Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
BZA 08-21-07 Meeting Agenda
AGENDA FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS The Board Room Frederick County Administration Building 107 N. Kent Street Winchester, Virginia August 21, 2007 3:25 p.m. CALL TO ORDER 1) Determination of a Quorum FILE COPY 2) Minutes of July 17, 2007 PUBLIC HEARING 3) Variance Request 908-07 of Franklin and Candy Miller for a 23.5 foot left yard variance, resulting in a 26.5 foot left yard setback, and a 17 foot right yard variance, resulting in a 33 foot right side setback, for the construction of a single family dwelling. This property is located on Woods Mill Road (Route 660) in John Hepfer's Subdivision No. 1, Lot 3, and is identified with Property Identification Number 55A-1-3 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. 4) Variance Request #10-07 of Jeffery Neff for a 19 foot side yard variance on both sides, resulting in side yard setbacks of 31 feet. This property is located in Lone Oak Subdivision, Lot 38, Block A, on the southern side of Virginia Drive (Route 710), and is identified by Property Identification Number 86B -4-A-38 in the Opequon Magisterial District. 5) Variance Request #11-07 of James Marlow, submitted by Richard Marlow, for a 63.4 foot rear yard variance, resulting in a rear yard setback of 36.6 feet. This property is located off of Wardensville Grade (Route 608), on Gobblers Knob Lane, Lot 15, and is identified by Property Identification Number 51 -A -78A in the Back Creek Magisterial District. 6) Variance Request #12-07 of Eagle Place Ind., Inc., for a 14 foot rear yard variance, resulting in a rear yard setback of 11 feet, for the construction of a wooden deck. This property is located on Purcell Lane (Route 721), and is identified by Property Identification Number 53A -A-109 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. 7) Variance Request #13-07 of Eagle Place Ind., Inc., for a 14 foot rear yard variance, resulting in a rear yard setback of 11 feet, for the construction of a wooden deck. This property is located on Purcell Lane (Route 721), and is identified by Property Identification Number 53A -A-111 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. 8) Variance Request #14-07 of C. Robert and Barbara Kidwell, submitted by Chris Boyce, for a 20 foot front yard variance, resulting in a front yard setback of 40 feet, and a 34 foot variance on each side, resulting in a side yard variance of 16 feet on each side, for the construction of a single family dwelling. This property is located on Pries Lane, Lot 13 — Dunbar, and is identified by Property Identification Number 42-A-114 in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. 10) Variance Request #15-07 of Jeremy and Deborah Kidwell, submitted by Chris Boyce, for a 40 foot front yard variance, resulting in a front yard setback of 20 feet, and a 36 foot variance on each side, resulting in a side yard variance of 14 feet on each side, for the construction of a single family dwelling. This property is located on Dunbar Lane, Lot 16, and is identified by Property Identification Number 42-A-117 in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. 11) Other 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, July 17, 2007. PRESENT: Theresa Catlett, Chairman, Opequon District; Robert Perry, Vice Chairman, Stonewall District; Dwight Shenk, Gainesboro District; Eric Lowman, Red Bud District; Jay Givens, Back Creek District; Kevin Scott, Shawnee District; and, Robert W. Wells, Member -At - Large. ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Mark R. Cheran, Zoning and Subdivision Administrator; Robert T. Mitchell, Jr., Attorney for Frederick County; 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. Lowman, the minutes for the June 19, 2007 meeting were unanimously approved as presented. The cut-off date for the August meeting is July 20, 2007. PUBLIC HEARING Appeal Application #09-07 of Skyridge, LLC, to appeal the determination of the Zoning Administrator in the administration of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance pertaining to Section 165-52, Permitted Residential Density; Exception. The subject property is located at Duck Run (Route 608) just south of Shawneeland in Section 32, and is identified with Property Identification Number 69-A-1 in the Back Creek Magisterial District. ACTION —APPEAL DENIED, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DETERMINATION UPHELD Mr. Cheran stated this is an appeal of the determination of the Zoning Administrator in the administration of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, Section 165-52, Permitted Residential Density in the Rural Areas District. Mr. Cheran stated for the record that Mr. Douglas Napier is representing the applicant. Mr. Cheran asked Mr. Napier to speak to the appeal. Mr. Doug Napier identified himself as an attorney from Front Royal and he is representing the appellant, Skyridge, LLC. Mr. Napier identified Greg Koons, owner of HT Development, Larry Weaver, project manager for Racey Engineering, and Joe Brogan, surveyor. inute loCok Pap 1465 vderic f Jont���7 f Zoning Appeals mutes o u y /, Mr. Napier stated that the overview is that in late July of 2005, Mr. Koons and Donnie Poe, who is the principal with Skyridge (Mr. Poe cannot be here because of a prior commitment, but he will be available by speaker phone to speak to this issue), were considering buying the northern portion, 194 acre parcel, which they did ultimately purchase. Originally, the parcel was all of the 194 acres and the 68 acres. They read the ordinance, and prior to closing on the lot went to see the Zoning Administrator and asked him if they were reading the ordinance correctly, that the permitted density of five acres in the 60/40 split in the RA District meant that the permitted residential density could be put on the northern portion of the property. They were informed that yes, you can put all of the permitted density, which translates to 52 lots, on the northern half. Mr. Napier further stated that the Zoning Administrator also said that, however, Wardensville Grade will have to be widened to allow for a 50 foot VDOT right-of- way. Based on that representation, Skyridge and HT Development went to Mr. Brogan, had a new plat drawn up which shows a 50 foot dedicated right-of-way, and then went to closing in August 2005. Mr. Napier gave the Board members some handouts. The property was subdivided at the closing into two lots, one of 194 acres, which is the subject of this appeal, and the southern portion of 68 acres. Thereafter, in late January or early February 2006, Larry Weaver had a series of face-to-face meetings and emails where he made a presentation of an actual lot layout, first of 51 lots and then 52 lots, showing how the property would be developed. Mr. Weaver submitted two pre -preliminary layouts of the property. The first one showed 51 lots, and at the face-to-face meeting, Mr. Cheran indicated that he needed two entrances off of Wardensville Grade as opposed to the one entrance that was originally shown. But before that was done, Mr. Weaver sent an email with a pre -preliminary lot layout and showed it to Mr. Cheran and asked if the lot layout and entrances were okay and Mr. Cheran wrote back, "The plan with the roads looks good to me — give me a call". It was determined that an additional lot could be placed on there, making 52 lots, which would be the permitted density under the Frederick County Ordinance. Mr. Napier further stated that in March 2007, there was a meeting with the Zoning Administrator, Pat Racey, who is the engineer with Racey Engineering, Mr. Poe, Mr. Koons, Mr. Weaver, Mr. Brogan and Mr. Napier, when Mr. Cheran again admitted that he had indicated that 52 lots could be put on that northern parcel and that was his oral opinion. Thereafter, in May 2007 following a request for a determination letter, Mr. Cheran on May 25, 2007, gave the determination letter that is in the agenda packet, saying that only 38 lots were allowed and not 52 lots. Mr. Napier stated the first argument with this determination is the concept of vested rights that in good faith, before they purchased the property and before incurring thousands of dollars, Mr. Poe and Mr. Koons wanted to make sure that they indeed were reading the ordinance correctly that they could get 52 lots on that parcel of land. They were assured that they could and in good faith reliance on that went to closing. Further, in reliance on that, they incurred professional expenses and the preliminary layouts were submitted, all this expense was done in good faith and reliance that they could indeed do what they'd been told they could do, and thereafter found out it was said that it could not be done. That makes a huge difference to an owner of property because your profit comes from the additional lots. The second part of Mr. Napier's argument is that if you read the Frederick County Ordinance closely, there could be construed to be ambiguity in that what the Ordinance says. It says the maximum density permitted on any parcel or group of parcels cannot exceed the equivalent of one unit per five acres as determined by the size of the parent tract as it existed on the date of the adoption of this Section. riAute Book Pag 1466 ,denck C�i nt� ��rOd7of Zoning Appeals mutes o u y , It was adopted in December 1991. In 1991, the property was the 232 acres as opposed to 194 acres. If you divide the maximum density of five acres into the 232 acres, it comes out to 52 lots. Nowhere in the Ordinance does it say that the 52 acres, if there's a later subdivision, that all of the density has to be put on one lot or the other lot or has to be split in two. There's an inherent ambiguity in the Ordinance which is why the appellants went to the Zoning Administrator and wanted to make sure they were reading this correctly and they were assured repeatedly that they were. The determination of the Zoning Administrator that only 38 lots could go on one side of the road and the remainder of the lots must go to the other side of the road is not supported by anything in the Frederick County Ordinance. Mr. Napier cited a court case from Warren County, Carolina Cement v Board of Zoning Appeals, wherein Judge Whetsell ruled, "The rule which prevails in most jurisdictions, at least in the absence of any statute to the contrary since zoning ordinances are in derogation of the common law and operate to deprive an owner of a use thereof which would otherwise be lawful, they could be strictly construed in favor of the property owner". What Judge Whetsell ruled is that when you have a zoning ordinance, it is in derogation of common law — common law means you can do with your property what you want. We all know that zoning is necessary, but nevertheless, zoning does operate to deprive an owner what would otherwise be the lawful use of his property. If there is an ambiguity, if there's two ways of reading it, it's got to be read in favor of the property owner. Mr. Napier contends that if there is an ambiguity in the Ordinance, which there is because Mr. Cheran has read it the other way saying that the development rights have to be split, you can't read that into the Ordinance expressly. Mr. Greg Koons, owner of HT Development, stated that in the initial meeting held before purchasing the property, there was a plat drawn that was surveyed that showed the whole parcel with the road going through. Mr. Koons and Mr. Poe were at the meeting and Mr. Poe had asked specifically if they could put that onto this parcel once they purchased this smaller piece and it was divided, and it was indicated that they could. Then at the meeting in January was when a preliminary layout was presented to him with the density showing on the one parcel, and that's when he indicated about having the additional road. It was re -worked and sent over again. Mr. Perry asked Mr. Koons if he owns the other 38 acres and Mr. Koons responded no, when it was purchased the contract said it was only going to be the property on the north side of the road. Mr. Perry asked did Mr. Koons not think when he broke up the property into two parcels, the Ordinance would pertain to the parcel that you purchased and whoever buys the 38 acres is going to pertain to them. In other words, Mr. Perry stated that if you put 52 lots on your part, how many will go on the other 38 acres. Mr. Koons stated that Mr. Poe is the one experienced in buying property and Mr. Koons is a minor partner and his experience in the development is minimal. Mr. Perry said it seems to him if he's allowed to put 52 on the big tract, then whoever buys the other tract won't be able to put anything. Chairman Catlett asked Mr. Koons if the complete discussion centered around their purchasing the 194 acres and not the other parcel, and Mr. Koons stated that's correct. Mr. Larry Weaver, project manager with Racey Engineering, stated his involvement with this is that they did the layout based off of the interpretation they had gotten on those Codes. They had done one layout with a single entrance showing 51 lots. He sent an email asking if he'd had a chance to look at it and the answer back was "Larry, we need to have a meeting about this". At that meeting, they discussed about needing the additional entrance. They went back and laid out another roadway section in the lots with the two entrances. Mi ute BBo k Page 1467 r�nde1 . 1 g'13 gr 7of Zoning Appeals mutes o u Mr. Joe Brogan of Brogan Land Surveying stated that he was involved early on with this when Mr. Poe was talking about purchasing the land. He did a boundary survey of the entire parcel. When Mr. Poe and Mr. Koons spoke with Mr. Cheran and he informed them that they needed to subdivide the south side of the road, Mr. Brogan asked Mr. Poe to make sure that by doing that he would not lose any rights in the subdivision. Mr. Cheran said no and when Mr. Poe told Mr. Brogan that it would not affect it, Mr. Brogan asked Mr. Poe does that mean that the 68 acres has no subdivision rights left. Reiterating that in the March meeting with Mr. Cheran, Mr. Brogan said Mr. Poe bought this land based off what you told him - that he would not lose any rights by subdividing that parcel. He saw three sets of plans showing 52 lots on 194 acres; it clearly says it. Mr. Brogan said to Mr. Cheran we don't subdivide in this County very often and that's why we came to you. After the email that said everything looked okay, Mr. Poe authorized him to stake the rough road layout. Mr. Robert Mitchell, Attorney, is appearing on behalf of the Zoning Administrator, the County's representative in interpreting the Zoning Ordinance. The Board of Zoning Appeals jurisdiction provides that you are authorized to hear appeals of administrative determinations made by the Zoning Administrator in the interpretation of the Ordinance, and variances. What's before you is an appeal of an administrative determination. That administrative interpretation was requested on behalf of the applicant by his counsel and you have in your agenda packet the written administrative determination made by Mr. Cheran, interpreting the Section of the Zoning Ordinance that is at issue. That has to do with determining the density on this 194 acre parcel of land. That's the issue before you and is the central issue. Mr. Mitchell further stated that Mr. Napier said there are two issues; how you interpret that ordinance, but he's also saying there's an issue about what they contend Mr. Cheran told them. Mr. Mitchell stated that Section 165-52(A) has been on the books in Frederick County since 1991. It has been in the terminology that is currently in the Ordinance and the staff report lays out the basis for his analysis of that Ordinance. The fact of the matter is that in Frederick County in the RA District there is a maximum density permitted on any parcel of the equivalent of one unit per five acres. As shown in the staff comments, in applying this Ordinance, the County first takes a look at the plat that's been submitted and determines the number of acres and divides it by five, and that's what was done here. Mr. Cheran took the number of acres, which was 194 acres, divided by five, and the presumed density is 38 acres. But then there's a further limiting factor that when they passed the Ordinance in 1991, they were establishing in the RA District, in the future, the development would be limited to one unit every five acres. That's what you could expect for the future, so you have to look at what was the parent tract and if the parcel that's before you had been subdivided off of the parent tract, you have to look at the parent tract. We looked at the parent tract in this case and that was 262 acres and then you have to look which would yield 52 units. Has that parent tract been subdivided and lots created and in this case it had been subdivided into just the two parcels, but there hadn't been any subdivision on it. So the overall density is that you could still have 38 lots on the 194 acres which would leave the remainder of the 52 lots on the remaining parcel. What they're suggesting is that when you subdivide, you can transfer all those development rights onto the one parcel and leave the other parcel with zero development rights. The County does not have a transferable development rights ordinance. There's no basis in Frederick County to transfer development rights from one parcel to another. What this Ordinance contemplated is that there wouldn't be development in excess of one unit per five acres on any parcel or group of parcels. Mr. Mitchell would submit that there's no ambiguity about this Ordinance, there's no ambiguity about how it's been interpreted. It has been correctly interpreted by the Zoning Administrator and that specifically is the issue before you. 1468 Mi A, ute, look Page Kfenck F�OByB%rd of Zoning Appeals inutes o u U(07 Mr. Mitchell stated that with respect to the issue about what statements may have been made by Mr. Cheran in the process, he would like to, with the Board's permission, ask Mr. Cheran some questions to focus the issue to expedite putting this information before you. Chairman Catlett stated that would be fine. Mr. Mitchell asked Mr. Cheran to address what they have testified about in the original meeting, apparently before they had purchased the property. Was there any discussion at that point about density and was there any discussion about density on only one portion of the property? Mr. Cheran responded it was the whole 262 acres that was discussed. Mr. Mitchell asked if Mr. Cheran was asked the question that if they divided the property, whether they could put the entire 52 acres on a portion of the property. Mr. Cheran said it was never brought up. Mr. Mitchell asked if Mr. Cheran had ever interpreted the Ordinance such that all of the development rights from the parent tract would go on one of the parcels. Mr. Cheran stated he never had, because that's not what the Ordinance says. Mr. Givens asked if the question was ever asked if the lots could be put on one side of the road as long as it was still the 262 acres. Mr. Cheran stated that wasn't brought up during any meetings. Hypothetically, it could have happened with a legislative action if it was the whole property. Mr. Givens asked if it had remained one lot and through the potential of some type of legislative action, all of the lots could have been on one side of the road. Mr. Cheran said it could, but it would have to be a legislative action. Mr. Mitchell asked Mr. Cheran, referencing the email, what was the subject of the discussion and what gave rise to that email and your reply? Mr. Cheran stated they had talked in depth about roads, because in the Subdivision Ordinance you can't have any road or cul-de-sac length greater than 1,000 feet. They were looking at the road issues and what Mr. Cheran sent back in the email was yes, the road issues looked fine. Thev were doing a loop road which is allowed in our Subdivision Ordinance and gets them out of another legislative action for cul-de-sac length. Mr. Cheran stated in the email that they needed to meet to talk about other issues. Mr. Mitchell stated they've attached a copy of the plat that came along with that email and he asked Mr. Cheran his response to that email was, "The plan with the roads looks good — give me a call". Mr. Mitchell said when you say the plan with the roads, what were you referring to? Mr. Cheran replied he was referring to the roads, not the general layout at all. Minut, Jo k Page 1469 Frederick '� nt� 13%rOd?of Zoning Appeals mutes o u Mr. Mitchell said under the Subdivision Ordinance, a subdivision of this nature that has public roads, what is the first step in the subdivision process. Mr. Cheran replied the first step is if you want to submit a rural subdivision, you have to do a preliminary sketch plan which shows a general layout of the development. Once that's done, it goes to review agencies, namely VDOT and Public Works, staff reviews it, makes comments and sends it back. Once that review comes to the Planning Department with the fee, we officially review and comment on it. Mr. Mitchell asked if there is a checklist of things that have to be submitted with that and a fee that has to be paid and Mr. Cheran replied that's correct. Mr. Mitchell said when a preliminary sketch plan is submitted on a subdivision, is that the time in which the analysis under the Zoning Ordinance Section concerning density would be done. Mr. Cheran replied that's correct. Mr. Mitchell asked if a preliminary sketch plan was ever filed in this matter and Mr. Cheran replied no sir. Mr. Mitchell asked if a fee was ever paid with the preliminary sketch plan and Mr. Cheran responded no sir. Mr. Mitchell asked Mr. Cheran how long he's been the Zoning Administrator and Mr. Cheran replied five years. Prior to that, Mr. Mitchell asked how long he's been with the Planning Department and Mr. Cheran stated four years. Mr. Mitchell asked during that period of time, has your interpretation of the Ordinance reflected in your zoning administrative determination in this case been consistent with the manner in which you have interpreted this Ordinance in the past. Mr. Cheran replied that is correct. Mr. Mitchell asked Mr. Cheran, to his knowledge has this Ordinance always been interpreted that way by the zoning staff administratively since 1991 and Mr. Cheran said that is correct. Mr. Mitchell asked since you've been with the County and the Planning Department, has this Ordinance been so interpreted by the Board of Supervisors and Mr. Cheran stated that is correct. Mr. Mitchell asked Mr. Cheran, to his knowledge is this the manner in which the Board of Supervisors has interpreted this Ordinance since 1991 and Mr. Cheran replied yes. Mr. Mitchell stated it's clear what the proper interpretation of this Ordinance is; it's been a consistent administrative and a consistent governmental body interpretation, consistent with the way it was interpreted in this case. Therefore, on the central issue before you, Mr. Mitchell thinks it is clear 1470 E ir�ute BBook Page �denck C�Ont�,�Bq��rOd7of Zoning Appeals mutes of u y , that the administrative interpretation of the density which should be applied to this tract was correct. With respect to the additional issue that's been raised, which is perhaps not even clearly within the domain of what's before you, they contend that Mr. Cheran said certain things before they bought the property. The law is clear. What's called estoppel doesn't run against a locality. What that means is if an administrator or employee of a jurisdiction makes a statement that's not correct under the Ordinance, the County is not bound by that verbal statement. They're not estopped from applying their Ordinances correctly if there's been some mistake or error made in interpretation of that. Mr. Cheran is clear in the fact that he never said that, but Mr. Mitchell's point is even if he said it, that does not bind the County and does not constitute a legal interpretation of that Ordinance. They have suggested in the application they have filed that they somehow have vested rights, vested in their ability to put 52 lots on this property. Virginia is clear on the vested rights law under Section 15.2-2307 of the Code of Virginia, the legislature is codified which constitutes vested rights. In order to have vested rights, there has to be a significant affirmative governmental act. A statement by the Zoning Administrator is not a significant affirmative governmental act. The statute gives certain things that constitute a significant affirmative governmental act such as the governing body approves an application for rezoning for specific use, or the governing body of the Board of Zoning Appeals has granted a special exception or special use permit, or the Board of Zoning Appeals has approved an exception, or the governing body of some designated agency has approved a preliminary subdivision plat. It's governmental action that significant affirmative governmental action that gives rise to vested rights. There was no approval of this preliminary plat; they had never submitted the preliminary sketch. The County had never gone through the process to do the density evaluation pursuant to the normal procedures with the submission of a preliminary sketch. With respect to the email that they talk about having sent in the plat with all those lots shown, Mr. Mitchell said if you look at that and look at Mr. Cheran's response in light of what he said the discussion was about, he writes back and says the plan with the roads looks okay — call me. Mr. Mitchell submits that the density determination made by the Zoning Administrator was correct and there's no basis for vested rights or any legal basis for saying that this property can be developed into 52 lots, which is well in excess of the County Ordinance requirement of one unit for every five acres. Chairman Catlett asked Mr. Cheran as they look at the 194 acre parcel, the remaining acreage, does that need to stay at the percentage that it is at this moment. Mr. Cheran stated under the rural preservation subdivision, at least 40% must be kept contiguous with that parcel. You get one development right on it, but you can't divide it, add to it and can't take away from it. Chairman Catlett asked Mr. Cheran if he's saying it needs to remain 40% of the 194 acres and Mr. Cheran stated that is correct. Mr. Givens asked if it is 38 acres, is that 38 two acre lots plus one development right and Mr. Cheran stated that is correct. Mr. Napier stated he would like the opportunity to put Mr. Poe on speaker phone and let him recount his conversations with the Zoning Administrator. Mr. Napier would also like to point out the statute that Mr. Mitchell mentioned, he's going to read the most relevant part. "Nothing in this article of the Code of Virginia shall be construed to authorize the impairment of any vested right. Without Minute Bo k Page 1471 Frederick 9 nt Bg2�rO7dof Zoning Appeals Minutes o July T7, limiting the time rights might otherwise vest, a landowner's rights shall be deemed vested in a land use- and seand such vesting shall not be affected by subsequent amendment to a Zoning Ordinance when the landowner obtains or is the beneficiary of a significant affirmative governmental act which remains in effect allowing development of a specific project, relies in good faith on the significant affirmative governmental act and incurs extensive obligations or substantial expense in diligent pursuit of the specific project and reliance on the significant affirmative governmental act." More specifically, the statute says, "For purposes of this section and without limitation, the following are deemed to be significant affirmative governmental acts allowing development of a specific project: The governing body or its designated agent has approved a preliminary subdivision plat, site plan or plan of development for the land owner's property and the applicant diligently pursues approval of the final plat or plan within a reasonable period of time under the circumstances". Mr. Napier pointed out that the interpretation that all 52 lots could be put on the north side of the road on the 194 acre parcel is entirely consistent with the Frederick County Ordinance because you still can have the 40% in that lot. There's nothing in the Code which indicates otherwise. Also, Mr. Napier pointed out this wasn't an isolated plan that was sent to Mr. Cheran where he was just approving a small part of it; there were three specific discussions about development rights and which side of the road they could be put on. There were two specific plats that were given to Mr. Cheran showing the lot layout and he suggested alterations to the roads but not to the number of lots. At no time was it ever indicated that they couldn't do it. Mr. Napier is asking the Board to consider the entirety of this flow of conversations. Mr. Wells stated he's been in business for 37 years and he's been in Court before with wonderful lawyers and they asked him if he had anything in writing that substantiates what took place in the verbal discussion. Mr. Wells told them no, he didn't, and the Judge says it's not easy for me because it's a "he said, she said". The conversations are wonderful and what Mr. Cheran said and what Mr. Poe heard is great, but there are two sides to every story. If Mr. Wells was developing those lots, he would have had a letter that said he had the right to do that. Mr. Napier stated in the absence of that, you have to look at the correspondence and documentation that did pass. Mr. Wells stated that he can look at the correspondence two different ways, from Mr. Cheran's standpoint and from the other standpoint. Mr. Perry stated that Mr. Cheran's email reply doesn't say it meets the requirements. Mr. Napier asked if it would be helpful to hear from Mr. Poe. Chairman Catlett stated the Board has not done that before if someone isn't present and she doesn't believe it's appropriate now. There was no one present who wished to speak in favor of this appeal. Mr. Walt Floyd, Mr. Mike Poole, Mr. Boyd Pitcock, and Mr. Tony Brill spoke in opposition to this appeal for density, environmental and transportation reasons. Chairman Catlett closed the public hearing portion of the meeting. MinuteBook Page 1472 Frederick c nt 3nrd� f Zoning Appeals Mmutes of- July T7, Discussion Chairman Catlett stated that she has a concern where, if the general public is contacting the County, the average person should be able to rely on the information that they get there and when it's said that the County does not have to stand behind a comment, where else is the public supposed to go. She also has some concerns about the email where perhaps Mir. Cheran says that he was referring to the roads but also what sort of implied liability is there or responsibility is there to say, well the roads look good, however it appears you may have too many lots. Chairman Catlett sees a lot of questions in this situation. Mr. Givens tends to disagree with Chairman Catlett on staffs comments. Mr. Givens served some 33 years as a local government official and one of the things you try to do is be helpful to the public. Maybe sometimes you get yourself in trouble with comments that you're making. One of the things Mr. Givens sees is there is a preliminary plat procedure process that's set forth in the Frederick County Code and to his knowledge, that process was not even initiated. He's sure there were conversations and there were probably misunderstandings. He doesn't believe it was anybody's intent for this to happen. The one comment that Mr. Mitchell made that's more important than anything is how do we interpret this Section 165-52(A) of the Ordinance? Is that residual parcel, the one lot which was broken off from the parent tract, is it entitled to the 38 lots under the Code or is it entitled to the full lots of the parent tract. Mr. Givens believes you've got to put a sense of reasonableness on any Ordinance and he doesn't see how you can apply any more than the 38 lots for this. Chairman Catlett stated that she knows that Mr. Cheran's position is that it's RA and that the minimum lots need to be five acres. She asked if there is any other legislative option that's available to the applicant? Maybe a rezoning? Mr. Cheran clarified there are three kinds of developments you can do in the Rural Areas. There's the traditional five acre lot, a family division where you can go as small as two acres and there's a rural preservation subdivision which Skyridge is looking to do. When you do a rural preservation subdivision, you have your densities and you have to leave at least 40% of that parent tract set aside. One to five is the density in the RA areas. This property is located outside the Urban Development Area and the Sewer and Water Service Area, and the policy of the Comprehensive Policy Plan from 2003 does not allow for that. The applicant can apply for it, but he doubts the Board of Supervisors would approve it. Mr. Givens made a motion to uphold the decision of the Zoning Administrator and Mr. Perry seconded the motion. The vote was a majority vote and the motion passed. PUBLIC HEARING Variance Request #07-07 of Bobcat Builders for a 16 foot side yard variance on the right side and a 26 foot side yard variance on the left side, resulting in a 34 foot building restriction line on both sides, for the construction of a single family dwelling. This property is located on Lot 50, Plat 1, Section 32 in Shawneeland at the intersection of Capon Springs and Arbutus Trails, and is identified with Property Identification Number 69A-1-32-50 in the Back Creek Magisterial District. iRuteBo k Page 1473 � eric rpglaty B�r0d7of Zoning Appeals mutes o y ACTION — VARIANCE APPROVED Before proceeding, Chairman Catlett excused herself from this action and turned the meeting over to Vice Chairman Perry. Mr. Cheran presented the staff report. The applicant is requesting a 16 foot side yard variance on the right side and a 26 foot side yard variance on the left side, resulting in a 34 foot building restriction line on both sides, for the construction of a single family dwelling. With the current setbacks and the size of the property, there's no buildable area. Frederick County adopted zoning in 1967. The historical map shows this property was zoned Al (Agricultural Limited) in 1967 and the setback lines were 35 feet front and 15 feet on the sides. Frederick County amended its zoning in 1989 and changed the Al zoning district to RA, making the current setbacks for the property 60 feet front, 50 feet rear, 50 feet right side and 60 feet left side (corner lot). Mr. Cheran further stated that based on the small size of this property and the large setbacks associated with the RA zoning district, the applicant is requesting the 16 foot variance on the right side and the 26 foot variance on the left side. The majority of the properties located in the Shawneeland Subdivision are zoned R5 (Residential Recreational Community) and have a setback of 35 feet off both Capon Springs and Arbutus Trails, 25 feet to the rear and ten feet on the side. 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. Mr. Cheran stated the applicant is seeking this variance in order to build a 32'x26' single family dwelling. Should this variance be granted, the building setbacks on this property would be 60 feet from Arbutus Trial (front), 50 feet from the rear and would change to 34 feet on both sides. It appears that this variance meets the intent of the Code of Virginia, Section 15.2-2309(2) and this request may be justified. Ms. Brandon Jones stated they're asking for the variance in order to build a single family dwelling. With the size of the lot and the current setbacks, they can't build anything there. Mr. Shenk asked the conditions of the road. Ms. Jones stated that where this lot is there's a gravel road. Further back into the subdivision, it's pretty bad and you would need to cut in roads. This lot is easily accessible. Mr. Shenk asked if there's a Homeowners Association to take care of the roads and Ms. Jones replied she didn't know. Mr. Cheran stated that in Shawneeland, the Sanitary District takes care of all the roads there. Mr. Shenk stated it doesn't appear to be in Shawneeland and Mr. Cheran apologized and told Mr. Shenk that he's correct, it isn't in Shawneeland. Minute, look Page 1474 Frederic c nt Bg2�r0d7of Zoning Appeals Mmutes of �u�y �7, Mr. Robert Priest of Bobcat Builders stated there isn't a Homeowners Association. The roads are terrible but accessible and the power lines are in. Vice Chairman Perry asked if the surveyed lots have the pins in place. Mr. Priest stated yes, it's been surveyed and perced. Mr. Calvin Combs stated that he has property across the road and the roads are terrible. There's going to have to be some help with the roads because only two people right now take care of the roads. Mr. Givens asked if the Board will have to consider a variance on each house that develops and at what point does the density come to a point where roads become a question. Mr. Cheran replied the Board just considers the variance request. Prior to building a house, the applicant will meet other requirements, and after so many houses are built on the property, under the E & S Code, they've been making them cut in roads. Vice Chairman Perry closed the public hearing portion of the meeting. Discussion Mr. Scott made a motion to approve the variance request. Mr. Wells seconded the motion and the vote was a unanimous vote, with Chairman Catlett abstaining. PUBLIC HEARING Variance Request #08-07 of Franklin and Candy Miller for a 23.5 foot left yard variance, resulting in a 26.5 foot left yard setback, and a 17 foot right yard variance, resulting in a 33 foot right side setback, for the construction of a single family dwelling. This property is located on Woods Mill Road (Route 660) in John Hepfer's Subdivision No. 1, Lot 3, and is identified with Property Identification Number 55A-1-3 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. ACTION — REQUEST TABLED BY THE BZA UNTIL AUGUST 21, 2007 MEETING Mr. Cheran stated that the applicant, nor their representative, is present today. The applicant did not contact Mr. Cheran stating they would not be present. Mr. Scott made a motion to table this request until the regularly scheduled meeting on August 21, 2007. Mr. Wells seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. k1mutes inutQ look Page 1475 vderic Fgnty Bc��r07of Zoning Appeals o Ju y PUBLIC HEARING Variance Request #10-07 of Jeffery Neff for a 15 foot side yard variance on both sides, resulting in side yard setbacks of 35 feet. This property is located in Lone Oak Subdivision, Lot 38, Block A, on the southern side of Virginia Drive (Route 710), and is identified by Property Identification Number 86B -4-A-38 in the Opequon Magisterial District. ACTION — REQUEST TABLED BY THE APPLICANT UNTIL AUGUST 21, 2007 MEETING Mr. Cheran gave the staff report. The applicant is requesting a 15 foot side yard variance on both sides, resulting in a 35 foot side yard setback on both sides, for the construction of a 52'x32' single family dwelling. Current setbacks for the property result in a small buildable area on the property. Frederick County adopted zoning in 1967. The historical map shows this property as being zoned A2 (Agriculture General), and the setback lines were 35 feet for the fronts and 15 feet on the side. Frederick County amended its Ordinance in 1989 to change the A2 zoning district to the current RA zoning District, making the setbacks 60 feet front, 100 feet rear and 50 feet on both sides. Mr. Cheran stated that with the current setbacks, this property does have a buildable area of 25 feet by 85 feet which would allow a house to be built on the property. The applicant has requested reduced setbacks in order to build a 52 foot by 32 foot house (1,664 square feet per level). The proposed dwelling could be reoriented on the property and reduced slightly in size in order to meet the requirements of the current RA setbacks. Staff also noted that the majority of the homes in this neighborhood are small, one story structures typically less than 2,000 square feet and it would be in keeping with the character of the existing development for this applicant to construct a similar dwelling. Therefore, this variance request may not meet the requirements for a variance under the Code of Virginia. 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. Staff would assert that a primary residential structure, of a reasonable size, could be built on the property with application of the current RA setbacks and, therefore, would recommend denial of this variance application based upon the above requirements of the Code of Virginia. Mr. Duane Brown of Marsh & Legge Land Surveyors, representative for Mr. Neff, stated that Mr. Neff bought this property in September 2005 with the intention of building a house at a future time. Mr. Brown stated the lot is actually 125 feet wide, which originally had 15 foot side yard setbacks, allowing 95 feet to build on. With the current setback of 50 feet side yards, it allows only 25 feet to build on. The house could be turned lengthwise, but the width of 25 feet would restrict what you could build and would not be consistent with the area. Mr. Neff could put a mobile home there, but again, that i ute Book Page 1476 renderick MOT Bg2�r0d7of Zoning Appeals in of �u�y �7, would not be consistent with the character of the area. Mr. Brown stated that Mr. Neff has found some house plans that he really likes. Unfortunately, with the request they have submitted to reduce the side yard setbacks from 50 feet to 35 feet, giving a building area of 55 feet width, the smallest house that he can find plans for that he really wants to build is in excess of 55 feet, so even the requested variance is not going to be able to accommodate what Mr. Neff is hoping to achieve. Mr. Neff would like to revise his request, still to reduce the 50 feet on the left side to 35 feet, but on the right side he would like to request a reduction from 50 feet to 22 feet which would be a reduction of 28 feet. Mr. Scott asked if Mr. Neff is going to build a two level house and Mr. Neff stated no. Mr. Neff further stated that he has connections to this subdivision and he would do nothing to harm this subdivision. The property has been in his family since the subdivision was built. The adjoining property behind his property, where the pond is located, is by the family business, and the three lots down from the one he owns is owned by his father's cousin. Mr. Neff further stated that he had a hard time getting a septic system to fit on the lot due to wells that some people have. Mr. Wells asked if the house Mr. Neff wants to build is 55 feet wide and Mr. Brown stated there are a couple of options that Mr. Neff is looking at as far as house plans. Mr. Brown said what they would like to have is a total reduction to 68 feet as far as building area. Mr. Perry stated the Board has an unwritten policy that if you don't have what you want to build for the Board to consider a variance, then the Board won't consider it. The Board isn't going to give you carte blanche on 15 or 30 feet of variance so that you can put any size house you want. Mr. Perry stated that's the reason that when you build a house you have it surveyed in. Mr. Perry told Mr. Neff that until he has a definite plan of what he wants to do, this Board is not going to say it'll be okay to build a 68 foot house when right now the lot, although it's not exactly what you want, is a buildable lot. Mr. Wells told Mr. Neff to pick a plan and then bring it back. Chairman Catlett asked Mr. Neff, based on what he's submitted, do you have the drainfield on this. Would you intend to put that in the front or the rear. Mr. Neff stated it has to go in the back. But he had to get an easement off the back property to put in the whole system, but you have to then consider the reserve area. Chairman Catlett stated that the Board generally would like to see what exactly you are asking for and also, while they would try to make it a buildable lot, keep in mind that the Board may not necessarily be looking to give you a variance to meet any future expansion, just what you're proposing to build. Mr. Neff asked if he can come back with plans for a larger house and it has a garage on it and he keeps it off and then comes back and adds it on later, is that possible. Mr. Perry suggested that Mr. Neff pick a house that is as narrow as you can find and as long as you can find, because right now you have, technically, a buildable lot. indutQ look Page 1477 e eric Futy Bc rOd7of Zoning Appeals Minutes o u y Mr. Givens stated that he did drive through the subdivision and he thinks what Mr. Neff is requesting is somewhat reasonable, but things like a garage, even though it's attached, can come off an L on the back or the front. These are the types of things that help narrow the width of the house. Chairman Catlett asked Mr. Neff if he would like for the Board to continue with their decision or would he like to have the opportunity to table this for 30 days and Mr. Neff requested it be tabled. Mr. Perry made a motion to table this action until the August 21, 2007 meeting. Mr. Shenk seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. vote. OTHER As there were no other items to be discussed, the meeting adjourned at 5:20 p.m. by unanimous Respectfully submitted, Theresa B. Catlett, Chairman Bev Dellinger, Secretary Mindut� look Page 1478 � eric (�9 my B%rd of Zoning Appeals M mutes of 9u y y7, 07 VARIANCE APPLICATION 408-07 FRANKLIN AND CANDY MILLER Staff Report for the Board of Zoning Appeals Prepared: August 3, 2007 Staff Contact: Lauren E. Krempa, Planner I This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Board of Zoning Appeals to assist them in making a decision on this request. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS HEARING DATE: July 17, 2007 — Action Tabled, Applicant Not Present August 21, 2007 — Action Pending LOCATION: Woods Mill Road (Route 660) in John Hepfer's Subdivision No. 1, Lot 3 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Stonewall PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 55A-1-3 PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned: Rural Areas (RA) Land Use: Residential ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: North: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Residential South: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Residential East: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Agricultural West: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Residential VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting a 23.5 foot left yard variance, resulting in a 26.5 foot left yard setback, and a 17 foot right yard variance, resulting in a 33 foot right side setback, for the construction of a single family dwelling. REASON FOR VARIANCE: Exceptional narrowness of lot. Variance #08-07 — Franklin and Candy Miller August 3, 2007 Page 2 STAFF COMMENTS: 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 feet for the fronts and 15 feet 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. The Frederick County Board of Supervisors amended the setbacks for the RA Zoning District on February 28, 2007 making the current setbacks for the property: 60 feet to the front, 100 feet to the rear, and 50 feet to both sides. Based on the narrowness of this lot, the applicant is requesting a 17 foot variance on the right side and a 23.5 foot variance on the left side in order to construct a single family dwelling. The current RA setbacks, if enforced, would eliminate a buildable area on this lot. If granted, this variance would result in new setbacks of 60 feet to the front, 100 feet to the rear, 26.5 feet on the left, and 33 feet on the right. This application was tabled at the July 17, 2007 meeting because the applicant was not present at the time of the public hearing. Therefore, it would be appropriate for the Board of Zoning Appeals to hold the public hearing for this application at their August 21, 2007 meeting. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE AUGUST 21, 2007 MEETING: 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 23.5 foot left yard variance and a 17 foot right side variance in order to build a single family dwelling. Should this variance be granted, the building setbacks for this property would be 60 feet to the front, 100 feet to the rear, 26.5 feet on the left and 33 feet on the right side. 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. TY � I Ii OJ _ J I L n t pal �. Q a S, 4n ® , , 0 q Ef 2 Q c a rT w ;i 2 Qo ) ) 1 � t < N � 1�o�G Ic / i L OO�y`c yy ��� o �� ` L1 'J, Q-� 2`' P ci 0 e -i 00� c I < w C ��p• yyPOi�. s z mom )) ss �s f r c m as g o / LL U � cr 41 3 C cl h -Q7Q a 1 W sPo � w O x a � O m y Q. j cu U m l � O v �S � • �oHNs,M I C �ooa I If APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE IN THE COUN`-Y OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA -OFFICE USE ONLY Variance Application No. ��'�? Submittal Deadline: t�r1 Submittal Date: 61191o'7 For the meeting ofJ/}}"7 Q Fee Paid: � initials: Sign Deposit MUST BE TYPED OR FILLED OUT IN INK - PLEASE PRINT 1. The applicant is the owner other Z. (Check one) 2. APPLICANT: NAME: ADDRESS 1 (� �, e �� �Gi { pr��z TELEPHONE: S-� 0 A 3 `t`' OCCUPANT: (if different) NAME: �y n C" ADDRESS: 1A1AU L a,�D fft o�I t' �. TELEPHONE: 'No -(Q0-10573 3. The property is located at (give exact directions and include State Route numbers): 4. The property has a road frontage of Q-5, Oq feet and a depth of / 3� �1 `� feet and consists of b 0 acres (please be exact). I 5. The property is owned by t ll c_tl as evidenced by deed from � recorded (previous owner) in deed book no. on page of the deed books of the Clerk of the Court for Frederick County. Please atiaeh a copy of the irecojr-ded deed. 6. Magisterial District: 7. Property Identification No.: -+ 's5 P ` it `-�3 S. The existing zoning of the property is A 9. The existing use of the property is: R___S �,4 ;A 10. Adjoining Property: USE ZONING North.a C� East �, e South West ��sc��►i;�li 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.") 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 7 13. Additional comments, if any: 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: : R, Pte : v Address B S S Property ID # L Address -14 Property ID # S'�S _• l 3 Address Property ID # Address-?,Ib�� ICA Property ID # Address Property ID # Address Property ID # Address Property ID # )X 15. Provide a sketch of the property (you may use this page or attach engineer's drawing). 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. 0 NOTES: 1. FREDERICK COUNTY TAX MAP: 55A-1-3. 2. NO TITLE REPORT FURNISHED, EASEMENTS AND/OR OTHER ENCUMBRANCES OF RECORD MAY EXIST WHICH ARE NOT SHOWN HEREON. 3. THIS PLAT IS THE RESULT OF A CURRENT FIELD SURVEY. 4. VERTICAL DATUM IS ASSUMED. a N 55—A-136 1 JRW PROPERTIES & RENTALS, INC. 5g$ S�S�Sy---------- D.B. 591, PG. 630 I i ,' I I / / f I /pQ�F�-� PROPOSED e��P�� DRAINFIELD EASEMENT 1"7001 �'v /i i `'7 630 R=11,479.16' N28'18'04"E A=95.09' 4.55' '---631 O , `� ' / CD / i /I✓// 67 40' R/W (D. B. 251, PG. 162) LQ 00 V XM�1-3 �_- -- 633 SCALE No. 303025 LOT 3/------I _ LOT 2 j, 1.9684 f CRES ---- 634 0 �� i LOT 4 ' / - 635 i / 0 3 FV� 63P. 6�a � 26.5' PROPOSED p/yy ' / EXISTING STRUCTURES 6551 , ' PRQP0/9ED% 64, TO BE REMOVED O O O W /- � O 60' BRL� z o l `, / r EXISTING / ^-639, _. :-..:- ASPHALT R=11,479.16' N28'18'04"E GRADING PLAN LOT 3 JOHN M. HEWER'S SUBDIVISION NO. 1 STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA SCALE: 1" = 50' DATE JUNE 11, 2000y7 y FA � ��`NTGOMER i� �na�n � a�� ��rg«reer«rg group, ,7�rc. 160-9 Prosperity Dr. (540) 450-3236 VOICE Winchester, VA 22602 (540) 450-3235 FAX www.MECinc.b¢ -T 1 JOB # 07-012 A=95.09' 4.55' ROUTE 660 WOODS MILL ROAD 0")2." 40' R/W (D. B. 251, PG. 162) �PLTH BENJAMINGRAPHIC MONTGOMLic. SCALE No. 303025 ;0100 iy,IONAL 1 inch = 50 ft GRADING PLAN LOT 3 JOHN M. HEWER'S SUBDIVISION NO. 1 STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA SCALE: 1" = 50' DATE JUNE 11, 2000y7 y FA � ��`NTGOMER i� �na�n � a�� ��rg«reer«rg group, ,7�rc. 160-9 Prosperity Dr. (540) 450-3236 VOICE Winchester, VA 22602 (540) 450-3235 FAX www.MECinc.b¢ -T 1 JOB # 07-012 SENT BY: ERA OAKCREST REALTY; 6620986, jUN-113-"t S:1:jAM; frAdt tit Alii ri' EMENI' VARIAN CE # 0&_-0"7 (Number to be assigned by the Planning Dept.) I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application, and petition the Freder County Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) to grant a variance to the terms of the kreder County Zoning Ordinance as described herein. I agree to comply with any conditions for variance requited by the BZA. 1 authorize the members of the BZA and :Frederick County officials to go upon the for site inspection purposes. 1 understand that the sign issued to me when this application is submitted must be place . at the front property line at least seven (1) clays prior to the BZAu�blic: hearing, and maintai�i d 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 my knowledge, true. SIGNATURE OF A1PPLWAPt'lE' DATE b - 6 . SIGNATURE OF OWNER Al" � 'L'�� � DATE i� - I ` G`1 (if other than appl.icanf) -OFFICE USE O1�LY- BZW" PUBLIC HEARTNG OF ..1711,716? ,7 _...0 % ACTIO?'d: %,4a1,15Z�> U 152-4 r APP O'IVAL SI NEI BZ4 C AI- i DEMIAL DATE: io 07/09/2007 16:50 5406679772 SCHRANT2 PAGE 01/01 ,Jul. 9. 2007 2:26PM . 4jj ,1 I No. 6436 P. 2 SpwaiaLl Limited Power of Atkprney County of Frederick Vir&ia kt.nnwag O CM20 of mdCrk-k, v 107 NGr& Kent Street, Wimc,hOftt, + * 22601 Phone 540 -665 -WI PacAmite 540-r65-6396 Know All Men By 'These Presmts: That I (We) (Namo) �RO? t (Phone) Su 0 :U (jI -9 0 S'3 (address)-q!iO6Xd6 LYd the owme s) of all those trach nrpmxls of land CTropezV) co ed to me (us), by &ed rcc=W in the Cleric's Off= of tlic (moult cowt of it. Cala ty of Frederick, tiT by Iaatrument Nay. on Fags µ_ , and is &-scribedHt-'2'p- as I'"i;GI: � Lot; _ Block: Section: ,Biub-&,, om L) t l Vl t'1 t- I2 ii' � � S do hereby mab-,cuustihft aW Tpo'x* �C) / (Phone) _(<' ^ CI 3", SJ (Address) I �Ue-��_. To act as my true and lavtft sM=ey iu-fWA fcc and in my (our) mme, place and stead wilh full power and =dwrity I (we) wwO have if acting personalty to file planning appheaftons for my (ow) above dyed Q Rmidag (including proffers) 0 Conditional Use Ptrmits ❑ Master Development Pian (PnHmkt=T and Flom ❑ Subdivision 0 Sife Plan </1 .\1a'r i OJ-) Lt� My a -fit ,aball have the authority to offer proms eaubdom and to maim an =bmAs to pnvlovsly %ppwvedpmff=d conditions except as follows: This audw radon shall expire tm year from the day it is signed, or. uuhi 11 ist" ded or modified. Tn wits theteo I (we) have hereto set my (oar) hand and seal this f �' day of jt — 200 nes, State of Virginia, City/County of o h C 1 CA— To -wit: a Notary Public in and fou the,jueu&cdon aforesaid; "my that the pmwn(s) wbo signed to tie ftmiag insu ment and who is (are) %vn tv me, personally appeared befteme ! s r a 6,o the same before me is the,jtmstlidtaotl tfdtesaid this 1 D day of J_ ul �. �p$1 A 401 Notary he -- 4 { C+ • b C7 a ,�1NwEALiH ��,.�`. 1011W110, VARIANCE APPLICATION #110-07 JEFFERY NEFF Staff Report for the Board of Zoning Appeals Prepared: August 3, 2007 Staff Contact: Lauren E. Krempa, Planning Technician This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Board of Zoning Appeals to assist them in making a decision on this request. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS NEARING DATE: July 17, 2007 — Action Tabled, Undetermined House Location August 21, 2007 — Action Pending LOCATION: Lone Oak Subdivision, Lot 38, Block A, on the southern side of Virginia Drive (Route 710) MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Opequon PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 86B -4-A-38 PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned: RA (Rural Areas) Land Use: Residential ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: North: RA (Rural Areas) South: RA (Rural Areas) East: RA (Rural Areas) West: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Residential Use: Residential Use: Residential Use: Residential VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting a 19 foot side yard variance on both sides, which would result in a 31 foot side yard setback on both sides, for the construction of a 5202 single family dwelling. This is an increased request from the July 17, 2007 meeting where the applicant originally applied for a 35 foot reduced setback on both sides. Variance #10-07, Jeffery Neff August 3, 2007 Page 2 REASON FOR VARIANCE: Current setbacks for the property result in a small buildable area on the property. STAFF COMMENTS: 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 feet for the fronts and 15 feet 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. The Frederick County Board of Supervisors amended the setbacks for the RA Zoning District on February 28, 2007 making the current setbacks for the property: 60 feet to the front, 100 feet to the rear, and 50 feet to both sides. With the current setbacks, this property does have a buildable area of 25 feet by 85 feet which would allow for a house to be built on the property. The applicant has amended the originally requested reduced setbacks in order to now build a 1,710 square foot house (slightly larger than the originally requested dwelling on the original application). The proposed dwelling could be reoriented on the property and reduced slightly in size in order to meet the requirements of the current RA setbacks or to reduce the needed variance. Staff feels that if a variance request is necessary due to the narrow buildable area provided by the current setbacks, the request should keep in character with the current neighborhood. Staff would note that while several of the homes in this neighborhood are located closer to the side property lines, the majority of the homes are small, one story structures typically around 1,200 square feet and it would be in keeping with the character of the existing development for this applicant to construct a similar dwelling. Therefore, this variance, as requested, may not meet the requirements for a variance under the Code of Virginia. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE AUGUST 21, 2007 MEETING: The Code of Virginia 15.2-2209 (2), states that no variance shall be granted unless the application can meet the following requirements: 1) The strict application of the Ordinance will produce an undue hardship. 2) The hardship is not generally shared by the properties in the same zoning district and vicinity. 3) That the authorization of such variance will not be a substantial detriment to the adjacent property and the character of the district will not be changed by the variance. Variance #10-07, Jeffery Neff August 3, 2007 Page 3 Staff would assert that a primary residential structure, of a comparable size to those existing in the development, could be built on the property with application of the current RA setbacks and, therefore, would recommend denial of this variance application based upon the above requirements of the Code of Virginia. rtv `y OJ U � V la�'oaa. � O M � 1 C ' y v s 141-.1 Ca Q r+ > 00 o = J OL O 1y, R / } m Z o a oa v E o m m C m n w o o 0� J �G pay 4� 00 I pd, aF.S{ eP p rw ? 0 e GPS L rob Pp• _ OBD � - i ti M1 r,�v 069 JS�Q- � � O e 9zsol � O6�\�•f' / U f QO ?O4 ✓ a�S1 0 e %pi � r i 6 tis J\.�. EiG QpQ a v ee � c QP m d 1 0 F t QP~y bVOP�`S, h9 4P�0 C 0 C C QPl e14pQ��. 1e �pP �6�\�c' 60 G��G e�`SP6 4,�P +aG p?• C 6 eo 4P � Q \SP4P \S� �O sb?FOP a: �p� O� pVJa Jvs� GP000`" P .�� h� 4p' 069 F,5 O 0`O0G?P v eeo`' PP, 0501 O���O t\P���S G pa4 RI 2E ,P 9p �bG dP�0 pa Obb �� o m 6 Opa�P � w yyy e�Q'b6yJ, G�J�c� � i sP b m o yp bye w w OF' 4'1 P m 4 yyo o w 6� P 4pJ�S��y 0 KERNS, GARY o ORW 0 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: Jeffery A. Neff NAME: ADDRESS 6095 Valley Pike ADDRESS: Stephens City, VA 22655 TELEPHONE: -(540)869-1010 . TELEPHONE: 3. The property is located at (give exact directions and include State Route numbers): Lot 38 is located in Block A, Section Four of Lone Oak Subdivision on the southern side of Va. Sec. Route 710 (Virginia Drive) approximately 530 feet northeast of the intersection of Virginia Drive and Va. Sec. Route 641 (Double Church Road). The property has a road frontage of 125 feet and a depth of 250 feet and consists of 0.72 acres (please be exact). 0 V1j 5. The property is owned by Jeffery A. Neff as evidenced by deed from Mildred S. Neff recorded (previous owner) in d&R1BB8k Instrument no. 050022086 OnquIggx of the deed books of the Clerk of the Court for Frederick County. Please attach a copy of the recorded deed. 6. Magisterial District: Opeguon 7. Property Identification No.: 86B -4-A-38 8. The existing zoning of the property is: RA 9. The existing use of the property is: Residential 10. Adjoining Property: USE ZONING North Residential RA East Residential RA South Residential RA West Residential 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 20' reduction of left and right side yard setbacks from 50' to 30' to allow construction of a 1,710 square foot, one-story dwelling 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 Current zoning setbacks (60' from road right of way, 50' from side and 100' from rear) yield a very small unsuitable building site that is not in keeping with the adjacent residential dwellings in this subdivision. 7 13. Additional comments, if any: Dwelling on ad joining Lot 37 lies 32.8' from the east property line and 25.8' from the west property line 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 Dennis R. & Mary Jo Whitacre Fred A. & Phyllis L. Wilson Charles E. III & Carolyn G. Newton Lisa Frances Lacivita Charles E. III & Carolyn G. Newton E. R. Neff Excavating, Inc. Address 109 Virginia Dr. Stephens City,VA 22655 Property ID # 86B -4-B-28 Address 107 Virginia Drive, Stephens City, VA 226 5 Property ID # Address 801 Wage Dr., SW, Leesburg, VA 20175 Property �0486B-4-B-30Address irginia Dr., Stephens City, VA22655 Property ID # 86B -4-A-37 Address 801 Wage Dr., SW, Leesburg, VA 20175 Property ID # 86B -4-A-39 Address P.O. Box 1027, Stephens City, VA 22655 Property ID # 86-A-229 Address Property ID # VA. SEC. ROUTE 710 VIRGINIA DRI VE) 60' R/W N J5 L5 10 " E 125.00' PROPOSED SETBACKS (VARIANCE 60.0' 54.7 REQUEST I 93.3' 32.8' EXISTING 30.0' EXISTINGI I DWELLING o SETBACKS 65 5� 25.8' 30.0' f IPROP. o f 'GAR. 0 31.0' 31.0' ' I W PROPOSED f DWELLING 159.2' -11, 710 SF 100.0' 101.0" Or 39 OT 38 10137 I LOT 36 - - - 31, 250 SQ. FT. - - - S 552510" W 125.00' GRAPHIC SCALE 50' 0' 50' VARIANCE REQUEST SDE YARD SETSACf( REDUCIION) L- SCALE : 1 " = 50' J PROPERTY OF JEFFER) / A. NEFF LONE OAK SU591141SIGN - LOT 38 - BLOCK A - SECTION FOUR OPEQUON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT, FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA DRAWN BY: JTG I DWG NAME: ID7962-BZA I SHEET 1 OF 1 Marsh 8c Legge Land Surveyors, P.L.C. 560 NORTH 10WOUN STREET WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601 DATE: 08/01/2007 PHONE (540) 667-0468 FAX (540 667-0469 �. _ EMAIL office(9mcrshondlegge.com SCALE: 1" = 50' AGREEMENT VARIANCE # l0 0 (Number to be assigned by the Planning Dept.) I (we), 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 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 APPLICANT ° DATE IF, SIGNATURE OF OWNER (if other than applicant) -OFFICE USE ONLY - DATE BZA PUBLIC HEARING OF s /0 0 ACTION: - ATV - 1 /o , APPROVAL SIGNED: BZA CHAIRMAN DENIAL DATE: 10 VARIANCE APPLICATION #11-07 JAMES MARLOW Staff Report for the Board of Zoning Appeals Prepared: August 6, 2007 Staff Contact: Lauren E. Krempa, Planner I This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Board of Zoning Appeals to assist them in making a decision on this request. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter_ BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS HEARING DATE: August 21, 2007 - Action Pending LOCATION: Off of Wardensville Grade (Route 608) on Gobblers Knob Lane, Lot 15 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Back Creek PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 51 -A -78A PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned: RA (Rural Areas) Land Use: Residential ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: North: RA (Rural Areas) South: RA (Rural Areas) East: RA (Rural Areas) West: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Residential Use: Residential Use: Residential Use: Residential VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting a 63.4 foot rear yard variance resulting in a rear yard setback of 36.6, for the construction of a single family dwelling with a deck. REASON FOR VARIANCE: The current RA setbacks for this property yield a very small buildable area and due to the shape and topography of the site available construction sites are limited. Variance #11-07, James Marlow August 6, 2007 Page 2 S'T'AFF COMMENTS: Frederick County adopted zoning in 1967. The Frederick County historical zoning map shows this property was zoned A-1 (Agricultural Limited) in 1967. The property setback lines at the adoption of the zoning ordinance were 35 feet for the fronts and 15 feet 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. The Frederick County Board of Supervisors amended the setbacks for the RA Zoning District on February 28, 2007 making the current setbacks for the property: 60 feet to the front, 100 feet to the rear, and 50 feet to both sides. This applicant is requesting a variance of 63.4 feet on the rear which would result in a rear yard setback of 36.6 feet for the construction of a single family dwelling with deck. The amended setbacks for this zoning district create a very small buildable area on this triangular lot and the sloping topography of the site renders the area provided by the current setbacks unusable. Therefore, this reduction of the current setbacks appears justified; however, staff would note that decks and other non-essential features are not typically considered a hardship and it may be appropriate for this applicant to remove the deck from the proposed building location dependant upon the public hearing for this request. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE AUGUST 21 2007 MEETING: The Code of Virginia 15.2-2209 (2), states that no variance shall be granted unless the application can meet the following requirements: 1) The strict application of the Ordinance will produce an undue hardship. 2) The hardship is not generally shared by the properties in the same zoning district and vicinity. 3) That the authorization of such variance will not be a substantial detriment to the adjacent property and the character of the district will not be changed by the variance. Should this variance be granted, the setbacks for this property would remain 60 feet from the front, 50 feet to the sides, and change to 36.6 feet on the 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. 2 G pyo �G ^`o�0y � of/77 £ 'PI -11 b iYos,�/� P'! 5, NPO No f49 q�Fb 4 oSb,�bti GPSHPMGP u 2 OJ U h s 2 ��.9jy1 ar`sy�y ;n g by�A : Ae S a j O,S, _ �J o v ¢ = v Ov p$y*14 ,a " i N z bpi ti bgz0 bOHONpO = 9��b NNby ®tel g s � J ? 4oux SJa�9go O y w� J b014 y . b9 0 dbo �. dpHON00 s G o � c d R Z d�as T r = N � � c Q U m m O a z o K Qz Z W Q � � U aha � W vi N U ZE W N08ab� a.9 a a =�•. ;ni �=, 2 G pyo �G ^`o�0y � of/77 £ 'PI -11 b iYos,�/� P'! 5, NPO No f49 q�Fb 4 oSb,�bti GPSHPMGP u 2 h s 2 ��.9jy1 ar`sy�y ;n g by�A Ae S 1P�P�P j O,S, �J o v ¢ = v Ov p$y*14 ,a " z bpi ti bgz0 bOHONpO = 9��b NNby ®tel g s � J ? 4oux SJa�9go y w� b014 y . b9 0 dbo �. dpHON00 s G o R Z d�as r b w Q U m m O a z o K Qz Z W Q � � U aha � W vi N U ZE W N08ab� a.9 a i 5 L APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE IN THE COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA -OFFICE USE ONLY - Variance Application No.'�-�f7 Submittal Date:%ate Fee Paid: e. initials: Sign Deposit Submittal Deadline: ?119,o 0 7 For the meeting of 07 t o MUST BE TYPED OR FILLED OUT IN INK - PLEASE PRINT 1. The applicant is the owner other ',/ . (Check one) 2. APPLICANT: NAME: ko)'anA %ap- �, / ADDRESS RC), aZ A-1 St, Jgi TELEPHONE: SAO S c 5 OCCUPANT: (if different) NAME: ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: 3. The property is located at (give exact directions and include State Route numbers): U",e_ \oar tS \opo A -J, CY16, \C:!7-�_ 4. The property has a road frontage of ,3.76- 1 feet and a depth of 2 5� yU feet and consists of 1 � S k 2- acres (please be exact). 5. The property is owned by �),cc__ \A v� V\2�s \ovd as evidenced by deed from a�iS recorded (previous owner) in deed book no. o pan gof the deed books of the Clerk_ of the Court for Frederick County. Please attach a copy of the recorded deed. 6. Magisterial District: 7. Property Identification No.:—'S 1 A -11 A 8. The existing zoning of the property is: 9. The existing use of the property is 10. Adjoining Property: USE North Rei• + a L_ East -V-ct-;dam a J� a �— South- ����� k a�— West o A a L_ RN ZONING 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.") 1jAC-uc_k�s:L' . 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 Due- �-O 7a"3d �i��c�".�f>!-s J�'f7cx1� �IvfltLtiiT C. CU ►.3-�`uc�ti0�. c"V 13. Additional comments, if any: 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: MAMF VQ k -k t3 Q, o -4 -/ Address Property lD# Address Property I D # Address 1 12� 'Q, V ke Property I D # S\ 4 Address Property ID # Address Property I D # Address Property ID # Address Property I D # n. 15. Provide a sketch of the property (you may use this page or attach engineer's drawing). 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. Fr RO;A <WED>MAV iB 2007 17:07IST. 17:02ZH-.7500000799 P 1 ,fie C/Pl'9g co V4 lo Cir MI� r 1 C) / o 119.5' AGREEMENT VARIANCE f // 0 7 (Number to be assigned by the Planning Dept) I (we), 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 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 APPLICAIT�— DATE SIGNATURE OF OWNER DATE 5h,7/6-7 if other than applicant) -OFFICE USE ONLY- BZA PUBLIC HEARING OF 91d, 1 D r% ACTION: - DATE - APPROVAL SIGNED: BZA CHAIRMAN DENIAL DATE: 10 NOTES: 1) CONTOURS TAKEN FROM FREDERICK COUNTY GIS DATA.. 2) NO TITLE REPORT FURNISHED. EASEMENTS AND/OR OTHER ENCUMBRANCES OF RECORD MAY EXIST WHICH ARE NOT SHOWN HEREON. 51-A-76' NGUYEN MARLOW -_, � E. gc NGOC-HAN JAMES r 4 401 ACRES -- ZONE: RA ` - 940--------- 0001357 ,,sT. X01 „ r r 1 0 W Q i /BRL%• — I �u)OZ Lo O `4/ 36.6' N —' c0 PECK to ------ , O_ 70 �5 -- i = i 41.4' , O L6 v \ 0 9d O ` �6 \ '\ `` `` ! \\ ° 51 —A -78A 'o `, 0 , N � O � 1.312 ACRES \ I ` w Q oN -' � a r i 51—A-78 \ ' ' I J, 00 \ TERRY M. LEI GHT ,-9>0, '\\ `!i Q 0 < z oN \ \ 8.95 ACRES Y O ZONE: RA----- \ `, �N \,;j ' D.B. 630. PG. 569 \ ` \ v \ i a <f ` ? 9 6s- -- _ - 9 , \ , 9 t EXHIBIT SHOWING tiT14 0 PROPOSED HOUSE LOCATION ON f, TAX MAP PARCEL 51—A -78A Y A STOWERS BACK CREEK MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT No. 002342 FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA SCALE: 1" = 50' DATE: MAY 30, 2007 KS _ MONTGOMERY .>w�F • ��g�r�eeri�rg �r��rp, ,7�c 180-9 Prosperity Dr. (540) 450-3236 VOICE Winchester, VA 22602 www.MEGinc.biz (540) 450-3235 FAX Jun 24 2007 2:29PM 5408773028 P.1 A2Wzco1. THIS DEED, made and dated this 14th day of _February , 2002, by and between JEFFREY S, DAVIS, married, Grantor, hereinafter called the party of the first part; and JAMES E. NIA LOW and NGOC-HAN N. MARLOW, Grantees, hereinafter called the parties of the second part. WITNESSETH: That for and inconsideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00), cash in hand paid by the parties of the second part to the party of the first part, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the said party of the first part does hereby bargain, sell, grant, and convey with general warranty and with English covenants of title unto the Grantees herein, in fee simple, jointly, as tenants by the entirety with the common law right of survivorship, the following real estate, subject to all easements and legally enforceable restrictions and reservations of record affecting such realty: All of that certain lot or parcel of land, together with the improvements thereon and the appurtenances thereunto belonging, lying and being situate in Back Creek Magisterial District, Frederick County, Virginia, beginning at a point on the west side of the existing roadway, as shown on the survey of Charles Kirkland, C_L.S., dated September 29, 1975, and of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Frederick County, Virginia, in Deed Book. 450, at Page 634; and running with that roadway from the land of Fishback to the other land of Fishback, then running in a Northeasterly direction along the lands of Fishback and the Shenandoah Land Company to the other lands of Fishback, then in a Northwesterly direction to the point of beginning. The property conveyed herein contains that land east of the line herein described to the lands of Fishback and the lands now, or formerly, owned by Shenandoah Land Company as shown on the aforesaid survey. AND BEING the same land conveyed to the Grantor herein by Deed dated August 8, 1983, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 569, at Page 364. This conveyance is made expressly subject to all restrictions, covenants and easements now of record on said property as the same may lawfully apply. WITNESS the following signature and seal: Jun 24 2007 2:29PM 5408773028 p•2 THONAS H. ROCKWOOD ATTO WM AT LAW µ'Ix C.MER. WRGMA O Ri7 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, CITY/CK)U W OF WINCHESTER , to -wit: L Hattie L. Palmer a Notary Public in and for the State and County/City aforesaid, do hereby certify that Jeffrey S. Davis, whose name is signed to the foregoing Deed dated February _14 , 2002, has this day personally appeared and acknowledged the same before me in my State and County/City aforesaid. My commission expires July 31, 2005 Given under my hand this 14th day of February 2002. VIRGTN''I .' FRED_ERICK COUNTY, SCT. This instrument of writing was produced to me on -•; ^aac o t)f ack owicdce7l' • .he ti'tk5 �l ru(j 1 ti rp i"tp a'717Lf • u�td. Ta' *.ruposec� byS_�•�. �3_-1-f�72 of I�aa c -•- , -wd 58.3-n1 have beer Pafd, if assessable Clark 2 VARIANCE APPLICATION #12-07 EAGLE PLACE IND., INC. Staff Report for the Board of Zoning Appeals Prepared: August 1, 2007 Staff Contact: Mark R. Cheran, Zoning Administrator This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Board of Zoning Appeals to assist them in making a decision on this request. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS HEARING DATE: August 21, 2007 - Action Pending LOCATION: 1160 Purcell Lane (Route 72 1) MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Stonewall PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 53A -A-109 PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned: RP (Residential Performance) District Land Use: Residential ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: North: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Residential South: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Residential East: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Residential West: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Residential VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting a 14 foot rear yard variance, resulting in a rear yard setback of 11 feet, for the construction of a wooden deck. REASON FOR VARIANCE: The applicant built a deck without a building permit over the rear setback. Variance #12-07, Eagle Place Ind., Inc. August 1, 2007 Page 2 STAFF COMMENTS: The Frederick County Building Department received a complaint on May 29, 2007, reporting a deck built on this property. The deck was failed because a building permit was not applied for. The applicant applied for a building permit for a deck on July 7, 2007, and was not issued the permit due to a rear setback violation. The applicant applied for a building permit (#2102) for a single-family dwelling with no deck on the permit on property that is zoned RP (Residential Performance). The minimum building setbacks within the RP Zoning District are: front 35 feet, sides 10 feet and rear 25 feet'. The applicant's building permit had building setbacks of: front: 38 feet, sides .10.5 feet and rear 26 feet. The applicant was required to submit a house location survey, as required by the zoning ordinance, for any primary structure located five (5) feet or less from any minimum setback. The setback survey placed the single-family dwelling at 25.3 feet at the rear BRL as shown. The applicant has applied for a 14 foot variance that, if approved, will result in a rear setback of 11 feet, to allow for this deck. (See attachments) The Code of Virginia 15.2-2209 (2), states that no variance shall be granted unless the application can meet the following requirements: 1) The strict application of the Ordinance will produce an undue hardship. 2) The hardship is not generally shared by the properties in the same zoning district and vicinity. 3) That the authorization of such variance will not be a substantial detriment to the adjacent property and the character of the district will not be changed by the variance. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE AUGUST 21 2007 MEETING: This application for a variance does not meet the requirements as set forth by The Code of Virginia 15.2-2209(2), and the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance and staff would recommend denial of this variance application. The strict application of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance does not produce an undue hardship as required by the Code of Virginia. This violation of the setback requirements was self-inflicted, as the deck was constructed without a building permit. ! O U U c �U I m QT W Jp� y - � c cf S!i � c VW� U NJ O dCL 3 a o �r M o Z C � a C w E'aY vEv Ec�immN O m LL =iiQ�in m' ua`In DW 13 o r� ! 1 :•.� y . r N I i t i t f S C i 1 u t S 1 i 17? \� UpRI al0 C C i f C a / C C c cmO f cc z \., h C N 0 U + a0J7 d O Q � r �QOp, Z 3 kn O r w mmmW==a��N UF. M, wm lel r N Ed rT nx�i¢�mm' �mw9n F+i R is nor f 1 1 � r L all 1 / J f.;V 1 i i C i i tit C C C \� i � c CL c �S N c a z m E U O Q,,alp N • t � N Arsrt�rs w / At— _7 3 JCTY �' O ' U o U U ON o b�'r�aNb ��^ _Amg v U L C 92- c all c; o Q o m _ h"ri O o. 7 r z 3 5 R&SUSP 5r W n tl w QQ S/iib 0 � y JF QIU3 s b S 0 Q 1' o y 53A p0�6LP5 � C p Q Q ➢ U' y Q' �, gyp^ qi' �_ r Q �� a C Q Q 4� J �14,� Q'm aj cP a� N� = � a'Q m o o_ �� Q W W QJ N Y v as d ■ � Y F W Q ✓Q. aP�s TUpry S z b 3N39 iL .V bES Q w pjmm O C: L 0:. 4. (n Ln 0 LL CL 0 `YC Fj a) 4A L 41 E .0 Ln 41 (D T3 Eli LL Q UI Z 0 Lu K* co bo m c ...... w Ln W (D Z . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CN cy) ..... cr) 0 ol 1 1 IN 114 C) 40� Fm- u K*K*: 7 ...... ...... Q C) ..... ..... pjmm O C: L 0:. W 0 E4 41 (n Ln cu 41 CL 0 `YC c a) 4A L 41 E .0 Ln 41 Eli LL Q UI Z 0 Lu K* ...... Ln (D CD CL CN cy) ..... cr) 0 IN o C) Fm- u C�l ...... ...... ..... ..... Z to CO .... (fl > (o ...... ...... ...... . ... ..... IJU OC)Ln (D ..... < in ..... LLJ Lr)Ha x CD Nc . .. ... En LU 44 m0L) 0 E 0 LLI Z v= ro 4J ci z 0 C t < LU 0 W LU w , . m W 0 E4 ot to 44 .h6' W -L2 4b 4J if> LL 4J Ls. o 4-A 4J W 46h 0 Z o o 0 b, 0 rM . ....... 44 cl El 41 o Cc sx; 0 LL ...... ..... IFF ..... . . ... ..... mC.). A CIN T I I 1 1 AE. . ..... ... 0 NLO 42 o Lf! C:) 6i . . .. ... ...... . ... ... ---- 0 0 )4- .......... TEa 0 0 ... .. ..... 0 b, (D. rM . ....... 44 El Cc sx; 0 b, 44 Cc ..... . . ... ..... ...... .... A) (U . ..... ... 0 En a, 41 -A 4.1 0 aL) 1 0 ...... 0 ...... CL M zz ..... 70 4. V °o Im L MnP4 lz� LL LU C -4 0 w El Cl (D 04 0 CA (0 0 cu CN .... C� > (D (D OD < wU (D (C) < OD 0� Ln LLj LI) ...... 0 a) 0 m= w w H LU U z 0 41 co CA w Lu 0 0 w 14 La p E - 0 0 0 b, 44 APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE Ia D IN THE COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA MUST RE TYPED OR FILLED OUT IN INK PLEASE PRINT �f I. The applicant is the owner i other (Check one) 2. APPLICANT: NAME: -7--4H k:�. v .ADDRESS TELEPHONE: L- lc- Z — C C :T OCCUPANT: (if different) NAME: ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: 3. The property islocatedat (give exact directions and include State Route numbers): i 1 Irv, t ! P w�,r_ vi f 4. The property has a road frontage of y feet and a depth of C� feet and consists of—acres (please be exact). �_ Page 5 of 9 5_ Theproperty is owned by Ac: ��-- "�•� w _ as evidenced by deed from ��i: _, �� ;��, ✓ recorded (previous owner) in deed book no.C, _d t 4 -?on page a2_q t -Q � - of the deed books of the Clerk of the Court for Frederick County. Please attach a copy of the recorded dem_ 6. Magisterial District:". 7. Property .Identification No_: 8. The existing zoning oftheroPertY is: �f ' P 9. The existing use of the property is: =_ ��' 10. Adjoining Property: 11_ North USF East ; t South o West fl Describe the variance sought in terms of distance and type. (For example: nA 3.5' rear yard variance for an attached two -car garage.") 12. List specific reason(s) why the variance is being sought in terms of exceptional narrowness, shallowness, size or shape ofpropeny, or exceptional topographic conditions or other extraordinary situation or condition of Property, or the use or immediately adjacent thereto rte' t--- rn�� _ 1 E V d Page 6 of 9 13. Additional comments, if any: f v L)C"` C'.� ��b'E"• " J .._'� �ir' �� ��P��i<)l Page 7 of 9 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 �,.d- Address `.s Property 1D # 3 34 / 1 Address ` oa a' ; fc� "'��:? . C-' Property ID # � � 4 r Address 9`S i 0 Property ID #, -- AJ f �.. Address/141 �f.s% �"�'}/ d.��Ly e ! m.= �si"0d, liv— Property 1b #� Address Property ID # Address Property ID # Address Property ID # Address Property Ib # Page 7 of 9 5 15. Provide a sketch of the property (you may use this page or attach engineer's drawing). Show proposed and/or existing structures on the property, including measurements to all property lines and to the nearest gmctnrPlcl ',., �d:,..:.,,. pope u'es• Please inc%Itld application. e any other exhibits, drawings or photographs with this Page 8 of 9 SANITARY MH ©RIM=500.08 835'± TO INTX. PURCELL LANE - VA. SEC. RTE. 721 RTE. 522 (Variable Width RM) _�%� IRF -40 09,11000 51 +91 `Ah 496 W SN I IRS - -- 5�------------- I r� 0 1 ---(-- 499 -- 0 - (rj < ti1z 10.4' cIL 1'-1(� 4g. + p LEGEND: IRF WM - WATER METER CO - SANITARY CLEAN OUT FIFE - FINISHED FLOOR ELEV. GFE - GARAGE FLOOR ELEV. WPP - WOODEN POWER POLE WP - WOOD POST IRF - IRON ROD FOUND IRS - IRON ROD SET x(494.5) - EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION 495 --_ - EXISTING CONTOUR N 30°35'00" E 60.00' I IRS - -- 5�------------- O 1 ---(-- 499 -- --- ---- _ - (rj < I I I � BRICK-- � QzS zS `pf 3T00P 11 P� .=" I 498 --_I FRAME SPLIT FOYER DWELLING WITH BRICK FACADE F.F.E. (508.09) G.F.E. (497.76) 39.2' 25 BRL �G (TYP:)----------- PIN 53 -A 01 9 00 Q. FT. N UTIL Y L1NI WPP �+ S 30°35'00" W 60.00' PIN 53A -A-118 N/F DA WS 09 959 PO 450 41 10.5' o ' � O J 1) (rj o I QzS zS a 497 U) h w Z Q X96 W I X96, W - 496 "-•..- IRF Z_ LV IN C. t_ COMMUNITY NO.: 510063 PANEL: 0105 B DATE: 7/17/1978 SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE NOTES: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION 1. NO TITLE REPORT FURNISHED. SHOWN ON THIS PLAT IS BASED ON AN ACTUAL 2. EASEMENTS MAY EXIST THAT ARE NOT FIELD SURVEY MADE UNDER MY SUPERVISION ON SHOWN ON THIS PLAT. NOVEMBER 28, 2006 AND THAT TO THE BEST OF MY 3. NO STREET ADDRESS POSTED AT TIME OF KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF THERE ARE NO SURVEY. ENCROACHMENTS OR VISIBLE EASEMENTS UNLESS SHOWN. HOUSE LOCATION & AS -BUILT TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY OF THE LAND OF LTH Op L� EAGLE PLACE INDUSTRIES, INC. o` �c INSTRUMENT NO. 060014375 U D STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT W. Marsh FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA No 001843 DATE: 11/29/2006 I SCALE: 1"=20' I SHEET 1 OF 1 Marsh & Legge Land Surveyors, P.L.C. 560 NORTH LOUDOUN STREET -WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601 PHONE (540) 667-0468 - FAX (540) 667-0469 - EMAIL office@marshandlegge.com �Z�lA �V � k. - s u \10 IDRAWN BY: CAJ DWG NAME: ID7826-HLS-109 AGREEMENT VARIANCE 0 (Number to be asmgned by tha '8Dep,� I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make a)plication; Rnd P lit, -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 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 linear Ieast seven (� day$�rior to the BZA pudic h so as to be visible from the road of right-of-way until the hearing. and maintained I hereby certify that all of the statements and information contained herein are, to the best of my knowledge, true, �f SIGNATURE CANT DATE SIGNATURE OF OWNER .y DATE 0 (if othcr than applicant) rO ICE USE ONIL Y- —`i– BZA PUBLIC HEARING OF4A-: ACTION: APPRO VAI, SIGNER": BZA CHAS DENIM, DATE: page 9 of 9 BOU BDEN /THE � SSO�N% NE E NORMAN L. & NANCY L. TISINGER DEED BOOK 963 PAGE 728 STFR 0 RCKMCOUNTY, KRGINAICT SCALE.- 1 ' = 20' SHEET.- 2 OF 2 DATE.' 1/307 +Marsh �e �.eg�e ". arr�d S�� eyers,- '^� � WINCHESTER. VIRGINIA 22601 _!! 560 NORTH LOUDOUN STREET FAX (540) 667-04"g - EMAIL officewnGrshondlegge.com PHONE (540) 667-0468 g- V Op U/ S.W. Marsh N o. 001843 l I l�1 O 04 S =4 Np SUR���.�"�• DRAWN BY: MBB DWG NAME:7985-BLA PLAT 53A -A-10.9 EAGLE PLACE INDUSTRIES, INC. I I n INST ;¢1060014375 p C) o ZONED: RP USE.- RESIDEN77AL h � I x o c� W Q S 5925100- E 90-00' _ _ IRF a 2 IRF OC:� 0' BRL 71,111 ' o � lO I 53A—A-108 O h — — 5,11-9 SOFT. (ORIGINAL) L h 5,404 SQ. FT (ADJUSTED) N RP - USE RESIDENTIAL � 3 IV EX PROP. LINE HEREBY VA CA TED 10' BRL C� I I (PROP. LINE HEREBY CREATED) _, IRS W IRS--- S 5975'00" E 90.14' I O rn o 10 BRL c') �W ASPHALT---- _ i Q JN I DRII/EWAY 55A -A-707 Q^ o Q I 5,514 SO. FT (CIRIGINAL) m ^ o Z CONCRETE5,529 SQ -FT. (ADJUSTED) p O BASEMENT ENT. I ZONED.. RP a 4, USE: RESIDENTIAL I p Ly 'h oO l I I 30 5' I t6 6 3 �i N � > �o l ti to (1150 I m Z I m e h EX. 1 -STORY -n ov N Io I Z FRAME HOUSE 10' BRL — 30-5 Z 5r EX PROP. LINE HEREBY VA CA TED 6.1' 5828'18" W 90.30' POINT ON ROCK IRS _N _ 53 -A -704A GEORGE N. & YDO N FENCE - - MARY JANE CARTER SCALE INST #OJOO11527 PLAT -�- DB 799 PG 1392 20. 0 20' 40' ZONED: RP - USE RESIDENTIAL C .LEGEND IRF - IRON ROD FOUND 1 INCH = 20 FEEI IRS - IRON ROD SET _ BOU BDEN /THE � SSO�N% NE E NORMAN L. & NANCY L. TISINGER DEED BOOK 963 PAGE 728 STFR 0 RCKMCOUNTY, KRGINAICT SCALE.- 1 ' = 20' SHEET.- 2 OF 2 DATE.' 1/307 +Marsh �e �.eg�e ". arr�d S�� eyers,- '^� � WINCHESTER. VIRGINIA 22601 _!! 560 NORTH LOUDOUN STREET FAX (540) 667-04"g - EMAIL officewnGrshondlegge.com PHONE (540) 667-0468 g- V Op U/ S.W. Marsh N o. 001843 l I l�1 O 04 S =4 Np SUR���.�"�• DRAWN BY: MBB DWG NAME:7985-BLA PLAT CURTIS W. MAY, ET UX TO DEED CECIL C. AFFLECK THIS Dr ED made and dated this 24th day of October, 1958, by fund between Curtis W. May and Sue V. May, his wife, parties of the first part; and Cecil C. Affleck, party of the second part. WITNESSETH: That for and in consideration of the sum of $10,00 and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of all of which is A -I by acknowledged, the said parties of the first part do hereby grant and convey, �•1 general warranty of title, unto the said party of the second part, -n fee simple, a.L, of that certain lot of land, together with the improvements thereon and the !appurtenances thereunto belonging, lying and being situate about 1 mile north of Winchester in Stonewall Magisterial District, Frederick County, Virginia, containing ,9,952 square feet, more particularly described by that certain plat and survey dated October 20, 1958, prepared by Lee A. Ebert, C.L.S., hereto attached and by this re- 'ference made a part of this deed, being the same property conveyed to the said par- ties of the first part by deed of Jackson DeHaven, et ux, dated January 22, 1955, of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Frederick County, Virginia, in Deed Book 235, page 24, to which deed and the references therein, reference is ,,made for a further description of the said property. The said parties of the first part covenant that they have the right to convey the said property; that the said property is free of any encum- brances; that the said party of the second part shall enjoy quiet possession to the said property and the said parties of the first part will execute such further assur- ances of title as may be requisite. Witness the following signatures and seals this date first above written. *************** CURTIS W. MAY (SEAL) REVENUE STAMPS $7.70 SUE V. M4Y (SEAL) CANCELLED State of Virginia County of Frederick, to -wit: I, Eula Shipe, a Notary Public in and for the County of Frederick, State of Virginia, do hereby certify that Curtis W. May and Sue V. May, his wife, whose names are signed to the foregoing writing bearing date the 24th day of October, 1955, have personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my County and State aforesaid. My commission expires October 19, 1960. Given under my hand this 24th day of October, 1958. EULA SNIPE Notary Public LOTS N PIN BEG. 60.1'— STAK1_—� zz z Z. FRONTING PURCELL , °yo DRIVE 03 �'PG• so t %T5 N 32 04 E- 322 S 53° 27'E- I V O 9,952 SQ. FT. J4 5 24° 58 W- 32 12 R- O_W \ / -` a ( CERTIFIED CORRECT LEE & EBERT. C.L.S. The above Plat is a Survey of the Curtis W. May Lot. The said Improved Lot fronts the western line of a 12 Ft. Right -of -Way (Foreman Drive) extending northwardly from the North Frederick Grade -U. S. 7522, at Sunnyside, in Stonewall District, Frederick County, Virginia: Beginning at an iron pin at the southwestern corner of the Lot, a corner to the Frye Lot, which pin is located by measuring 788 ft. northeastwardly along the original Patton - Stotler Line from a point in the northern line of the Old Roadway (Old Rt. #7), also by measuring 800.4 Ft. northeastwardly along the said line from a point in the northern line of the North Frederick Grade - U. S. T'r522, running with a line of the Lots fronting Purcell Drive N 32° 04' E - 322 ft. to an iron pin in a line of the Price Lot; thence with the said line S 53° 27' E - 11 ft. to an iron pin in the western line of the 12 Ft. Right -of -Way; thence with the said line S 24° 58' W - 324 ft. to a stake corner to the said Frye Lot; thence with a line of the said Lot N 57° 30' W - 51 ft. to the beginning. Containing - - 9,952 Sq. Ft. LEE A. EBERT Surveyed - - - October 20, 1958. er e urveyyor. Comm. of Virginia f"r 484'. VIRGINIA FREDERICK COUNTY, (SCT. This instrument of writing was produced to me on the 24th day of October 1958 at 1:55 P. M. and with certificate of acknowledgment thereto annexed was admitted to record. __-_-.-- , ., 1 , a y 'CLERK I O OLD ROADWAI 1 I RT. 7 - LINE ON 0 788' PT° - 800.4' 3 '0 Li O tolI m L, to W > I- ' Ln co i �a I, -I z LOTS N PIN BEG. 60.1'— STAK1_—� zz z Z. FRONTING PURCELL , °yo DRIVE 03 �'PG• so t %T5 N 32 04 E- 322 S 53° 27'E- I V O 9,952 SQ. FT. J4 5 24° 58 W- 32 12 R- O_W \ / -` a ( CERTIFIED CORRECT LEE & EBERT. C.L.S. The above Plat is a Survey of the Curtis W. May Lot. The said Improved Lot fronts the western line of a 12 Ft. Right -of -Way (Foreman Drive) extending northwardly from the North Frederick Grade -U. S. 7522, at Sunnyside, in Stonewall District, Frederick County, Virginia: Beginning at an iron pin at the southwestern corner of the Lot, a corner to the Frye Lot, which pin is located by measuring 788 ft. northeastwardly along the original Patton - Stotler Line from a point in the northern line of the Old Roadway (Old Rt. #7), also by measuring 800.4 Ft. northeastwardly along the said line from a point in the northern line of the North Frederick Grade - U. S. T'r522, running with a line of the Lots fronting Purcell Drive N 32° 04' E - 322 ft. to an iron pin in a line of the Price Lot; thence with the said line S 53° 27' E - 11 ft. to an iron pin in the western line of the 12 Ft. Right -of -Way; thence with the said line S 24° 58' W - 324 ft. to a stake corner to the said Frye Lot; thence with a line of the said Lot N 57° 30' W - 51 ft. to the beginning. Containing - - 9,952 Sq. Ft. LEE A. EBERT Surveyed - - - October 20, 1958. er e urveyyor. Comm. of Virginia f"r 484'. VIRGINIA FREDERICK COUNTY, (SCT. This instrument of writing was produced to me on the 24th day of October 1958 at 1:55 P. M. and with certificate of acknowledgment thereto annexed was admitted to record. __-_-.-- , ., 1 , a y 'CLERK HOUSE LOCATION SURVEY LAND OF CHARLES 4. DENNY WILL BOOK 80 PAGE 543 STONEWALL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA THIS LOT IS LOCATED IN HUD FLOOD ZONE C, AREA OF MINIMAL- FLOODING AS SCALED FROM FIRM MAP 510063 0105 B EFFECTIVE JULY 17, 1978 CD rn TRITON N F DICK DB 791 P. 1383 S 30'01'38" W 40.00' IRS IRS Opp 960 z fl0 TM 53A—A-98 I w o° 3,502 SQ. FT. � — r mIn Ico Q LLN DRIVEWAY EASEMENT FOR THE 'NEFIT OF TM 53A—A-98 & 99'n Q HEREBY DEDIC cO F- I I 1 STORY _ I co FRAME # 1116 I I T- # 1112 I z N 0. I oof �y 28.3' 0 7� s� 262.5' TO 0 N N. FREDERICK Pt� ` I _ _ IRS _ N 30'35'09" E 40.00' PURCELLLANE 30' RIW NO TITLE, REPORT FURNISHED '4aLTfi�" CH '�+ S' PH R D. FURSNAU, L.S. FC w 133 WEST BOSCAWEi1 STREET SUITE 2 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601 OC 540 542-1164 FAX 540 542-1183 SERVICESQCi;,FSYJRVEYS.COM v MEMBER VIRGINIA ASSOCIATION OF SUR -VI -MORS u SrhRtS'iOpHER D. FURSTEAIAti ATE: SEPT. 25, 2006 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT ON �O 2727 CALF: 1- 20' SEPTEMBER 25, 2006 THAT I MADE AN ACCURATE SURVEY OF THE PREMISES iIiAP: 53A—A—DR SHOWN HEREON AND THAT THEUR APR �re THIS I3 TO CERTIFY THAT ON APRIL 17, 2u, THAT I MADE AN ACCURATE SURVEY OF THE PR—.iSES SHOWN HEREON AND THAT THERE ARE NO EASEMENTS OR ENCROACHMENTS VISIBLE ON THE GROUND OTHER THAN THOSE SHOWN HEREON. TRITON 791/1383I STINE ---r. ° r -01-1.1 An rl t ' IW° THIS LOT IS LOCATED IN FLOOD ZONE C, AREA OF MINIMAL FLOODING AS SHOWN ON FIRM MAP 11 510063 3,518 to 0105 B EFFECTIVE JULY 17, 1978 m 0 m m i m 03 r` CC) DECK pi bq/$6 W f d CD M - ' 5.6Ln V ul -� o m Ln O Ln 1 1/2 story M CC) z — ut frame i d o i tt 1108 !@ 3 { T O Z v GRAVEL Q O DAVW I& x ° � PORCH ` 12.9' DRNE AY W U N 1455 N 1' �� suu�Ey 222. 1 to N 30035 r26"E 40.00 ' North Frederick Pike PURCELL LANE LAND OF 30' IDE T. P. AND SUSAN M. GOODMAN STONEWALL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA HOUSE LOCATION SURVf=:Y y OAT'c: APRIL 17,2002 SCAM: I" = 15' ElUIRSTENAU SURI VEYIN r c lax map 53A -A-97 III SOUTH H LOUDOUN STREET DEEP REF. BB. 836 P. 1157 WiNC NESTER, VIRGINIA(.540,1 66' 9"52-.3 89799PG1392 C 41 i 4qc r. ev, LFGE1ND IRF Iran Rod Found T,y s3R 'oC tet• 9 Qa / j;k / . The lot represented by this plot was conveyed SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE to Frank V. Sherwood, Jr. and Beverly J. Sherwood, rnrdaldWrvrq. Wglnb 22�a1 his wife, by deed dated 25 May 1990 and recorded I hereby certify that the information shown on this among the land records of Frederick County, Virginia plat is based 0.1 an actual field survey made under or in Deed Book 745 at Page 736. my supervision and there are no encroachments . No title report furnished. visible easements unless shown.. �. This lot does not tie within a H.U.O. designated (�• (-'/?: ICO year flood zone. C=%`j� . Dougias C. Legge, C.L.S. and with wrt((ica t�ecknowledgment thereto annexed BUILDING LOCATION SURVEY was admitted to r Tax Imposed by Sac. 58-54.1 of of s"/115 and 58-54 have been paid, if assessable. PREMISES LOCATED AT S H OF L 1144 PURCELL DRIVE �P� f -p STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA FD U E ATE NO. �-. DATE: JUNE 29, 1993 SCALE: 1"=20" SURVEY DATE: JUNE 17, 1993 ❑ CER?TIF L) gilhert w. cliffard & associates, inc. 1:5SURVEYORS 0 ENGINEERS LANO PLANNERS 150-C Gde Crrmwkh Ddwi 2110 North Come•aa St winoie.le wryleie 22601 rnrdaldWrvrq. Wglnb 22�a1 (703) 667-2'39 (103) a96-2115 VIRGINIA: FREDERICKZMJM7. PLAT (j: 14LPD1144.DWG This Instrumaint A ing was produced to the on the C� day �7.91t,7at�'tannexed and with wrt((ica t�ecknowledgment thereto annexed was admitted to r Tax Imposed by Sac. 58-54.1 of s"/115 and 58-54 have been paid, if assessable. KJ CLERK Li i .'i .n r T� i - 44i 7563-8039 EBY/cmj iA E - py 'rare nVTMI mad- and dated this 27`'' day of July, 2006 b" and between jAMES G. 11110 DE, c j .77 �-' J GIBSON, hereinafter called the Grantor, and EAGLE PLACE INDUSTRIES, INC., a Virginia Corporation, hereinafter called the Grantee. WITNESSETH: That for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00), cash in hand paid and other valuable consideration, receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, the Grantor does grant and convey, with General Warranty and with English Covenants of Title, unto the Grantee, in fee simple, together with all rights, rights of way, privileges improvements thereon and appurtenances thereto belonging, all of the following realty: All of those two (2) certain lots or parcels of land together with all improvements and appurtenances thereto belonging, lying and being situate along the Eastern side of Purcell Drive at Sunnyside, about one mile Northwest of Winchester, in Stonewall District, Frederick County, Virginia, fronting on said Purcell Drive a distance of 120 feet, and extending back Eastward between parallel lines a distance of 90 feet, described as PIN #53A -A-109, containing 5,400 square feet and PIN #53A -A-111, containing 5,400 square feet, and further more particularly described by plat and survey drawn by S. W. Marsh, L.S., dated July 5, 2006 attached hereto and made a part hereof as if set out in full. AND BEING the same property conveyed to James G. Gibson by Deed from Daisy L. Peacemaker, by her Guardian and Conservator, Pam Peacemaker, dated June 29, 2006 of record in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Frederick County, Virginia, as Instrument Number 060012443. Reference is hereby made to the aforesaid instruments and the references contained therein for a further and more particular description of the property conveyed herein. This conveyance is made subject to all legally enforceable restrictive covenants and easements of record affecting the aforesaid realty. The Grantor does hereby covenant that he has the right to convey to the Grantee; that the Grantee shall have quiet and peaceable possession of the said property, free from all liens and encumbrances; and he will grant such further assurances of title as may be requisite. WITNESS the following signature and seal: JAMES G. GIBSON STATE OF, VIRGINIA COUNTY OF FREDERICK, To -wit: (SEAL) I, Cathy M. Jewell, a Notary Public in and for the State and jurisdiction aforesaid, do hereby certify that James G. Gibson, whose name is signed to the foregoing Deed, dated this 27`h day of July, 2006 has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my State and jurisdiction aforesaid. Given under my hand this 26`h of July, 2006. My commission expires: 12/31/08. Notary Public 2 VARIANCE APPLICATION 913-07 EAGLE PLACE IND., INC. Staff Report for the Board of Zoning Appeals Prepared: August 6, 2007 Staff Contact: Mark R. Cheran, Zoning Administrator This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Board of Zoning Appeals to assist them in making a decision on this request. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS HEARING DATE: August 21, 2007 - Action Pending LOCATION: 1164 Purcell Lane (Route 72 1) MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Stonewall PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 53A -A-111 PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned: RP (Residential Performance) District Land Use: Residential ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: North: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Residential South: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Residential East: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Residential West: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Residential VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting a 14 foot rear yard variance, resulting in a rear yard setback of 11 feet, for the construction of a wooden deck. REASON FOR VARIANCE: The applicant built a deck without a building permit over the rear setback. Variance #13-07, Eagle Place Ind., Inc. August 6, 2007 Page 2 STAFF COMMENTS: The Frederick County Building Department received a complaint on May 29, 2007, reporting a deck built on this property. The deck was failed because a building permit was not applied for. The applicant applied for a building permit for a deck on July 7, 2007, and was not issued the permit due to a rear setback violation. The applicant applied for a building permit (#2097) for a single-family dwelling with no deck on the permit on property that is zoned RP (Residential Performance). The minimum building setbacks within the RP Zoning District are: front 35 feet, sides 10 feet and rear 25 feet. The applicant's building permit had building setbacks of. front: 38 feet, sides 10.5 feet and rear 26 feet. The applicant was required to submit a house location survey, as required by the zoning ordinance, for any primary structure located five (5) feet or less from any minimum setback. The setback survey placed the single-family dwelling at 25.3 feet at the rear BRL as shown. The applicant has applied for a 14 foot variance that, if approved, will result in a rear setback of 11 feet, to allow for this deck. (See attachments) The Code of Virginia 15.2-2209 (2), states that no variance shall be granted unless the application can meet the following requirements: 1) The strict application of the Ordinance will produce an undue hardship. 2) The hardship is not generally shared by the properties in the same zoning district and vicinity. 3) That the authorization of such variance will not be a substantial detriment to the adjacent property and the character of the district will not be changed by the variance. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE AUGUST 21 2007 MEETING: This application for a variance does not meet the requirements as set forth by The Code of Virginia 15.2-2209(2), and the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance and staff would recommend denial of this variance application. The strict application of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance does not produce an undue hardship as required by the Code of Virginia. This violation of the setback requirements was self-inflicted, as the deck was constructed without a building permit. JtlCY � O U J �-1 a3 Qr '� U I1I d U R T ' '' � C a ` 4 J 10 �m'y x m • L U w c m�a _�:f a m Z7 _., J� 62 � wA � I I C r 1 I 1 f J I E 1 1 L a tt? uisw . aJO�t f c � _ _ � E c c a a � 2 C L L C E O I/aa nd ca AMs� ■ � z .rQ aoisfp�ns � r _ �r ri UJ J W 3 J O V R � C a ��TT LL =iiQ�in m' �a`rn r=�ai o �0too 1??c• '� J � JQ JiJ o z ��14 3 5 R�'SJSpNp �O 5 pEL y y� � tY ? eL N Qgn 5 r- m 3� A C Ctt 2 U o V F w � n e 4• �4r� =0 w^UIQ 2V 414 4?4g41a�o� ^oo h v o��� 53A P=u��ASR w 4U C7 CD ¢ Q • � 5 y � SQ�WA Q Q. Q LL � � p QK W y vii W y = (70 ,�4 Q Z } zi z W I I -u Q) (1) a) a) W in 4j 4j 4j 4j mu) to M M M Em in a a a c W—M 2 4j ta CL CL c% 2 od LU ,u M V j - w V 0 C: 0 0 14 m -- U) Ln as.... C) r 0 0 Id v 0 E4 . .. ...... . . CL Z.5 .F- .......... : U- X o S 0 0 0) IL 41 41 -q X 0 0 C tu Ul 4" E ------- CN 41 .0 cn Ln rn M ...... ..... P4 p �,7 R M. cc ta -Y 0 E. w CN 0 (Y 0 CI4 Ln ca (D (14 (C) CL 0 D CN CY) 0 0 W tn 14 W LL < (D wo....... < ... 0 W (D C) u .. ........ .. ...... ..... ... ,u M V j - w V 0 C: 0 0 14 m U) Ln 0 0 Id v 0 E4 . .. ...... . . CL Z.5 .F- .......... : U- X o S 0 0 0) 41 41 X ,u M V j - w V $4 C: 0 0 14 m U) Ln 0 0 Id v 0 E4 44 CL 0 0) 41 41 C: 0 0 tu Ul 4" E ------- 41 .0 cn Ln rn M ...... ..... P4 p U. cc ta -Y 0 E. w CN 0 (Y 0 CI4 Ln ca (D (14 (C) CL D CN CY) 0 C,4 LL < (D < W (D C) u CC) Q�, 0 v- UJ Ln x EnN is Yl 0 6i H J m u 0 Z 4J Q 0 0 W ,u M V j - w V $4 0 14 m 0 0 Id v 0 E4 44 (D C) 0 C14 O 0 00 0 0 LO C14 M T-- C14 0 0 0 C�j C) -- 0 C14 i - U" N a) M 4J 4J 4J 4J (n tu Co CU to m 0 0 a 0 ca) — z 0 cc cc ca w E.(n a) a !2 ad 4J Lo 0 4J (1) ) U 0 3. E IM LL L: 4J Cosa' 1 (D 00 u- a) 7F— S-- CL) 41 C 0 U 4- fO 41 . . . . . . CX --------- . (D OC14 4, LZO (1) a) 41 0) CD LO .; E 4, Ln 41 .c 41 ...... co Ln ..... ......... E 4J M ui R X co Ln . ...... ui M 0 Lii 0 CN ...... LLI zW. 0 m F- .... .. co . ..... .. 4a .. ........... Lncli CD T Gr) cli cm -le 0 9 &L 0 CK:* a) 0 E-1 0 < ce) kb ti Z "No", M pd fig N 7F— S-- CL) 41 4� 4- fO 41 CX 0 4, LZO (1) a) 41 CD LO .; E 4, Ln 41 .c 41 co Ln 0L- (D 4J M ui X U. ui 0 CN 0 m F- O C14 co ..... Lncli CD Gr) cli cm -le 0 9 C.4 < (c) i < > (D < 41 Lli (D u CO 13e < Lu Lr) X En o LU m LU m C z 0 0 CLt; < 01 w LU -i I go —M 0 E-1 0 < ce) kb ti Z "No", M pd fig N APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE 13-0'7 IN THE COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA MUST BE TYPED OR FILLED OUT IN INK - PLEASE 1?11M 1. The applicant is the owner other /Check (Check one) 2. APPLICANT: NAME ADDRESS NY f L OCCUPANT: (if different) NANE: ILCi ikDDRESS:- TELEPHONE. TELEPHOIM:- 3. The property is located at (give exact dircctions* and include State Route numbers): 2) C 4. The property has a road frontage of Geo I feet and a depth of and consists of acres (Please be exact)- feet 0Y Page 5 of 9 5. TMeproperty is owned by b deed from �r _ ° as evidenced y4 �"� «s recorded (p ious owner) in deed book no. ti-ccorl V41 "On page 4iof the deed books of the Clerk of the Court for Frederick County. Please attach a copy Qf the recorded deed. 7 6. Magisterial District: /OC- e _ 7. Property Identification No.: 8. The existing zoning of the property is: R P 9. The existing use of the property is: 10. Adjoining Property: JS O G North East Iv 1! South + t -� West a C IL Describe the variance sought in terms of distance and type. (For example: "A 3.5' rear yard variance for an attached two -car garage. ") 12. List specific reason(s) why.thc variance is being sought in terms of.- exceptional f exceptional narrowness, shallowness, size or shape of property, or exceptions) topographic conditions or other extraordinary situation or condition of property, or the use or develop ent of property immedia ly ad - Ila �N � � V4 tri[ 1 page 6 of 9 thereto t. r n Icy' E7x 1e- --r- 13. Additional comments, if any: C (N C)o i-- 81-5 M C �� C', lc, N, -S J 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 V, PJ' Address Property 11) # 1*14, Address s _Tj Property ID #5—A- - 3,1i t Address t e) Property ID # AddressCz 0 s Property ID # 'Address Property ID # Address Property ID # Address Property ID # Address Property ED # Page 7 of 9 15. Provide a sketch of the property (you may use this page or attach engineer's drawing). Show proposed and/or existing structures on the property, including measurements to all Dronerty lines and to the atn4rtii./o\ a s e nearest w•,.�-./ vu a%AJVULutg properties. Please include any other exhibits, drawings or photographs with this application. Page 8 of 9 895'± TO INTX. RTE. 522 IRS --31- ---- 499 0'� I�ER��10� 8096° y, PURCELL LANE VA. SEC. RTE. 721 (Variable Width R/W), N 30°35'00" E 60.00' ml 9 rr— —r M BRICK 4y STOOP 'D"_' k - (9 " D (GI i a 0 WM - WATER METER CO - SANITARY CLEAN OUT FFE - FINISHED FLOOR ELEV. GFE - GARAGE FLOOR ELEV. WPP WOODEN POWER POLE I O L9 •, � `yA1- O O - _ �W rn } FRAME 00: SPLIT FOYER o DWELLING p1 R I W m WITH BRICK FACADE �5� F.F.E. (508.51) G.F.E. (498.27) w9 10.4' � 'D"_' k - (9 " D (GI i a 0 WM - WATER METER CO - SANITARY CLEAN OUT FFE - FINISHED FLOOR ELEV. GFE - GARAGE FLOOR ELEV. WPP WOODEN POWER POLE I } 3 I I o I o c I } OF LAND r Ate, I - 498 " 00 �a� 35 BRL. 39.1' o FRAME 00: SPLIT FOYER o DWELLING p1 I o lf] I W m WITH BRICK FACADE F.F.E. (508.51) G.F.E. (498.27) � - Z O [IB RL ---- — — -- ANG (TYP. F --T. ni , N 496 UTILITY INE S 30'35'00" W 60.00 PIN 5JA-A-718 N/F DA 145 DB 959 PG 450 w91, FLOOD NOTE: WP - WOOD POST IRF - IRON ROD FOUND ZONE: C IRS - IRON ROD SET COMMUNITY NO.: 510063 PANEL: 0105 B x(464.5) - EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION DATE: 7/17/1978 495 - EXISTING CONTOUR SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION NOTES: SHOWN ON THIS PLAT IS BASED ON AN ACTUAL 1. NO TITLE REPORT FURNISHED. FIELD SURVEY MADE UNDER MY SUPERVISION ON 2. EASEMENTS MAY EXIST THAT ARE NOT NOVEMBER 28, 2006 AND THAT TO THE BEST OF MY SHOWN ON THIS PLAT. KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF THERE ARE NO 3. NO STREET ADDRESS POSTED AT TIME OF ENCROACHMENTS OR VISIBLE EASEMENTS SURVEY. UNLESS SHOWN. HOUSE LOCATION & AS—BUILT TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY OF THE LAND OF �PLTH OF !r� EAGLE PLACE INDUSTRIES, INC. INSTRUMENT NO. 060014375 U STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA No . Marsh N. 0018 3 /z/G o6 DATE: 11/29/2006 SCALE: 1"=20' SHEET 1 OF 1 CgNo SUR'Jo A. Marsh & Legge Land Surveyors, P.L.C. 1 DRAWN BY: CAJ 560 NORTH LOUDOUN STREET - WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601 PHONE (540) 667-0468 - FAX (540) 667-0469 - EMAIL office@marshandlegge.com DWG NAME: ID7826-HLS-111 AGREEMENT VARIANCE It OV--Mbff to be wmg. ad b da.- �:amung ape) I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make anntimtIo y and pedIIio;, the i rEdA icx 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 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 frons property line at Least seveg_(7) day prior to the BZA public hearm� 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. SIGNA CANT — -, DATE' SIGNATURE OF OWNER DATE (if other than applicant) -OFFICE USE ONL'Y- BZA PUBLIC HEARING OF4DA(- ACTION: APPROVAL SIGNED: BZA CHAIRMAN DENIAL DATE: Page 9 of 9 K 53A -A-109 EAGLE PLACE INDUSTRIES, INC. INST ¢'060014375 ZONED RP USE- RESIDEN77AL I cn J o -* V7 U zi W IRF _ S 59'25'00" E 90.00' _ _ IRF Q 1r) mo 0 Q) 0 0--- J Q CONCRETE BASE'9ENT ET _I 10 BRL_ '53A -A-107 5,514 SQ. FT (O.RIGINAL) 5,529 SOFT (ADJUSTED) I ZONED: RP USE. RESIDENTIAL 3O 5. 1 't `6 6.3 j1150 1 m m EX 1 -STORY HOUSE I n o W o'o SIN 1(1) fRlimr- 1_0 ' a _ CX 30.5" 2.5T _HEREB PROP. VA CA TED 6.1' N 5828'18- W 90.30' _POINT IRS — — "— ON ROCK 53-A-1 44A WOOD& FENCE GEORGE N. & - - MARY ✓ANE CARTER SCALE INST. '#030011527 40 PLAT - DB 799 PG 1392 0 20' LEGEND ZONED: RP USE. RESIDENTIAL 20 IRF - IRON ROD FOUND 1 INCH = 20 FES T /RS - IRON ROD SET _. .a.� -�, Ee- .��4� •E BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN THE !ANDS OF NORMAN L. & NANCY L. TISINGER DEED BOOK 963 PAGE 728 STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, NRGINIA DATE.- 1/3/07 1 SCALE.- 1 ' = 20 OF S.W. Marsh No. 001643 x SHE F 2 ,,' v s u g-4 x it L. - Marsh & Legge Land Survey©rte,_ N WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601 14U, 560 NORTH LOUDOUN STREET FAX (540) 667-0469 , EMAIL ofrice@marshandlegge.com 667-0468 DRAWN BY: MBB DWG NAME:7985-BL4 PL4T �I Lr) Ln IN o 53A -A-108 o� ;,� 5,179 SQ.FT (ORIGINAL) a `25,404 ! SO-FT(ADJUSTED) ry ZONED: RP - USE RESIDEN TIAL N EX PROP. LINE CA TED 70 " BRL J HERESY VA — (PROP. LINE HEREB Y CREATED) IRS IH-, ----- ! S 5925'00- E 90.14' I CONCRETE BASE'9ENT ET _I 10 BRL_ '53A -A-107 5,514 SQ. FT (O.RIGINAL) 5,529 SOFT (ADJUSTED) I ZONED: RP USE. RESIDENTIAL 3O 5. 1 't `6 6.3 j1150 1 m m EX 1 -STORY HOUSE I n o W o'o SIN 1(1) fRlimr- 1_0 ' a _ CX 30.5" 2.5T _HEREB PROP. VA CA TED 6.1' N 5828'18- W 90.30' _POINT IRS — — "— ON ROCK 53-A-1 44A WOOD& FENCE GEORGE N. & - - MARY ✓ANE CARTER SCALE INST. '#030011527 40 PLAT - DB 799 PG 1392 0 20' LEGEND ZONED: RP USE. RESIDENTIAL 20 IRF - IRON ROD FOUND 1 INCH = 20 FES T /RS - IRON ROD SET _. .a.� -�, Ee- .��4� •E BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN THE !ANDS OF NORMAN L. & NANCY L. TISINGER DEED BOOK 963 PAGE 728 STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, NRGINIA DATE.- 1/3/07 1 SCALE.- 1 ' = 20 OF S.W. Marsh No. 001643 x SHE F 2 ,,' v s u g-4 x it L. - Marsh & Legge Land Survey©rte,_ N WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601 14U, 560 NORTH LOUDOUN STREET FAX (540) 667-0469 , EMAIL ofrice@marshandlegge.com 667-0468 DRAWN BY: MBB DWG NAME:7985-BL4 PL4T �154- CURT MAY, ET UX TO DEED :CECIL C. AFFLECK THIS DEED made and dated this 24th day of October, 1958, by ��and between Curtis W. May and Sue V. May, his wife, parties of the first part; and ,Cecil C. Affleck, party of the second part. WITNESSETH: That for and in consideration of the sum of $10.00 and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of all of which is hereby acknowledged, the said parties of the first part do hereby grant and convey, X �7,with general warranty of title, unto the said party of the second part, in fee simple, all of that certain lot of land, together with the improvements thereon and the ��v\ ;appurtenances thereunto belonging, lying and being situate about 1 mile north of Winchester in Stonewall Magisterial District, Frederick County, Virginia, containing 9,952 square feet, more particularly described by that certain plat and survey dated October 20, 1958, prepared by Lee A. Ebert, C.L.S., hereto attached and by this re- ference made a part of this deed, being the same property conveyed to the said par- ties of the first part by deed of Jackson DeHaven, at ux, dated January 22, 1955, of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Frederick County, Virginia, .in Deed Book 235, page 24, to which deed and the references therein, reference is ';made for a further description of the said property. The said parties of the first part covenant that they have the right to convey the said property; that the said property is free of any encum- brances; that the said party of the second part shall enjoy quiet possession to the said property and the said parties of the first part will execute such further assur- ances of title as may be requisite. Witness the following signatures and seals this date first above written. ************* CURTIS W. MAY (SEAL)' ::REVENUE STAMPS $7.70 * SUE V. MAY (SEAL) CANCELLED State of Virginia County of Frederick, to -wit: I, Eula Shipe, a Notary Public in and for the County of Frederick, State of Virginia, do hereby certify that Curtis W. May and Sue V. May, his wife, whose names are signed to the foregoing writing bearing date the 24th day of October, 1958, have personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my County and State aforesaid. My commission expires October 19, 1960. Given under my hand this 24th day of October, 1958. EULA SHIPE Notary Public 3 OOLD ROADWAY za z RT. 7 - LINE yo a LOTS zw FRONTING PURCELL ye DRIVE OV - IRON PIN 788' p0 E �n - - ,�✓: „, _1 N PT. BEG. f 4 N Z 800.4' 3 60.1 1 S. N 32 04 E- 322 I' 5 53° 27'E- I p 'n w b SHIN G 9,952 SQ. FT. m - 324 W 58 W -� : V) w r E- ` � � 12 � S 24' 12' R - O `�'� _ w Cr ¢ O ' U Dn. I, _J z STAKE�To R 22 J o. ( CERTIFIED CORRECT LEE A. EBERT. C.L.S. SCI A,: -r A_ The above Plat is a Survey of the Curtis W. May Lot. The said Improved Lot fronts the western line of a 12 Ft. Right -of -Way (Foreman Drive) extending northwardly from the North Frederick Grade -U. S_#522, at Sunnyside, in Stonewall District, Frederick County, Virginia: Beginning at an iron pin at the southwestern corner of the Lot, a corner to the Frye Lot, which pin is located by measuring 788 ft. northeastwardly along the original Patton - Stotler Line from a point in the northern line of the Old Roadway (Old Rt. 77), also by measuring 800.4 Ft. northeastwardly along the said line from a point in the northern line of the North Frederick Grade - U. S. 7522, running with a line of the Lots fronting Purcell Drive N 32° 04' E - 322 ft. to an iron pin in a line of the Price Lot; thence with the said line 5 53° 27' E - 11 ft. to an iron pin in the western line of the 12 Ft. Right -of -Way; thence with the said line S 24° 58' W - 324 ft. to a stake corner to the said Frye Lot; thence with a line of the said Lot N 570 30' W - 51 ft, to the beginning. Containing - - 9,952 Sq. Ft. LEE A. EBERT Surveyed - - - October 20, 1958. Uerti-fied Land ureyo8r4: Ccmm. of Virginia rr A 4 VIRGINIA FREDERICK COUNTY, (SCT. This instrument of writing was produced to me on the 24th day of October 1958 at 1:55 P. M. and with certificate of acknowledgment thereto a TT1-i WAq Arlmit.t.arl to nP.nrmA J HOUSE LOCATION SURVEY LAND OF CHARLES 0. DENNY WILL BOOK 80 PAGE 543 STONEWALL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA. THIS LOT IS LOCATED IN HUD FLOOD ZONE C, AREA OF MINIHA.L FLOODING AS SCALED FRO `a FIRM krAP 510063 0105 B EFFECTIVE JULY 17, 1978 O N F DICK TRITON DB 791 P. 1383 S 30'01'38" W 40.00' f) IRS IRS 00� g60 �7 "� Z `0 CO a 0 W TM 53A—A-98 I N - 3,502 SQ. FT. I co z 00Q I DRIVEWAY EASEMENT FOR THE � � � C) BENEFIT OF TM 53A -A-98 & 99 Ln 3-< HEREBY DEDICATED�r o .L dlF 1 STORY I COFRAME # 1116 # 1112 a IZ CA28.3262.5' TO N N. FREDERICK P . _ IRS N 30'35'09" E 40.00' PURCELLLANE 30' RM c. . NO TITLE REPORT FURNISHED Cl -STOPBER D. FURSTENAU, L.S. PC 0 ow 133 WEST BOSCAWE4 N STREET SUITE 2WIINCRESWR, VIRGtNL lA 22601 540 542-1164 FAX 540 542-1183 SERVICES CDFSURVEYS.COM O �{Z MEMBER VIRGUWA ASSOCIATION OF SURVEYORS C, CHRISTOPHER D. FURSTEIdAtI ATE. SEPT. 25, 2006 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT ON No. 2727 SCALE: 1 " y 20' SEPTEMBER 25, 2006 THAT 1 MADE AN Sv'f l ), %.- ACCURATE SURVEY OF THE PRE.U]SES C11-1_ -10-1 TAX lr;?1iP. 53A -A -9F SHOWY HEREON AND THAT TH RR ARR THIS I9 TO CERTIFY THAT ON APRIL 17, 2002 THAT I MADE AN ACCURATE SURVEY OF THE PREMISES SHOWN HEREON AND THAT THERE ARE NO EASEMENTS OR ENCROACHMENTS VISIBLE ON THE GROUND OTHER THAN THOSE SHOWN HEREON. rf) d' fl CO r z z w 0 I t` m W DECK O O 5.6' LI'1 79.5' d Ln ® 1 1/2 story Ln frame Fj n 01106 10.6' C7 03 GO PIP !P 3 d O O U7 D Go in r) ro Z I m 3 U) z o GRAVEL Q PORCH o w 12.9' wDRIVEWAY N N 30035'26"E 40.00' PURCELL LANE ( 30' WIDE ) THIS LOT IS LOCATED IN FLOOD ZONE C, AREA OF MINIMAL FLOODING AS SHOWN ON FIRM MAP # 510063 0105 B EFFECTIVE JULY 17, 1978 7 222' 3 to North Frederick Pike g60 Aa0 ,p 9' v DAVID Vi. MSYC C10. 1455 o SUR,40" LAND OF T. P. AND SUSAN M. GOODM-AN STONEWALL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY. VIRGINIA HOUSE LOCATION SURVEY �� APRIL 17� 2002 moommosew _ _ SCALE: I" 15' FURSTEN ASURVEYI tax map 53A -A-97 I I SOUTH UOUDOUN IS T REET WINCHESTER ER, VIRGINIA (540) 662-9'32a DEED REF. BB. 636 P. 11 1 1RM nR Prj�011 \ � 4"•w,y fy \ \ (a S � � eK799PG1ao1 CAR4/` cf N� LEGEND INF IRF Iron Rod Found / 1. The lot represented by this plat was conveyed SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE to Frank V. Sherwood, Jr_ and Beverly J. Sherwood, his wife, by deed dated 25 May 1990 and recorded I hereby certify that the information shown on this among the land records of Frederick County, Virginia plot Is based on an actual field survey made under Deed Book 745 at Page 736. my supervision and there are n/e/en7croachments or 2. No title report furnished. visible easements shown. l� . 3. 7nts lot does not fie within c Fi.U.D. designated , ICO year flood zone. la Douglas C. Legge, C.L.S. BUILDING LOCA DON SURVEY of PREMISES LOCATED AT 1144 P URCELL DRIVE STONEWALL MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA CERTIFICATE NO. «. DATE: JUNE 29, 1993 1 SCALE: t"=20' SURVEY DATE: JUNE 17, 1993 1 a gilbert w, clifford & associates, Inc. It RT1F 0 � ENGINEERS - LAND PLANNERS - SURVEYORS 150-C OAS G—kX Drkv 200 North C.— Slreat FmdalckWVagina gina 22401 win le�lar, vtrainla 22601 (703) 667-2'39 (703) 695-2115 VIRGINIA: FREDERICK - PLAT a: 14LPD1144.DWG This Instrunwlt of Ing was prredquc�ed o me on a day .r �a4-reeF�+r ft end with urtlliu t�eckmwledgment thereto annexed ix was to r Tax Imposed try Sec. 5&54.1 of admitted Sit •-��and 58-54 ha�ve� been paid, it assessable. K�J CLERK s eYi .�8 �sA r� f1a ate- � `� � 1, Ii�• � ,_ _ r I u j { F� 1_ S r - L - p �a i.l I - 7� !'fit _ � Ga•a 3 � � Y 1 s eYi .�8 �sA r� f1a F� S r - L t !I I I �m WaSr 3�C � .n� •}.5�b 13x''^3` �eM:..'.� t 4 R. �sA f1a WaSr 3�C � .n� •}.5�b 13x''^3` �eM:..'.� t 4 R. IN v c I S �I SCULLY I & GLASS ATTORNEYS AT LAW 20 SOUTH KENT STREET WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601 0'70009947 CD DO .9 - THIS DEED, made and dated this 18th day of June 2007, by and between EAGLE PLACE INDUSTRIES, INC., party of the first part, hereinafter called the Grantor, and RICHARD F. LINEBERG, party of the second part, hereinafter called the Grantee. WITNESSETH_ That for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00), cash in hand paid and other good and valuable consideration, receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, the Grantor does grant and convey, with General Warranty and with English Covenants of Title, unto the Grantee, in fee simple, all of the following realty: All of that certain lot or parcel of land, together with the improvement thereon and the appurtenances thereunto belonging, lying and being situate in Stonewall District, Frederick County, Virginia, described as PIN #53A -A-111, containing 5,400 square feet, more or less, as shown on plat entitled "Plat of Consolidation of the Land of James G. Gibson", prepared by S. W. Marsh, L.S_, dated July 13, 2006, attached to the Deed of record in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court, Frederick County, Virginia, as Instrument No. 060014375; AND BEING a portion of the same property conveyed to Eagle Place Industries, Inc., by Deed dated July 27, 2006, from James G. Gibson, of record in the aforesaid Clerk's Office as Instrument No. 060014375. Reference is here made to the aforesaid instruments, the attachments thereto and the references therein contained for a further and more particular description of the property hereby conveyed. This conveyance is made subject to all legally enforceable restrictive covenants and easements of record affecting the aforesaid realty. SCULLY GLASS ATTORNEYS AT LAW 20 SOUTH KENT STREET WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601 C--) N Cn WITNESS the following signature and seal: Eagle Place Industries, Inc. �TRmes G. 9,bson STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF FREDERICK, to -wit - (SEAL) 1, Tina R. Ladd, a Notary Public in and for the State and jurisdiction aforesaid, —� 1 1 do hereby certify that �l f me -r 0. (� bsDl-) , whose name is signed to the foregoing Deed, bearing date of the 18th day of June 2007, has this day personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my State and jurisdiction aforesaid. Given under my hand this 18th day of June 2007. Ir NOTARY 01-1113 I VIRGINIA: FREDERICK C©UNTY.SCT. My commission expires January 31, 2011. This instrument of writin- was produced to me on at l I J m and N\ilh certificate acknowledgement thereto annexed was admitted to record. Tax imposed by Sec. 5&102.4 �o and 58.1-801 have been paid, if assessable. 4e�t 1-9 Clerk At�Ege��i�tEiattde !e FJ� VARIANCE APPLICATION #14-07 C. ROBERT AND BARBARA KIDWELL Staff Report for the Board of Zoning Appeals Prepared: August 6, 2007 Staff Contact: Lauren E. Krempa, Planner I This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Board of Zoning Appeals to assist them in making a decision on this request. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS HEARING DATE: August 21, 2007 - Action Pending LOCATION: Fries Lane, Lot 13 - Dunbar Subdivision MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Gainesboro PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 42-A-114 PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned: RA (Rural Areas) Land Use: Vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: North: RA (Rural Areas) South: RA (Rural Areas) East: RA (Rural Areas) West: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Residential Use: Residential Use: Residential Use: Residential VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting a 20 foot front yard variance, resulting in a front yard setback of 40 feet, and a 34 foot variance on each side, resulting in side yard variance of 16 feet on each side, for the construction of a single family dwelling. REASON FOR VARIANCE: Current setbacks for the property result in a small buildable area on the property. Variance #14-07, C. Robert and Barbara Kidwell August 6, 2007 Page 2 STAFF COMMENTS: 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 feet for the fronts and 15 feet 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. The Frederick County Board of Supervisors amended the setbacks for the RA Zoning District on February 28, 2007 making the current setbacks for the property: 60 feet to the front, 100 feet to the rear, and 50 feet to both sides. The applicant is requesting a front yard variance of 20 feet from the current 60 foot setback requirement and a 34 foot variance on each side. These requests result in a new front setback of 40 feet and a new side setback of 16 feet (on both sides). The majority of the homes in the vicinity of this variance request are located close to the road and have small side yard setbacks. If enforced, the current RA setbacks would eliminate a buildable area on this lot. However, the enforcement of the front setback requirement on this property does provide a large enough area on the property for the placement of the proposed dwelling, only the enforcement of the side setbacks eliminates the building lot completely. Therefore, the side yard variance requests appear justified and the applicant should be prepared to revise the front yard variance request dependant upon the public hearing for this request. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE AUGUST 21, 2007 MEETING: The Code of Virginia 15.2-2209 (2), states that no variance shall be granted unless the application can meet the following requirements: 1) The strict application of the Ordinance will produce an undue hardship. 2) The hardship is not generally shared by the properties in the same zoning district and vicinity. 3) That the authorization of such variance will not be a substantial detriment to the adjacent property and the character of the district will not be changed by the variance. The applicant is seeking a 20 foot front yard variance and a 34 foot side variance on both sides in order to build a single family dwelling. Should this variance be granted, the building setbacks for this property would change to 40 feet to the front, 16 feet to the left side, 16 feet to the right side, and remain 50 feet in the rear. It appears that this variance meets the intent of the Code of Virginia, Section 15.2-2309 (2); however, staff does feel that the front setback request could be reduced and still allow for the construction of a single family dwelling. This request from the current setbacks of the RA zoning district may be justified. a2 A 249 mf - HICKS,DAVIDA r a 42 A 1 23i a o ALI, MOH' MMED' d r � Bry�rly'R 2 � zo f 3 a a _Ez- � ENO� w C A 93 x'101` 42- OEBECCPS P 1165EN 42 LEE R11A 42 RWANDAL BPGEPN„ i 41 PpEN y _�i WILSON, MICHAEL, L p J �d11T' - IATRIC" CARMAN,P N,. ' i 42A 1W 9 PATRICIA J ¢ ' . 42 AS KA c m PHILIP ' 42�A 100 KAREN 42 A 117 CARMAN, WANDAL FAOELEY, _ KIDWELL, JEREMY M MICHAEL, �- 13 ADAMs,KYLEH m o � 142 :A^115 J ua, RATHORE��HARANJIT SIN Q+ c a �+JF 0 42A 1 15 H ro 42 A 99 ENT. LLC Q i x ADAPS•KYLE 9 [ POYlELL's INVESTM U G Faiu S LL C Fries•L•n � it U Z I W a� Q LZ 42 Ak121� i "� ? _ a 42A 1 19 MICHAEL, W� L. E &MARIAN M m ¢ a o' RONALD J J GORDON, � 42 A L722j o Y 1 21 U z arc 42A E 8 MARIANM C ^z o WEAVER, CHESTERF BLIGAJ �x of RDON RONALO C a N I a GO E } t cc = y� w e� mN 42A 1 Eg MARIANM 3 GORDON. RONALD \ _ v 42A 124 -_ �.� KIDWELL, DONALD WAYNE ao 0 ej �f w ry Dunbar -St- J ..y ,a 'l tlNNtl 4 �`y _. 1a391IM'y3Atl3M3Nr �6 SZl tl ZO I J H13Bt21T3 8'37tlO1fOO1S a�6, I IL b Z6 �+ Q C Z R I O r� r I � - . L L J 3 C(0 p n Q m t U y E u Z,pa • LL S » tL f/1 m � D. N H S to a2 A 249 mf - HICKS,DAVIDA r a 42 A 1 23i a o ALI, MOH' MMED' d r � Bry�rly'R 2 � zo f 3 a a _Ez- � ENO� w C A 93 x'101` 42- OEBECCPS P 1165EN 42 LEE R11A 42 RWANDAL BPGEPN„ i 41 PpEN y _�i WILSON, MICHAEL, L p J �d11T' - IATRIC" CARMAN,P N,. ' i 42A 1W 9 PATRICIA J ¢ ' . 42 AS KA c m PHILIP ' 42�A 100 KAREN 42 A 117 CARMAN, WANDAL FAOELEY, _ KIDWELL, JEREMY M MICHAEL, �- 13 ADAMs,KYLEH m o � 142 :A^115 J ua, RATHORE��HARANJIT SIN Q+ c a �+JF 0 42A 1 15 H ro 42 A 99 ENT. LLC Q i x ADAPS•KYLE 9 [ POYlELL's INVESTM U G Faiu S LL C Fries•L•n � it U Z I W a� Q LZ 42 Ak121� i "� ? _ a 42A 1 19 MICHAEL, W� L. E &MARIAN M m ¢ a o' RONALD J J GORDON, � 42 A L722j o Y 1 21 U z arc 42A E 8 MARIANM C ^z o WEAVER, CHESTERF BLIGAJ �x of RDON RONALO C a N I a GO E } t cc = y� w e� mN 42A 1 Eg MARIANM 3 GORDON. RONALD \ _ v 42A 124 -_ �.� KIDWELL, DONALD WAYNE ao 0 ej �f w ry Dunbar -St- J ..y ,a 'l tlNNtl 4 �`y _. 1a391IM'y3Atl3M3Nr �6 SZl tl ZO I J H13Bt21T3 8'37tlO1fOO1S a�6, I IL b Z6 �+ Q Q O U a • �- r,ny V V N �..i Q 4 � L 22 r+Y 7 � Y 22 a 0 ;2i 2 1 t ut F �ra i � � s Bryarly'Rd • � - �. �, I ICA `i { 4; - S r ~ r -'may.« ir o z � � �" Frley'L•n ; I � � — Y G cc cu �I • ~ r Dunbar St Q APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE IN THE COUNT' OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA MUST BE TYPED OR FILLED OUT IN INK - PLEASE PRINT 1. The applicant is the owner 2. APPLICANT: NAME: 6// /–(�' 06 K6 ADDRESS /(IM 7 �� i' ��O other"",i . (Check one) OCCUPANT: (if different) NAME:, 66'e�'elowe, ADDRESS: � tyr �p L — & - � TELEPHONE:,3(/ 96& TELEPHONE: 5��– z2 -O'C6 ( 3. The property is located at (give exact directions and include State Route numbers): FIC–OPl 78% e'i 37 -- SZ'2. ^J 6,j 7>'OP7V7- C1-10e(N ej, f --p16,5 Z 41V -e= 4. The property has a road frontage of "� l J feet and a depth of ���, `70 feet and consists of . 32– ! acres (please be exact). Page 5 of 9 5. The property is owned by �, %G°L �C� f �A� j � 1 b6"I( as evidenced by deed from X4101V 6, 46 Il ll recorded (previous owner) in deed k no./,)%�-3 J52V10 -page IuA of the deed books of the Clerk of the Court for Frederick County. Please attach a copy of the recorded deed. 6. Magisterial District: �� i /U � C-0 7. Property Identification No.:2 ' /q S. The existing zoning of theproperly is:� 9. The existing use of the property is: 10. Adjoining Property: USE ZONING North .0 l tl;Cl East �Y NG Le VAm I Ly Dw&_tA_ i rj South�t N C: L F�r`` m t L'( West La t\,j&jLE" T76Wt It L DLU LUI N �- 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.") rcoru '% G 4 TZ 0P 4 61,-v 177J;Y7,C.,/ bZV &-C7,6 7�J6::-- 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 Page 6 of 9 13. Additional comments, if any: A,' ®-/-- r/ -/,!3F IQrrWi/v r,-„�,,,, 6u#3 bit, /S s- vv A►2 t9f' SSI 2�6 &T�1c �F [� �{'Z! f �v s X11 d� ;' MEET 6'61426s- Mi” 1 Al E' LDC T3 7Z Vii;� e "J FAr e A :L; Q 6:Qu i'7—h&c 94o/v 5 m -u r o &, 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 IiDil�=ZZ Address _%'L �� 2- , 81-VC,dAeA Property ID # `'Z A 1 J% J ep—e lZ l' /q Address �ilJ7li� DCT(�!�)'?AW / Properly ID A 1 7 &rfo 2& G��rj���,��. / T�' O1U ,WP- Z -/L, AddressSY A,16'1-/<// /'h Property ID # .` fz- A Address . 61V Or t A 8,4?ZZ Z -1U C7 Property ID # 4Z -,-7 b /t,10 6 AddressJLc � ' ��e�%�f1`� L -N 0 Z&63 Property ID # / 3 Y&7, ' J'--&f� /tet-% 14 Address T /�L `t Property ID # 2 Address Property ID # Address Property ID # Page 7 of 9 15. Provide a sketch of the property (you may use this page or attach engineer's drawing). 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 8 of 9 20 0 20 GRAPHIC SCALE (IN FEET) LOT 16 TM 42—A-107 N/F KIDWELL — S O 1.19' 17" E 77.27' LOT 15 y i 0 O O a rri LOT 14 NOTES 16.0' 1. NO TITLE REPORT FURNISHED. i EASEMENTS OTHER THAN SHOWN I MAY EXIST. MERIDIAN OF RECORD INST. NO. 010009320 yr 50, BRL LOT 13 13965 SQ. FT. DECK 60' BRL PROPOSED DWELLING 16.0' 2. THE BOUNDARY INFORMATION SHOWN HEREON HAS BEEN PREPARED FROM AVAILABLE RECORDS AND IS NOT PURPORTED TO BE A BOUNDARY SURVEY OF THE PARCEL OR ANY PORTION OF THE BOUNDARY, LINES. 212' t TO N 02'30'00 E 77.10' DUNBAR LN. FRIES LANE (30' WIDE) PROPOSED HOUSE LOCATION SKETCH LOT 13 - DUNBAR, MARTIN S. GLAIZE LOTS AT ALBIN GAINESBORO MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT, FREDERICK COUNTY, ORGINIA SCALE: 1" = 20' AA DATE. JULY 13, 2007 GREEN � ���rr CIVVINEERIN 7s INC. 151 Windy Hill Lane Engineers Winchester, Virginia 22602 Surveyors Telephone. (540) 662-4185 FAX: (540) 722-9528 Founded in 1971 www.greenwayeng.com 0 0 ;. 1 4.9.35 SHEET 1 OF 1 1 xM3 ° 9pso�®� oa n�aar�� say poxQUEa ojes®ga jo ®aaojJj4a®a q}jca pao 'A'd OV ZT as qml Bung Jo Pap qjb eqj no o® of p;@DyToad ®Ba 2ujajaA ao pumuJOUT fis • VZtIIJtiIG N'rb eat �r� mm 0 s CA � v T F— Q �o AGREEMENT VARIANCE (Number to be assigned by the Planning Dept_) I (we), 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 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 O DATE SIGNATURE OF OWNER DATE - G' .7 (if other than applicant) -OFFICE USE ONLY- BZA PUBLIC HEARING OF ACTION: -DA - APPROVAL SIGNED: BZA CHAIRMAN DENIAL DATE: Page 9 of 9 Home runs anti House irkans my F-anK jr:De z tvsse6 uaups rart; 1vi1 Shopping Cart My Favorites My Cornpa,es Sign in HOME SEARCH PLANS PRODUCTS SERVICES GENERAL INFO HELP LINKS Main Order Online Elevation Main Floor Lower Floor Plan Specs Similar Plans [ Click to enlarge ] [Click to enlarge] Similar Home Plans sY SHERMAIN OAKS 1st Floor 46 sq. ft. 2nd Floor 1249 sq. ft. Total 1295 sq. ft. Overall Dimensions: 45'-0" x 31'-4" More Options COMPARE THIS PLAN » ADD TO MY FAVORITES_ PRINT THIS PAGE -M_ ODIFY_T_HIS PLAN » Sponsored Acts Mtoult4igs For lour C`ru Houw Use on Stucco, Brick or Stone Many Style, ;o Choose From Floorplans and Elevations are subject to change. Floorplan dimensions are approximate. Consult working drawings for actual dimensions and information. Elevations are artists' conceptions. HONE PLANS I PRODUCTS I SERVICES I GENERAL INFO I HELP COPYRIGHT 1997 - 2007 FRANK BETZ ASSOCIATES, II LINKS I PRIVACY POLICY I CONTACT INFO I SITE HAP http://www.frankbetz.com/homeplans/plan_info.html?pn=1080 6/27/2007 dome rians ana blouse rlans oy ra7Ias jumz iv&Nuivui9w- 1-888-717-3003 Shopping Cart My Favorites Ply Compares Sign in HOME SEARCH PLANS PRODUCTS SERVICES GENERAL INFO HELP L+NKS Main order Online Elevation Main Floor Lower Floor Plan Specs Similar Plans 45LO' More Options -Y---r� __ COMPARE THIS PLAN )> } * ADD TO MY FAVORITES » 6ining Area 4 Kitchen 10° x 10° Master Suite ' PRINTER FRIENDLY VERSION ------ Vaulted 12° x 14' MODIFY THIS PLAN » Great Room x 1®° — Bath ` - GELf , I)' Vaulted F j M.Both Bedroom 2 w' dIA-- ` r -`r_ t1� x r09 C Bedroom 3 _WLe 107 x l0° Foyer UPPER LEVEL PLAN Floorplans and Elevations are subject to change. Floorplan dimensions are approximate. Consult working drawings for actual dimensions and information. Elevations are artists' conceptions. HOME PLANS I PRODUCTS I SERVICES I GENERAL INFO I HELP COPYRIGHT 1997 - 2007 FRANK BEIZ ASSOCIATES, it LINKS I PRIVACY POLICY I CONTACT INFO I SITE MAP http://www.frankbetz.com/homeplans/plan_info.html?pn=1080&vw=3 6/27/2007 c:) Q 0 CI) 04001529E THIS DEED made and dated this 2nd day of August, 2004, by and between JASON D. McKELVEY, party of the first part, hereinafter called the Grantor, and C. ROBERT KIDWELL and BARBARA E. KIDWELL. parties of the second part, hereinafter called the Grantees. WITNESSETH: That for and in consideration of the sum of Ten ($10.00) Dollars, cash in hand paid, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the Grantor does hereby grant, bargain and sell with general warranty and English Covenants of title unto the Grantees, in fee simple absolute, as tenants by the entirety with common law right of survivorship, all of that certain lot or parcel of land lying and being situate a short distance west of U -S. Highway No. 522 (now known as Virginia Secondary Highway Route 719) in Gainesboro Magisterial District, and being identified as Lot 13 on the plat of Dunbar, Martin S. Glaize Lots at Albin, which is of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Frederick County, Virginia, in Deed Book 196 at Page 407, and further shown on that certain plat of survey drawn by Scott J. Wolford, L.S., dated June 27, 2001, as containing 13,965 square feet, Lot 13, which is attached to that certain Deed of record in the aforesaid Clerk's Office as Instrument No. 01-0009320, and being a portion of the same land conveyed to Jason D. McKelvey by Deed date July 19, 2001 from Jeremy M. Kidwell, of record in the aforesaid Clerk's Office as Instrument No. 01-0009320. Page 1 of 2 This conveyance is made subject to all easements, rights of way and restrictions i of record affecting the subject property. i WITNESS the fo:lowing signatures ane. seats. J , � SEAL) Jas n D. McKelvey STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY OF WINCHESTER, TO -WIT I , a Notary Public in and for the State and jurisdiction aforesaid, do ereb!y certify that Jason D. McKelvey, whose name is signed to the foregoing DEED dated the 2'' day of August, 2004 has persona.ly appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my State and jurisdiction aforesaid. Given under my hand this 3 day of �_> 2004. j My Commission expires /- 3/ -OZ � `�„tutumwurrrr� - - a (3S NOTARY 15UBLIC IARyFn'; pueltc lam' .7�Fr0F'V`P��� VIRGINIA: FREDERICK'COUNTY' SCT- jTris instrument of writing was Produced to me on g — — at 1 im7i _111 A\DEED-"Oveym KdwdLvvpdnnexed cicn as a hit�ted'to rewrd. T owtnpos d by Sec- 58.1-802 of $ .�� ,and 58.1-801 have been pa id. if assessable `aax ... ` I Page 2 of 2 VARIANCE APPLICATION 915-07 JEREMY AND DEBORAH KIDWELL Staff Report for the Board of Zoning Appeals Prepared: August 3, 2007 Staff Contact: Lauren E. Krempa, Planner I This report is prepared by the Frederick County Planning Staff to provide information to the Board of Zoning Appeals to assist them in making a decision on this request. It may also be useful to others interested in this zoning matter. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS HEARING DATE: August 21, 2007 - Action Pending LOCATION: Dunbar Lane, Lot 16, approximately 350 feet from Bryarly Road MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Gainesboro PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 42-A-117 PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned: RA (Rural Areas) Land Use: Residential and Vacant ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: North: RA (Rural Areas) South: RA (Rural Areas) East: RA (Rural Areas) West: RA (Rural Areas) Use: Residential Use: Vacant Use: Residential Use: Residential VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting a 40 foot front yard variance, resulting in a front yard setback of 20 feet, and a 36 foot variance on each side, resulting in a side yard variance of 14 feet on each side, for the construction of a single family dwelling. REASON FOR VARIANCE: This property has a width 60 feet and a depth of approximately 135 feet, therefore current setback requirements for the RA zoning district eliminate buildable area on the property. Variance #15-07, Jeremy Kidwell August 3, 2007 Page 2 STAFF COMMENTS: 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 feet for the fronts and 15 feet 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 feet to the front, 50 feet to the rear, and 50 feet to both sides. The applicant is requesting a front yard variance of 40 feet from the current 60 foot setback requirement and a 36 foot variance on each side. These requests result in a new front setback of 20 feet and a new side setback of 14 feet (on both sides). The majority of the homes in the vicinity of this variance request are located close to the road and have small side yard setbacks. If enforced, the current RA side setbacks would eliminate a buildable area on this lot. Staff would point out, however, that the enforcement of the front yard requirement does provide some buildable area and therefore such a large reduction in the front yard setback may not meet the intent of the Code of Virginia. Staff does confirm that the side yard variance requests are justified and the applicant should consider reducing the requested variance from the front setback dependant on the public hearing for this request. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE AUGUST 21, 2007 MEETING: The Code of Virginia 15.2-2209 (2), states that no variance shall be granted unless the application can meet the following requirements: 1) The strict application of the Ordinance will produce an undue hardship. 2) The hardship is not generally shared by the properties in the same zoning district and vicinity. 3) That the authorization of such variance will not be a substantial detriment to the adjacent property and the character of the district will not be changed by the variance. The applicant is seeking a 40 foot front yard variance and a 36 foot side variance on both sides in order to build a single family dwelling. Should this variance be granted, the building setbacks for this property would change to 20 feet to the front, 14 feet to the left side, 14 feet to the right side, and remain 50 feet in the rear. It appears that this variance meets the intent of the Code of Virginia, Section 15.2-2309 (2); however, staff does feel that the front setback request could be reduced and still allow for the construction of a single family dwelling. This request from the current setbacks of the RA zoning district may be justified. I J - GQ o - U Q .Q ZS u L d ca cl ¢ >Q0.0 � � C U � _ a o a E � ^tel ■ d o w 42 A 249 a � Q 42 A HICKS, DAVID A _ i d a ALI, MORA, y-rty'Rd W w J ry O S a- N N Q MR I Q z Q�W U' Qm Q r 1 Cr„F. 00 J Y x dw v� n' U H m b w U J o J w 3 x LL 1 7 R� LUTERELL,VI-. Y 42 A 101l MICHAEL, WANDA L D�¢ �I\�Pyp• - J J d 42K 100 MICHAEL,WANDAL 42 VADELEY,KAREN 42 A 117 Z. KIDWELL, JEREMY M w a w m o� d N 13 H 42A all ry o C, ADAMS, KYLE . 3 CH ANJ17 SINGH � w w w 42A 9 42 A 99 T LLC ¢ �;, Q Q RA ORE, TH ADAMS, KY P�LL'S IN VESiMEN � z Fries•L•n z� ,a a ; H > .2 Sol" 42 A,;�2� � o WANDA L. m J ^ d z Q . MICHAEL, lel Q Q O 0 W J 3 O Y Y Q K rv� N Q S U Fi �w W ry n Q W' 42 A 124 KIDWELL, DONALD WAYNE J L* M � Dunbar-St N w w s � b37)3p e[ ` p My 0 b00 Z6 3 Nq -.'IbNNV 8121381IM � U `f a rr o jS4V I H13812113 B "3lVOHOOIS SZb�b�,ahr.a7' a LL V Z6 ! .ryA c� i I � o OR UPJ F _ C, yr R > Q Q ISI Q c �aN • U� �w x(na �a3 3 _ N • ®9 / ® / Y Z � a = of ° a. m v � E Z• Z i I OR r t F i I Q N V N M T O O N M N 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 other (Check one) 2. APPLICANT: OCCUPANT: (if different) NAME: eAell'� .ES C = NAME: ADDRESS &C,`7.6&x,6B ADDRESS: f'q TELEPHONE:-,- TELEPHONE:�� (6Z --%y j 3. The property is located at (give exact directions and include State Route numbers): ON r2'Z C -O (L I ,13ro 14,5 . —1b e ry t_ �Tz--r aiv F5u RtJT-- C RRO (264- (LD. 4. The property has a road frontage of 0, 0-0 feet and a depth ofK j (0` feet and consists of A 1 S : acres (please be exact). Page 5 of 9 5. The property is owned by J O,Y-e 'm �j jYI V 'Debor-ez h L , i CMAs evidenced by deed from 6. P 6 14 recorded (previous owner) in deed -book no. Mr-132cl on page NAS of the deed books of the Clerk of the Court for Frederick County. Please attach a copy of the recorded deed. 6. Magisterial District: A Z 1Vp� 9pC O 7. Properly Identification No.: 42� /i7 8. The existing zoning of the property is: /U 9. The existing use of the property is: U t4C4 10. Adjoining Property: -USE North airy ' i;ii% ?,�/i A East i�' ll U ,Y1 A _ South diva' 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.") ecii,5���' r� 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 properly, or the use or development of property immediately adjacent thereto A A)b Page 6 of 9 13. Additional comments, if any: A a p/- T -Il Leo r. &/J r //tv i s LV 1-4( ("ys� ilri- �. ; n.! - ° ro e PP—oF�—tzi-y 47 All? 2E--OV&� 5Ts ro FOk AN 2 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 Address I,IV 22 Property ID #� i Address /� �'I� ' Z /V Zz&o3 Property M # i 2 Address Property ID # `/ ' Address '527 6��-4 e -C Y/ `►6 Property ID # 42 4 Address �,'�- rL`I alp Property ID # A. j 07 Address Property ID # Address Property ID # Address Property ID # Page 7 of 9 15. Provide a sketch of the property (you may use this page or attach engineer's drawing). 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 8 of 9 TM 42-A-107 N/F KIDWELL N 82-27'32" W 13.45' LOT 17 LOT 16 ' 8171 SO. FT. 50' BRL d- 3 1=� A NOTES 1. NO TITLE REPORT FURNISHED. EASEMENTS OTHER THAN SHOWN MAY EXIST. 2. THE BOUNDARY INFORMATION SHOWN HEREON HAS BEEN PREPARED FROM AVAILABLE RECORDS AND IS NOT PURPORTED TO BE A BOUNDARY SURVEY OF THE PARCEL OR ANY PORTION OF THE BOUNDARY LINES LOT 13 0 0 0 60' BRL 0 z PROPOSED DWELLING 0 0 N S 88'03'30" E 60.00' DUNBAR LANE (40' WIDE) PROPOSED HOUSE LOCATION SKETCH LOT 16 - DUNBAR, MARTINS. GLAIZE LOTS AT ALBIN 14.5 LOT 15 LN. 20 0 20 GRAPHIC SCALE (IN FEET) GAINESBORO MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT, FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA SCALE.- 1" = 20' 1 DATE. JULY 13, 2007 GREENWAY ENGINEERING, mc. 151 Windy Hill Lane Engineers Winchester, Virginia 22602 Surveyors Telephone: (540) 662-4185 FAX.- (540) 722-9528 Founded in 1971 www.greenwayeng.com 0 M. - v -pion®a oa PoIlTmPu "Ll p®x®oIIs 30 ptm 'N'a oE:ZT 48 9'r6T cunp 3o Amp ne mm m-0 wwtlyTosa rem 'RRTITM 30 lueaw3®tY �T. YiV �Yq - e--�•c - ' lot) oul moo loI2 aamq ' Vi tIIJItI d CA W �A������ roe• CC Q j AFi —3 b� a bs o® 4 A p• 30 PI CA W �A������ roe• a bs o® 0 ;19 24 2'1 Z2 Z3LAJ� So' FRFa OBRA LOD <� �h - o o � •w tc 26®' Q-. •� FE -. F - Q r0 Tl i iv-,hnr I nnP AGREEMENT VARIANCE # (Number to be assigned by the Planning Dept) I (we), 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 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, trye. SIGN UREPLICANT DATE SIGNATURE OF OWNER if other than applicant) -OFFICE USE ONLY- 7ATE BZA PUBLIC HEARING OF ACTION: SIGNED: APPROVAL - DATE - BZA CHAIRMAN DENIAL DATE: Page 9 of 9 .Douse Plan jiW-teL!4Uf3L Irflar apc; i %ji close window http://www.eplans.com/image-gallery.hwx/Q/Plan.HWEPL 14062/lmageld.413927 7/2/2007 House Plan HWEPL!4062 imag- '51 y 1,�� . 4. BE-Mchroom I I.V x 1 *1-0 9'-0" Clea, .. Ht. "ath Hall Bedroom 2 11-6-x 13-0 9'-0 Cig. Ht. ragu Z, "I -Y Rear P o r C; 1, 1 12-8)K 9 -- 0 Raised Bar Living Room 17-6 x 12-10 (CLEAR) 9'-0" C1g- Ht. Front Porch 17-10 x 5-0 h"://www.eplans.com/image-gallery.hwx/Q/Plan.HWEPL 14062/lmageld.413935 7/2/2007 NO N ct Q N M O N y N d A 0 G �3 O' 0 b+v a 0 .p -o .y 0 0 U �Umew wcwk EAS Fr Atlmey5 R Cmmdm at lav jot wee aoscaw Il Strad wbck= V"" v6of 060017325 a N THIS DEED. OF GIFT, made and dated this M day of September 2006, by and between C. ROBERT KIDWELL and BARBARA E. KIDWELL, Grantors; JEREMY M. KIDWELL and DEBORAH L. KIDWELL, hereinafter called the Grantees. WITNESSETH: THAT, for and in consideration of the sum of TEN DOLLARS ($10.00), cash in hand paid by the Grantees to the Grantors, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the Grantors do hereby quitclaim, release and convey unto the Grantees, any and all right, title and interest they may possess in and to the following described real estate, in fee simple, as tenants by the entirety with right of survivorship, as at common law, all the following described property: All those two certain lots of land improved by a dwelling known as 127 Dunbar Lane, lying just west of Route 522 about three miles northwest of Winchester in Gainesboro Magisterial District, Frederick County, Virginia, designated as Lots 16 and 17 on the Plat of "Dunbar", Martin S. Glaize Lots at Albin, recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Frederick County, Virginia, in Deed Book 196, at Page 409, and fronting on the south side of Dunbar Street (formerly Fries Street) a distance of 60 feet each and extending back in a southerly direction a uniform width for a distance of 146.3 feet; AND BEING the same property conveyed to C. Robert Kidwell and Barbara E. Kidwell, by deed dated September 2, 2005 from C. Robert Kidwell, Barbara E. Kidwell and Clarence Kidwell, of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Frederick County, Virginia as Instrument No.050020108. Reference is hereby made to the aforesaid instruments and the references therein contained for a more particular description of the property hereby conveyed. o! CD i k{ N 6� ii This conveyance is made subject to all easements, rights of way and restrictions of record affecting the subject property. WITNESS the following signature ane. seal: (SEAL) I C. RO ERT KIDWELL KJLI laic ai, 6(SEAL) 1 BARBARA E. KIDWELL a I STATE OF Virginia, County/City of Frederick, to -wit: i The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of September 2006 by C. Robert Kidwell and Barbara E. Kidwell. My commission expires: i C � I i Public Jonq VIRGINIA: FREDERICK COUNTy.SCT. attThis instrument of writing was produced to me on gym. 1 I $� tand Hlith certificate aci:nox ledgemc�io annexed J t_7�, : 0W: 0We001was admitted In record. Tax imposed by Sec. 58.1-802 of i N� ��. and 58.1-801 have been paid, if assessable. i4L fiPc i �eJ/ a Clerk Mr" 6 Cxnd¢S n lav PWrA BOso�rn S6rty I Q'mdrsiC. VYO' a 226oi I -- Al