services including opportunities for a limited variety of comparative shoppers' goods.


Commercial business C-B. The commercial business C-B is a district comprised of areas to provide for a full range of retail sales and services including opportunities for a complete variety of comparative shoppers' goods.



 Our neighborhood is number 4.  ONLY!!!!

 Our neighborhood is not numbers 7 -9.

City Council allows Code Enforcement to break our residential laws for favoritism.  It is also against our ethics code for public servants...you folks.
Here are the pics from today for my proofs.  Updates will come daily until this is cleared up.
Bev Beaufait

Sec. 9.04.050. Disobeying a lawful order.permanent
                                                          link to this
                                                          piece of

It is unlawful for any person to knowingly disobey the lawful order of any police officer, firefighter, or emergency personnel giving incident to the discharge of the official duties of such police officer or firefighter.

(Code 1977, § 9.04.050; Ord. No. 748-1981, § 4)


Sec. 10.20.040. Oversized commercial vehicles.permanent
                                                          link to this
                                                          piece of

An oversized commercial vehicle, defined as any vehicle registered, licensed or used for commercial purposes or displaying advertisements for commercial enterprise and exceeding 18 feet in length, 18 feet in combined length for vehicles with trailers, or eight feet in height, or 8,000 pounds in weight by the G.V.W. rating indicated on vehicle, loaded or unloaded, shall be prohibited from all zoning districts except with the following exceptions: I-Industrial.


Oversized commercial vehicles incidental to a commercial enterprise shall be permitted on the premises of such commercial enterprise in C-C, C-B, C-N, zoning.


Loading or unloading of moving vans or similar type vehicles used for moving of personal goods for a period of 24 hours or less.


Temporary parking for pickup and delivery purposes for a period of four hours or less.


Construction equipment and/or machinery employed in any public works project in the city parked at the site of and for the duration of such construction.

(Code 1977, § 10.20.040; Ord. No. 748-1981, § 5)

Sec. 17.20.160. Motor vehicle parking limitations.permanent
                                                          link to this
                                                          piece of


B.  On residential lots, no more than two motor vehicles may be parked on any area of the lot other than within a fully enclosed structure or on the paved driveway which is intended for parking or access to the garage or carport. A motor vehicle which is parked or stored on an improved surface adjacent to a paved driveway, or in a rear yard, a side yard, or a side yard adjacent to the street shall be counted towards the limit of two such vehicles. No more than one such motor vehicle may be an inoperable vehicle as defined in section 8.16.040.D.1 of this Code.

Sec. 17.20.100. - Parking spaces not to be used for storage or advertising. Required parking spaces shall be available for the parking of operable passenger automobiles of residents, customers, patrons, and employees only, and shall not be used for the storage of vehicles or materials or for the parking of trucks used in conducting the business or use, or for the purpose of advertising.(Code 1977, § 17.20.100; Ord. No. 715-1981, § 15) 

This is from our Ethics Code

"Open Government & Ethics Pamphlet 2013
Other Ethics Rules of Interest 
Page 7

It also prohibits acts of advantage or favoritism and, in that regard, prohibits special considerations, use of employee time for personal or private 
reasons, and use of City vehicles or equipment, except in same manner as available to any other person (or in manner that will substantially benefit City)."

"Last night we heard from the owners of the truck.  It belongs to a couple who recently moved to Louisville and who just purchased the vehicle.  The husband and wife are a little distressed about why the selective enforcement against them.  Commander Kingston will speak with them and convey our assurances that this is all quite routine and innocent. "

This quote is from a May 25, 2012 e-mail to me from Bruce Goodman, Police Chief.  He knows the rules.  He applies them when he wants.  He is a bully.  He does not do his job that he is paid to do.  He should be fired on the spot.  If he did his job correctly, the first time he contacted the owners, he would not be  backed into a corner to save face.  Now, he will not do his job, just to try to prove he is correct, when he is so very wrong.