My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Board of Adjustment Agenda and Packet 2017 03 15
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
>
2001-2019 Board of Adjustment Agendas and Packets
>
2017 Board of Adjustment Agendas and Packets
>
Board of Adjustment Agenda and Packet 2017 03 15
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 2:03:13 PM
Creation date
3/17/2017 2:09:57 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
BOAPKT 2017 03 15
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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 />February 15, 2017 <br />Page 4 of 10 <br />Campbell explains the lot directly across the street from the applicant's showed a square <br />footage of 7,612, which is smaller, the lot next to that one is 7,533, which is smaller, and the lot <br />located at 1608 Longs Peak is smaller as well. <br />Ritchie explains that the accessor website uses digitized GIS, whereas the plat is the true legal <br />description related to this subdivision. Staff has found discrepancies in the past with the <br />accessor website. <br />Campbell asks if staff can share the square footages. <br />Ritchies replies that they would have to look in the plats downstairs where the plats are kept. <br />Stuart asks what impact Campbell's questions have for the discussion. <br />Campbell states that this isn't a unique lot. <br />Ritchie agrees this isn't a unique lot, but Staff believes the impact of the corner setback being <br />adjacent to a street creates the unique condition. <br />Meseck discusses the term "unique" and how in past board meetings, board members have <br />discussed how the term unique is not a requirement. <br />Williams states that he assumes that "unique" is subject to interpretation. <br />Meseck tries to recall if "unique" is in the verbiage. <br />Ritchie states in criteria one, the word "unique" is referenced that there are unique <br />circumstances or conditions, peculiar to the affected property. She reminds the board that Staff <br />doesn't define the word unique. That is up to the board's discretion of how to apply the term. <br />Campbell says that "unique" to him means one of a kind. <br />Williams thinks that because it is a corner lot, that means it is "unique." Four houses down from <br />the applicant's, Williams asks if that area is a garage. She also asks if it is a one or two car <br />garage. <br />Ritchie replies that she assumes it is a garage based on when she looked at the area on <br />Google maps. She believes it is a two car garage. <br />Meseck asks if there will be visibility issues if the garage is developed. <br />Ritchie says vision clearance is cleared, but a parked car coming in and out of driveway is a <br />concern Public Works has. Public Works has worked with the applicant though. <br />DeJong asks if traffic will only be coming from the west traveling east direction on South <br />Boulder Road. <br />Zuccaro confirms that it is a full movement intersection. <br />Williams wants to know Staff's thoughts on moving it from 3 to 7 feet other than not meeting the <br />criteria. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.