Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA199000035 Action Letter 1990-05-10 r 1 Wr.1,4.1 � � 4 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Zoning 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 229(11-4596 (804) 296 5875 May 10, 1990 Eldon A. & Mary S. Morris Rt. 2 , Box 489 Crozet, VA 22932 Re: Board of Zoning Appeals Action for VA-90-35 Tax Map 14 , Parcel 40A Dear Mr. & Mrs. Morris: This letter is to inform you that on May 8 , 1990, during the meeting of the Albemarle County Board of Zoning Appeals, your application for VA-90-35 was approved. This variance approval allows relief from Section 10. 4 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance to reduce the required front yard setback from the right-of-way of Route 810 from 75 feet to 56 feet, a variance of 19 feet to build an addition to a single-family residence. If you have any questions, please contact our office. Sincerely, AfCelia M. Patterson Zoning Administrator AMP/st cc: VA-90-35 Inspections Department STAFF REPORT: John Grady PUBLIC HEARING: May 8, 1990 STAFF REPORT - VA-90-35 OWNER/APPLICANT: Eldon A. Morris (owner) TAX MAP/PARCEL: 14/40A ZONING: RA, Rural Area ACREAGE: 2.84 acres approximately .5 mile LOCATION: Located on the west side of Route 810, a north of the Route 810 and Route 668 intersection. REQUEST: The applicant requests relief from Section 10.4 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, which states: "Area & Bulk Regulations. • • Yards, minimum Front 75 feet. . ." requests a variance to reduce the required front yard setback from The applicant re q the right-of-way of Route 810 from 75 feet to 56mobile homeriance of 19 eet o build an addition on to the rear of an existing The applicant' s justification includes: 1. The mobile home was located on a permanent rock foundation in 1966 before the adoption of the Zoning Ordinance and yard requirements in 1968. 2. The family room addition will be to the rear ofstlff e home and further away from Route 810 than the existing mobile home 3. The area chosen for the addition is the most practical from a structural stand- point as an existing window can be enlarged to form an entrance way to the addition. RECOMMENDATION: area for the new addition does appear to be the most logical location The proposed structure. so as to match up well to the existing It is staff's opinion that the applicant does possess undue hardship that is not shared generally, and is not of substantial detriment. The proposed addition would not substantially impact the district, by not encroaching further than the present structure. No other structures on adjacent property are in close proximity to the proposed addition. Page 2 Staff Report - VA-90-35 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.