Loading...
All Correspondence River and WoodsFrom:Roberto Caccia To:boulderplanningboard Subject:River and Woods Docket - at the Boulder Reservoir Date:Tuesday, November 3, 2020 9:54:42 PM External Sender Dear Boulder Planning Board, As a resident of the Waterstone community, I am directly affected by the decision of allowing a restaurant at the reservoir. I have already taken a survey and shared my deep concerns about the restaurant concession at the Boulder Reservoir. My concerns can be grouped in three categories: 1. Safety. Residents in the area and from Boulder in general enjoy the outdoors around the reservoir. We see bikers, runners, etc. enjoy the quiet roads surrounding the entrance of the Boulder Reservoir, including -but not limited to- the segment leading to Eagle trailhead etc. More cars around, especially driven by those who may have consumed alcohol at the reservoir would drastically diminish safety. 2. Noise. The food+beverage concession at the Boulder Reservoir would substantially increase noise and consequently diminish the market value of the homes in the area. 3. Traffic and parking. The presence of a food + beverage concession will in general increase traffic on 51st street. NO to Liquor license Now I am learning about applications for liquor licenses. It is imperative to prohibit liquor for the safety in these areas. It is also very important to prohibit the the use of amplification (to address the noise problem), and enforce a strict rule of no parking along 51st street (traffic). Failing to do so will be a disservice to the community in terms of safety and well-being, and will also translate into a reduction in home prices. I am sure Boulder will be facing a large number of households contesting home value estimates and *actively* seeking a real estate tax reduction. Thanks, Roberto Caccia roberto.caccia@gmail.com https://www.linkedin.com/in/roberto-caccia/ +1-267-r0bert0 (+1-267-702-3780) (cell + work) +1-973-508-7072 (cell + WhatsApp + Signal) From:Roger Pioszak To:boulderplanningboard Subject:River and Woods Docket Date:Wednesday, November 4, 2020 8:23:21 AM External Sender Dear Planning Board, I am opposed to the City of Boulder allowing outdoor amplified music venues in areas surrounded by homes and residences, especially establishments that have a liquor license. People want to live, study, and sleep in their homes, and outdoor amplified music (and the noise of patrons cheering and carrying on) rob nearby residents of their rights to peace and quiet. It is not fair to put the establishment owner's revenue and profit over the surrounding residents rights to peace and quiet. Please prohibit River and Woods from having amplified outdoor music. This same company will be applying for a liquor license for the Dockside restaurant at the Boulder Reservoir, and they are planning for outdoor parties, weddings and events with amplified music being played until 11:00pm. Again this is not fair to the residents of the surrounding neighborhoods (Valhalla and those along 51rst) for the same reasons above. In addition, the idea of granting a liquor license to an establishment at the Boulder Reservoir, with 51rst street as the only access, which has two blind hills (to the north and to the south) at the entrance to the Reservoir, is a recipe for a tragic accident. Impaired/drunk drivers will leave the Dockside restaurant at night and navigate two blind hills on a dark county road. Serving ANY alcoholic beverages at this location is going to lead to tragedy. Dockside should not be allowed to operate past sundown, should not be allowed to play outdoor amplified music, and not be allowed to serve alcoholic beverages. Thank you. Roger Pioszak -- Roger Pioszak 707-861-2760 From:Lisa Hilmes To:boulderplanningboard Subject:Regarding the River and Woods violation Date:Thursday, November 5, 2020 12:21:53 PM External Sender To the Boulder Planning Board, My name is Lisa Hilmes, and I live at 2319 Walnut Street in Boulder. I wanted to speak to the board tonight about the violations of River and Woods and how to mitigate the issues of noise and the trailer bar moving forward. I also want to set the record straight on one matter. In his letter, Josh Dinar claims that only Mr. Kass complained about the noise from the backyard music venue, and that is not true. I have lived in this building since before River and Woods moved in. I enjoyed two quiet years here, but starting in late 2016, I have called the restaurant multiple times to specifically complain about the noise from their backyard venue. And it's not just the music that's a problem: When they held catered holiday parties, I called and left voicemails to complain about their clean up staff who were playing their music and talking too loudly after 11pm. Last fall I called the police during one of their wedding or bat mitzvah events they were holding because the DJ was playing music unbearably loud. And I called the police again this past summer because of an alarm going off in their trailer at 4am. It sounded like an alarm clock going off, and it was just 20 feet from where I sleep. It took 10 hours for them to shut it off, and this happens whenever the refrigerator in their trailer is "below temperature". A former neighbor of mine tried talking directly to employees when they were regularly hanging out behind the trailer in the alley, right under her bedroom window. They smoke cigarettes back there, and she said they drink alcohol back there after their shifts. One night after 10pm, she asked them to please be quiet, and they yelled obscenities at her. So the next time it happened, she called the police. She recently moved out, and I know the noise was a major factor in her choice to move. It's not just the loud music, it's everything that goes with it, including the dumpster lids slamming at 10:45pm waking you up. A neighborhood restaurant should be more considerate of their neighbors. Going forward, I have three requests: 1. If they are going to serve drinks out of the trailer, it needs to be moved further away from the alley. They were never supposed to serve alcohol or customers that close to the alley in the original plan. 2. If they are allowed to have live music going forward, it must be kept to 3 concerts per week. This summer they had concerts 6 days per week, and there were days where they would have two sets of music at brunch, and another two sets of music at dinner. This is too much. They should not be able to exceed one concert with two sets in a day, and not more than three concerts per week. 3. If they are allowed to have live music going forward, it must be specified that there can be no sound amplification of any kind, including no microphone use or amplification of acoustic instruments. I need to be able to have a conversation on the phone with my mom without being drowned out by banjos or having to close my windows in 90 degree heat when I have no AC just to hear my TV. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to the board. -- Lisa Hilmes From:Gregory Adam Kass To:boulderplanningboard Cc:Ferro, Charles; Spence, Cindy; Bista, Shabnam Subject:River & Woods Hearing - Please define the word "acoustic" Date:Thursday, November 5, 2020 11:33:28 AM Attachments:Planning Board Presentation_11_05_20.pdf External Sender Dear Planning Board, My name is Greg and I will be giving a 15 minute presentation tonight on behalf of the neighbors in the quasi-judicial hearing against River & Woods for violating their 2016 Use Agreement. The owner has already admitted to violating the Use Agreement so the purpose of this proceeding isn’t to determine liability (because the owner has already admitted liability), the purpose is to revise his Use Agreement in response to 4 years of major continuing violations. I have attached my power point to this message because it contains my exhibits. There is no need for you to review it before the hearing. Importantly, the town wrote a memo to you, the Board, recommending that you find: 1. The restaurant violated their Use Agreement 2. That you impose additional restrictions on the restaurant’s use As to the second point, the proposed restrictions (page 12 of tonight’s packet) need one clarification. As it stands, the town’s new restriction says the restaurant may not have any amplified music in their outdoor space. This is perfect. However, the proposed restriction also allows for "live acoustic music" three days per week. Problematically, the restaurant’s definition of “acoustic” music is an amplified acoustic guitar. This definition contradicts the first condition- no amplified music. Therefore, the second recommended condition requires your clarification. Please define the word “acoustic” in the proposed restriction as: “acoustic instruments or voices that are not amplified.” This will ensure that the second recommendation does not act as an exception to the first. Failure to define “acoustic” would grant the restaurant new permission to engage in loud conduct that the 2016 Use Agreement prohibits. Thank you for your time. See you tonight. -Greg Gregory A. Kass, RN, JD (201)-919-7474 GregoryAdamKass@gmail.com NOTICE: The information contained in the above message is privileged and confidential information to be used solely by the intended recipient. The reader is notified that any use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender.