My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Board of Adjustment Documents 1980
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
>
1974-1998 Board of Adjustment Agendas and Packets
>
1980 Board of Adjustment Agendas and Packets
>
Board of Adjustment Documents 1980
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 2:05:03 PM
Creation date
11/6/2006 2:32:18 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
BOADOCS 1980
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
71
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
<br />BOARD OF APPEALS AND BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES - ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING <br />JANUARY 24, 1980 PAGE 3 <br /> <br />All the Board Members reply that there is no tie vote. <br /> <br />Rupp asks what if there were only 4 members. <br /> <br />Pickett replies that they have the option of continuing the hearing until there <br />are 5. <br /> <br />Rupp asks what if they wanted to go with the 4 members? <br /> <br />Davies replies that in a tie vote then they would lose. <br /> <br />Rupp states that it would be an automatic denial then. Rupp then asks what <br />would the applicant do about re-app1ying? <br /> <br />Davies replies that it would be too late for the applicant, that it would take <br />2 years to re-apply. <br /> <br />Rupp points out that it's not spelled out in the By-Laws. <br /> <br />Pickett states that that is explained to the applicant at the time, that they <br />can take their chances, and that it's 2 years before they can re-app1y. <br /> <br />Ferris points out that it is in the By-Laws, under Section 3. The Quorum. <br />liThe concurring vote of 4 members of the Board shall be required to approve <br />matters presented before the Board. II <br /> <br />Pickett says that under Section 6. Continuance., it tells why, and finishes <br />it up. <br /> <br />Reed? or Davies? points out that it still does not day that it's denied. <br /> <br />Ferris says that they probably ought to spell out what it takes to get a <br />variance. He says that under the State Statue it requires 4 concurrant votes <br />for it to be approved. He points out that if they spelled it out they would <br />be covered right from the very beginning. <br /> <br />Pickett says that the Chairman always does this when he opens the hearing. <br /> <br />Chairman says that when there is only 4 members, he tells the applicant if they <br />want to go ahead with just the 4 members, okay, and if they don't, then they <br />have to re-app1y for their variance. He also refers to Section 17.48.060 of . <br />the Louisville Municipal Code, Number of Votes Required for Case Approval. liThe <br />concurring vote of 4 members of the Board of Adjustment shall be required to <br />approve any matter presented to the Board. II <br /> <br />Rupp states that they've got to have a motion to deny or approve, because when <br />he's run into tie votes at meetings before, they say it hasn't been denied or <br />it hasn't been approved, and it could just go on and on with the tie voting, <br />and it just wouldn't get approved. <br /> <br />It is generally agreed, by the Board members that it takes 4 concurring votes to <br />approve a variance. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.