Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.boa.88.49,< • BATE A?PLZ p(•ti; E LOCAT .. , ~, ~.> --~ ~,~~ BCARD OF ADJUST:1~"' ,; .q~~-~~~~ Any pertinent data must accompany this application, and will be made p this Case Vo. ~j ,~-f/~ The Ooard may return this application if it does not contain all the f in cuestion. Applicant`s description of proposed variance sho•aing justi`_ication: ./,vf' /'r'te-y- ~,L~~"U,,c~,?'t~r"~~`~~f~-s6~~-c..c'/ ~`~//`-~C'~ }~ ~~~~~ `~ ~,~ ~~~~ Applicant Signature Provisions of the zoning resolution requiring. the Building Inspector fonozrd this anp'_ication to the 3oard of Adjustment and reason' '_.,r no arar.ting a buiding permit: Bu~i''in^ L^.s~ec~or ___^_ .-_..__ _nioC «a,; °_oa=.. CeC i51C:7 :.,-:_ ..__.... ---ec 7~~q'~~ date .... .. 9-ZI ..~.___ . ~~ a,-. - _~.,.. ~~--z-.__: ______.: ~~~~~~~ n e_ .. ~t _ ~; %~" ,_ ,~ ~ ~, , _ ~ Q ~"~ 2.' -SQL ~~° ~~ 0 jcrxl e 1 "-50'. 6r / v \ ~, tie ,,.$' o -~ ~, \ ~~ ti s ~~~ '~~', \ ? ~Q \ \\ • "" Lx~ CpX~.C0.f~c.G~' S rSG~t GOn/~S~Yr/-IC~C0111 S'tR ~{ ~~ ~\ "7 ~ ~ L'YLOl.1..CA~'C25 }O ~'YW(_. 'Y'G~1L~Q'Y G C[Q~(1~ ~t~i_( i. ~a.Sev~Qi/~.~5 ia~t,Si cue. cxl ~ T"r~ Q - S C.ati 5 cis sG~,w v~-. ~~ ~~~~ , ~~ . Legal Description: Lot 18A, Blo\ , Gateway of Snowmass Mesa Subdivision, Second Filing, Pitkin County, Colorado. f5~~-~.a3,LC18g I hereby certify that on August 26, 1988 ~ a survey was performed by me on the above described parcel of land. All easements, encroachments and rights-of-way in evidence or known to me are shown. This survey is true and correct to the best of Iny knowledge and belief. y trey ~ z come P_ O r,, I BY~ L/NES /N SPACE 21 CAFt6( it t.., .. _, :~ ,_~,t , 4`.. _ ~... i~ - i '~ G tl ~-8.~'~ ~-~ 5Q_--___ ----_ ,~ ~ ~'4 r~ ~ ~~ 1 Scn-1 e ~ / ~ -~O ~ ~l' ~o~ '18 ~,. /~ O ~~ ~lOC_k 2-- / M ,0 ' ~ /© ° ' O ,r ~ /~~ s ~ ~•: r, A ~ ~y~' ~~~ hao / G 4 0 ~e.o. Q~e~~~ ~° ~ Q /S\ V ~ ' S`5~. `~C s/ ,TC~ ~ S y o ~ iw~.i~a~cC'S S~~ co+r~s-~rllC~lovL S~r-~ • ~ i~L~~es ~ow~ ~~~0.r ~ t.l~,l ~ ~as2v~ v~.~s ; ia~tsis~t-e. 0_.1 ~ t'o-~ ( C,ati.c? s c~.s sC~v.~ v~ . Legal Descri tion: Lot 18A, Block 2, Gateway of Snowmass Mesa Subdivision, Secon p Filing, Pitk\ ounty'; Colorado. d I hereby certify that on August 26,'7988, a survey was performed by me on the above described, parcel of land.. All easements,"encroachments and rights-of-way in evidence or known to me are shown. This survey is true and correct to the ...,.w, n, ~ ,~ .. ., best of lny knowledge and' belief. By: ~er . ti11 x. a,v ~..,x+w~..c:;a #n ~«,ka~:-s r~::l;.,`'.~zt" ~~ `:;+',s..`SS,~,~ I.r?v.:;9~5nhrz.~~s4sw;~':.s~'?;Y~& i +~ ~ ~t R~ \~l I v S -~ c~ I ~; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.~ ,~ R ^ ,. ~9 n r, I ~ / Q0./ l C~l~~S!~fi _T_ __ wa .. ;4'= .~ ~;~~.~ ' ` .era "°r~on, cow-aao BTa~ °~~}:~ ~^ °~'- ~ ' ~~ d~ ~ ~ ` ;?' ~ (303)5-' 2020 x ~~~¢ 4~ '~~~' e LANb'E APP~.ICATION P~i:~ _ '' ~`"* ,k,t~~,,..-~-, ~ ,~ •~'' A 00113 63721 ~ -4733T `GMP/CONCEP'IAL ~ . ~.'." „ ~.~~~~~ :,'{".-`-- . - -63722' ..'47332 ~. "'GMP7PRE[.it.•11t~i1TiY•`-~'':,;.•w~ „• ti-.'^w :?f?;"-'.s`~.i'•: ''~ _ - Gi723 47333 -'GMP/FIMA~~ a wxµ x -.- '~„ x- _ ~ I. ' -63724 47341 ' ~~SUB/CO~IC'EPTUA~ %~a'~ ° + 2~' c'~ , " 637zs ` ~ a73a2 `' SOBnR~Lir:41r1S~RV r ~~ wa ~~ ~- . ~' 637126 47343 ~~` SUB'/FINAL ~ A x ~ `~ "~~ g ~ P -..,yam ,„ ~' ' yy~~ Yvt b.„ ^~' 63727 ~,..4~~' `"`'ALL 2 ST~P`'APPLICATfO S . , '~`' ^9`: v i r 63728 ^~ X47360 "`RLL'1-S"fEP~AP~1.IVr'ATIONS/ .n*a~ '' S~ '-" - ~' ~ ~ .1- ' ~ 'CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS ~, ~„~ ~~~ ,,,_, ~ ,- e "•F ~ REi:`ERA"AL} - ~ , ~,r °' ,ykc;.r 3. x.SA^ sMS., 00726''°~~73tl ~,,,' 47380 ENVIRONMENTA'LAI .:m .~yq~,}~fip,' ~4~~ 00123 7"t '89730~~~p'47380 ~~HOUSING "~ ~ a~aa`•t „~ - ~'i.r" . i b i S,'C. 7fi' '00115 '6~f30 ~"x'~7380 ENGINEERING ~`"'~` "c °'~:5,'zY,,"•I °~&.c.,*x:xi ~~,.'> e, .-.-_.aw '7rcaa}si ~.r* ~. ~ - r ~ ~E. s _ ' ,~ - ... "a~~" 4y-`,fncrcnnn~ tKtJ: :.,..: ~.... ~: _ "' 'r, ~. . ~--- - :z,.w,.~yw~.:..~ .,_-`6;1730. "'t'" "37J~0"'~~'"• R~ ~A .: .,, ?8,q • • ~x^-~.: ;'-. ~;~.Y',,,,., ::. Y: 00123 ? $ : ,. "ENVf P4 e ~ ~~t' i ~ . .: ,s .....;x,:.; +a ai. ~~"s;; EiIL ~* 00523 ~ 63730 '~,:~47460 '' -F~GUS~dv~~~'''-.' •• F a k~# tr< ry sa.'~v`}'`w . 00113 ~~`8331 r.~-~-'47460 _ w„ cc ~~ '' ENVtRONMENTJAt COOF't~Df~"h''i~ ~C"* ' , -~' ~ ~ ~ ~ 00113 ~ 63732' ~'` 47460 ~ . ~ ~ ~.."~ - ENG(NEF111t~G s"`~"5di"~' ~ ,'Ya~~R~°sav, vtrw,lx,,< ~.-, w ~ ~ PLANNING OFF(GrE§AL~ 00113 8306 =' 3` ~- 1~~a?» ,~ ~y`fi.'z1*~.a.:. 1 ~ ~ • w.:? ; ' :SL-~.. ~ , ,-- 1 09000 ;„ ;. p . COUNTY COdE ~~ ~~e,: , , ~ " E ''~~ ~ Y _., . -63062' -'09000 COMP:"PLdN'"'"'" q 't , 'x:l~':~""„ . '~ d- ~ " .•, ,0'900C7st>. -63066 ~.., '. .,`S~~u COPY"F EE ~1.~: : _ - ' _ -63069 -'-09000 _ -OTHER ~jO+k ~~ ~ rW~~~ `'4,4i -.vs*°"'. ':. d~ . , ` ~ ~dT-..a.,,., .,.: ~ ,ac : Check p .. _ _ - ~ >..~,q,.p 77`T a- '-;~ 'AddlNonal Bltlln I ~ * 'x "'r^~1 ~1 +. 5`;^'' ,,,- ,., '~ °~- a_ _.__~? ,._.___ ___ ~ ~.~ _v~,_ A._.__.~~.. ,. ,. - ,__ __._~ _m~_ -.._ _t i. - w-.u.v.~.~ie~ .. n YAA.. ...MFai vAy. . ~.R rc'~b Xt t. .~:..5' ~- .iew~~d4~+A _. .~.~~.~~+w«-.rw :~..~_.4~~..n+v. ~n -w v. y~p. .l: -~~b»3~~13~va tPo'+°k"a~Y- n.+w... ~.. ........ - -1a m~,,rv+nj4~.?~iv'0.1 «~P:^~N.tEt'3/{X14%kiFYv'm .v ~ ~~An"YBr~Y`uVR~M _. ..... r ..... - a .~ ..~ s«v.S /~tL...4tSb-..L_ ' . I }.~ ~ 4«i:T1'K+~.^3%A'Fl1:dK•`"`~~~% ~ ~..~... i4+~..u i. hev -..rte-~..~~-~..~~ +ky` ~v4 „ '~s_,Y 5F. n~n~. -, ~,~ .tl "'~. 4~~M.n'i~.'~h"'~z~#'th~u' "_' "-.:_':~as" "^+. 1...~ k "W,W *,&`t c+v .. ~.k~_ a2^WL1:,~, y#y ~»., ,vynl ,.,,, .,; ~~2b•, .......... ...~..._....~ ... .. _~.::> .. ..~v4~~..~r..v...~.vW.v:. '. < x. .,,:..y f+cd'4~ h+S .3..1`w'i^.:. ~. o. ia.i~ tw ... nv. k'os,_+i+!A'JHYM1W/4+ "~, Evan Gull moved that the following be adopted: BEFORE THE BOARD' O~';.A.'~(J~~..,.,, ... , .:: ,. ~.<. ....~., -~ r;,. OF THE COUNTTt OF PITRYg7` `",. r , „> i STATE OF COLORADb' RESOLUTION NO. 88-49 Snowmass Mesal requests a~50' fro tgya d s~etbackkvarianceeWand~of WHEREAS, the subject property is within the unincorporated area of Pitkin County, Colorado; and, WHEREAS the Board of Adjustment is vested with the ower t grant 'or deny such yvarian (LandyUse1 Coe of Title Ii,p Section 16-1.3 Pitkin Count Code de) ahd Colorado Revised Statutes, 1973, 30-28-118.(2) (Cj; and, makesAthebfollownghfindingsce presented, the 'Board of ,Adjustment 1. Proper notice procedures, including the notification of all adjoining property"` owners., has been shown by the applicant. 2. The 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 end 'the zoning maps. NOW, THEREFORE, HE ''~T RES'OLVBD by thge Board J~ g. a 40' front and setback variance be ranted due to downzoninthat WARNING: Any violation of the terms of this resolution may result in rehearing and possible revocation. Melinda Pearson Resolution. seconded the adoption of the foregoing 'i ~.. + _p, ~ _ - ~ i Resolution # 88- Page 2 The roll having been called., the vote was as follows: Kand Sha.ffran - yes Melinda Pearson =yes Evan Gull - yes Peter DobY~ovoln Joe Zanin - yes Y - yes The Resolution was adopted by vote of the Board of Adjustment of the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado. DATED: October 06, 1988 The Board of Adjustment of Pitkin County, Colorado Attest: se etas ~ Chairman' •, - - <.. ,., construction of a house. PTOnPrty r..,,.~+;,.... ,.,.., - °~ ;; :. ,. ~~ , ~ ' e PIIBLIC NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS AFFECTED YBY ';THE 12EQUESTED' ZONING OR USE VARIANCE DESCRIBED BELOW: Pursuant to Pitkin County Zoning Resolution of June 5, 1955, as amended, a Public Hearing will be held in the District Courtroom, Pitkin County Court House, 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. DATE AND TIME OF MEETING: October 04, 1988 at :5:15 p.m. Bruce Dreher: requesting a variance for a 22' front yard setback where 30 feet is required in the R-15 zone, to 'allow for the construction of a residential garage. Property Location: Lot 4; 110 Ardmore, Ardmore Subdivision, Pitkin County, Colorado. Edward Golub: requesting a variance for a 5' side yard setback where a 30' setback is required in the AF-1 zone, to allow for the construction of a residential garage. Property Location: 0086 Horseshoe Drive, Basalt, Pitkin County, Colorado. qu ' ront yard setback where 100 f et sisn rea red aine the rAF-12 zohe, for the constructionn of a residential garage. Property Location: 900 Juniper Hill Drive, Brush Creek Village, Pitkin County, Colorado. Alfred and Valerie Braun: requesting a variance for a 9' side yard setback where 50' is required in the RS-20 PUD zone for the construction of a house. Property .Location: 0041 Rainbow Lane, Lots'6 & 7, Woody Creek, Pitkin County, Colorado. Carl Lines: requesting a variance for a 50' front yard setback where loo' is required in the IYS-30 zone, for the Construction of a house. Property Location: Lot 18 A, Block 2, Gateway of Snowmass Mesa, Pitkin County, Colorado. Pitkin County: requesting a variance. for a 96' setback where 200' is required to comply with Highway 82 setbacks,' for the y J p y g rp g BS Radar SostemuProoect f Pro ert bLocation•foBase ofAexistn A Air Traffic ._~'.._<. ._..'. :...~, ,.,>>R; u. .kv .,e4_Y S..,c ~.:- ~...;~ai:lwa....n::..~~*d+_.sw~. ~,!x.~x.~.da.+;;xrv. z ~, ~;~ w ... - ., .~., , ... :~.~ ., ,. ~,, . Control Tower, Pitkin County Airport, Pitkin County, Colorado. Terry Trish: requesting a variance for 0' front and side yard setbacks where 100' and ;30' respectively are required in the AF- 1 zone, for the construction of a house. Property' Location: On the west side of Block 1, Pitkin Mesa Subdivision, Pitkin County, Colorado. Walter Mueller: requesting a variance for an 18' front yard setback where 30' is required in the R-30 zone, for the remodeling of an existing house. Property Location: Lot 19, Block 2, Pitkin Green Subdivision, Pitkin County, Colorado. Submitted to the Aspen Times on September 20, 1988, to be printed on Thursday, September 22, 1988. P O #41359 MINUTES Pitkin County Board of Adjustment Site visit October 06, 1988 Members Present: Kandi Shaffran Melinda Pearson Evan Gull ~. ... t. . :: , ,,. Joe Zanin Peter Dobrovolny Mary Lackner, Pitkin County Zoning Officer, was pre'seiit for staff recommendations. Case # 88-49 - Carl Lines Lot 18A Block 2 Gateway to Snowmass Mesa Chairman, Kandi Shaffran, reopened the .case, which had been tabled at the October 4, 1988. meeting until a site visit could be made. Lines staked his property as requested, indicating property lines and maximum building height, to determine how the placement of the house directly affects neighbors. A picture of the proposed house was presented. Lines informed the Board,_that the original stakes were cut apart. the night before by vandals, and that he replaced them as best he could. However, the Board discovered that the stakes were' misplaced and tFiat""they did not draw an accurate picture of the placement of the house The situation was corrected and everyone was informed of the change. Neighbors Nancy Clan Domelen, Bill Lanman,. Susan Furr, Dave Konick, Line Hecht, Amy K~ernari; and Stilart Duncari`v/ere 'p'resent. With the exception of Kiernan and Duncan all felt the house would create a negative impact on the subdivision since the front of the house would have a 70' profile and would sit only 50' from the road. Duncan and Kiernan preferred the house aid not conform to a 100' front yard setback since Duncan resides on the lot behind Lines and appreciated the extra space's 50' dariance would allow him, and Kiernan felt the house would infringe on' her view corridor._ Lanman felt the house design was not the best choice for the ,lot, but Lines insisted this was the house he intended t~ build. After several suggestions of compromise, the Board voted in a manner which took all neighbors opinions into consideration. Evan Gull made a motion to grant a 46' front yard setback variance due`to downzoning. Pearson seconded the motion. All were in favor, and the motion carried 5-0. Respectfully Submitted, ~ ~,~`z r. , ate. ~ ,T ' ~ ~. ~ Se retary~~ \ Chairma ' ..,, 'p ,. ~1p~ ' F .:p, - ~ -~. ~ L;:. I _ Minutes Pitkin County Board of Adjustments October 04, 1988 Members Present: Kand Shaffran Evan Gull ' Joe Zanin Melinda Pear5bn`' Robert Miller Peter Dobrovolny Francis Krizmanich, Pitkin County Zoning Enforcement Officer, _.~. present with staff recommendations. , was Shaffran called the meeting to order at 5:26pm:' "The reading of the 'minutes was postpone3 until. the eiid of 'tt~e meeting. Shaffran announced that although six Board members were present at the meeting, (including alternates), only five members would ~~;... eackible to vote, and tl"i"at one inem~e"r `must""refrain.";from `voting on _,.... of the cases to be heard." Kriz Muelmanich informed the Board tfiat the, application for 'Walter ler, Lot `1"9, "Block "2, 'Pitkin Green Subdivision, has been w ... withdrawn. - T 'mil '~~~v. ~ .4._... A letter was presented by attorney, John Thomas Kelly, requesting that Dreher's request for a variance be wittidr`aian:""~ Case # 88-40, Edward Golub 0086 Horseshoe Drive, Basalt Edward Golub and attorney, Lennyy Oates, were present to request a 5' side yard setback to allow for aii`existrng three door garage: The garage was built without a' ment,s discussion on this case permit. Shaffran summarized last '~ ~ ~for'Miller ahd Zann Krizmanich oned that a site inspection was done`of Golub's garage'"arid the bouble K subdivision. He admitted it wasp difficult to accuYately determine lot lines, but that it appeared that while most houses were located toward"the center of the Pots s barns were laced in p y ~' beds and" p pro ert corners within setback lines. Oates pointed out that all the lot`s in the subdivision are two structure uwasstnot tyet builtas andh Dobr b lnya agreedoas z1 Golhe removaldoftone bayr(lbt)awouldacostmhm upttoa~$25,0'OOCel$nce the .. ... .. < :_ ~ r y~".~9 ~, ~ a~. i r .. ~ ~ ;- Gv +~ entire garage was built at $35,000, Golub claimed that tpe removal cf one bay would "be an unnecessary financial hardsh since, according to Golub, no one would benefit from its removal, Gull agreed that the removals of the garage`aould not be serving the public good, but Shaffran countered thaty the hardship was self-imposed: St is Gull"'s contention that t"he general public is _._ , basically ill informed in matters regarding building procedures:' Dobrovolny disagreed, and commented that since Pitkin County is ... .. so difficult to build in, building permits should be common` knowledge. Dobrovolny said he did`not approve of the message the ~ ld be sending out were they to approve this variance Bearest ~u'Pearson wondered why subcontractors "hired to construct" ' the garage never giCestioned why plans were not stamped APPROVED, but Zanin defended"Golub~`~y saying subcontractors usually don't look for approvals, and Golub acTmitted that a friend of his from Texas came to do the 'work. Neigh`tors,'~Clark, Connors, and Krahlich were present orr behalf of Golub, and` to, defend their setback variance due to downzonin which allows the ro ert a commensurate setba k w th theo AF-2"toner district'whi h most closely approximates this_ property size.. Gull seconded the' motion and it carried 5=6 with Miller, not voting. Case"# 88-47, Michele Bodner 900"~'uniper Hi11 Drive, Brush Howard Bass and Michele"Bordner were present to Yequest a 20' setback variance for the construction of a detached residential' garage. A topographical map wa's presented to show"a 40sdrop in grade between the 'road and house. "The proposed garage, Bass said, wou~d~not be' visible Proiri~the road. bobrovglny, familiar with the site, agreed there was no doubt that the site was 'very"' steep. Zanin made a motion to grant a 20' front yard setback variance due to topographical hardship. Miller' seconded' the motion, and it carried" 5`=0, with" G'u15. ""not voting'. Alfred Braun, was presented to'"request a variance which would allow" him to Build a new house e9' from his property line to maximize exposure to morning sun. The original house` was` designed as a guest house, and is unsuitable for remo3eling or for additional "building.. Also, B"raun noted that 'with the variance the existing driveway Could still be utilized. Finally, Braun claims downzoning as a harship, since his two acre lo£ is restricted with AF-2 zoning requirements. He presented letters' from neighbors, MacKenzie and Sterling, who expressed their approval for the `variance. A letter from neighbor, Fox," protested the variance., dnd sited several violations he believed to be on-going 6n the Braun property. Dobrovolny Commented that there existed no substantial hardship since there wa's"plenty of a~ .. L~.:~: n~~,w , . ~ ,. land available for building. A different house design, he 9 woulddalso~ not disturbf sr access from the current'c~rveway and urrouncing trees. Shaffran explained how P P g pp ,.. the dronosedn house novas a a l new 1 structure andcu~so~anan add tion. Dobrovolny moved that t_he setback variance request be denied because of demonstrated'~~ ~lac"k~ ~of 'tiardstiip. Miller seconded the motion, and it carried 4-1, with Gull voting against and Pearson not 'voting. ,. ,. constructe,g was present to request a 50' variance for the on of his house. A topographical map was presented to show a sharp decline after 100' which is the required setback. Neighbor and architectural committee member, Luke Hecht, was present to object to the variance stating that the house would ~,aw .M~ ,..w .. bheothertsubclose Eo`"~the, road,~a situation which is not desired Y division land owners. Also present were neighbors, Amy Kiernan, who claims the house would cut directly into her view corridor were it to comply with 100', and neighbor, Bill Landon, who claims that because_ of variances issued to other siaeedh Linesi n cso nth tb theanaffects hof Blieight s ayn'be better 7 g ill post stakes to show height. Dobrovolny made a motion to table the request until the site. inspection, to be . ., , ._. held, October`"5, 1388`, at`12;OO~~noon. Shaffran seconded the' motion and it carried 4-0, with Pearson not voting. Land. ,Use 'Engineer, Tom Newland, and Special Council to the Airport, Gary Esarp, were present to represent the County and its request for a 96' setback where 200' is required to comply with. Highway 82 setbacks, for the 'construction of a 'base building for the Airport ATCRBS Radar System Project. The proposed structure would be 50' x 70', and l'-14' tall. The 50' side would be nearest the road to minimize the visual impact 'from the highway. It is by request of the FAA that both the ~ase~ build ing and tower be kept as close together as possible for efficient and economical uses. Esary pointed out., that the FAA has scheduled to move Highway 82 in 1991, thereby bringing the proposed buildings into compliance with setback regulations. He mentioned that the location of the runway and the Highway both pre-date all zoning regulations. Esary continued that due to the size and shape of the property, compliance with both'FAA and County setbacks would be impossible. He also mentioned that the' County will appear before the Board at a later date, to request a height variance £or the radar antenna placement on Cozy Point. Plans and a water color of the proposed site were presented. A ..<... letter. was on file From adjacent land owner Elsa Mitch, who ell was in favor of the variance because she believed the radar tower was necessary for the County. Bob Jensen,` of Grizzley Landscaping was present to oppose the variance, claiming 'the construction of a radar tower would benefit only those"" with private jets, and that Phis was too small a percentage of the general County population to warrant the expense.' Gull stated that it was vital for a destination resort to have.,"this type o Highwayy82 toZconstru to aaradarl tower, grant a 96! variance from Shaffran seconded the motion, and the vote carried 4'-1, with Dobrovolny voting against, and Pearson not voting. ~ g. k;~+f+' w,n es,.~aw p a"- '~ A letter from re resentative James Columbo, requested that the a e he variance a lication untiS~the Novembeeconded by the ng. Shaffran made apmogtion to table the applicati~ 1988 on until Y. r 1 oar next scheduled meetin The motion was' s Dobro votinvoln and the vote `carried 4-0, with Pearson and Zanin not g. ( Pearson left the meeting early.)` adjourned at 7 23 pmccepted with changes, and the meeting was` Respectfully Submitted, ~~ Joannachaff er, Secretary Kandi Shaffran,''' Chairman is/[o /88 Date