Loading...
BZA 01-15-02 Meeting AgendaFILE COPY AGENDA FREDERICK COUNTY BOT OF ZONING APPEALS The Board Room Frederick County Administration Building 107 N. Kent Street Winchester, Virginia January 15, 2002 3:25 p.m. CALL TO ORDER 1) Determination of a Quorum 2) Election of Officers for 2002 3) Minutes of November 20, 2001 and December 18, 2001 PUBLIC HEARING 4) Variance #21-01, Fairfield Inn & Suites, (tabled at the December 18, 2001 Meeting) submitted by Greenway Engineering for a 40' distance buffer variance to the Category A buffer requirements. This property is located on the north side of the intersection of Front Royal Pike (Route 522) and Costello Drive (Route 1367), and is identified with Property Identification Numbers 6413-1-4 and 6413-1-5 in the Shawnee Magisterial District. 5) Variance #01-02, Lake Holiday Utility Company, submitted by Bushman Engineering, PC requesting variances of the 600' buffer requirement as follows: 593' from the northeast property line; 530' from the west property line; 550' from the south property line; 590' from the east property line; and 560' from the northern property line. The .96 -acre site is located in the "Summit at Lake Holiday" near Cross Junction on the south end of Lakeview Drive, 0.1 miles southeast of the intersections of Holiday Road and Lakeview Drive; and is identified with Property Identification Number 18 -A -28E in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. 6) Variance #02-02, Dove Family Co., LLC, submitted by Dove & Associates for a variance to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, Sec. 165-27E(1), Surface Material Requirements, and (3), Curb and Gutter Requirements. This property is located at 780 Airport Road and is identified with Property Identification Number 64-5-3 in the Shawnee Magisterial District. 7) Other a • MEETING MINUTES OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF .BONING APPEALS Held in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building, 107 N. Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia, on November 20, 2001. PRESENT: James Larrick, Jr., Chairman, Gainesboro District; Theresa Catlett, Opequon District; Dudley Rinker, Back Creek District; Thomas Malcolm, Shawnee District and Robert Perry, Stonewall District STAFF PRESENT: Patrick T. Davenport, Zoning Administrator; Mark R. Cheran, Planner I; Carol Huff, Secretary CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Larrick at 3:25 p.m. MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 25.2001 On a motion made by Mr. Rinker and seconded by Mr. Malcolm, the minutes for the September 25, 2001 meeting were unanimously approved. OLD BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARING Continuation of Application #17-01, (tabled at the 11/20/01 meeting) Appeal of the Decision by the Zoning Administrator, submitted by Capon Valley Bank in regard to the denial of a time and temperature clock in a bank sign. The property is located at 6701 Northwestern Pike and is identified with Property Identification Numbers 28 -A -14B and 28-A-141) in the Back Creek Magisterial District. APPROVED Mr. Davenport, Zoning Administrator, gave a brief synopsis of the appeal and the actions at the September meeting. The appeal had been tabled for 60 days to give the applicant an opportunity to have the sign repaired and to allow them time to prepare a video presentation. Mr. Clinton Ritter, attorney for the applicant, showed a video which depicted the bank Frederick Co. Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of November 20, 2001 Minutes Book Page 1 124 sign display set at various speeds. It was noted that the first setting was clearly `flashing' at a speed of one -to -two-second intervals; however, the second setting, which was set at 15 -second intervals, was considered by the applicant to be `alternating.' Mr. Ritter asked the Board to approve the appeal based on the evidence presented by the tape, based on the ambiguity of the language in the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, and based on the fact that there was no opposition from any members of the community in the area affected. There were no other speakers for or against the appeal; therefore, Chairman Larrick closed the public hearing portion of the meeting. DISCUSSION Chairman Larrick reminded the Board once again that they were not considering a variance and that the only thing they could vote on was whether or not the Zoning Administrator made the correct interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance when denying the use of the time and temperature component of the Capon Valley Bank's sign. Further discussion ensued as to what constituted a flashing or alternating sign. Mr. Ritter told the Board they would be willing to apply for a conditional use permit if that would allow the sign to stay. The Board questioned whether alternating signs were allowed by the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Davenport replied that different signs could be interpreted differently and needed to be handled on a case-by-case basis; however, in this particular instance he felt that this type of sign was not allowed. Additional discussion on various types of flashing signs such as VDOT road signs, traffic alerts, etc., followed. The Board questioned whether this appeal came about because of a complaint. Staff replied that a complaint was received in the Planning Department regarding the sign and that while investigating the complaint, it was also discovered that the sign had been installed without the proper permits from the Building Inspections office. Mr. Malcolm moved to overturn the decision of the Zoning Administrator, thereby granting the appeal, based on the authority of the Board of Zoning Appeals to practice discretion. The motion was seconded by Mr. Rinker and passed by unanimous vote. BE IT RESOLVED, that application #17-01, submitted by Capon Valley Bank, Appeal of the Decision by the Zoning Administrator in regard to the denial of a time and temperature clock in a bank sign, was approved by unanimous vote. NEW BUSINESS Frederick Co. Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of November 20, 2001 2 Minutes Book Page 1 125 Variance #19-01, Autumn Woods, L.L.C., for a 1.5 -foot front yard setback variance for an attached garage. This property is located on Lynn Drive in the Autumn Glen Subdivision, Lot 18B, and is identified with Property Identification lumbers 75L -3-1-18B in the Opequon Magisterial District. APPROVED Mr. Davenport presented the background information and stated that had the mid - construction survey been performed when the rough framing was completed (as is the intent of the ordinance), the violation may have been prevented. The Board asked how many applications of this type had been heard so far this year, and who was responsible for making sure the houses are built according to survey specifications. The question on when a mid -construction survey was expected to be performed was also posed. Staff stated that the intent of the mid -construction survey was to not wait until the Certificate of Occupancy was applied for but as a means of catching violations or errors in advance; however, the Zoning Ordinance does not specify an exact time period. Mr. Don Arnold, the builder in this case, explained how the error came about, saying that the concrete man used the original house plans instead of the revised ones. Mr. Arnold stated that this was the first violation he has had in 20 years. He added that the buyers, who were retiring here from New Jersey, were present. They had requested that Mr. Arnold apply for the variance, even though he was willing to tear it down, because they wanted the garage and were not happy with the prospect of its removal. The Board questioned how the plans for the duplex dwelling `got flipped' and when the mistake was discovered. Mr. Arnold said they didn't realize what had happened until it was time to go to closing. He added that the buyers had no other place to live and had received a temporary C.O. to live in the house until this issue was resolved. The owners of the house did not speak formally; however, did state from their seats that they liked their house and wanted to keep the garage. They requested that the Board approve their variance request. Mr. Perry stated that although it had no bearing on this particular case, he felt that something needed to be done to `get a handle on this cul-de-sac situation.' He commented that this same type of variance had come before the Board several times. For Mr. Arnold's benefit, Chairman Larrick explained that cul-de-sacs tended to create problems and that other builders had been before the Board as a result. Mr. Rinker added that if they started seeing the same builder more than once, that it would be noted. That having been said, Mr. Perry made a motion to approve the variance as requested. Mrs. Catlett seconded the motion which passed by unanimous vote. BE IT RESOLVED, that Variance #19-01 of Autumn Woods, L.L.C., for a 1.5 -foot front yard Frederick Co. Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of November 20, 2001 3 Minutes Book Page 1 126 setback variance for an attached garage, was approved by unanimous vote. Variance #20-01, Edgar L. Heishman, Jr., for a 14 -foot rear yard setback for an attached screened -in porch. This property is located at 219 Bentley Avenue in the Chapel Hill Subdivision and is identified with Property Identification Number 64D-7-34, Lot 34, in the Shawnee Magisterial District. APPROVED Mr. Davenport gave the background information and explained that staff s position was that no since no undue hardship existed, and all lots within this subdivision must comply with the setbacks, denial would be justified. Mr. Edgar L. Heishman, Jr., applicant and property owner, stated that he and his wife would like to build a screened -in back porch but were advised that the setbacks did not permit it. He told the Board that he had letters from all of the adjoining property owners and from the Homeowners' Association which demonstrated approval of the Heishman's request. Mr. Heishman continued by saying that there was a pond on the left side of their house, and the house was the original model home which was purposely set deep on the lot to enhance the appearance of the home. There is no nearby dwelling to the rear except one property which also had a pond behind it, so there is no possibility of any further construction in the rear of the property. Ms. Barbara Baltimore, adjoining property owner across the street from the Heishmans, stated that the property owners in Chapel Hill were like a family, and that no one had any opposition to the Heishmans building a porch. DISCUSSION Chairman Larrick told the applicants that although their Homeowners' Association approved the building of the back porch, the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance was a different entity and the Board was obligated to uphold those ordinances. Mrs. Heishman asked the Board if any of them had gone out to look at the property [they had not], as their neighbor's house sits 17 feet off the property line and they have a six-foot deck on the back. Staff noted, however, that corner lots have different setbacks. Mrs. Heishman also added that there is another pond behind their property and there's no way anyone could build back there. The Board asked if there was any way that any porch could be built; Mr. Hershman said that according to the code they could build one two feet wide going the full length of the house. Additionally, there is an existing back door which was installed for the purpose of the future building Frederick Co. Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of November 20, 2001 4 Minutes Book Page 1127 of a deck or back porch. It is currently blocked off with safety bars. Chairman Larrick asked about the rule which stated that a porch could be built as long as it is one-third the length of the house. Staff confirmed that the porch could extend three feet into the setback; however, that would only give them a five-foot wide porch. The only other scenario, which would involve a boundary line adjustment, may not be possible on these lots as they have already been established at a minimum size. Mr. Malcohn moved to deny the application based on the lack of hardship and in the interest of upholding the integrity of the regulations. Mr. Perry offered the second and the motion passed with all ayes. BE IT RESOLVED that Variance #20-01, Edgar L. Heishman, Jr., for a 14 -foot rear yard setback for an attached screened -in porch, was denied by unanimous vote. OTHER Chairman Larrick gave the Board an update on his attempts to have alternate members appointed to the BZA. He said that he had been advised by the Assistant County Administrator, Kris Tierney, to wait until after the election and the new Board of Supervisors is in place. Mr. Malcolm told the Board that since he is a resident of the newly -created Red Bud District, he felt that he should be representing that district rather than Shawnee, especially since the minutes reflect him as representing Shawnee District. Mr. Larrick reminded the Board that the BZA does not necessarily have one representative from each district, per se, because they have to have either five or seven members according to the statute. However, if that is the wish of the Board of Supervisors, the Board of Zoning Appeals Bylaws could probably be amended to that effect. The Board asked Mr. Malcolm to `hang in there' until they could get a decision from the Board of Supervisors. at 4:30 p.m. There being no further business at hand, the meeting adjourned by unanimous consent Respectfully submitted, James Larrick, Jr., Chairman Carol I. Huff, Secretary Frederick Co. Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of November 20, 2001 Minutes Book Page 1128 1 • 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 December 18, 2001. PRESENT: James Larrick, Jr., Chairman, Gainesboro District; Dudley Rinker, Back Creek District; Thomas Malcolm, Shawnee District and Robert Perry, Stonewall District ABSENT: Theresa Catlett, Opequon District STAFF PRESENT: Patrick T. Davenport, Zoning Administrator; Renee' Arlotta, Administrative Assistant CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Larrick at 3:25 p.m. NOVEMBER 20, 2001 MINUTES The minutes for the November 20, 2001 meeting were unavailable at this meeting and will be included in the January 15, 2002 agenda. PUBLIC HEARING Variance #21-01, Fairfield Inn & Suites, submitted for a 40' distance buffer variance to the Category A buffer requirements. This property is located on the north side of the intersection of Front Royal Pike (Route 522) and Costello Drive (Route 1367), and is identified with Property Identification Numbers 6411-1-4 and 6411-1-5 in the Shawnee Magisterial District. TABLED TO THE JANUARY 15, 2002 MEETING Chairman Larrick pointed out that Mrs. Catlett was unable to be present for this meeting and that Mr. Perry would need to abstain from discussion and voting due to a possible conflict of interest. He told the applicants that due to the fact that only three members were available to consider the application, they had the option of postponing the public hearing until next month if they so desired. Mr. Mark D. Smith of Greenway Engineering, representative for Fairfield Inn & Suites, Frederick Co. Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of December 18, 2001 Minutes Book Page 1129 1 conferred with the applicants and told the Board that they wished to table the application. Chairman Larrick apologized on behalf of the Board of Zoning Appeals and said that they were in the process of alleviating this type of problem in the future. Although the Board was not taking public comment at this time, Chairman Larrick asked if anyone wanted to comment on the tabling of the application. Dr. Gerry L. Grimes, adjoining property owner, stated that he believed that Chairman Larrick may also have a conflict of interest. Dr. Grimes explained that he has been requested to grant Fairfield Inn & Suites a drainage easement. There was a recent lawsuit regarding the right-of-way easement dispute in which Mr. Ben Butler was Dr. Grimes' representative but is now with Fairfield Inn & Suites, and Mr. Larrick represented the opposing side of the lawsuit. For these reasons, Dr. Grimes believed Chairman Larrick and Mr. Butler should both excuse themselves at the public hearing. Chairman Larrick did not believe that the lawsuit he represented had anything to do with the matter involved with the variance but said he would be willing to listen to any concerns the clients may have. Chairman Larrick then declared the matter tabled until the January 15, 2002 meeting. There being no further business at hand, Mr. Rinker moved for adjournment which was seconded by Mr. Perry. Respectfully submitted, James Larrick, Jr., Chairman Carol I. Huff, Secretary Frederick Co. Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of December 18, 2001 2 Minutes Book Page 1 130 !� C • BZA REVIEW DATE: 12/18/01 (tabled); 01/15/02 VARIANCE ##21-01 FAIRFIELD INN & SUITES LOCATION: This lot is located on the north side of the intersection of Front Royal Pike (Route 522) and Costello Drive (Route 1367). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 64B-1-4 and 64B-1-5 PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned B2 (Business General) District; Land use - Vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned B2 (Business General) District and B3 (Industrial Transition); Land use - Commercial and Residential VARIANCE: The applicant is requesting a 40' distance buffer variance to the Category A buffer requirements. REASON FOR VARIANCE: See #12 and #13 on Page 2 of the application. STAFF COMMENTS: The subject properties (lot consolidation pending) are intended to be developed into a hotel facility. The adjoining properties are zoned B2 with one exception. One of the adjoining properties on the eastern side is zoned B3. Chapter 165-37D specifies the zoning district buffers. It states that: "Buffers shall be placed on land to be developed when it adjoins land in certain different zoning districts." Subsequent tables illustrate the requirements for a property zoned B2, proposed for development when it adjoins property previously developed, zoned B3. The requirements are for a provision of a Category A buffer. The Category A buffer allows for no landscape screening with a 50' distance buffer required. Please refer to Exhibit "A" for the illustration of the buffer requirement. Half (25') of the distance buffer may be used for active functions such as a parking lot. The remaining half is required to be an inactive use such as open space. The only applicable setback for this property is 50' for the front. The sides and rear have no setback requirements. Variance #21-01, Fairfield Inn & Suites Page 2 January 8, 2002 Exhibit "B" is a copy of the proposed site plan that has been submitted for review by staff. The applicant has indicated that the placement of the building is restricted by the irregular shape of the parcel and the anticipated stormwater management requirements related to the adjoining stormwater management facility. The concern regarding fire protection has been alleviated by the Fire Marshal's approval (see attached comment sheet submitted by the Fire Marshal regarding the site plan). Should the variance be granted, the applicant is proposing to establish a 10' landscape screening buffer in place of the 50' distance buffer as indicated on Exhibit "A." STAFF CONCLUSION: The Code of Virginia, Section 15.2-2309(2), states that no variance shall be authorized by the Board unless it finds that: a) strict application ofthe Ordinance would produce an undue hardship approaching confiscation; b) that such hardship is not shared generally by other properties in the same zoning district and the same vicinity, and; c) that the authorization of such variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, and that the character of the district will not be changed by the granting of the variance. The adjoining property, Southern Fasteners, zoned B3, should not be negatively impacted by the reduced distance buffer nor should the proposed hotel facility be negatively impacted by the reduced proximity to Southern Fasteners. The zoning district buffer between the subject property and the property zoned B3 could be determined to place an undue hardship upon the applicant's capability to develop the property. A practical hardship may exist due to the onsite stormwater management requirements and the adjoining stormwater facility. The other practical hardship may also exist due to the irregular shape of the property. However, all properties proposed to be developed in the County must recognize the zoning district buffers and other allowed potential uses on the applicant's property may not require the waiver being currently considered. After consideration ofthe merits ofthe request, the granting of this waiver would be justified. 0:\Agendas\BZA\StafTReport\2001\Fairfield Inn&Suites.wpd COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA FIRE MARSHAL'S OFFICE LAND DEVELOPMENT COMMENTS Control No. SPO1-0059 Date Received 10/24/01 Date Reviewed 10/24/01 Applicant Greenway Engineering Plan Rev. Date: Address 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, Va. 22602 Project Name Fairfield Inns & Suites Type of Application Site Plan 1st Due Fire Co. 21 1st Due Rescue Co. 2 Tax I.D. No. 64-14 & 5 RECOMMENDATIONS 1 Phone No. 540-662-4185 Current Zoning B-2 Election District Shawnee Automatic Sprinkler System XX Residential Sprinkler System Automatic Fire Alarm System XX Other REQUIREMENTS Emergency Vehicle Access Adequate XX Inadequate Not Identified Fire Lanes Required Yes XX No Comments : Fire Lane No Parking signage and markings required at all fire hydrants and curbage not identified as parking. Roadway/Aisleway Widths Adequate XX Inadequate Not Identified Special Hazards Noted Yes No XX Comments Hydrant Locations Adequate XX Inadequate Not Identified Siamese Location Adequate XX Inadequate Not Identified Additional Comments Attached? Yes No XX Plan Approval Recommended? Yes XX No Signature f Title RECEIVED NOV 3 p 20n1 -OT, nF FLMN1NG/0FVFL0P4F^ VAR ## 21-01 Location NIAP For: Fairfield Inn & Suites PIN: 64B -1- 4 64B- I - 5 Dept. of Planning and Development, 11/01, AP-rav APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE IN THE COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA MUST BE TYPED OR FILLED OUT IN INK — PLEASE PRINT 1. The applicant is the owner X other. (Check one) 2. APPLICANT: OCCUPANT (if different) NAME: Greenway Engineering NAME: Aikens Group(Contract Owner) ADDRESS 151 Windy Hill Lane ADDRESS PO Box 2468 Winchester, VA 22602 Winchester, VA 22604 TELEPHONE 540-662-4185 TELEPHONE 540-667-3752 3. The property is located at (give exact directions and include State Route numbers): North side of intersection of Front Roval Pike (US Route 522) and Costello Drive Rt 1367 4. The property has a road frontage of 390 feet and a depth of 390 feet and consists of 2.01 acres. (please be exact) 5. The property is owned by Janet G. Ziviello (current owner) as evidenced by deed from (previous owner) recorded In deed book no. 764 on page 501 of the deed book of the Clerk of the Court for Frederick County Attach a copy of the deed 6. Magisterial District: Shawnee 7. 14 -Digit Property Identification No.: 64B -((I))-4, 64B-((1))-5 8. The existing zoning of the property is: B2 9. The existing use of the property is: Vacant Page 2 of 5 10. Adjoining Property: See attached Zoning Map USE ZONING North Commercial Residential B2 East Ponding Area Commercial B2 South Route 522 West Commercial, Residential B3, B2 11. Describe the variance sought in terms of distance and type. (For example: "A 3.5' rear yard variance for an attached two car garage.") A 40' distance buffer variance Cates ory A -No screen The applicant proposes to provide a landscape screening buffer of 10' in width and to be in compliance with Section 165-37B.(1) 12. List specific reason(s) why the variance is being sought in terms of.- - f- exceptional narrowness, shallowness, size or shape of property, or - exceptional topographic conditions or other extraordinary situational or condition of property, or - the use or development of property immediately adjacent thereto • All surrounding properties are zoned B2 except for the one existing B3 zoned property as shown on the attached Zoning Map The existing B3 zoned property, Southern Fasteners, was a B2 zone in the original rezoning of this area. In 1989 Southern Fasteners requested their property zone to be changed to meet their specific need of operation. At that time there were no buffering standards within the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance • The existing Southern Fasteners buildin�ad'acent to this property to be developed is of metal building construction with no door access or window openings facing the subject property. • The unique configuration of the subject property to be developed is approaching a triangular shape near the Southern Fasteners property and limits the ability of this property to be developed. 13. Additional comments, if any • See attached Buffering Exhibit • See 2 review comment letters from Frederick County Planning Department referring the Category A Buffering requirements The first letter, dated November 13 2001 corresponds to the applicant's original interpretation of the Category A Buffer being allowed the ability to provide a landscape easement The second letter, dated November 19, 2001 states that the original interpretation was invalid and should have been a 50' distance buffer requirement. After further discussion with the County and research on the applicant's part, we concur with the County's 50' distance buffer interpretation • We, as the applicant for the owner, hereby respectfully request approval of this variance as stated above in Item 11. COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 November 19, 2001 Greenway Engineering Mr. Michael S. Stickley, P.E. 151 Windy Hill Lane Winchester, Virginia 22602 RE: Addendum to Review Comments for Site Plan #50-01 Category A Buffer Requirements Fairfield Inn & Suites: Proposed Hotel Property Identification Numbers (PINs) 64B-1-4 and 64B-1-5 Dear Scott: After further review of the proposed site plan, staffhas determined that the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance requires no less than a fifty -(50)- foot distance buffer between Lot 64B-1-4 and 64B -1-1A. This must be divided into a twenty -five -(25)- foot inactive buffer and a twenty -five -(25) -foot active buffer. Section 165-37D (1) of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance does not allow a Category A Buffer to be reduced with the installation of a full screen or a landscape screen. Based on the requirements noted above, the proposed hotel location does not satisfy the requirements of Section 165-37 D (1). In order to satisfy all buffer requirements, you must either provide a distance buffer of fifty (50) feet or obtain approval of a variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals. If the latter option is chosen, please consult with staff regarding the appropriate procedure for applying for such a request. Feel free to contact me, if you wave any questions or concerns. Sincerely, Jeemy Franklin .Camp Planner II JFC/rsa cc: Mark Smith, Greenway Engineering ` U•Uwwny\SilePlan RvWa-120011PalfddInn&SW1,,WddendamCammentV#J -01.Wd 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 Page 3 of 5 14. The following names and addresses are all of the individuals, firms, or corporations owning property adjacent to the property for which the variance is being sought, including properties at the sides, rear and in front of (across street from) the subject property. (Use additional pages if necessary.) These people will be notified by mail of this application: NAME Sunnyside I LLC Address 303 South Loudoun Street Property ID# 64B-((1))-3 Winchester, VA 22601 NAME GKH Partnership & Address 160 Garber Lane Building Property ID# 64B -((1))-2D Winchester, VA 22602 NAME Gordon Enterprises, Address 174 Garber Lane, Suite 3 LLC Property ID# 64B -((1))-2C Winchester, VA 22602 NAME Southern Fasteners, Inc. Address 182 Garber Lane Property ID# 64B -((1))-1A Winchester, VA 22602 NAME Dr. James M. Schultz Address 170 Garber Lane, Suite 12 Property ID# 64B -((1))-2B Winchester, VA 22602 NAME James A. Garber Address 190 Garber Lane Property ID# 64B -((A))-2 Winchester, VA 22602 NAME Billy Au Address 1705 Brandon Drive Property ID# 64B -((A))-1 Winchester, VA 22601 NAME Jerry L & Patricia B Address 229 Garber Lane Grimes Property ID# 64 -((A)) -5B Winchester, VA 22602 NAME Marilyn J. Roane, et als Address 241 Garber Lane Property ID# 64 -((A)) -5C Winchester, VA 22602 NAME Commonwealth of Virginia Property ID# 64 -((A)) -4C Address VDOT- 14031 Old Valley Pike Edinburg, VA 22824 15. Provide a sketch of the property (you may use this page). Show proposed and/or existing structures on the property, including measurements to all property lines and to the nearest structure(s) on adjoining properties. Please include any other exhibits, drawings or photographs with this application. Page 4 of 5 D DO ZU 1 VARIANCE #1 I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application, and petition the Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals (BAZ) to grant a variance to the terms of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance as described herein. I agree to comply with any conditions for the variance required by the BZA. I authorize the members of the BZA and Frederick County officials to go upon the property for site inspection purposes. I understand that the sign issued to me when this application is submitted must be placed at the front property line at least seven (7) days prior to the BZA public hearing and maintained so as to be visible from the road or right-of-way until the hearing. I hereby certify that all of the statements and information contained herein are, to the best of my knowledge, true. SIGNATURE OF APPLIC SIGNATURE OF OWNER (if other than applicant) ANT DATE 1 k Z (, ' e5> 1 DATE ontract wn r -OFFICE USE ONLY BZA PUBLIC HEARING OF 11- / r— Q / ACTION: -DATE- II APPROVAL SIGNED: BZA CHAIRMAN DENIAL DATE: /Z -Ar O / LLI MATCH Lie 11416 %W LU V1 ALs 0.00" "LAI. ww"Oftua catmpcu& M4= Lfe TWS um omtwcm vp � � 3 1 i �s>� ism", glut WhOP, ur OL CatmoA cn M: —s P............................. ........ ........ ..... . ..... ..... —�-. —.0-.- ..... ....... ................. 11\ ........... ........ . . fr ................................ ...... .... ... ... .................. . . ........ ............ ................................ . ..... ............... .... ..... waver ..... ........ IVIR 'on W- UW, WTAL LkJ% December 18, 2001 To: Board of Zoning Appeals Frederick County, Virginia From: Jerry L. and Patricia B. Grimes Adjoining property owners 229 Garber Lane Winchester, VA 22602 I am appearing here today for two reasons: 1. To request that the Board of Zoning Appeals deny Variance #21-01 as submitted. A. A development of this size and nature will negatively impact the quality of life of those residing in the three remaining residences adjoining this property. The variance submitted proposes a ten -foot landscape -screening buffer only with the adjoining property included in the variance. I propose that as a requirement for the granting of a variance that the landscape screening buffer be extended to twenty feet and be extended to include all borders that adjoin property being used as residences. B. The granting of a variance to allow development of this size and nature will further negatively impact my property downhill due to additional storm water runoff. My property presently suffers to accept runoff from surrounding areas as well as water from the VDOT detention pond. This water originates from the Route 522 VDOT right of way where it has been redirected and made to flow to the detention pond and then flow down to my property. The development of two more acres of roof and asphalt will create an enormous amount of runoff and additional threat to my property. The developers' answer has been to create an elaborate underground storm water system requiring a drainage easement through my property. This easement would require enlarging an already existing twenty foot water and sanitary sewer easement to as much as 35 feet to include a thirty inch storm water pipe. This easement would prohibit approximately 3000 square feet of valuable property from future development. 2. To register a complaint and have this complaint entered as part of the public record. Recently, Mr. Butler represented me in a lawsuit involving a right of way dispute over the same twenty -foot water and sanitary sewer easement mentioned previously. Mr. Larrick represented the opposing side. Mr. Butler now represents Fairfield Inn and Suites. Mr. Larrick is the present chairman of the Board of Zoning Appeals. I am asking that Mr. Butler and Mr. Larrick both excuse themselves from the present and future proceedings due to conflict of interest. I have provided each of you a copy of Rules of Professional Conduct for Lawyers for your reference. In conclusion, it is obvious that to grant Variance #21-01 in whole is to open the door to more problems. The development and intensity of use will produce undue hardship shared generally by adjoining property owners and longtime residents. The authorization of such variance will be of substantial detriment to adjacent property and the character of the local district will be changed, therefore making it unjustified. There are more suitable uses for the property, which would cause a less negative impact. Respectfully submitted: Jerry L. and Patricia B. Grimes EX FaEaVE14=40 NA-- BILLY AU DB 636, m 220 ZONED: $-2 USE: RESIDENTIAL WF JAMS A GAR5ER ARFG 5-2 144 LEE FREsceinAL Nff- JERRY L 4 PATRICIA B. GRIMES D5 405, PG 261 ZONED: 5-2 USE: RESIDENTIAL N,f MARILYN J ROANE, ET ALS 05 618, PG 154 ZONED,a-2 USE: C4VMF;r-IAL Ntnb5l i -n NoF SOUtWERN FASTENERS,` 05 64% FS 81 ZONED: 15-3 IDLMTAL UM COMM M;r-IAL Nif GORDON ENTERPRISES, LLC DB 92m, PG 165 USE: COMMERCIAL rix 1w GTCW N# DR. JAMES t*t ft��LTZ FG 284 M-15 2 6e LIBF- CZMMEIaMAL001 NA-- GKH PARTNERSHIP 4 aULDftn>/ N# JANET GL ZIV[ELL0 D5 5M FS rU TM 6454(W-5 ZONM. 15-2 ZCNED: VACNT C421MONUBALTH OFF USE. CZMMERCLAL USE. VACANT VIRGINIA, 05 805, PG 563 5-2 N N)F JANET GL ZIVIEUZONED- O USE PCNDING AREA TM 64154(W-4 Nif 8LINNYSIDE I D5 164 P 501 DB 5FG 15514 ZONED: 5-2 814, PG LIM VACANT CCNOWDAIM i —4 USE.- CZMMERCLAL -1 rm - FRONT ROYAL PIKE ........... NAVWUNIA ASSOC, WC Da cSl, PGL 63 ZONE: 52 flr USF. RESTAURANT N* THE PRICE COMPANY D-5. = PGL 481 ZONE: 152 USE: RETAIL SALES co LU I-- 5 co es z z LU R U. 4c.lm.6 P . 3w mn, I t N* THE PRICE COMPANY D-5. = PGL 481 ZONE: 152 USE: RETAIL SALES co LU I-- 5 co es z z LU R U. 4c.lm.6 P . 3w mn, I BZA REVIEW DATE: 01/15/02 VARIANCE 901-02 LAKE HOLIDAY UTILITY COMPANY LOCATION: This lot is located in the "Summit at Lake Holiday" near Cross Junction, Virginia. The site is on the south end of Lakeview Drive, 0.1 miles southeast of the intersections of Holiday Road and Lakeview Drive. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Gainesboro PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 18 -A -28E PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned R5 (Residential Recreation Community) District; Land use - Wastewater Treatment Plant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned R5 (Residential Recreation Community) District and RA (Rural Areas) District; Land use -Residential, agricultural, and utility. VARIANCE: The applicant is requesting variances of the 600' buffer requirement for sewage treatment facilities: 593' from the northeast property line, 530' from the west property line, 550' from the south property line, 590' from the east property line and 560' from the north property line. REASON FOR VARIANCE: Size and shape of the lot; also, please see attachment after page 2 of application for additional comments. STAFF COMMENTS: The Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, Section 16546(B), requires a minimum buffer of 600 feet on parcels containing sewage treatment facilities adjacent to residences or properties zoned RP (Residential Performance), R5 (Residential Recreation Community), R4 (Residential Planned Community), or MH1 (Mobile Home Community). Such buffers should be from the facility to the property boundary line ofadj acent properties so zoned or containing residences. Adjacent properties to the Summit Waste Water Treatment Plant are zone R5 and RA and contain residences. The waste water treatment facility at Lake Holiday is operating at maximum capacity and is under a court mandate to expand the facility. The facility is located on a .96 acre lot of an irregular shape. Please refer to the attached plan which illustrates the proposed expansion. Lake Holiday Waste Water Treatment Plant Variance #01-02 Page 2 January 8, 2002 The Code of Virginia, Section 15.2-2309(2) states that no variance shall be authorized by the board unless it finds that a) strict application of the Ordinance would produce an undue hardship approaching confiscation; b) that such hardship is not shared generally by other properties in the same zoning district and the same vicinity, and; c) that the authorization of such variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, and that the character of the district will not be changed by the granting of the variance. The applicant's request for a variance meets this criteria as the property's dimensions cannot accommodate the court -mandating expansion of the facility. In addition, granting the variance should not severely alter the character of the district or cause detriment to adjoining properties. The parcel is well buffered by trees. The granting of the requested variance as submitted would be appropriate. 0 �Aeendas\BZA\Staff Repot1\2002\Lake Holiday Utility.wpd Q Q1 T —. j LHCC 18 A 28B BLUE RIDGE F" M H PARK, INC 18A01 14 1 \ R5 LHCC 18 AR�8B BAYUSS 185131 B 30 BAYUSS 18A01 AtB 29 JOHNSON ALDONAS 18AO1 3113 1 r' 18A01 31 B 2A`, R5 R5 18 AR5 28D HETLAND 18 A 29 RA BAYUSS \`18AOWB 28 BAYUSS fes. 18A01 31B 19 R5 TOONE 1 A01 31B �� R5 1 BROWN \ PAGE 18A01 31 B 8 18A01 31 B 18 ;' R5 LHCC \ R5 I / 18\ A 28D R5 VAR #01-02 Location Map For: Lake Holiday Estates utility Co. Water/Sewer Expansion PIN: 18 -A -28E'! f I lIl 1 j � Paye 1 of s APPLICATION FOR VARIILNCE IN THE COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA �a � tz t 1. The applicant is the owner 2. APPLICANT: NAME: Lake !lohda FS ADDRESS 231 Re llaKd �d X other (Check one) OCCUPANT: (if different) e r"S s fV'We' H, l%� 2 26 Z,5— ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: SVo- 13,155 -S ZZ6 TELEPHONE : 3. The property is located at (give exact directions and include State Route numbers): ,�/� 14 74Ae Svir,, � 2 � L a ,�c Alo boo a, Crass �vNG��vN .:� �rrc��r/c /� �o�.�r �C s.lc .es okr Z_2 ke at env le 1;�s ,7 ,e, -,S c�feo-yr JC/i;4 /-10/i of a v �oa a•-s�/ L ,��vi,ew ,Gt-. mac, 4. The property has a road frontage of Z feet and a depth Of 4/9Z'0' -feet and consists of :P,96 acres. (please be exact) 5. The property is owned by L2ke- Aylj,o%y ,6s f)Ies (i74i/-fy Cc, as evidenced by deed from L�,Ec /,/e/�;/�., .�s���cftlrsc, recorded (previous owner) in deed book no. 4405/ on page 3,/g of the deed books of the Clerk of the Court for Frederick County. Attach a copy of the deed. Page 2 of 5 6. Magisterial District: �rzOwl 7. 14 -Digit Property Identification No.: /9-4 _ Zg,� 8. The existing zoning of the property is: 9. The existing use of the property is: 4.4g 10. Adjoining Property: ZONING North East South r West 11. Describe the variance sought in terms of distance and type. (For example: "A 3.5' rear yard variance for an attached two car garage.") 593 ' . Q✓�i�y dd ✓� ZK c � �.' /�/� � .ops. �c. /ire .� .5.30 -Y oyC< /tea,.- G% so rili., fines. SSo � B�/t�li tJdn'�+c� ��- 7Yt �. S e✓o.c.►tr� /i�c�. S64 � �✓ /fit.. vd rid+r tt for fit e /S/ ��Pt r� /may � + 12. List specific reasons) why the variance is being sought in terms of: - exceptional narrowness, shallowness, size or shape of property, or - exceptional topographic conditions or other extraordinary situation or condition of property, or - the use or development of property immediately adjacent thereto / /1 Z S/ � c arc✓ ..S `lomat o F 7y -r es .drooti� �.-���r�s i � MtCif/rnti I%<- 6o," zyfi,e'tr /�r�J/✓I�J�H�3 HECEIVEL 13. Additional comments, if any Sic .2#a Ch .Wf e-�rf DEC 1 9 7001 paps 3 d 5 14. The following names and addresses are all of the individuals, firms, or corporations owning property adjacent to the property for which the variance is being sought, including properties at the sides, rear and in front of (across street from) the subject property. (Use additional pages if necessary.) These people will be notifd by mail of this application: NAME Labe. llo/[LaV zrlaZ Address 23/ -Tv--.c{ro" PropertyHO /$ - A - Z & flr� 2Z6 L r NAME Zol-a Ho /i a%ar4 lo,,.r><.W 4iz Property M# NAME parr.�c/ Property M# 18— -2? NAME Address Z3/ A7ta//d WC(mac% -C::nroSs f7o01 Address 3Z/ .Vie. fi e' �/a �Comss J ow -,?a,, V14 zzdzJ- Address --W7 8aJk- /19. 44W4keT A%— (/A ZZ6oZ„ NAME Thtd��ois �o�r r�so h Address Pro ID# - / - / VA Z Z/SZ 1� NAME Address NAME Address Property. ID# NAME Address Property ID# NAME Address NAME Property ID# Address LEC -1 i'-2001 04:5E PM EUSHMHN ENGINEEPINU 540 _436 92-37 P.06 1v"Jan AGREEMENT VARLANCE # 0 1— 0L I (wcj the undue. do haaby respec0illy make app o4 and petition the Frederick Cou* Board of Zoning Appeals AZA) to Brant a variance to the tam of the Frederick County Zo&g Ordrnanca as descn'bed herein. I agree to comply with any conditions for the variance mp irW by -the DZA I authorize the mambm of the BZA sad Fredat ick CourAl officials to ,go upon the property for site kmps.alm pwposa. I understand that thesign issued to me when th6 Vplicstiaa is d =,a be placed at the property Iim at. bW seven (7) d4ys prior to the BZA public hearing aw mabbiwA so as to be visible from the road or right -of way ung the hearing: I bmby ca* that ag of the a and informs im cenh fined herein are, to the best of my barla 4m tree. SHWATURK OF APPLICANT DATE Z f O MGMATQRZ OF OWNER / DATE 7 cu Cif otter than appli :Bd) 6 %J�— s . L BZA PUBLIC HEARING OF ACITON: -DATE- APPROVAL $IC1vED• BZA CELAMMAAN ____� DFJfL4L DATE: Lake Holiday Estates Utility Co. Frederick County Variance Request Additional Comments Attachment The Lake Holiday Estates Utility Co. operates the Summit Sewage Treatment Plant (STP), which was constructed to serve the Summit development in northwest Frederick County near Cross Junction_ The STP went into operation in the early 1970's with a treatment capacity of 160,000 gallons per day. The plant is currently operating at its maximum capacity and Lake Holiday is under a court -imposed mandate to expand the treatment capacity of the STP. The original STP design calls for the STP to be expanded to an ultimate capacity of 320,000 per day by adding two additional treatment units in parallel to the existing duplex system. The first phase design to increase the capacity of the STP to 240,000 gallons per day has been approved by the Virginia Department of Health and Lake Holiday is ready to begin the installation process_ This is a necessary step to satisfy the court ordered expansion and lift the present moratorium on new home construction at The Summit. December 2, 2001 Mr. Evan Wyatt Director of Planning Frederick County 107 N. Kent Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 Re: Summit WW'IP Expansion Dear Evan, Enclosed are two copies of the site plan for the expansion of the Summit WWTP at Lake Holiday in Frederick County. I am submitting this to you so that you can determine if the proposed work- will orkwill require formal site plan approval from Frederick County. The work is being carred out as a joint effort by the Lake Holiday Estates Utility Company and the Lake Holiday Country Club. The work consists of installing a third in ground 80,000 gallon per day package steel WWTP that Will increase the total treatment capacity of the WWIP to 240,000 gpd from the current 160,000 gpd. There will also be a new in ground chlorine contact tank installed. The only above ground construction that is proposed is a cover over the existing sludge drying beds. This part of the project will not be performed at this time but must be constructed within the next 2 -year period. I hope this information will allow you to make your assessment of the situation. However, if you have any questions or need additional information, please give me a call. Sincerely, Bushman Engineering; pc David L. Bushman, P.E. cc: Bill Lemeshewsky, Lake Holiday Country Club RECEIVED John Shields, General Manager, Lake Holiday Utility Co. DEC 0 5 2001 "IT nF PLANNING/oRELOpAgN, BUST mAN ENGINEERING, PC 12335 BACK ROAD, Toms BRooK, VIRGINIA 22660 P► io�I:: 540-436-8332 Fx,�: 540-436-9237 email- dbushman@shentel.net BZA REVIEW DATE: 01/15/02 VARIANCE #02-02 DOVE FAMILY COMPAI•TY, LLC LOCATION: The property is located at 780 Airport Road. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 64-5-3 PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned M1 (Light Industrial) District; Land use - Residential ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) and M 1 (Light Industrial) District; Uses: Regional Airport and Distribution Center VARIANCE: The applicant is requesting a variance to the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, Sec, 165-27E(1), Surface Material Requirements, and (3), Curb and Gutter Requirements. REASON FOR VARIANCE: See attached tetter of justification from the applicant. STAFF COMMENTS: The applicant is proposing to convert an existing residence to an office facility with 12 parking spaces. Chapter 165-27E(1) provides the requirements for parking lot surface materials in the Ml District. The section states that: "...parking lots shall be paved with concrete, bituminous concrete or similar materials." The Zoning Ordinance also contains a provision for the administrator to allow a parking lot to be paved with other hard surface materials, including a double prime and seal surface, if the property is located outside of the Sewer and Water Service Area (S WSA). The applicant is proposing to pave the parking lot with a double prime and seal treatment which is one of the subjects of the variance request. The applicant's property is located within the SWSA which requires the parking lot to be paved with concrete, bituminous concrete or similar materials. The other portion of the variance request pertains to the applicant's proposal to construct the parking lot without curb and guttter. Chapter 165-27E(3) provides the curb and gutter requirements for the M1 Zoning District. The requirement states that: "Concrete curbing and gutters shall be installed Dove Family Company, LLC Variance #02-02 Page 2 January 8, 2002 around the perimeter of all parking lots..." The Zoning Ordinance contains a provision for the Zoning Administrator to allow a parking lot to be constructed with concrete bumpers instead of curb and gutter if the property is located outside the SWSA. The applicant's property is located within the SWSA which requires the parking lot to be constructed with concrete curb and gutter. STAFF CONCLUSION: The Code of Virginia, Section 15.2-2309(2) states that no variance shall be authorized by the Board unless it finds that a) strict application of the Ordinance would produce an undue hardship approaching confiscation; b) that such hardship is not shared generally by other properties in the same zoning district and the same vicinity, and; c) that the authorization of such variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, and that the character of the district will not be changed by the granting of the variance. The first criteria of 15.2-2309(2) is not met because the additional expense of complying with the subject requirements does not cause an undue hardship approaching confiscation. The second criteria is also not met. Other undeveloped properties throughout the M1 Zoning District without site development plans vested by previous regulations must comply with the subject requirements. Since two of the criteria specified in § 15.2-2309 (2) have not been met, denial of this variance would be justified. 0 \AIeO(IaS\BZA\Staff Report\2002\Dovc Family LLC wpd STATEMENT OF JUSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE AT 780 AIRPORT ROAD My wife and I entered into a contract to purchase this property with the intention of moving the office of Dove & Associates into the existing house. We got the property Zoned M1 earlier this year and at the time the zoning ordinance required that we add parking spaces to have the required number according to the size of the existing house and widen the existing driveway to the required width. At the time we agreed to buy the property, these facilities only needed to be covered with double prime and seal and no curb and gutter was required. Since that time the zoning ordinance has been changed to require these facilities be constructed with curb and gutters and be surfaced with bituminous concrete. In addition The Winchester Regional Airport owns a tract of land between our property and Airport Road which requires us the widen the existing driveway approximately 400 feet across this land. This land was purchased for the intended purpose of relocating Airport Road to a location adjacent to our property. This work is scheduled to be done in approximately two years. In the mean time we have purchased the property and are trying to get our site plan approved so we can occupy the house as our office. This requirement has posed an undue hardship on us. This hardship is not shared generally by other properties in the same zoning district in the same vicinity. As a matter-of-fact, by granting this variance, we would have similar facilities as our neighbor to the east (AMK Products, Inc.) The authorization of this variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property. The character of the district will not be changed by the granting of this variance. Respectfully Submitte 4�, �ia�a�,h� iDo✓e F'xYii <fak" M1 RA M1 M1 (Mi M1 M1 WINCHESTER REGIONAL AIRPORTAUTH M1M11 M1 64 5�1AM1 �'64 5 3A'M1 RA 64 5 4A M1 RGA 5El M1 M1KOC OWS4 / RODGERS $4 5 3 RA ! ANDERSON o RA \. \// 64 SMA"" 37B `RA RUSSELL 64 5 B 2 BZA # 02-02 A . RA 03" Location Map For: Dove Family Co, LLD PIN: 64-5-3 Dept of Planning and Development, Agrr '2002 Paye 1 of 5 APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE IN THE COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA 1. The applicant is the owner 2. APPLICANT: XX other (Check one) OCCUPANT: (if different) NAME: Dave Family LLC NAME: Edward W. Dove Managing Member ADDRESS 209 S1 noet Circle ADDRESS: Gross Uaation, VA 22625 TELEPHONE: 540_888-9140 (H) 540-667-1103 (W) 3. The property is located at State Route numbers): 780 Airport Road TELEPHONE: (give exact directions and include 4. The property has a road frontage of 212_.15 feet and a depth Of 2161.97 feet and consists of 20.986 acres. (please be exact) The property is owned by-nnyeCompMj, LLC DEG 120pAas evidenced by deed from - . Rod 'vers recorded Instrument (previous owner) ►eeeek no. 475 on page 0128 of the deed JF?L0NGpEVE� oks of the Clerk of the Court for Frederick County. Attach a copy of the deed. Page 2 of 5 6. Magisterial District:_ Shaw"ee 7. 14 -Digit Property Identification No.: S. The existing zoning of the -property is: 9. The existing use of the property is: Residence 10. Adjoining Property: ZONING North Arrvort RA East DistributWou Center MI South Vacant RA West Vacant RA 11. Describe the variance sought in terms of distance and type. (For example: "A 3.5' rear yard variance for an attached two car garage.") A variance to allow a driveway and narking lot to be con- structed using 6" Wravel topped with Rrime and doubile seal surface and without curb and gutter for the c.hanR a of use from PIP residence to office 165-27-E (1) & W 12. List specific reason(s) why the variance is being sought in terms of: exceptional narrowness, shallowness, size or shape of property, or exceptional topographic conditions or other extraordinary situation or condition of property, or - the use or development of property immediately adjacent thereto See letter of justification attached 13. Additional comments, if any See letter of justIUcatWon attached 14. The following names and addresses are all of the individuals, firms, or corporations owning property adjacart to the property for which the variance is being sought, including properties at the sides, rear and in front of (across street from) the subject property. (Use additional pages if necessary.) These people will be notifd by mail of this application: NAME Robert Largent et al Address 141 Westwood Dr. Winchester, VA 22602 Property ID# 64-5-2 730 Airport Rd. NAME Andrew M�isa A. RotloKski Address 782 A; rnort Rd. Winchester, VA 22602 Property ID# 64-5-4 NAME M ncheaLar Re&Wunal Ai r=nrr Address Winchester, VA 22602 Property ID# 64 -A -76-79A NAME Justus J. Russell Address X81 T.aurelrann�i nr;vv _ Winchester, VA 22602 . Property ID# _ 64-57X NAME Mark D. & Arlene D. Smith Address Winchester, VA 22602 Property ID# 64A -31B NAME Winchester RegionNI Airport Address 491 Airport Rd. Winchester, VA 2-2602 Property ID# 64-5-D NAME Anderson Carol Lee & Charlene Address 820 Airport Rd. Winchester, VA ZZbUZ Property ID# 64-5-D2 MANE Anderson, Deborah C. Address 818 Airport Rd. Winchester, VA 22602 Property ID# 64-5-D3 NAW Winchester Regionial.1. Airport Address 491 Airport Rd. _ Winchester, VA 22602 Property ID# .._ NAME Property ID# M Np5of5 AGREEMENT VARIANCE # "0,2-_ I (wel the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application, and petition the Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) to grant a variance to -the terms of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance as described herein. I agree to comply with any conditions for the variance required by -the BZA I authorin the members of the BZA and Frederick County officials to go upon the property for site inspection purposes. I understand that the sign issued to me when this application is submitted must be placed at the front property line at. least seven (7) days prior to the BZA public hearing and maintained so as to be visible from the road or right-of-way until the hearing I hereby certify that all of the statements and information contained herein are, to the best of my knowledge, true. SIGNATURE OF APPLI DATE Z/-zly SIGNATURE OF OWNER DATE (if other than applicant) -OFFICE USE ONLY- BZA NLY BZA PUBLIC BEARING OF HS -02— _ ACTION: -DATE- APPROVAL SIGNED: BZA CHAERMAN DENIAL DATE: 64-5-1 ZONED.- RA USE: VACANT N 35'35'08" E 1749.97' Y HIE; y1 � TREE UNE lz• W� m§x I ^- MEIM/rF i I 000 CO QI(Y 64-5—J � 1 ` (OTHER LAND OF o•R� H DOW FAMILY COMPANY,Ll-C.) � "d � � • � � � I � � tp e' o9cvaao , mcwt�ao 1 _ \ it' qlE Y Oat � 5. LLti10N e I 4' W 14 (r '. 7- NATE lei 9 sn � 25'8RL �, 1 � � ;�,..�- 324.51' 5 282 64-5-4 ZONED: A(-1 USE, D/SMS4177ON CANTER OWJPAU FROARry EMAP SCALE- I-200' S 46'40'40" E 30.99' 64-5—JA ZONED: RA USE VACANT is, AV= & VICINITY MAP SCALE" l`--2000' 1. TALC PRORWY SHOMN MWEOV IS MffPFA7E0 OV FAEnmrY COL/NIY r" NAP 64-3-.52 ST4NEWAL4 A1U'/S RAL P4W. 2 ZaM w-1 OA4N4STA'A;j .3 SEIBACYS RELMRED.IRMT = 75' SPE25' REAR ..Zr 4. LOT OO&M 0E - _X APEOMOW S BDC04WY kODWA RaY TAKEN MOV SIFRWY BY LECW E MwL£, OWED 25 SEPT. 96 RL NSED !0 .CNE 'L& T{P* CMEY FROM TOPOCRAPW SWKY BY DOW k ASSCaUT5 4w 12 NOV. t11. 6. CCNIp'.R W7L7PYK - Y 7. OXNW/VfLna"ER' OD4£FAA(3Y CYMAPANY, LLC 709 57AY."E'T ORCLE Of= AAYC7ADK VA 22625 TELA (3w) d6M-9140 8 MW AIWA - 2a966 AOWS mut AREA OF ATE - 4783 ACRES - 77667 SF. R A90925ED M* FRO £SMM4 OMCE 10 MA4KW HOCYIT - 6O" 11. ALL CaV$MW7ION PERFPW" MRM 7W RWC R/W AAD/a4 EAMIOWs 7a BE DOW W APXMAACE W7H STWAVS OF naMVb4K CY.WTY AND/aP 190r. 12 rO-9X SHALL bF S7RPP® 0046-LCIFLY rO EXPOSE 7H£ 40GLRL VW %ULE .STBCd7ACl" AW gYA44 BE SIVOG:KE0 Ar A LOC45W APMOSED BY 7AF CN 49t 1J NA 7E7TIAC UVR W FRAU atr AREAS MAY Zr USED Fal CCIVPAC?W FLL AREAS Il FILL AREAS RUT ARE LOCI IED tMe? PROPOW PARKING AND MPEWAY AREAS SHALL RE PU4P W CAr75 LESS IRAN 0 WOWS AND 90KL aF n%PACTED 7O 9CK C1" ASAI D-1557. 15 77L fXCAYARGiV CAV7RACR14 SKALL NUP/T A �£1WaPARY D7A.NAGE FL.W F7iCY7 RI MO ° � � r' Ani CSS SOMv grThE11� � F'4,W SHAL[ .N4L�4PCWAlE INE 16 7145 $Fw IS Nor W DW 700 YR fLOLD PLAN W 17 F COKMACE AfAM91 F JOD, FRONDED BY 016M; FRE HMUW O 800 A/RPOYT ROM. 1H mm 577E is SERIED BY 11 u AND SEP•RC IA NO WWAI W4 MR AUNA4 pCVT PRO1YED Ar RA8 76F SANGE asT agm AREA - mo7 SF. wr mwaw cm"mw AREA OF E19SAW PNWT J92O SF. AREA aT EM##C S/W 79 SF. AREA Or ETA IW BLDG. - 1362 SF. AREA OF PACYOS[D PYWr w Betz SF. R1rAt T 1.760* SF. 97E AIWA - 1.783 AC . 77807,',F FAR (VMF? G) - 31241^77647 + ADI PARIAM 1F^aXW PARKA REaNTp - 1 .91"/ 2W W x3124 - 12 SPACES PARKIN FbPOL•kLFD OW FAIL ore x 16(YAH ACBE) I? S74ACirS DOME FRAME S SLK �w / 6' CCMMACIED 21-A GY7NPACIFO S(/lKRADA" air-srr� PA�fLww arc NOT TP SCA 1ll = 30' 30' 0 30' 60' M'E SO' 9N71 OF/