Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBZA 02-20-01 Meeting AgendaFILE COPY AGENDA FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS The Board Room Frederick County Administration Building 107 N. Dent Street Winchester, Virginia February 20, 2001 3:25 p.m. CALL TO ORDER 1) Minutes of the January 16, 2001 Meeting PUBLIC HEARING 2) Variance #15-00 of Stephen P. Scothorn (amended application) for a 41 -foot front yard setback variance to construct a detached two -car garage. This property is located at 333 Songbird Lane and is identified with Property Identification Number 32-12-8 in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. 3) Variance #01-01 of Omps Funeral Home, submitted by G.W. Clifford & Associates, Inc., for a 4.44 -foot front yard setback variance for a free-standing business sign. This property is located at 1260 Front Royal Pike and is identified with Property Identification Number 64-3-A1 in the Shawnee Magisterial District. 4) Other 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 January 16, 2001. PRESENT: James Larrick, Jr., Acting Chairman, Gainesboro District; Theresa Catlett, Opequon District; Dudley Rinker, Back Creek District; Gilbank Hamilton, Shawnee District and Robert Perry, Stonewall District STAFF PRESENT: Eric R. Lawrence, Zoning Administrator; Jeremy F. Camp, Planner I; Evan A. Wyatt, Planning Director; Carol Huff, Secretary CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Acting Chairman Larrick at 3:25 p.m. WELCOME TO NEW MEMBER: On behalf of the Board of Zoning Appeals, Acting Chairman Larrick welcomed the newest member, Mr. Robert B. Perry, who replaced Mr. Manuel Sempeles from the Stonewall Magisterial District. MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 21, 2000 On a motion made by Mr. Rinker and seconded by Mr. Hamilton, the minutes for the November 21, 2000 meeting were unanimously approved. ELECTION OF OFFICERS On a nomination made by Mr. Rinker and seconded by Mrs. Catlett, Mr. Larrick was unanimously elected as Chairman for the year 2001, and shall hereafter be referred to as Chairman Larrick. On a nomination made by Mr. Rinker and seconded by Mr. Perry, Mrs. Catlett was unanimously elected as Vice Chairman for the year 2001. Mrs. Huff was reelected as Secretary by unanimous consent. PUBLIC HEARING Prior to hearing the first application, Chairman Larrick explained to those present that Frederick Co. Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of January 16, 2001 Minutes Book Page 1094 due to the cancellation of the December 16, 2000 meeting because of inclement weather, Variance # 15- 00 was once again on the agenda. Variance 15-00 of Stephen P. Scothorn for a 22 -foot front yard setback variance to construct a detached two -car garage. This property is located at 333 Songbird Lane and is identified with Property Identification Number 32-12-8 in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. ACTION - POSTPONED TO FEBRUARY 20, 2001 Mr. Lawrence told the Board that he had been contacted by the applicant about increasing the number of feet he was requesting for his variance. As this would require re - advertisement, the application could not be heard until the February 20, 2001 meeting. The Board agreed by unanimous decision to postpone Variance #15-00 for 30 days. Variance #17-00 of Michael W. Gunter for a five-foot side yard and 21 -foot rear setback variance for a deck, and a 2.5 -foot rear setback variance for a shed. This property is located at 206 Alpine Meadow Road and is identified with Property Identification Number 65E-1-91 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. ACTION - 21 -FOOT REAR SETBACK VARIANCE DENIED 2.5 -FOOT REAR SETBACK VARIANCE WITHDRAWN BY APPLICANT Mr. Jeremy Camp, Planner I, presented the background information and explained that this case first came to the attention of the Planning Department after one of Mr. Gunter's neighbors called in a complaint. After an inspection of the property, it was discovered that the deck and shed were in violation of the setbacks and the proper building permits had not been obtained which resulted in a violation case being opened. Photographs were made available to the Board. Mr. Michael Gunter, applicant and property owner, admitted that he was ignorant of the setbacks because he thought he could build within five feet of the property line. He told the Board that he did not believe the two decks were attached and did not understand how that conclusion had been reached. He stated that there was confusion over the building permits because he thought the deck was included on the permit for the swimming pool. No one else spoke in favor or against the application. DISCUSSION Mr. Rinker asked where the `three-foot' rule came into play; Mr. Lawrence responded that this was a policy that has been in place for approximately five or six years, that if you can walk from your house onto a deck, it is considered attached. The Zoning Ordinance does not define "attached," therefore, it is a matter of interpretation and accepted practice. Mrs. Catlett asked for clarification regarding the issuance of a permit for a deck; Mr. Lawrence confirmed that a building permit for a deck had never been applied for nor acquired. Mrs. Catlett moved for denial of the five-foot side yard and 21 -foot rear setback variance for the deck; this motion was seconded by Mr. Rinker and passed unanimously. Frederick Co. Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of January 16, 2001 2 Minutes Book Page 1095 At this point, Mr. Gunter withdrew his request for a 2.5 -foot rear setback variance for a storage shed before the Board had a chance to act on it and, consequently, left the proceedings. BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals does hereby unanimously deny Variance #17-00 of Michael W. Gunter for a five-foot side yard and 21 -foot f t rear setback variances for a deck, and accepts the applicant's withdrawal ohe 2.5 -foot rear setback variance for a shed. Variance #18-00 of Ronald and Marie Wible for a 4.7 -foot side yard setback variance for an existing house. This property is located at 200 Camellia Court and is identified with Property Identification Number 75G -4-4A-77 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. ACTION - APPROVED Mr. Lawrence gave the background information and explained that the Wible's situation occurred before the survey standards, which are in place today, were adopted. Given the circumstances, staff believed this variance was warranted. Mr. Wible explained that they wanted to build an addition but the corner of the house was a little over four feet into the side yard setback. They did not realize that the "waiver" they had received in the deed pertaining to the setbacks was not acceptable and were not aware of it until they came in to apply for a building permit. There was no further discussion on the matter. Mr. Hamilton made a motion to approve the variance as stated and Mr. Rinker offered a second. The Board voted with all ayes for approval. BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals does hereby unanimously approve Variance #18-00 of Ronald and Marie Wible for a 4.7 -foot side yard setback variance for a single-family dwelling. Appeal #16-00 of R.R. Restaurant, submitted by Wharton, Aldhizer & Weaver, P.L.C. on behalf of Arogas, Inc., to appeal the decision of the Zoning Administrator in the administration of the Zoning Ordinance, concerning the denial of a site plan application for a restaurant in the M2 (Industrial General) Zoning District. This property is located approximately 500 feet south of Rest Church Road (Rt. 669) and Martinsburg Pike (Rt. 11), located between Rt. 11 and 1-81 and continuing south to Duncan Run, and is identified with Property Identification Number 33-A-91 in the Stonewall Magisterial District. N - DENIED THE APPEAL AND UPHELD THE DE Chairman Larrick outlined the procedures for the public hearing, stating that each side had 20 minutes to present their case and 10 minutes each for rebuttal. Persons who had signed up to Frederick Co. Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of January 16, 2001 Minutes Book Page 1096 3 speak were given three minutes each. The Board agreed by unanimous consent to adopt these rules for this proceeding. Mr. Evan Wyatt, Planning Director, explained the history of this particular case from the time it was initially submitted as a rezoning application up to the time it was re -submitted as a site plan for a restaurant with accessory retail and bulk fuel oil sales. It was Mr. Wyatt's denial to accept the site plan, based on the fact that the proposed primary use of this plan was retail and bulk fuel sales in an M2 (Industrial General) Zoning District, rather than a restaurant, that prompted the applicant's appeal. Ms. Lisa Hawkins, legal counsel representing the applicant, spoke in favor of the appeal. She stated that when their attempts to `down -zone' the property were met with great opposition from the public, they decided to go back to square one and present the application for what they felt was the primary use, i.e. a restaurant with retail sales. She handed out a list of definitions, then referred to three points of Mr. Wyatt's letter which they felt were wrong: 1) the structural floor area definition; 2) square footage/impervious area dedicated to maneuvering for truck traffic; 3) the term fueling positions is not defined specifically in the Frederick County Code. In their opinion, wholesale trade is an acceptable use in the M2 District. After several quotations from the SIC Manual and other points which they felt strengthened their position, Ms. Hawkins ended by contending that the restaurant was the "main game." Mr. Robert Mitchell, Board of Zoning Appeals attorney and representative for staff, started his presentation with the statement that "if it walks like a duck, looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is a duck." Although there is no exact formula for determining the primary use, the Planning Department staff is charged with making determinations based on experience and common sense. The Zoning Administrator has the authority for interpreting the Zoning Ordinance and, after looking at the site plan, determined that the primary use was a truck stop. This is not a permitted use in the M2 District. Mr. Mitchell handed out a compilation of the restaurants which have been built in Frederick County in the past five years and how much land was generally used for each. None of them contained the acreage proposed by the R.R. Restaurant plan. He then handed out the applicant's own rendering of the project entitled "Perspective View" which clearly shows a truck stop. He stated that this presentation by the applicant was a clear attempt to circumvent the Zoning Ordinance. Ms. Hawkins' rebuttal was that there is no definition in the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance for truck stops. She reiterated that it's been their position all along that a restaurant is an allowed use in the M2 District. Mr. Mitchell's response was that the SIC, Number 554, defines truck stops and they are not allowed in the M2 District. Attempts to classify the truck stop as primarily a restaurant use was just an attempt to get around the zoning ordinance, and the Zoning Administrator was correct in his assertion that the site plan could not be accepted. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Before the meeting was opened for public comment, Chairman Larrick again emphasized the purpose of the meeting and that no other business would be discussed nor acted upon except that of whether the Zoning Administrator acted appropriately in his decision to deny the R. R. Restaurant site plan application. For the sake of time, Chairman Larrick requested that speakers not repeat what the person ahead of them just said but to just state that they concur with the previous speaker's comments. Chairman Larrick called those who had signed up to speak against the application. Mr. Larry Crim stated that there were already problems with the bridge because of the large number of Frederick Co. Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of January 16, 2001 11 Minutes Book Page 1097 trucks using it now. Mr. Ed Butler submitted a letter of support from the Concerned Citizens for Safety which fully concurred with the decision of the Zoning Administrator. He stated that there is no way that a facility with 28 fueling bays could be considered primarily a restaurant. Mr. Mark Stivers forfeited his time allotment so that Mr. Butler could finish reading the group's statement. back yard. Mr. Ronnie Edmonds told the Board that he does not want fuel contamination in his Mr. John Rinaldi, an attorney from the Manassas area, stated that he represented the owners of the Stateline Exxon and although his client was not opposed directly to the development of the property, they wanted to make sure that they had to follow the same rules and regulations that apply to others. He urged the Board to apply the law in this case unless the Zoning Administrator was clearly wrong. Mr. Kevin Rice, representative for H. N. Funkhouser, was present not to fight development of property but for the proper development of the properly. He said that theproperty was zoned for bulk plants and bulk storage but not for retail sales of the product. He pointed out that it was evident that the dynamics driving this project related to the amount of truck traffic presently utilizing I-81 and their need for fuel and a place to park, and the price differential per gallon between Virginia and West Virginia. Visualizing the impact a truck stop of this magnitude would have on the area, Mr. Rice concluded that although the need was present, this particular site was not the best place. Mr. Rinker inquired of Mr. Rice what the tax rate was on retail and wholesale fuel sales. Mr. Rice replied that licensed wholesalers do not pay sales tax but anyone who purchased fuel retail would have to pay a retail sales tax. Mr. Rinker asked Ms. Harris what was involved in the accessory retail portion of the restaurant business. She replied that it would be much like a Cracker Barrel; that you could buy soft drinks, candy, gum, and other gift items, and offered to show a picture of the proposed interior. Mr. Rinker asked about the anticipated seating size of the restaurant, rate of patron turnover, and fuel turnover. Ms. Harris said they had not reached that stage of planning yet and could not answer the questions. Mrs. Catlett asked if she understood correctly that they expected the restaurant to generate six times that of the accessory use; Ms. Harris clarified by saying `six times of the accessory retail fuel sales.' Ms. Harris explained that the restaurant AND accessory retail would exceed by six times the gross profit of the fuel pumps (gross product vs. gross sales). Mr. Perry inquired about the business plan and revenue projections for the project by category. Ms. Harris revealed that wholesale sale of fuel generates the most significant revenue and gross profit, then restaurant, then retail sales of fuel, and finally, bulk motor oil. Mr. Perry asked about regulating the ratio of wholesale to retail sales of fuel to remain legal in the M2 District. Ms. Harris replied that she was not clear as to the purpose of the question because according to the Zoning Ordinance, there is no requirement to balance the two, as wholesale fuel sales are an allowed use. Chairman Larrick asked both sides how much weight they [the Board] should give to the Zoning Administrator's decision. Ms. Harris replied that it was a clear case of right or wrong, with no "wiggle room." Mr. Mitchell stated that it was the applicant's responsibility to show the burden of proof that the Zoning Administrator was wrong. Mr. Pat Manning, the developer for this project, told the Board that he had invested two -and -a -half years and $150,000 dollars thus far. He said that he wanted to come to this county with his head held high and invest a minimum of $6,000,000.00 in payroll, local construction contracts, cheap gas and a fine-looking facility. He felt that he was being wrongly portrayed and asked the Board Frederick Co. Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of January 16, 2001 Minutes Book Page 1098 and everyone present to try to see this restaurant and fueling facility as a positive move forward for the county. After one more question regarding the floor space allocated to the restaurant, there were no other speakers for or against the appeal. Mr. Rinker moved to uphold the decision of the Zoning Administrator and to deny Appeal #16-00 of R. R. Restaurant (Arogas, Inc.). Mrs. Catlett seconded the motion and the Board voted unanimously on this conclusion. BE IT RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals does hereby unanimously uphold the decision of the Zoning Administrator in the administration of the Zoning Ordinance, concerning the denial of a site plan application for a restaurant in the M2 (Industrial General) Zoning District, and hereby denies the Appeal of R. R. Restaurant (Arogas, Inc.) ADJOURNMENT As there was no further business, the meeting adjourned by unanimous consent at 5:30 p.m. Frederick Co. Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of January 16, 2001 rel Respectfully submitted, James Larrick, Jr., Chairman Carol I. Huff, Secretary Minutes Book Page 1099 C: BZA REVIEW DATE: 11/21/00 (Postponed); 12/17/00 (meeting cancelled); 01/16/01; 02/20/01 VARIANCE #15-00 STEPHEN SCOTHORN LOCATION: This property is located at 333 Songbird Lane. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Gainesboro PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 32-12-8 PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned: RA (Rural Areas) District; Land use: Residential ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned: RA (Rural Areas) District; Land Use: Residential VARIANCE: 22 -foot front yard setback variance to construct a detached two -car garage REASON FOR VARIANCE: The applicant states that "there is only one practical place for garage; to place elsewhere would have to remove many 75 to 100 -year-old oak trees and many small dogwood trees. Lower front acreage floods in wet weather. Unfeasible to run another driveway through yard to put garage behind house. Many homes and some garages along Apple Pie Ridge and Hiatt Road (main State roads) in area are less than 60 feet from road and some as close as 20 feet. The right-of-way into my house is a gravel road only 10 to 12' wide (private drive)." STAFF COMMENTS: The minimum distance that an accessory structure can be built to a property line in the Rural Areas (RA) Zoning District is 15 feet. However, no accessory building can be closer than 60 feet from the front property line or any public right-of-way. Mr. Stephen Scothorn is applying for a variance to this requirement. Specifically, Mr. Scothom is seeking a 41 -foot front yard variance in order to construct a detached two -car garage. His reason for this request is that he would like to preserve an area of large oak trees located to the right of his house. Staff estimates that one or two of these trees will need to be removed in order to located the Rarage at least 60 feet from the front property line. If this variance is approved, the garage will be 19 feet from the front property line. All other setbacks would be in conformance with county requirements. Stephen Scothorn Variance #15-00 (Amended) Page 2 February 13, 2001 The property in question is located near the end of Songbird Lane, which is off of Apple Pie Ridge Road. The size of the lot is approximately five acres, typical in both size and shape when compared to other lots in the area. Dimensionally, the lot is 333 feet deep and 672 feet long. The use of the surrounding properties is residential. NOTE: On January 19, 2001, the applicant submitted an amended application form (included). He changed his request from a 22 -foot variance to a 41 -foot variance. STAFF CONCLUSION: The Code of Virginia, Section 15.2-2309(2) states that no variance shall be authorized by the board unless it finds that a) strict application of the Ordinance would produce an undue hardship approaching confiscation; b) that such hardship is not shared generally by other properties in the same zoning district and the same vicinity, and; c) that the authorization of such variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, and that the character of the district will not be changed by the granting of the variance. After an inspection of the property, and a thorough review of the Zoning Ordinance, it is the planning staffs opinion that approval of this variance would be inappropriate. The three reasons the planning staff recommends denial are as follows: 1. There appears to be no undue hardship directed toward Mr. Scothorn if we require the minimum setback distance for the garage. Mr. Scothorn has the ability to build the garage back at least 60 feet from the front property line if he so desires. Furthermore, the inability to build the garage does not preclude a reasonable use to the property. 2. All other neighboring property owners, who share the same right-of-way, are required to meet today's setback standards if they wish to construct a building or structure. 3. There may be substantial detriment to adjacent property owners if Songbird Lane ever expands eastward. - ), Agray Page 1 of 5 APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE IN THE COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA 3 1. The applicant is the owner 2. APPLICANT: other . (Check one) OCCUPANT: (if different) NAME: T� ;�95,A1 A YL T/�o%'�l NAME: ADDRESS TELEPHONE: ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: 3. The property is located at (give exact directions and include State Route numbers): r 9o� ��f/� f;.�•� .:�^/� ori �i r';� ;G'n .'% i1�, : � /.-�,4t�Y S�,+r��i,�"7 4. The property has a road frontage of,'%.+" feet and a depth of 333,33 feet and consists of 5.0 acres. (please be exact) 5. The property is owned by /0, d o i l-16,-2 it as evidenced by deed from 7'r.7 / t'/ recorded (previous owner) in deed book no. Ly` on page 2 -7" of the deed books of the Clerk of the Court for Frederick County. Attach a copy of the deed. Page 2 of 5 6. Magisterial District:rrl,��S 7. 14 -Digit Property Identification No.: 3 - " 8. The existing zoning of the.property is: Rl� 9. The -existing use of the property is: c; i r,iTiA� 10. Adjoining Property: IISE ZONING NorthS17 Eastiii �,S,t ; , ;' � li South /•7) -At r; /�'L iI West L �J 11. Describe the variance sought in terms of distance and type. (For example: "A 3.5' rear yard variance for an attached two car garage.") i � l 12. List specific reason(s) why the variance- is being sought in terms of: 13. exceptional narrowness, shallowness, size or shape of property, or exceptional topographic conditions or other extraordinary situation or condition of property, or the use or development of property immediately adjacent thereto AIW .Cf -:.'v rlw �,, z ? �i;=� % / t �' /�V �i�! ��., t.=//1.f6✓'�, ���1 �.� 'L,'-�K , � /% �c..u. �=ut."'�� Additional comments, if any ; /&,?t /,,::,J page 3 od 5 14. The following names and addresses are all of the individuals, firms, or corporations owning property adjacent to the property for which the variance is being sought, including properties at the sides, rear and in front of (across street from) the subject property. (Use additional pages if necessary.) These peoyle will be notifd by mail of this application: �Ta�r NAME Address Property ID# 3 a- ` l NAME Property m# NAME //o y Property ID# ?I - r 2- - !� Property ID# 9 2 - IF-- 5 - Z/ NAME Samx,- t K 9 C"i 1 r 13v�r s Property ID# 32 - t it - Ar - 5 Address . 2 "? Address Address Cao 77? Ai ;F�/' 7, Address i Sr2 ala Ad$ Ly -- JV,Wr4*-,r4 .�, Y, X4,03 NAME A06t, ► .7am rs Address ! a-'? to "C L Al - - - 1�a NrnZ�FCr � ✓4 22 6 O 3 Property IN 3 2. " 1 S ~ 1 Address Soo Sang �,;r j nrch ester r VCL ; z&1103 Property ID# 3 2 - ! NAME Property IN NAME Property ID# NAME Property ID# Address Address Address Page S of 5 AGREEMENT VARIANCE # 5 I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application, and petition the Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) to grant a variance to the terms of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance as described herein. I agree to comply with any conditions for the variance required by -the BZA. I authorize the members of the BZA and Frederick County officials to go upon the property for site inspection purposes. I understand that the sign issued to me when this application is submitted must be placed at the front property line at. least seven (7) days prior to the BZA public hearing and maintained so as to be visible from the road or right-of-way until the hearing. I hereby certify that all of the statements and information contained herein are, to the best of my knowledge, true. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT ✓ ; '� DATE - © D SIGNATURE OF OWNER ('if other than applicant) BZA PUBLIC HEARING OF APPROVAL -OFFICE USE ONLY- - DATE - SIGNED: DENIAL DATE: DATE ACTION: e{ 471 39 M • f• � q � v p s 15 a Ir � v a ' 1 hereby certify that the land in this plat is a portion of the land q 4 ' conveyed to Gerald dated Phelps by deed i 2 August 5, 1975, and recorded in the Frederick County 1 • ' �tt ` Court Clerk's Office in Deed Book 447 at Zvi Page 494. SCALE � � Y _ ',� �( /�rw d'•L>z.J O JG1D �aD R. Bruce Ldens,. COMM I .:.► Qr,�I LOTS y�tit,Tfl PHELPS , . - .r i�. =�• .�.G�Z� :� .,........ : yt STOVEM U Mr.. fi4ED. G0� rue t Zs OON&URr toss •_.:� VOKMM Facm"ex COUNTY. SM Tum nnvum.n: of rwc:•c ....s me 0, m, a� dry ef J .....1 C _ _c.c a :::.: c. ` r-ra+# Owaft amend arra aMM:* i b KOtd. 1 !j 0 o -D, L 0 rOU tJ� A /A� :U—, 3 3 ,07 T I i 1© 0 0 I � � a I �o I o I � � I � RECEIVED JAN 0 9 2001 DEPT oFpLANNINGIDE r VELOPMENT Amendment to Variance Application # 15-00 Submittal Date: 10/26/00 Revision Date:j lla. Describe the variance sought in terms of distance and type: 13a. Additional comments, if any: 4�1 to 15a. Please attach a sketch of the subject property and the proposed structure, including all setback distances. 16. Reason for change in variance reques . Signature of Applicant*. ',a * Applicant agrees to the same terms speci5 in the original variance agreement signed on October 26, 2000. IVeusWser spaceVeremyl Variances lScothornlamendment application.wpd �CoT 7 \ i 4 O PoafNrl O ,LO r _ o Q ✓��O��J� /q oa /n/ 5" /�12)AIG /4 J w L- i GJ L-)977#EW ' ``K � jj woo i1 -- 3 3 l7oGwOOD R PlOvr-A:•D p - -s. RRA S�t�F y /�vAt� Flow -VY57-N'I-V /0 / w 07- I i C� • C BZA REVIEW DATE: 02/20/01\ VARIANCE #01-01 OMPS FUNERAL HOME Freestanding Sign LOCATION: The property is located at 1260 Front Royal Pike. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Shawnee PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 64-3-A1 PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned B2 (Business General) District; Land use - Funeral Home ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) District; Uses: Cemetery and Residential VARIANCE: The applicant is requesting a 4.44 -foot front yard setback variance for a freestanding business sign. REASON FOR VARIANCE: The applicant states that the existing sign, as situated, does not provide adequate notice to the traveling public (see attached photographs). STAFF COMMENTS: The Frederick County Zoning Ordinance requires that all freestanding signs be set back at least 10 feet from property boundary lines [§165-30.E]. It is from this ordinance requirement that the applicant has requested a variation to enable a sign to be placed closer to Front Royal Pike. The applicant's business, Omps Funeral Home, is located on Front Royal Pike, near its intersection with Papermill Road. A required landscape screen has been provided along this road frontage to buffer the subject commercial use from the adjoining residential uses. This required landscape screening has impacted the traveling public's ability to view the business' sign, resulting in the request for a variance. Currently, the business is identified by a three -foot -high, 24 -square -foot monument sign. This monument sign has been placed parallel to Front Royal Pike, at the 10 -foot setback line. This is an Omps Funeral Home Variance #01-01 Page 2 February 6, 2001 attractive sign, at scale with the landscape screening so as to not be a significant visual impact to the adjoining residences. Staff would mention that freestanding business signs in the B2 Zoning District (as the subject property is zoned) may be up to 35 feet in height, with a maximum surface area of 100 square feet. The applicant's monument -style sign is less intrusive than the ordinance would allow. It is also important to mention that Front Royal Pike is a heavily traveled Minor Arterial Road. If the variance is granted, the applicant would continue to utilize the same sign, but rotate it 90 degrees so that the sign would be perpendicular with Front Royal Pike. Rotating this sign will necessitate a 4.44 -foot variance, as the sign would be within 5.56 feet of the property line. STAFF CONCLUSION: The Code of Virginia, Section 15.2-2309(2) states that no variance shall be authorized by the board unless it finds that a) strict application of the Ordinance would produce an undue hardship approaching confiscation; b) that such hardship is not shared generally by other properties in the same zoning district and the same vicinity, and; c) that the authorization of such variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, and that the character of the district will not be changed by the granting of the variance. The unusual location of the landscape buffer along a Minor Arterial Road (Front Royal Pike) creates a situation unique to the subject property. The request to place an attractive 24 -square -foot monument sign closer to the property line is less intrusive to the adjoining residences than the placement of a 35 - foot -high freestanding business sign. Staff feels that based on the specifics of this site, it would be reasonable to allow the variance as requested. A: \om ps. staffreport. wpd CASEY, DORIS F 64 A 23 JUCAPA,LC SHENANDOAH MEMORIAL PARK, INC 64 3 A 64D 4 Laurelwood Dr 64 A 35 SULLIVAN VAR#01-01 Location Map For: 4MPS Funeral Home PIN: 64-3-A1 Office of Mapping and GIS, 02/01, Agray APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE IN THE COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA MUST BE TYPED OR PILLED OUT IN INK — PLEASE PRINT 1. The applicant is the owner X other 2. Applicant: Name- Larry and Nancy Omps Address: 1600 Amherst Street Winchester, VA 22601 Phone: 540-662-6633 (Check one) Occupant: (if different) Name: Omps Funeral Home Address. - Phone: 3. The property is located at (give exact directions and include State Route numbers): 1260 Front Royal Pike_ on the west side of U.S. Route 522, south of Winchester 760 feet north of VA Route 644 4. The property has a road frontage of 386.27' feet and a depth of 161.49 feet and consists of 1.397 acres. (please be exact) 5. The property is owned by Larry and Nancy Omps as evidenced by deed from Sunset Memorial, Inc. recorded in deed book number 906 on page 1818 of the deed books of the Clerk of the Court for Frederick County. Attach a copy of the deed. ptd-n .. Submittal T eadffiie _ 71" �4 laitials. t..'��Y x �:. V Ss _ n reftirn date F ,m..�.. -.u. MUST BE TYPED OR PILLED OUT IN INK — PLEASE PRINT 1. The applicant is the owner X other 2. Applicant: Name- Larry and Nancy Omps Address: 1600 Amherst Street Winchester, VA 22601 Phone: 540-662-6633 (Check one) Occupant: (if different) Name: Omps Funeral Home Address. - Phone: 3. The property is located at (give exact directions and include State Route numbers): 1260 Front Royal Pike_ on the west side of U.S. Route 522, south of Winchester 760 feet north of VA Route 644 4. The property has a road frontage of 386.27' feet and a depth of 161.49 feet and consists of 1.397 acres. (please be exact) 5. The property is owned by Larry and Nancy Omps as evidenced by deed from Sunset Memorial, Inc. recorded in deed book number 906 on page 1818 of the deed books of the Clerk of the Court for Frederick County. Attach a copy of the deed. 6. Magisterial District: Shawnee or - 7, 14 -Digit Property Identification Number 8. The existing zoning of the property is B-2 9. The existing use of the property is Funeral Home 10, Adjoining Property ZONING RA RA RA RA 11. Describe the variance sought in terms of distance and type. (For example: "A 3.5' rear yard Variance for an attached two car garage.") Seeking a variance of 4.44 feet for a sign 12. List specific reason(s) why the variance is being sought in terms of • Exceptional narrowness, shallowness, size or shape of property, or • Exceptional topographic conditions or other extraordinary situation or condition of property, or • The use or development of property immediately adjacent thereto Existing signage and monumentation at the entrance to the cemete immediately south of the site is located closer than 10 feet to the lot line. 13, Additional comments, if any The sin is of monument typedesigned to complement and be accented by the required landscape screen. This screening is allowed within 10 feet of the lot line. USE North Cemetery East Residential South West —Cemetery Cemetery ZONING RA RA RA RA 11. Describe the variance sought in terms of distance and type. (For example: "A 3.5' rear yard Variance for an attached two car garage.") Seeking a variance of 4.44 feet for a sign 12. List specific reason(s) why the variance is being sought in terms of • Exceptional narrowness, shallowness, size or shape of property, or • Exceptional topographic conditions or other extraordinary situation or condition of property, or • The use or development of property immediately adjacent thereto Existing signage and monumentation at the entrance to the cemete immediately south of the site is located closer than 10 feet to the lot line. 13, Additional comments, if any The sin is of monument typedesigned to complement and be accented by the required landscape screen. This screening is allowed within 10 feet of the lot line. 14. The following names and addresses are all of the individuals, firms, or corporations owning Property adjacent to the property for which the variance is being sought, including properties at the sides, rear and in front of (across street from) the subject property. (TTse additional pages if necessary.) These people will be notified by mail of this application. NAME Elwood and Turessa Fox Address: 1231 Front Royal Pike, Winchester, VA 22602 Prop rty ID # 64D-4-3 William Braithwaite Address: 1257 Front Royal Pike, Winchester, VA 22602 Property ID # 64D-4-6 Ronald Russell est. Address: 1591 Cedar Hill Road, Clearbrook, VA 22624 Property ID # 64D-4-7 Shenandoah Memorial Park, Inc. Address: 4126 Norland Avenue, Burnaby, British Columbia Property ID # 64-3-A Doris S. Casey Address: 404 Imperial Street, Winchester; VA 22601 Property ID # 64-A-23 Address Property ID # Address Property ID # Address Property ID # Address Property ID # Address Property ID # Address Property ID # Address Property ID # Address Property ID # Address Property ID # Address Property ID # Address Property ID # Address Property ID # Address Property ID # AGREEMENT VARIANCE # ©1 D I (we), the undersigned, do hereby respectfully make application, and petition the Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) to grant a variance to the terms of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance as described herein. I agree to comply with any conditions for the variance required by the BZA. I authorize the members of the BZA and Frederick County officials to go upon the property for site inspection purposes. I understand that the sign issued to me when this application is submitted must be placed at the front property line at least (7) days prior to the BZA public hearing and maintained so as to be visible from the road or right-of-way until the hearing. I hereby certify that all of the statements and information contained herein are, to the best of my knowledge, true. SIGNATURE OF APPLICA I DATE l SIGNATURE OF OWNER DATE (if other than applicant) OFFICE USE ONLY BZA PUBLIC HEARING OF ACTION: (DATE) _ APPROVAL SIGNED: (BZA CHAIRMAN) DENIAL DATE: EXISTING FUNERAL HOME SIGN OMPS FUNERAL HOME BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS EXISTING FUNERAL HOME SIGN OMPS FUNERAL HOME BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS { t� OMPS FUNERAL HOME BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS 4 �^F4i � r Z ,�� .. .... �x`� .cam , .,� .• ■.; � ' �'f'�;da.a o- s Z "' to "4. IN a .n, ■ OMPS FUNERAL DOME BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS gilbcrt w. Clifford & associates, inc INCORPORATED 1972 Engineers — Surveyors — Land Planners — Water Quality January 10, 2001 Eric Lawrence Zoning Administrator Frederick County Planing 107 N. Cameron Street Winchester, VA 22601 RE: BZA Appeal Dear Eric, Board of Directors: President: Thomas J. O'Toole, P.E. Vice Presidents: Charles E. Maddox, Jr., P.E. Earl R. Sutherland P.E. Ronald A Mislowsky, P.E. David J. Saunders, P.E. Directors: P. Duane Brown, L.S. William L. Wright Michael A Hammer Thomas W. Price On behalf of Larry and Nancy Omps, we request the Board of Zoning Appeals consider our request to locate a sign within 10 feet of a lot line. The site is the new funeral home at 1260 Front Royal Pike. I've attaches the application, the fee of $250, and 3 copies of the Site Development Plan. I've also attached 3 copies of sketches showing the desired sign layout, and a few pictures of the existing signage. Mr. and Mrs. Omps have attempted to create an attractive road frontage layout incorporating the required landscape screen and a monument sign. However, if you go by the site, you will notice that the sign, as situated, does not provide adequate notice to the traveling public. This results in customers having to make U turns in Route 522 to return to the only entrance. Allowing placement of the sign as requested, and shown on the sketch provided, will better alert those desiring to enter the site. As we've noted in the application, existing monumentation and required landscaping is located within 10 feet of the lot line. The sign is designed as part of the landscaped screen and therefore, it is our opinion, that it should also be allowed closer to the lot line. Please let me know when the Board will consider our proposal. And of course, call if you have questions. Regards, gilbert .w clifford & associates, inc. RE V ,SAN a ald A. Mislowsk�PE,,�VP, POF PIANNINGiLC V 200 North Cameron Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601 IM (540) 667-2139 Fax (540) 665-0493 e-mail gwcliffgmnsinc.com MemberAmerican Consulting Engineers Council