HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA198900037 Action Letter 1989-06-14 f.
'
v"�
J� 1.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Zoning
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville. Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5875
June 14 , 1989
Elwood S. & Anna C. Dillon
2803 Brookmere Road
Charlottesville, VA 22903
Re: Board of Zoning Appeals Action
VA-89-37, Tax Map 45C, Parcel 01-B13
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Dillon:
This letter is to inform you that on June 13 , 1989 , during
the regular meeting of the Albemarle County Board of Zoning
Appeals, your application for VA-89-37 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,
Ctrckt;<,hr),P434, 1,_
Amelia M. Patterson
Zoning Administrator
AMP/st
cc: VA-89-37
STAFF REPORT - VA-89-37
OWNER/APPLICANT: Elwood S. and Anna C. Dillon
TAX MAP/PARCEL: 45C/01-B13
ZONING: R-2 Residential
LOCATION: The west side of Brookmere Road, south of
the intersection with Woodbrook Drive. It
is within Woodbrook at 2803 Brookmere Road.
REQUEST: The applicant seeks a variance from Section
14 . 3 of the Albemarle County Zoning
Ordinance, which states:
"14 . 3 Area and Bulk Regulations
Yards, minimum
Side 10 feet . . . . "
The applicant proposes to construct a single-car carport addition
to the north side of the dwelling and seeks a reduction of the
side yard measurement from the minimum requirement of ten (10)
feet to four (4) feet. The carport will be approximately 14 feet
wide with a solid brick side wall. The carport roof will be 1 -
1. 5 feet below the house roofline.
A door stoop projects approximately 3 feet into the existing
drive. The adjacent owner has claimed no objection.
RECOMMENDATION:
If it were detached from the dwelling and 12 ft. wide, the carport
would be an accessory structure and would not require a variance.
(Section 4 . 11. 2 . 1 states "accessory structures or portions thereof
may be erected no closer than six (6) feet to adjacent lot lines) .
It is the applicant's opinion this alternative is not
aesthetically pleasing.
Use of the alternate side of the house is somewhat constrained,
but not exceptionally so. The other side is slightly sloping and
grown with mature trees. In addition, the driveway would need
relocation.
The application should be denied for cause:
1) The applicant has not provided evidence that a strict
application of the ordinance would produce a clearly
demonstrable hardship approaching confiscation as
distinguished from a special privilege or convenience.
Staff Report - VA-89-37
Owner: Elwood S. and Anna C. Dillon
Page 2
2) The applicant has not demonstrated that the perceived
hardship is unique to his property in contradistinction
to other properties in the same zoning district and
general vicinity. This lot is typical in shape and size
to others in Woodbrook.
3) The applicant has not provided evidence that the character
of the district will not be changed by the granting of the
variance.