HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-05-08 BAA MINUTES•
•
•
MINUTES
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS
May 8, 2002
I. CALL TO ORDER
The regular meeting of the Englewood Board of Adjustment and Appeals was called to
order at 7:30 pm. in the Englewood Community Development Conference Room, Chair
Carlston presiding.
Members present: Baker, Bode, Carlston, Davidson, O'Brien, Seymour, and Smith
Members absent::
Alternate absent:
Staff present:
None
Ferber
Tricia Langon, Senior Planner
Nancy Reid, Assistant City Attorney
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Chair Carlston asked for consideration of the Minutes from the March 13, 2002 public
hearing.
Mr. Smith moved;
Mr. Bode seconded:
THE MINUTES OF MARCH 13, 2002 BE APPROVED AS WRITIEN.
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Baker, Bode, Carlston, Davidson, O'Brien, Seymour, Smith
None
None
None
The motion carried. The Chair announced the motion approved.
Ill. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT
Mr. Smith moved;
Mr. Bode seconded:
THE FINDINGS OF FACT IN CASE #14-2001, 3001 SOUTH ACOMA STREET, CASE
#2-2002, 3555 SOUTH OGDEN STREET, CASE #3-2002, 4202 SOUTH GRANT
STREET, BE APPROVED AS WRITIEN .
1
•
•
•
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Baker, Bode, Carlston, Davidson, O'Brien, Seymour, Smith
None
None
None
The motion carried. The Chair announced the motion approved.
IV. STUDY SESSION
Assistant City Attorney Reid provided information on open meetings, open records, conflict
of interest, and procedures for executive session . Ms. Reid also explained that the Board's
role in a variance case is as judge, not witness. Discussion ensued.
Ms. Langon explained the difference between an appeal and a variance. Ms. Langon
provided information on the four different types of variances and their criteria. She stated
that at a future meeting she would like to bring the Board a hypothetical variance case and
then review the criteria necessary to grant or deny the variance. Discussion ensued.
Ms. Reid stated that a quorum is a minimum of 5 board members. Also, the vote is based
on a super majority, rather than a simple majority.
Ms. Langon described the pre-application meeting process which is conducted with
potential applicants prior to a variance or an appeal being filed. She then proceeded to
explain all the procedures and forms necessary to bring a case to public hearing.
Discussion ensued. Ms. Davidson praised staff for improving the variance process and
making it easier on the applicant, as well as the Board.
Staff and the Board discussed administrative variances, proposed changes to the Zoning
Ordinance, and the time frame for the Unified Development Code.
V. STAFF ADVISOR'S CHOICE
Ms. Langon stated there were no cases to be heard at the June meeting. The Board
decided not to meet on June 12. Ms. Langon reiterated that for a future study session, she
would like to bring a hypothetical case to the Board for discussion and review.
VI. CITY ATTORNEY'S CHOICE
Ms. Reid stated that City Council has asked the City Attorney's office to look into the
procedures for the Boards and Commissions . She asked the Board to submit comments to
her.
VII. BOARD MEMBER'S CHOICE
Mr. Smith stated he would like a flow chart showing the appeal and variance process from
beginning to end.
2
•
•
•
Ms. Davidson again thanked staff for improving the variance process and instituting a pre-
application meeting with potential applicants.
There was no further bus i ness brought before the Board. The meeting was declared
adjourned at 9:05 p .m .
3