Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBZA 06-20-06 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, June 20, 2006. PRESENT Theresa Catlett, Chairman, Opequon District; Robert Perry, Vice Chairman, Stonewall District; Dudley Rinker, Back Creek District; Dwight Shenk, Gainesboro District; Lennie Mather, Red Bud District; and Robert W. Wells, Member -At- Large. ABSENT: Kevin Scott, Shawnee District. STAFF PRESENT Mark R. Cheran, Zoning and Subdivision Administrator; Kevin Henry, Planning Technician; Lauren Krempa, Zoning Inspector; and, Bev Dellinger, BZA Secretary. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Catlett at 3:25 p.m. On a motion by Mr. Shenk and seconded by Mr. Perry, the minutes for the May 16, 2006 meeting were unanimously approved as presented. 0 ? Chairman Catlett asked Mr. Cheran the cut -off date for the next meeting. Mr. Cheran replied that Friday, June 23, 2006, is the cut -off date. PUBLIC HEARING Variance Request #07 -06 of Elizabeth Ann Cook, for a 35' variance on the eastern side and 9' variance on the western side of the property. This property is located on Bethel Grange Road Route 630), Lot 153, and is identified with Property Identification Number 41 -A -153 in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. ACTION — VARIANCE APPROVED Mr. Henry gave the staff report. 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 current RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District, making the current setbacks 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. St Minute Book Page 1382 Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of June 20, 2006 The applicant is requesting a variance of 35' on the eastern side yard and a 9' variance for the westerneyard. Should the variances be granted, the building setbacks for this property would remain 60' in the front, 50' in the rear, but would change to 15' on the eastern side and 41' on the western side yards. 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 about the proposed garage, which had been crossed off the site plan. Mr. Henry stated they had included a garage on the survey and that he crossed it out. This variance is strictly for the house. Mr. Rinker asked Mr. Henry if the proposed garage would need a variance. Mr. Henry replied that the garage is proposed to be detached. As long as it's 3' from the house, it's considered detached, and the garage only needs to be 15' off the sides and rear property line. Chairman Catlett asked Mr. Henry about the aerial map; how close is the house on the eastern side of this property. Mr. Henry stated it's fairly close and he thinks it's only about l0' to 20' off the property line. Ms. Elizabeth Ann Cook approached the podium. Ms. Cook stated that when she was approved for her loan, she had the property surveyed and the surveyor stated it is zoned RA, which meant it only left 20' deep to do something with. She further stated that she just wants to set a modular on her property. Eventually, she would like to build a garage, but it's not going to be attached. Chairman Catlett asked if anyone is present who would like to speak and no one responded. She then 6 ,a ed if anyone who is opposed would like to speak and Shirley Fixx Ryan approached the podium. Ms. n wondered, because they're moving the variance on her side, what effect that would have on the future sale of her property. Chairman Catlett stated that if this variance is granted, they would only be able to come to the point that is approved by this Board; they could not build closer to the property unless they came before the Board for another variance. No one else wished to speak. The public hearing portion of the meeting was closed. DISCUSSION Mr. Shenk made a motion to approve Variance #07 -06. Mr. Wells seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING Variance Request #10 -06 of Kay -Mor, Inc., and Debra Toms, submitted by Clinton R. Ritter, Esq., for a 30' variance on the eastern side of the property. This property is located on the east side of Sulphur Springs Road (Route 655), 1/10 mile north of the entrance to the County Landfill, and is identified with Property Identification Number 65 -A -176 in the Shawnee Magisterial District. ACTION — VARIANCE TABLED Mr. Cheran gave the staff report. The applicant is requesting a 30' side variance on the eastern side of the property. This lot was created on April 11, 1966, prior to Frederick County adopting zoning Minute Book Page 1383 Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of June 20, 2006 on March I1, 1967. At the time of the adoption of the zoning ordinance, this 1.041 acre property was zoned A -2 (Agricultural General). The property setback lines for the A -2 were 35' front and rear and 15' on all sides. On December 11, 1991, Frederick County amended its zoning ordinance to change the rural zoning districts to the current RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District, making the current setbacks for the property 60' front, 50 right side and 100' rear. Mr. Cheran further stated there are other items to bring to the Board's attention. The letter which was given to each of them prior to the start of today's meeting from Harvey E. Strawsnyder, the Public Works Director, who is not in favor of this variance due to its location and proximity to the Frederick County Landfill. Mr. Strawsnyder also speaks about the FEMA flood plain and the possible drainfield. Mr. Cheran stated that the FEMA flood plain is along Sulphur Springs Run. This buildable lot, should the variance be granted, would not be in that zone. Should this variance be granted and go forward, it would still have to meet all County and State regulations as to drainfields. One other issued pointed out by Mr. Strawsnyder is the landfill support area. Building next to the landfill could present problems should this become a buildable lot. Mr. Cheran pointed out that the current Frederick County Comprehensive Plan does not identify the landfill support area. Mr. Cheran stated for the record that the map included with this agenda shows the proposed Route 37 going next to this property. If this variance is granted and Route 37 is built, there will have to be condemnation to allow for the proposed route. 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 30' variance on the eastern side of the property to build a residential structure of approximately 2,016sf. Should this variance be granted, the building setbacks for this property would be 60' front, 70' left side and rear. 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. Strawsnyder's letter will be added to the file. Mr. Perry asked Mr. Cheran what a "Flood Zone C" is. Mr. Cheran stated that "A" is the 100 year plan, and the "C" zone is outside of that. It's the designation that FEMA gives. Mr. Rinker asked Mr. Cheran if there were any well problems in that area and Mr. Cheran responded no, not to his knowledge. Chairman Catlett stated that the issue the Board is concerned with is the southeast corner of the proposed house, and it doesn't appear from the plan that the proposed house could be situated in any Minute Book Page 1384 Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of June 20. 2006 0 other manner to request a lesser variance. Mr. Rinker asked, since the County is an adjoining land owner, with the Board of Supervisors as the Trustees, and this Board is an arm of the Board of Supervisors, is the Board of Zoning Appeals in conflict of interest to hear this. Mr. Cheran responded no, because the Board of Zoning Appeals is set up as a quasi-judicial board. The Board of Supervisors submits potential Board member names to the Circuit Court and the Circuit Court appoints Board members. If the Board of Supervisors does not like the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals, they could apply to the Circuit Court to appeal the decision. Mr. Clinton Ritter, attorney for the property owners, approached the podium. Mr. Ritter stated that his clients take the position that the property is grandfathered under the 1991 ordinance. Mr. Ritter gave a brief history of this property and adjoining properties, as well as the landfill. The property is a beautiful lot, all wooded. It runs from the asphalt road at a downward slope to the creek. The back portion of the lot is in the flood plain so it's not buildable there. The front part of the lot along the road is level and the property they want the variance for overlooks a beautiful field that's mowed and maintained by the City and County. Mr. Ritter said in reference to the issues presented by Mr. Strawsnyder, if it's a requirement that the owners have to notify the new buyer that they're buying a house next to the landfill, legally that may not hold up, but the owners wouldn't have any objections to it because there's no way a person wouldn't see the landfill sign. The Flood issue is not of major concern because where his clients want to set the house is outside the flood plain. Mr. Ritter further stated that, eventually, the landfill may be a big plus to all the land value in the area. If the owners put a business on the property, they'd have to have a well and a drainfield. Ideally, maybe what the proper use for this property may be is to apply to the County for a rezoning once they get a variance and put a well, septic and a building there and that property may be ideal for a metal building for some type of recycling process to accommodate the landfill. Ms. Mather asked Mr. Ritter what type of septic system the land is approved for. Mr. Ritter stated it was originally approved for a three bedroom system. Mr. Ritter thinks it's a pure flow system; a more expensive system. The last report, unless they re -plat it, is for two bedrooms. Mr. Rinker asked if any part of the drainfield is in the flood plain area and Mr. Ritter responded yes, the lower corner of it. Chairman Catlett asked if anyone in favor of the variance request would like to speak and no one responded. She asked if anyone opposed would like to speak and no one responded. The public hearing portion was closed. DISCUSSION Ms. Mather stated that she thinks if this were a commercial piece of property with water and sewer, she would have no reservations, but there are some who might sell this residence to someone from the city who could only see it after dark. Ms. Mather feels the Board is setting themselves up for a problem down the road if this is a residence. There's no guarantee without having water and sewer that at some point the well won't become contaminated because of the leeching that normally happens from Minute Book Page 1385 Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes ofJune'20, 2006 the landfill. A much better use for the property would have something to do with the landfill. Mr. Wells stated that the question of liability - there isn't any liability for the Board members. The Board of Zoning Appeals' authority is to decide whether to grant the variance and the liability would be up to the owner of the land and the builder. Mr. Cheran noted for the record that zoning isn't changing; it's still RA. Mr. Shenk made a motion to approve Variance 410 -06. Mr. Wells seconded the motion. The vote was a tie vote, with three members voting yes and three members voting no. The motion did not receive the required affirmative votes. PUBLIC HEARING Variance Request #11 -06 for Funkhouser Lots, Lot 35, submitted by Artz and Associates, PLC, for a 40' side yard variance on both sides. This property is located 113 Callaway Court, and is identified with Property Identification Number 76A -1 -35 in the Shawnee Magisterial District. ACTION — VARIANCE TABLED 1 Mr. Henry gave the staff report. Mr. Henry stated that the next three variances before the Board are going to be very similar. This property was created in 1946. Frederick County adopted performance zoning in 1967, at which time this property was zoned A -2 (Agricultural General). The property setback lines at the time of adoption were 35' for both fronts and 15' sides. Frederick County amended its ordinance in 1989 to change the rural zoning districts to the current RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District, making the current setbacks for the property 60' front, 60' 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 40' on both side yards to build a two -story residential structure of approximately 1,568sf. Mr. Henry noted that on the application, the applicant put that the land is vacant, but there's actually a small house on the property. Should this variance be granted, the building setbacks for this property would be 60' in the front, 60' in the back and would change to 10' on the sides. It is important to note that with the given setbacks, the dwelling will fit the appearance of the neighborhood. It appears that the 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. C Minute Book Page 1386 Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of June 20, 2006 Ms. Mather asked if the entrance will be off of Front Royal Pike or Callaway and Mr. Henry responded Callaway. Mr. Rinker asked if the cul -de -sac has invaded the subject property and Mr. Henry stated he is not aware that it has. Mr. Rinker noted that it is only half a cul -de -sac. Ms. Mather asked the square footage of the lots and Mr. Henry replied that they're roughly 8.000sf. Chairman Catlett asked Mr. Henry if there is a house presently on the lot and Mr. Henry responded yes. Mr. Perry asked if the house is going to be demolished and Mr. Henry answered yes. Chairman Catlett asked if this is a useable lot for residential purposes as it stands now. Mr. Henry stated that it is. Chainnan Catlett stated they wish to tear this down and build a larger structure and Mr. Henry replied yes. Ms. Mather asked how large the proposed dwelling will be and Mr. Henry said 28x28. Mr. Shenk asked if the existing residence meets the original requirements that were set aside in 1967. Mr. Henry stated he couldn't say because he doesn't know where the house is located right now is on the lot, but he believes it's fairly close to being 15' within the sides. Chairman Catlett asked, since there are three requests in the same name, are there houses on all three lots. Mr. Henry stated no, just this lot. Mr. Mike Ariz approached the podium and stated that he is representing the owner. Mr. Artz stated that this is a very similar request to one which he brought to the Board about one year ago on the Funkhouser Lots. These lots were created in the 1940's and were intended to be 50x180. Since then, there's been road widening on Rt. 522 which has taken away some land from all these lots, and that contributed to creating a fairly high bank along Rt. 522. The existing house on Lot 35 was constructed in 1960 and is planned to be demelished. Mr. Ariz stated that he did not locate the house in the course of his survey so he couldn't say if it meets the setbacks or not, but it is not in the best of condition. The intent is to demolish the house and replace it with a new structure that would meet the requirements. Ms. Mather asked the size of the new structure and Mr. Ariz replied 804sf and if there are two stories. 1600sf. Mr. Ariz further stated it is the intent that access would be from Callaway Court, not off Front Royal Pike. Mr. Perry brought up the fact that a structure with less width might be a better use of the variance request. Mr. Ariz stated that he has power of attorney and he would be willing to revise the request for 15' setbacks on both sides. Minute Book Page 1387 Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of June 20, 2006 Chairman Catlett stated that her concern is that it is not a building lot, it is a lot that contains an existing residence, so does the hardship exist? Mr. Perry asked if it's a livable building. Mr. Artz replied yes, it's in poor condition, but it's livable. Mr. Artz stated that where there's an existing residence on a piece of property, the zoning regulations do allow for a person to replace a residence on a piece of property. Under those circumstances, a person could actually build a much bigger house as long as they didn't build the house any closer to the setbacks than they already are. While there might be an argument that says yes we could take the existing house and rebuild it, it could be built bigger if they could continue to meet the same setbacks that the existing house meets. That's a feasible option, but Mr. Artz would prefer to see that house removed and another house built that would be more in line with the restrictions that the variance requests. Mr. Perry stated it would probably make the area look better to have three houses there that were very similar in design. Chairman Catlett asked if anyone is present in favor of the variance request and no one responded. She then asked if anyone opposed would like to speak. Mr. Chuck Swope approached the podium and identified himself as a resident of Callaway Court. Mr. Swope is opposed to this variance request because the houses being constructed will be smaller and he believes it's an issue of trying to squeeze as many houses on as few lots that you can possibly squeeze in. Also, there is someone living in the current structure. No one else wished to speak and the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed. Discussion Mr. Artz stated that he would like the Board members to proceed with this matter with amended variances requesting 35' side yards on both sides as opposed to 40'. Mr. Rinker made a motion to approve Application #11 -06 as amended. Mr. Perry seconded the motion. The vote was a tie, with three members voting yes and three members voting no. The motion did not receive the required affirmative votes. PUBLIC HEARING Variance Request #12 -06 for Funkhouser Lots, Lot 36, submitted by Ariz and Associates, PLC, for a 40' side yard variance on both sides and a 20' front yard variance fronting Callaway Court. This property is located at 111 Callaway Court, and is identified with Property Identification Number 76A -1 -36 in the Shawnee Magisterial District. ACTION — VARIANCE APPROVED Minute Book Page 1388 Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of Rme'M, 2006 Mr. Henry stated that the only variation to this request from the previous request is there is also a front setback of 20' being requested, and the property is vacant. The 20' front yard variance is being requested to save the oak trees on the property. Mr. Mike Ariz stated that this request is slightly different; it is a vacant lot. They are asking for a front setback variance against Callaway Court in order to move the house closer to Callaway Court to save a large oak tree located approximately 15' behind the dwelling. That's the only reason to move it closer to Callaway Court. Once again, Mr. Artz offered 35' side yard variances as opposed to 40' side yard variances. Chairman Catlett asked if anyone in favor of this request would like to speak and no one responded. She then asked if anyone opposed would like to speak. Mr. Chuck Swope reiterated his opposition. No one else wished to speak and the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed. Discussion Chairman Catlett stated that she sees this request differently from the last because it is a vacant lot and the Board has to consider whether it can make it a buildable lot. Mr. Rinker made a motion to approve Variance #12 -06 with the amended 35' side yard variance 10 request, together with the 20' front yard variance as requested. Mr. Wells seconded the motion and it passed by majority vote. PUBLIC HEARING Variance Request 913 -06 for Funkhouser Lots, Lot 37, submitted by Ariz and Associates, PLC, for a 40' side yard variance on both sides. This property is located 109 Callaway Court, and is identified with Property Identification Number 76A -1 -37 in the Shawnee Magisterial District. ACTION — VARIANCE APPROVED Mr. Henry stated this is the third variance of this set. A 40' side yard variance on both sides is requested, meaning that it will be 60' off of Callaway as well as 60' off of Front Royal Pike. The lot is vacant. Mr. Mike Artz offered a 35' variance on this request. Chairman Catlett asked for comments, either for or against, the variance. Mr. Chuck Swope reiterated his opposition. The public hearing portion of the meeting was closed. Minute Book Page 1389 Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of June 20, 2006 Discussion Mr. Wells made a motion to approve Variance 413 -06 as amended, with a 35' variance on both side yards. Mr. Perry seconded the motion and it passed by majority vote. 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 5:00 p.m. by unanimous vote. Respectfully submitted, Theresa B. Catlett Chairman Bev Dellinger, Secretary is Minute Book Page 1390 Frederick County Board of Zoning AppealsMinutesofJune'20. 2006