The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About16-05 CommentsJune 2 2005 Mr. and Mrs. Stephen R. Slaughter 312 Handley Blvd. Winchester, VA 22601 RE: VARIANCE REQUEST #16 -05 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Slaughter: Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/665-6395 This letter is to confirm that the above- referenced application was approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals at their meeting on June 21, 2005. Your request on parcel bearing Property Identification Number 31B -1 -23 was for a 15 foot right yard variance and a 15 foot left yard variance. The property is located on Lake Serene Drive, in the Gainesboro Magisterial District. If you have any questions regarding this action, please feel free to ball this office. Sincerely, ark R.CherC Zoning and Subdivision Administrator MRC /bad cc: Jane Anderson, Real Estate John Trenary, Inspections 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 �wr�C f ILE OPII TO: Finance Department FROM: Pam Deeter, Office Assistant II SUBJECT: Return Of Sign Deposit DATE: June 22, 2005 Please send a check in the amount of $50.00 to: RSA/pd MEMORANDUM COUNTY of FREDERICK Stephen Slaughter Deborah Slaughter 312 Handley Blvd Winchester, VA 22601 Department of Planning and Development 540/665 -5651 FAX: 540/665 -6395 The amount of $50.00 was deposited in line item #3- 010 019110 -0008 for Stephen and Deborah Slaughter. They had a deposit for one sign for a Variance Request #16 -05. Mr. Slaughter has returned the sign and is therefore entitled to the return of the deposit. You may pay this through the regular bill cycle. 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 Winchester, Virginia 22601 -5000 Dear Mr. Cheran: Mr. Mark R. Cheran Zoning and Subdivision Administrator Department of Planning and Development County of Frederick 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 Winchester, VA 22601 -5000 Re: Variance Request #16 -05 of Stephen Deborah Slaughter For these reasons, we would prefer that the requested variance not be granted. 251 Lake Serene Drive Win VA 22603 June 15, 2005 This letter is our input, as adjoining property owners, to the public hearing on the referenced variance request, which is scheduled for Tuesday, June 21, 2005 at 3:25 pm. Our comments relate to the requested 35 -foot variance on our side of the Slaughter's property. We have no objections to the requested variances for front and rear or the side that does not adjoin our property. since they would have no direct impact on us. We moved to Lake Serene to escape from the suburban sprawl of eastern Loudoun County. Having experienced the unfortunate transformation of Loudoun Country from rural to suburban during the previous 20+ years, we were intentionally looking for as much space as possible between our neighbors. Approval of the requested variance would put the Slaughter's house closer that it otherwise would be permitted to be. As it is, site work that has already been done on the property has despoiled our view and our privacy. Additionally, we have already experienced some personal property damage as a result of the heavy equipment working next door, and do not wish to see the situation exacerbated. On the other hand, we have absolutely no desire to be unwelcoming to our new neighbors. Nor do we believe that it is appropriate for us to dictate what the Slaughters may do on their own property subject to compliance with the Lake Serene homeowners covenants to which they agreed when they purchased the property since that would be an infringement on their property rights. L f we philo v th normal 50 -foot requirement (from w hi c h th variance is being requested) as an infringement by Frederick County on the Slaughter's same property rights. Nevertheless, we also reco uze the County's le al r requirement in to impose such a re gu g' right impose q the interest of the "greater public good." -2— The County also has the right to waive (through approval of the requested variance) the normal 50 -foot requirement. In order to do so, however, there should be compelling reasons that justify overriding the "greater public good" associated with the normal 50 -foot requirement. We are unaware of whether there are any such compelling reasons. In any event, we would be in no position to judge whether they would justify overriding the "greater public good." This is a decision that would best be made impartially by the Department of Planning and Development. Accordingly and notwithstanding our preference that the requested variance not be approved we will defer to the decision of the Department as to whether there are compelling reasons for overriding the "greater public good" associated with the normal 50 -foot requirement, thereby justifying approval of the requested variance. Jay M. Bergman C 1 4 :7 Cynthia A. Ber Variance Request 16 -05 Subject: Variance Request #16 -05 Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 22:02:34 -0400 From: "Wellington H Jones" <whjones465 @adelphia.net> To: <mcheran @co.frederick.va.us> 20 June 2005 Mr. Charan: As an adjacent lot owner, this is to confirm my support for the Stephen 23, Lake Serene. As the Secretary of the Homeowners Association, I can also report the proposed site plan for their new home as conforming to the covenants. Thanks for your favorable consideration. Wellington H Jones 299 Lake Serene Drive Winchester VA 22603 Debbie Slaughter variance request for Lot Board favorably approved the Slaughter's 1 of 1 6/21/2005 8:38 AM fariance Request #16-05 Subject: Variance Request #16 -05 Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 22:02:34 -0400 From: "Wellington H Jones" <whjones465 @adelphia.net> To: <mcheran@co.frederick.va.us> 20 June 2005 Mr. Charan: As an adjacent lot owner, this is to confirm my support for the Stephen 23, Lake Serene. As the Secretary of the Homeowners Association, I can also report the proposed site plan for their new home as conforming to the covenants.. Thanks for your favorable consideration. Wellington H Jones 299 Lake Serene Drive Winchester VA 22603 Debbie Slaughter variance request for Lot Board favorably approved the Slaughter's 1 of 1 6/21/2005 8:38 AM DEPT. OF GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA GIS, MAPPING, GRAPHICS WORK REQIJEST DATE RECEIVED: c_5/7- X,6 (5 REQUES 1 Ell COMPLETION DATE: '51-22/(15 REQUESTING AGENT: GJ-C Laaes. 2 Department, Agency, or Company: uD Mailing and/or Billing Address: FAX: Telephone: E -mail Address: ESTIMATED COST OF PROJECT: STAFF MEMBER COMPLETION DATE: MATERIALS: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST. (Write additional info e r dnn mops wit/ A -/JC6 ?S /te-CL DIGITAL: PAPER: FAX: SIZES: COLOR:. BLACK/WHITE: NUMBER OF COPIES: HOURS REQUIRED DATE OF PICK- UP/DELIVERY: AMOUNT DUE: AMOUNT PAID: AMOUNT BILLED: METHOD OF PAYMENT: CHECK NO.# Frederick County GIS, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, VA 22601, (540)665 -5651) Application Process Evaluation We would like to learn how we might improve this process. Please complete this form and submit it to the Planning Department. You can submit it to us separately from the application if you wish. You may submit it anonymously. 1. Which type of application did you complete? Rezoning Site Plan Master Development Plan Subdivision Conditional Use Permit Variance X 2. Which part, if any, of the application process did you fmd particularly difficult? (Check as many as you wish.) Completing the application form Tax verification Agency review comments Adjoiner identification information Other (Please specify) So far, everything has gone smoothly 3. Did you have a discussion with a staff member before submitting the application? YES X NO 4. Were you able to receive the assistance or information that you needed from the staff? YES X NO 5. What portion of this process took the longest for you? Completing plans Completing the application X Tax Verification Agency review comments Other (Please specify) 6. What do you think could have been done differently to make this process quicker? Everything has gone smoothly. 7. Do you have any suggestions about what we could do to make this process work better? Everything has gone smoothly. May 17, 1996 (K. \wp\cmn \bah_er\apPlic.rev)