Jeanne English knew something was wrong a few months ago when construction crews began piling mountains of dirt behind her fence to start three new buildings in the Dublin Terrace Townhomes.
She and other neighbors knew the hard-fought site development plan approved by the city in 2006 called for Todays Homesto build lower-profile townhomes that slope down, with the natural grade, not sit atop 7 feet of dirt.
One of three Dublin Terrace Townhome buildings built in violation of the development plan, the city says.
But before long, her home and the others on Whereabout Court, along with several on Many Springs Drive, were being dwarfed by three towering new townhome buildings, each upwards of 35-40 feet tall.
“I look out my window and their front doors are higher than my fence,” English said. “These buildings loom over me. This is crazy.”
The development plan called for the townhomes to slope down with the grade. Instead, developer Todays Homes hauled in tons of dirt, built a retaining wall and elevated the entire structures about 7 feet, the city says.
Now, those buildings are ready for occupancy but the city won’t allow it because officials say they are in serious violation of the development plan.
Todays Home president Mil Younkers says the structures were built by mistake and he’s asking the Colorado Springs Planning Commission at its April 19 meeting to amend the 2006 site plan and let them remain.
Younkers insists it’s not a case of a rogue developer deliberately ignoring the blueprints, building what he wanted and then asking forgiveness once construction was finished.
“No one maliciously went out and built those units,” Younkers said.
The city-approved development plan called for lower-profile structures, like the brown building in the middle, to be adjacent to the neighborhood, on the left, and buffer the homes from more massive buildings like the one on the right.
“We’ve told the homeowners it was a mistake. We told the city we made a mistake. Now how do we rectify it?”
Younkers said the error is the result of a complete change in leadership at Todays Homes in 2009 when he was hired as president and brought in a new team.
He said his team struggled to sell three townhomes in the first low-profile building constructed a year ago.
“The market was not responding to the units approved for those lots,” he said. “We made the marketing decision to build (larger) units.
“We contacted our surveyor and confirmed they would fit and we made the change.”
But the development plan dictates what could be built, I told him.
The blueprints show exactly which type building goes on which lot. There was no ambiguity I could see. How could that be a mistake?
“No one understood specific building types were called out on that plan,” Younkers said. “It got by us all.”
New Dublin Terrace Townhome buildings tower over a home on Whereabout Court.
English scoffed at that explanation. Me, too.
“They are professional builders,” she said. “How could you not know that?”
Younkers added that the city should have caught the error when Todays Homes requested building permits or during multiple inspections by the Regional Building Department.
This comparison shows how the foundation of the original lower-profile townhome on the left slopes down with the natural grade while the new building on the right steps up and sits atop a retaining wall and 7-feet of dirt.
City planner Rick O’Connor rejects that suggestion, pointing to the blueprints, which spell out detailed guidelines for grading and building types.
“We had very specific conditions on the developer to address the impacts of size, scale and bulk of this project on the adjacent single family homes,” O’Connor said. “That’s why we required lower-profile units next to the neighborhood.”
So what happens now, I wondered.
The city is evaluating the Todays Homes proposal and taking neighbors’ suggestions.
The feedback is not terribly positive.
“Tear them down,” said Bill Sheridan, a seven-year Whereabout Court resident. “The developer admitted they couldn’t make any money selling the smaller units. So they decided to build the larger buildings.
One of Todays Homes floorplans for the Dublin Terrace Townhomes
“The city ought to pull their license, fine them to the maximum extent of the law, tear them down and put in what was approved.”
Would the city be satisfied with Younkers’ suggestion he chop 8 feet out of the roofs of each building to soften the lines and plant 50 trees to buffer the buildings?
“I think it’s going to very difficult for them to comply with our review criteria,” O’Connor said ominously. “I think moving the buildings may be an option.”
Moving buildings that cost $300,000 or so to build? Really?
“It’s not conceivable that these buildings could be moved,” Younkers said.
Well, then. Maybe a solution will emerge from a neighborhood meeting Younkers is planning next week.
Or, I suppose, they could just take Sheridan’s suggestion: “Blow them up!”
======================================================
Hey developers, see why nobody trusts you?
I don’t think Today’s Homes is worried….their developer-in-chief will push it through, firing anyone who dares get in the way.
Bill … here’s my question:
Doesn’t the city do periodic inspections of building sites to make sure they’re in compliance with the blueprints as the project moves along? How did these buildings get to the point of completion without the Planning Department checking in? Geez when i build my garage up in Woodland Park, Teller County checked in on the project from foundation to finish like 7 times.
“Tear them down,” said Bill Sheridan, a seven-year Whereabout Court resident. “The developer admitted they couldn’t make any money selling the smaller units. So they decided to build the larger buildings”
Exactly. This is nothing more than adeveloper doing whatever they want in order to make a profit in Colorado Springs. Everything was spelled out beforehand, yet the builder chose to ignore the rules. Tear them down, and if the builder can’t sell an approved home style on that lot, look to using the ground as open space. You’ll create much more good will with the present neighbors and the rest of the community.
It must be removed.
Zen…..good example, just like the 16 x 20 shed we put up in our backyard. Pikes Peak Regional was very involved in the project from the start of the layout and design, to the final signoff, almost to the point of absurdity, but we complied with every step.
Something is very crooked with the entire process of the Dublin Townhomes.
Great article Mr. Vogrin.
Please keep us informed on the outcome of this situation, although I would bet my entire 401K retirement that the developers are granted a variance waiver and allow them to stand as-is.
Also, the inspectors who knowingly signed off on the periodic inspection permits should be reprimanded and fired for incompetence.
Hey everyone, I want to make a bet, say….. $100.00, that the neighboring homeowners are going to get screwed and the townhomes will stay. Anyone want to take me up on that? Anyone?
Who signed off the permits?
A city employee!
How is THAT a mistake?????
R-i-i-i-ight. Younkers’s explanantions are laughable. It clearly IS a case of “asking forgiveness later” and counting on the largesse of the planning commision now that the deed is done. This statement says it all: “The market was not responding to the units approved for those lots.”
I believe the city does not check building sites well. I have friends who have bought condos along Centennial Blvd by Trailblazer Elementary, and the builder above has not put in the proper drainage, the city blocked the storm drains so debris from construction would not flow into the drains, and the city left the drains sandbagged without checking. During last summer’s storms, all the red dirt and debris from the above townhouses ran downhill all over the condos parking lots, etc. completely destroying landscaping and creating a mess. They city never inspected what the builders were doing.
From the floorplans and profiles presented, I’d give Todays Homes a choice: either lop off the top floor (bringing the roofline back to the approved height) or demolish these buildings. They could then build the approved designs after demolition but with increased scrutiny from the community and Planning Commission.
They could, of course, lower the buildings but that’s likelier to be more expensive than just demolishing them and rebuilding.
Neither of those options is likely to be palatable to the developer but they’re the ones that screwed up and I see no way to make the current homes fit the neighborhood. The neighbors should not have to suffer long term by the developer’s callous disregard of the Planning Commission approvals, intentional or not.
It’s collusion and evidence of a elitist taking over our cities.
The “central” planners, inspectors and developer all looked the other way because they felt “they” knew better than the small number of residents who protested the larger buildings and had the “hard-fought site development plan” changed.
If our elected officials look the other way then I think it’s safe to assume they are elitist and no longer support the democratic process. “They” no longer care what we think.
How long will you stay silent America?
This will be an interesting test for our Mayor given the allegations prior to his election (big developer supporter). As a home owner that completed my basement working with the regional building dept taught me they were (and should still be) methodical in approving and complying to code. It seems difficult to accept this simply as a mistake.
It is not real clear when the first objections were raised but that will play into how to resolve. If they continued building after being advised of the oversight, then tear them down. If no body objected until after completion then perhaps a compromise is in order.
Since the developer ignored the plans and upset the community they should give back to the community. Donate half of these units to a family that is in need of housing. I know that’s a lot but it’s better than tearing them down.
So sad that a developer would have no respect for property owners and neighbors, but this is no surprise. Somebody made the decision to ignore the 2006 site plan, roll the proverbial dice, and gamble that a little exchange of money would offset this egregious violation of code. I doubt that any of the residents of this city care how much it will cost the developer to come into compliance; all we care about is that our city stands behind each of us as tax paying citizens who have a right to expect protection for property owners. We will be watching to see which city servants are worthy of our continued trust.
This is so wrong! The developers messed up, They should tear them down or move them and the City should enforce it.
I don’t buy it! They past several building milestones knowing full well these properties were non-compliant! Its impossible to conceive an oversight of this magnitude.
I’m guessing if they keep them they way they are. Residents or not. I would be concerned about proper drainage in to the lower homes. Trust me a flooded basement due to a crappy builder is not fun( this one seem to fall into this area of ruthless builders).
My whole 5ft. wide x 5 ft deep window well was full to the top with run off water from the home above us. We were out in a thunder storm ,with buckets trying to relieve the pressure off the window and its glass.This one example of the issue that may be faced while they figure it out by the homes and neighbor involved.
There is going to be issue from the wrong construction and land development. Home owners beware. Make sure this “mistake” won’t have long term destructive effects to your investment.
As for privacy issue maybe they will need to plant trees or pine trees to compensate for your concerns.
Always be proactive when it comes to your largest investment ever.Despite the lack of a responsible governing bodies, (paid position), to at the last minute become involved in the matter or a smarmmy builder whom “OPPS” built a housing community and didn’t know … Humm. Smell like some people needs a new community development representative. Cause why? A housing village just showed up. weired? right?
It’s no mistake. It’s a TYPICAL “developer deliberately ignoring the blueprints, building what he wanted and then asking forgiveness once construction was finished.”
He “maliciously went out and built those units”.
WHY?
“The market was not responding to the units approved for those lots”…“We made the marketing decision to build (larger) units.
It’s what the teaklan calls the “free market”
The mayor, which they paid to put in power will allow the variance.
The new “strong developer” inspector culture stood there and watch all that dirt being poured in there is violation of the schematics and did nothing.
GREED PUSHES DEVELOPMENT.
I am a resident right around the corner from this development, and I think it’s a classic case of greed. It was ridiculous when they were building when the real estate market tanked. The city is as much to blame as the builders. Greed for profit and more taxable properties. Look how they allowed Taco Bell and Burger king to build in a corner of undeveloped narrow streets. Dublin goes from 4 lanes to an abrupt 2 lanes and 30 miles an hour. People are zig zagging through there at high speeds.
Now they shoehorn in all these town houses and are not watching what is happening. The builders are pathetically incompetent and the keystone cops planning department is asleep at the switch! All the while greed keeps pushing.
If the city allows this or makes any concessions at this point they should be sued by the surrounding homeowners. Adjoining property owners have rights – they have to be able to rely on city government that what was approved is actually built. In this instance, the city is equally liable and culpable as the developer. The developer story does not wash as an excuse (and is quite unbelievable). Building permit regulations apply to all builders and developers. Any competent building inspector would have discovered that what was being built was not what was submitted and this project should have been ordered a cease and desist way in the beginning – not NOW!! This is a travesty – unfair to the neighbors – neighborhood – and the supposed legal building process in place that every builder is mandated to follow.
What a joke. Not intentional? Why then did he decide to violate the plans, knowingly (don’t give us that B.S., you’re a professional developer and you knew), after the market didn’t respond?
He is so transparent it’s literally funny. What a shame. Some people have no integrity. I wonder if his friends and family trust him? I wouldn’t.
csaction: I’m afraid you’re probably right about the mayor allowing it. If he has any sense at all, and wishes to keep his job, he won’t allow it. Unfortunately, I foresee a different outcome.
the staff want jobs with developers when they leave city job , so they approve anything!
Offer the current impacted homeowners a cut of the profits.
Tear them down. If they don’t, I’m sure we could find some folks from ELF who could help us out with the problem.
Regional building needed to leave the palace they built for themselves and learn about construction.
Pathetic! Each affected homeowner needs to be bought out by the corporation.
The builder should have to bulldoze them. If he doesn’t like it, then he should have followed what was approved.
Sadly, Colorado Springs is not known for choosing what’s best for the Community over what’s best for Developers. They relied to an extreme extend on the housing market for growth, neglecting other avenues of growth that would have been much more solid, like bringing in new Industries, encouraging new business, etc. Instead – it’s all a flash in the pan – like USOC (looks and prestige – but no results), massive developments (Banning Lewis) without any solid plan to increase jobs accordingly.
CIties that are thriving are those that concentrate their efforts on jobs, tourism and overall improvements – not growth without limits.I love this place, and enjoy living here – but if things don’t change, the views/location alone will not bring new growth/businesses/investments.
Allowing developers “to get away with everything” and ask forgiveness later, is just another example of catering to an industry segment that can not sustain growth by itself. (Yes – it offers jobs – in construction…but where are the people supposed to work that eventually buy these homes? In call centers for minimum wage?)
Sadly – I don’t think the community will “win” on this one – specially not with a Realtor as our Major. Just my two cents….
as a contractor and craftsman there is only one way to ‘rectify’ this , that is TEAR IT DOWN and correct the problem . obviously the contractor did this thinking he would get a variance . uh uh
When we built the 4 ft deck at my house just a few blocks from this development a few years ago, the inspector came out and inspected the holes I dug for the support posts. They came out again after I poured the concrete, and again for the final inspection. This was for a 4′ x 10′ deck. Had I not done this properly, I would have had to tear it down and start over. Why should the rules be any different for a developer? The rules are there for a reason and didn’t someone once say, “ignorance of the law is no excuse”?
I believe their only options should be to tear down and rebuild in accordnace with the approved site plan, tear down and not rebuild, or lower the top of the structures to the level authorized in the approved blueprints and provide privacy screening so they can’t look from their back door into their neighbors’ bedrooms.
Let’s hold our collective breath, shall we?
these units went through multiple inspections before receiving a certificate of occupancy . regional building bears significant responsibility for lack of oversight .
hey Nick, please don’t slander City staff – my spouse used to work for the city and did not like (still doesn’t) “pro-developer to a fault” mindset with some people here. In fact, many City employees hate having to roll over on design issues, safety requirements, etc. because of the culture here since staff are left holding the bag to fix the stuff some developers weasel their way out of. And my spouse certainly NEVER wanted to work for a developer….
hmmmm. How about let the building stay, but the homeowners below get all the profits, plus a moderate additional penalty?
Contractor loses money but not nearly as much as if forced to tear down and start over, so doesn’t benefit from what was either trying to game the system or gross incompetence.
I’m really interested to see how this will turn out. Given situations of which I am aware, in which private individuals built unapproved stuff, the solution is to enforce removal.
http://www.gazette.com/articles/villa-36928-city-house.html
I am aware that the building department and the planning commission both have authority in permitting, but refuse any liability when consequences occur.
In this case, all involved seem to have been affected by compounding mistakes, leaving the existing neighborhood to bear the burden. I cant think of any analogous situation (contract, taxes, insurance, …) where one could screw up like this, and change the rules after the fact to make everything OK.
In southern California, a developer violated the site plan and built multistory apartment buildings over 20 feet higher than allowed by site plan. They were built at the base of a steep hillside. The top floor of each building looked into the neighbor’s backyards and blocked what was a beautiful view.
They also claimed it was an honest mistake. They offered impacted neighbors a cash settlement which they refused. The developers had to bring buildings into compliance before they received an certificate of occupancy, which they did.
The developers broke what was essentially a contract between them, the city, and their neighbors. I don’t know if it was intentional or not. Either way, the neighbors should not suffer and the developers should not be rewarded.
I watched those units being built up. They were an eyesore from the get-go. The sizing just looked ‘off” and the colors used on the buildings and fencing do NOT match the surrounding homes.
That final eyesore will hurt home values in that area.
I’m not surprised. Look what city planning did to us on the west side – Darby St and Centennial. That town home development by Douglas Creek blocked all view and deleted all privacy from inside of the existing homes. The developer won and city planning helped them throughout the process.
A clear representation of Colorado Springs citizens (above) have spoken overwhelmingly on this issue – and it’s all vehemently for making the builder and the city comply with what was initially approved. If the city government waivers even slightly on this then they are clearly ignoring and not representing the populace and local opinion. This is a LANDMARK precedent setting case and should be watched by all!
Ask the head of Regional Building who the inspectors were on the project and see why they signed off on the townhomes…….I bet there will be a couple openings in the Building Department soon.
If the developer doesn’t move these monstrosities or rebuilds them to the development plan, then each and every homeowner on Whereabout Court and Many Springs Drive that is affected should be compensated for their loss of “reasonable privacy” (say at least $250,000 each). The buildings do sit above their privacy fences, you can see that in the photos. Then later when the neighbors get flooded due to poor slope drainage they can sue the developers again.
GREAT reporting Bill! It’s moments like these when reporters truly shine and we’re all grateful for what you do.
The developers seem fairly confident of the outcome, since they have these units for sale on their website.