HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA198900094 Action Letter 1989-11-16 CJ/3�2d2y\32�y2\2
2<7J»»e9 of Zoning
«? S22E: 2oa§
32« 22w5S75
November IS . 1939
Percy
1304 escyeahe Street
22c2222«2s72T22z 2« 22«21
be: Isar? ci Zcnirr 2gycais Action Icr VA-59-94
2z2 Jzg 100 , oc. e2 7c
This letter is to isicru you that on November 14 , 1989 , during
the meeting of the Albemarle County Board of Zoning Appeals, your
11zti- :for "- -24 was u.a.2\ousvy dismissed without
if you have an =2_ons , _ �_s_ contact our office.
Am.mlla 3. Pat or doncc: VA-29-94
Z2222y Administrator
of n,.aF,lr
o�
ARV
I%1H;IN�P
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Zoning
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5875
November 29, 1989
Certified Mail # P 572 305 238
Percy Maupin
1304 Chesapeake Street
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Re: Use of Mobile Home
Violation File V-89-50
Dear Mr. Maupin:
This office has tried several times to reach you by telephone, but
was unsuccessful. It is my determination that there is no Zoning
Ordinance provision for the use of a mobile home with storage as a
primary use. There is no authority for the Board of Zoning
Appeals to grant a variance for such use. If you wish to pursue
it, you must appeal my determination within 30 days, to the Board
of Zoning Appeals. Your proposed use of the trailer as storage
was not part of your variance application (VA-89-94) . This office
was not informed of these plans.
Your current special use permit application (SP-89-92) proposes
that the trailer be used as a residence. Within five (5) days of
the receipt of this letter, you must decide if you intend for the
mobile home to be used as a residence. If so, your special permit
will be forwarded and the variance can again be scheduled. If you
do not intend to use the mobile home for a residence, it shall be
removed by January 18, 1990. This letter serves to extend the
previous deadline of November 1, 1989. Failure to comply will
result in legal action against you.
Percy Maupin Letter
November 29, 1989
Page 2
This office has repeatedly notified you of your violation. *THIS
IS THE FINAL NOTICE.
Sincerely,
0- . 1.7! per.---
Amelia M. Patterson
Zoning Administrator
AMP/st
cc: Hunter and Mary Maupin CERTIFIED MAIL # P 372 305 237
Rt. 1, Box 564
North Garden, VA 22959
Ron Keeler
STAFF PERSON: Amelia M. Patterson
PUBLIC HEARING: November 14, 1989
STAFF REPORT - VA 89-94
OWNER/APPLICANT: Hunter and Mary Maupin (owners) ;
Percy Maupin (applicant)
TAX MAP/PARCEL: 100/7C
ZONING: RA, Rural Area
ACREAGE: 1. 6 Acres
LOCATION: On the west side of Rt. 631 (Old Lynchburg Road)
approximately 2 miles south of Rt. 708
REQUEST:
The applicant requests relief from Section 10.4 of the Albemarle
County Zoning Ordinance, which states:
"Yards, minimum:
Front 75 feet . . .
Rear 35 feet"
The applicant requests a front setback of 60 feet and a rear
setback of 10 feet, reductions of 15 and 25 feet respectively.
The applicant requests the variance to permit a mobile home to
remain on the property.
The 1944 plat of the property shows a depth of 102 feet at the
south end, and 140 feet at the north end, exclusive of Rt. 631
prescriptive easement. The setbacks total 110 feet in depth
(front and rear) .
RELEVANT HISTORY:
Staff recognizes that each variance is reviewed on its own merits,
and is not on its face, precedent-setting. The following history
is provided for information:
VA 88-74 Woodrow Campbell was approved on October 11, 1988 to
permit a front setback reduction to forty-eight (48) feet for a
building addition.
RECOMMENDATION:
An uninhabitable house and a mobile home presently are located on
the property. The mobile home was originally located in May, 1988
as interim housing to be used during the renovation of the house.
To date, work on the house has not begun and the mobile home has
not been occupied. As a result, the Zoning Administrator has
revoked the interim housing permit, and the mobile home is in
Page 2
Staff Report - VA-89-94
violation. To abate this violation, and more adequately serve his
purpose, the applicant has applied for a special use permit for
the permanent location of a mobile home on the property, and has
abandoned plans to reconstruct the house. Bear in mind that it is
the decision of the Board of Supervisors as to whether a mobile
home unit type is appropriate on this property through review of
the special permit. They will consider the characteristics of the
property, and may impose additional setbacks.
It is possible to locate a mobile home on the north end of the
property, opposite to that proposed, and meet the zoning ordinance
setback requirements, subject to moderate constraints. The north
end of the property is slightly higher than the grade of Rt. 631,
is grown in mature hardwoods, and is traversed by two defined
drainage swales. The property's entrance would require
relocation, or the driveway would need to be extended. However,
there appears to be sufficient level land for a house site. It
appears that development, which would not necessitate a variance
is possible without undue hardship, based on information available
at this time.
Therefore, staff recommends denial for cause:
1. The applicant has not provided evidence that the strict
application of the 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 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.