HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA198900068 Action Letter 1989-08-16 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Zoning
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5875
August 16, 1989
Alan Roecks
118 Blithe Court
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Re: Board of Zoning Appeals Action
VA-89-68, Tax Map 61W2 , Parcel 01-P5
Dear Mr. Roecks:
This letter is to inform you that on August 15, 1989, during
the regular meeting of the Albemarle County Board of Zoning
Appeals, your application for VA-89-68 was approved.
This variance approval allows relief from Sections 4 . 11. 2 . 1 and
17 . 3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance to allow a deck
(existing) to be located three (3) feet from the rear property
line, a variance of three (3) feet from the required six (6) foot
setback.
If you have any questions, please contact our office.
Sincerely,
OkrN2AjO., N,V0Aele —
Amelia M. Patterson
Zoning Administrator
AMP/st
cc: VA-89-68
Inspections Department
STAFF REPORT - VA-89-68
APPLICANT: Alan Roecks
TAX MAP/PARCEL: 61W(2)/01-P5
ZONING: R-10, Residential
LOCATION: Located off the east side of Rio Road west, in
Birnam Wood at 118 Blithe Court
REQUEST:
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 deck to be located abutting the rear property
line with a three (3) foot setback, a variance of three (3) feet.
This request is for an existing deck to become compliant with the
zoning setback requirements. These residences are attached
townhouse/condominium units with enclosed privacy fences.
RELEVANT HISTORY:
This variance request has not been previously heard by the Board
of Zoning Appeals. However, the properties to the east have
pursued variances for existing decks which extend into the rear
yards.
VA-89-15 James and Jennifer Rice was approved by the Board of
Zoning Appeals on July 11, 1989 after rehearing a prior decision
for denial on April 25th.
VA-89-22 Kay P. Steigman was denied on April 25th, and has not
refiled.
Staff Report - VA-89-68
Alan Roecks
Page 2
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial for cause:
1. The applicant has not shown that the strict application
of this ordinance would produce undue hardship;
2 . The applicant has not provided evidence that such hardship is
not shared generally by other properties in the same zoning
district and the same vicinity;
3 . The applicant has not shown that the authorization of such
variance will not be of substantal detriment to adjacent
property and that the character of the district will not be
changed by the granting of the variance.
STAFF REPORT - VA-89-15
APPLICANT: James & Jennifer Rice
TAX MAP/PARCEL: 61W(2) -01/P3
ZONING: R-10 (Residential)
LOCATION: Located in Birnam Wood Subdivision on Blithe
Court
The applicant seeks 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)
4 . 6. 3 LOTS, YARDS ADJACENT TO STREET"
The applicant requests relief from the required six (6) foot
setback to locate a deck two (2) feet from the property line, a
variance of four (4) feet.
Via this proposed application, the applicant seeks approval for an
already constructed deck within the rear yard area.
The residences are attached townhouse/condominium type units with
enclosed privacy fences.
The following comments are offered to the Board of Zoning
Appeals in consideration of the requested application.
A) A self imposed hardship is not customarily viewed as an
undue hardship. Evidence has not been made available that
provides a basis that the strict application would
effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict the use
of the property.
B) You must find that a hardship is not shared by other
properties in the same vicinity or zoning district.
In general most of the adjacent properties have similar
size yards with the exception of the "end" housing
units, and comparable topography exists on the properties.
r
Staff Report - VA-89-15
James & Jennifer Rice
Page 2
No basis has been established that demonstrated that the
variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent
property or that the character of the district will not be
changed by the granting of the variance. Other cases can not
be a basis for the granting of a variance if it does not
provide that it is in harmony and in keeping with the spirit
and purpose of the ordinance.
ua
STAFF REPORT - VA-89-22
APPLICANT: Kay P. Steigman
TAX MAP/PARCEL: 61W(2) -01-P4
ZONING: R-10 (Residential)
LOCATION: Loc ted in Birnam Wood Subdivision, at
12(0Blithe 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.