BZA 02-21-06 Meeting MinutesMEETING MINUTES
i. 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, February 21, 2006.
PRESENT Theresa Catlett, Chairman, Opequon District; Robert Perry, Vice Chairman, Stonewall
District; Dudley Rinker, Back Creek District; and, Lennie Mather, Red Bud District.
ABSENT: Dwight Shenk, Gainesboro District; Kevin Scott, Shawnee District; and Robert W. Wells,
Member -At- Large.
STAFF
PRESENT Mark R. Cheran, Zoning and Subdivision Administrator; Bernard Suchicital, Planner l;
and, Bev Dellinger, BZA Secretary.
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Catlett at 3:25 p.m.
Chairman Catlett said the first item on the agenda is the adoption of the Bylaws. She asked if
everyone has had an opportunity to review the changes that were made. Mr. Rinker had a question on
4R2-1 regarding "nomination of officers shall be made from the floor at the first meeting ". He stated
at sounds like the public is nominating the officers, and it should be clear that the motion to
nominate officers is made by BZA members. Mr. Cheran noted that and stated that he will make that
change, and the Board can still adopt the Bylaws today.
Mr. Rinker made a motion to approve the Bylaws, with the noted change. Mr. Perry seconded
and the motion passed unanimously.
On a motion by Mr. Perry and seconded by Mr. Rinker, the minutes for the December 20, 2005
meeting were unanimously approved as presented.
On a motion by Mr. Perry and seconded by Mr. Rinker, the minutes for the January 17, 2006
meeting were unanimously approved as presented.
Chairman Catlett asked Mr. Cheran the cut -off date for the next meeting. Mr. Cheran replied
that Friday, February 24, 2006, is the cut -off date.
1"1
U
Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals
Minutes of February 21, 2006 Minute Book Page 1358
PUBLIC HEARING
Variance Request 425 -05 of Donald Halcy, for a 10' front yard and a 10' rear yard variance. This
property is located at 1008 Back Mountain Road (Route 614), and is identified with Property
Identification Number 39 -A -82 in the Back Creek Magisterial District.
ACTION ā VARIANCE DENIED
Before staff comments could be heard, Mr. Cheran advised that this property was not properly
posted for the hearing, per the Code of Virginia. Therefore, this item should not be heard today. The
history of this request is that we are at the 90 day limitation to hear this item because it was postponed at
the November 2005 meeting, and tabled for 60 days at the December 2005 meeting. The Board has to
act upon the request at this meeting. One of the legal requirements of the applicant is to post the hearing
sign, and because the hearing sign was not posted on the property, the requirement was not met.
Chairman Catlett asked if it is the applicant's or staff's responsibility and Mr. Cheran stated it's the
responsibility of the applicant. Chairman Catlett asked Mr. Cheran how staff verified that the sign was
not posted and Mr. Cheran responded that staff checked three times last week, the last time being Friday,
and verified that it wasn't posted. The sign should be posted at least one week prior to the meeting.
Chairman Catlett asked if the Board does not approve this request today, does the applicant have to re-
apply and Mr. Cheran stated yes he does.
Chairman Catlett asked if the applicant is present and Mr. Haley approached the podium.
Chairman Catlett asked Mr. Haley if he understands the reason why the Board cannot hear his request.
Mr. Haley said it was posted, but he's a truck driver and he's on the road. He stated the sign was up in
his front yard and they had a real bad wind storm and the sign fell down. Chairman Catlett stated that
the requirement is that it be posted for one week prior to the meeting. Mr. Haley stated that the first two
times he applied he was told he did not have to be present and the sign was in his yard. He's here today
because he was told he had to be present. Chairman Catlett told Mr. Haley that if the sign is not posted
so that any interested party can see the sign and come to the meeting, then this Board doesn't have a
choice in hearing the matter.
Mr. Perry stated that in reference to the facts just heard, he moves for denial of this variance
request. Mr. Rinker seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING
Variance Request #01 -06 of Roy Gottschalk, for a 35' variance on both sides of the property. This
property is located in Lake Serene, on Lake Serene Drive, Lot 36, and is identified with Property
Identification Number 31B -1 -36 in the Gainesboro Magisterial District.
ACTION ā VARIANCE TABLED
Mr. Suchicital gave the staff report. Frederick County adopted performance zoning in 1967. The
Frederick County historical zoning map shows this 1.00 acre property was zoned A -1 (Agricultural
Limited) in 1972. The property setback lines at the adoption of the zoning ordinance were 35' front and
15' sides. Frederick County amended its Ordinance in 1989 to change the rural zoning districts to the
Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals
Minutes of February 21, 2006 Minute Book Page 1359
current RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District, making the current setbacks for the property 60' front, 50'rear
and 50' sides
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; 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 is seeking a variance of 35' on the left and right sides of the property to build a
residential structure of approximately 2,877.24 square feet in size. Should this variance be granted, the
building setbacks for this property would be 60' in the front, 50' in the back and would change to 15' on
the sides. It appears that this variance meets the intent of the Code of Virginia, Section 15.2- 2309(2).
This request from the current setbacks of the RA zoning district may be justified.
Mr. Perry asked the footprint of the house and Mr. Suchicital responded that it's in the agenda
packet. According to the drawing, it will be 153' on one side and 15.7' on the other side.
Chairman Catlett asked the applicant to come forward. Mr. Gottschalk came to the podium and
identified himself. Mr. Gottschalk stated that where the lot stands and where the septic field is, the only
place he can put the house is where it's located on the drawing and without a variance, he can't build.
Mr. Rinker asked if the house could be rotated a little clockwise so it's not sitting at so much of
an angle. Mr. Gottschalk stated he thinks the way it is now gave them the most amount of room. Mr.
Rinker further stated that the house is taking up every bit of that 15' setback, where if it's rotated a little
bit, he could have 15' to 20'.
Mr. Perry stated that he agrees with Mr. Rinker. Mr. Gottschalk stated it's something that could
be done. He further stated they were trying to get more of a view of the lake and that's the reason they
located it that way.
Mr. Perry asked Mr. Gottschalk if there is any topographical reason for orienting the house the
way it is on the drawing and Mr. Gottschalk responded no.
Chairman Catlett asked if anyone else is here to speak in favor of the variance and no one
responded. Chairman Catlett stated that it looks like a number of people are here today so anyone who
does speak, the Board would like to hold that to a maximum of three minutes. She asked if anyone is
here to speak who is opposed to the variance.
Mr. Clinton Ritter, attorney for Mr. Preston Moffett, Jr., approached the podium and identified
himself. Mr. Ritter stated that Mr. Gottschalk owns two lots, which the previous owners sold to him as
if it were one parcel, for privacy sake. Mr. Ritter further stated that the drainfield shown on the plat is
located in an area they feel when they have huge snowfalls and rains, everything runs down through that
hollow and water actually shoots out of the culverts and runs down through the hollow in the middle of
Mr. Gottschalk's lot. That could be the reason it hasn't been built on for the last 35 years. Mr. Ritter
stated that his client, Mr. Moffett, is concerned about protecting the beauty and the water of the lake.
Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals
Minutes of February 21, 2006 Minute Book Page 1360
Chairman Catlett asked Mr. Cheran if any decision made today by the BZA would be subject to
the drainage and drainfield approval by other departments before the building permit is issued. Mr.
Cheran stated that is correct. Mr. Cheran stated that on the plat under "Flood Note ", it states Zone C,
which means it is not a flood prone area. There may be a drainage run -off, but it's not in the flood plain.
Chairman Catlett asked if there is anyone else opposed to this request who would like to speak.
The following individuals came before the Board and spoke against the variance request: Mr. Paul
Holley, Mr. Donald Vaschon, Mrs. Dolly Vaschon, Mr. Preston Moffett and Phyllis Bridinger.
Mr. J. T. Anderson spoke in favor of the variance request.
The public hearing portion of the meeting was closed.
DISCUSSION
Mr. Rinker asked Mr. Gottschalk if the drainfield has been approved and signed off by the
Health Department and Mr. Gottschalk responded yes. Mr. Rinker asked when that was done and Mr.
Gottschalk stated two months ago. Mr. Rinker asked who did the perc test and Mr. Gottschalk said Greenway
Engineering.
Mr. Perry stated the only concern he has is if there's no topographical reason for the house to be
oriented as is presently shown on this plat, he would like to see an investigation to rotate the house to
grumnlize the required variance from this Board. By rotating the footprint on the plat, Mr. Gottschalk could
astically reduce the requested variance.
Mr. Rinker made a motion that this request be tabled until the next meeting in order to see a plat
where the house is rotated so the variance can be minimized. Mr. Perry seconded the motion and it passed
unanimously.
Mr. Ritter stated that within this private subdivision, there is an Architectural Review Board
where the property owners are supposed to bring house plans for Board approval. This has not been done and
that's one thing that maybe would have eliminated his neighbors and friends from showing up today.
OTHER
Chairman Catlett asked if there is any other business to come before the Board.
As there were no other items or new business to be discussed, the meeting adjourned at 430 p.m. by
unanimous vote.
Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals
Minutes of February 21, 2006 Minute Book Page 1361
iRespectfully submitted,
Theresa B. Catle t, Chairman
Bev Dellinger, Secretary
Iā¢
u
Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals
Minutes of February 21, 2006 Minute Book Page 1362