Laserfiche WebLink
Board of Adjustment <br />Meeting Minutes <br />November 20, 2013 <br />Page 2 of 4 <br />Fuller then stated copies of the criteria are located on the table next to entryway. He <br />asked for verification of proper public notice. <br />Staff verified both applications to be heard this evening are complete, and were both <br />mailed to surrounding property owners on November 1, 2013, published in the Boulder <br />Daily Camera on October 30, 2013; and the property was posted on posted on <br />November 1, 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 on both <br />applications <br />All Board members indicated they did not have any ex parte communication or any <br />conflicts of interest for both applications. Stuart and Jasiak stated they had completed <br />site visits. <br />Fuller stated he believed he has a conflict of interest due to professional dealings with <br />the applicant and asked to be recused. He stated Vice Chair Ewy will be asked to take <br />over the hearing procedures. la gilt, <br />Ewy stated that for the requested variance to be approved, four (4) of the five (5) votes <br />would need to be affirmative. <br />Ewy asked the applicants if they were ready to proceed with the hearing. <br />The applicants indicated they were ready to proceed with the hearing. <br />Staff Presentation of Facts and Issues: <br />Russ summarized the request for a variance at 169 Roosevelt Avenue: <br />▪ Background: <br />a. Post construction request for a variance <br />b. 6,489 SF lot <br />c. 3,000 SF home and 600 attached garage currently on lot <br />d. There is a front setback variance being requested <br />e. Bella Vista South, Replat A, Subdivision <br />▪ 25 foot setback requirements are permitted in the Bella Vista PUD. <br />• At time of building permit the plans showed the building was going to comply with <br />the 25 foot setback. <br />• Typically, if a setback is within 3 feet of the required setback, a surveyor's <br />setback certificate is required at time of framing to ensure they structure complies <br />with the setback. <br />▪ Inspections were approved without reception of a surveyor's setback certificate. <br />