BZA 10-21-97 Meeting AgendaAGENDA
FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
The Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building
107 N. Kent Street
Winchester, Virginia
October 21, 1997
3:25 p.m. CALL TO ORDER
1) Minutes of September 16, 1997
3:30 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING
2) Variance Application #015-97 of Lloyd and Gail Winters for a five foot side yard
setback variance for an addition to existing detached garage. The property is located
at 253 Ruebuck Road, and is identified with Property Identification Number 23-2-1-
41 in the Stonewall Magisterial District.
3) Other
MEETING MINUTES
OF THE
FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
Held in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building, 107 N. Kent Street,
Winchester, Virginia, on September 16, 1997.
PRESENT: James Larrick, Jr -,Vice Chairman, Gainesboro District; Harold Nichols, Opequon
District; and Ralph M. Wakeman, Shawnee District
ABSENT: Manuel Sempeles, Jr., Chairman, Stonewall District; Dudley Rinker, Back Creek District
STAFF
PRESENT: Michael T. Ruddy, Planner II; Carol Cameron, Secretary
CALL TO ORDER
In the absence of the Chairman, Vice -Chairman Larrick called the meeting to order at
3:30 p.m.
MINUTES OF AUGUST 19, 1997
On a motion made by Mr. Wakeman and seconded by Mr. Nichols, the minutes for the
August 19, 1997 meeting were unanimously approved as presented.
PUBLIC HEARING (3:35 p.m.)
Variance Application 4013-97 of Tederick/Miller Investments for a 12.2' rear setback variance for an
existing house and attached deck. The property is located at 110 Dots Way, and is identified with
Property Identification Number 55I -1-3-159A in the Stonewall Magisterial District.
ACTION - APPROVED (AS AMENDED)
DISCUSSION
Mr. Ruddy presented the background information on the variance request, stating that
the house was constructed before the survey standard requirements went into effect and is in violation
of the setback by 2.2 feet. The attached deck is located 12.8 away from the adjoining property line. Staff
would recommend approval of the 2.2' variance for the house, and denial of the additional 10 feet
2
variance for the deck. Mr. Ruddy also presented photographs of the property which show the house in
relationship to the adjoining properties to the rear and to the side.
Mr. Larrick asked for anyone in favor of the variance to come to the podium.
Mr. Chris Hill, contractor and representative for the applicant, came forward to speak.
He stated that the applicant was out of town and could not be at the public hearing. Mr. Hill stated that
there was really no other way to place the house on the lot.
Mr. Larrick asked if this was a "spec house." Mr_ Hill replied that it was built as a spec
house and was then rented. The renters recently moved out and it was back on the market which is what
prompted the variance request.
Mr. Larrick asked when the house was built. Mr. Hill said that the date on the final site
survey was September 13, 1996, so the house was completed somewhere in that time frame. The house
was not built with a deck, that was added by the tenants.
Mr. Larrick noted that according to the pictures, it looked as though most of the houses
had decks attached.
Mr. Hill stated that he wanted to bring to the attention of the board that after each house
was built with a small step in the rear or a four -foot step in front of the sliding glass door, and a final
certificate of occupancy was granted, it seemed that it was just a matter of a week to 10 days before a
deck was added.
After a comment by Mr. Ruddy that he hoped the other decks were added with the benefit
of building permit, Mr. Hill replied that he wasn't trying to justify the deck based on the fact that the
other houses had decks [possibly in violation]. He said if the deck has to be removed, they will remove
it.
Mr. Nichols asked how the house was built on that lot, ten feet off the line, in the first
place.
Mr. Hill replied that when they first started the project, they were unaware that there was
a covenants package in place (a 1,400 square foot minimum). The house was up and built, and was
1,386 square feet under roof, when Timothy Johnson (who runs the committee) approached them and
told them they had to stop construction. Mr. Hill felt he had no choice but to finish the house.
Mr. Nichols questioned whether the covenants committee had more power than the
County. Mr. Hill admitted that he has learned a lot over the past two years. Mr. Larrick said that in this
case, you're really dealing with two sets of rules: one is private and the other is the County's.
Mr. Larrick asked staff to explain what is meant by "survey standards."
3
Mr. Ruddy responded that as of last November [19961, whenever anyone would come
in for a building permit, if the proposed setbacks on the house are within Hive feet of any building
restriction line, then a surveyor has to go out and stake the property to ensure that it is not in violation
of any zoning requirements. In this case, the house was built before this was in effect. If the survey
standard had been in place at that time, this variance application may have been prevented.
There was no one else to speak either for or against the variance request.
Mr. Larrick suggested that the Board consider whether they wanted to treat the variance
as one or two requests.
Mr. Wakeman moved for approval of the variance as presented which included 2.2 feet
for the house and 10 additional feet for the deck. The motion failed for lack of a second.
Mr. Nichols moved for granting a 2.2 -foot variance for the house, and Mr. Wakeman
offered a second. The motion passed unanimously.
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals does hereby unanimously
approve Variance Application ##013-97 of Tederick/Miller Investments, as amended, for a 2.2 -foot
variance on the setback requirement for an existing house.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 4:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Manuel G. Sempeles, Chairman
Carol I. Cameron, Secretary
A:W1NUTES%1997SEPf 16.8ZA
i
•
C
BZA REVIEW DATE: 10/21/97
VARIANCE #015-97
LLOYD & GAH, WINTERS
LOCATION: The property is located at 253 Ruebuck Road.
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Stonewall
PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 23-2-1-41
PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) District; Land use - Residential
ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) District; Land use -
Residential and Agricultural
VARIANCE: A five-foot side yard setback variance for addition to existing detached garage.
REASON FOR VARIANCE: The applicant states variance is being sought due to the narrowness
to the south of the existing garage.
STAFF COMMENTS: Within the RA (Rural Areas) zoning district, the minimum setback for
an accessory structure is 15'. The applicant is proposing to build an addition to an existing accessory
structure that would place the accessory structure 10' from the adjoining property line. This would
require a 5' side yard variance.
In this case, strict application of the zoning ordinance does not prohibit the use of the property for
residential purposes. The principal use of the property is residential. Furthermore, it would appear
that there is sufficient space on the property to locate the addition in conformance with the setback
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The Code of Virginia, Section 15.1-495(2)(a) states that no
variance shall be authorized by the board unless it finds that strict application of the ordinance would
produce an undue hardship approaching confiscation. Staff believes that granting this variance would
be inappropriate as a demonstrable hardship approaching confiscation does not exist.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Denial