November 5, 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, November 05, 2013 10:10 am
 Subject:  District Categories Again Illegal Commercial Dumpster
Attachments:
 Text version of this message. (7KB)
 dumpster1105.JPG (60KB)

Day 4. Still there.
 
The renter left this morning without his commercial vendor dumpster.  The renter parks the commercial vendor dumpster in the driveway, like a car.  This dumpster was gone last week.  The renter's commercial vendor truck that pulls his commercial vendor dumpster needs to be stored elsewhere.  Specifically, where ever it was parked last week, that is where it needs to stay. 
 
He should not even be allowed to have his commercial vendor truck that pulls his commercial vendor dumpster in our neighborhood, either, as it is a vendor vehicle, which is against the law in this residential neighborhood for operating a commercial vendor business.
 
This renter seems to think, because of favoritism by Code Enforcement and City Council, that he can come an go with parking his commercial vendor truck and his commercial vendor dumpster any time he wants, since last May.  Disgusting!!!!!!!! 
 
 
 
 
He has no business coming back to this neighborhood with his commercial vendor business equipment, which is against the law in our City.
 
Why does not Code Enforcement just tell the renter the truth, so this person does not continue to do this?
 
Why is Code Enforcement giving preferential treatment to renters?
 
Why is Code Enforcement letting this renter bring down our neighborhood values?
 
Why does not Code Enforcement tell this renter that this commercial vendor dumpster of his also is too large for storage in residential property, to boot?
 
Why is this going on and on?
 
What is the problem with Code Enforcement?
 
What is wrong with City Council?
 
Why do you continue to allow this to happen month after month after month?
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.

8.

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.

9.

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.
 
 
Sincerely,
 
Bev Beaufait
P.S.

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

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
                                                          content

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.

A.

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.

B.

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

C.

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

D.

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)


 
 
Chapter 17.20 OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING [1] 
Sec. 17.20.160. Motor vehicle parking limitations.permanent
                                                          link to this
                                                          piece of
                                                          content

 

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.
 
 409 W. Sycamore Court.