BZA 04-20-10 Meeting MinutesMEETING MINUTES
OF THE
FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
Held in the Board Room of the Frederick County Administration Building, 107 N. Kent Street,
Winchester, Virginia, on April 20, 2010.
PRESENT Kevin Scott, Chairman, Shawnee District; Robert Perry, Vice Chairman, Stonewall
District; Bruce Carpenter,. Gainesboro District; Jay Givens, Back Creek District; and Robert W.
Wells, Member -At -Large
ABSENT: R. K. Shirley, III, Opequon District; and Eric Lowman, Red Bud District.
STAFF
PRESENT Mark R. Cheran, Zoning and Subdivision Administrator; Dana Johnston, Zoning
Inspector; and, Bev Dellinger, Secretary.
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Scott at 3:25 p.m. and he determined there
is a quorum. Chairman Scot, welcomed Mr. Brian Hester of the Winchester Board of Zoning
Appeals to the meeting.
On a motion made by Mr. Perry and seconded by Mr. Wells, the minutes for the March
16, 2010, meeting were unanimously approved as presented.
Chairman Scott inquired if there are any applications pending for May. Mr. Cheran
responded there are no applications at this time; the cut -off date is Friday, April 23, 2010.
PUBLIC HEARING
Variance Request #04 -10 of John McAllister, for a 26 foot right side yard
variance, resulting in a 24 foot right side yard setback, for the construction
of a master bedroom, deck and porch. This property is located 573 Lake
Saint Clair Drive, and is identified with Property Identification Number
31A -1 -1 in the Gainesboro Magisterial District.
ACTION — VARIANCE APPROVED WITH BZA MODIFICATION
Mr. Johnston presented the staff report. Mr. Johnston directed members to the screen, showing
the front, side and rear views of the subject house. The property has a width of 221 feet and a depth of
approximately 335 feet and the size of the lot is .99 acres, thereby eliminating a buildable area by
today's RA setback requirements. Mr. Johnston continued that the house was built in 1966 and through
Lake Saint Clair's covenants, the setbacks were 25 feet on all sides. Frederick County adopted zoning
in 1967 and further amended zoning in 2007 to the current setbacks of 60 feet to the front, 50 feet to the
rear and 50 feet on both sides.
E
1542
rederick unto goard f Zoning Appealsmutesoprit20, 2018
In conclusion, Mr. Johnston stated that the applicant's variance request of 26 feet is in order to
construct a 12 foot by 54 foot deck, a 13 foot by 15 foot screened porch and a 13 foot by 28 foot master
bedroom. According to the Code of Virginia 1950 as mended 15.2 -2309 (2), and Section 165- 1001.2
C) of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, this variance request does not meet the intent of a
hardship or the current setback requirements.
Mr. Givens stated that Mr. Johnston noted that the 25 foot building restriction line shown on the
plat was a covenant restriction and the subdivision was approved or platted in 1959. Did the County
approve this subdivision and was it approved with the 25 foot building restriction line? Mr. Johnston
stated that Frederick County did approve the subdivision but at that time, Frederick County didn't have
setback requirements so it wasn't approved for a 25 foot setback. The plat that Mr. Givens is speaking
of was created later. Mr. Cheran stated that Frederick County does not follow the covenants that go with
the land, but follows the recorded plat, and this is not on the plat.
Mr. Danny McKee of Kee Construction stated he is representing Mr. McAllister. Mr. McKee
handed material to the Board members. He stated the McAllisters approached Kee Construction a few
months ago and asked them to do some renovations on the house. At that time, Mr. McKee said they
knew there wasn't a fully completed plat for the property, so they had Foltz Land Surveying, Inc.,
complete a survey. Mr. Foltz researched the deed from 1959 and saw there were 25 foot boundary line
setbacks. After turning in the package to the Inspections Department, they became aware of the fact that
50 foot setbacks now apply to this area. The material handed out by Mr. McKee showed pictures of the
lot and house. Mr. McKee further stated that with the structure that is there now, there is minimal
opportunity to do any type of renovation or make improvements. The family purchased the property
with the intent to make more room; it's currently a two bedroom structure but it has a three bedroom
pere approval. Mr. McKee stated they submitted this with the understanding that they had 25 foot
boundary lines. They made a note on the drawing that shows a 19 foot measurement to the edge of the
new deck that was going to be added onto the structure, with a side note saying that if they had to put an
angle on the deck to accommodate the 25 foot boundary line, that would be possible.
Chairman Scott asked how many square feet this addition would add. Mr. McKee stated the
current structure is approximately 1,100 to 1,200 square feet and the addition would add another 600 to
700 square feet.
Chairman Scott opened the public hearing portion of the meeting for comments, either for or
against this variance request. Chairman Scott stated that he received several e -mails from citizens and
the Homeowners' Association in support of the variance request.
Mr. John Schroth and Mr. Jim Longerbeam both spoke in favor of the request. Both citizens
made comments that the setback issue is an issue they all suffer at Lake Saint Clair; no one can expand
their property. Mr. Schroth pointed out that the 50 foot setback was originally intended for five acre
lots, but the lots in Lake Saint Clair are rectangular lots of one acre or less.
Discussion
Mr. Wells stated that he can understand both sides of this request and although this doesn't
completely fit the category of a hardship, he would be willing to seek a compromise.
1543
WWderick County l ord f Zoning AppealsofApra2 , _018
Mr. Givens stated that building the bedroom addition will not encroach any further into the
setback area and without adding the bedroom, there could be an argument for a hardship. However, Mr.
Givens doesn't believe that a deck creates a hardship. He believes that a 25 foot building restriction line
has been established and the Board could work within that 25 foot setback, which would mean that the
deck would have to be angled.
Mr. Carpenter stated that the Board should abide by the 25 foot restriction line.
Chairman Scott asked Mr. McKee if they could work within the 25 foot adjustment of the
setbacks and Mr. McKee responded yes.
Mr. Perry stated he's in agreement with the 25 foot building setback line.
Mr. Wells stated that Mr. Cheran and his staff are driven by the law as to what they have to do
and, as a supporter of Mr. Cheran and his staff, Mr. Wells feels they do an excellent job. They have said
today that this does not legally create a hardship. However, Mr. Wells feels that the response of the
Board shows their willingness to compromise.
Mr. Carpenter made a motion to approve Variance Request #04 -10 with the adjustment of a 25
foot southern line variance, resulting in a 25 foot setback. Mr. Givens seconded the motion and the vote
was unanimous.
0
Other
As there was no further business, the meeting adjourned at 3:55 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Kevin Scott, Chairman
Bev Dellinger, Secretary
n
U
1544
prederick C unt T rd 8F Zoning AppealsMmutesof pril 018