Laserfiche WebLink
Board of Adjustment <br />Meeting Minutes <br />March 19, 2014 <br />Page 5 of 16 <br />Stuart stated the reports were through and believes the criteria have been met. <br />Niska agreed. <br />Ewy agreed and said the ability for future mitigation is helpful. <br />Stuart made a motion to approve. Ewy seconded the motion. <br />Roll Call Vote: <br />Chris Fuller, Chair <br />Yes <br />Leslie Ewy, Vice Chair <br />Yes <br />James Stuart <br />Yes <br />Christine Niska <br />Yes <br />Andrew Meseck <br />Absent <br />Gunnar Malmquist <br />Yes <br />Carl Borrmann <br />Yes <br />Motion passed: <br />6 to 0 <br />Fuller <br />ther <br />Full <br />asked <br />A 2146 Garfield (Eric Berger). A vari <br />setback where 10 feet is required. 214 <br />North 1. Case No. 14 -0 <br />i. Applicant and Repr . sic Berger <br />ii. Owner: Same <br />iii. Case Manager Sean <br />1) Open Public Hearing <br />2) Opening State, Chair <br />3) Public Notice am Apprtcon Certific <br />4) Disclosures <br />5) Staff ,PreSentation and Q <br />6) Applicant Presentation a <br />7) PubIi � ment <br />8) Applic. ' g cussion o <br />9) Closings : ent by <br />se public <br />or an 8 foot side yard <br />Id Avenue, Lot 162, Louisville <br />ons of sta <br />uestions of <br />ent, if an <br />d questions by board <br />action <br />for the meeting; opened the public hearing; and stated <br />e met for the board to approve a variance request. <br />the e4a is are located on the table next to entryway. He <br />er pu•c notice. <br />McCartne f fled both a g ications to be heard this evening are complete, and were <br />both mailed roundi property owners on March 4, 2014, published in the Boulder <br />Daily Camera o ��r 014; and the property was posted on posted on March 4, <br />2014. <br />Stuart moved and Malmquist seconded a motion that all requirements have been <br />satisfied and the applications submitted by the applicants have been properly filed. <br />Motion 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 />