Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBZA 01-15-08 Meeting MinutesMEETING MINUTES i OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Held in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building, 107 N. Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia, on January 15, 2008. PRESENT Robert Perry, Vice Chairman, Stonewall District; Dwight Shenk, Gainesboro District; Kevin Scott, Shawnee District; Jay Givens, Back Creek District; R. K. Shirley, III, Opequon District; and, Robert W. Wells, Member -At- Large. ABSENT: Eric Lowman, Red Bud District. STAFF , PRESENT Mark R. Cheran, Zoning and Subdivision Administrator; Dana Johnston, Zoning Inspector; and, Bev Dellinger, BZA Secretary. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Vice Chairman Perry at 3:25 p.m. Before approval of the December minutes, Mr. Givens made a motion to amend a portion of the minutes. Mr. Givens would like to amend the minutes to clarify the terms "easement" and setback ". On Page 1507, the last paragraph, Mr. Givens would like it to read, "Their permit said they were going to be 65 feet off of that se the easement line and if it had been 65 feet, it would have been 20 feet inside the easement required setback. It turns out being 30 feet outside the easement required setback so the house was set 55 feet to the left side from where it was proposed to be set ". The motion to amend the minutes was seconded by Mr. Wells and unanimously approved. On motion by Mr. Givens and seconded by Mr. Shenk, the amended minutes for the December 18, 2007, meeting were unanimously approved. Vice Chairman Perry stated that the Agenda calls for the Election of Officers and Adoption of Bylaws, but he's going to put this item off until after the public hearing for the variance. PUBLIC HEARING Variance Request 426 -07 of Winchester Regional Airport, for a 15 foot front yard variance, resulting in a front yard setback of 45 feet. This property is located at 491 Airport Road (Route 645), and is identified by Property Identification Number 64 -A -79, in the Shawnee Magisterial District. ACTION — VARIANCE APPROVED Mr. Cheran presented the staff report. The property setback lines in 1967 were 35 feet front and 15 feet side yards. Frederick County amended its ordinance in 1989 and the current RA setback pMinute $o k Pag 1509 M ericxx rpunly ?rc 8,Q oning AppealsmutesoanuaryL requirements are 60 feet front, 50 feet rear and 50 feet side yards. Mr. Cheran further stated that the applicant is planning to construct an aircraft hangar of approximately 32,000 square feet, which is an amended footage from the staff report. The engineer emailed Mr. Cheran of this change last week after the agendas had been mailed. The footprint of about 32,000 square feet includes the hangar, door pockets and second floor area. Due to FAA regulations on runways and taxiways, the applicant will have difficulty in locating and constructing the hangar on this property. Section 165 -50 of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance does allow this as a by -right use in the RA zoning district. The Code of Virginia 15?- 2309(2) states that no variance shall be granted unless the application can meet the following requirements: 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. Mr. Cheran stated that due to this unique land use within the RA district, the strict application of the zoning ordinance and FAA requirements will produce an undue hardship for current and future development and use of the property. The hardship is not shared by properties in the same zoning district, as this use is unique to the Winchester Regional Airport. This proposed variance will not change the character of the district or the adjacent properties. Therefore, it appears that this variance meets the intent of the Code of Virginia, Section 15.2- 2309(2). This request from the current front setback of the RA zoning district may be justified. Mr. Cheran stated that the Frederick County 2003 Comprehensive Plan does identify an airport support area. It's not right on target; it's vague. The BZA doesn't usually deal with Comprehensive Plan issues because we mostly deal with zoning ordinances. The zoning ordinance ( §165 -105) does include an airport district, API, and it calls out the things that this applicant is requesting such as horizontal approach zones, airport zones, conical zones and transitional zones. Most airports have a separate zoning district, but Frederick County does not. Mr. Givens asked, if the Board approves this setback, is it for this building only. Mr. Cheran responded it is just for this building. Ms. Renny Manuel, Director of the Winchester Airport, stated that this request is just for this particular hangar. They are restricted where they can develop on the airport. not so much because of County restrictions but because of FAA restrictions. Ms. Manuel further stated that this is the only area at the lower end of the field that is left where they can build and stay out of the FAA restrictive areas. Vice Chairman Perry asked what the clearance requirement is from the center line of the taxiway to the building. Ms. Manuel replied that one of the things that drives the clearance is the size of the aircraft and the type of aircraft that will be utilizing and be kept in that hangar is a Group 4 aircraft. The minimum is 93 feet. Mr. Joe Knechtel of Potesta stated there are two airplanes depicted on the drawing and those are nute B k Pag 1510 notes or.pant9Rrc 8Woning Appealsry Class 3 aircraft. The dimension shown of 99.24 feet is the distance they have from the front of the hangar to a restrictive zone. Vice Chairman Perry asked what the FAA distance requirement will be. Mr. Knechtel stated that distance has to be exceeding the wing span of the aircraft, which is 77.9 feet. Ms. Manuel stated when that aircraft is taxi -ing, another aircraft is sitting parked in front of the hangar, and they have to have so much of a distance between them. One of the things they took into consideration in trying to develop this site plan to accommodate a hangar large enough to house the aircraft is that the current existing taxiway is going to be re- located another 100 feet closer to Airport Road. They factored those distances in because that project will start within the next two years. Vice Chairman Perry stated that he doesn't have any problem with seeing the Airport develop, but he does have a problem with the applicant asking for a 15 foot variance if they only need ten feet, four inches. Vice Chairman Perry wants to know what the actual dimensions are. Mr. Knechtel stated that the building right now at the closest elevation is within three or four tenths under the transition zone, which is the height of the building. The closest section of the building to this imaginary transition zone is not actually at the peak, it's at the corner of the door pocket. Lantz Construction has worked very long and hard to try to get this building as short as possible to fit underneath this transition zone. Right now it's at 737; the door pockets on the east side of the building are at 737. Ms. Manuel stated they not only have the setback on the wing span and the distance from the center line of the roadway and taxiway, they also have a 71 transitional zone that comes out from the center line. The FAA has already said there's no way that they would grant permission for them to penetrate that imaginary angle with even a couple inches. Mr. Knechtel stated the building is 34 feet at the ridge and 32 feet at the door pockets. Ms. Manuel stated this is the last area on this side of the runway that the Airport has left to develop. They just completed a land swap with the owners of Govenor's Hill so that they have room for growth near the Public Safety Building. Before they can develop that area, they have to put in a full parallel taxiway and that project is estimated to run about $4,000,000.00. Mr. Steve Diel with Lantz Construction, the design/build contractor for ProJet Aviation Services, stated that they have spent approximately four and one half months trying to make the hangar fit the aircraft. The building is as narrow as they can possibly get it at 91 feet. This is a very custom steel building; it is not a standard steel building in height. There were no citizen comments. Vice Chairman Perry closed the public hearing portion of the meeting. Minute to k Pag 1511 i ene unty rd 8 oning Appealsmuteso anuary , 2V0 0 Discussion Mr. Wells made a motion that the Board accept and approve the application for Variance #26 -07 Mr. Scott seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. OTHER Election of Officers Vice Chairman Perry asked for a motion for Chairman of the Board of Zoning Appeals. Mr. Givens made a motion to nominate Mr. Scott as Chairman, seconded by Mr. Shenk, and the vote was unanimous, with Mr. Scott abstaining. Vice Chairman Perry asked for a motion for Vice Chairman of the Board of Zoning Appeals. Mr. Wells made a motion to nominate Mr. Perry as Vice Chairman, seconded by Mr. Scott, and the vote was unanimous, with Mr. Perry abstaining. Vice Chairman Perry asked for a motion for Secretary of the Board of Zoning Appeals. Mr. Scott made a motion to appoint Ms. Dellinger as Secretary, seconded by Mr. Givens, and the vote was unanimous. Vice Chairman Perry asked for a motion to officially set the time, date and place of the meetings of the Board of Zoning Appeals. The meetings will be held on the third Tuesday of the month at 3:25 p.m., in the Board Room at 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. Mr. Wells made a motion to approve the time, date and place of the meetings of the Board of Zoning Appeals. The motion was seconded by Mr. Scott and the vote was unanimous. Mr. Cheran stated that we do not have any applications pending and the cut off date is Friday, January 18, 2008. Mr. Cheran stated that the Board members don't have any issues with the Bylaws so we will keep them as is. Mr. Wells made a motion to approve the Bylaws as they stand. Mr. Scott seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. Mr. Cheran stated that after last month's variance request from Red Apple Group, some of the members wanted to take a closer look at the form of our building permits. Mr. Cheran passed out a copy of the current building permit used by our Inspections & Permits Department. At the bottom of the permit, the applicant signs a statement that includes a sentence where the applicant agrees to follow all Frederick County Zoning Ordinances and all provisions of the Uniform Building Code, and also the Freedom of Information Act. That statement and signature puts the responsibility on the permit holder and /or property owner. Mr. Shirley asked Mr. Cheran when someone signs the building permit and they don't abide by it, does the County Attorney have any jurisdiction because they've defrauded the County? A few fines on a few of these guys would probably straighten it out. M uw ,ko k Pag r (7 1512 Minutes o anuryyJ, oning Appeals Mr. Cheran replied what usually happens in an instance where a setback is off, Mr. Cheran will immediately issue a Stop Work Order. Then it becomes the building officials for design standard and he takes over from there. Under the Building Code, they have a Board of Appeals for that which has nothing to do with this Board; it has to do with design standard. Once the Stop Work Order is issued, they have a chance to get the design feature changed and if they can't, Mr. Cheran and Mr. Trenary will file court papers, unless they come to the BZA. Mr. Trenary will go to Circuit Court and the court will decide. Board members and Mr. Cheran discussed at length the problems and issues involved with setting a dwelling or building and how best to avoid the errors that bring applicants to the Board of Zoning Appeals. The general consensus is, it's the applicant's responsibility. As there were no other items to be discussed, the meeting adjourned at 4:20 p.m. by unanimous vote. E Bev Dellinger, Secretary pMpinute Io 9kk Page qtr Q{ 1513 Minutes oJanuiy I J,UOoning Appeals