My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Building Code Board of Appeals Minutes 1997
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
BUILDING CODE BOARD OF APPEALS
>
1996-1999 Building Code Board of Appeals Agendas and Packets
>
1997 Building Code Board of Appeals Agendas and Packets
>
Building Code Board of Appeals Minutes 1997
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 2:01:12 PM
Creation date
10/4/2018 10:26:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
BCBOAMIN 1997
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
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
I don't think anyone here knows how long any of the window wells last. I would ask that this be <br /> consider as a separate item from the interior of the building. <br /> Board discussion comments/questions <br /> There were none <br /> Public Hearing Closed <br /> Sam Light- I just have a few comments with regard to procedure. Under the ordinance <br /> establishing the Board,the Board does have up to 30 days to issue a written decision. You can <br /> make you decision tonight. You can take some time, if any one Board member desires to draft a <br /> motion, or you can continue this meeting and reconvene at some other time within 30 days to <br /> hear a motion that a member has prepared. <br /> Q Tom Talboom to Sam Light-Does the applicant have any right to ask for a decision that <br /> night? <br /> A. Sam Light- The way the rules of procedure are written is that the Board has up to 30 <br /> days to issue a written decision. The Board can decide and discuss how quickly it want's <br /> to make that decision,that is the Boards choice. <br /> Q Giles Schurman- When we have a discussion after the hearing is closed, is the discussion <br /> public. <br /> A. Sam Light-It stays public <br /> Chuck Keim-I think, from the evidence presented and the testimony, my interpretation is that <br /> we would be amiss in approving this as an acceptable method in Building Code terms. On the <br /> basis of several things. One is the control methods used. The other is the procedures for coming <br /> up with an alternative method. I would like to encourage the building department to work with <br /> the applicant to come up with a method of solving the problem, other than having us determine <br /> that this is an acceptable application. <br /> Erik Hartronft-If there is a variance to be had, could we add an inch and a half of treated <br /> material onto the existing material. I don't know how close we are to the 3 foot rule at this time <br /> If we are at exactly 3 feet would we consider 34 and '/2 inches? <br /> Public Hearing reopened by unanimous voice vote <br /> Q Erik Hartronft to Tom Talboom- Would you have clearance to do something like what I <br /> stated, and if you do not would that be something that we would be able to consider <br /> tonight. <br /> A. Tom Talboom - I am not sure what the measurements are Mr Aten and I have talked <br /> about some alternatives of what can be done while keeping the structure in tact. Under <br /> the rules of procedure and the Building Code,the Board of Appeals does not have the <br /> 9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.