HomeMy WebLinkAboutBZAMinutes2026March17
Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals 1995
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 March 17, 2026.
PRESENT: Eric Lowman, Chairman, Red Bud District; Dudley Rinker, Vice-Chairman, Back Creek;
Linda Whitacre, Gainesboro District; John Cline, Stonewall District; James Prohaska, Opequon District;
Dolores Stottlemyer, Shawnee District; and Ronald Madagan, Member at Large.
ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT: Mark Cheran, Zoning Administrator; John Lowery, Zoning Inspector and Pamala
Deeter, BZA Secretary.
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Lowman at 3:30 p.m. and he determined there is a quorum.
A motion was made by Mr. Rinker to change the order of the agenda, moving item 5.A. first and was
seconded by Mr. Cline
Chairman Lowman led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Chairman Lowman asked if there are any applications for April. Mr. Cheran replied yes.
Mr. Cline made a motion to approve the meeting minutes for February 17, 2026, and was seconded by Mr.
Prohaska and was unanimously approved.
ACTION ITEM
Variance #04-26 for Cline Manor VA LLC., submitted a request for the foregoing buffers to provide an inactive
buffer of 25’, with full screening, together with an active buffer of 25’ and a 35’ inactive road buffer, with full
screening, together with a 40’ active road buffer. The property is located at 3266 Valley Pike and is identified by
Property Identification Number 63-A-37 in the Back Creek Magisterial District.
Chairman Lowman stated the Board has received the letter from Mr. Kronenthal’s office but for the record
come forward and confirm what is the intent. The Attorney, Mark Kronenthal came forward and stated that
after meeting last month the applicant wanted to defer because of the open items that were presented at the
meeting which are still in motion and would like to come to an end.
Chairman Lowman asked the deferral request is for how long? Mr. Kronenthal replied for 3 months. Mr.
Prohaska inquired about the notation in the letter. Mr. Kronenthal addressed the Board this is a state code
that the Board must take action within 90 days of the application date. The Applicant has waived the right
on the state code.
3
Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals 1996
On a motion from Mr. Rinker to defer the Variance #04-26 Cline Manor LLC., for 90 days or the June
meeting and was seconded by Mr. Cline and the vote was 4 to 3 to defer the application.
PUBLIC HEARING
Variance #05-26 for Mark Landrio (Delta Contractors, LLC Nick Sardelis) submitted a request for a
5-foot variance to a required 45-foot front yard setback resulting in a 40-foot front yard setback for an
accessory structure. The property is located at 141 Merrifield Lane and is identified by Property
Identification Number 52-20-1 in the Back Creek Magisterial District.
Mr. Cheran made an addendum request stating the Applicant requested for a 40-foot variance to a required
45-foot front yard setback resulting in a 5-foot front yard setback for an accessory structure. Mr. Cheran
came forward to present his staff report and maps. Mr. Cheran proceeded with background inf ormation
and this property at creation has three fronts and is in the Roscommon Subdivision. The shortest distance
is always the front, which is Merrimans Lane. Staff indicated that in 2017 the County amended the setbacks
for accessory structures located along private R-O-W from 60 ft to 45 ft. Staff stated the Applicant can
place this proposed accessory structure 45-ft or more off the 50-ft ingress/egress R-O-W and Merrifield Lane.
The R-O-W serves as citizen property.
Staff concluded by stating The Code of Virginia §15.2-2309(2) and the Code of Frederick County §165-
1001.02 state that no variance shall be granted unless the application can meet the following
requirements:
a) The property interest for which the variance is being requested was acquired in good faith;
b) Any hardship was not created by the applicant for the variance;
c) The granting of the variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property and nearby
properties in the proximity of that geographical area;
d) The condition or situation of the property concerned is not of so general or recurring a nature as to make
reasonably practicable the formulation of a general regulation to be adopted as an amendment to the
ordinance;
e) The granting of the variance does not result in a use that is otherwise permitted on such property or a
change in the zoning classification of the property; and
f) The relief or remedy sought by the variance is not available through a conditional use permit process
or the process for modification of a Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. Cheran noted the applicant does meet the intent of the State and County Codes for a variance on
setbacks from a R-O-W.
A member asked if the R-O-W is being used. Staff replied there is another structure in the back. Chairman
Lowman inquired if the R-O-W is recorded and if that is the property line. Staff replied yes the R-O-W is
recorded.
4
Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals 1997
Chairman Lowman ask the Applicant Mark Landrio and Delta Contractor Nick Sardelis to come forward.
He asked what is your justification for this variance. Mr. Sardelis stated if we move the structure, it would
be close to the pool house structure. Chairman Lowman inquired is there anything between the pool house
and the garage. Mr. Sardelis replied no, but catacorner from the garage will be a new drain field for the
new structure. The Board had concerns about the drain field. Mr. Sardelis explained for the main house
the drain field is in front of the house and the other drain field will service just the new structure. Mr.
Landrio noted along the R-O-W is a row of trees that nothing would be visible from the road and prefer to
have grass between pool house and garage.
Chairman Lowman asked if the contractor or the Applicant considered the square footage of this structure.
The County Code only allows a certain percentage for an accessory structure. Mr. Sardelis replied this is a
garage with a small kitchenette and a restroom. Mr. Rinker inquired what the square footage of the front
area 28 x 42, and the garage area is 60 x 85 combined square footage is 6,270. Mr. Rinker inquired, what
is the square footage of the house? Mr. Landrio explained 3 floors and a basement and is approximately
7,200 square feet. Mr. Landrio explained that the front struct ure would be facing out toward Merrifield
Lane because he does not want the appearance of a garage look.
Mr. Rinker clarified the accessory structure rule with Mr. Cheran that accessory structure is 25% of the
original dwelling and this accessory structure is over the threshold. Mr. Cheran said that is correct but
remember we are not here for the square footage of the structure we are here for the setback of the right of
way.
PUBLIC HEARING COMMENT
Chairman Lowman asked if there is anyone to speak in favor or in opposition to come forward. No one came
forward.
CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. Madagan visited the site, and the owner has enough room to move the structure. The Board of Zoning
Appeals only approves a 5-foot setback if there is no other room to move the structure.
On a motion from Mr. Rinker to deny the Variance #05-26 Mark Landrio (Delta Contractors LLC.) and was
seconded by Ms. Stottlemyer and the vote was unanimous.
PUBLIC HEARING
. Variance #06-26 for Zachary and Shaina LoVerde (Mike Artz) submitted a request for a 13-foot variance
to a required 100-foot side yard setback resulting in an 87-foot side yard setback for a dwelling. The property
is located off Green Spring Road, proceed north on Frog Hollow Road then left on Peeper Lane on right side at
the ridge top and is identified by Property Identification Number 22-A-8A in the Gainesboro Magisterial
District.
Mr. Cheran came forward to present his staff report and maps. Mr. Cheran proceeded with background information.
The property is located at 516 Peeper Lane and is 8.6558 acres and is zoned RA (Rural Areas) District. The property
was created in 2004. In 2004 when the Zoning Ordinance was updated and the Rural Areas studies were complete
the Board of Supervisors established certain lots would be considered Agricultural lots for the farms and orchardists.
These lots did not have drain fields or setbacks on the plats. This parcel is one of those lots. The current RA setback
would apply to this lot, 60ft for the front, 100ft for sides and 100ft for the rear. Either in 2006 or 2007 the Board of
Supervisors discontinued the Agricultural lots in the County. The plats today require setbacks and a drain fields
before it is signed off by the Zoning Administrator.
5
Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals 1998
Staff concluded by stating The Code of Virginia §15.2-2309(2) and the Code of Frederick County §165-
1001.02 state that no variance shall be granted unless the application can meet the following
requirements:
a) The property interest for which the variance is being requested was acquired in good faith;
b) Any hardship was not created by the applicant for the variance;
c) The granting of the variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property and nearby
properties in the proximity of that geographical area;
d) The condition or situation of the property concerned is not of so general or recurring a nature as to
make reasonably practicable the formulation of a general regulation to be adopted as an amendment
to the ordinance;
e) The granting of the variance does not result in a use that is otherwise permitted on such property
or a change in the zoning classification of the property; and
f) The relief or remedy sought by the variance is not available through a conditional use permit
process or the process for modification of a Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. Cheran ends the presentation by stating this variance meets the Code of Virginia and Frederick County
Mr. Artz came forward representing the Applicant Zachary and Shaina LoVerde. Mr. Artz prepared the plat in 2004
for this subdivision and at that time the previous Zoning Administrator did not require setbacks or drain fields on
agricultural lots. It was not about this lot being agricultural it was about uses which were considered residential.
There are three ways to determine setbacks which are based on adjacent neighbor’s property. If the property abuts
an orchard the setback is 200ft and if the parcel is agricultural or forest the setback is 100ft and if it is residential the
setback is 50ft. The proposed structure has been moved to the center of the parcel making the house meet one
setback.
PUBLIC HEARING COMMENT
Chairman Lowman asked if anyone would like to speak in favor or opposition of this request. No one came
forward.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
On a motion made by Mrs. Whitacre to approve the variance #06-26 for Zachary and Shaina LoVerde as
requested and seconded by Mr. Rinker was unanimously approved.
The meeting adjourned at 4:25.
________________________________
Eric Lowman, Chairman
________________________________
Pamala Deeter, Secretary
6