Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBZA 11-17-15 Meeting AgendaAGENDA FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS The Board Room Frederick County Administration Building 107 N. Kent Street Winchester, Virginia November 17, 2015 3:30 p.m. CALL TO ORDER 1) Determination of a Quorum 2) October 20, 2015 Meeting Minutes PUBLIC MEETING 3) Variance Request #06-15 of Kenneth Harper and Dorothy Harper for a 9.7 foot variance to a required 15 foot rear setback will result in a 5.3 foot setback. This property is located at 157 Harvest Ridge Drive and is identified with Property Identification Number 63-9-2-13 in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. 4) Other MINUTES FOR THE OCTOBER 20, 2015 BZA MEETING Draft Frederick Count Board of Zoning Appeals Page 1664 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 October 20, 2015. PRESENT: Eric Lowman, Chairman, Red Bud District; Bruce Carpenter, Vice Chairman, Gainesboro District; Jeremy McDonald, Back Creek District; Reginald Shirley III, Opequon District; Kevin Scott, Shawnee District; and Ronald Madagan, Member at Large. ABSENT: John Cline, Stonewall District. STAFF PRESENT: Mark Cheran Zoning Administrator; David Burke, Zoning Inspector; Roderick Williams, County Attorney, and Pamala Deeter, BZA Secretary. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 3:30 p.m. and was determined there was a quorum. Chairman Lowman inquired if there are any applications pending for the month of November. Mr. Cheran responded yes, one application at this time. The cut-off date is October 23, 2015. On a motion made by Mr. Shirley and seconded by Mr. Carpenter the minutes for September 15, 2015 were unanimously approved as presented. Mr. Cheran recommended to the Board to put the old business first, Application # 03-15 James W. Loveless Jr. appeal of the zoning administrator since the Board has already had the public hearing on this application. On a motion made by Mr. Shirley and seconded by Mr. Madagan the old business was heard before the public hearing started and was approved with unanimous vote. Chairman Lowman recused himself from the old business because of personal issues. Vice-Chairman Carpenter led the Pledge of Allegiance. Mr. Cheran came forward, this is the appeal application #03-15 of James W. Loveless Jr., who is appealing the decision of the Zoning Administrator as to Chapter 165 Zoning, Part 606, under Section 165-606.02 Allowed Uses in the M1 (Light Industrial) District. This application has been postponed twice and the Board needs to take action at this meeting. Draft Frederick Count Board of Zoning Appeals Page 1665 Mr. Cheran briefed the Board that a public hearing was held on August 18, 2015, the action at that meeting was postponed for 30 days, while the County Attorney was consulted with legal questions and the Applicant was working with the tenants. A public meeting was held on September 15, 2015 and the Board postponed taking action for 30 days. Mr. Cheran is requesting to the Board of Zoning Appeals to affirm the decision of the Zoning Administrator in the administration of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance, Section 165-606.02 that SIC-79 Amusement and Recreation Services operated indoors is not a permitted use within the M1 Zoning District. Vice-Chairman Carpenter asked the Applicant is there any new information. Mr. Pettler, Attorney, representing the Applicant came forward to address the Board. Mr. Pettler stated that his client has two tenants Winchester Soccer and FASST. The two tenants would like to finish their lease which is up in August 2016. Mr. Pettler is aware that this application according to the Board of Zoning Appeal thinks they only have two options rather to approve or deny. Mr. Pettler presents three points to the Board to consider while making their decision. 1. §15.2-23-07 of Virginia Code under Vested Right Not Impaired. 2. §15.2-2311 of the Virginia Code under Appeals to Board. 3. §165-1001.02 of the Frederick County Code Ordinance under Power & Duties of Board Zoning Section A #2. Mr. Shirley asked the question to Mr. Pettler why didn’t your client just rezone the property since she made upgrades to property. Mr. Pettler stated she was under the impression since the previous tenants were allowed for indoor recreation that the new tenants would be too. The applicant was unaware of the zoning use until he received the notice of violation letter. Mr. Pettler stated the Board might want to seek out the written document, as to who granted permission and how it was granted, before action is take on the application. Mr. Williams, County Attorney, stated that this application has been to the Board two previous meetings, the public hearing is closed, and the time to present evidence is gone. The record is now complete. It is now being brought to the Board’s attention that there is statement being made that there was an approval and not sure what permission was given. If there was a document, the Planning Department would have included it with the agenda. Mr. Williams stated the significant affirmative governmental act. The Virginia Code states 7 different examples of what would constitute a significant governmental act. 1. Governing body has accepted proffers or proffer conditions which specific use related zoning amendment. 2. Governing body has approved an application for rezoning. 3. Governing body or the Board of Zoning Appeals has granted a special exception or use permit. 4. Board of Zoning has approved a variance. Draft Frederick Count Board of Zoning Appeals Page 1666 5. The Governing body has approved preliminary subdivision plat, site plan, and plan of development or the like for development of the property. 6. Governing Body has approved a final subdivision plat, site plan, plan of development for the property. Mr. Williams notes that 1 through 6 does not pertain to this application and Mr. William’s quoted number 7 of the significant affirmative governmental act. 7. The Zoning Administrator or other administrative officers has issued a written order requirement decision or determination regarding the permissibility of a specific use of density landowner property that is no longer subject to appeal and no longer subject to change, modification or reversal. Mr. Williams notes that Mr. Pettler is referring to number 7 act as to where something should have been documented or written down. Mr. Williams noted that this is the Applicant’s burden of proof to locate this written documentation. A violation letter was mailed out on June 8, 2015, and four months has lapsed and now we are looking for written determination in which no one has found it yet. Mr. Williams stated that this Board is appointed by the Circuit Court and is here to do its job. Mr. James Frisby, FASST owner, came forward. Mr. Frisby stated he would like to sta y at that location until the end of the lease which is in August. Mr. Frisby states he has a service to offer to the community and not trying to do anything illegal. Mr. Madagan made a motion to uphold the decision of the Zoning Administrator, and was seconded by Vice-Chairman Carpenter and the vote was unanimous. Vice-Chairman Carpenter and Mr. Scott expressed empathy toward the tenants. PUBLIC HEARING Mr. Cheran presented Variance Application #04-15 of William G. Meier IV who is requesting a 35 foot left side yard variance to a required 50 foot left side setback resulting in a 15 foot left side setback and a 35 foot right side yard variance to a required 50 foot right side setback resulting in a 15 foot right side setback. The property is located in the 1,000 block of Jordan Springs Road, on the south side of the road in the Stonewall Magisterial District and is identified by Property Identification Number 44-A-22. The zoning of the property is RA (Rural Areas) and the adjoining properties are R4, (Residential Planned) to the south, and the north, east and west are RA (Rural Areas). Mr. Cheran stated the reason for the variance is the property is 0.7546 acres in size, and due to exceptional narrowness of the parcel, a structure cannot be built with the current RA setback requirements. Draft Frederick Count Board of Zoning Appeals Page 1667 Frederick County adopted zoning in 1967. The historical zoning maps 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 front and 15 feet for the side yards. In 1989 the ordinance was amended and changed the A-2 Zoning District to the current RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District. Again, on February 28, 2007, the Board of Supervisors amended the current setback for this property to 60 feet to the front, 50 feet to the rear, 50 feet on the left side and 50 feet on the right side. The adjoining properties were created prior to 1967. The setbacks for these parcels were associated with the A-2 Zoning District setback. The setback for these properties are consistent with current A-2 setbacks, the dwellings are approximately 15 feet or less from the side property lines. The Code of Frederick 165-1001.2 and The Code of Virginia 15.2-2309 (2), states that no variance shall be granted unless the application can meet the following requirements. 1. The property interest for which the variance is being requested was acquired in good faith. 2. The granting of the variance will not be a substantial detriment to adjoining property or nearby properties in the proximity of that geographical area. 3. The condition or situation of the property concerned is not of so general or recurring as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of a general regulation to be adopted as an amendment to the ordinance. 4. 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. 5. The relief or remedy sought by the variance is not available through a special exception or the process for mediation of a zoning ordinance. The Applicant, Mr. William Meier IV, came forward to speak. Mr. Meier noted with the current setbacks the property is useless. Mr. Meier stated he met with Mr. Cheran and inquired as to what his next step would be. Mr. Cheran informed him that he could appear before the Board and ask for a variance for setbacks. Chairman Lowman asked for anyone to come forward to speak for or in opposition. DISCUSSION No discussion. Mr. Carpenter made a motion to approve Variance #04-15 William G. Meier IV and Mr. Scott seconded, the vote was unanimous. Mr. Cheran presented Variance #05-15 Robert Byers and Linda Byers requesting a 37 foot right side yard variance to the required 50 foot right side setback resulting in a 13 foot right side setback for an addition. The property is located at 2159 Senseny Road and is identified with Property Identification Number 65-A-25B in the Red Bud magisterial district. The adjoining properties to the Draft Frederick Count Board of Zoning Appeals Page 1668 north and east are RP (Residential Performance) Zoning District and to the south and west are RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District. Mr. Cheran noted the reason for the variance is the property is 1.5 acres in size and due to exceptional narrowness of the parcel and an addition to the existing structure cannot be built with the current RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District setback requirements. This property is part of the Braithwaite Subdivision created in 1940. The setback associated with these parcels under the A-2 Zoning District. The County adopted zoning in 1967. The 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 front and 15 feet for the side yards. The ordinance changed and was amended in 1989 to change the A-2 Zoning District to the current RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District. On February 28, 2007, the Board of Supervisors amended the ordinance for the RA Zoning District. The current setbacks for this property is 60 feet to the front, 50 feet to the rear, 50 feet on the left side, and 50 feet on the right side. Mr. Cheran noted this variance is for an addition because there is an existing dwelling on the property. The Board might consider that the applicant may have the ability to add a second story to the existing structure. The property is on a drainfield. The Code of Virginia 15.2-2309 (2) and the Code of Frederick County 165-101.2, states that no variance shall be granted unless the application can meet the following requirements. 1. The property interest for which the variance is being requested was acquired in good faith. 2. The granting of the variance will not be a substantial detriment to adjoining property or nearby properties in the proximity of that geographical area. 3. The condition or situation of the property concerned is not of so general or recurring as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of a general regulation to be adopted as an amendment to the ordinance. 4. 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. 5. The relief or remedy sought by the variance is not available through a special exception or the process for modification of a zoning ordinance. Mr. Michael Artz, of Pennoni Associates, is representing the Mr. and Mrs. Byers. The house was built in 1975 and is approximately 1100 sq ft. and has two bedrooms. The family members that live at this address are Mr. & Mrs. Byers, their daughter and husband and two children. The house was not constructed so a second story could be put on. There is a small room on the back of the house and it doesn’t have a foundation. The house is 20 feet from the left side of property line and on the right side is the Harvest Communities Properties which is RP and the setback allows you to build a structure up to 10 feet. The front of the house is 7 feet from the existing property line and the back Draft Frederick Count Board of Zoning Appeals Page 1669 of the house unable to build because of the existing drainfield. The Byers are requesting to add a 30 foot addition to the side of the house. Mr. Shirley asked the question what is the purpose of the addition? Mr. Artz replied bedrooms. Mr. Shirley asked will the drainfield work with the addition. Mr. Artz replied yes. Mr. Carpenter asked how many bedrooms are in the existing house now. Two bedrooms now replied Mr. Artz. Mr. Carpenter clarified that this house is going from a two bedroom to a three bedrooms. Chairman Lowman opened the floor to any one in favor of this application . No one came forward. Chairman Lowman opened the floor to anyone opposing this application. Stuart Butler with Harvest Communites came forward. His property is adjacent to Mr. Mrs. Byers property. He is not opposing this application. Mr. Butler is making sure that the applicant is aware that the adjacent property is zoned Residential Performance (RP) and will be a subdivision of 13 single family lots. There is also a road plan in place that will run parallel between the properties. Mr. Butler had concerns as to the height of the addition and should there be a buffer put in place. Mr. Shirley had a question for Mr. Butler on the future subdivision. Will your subdivision be installing fences? Mr. Butler responded I am not sure at this time but that is something we will think about when we start to develop. DISCUSSION Members of the Board asked Mr. Artz a few questions. Is it a single story or two story house? Mr. Art’s noted a single story house. Does the existing house have a crawl space or foundation? Mr. Art’s noted a crawl space. The new addition will have a crawl space as well. Mr. Madagan made a motion to approve Variance #05-15 of Robert and Linda Byers and was seconded by Mr. McDonald the vote was unanimous. Mr. Scott made a motion and Mr. Carpenter seconded the motion to adjourn the meeting. There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 4:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, _______________________ Eric F. Lowman, Chairman _____________________ Pamala Deeter, Secretary VARIANCE REQUEST #06-15 OF KENNETH & DOROTHY HARPER VARIANCE APPLICATION #06-15 KENNETH AND DOROTHY HARPER Staff Report for the Board of Zoning Appeals Prepared: November 10, 2015 Staff Contact: Mark 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: November 17, 2015 Public Hearing; Action Pending LOCATION: The property is located at 157 Harvest Ridge Drive MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Gainesboro PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 63-9-2-13 PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned: RP (Residential Performance) Land Use: Residential ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: North: RP (Residential Performance) Use: Open Space 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 9.7 foot rear yard variance to the required 15 foot rear setback resulting in a 5.3 foot rear setback for an addition. REASON FOR VARIANCE: The existing dwelling had an addition built without a building permit over the rear setback. Variance #06-15 – Kenneth and Dorothy Harper Page 2 November 10, 2015 STAFF COMMENTS: The original dwelling was completed in 2007, with an approved building permit and in compliance with the rear setback. The prior owner built the addition to the dwelling without an approved building permit. This illegal addition does not comply with the rear setback of the single-family small lot of 15 feet. This addition was discovered by the applicant via a building location survey done by the title company. Therefore, the applicant is requesting this variance for clear title to this property. It should be noted that this property backs to open space so impact is nominal. STAFF CONCLUSIONS FOR THE NOVEMBER 17, 2015 MEETING: The Code of Virginia 15.2-2309 (2) and Code of Frederick 165-1001.2, states that no variance shall be granted unless the application can meet the following requirements: 1) The property interest for which the variance is being requested was acquired in good faith. 2) The granting of the variance will not be a substantial detriment to adjoining property or nearby properties in the proximity of that geographical area. 3) The condition or situation of the property concerned is not of so general or recurring as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of a general regulation to be adopted as an amendment to the ordinance. 4) 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. 5) The relief or remedy sought by the variance is not available through a special exception or the process for modification of a zoning ordinance. If the prior owner had applied for a building permit a survey would have been required or if the addition could not meet the setback, the permit would have been denied. This request for a 9.7 foot variance maybe justified from the rear setback requirements, as the applicant did not produce the violation of the rear setback. ST622 Winchester 63 9 2 13 1064CEDARCREEK GR 1207CEDARCREEK GR 147HARVEST RIDGE DR 149HARVESTRIDGE DR 150HARVEST RIDGE DR 152HARVESTRIDGE DR 151HARVESTRIDGE DR 154HARVESTRIDGE DR 153HARVESTRIDGE DR 156HARVESTRIDGE DR 155HARVESTRIDGE DR 949CEDARCREEK GR CEDAR C R E E K G R Applications Parcels Building Footprints B1 (Business, Neighborhood District) B2 (Business, General Distrist) B3 (Business, Industrial Transition District) EM (Extractive Manufacturing District) HE (Higher Education District) M1 (Industrial, Light District) M2 (Industrial, General District) MH1 (Mobile Home Community District) MS (Medical Support District) OM (Office - Manufacturing Park) R4 (Residential Planned Community District) R5 (Residential Recreational Community District) RA (Rural Area District) RP (Residential Performance District) I Note:Frederick County Dept ofPlanning & Development107 N Kent StSuite 202Winchester, VA 22601540 - 665 - 5651Map Created: October 22, 2015Staff: mcheran WinchesterCEDAR C R E E K G R S T O N E R I D G E D R MEAD O W C T VAR # 06 - 15Kenneth and Dorothy HarperPIN:63 - 9 - 2 - 13Rear Variance 0 75 15037.5 Feet VAR 06-15 VAR # 06 - 15Kenneth and Dorothy HarperPIN:63 - 9 - 2 - 13Rear Variance ST622 Winchester 63 9 2 13 1064CEDARCREEK GR 1207CEDARCREEK GR 147HARVEST RIDGE DR 149HARVESTRIDGE DR 150HARVEST RIDGE DR 152HARVESTRIDGE DR 151HARVESTRIDGE DR 154HARVESTRIDGE DR 153HARVESTRIDGE DR 156HARVESTRIDGE DR 155HARVESTRIDGE DR 949CEDARCREEK GR CEDAR C R E E K G R Applications Parcels Building Footprints I Note:Frederick County Dept ofPlanning & Development107 N Kent StSuite 202Winchester, VA 22601540 - 665 - 5651Map Created: October 22, 2015Staff: mcheran WinchesterCEDAR C R E E K G R S T O N E R I D G E D R MEAD O W C T VAR # 06 - 15Kenneth and Dorothy HarperPIN:63 - 9 - 2 - 13Rear Variance 0 75 15037.5 Feet VAR 06-15 VAR # 06 - 15Kenneth and Dorothy HarperPIN:63 - 9 - 2 - 13Rear Variance