Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-11-14 BAA MINUTES• • ENGLEWOOD BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS NOVEMBER 14, 2001 I. CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Englewood Board of Adjustment and Appeals was called to or- der at 7:40 p .m. in the City Council Chambers of the Englewood Civic Center, Chairperson Jill Carlston presiding. Members Present: Members Absent: Secretary's Note: Staff Present: Seymour, Smith, Bode, Davidson, O'Brien, Carlston None One Vacancy on the Board Senior Planner Tricia Langon Assistant City Attorney Nancy Reid Chairperson Carlston stated there were six members present; therefore, five affirmative votes would be required to grant a variance. Chairperson Carlston stated that the Board of Adjustments and Appeals is empowered to grant or deny variances b y Part 111 , Section 60 , of the Englewood City Charter . Chairperson Carlston stated that the Board does have one case on th e agenda that w,1s continued from October. II. CASE #13-2001 Robert L. Pitier 2303 East Dartmouth Avenue Chairperson Carlston stated that the request before the Board is to consider an amendment to Case #23-84, Case #32-84, and Case #22-86 to expand permitted uses from Attorneys, Architects, Real Estate Brokers and Engineers to add Public and/or Certified Public Ac- countants, Developers, Doctors, Medical Practitioners, and other professional office uses . This is an expansion of a variance to §16-4-2:B Permitted Principal Uses of the Englewood Municipal Code. Chairperson Carlson asked that the applicant address the Board . Mr. Robert Pitier was administered the oath, and stated that on October 10 111 , prior to clos- ing the Public Hearing, the Board directed him to meet with staff members to consider th e issue of "p rofessional " office use , and consolidation of all previous variance cases into a single Board decision. He testified that he and Ms. Langon ha ve met, and hJve had phone • conversations, and in his opinion have reached an acceptable solution . H:IGROUPIBOARDSIBOA\2001 Cases\1 3-2001 Pitlerl BOA Minutes 11-14-01.doc • Ms. Langon was sworn in, and testified that she has met with Mr. Pitier a couple of times since the meeting of October 10 1h and discussed the "professional" office issue. Ms. Lan- gon also stated that all previous actions by the Board have been reviewed, and a list of pro- posed conditions encompassing previously imposed restrictions, has been developed and included in the staff report. She asked if members of the Board wanted her to go through the proposed conditions individually. Mr. Smith questioned proposed Condition #5, and asked why an interpretation of us e should go to the Planning & Zoning Commission, and not come before th e Board of Ad - justment and Appeals. He noted that approval of the requested expansion of the permitted uses will be the prerogati v e of the Board of Adjustment and Appea ls , and fe lt that the Board should be the body responsible to interpret whether or not a proposed "profes- sional" use is within the intent of the Board action. Ms. Langon stated that "interpretation " of proposed uses , and whether they are allowed in a specific zone district, is a responsibilit y of the Planning and Zoning Commission b y Ordinance . Ms. O'Brien questioned Condition #1, noting that the wording of this Condition is conflict- ing -"shall be only" is mandatory and limiting, but inclusion of the parenthetical phrase "but not limited to " does not impose any limitation on the type of use. Ms. Langon re- sponded that Mr. Pitier felt that without inclusion of this phrase, no other professional use would be accepted in this location . • Ms. O 'Brien cited Condition #2, and asked what is the definition of "professional" in this context. Ms. Langon responded that for any word not defined within the code the histori- cal definition from a dictionary is used . • Mr. Smith suggested placement of a "pe riod " after " .. .for office use "; there wil l be no spe- cific listing of professional office use, and specific uses could be de termin ed b y the Com - munity Development personnel and Bo ard of Adjustment memb e rs. Mr. Seymour asked if it is Mr. Smith 's intent that Condition #5 be rewo rd ed to bring profes- sional use clarifications back to the Board ? Mr. Smith asked if other memb e rs of th e Board are comfortable letting Community Development/Planning Commission have control of th e determination . He reiterated that in his opinion, "interpretation " of the acceptability of a professional use is the responsibility of the Board in this case . Assistant City Attorney Reid pointed out that the Planning & Zoning Commission is charged with "interpretation" of zoning issues via the City Charter. Mr. Smith stated that by granting a variance, the zoning of a site is not changed. Ms. O 'Brien stated that she understood from previous testimony that the original variance was granted on a "hardship basis ". She stated that she does not find any justification for the Board to consider expansion of the previous variance to allow a greater variety of pro- fessional office use . Brief discussion ensued . H:IGROUP\BOARDSIBOA\200 1 Cases\13 ·2001 Pit lerl BOA Minu tes 11.14.0l doc • Chairperson Carlston asked for a motion. • • Smith moved: Bode seconded: The Board of Adjustment and Appeals approve Case #13-2001, the request of Robert L. Pitier and Mark Lee Levine, 2303 East Dartmouth Avenue, to amend Case #23-84, Case #32-84, and Case #22-86, to expand permitted uses from attorneys, architects, real estate brokers, and engineers to add public and /or certified public accountants, de- velopers, doctors, and medical practitioners, and other professional of- fice uses. In approving this request from Messrs. Pitier and Levine, the Board imposes the following conditions: 1. Principal permitted use of the building and premises shall be only for office use by, but not limited to, accountants, architects, attorneys, engineers, real estate brokers, or similar users. 2. For the purpose of this variance, office shall be defined as a building wherein ser- vices are performed involving administrative, professional , or cleri ca l func tion s Jnd in which retail goods, wares, and /or merchandise are not created or sold . 3. All healthcare practitioners such as, but not limited to , doctors, dentists, ps ychia trists , or other health-related practitioners are prohibited . 4. Provided that all other district regulations are met, the building and premises ma y b e occupied by any R-1-A permitted use. 5. The Community Development Department shall make determination as to whether a specific profession is a permitted use under the terms of this variance. If the Community Development Department is unable to make such determination the proposed use shall be referred to the Board of Adjustment and Appeals for a zoning interpretation. 6. No exterior structural alterations to the building shall be permitted. 7. The office use should be operated during regular daytime office hours. 8 . The office use shall not generate a high volume of traffic. 9. The parking shall be restricted to the current paved lot area on site as of the dzit e ot the approval of this variance and a minimum of 42 parking spaces shall be llldin - tained. 10. No advertising shall be permitted except one (1) identification sign , no larger than permitted under the Sign Code . H:IGROUPIBOAROSIBOA\200 1 Cases\13 -200 1 Pitler\BOA Minuies 11-14-01 doc • This Board action clarifies that the current variance approval super- sedes all prev ious v ariances, and vacates Case #2 3-8 4, Case #3 2-8 4, and Case #2 2-86. Ms. O 'Brien stated that she would be voting "no " on this request. She stated that tes ti- mony has been received that the original variance w as grante d on a hardship basis , and in her opinion, the current applicants are "bootstrapping" this request onto the original re- quest. She is not of the opinion that the request to expand the list of permitted professional uses to increase marketability of the property constitutes a "hardship ". Ms. O 'Brien stated that she feels that the proposed Condition #1 is "inartfully drafted", would not approve modification of Condition #5 . Ms. Davidson inquired about the uses that will generate a high volume of traffic. Ms. O'Brien stated that such a stipulation cannot be enforced. She expressed the opinion there were no grounds for the original variance. Ms. Carlston stated that regarding Condition #5 , she questioned that the ty pe of profes- sional office will be monitored that closel y . She also stated that she is not sure the reason for the request is a "hardship ". The votes were cast electronically; three members voted in fa v or, three voted in opposition . • Ms. Davidson asked if the Board should make a second motion to combine th e pr ev ious variance actions into one act ion . Mr. Smith stated he did not think this action appropriat e unless the property owner agrees to it. Ms . Reid stated that she did not think this was ne c- essary . • Ms. Carlston asked if the Board needed to gi v e findings on their vote. Mr. Smith stated that the Board did not make findings unless a case is approved. Ms. Reid stated that the Board did need to give findings. Mr. Smith disagreed . Chairperson Carlston stated that the request filed by Mr. Pitier and Mr. Levine has failed on a 3 - 3 vote. ********** Chairperson Carlston stated that the Board will take a short recess . The Board reconvened at 8 : 10 p.m . Ill. * * * * * * * * * * CASE #14-2001 Mayflower Congregational Church 3001 South Acoma Street H:\GRO UPIB O ARDSIBOA\200 1 Cases\13-2001 Pitler\BOA Minutes 11-14-01 doc • • Chairperson Carlston stated that the request is for a variance to encroach 8 .5 feet into the required minimum 10-foot setback for a ground sign for a non-residential use in a residen- tial zone district. This is a variance to § 16-4-19-9:C 1 Permitted Sign Ty pes of the Engle- wood Municipal Code. Chairperson Carlston declared the Public Hearing open. Ms. O 'Brien stated that she will have to recuse herself from this Hearing. She stepped down and left the Council Chambers . Mr. Seymour stated that he will have to recuse himself from this Hearing. He stepped down and left the Council Chambers. Ms. Carlston stated that the Board will follow the Roberts Rules of Order. With the dep.u - ture of two members, the Board no longer has the required quorum of five members , and cannot proceed with the Public Hearin g. Ms. Carlston stated that th e Board has two ac - tions it can follow: 1) take action to obtain a quorum, or 2 ) con tinu e th e pro ceed ings to a date certain. She stated that the Bo ard is composed, normall y, of seven members . Ther e is now one vacancy on the Board, leaving a membership of six voting members . A quorum of five is required by the Board Handbook to conduct business. After the two members recused themselves, this leaves a membership of four voting members -one short of the required quorum. Thus, there is no way that action can be taken to obtain a quorum . This leaves only one procedure for the Board to follow -to continue the Public Hearing to a date certain . Ms. Carlston stated that the Public Hearing for the Mayflower Congregational Church will be continued to February 2002 (Secretary's Note: February 13, 2002). Mr. Robert Kelley asked if he could address the Board. Mr. Smith stated that the Board cannot hear testimony because there is no quorum, and City Council will not appoint a 71 h member until late January or early February of 2002. Mr. Kelley reiterated his request to address the Board, and to offer a couple of suggestions. Ms. Carlston polled the members in attendance, and the y agreed to hear a brief statement from Mr. Kelley. Mr. Kelley stated that he is an agent of Mayflower Congregational Church, and is represent- ing the Church in this case before the Board. He stated that he was made aware earlier on this date that the Board could not conduct the Public Hearing because of the quorum issue. Mr. Kelley stated that he wanted to propose that Mr. Seymour and Ms. O'Brien not recuse themselves until after testimony has been given; they then recuse themselves and refrain from participating in the decision, and the Board take the testimony under advisement until a full membership of the Board has been appointed. The new member can reference the staff report and minutes of this meeting, and thus vote on the issue . Mr. Kelley stated that this is his suggestion, and his request. H:IGROUPIBOAROSIBOA \2 001 C:is es \13-2001 Pi1ler\BOA Minu1es 11-14-01.doc • • • Chairperson Carlston emphasized that two members of the Board determined in good con- science that they must recuse themselves from any participation on this request . Mr. Kelle y acknowledged that Mr. Seymour initially raised the issue of the Church sign , and should recuse himself from voting on the issue . He did reiterate that both members could have remained seated with the Board and allow the Hearing to proceed and then recuse them- selves at the time of voting. Mr. Kelley stated that his second suggestion is to continue the Hearing to a date certain; by continuing the Hearing it will save the Church the expense of having a new sign made . Mr. Smith stated that the Hearing has been continued to February 2002. Chairperson Carlston stated that hopefully the seventh member of the Board will have been appointed by City Council by February, and the Hearing can proceed. Mr. Kelley stated that he had not heard a motion to continue the Hearing. Chairperson Carlston stated that she announced that the Hearing will be continued . Mr. Seymour and Ms. O'Brien re-entered the Council Chambers and assumed th eir seats with other members of the Board . IV. CASE #18-2001 Carolyn Hess Herzog and Don Herzog 2130 East Eastman Avenue Chairperson Carlston stated that the applicant is requesting variances to encroach 4 feet into the required 25-foot front y ard setback; to encroach 3.8 feet into the required 7-foot side yard setback; and to encroach 1.7 feet into the required 18-foot separation between principal structures on adjacent lots. These are variances to §16-4-2:H Minimum Front Yard and § 16-4-2 :1 1 Minimum Side Yard of the Englewood Municipal Code. Chairperson Carlston stated that the Public Hearing is now open. She stated for the record that she does have in hand the certification of posting, and the notice of public hearing published in the Englewood Herald on October 26 , 2001 . Chairperson Carlston asked that the applicant present the case . Ms. Carolyn Hess Herzog was sworn in . Ms . Herzog testified that the sign was post ed ior the required 15-day period, and is still up. Ms. Herzog stated that she and her husband want to add a master bedroom/bath to their home. The home was built in 19 53, and si ts at a steep angle on the lot. The positioning of the house on the lot affects th e de sign oi <l l1 V addition . There are covenants in place on the property, which prohibit second stor y con- struction for expansion, and they do not have a basement. The only option open to them for expansion of their home is to increase the footprint. Adjacent properties are developed , and the proposed expansion will not adversely affect those properties. Nor will the pro- posed expansion impair use of the adjacent properties. Ms. Herzog stated that the vari- ances they have requested are very minimal, but will allow them to expand the existing home and make it a three bedroom, two and one-half bath home when completed. H:IGROUPIBOARDSIBOA\200 1 Cascs\13-2001 Pitl cr\BOA Minuics 11-1 4-01.doc • • • Chairperson Carlston asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor or the request. No one indicated they wished to speak. Chairperson Carlston asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition to the request. No one spoke in opposition. Chairperson Carlston asked if staff had an y comments. Senior Planner Langon st at ed th at staff had no comments. Mr. Smith questioned what governs setbacks - a plat approved in 195 2, or the zon i ng or- dinance. Assistant City Attorney Re id stated that the Zoning Ordinance controls the set- back. Brief discussion ensued . Chairperson Carlston declared the Public hearing closed. Bode moved: Seymour seconded : That Case #18-2 001 , 2130 East Eastman A v enue, be granted v ariances to encroach 4 feet into the required 25 foot front y ard setback; to en- croach 3.8 feet into the required 7 foot side yard setback; and to en- croach 1.7 feet into the required 18 foot separation between principal structures on adjacent lots. These are variances to §16-4-2:H Mini- mum Front Yard , and §16-4-2 :1 1 Minimum Side Yard of the Engl e- wood Municipal Code . The Board voted : Six members v oted in fa v or of th e varianc es; none v oted in o pp o sition ; there is one vacanc y . Mr. Bode stated he v oted "yes "; he fin ds that ther e ar e exce p t io nal c ir c um stances -th e sit - ing of the structure on the lot, existin g co v enants , w hi ch restri c t ex p an sion b y se co nd st o ry, and the lack of basement. The spirit of the ordinance is maintained in that it w ill improve the livability of the single-famil y home. The variances will not ad v ersel y affect adj ac ent property or the neighborhood, nor w ill the va riances substantiall y or perm anentl y imp air the use or development of adjacent property. The requested variances are the minimum modification to provide the relief sought by the homeowner Ms. O'Brien stated she voted "y es "; she concurs with Mr. Bode 's findings. Ms. Davidson stated she voted "yes"; she also concurs with Mr. Bode's findings . Mr. Seymour stated he voted "yes "; he concurs with Mr. Bode . Mr. Smith stated he voted "yes "; he concurs with Mr. Bode . Ms. Carlston stated that she also voted "yes ", and concurs with Mr. Bode . H:IG RO UPIBOARDSIBOA \200 1 Cases\I J .200 1 Pit lerl BO A Min ut es 11·1 •·01 doc • • • Ms. Carlston stated that the variances requested in Case #18 -2001 have been granted by a vote of 6 -0. V. CASE #19-2001 Matthew Dean 4868 South Sherman Street Chairperson Carlston stated that the request is for a variance to encroach 6.5 feet into the required 25 feet front yard setb ack. This is a variance to §16-4-4:H Minimum Front Yard , of the Englewood Municipal code. Chairperson Carlston declared the Public Hearing open ; she stated that she does ha ve a copy of the Notice of Public Hearing published in the En g le wo od H erald, and the Certifica- tion of Posting . Chairperson Carlston asked the applicant to present his case . Matthew Dean was sworn in. He stated that he wants to construct a roof over an existing cement front porch, and that the roof will extend 6 .5 feet into the required 25 foot setback. The existing front porch is 18 .5 feet from the front property line . He stated that the roof will provide protection for the front door to his home; during inclement weather, he cannot use the front door . Mr. Seymour noted that it appears the roof is partially constructed. Mr. Dean acknowl- edged that he had begun work without a permit, and received a stop-work order. He stated that this is the first home he has owned, and was unaware he was required to obtain a Building Permit. He stated that he has done nothing further to the roof since he received the stop-work order beyond co v ering it with a tarp . Chairperson Carlston asked if the concrete porch will be extended across the full front of the house. Mr. Dean stated that he ma y put in a wooden deck, but hasn't decid ed y et. H e does want to roof the entire porch area across the front of the house. Chairperson Carlston asked if there was anyone else who wished to speak in favor of the request. No one else spoke in fa v or. Chairperson Carlston asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. No one spoke in op- position . Chairperson Carlston asked if staff had any comments . Senior Planner Langon stated that staff had no comments. Chairperson Carlston declared the Public Hearing closed, and asked for a motion . H:IGROU PIBOARDSIBOA\2001 Cases\13-2001 Pitlerl BOA Minutes 11 -14-0 1 doc • • • Seymour mov ed: Bode seconded : That Case #19-2 001 , 4868 South Sherm an Street, b e grant ed Cl v ari- ance to en c ro ac h 6.5 feet i nt o th e requir ed 25 ioo t fro nt yar d se tl.J<1 c k. This is a varian ce to§ 16 -4-4 :H Minimum Fr o nt Ya rd, of th e Engl ew ood Municipal Code. Board members cast their votes . Six members voted in favor of the variance; none voted in opposition, and there is one vacanc y on the Board . Chairperson Carlston asked for the Findings. Ms. O 'Brien stated that she voted "yes"; she finds that there are exceptional conditions on the property in that the existing concrete porch already encroaches into the front setback, and constructing a roof over the porch will not increase the amount of encroachment. The Spirit of the Ordinance is maintained, and allowing construction of the roof over the porch will improve the appearance of the property. The variance will not adversel y affect adja - cent property or the neighborhood, and there will be no impact or impairment of use of th e adjacent properties . This is the least modification needed to allow the constru c tion of th e roof over the existing concrete porch . Ms. Davidson stated that she voted "yes ", and added that pro v idin g the cove red po rch w ill make the front entrance much saf e r durin g wi nt er months . Mr. Seymour stated that he v oted "yes ", and concur s w ith M s. O 'Bri e n and Ms . D avidso 1i. Mr. Bode stated that he voted "yes ", and concurs with reasons previousl y cited . Mr. Smith stated that he voted "yes", and concurs with reasons previously cited . Ms. Carlston stated that she voted "yes", and concurs with reasons previously cited. Chairperson Carlson stated that the variance in Case #19-2001 is granted by a vote of 6 -0. VI. CASE #20-2001 David Philip 3159 South University Boulevard Chairperson Carlston stated that the request is for a variance to encroach 2.5 feet into the required 7-foot side yard setback . This is a variance to §16-4-2 :1 1 Minimum Side Yard , of the Englewood Municipal Code. Chairperson Carlston declared the Public Hearing open , and stated that she does have the Certification of Posting, and the Notice of Public Hearing published in th e Engl ewoo d H er- ald. The applicant was asked to present the case. H:IG RO UPIBO ARDS\BOA\2001 Cascs\13-200 1 Pitlcr\BOA Minutes 11-14-01.doc • • • David Philip was sworn in. Mr. Philip testified that his house was constructed in 1955, and was built 2.5 feet into the required side yard setback. There is an existing patio that he now wants to enclose. The patio is under the existing roof, and enclosure of the patio will not increase the amount of the existing side yard encroachment. Mr. Philip noted that all adja- cent property is already developed, and adjacent neighbors have signed statements stating they have no objection to the proposed variance . The requested v ariance to construct two walls to enclose the patio is the least modification needed to allow enclosure of the patio. Mr. Bode asked what the enclosed patio will be used for. Mr. Philip stated that it will be used as a sewing room. Chairperson Carlston asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of the request. No one else addressed the Board. Chairperson Carlston asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition to the request. No one spoke in opposition. Chairperson Carlston asked if staff had any comments . Ms. Langon stated that staff has no comments. Mr. Smith asked whether the Board needed to give a variance to the house itself inasmuch as it was built 2 .5 feet into the required setback . Ms . Langon stated that action the Board takes on this request will allow the encroachment of the existing structure and the enclose d patio. Chairperson Carlston declared the Public Hearing closed . Seymour moved: Smith seconded: That Case #20-2001 , 3159 South University Boulevard, be granted a variance to encroach 2.5 feet into the required 7 foot side yard set- back. This is a variance to §16-4-2:1 1 Minimum side Yard of the Englewood Municipal Code . Board members cast their votes; six members voted in favor, none voted in opposition; there is one vacancy on the Board. Chairperson Carlston asked that members state their Findings. Mr. Seymour stated that he voted "yes"; he finds that the applicant has met all criteria . The house was constructed in 1955 and was built 2 .5 feet into the required setback . The Spirit of the Ordinance is preserved, and the enclosure of the existing patio will pro v ide addi- tional living space . Adjacent properties are developed, and the variance will not ha ve an adverse impact on those properties . This is the least modification needed to pro v id e th e relief sought by the property owner . H:IGRO UP\BO ARDSIBO A\200 1 Cases\13-2001 Pitler\BOA Minutes 11-1 4-0 1 doc 10 • Ms. Davidson stated that she voted "y es "; she concurs w ith the Finding s cited b y Mr . Se y- mour. • Ms. O'Brien stated that she voted "yes "; she also concurs with Mr. Seymour. Mr. Bode stated that he voted "yes "; he concurs with reasons cited. Mr . Smith stated that he voted "yes "; he concurs with reasons cited. Ms. Carlston stated that she voted "yes "; she also concurs with the reasons cited. Chairperson Carlston stated that the variance for 3159 South University Boulevard has been approved by a vote of 6 -0. VII. FINDINGS OF FACT Case #15-2 001 -2790 South Grant Street Case #16-2 001 -3588 South Emerson Str e et Case #1 7-2001 -2 780 South Emerson Street Smith moved : Seymour seconded : The Findings of Fa ct on Ca se #15-2 001 , 2 790 South Grant St reet; Case #16-2001 , 3588 South Emerson Street, and Case #1 7-2001 , 2 780 South Emerson Street, be approved as written . The motion carried unanimously. VIII. APPROVAL OF MINUTES October 1 0, 2001 Smith moved : O'Brien seconded: The Minutes of October 10, 2001 , be appro ved as written . The motion carried unanimously. IX. STAFF'S CHOICE Senior Planner Langon referenced materi a ls included in the packet regarding remo va l of Mr. Rasby from membership on the Board . Mr . Rasby has been notified via U.S. mail of his removal from the Board . Ms . Langon stated th a t Cit y Council will a ccept applic a tions for appointment to boards and commissions , intervie w in Januar y, and make appointments in early February . Ms . Langon stated that no cases are scheduled before the Board for December. • The annual Holiday Dinner for Boards and Commissions is scheduled for December 13 th at the Englewood Golf Course . Invitations will be mailed shortly . H:IGROUP\BOARDS\BOA\200 1 Cascs\13 -200 1 Pitlcr\BOA Minutes 11-14-0 1 doc 11 • Ms. Langon asked, if no variance applications are received for Januar y 2002 , does th e Board want to have a study session in lieu of a regular meeting. Brief discussion ensu ed . There will be a study session on "corner lots" in January if no variance applications are re- ceived. Ms. Langon stated that she understood there had been discussion regarding a change of meeting location from the City Council Chambers to the Community Room because of acoustical concerns . She asked if members wanted to pursue the change of meeting loca- tion. Members of the Board agreed that the sound system was much better this evening, and that relocation would not be pursued at this time. X. A TIORNEY'S CHOICE Ms. Reid stated that she had nothing to bring before the Board. XI. BOARD MEMBER'S CHOICE Chairperson Carlston raised the possibility of scheduling Board meetings to begin at 7:00 p.m. rather than 7:30 p.m . Mr. Seymour noted that a number of years ago , the meetings began at 8 :00 p.m. • Members of the Board expressed their preference to continue the 7:30 p.m. meeting time . • There was nothing further raised for discussion. The meeting was declared adjourned . . £~ Ud7~ Gertrude G. Welty Recording Secretary H:IGROUPIBOARDSIBOA\200 1 C:ises\1 3-200 1 Pit ler\BOA Minutes 11-14-01.do<: 12