The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About04-99 Peter & Michelle Brogger (Panache Catering) - Back Creek - BackfileDate: BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Variance Request Tracking Sheet File opened �j Reference Manual updated/number assigned D-base updated v 12 color location maps requested from GIS Two sets of labels requested from Data Processing (o • / File given to Renee' to update Application Action Summary MEETING DATE: 17-�,0-FINALACTIO�`PPROVE CLOSE OUT FILE: /- Approval (or denial) letter mailed to applicant/copy made for file File stamped "approved", "denied" or "withdrawn" Reference Manual updated D-base updated File given to Renee' for final update to Application Action Summary UACaro1\Common\TRACKING. BZA Revised 11/1/98 r CASH '--(l 001263 RECEIPT Date „ Received From w Address �` �- 'f N\ � _ _ j For k � �"7AMLI y�j �~ CASH V CHECK/'y�DUE AA ." { QY 7 ORDER IN p CASH Date 0 012 7 3 . . r\ a ` n 01, Received From Address Qjyi0 [�lJ For `, �Q Q V0 M1 f 1 yJ AMT. OF ACCOUNT ....- CASH AMT. PAID CHECK BALANCE y DUE- ORDER pf.t-oog-97 P) COUNTY of FR D ERI CK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/678-0682 MEMORANDUM TO: Finance Department FROM: Beth Ann Hall, Secretary I SUBJECT: Return of Sign Deposit DATE: July 30, 1999 - The amount of $25.00 was deposited in line item #10-911-08 for the persons named below as a deposit for a sign for Variance Application #04-99. They have now returned the sign and are therefore entitled to the return of their deposit. You may pay this through the regular bill cycle. Please send a check in the amount of $25.00 to: RSA/bah Panache Catering Company c/o Peter & Michelle Brogger 152 Lusitano Lane Middletown, Virginia 22645 107 North Rent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 AREA OF LOT I - 2.1273 ovebRW AREA OF BARR PARCEL- 33.5 ones AREA OF ADXSTMENT - Q/3gl ogres TOTAL OF NEW LOT FA- 2.2664 acres REMAINDER OF BARR PARCEL- 33.36 acres N/F E.Y. MARY ROSE a� AND BEVERLY T. ROBINSON e. a Tax Map 83-" O Resld&Wol z RA 0 a 0 a�a a A�' / R�s3arve Arno � ------------- i aWn Fleld l wQ 50 z s60 NOTES: /.EASEMENTS OTHER THAN THOSE SHOWN HEREON MAY EXIST. 2. NO TITLE REPORT FURNISHED. L - Bulldlnp Rbslrldion Una IRF - Iron Rod Found - Prop" Line - Some OwnersNp IRS - Iron Rod Set &ANDERSON & ASSOCIATES 7722 MIDDLETOWN,VIRGINIA 22645 Phone : (540) 869-2501 Fox : (540) 869-2625 % LOT 1-A 2.2664 Acres OF t� Ft 50' DRIVEWAY EASEMENf__.rl HEREBY REVISED / A 5904 (3')� �i R'� Cf4WRa O U r tij � AQ Cj CA:x,vg Q k92 a i / 5v p9,799 D2- RA i rni 4� IRS BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT OF THE LANDS OF PETER J. & MICHELLE BROGGER AND SUSAN L. BARR AND KENNETH E. BARR Opequon Maglsterla/ Dlstrlct of Frederlck County,Vlrginlo Tax Mop Pcls. 83-(A)-19-C & 834A)-87 /00 50 0 /00 20CI SCALE /N FEET (r - 1001) 8131198 Page 2 of 2 I July 21, 1999 Peter and Michelle Brogger 152 Lusitano Lane Middletown, VA 22645 0 FILE COPY COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 540/665-5651 FAX: 540/678-0682 RE: VARIANCE #04-99 OF PETER AND MICHELLE; P.I.N. 83-A-19C Dear Mr. and Mrs. Brogger: This letter is to confirm action taken by the Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals at their meeting of July 20, 1999. Your Variance Application, #04-99, has been approved as requested for a 24.5-foot front yard setback variance for an existing single-family residence. If you have any questions regarding this action, please feel free to call this office. Sincerely, IN61&`_ Q__ Christopher M. Mohn Planner II CMM/ch cc: Frederick County Inspections Dept. O: W grndas\B7.AW PPR_DEN.LTR\&oggerAPP 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 ..; � 4 � 4 tots R F e w 1 .x nl�-a Ilk JL �r -4L M= .5p _'.�Y$ � N ��t`P$�. •-, t �cf F i. ,� � � .. A • YY yy 'S1M y +� ► � �qF � � � �� ,fit ,' � r .. .>�Y ,.. _�. ...ten.»... 0. r BZA REVIEW DATE: 07/20/99 VARIANCE #04-99 PETER AND MICHELLE BROGGER (Panache Catering) LOCATION: The property is located at 152 Lusitano Lane. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Back Creek PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 83-A-19C PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned RA (Rural Areas) District; Land use - Residential and Cottage Occupation with Conditional Use Permit (#008-97) ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & USE: Zoned RA (Rural Areas); Uses: Residential, Agricultural, and Vacant VARIANCE: 24.5-foot front yard setback variance for an existing dwelling. REASON FOR VARIANCE: See attached letter of justification. STAFF COMMENTS: Within rural preservation subdivisions in the RA (Rural Areas) Zoning District, the front yard setback from the right-of-way of an existing private access easement is 45 feet. The existing three-story dwelling was constructed in violation of this requirement as it is located 20.5 feet from the Lusitano Lane right-of-way; therefore, a 24.5-foot front yard setback variance has been requested. The as -built plat submitted with the application, in conjunction with an inspection of the site, confirmed that the subject dwelling is located within the required front yard setback area. It is evident that the precise location of the Lusitano Lane right-of-way was misjudged during construction of the dwelling. Ironically, this encroachment occurred despite the unique design ofthe structure, which was specifically employed to accommodate the narrow dimensions of the parcel's buildable area. The dwelling is presently occupied by the applicants. Following their discovery of the subject encroachment, the applicants informed staff of the issue and requested assistance regarding possible means of resolving the violation. Staff advised the applicants that every effort should be made to correct the problem through cooperative arrangements with Peter and Michelle Brogger Variance #04-99 July 13, 1999 adjoining property owners prior to pursuit of a variance. Specifically, it was noted that the building restriction line could be adjusted through either the relocation or termination of the private access easement. The viability of such alternatives was ultimately dependant upon the willingness of adjoining property owners to permit the necessary modifications. Following several months of negotiation, the applicants reported to staff that the agreements required to relocate the easement could not be secured. Staff subsequently acknowledged that it was appropriate to seek a variance, as the sole remaining means of resolution involved either relocation or demolition of the dwelling. STAFF CONCLUSION: The Code of Virginia, Section 15.2-2309(2)(a), states that no variance shall be authorized by the board unless it finds that strict application of the Ordinance would produce an undue hardship approaching confiscation. In this case, it is arguable that a hardship approaching confiscation does not exist as the subject property is capable of accommodating the footprint of the existing residential dwelling in conformance with all applicable setback standards. Indeed, the hardship identified by the applicants was self-imposed, the result of an unfortunate error. However, it is equally evident that the applicants have diligently pursued resolution of this matter through methods other than the requested variance. Staff is confident that the applicants' efforts to secure agreements with adjoining property owners regarding relocation of the easement were made in good faith. Due to the failure of such efforts and without the requested variance, the applicants will be faced with the prospect of attaining compliance through either the relocation or demolition of the dwelling. O:\Agendas\BZA\COMMENTS\Brogger. VAR N Marlboro CIO G Ca w E 2 . pts. Stephens art S <15 2 pts. 0 O SHEN N C6 4�VDOAH N 364-307 "o 14A ED ICY, CO. 16B 16C 16A 364-303 ch 'Oe/ 62;7 Rood C� . 1--loymaker Se e* 23 n ob'-so od co See 26 vJ ny oQ 'K VARIANCE #04-99 PIN: 83-A- 19C Panache Catering (All zoning is RA) Produced by Frederick County Planning and Development, 06-21-99 • Peter and Michelle Brogger 152 Lusitano Lane Middletown, VA 22645 540-869-2090 Frederick County Variance Board To Whom It May Concern: My husband and I are first time owners of anything. We were very excited about finally owning some property and building our home. We found what we thought was a beautiful location and also was in our price range. We worked very bard improving the property and then began to build our home. Unfortunately because we are new at this, we were naive when it came to dealing with sellers, lawyers and the difficulties that can arise in owning and building. When we first looked at the property and met with the sellers we were given a plat and told that we would own to the other side of the abandoned country road referred to as Old Minebank Rd. It was explained to us that an easement would run through this area to allow the sellers to reach their home. (See exhibit 1) We were also told we would share in the maintenance of this road. We did not have any concerns about it and felt that it was fair. Later, after meeting with our lawyer and real estate agent we were told we did not own the road but only half of it. The other half was supposed to be owned by Haymaker LC but that it did not limit our access to it. We accepted this information at closing on the land but we were surprised that all of the sudden things had changed right before closing. We were given a new plat and unfortunately our lawyer and real estate agent did not see the changes and report them to us. (See exhibit 2) We began to build our home and after carefully measuring from what was told to us was our property line we put in our foundation and began to build. Months later the bank requested a wall check survey and we confidently accepted this and hired Anderson and Assoc. to do the wall check. (See exhibit 4) We were shocked to find out that we had been misled and that the property line was in fact 20 feet closer to our home. At this point there was no turning back. We contacted Mike Ruddy at the planning office to try and figure out how to resolve this. He suggested we do everything possible to try and buy a small section from Haymaker LC to allow as to move our building restriction line and not have to try and get a variance. We did contact Haymaker LC and they agreed to sell us a small section, which would have solved this problem. We paid a new lawyer (.loan Fine), to draw up the papers for this transaction at quite a large expense. We also had a new survey done to show Haymaker LC how little property we were asking for. This was another large expense. After the papers were ready to be signed the Haymaker LC changed their minds and would not sign. We also tried to negotiate with them for just moving the easement but they had decided at this point that they did not want to be involved in our problem. The Marlboro Land Trust of course had no problems with this but they were not the people who we needed to sign. The Marlboro Land Trust again told to us that we did in fact own to the middle of the road and they produced some documents to show that the road was in fact divided between us and Haymaker Le. (See exhibit 3) When we spoke again with the surveyor and our lawyer we were told perhaps there had been an error in the past from another surveyor or that perhaps the road had moved after so- many years. We then requested a meeting with the Marlboro Land Trust. We were told they would meet with us to discuss this problem. But just moments before it was scheduled to- begin, it was cancelled by them- and they refused to discuss- either moving the easement at our expense or terminating it completely as was a suggestion made by the planning and zoning commission. Peter and I walked the road and noticed that there were large virgin trees lining the road so we felt it couldn't have moved very much. I invite you to please come look and see if you agree. We have tried every means possible to try and correct this mistake but we have had no luck. We have spent a lot of money trying to resolve this in any way possible but to no avail. Our home is now built and we are living in it. We love our home and feel great about finally having something that is ours that we can take care of and love. But this problem with the building restriction line hangs over our heads and keeps us up at night worrying about our next step. We tried to avoid asking for a variance at all costs but it was not to be. So it is with deep regret that I must ask you to help US. We realize now that we were too ignorant of the variables of real estate to be smart about our purchase and building. We have to accept responsibility even though we were misled down so many paths. I know that we are asking for something that is difficult for the county but we are also hoping that you will have some mercy upon us and grant us this variance. We never intentionally tried to do anything wrong. We were absolute in efforts to meet all the county requirements and felt that we had, until we were surprised to find that we had been misled and so all these errors fall on our backs. I know that you will consider all the factsand I hope that we can find a way to keep our home. We are devastated at the possibilities and do not know which way to turn. Please help us keep our home. We have worked so hard on it and basically built it ourselves to save money and so we could make sure we had a beautiful well- built place to live. f don't know what other choices we have but to throw ourselves on your mercy and hope for the best. Thank you in advance for your -kind consideration. Very Sincerely, 11 � I BKl 8PSh3� v�� G�� 05�2a.° .. �9 � Oo b1. CO Crflrcr�r.dufrp- 'z G� i A p\01 o�\,C) ,'O ep 3�' Kn fe '30 tr} LrrT ��.i� � I l w 01 r 0. I cum d o I / o. o, (o nD CO IrV 0) / to (u b^n M YIC) r77 � - Q v jr Ai Q Qj 1 S tN 3 0 1 Co WeI.L$ o �47 L44 ¢ { Y,4 r ? 03, 3z3 38 z ri �o� r: U l ' 202 20. 9g �0 �°` P qV ° MARGARET E. SC0 t ; 169 J 41 il b SUIi� �. U � � -;,a pl'OpO;eu prl�a-� Or'1%P•��.9:, i5 not. OLI.1t . N v CCD:)p w;ji not oe maintained c. nc� vl al^l� U /lb _ I ;pe_lsl[at.ons 01 ?n0 ?;e lmr�r e�eme,i1 ti r 7 u- jil vepar. tment of Tr ancprn i.a; l7n er rre0o lr_i; COLlniv. ti• ii O 4' ana maintenance of said ViveWdY �n311 OB the =rija 1'eSpss via :n•• v : pe owners of the jots which are provide'] with ?cc2cs vl?. tn� /r o ti l PPP(1 lncili510n into Vti .!�� m p to drlvewaY. Said drl�ewav wiii not be [0nsid_ ✓��? �, h state secondary sr=_tem unu i they meet e the apPiicable fl [nn5'ruCt10' 56anCd�75 0' vlrQlni3 VePar'tment Ot II'?nip01'tatl7"l. ?h0 Cost 0; b'ra�raira _?id ..rivewa`% t.0 .3r[eptab;o standards sh?ii " Q Gr' ;nE •ill'Olnlc L'epartment of TI'an'pOr'}3t10n no- 1000 not Qe borne LjCAI _ 'Aunt �OD'PIV � too 200 DATE: Nov • Z' t" ¢ SC CTFPF- SCALE: 1'' = tOO G3 o � K'f 'Z o F 'T Fx�Al i)- ' a. (— Wb l�rP°I 8L2 LD 00 � Q � 4-9 u / Ill All , 8 h 1 lk N 2Y'-. LL 3 'Ic Kod16 o tJ AND 7 mCr✓t a 1 KT. <v27 SCOTT SURVEYS DATE: �uu-,' SCALE: l "= Ind STEPHENS CITY, VIRGINIA 22655 :FD U-� Rt. 6z7 C/a av Rd. / V N/F E.Y. MARY ROSE o� AND BEVERLY T. ROBINSON Tox flop 83-A49 &c7 U ResldeMlol RA a C 3� i, ZCO O � CL off. F 0 z t F o �ti U P9.799 .5 as rf pg.52GRA a LOT 1 2.1273 Acres Reserve Areo Oroln fled / 4� / S z Easement a a05 � \Grv. Cz Ent. z a 3g554j BRC �. LTH U LEON E. TREUTLE o. 20 i BRL • Bulldlrp Restrldlon Une IRF IRF • Iron Rod Found IRF 58C 16w -Prop" Uoe 90Ba Lot Une with some Owner SIC I. LEON E.TREUTLE, A DULY CERTIFIED LAND SURVEYOR IN THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA• WALL CHECK SURVEY DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS LAND O �, STANDS IN THE NAME OF PETER J.AND MICHELLE BROG R, FOUND AMONGST THE THE LANDS OF LAND RECOR F RICK OUNTY. PETER J. & MICHELLE BROGGER VIRGINIA —L - 8 DB.886 Pg.671 NOTES: 8131198 I. EASEMENTS OTHER THAN THOSE Opequon Moglsterlol Dlstrlct SHOWN HEREON MAY EXIST. of Frederick County.Vlrglnlo 2. NO TITLE REPORT FURNISHED. Tax Mop No. 83-A-I9-C l00 50 0 /00 200 �nn ALANDERSON & ASSOCIATES 7722 MIDDLETONN.VIRG/NIA 22645 SCALE IN FEET Phone : (540) 869-250I (P - 50') Fox : (540 869-2625 U m ti J. O (10 3 " , JOHN H . DUNN , ia. to ``w 6 [ of WILLIAM H. MCCOY, III j�/00� NS6.49'£ 9 59.46 ACx�S ,- / u v O J oz t v v 8 m 0 BOOK '364 FACE M o .1OO'z001 /00' o , JOO � •60O' SCALE /N FEET 10 --_ ROAD lVO. 627 N 6,3 ' S6 'E —'T 6• OPT Q` 6/ ? S55'/7'W �-- �-D EO oLD M//V£BAIVKr ROAD AB • 0 Page I of 5 APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE IN THE COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA RE 11 V E D JUN1.61999 MUST BE TYPED OR FILLED OUT IN INK - PLEASE PRINT 1. The applicant is the owner other . (Check one) 2. APPLICANT: NAME :i Zz E �t�(i C�►e [ Ic.��'O �PQ Q.i' ADDRESS IQ L.usi4akio Lo-h-e- M dd " wpi , VA ZZU4 S' OCCUPANT: (if different) NAME: ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: 54()161-'.1o9Cp TELEPHONE: 3. The property is located at (give exact directions and include State Route numbers): Fy'orn Aidd(a+Ow" or+ rz+.( ( 1•�nc Sa('L+h : `Tdrn w.csf oV40 4. �-1-. 62-7 LCIn&PO U) ao ++ Y • ,'Z nil s ID 1e 41 o n LUST t"a )iA5 i Passf %r+es i l�r o down L" S + ` A--,* Lari t.. -i-d ,r ✓ s f Cj r i ►%C Way ax% d h a u.s e, O rn L i The property of exact) on occe-ss -eas-emtecl-br" G2-7 has feet feet and consists of cp. /,,73 acres. and a depth (please be 5. The property is owned by "k+w ay,ci ►ti(,j cke(te-Broqux-- as evidenced by deed from 144"1 jpdrn L,a,,ot Tr"A+ recorded (previous owner) in deed book no. SSG on page Q(C-1 j of the deed books of the Clerk of the Court for Frederick County. Attach a copy of the deed. Page 2 of 5 JUN 1 1999 6. Magisterial District: r-zac . Cr2.C.k. DEPT,OFPLANNING/DEVEinPMFNT 7. 14-Digit Property Identification No.: 93 -A - 19 G 8. The existing zoning of the property is: 9. The existing use of the property is: 1eside-n4;& 1 -- bus►na,55 10. Adjoining Property: �� C �'� P• /^1USE ZONING �'t North ri C - r East o d e d Okwtt South d&LI;ha;e, R A West ,A Q r i cu-Aturrc. Q A 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.") ,� o? �f,S ►: Vd.ri li.n << toy-yC."t card 541- bay.. ,fi n r l) c use. +k + is ) D tamc d o? D. 6- 4tg-�t row 4h e. -e- d q.Q-- o k +lt,e. ri c►6t o k Wa,c, / A tt SS' ta,semen t'. 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 13. Additional comments, if any page 3 of 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 people will be notifd by mail of this application: to O• gleX NAME �Q(' (baro Gi �r u 5�- Address I a;L U' 1Lam e_ , WAdd 4 �,�e-�t✓t ;,(Zob�son� E y ,/Nadi %2aYe-) %r`uj1,Iee-S I Va,- o1o26Lir Property ID# A — CCC NAME �LtSdt,r►�dx� i�at� rr4jw- LG Address 9 11 0Y-6A&rd A jo e . , W 111 rJu s J�e-e ID# — A — 8 % Property I'W#/' �l 14--r.0 i 11 "tip NAME Address Property ID# NAME Address Property ID# NAME Address Property ID# _ NAME Address Property ID# NAME Address Property ID# NAME Address Property ID# NAME Address Property ID# NAME Address Property 1139 Page 4 of 5 15. Provide a sketch of the property (you may use this page). Show proposed and/or existing structures on the property, including measurements to all property lines and to the nearest structure(s) on adjoining properties. Please include any other exhibits, drawings or photographs with this application. C�.r► G� /.�.,� �� Ott' �e i-s Page 5 of 5 AGREEMENT VARIANCE #04--q9 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 SIGNATURE OF OWNER (if other than applicant) -OFFICE USE ONLY- DATE BZA PUBLIC HEARING OF ACTION: - DATE- _ APPROVAL SIGNED: V i C -e C �1 i6ZACHAIRMAN DENIAL DATE: r. Peter and Michelle Brogger 152 Lusitano Lane Middletown, VA 22645 540-869-2090 Frederick County Variance Board To Whom It May Concern: My husband and I are first time owners of anything. We were very excited about finally owning some property and building our home. We found what we thought was a beautiful location and also was in our price range. We worked very hard improving the property and then began to build our home. Unfortunately because we are new at this, we were naive when it came to dealing with sellers, lawyers and the difficulties that can arise in owning and building. When we first looked at the property and met with the sellers we were given a plat and told that we would own to the other side of the abandoned country road referred to as Old Minebank Rd. It was explained to us that an easement would run through this area to allow the sellers to -reach their home. (See exhibit 1) We were also told we would share in the maintenance of this road. We did not have any concerns about it and felt that it was fair. Later, after meeting with our lawyer and real estate agent we were told we did not own the road but only half of it. The other half was supposed to be owned by Haymaker LC but that it did not limit our access to it. We accepted this information at closing on the land but we were surprised that all of the sudden things had changed right before closing. We were given a new plat and unfortunately our lawyer and real estate agent did not see the changes and report them to us. (See exhibit 2) We began to build our home and after carefully measuring from what was told to us was our property line we put in our foundation and began to build. Months later the bank requested a wall check survey and we confidently accepted this and hired Anderson and Assoc. to do the wall check. (See exhibit 4) We were shocked to find out that we had been misled and that the property line was in fact 20 feet closer to our home. At this point there was no turning back. We contacted Mike Ruddy at the planning office to try and figure out how to resolve this. He suggested we do everything possible to try and buy a small section from Haymaker LC to allow us to move our building restriction line and not have to try and get a variance. "We did contact Haymaker LC and they agreed to sell us a 0 small section, which would have solved this problem. We paid a new lawyer (Joan Fine), to draw up the papers for this transaction at quite a large expense. We also had a new survey done to show Haymaker LC how little property we were asking for. This was another large expense. After the papers were ready to be signed the Haymaker LC changed their minds and would not sign. We also tried to negotiate with them for just moving the easement but they had decided at this point that they did not want to be involved in our problem. The Marlboro Land Trust of course had no problems with this but they were not the people who we needed to sign. The Marlboro Land Trust again told to us that we did in fact own to the middle of the road and they produced some documents to show that the road was in fact divided between us and Haymaker Le. (See exhibit 3) When we spoke again with the surveyor and our lawyer we were told perhaps there had been an error in the past from another surveyor or that perhaps the road had moved after so many years. We then requested a meeting with the Marlboro Land Trust. We were told they would meet with us to discuss this problem. But just moments before it was scheduled -to -begin, it was cancelled by them. and they refused- to discuss -either moving the easement at our expense or terminating it completely as was a suggestion made by the planning and zoning commission. Peter and I walked the road and noticed that there were large virgin trees lining the road so we felt it couldn't have moved very much. I invite you to please come look and see if you agree. We have tried every means possible to try and correct this mistake but we have had no luck. We have spent a lot of money trying to resolve this in any way possible but to no avail. Our home is now built and we are living in it. We love our home and feel great about finally having something that is ours that we can take care of and love. But this problem with the building restriction line hangs over our heads and keeps us up at night worrying about our next step. We tried to avoid asking for a variance at all costs but it was not to be. So it is with deep regret that I must ask you to help US. We realize now that we were too ignorant of the variables of real estate to be smart about our purchase and building. We have to accept responsibility even though we were misled down so many paths. I know that we are asking for something that is difficult for the county but we are also hoping that you will have some mercy upon us and grant us this variance. We never intentionally tried to do anything wrong. We were absolute in efforts to meet all the county requirements and felt that we had, until we were surprised -to find that we had been misled and so all these errors fall on our backs. I know that you will consider all the facts and I hope that we can find a way to keep our home. We are devastated at the possibilities and do not know which way to turn. Please help us keep our home. We have worked so hard on it. and .basically built it ourselves to save money and so we could make sure we had a beautiful well- built place to live. I don't know what other choices we have but to throw ourselves on your mercy and hope for the best. Thank you in advance for your kind consideration. Very Sincerely, /t 1 • COMMONWEALTH OPIRGINIA OFFICIAL RECEIPT FREDERICK CIRCUIT COURT DEED RECEIPT DATE: 08i28/97 TIME: 09:54:27 ACCOUNT: 069CLR9?0007376 RECEIPT: 97100001i534 CASHIER: KDS REG: WN17 TYPE: DBS PAYMENT: FULL PAYMENT INSTRUMENT : 97000?376 BOOK: 886 PAGE: 671 RECORDED: 08/28/57 AT 09:54 GRANTOR: ROSE, E Y MARY EX: N LOP: CD GRANTEE: PRO68ER. PETER J EX: N PCT: 100% AND ADDRESS : 180 HILANDALE LANE WINCHESTER. VIRGINIA RECEIVED OF : DOUGLAS C ARTHUR DATE OF DEED: 08/28/97 CHECK $198.00 DESCRIPTION 1: OP DIST 2: LOT 1. 2.1273 ACRES CONSIDERATION: 15.000.00 ASSUKE/VAL: ,00 HAP: o CODE DESCRIPTION PAID CODE DESCRIPTION PAID u2 301 DEEDS 14,00 145 VSLF 1.00 039 DEEDS AND CONTRACTS 52.50 030 DEEDS OF CONVEYANCE 17.50 213 '"COUNTY SRANTEE TAX 17.50 212 TRANSFER FffE i.00 220 GRANTOR TAX 17.50 106 TECHNOLOGY FUND FEE 3.00 TENDERED 1?8.00 DC- 18(3/97) AMOUNT PAID: 124.00 CHA#Gf AMT 74 . CV. CLERK OF COURT: REEECCA P. HOGAN • • BK886PGO67I D E E D THIS DEED is made and entered into this 26th day of August, 1997, by and between E. Y. MARY ROSE and BEVERLY T. ROBISON, TRUSTEES FOR THE MARLBORO LAND TRUST, a Virginia Land Trust, Grantors, herein called Grantors, and PETER J. BROGGER and MICHELLE BROGGER, husband an4 wife, 180 Hilandale Lane, Winchester, Virginia 22602, Grantees, herein called Grantees. WITNESSETH: That for and in consideration of the sum of TEN DOLLARS ($10.00) cash in hand paid to the Grantors and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowl- edged, the said Grantors do hereby grant, bargain, sell and convey with General Warranty and English Covenants of Title unto the said Grantees as Tenants by the Entireties and not as Tenants in Common with the Express Right of Survivorship as at Common Law, all that certain lot or parcel of real estate, together with all improve- ments thereon, situate, lying and being approximately five miles west of Middletown in Opequon Magisterial District, Frederick County, Virginia, and being described as Lot 1 containing 2.1273 acres, more or less, as shown on that certain plat prepared by Scott Surveys, dated November 2, 1994, and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Frederick County, Virginia, in Deed Book 834, Page 0528. Said real estate is described with more particularity on that certain plat of survey made by Margaret E. 1 0 HI 1111117? Scott, Land Surveyor, dated July 5, 1997, attached hereto, recorded herewith and made a part hereof. The aforesaid real estate is a portion of the real estate conveyed to the Grantors herein from E. Y. Mary Rose, Unmarried, by deed dated December 19, 1992, and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Frederick County, Virginia, in Deed Book 789, Page 1373. This conveyance is made together with that certain fifty (50) foot right of way and easement which provides a means of ingress and egress to and from the real estate herein conveyed and State Route 627 (Chapel Road). Said right of way and easement being described with more particularity on the aforesaid plats of survey and shown thereon as "50' Private Driveway Esmt.", and being further described in that certain Deed of Easement dated May 15, 1996, recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 859, Page 1792. The aforesaid real estate is subject to and further reference is made to that certain Deed of Easement and Maintenance Agreement dated May 15, 1996, recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 859, Page 1796, which provides for the maintenance of said easement Said right of way and easement shall inure to the benefit of the parties hereto, their heirs, successors and assigns. This conveyance is further made together with that cer- tain drainfield easement which provides for the construction, operation and maintenance of a septic drainfield in an area 2 0 6K88A- 0573 located on other real estate owned by the Grantors herein and designated as "Residue Lot" on the aforesaid plats of survey, all as set forth with more particularity in that certain Drainfield Easement dated May 15, 1996, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 859, Page 1788. This conveyance is made together with and subject to all other easements, rights of way, reservations and restrictions of record affecting the aforesaid real estate and is specifically subject to the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restric- tions dated May 15, 1996, recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 859, Page 1782. Reference is hereby made to the aforesaid plats, deed, easements, and records for a more complete description and further derivation of title. WITNESS the following signatures and seals: MARLBORO LAND TRUST, A Virginia Land Tru By: � .(,� (SEAL) E. Y/' ARY ROSE, Trustee By ' ��.l..a�-I.�l�t� (SEAL) BE ERLY ,J ROBISON, Trustee 3 n LJ • STATE OF VIRGINIA SK836`60674 COUNTY OF SHENANDOAH, To--4it: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged ZZfore me this o` �11-N day of A 1-T 1997, by E. Y. Mary Rose anu Beverly T. Pobiscn, 'rustees of the Marlboro Land Trust, a Virginia Land Trust. Notary Public My commission expires: p 4 • I �D/ `tr't� POD 8 �PF.. r� Iv ry 000!'1,10675 00 � o� A / z /c, ti 2.121 S AL o �� 0 M? W\' I , C� - � GJ pay,•_ _ . {'` n a o or— d t\ wN ge Lo E LA wi D D i= ft11 �1Cl�C 'f. fzod16c) t.l AN D IL u I r 1z-f . Co 2 7 SCOTT SURVEYS DATE: -i Zs 1��-7 SCALE: STEPHENS CITY, VIRGINIA 22655 VIRGINW FAEDEfCC K COIP" Wt Thi Instrument qoz;al u to me on the �= of and withcertN{cateeW ttwow arummd was admkted to by Sea SR. -= o1 5�and 5a.1-Ml have Dean paidk it asoomabia. cWk i COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 5401665-5651 FAX: 540/ 678-0682 July 6, 1999 TO: THE APPLICANTS) AND/OR ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER(S) RE: VARIANCE APPLICATION #04-99 OF PANACHE CATERING On behalf of the Frederick County Board of Zoning Appeals, you are hereby notified of a public hearing being held on Tuesday, July 20, 1999, at 3:25 p.m., in the board room of the Frederick County Administration Building at 107 N. Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia. This hearing is to consider Variance #04-99, Panache Catering, submitted by Peter and Michelle Brogger, for a 24.5' front yard setback variance for an existing residence. The property is located 152 Lusitano Lane, and is identified with Property Identification Number 83-A-19C in the Back Creek Magisterial District. Any interested parties having questions or wishing to speak may attend this meeting. A copy of the application will be available for review at the Handley Library approximately one week prior to the meeting, or at the Department of Planning and Development located at 107 North Kent Street in Winchester, Virginia. Sincerely, (74��Q- Christopher M. Mohn Planner II CMM/ch O:\Agendas\BZA\ADJOINE R\Panache.var 1 107 North Kent Street • Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000 This is to certify that the attached correspondence was mailed to the following on ,3 tf L '7 / 79 from the Department of Planning and Development, Frederick County, Vir inia: Peter & Michelle Brogger 152 Lusitano Lane Middletown., VA 22645 P.I.N. 83-A-19 Beverly T. Robison & E.Y. Mary Rose, Trustees P.O. Box 956 Stephens City, VA 22655 --- - P.I.N. 83-A-87 Haymaker L.L.C. c/o Susan Barr 911 Orchard Avenue Winchester, VA 22601 P.I.N. 83-A-17 Hites Chapel 150 Chapel Lane Stephens City, VA 22655 Chrito her M. Mohn, Planner H Frederick Co. Planning Dept. STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF FREDERICK a Notary Public in and for the State and County aforesaid, do hereby certify that Christopher M. Mohn, Planner II, for the Department of Planning and Development, whose name is signed to the foregoing, dated 1 •9 1 qq has personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same in my State and County aforesaid. Given under my hand this qjh day of3(jj(q `7 My commission expires on IT-bmaq) I'-- ARY PUBLIC 0 i Date qCIq 001263 Received Fro UJV-\ t Address ars $" Fo t 2 (�j o Y = g AM r [>F IL AGGOUNT CASH w AM] PAID CHEC � UCE DUEJ MONEY ORDER By �x/n COUNTY of FREDERICK �N U.S. POSTAGE «� Department of Planning & Development " 107 North Kent Street " JR06'93 - . Winchester, Virginia 22601 H METER 702338 r v P.I.N.83-A-17 M z Hites Chapel f 150 Chapels 9.00L a t � m Stephens City, VA 22655 � m � C NIXIE 2030 1 20 07/08/99 M Z 4 y RETURN TO SENDER NO SUCH STREET UNABLE TO FORWARD _��,��41..�ii,