Board of Adjustment Agenda and Packet 2016 09 21

Home Browse Search

Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes August 17, 2016 Page 8 of 10 • Case Manager: Scott Robinson, Planner II Motion made by Malmquist to continue 749 Wildrose Way — Variance Request, Case #16- 027 -VA to September 21, 2016, seconded by Ewy. Motion passes 4-0. Meseck discusses the Resolutions of Denial. Apparently the City Attorney recommends we do this consistently upon denial so there is a record. Robinson says this is the recommendation from the City Attorney for anything denied from now on, that the Board approves a Resolution of Denial that formalizes and memorializes the decision in case there is any further proceeding such as court. The request is to look at them and make sure they reflect the reasons the application was denied. Staff requests that you vote to approve the Resolution of Denial as long as you feel it accurately reflects the reasons for the denial. Malmquist says I was not present for these applications listed below. Am I allowed to vote? Should I vote in good conscience? Did we deny these in the previous meetings? Do we have the option of re -opening them? Is this the reason that th- ity Attorney is asking us to re -look at them? If that is the case, I would want to also wait un ave a further quorum and I am not willing to vote tonight. Robinson says you do not have the option to r advertised as Resolutions of Denial. Without the think we can go in that direction. To answer your fi from the June meeting when these were decided, I comfortable voting on them. Malmquist says essentially, I would be voting that I agree with the Denial. What happens if I don't agree? Ewy says you are agreeing with the representation of what was discussed in the meeting and the record of denial. Not that if you agree with the denial. Robinson says the Board made the decision at the June meeting and we are requesting that you approve this as a memorialization of that decision. You are not re -deciding the issue. It has already been decided and this is setting it into a resolution. Ewy says I agree it is difficult if you didn't attend. I don't know if I would want to vote on cases I didn't attend. Malmquist says I don't want my name on the record on these if they are something like we just discussed. I will not vote. Robinson says if you are not comfortable voting and you will recuse yourself, then we don't have a quorum. These will come back at the next meeting. these because they have been cant's request to reopen then, I do not est you have reviewed the record n vote. It is up to you if you feel th ➢ Resolution of Denial - 2252 Crown Circle — Variance Request — Resolution 01, Series 2016. A request for a variance from Section 17.12.040 of the Louisville Municipal Code (LMC) for relief from front and side setback and maximum lot coverage requirements to allow additions to the garage and second story. — Continue to September 21, 2016 • Applicant & Owner: Terry Nelson, 2252 Crown Circle • Representative: Patrick Hubbell, Summit Studio Architects • Case Manager: Scott Robinson, Planner II ➢ Resolution of Denial - 346 McKinley Court — Variance Request — Resolution 02, Series 2016. A request for a variance from the Dutch Creek planned unit development (PUD) for relief from the side setback requirement to allow an addition to the second story. — Continue to September 21, 2016 • Applicant & Owner: Rachel and Dan Fox, 346 McKinley Ct • Case Manager: Scott Robinson, Planner II Business Items tentatively scheduled for September 21, 2016: