The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutVA198900098 Action Letter 1989-12-20 der >RG1NVP COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Zoning 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596 (804) 296-5875 December 20, 1989 James E. Payne Rt. 4 , Box 139 Charlottesville, VA 22901 Re: Board of Zoning Appeals Action VA-89-98, Tax Map 46, Parcel 45 Dear Mr. Payne: This letter is to inform you that on December 19 , 1989, during the meeting of the Albemarle County Board of Zoning Appeals, the Board unanimously approved your request for VA-89-98 . This variance approval allows relief from Section 10. 4 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance to allow three existing dwellings to be located "0" feet, a variance of 75 feet; 11 feet, a variance of 64 feet; and 28 feet, a variance of 47 feet, from a proposed 30 foot access easement for purposes of a family division. df you have any questions, please contact our office. Sincerely, is A lia M. Patterson Zoning Administrator AMP/st cc: ~'VA-89-98 Inspections Department Planning Department STAFF PERSON: Amelia M. Patterson PUBLIC HEARING: December 19 , 1989 STAFF REPORT - VA 89-98 OWNER/APPLICANT: James E. Payne TAX MAP/PARCEL: 46/45 ZONING: RA- Rural Areas ACREAGE: 15. 949 Acres LOCATION: Located on the west side of Route 649 (Proffit Road) , approximately 0. 2 mile north of the intersection with Route 784 (Proffit Exchange) . REQUEST: The applicant requests relief from Section 10. 4 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, which states: "10. 4 Area and Bulk Regulations: Yards minimum: Front 75 feet" The applicant requests a front setback variance for subdivision (Family Division) into two (2) lots. The existing driveway which is between three (3) existing dwellings, will be platted as an access easement. The applicant requests front setbacks of 0, 11 and 28 feet from one mobile home and two frame dwellings, variances of 75, 64 and 47 feet respectively. The three dwellings will be located on one (1) lot, and a proposed second lot is intended for construction of a dwelling or location of a mobile home. The applicant's justification includes: 1. The expense in relocating the driveway creates a hardship; 2 . Two large, mature trees (sycamore and oak) would have to be removed; 3 . Relocating the driveway in order to more comply with setbacks to need less variance would place it in the general vicinity of the septic tank and transmission line; 4 . Relocating the driveway would destroy the front yard; 5. There will be very little change from the existing conditions, except that once the new lot is built, his son will also travel on the driveway. Page 2 Staff Report - VA-89-98 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-82-35 James E. Payne was approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals on July 13 , 1982 . This allowed a setback reduction to 19 feet from the side yard for the mobile home, with the condition that only immediate family members occupy it. RECOMMENDATION: The applicant has not yet submitted a subdivision plat, therefore it is difficult to determine if additional variances are necessary and the accurate locations of the dwellings and driveway. It appears that an access easement of the standard 30 foot width could not be platted in a different location so as to comply with setback requirements. Therefore, it appears that an access easement could not be located so as to comply with setbacks and not necessitate a variance. An easement of reduced width, if permitted, would be difficult given the constraints of existing conditions such as the house location and others delineated by the applicant. In addition, a driveway in the present location would still be necessary to serve the existing dwellings. Without further information, it is difficult to ascertain the exact locations of the septic tank and field. At a minimum, it is clear that a relocated driveway would cross the transmission line from the house to the tank and a portion of the field. Trees which would need to be removed, are each at least 100 years old. Staff recommends approval for cause: 1. The applicant has provided evidence that the strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship; 2 . The applicant has 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 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. p:A IR,A,9'�. ti 41- l 1.\" bf id'.� (L n2e' 61- /� 11.01- COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596 (804) 296-5823 February 28, 1990 Mr. James Payne Route 4, Box 139 Charlottesville, VA 22901 RE: James Payne Plat Tax Map 46, Parcels 45 Dear Mr. Payne: Staff has reviewed the above-noted family division plat and offers the following comments. This department as well as the Zoning Department have concerns that approval of the new lot in its proposed location will severely limit the ability of this property to further sub divide. If, in the future, someone wished to subdivide the frame residence from the other dwelling units on the residue, the approval of this plat would preclude such lot from being created. It would result in an extremely odd shaped lot or require variances for the two acre minimum lot size and possibly setbacks also. I suggest you discuss with Mr. Lincoln alternative locations for the lot preferably more to the south and east of the property. Such a location would be more in accordance with the sketch we reviewed with you in October and also with what the Board of Zoning Appeals reviewed in December ( see attached) . In addition, an alternative location could be designed to allow future division of the frame residence if it is ever pursued. While the approval of the proposed plat would not appear to result in a violation of any Zoning Ordinance regulations, we are requesting that you seek an alternative location in the interest of good planning practice to avoid potential regulatory conflicts on this property in the future. If the property has some physical constraints which limit your options for the lot location, we may be able to approve the plat as proposed. James Payne Page 2 February 28, 1990 In addition to the lot location concerns, the plat needs to be revised to address the following technical notes: • The note referencing the applicable variance should read "VA-89-98" rather than "ZA-89-98. " • Delete the note "Lot A may not be further divided. The residue parcel of 13 . 949 acres may be divided into four ( 4) lots less than twenty-one acres. " • Add a note stating " This private road will provide reasonable access by motor vehicle as required by Section 18-36 of the Albemarle County Code. " • The signature panel should simply read "Approved for Recordation" with a line for signature. • Health Department approval must be received for a primary and reserve drainfield for the proposed lot as well as verification that the lot will not encroach on the existing drainfields for the three residences. • Verification of family division must be submitted by copy of deed or letter from an attorney certifying that this is a family division pursuant to Section 18-56 of the Subdivision Ordinance. If you should have any questions or comments regarding any of these comments, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Richard E. Tarbell Planner RET/blb cc: Thomas Lincoln Amelia Patterson