HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA199000016 Action Letter 1990-03-16 •
y1P
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Zoning
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296.5875
March 16, 1990
Ricky James Reece
Rt 1, Box 120
Earlysville, VA 22936
Re: Board of Zoning Appeals Action
VA-90-16, Tax Map 19, Parcel 40F
Dear Sir:
This letter is to inform you that on March 13, 1990, during the meeting of
the Albemarle County Board of Zoning Appeals, the Board unanimously approved
your request for VA-90-16.
This variance approval allows a proposed addition to a single-family dewelling,
and an exiting deck to remain as located, 39 feet from the front property line,
a variance of 36 feet.
If you have any questions, please contact our office.
Sincerely,
Amelia M. Patterson
Zoning Administrator
AMP/rp
cc: VA-90-16
Inspections Department
STAFF REPORT - VA-90-16 Staff Person: Kathy Dodson
Public Hearing: March 13 , 1990
OWNER/APPLICANT: Ricky James Reece
TAX MAP/PARCEL: 19/40F
ZONING: RA, Rural Areas
ACREAGE: 3 . 0 Acres
LOCATION: West side of Rt. 817 , approximately . 05 mile
northwest of the intersection of Rt. 816 and
Rt. 604
REQUEST:
The applicant requests relief from Section 10.4 of the Albemarle
County Zoning Ordinance. This section states:
"10.4 Area and Bulk Regulations
Yards Minimum:
Front . . . 75 feet"
The applicant request a front setback of 39 feet, a variance of
36 feet to allow a proposed addition to a single family dwelling
and to allow an existing deck to remain as built.
The applicant's justification includes:
(1) The applicant was unaware that the deck addition required a
building permit. When he learned of the requirement, he
made application and was informed of the setback violation.
(2) The house was built in the early 1900's and is only 39 feet
from the front property line. The proposed addition and
existing deck will not be any closer to the front property
line than the existing dwelling.
RECOMMENDATION:
The house was built prior to the adoption of the zoning ordinance.
Section 6.5 of the current ordinance requires that any non-
conforming lot meet current ordinance requirements. Because
of the location of the existing dwelling and a well to the rear
of the property, there is virtually no area for expansion which
would not necessitate a variance.
It is staff's opinion that the applicant does possess undue
hardship that is not shared generally and is not of substantial
detriment. The existing deck and proposed addition would not
substantially impact the district as it will not extend any closer
than the existing dwelling.
Staff Report - VA-90-16 (Reece)
Page 2
The application should be approved 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 deteriment to
adjacent property and that the character of the district will
not be changed by the granting of the variance.
STAFF REPORT - VA-90-16 Staff Person: Kathy Dodson
Public Hearing: March 13 , 1990
OWNER/APPLICANT: Ricky James Reece
TAX MAP/PARCEL: 19/40F
ZONING: RA, Rural Areas
ACREAGE: 3 . 0 Acres
LOCATION: West side of Rt. 817, approximately . 05 mile
northwest of the intersection of Rt. 816 and
Rt. 604
REQUEST:
The applicant requests relief from Section 10.4 of the Albemarle
County Zoning Ordinance. This section states:
"10.4 Area and Bulk Regulations
Yards Minimum:
Front . . . 75 feet"
The applicant request a front setback of 39 feet, a variance of
36 feet to allow a proposed addition to a single family dwelling
and to allow an existing deck to remain as built.
The applicant's justification includes:
(1) The applicant was unaware that the deck addition required a
building permit. When he learned of the requirement, he
made application and was informed of the setback violation.
(2) The house was built in the early 1900's and is only 39 feet
from the front property line. The proposed addition and
existing deck will not be any closer to the front property
line than the existing dwelling.
RECOMMENDATION:
The house was built prior to the adoption of the zoning ordinance.
Section 6.5 of the current ordinance requires that any non-
conforming lot meet current ordinance requirements. Because
of the location of the existing dwelling and a well to the rear
of the property, there is virtually no area for expansion which
would not necessitate a variance.
It is staff's opinion that the applicant does possess undue
hardship that is not shared generally and is not of substantial
detriment. The existing deck and proposed addition would not
substantially impact the district as it will not extend any closer
than the existing dwelling.
Staff Report - VA-90-16 (Reece)
Page 2
The application should be approved 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 deteriment to
adjacent property and that the character of the district will
not be changed by the granting of the variance.