HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA198900022 Action Letter 1989-04-26 'Zt
�U'ALN, �,,•
1
J f.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Zoning
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5875
April 26, 1989
Kay P. Steigman
120 Blithe Court
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Re: Board of Zoning Appeals Action
VA-89-22 , Tax Map 61W2 , Parcel 01-P4
Dear Ms. Steigman:
This letter is to inform you that on April 25, 1989 , during
the regular meeting of the Albemarle County Board of Zoning
Appeals, your application for VA-89-22 was denied.
Anyone aggrieved by a decision made by the Board can appeal
the decision to the Circuit Court of Albemarle County within
thirty days of the decision.
If you have any questions, please contact our office.
Sincerely,
////ILJ).
A •rew D. Evans
•-puty Zoning Administrator
ADE/st
cc: VA-89-22
Inspections Department
STAFF REPORT - VA-89-22
APPLICANT: Kay P. Steigman
TAX MAP/PARCEL: 61W(2) -01-P4
ZONING: R-10 (Residential)
LOCATION: Located in Birnam Wood Subdivision, at
'Zr0 Blithe Court
The applicant requests relief from Section 4 . 11. 2 . 1 of the
Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, which states:
"4 . 11. 2 . 1 ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
If no utility or drainage easements or other
easements are adversely affected, accessory
structures or portions thereof may be erected
no closer than six (6) feet to adjacent lot lines
in the case of detached structures, or to a common
wall in the case of attached structures; provided
further that no such structure shall be located
within any yard required by Section 4 . 6. 3 . "
(Addition 3-18-81) (Amended 1-1-83)
The applicant is asking relief from the required six (6) foot
setback to have a desk to be located abutting the property line
with zero (0) setback, a variance of six (6) feet.
A request is being made by the applicant to leave in place an
already built deck, located in the rear lot portion of the
property. The deck was constructed with the knowledge that if it
were constructed "as built" , it would be in conflict with the
setback requirements.
It is not evident that a deck could not have been constructed
that, both meet the setback requirements and afforded the best use
of the rear yard area.
The following comments are offered to the Board of Zoning Appeals
in consideration of the requested application.
A) If it is found that the special conditions and circumstances
are the result of actions by the applicant, and if the
granting of a variance will confer on the applicant
any special privilege, then there cannot be shown an undue
hardship.
STAFF REPORT - VA-89-22
Kay P. Steigman
Page 2
B) The hardship must not be shared by other properties in the
same vicinity or zoning district. Most of the adjacent
properties share similar size yards. The topography of
some adjacent properties do vary. In this specific
situation there is an adjacent property that is presently
experiencing a "like" request for relief from a setback
of two (2) feet from the property line.
C) Again, no basis has been established that the variance
will be of detriment to the adjacent property or that
the character of the district will not be changed by the
granting of the variance.