My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Board of Adjustment Agenda and Packet 2013 11 20
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
>
2001-2019 Board of Adjustment Agendas and Packets
>
2013 Board of Adjustment Agendas and Packets
>
Board of Adjustment Agenda and Packet 2013 11 20
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 2:03:11 PM
Creation date
11/21/2013 11:20:53 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
BOAPKT 2013 11 20
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Board of Adjustment <br />Meeting Minutes <br />October 16, 2013 <br />Page 2 of 5 <br />Fuller then stated copies of the criteria are locatedon the table next to theentryway. He <br />asked for verification of proper public notice. <br />Staff verified both applications to be heard this evening are complete, andwere both <br />mailed to surrounding property owners on October 4, 2013, published in the Boulder <br />Daily Camera on October 6, 2013;and the property was posted on postedon October <br />6, 2013. <br />Niska moved and Stuart seconded a motion that all requirements have been satisfied <br />and the applications submitted by the applicants have been properly filed. Motion <br />passed by unanimous voice vote. <br />Fuller asked if anyone at the hearing had any objections to the hearing procedures he <br />had described and asked if there were any other preliminary matters that needed to be <br />taken care of. None were heard. <br />Fuller asked for disclosures from the board members for any site visits, ex parte <br />communications, and any conflicts of interest or required disclosures with regards to <br />both applications <br />Board Member Jasiak arrived to the meeting. <br />All Board members indicated they did not have any ex parte communications or any <br />conflicts of interest for both applications. Stuart and Jasiak stated they had completed <br />site visits. <br />Fuller stated that for the requested variance to be approved, five (5)of the six (6) votes <br />would need to be affirmative. <br />Fuller asked the applicantsif they wereready to proceed with the hearing. <br />The applicantsindicated they were ready to proceed with the hearing. <br />Staff Presentation of Facts and Issues: <br />McMillan summarized the request for a variance at 494 Lois Drive: <br />Background: <br />a.Cover 32.9% of a lot in the RE zone district where 20% is the <br />maximum permitted <br />b.6,489 SF lot <br />c. 1,590 SF homeand 558 SF garage currently on lot <br />d.All structures cover 22.2% of the lot <br />e.Centennial Valley 3 Subdivision <br />RE zone district – 12,000 SF minimum lot size – applicant’s lot is smaller than <br />this minimum. <br />PUD did not waive the lot coverage requirement of 20% <br />McMillan gave an overview of the proposed addition to the home which would <br />bring the lot coverage to 32.9% which would require a variance. <br />McMillan went through the sixcriteria for approval of a variance, and indicated <br />staff had found the application hadmet all the criteria for approval, and <br />recommends the board approve the application for a variance. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.