HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA198900028 Action Letter 1989-04-26 041
JA tier-
�II2ciN��'
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Zoning
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5875
April 26, 1989
Concept Builders
c/o Jeff Smith
1929 Commonwealth Drive
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Re: Board of Zoning Appeals Action
VA-89-28, Tax Map 46, Parcel 29E (part of)
Dear Mr. Smith:
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-89-28 was approved.
This variance approval allows relief from Section 15. 3 of
the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance to reduce the side
yard setback from the minimum required measurement of ten
(10) feet to eight and five-tenths (8 . 5) feet to allow
construction of a single-family dwelling.
If you have any questions, please contact our office.
Sincerely,
GILAZ
An rew D. Evans
D puty Zoning Administrator
ADE/st
cc: Inspections Dept.
VA-89-28
STAFF REPORT - VA-89-28
APPLICANT: Concept Builders
TAX MAP/PARCEL: 46/29E
ZONING: R-4 (Residential)
LOCATION: Located on Cove Lane (3010) , within the
Forrest Lakes Subdivision, off Rt 29 North
The applicant is requesting relief from Section 15. 3 of the
Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, which states:
"15. 3 AREA AND BULK REGULATIONS (Amended 3-18-81)
Yards, minimum:
Front 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet
Side 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet
Rear 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet
Minimum side yards shall be reduced to not less
than ten (10) feet in accordance with Section 4 . 11. 3. "
(Amended 1-1-83)
The applicant is seeking a reduction of the ten (10) foot side
yard setback requirement, to locate the residence at eight and
five-tenths (8 . 5) feet from the side property line, a variance of
one and five-tenths (1. 5) feet.
A new residence was constructed on Lot 26, located on Cove Lane,
in the Cove Pointe section of Forrest Lakes Subdivision.
It appears from what information that was passed on to the Zoning
office that an error was made in locating the house on the lot in
question. Offset points were used, and by doing so the contractor
located the structure in conflict with the required side setback
requirement.
The following are comments offered to the Board of Zoning Appeals
in consideration of the requested application:
A) If the strict application of the ordinance were applied,
then a hardship would be imposed upon the applicant
even though it was self created. You already have a
structure, which a main portion projects over the required
setback line. Practical difficulties are involved that
make the variance option a viable solution.
B) The subdivision development has not experienced similar
occurrences as this application. The staff can not make
any statement to the effect that such a hardship is not
shared by other properties in both the same vicinity and
district.
STAFF REPORT - VA-89-28
Concept Builders
Page 2
C) It is difficult to speak to whether or not the granting of
this request will be of detriment to the adjacent property
or that the character of the district will be changed.
Certainly the granting of the variance would have some
effect on the adjacent property, due to the reduction
of space that provides light and air as per Section 2 . 1. 5
of the ordinance.