HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA198900071 Action Letter 1989-09-13 ®ii it l;7
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Zoning
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5875
September 13 , 1989
Gregory or Elizabeth Davis
Rt. 7, Box 311
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Re: Board of Zoning Appeals Action
VA-89-71 - Tax Map 62 , Parcel 32D
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Davis:
This letter is to inform you that on September 12, 1989, during
the regular meeting of the Albemarle County Board of Zoning
Appeals, your application for VA-89-71 was approved as submitted.
This variance approval allows relief from Section 10.4 of the
Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance to reduce the required side yard
setback for a building addition to be fourteen (14) feet from the
side property line, a variance of eleven (11) feet.
If you have any questions, please contact our office.
Sincerely,
Ouv-i\kt 61/4. ("n R4,446-0,
Amelia M. Patterson
Zoning Administrator
AMP/st
cc: Inspections Dept.
VA-89-71
Staff Person: Amelia Patterson
Public Hearing: September 12, 1989
STAFF REPORT - VA 89-71
OWNER/APPLICANT: Greg Davis
TAX MAP/PARCEL: 62/32D
ZONING: RA, Rural Areas
ACREAGE: 2 . 004 acres
LOCATION: In the southwest quadrant of the intersection
of Rt. 816 and Key West Drive, off the west
side of Rt. 20 North
REQUEST:
The applicant requests relief from Section 10.4 of the Albemarle
County Zoning Ordinance, which states:
"Area and Bulk Regulations . . .
Yards, minimum . . . side 25 feet . . . "
The applicant proposes a building addition (25 X 16 feet) and
requests a side yard setback reduction from twenty-five (25) to
fourteen (14) feet, a reduction of eleven (11) feet.
The front yard setback of thirty (30) feet (from a previous Zoning
Ordinance) will be met. This subdivision was approved in 1973 .
This "grandfathered" setback is permitted pursuant to Section
6. 5. 2, which states in part, " . . . in the case of any subdivision
approved . . . after December 22 , 1969, and prior to the adoption
of this ordinance and which was of record at the time of the
adoption hereof, the rear, side and front yard and setback
regulation of the Zoning Ordinance in effect at the time of such
approval shall apply . . . "
RECOMMENDATION
Staff concurs that the proposed addition is in the most practical
location. Addition to the rear is complicated by the location of
an above-grade screened porch and addition to the other side is
in the area of the septic tank and field. It is the staff's
opinion that strict application of the ordinance would produce
undue hardship. The side property line has grown in mature trees,
which are primarily evergreen.
However, in staff's opinion the other two criteria are not met.
Staff Report - VA-89-71
Greg Davis
Page 2
Staff recommends denial for cause:
1. 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.
2 . The applicant has not provided evidence that the
authorization of such variance will not be of substantial
detriment to adjacent property and that the character of
the district will not be changed by the granting of the
variance.