BZA 03-21-06 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, March 21, 2006.
PRESENT: Theresa Catlett, Chairman, Opequon District; Robert Perry, Vice Chairman, Stonewall
District; Dudley Rinker, Back Creek District; Lennie Mather, Red Bud District; Dwight Shenk,
Gainesboro District; Kevin Scott, Shawnee District; and Robert W. Wells, Member -At -Large.
ABSENT:
STAFF
PRESENT: Mark R. Cheran, Zoning and Subdivision Administrator; Bernard Suchicital, Planner I;
Kevin Henry, Planning Technician; 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. Rinker and seconded by Mr. Perry, the minutes for the February 21, 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, March 24, 2006, is the cut-off date.
PUBLIC HEARING
Variance Request 901-06 of Roy Gottschalk, for a 30.5' 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 — VARIANCE APPROVED
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
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
Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals
Minutes of March 21, 2006 Minute Book Page 1363
property, and that the character of the district will not be changed by the granting of the variance.
As of the last public hearing held on February 21, 2006, the applicant was asked to reduce the
amount of distance he was applying for, which was 35'. The applicant is now seeking a variance of
30.5' 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 new side setbacks of 19.5. 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. At the February 21, 2006 BZA meeting, Mr. Rinker made a motion that this
request be tabled until the March 21, 2006 meeting in order to see a plat where the house is rotated so
the variance can be minimized. Mr. Perry seconded this motion and it passed unanimously.
Mr. Roy Gottschalk approached the podium and stated that he had submitted a new plat as
requested.
Chairman Catlett asked if anyone else is present in favor of the variance request who would like
to speak and no one responded. Chairman Catlett asked if anyone who is opposed would like to speak.
Mr. Clinton Ritter, representing Preston Moffett, asked, with the change, is the house 19.5' off of
the property line now? Mr. Suchicital responded yes, it is. Mr. Ritter asked if that distance is on both
sides, or the side that faces Mr. Moffett's home? The response was not picked up by the microphone
and was unintelligible to the Secretary.
Chairman Catlett asked if anyone else opposed to the request would like to speak and no one
responded. The public hearing portion was closed.
Discussion
Mr. Rinker made a motion to approve the current variance request. Mr. Scott seconded the
motion and it was unanimously approved. (Mr. Wells was not present for the motion and vote).
PUBLIC HEARING
Variance Request #02-06 of Donald Haley, for a 40' southern side yard and a 90' northern yard
variance, resulting in 10' side yard setbacks. 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 — VARIANCE TABLED
Mr. Henry gave the staff report. Frederick County adopted zoning in 1967. The Frederick
County zoning map shows this property was zoned A-2 (Agricultural General) in 1967. The property
setback lines at the adoption of the zoning ordinance were 35' for the fronts (any time property faces a
road) and 15' for the side yards. 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' to the rear, 50' to the southern side and 100' to the northern side, on which the
Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals Minute Book Pae 1364
Minutes of March 21, 2006 g
adjoining property is used agriculturally. This property is unique in that it has two front yards because
of the existing road location. Frederick County zoning requires a 100' setback for any dwelling
adjoining a lot which provides an agricultural land use. The proposal for a 90' variance on the north
boundary would be a drastic decrease from the required setback.
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 the southern side and 90' from the northern side to
replace an existing mobile home. Should this variance be granted, the building setbacks for this
property would be 60' for each of the front yards (road frontage), 60' in the rear, and would change to
10' 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 maybe justified.
Mr. Wells arrived at 3:30 pm.
Mr. Perry asked if a footprint of the proposed dwelling was submitted. Mr. Cheran stated that
the applicant can speak to that. A boundary line adjustment was done in 1999 on this property which
was a correction to get that house in compliance. In doing so, Mr. Haley lost some property. The
mobile home has always been there and Mr. Haley can tell you what size house he wants to put on the
property. Just to give clarification, this is a clean-up after 1999.
Mr. Rinker asked what the overall width of the property is. Mr. Henry stated that he believes it's
roughly about 75'.
Mr. Perry stated that if you're dealing with a dimension that's roughly 75', how do you know
that you need a 10' setback on each side. Mr. Henry stated he doesn't know what the square footage of
the house is.
Mr. Donald Haley approached the podium and identified himself. Mr. Haley stated that he has a
house trailer and it's been there since 1965 and he is trying to get a house put in to eliminate the trailer.
That's why he needs the variance, because he doesn't have enough clearance on each side of the
property to get the house in there. But there is enough room to get an emergency vehicle through there
if needed.
Chairman Catlett asked Mr. Haley if the proposed house would face Hayfield Road. Mr. Haley
responded that the back of the house would face Hayfield Road and the front would face Back Mountain
Road.
Ms. Mather asked if it is similar to the orientation of the trailer now and Mr. Haley replied about
like the trailer is facing now.
Chairman Catlett asked Mr. Haley the square footage of the proposed house. Mr. Haley said the
Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals
Minutes ofMarc_h 21, 2006 Minute Book Page 1365
size of the house is almost the same length as the trailer. It's 54' long and 35' wide.
Mr. Perry asked what the width of the lot is at that point. Mr. Haley said the width of the lot
leaves approximately 15' on each side.
Mr. Perry stated that he doesn't like dealing in approximations.
Mr. Rinker asked if the house is going to be on the same location as the trailer is now. Mr. Haley
said no, it's set back about 75' from where the trailer is because the well is right beside the trailer and
the requirements are 50' away from the well.
Ms. Mather asked if anyone has come out and located where the house will be on the lot. Mr.
Haley responded he had a contractor come out and spot where the house should be on the highest point
of the property.
Chairnlan Catlett stated it will be farther away than it is presently and it appears as though
there's not a house close by on the Fox property.
Ms. Mather asked Mr. Cheran if it is possible to ask Mr. Haley to give them a footprint of the
house as it affects the property and come back to the BZA. Mr. Cheran stated this is up to the Board
members.
Mr. Perry stated that his problem with the whole situation is he cannot support a variance
without knowing the width of the lot and where the structure is going to go. Therefore, we don't know
how much variance we have to grant. Mr. Perry stated that with the shape of the lot, the only thing he
can see to do is to have the lot surveyed.
Mr. Haley stated from fence line to fence line, there's almost 100' - about 98'. That's in
between where the house is going to be located.
Chairman Catlett told Mr. Haley that the concern of the Board is without knowing the exact
width of the lot, it's hard to determine exactly the amount of the variance to be granted. She asked him
if he had had the property surveyed. Mr. Haley stated they surveyed property line to property line, but
that was it.
Mr. Perry made a motion to table this variance request until the Board has sufficient information
required to grant the variance that is needed. Mr. Rinker seconded the motion and it passed
unanimously.
Chairman Catlett advised Mr. Haley to get with Mr. Cheran so he could explain what it is that he
needs to get to come back to the meeting next month.
Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals
Minutes of Mardi 21, 2006 Minute Book Page 1366
PUBLIC HEARING
Variance Request #03-06 of Matthew Robertson, for a 36' side yard variance. This property is
located on East Parkins Mill Road (Route 644), Lot 51, and is identified with Property Identification
Number 77-A-51 in the Shawnee Magisterial District.
ACTION — VARIANCE TABLED
Mr. Henry gave the staff report. Frederick County adopted zoning in 1967. The Frederick
County historical zoning map shows this property was zoned A-2 (Agricultural General) in 1967. The
property setback lines at the adoption of the zoning ordinance were 35' for the fronts, 25' for the rear
and 15' for the side yards. Frederick County amended its Ordinance in 1989 to change the A-2 zoning
districts to the current RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District, making the current setbacks for the property
60' front, 50' rear and 50' on both sides. This variance would change the setbacks for the side yards to
14'.
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 36' for both side yards. 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
14' 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. Henry further stated that there is some steep grade toward the rear of the property, not
allowing the applicant to build the house in that area, as well as the drainfield being in this portion of the
parcel. That is why Mr. Robertson has requested to build the house in the top part, near the road. The
width is 70'. Mr. Henry stated that the applicant has submitted two floor plans with slightly different
square footage. Someone is here today to represent Mr. Robertson, who is not available.
Mr. Perry asked Mr. Henry if the proposed dwelling is going to be perpendicular with the road
out front, with the front property line. If it isn't, the lot is not 70' wide perpendicular to the side lot line
because the 70' is on an angle. Mr. Henry stated that he didn't exactly follow what Mr. Perry is saying.
Mr. Perry said if you go to the road, Route 50, that front lot line is not perpendicular to the side
lot lines. It says that it's 70' at that point, but if you come back and go perpendicular to the lot lines, the
lot is not going to be 70' wide. Mr. Perry's question is, is the house going to be parallel with Route 50
or perpendicular to the lot lines. Mr. Henry stated the applicant's representative could probably answer
that, because two different plans were submitted.
Mr. Perry stated this is the same situation as the last request.
Chainnan Catlett asked if the applicant is present and Mr. Henry stated that someone is here to
Frederick Countv Board of Zoning Appeals
Minutes of March 21, 2006 Minute Book Page 1367
represent him. Mr. Robertson's wife is in labor.
Mr. John Goode approached the podium and identified himself as Mr. Robertson's stepfather.
Mr. Goode stated that realizing the road isn't perpendicular to the side lines of the property, the
orientation of the house if you run it parallel with the side lines, may be less than 70'. But if you were to
locate the house parallel with those side lines, the house also wouldn't be perpendicular with the road,
but to take advantage of the most use of the property, Mr. Goode believes his son is going to locate the
house parallel with the property lines. If you rotate it and the reason he's asking for as much variance as
he is, in case he did want to have a little rotation, because the drive will be coming down approximately
parallel with the property lines and the house as well. Depending upon the width of the house he
chooses, he's going with the pre -fab home and they come in different dimensions, varying from 24' to
38' or 40'. Depending on the variance he got approved, he was going to try and narrow that down. Mr.
Goode said that Mr. Robertson has a couple of floor plans picked out, but there is an existing drainfield
in the back of the property and he can't build back there. Mr. Goode stated that Mr. Robertson has a
contract, which he believes is extended until April 1St due to the schedule of this meeting, on the
property that's contingent on the variance approval, going with the 36' variance, giving 14' on either
side, that may be a little less due to the geometry of the road orientation where they show the 70'. But
actually on a plat he has that was for the permit, it looks as if the line to the left actually isn't parallel to
the line on the right, it looks like it's over more as well.
Chairman Catlett asked Mr. Goode if the Board could look at what he just referenced and Mr.
Goode handed the sheet to Chairman Catlett. Mr. Perry didn't think they could go by that, it was a
sewer permit.
Mr. Perry asked Mr. Goode if Mr. Robertson knew now whether he's going to build a 41' wide
house or not. Mr. Goode responded Mr. Robertson hasn't definitely decided which floor plan he wants
because if he gets less variance approved, that would change. If the Board approves the 36' variance, he
not only wanted some land for the house but also if he ever wanted to add a deck on, he wanted to have
a little leeway in the location of the house.
Mr. Rinker stated they need to know the size of the house so they know what variance to grant.
Mr. Goode stated that Mr. Robertson was hoping to have 14' just so he could utilize putting the
house at that location.
Mr. Perry made a motion to table this variance request until they have the information they need
to grant the variance. Mr. Rinker seconded the motion and it passed with a majority vote.
Ms. Mather questioned whether the Board can request that Mr. Cheran not present anything
unless there is a house location survey. Mr. Cheran stated that he will look into the stakeout survey, to
see if he is able to require that.
Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals
Minutes of March 21, 2006 Minute Book Page 1368
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 4:35 p.m.
by unanimous vote.
Respectfully submitted,
Theresa B. Catlett, Chairman
Bev Dellinger, Secretary
Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals
Minutes of March 21, 2006 Minute Book Page 1369