Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBZA 11-19-02 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 November 19, 2002. PRESENT James Larriek, Jr., Chairman, Gainesboro District; Thomas Malcolm, (representing Shawnee District); Dudley Rinker, Back Creek District; Lennie Mather, Red Bud District Robert Perry, Stonewall District; Theresa Catlett, Opequon District and Robert W. Wells, Member -At -Large STAFF PRESENT Patrick T. Davenport, Zoning Administrator; Carol Huff, BZA Secretary CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Larrick at 3:25 p.m. AUGUST 20, 2002 MINUTES The minutes for the August 20, 2002 meeting were approved by unanimous vote after a motion by Mr. Malcolm and a second by Perry. PUBLIC HEARING Variance #17 -02 of David L. Goode, submitted by Greenway Engineering, for a 50 -foot buffer distance variance for the 100 -foot residential buffer required against the Star Fort Estates subdivision; and a 95 -foot buffer distance variance for the 100 -foot residential buffer required against the rear lot lines of the residential parcels located along Lee Avenue. The property is located at 155 Lee Avenue and is identified with Property Identification Number 54 -A -34 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. ACTION - APPROVED WITH CONDITION Mr. Davenport briefly reviewed the background information and stated that the staff report is consistent with the last one [August 20, 2002] in that staff still believed there was insufficient hardship demonstrated for a variance to be granted. t Co. Board of "Zoning Appeals of November 19, 2002 Minutes Book Page 1 161 Members of the Board questioned if there had been any change whatsoever to the applicant's application since being heard in August; staff replied that it was the same application and that the applicant is proposing the same dwelling type (multi - family). Mr. Rinker asked what the site plan requirements would be and whether curb and gutter would be required. Staff replied that all requirements for the RP Zoning District would have to be met before the site plan could be approved, and that curb and gutter are required for the type of development the applicant is proposing. Mr. Evan A. Wyatt, of Greenway Engineering, was present once again to represent the applicant, Mr. David L. Goode. Mr. Wyatt stated that the application was indeed the same as the last time; however, at that time he had concentrated on the site plan aspect of the proposed use and the suggested presentation to, and approval by, the Planning Commission. Mr. Wyatt stated that this time he wished to present only the facts which pertained directly to the request for a variance and the reduction of the buffer distance. Mr. Wyatt continued by stating that the property was zoned RP (Residential Performance) and that multi - family units were an allowed use in the RP District. He told the Board that this plan was consistent with Frederick County's Comprehensive Plan in that the property was located in an urbanized area of the community, and that his client believed that this was the highest and best use for his property. Mr. Wyatt provided three colored exhibits for the Board's review. One was of similar apartment complex constructed by David L. Goode located in Kemstown which depicted, basically, the way the proposed complex would look; another was a letter from Mayor John Copeland of Middletown which stated his support for Mr. Goode and of the proposed project; and several photos of the existing commercial and residential uses on Lee Avenue. Mr. Wyatt requested that the exhibits be entered into the record and are hereby entered. A brief discussion ensued on various options for the proposed development such as landscaping, number of buildings, whether applicant must maintain a 50' distance buffer, etc. Mr. Wyatt answered each question and concluded by stating that the applicant was willing to have a site plan reviewed by the Planning Commission before final approval, and that the applicant was willing to post a bond with the County to ensure that all development would take place as planned and the landscaping would be kept up. Chairman Larrick asked for anyone else in favor of the proposal to come forward. Mr. Al Graber spoke on behalf of the applicant, stating that he had known Mr. Goode for many years and that he could vouch for the high quality standards to which Mr. Goode adhered. Mr. Sam Waymouth was also present to speak to Mr. Goode's character, high standard of construction, and compliance with all state and county code requirements. He concluded by saying Frederick Co. Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of November 19, 2002 Minutes Book Page 1 162 2 that young people just starting out needed apartments [such as the ones Mr. Goode was proposing] because they were not able to afford the homes which were going for, on average, $200,000 now. Ms. Sheila Cox, a resident of Mr. Goode's apartments in Middletown, Virginia, spoke in favor of the proposed project. She told the Board that she was unable to find affordable housing anywhere else with the types of amenities that Mr. Goode's development provided. She stated that the maintenance was excellent and that problems were not `let go' as in so many other places. She highly recommended that the Board approve the variance. Mr. David L. Goode, applicant and property owner, came forward to say that he and his wife have owned the property for about 14 or 15 years and that it has always been their intent to construct apartments there. He told the Board that the landscaping he has planned for the project will offer effective buffering between the complex and the adjoining properties. He also stated that after the August 20" public hearing, he felt the need to defend his integrity. He said that he has always strived to build quality projects and has worked with Frederick County on a number of occasions, citing the time he granted an easement to the Sanitation Authority when requested to do so. Mr. Goode also told the Board that he had spoken with the residents on Lee Avenue and they had no problem with the proposed apartments being built. Chairman Larrick asked if anyone had questions for Mr. Goode before he went back to his seat. Several questions followed regarding whether the ADA standards would be met; what exactly would the bond cover and how much would it be; how long would it last; and would the bond go with the property' in the event it was ever sold. Chairman Larrick called for public comment against the proposal and Mr. Zack Smith, adjoining property owner, and Mr. Martin Gavis, owner of Marty's Used Cars, stated their concerns regarding drainage and stormwater management, backfill problems on the lot over the years, and additional traffic on Lee Avenue. These were the same concerns they had stated previously. Mr. Smith repeated his assertion that there was not a true hardship present to allow the proposed apartment complex to be built. When asked by Mr. Wells whether they actually lived on the property, Mr. Smith replied that he did not presently live there but may build a small house there someday. He stated that he presently stores vehicles on his lot. Mr. Gavis told the Board that although he doesn't live there, he works there from 7:00 a.m. to midnight. Mr. Gavis said that his understanding of the Zoning Ordinance is that there has to be a proven hardship before a variance is granted and he does not see one in this case. He also stated that he would argue with Mr. Goode's contention that neighbors on Lee Avenue are in agreement with the plan; he said that the people he had talked to were against it but were in too poor of health to be present at the meeting. Mr. Mark Mason, a resident on Lee Avenue, stated that he wasn't actually speaking against the project as a whole but would rather have a privacy fence instead of landscaping. He also wanted to know what would happen to the creek and stated that he would like to see a culvert installed with backfill over the culvert, rather than just diverting the flow. Frederick Co. Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of November 19, 2002 Minutes Book Page 1163 3 Mrs. Mather asked if those issues were handled, would he have any other objections. Mr. Mason said that he would not. Upon a question from Mr. Wells, Mr. Mason stated that he did reside on Lee Avenue. No one else came forward to speak against the variance. In response to the concerns that had been raised, Mr. Wyatt said that the site plan and the required review process would address all of the problems. He stated that State Code would have to be met, all sewer and water management issues would be reviewed by the Engineering Department, VDOT would review traffic proposals, and that, finally, the Planning Staff would have to sign off on it. In response to the question of hardship, Mr. Wyatt told the Board that a hardship did exist, in that the shape of the lot is long and narrow and prevents development of the type being proposed with the present setbacks. The public hearing portion of the meeting was closed at 4:30 p.m. DISCUSSION Chairman Larrick told the Board that he was concerned about the fact that the application was the same as the last time they heard this request, and they had turned it down. Mr. Wells said that he voted in favor of it last time and still saw this project as being a positive improvement and not a negative impact on the surrounding properties. He also felt that it would be a `good thing' for the County, and that the property was zoned for the use being proposed. Mrs. Mather asked if the housing type itself was what was causing the hardship, or was it the shape of the lot. She also asked if the bond could cover stormwater issues. Staff stated that the Engineering Department would have a full review of the stormwater issues, and that the bond could be written to cover any concerns. Mr. Rinker stated that although a site plan would cover the issues brought up, he still felt that there was no actual hardship in this situation because other options were available that did not require a variance. Mr. Perry stated that he was familiar with Mr. Goode's work and agreed that he does an outstanding job; however, he just could not see the hardship. Mr. Malcolm asked for clarification on the allowed uses in the RP District. He wanted to know if the applicant was required to choose a use that was less intense or did he have the right to choose the type of use that he felt was the best for the property. Mr. Wells made the motion to grant both variance requests contingent upon all County and State approvals on the site plan, and upon the establishment of a bond covering landscaping and stormwater management issues. Mr. Davenport asked for clarification on whether the motion allowed for the Planning staff's administrative approval on the site plan, as is normal procedure, rather than sending it through the Planning Commission. Mr. Wells was confident that the normal review process Frederick Co. Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of November 19, 2002 Minutes Book Page 1 164 was more than sufficient and did not request that the site plan be reviewed by the Planning Commission; therefore, the motion was amended to state "to grant both variance requests contingent upon all County, State and administrative approvals of the site plan, and upon the establishment of a bond covering landscaping and stormwater management issues." The motion was seconded by Mrs. Catlett and approved by the following majority vote: AYES Mr. Wells, Mr. Malcolm, Mrs. Catlett, Ms. Mather NAYS Mr. Rinker, Chairman Larrick, Mr. Perry BE IT RESOLVED, THEREFORE, That Variance #17 -02 of David L. Goode for a 50 -foot buffer distance variance for the 100 -foot residential buffer required against the Star Fort Estates subdivision; and a 95 -foot buffer distance variance for the 100 -foot residential buffer required against the rear lot lines of the residential parcels located along Lee Avenue, is hereby approved by majority vote contingent upon all County, State and administrative approvals of the site plan, and upon the establishment of a bond covering landscaping and stormwater management issues. As there were no other items on the agenda, the meeting adjourned at 4:45 p.m, by unanimous vote. Respectfully submitted, n k A Jam s Earrick, Chairman Ji. Car Huff, Secretary Frederick Co. Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of November 19, 2002 Minutes Book Page 1165