Laserfiche WebLink
He said now the owners of 1081 Riverside drive are coming back for a COA to do <br />legally what they had done illegally the first time and caused the <br />King-Hendriksen's tree damage. Commissioner Bullene asked if the survey sketch <br />was inaccurate because it did show a flare on the other side as well. Mr. King <br />asked if he could see a photo because as far as he could tell, the driveway <br />only flared on one side, and the flare was quite extensive. Commissioner <br />Bullene noted it was difficult to read the photographs accurately because of <br />the angle. Mr. King felt, if examined, the western side would come down <br />straight from the ribbon and the eastern side, toward his property would flare <br />off to the side. Mary Hendri.ksen spoke of the inaccuracy of Mr. Talley's <br />statement of the facts of the case. She said this was not a case in which the <br />Commission approved the flange and then she and her husband objected to the <br />flange crossing their boundary line. The Commission Staff approved an in-kind <br />replacement, which was a straight ribbon. She further contended the owners <br />used the in-kind COA to extend a few feet over to. create a flange, and that <br />she believed they knew what they were doing all along. She clarified that <br />their concern was, as shown in the previous hearing, the owners would do <br />something illegally and then come and ask for a COA. She reiterated that they <br />had damage done to a 40-50 year old Norway Maple when the driveway was done <br />illegally. She explained they did not have a particular objection to the <br />flange in brick, except that it set a bad precedent as far as doing work and <br />then seeking approval from the Commission. Mrs. Hendriksen said they wanted <br />the Commission to know there was not approval for this flange, and they <br />objected because the approval was in-kind. She explained their real concern <br />was not so much the bricks and paving, but that the letter she had received <br />from Mr. Talley and Mr. Geisel demanded in thirty days the owners of 1077 <br />Riverside Drive trim all bushes or trees that overhang the property line or <br />the owners of 1081 would do it for them. Mrs. King said she and her husband <br />had never received a copy of the survey. She noted there are two marked points <br />in the boundary line and Mr. Talley had brought in photographs, but that there <br />are intervening bushes and Mr. Talley had stretched the string around them in <br />an are. The string passes behind a rhododendron, behind a lilac and arcs out <br />again. Mrs. 4;i4ign-uted they had their surveyor come out and do a preliminary <br />survey who stated given the two iron stakes in the ground, the peonies and <br />rhododendrons would belong to 1077 Riverside Drive, the lilac would be <br />commonly shared, and that it would be to the inch on the cedar trees. Mrs. <br />tjv1��'a said her surveyor b y quoted a purvey with intervening stakes along the line <br />costing $200. She commented the owners of 108.1 Riverside Drive had not given <br />any reason to have the trees and shrubs cut down and the specimens are <br />established plantings that form a boundary line between the two properties. <br />The plantings don't interfere with access to the driveway nor harm the owners <br />eHast c <br />in any way, Mrs.g nt�?i, and she felt this was motivated out of spite <br />because the day they were pouring the drive she had gone over to discuss with <br />the workers the impact they were having on the Norway Maple. She continued <br />with her concern over the tree and their insistence that the owners of 1081 <br />Riverside Drive follow the procedures all the property owners in Riverside <br />Drive Historic: District agreed to and, especially Ed as Liaison, should know. <br />She noted if the procedures had been followed, they wouldn't have had a <br />disagreement at the eleventh hour, the night before the concrete was being <br />poured and they could have protected their tree. She asked the Commission to <br />do two things. If the Commission approved the COA, Mr's. K,ng asked it to <br />include specific language stating it did not in any way approve a boundary <br />line between the parties and it does not give approval to cut or remove any <br />plantings. She added there had been actions which made her believe Mr. Talley <br />