Over-sized dock raises dispute
, Staff Writer
05-10-2007
PULASKI — Unless a Claytor Lake resident is able to get a special use permit for a new over-sized dock at Claytor Lake, his only recourse would be to foot the bill to reduce it’s size or take legal action against the company that constructed it.
Ken C. Harvey of 4867 Treehouse Lane appeared before Pulaski County Planning Commission Tuesday night, seeking a special use permit to allow him to keep a nearly 1,390-square-foot dock intact. County zoning regulations prohibit docks from exceeding 1,000 square feet in size.
According to a county staff report, the dock was constructed in late 2006 without a building permit being obtained.
Shawn Utt, acting zoning administrator for the county, told the planners the dock was constructed by an area contractor that has “been in business quite a while.”
As a general rule, Utt said, property owners expect contractors to obtain building permits, “but (county ordinances indicate) it’s actually up to the property owner to get it,” Utt said. He said the property owner possibly could legally pass the responsibility off to the contractor since the contractor has been in business a number of years.
The staff report indicates the county has been in contact with the contractor regarding the matter and that the contractor and/or the applicant (Harvey) have agreed to purchase a building permit if the special use permit is granted.
“Any builder knows they have to have a building permit and comply with the ordinances,” Planner Basil Scott said. He made a motion to recommend the contractor be required to alter the dock at the contractor’s expense, to bring it into compliance.
Other planners questioned whether the county has the authority to issue such a mandate.
Scott contended the county had required a contractor to foot the bill to alter a violation in the past.
However, Utt said other county staff said they haven’t seen any record of such action having been taken.
Planning commission vice chairman Larry Hancock said he has no problem with the dock, “but we can’t just let people do what they want and then say they’re sorry. But I don’t think we have the legal right to make the contractor pay to fix it at his own expense.”
Utt agreed. He said that would be a matter for a court to decide.
However, Utt said the county would pursue the fact that a building permit wasn’t obtained.
Harvey said he chose the design of the dock based on others he had seen. The dock has an elevated sundeck enclosed by a railing and there are two boat slips with lifts underneath.
“I don’t know how it could be remedied based on how it has been constructed,” Harvey said. “It would be a hardship and a long, potentially expensive, legal battle to try to remedy it.”
Planner Richard Guthrie said the error was made by the contractor and “there was no intent to deceive” on Harvey’s part. He said it is a “good dock” and requiring that it be altered wouldn’t affect the contractor.
“We shouldn’t punish the owner to get back at the contractor,” Guthrie said.
When Scott’s motion died for lack of a second, Guthrie made a motion to recommend approval of the special use permit and have the county attempt to sanction the contractor through the Virginia Board of Contractors.
“It seems the contractor could be notified his next request might not be granted or that it will be gone through with a fine-toothed comb,” Guthrie commented.
Hancock seconded Guthrie’s motion.
The motion passed 6-1, with Scott casting the only dissenting vote.
The matter will now go to Pulaski County Board of Supervisors for a final decision.
Other Top Stories
