Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.boa.91.47~. '~..;~ ;. PITRIN COIINTY BOARD OF ADJLTS'1'X2ENT DATE - _ ~jJ~~~ t.P E ,"1 a I _ CASE # APPLICANT _J1~~Il?Ali4-~Y2!tJ~C~11A/~ PHONE va3 ~(ZS`/a3) MAILING ADDRESS DUX 383q i /~p~ ~ ~~, g(~ i 1 OWNER S~vtC PHONE QL5-/O3g MAILING ADDRESS Sf1'YVi~' `°~~' ~7~P1 LOCATION OF PROPERTY C~~OLJJ Tf~~-7t)Z~~'Z. ~(' Any pertinent data must accompany this application, and will be made part 'of this Case. The Board may retutrn this application if it does not contain all the facts in question. Applicant Signature ^\~~~~~~,~~y ~-u.~,~f.n Clti~„/ _ _ . w~ ~~ _~:. _~~~?~w_r~ {TO be completed by the Zoning Department) Provisions of the zoning resolution requiring the Zoning Official to forward. this application to the ,Board of Ad;~.istment, and reasons for not granting a building permit: Requesting: S'~ Zone District 5.8 as Lot Size ~~,' Front Yard Setback Variance, where GCi' is required. ' Rear Yard., Setback Variance, where. ' is required. ' Side Yard Setback Variance, where ' is required. ' Side Yard Setback Variance, where ' is required. ' Height Variance, where ' is required. Square Feet where a maximum of sq. ft. is allowed. Other: <.,. _~,, rv., ~~x. ~ Hardship: ,. _ .„~,. ,. . _w ,r~, ... i :~.:.~ Zoning Officia Application filed/ '_q ~j 91/ Date Notices mailed y' ~,~(}'~/ Parcel ID #~lo~,?~~a~~-~-C70,~ Secretary Resolution to Building when Completed ~ ~U Yes ~_ ~ No <a«? i_ ~,I NOTICE OE PIIBLIC'HEARING '1'0 ADJACENT PROPERTY bWNERB' BEFORE THE PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTNTENT TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS AFFECTED BY~"THE REQUBSTED ZONING OR USE " VARIANCE DESCRIBED BELOW: Pursuant to Pitkin County Resolution of June 5, 1955, as amended, a Public Hearing will be held in City Council Chambers, City Hall, First Floor, Aspen, Colorado (or at such other place as the meeting may then be adjourned) to consider an application filed with the said Board of Adjustment requesting authority for variance from the provisions of~the County Zoning Resolution. All persons affected by the proposed variance are invited to appear and state their views, protests or objections. If you cannot appear personally at such meeting, then you are urged to state your views by letter, particularly if you have objection to such variance, as the Board of Adjustment will give serious consideration to the opinions of surrounding property owners and others affected in deciding whether to grant or deny the request for variance. THE PARTICULARS OF THE HEARING AND OF TTiETREQUESTED VARIANCE ARE AS FOLLOWS: Date and time of meeting: Owner: Name and Address of Applicant: Property Location or Description: October 1, 1991 City Hall, 2nd Floor Meeting Room Deanna Brinkman Deanna Brinkman BoX 3839 Aspen, CO 81612 0653 Trentaz Drive Lot 9, Block 2, White Horse Springs Re uest q inq approval for a 65 foot front yard setback variance, where i00 feet is required in the R5-20 zone district, for construction of a proposed addition to a single-family residence. Approval of this variance would place the proposed addition 35 feet from the Brinkman's front yard property line. VARIANCES GREATER OR LESS THAN RBQUESTE~ 'COtTD BE`"GRA27TME'b. Duration of variance: Temporary Permanent X TH~,_,/t/~cq} ^ COUNTY BO OF ADJi7STMENT ~Q Cindy L.j~Chrstensen, Secretary dd '~A:.ap rty ~. r... i ., .~. l~iE BRINI~NAN RESIDENC September 9, 1991 The Brinkman residence was constructed in 1973, prior to the 100 foot set back in the County. Due to the topography of this lot in the White Horse Springs subdivision, only one building site exists so that the addition can be attached to the present house. Therefore, the hardship was created by the County in extending the setbacks to include the pre-existing house. Thus making it impossible to alter or add to the existing house without receiving a variance from the Board of Adjustments. The addition is not visible from Trentaz Drive and can barely be seen from any adjacent properties. '~.ua.„~ai~ ... A~ cN PRODUCTIQN SERVES dOX 8862 ASPEN. CO. 81412 DE DE DRIIYKMAIY (303) 925-1081 ~GRJAC~T ~P-Qp~`f`~/ Ow~.1~-Yzc`, -~-~... K~ N~.-r Q.o. BK Soi o . A'~c,J, Lo ~~~~t _ uvls• J.1\ S~_ ,,off p. 0 3~t ~f 3 $ 7 lM t ~ lutle 5. S tYF+u ~~ ~ U ~ "f'/tl1 Y•O. ~ '1l ~J~.2~ PEh> > ~ O ~3I1o11 g d:r ~R ~g B,~~r '~, .~~...: i ~..,, ... NOTICE OF PZ1B'LIC 8E3~RfµNG TO ADJACENT PROPEYZTY""f1WNER8 ' BEFORE THEE PhTKIA COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT "` TO ALL 7 VARIANCE Pursuant to Pitkin County Resolution of June 5, 1955, as amended, a Public Hearing will be held in City Council Chambers, City Hall, First Floor, Aspen, Colorado (or at such other place as the meeting may then be adjourned) to consider an application filed with the said Board of Adjustment requesting authority for variance from the provisions of the County Zoning Resolution. All persons affected by the proposed variance are invited to appear and state their views, protests or objections. If you cannot appear personally at such_meetng, then you are urged to state your views by Tetter, particularly if you have objection to such variance, as the Board of Adjustment will give serious consideration to the opinions of surrounding property owners and others affected in deciding whether to grant or deny the request for variance. ASEFOLLOTWSU~S OF THE HEARING `AND OF' TFTE REQUESTEb VARIANCE ARE Date and time of meeting: owner: October 1, 1991 City Hall, 2nd Floor Meeting Room Deanna Brinkman Name and Address of Applicant: Propertp Location or Description: Deanna Brinkman Box 3839 Aspen, CO 81612 0653 Trentaz Drive Lot 9, Block 2, White Horse Springs Requesting approval for a 65 foot front yard setback variance, where 100 feet is required in the RS-20 zone district, for construction 'of a proposed addition to a single-family residence. Approval of this variance would place the proposed addition 35 feet from the Brinkman's front yard property line. VARIANCES GREATER OR LESS THAN REQUESTED CODED BE GRANTED. Duration of Variance: Temporary THE h~ITKIN Cy ``~ ~ ~ w ~ e> J ('~ / ~ ~ `-' ~~~ ` Cindy L ~V ~ B~/~c~rc7,~ - ~~~~ ~ ~ ~~3~gr stensen, Permanent X OF ADJUSTMENT ~:~ w {. ~£ '~ __.. - 1 I ~- ~ ~1 A.) k-Q/~.~T^ ~ l '/~ ~T~ C~ l S ~ ~ ~~il.~I~ f /~-~ (~ `J 3 1 ~.~'hJ'r'Y4 2 Y f' . ~,~1 {~~'~ ~~ ~j21 NctS r ~je~~Z ~r_ t S S~ 2 5"C,~c~C '~C'G~cQ ~ n o9 ~A .. _, ~YLc3wt _r~- ' rr1~-G~~il ~U ~(..uk-~s ~ D . -~-z~ -~"~ ~j{-y4r2 W oc~ D SU l3 7> c J ~ S i o rJ , ~lC'. ~"d~s~ ~~s ~P~.'~x~nv~catEf~ ~3 o-F 0. I ,~1~ fJo~~c~-v~ ~~q~J ~,a ~ l 1 h~ ~5-t~-n ~P ~T~;~~~~; i. F ~T AS' N/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE 730 South Galena Street ' Aspen, Colorado 87671 ' (303)`920=5090 LAND,USE APPLICATION FEES City 00713 -63250-134 GMPICONCEPTUAL ~~ -63270-736 GMP/F1NAL (3280-737 -63300-139 -63370-140 -63320-141 t REFERRAL FEES: 00125 -63340-205 -00123 X3340-190 00115 -63340-163 County 00113 -63760-12fi ' -63770-127 ~. -63160-128 -63790-t29 -63200-190 -63210-131 -63220-732 ' -63230-133 -63450-14 '~~. REFERRALFEES 00125 -63340-205 00723 -63340-190 00113 -63360-143 PLANNING OFFICE SALES ` 00113 -63080-122 -63090-923 -63140-124 -69000-145 ,^ £~-- SUBTOTAL L% TOTAL Name: //f {~i(J/' phone: Address: p~• .~~~,-g~- ~~~y~ ~~ Check # Date: Additional billing: #of Hours: SU&CONCEPTUAL SUB/FINAL ALL 2=STEP APPCIC'ATIONS ALL 1-STEP APPLICATIONS/ CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH ENGINEERING SUBTOTAL GMP%GENERAL~ GMP%D'ETAILED GMP/FINAL SUB/GENEFAL SUB/DETAILED ' SUB/FINAL ALL 2-STEP APPLICATIONS ALL 1-STEP APPLICATIONS/ CONSENT AGENDA'1TEMS`"~ BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL HEA'LTH`` HOUSING ENG1f~fEERING~ `'' t;ITY%CO(7NTY CODE COPY FEES OTHER` -.. 8 d ; )r~. i ~. - :~a~ ,: , ... r' icome P.L.S. T4111 ....,. r ~,.' "~ , N. ~:"~. ~*"z .~ ~,.~cs,i.~~' Y4,VC'. -~-~ BY' L./NES /N SPACE- ~POWO ore eZ 2~-f Lll! ~aa~ SCALE I" X00' -~--.,r---- Q >, ~, ~~ ~(~~ ~ it i i I_r ~'c ~ 1 _~_> ~ ~~ r , _ ~ - Sca,1e~ ~"-ioo' O/, ~g~F 16 _. ., ~ ._ / `--t / / Notes: 7.5 foot wide utility easements inside all lot lines The real poprerty described hereon does not lie within the limits :of a 100 Year Flood Hazard Boundary. Legal Description: See Page 2. I hereby certify that on July 22, 1991 a survey was performed by me on the parcel of land described hereon. A two-stor frame house was found to be on, .said parcel as shown on this plat. All easements, `encroachments and rights-of-way in evidence or known to me ar shown. This suxve~ is true and correct,. to the best of., my know- ledge ar~d belief. i y. a LEGAL DE5CR,IPTION Lot 9, 131cck 2, of WH17(: iiO~SE SPFINGS, more full described as fol~ows:' y A tract of land sli•uated in Lo•t 12 of Section 26, Township] 9 South,'Rar}ge 85 YJos-t of the 6th P.M:, Pi•Mtin County, CoCorado, described ras follows`, (3cgtnning at a Point in •hhe center of a 30 foot roadway ©~sement, said poin•h being thca mos Southvresteriy corner of saitl Lo•F 9, E31ock 2', whence the Southwest corner of said; Section 26 bears 5 21°11r00" W, ~~,99.82 fee9; . ,.., thence N 38°30 ~0 .26 tee~~ aion t I thehcenN~25 10'00' E, 88 et alon tho~centerlline o~said road~ray ° , E 111.68 fe g ,said roadway I ousea~ont; thence N U4°4h+35" W, 71.46 feet along the canter Iine,of~~said raod~ray easerrr n t; •thence N 05°49'7.5" E, 141.44 feot along the center Iln© oi< sald roadway case3rrranl'; ~ ttrence N 15°14+00" E, 102.62 feel- along the center tine of. said roadway ea~cmen't; lhernce N 51°54+30" E, 165.56 felt along •the center Iine o~ said roaYlway oasement; •thonce S 62°40'00" E, 300.18 feet to a point on the vresterly line o~fi'•the Starwood Subdivision Fond; i the~nro 119.68 foot along the ar•c of a curve to tho left h>uving a radius of 243.76 feet, ih© chord of which bears S 29°47+00+r W, 118.49 feel'; i 1-hence 119.16 feel- along the ar•c of a curve to the left having a radius of 72:23 Poet, •the chord of which bears,S,31°33°00""E, 106.1 feet; thonce S III°49+00" L-, 131.38 foot al ong'1he~lVnster(y Tine, of said Starwood thencai32 56Ffeet along tho arc of a curvy 1'o the ri ht hErving a radius of 9 15.50 feet, tho chord of which. bear S 18 37 00 E, 26.90; feet; thonce S 41°35'00" V;, 213.81 along •fhe Wester•Iy line of ~~Id Starwood SubdlvYSJon°Fro.ad; ~ g ~. ;loo`" roadwa Sea~errrunl79 Ihci ,oint7of~bo innin oint In'the center o'. a 30 r ~. y, , . ~ ... Suave BY ~ ~ ~. i 2`•1 J~1~.t { qqi i SCALE ~;a ,r .x s,~s.ti ,., . ~. .e•~ County of Pitkin State of Colorado The undersigned, follows: I, being or representing an Applicant before the Pitkin County Board of Adjustment, personally certify that the attached photograph fairly and accurately represents the sign posted as Notice of the variance hearing on this matter in a conspicuous place on the subject property (as it could be seen from the nearest public way) and that the said sign was posted and visible continuously from the ~~ day of '7`- lg~`/ to the _~~_ day of ~ t"~2._ 19 mot'/ (Must be posted for at least nine (g) full days before the hearing date). `~1 Applicant's Signature Subscribed and sworn to before me this ~ day of OC) L`/.3~.-~ _~ } AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE BY ss. POSTING OF A VARIANCE HEARING } BEFORE THE PITRIN COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT being first duly sworn, deposes and says as WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL. My Commission expires: %-/(--~ ~- =._ ,; I ~` ~. - e 1 _. ~,~,. _, ~.~ r ~„ .. h #8337888 101191 16:4 F,ec $. UU., E!E' 660 /176 .. _ __ 5il.via Davis, F'it4:ir~'Cnty`~1erk:`, Doc ~-~-~- RESOLUTION OF THE PITKIN COIINTY,""COT,O2~AD0 `~ ~ " `" ~ BOARD OF ADJIISTMENT' .` GRANTING SETBACK ~R~EY,S~~'"1~~It"~DE~~.~1"~8«~ a~~:,, ~-,., ~,~.,~f,~,~ _~. .,~„-. i„ .. , RESOLUTION NO. 91-47 WHEREAS, Deanna Brinkman, owner of a tract of land situated at Lot 9, Block 2, White Horse Springs, requests a 65 foot front yard distrk variance, where 100 feet is required in the RS-20 zone ct, for- construction of an addition to a single-family residence; and WHEREAS, the subjecf property is within the unincorporated area of Pitkin County, Colorado (as described in Exhibit ~~A", at"tacliecl) ; and, -- WHEREAS, the_Board of Adjustment is vested with the power to grant Y or den such variances by virtue of Title II, Section 16-1.3, Pitkin County Code (Land Use Code)""arid Colorado Revised Statutes, 1973, 30-28=118(27 (C); and, makesAthebfd"llowinghfindingsce presented, the Board of Adjustment 1. Proper notice ,procedures, including the notification of all adjoining property owners, has been shown by the applicant. 2. Tkae required hardship or practical difficulty has been established. 3. Granting such relief will .not cause substan- tial detriment to the public welfare and will not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the Zoning Resolutions and the zoning maps. Ad ustment that a toWa sinf le fammly res denCebengrantedcdue to tion of*an additio g n the plans submitted (Exhibit nBu), downzoning, as per WARNING: Any violation of 'the terms of this resolution may result in rehearing and possible revocation. ~`' ... . __~... ~'^~ ; Jun i3.~1 PAGL~~c3 w -~. _....:.~:____ _; < ~ e . ~,. .,~. ' ATTACHED E7{HIHIT A_ _... _ Tn BIRD - BRiNKMAN WARRANTY DEED. Lot 9, Slock 2, of WHITE HORSE SPRINGS, more fully described as follows: . A tract bf land situated in Lot 12 of Section 26_, Township 9 South, Range 85 West `of the 6th"~~rnc~pa'~' *ter~dian, Pitkin County, Colorado, described as followse Beginning at a point in the center of a 30-foot roadway • easement, said 'point being the most Southwesterly corner of said Lot, 9, Block 2, whence t'he Southwest corner of said ,, Section 26 bears S. 21°11' W. 599.82 feet; ._.~ thence ~N. -38'30.20" E: 88.26 feet along thQ centez l.~e_o£. ° y.. ~ _ g .. . _ ~ _._.~.......~.._._~..= said roadwa easement, thence N. 25 10 E.111.68 feet alon the center line of said said roadway easement; thence N. 04°46'35" W. ._71..46 feet along•the center line of said roadway easement; thence N. OS°40'25" E. 141.44~feet along the center Line of ~. ~... said roadway easement; thence N. 15°14' E. 102.62 feet ,along the center line of said. roadway easement; ' thence I~. 51°50'30" E. 165.56 feet along the center line of -~ , ..~.•,.,.x said roadway easement, ' thence 5. 62°90' E. 300.18 feet to a point on the westerly • L f.,+ by 'Yy :~ t "- •A line of the StarwoodgSub'~ivs.sion Road, t having ' thesradiusoff243.76 feet,2ethe chord ofrwhi h bears S; 29°47'`W. 118.4.9 feet; _ thence 119.16 feet, along the. 'arc of a curve to the left having a radius of ?2.23 `f`eet, the chord of which bears S: 32°33' E. 166.11 feet; ' . thence 5. 78°49' E. 131.:38 feet along the Westerly line of said ~." Starwood Subdivision Road;" .~. ':' thence 32:56 feet along the arc of a curve to'the,right having a radius of 15.50 feet, the chord of which bears S, 18°37' E. 26.90 feet; thence S. 41°35' W. 213.81 feet along the Westerly line of said Starwood Subdivision Road; ° ' " feet to a point in the center thence S. 84 16 09~ W: 5d1 27~~ ~~ of a 30-foot roadway easement;;tfie~point of,beginning..`.. ~~ ,.. .. .. .. ; _ , County of Pitkin State of'Colorado ~ ':•- '' ' • . <.. .. _ '~ ~~;n St . bb ~ F_~ 178 ...• `.... . iDlyC~gi k~n Cn Y G1E,~..~.c, gac #~ ~ "~gpzvi~, Fib ` ,: NOTI TO ZONING 'Pursuant. to Pitkin County Zoning Resolution of June 5 1955 as amended, a Public Hearing will be held in the District Courtroom, Pitkn County Court House, Aspen, Colorado, (or at such other place as the meeting may then be adjourned) to consider an ap~slicatior filed with the said Board of Adjustment requesting authority for variance from the provisions of the County .zoning Resolution. . and state their views r All persons affect protestsp or objectionsCe IfeyouV ant appea . personally at such meetin then r letter g~ you are urged to state your views by r particularly if you" have •obj action to such • variance," -as 'the Board of Adjustment will give serious""consideration to the opinions of surrounding property owners"end others af'fectc3` ,;"ae.:;.~;..,. ..ti_~~___.~_ DATE AND"TIME OF'FfEETINGl October 1 • City Hall, Dillingham, Dale & Sharon: 'request; variance;"'`where 100 feet is required construction of a proposed addition Property Location: Lots 2, 19"and 20 Range 85 West." 199Sat 3:i5 p.m. 2nd`"Floor `2~teeting Room ~g a 37 foot front yard setback in the RS-20 zone district `for to a•single-family residence. of"Section 9, Township 9 South, Lackey, Mary Ellen: requestin quired in therRSe2bt zonee district bfok variance, where 50 feet is re construction of a proposed addition to a barn. Property Locations Tract 5, White Star Ranch. R.R.F. Corporation (Furman): requesting a 64 foot front yard setback variance, where 100 feet is required in the AF-1 zone district, for construction o Pro art Locat'f a ,proposed addition to a single-family residence. P y ion: Parcel 3, Beatrice Placer M.S. No. 11426, also known as 0960 Castle Creek Road. Croft Richard"~ Jennifer- requesting a 25 foot north side yard setback.,. variance where 50 feet is required in the RS-30 zone`distrct for construction of garage. Property Location: Lot 8. Gardner, Yhomas R.: requesting a 40 foot front yard setback variance g n of a proposed addition to a single-family residence;' ao6lcfoot front yard setback variance ,for construction of a proposed residential arage, and a 50 foot front yard setback variance for construction of,a proposed gazebo, where 100 feet is required for each in the RS-30 zone district. Property Location: Lot 16, Shield-0- Terrace. a proposed residential Gateway to Snowmass Mesa, Filing 3, Block _, ...., , .. U ~' ,~ Minutes Pitkn County Board of Adjustment Octo~ier. a~ "1941 Members Present: Kandi Shaffran, Chairman Rick Neiley TednGuyll John Wheeler, Members Absent: Stan Mathis R,od Dyer Staff: Joanna Schaffner, Zoning Enforcement Officer Dillingham explained the history of the home. The home was. built in 1950, before the `zoning regulations:" Dillingham submitted two letters from adjacent property owners, Howard Vagneur and David Hoff, supporting his request. "' Shaffran asked for public comment and there was none., " Gull moved to grant a 37 foot front yard setback variance for the proposed addition, as per the plans submitted, due to dow'n'zoning. Shaffran seconded the riiotion and all were in favor. .(Rick Neiley was not present during this case.') `Motion passed. setback variance, where 50 9 district, for canstruction_of a forth side yard " the R5=~0 zone" Croft briefed the Board on the., present locat the driveway and the topbgraplfp `of the sum stated that the house was built about 15_ locatiks were" required. Croft also statei setbacon for the garage is the only°Yevel"spot would 'not require removing trees and,.vege`tati 1 n of the house and ldng land.;. Croft rs ago before the that the ""p'r'oposed'° n the property that t• . .. _ _ ,,.. ,rre, ~...> .. r,~nr. a ., ;.~? .aw. .:a Y -"4'xY~a'. cT , ^;... w:€h1L.5 , ,.at.'S`:diu Shaffran opened the meeting at 5:15 p.m. and introduced the Board to those present. ~ J For the next. case, Ted Guy' had to abstain so he left the"room: M. a 30 foot northeast ,side yard setback bariance, where 5o feet is required in the 2YS=~0""zoie~ district, for construction of an addition to an existing barn. Olson showed on the lans submitted exactl where the encroachment would be and where-the 'a`ddition is to be constructed. 5c`fiaffner stated that this is the barn that the~BoaYd did a site visit on in 1989 when 1t was on s land, ' ginally built on Tam Scott' ~'' Shaffran asked for public comment and tfiere was none: Olson 'stated that they are enoroacling an additional+4 feet into the side yard setback. After further discussion, Neiley made a motion to grant a 30 foot northeast side yard setback variance, where 50 f"eet is required s.....~ ,,r..~ for construction of an addition 'to an existing barn, due to topographical considerations and the unusual narrowness of 'the „.. ,.. , ,-. ,.~~- .N;., ~. property. Shaffran`"seconded the` motion andl all were in favor. Motion passed. Shaffran read to the Board`"the"previou's case requesting a 50 foot variance, which was., a~ipro'ved. Neiley stated that the . tis .. a~mw,w ..,.. s.~ ~~ characteristics of the property have not changed arid~the topography is still the same This would be a single 'story addition and would not be seen from Ehe `road:'" "" " ` Shaffran asked for public comment._and there was none. After further discussion, Guy made a motion to grant a 64 foot front` Y 1 zone and set~ac~c variance, where 100 i`eet"is required in the ~F= :.._.~ .: _,~ r ..~ , ., district, due to topographica~rvhardships, as shown on the u., _ ~,..~ ~ ,. ~.. , , plans submitted. 27eley seconded the motion and it passed with all in favor.... .,. ., John Wheeler re-entered 'the room for the rest of~the meeting. 3 John Wheeler had to abstain from the next case and left` ~'ki "~ ~"~'~"'~ e room. Ted Gu" 're-entered" tie roo}a;, ,.. .. ._ Y _ ~ submitted. Guy seconded the motion and four were in favor with Gull opposing. Motion passed. _ ;„. . - , ;,: -.: .. Mart Sghluinbe er was " y ' g present representing 'ter "Luber, to``request a 10 foot height variance, where 12 feet is required per the Pitkin County Land Use Code for''accessory structures; for construction of ..... a ranch gate. Schlumberger stated that Luber wants to move an existing gate to' another location. Shaffrari asked how it was built befo're'without a variance. _: Shaffrari asked if there was any public comment and tfiere was none.'' Schaffner asked if what t~'iej~ were going to do''was' to disassemSle the existing gate and then relocate it_ Schlumberger"sta~ed that " the top part will come"`o`ff ` an"c~'"'tFiat ` will}~`be' 'reused. 'The stone pillars will be new. 5chlumberger briefed the Board on `"the `new ' location for the ranch gate Fro"Yn the `center of'Owl Gi'reek Road` __.:....,...... ......_. ..._ _.~ ,...,~ ~,.w..:,.~ it is to be 14'6 feet''back". It was. further stated that tliia parcel is between 800 and'900 acres. Neiley stated that he has no prolilem``with ranch ga"tes`. After further discussion, Guy`~e the nerd proposed ranch gat~7ie~ gate, and `Wheeler aiirended' `'this' on the name of the ranch (Ma natural grade, due to Code con seconded °Guytis' 'part "of `ttieW" mo portion of the motion and f opposing. Motion passed.' grant a hei.g2i£ variance for gher than the eitistirig ranch where the bottom of the "Y" `d '"the' 'amended with '5`haffran '" David 'Warner` '5as present, representing the "Flornirigs, to request an 80 foot front yard setback variance, where 100 feet is required in ..._ . the AF'-1~ z`o~ie"district, for construction of a'proposed decd: warner stated that the Harnings were given approval'to build with a 20 foot setback as '"''` '~ ~^ per F~`1`anning and Zoning Commission Resolution No. 80=25. It was discovered that'tbe applicant did not go to the Board of Adjustment to obtain thin variance. Warner stated that they want this motion to take care 'of two things: First, to be able to build a deck and also"to establish the 20' foot, setback t"hat" everyoneY believed` ssiiated. µ~.m~.«"e Guy asked Warner if the deck was part of the original building " permit ._ Warner stated that it was, but a different shape. This will bean abcbe- grade deck. 5 ~v _ ~_. ~~ .~ ~ "~ a.~3 .~ , ~~ Smith further stated that the beacon is for visual use., by aircraft. statedlthatlform lly heehas not ~o Siat th skate"d 'that the ~eaconls' approved in the Airport Master Plan, in the"last amendment." It"was ofgthetBOCC part of the Grand 7,pplicaton in April by'tlie'Chairman' After .further discussion nn the beacon, Guy made a motion to grant a height variance to ahow'for a beacon, witY the"condition that the Board of 'County"Commissioners review and approve the submitted' design plans and specifications. Gul h seconded the motion"and all were in favor. Motion passed. Regarding the necessity of a fence, the question was asked how many deer have been hit. Smith stated that"there has been one strike last winter season, but that everyday employees at the airport have to go out onto the field to chase the deer off of the runway. Shaffran asked if the electrical fence Will hurt the deer: Smith stated that the fence will 7 'ust shock tTem aricT'wil'l not hurt them. Smith stated that the fence is to be 12 strands, e'lectr`ified (solar' powered), there will be less gates than what is presently existing. Gu sated that he doesn't think t y asked if the Division of Where needs to be so many strands. forlthe fence. Smith stated that ldlife reviewed 'the plan design of fen they have not, but that this type. ce has been installed at other airports and has proved to be" effective and is less expensive. Neiley had to leave the meeting during the discussion, so was unable to vote. It was decided by the Board to vote on the beacon and the fence separately. For the fence, Gull made a n variance; a 30 foot front, yard side yard setback variance; a variance; a 10 foot rear `yard road setback variance ahci a 100 where 30 feet, 10 feet and S6" fey both side yards and rear yarc district, for the erection of a: submitted. Guy seconded the mot passed:. Smith will review tk Division of Wildlife. >uon to grant a 2 foot height ~etbac7t'"variance; a 10 foot north 10 foot south side yard 'setback etback variance; a 50 foot major foot Highway 82 setback variance, t are required for the front y£rd, respect%vely, "in "the PUB zone electric fence, as per the plans' Con and alI were in favor. Motion design of the fence with the