BZA 07-18-00 Meeting MinutesMEETING 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 July 18, 2000.
PRESENT: James Larrick, Jr., Acting Chairman, Gainesboro District; Theresa Catlett, Opequon
District; Gilbank Hamilton, Shawnee District; Dudley Rinker, Back Creek District
STAFF
PRESENT: Michael T. Ruddy, Zoning Administrator; Amy M. Lohr, Planner II; Mark R. Cheran,
Planner I; Howard R. Long, III, Planner I; Carol Huff, Secretary
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Acting Chairman Larrick at 3:30 p.m.
It was noted for the record that a letter of resignation (due to health reasons) was
received from Manuel Sempeles, Jr., Chairman, Stonewall District, effective July 12, 2000. Until such
time as the Board of Supervisors can nominate a successor and the Circuit Court has appointed another
Board of Zoning Appeals member from the Stonewall District, Mr. Larrick will serve as Acting
Chairman.
MINUTES OF JUNE 20, 2000
On a motion made by Mr. Rinker and seconded by Mr. Hamilton, the minutes for the
June 20, 2000 meeting were unanimously approved.
PUBLIC HEARING (tabled at the June 20, 2000 meeting)
Appeal Application 03 -00 by Terry DeHaven of Triple T Trucking. This is an appeal of the
determination made by the office of the Zoning Administrator in the administration of the
Zoning Ordinance, pursuant to Section 165 -27E, concerning the operation of a commercial
trucking company. This property is located at 180 Quiet Meadow Lane and is identified with
Property Identification Number 30- A -122A in the Gainesboro Magisterial District.
ACTION — AFFIRMATION OF THE DECISION MADE BY THE
OFFICE OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
Frederick Co. Board of Zoning Appeals
Minutes of July 18, 2000 Minutes Book Page 1076
Representatives for both sides of the appeal agreed that even though there were still
only four members of the Board present, they were prepared to proceed.
Mr. Ruddy gave a summary of the case which had been tabled at the June 20, 2000
meeting. He directed the Board's attention to the list of the permitted uses in the RA (Rural Areas)
Zoning District as they stand today, and a copy of the permitted uses since the Zoning Ordinance first
went into effect. He again stated that the use was not permitted in the RA Zoning District; however,
it is allowed in the M 1 (Light Industrial) and M2 (Heavy Industrial), and also in the B3 (Industrial
Transition) Zoning District.
Acting Chairman Larrick asked about the origin of the definition of a "Commercial
Trucking Business," versus "home occupation" or "cottage occupation." Mr. Ruddy explained the
differences in the SIC Code, Section 47, and the definitions in the Frederick County Zoning
Ordinance.
Mr. Rinker asked about the number of employees specified in a conditional use permit
in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District and discussion followed on whether a commercial trucking
business could be allowed with a CUP.
Mr. Nate Adams, legal representative for the appellant, was present to speak in favor
of the appeal. He passed out hand -drawn maps which depicted the property and the adjoining
properties. He stated that there was no loading or unloading of trucks and passed out pictures of the
site. Additionally, he informed the Board that there was no maintenance of the trucks on site; in fact,
they were basically just stored there. Mr. Adams presented two letters from adjoining property
owners, one from Ms. Susan French, the other from Mr. James Adams, stating that they had no
objection to the DeHavens' trucking business. Additionally, Mr. Adams presented a petition
containing over 150 signatures from people living in the area, most of whom live within 15 miles of
Gainesboro, stating that they have no objection to the trucking business or the parking of the trucks
on the property.
Discussion followed on how many years the DeHavens have been in business, how
many trucks they have, how far they travel and where they do business, and how many employees are
involved.
Mr. Ben Butler, who represents Mr. Douglas Cooper (adjoining property owner who
made the complaint) told the Board that his client was opposed to the trucking operation because he
has observed many trips being made by the trucks bringing in loads of dirt and'garbage to the property.
Also, the ICC controls businesses of this type because it is "big- time." Mr. Cooper stated that he has
lived on his property for the past 28 years and the activity he described has taken place just within the
last few years.
Mr. Butler added that although the DeHavens have demonstrated strong support from
the surrounding community, the fact remains that the trucking operation was a violation of the
Frederick County Code and should not be allowed to remain.
DISCUSSION
Mr. Ruddy reiterated what the SIC Code described for a commercial trucking business.
There was discussion among the Board members on whether a Conditional Use Permit would be a
viable alternative for the DeHavens to pursue, or they could move their business to a zoning district
that allowed the use.
Based on the fact that an operation of this type and size in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning
District needs to be governed by the approval of a Conditional Use Permit and not popularity, Mrs.
Frederick Co. Board of Zoning Appeals
Minutes of July 18, 2000 Minutes Book Page 10T
Catlett moved to affirm the decision of the Zoning Administrator in the administration of the Zoning
Ordinance, pursuant to Section 165 -27E, concerning the operationofa commercial trucking company.
Mr. Rinker seconded the motion which passed by unanimous vote.
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals does
hereby unanimously agree to affirm the determination made by the office of the Zoning
Administrator in the administration of the Zoning Ordinance, pursuant to Section 165 -27E,
concerning the operation of a commercial trucking company. i
PUBLIC HEARING
Variance 05 -00 of Alice Stendeback requesting a 3.92 -acre variance to the minimum lot size
requirement in a rural area. This would enable a boundary line adjustment between two
parcels. This property is located at 2230 Welltown Road and is identified with Property
Identification Number 32 -A -77 in the Stonewall Magisterial District.
ACTION — APPROVED
Mr. Ruddy read the background information and showed a black and white photograph
of the property. The house which is located on the property is a legally nonconforming structure by
today's standards.
Ms. Alice Stendeback, applicant, explained her reasons for requesting the variance and
for seeking a boundary line adjustment with adjoining property owner, Mr. Terry Lee.
Mr. Rinker asked if the boundary line adjustment would allow
w
her to add on to her
home without seeking an additional variance from the Board; staff replied that it would.
Mr. Manuel Benitez, another adjoining property owner, stateId that he had granted a
right -of -way to Ms. Stendeback and wanted to make sure that if this variance was approved, it would
not further impact his property and that the right -of -way would be eliminated.
Mr. Terry Lee spoke in favor of the variance and the boundary line adjustment. He said
that the property would not be used for anything other than pasture land for his livestock.
I
No one else spoke in favor or against the request.
DISCUSSION
Mr. Larrick spoke to Mr. Terry Lee about the need for a lot consolidation once the
boundary line adjustment has been completed. Mr. Lee assured the Board that he understood the
procedure.
There was no further discussion by the Board.
Mr. Rinker moved to approve the variance request based on the following conditions:
1. That a boundary line adjustment with Mr. Terry Lee's property is executed; and
Frederick Co. Board of Zoning Appeals
Minutes of July 18, 2000 Minutes Book Page 1078
2. The existing right -of -way through Mr. Benitez's property be vacated.
Mr. Hamilton made a second to the motion which approved by the following majority
vote: AYES: Mr. Hamilton; Mr. Rinker; and Mr. Larrick NAYS: Mrs. Catlett
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals does hereby approve
Variance #05 -00 of Alice Stendeback requesting a 3.92 -acre variance to the minimum lot size
requirement in a rural area.
PUBLIC HEARING
Variance #08 -00 of Tibow, L.L.C. requesting a five -foot front yard and five -foot back yard
setback variance to construct a single - family residence. This property is located at Westside
Station, Section 2 (Lot 13), and is identified with Property Identification Number 53E- 1 -2 -13 in
the Back Creek Magisterial District.
ACTION — DENIED
Variance #09 -00 of Tibow, L.L.C. requesting a five -foot front yard and rive -foot back yard
setback variance to construct a single - family residence. This property is located at Westside
Station, Section 2 (Lot 14), and is identified with Property Identification Number 53E- 1 -2 -14 in
the Back Creek Magisterial District.
ACTION — BACK YARD SETBACK VARIANCE APPROVED,I FRONT YARD
SETBACK VARIANCE DENIED
Variance #10 -00 of Tibow, L.L.C. requesting a five -foot front yard and five -foot back yard
setback variance to construct a single - family residence. This property is located at Westside
Station, Section 2 (Lot 15), and is identified with Property Identification Number 53E- 1 -2 -15 in
the Back Creek Magisterial District.
ACTION — APPROVED
The Board deliberated briefly on whether all three lots of the subject subdivision (13,
14, and 15) should be discussed together or taken individually. The decision was made to discuss the
lots as a whole but to take separate action on each one.
Amy Lohr, Planner II, reviewed the background information and added a letter from
an adjoining property owner which opposed the application.
Mrs. Catlett asked about the lot sizes being considered at the time of the initial
subdivision. Staff replied that subdivision design standards were not in place back in the 1980's.
Mr. B. J. Tisinger, representing TIBOW, L.L.C., showed the location of the lots on his
plan and told the Board that TIBOW, L.L.C. wants to build houses that conform with the covenants
of the subdivision (i.e. square footage requirements), and are comparable to the surrounding existing
homes.
Mr. Tisinger told the Board what type of homes they planned to put on the lots, with
Frederick Co. Board of Zoning Appeals
Minutes of July 18, 2000 Minutes Book Page 1079
the hope of including garages as this is something buyers are looking for. He stated that it appears that
when these lots were first created, the ones in the City of Winchester were larger than the ones that
fall over into the County. He told the Board that a boundary line adjustment had already been done
on lot 15.
Mr. James Bayliss, who is looking to purchase Lot 12, spoke against the request. He
stated that the type of homes that would be squeezed onto these small lots would affect the property
value and the aesthetics of the cul -de -sac.
There was no one else present to speak for or against the variance.
DISCUSSION
There was discussion on whether the developer was the current owner (no), the
developer's ensuing bankruptcy in the late 1980's and whether it were possible to build a quality home
on such a lot. There was also discussion on what order covenants and creation of plats follow.
The following action was taken on each variance request:
Lot 13: Mr. Rinker made a motion to deny the variance; Mr. Hamilton made the second. The
motion passed for denial with all ayes from the Board.
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals does hereby
unanimously deny Variance #08 -00 of Tibow, L.L.C. requesting a five -foot front yard and five-
foot back yard setback variance to construct a single - family residence on Lot 13.
Lot 14: Mr. Rinker moved to deny the front yard setback variance and to' approve the back yard
setback variance; Mrs. Catlett made the second. The motion passed by unanimous vote.
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals does hereby
unanimously deny the five -foot front yard variance request of Variance #08 -00 of Tibow, L.L.C.,
and unanimously approve the request for a five -foot back yard setbackivariance to construct
a single - family residence on Lot 14.
Lot 15: Mr. Rinker moved to approve both the front and rear yard setback variance requests which
was seconded by Mr. Hamilton and passed by unanimous vote.
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals does hereby
unanimously approve Variance 410 -00 of Tibow, L.L.C. requesting a five -foot front yard and
five -foot back yard setback variance to construct a single- family residence on Lot 15.
Frederick Co. Board of Zoning Appeals
Minutes of July 18, 2000 Minutes Book Page 108(
Before the Board adjourned, Mr. Larrick noted for the record the contribution which
Mr. Manuel Sempeles has made to the County over the years.
Mr. Rinker moved that a Resolution of Appreciation be signed by all members of the
Board, to be presented at a future meeting to which Mr. Sempeles will be invited. The motion passed
by unanimous consent.
ADJOURNMENT
There was no further business at hand; therefore, the meeting was adjourned at 5:25
p.m. with all members voting AYE.
Respectfully submitted,
t
James L mck, Jr., Acting Chairman
P/2m/j
Carol ff,iSe retat 1
Frederick Co. Board of Zoning Appeals
Minutes of July 18, 2000 Minutes Book Page 1081