HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-83 Christopher R See - BackfileAUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
540/665-5651
FAX: 540/678-0682
Zoning Review of Business License Application
Please provide the following information about your business. It is important that all of the requested
information is provided completely to ensure accurate review by Planning Department staff. If you have any
questions about this form or the zoning regulations of Frederick County, please contact the Planning
Department at (540) 665-A
5651.
APPLICANT NAME: ' DAYTIME PHONE #: qO
BUSINESS/TRADE NAME: S ' 1 5,
STREET ADDRESS (actual location o business - this address ay be different from the mailing address):
/ 0 o3 l -k—_ C`� Q 1( to 11eafU'q.
OWNER(s) OF PROPERTY (if different from applicant): DESCRIPTION of BUSINESS: �Qj(n I I he+ SQ le-S
APPLICANT SIGNATURE:
t l`� DATE , J,.
Please Do Not Write Below This Line... -. For Planning. De,�ariment Review
..............................................................................................................
PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION # (PIN): 76 - A 3 9 , 3 7, A ; 4 4 t ��
ZONING DISTRICT: _R.\
IF BUSINESS IS HOME -BASED (Home or Cottage Occupation):
1. Number of Employees Other Than Members of Household:
2. New Construction or Alteration Required: Yes _ No
3. Business Located Within: House Accessory Structure
Based upon the information provided by the applicant, is the use proposed for the above -referenced location
permitted in the identified zoning district?
YES _X ;.
STAFF COMMENT: owl- aW , ro A.
rca-
Pytida,
Ace;" oLo no+ ,o bk w a yowol w& tu�A I 101A. CI9 $l
STAFF SIGNATURE: DATE:
107 North Kent Street • W /nchester, Virginia 22601-5000
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL
FILE #010-83, Christopher R. See
LOCATION - Southwest corner of state routes 636 and 642
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT - Opequon
TAX MAP & PARCEL NUMBER - 76((A)), 39, 40, 41
LAND USE & ZONING - Residential & Commercial Land Use, A-1
(Agricultural -General) Zoning
ADJOINING LAND USE & ZONING - Residential and Agricultural Land Use
and Agricultural Zoning
PROPOSED USE & IMPROVEMENTS - Continued Commercial Public Garage Use.
APPEAL REQUESTED - An administrative appeal concerning the legal
non -conforming status of the existing commercial public garage use.
The staff has determined that Mr. See's use is not a legal
non -conforming use (see attachment), based on evidence presented.
Mr. See feels that his use is a legal non -conforming use.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION - Attached are letters & information regarding
the details of this case. -
Attachment A - Letter to Mr. Christopher R. See from Stephen M.
Gyurisin, Deputy Director, requesting conditional use
permit application.
Attachment B - Letter to Stephen M. Gyurisin from Robert T.
Mitchell, Jr., representing Mr. See.
Attachment C - Letter to Stephen M. Gyurisin from Robert T.
Mitchell, Jr. requesting non -conforming status of use with 24
signed statements as evidence.
Attachment D - Letter to Robert T. Mitchell, Jr. from John T. P.
Horne, Director, regarding non -conforming status.
O I O- � 3-3
Page 2
Christopher R. See
Attachment E'- Letter to John Horne from Robert Mitchell,
appealing administrative decision.
Attachment F - Letter to Stephen Gyurisin from Robert Mitchell,
status of documentary matters to Board of Zoning Appeals
Attachment G - Copy of Frederick County Building Permit 5551 for
Mr. Christopher See
Attachment H - Copy of Frederick County Non -Conforming Code
Regulations.
STAFF COMMENT - This is an appeal of an administrative determin-
ation and has been placed on the.BZA agenda as prescribed by the
state code and local zoning ordinance. The action required by
the BZA is that a determination be made whether Mr:.See's use
is or is -not a legal nonconforming use.
•
O10 -95- 13
FREDERICK COUNTY
INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT
APPLICATION for BUILDING PERMIT
S tember 12, 1978
DATE
Ownerorl-essee Christopher R. See
Address Rt . 1, Box 139 -A
City&State White Post, Virginia Zip 22663
Telephone 869-3028
ContractorSame
Address
City & State. Zp
Telephone Registration No.
A ZONING & LOCATION: 64
St. Address & No. Cor. M & 636
1. Subdivision 11 S. aSt Bass Hoove ementaT
2. Lotr st Wakelan Manor on R. e ore c urc
3. Magisterial District 0 e lion
4. Zoning of Property t �'•� i ,
5. Site Plan No.
6. Conditional Use Permit No.
7. Property Width at Set Back
B. Property Size: W. L H.
9. Building Lines:
a. Front 125' b. Rear 75'
c. L Side 25' d. R. Side 200'
10. Complies with Subdivision Code:
Yes No
11. Review Action: AP d - Y
DATE- 8 f �--
' Zoning Signature u
B. BUILDING INFORMAz160N:X 40'
1. Building Size ii
2. Basement - Yes No -
3. Crawl Space - Yes No -
4. Construction Metal
5. Roof Construction: see attached brochure
a. Truss b. Conventional
6. Floor Construction 06ncrete
7. Exterior Walls Metal
8. Interior Walls-------
9. No. Stories 1 No. Rooms
10. No. Dwelling Units
11. Toilets/Baths
12. Class. of Construction 3-C
13. Misc.Intended Use: Storage of Garden,
C. Farm Tnnl c S.. Ma inar� _
C. ESTIMATED TOTAL VALUE OF CONSTRUCTION
INCLUDING VALUE OF MATERIALS AND LABOR:
1. $ 5500. 00 2. Sq. Ft.
3. Fee $ 10. 00
0. WATER & SEWER:
1. Yes No
2. Sewer - App. Rej.
3. Water - App. Rej.
E. LAND DISTURBING PERMIT REVIEW REQUIRED:
Yes Multi- Family
Yes Commercial
No Single Family Dwelling._
Located in known 100 Year Flood Plain
Yes No
DATE
Public Works Director
N° 5551
OFFICE USE ONLY
Building Permit No..
Electrical Permit No.
Plumbing Permit Nr
arooerty I. D. No.2
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS APPROVAL
REQUIRED:
Yes No
BUILDING INSPECTIONS:
O. K. - Rej.'
1.
_ Footings
2.
Foundation
y Ei_
Slab
h 4.
Backfill
5.
Framing
6.
Fireplace & Chimney
7.----
- Final
8.
Other
H. ELECTRICAL INSPECTIONS:
1.
Rough -in
2.
Final
1. PLUMBING INSPECTIONS:
1.
Rough - in
2.
__ Final
Refer to Daily Logs
L
PROPOSED USE:
(Residential)
1. _
Single Family
2.
Two Family
3.
Townhouse
4.
Apartments
5.
Garage / Carport
6.
Mobile Home
7.
Other
K. PROPOSED USE:
(Non - Residential)
1.
Amusement
2.
Church
3,
Service Station
4.
Office / Bank
5.
Private Swimming Pool
6.
Commercial "
7.
Tanks
8.
Towers
9.
Hospital
10.
Industrial Buildings
11.
Private School
12.
Public School
13. x Other Storage Buildin€
L. TYPE OF ACTION:
1. Construction
2. Extend/Addition
3 Alter
4. Repair
5. Move
6. Foundation
7. Other
I hereby agree to comply with all provisions of the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code and the Zoning Ordinance as adopted by
the County of Frederick.
Signature of Applicant Address
` Inspections Director �� �> �� pate
010-13-N
-.... �.. . _.:. -... ,;. .:-: ,mz, w�:.:rYY asi{�!,:�<� vM. ... :.:.. .•_�s. ,', .:.=�.c.,y �,•t,,�aa�l'�j,;sjtl{,LL�;�m:,..�ir�4-*VW+LihYJ.er.YrrwK::3 _,,,� .cri'F. -�
�s
a 5- ('
y
a
21-150
Zoning
21-150
(k
Co{nty and tat
agenci
s re onsibl
fo the uper ision
and en-
forceme L. o
tiffs sect on s
all
pe iodic lly
in ect the
ite d ri
v he eried
of cons ructio
(1)
U on com fiance
with
he to s of
his ect'
and the
atis acto
compl tion
of constr et'on,
the
and stall r
lease
f the bond
whi h
may ave bee
furnis ed.
(m)
'o chang , rev
sio
or e asu
shal be in
de on any
end' g o
fin 1 site
evelopm it pla
nor
any com
anyi g dat
she whe
e a prov l'
has been en
orsed o the
at o
sh t unle
s au
horiz
tion for s
ch han es
is ranted
n writi g by he
ap
ving ody
r t
e agent.
(n)
Any sit deve
pment
plan nay be
-ev
sed, p
ovid d req
es fo
re ision s
all be f le aid
processed
'n the
saw
manne
as the or'gi
al ite
pl n.
(o)
boa d of s
perv'sors,
b res
lut
on, sh
e tabl'sh
ro, time
to ime a
hedule f fees
for
he exam nati
n a� appr
val r di
pp ov 1 of
sit d elo
ent p ans. Su
h f
es shall be
ayab e to
he.t rer
Fre ick Co nty, irginia,
nd
shall be ub;itte to to
age
Article XIX. Nonconformintr Uses.
}� Sec. 21-150. Continuation.
(a) Any nonconforming activity which is being pursued, or any non-
conforming lot or structure legally in existence or use at the effective
date of this chapter or which becomes a nonconforming use as a result of
subsequent amendments to this chapter, may be continued so long as it remains
otherwise lawful.
(b) If any nonconforming use (structure or activity) is discontinued
for a period exceeding one year after the enactment of this chapter or
subsequent amendments, it shall be deemed abandoned and any use thereafter
shall conform to the requirements of this chapter unless a conditional use
` permit is obtained. Such conditional use permit shall allow for only an
equal or less nonconforming use.
(c) Temporary seasonal nonconforming uses that have been in continual
operation for a period of two years or more prior to the effective date of
this chapter are excluded from (b).
(d) If any change in title of possession or renei,al of a lease of any
non -conforming activity, structure, or lot occurs, the existing use may be
continued, so long as the require-i`.:=s of (b) are complied with.
209
revised 4/12/78
61b -93 -16
ON
LJ
•
21-151 Frederick County Code 21-156
-See. 21-151. Repair and maintenance.
Yothing in this chapter shall be deemed to prevent the strengthening or
restoring to a safe condition of any structure or part thereof declared to
be unsafe by any official charged with protecting the public safety, upon
order of such official.
Sec. 21-152. Expansion
(a) A nonconforming structure to be extended or enlarged shall conform
to the provisions of this chapter, except, however,a nonconforming structure
may be enlarged or modified in size only if such enlargement or modification
will not result in an increase in the degree of nonconformity.
(b) Any nonconforming use in operation at the time of the adoption of
this chapter may expand up to fifty percent of the square footage of the original
structure.
Sec. 21-153. Change in use.
trhenever a nonconforming activity is changed it shall only be changed to
an equal or more limited use.
Sec. 21-154. Changes in district boundaries.
f a district are changed an uses of land or
Whenever the boundaries o changed, Y ♦.,
buildings which become nonconforming as a result of such change shall become
subject to the provisions of this article.
Sec. 21-155. Nonconforming lots of record.
Any lot of record at the time of the adoption of this chapter, which is
less in area or frontage than the minimum required by this chapter, may be
used when the requirement of this chapter are met regarding setbacks and
side and rear yards.
Sec. 21-156. Restoration or replacement.
Nothing in this ordinance shall prevent the restoration of a nonconforming
use, building, or structure, destroyed by fire, windstorm, explosion, act of
public enemy, accident, or for any other reason whatsoever, or prevent the
continuance of the said nonconforming use, provided that the o�.rners of the
property in question shall file with the Zoning Administrator a notice of
intention to continue the nonconforming use within six (6) months of said
destruction or damage, and provided further that said restoration or construction
is co:--;enced within one (1) year of the date of said notice of intention to
continue the nonconforming use in question. In the event that said notice is
not filed, then the nonconforming use in question shall be deemed to have been
abandoned.
270
revised 4/12/78
•
- 5 -
ImC) 10 - X3--4.1
Administrative Appeal, File #010-83 of Christopher R. See concerning
the legal nonconforming status,pf the existing commercial public garage
use of his property.
ACTION - Use considered a legal nonconforming use
Mr. Swift read the background material.
Mr. Gyurisin next provided background information regarding
the staff's administrative decision. 'He stated that when Mr. See
applied for a Department of Motor Vehicles Dealers License, the
Planning Department was contacted.in,_order to determine whether the
business was in conformance with local zoning codes. Mr. Gyurisin
. .5
stated that the staff determined that this property was not zoned for a
public garage use and asked that Mr. See apply for a Conditional Use
Permit or provide evidence that the garage was in prior to
November 1, 1973. Mr. Gyurisin added that Mr. See chose to provide
evidence of the existence of the operatidn prior to November 1, 1973.
He said that based upon information submitted, the staff felt Mr. See's
business was not a nonconforming use.
Mr. Robert Mitchell, attorney, came forward and stated that
he represented Mr. Christopher See. Mr. Mitchell said that this case
was brought up by inquiry and not as the result of complaints about the
use of the property. Mr. Mitchell stated that Mr. See has operated a
motor vehicle repair and parts bu iness Ion the property uninterruptedly
since 1973. In 1979, Mr. See began employment with Mr. Sandy's auto
business while continuing to conduct his own business. Mr. Mitchell
added that Mr. See spent as much time or more on his own business as he
did with Mr. Sandy. Mr. Mitchell next introduced Christopher R. See.
and proceeded to ask him some general questions regarding his use of
6 -
the property in order to prove that his business was a legal
nonconforming use..
Chairman Starliper asked Mr. See if he put in at least 40
hours per week into his garage business and Mr. See replied that he
did.
Mr. Mitchell then called before the Board several of Mr.
See's neighbors and proceeded to ask each of them a series of questions
to determine Mr. See's use of the property. The first person to come
before the Board was Mr. John Sargent, an adjoining property owner.
Mr. Sargeant felt that the nature of Mr. See's business was the same
before 1973 as it is today.
Mr. W. J. Heflin, from Macedonia Church Road, came forward.
Mr. Heflin felt the business was the same today as it was before 1973.
There were three other neighbors in the audience who also
!x
felt that Mr. See's business was being operated at the same intensity
before 1973 as it was=.today. Those persons were: Mr. James Sandy, Mr.
Charles Sandy, and Mr. Buracker. Mr. Mitchell asked everyone in the
group if they had any complaints or knew of anyone who had any
complaints about Mr. See operating a garage on his property. All
members of the group said they had no complaints and did not know of
any neighbors who did.-
Mr. John:T;`JP...Horne, Zoning Administrator for Frederick
County, came forward �tnd'introduced himself to the Board. Mr. Horne
said that in 1973, Mr..'i;8ee's business was of a small scale and size as
compared with today. �ffe said that presently Mr. See's operation is
largely truck repair, whereas in 1973 he repaired automobiles. Mr.
•
- 7 -
Horne stated that the Virginia Department of Highways and
Transportation did not recognize this location as a salvage yard when
they conducted a survey in the '60s and '70s. He added that Mr. See
previously held a 40 hour/week job and then came home to work on
vehicles; whereas today he does not have another job, but works
entirely on his own vehicles. Mr. Horne added that the Inspections
Department has a building permit on file that was issued in 1978 for a
storage building. Mr. Horne told the Board that this type of structure
is very different from one used for auto repair because of the specific
electrical and building safety requirements.
Mr. Mitchell was then allowed several minutes for rebuttle.
Mr. Ralph Wakeman stated that he owns property within a few
hundred feet of Mr. See and has known him since the late 1960's. Mr.
Wakeman stated that Mr. See has done work for him on a continuous
basis, has never refused to repair a piece of equipment, and has worked
around the clock.
Mr. Wakeman motioned that Mr. See's business be designated as
nonconforming and a nonconforming permit be issued. This motion was
seconded by Mr. Hockman.
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals does
hereby designate the use of Mr. Christopher R. See's property, located
on the southwest corner of State Routes 636 and 642, as a nonconforming
commercial public garage use. This property is designated as Tax Map
76 ((A)), Parcels 39, 40, and 41 in the Opequon Magisterial District..
The above resolutions passed by the following majority vote:
YES: Mrs. Starliper; Messrs. Wakeman, Hockman, Garrett
NO: Mr. Adams
3-1
COUNTY of FREDERICK
IDepartment of Planning and Development
John T.P. Horne - Planning Director
Stephen M. Gyurisin - Deputy Director
703/662-4532
September 16, 1983
Mr. Christopher R. See
Route 1, Box 139-A
White Post, Virginia 22663
Dear Mr. and Mrs. See:
This letter is to confirm the Frederick County Board of Zoning
Appeals' action at their meeting of August 23, 1983.
The Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals acted in favor of Mr.
Christopher R. See for the Administrative Appeal Case #010-83 and
determined that a nonconforming use permit be issued for Mr. See.
This property is designated as Tax Map 76((A)), Parcel Numbers 39,
40, and.41 in the Opequon Magisterial District.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this
office.
Sincerely,
J hn T. P. Horne
irector
SMG/rsa
cc: Mr. Robert T. Mitchell, Jr.
9 Court Square - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 22601
HALL, MONAHAN, ENGLE, MAHAN & MITCHELL
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
LEESBURG, VIRGINIA WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA
3 EAST MARKET STREET 9 EAST.BOSCAWEN STREET
TELEPHONE 703.777-IOSO TELEPHONE 703-662-3200
August 25, 1983
Mr. Christopher R. See
Route #1
Box 139-A
White Post, Virginia 22663
FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RENDERED
PLEASE REPLY TO:
WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601
(P. O. Box 846)
Representing with respect to determination of noncon-
forming status of property under Frederick County Zoning
Ordinance; initial office conference; review of zoning
classification" and applicable zoning provisions to property;
conferences with representatives of the Planning and Zoning
Department; preparation of request for administrative
determination of nonconforming status; preparation of
petitions for submission in support of application;'
review of administrative determination; appealing
administrative determination to Board of Zoning Appeals;
preparation for Board of Zoning Appeals hearings inter-
viewing witnesses and visit to site; representing at
hearing before Board of Zoning Appeals on August 23,
1983; conferences, correspondence, and telephone calls. $
Costs Advanced to Treasurer of Frederick'County,
Virginia for appeal fee
Credit - September 6; 1983
Credit - Oct. 5, 1983
$ 20.00
Total $ 870.00
$ 500.00
Balance $ 370.00
200.00
Balance $ 170.00
• r
HALL, MONAHAN, ENGLE, MAHAN & MITCHELL
WILBUR C. HALL (1892-1972)
THOMAS V. MONAHAN
SAMUEL D. ENGLE
O. LELAND MAHAN
&ROBERT T. MITCHELL,JR.
JOHN R.PROSSER
WOODROW W. TURNER, JR.
NIKOLAS E. PARTHEMOS
JOHN F. LANHAM
KENNETH F. PARKS
ANN BRAKKE CAMPFIELD
PAUL ENGLISH SMITH
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
LEESBURG, VIRGINIA WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA
P. O. BOX 390 P. 0. BOX 848
3 EAST MARKET STREET 9 EAST BOB CAW
EN STREET
TELEPHONE 703-777-1050 TELEPHONE 703-662-3200
Mr. Christopher R. See
Route #1
Box 139-A
White Post, Virginia 22663
Dear Mr. See:
August 25, 1983
PLEASE REPLY TO:
WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601
(P. O. Box 848)
This will confirm the decision made by the Board of Zoning Appeals
following the hearing on August 23, 1983: The Board reversed the
administrative decision and found that your present use of the
property is a nonconforming use under the Frederick County Zoning
Ordinance. Accordingly, you can continue your present operations.
The County has thirty days to appeal the decision of the Board of
Zoning Appeals.to the.Circuit Court. An appeal by the County is
a possibility, but I feel it is more probable that they will not
appeal the decision.
However, as we have discussed, there is a possibility of a couple
of other issues which may be raised by the County, including the
status of the use of the building. You will just have to wait
to see if they raise any issue concerning that.
I am enclosing my statement for services to date in this matter.
I am pleased that we were able to obtain a favorable result.
With kind regards, I am
RTM:jlh
Enclosure
pi0 -83-�t
%-CEIVED JUN 1983
HALL, MONAHAN, ENGLE, MAHAN & MITCHELL
WILBUR C. HALL (1892-1972)
THOMAS V. MONAHAN
SAMUEL D. ENGLE
o. LELAND MAHAN
ROBERT T MITCHELL,JR,
JOHN R. PROSSER .
WOODROW W. TURNER, JR.
NIKOLAS E. PARTHEMOS
JOHN F. LANHAM
KENNETH F. PARKS
ANN BRAKKE CAMPFIELD
PAUL ENGLISH SMITH
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
LEESBURG, VIRGINIA WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA
P. 0. BOX 390 P. O. BOX 648
3 EAST MARKET STREET 9 EAST BOSCAWEN STREET
TELEPHONE 703.777-1050 TELEPHONE 703-662.3200
June 22, 1983
Mr. Stephen M. Gyurisin
Deputy Director
Department of Planning and Development
County of Frederick
P. 0. Box 601
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Re: Christopher R. See
Dear Steve:
PLEASE REPLY TO:
WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601
(P. O. BOX 848)
This will confirm our telephone conversation regarding this
matter which is on appeal to the Board of Zoning Appeals.
You have confirmed that the appeal of the administrative
decision has been properly noted to the Board of Zoning
Appeals and that the matter is now pending before the Board
of Zoning Appeals. You indicated that the Board may want a
specific form completed, and that perhaps a fee may have to
be paid, but you or Doug Swift would let me know about that.
As we discussed, those matters will not have to be done,
in any event, within the thirty -day period from the date of
the administrative decision, and they will not affect the
validity of the appeal.
You indicated that the documentary matters which were before
your Department in this matter will be made available to the
Board of Zoning Appeals, and we will make any additional docu-
mentary matters available to the Board of Zoning Appeals prior
to the hearing of the Board of Zoning Appeals. Further, as
we discussed, we will have the opportunity to present additional
evidence or witnesses to the Board of Zoning Appeals at the
hearing.
This will further confirm that the hearing in this matter will
be set on August 23, 1983, at 3:00 P. M. in the Board of
Supervisors Room.
HALL, MONAHAN, ENGLE, MAHAN & MITCHELL
Mr. Stephen M. Gyurisin Page 2 June 22, 1983
With kind regards, I am
Very j-t�ri my yo ^rs ,
Robert T. MitcMell,
RTM : j lh
0
HALL, MONAHAN, ENGLE, MAHAN & MITCHELL
WILBUR-C. HALL (1692-1972)
THOMAS V. MONAHAN
SAMUEL D. ENGLE
O. LELAND MAHAN
ROBERT I MITCHELL,JR.
JOHN R. PROSSER
WOODROW W.TURNER, JR.
NIKOLAS E. PARTHEMOS
JOHN F. LANHAM
KENNETH F. PARKS
ANN BRAKKE CAMPFIELD
PAUL ENGLISH SMITH
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
LEESBURG, VIRGINIA WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA
P.
O. BOX 390 P. O. BOX 848 -
3 EAST MARKET STREET 9 EAST BOSCAWEN STREET
TELEPHONE 703-777-IOSO TELEPHONE 703-662-3200
Mr. Christopher R. See
Route #1
Box 139-A
White Post, Virginia 22663
Dear Mr. See:
June 22, 1983
PLEASE REPLY TO:
WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601
(P. 0. BOX 848)
The appeal of the administrative decision in your case has been
noted to the Board of Zoning. Appeals. I have been advised by
the County that the Board of Zoning Appeals will hold a hearing
in this matter on August 23, 1983, at 3:00 P. M. in the Board
of Supervisors Room.
It is.going to be necessary for as much evidence as possible to
be gathered to be presented to the Board at the hearing. This
will confirm that you will be checking the records with your
former employer to try to locate records to document the _fact
that you were.doing work on the property, which was billed
through your employer, prior to the effective date of the
ordinance. This could be very important evidence to present
to the Board of Zoning Appeals, and I would ask that you keep
me advised on whether or not you are able to find any of these
records. In addition, I believe it will be important to have
several of your closest neighbors personally appear at the
hearing to describe to the Board the work that was being done
by you on the property prior to the effective date of the
ordinance. Accordingly, you should make contact with those
witnesses and make arrangements for them to come to the hearing
on- August 23',. 1983.
We should meet, together with your witnesses, prior to the hearing
date. Perhaps, it would be advisable for me to meet you on your
property so I could view the property before the hearing date.
It would be helpful if,at the same time I come to your place to
view the property, the witnesses who will be testifying can be
available so that I can talk with.them and cover some of the
•
HALL, MONAHAN, ENGLE, MAHAN & MITCHELL
Mr. Christopher R. See Page 2 June 22, 1983
information that we need presented at the hearing. Accordingly,
please give me a call upon receipt of this letter so that we
can set a date and time for me to meet you and the witnesses
at your property before th.e.hearing date.
I shall also mention to you that in discussing this matter
with the Director of Planning, he indicated that you could
probably get a conditional use permit for use of the property
as a public garage without much difficulty, and.with only the
standard conditions on the use. He further indicated that
although the permits are issued on an annual basis, the re -
issuance of the permit each year is virtually automatic and
does not require you to reapply on an annual basis.
In reviewing my time records in this case to date, and estimating
the time which would be involved in presenting this case on appeal
to the Board of Zoning Appeals, I would estimate a total fee
of approximately $850.00, I would ask that you let me know
what arrangements you would like to make for the handling of the
anticipated fee.
Looking forward to hearing from
RTM:jlh
I am
truly yours,
uc).
HALL, MONAHAN, ENGLE, MAHAN &
WILBUR C. HALL (1892-1972)
THOMAS V. MONAHAN
SAMUEL D. ENGLE
O. LELAND MAHAN
ROBERT T. MITCHELL,JR.
JOHN R. PROSSER
WOODROW W.TURNER, JR.
NIKOLAS E. PARTHEMOS
JOHN F. LANHAM
KENNETH F. PARKS
ANN BRAKKE CAMPFIELD
PAUL ENGLISH SMITH
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
LEESBURG, VIRGINIA
P. O. BOX 390
3 EAST MARKET STREET
TELEPHONE 703-777-1050
ReCEIVED 'I %IV 16 1983
MITCHF-LL
WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA
P. O. BOX 848
9 EAST BOSCAWEN STREET
TELEPHONE 703-662-3200
June 15, 1983
Mr. John T: P. Horne, Director
Department of Planning and Development
County of Frederick
9 Court Square
P. O. Box 601
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Re: Christopher R. See
Dear John:
PLEASE REPLY TO:
WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601
(P. O. Box 848)
By this letter, I hereby appeal, on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Christopher
R. See, your administrative determination of May 25, 1983 that Mr.
and Mrs. See's use of their property is not a nonconforming use.
It is my understanding that the information previously submitted
to your Department will be forwarded to the Board of Zoning Appeals,
together with the complete file from your office. In addition, it
is my understanding that the Board of Zoning Appeals will hold a
hearing in the matter, at which time we will have an opportunity
to present additional evidence.
With kind regards, I am
Very truly yours,
/72,:ede e (,:);. (a
Robert T. Mitchell, Jr. ��v 4
RTM: jlh
0 0
HALL, MONAHAN, ENGLE, MAHAN & MITCHELL
WILBUR C. HALL (1892-1972)
THOMAS V. MONAHAN
SAMUEL D. ENGLE
O. LELAND MAHAN
ROBERT T MITCHELL,JR.
JOHN R.PROSSER
WOODROW W.TURNER, JR.
NIKOLAS E. PARTHEMOS
JOHN F. LANHAM
KENNETH F. PARKS
ANN BRAKKE CAMPFIELD
PAUL ENGLISH SMITH
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
LEESBURG, VIRGINIA WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA
P. O. BOX 390 P. 0. BOX 848
3 EAST MARKET STREET 9 EAST BOSCAWEN STREET
TELEPHONE 703-777-IOSO TELEPHONE 703-662-3200
Mr. Christopher R. See
Route #1
Box 139-A
White Post, Virginia 22663
Dear Mr. See:
May 31, 1983
PLEASE REPLY TO:
WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601
(P. O. Box 848)
Please find enclosed a copy of a letter dated May 25, 1983
which I have received from the Director of Planning and
Development of the County of Frederick.
As you can see, the Director has made an administrative de-
termination unfavorable to you with respect to the issue of
whether or not your present use of the property is a legal
nonconforming use.
I would suggest that you get in touch with me immediately
so that we can discuss how we wish to proceed at this time.
If the matter is to be appealed to the Board of Zoning Appeals,
that appeal has to be filed within 60 days.
Looking.forward to hearing
RTM: j lh
Enclosure
•
•
COUNTY of FREDERICK
IDepartment of Planning and Development
.lohn T.P. Horne - Planning Director
Stephen N4. Ciyurisin - Deput}• Director
703/662-4532
May 25, 1983
Mr. Robert T. Mitchell, Jr.
P.O. Box 848
Winchester, Virginia 22601
RE: Mr. Christopher R. See
Dear Bob:
The purpose of this letter is to inform you that this office has
determined that ',fr. See's Dresent use is not a legal nonconforming
business as prescribed in the Frederick County Code. This
determination was based upon a number of considerations, including
the 24 statements that you have submitted. Should you wish to submit
further evidence, I would be happy to re-examine my determination.
Should you wish to appeal my determination, the provisions of Chapter
21, Zonina, Article 10, Board of Zoning Appeals, Section 21-153,
Power and Duties, allow you to do so. Any such appeal is made to the
Board of Zoning Appeals of Frederick County through the Department of
Planning and Development. Because of my determination, I would
request that an application for a conditional use permit, public
garage, be submitted to this office no later than July 8, 1983.
My determination is based upon the distinction between a full-time
use and a part-time use, and the evidence submitted pertaining to the
legal nonconforming status of the part-time use of '-tr. See's
property. The part-time use of the property does not represent a
standard or norm by which the zoning interpretation for a partic!ilar
kind or class of use may be identified. A fill -time use of the
property represents a standard that is measurable, therefore, the
essential characteristics of the uses can not be compart.d. Simply
stated, the full-time use is not the same type of us-, as a part-ti.rie
use.
The evidence presented in the form of statements from other property
owners does not indicate to me that the business was a legal nol.1
conforming use or that the structure in which this business is now
being conducted is a legal nonconforming structure. As a rule, this
office requires more than generalized statements from property
owners. Such items as tax records, business receipts, dated
photographs, licenses, or dated advertisements, generally are
indicators of the legal status of the use. As I in,iic.ated earlier,
if further evidence can be presented indicating the extent and nature
of the full-time .Ise, I would be happy to reconsider any
administrative decisions based on the new evidence. In reference to
the statements submitted, I would like to add that the County does
:1 :1 V.' Cndr-! ra ail l.at L0 i1S ?oyeCni-u' the ex7anS 10 T1 of let,ai
)t;rt uuare - P.O. Box l)t)f 1`icopy
i- 22601
Page 2
Robert T. Mitchell, Jr.
May 25, 1983
uses. The County Codes limit expansions to 50%.
In reviewing the background information regarding Mr. See's request,
it has come to my attention that September 12, 1978,_a building
permit was issued to Mr. Christopher R. See for a storage building.
The Frederick County Building official has advised me to inform Mr.
See that he should come in and apply for a change of use permit for
building permit #5551 from a storage building to a public garage. If
you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate
to call me.
Sincerely,
John T. P. Horne
Director
JTPH/rsa
cc: John Dennison, Building official
HALL, MONAHAN, ENGLE, MAHAN & MITCHELL
WILBUR C. HALL (1892-1972)
THOMAS V. MONAHAN
SAMUEL D. ENGLE
0. LELAND MAHAN
ROBERT T MITCHELL,JR.
JOHN R. PROSSER
WOODROW W.TURNER, JR.
NIKOLAS E. PARTHEMOS
JOHN F. LANHAM
KENNETH F. PARKS
ANN BRAKKE CAMPFIELD
PAUL ENGLISH SMITH
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
LEESBURG, VIRGINIA WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA
P. O. BOX 390 P. O. BOX 848
3 EAST MARKET STREET 9 EAST B05CAWEN STREET
TELEPHONE 703-777-IOSO TELEPHONE 703-662-3200
April 21, 1983
Mr. Stephen M. Gyurisin
Deputy Director
Department of Planning and Development
County of Frederick
P. O. Box 601
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Re: Christopher R. See
Dear Steve:
PLEASE REPLY TO:
WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601
(P. O. Box 848)
You will find enclosed copies of statements which have been
signed by members of the families who have been long time
residents of the area in which Christopher R. See's property
is located. These statements are submitted pursuant to
Mr. See's request that an administrative determination be
made that his current use of the property is a non -conforming
use and that this use is of the same type which existed prior
to the enactment of the ordinance in 1973.
I feel the statements clearly represent the feelings of the
residents in the area, and these are the persons who have
been in the best position to observe the use of the property
over the years. While the business use of the property prior
to 1973 was part-time, the fact that Mr. See now operates the
business full-time does not change the essential character of,
the use.
Accordingly, on behalf of Mr. See, I would request that an
administrative determination be made at this time and con-
firmed in writing that the present use of the property is a
non -conforming use which has existed since prior to 1973.
Please let me know if I can provide any further information
with respect to this request.
n
HALL, MONAHAN, ENGLE, MAHAN & MITCHELL
Mr. Stephen M. Gyurisin Page 2 April 21, 1983
With kind regards, I am
Very t ly yours,
Robert T. Mitchell, Jr.
RTM:jlh
Enclosures
u
• oio-s3jh
Tt c' 11"Jo(`1' i or (-ci own property or reside in tho area of
the Property owned by Christopher R. ;lee:: In Frederick
county, Virginia. Christopher R. Sege has lived on the
property since Approximately 1963, and before 1.973 he was
conducting on the property a part-time business doing
repairs to motor. vehicles. At times during the 1960's
Chr.ist.opher. R. See dial work on motor vehicles in a barn
which was located on the property (but which hra.s since been
torn down), in his carport, and in the open. The business
which Christopher R. See is now operating gull -time on the
property is the same type of business he was operating
pjir.t-time prior to 1973.
The undersigned understands that Christopher R. See has
requested a ruling by Frederick County that his present use
of his property is the same type of use which he was making
of the property before 1973. The undersigned states that
Christopher R. See's present use of his property is the same
type of use of the property which he was making before 1973.
Furthermore, the undersigned agrees that Mr. See's use of
the property should be ruled by Frederick County to be a
nonconforming use of the property and the undersigned has no
objection to Mr. See's continuing his present use of the
property without further restrictions.
23 similar petitions
on file in the Dept.
of Planning
,7
0
The 1111ders i tined own }property or .residP in the area of
the property owned by Christopher R. See in Frederick
County, Virginia. Christopher. R. See has lived on the
property since approximately 1963, and before 1973 he was
conducting on the property a part-time business doing
repairs to motor_ vehicles. At times during the 1960's
Christopher R. See did work on motor vehicles in a barn
which was located on the property (but which has since been
t(-,rn down), in his carport, and in the open. The business
which Christopher R. See is now operating full-time on the
property is the same type of business he was operating
part-time prior to 1973.
The undersigned understands that Christopher R. See has
requested a ruling by Frederick County that his present use
of his property is the same type of use which he was making
of the property before 1973. The undersigned states that
Christopher R. See's present use of his property is the same
type of use of the property which he was making before 1973.
Furthermore, the undersigned agrees that Mr. See's use of
the property should be ruled by Frederick County to be a
nonconforming use of the property and the undersigned has no
objection to Mr. See's continuing his present use of the
property without further restrictions.
J
•
oto-g3- M
i(Tned own property or. resid.- in the arQa of
b1. l I Y.].:'i ��. C�)J ti:� :a
� � I E..1"' li 1
COUnt.y, Virginii:,. Christopher R. See has lived on the
property since approximately 1963, and before 1973 he was
conducting on the property a part-time business doing
repairs to motor vehicles. At times during the 1960's
Christopher R. See did work on motor vehicles in a barn
which was located on the property (but which has since been
torn clown), in his carport, and in the open. The business
which Christopher. R. See is now operating full-time on the
property is the same type of business he was operating
part-time prior. t:o 1.973.
The undersigned understands that Christopher R. See has
requested a ruling by Frederick County that his present use
of his property is the same type of use which he was making
of the property before 1973. The undersigned states that
Christopher R. See's present use of his property is the same
type of use of the property which he was making before 1973.
Furthermore, the undersigned agrees that Mr. See's use of
the property should be ruled by FrederickCounty to be a
nonconforming use of the property and the undersigned has no
objection to Mr. See's continuing his present use of the
property without further restrictions.
IIti.ICI l 5: i -)110' l t wn r)1-nr)nr h17 or reside in the area of
the property own .d by Christopher R. Se_e: ill Frederick
County, Virginia. Christopher R. See has lived on the
property since approximately 1963, and before 1973 he was
conducting on the property a part-time business doing
repairs to motor. vehicles. At times during the 1960's
Christopher R. See did work on motor vehicles in a barn
which was located on the property (but which has since been
torn down), in his carport, and in the open. The business
which Christopher R. See is now operating full-time on the
property is the same type of business he was operating
part-time prior to 1973.
The undersigned understands that Christopher R. See has
requested a ruling by Frederick County that his present use
of his property is the same type of use which he was making
of the property before 1973. The undersigned states that
Christopher R. See's present use of his property is the same
type of use of the property which he was making before 1973.
Furthermore, the undersigned agrees that Mr. See's use of
the property should be ruled by Frederick County to be a
nonconforming use of the property and the undersigned has no
objection to Mr. See's continuing his present use of the
property without further restrictions.
't'ttn tttIdr-t•'; i (Illr,0 own Pror,orty nr res ildp i n the arvrj of
the property owned by Christopher R. Sec' in Pre-derick
County, Virginia. Christopher R. See has lived on the
property since approximrately 1963, and before 1973 he was
conducting on the property a part-time business doing
i'
repairs to motor, vehicles. At times during the 1960's
Christopher R. See did work on motor vehi.c:los in a barn
which was located on the property (but which has since been
torn down), in his carport, and in the open. The business
which Christopher_ R. See is now operating full-time on the
property is the same type of busi.ne-ss he was operating
part-time prior to 1973.
The undersigned understands that Christopher R. See has
requested a ruling by Frederick County that his present use
of his property is the same type of use which he was making
o{ the property before 1973. The undersigned states that
Christopher R. See's present use of his property is the same
t•:•�e of use of the property which he was making before 1973.
Furthermore, the undersigned agrees that Mr. See's use of
the property should be ruled by Frederick County to be a
nonconforming use of the property and the undersigned has no
objection to Mr. See's continuing his present use of the
property without further restrictions.
i ti t hp T „t-
"Wile(I t)y Chx .i. s tophNr R. See in. Fr.'ede r. ick
County, Virginia. Christopher R. See has lived on the
Property since approximately 19631 and before 1973 he was
conductA nq on the property ii part-time business doing
repairs to motor vehicles. At times during the 1960's
Christopher R. See dad work on motor veh.ic:]_e- in a barn
which was located on the
Property (but which has since been
torn down), in his carport, and in the open. The business
which Christopher R. See is now operating full-time on the
Property is the same type of business he was operating
part: -time prior to 1973.
The undersigned understands that Christopher R. See has
requested a ruling by Frederick County that his present use
of his property is the same type of use which he was making
of the property before 1973. The undersigned states that
Christopher R. See's present use of his property is the same
type of use of the property which he was making before 1973.
Furthermore, the undersigned agrees that Mr. See's use of
the property should be ruled by Frederick County to be a
nonconforming use of the property and the undersigned has no
objection to Mr. See's continuing his present use of the
property without further restrictions.
s
The undersigned own property or reside in the area. of
Lilt, I'r c>pe.L ty oweled by Chl is:itlopher R. See :in Prederick
County, Virginia. Christopher R. See has lived on the
property since approximately 1963, and before 1973 he was
conducting on the property apart -time business doing
r_epai.rs to motor. vehicles. At times during the 1960's
Christopher R. See did work on motor vehicles in a barn
which was located on the property (but which has since been
torn down), in his carport, and in the open. The business
which Christopher R. See is now operating full-time on the
property is the same type of business he was operating
part-time prior to 1973.
The undersigned understands that Christopher R. See has
requested a ruling by Frederick County that his present use
of his property is the same type of use which he was making
of the property before 1973. The undersigned states that
Christopher R. See's present use of his property is the same
type of use of the property which he was making before 1973.
Furthermore, the undersigned agrees that Mr. See's use of
the property should be ruled by Frederick County to be a
nonconforming use of the property and the undersigned has no
objection to Mr. See's continuing his present use of the
property without further restrictions.
f
Olb-83 ay
The iindorni(ITICO own property or reside in the area of
the property owned by Christopher R. Sea hi Pre-dori.ck
County, Virginia. Christopher R. See has lived on the
property since approximately 1963, and before 1973 he was
conducting on the property a part-time business doing
repairs to motor. vehicles. At times during the 1960's
Christopher R. See did work on motor vehicles in a barn
which was lor.ated on the property (but which has since bec,;n
torn down), in his carport, and in the open. The business
which Christopher R. See is now operating full-time on the
property is the same type of business he was operating
part-time prior to 1973.
The undersigned understands that Christopher R. See has
requested a ruling by Frederick County that his present use
of his property is the same type of use which he was making
of the property before 1973. The undersigned states that
Christopher R. See's present use of his property is the same
type of use of the property which he was making before 1973.
Furthermore, the undersigned agrees that Mr. See's use of
the property should be ruled by Frederick County to be a
nonconforming use of the property and the undersigned has no
objection to Mr. See's continuing his present use of the
property without further restrictions.
0 0 ( 0 - 83 -;� 5- ','
Tlw 111141orsigned own property or reside in the area of
tli pi.opuit:y ownted by Christopher R. Sees In Pre3det-ick
County, Virginia. Christopher R. See has lived on the
property since approximately 1.963, and before 1973 he was
conducting on the property a part-time business doing
repairs to motor vehicles. At times during the 1960's
Christopher R. See did work on motor vehicles in a barn
which was located on the property (but which has since been
torn down), i_n his carport, and in the open. The business
which Christopher R. Sc e is now operating full --time on the
property is the same type of business he was operating
part-time prior to 1.973.
The undersigned understands that Christopher R. See has
requested a ruling by Frederick County that his present use
of his property is the same type of use which he was making
of the property before 1973. The undersigned states that
Christopher R. See's present use of his property is the same
type of use of the property which he was making before 1973.
Furthermore, the undersigned agrees that Mr. See's use of
the property should be ruled by Frederick County to be a
nonconforming use of the property and the undersigned has no
objection to Mr. See's continuing his present use of the
property without further restrictions.
0 0 oio-s3a6
t ho Firy i of
'lc pl. s.�i♦ .t'1 ,' wi��:ii f.�� �:I,�:.lsl..)�:hc t tt. fsc, tt, P'ii Cle:YJ. 4,:h
County, Virginia. Christopher R. See has lived on the
property since approximately 1963, and before 1973 he was
conducting on the property a part-time business doing
repairs to motor vehicles. At times during the 1960's
C'hr.•.i.stopher R. Seu did work on motor vehicles in a barn
which was located on the property (but which has since been
torn down), in his carport, and in the open. The business
which Christopher. R. See is now operating full-time on the
property is the same type of business fie was operating
part-time prior to 1973.
The undersigned understands that Christopher R. See has
requested a ruling by Frederick County that his present use
of his property is the same type of use which he was making
of the property before 1973. The undersigned states that
Christopher R. See's present use of his property is the same
type of use of the property which he was making before 1973.
Furthermore, the undersigned agrees that Mr. See's use of
the property should be ruled by Frederick County to be a
nonconforming use of the property and the undersigned has no
objection to Mr. See's continuing his present use of the
property without further restrictions.
Thr imdrr=; i onecl own t�repvrt: y oi• ri df i rt the area of
t. t . fir opert_Y k,wII(.(I by C'hr i ,tupIIei- h. ., .t ri 14'recieI' j.t lc
County, Virginia. Christopher R. See has Lived on the
property since approximately 1963, and before 1973 he was
conducting on the property a part-time business doing
repairs to motor vehicles. At times during the 1960's
Christopher R. See did work on motor vehicles in a barn
which was located on the property (but which has since been
torn down), in his carport, and .in the open. The business
which Chr:i:actopher R. See :is now operating full --time on the
property is the same type of business he was operating
part-time prior to 1973.
The undersigned understands that Christopher R. See has
requested a ruling by Frederick County that his present use
of his property is the same type of use which he was making
of the property before 1973. The undersigned states that
Christopher R. See's present use of his property is the same
type of use of the property which he was making before 1973.
Furthermore, the undersigned agrees that Mr. See's use of
the property should be ruled by Frederick County to be a
nonconforming use of the property and the undersigned has no
objection to Mr. See's continuing his present use of the
property without further restrictions.
s � oio-�3-a8
The undoi-:,i_(7ned own property or reside in the area of
the pr-operty owned by R. Seo in
County, Virginia. Christopher t2. See has li.vod on the
property sinco appz-oxi.mately 1963, and bofo.re 1973 he was
coiiduct_.i ng on t hO P r.-oper t:y a }. a rt-t.i.me business doing
repairs to motor vehicles. At times during the 1960's
Christopher R. See did work on motor vehicles in a barn
which was located on the property (but which has since been
torn down), in his carport, and :in the open. The business
which Christopher R. See is now operating full-time on the
property is the same type of business he was operating
part-time prior to 1973.
The undersigned understands that Christopher R. See has
requested a ruling by Frederick County that his present use
of his property is the same type of use which he was making
of the property before 1973. The undersigned states that
Christopher R. See's present use of his property is the same
type of use of the property which he was making before 1973.
Furthermore, the undersigned agrees that Mr. See's use of
the property should be ruled by Frederick County to be a
nonconforming use of the property and the undersigned has no
objection to Mr. See's continuing his present use of the
property without further restrictions.
s � 01043-ay
The undersigned
own property
or
reside
in the area of
f lit• pl ,'i.': ! i.',' i wI).::�
County, Viryi_nia. Christopher R. See has .lived on the
property since approximately 1963, and before 1973 he was
cc:)nducting on the property a part-time business doing
repairs to motor vehicles. At times during the 1960's
Christopher R. Secs (lid work on motor, vehicle, in a barn
which was located on the property (but which has since been
tarn
clown) , in Fi i
s carport,
and
in the open. The busi.nekiF,
wh i.ch
Christopher
R. See is
now
operating full-time on the
property is the same type of business he was operating
part-time prior to 1973.
The undersigned understands that Christopher R. See has
requested a ruling by Frederick County that his present use
of his property is the same type of use which he was making
of the property before 1973. The undersigned states that
Christopher R. See's present use of his property is the same
type of use of the property which he was making before 1973.
Furthermore, the undersigned agrees that Mr. See's use of
the property should be ruled by Frederick County to be a
nonconforming use of the property and the undersigned has no
objection to Mr. See's continuing his present use of the
property without further restrictions.
`j't131, do1 i IIIr- l OWTI j.`Y'('1"0t..t..)- (l1`' 7.-0.1� l.dP 111 4-11r-1 -3r'r, I 1')
(I }t '(i}�t'X`L. ' k1W1 (21111:• L.Uf)flt:'1. R ek'., I[I f.''rttdaL']t.7�..
County, Virginia. Christopher R. See has lived on the
property since approximately 1963, and before 1973 he was
c on(luct:i.ng on they property a part-time business doing
repairs to motor vehicles. At times during the 1.960's
Christopher R. See did work on motor vehicles in a barn
which was located on the property (but which has since been
torn down), in his carport, and in the open. The business
which Christopher R. See is now operating full-time on the
property is they same type of business he was operating
part-time prior. to 1973.
The undersigned understands that Christopher R. See has
requested a ruling by Frederick County that his present use
of his property is the same type of use which he was making
of the property before 1973. The undersigned states that
Christopher R. See's present use of his property is the same
type of use of the property which he was making before 1973.
Furthermore, the undersigned agrees that Mr. See's use of
the property should be ruled by Frederick County to be a
nonconforming use of the property and the undersigned has no
objection to Mr. See's continuing his present use of the
property without further restrictions.
f
i
Tllc own prul)f>rty or reside in the area of
i_he pr.opert.y owned by Chr.istoplrf-,r- It. See in Fredc:.,r.ic It
County, Virginia.. Christopher 1.2. See has lived on the
property since approximately 1963,.and before 1973 he was
conducting on the property a part. -time business doing
repairs to motor vehicles. At times during the 1960's
Christopher R. See did work on motor vehicles in a barn
which was located on the property (but which has since been
torn clown), in his carport, and in the open. The business
which Christopher. R. See is now operating full-time on the
property is the same type of business he was operating
pd L t.-t1IllE` prior to 1973.
The undersigned understands that Christopher R. See has
requested a rulinq by Frederick County that his present use
of his property is the same type of use which he was making
of the property before 1973. The undersigned states that
Christopher R. See's present use of his property is the same
type of use of the property which he was making before 1973.
Furthermore, the undersigned agrees that Mr.. See's use of
the property should be ruled by Frederick County to be a
nonconforming use of the property and the undersigned has no
objection to Mr. See's continuing his present use of the
property without further restrictions.
T}l�
tr „}'�'� r l' ,„ � imt� {,},, f It # fi}ca r�er'�r, •:I
,r r, 1 n I'ierc9er.i.c:�k
Cr,,, n h )' ,'. vie(
3 Irhr..i:,t:ot,ht'r 11. Sczo t}t�r� l :f.vnd oza t'lie
},rc,per t y;,-jrr,, approx.i.mately 1963,
and before 1973 he w,�s
roc>nc�ucti-ng nn thc� Property cj part-time business doing
At t.imc±s during the 1960119
r:'hr i st.aphe1 tt. Sc2c:' did work on motor vehicles in
wh i c:'h was 1 c}cart r�cl a barn
On the propert
Y (but which has tarsince been
n down), CeIr.port, and i.r, the open. The
businc_rzar,
now opr_r.atin9 full-time on the
t,rc>I,crt.y t;},(-' Same type of business he was operating
}part-ti.me prior to 1973.
The uncl ri.ync.�c'{ understand , t.hFIt CI
1ristopher R. Se
has
er.ick
rec{ue;_;ted a rul..ing by
Y
FredCount that his
present use
c� f h.i s pz-ope.rtY is the same type Of use which he was
making
OF the Property before 1973.
The undersigned states that
hr.iStopher R, See's present use of his propertyi
tvz�e of use of the property which hs the same
e was making before 1973.
Furthermore, the undersigned agrees that Mr. See's
use of
the property should be ruled by Frederick County to be a
nonconforming use of the property and the undersigned has no
objection to Mr. See's continuing his present use of the
property without further restrictions.
it ►rl ,.?IrtTl'i...,�' i r11r111tt tr1/ l'III .i r,l t?Illlt:•r. R tt9 r
I'resdet'tc;k
t',Ilnt y=, Virg i n i,i. Chri_a;tot)her R. See .hatj 1 i.vC!d on the.
1" ()peI.-t y :, i11ce ,:Ipproxi.mately 1963 and before 1973 hrr wO a
t;
(•()nriuc-t.in(t ()n the property a part-time business doing
•
is
t,•1,•Iir-:� t.c') r1o1i?1 V(::trit::lr.�;. At. t:imrs during the 1,960's
a:
s :•
did wo.t:,k on motor vehir..les in a barn
wt.) i(.•h wars tOcat ed on the property (but which has since been
tarn d0wrl) , in t►i.r:r carport, and in the open. The business
�
whirl') Chria>topher P. SCe is now operating full --time on the
1)1"()pert..y i!;' 1:1w, same type of brasince�SS Ile was operating
F
r)d rt --time piior to 1973.
r,
The r si.rjned. understands that Christopher R. See has
requested a,,.rul.ing by Frederick County that his present use
nf his property is the same type of use which he was making
$'
of- the property before 1.973. The undersigned states that
Christopher R. See's present use of his property is the same'
i
t%,ze of use,of the property which he was making before 1973.
Furthermore, the undersigned agrees that Mr. See's use of
'
the property, should be ruled by Frederick County to be a
1.
nonconforming use of the property and the undersigned has no
objection to, Mr. see's continuing his present use of the
property without further restrictions.
a
`Nh< tirr,�,'rr:'i,1n,��i ,���n I�rri'c`r t�' car re0i.thy±
r (.)pel.. t_y ,,w'ii,-,l by C'lii .i>clr►l,lic�r tt. ;ic:K j11 Frederick
c'( t , , Vi r.,cl i I iri. Chr. i:,I opher R. Son het I.ivnd can ttie
i lwo ,lpj).1 ox i ITl at o'I y 1963 , and before J.973 ho wa i
:oncluct i nq on t proport y a part-time business doing
r
to `trotox• vehi.c].(--rs. At times during the ' 1960' s
�
IY: �,i:o1)11er, P. Soo dial work can motor vehic]_es in a barn
i
� r.
wh'i c-h was loc-at ed on the property (but which has since been
Yf
t c,r n (i()wil) ,;, in hi..,; carport, and in the open. The buniness
�
which R. '-Ilee is now operating fu11--time on the
°
I,r r>rrr r t:y a ,;I i lw �-; ame type of business htj Was operating
t).i rt -t. i.me prior to 1973.
s
The undersigned understands that Christopher R. See has
requested ai,ruling by Frederick County that his present use
(-,t' his property is the same type of use,which he was making
)f the property before 1973. The undersigned states that
Christopher.R. See's present use of his property is the same
-,,,;De of use:.of the property which he was making before 1973.
Furthermore,' the undersigned agrees that Mr. See's use of
the property should be ruled by Frederick;County to be a
nonconforming use of the property and the'undersigned has no
objection to Mr. See's continuing his present use of the
e.
property without further restrictions.
r ' �r /„� .-
'!'li,• tii�7, . i,rti,l ,�,•i I� „I,� O' �t t ll iil,I,� I I,��
I„ t',I'f't t y -wi,t d F,y t'trr i :; t Opher.• F2.
n Pr e (In r i ok
c'c,i�nt.:✓. Vir g.i rI:i ii . ('hr. i:;i-c�f,hcr R. Set, ttaia Jived on the
F,rc,F�er ty S.i.rlcc iri>,ro};imatel 1�1fi3 ,
Y , and before 1973 .he war; s
ni„rt. i.nq cprr t l-ic, property business doing
;
:irs to "'Otc,r vehi.r,1(.,r;. At times during the 1960's
r�
work on nuytor vehicles barn #� i
the propor.t:y (but which has since been fi k
E
toI-r) (]Owl,) #
i.n h i - carpot."t, �rnd in the open. The bus.ine3s:; j ('I,ri st(phcrr Il. .cE?C? 1.s rrow operating full-time on thEr
t �e f ;
YF of business he w,3s operating-
j,,irf t-imp pri:r,r tc, (1)73. '
ty
LIT)d rt;i(Pled under,;ttrnd., that Christopher R. See has ,.
rf'u"('steel a ruling by Frederick County that his present use
of his proper is t; p Y the same type of use which he ;was making `i t
o� the proper.iy before 1973. The undersigned states that r
See's p.resf�nt user of his property is the same
tY!I`c of
use of, the property which he was making before 1973.
I'nrthermor_e � I
the undersigned agrees that Mr: See's use of
the property should be ruled by Frederick County to be a
nonconforming use of the property and the undersigned has no
Objection to Mr. See's continuing his present use of the
property without further restrictions.
0 c)((:)- Y3-3�
q
()W I I cl
I)y
t I
d J
I k 'J k I J vc(a earl
the
jj i ()[)(! I, t.y ;; j,l ( ( , 11 i Ill;, i.(, I Y 1963, c111d 1)(;! f Ore 1973 ho WW1;
(:Orldlictinq oil t1je property
j, part-tim(� business doing
repairs to motor vehicles.
At times during the 1960's
,:,Oe (Jid Work
on Motor vehicl(-.s in a barn
which was, lOcIrt od on the, property (but which has since )a(.!Qjj
torn clown) -ill Ilit:; carport,
and in the open. The busine.c
See is
now opey-at.ijIg fill j__tj.me on t I I-je
Ile wtls operating
Pil"t-1-filte prior. to 1973.
The undersigned understands that Christopher. R. See has
requested a;ru].Jnq by Frederick County that his pro -sent use
of his property is the same
type of use which he was making
()F Lhe Pror)erty b(--More 1.973.
The undersigned states that
c.'l-ir.istopher R. See's present
use of his property is the same
tye of use of the property which he was making before 1973.
Furthermore, the undersigned agrees that Mr. See's use of
the property should be ruled by Frederick County to be a
nonconforming use of
the property
and
the undersigned has no
objection to Mr. See's
continuing
his
present use of the
property without further restrictions.
t4
Q1043-3t
'!,h4, IIIIW" ;, tI ,
T c�,j � 1,'II rT ol,cri 1" III T f'CI T.fIF' 'i n 1 !TF? Art,;l Of
r tw ty by CII I I 'At'lphot k E;etj . ] tI I'rF.:Ciktr.l c ll.
Colint:`J,., Vi r.y.i n i rl . Chr.i ntophc.r: 1t. seo h.1Fr 1 i.vc,Id on thv
L;I:-c 1A,t'ty :; i,llc t ia1-Wr-ox i_mat..oly 1963, and bnfc�r(_.� .1973 be wan,
c•c,ncluct:inc} .on l.he property a part -times business doing
repairs to Plot or. vehicles. At times during the, 1960' s
C,hri.stoliher.' P. See did work on motor vehicles in a barn
wh i c'h was l octi t. ed on the pr'ope rt:y (hut wh i(.-h has since been
! ()I'll dt„wll) , ill III!; carport,, iind in the op . The businerit;
whi,-h R. Soo i..s now operating full-time on the,
t,r oju.'...rt y i :; t I,c. tyjw of hus i.nu',S s fie was operating
part', -time prior t. o 1.97.3 .
The undersigned understands that Christopher R. See has
requested a'r.uling by Frederick County that his present use
of his property is the same type of use which he was making
of the property before 1973. The undersigned states that
Christopher P. See's present use of his property is the same
type of use of the property which he was making before 1973.
Furthermore, the undersigned agrees that Mr. See's use of
t.hc property should be ruled by Frederick County to be a
nonconforming use of the property and the undersigned has no
objection to Mr_. See's continuing his present use of the
property without further restrictions.
Th ,�T71�,., ,.; atlr;i r,wt, },,..,-ll}�,r.t �, rr a ns{rle r,. thy,q raga r7f
1', 1gl0i (..\ I.1', e,t,r Jill l.11;ll,ilj. t`. u�R1 �' � Ir Pr ticitit Iaill.
r'I y V.i r.c} i I i rr . C'hri s';t:oj>hc'r R. Seeo hilrl lived can the
llr „F.,<�r. t y :, i II-l' ;,},l;r.oxim<►t-el.y 1963, and bofor'e, 1973 lien Was
c oriduc. t.inq can the property a part-time business doing
r'e (,r1i.r to ho for vehi.c.les. At times during the 1960's
Chri.5topher R. Sets did work on motor vehicles in a barn
wl, i ch w.r s l'oc i t. car} on the property (but which has since been
t-or.-n dowry) , i.n his carport, and. in the: open. The business
)
whi-ch C hri.:;'to pher. R. See i_s now oper.ilting full-time oil the
t'
l,7-r,F.,rrty i.:, t }re same type of business he was operating
pl-irt--t.Jme p,ri.or t:o 1973.
The under.,;.i-griod understands that Christopher. R. See has
requested a rul. ing by Frederick County that his present use
of his property is the same type of use which he was making
of the property before 1973. The undersigned states that
Christopher R. See's present use of his property is the same
type of use of the property which he was making before 1973.
Furthermore, the undersigned agrees that Mr. See's use of
they property should be ruled by Frederick County to be a
nonconforming use of the property and the undersigned has no
objection to Mr. See's continuing his present use of the
property without further restrictions.
C7�0-83
1 711r`�1 r�tt*T1 I,t •
I•�•► t �' � `t. 1 t'�it IrlrI fl 1 Ili,, `�► i�et „1
1 e t r r��.►t� c( h} t.'h r 1 -Int.<,}a17t.'r L're
c:'Ot.1r1t.Y. Virq:i n i �f . derick
c'hri ,top}7f,t 1t. :iec: h l.Wid on the
I:,rr�pr�rt:y ;;ince aPProx.i.mately 1963, and be't'n
r�nciur.t7 r1cl hn 1. c_ 1973 he w,j;,
t:)fr
}. ro}�c:�t-t:y �t }'tr�r. t�-t�3.rncr t>u�airtc:r�tra cicr.i.ny
r r'},�=►.ir-s to mc�tc>r vehic.tes.
At t:imc�s
c'hri �;t:c,},I►E�r- J." dttr..incl the 1.96q's
. rl.iri wr,rl� c_>rt nu.�Y.t:rt:• vrhir!1r.,t .in s krorrn
which w.►:; Ic,c-ficct c,rt i:h<.� }�r��pe,rtY (but wh:i.c
t c,r n rt<�w►► h has since been
in hi,, carport
and in the oPen. The business
wh i_r,•h C: h.r-i.sct-.4 �hr�r
} R. See is now operating full-time on t}je
L>roF�r_r-t.y is t„hr.` :;"_tme typ(E. of business he w�
i�nr t—tlOperating
mr�
pri.c,r to 1973,
x ._•_,.<.I►,c„d understar►c1;; that Christopher R. See has
rrc;ttr";tc'd a rul:incl by Frederick County that his
of hi;- present use
pr'opertY iS the same
type of use which he was making
the property before 1973..The undersigned states that
Christopher. R. See's present use of his Propertyis
type of use of the the same
property which he was making 9 before 1973,
the undersigned agrees that Mr. see's use
se of
Y should be ruled by Frederick County to be a
noncortfor-ming use of the
Property and the undersigned has no
�,I,ac•<.t i nx► to Mr. Sc�e's continuing his Present
prap,_-•r.ty without further restrictions. use of the
.,.. .1 I .•I-I,i I �- 11t t s , } I III - ,
It I Itr, -� r�•�i . f.
R. htit; 111 1''I e3eitzl' LI±l:
c'c.rl.rnt y, Vi rcl i rt i,I . c'hristopher It. Sc•.c 1)as lived on the
PrOPer.'t:y i lwe approximately 1963, and before 1973 he was
('.onducting on the property a part-time business doing
rc'pairs to rnc>tc,r vehicles. At: times during the 1960's
i'llr E.-t R. Sera curl wr>I Ic on mot.o>.' vc-hlcle-n in a barn
wll i � II w,l;; 1 Cry ,t t c:ct c.rrl the pr. rqw r.t y (but: which tlaa si nco been
t.c>rn dower) ,+ in hi;; carport, and in the open. The businc ss
wlr i.(1h C'hri:-�tI OPIlOr R. See! is now operating full. -time on the
I,rr,l)rrty ist1w sallle type of business he was operating
pat-t.-ti rfie prior to 1973.
`I'llo under:sicgned understands that Christopher R. Sec-: has
r-equested a ruling by Frederick County that his present use
of his property is the same type of use which he was making
of t:he property before 1973. The undersigned states that.
C'Irr-istopher R. See's present use of his property is the same
tv,pe, of use of the property which he was making before 1973.
Furthermore, the undersigned agrees that Mr. See's use of
the, property should be ruled by Frederick County to be a
nonconforming use of the property and the undersigned has no
objection to Mr. See's continuing his present use of the
property without further restrictions.
HALL, MONAHAN, ENGLE, MAHAN & MITCHELL
WILBUR C. HALL (1892-19721
THOMAS V. MONAHAN
SAMUEL D. ENGLE
O. LELAND MAHAN
ROBERT T. MITCHELL:,JR.
JOHN R. PROSSER
WOODROW W. TURNER, JR.
NIKOLAS E. PARTHEMOS
JOHN F. LANHAM
KENNETH F. PARKS
ANN'BRAKKE CAMPFIELD
PAUL ENGLISH SMITH
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
LEESBURG, VIRGINIA WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA
P. O. BOX 390 P. 0. BOX 848
3 EAST MARKET STREET 9 EAST BOSCAWEN STREET
TELEPHONE 703-777-1050 TELEPHONE 703-662-3200
March'18, 1983
Mr. Chistopher R. See
Route #1
Box 139-A
White Post, Virginia 22663
Dear Mr. See:
PLEASE REPLY TO:
WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601
(P. O. BOX 848)
I am enclosing fifteen statements for your use in talking with
the neighbors and other landowners in the area of your property.
If the person agrees with the statement as written, he should
sign it and print his name under the line below his signature.
If the property is owned by both husband and wife, both husband
and wife should sign the statement.
You should try to get all the property owners who adjoin your
property to sign the statement. As soon as you have the
statements signed, please get back in touch with me so that I
can make arrangements to present them to the County Planning
Department and discuss the matter further with them.
Looking forward to hearing from you, I am
Very truly yours,
Robert T. Mitchell, Jr.e'�v`"'�
RTM:jlh
Enclosures
V 10-Y3- v
AO 9 1083
HALL, MONAHAN, ENGLE, MAHAN & MITCHELL
WILBUR C. HALL (1892-1972)
THOMAS V. MONAHAN
SAMUEL D. ENGLE
O. LELAND MAHAN
ROBERT T. MITCHELL,JR.
JOHN R. PROSSER
WOODROW W. TURNER, JR.
NIKOLAS E. PARTHEMOS
JOHN F. LANHAM
KENNETH F. PARKS
ANN BRAKKE CAMPFIELD
PAUL ENGLISH SMITH
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
LEESBURG, VIRGINIA WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA
P. O. BOX 390 P. O. BOX 848
3 EAST MARKET STREET 9 EAST BOSCAWEN STREET
TELEPHONE 703-777-1050 TELEPHONE 703-662-3200 PLEASE REPLY TO:
WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601
(P. O. BOX 848)
March 7, 1983
Mr. Stephen M. Gyurisin
Deputy Director
Department of Planning and Development
P. 0. Box 601
9 Court Square
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Re: Christopher R. See
Dear Steve:
This will confirm that following our recent conference regarding
the zoning matters on Mr. See°s property,�I have made arrange-
ments to meet with Mr. See to obtain documentation for his use
of the property prior to 1973. However, I am going to be unable
to meet with Mr. See until March 10, 1983. 'Accordingly, I will
be unable to get back in touch with you prior to that date.
I anticipate that after I meet with Mr. See on March 10, 1983,
we will go about obtaining the necessary documentation and will
make every effort to do that in a timely fashion. As soon as
that documentation has been collected, I will forward same to
you. In the meantime, should you have any questions, please
contact me.
RTM : j lh
•
HALL, MONAHAN, ENGLE, MAHAN & MITCHELL
WILBUR C. HALL (1892-1972)
THOMAS V. MONAHAN
SAMUEL D. ENGLE
O. LELAND MAHAN
ROBERT T. MITCHELL,JR.
JOHN R. PROSSER
WOODROW W. TURNER,JR.
NIKOLAS E. PARTHEMOS
JOHN F. LANHAM
KENNETH F. PARKS
ANN BRAKKE CAMPFIELD
PAUL ENGLISH SMITH
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
LEESBURG, VIRGINIA WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA
P. O. BOX 390 P. 0. BOX 848
3 EAST MARKET STREET 9 EAST BOSCAWEN STREET
TELEPHONE 703-777-IOSO TELEPHONE 703-662-3200 PLEASE REPLY TO:
WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601
(P. O. BOX 848)
Mr. Christopher R. See
Route #1
Box 139-A
White Post, Virginia 22663
Dear Mr. See:
March 2, 1983
I have had some preliminary discussions with representatives
of the County regarding the zoning problem on your property.
I believe it would be advisable at this time for me to meet
with you again to go over the.discussions which I have had
and to decide howwe can proceed at this time.
Accordingly, please call my office and make an appointment to
see me at your earliest convenience.
Looking forward to hearing from you, I am
my yours,
5,
Robert T. Mitchell, Jai'.
RTM: j 1h
•
u
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
John T.P. Horne - Planning Director
Stephen M. Gyurisin - Deputy Director
703/662-4532
February 17, 1983
Mr. Christopher R. See
Route 1, Box 139-A
'White Post, Virginia 22663
RE: Conditional Use Application for Public Garage
Dear Mr. See:
U,
It has come to my attention that you have not completed and filed
your application for a conditional use permit for a public garage
with this office. The next cut-off date for submission of your
permit application is March 10, 1983. Please contact this office as
soon as possible to let me know the status or your intent to complete
and apply for the conditional use permit. I would also asked that
you submit your application by March 10, 1983.
If you have any questions regarding the application or the
information required for completing the application, please feel free
to contact me.
Sincerely,
Stephen M. Gyurisin
Deputy Director
SMG/rsA
9 Court Square' - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia
- 22601