Loading...
BZA 06-21-16 Meeting MinutesFrederick County Board of Zoning Appeals Page 1686 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 June 21, 2016. PRESENT: Bruce Carpenter, Vice-Chairman, Gainesboro District; Reginald Shirley III, Opequon District; Kevin Scott, Shawnee District; Dudley Rinker, Back Creek; and Ronald Madagan, Member at Large. ABSENT: Eric Lowman, Chairman, Redbud District and John Cline, Stonewall District. STAFF PRESENT: Mark Cheran, Zoning Administrator, David Burke, Zoning Inspector; and Pamala Deeter, BZA Secretary. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Vice-Chairman Carpenter at 3:30 p.m. and he determined there is a quorum. Vice-Chairman Carpenter led the Pledge of Allegiance. Vice-Chairman Carpenter asked if there will be a July meeting. Mr. Cheran responded there are two applications at this time. The official cut-off date is Friday, June 24, 2016. On a motion made by Mr. Shirley and was seconded by Mr. Scott, the minutes for the May 17, 2016, meeting was unanimously approved as presented. PUBLIC HEARING Mr. Cheran came forward and presented Variance Request #04-16 of Jordan and Joan Casteel for a two foot rear yard variance to a required 25 foot rear yard setback which will result in a 23 foot rear yard. The property is in the Opequon Magisterial District and the Property Identification Number is 75F-4-193. The location of the property is 105 Chardonnay Drive, Stephens City. The property is zoned RP (Residential Performance) and the land use is residential. The Applicant is requesting for a sunroom addition to an existing deck. Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals Page 1687 Mr. Cheran directed the Board member to the screen. One map is showing the zoning district and the other is a plat which shows the addition of the sunroom. Mr. Cheran stated this lot has a square footage of 12,000 with a single family dwelling. The Frederick County Zoning Ordinance allows for lots in the RP Zoning District to range in size from 100,000 sq. ft. to 3,000 sq. ft. The Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, requires setbacks to be: 35 feet front, 10 feet sides, and 25 feet rear. The developer pulled a building permit and it was issued in 2014 and the dwelling was built in 2015. The Applicant currently has an existing rear deck on the dwelling. The zoning ordinance was amended in 2012 to allow property owners to build unroofed decks at the rear setback of 15 feet. This allowed for a 10 foot difference from the original rear setback of 25 feet for unroofed decks, stoops, landings, and similar features to be built without having to apply for a variance. Prior to Frederick County amending the zoning ordinance, an addition of a deck would not allow a variance to be granted as the deck did not meet the ordinance. This ordinance change lessened the applications for variances for decks. Mr. Cheran stated the addition of a sunroom on this property does not meet the requirements for a variance, as the ordinance was amended to allow for relief of unroofed decks. Mr. Cheran expressed that the contractor should have contacted the Planning & Development Office before designing the sunroom. Mr. Cheran suggested two options, make the current deck smaller or design the sunroom to fit the setbacks. Mr. Cheran noted that the Applicant is aware the deck currently meets setbacks, and payment to the contractor does not constitute a variance. In closing Mr. Cheran said that granting this variance would violate the spirit in which the Ordinance was amended to allow for decks in the RP Zoning District. The Applicant should design the sunroom to fit today’s setbacks. Mr. Jordan Casteel the Applicant came forward to speak in favor of the variance. Mr. Casteel stated the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance states that “the burden of proof shall be on the Applicant for a variance to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that its application meets the standard for a variance as defined” in the regulations. Mr. Casteel presented the four essence of a variance. 1. A reasonable deviation. 2. Strict application of this chapter would unreasonably restrict the utilization of the property. 3. Such need for a variance would not be shared generally by other properties. 4. Such variance is not contrary to the purpose of this chapter and shall not include a change of use. Mr. and Mrs. Casteel are proposing to cover 70% of our existing deck with a sunroom. Approximately 40 square feet of the deck is within the setback area allowed for uncovered, but not covered decks. The variance is to allow the sunroom to encroach 6 squa re feet (a right triangle 6 feet long and 2 feet deep average encroachment 1 foot) into this part of the deck. Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals Page 1688 Mr. Casteel presented a lot data sheet for the Albin Estates Subdivision. The data sheet included in it the square footage of lots, rear width, left and right depth, minimum depth, and average depth. This information sheet is comparing other lots in Albin Estates to his lot. The conclusion is that Mr. Casteel’s lot is restricted in certain ways. Vice-Chairman Carpenter asks if anyone wishing to speak in favor of Variance Request #04-16 to come forward. Mr. Richard Balzhiser who lives at 104 Chardonnay Drive came forward. Mr. Balzhiser stated that this sunroom would not cause a hardship to Albin Estates. He was in favor of the variance. Vice-Chairman Carpenter asked if anyone wishing to speak in opposition. No one came forward. Public Hearing Closed Discussion Mr. Madagan expressed that this Board works with the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance and each County has their own zoning ordinance. Mr. Shirley made a motion to approve Variance Request #04-16 for Jordan and Joan Casteel as requested and was seconded by Mr. Rinker and passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING Mr. Cheran came forward to present Variance Request #05-16 Lawrence and Pleasant Rich. The Applicant is requesting a 3.0 foot rear yard variance to a required 15 foot rear yard setback for a deck resulting in a 12 foot rear yard setback. This property is located at 114 Paris Court, Stephens City, Virginia with Property Identification Number 75P-11-32 in the Opequon Magisterial District. The property is zoned RP (Residential Performance) and the current land use is residential. Mr. Cheran explained the reason for the variance is the deck is over the rear setback line. The variance is to allow for a three (3) foot encroachment into the rear setback for a deck. The property has a square footage of 12,468 with a single-family dwelling. The Frederick County Zoning Ordinance allows for lots in the RP Zoning District to range in size from 100,000 sq. ft. to 3,000 sq. ft. The setbacks for that particular lot are 35 feet front, 10 feet side, and 25 feet rear. Mr. Cheran stated the setbacks for unroofed decks in the RP District are 15 feet. The Applicant applied for a building permit with rear setback of 15 feet. The Frederick County Zoning Ordinance requires survey standards to establish the location of primary structures located five (5) feet or less from the minimum setback requirement of the zoning district in which th e property is located. This building permit was required to provide setback surveys. The Applicant caught the setback violation and stopped the construction of the deck. Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals Page 1689 Mr. Cheran met with Applicant on site. Mr. Cheran suggested that maybe move the stairs to the other side of the deck. The Applicant had some issue with moving the stairs to the other side. Mr. Cheran concluded by saying this violation to the setback requirements of the RP Zoning District for an unroofed deck is self-inflicted, and should not be granted. Mr. Scott Burkhart came forward to speak on the variance request. Mr. Burkhart is the builder that pulled the permit for the deck. The property owner wanted the steps on the left side of deck but Mr. Burkhart informed the property owner that the footer would encroach the building restriction line. The property owner approached the HOA about moving the stairs to the right side and the HOA said no. The steps were built and this encroached the building restriction line. When Mr. Burkhart built the deck, the footer didn’t not cross the building restriction line but when the steps were added this encroached the building restriction line. Mr. Burkhart stated he made a mistake when interpreting the Frederick County Zoning Oridiance deck rules in the RP Zoning District. He built the deck and then realized that the 1/3 rule was for the wall and not the size of the house. Vice-Chairman Carpenter needed clarification on the 1/3 wall rule. Mr. Cheran stated the ordinance has changed, we no longer have the 1/3 wall rule. The County allows 15 feet for decks etc. Mr. Cheran also mentioned that it would also be impossible for them to move the steps because the rear property has a drainage easement. Vice-Chairman Carpenter clarified that no other dwelling will be built behind this house. Mr. Cheran replied no. Mr. Matthew Bolley came forward and stated the Northern Virginia Home Improvement Company is putting into place a prevention policy and is working on a standard operating procedure policy so this won’t happen again. Vice-Chairman Carpenter asked is anyone wishing to speak in favor the Variance Request #05- 16. Mr. Casteel came forward to speak for this variance. Mr. Casteel explained this house is a few blocks away from theirs and he sees no real impact on the neighbors. Vice-Chairman Carpenter asked is there anyone here to oppose Variance Request #05-16 and wishes to speak. No one came forward. Public Hearing Closed Discussion Mr. Shirley needed clarification that the deck is within setback but the steps are over the building restriction line. Mr. Cheran replied yes. If Board approved the variance, then inspections could final out the building permit.