HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Estes Park Board of Adjustment 1967-10-31RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Board of Adjustment
October 31, 1967
Committee: Chairman Dannels; Members Harry Tregent, N. T.
Petrocine, Rollen Sutter and Ed Palmer.
Attending: Chairman Dannels; Members Harry Tregent, N. T.
Petrocine, Rollen Sutter and Ed Palmer.
Also Attending: Building Inspector Ted Hackett and Town Clerk
Dale G. Hill
Absent: None
Mr. Pat Ash, owner of lots 15, 16 and 17, block 2, Town of Estes Park
appeared before the Board of Adjustment because the Town Building Inspec-
tor, Mr. Ted Hackett refused a building permit for the above described
property. Building Inspector Hackett refused the permit because the
addition required would violate the municipal code of the Town of Estes
Park in that the addition would not conform to the setback regulation as
required and a portion of the addition would be constructed in the street
right of way. Mr. Ash requested the Board of Adjustment grant him a
variance to construct a decorative roof that would extend 31" to 4"
beyond the existing west side of the building. Mr. Ash stated there
would be no structural changes made in the building.
Building Inspector Hackett explained the location of the above mentioned
building in regard to the existing street right of way. A plat drawn by
Paul Van Horn showing location of the above mentioned building in relation
to the street right of way is attached to and made a part of these
minutes. Mr. Hackett explained the plat to the Board of Adjustment.
Board Member Harry Tregent moved the requested variance not be granted.
Board Member Rollen Sutter seconded the motion. Upon roll call the
motion lost by the following votes: Those voting "Yes" Members Tregent
and Sutter. Those voting "No" Members Dannels and Palmer.
Board Member N. T. Petrocine arrived and took his place on the Board of
Adjustment at this point in the meeting. Mr. Pat Ash reviewed his request
for the variance. Building Inspector Hackett reviewed the location of the
building and the request for the variance. Board Member Tregent moved
that the variance not be granted. Board Member Sutter seconded the motion
and upon roll call the motion lost by the following votes: Those voting
"Yes" members Tregent and Sutter. Those voting "No" Members Dannels,
Palmer and Petrocine.
Board C i n Dannels moved the requested variance be granted. Board
Member ' seconded the motion and the followingvote was recorded:
Those voting "Yes" Members Dannels, Petrocine and Palmer. Those voting
"No" Members Tregent and Sutter. Board Chairman Dannels declared the
variance not granted because State Statuates(139-60-7) required that the
concurring vote of four members of the board shall be necessary to reverse
any order, requirement, decision or determination of any such administrative
official, or to decide in favor of the applicant any matter upon which it is
required to pass under any such ordinance or to effect any variation in such
ordinance. Every decision of such board shall, however, be subject to re-
view by certiorari. Such appeal may be taken by any person aggrieved or by
an officer, department, board or bureau of the municipality.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned.
a le (. Hill, Town Clerk