Ripon board rescinds stop-work order for Next Generation home at 209 Stonehill Court after unanimous/majority vote

The Ripon appeals board voted to rescind a stop-work order and allow construction to proceed at 209 Stonehill Court, after hearing that the foundation sits about 5 feet 3 inches from the lot line—roughly 9 inches inside the city’s 6-foot side-yard setback—because of what the builder called a good-faith surveying error.

Nathan Watson, representing Next Generation Homes LLC, told the board that the company had poured the foundation and a later survey showed the foundation closer to the lot line than the approved plan. "It was a good faith error," Watson said, adding that a disturbed or moved survey stake likely produced the discrepancy. He asked the board to rescind the stop-work order, saying removing the foundation would cost "tens of thousands of dollars" and significantly delay work.

Neighbors said the encroachment raised practical safety and property concerns. Ben Murphy, who lives at 201 Stonehill Court next door, told the board he was worried about fire separation and emergency access and said, "I want a compliant structure next door." Ken Worthing and Don Gilding also described rapid excavation in snow and limited visible lot markers, urging the board to honor setback rules and avoid setting a precedent.

Staff explained the legal distinction at issue: once concrete footing is poured the foundation is normally treated as a permanent structure and a stop-work order remains an available enforcement tool. Staff also noted that the code’s standard for separation of detached accessory structures from a principal structure is 10 feet (triggering fire-separation rules if closer), but the board’s decision here concerned a nonconforming permanent structure and an appeal of the stop-work order rather than a variance application.

After deliberation, committee member (speaker 4) moved to approve the notice of appeal application for 209 Stonehill Court and to rescind the stop-work order; the Chair seconded. The board held a roll-call vote and the Chair announced the motion carried. Several members described their votes as reluctant, and members urged administration, plan reviewers and field inspectors to tighten checks so similar placement errors do not recur.

The board did not require design concessions as a condition of rescission; staff said remedies for future additions or repairs would still have to comply with the ordinance and that any future noncompliant additions would need review or a variance. The stop-work order had applied only to work on the existing poured foundation; rescinding it allows building to continue as allowed under the board’s action.

Next steps: the board’s action rescinds the administrative stop-work order on the existing foundation; the project remains a nonconforming structure and any future changes must comply with the ordinance or secure necessary approvals. The board urged the planning and inspection staff to coordinate with developers to prevent similar errors in future projects.