►
Description
The City of Aiken Board of Zoning Appeals is meeting Tuesday, August 28th, at 5:30PM in Council Chambers. To preview the meeting's agenda, click here:
https://edoc.cityofaikensc.gov/weblink/0/doc/423695/Page1.aspx
A
A
A
A
A
D
A
A
A
That's
a
petition
from
crown
castle,
nge
LLC
and
they're,
requesting
a
special
exception
to
allow
a
telecommunication
facility
and
that's
located
in
ACP
property
area,
GB
property
area
within
the
right-of-way
of
the
SCD
ot,
and
that's
at
the
northwest
corner
of
Richland,
Avenue,
West
and
Deborah
way
to
the
city
has
been
properly
posted.
It
has
any
inquires
that
you
wish
to
share
with
the
board.
We.
D
D
Previously,
a
very
similar
application
was
approved
by
the
board
earlier
this
year
for
a
location
on
a
different
portion
or
adjacent
to
a
different
portion
of
the
same
parcel.
The
applicant
after
continuing
to
work
with
SC
d
ot,
the
DoD
essentially
changed
their
mind
as
to
whether
they
would
prefer
the
location
and
the
special
exception
that
was
granted
was
so
specific
that
it
didn't
allow
staff
any
administrative
leeway.
It
was
down
to
the
foot
as
the
description
in
the
in
the
orders
in
this
case,
so
it
would
be
reconsidered
as
a
new
application.
D
D
That's
correct
so
we're
feeding
as
a
new
application.
What
you
have
is
a
small
cell
facility,
which
is
essentially
a
utility
pole
with
what
I
would
best
describe
is
what
looks
like
an
upside-down
trashcan
on
top
of
it,
that
is
a
small
cell
antenna,
providing
cellular
service
to
shorter-range
areas
with
communications
back
to
a
larger
tower.
The
specific
location
is
just
at
the
northwest
corner
of
the
intersection
of
pepper
hill
way
in
Richland
Avenue
West.
D
We
provided
you
in
your
packet,
a
kind
of
a
general
view
of
what
that
area
looks
like,
and
then
the
applicant
has
provided
here
on
the
screen
in
front
of
you
in
the
screen
here.
A
rendering
of
what
that
would
look
like
at
that
location
would
be
the
board
so
review
it
as
a
new
application,
pursuant
to
the
special
exception
criteria
that
were
responded
to
by
the
applicant
and
in
accordance
it
meets
all
applicable
staff.
Would
you
say
that
it
would
satisfy
the
special
criteria
established
in
the
zoning
ordinance
for
this
type
of
facility?
E
A
D
D
It
was
originally
going
to
be
immediately
to
the
street
side
of
that
detention
pond
behind
the
especially
essentially
split
between
the
the
fence
for
the
detention
pond
and
the
sidewalk,
and
that
was
a
specific
location
considered
it's
the
same
adjacent
parcel,
but
this
is
adjacent
to
the
pepper,
Hill
Way
cul-de-sac
entrance,
as
opposed
to
the
the
other
side
of
the
driveway
I.
Guess
in
this
case,
it's
way
I
would
describe
it
all.
A
A
F
F
A
A
C
B
B
The
telecommunication
facility
must
comply
with
the
standards
of
section
3
point
3
point
2
of
the
zoning
ordinance,
with
the
exception
of
setback,
screening
and
fencing
conditions
listed
there
in
at
section
3
point:
3
point:
2
capital,
B
for
lowercase,
B,
section
3,
point
3,
point
2
to
point
capital,
B,
5
and
section
3
point
3
point
2
to
capital,
B,
6
and
file
order
to
run
with
the
land
and
be
recorded
at
the
Aiken
County
RNC.
Ours.
A
A
D
D
D
The
applicants
indicated
that
he
did
so
to
provide
shade
relief
for
horses
when
they're
out
during
the
day
in
that
South
paddock
adjacent
to
the
equestrian
easement.
The
staff
would
define
that
as
backing
up
the
zoning
ordinance
defines
any
frontage
adjacent
to
a
street
as
a
front
setback.
So
it
has
a
larger
setback.
When
it's
adjacent
to
a
street,
the
staff
would
not
consider
the
easement
along
there
as
a
as
a
front
yard.
As
we
would
other
rights
of
way,
it
would
considered
a
side
yard
which
require
typically
a
10-foot
setback
for
accessory
buildings.
D
The
applicant
is
requesting
a
variance
to
continue
to
locate
that
facility
that
shade
structure
at
that
location,
which
is
approximately
a
1
foot
setback
in
response
to
some
initial
comments
and
a
complaint
received
regarding
the
position
of
it,
the
applicant
is
proposing
to
move
it
back
more
flush
with
the
residents.
As
you
can
see
from
the
photo
here
kind
of
there
and
behind
it,
you
can
see
that
it
from
the
Coker
spring
side.
It
is
visible
there
to
the
right
of
the
residents.
D
The
the
applicant
is
essentially
proposing
to
move
that
back
more
flush
with
the
residents,
so
the
front
line
of
the
the
residents,
so
you
wouldn't
be
able
to
have
it,
be
as
noticeable
from
the
Coker
spring
side
and
I
also
took
a
picture
here,
and
it's
rather
dark,
which
is
actually
kind
of
accurate
at
that
location,
that
this
is
from
the
gray
circle
side.
It
tends
to
kind
of
blend
in
with
the
trees,
because
it's
a
green
color,
so
it's
kind
of
hard
to
denote
there.
A
D
Would
we
would
consider
it
yeah
very
similarly,
except
for
we
would
because
the
equestrian
easement
isn't
a
street?
We
would
probably
just
as
staff
interpret
the
portion
that
fronts
great
circle
as
being
a
front
yard
as
far
as
setback
is
concerned,
and
what's
and
kind
of
the
area
where
the
the
equestrian
easement
is
between
great
circle
and
Coker,
Spring
I
believe
we've
considered
that
a
side
yard
by
the
way
the
code
is
written
and.
D
A
G
D
This
case,
at
that
same
location,
it
still
would
be
because
you
would
have,
in
this
case
a
side
yard
setback
is
the
same
for
a
primary
structure
as
an
accessory
structure
on
the
side
yard.
What
where
it
relaxes
in
the
code
is
the
rear
yard
setback
for
an
accessory
structure
versus
a
primary
structure,
so
you
would
have
typically
it's
20%
lot
depth
for
a
rear
yard.
An
accessory
structure
can
be
located,
except
for
a
building
to
be
located
within
10
feet
of
a
Revere
property
boundary.
D
D
Complaint
was
primary,
aesthetic
in
nature.
They
felt
that
that
it
didn't
meet
the
design
guidelines
predominantly
due
to
its
visibility
and
and
what
the
structure
is
made
out
of.
However,
in
talking
with
the
Design
Review
Board
Chair,
which
would
be
a
second
part
of
this
process
for
the
applicant
as
opposed
Daiso,
so
first
the
gist
for
everybody's.
D
If
it's
something
we're
gonna
need
at
variance
and
that
comes
first
prior
to
an
overlay
district
design
review
board,
Authority
kicking
in
so
it
would
first
need
the
variance,
but
it
was
primary,
aesthetic
in
nature
and
and
working
with
the
board
chair.
We
do
believe
by
setting
it
back
further,
as
the
applicant
has
proposed
that
it
it
better
meets
the
code
as
far
as
being
less
visible
from
a
right-of-way
and
therefore
not
subject
to
as
stringent
so
right
now
we're
currently
sits.
E
B
But
mr.
plan
that
the
couldn't
get
on
to
the
property
out,
looking
from
the
gate,
trying
to
get
an
idea
of
the
structure,
looked
like
a
temporary
building,
correct,
look
like
something's
put
up
and
you
can
move
it,
that's
correct,
but
most
anywhere
you
want
to
that.
Would
that
in
itself,
I
understand
would
be
in
dilation.
D
Similar
buildings,
as
far
as
like
a
metal
roof,
shade
structure
have
been
permitted
in
on
horse
property.
So
there
is
some
precedent
for
that.
However,
typically
they're
located
in
the
situation
that
mostly
the
roof
is
seen
as
opposed
to
the
legs
and
and
that
sort
of
thing,
so
again
it
kind
of
depends
on
on
the
level
of
visibility.
D
As
far
as
what
we've
seen
is
precedent
for
us,
okay,
right
out
in
front
of
the
house,
for
instance,
the
design
guidelines
would
probably
not
allow
it,
but
if
you
were
to
located
again
in
a
position
where
it
would
be
much
less
visible,
you
might
be
only
only
be
able
to
see
the
roofline
and
very
minimally
any
sort
of
structure.
Metal,
roof
structures
have
been
permitted
by
the
design
guys
before,
especially
for
shade
on
horse
properties.
We
found
a
couple
cases
where
those
who
permitted
I.
B
Certainly
understand
the
idea
of
the
shade
and
everything,
but
the
building
is
according
to
the
documents.
Er
is
roughly
41
feet,
long
and
18
feet
wide
and
just
eyeballing
the
distance
he
has
from
the
retaining
wall
to
the
property
line,
looks
like
about
19
or
less
than
20
feet
correct
that
right.
It.
D
D
Typically
put
the
ordinance
you're
allowed
to
for
the
first
a
Kerr,
and
that
is
what's
there
currently,
the
what
we
didn't
look
into
is
because
it
hasn't
arisen.
Yet
is
what
any
sort
of
grandfathering
at
that
property
to
be
allowed,
because
it
does
have
additional
stables
other
than
that,
but
under
the
current
ordinance
it
complete
would
be
allowed
to,
because
that's
kind
of
what's
been
the
minimum
consistent
use
on
the
property,
but
as
to
is
to
for
the
first
a
Kerr
and
then
one
for
each
additional
acre,
typically
for
an
RSS
property
that
becomes
unlimited.
D
D
D
A
I
I
Storms,
which
we've
had
a
few
of
then
during
the
day,
we've
got
a
hole
in
which
I
can't
address
right
now,
change
of
seasons
and
the
leaves
are
going
to
be
gone
and
the
shades
gonna
be
more
important
and
then,
at
that
point,
they'll
be
out
instead
of
at
night
they'll
be
out
in
the
daytime,
I'm
sure.
That's
probably
yeah,
there's
clear
as
mud.
I
K
C
C
I
J
B
B
Daily
said
about
a
structure
coming
out
from
your
stable
out
into
that
space,
where
your
temporary
building
is
now
to
provide
shade,
in
your
estimation,
wouldn't
suffice
and
still
meet
the
setback.
The
10-foot
setback,
in
other
words,
reduce
your
20
feet
down
to
10
feet,
or
you
feel
that
wouldn't
work
at.
I
K
B
Well,
I
can
understand
with
the
space
that
you've
got
in
the
space
you're
occupying,
because
you
one
leaves
you
that
one
foot
on
the
set
from
the
property
line
and
what
I
hear
you
say
is.
It
is
the
horse
that
you
have
two
horses.
You
have
I
want
to
get
caught
up
in
there
and
panic
or
anything
like
that.
Right.
I
J
G
L
I
G
G
G
E
D
C
D
I
Wouldn't
be
any
more
visible
because
they're
trees
all
along
there
and
the
only
thing
they
can.
The
fence
is
a
solid
fence
and
it's
six
feet
and
the
eaves
of
this
thing
or
I
don't
know
the
total
height
is
11
feet,
but
he
was
there's
only
about
four
or
five
feet
that
they
can
see
and
mostly
they're,
seeing
the
legs
which
I've
also
depending
how
all
this
comes
out
of
paint
them
black,
which
makes
everything
go
away.
Ting.
B
B
B
E
G
A
H
D
There
a
concern
is
to
get
separation
between
them
for
the
purposes
of
fire
prevention.
That
way,
you
don't
have
one
of
them
catch
fire
jump
over
to
another.
One
yeah
think
about
people
storing
gasoline
things
like
that
and
storage
sheds,
so
you
could
be
essentially,
if
everybody
had
you
know,
excess
restructures
right
up
against
their
property
lines
in
a
corner.
They
could
spread
to
four
properties
fairly
quickly
and
you'd.
You
know
have
an
issue
so
by
providing
that
separation
between
them,
it
kind
of
helps
by
default
meet.
D
Establishes
maybe
probably
safely
called
a
1
foot
setback
because
the
the
basis
of
legs
are
it's
within
one
or
two
feet
of
the
of
the
fence.
It
was
hard
to
determine
if
the
fence
was
right
on
the
property
line
or
on
the
interior
side
of
the
property
line.
So
staff
wrote
it
up
as
a
1
foot
setback
for
the
purposes
of
just
kind
of
being
on
the
careful
side.
C
A
M
L
I
couldn't
for
the
life
of
me
figure
out
what
it
was
because
I
saw
no
building
permit
I
had
never
seen
a
sign
like
I
had
to
put
up
when
I
am
done
to
my
property
for
the
design
review
of
such
a
structure,
and
it
just
seemed
like
it
appeared
and
then
I
had
no
idea
what
it
was
used
for.
It's
huge
it's
800
square
feet,
the
horses
that
he
has
when
they
go
into
the
paddock
area.
They
stay
in
the
front
pack
and
they
run
around
and
the
dogs
that
he
has.
L
L
I
just
have
this
fear
that
there's
going
to
be
more
horses,
it's
very
large
for
two
horses
I've,
never
seen
the
horses
really
sitting
under
it,
they're
always
out
running
in
that
front
paddock
when
they're
out.
As
far
as
shade
goes
during
the
summer,
there's
plenty
of
shade
his
argument
was
they
never
had
to
worry
about
this
because
the
horses
were
never
there
in
the
summer.
L
L
H
B
L
L
H
K
L
The
thing
is
so
high
that
when
the
Sun
is
at
the
right
angle,
it
shines
right
underneath
that
it's
not
really,
and
so
my
fear
was
that
maybe
he's
gonna
put
up
walls
I
had
no
idea.
What
it
was
for
is
the
first
I've
heard
it's
it's
gonna
be
used
for
shade
for
horses,
I
thought
this
is
gonna,
be
some
sort
of
a
building.
You
know,
eventually
we're
gonna
see
walls
on
it
and
equipment
stored
that
I
had
no
idea
because
he
never
even
mentioned
what
he
was
gonna
do
to
me.
L
D
N
Is
it-
and
you
might
not
know
this,
but
when,
if
mr.
Dabney
comes
back
up,
perhaps
we
could
ask
him
how
visible
is
it
from
where
he
is
versus
the
people
who
are
complaining
about
the
way
it
looks?
It
seems
to
me,
like
it's,
tucked,
pretty
well
behind
there,
so
it
wouldn't
be
a
bother
to
him.
He
might
not
realize
that
it's
unattractive
if
he
doesn't
have
to
see
it.
You
know
as
a
part
of
his
Vista,
but
my
real
question
is
I.
Just
well.
I
happened
to
be
here
at
a
meeting.
N
It
might
have
been
a
city
council
meeting
when
mrs.
Cavanaugh,
who
I
believe
was
her
father
owned
that
right-of-way
of
that
trail
and
she
deeded
it
to
the
city
to
maintain,
to
maintain
it,
I
guess
and
what
I've
always
what
I
wonder
about
this
shed
is
the
runoff
and
if
the
runoff
is
going
to
go
and
straight
into
the
trail,
what
is
that
going
to
do
I
drove
her
down
and
took
a
look
at
it?
N
I
know
we
have
a
new
brain
very
recently,
but
there's
a
pretty
good
little
Grand
Canyon
going
right
down
through
the
middle
of
the
trail
and
I.
Will
it's
happened?
You
know
it
happens.
Sometimes
it's
not
only
because
of
this
roof,
but
I
think
the
roof
would
certainly
exacerbate
it.
If
all
the
water
that
used
to
go
in
those
in
that
particular
paddock
is
now
dumped
on
to
the
bridal
trail
and
I
was
looking
at
this
picture
and
I'm
unable
to
tell
whether
the
roof
of
that
shed
actually
extends
over
that
privacy
fence
or
I.
A
K
K
N
So
maybe
y'all
should
think
about,
and
maybe
maybe
there's
another
place
on.
The
property
would
wouldn't
cause
that
much
runoff,
because
that
is
really
eight
hundred
square
feet.
That's
a
size
of
a
mobile
home
or
something
isn't
it
I
mean
that's
a
pretty
good
sized
shed
and
I
know
the
other
paddocks
are
being
maybe
that
could
go
somewhere
else.
We
might
suggestion.
K
N
B
A
questionable
way
here
what
you
say
about
the
story,
because
I
walked
that
walk
the
entire
length
from
grace
from
cooker
Springs
up
to
grace
and
back
and
that
noticeable
washing,
whether
that's
from
grace
circle
and
and
other
runoff
I,
don't
know,
I
hear
your
concern
about
the
further
concentration
of
runoff
must
be
getting
into
that
area.
And
now
did
you
see
anything?
Would
you
perceive
any
hazard
it
to
those
on
horseback
using
that
right-of-way.
N
As
it
stands
now
well,
I
think
the
only
hazard
would
be
in
my
mind
right
now:
I
walk
my
dogs
through
there.
So
I
can
you
know,
pick
and
choose
my
path
and
I
think
the
only
people
that
probably
can't
pick
and
choose
their
path
be
somebody
driving
a
carriage
and
that's
I've,
done
that
in
the
past
as
well,
and
if
and
if
it's
washed
out
you
just
you
know
you
better
not
go
there
right.
B
N
B
As
it
stands
now,
I
mean
the
easement
is
the
width
is
what
it
is,
but
it
appears
just
walking
it.
It
appears
to
be
narrower
because
of
the
growth
on
either
side
and
I
could
see,
walking
the
dog
and
so
forth.
But
someone
on
horseback
coming
through
there
I
think
would
have
a
little
more
of
a
challenge
somewhat
to
work
through
the
ruts,
as
well
as
the
the
overgrowth
mm-hmm.
Would
you
not
agree
I
mean,
but
if
it
were
widened
and
cleaned
up,
so
to
speak,
to
let
both
horses,
dog,
walkers
and
maybe
carriages?
N
Have
they
always
have
and
I
think
what
happens
is
in
the
summertime?
You
know
the
weeds
come
up
on
the
side
of
the
stable
and
then
the
branches
on
those
red
tips
come
out
a
bit,
but
in
the
fall
it'll,
probably
all
get
cleaned
up,
because
you
know
there
are
a
lot
more
horses
in
town
and
then
that
hedge
usually
gets
I,
don't
know
who
does
it,
but
some
somebody
cuts
the
limbs
on
that
hedge
and
the
weeds
dive
back
on
the
stable
side.
So
it
does
get
a
bit
wider.
K
N
A
O
My
name
is
Sam
Kato
and
I
live
at
6:22
Magnolia
Street
in
the
horse
district
I
ride
from
622
across
whiskey
and
down
that
path
on
a
regular
basis.
I
am
very
familiar
with
the
property
that
mr.
Dabney
owns
because
I
suggested
he
buy
it.
It
was
formerly
owned
by
Linda
mcclain.
She
was
the
master
of
the
Eichen
house.
There
were
eight
horses
on
that
property.
For
many
years,
lots
of
people
lived
in
the
apartment.
That
is
part
of
that
barn
where
mr.
Dabney
excuse-me
lives.
Now
mr.
O
Dabney
is
going
on
75,
he
has
two
horses.
He
has
no
intention
of
having
any
more.
That
is
the
least
amount
of
horses
that
have
ever
been
on
that
property.
There
were
formerly
eight.
It
has
been
reduced
to
two
paddocks
from
five,
the
patli
area
that
he
has
placed
that
overhang
is
necessary
to
that
lower
paddock.
There
is
no
other
place
or
no
other
reason
to
have
it.
On
the
property.
O
And
ultimately,
the
city
has
now
taken
over
that
right-of-way
and
they
came
in
at
my
insistence
and
cleared
all
of
debris,
because
anyone
living
on
the
other
side
of
whiskey
road
couldn't
pass
down
that
right-of-way,
which
has
been
used
for
years
and
years
to
get
into
hitch,
Hitchcock
woods
so
I
think
I'm
about
as
familiar
with
this
whole
situation
as
anyone
here
and
I
would
suggest
that
the
individual
and
I
can't
remember
his
name
who
has
objected
to
all
of
this
has
objected
to
just
about
everything
that
ever
occurred
on
that
property.
When
mrs.
O
McLean
owned
it,
he
complained
constantly
about
the
hounds.
He
complained
about
everything
he
doesn't
like
the
dogs.
He
doesn't
like
the
horses.
There
is
no
way
his
horses
can.
John's
horses
can
ever
get
any
closer
to
the
property
because
it
is
behind
a
brick
wall.
They
will
never
be
able
to
get
closer
to
the
property.
It
seems
that
it
offends
no
one
except
he
has
complained
about
absolutely
everything
for
years
and
years
and
years
of
everybody
that
has
been
on
that
property.
O
A
A
C
That
we
accept
application,
1993
double-o
2
with
the
following
conditions:
approval
to
allow
an
approximate
1
foot
side,
yard
setback
on
approximate
738
square
feet.
Accessories
shed.
Excuse
me
accessories
shade
structure
at
524,
Koko,
Springs,
Road,
Southwest
tax
map
parcel
number
105,
1,
2,
10,
double
O
required
that
all
other
pertinent
requirements
of
section
3,
point
4
point
2
are
met
that
the
final
order
is
recorded
in
the
Aiken
County
RNC
office.
J
A
G
D
Mr.
chairman,
so
the
the
process,
yeah
I,
wouldn't
be
required
to
file
a
design
review
application
typically
accessory
structures.
Then
the
district
can
be
up
to
administrative
review,
which
is
subject
to
planning
director
and
chair
review,
as
opposed
to
going
to
the
full
board,
and
then,
if
it
were
rejected
through
that
process,
it
would
go
to
the
full
board.
The
the
design
review
board
has
essentially
created
a
checklist
of
items
that
need
to
go
to
the
board
and
immediately
versus
those
that
could
be
reviewed.
Administrative
Lee,
accessory
structures
are
typically
at
administrative
and
in
nature.
G
The
way
that
mr.
Dabney
is
ensuring
the
care
of
his
horses
they're
doing
what
they
need
to
do
as
far
as
movement
he's
making
sure
that
they're,
sheltered,
etc.
It
seems
that
the
horse
management,
the
horse
property,
is
not
the
issue,
it's
always
being
a
horse
property,
so
listening
past
that
it
seems
that
this
stemmed
from
an
aesthetic
objection,
first
and
foremost,
which
sort
of
where
I'm
struggling
because
I
think
if
from
a
design
standpoint
I
completely
understand
the
structure.
G
I
understand
the
placement,
the
utilization
on
the
property
I
think
because
of
the
specific
area
as
I
sort
of
alluded
to
in
the
beginning
about.
Could
it
be
more
aesthetically
pleasing
Brown,
like
the
stable
sort
of
incognito?
If
you
wish-
and
maybe
it
wouldn't
have
been
on
someone's
radar
quite
as
strongly
as
it
is
it's
where
I'm
kind
of
struggling
about
setting
a
precedent,
but
at
the
same
time
allowing
what's
needed
for
on
the
property.
G
C
B
B
B
D
So
the
approval
particularly
has
moved
so
far
would
run
with
the
land.
The
board
does
have
the
authority
to
place
a
condition
on
there
that
would
that
it
would
run
with
ownership.
Do
you
can
further
restrict
that,
if
you'd,
if
the
board
were
to
choose
to
do
so,
but
the
motion
on
the
table,
it
would
run
with
the
land
automatically
unless
otherwise
stated,.
E
Mr.
chairman,
if
this
property
did
not
have
horses
on
it,
I'm
asking
myself,
would
this
be
something
that
I
would
approve
the
variance
you
know
to
have
a
structure
that
close
to
two
neighboring
properties
and
my
answer
to
that
forget
about
the
horses.
My
answer
to
that
is
no,
because
we
have
a
zoning
variance.
E
I
mean
we
have
a
zoning
laws
with
how
far
things
can
be
built
from
the
structure
and
if
these
people
that
were
coming
up
against
this,
these
two
people,
the
letter
that
we
have
here
and
this
other
man
lived
across
town
I'd,
be
like
well
and
you're,
not
next
door.
You're
not
concerned
about
what
you
thought,
I
mean
I,
don't
mean
what
you
think,
but
these
people
live
right
next
door
and
I'm
having
a
problem
with
this.
Because
of
that
forget
about
the
horses
just
about
the
structure
being
that
close
I.
C
E
H
Agree
largely
with
you,
I
think,
with
all
due
respect
to
mr.
Dabney.
It's
almost
like
he
got
a
deal
on
the
structure
and
he
crammed
it
in
there
without
any
thought
to
design
or
how
it
looks
or
run
off
from
the
roof.
I
I
think,
if
there's
some
way
that
we
could
diminish
the
the
look
of
it,
it
might
be
a
better
thing
and.
H
It's
to
me,
that's
just
it's
jammed
in
there
with
a
shoehorn
and
it's
I
don't
think
it's
needs
to
be
so
tall,
but
I,
don't
have
horses,
I,
don't
know
18,
hands
or
not
I,
don't
think
you
know
I
think
it
could
be
a
little
lower,
maybe
a
way
to
deal
with
the
runoff
a
little
more
strategically
that's.
It
was
a
very
good
point
coming
off
that
work,
there's
nothing
impeding
the
water
flow
and
it
may
even
aggravate
the
runoff
in
there
right
away.
B
F
A
K
A
A
C
A
C
A
A
1993,
zero,
zero
one
appearance
of
quests
regarding
the
minimum
lot
size
in
the
HD
horse,
District
zone,
in
particular,
785
Grace
Avenue
of
the
Barons.
The
quest
is
to
divide
the
lot
into
the
property
into
two
lots
of
less
than
10
acres
to
the
city.
Is
that,
as
it's
been
probably
posted,
it
has
any
inquires
that
you
wish
to
share
with
a
border
in
addition
to
the
ones
you
passed
out,
you.
D
Say
you
just
that
yeah
you've
received
an
additional
memo
from
staff
with
five
different
pieces
of
email
staff
received
from
four
different
individuals.
When
was
a
clarification
to
a
previous
email,
so
you
have
three
additional
in
support
of
and
two
additional
in
opposition
to
staff,
a
label,
the
the
staff
memo
and
additional
comments
as
Exhibit
A
for
the
record.
D
Property,
as
described,
is
West
to
not
Road
between
meat,
Avenue
and
grace
Avenue
Southeast,
the
applicant
is
requesting
a
variance
from
section
four
point:
three
point:
one
of
the
zoning
ordinance,
which
is
the
design
standards
for
non-residential
properties
horse
district
properties,
have
a
in
that
table
a
ten
acre
minimum.
The
subject
property
the
applicant,
which
is
to
divide
the
subject
property
into
two
parcels
that
are
less
than
that
10
acre
minimum.
D
A
six
roughly
six
point:
three
five
acre
lot
and
a
three
point:
six
five
acre
lot
as
seen
in
applicants,
some
middle
label
of
attachment
B,
which,
on
the
map
of
the
overhead,
is
the
right
the
right-hand
photo
there.
The
smaller
of
the
two
parcels
proposed
is
a
northern
parcel
which
currently
contains
a
residence
which
is
a
essentially
kind
of
a
continued
special
exception,
but
was
there
prior
to
the
current
HD
zone
district
and
exist,
so
it
could
be
considered
legal
non-conforming
use
or
a
special
exception.
D
That's
continued
one
or
the
other,
but
may
remain
there
basically
until
the
residents
would
be
no
longer
be
there.
Typically,
a
residences
is
allowed
by
special
exception
in
the
horse
district.
The
primary
use
of
the
property
is
for
equestrian
uses
and
the
horse
district,
as
opposed
to
most
districts
that
are
more
residential
where
the
house
and
the
residence
is
primary.
So
that's
unique
to
the
horse
district.
The
southern
property
currently
mostly
consists
of
stables
and
paddocks
and
has
been
traditionally
a
more
commercial
use,
and
that
would
be
the
proposed
six
point.
Three
five
acre
lot.
D
So
that's
the
the
zoning
Orange
requires.
Ten
acres
are
larger
for
horse
district
properties.
However,
there
are
a
number
of
properties
at
which
time
the
horse
district
was
zoned,
such
in
the
in
the
ordinance
written.
This
was
the
1999
ordinance
that
I'm
speaking
of
the
most
recent
version.
There
are
a
number
of
properties
that
are
smaller
than
10
acres
that
have
been
grandfathered
in
essentially
as
such,
but
they
could
not
split
without
a
variance.
H
D
D
B
D
Correct
yeah-
and
that
was
a
an
exhibit
presented
by
the
applicant
as
part
about
his
application
materials
but
yeah
the
the
acreages
are
accurate
as
depicted
on
there
yeah.
So
there
are
a
number
of
properties
within
the
vicinity
of
the
property
that
are
zoned
horse
district
and
less
than
ten
acres
in
size.
P
As
my
application
points
out
and
first
I'll
thank
mr.
bland
for
bringing
it
up,
it
was
in
1999
zoning
ordinance
that
came
after
I
own
the
property,
but
supposedly
we
were
all
contacted
prior
to
enacting
this
zoning,
which
I
was
not
minimum.
Ten
acres
in
the
HD
zone.
District
I
am
the
only
ten
acre
property
there.
All
of
the
others
range
from
between
0.3
acres
and
five
and
a
half
acres
that
are
privately
owned.
Other
than
that
you
have
a
racetrack,
a
polo
field
and
a
retired
hardest
track.
P
Other
properties
that
are
larger
that
other
than
the
8.3
next
to
me
are
zoned
RSS.
They
don't
require
the
minimum
10
acres
I've
pointed
out
through
my
application
and
I
don't
feel
I
should
have
to
go
through
every
page
of
it,
because
everybody
has
it
that
when
this
was
first
created
in
the
mid-1990s
and
my
mother
was
a
part
of
it,
it
was
because
there
was
a
developer
who
wanted
to
put
1
acre
lots
through
the
horse
district.
P
P
If
you
take
out
the
public
trust,
the
the
racetrack,
the
polo
fields,
the
harness
track,
the
privately
owned
properties,
what
was
commercial
encompassed
better
than
40%
of
the
staples
that
are
in
that
area?
These
were
businesses.
These
were
racing,
stables
that
operated
in
there,
be
it
only
seasonally
for
five
six
months
and
then
they'd
be
empty,
but
these
were
actual
commercial
operations
and
you'll
see
that
in
the
yellow.
P
It's
the
next,
but
please
in
the
yellow,
okay,
the
light
blues-
that
is
the
the
big
the
darker
color,
is
what
was
commercial
in
1998
the
yellow
were
privately
held,
personal
stables,
nothing,
no
business
is
running
out
of
them,
just
people
having
their
pleasure
states.
If
you
go
to
the
next
slide,
it
shows
the
way
it
looks
in
2018.
P
P
For
sale
is
empty
is
not
promoting
the
equestrian
benefits
of
the
horse
district
whatsoever,
so
there
is
virtually
one
racing:
stable,
left
commercial
racing
stable
in
that
entire
horse
district,
everything
in
yellow
is
being
used
for
other
disciplines.
Pleasure
riding
could
be
three-day,
eventing
could
be
foxhunting,
it's
every
other
discipline
out
there,
there's
no
more
commercial.
P
Yet
I
have
what
is
a
ten
acre
commercial
property
when
I
had
the
racing
stables
there,
that
dog
would
Ron.
Stevens
had
I
had
26
more
stalls
that
burned
five
years
ago
without
those
26
dolls.
That
is
not
a
commercially
viable.
It's
an
open
lot.
It's
just
sitting
there,
which
I
can
let
grow
to
20
feet
high
and
grass.
It's
just
not
a
viable
anything
to
promote
the
equestrian
industry,
Oh
and
with
residences.
P
He
doesn't
come
down
and
when
he
does,
he
doesn't
have
any
horses.
These
are
properties
that
are
sitting
there
without
anybody
using
them
to
promote
the
equestrian
uses
of
the
horse
Geist,
which
is
what
the
comprehensive
plan
is
trying
to
do,
get
more
use.
You
put
two
parcels
there.
You
have
parcels
that
are
there
oh
and
mr.
Wetzel
has
the
horse
show
is
going
now
at
the
steeplechase
track,
eight
stalls
he
built
there
and
they
have
thousands
forces
that
come
through.
P
These
are
people
who
can
add
to
the
economic
impact
of
downtown
akin
instead
of
buying
outside
of
town
or
just
coming
in
for
a
weekend
and
leaving
they
want
to
be
in
town.
They
want
to
have
some
place
where
they
can
ride.
If
everybody
else
is
sitting
there,
with
0.3
acres
to
5
acres
and
I've
got
10.
This
is
not
something
that's
drawing
more
people
more
activity
into
the
horse
district.
P
It
is
not
something
that's
benefit
and
helping
to
go
to
the
future
of
what
the
comprehensive
plan
is
there
to
do,
preserve
and
promote
the
equine
industry.
Here,
if
I
may,
I
would
like
to
address
some
of
the
letters
that
have
come
in
again.
I've
got
Alice
Knowles.
She
has
the
one
remaining
commercial
rate
stable.
She
is
a
trainer
on
the
racetrack.
P
She
is
has
been
on
the
track
for
decades
she's
a
vice
president
of
the
in
training,
track,
she's,
doing
the
restoration
of
the
Whitney
trust
Barnes
to
try
and
maintain
and
promote,
and
carry
forward
the
heritage
of
the
Aiken
historic
area.
Mr.
Wilkinson,
who
has
five
properties
surrounding
me,
they
actually
use
their
properties
with
their
horses.
They
are
there.
He
has
commendations
from
the
city
for
what
he
has
done
with
his
properties
surrounding
mine
and
he
is
promoting
it
then
I
have
my
brothers
next
door
who
I
find
his
letter.
P
P
Flavor
of
the
horse
industry
was
changing
and
was
going
to
be
changing
over
the
coming
years.
I
pointed
out,
then
that
the
racetrack
was
declining,
that
other
disciplines
were
coming
in
and
all
I
am
is
10
years
later
saying
here,
it's
happened,
but
since
he
brought
it
up
that
ruling
from
the
bza
went
through
the
courts
to
mediation.
P
Several
of
you
were
in
the
mediation
it
was
agreed
to
in
mediation.
We
came
out
of
that,
went
to
City
Council
for
ratification,
and
mr.
pattern,
Edie
decided
that
he
was
gonna
renege
on
the
agreements
that
he
made
during
our
mediation,
which
was
approved
and
agreed
to.
We
had
several
things
in
there.
P
P
It
does
nothing
to
dilute
the
horse
district.
It's
exactly
the
same
uses
as
are
possible
and
potential
for
the
horse
district.
It's
just
putting
it
out
there
where
the
potential
people
to
you
utilize.
It
will
have
access
to
it.
It's
actually
promoting
what
the
horse
district
is
zoned,
for
it
is
not
diluting
it.
P
P
Then
something
should
be
done
to
look
at
those
properties
and
say
we
need
to
protect
them
more
of
an
open
space
designation.
They
should
not
be
zoned
the
exact
same
as
a
point
three
acre
property,
but
that's
he
brought
that
up
upon
me.
The
racetrack
is
there
at
the
moment,
73
acres,
the
Whitney
Trust.
Is
there
at
35
acres?
P
That's
a
whole
nother
issue
that
he's
brought
up.
He
talks
about
the
character
and
sustainability
of
the
horse.
District
well,
I
think
that's
what
I'm
trying
to
promote
and
offer
more
opportunity
and
viability
for
that's
exactly
what
I'm
looking
at
and
he
did
put
his
property
into
an
open,
Land
Conservancy.
P
He
does
say
here
that
he
when
he
inherited
it,
he
did
it,
though
he
waited
14
years
he's
just
on
that
recently,
but
either
way
we
you
know
it's
it's
to
plan
forward,
not
do
what
happened
in
1996
to
98
and
99,
which
is
to
fix
something
right,
then,
without
looking
forward
to
how
it
was
going
to
grow
and
how
you
could
best
use
it.
Go
forward
with
your
plan.
P
Precedent
for
other
future
variances.
He
brings
out
well
I'm
the
only
10
acre,
privately
owned
property.
There
I
don't
know
how
can
be
a
precedent.
Anybody
else
think
mr.
winter
Steen
mentioned
that
as
well.
Well,
his
is
owned
RSS.
These
are
not
properties
that
are
comparable.
They
are
totally
different
animals
all
together
and
if
I'm
the
only
privately
owned,
10
acre
parcel
I
can't
be
you
know:
I
can't
be
setting
a
precedent
for
anybody
else,
because
there's
nobody
to
set
a
precedent
for.
P
Then
mr.
winter
Steen
he's
concerned
that
this
doesn't
promote
equestrian
use,
I
think,
as
mr.
Wilkinson
said,
having
two
parcels
out
there
to
promote
and
be
able
and
encourage
viable
horse
properties
is
much
better
than
having
one
underutilized
piece
of
property
as
mr.
winter
Steen's
is
as
some
of
these
other
properties,
where
they
just
sit
there
and
hold
it
because
it
has
a
stable
on
it
and
it's
open
ground
now
there
will
be
those
who
just
want
open
ground,
but
that
does
not
fulfill
the
Mandate
of
the
comprehensive
plan
to
promote
equestrian
use.
P
It's
a
nice
thought
and
I
am
NOT
trying
to
delete
or
denigrate
or
take
away
any
open
space.
The
open
spaces
are
still
there.
I've
also
offered
to
put
a
deed
restriction
on
a
larger
parcel
so
that
it
could
never
be
divided
again.
I've
gone
the
above
and
beyond
trying
to
do
what
I
can
to
promote
what
is
the
horse
district
and
what
is
in
the
comprehensive
plan
to
make
more
viable
opportunities
for
people
to
utilize
horse
properties.
P
What
do
you
want
to
parcels?
10
years
ago,
I
actually
had
a
very
functioning
37
stall
racing
stable
going
there
then
I
lost
26
dolls
to
a
fire.
It's
just
open
space
sitting
there.
Now
it's
a
parking
lot.
You
know
we
clean
up
stalls,
we
let
people
board
there,
they
come
in
and
they
go
out.
This
is
not
something
that's
promoting
the
equestrian
uses
of
the
horse
district.
This
is
not
something
that's
bringing
people
in
this
is
not
something
that's
helping
the
city
economically.
This
is
not
it's
not
doing
anything.
A
P
P
No,
no,
no
a
hardship
was
represented,
which
is
again
represented
here,
but
I.
That's
the
false
news:
there
is
no
financial
hardship,
there
is
no
hardship.
I
was
not
in
the
Trump
Tower
with
the
Russians.
Any
of
this.
That's
nonsense
that
is
flak
and
I
try
and
deal
with
the
facts.
There
is
no
hardship,
no
economic
hardship,
the
only
hardship
is
going
out
there
and
cutting
the
grass.
A
P
You
wish
to
have
a
future
with
the
horse
district
and
you
wish
to
have
a
promotional,
that's
bringing
people
in
and
utilizing
it
promoting
the
horse
industry,
the
equestrian
industry,
to
have
mr.
winter
Stein's
property
sitting
there
with
a
nice
stable,
but
nobody's
ever
there
to
have
me
sitting
there,
but
nobody's
there
to
have
my
brother
lease
his
out
for
three
months
a
year
but
otherwise
nobody's
ever
there.
This
is
not
promoting
and
bringing
people
into
the
horse
district.
It
is
not
doing
what
the
comprehensive
plan
says.
It's
there
to
do.
It
is
not
there.
P
What
people
want
to
maintain
it
to
do.
I
have
letters
from
all
of
the
people
who
ride
in
that
district.
I
have
the
letters
from
the
people
who
use
it
and
they
are
all
supportive,
because
and
and
again
mr.
Wetzel's
brought
in
thousands
of
horses
for
weekends
here
and
there.
These
are
people
who
would
like
to
live
in
Aiken.
They
don't
want
to
live
outside
of
Aiken,
don't
want
to
live
in
a
kit.
P
They
want
to
be
able
to
utilize
these
properties,
but
as
long
as
there
are
these
big
things
that
are
way
beyond
what
they
require,
those
rrss
properties
other
than
mine,
those
are
our
SS,
but
if
you
want
to
bring
people
in
here
to
utilize
it
the
way,
this
comprehensive
plan
says
that
we're
there
for
and
that's
what
we
maintain
the
dirt
roads
for
and
that's
what
we're
trying
to
bring
people
and
that's
the
beauty
of
Aiken.
If
you
don't
offer
them
access
to
it,
they
can't
have
it
you're,
not
you're,
not
doing
what
this
says.
E
P
Ten
acres
is
too
large
to
maintain
for
what
you
can
do
on
it.
You're
just
wasting
money,
maintaining
if
it
was
20
acres.
Well,
there's
a
farm.
These
five
acre
parcels
that
people
can
be
on
it.
That's
a
maintainable
usable
functioning
size.
You
look
at
the
ones
that
are
sitting
there
empty
like
mr.
winter
Steen.
It's
just
a
big
space.
It's
just
it's
a
it's
a
hole
in
the
water,
so.
P
P
P
You
know
the
property
where
all
the
trees
were
taken
down.
The
house
has
redone,
the
barn
was
put
up,
here's
something
beautiful
that
could
be
on
that
property
and
be
a
functioning
equestrian
property,
beautiful
horse
property
I'm
not
going
to
do
it
I'm
not
going
to
spend
a
million
or
two
somebody
could
and
could
actually
do
something
to
benefit
that
area
and
promote
it.
P
P
G
G
P
P
I'm
trying
to
I've
got
two
kids,
so
I
have
to
devise
that
somehow
and
I'm
not
going
to
be
there
to
wait
and
get
that
money
back
to
break-even
The
Preserve
Aiken,
with
26
more
stalls
I'm
trying
to
do
something
that
can
help
preserve
it
for
Aiken
I
turned
down
the
one
offer
I
had
had
on
that
property
and
they
were
gonna
level.
Everything
and
put
a
40-foot
high
house.
There
I
turn
that
one
down
I
mean
I'm,
trying
to
do
it
for
that
area,
but
I'm
only
gonna
go
so
far.
B
Think
a
lot
of
been
taken
while
have
seen
the
change
and
changes
and
in
our
horse
community
and
from
seasonal,
thoroughbred
horse
training
and
to
now
what
has
been
going
on
over
at
the
over
to
Bruce's
field
and
I
can
remember
growing
up
and
looking
at
Bruce's
feel
and
nothing
went
on
there
right
now.
I
was
growing
up,
but
anyway
mr.
B
Take
your
10
acres
and
I'm,
not
advocating
Bill
Domini
what
they
have
done
over
there,
but
a
support
facility
that
would
not
only
support
the
Aiken
training
track,
as
did
the
green
tree.
Staples
did
for
many
many
years
that
was
right
on
your
property,
but
also
support
the
events
that
are
going
on
at
Bruce's
field.
I
know,
there's
been
a
lot
of
discussions
at
the
Aiken
training
track
about
trying
to
revitalize
it
and.
K
B
And
right
make
more
income
from
it
and
so
forth
in
events
that
would
go
on
there,
but
my
question
would
be
with
the
10
acres
that
you
have
there
now
if
there
were
barn
built
to
to
support
some
of
these
other
events.
I
know
it
takes
money.
I,
don't
don't
hear
you
loud
and
clear
on
that,
but
my
point
is
that
the
10
acres
first
and
one
parcel
versus
two
parcels
I'm
trying
to
figure
out
the
difference
there
and
try
to
make
it
support
the
existing
horse
industry
as
well
as
what's
happening.
The.
P
Racetrack
barns,
right
now
are
more
than
enough
stalls
remaining.
Even
those
dolls
have
been
taken
from
the
racetrack
for
other
disciplines,
but
the
attendance
at
the
racetrack
has
gone
down
right
now.
Again,
the
president
of
the
racetrack
is
leasing,
Mike,
Freeman's
old
barn,
when
the
racetrack
barns
are
sitting
there
at
the
stalls
are
sitting
there
empty.
She
should
be
moving
back
over
there,
but
that's
going
to
leave
more
empty
stalls
over
here
for
other
disciplines.
P
The
racetrack
doesn't
need
more
stalls
right
now.
It
needs
it
needs
the
horses
to
fill
the
stalls
and
with
Alice
doing
what
she's
doing
to
renovate
the
Whitney
trust
barns
and
getting
those
back
up
and
running.
There
are
plenty
of
stalls.
We
can
double
the
number
of
horses.
We
have
on
the
track
right
now
and
have
stalls
for
them
that
are
the
racetrack
stalls
and
they
should
go
to
the
racetrack,
because
then
the
revenue
goes
to
the
racetrack
to
support
it.
So
we
don't
want
to
take
away
from
that.
P
P
I
have
a
paddock
for
every
saw,
I've
done,
all
I
can
do
and
all
I
can
get
is
the
overflow
from
there
I
can
get
people
who
come
in
for
hunt
week
and
they
want
to
rent
stalls
for
a
little
while
and
it's
it's
just
it's
quite
a
big
parking
lot.
That's
it
which
I
spend.
You
know
a
lot
of
time
going
around
repairing
fences,
repairing
the
grass
cutting
the
grass
getting
all
the
irrigation
going,
taking
the
trees,
just
keeping
it
looking
nice
for
the
horse
district.
That's
all
it's
doing
right
now.
P
E
P
But
the
house
there's
a
house
a
little
cottage
and
bar
all
sitting
there
with
six
stall,
barn,
six
paddocks,
a
nice
little
field
and
that
whole
piece
is
sitting
there.
Then
there's
this
huge,
wide,
driveway
down
the
middle
and
then
there's
the
other
side.
It's
now
just
a
big
open
field.
Really,
you
know,
put
some
fences
up,
so
you
can
turn
horses
out
and
it's
it's
a
waste
for
the
equestrian
industry.
I'm
not
going
to
do
anything
with
it.
P
I
am
more
than
willing
to
just
let
that
half
grow
up
and
not
think
about
it,
because
it
costs
more
to
maintain
for
the
little
bit
you
get
out
when
you
offer
somebody
a
stall
I'll,
just
let
it
go
that
isn't
going
to
benefit
the
horse
district
at
all.
Either
I
mean
that's
just
sort
of
after
ten
years
of
watching
that
and
after
five
years,
without
that
other
foot
back
of
the
barn
burned,
that's
just
where
it's
at
one
side
I
can
keep
and
maintain
keep
the
horses
in
keep
the
house.
P
P
C
P
I'm
trying
to
look
ahead
to
the
future
of
how
this
property's
gonna
work
for
the
horse
district.
Again,
the
one
time
that
somebody
came
to
me.
He
wanted
to
level
everything
hit,
the
racehorses
out,
build
brand
new
and
he
ended
up
building
on
dollar
bostwick's
property.
That
big
and
that's
what
could
have
been
there
if
I
had
said
yes
to
him.
A
P
Would
that
be?
Nobody
has
offered
me
anything
I
couldn't
get
more
for
it
as
two
parcels
as
I
can
for
one
I
have
no,
you
know
what
happens
in
the
future.
Somebody
might
come
to
me
and
in
two
years,
if
this
is
two
parcels
and
say
I
want
the
whole
thing
you
don't
know,
what's
gonna
happen
with
that,
we
had
somebody
in
two
years
ago
who
wanted
to
buy
the
whole
block.
P
J
Daniel
I
think
this
whole
thing
can
be
summed
up
the
purpose
of
the
ordinance.
It
says
a
variance
may
be
granted
by
the
board
if
the
board
concludes
that
strict
enforcement
of
any
design
of
performance
standards
result
in
an
unnecessary
hardship
to
the
applicant
and
that
by
granting
the
variance,
the
spirit
of
the
ordinance
will
be
observed.
Public
health,
safety
and
welfare
will
not
be
diminished,
and
substantial
justice
will
be
done.
It's
true.
These
two
properties
would
be
easier
to
sell
in
one
it's
true.
J
One
of
them
is
residential
and
it
if
it
be
taxed
as
residential,
could
be
used
and
insured
as
residential
the
somebody
else
could
take
the
commercial
side
and
Bill
Barnes
has
suggested
or
really
make
that
a
commercial
operation,
a
question
in
hospital
or
something
like
that,
but
look
at
Exhibit,
D
or
C,
and
this
is
the
only
ten
acres
nobody's
complaining
about
these
one.
Two:
three
acres
for
statistics
that
are
not
ten
acres.
This
is
an
anomaly
to
have
the
only
ten
acre
parcel.
So
that's
that's.
J
That's
not
a
financial
hardship,
but
it's
a
hardship
because
you're
competing
in
the
market.
If
you
wanted
to
sell
your
residents,
you
wanted
to
sell
the
commercial
site,
you
would
have
two
parcels
to
sell.
That's
it
just
makes
sense
with
what's
changing
in
the
horse
district,
though
it
was
written
almost
twenty
years
ago
brain
it
recognizes
the
that
it's
not
going
to
be
I,
don't
think
it'll
be
Dutchman.
You're,
not
gonna,
see
a
difference.
When
you
ride
down
the
street,
it's
gonna
look
the
same.
You
won't
even
see
the
property
line
or
less
they
bill.
J
A
Yeah
but
mr.
Boone,
when
mr.
Rivera
first
started,
I
asked
him
about
hardship
that
the
ordinance
has
caused
them
and
the
reason
for
requesting
appearance.
And
if
you
read
further
and
in
terms
of
our
obligations,
we
cannot,
by
state
statute,
offer
a
variance
for
financial
gain.
I,
explain
I'm,
trying
to
get
off
of
those
two
points
that.
P
Q
My
name
is
Edward
gob
and
I
live
at
five
for
one
grace.
Avenue
southeast
in
Aiken,
I
believe
that
you
are
in
you
have
a
copy
of
my
letter,
which
is
in
opposition
to
mr.
Revere's
application,
and
I
would
only
echo
mr.
Ogletree
x'
for
a
short
while
ago
that
variances
may
not
be
granted
by
reason
of
economic.
Q
Quite
clear
that
granting
this
variance
would
be
for
the
purpose
of
enhancing
the
value
of
the
property.
Again,
you
must
decide
whether
there
is
sufficient
hardship
involved
to
override
the
requirements
that
are
necessary
to
grant
a
variance.
It
would
appear
that
that
is
not
the
case.
I
also
have
a
letter
from
mr.
mrs.
winter.
Steen
I,
don't
know
if
that
reached
you
in
time,
but
it
just
follows.
Mr.
plan,
we
own
the
property
at.
Q
7:26
grace
Avenue
known
as
Kells
borough
house,
our
properties
across
property
that
mr.
Revere
is
trying
to
apply
for
parents
to
allow
to
subdivide
his
property.
We
purchased
our
property
in
2001,
expecting
what
is
known
as
a
horse
district,
never
to
be
broken
up
by
subdivision.
If
mr.
Revere
is
granted
his
subdivision
request,
we
believe
that
our
area
rakin
would
be
subject
to
the
same
variances,
thereby
totally
spoiling
the
character
vacant.
We
are
unable
to
be
at
the
hearing.
We
are
president
our
home
in
Pennsylvania.
Q
Q
The
winter
scenes
do
not
have
horses
on
that
property.
When
they
are
here
and
come
down
for
the
winter,
they
do
have
horses
on
that
property.
I
would
point
out
to
the
Commission
that
is
important
that
do
not
be
subject
to
the
whims
of
what
may
be
temporary
or
immediate
concerns
at
the
expense
of
longer-term
considerations
and
I
would
point
out
a
number
of
instances
where
the
reaction
to
some
immediate
concerns
would
have
had
extraordinarily
negative
consequences.
Q
I
would
point
out
that
a
number
of
years
ago,
the
city
actually
proposed
paving
some
of
the
dirt
roads
as
I
understand
it
from
mr.
Scott
Revere,
who
opposes
his
mother,
mrs.
Revere
at
the
time,
and
you
may
be
able
to
verify
this
was
instrumental
in
preventing
that
the
Winthrop
field
was
saved
from
24
houses
on
quarter,
acre
lots
by
people
who
had
the
foresight
to
preserve
that
at
the
time
there
was
a
great
demand
for
housing.
Q
That
wonderful
piece
of
property
across
the
street,
which
was
slated
to
be
a
low-income
housing
about
him,
was
saved
by
one
vote
on
City,
Council
and
another
time
in
the
express
interest
of
so-called
development.
It
was
proposed
that
an
expressway
be
built
through
the
world
view.
With
the
woods
citizens
park.
There
was
a
proposal
to
build
a
housing
development
there.
All
this
was
in
response
to
demands
for
housing
for
development.
Q
Again,
it
is
extraordinarily
important
that
we
do
not
lose
sight
of
the
fact
that
this
application
in
essence
strip
away
all
the
arguments
it
is
brought
down
and
one
thing,
and
that
is
to
enhance
the
value
of
the
property,
and
that
must
be
a
decision
that
you
must
make
to
justify
that
I
would
suggest
and
I
would
support
the
last
paragraph
from
mr.
Whitson
state
suppose
perhaps
mr.
Q
Revere's
application
should
be
part
of
a
larger
discussion
or
more
appropriately
tabled
until
proper
consideration
is
given
to
the
ramification
of
allowing
additional
horse
district,
commercial
and
parenthesis
properties
of
less
than
ten
acres.
I
think
that
we
should
not
allow
piecemeal
decisions
to
be
made
that
affect
the
entire
horse
district
and
I.
Think
again,
it
is
important
and
we
have
to
put
this
in
in
a
proper
context.
Q
Everyone
has
considerations,
and
we've
heard
the
arguments
in
Prior
times
when
this
applicant
has
presented
application
for
subdivision.
It
was
turned
out
that
it
was
for
various
purpose
such
as
estate
planning
and
his
particular
hardship
imposed
upon
him
that
can
be
replicated
throughout
akin,
but
we
cannot
allow
individual
intentions
as
good
as
they
may
be,
for
personal
reasons,
to
allow
our
town
to
be
degraded
because
of
what
may
be
perfectly
good
personal
considerations,
but
are
not
in
the
best
interests
of
the
town
as
a
whole.
Q
As
I
stated
in
my
letter,
the
horse
district
is
a
unique
character
in
an
unusual
place,
an
urban
environment
along
with
the
Hitchcock
woods,
and
it
represents
an
integral
part
of
the
charm
and
attractiveness
of
akin
as
a
whole,
and
it
should
not
be
diminished
in
any
way.
The
large
open
spaces
in
the
horse
district,
as
well
as
other
areas
of
Aitkin,
can
never
be
replicated
and
serve
as
a
recognized
reason
that
akin
has
become
a
destination
for
equestrian
activities
as
well
as
superior
residential
living.
Q
Q
Q
We
should
not
allow
that
to
influence
what
could
be
a
negative
effect
on
our
longer
term.
Considerations,
which
I
don't
know
the
comprehensive
plan
and
which
all
of
us
who
live
in
that
area
and
certainly
I.
Think
most
people
throughout
the
town
want
to
make
sure
that
these
open
spaces,
which
can
never
be
created
again
be
kept
as
they
are
and
not
allow
them
to
be
diminished.
H
D
Both
properties
are
would
remain
zone
horse
district,
there's,
no
reasoning,
a
property
associated
with
this
at
this
time,
but
the
northern
well,
both
properties
would
still
continue
to
exist
under
the
horse
district
rules,
which
again
promotes
primarily
commercial
equestrian
uses,
unless
otherwise
grandfathered,
due
to
the
fact
that
again
residences
in
the
horse
district
are
considered
essentially
the
accessory
to
the
to
the
structure
or
to
the
property,
and
we
need
to
come
before
this
board
to
grant
a
special
exception
to
do
so.
So
it's
unique
in
that
it's
does
have
larger
lot
sizes.
D
It
does
not
limit
the
number
of
horses
on
the
property
other
than
by
being
able
to
maintain
the
property
in
accordance
with
some
standards
that
are
established
as
far
as
removal
of
manure
and
things
like
that.
But
in
that
sense
it's
it's
still
is
still
governed.
By
that
there
aren't
additional
commercial
uses
allowed
and
residential
uses
are
limited
to
the
special
exception
provision.
Q
N
Draft
the
ordinances
and
she's
the
head
of
the
equanimity
now
and
her
concern
is
that
if
it
is
divided
that
the
other
large
HD
properties
may
then
ask
to
be
divided
as
well,
if
they're
no
longer
viable
as
a
big
piece
that
they
would
ask
to
be
divided
and
the
impact
of
a
lot
of
small
Barnes
is
different
than
one
large
barn.
So
that
was
her
concern.
N
I
think
you
know,
as
I
look
back
through
the
the
agreement
from
2012
the
mediation
agreement
that
mr.
Revere
referenced
and
that
the
City
Council
turned
down,
even
though
it
was
technically
agreed
upon,
but
then
City
Council
had
to
vote
on
it
and
they
decided
to
vote
to
vote
against
it.
Accepting
it
I'm,
not
sure
if
y'all
went
back
to
2012
to
read
all
this,
but
it's
very
it's
very
lightning,
and
one
of
the
one
of
the
things
that
sticks
out
to
me
is
you
know
mr.
N
pattern,
it
ease
comments,
and
in
that
and
the
question
about
the
10-acre
lot
size
came
up
and
it
was
asked
why
why
is
it
ten
acres
when
there
so
many
that
are
not
ten
acres
and
his
he
explained,
and
it
makes
sense
to
me
that
was
looked
at
as
the
optimum
size.
It
would
be
great
if
there
was
nothing
smaller
than
that.
These
already
were
smaller,
and
so,
as
some
people
have
done
in
the
last
few
years,
they've
bought
more
than
one
parcel
and
they
operate
them
as
one
stable
by
combining,
which
is
I.
N
Think
you
know
the
ideal
thing
instead
of
dividing
is
to
put
these
things
back
together
into
larger
pieces.
So
it's
the
ten
acre
is
not
the
size
that
all
of
them
are,
but
that
would
be
the
optimum
minimum.
If
you
were
going
to
come
in
and
start
and
in
every
zone
and
in
the
town,
it's
like
that.
Nothing
rs.15
doesn't
have
all
fifteen
thousand
square
feet
or
whatever
the
you
know
whatever.
That
means
a
lot
of
them
are
a
lot
smaller
than
that.
N
Since
the
zoning
and
they're
never
going
to
have
a
it's
like
Genie
groats
house,
which
is
right
on
the
corner,
it's
never
gonna
have
a
horse
in
it
and
it's
a
there's,
a
little
property
on
you
know
the
little
tiny
pieces
are
HD
because
they
you
know
because
they
are.
But
it's
not
I,
don't
in
a
question
whether
the
taxes
on
a
commercial
piece,
if
it's
zone
HD
or
do
they
pay
different
taxes.
He
mentioned
something
about
he's
being
taxed
as
a
commercial
property
and.
D
N
Probably
they're
not
I,
think
you
would
probably
heard
from
them
if
they
were
being,
but
also
I
just
want
to
point
out.
There's
a
there's,
a
big
variety
of
properties
for
sale
over
in
that
area.
Now
I
there
there
are
some
that
are
zoned
RSS
and
there's
some
that
are
zone
HD
and
then
sell
you
for
sale
for
years
and
years,
but
there's
tiny
ones,
there's
big
ones
there.
You
know
there's
a
lot
of
stuff
for
sale.
N
That's
not
selling
I,
don't
know
that
it's
because
you
know
his
is
10
acres,
that
it's
not
selling
I.
Think
in
these
properties,
they're
unique
and
it
takes
one
person
who
comes
in
and
that's
going
to
fit
that
person
and
they're
going
to
buy
it,
and
some
of
them
are
for
sale
for
for
years
and
years
and
years
until
that
person
comes
along,
so
I
think
the
you
know
dividing
it
is,
you
know,
obviously
it's
dividing
it
to
sell
or
dividing
it
to
use
or
whatever
it's
it
may
or
may
not
get
used
any
differently.
N
So
why
divide
it?
That's
the
question
I
mean
if
you
have,
if
you
have
to
answer
your
criteria,
why
you
know
why?
Why
would
you
say
yes,
why
is
he
asking
for
this?
He
wants
five
acres
instead
of
ten,
it's
not
a
unique
I
mean
it
may
be
unique
in,
and
it's
in
that
it's
ten
acres,
but
it's
not
unique.
I
would
say
that
the
ones
that
are
0.37
acres
and
zone
HD
and
don't
even
have
a
horse
on
them.
N
They
could,
you
know,
that's
pretty
unique
if
you
to
me
so
I
would
think
that
this
should
be
looked
at
in
the
whole
big
picture,
and
not
just
this
one.
Maybe
it
comes
you
know.
Maybe
it
comes
back
as
as
you're
looking
at
the
whole
as
wouldn't
be
you
I
assume
it
would
be
Planning
Commission,
looking
at
lot
sizes-
or
you
know,
restrictions
on
all
of
these
horses
owns,
but
I,
don't
think
it
would
be
a
good
idea
to
just
divide
this
one
at
this
time.
Thank
you.
A
H
P
Like
to
point
out
too,
that
missus
Stoker
was
absolutely
right.
There
are
a
lot
of
parcels
out
there
that
are
for
sale.
This
is
not
to
say:
oh
I
can
sell
it
like
this.
If
it's
divided
I'm
looking
forward
trying
to
create
for
the
future
is
going
to
be
a
horse
district,
that's
going
to
have
viable
horse
properties.
Doesn't
change
the
look
of
it.
You
know
everybody
thinks
it's
two
parcels
now
most
people
don't
know
that.
P
That's
one
big
lot
and
again
I've
had
all
of
the
genus
a
Latino
with
thirty
some
horses
in
her
barn
riding
by
every
day
through
the
Wilsons.
All
of
the
people
who
actually
ride
in
there,
except
for
one,
are
all
there
saying.
Yes,
this
would
be
a
good
thing
and
they've
all
written
letters.
To
that
extent,
thank.
J
I,
just
don't
think
this
sets
any
precedence
when
you're
the
only
one
in
the
horse
district,
it's
privately
owned.
As
ten
acres,
you
cannot
have
two
four
six
acre
lot
and
a
four
acre
lot
essentially
and
you've
got
small
Lots
either
they
argue,
they're
gonna
be
combined
and
become
horse
district,
or
they
probably
should
be
residential.
There's
all
those
small
lots
and
it's
not
hurt
the
horse
district
to
have
those
small
lots.
A
B
Mr.
chair,
but
really
to
warrant
some
discussion
and
get
get
this
issue
out
once
and
for
all.
I'm
gonna
move
mr.
chair
that
the
application
number
19
nine
three
zero
zero
one
requesting
a
variance
to
section.
Four
point:
three
point:
one
of
the
zoning
ordinance
to
allow
the
acceptance
property
be
divided
into
two
lots
for
less
than
tankers
within
the
horse
district
be
denied
those
two,
those
two
parcels.
I'm
sorry
were
a
six
point.
Three
five
acre
lot
in
a
three
point:
six
five
acre
lot
be
denied
and
the.
A
A
H
Respecting
his
desire
to
subdivide
his
own
property
I,
don't
see
where,
with
all
the
smaller
properties
around
him
and
if
he
wants
to
subdivide
his
own
property,
why
shouldn't
he
be
able
to
that's
with
the
profitability
clause?
Put
aside
I
think
with
the
zoning
ordinance
that's
in
place
and
the
protections
that
exist
there
I
don't
think
if,
if
he
does
subdivide
and
sell
I,
don't
think
it
would
be
of
great.
B
These
six
criteria
must
be
met.
All
six
I,
don't
think
the
criteria
where
the
number
one
where
the
extraordinary
or
exceptional
conditions
pertain
to
this
piece
of
property.
I,
don't
see
that
but
I
also
don't
see
on
item
three
due
to
the
conditions.
The
applet.
The
application
of
the
ordinance
to
this
particular
piece
of
property
would
effectively
prohibit
or
unreasonably
restrict
the
utilization
of
the
property.
B
A
A
Pay
I
feel
that
we,
we
probably
should
deny
this
request
and
then
instruct
the
Planning
Department
to
elevate
this,
to
have
a
review
of
the
particular
ordinance
elevated
to
City
Council,
so
that
they
can
appoint.
I
was
really
sorry
to
see
losing
those
lead
because,
as
chair
of
the
equine
committee,
I
wanted
to
get
what
she
had
to
say
and
then
there
other
person,
the
Planning
Commission,
there's
a
design
review
board.