HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA199100012 Action Letter 1991-06-18 OF Al lip
tIlfl r
-var.
COUNTY OF ALB1
Department of Zc
401 McIntire R •
Charlottesville, Virginia
(804) 296-58
June 18 , 1991
•
Steven W. Blaine
418 E. Jefferson Street •
Charlottesville, VA 22901 •
RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Acti
Tax Map 42 , Parcel 44
Dear Mr. Blaine:
This letter is to inform you that on June 11, 1991, during the
meeting of the Albemarle County Board of Zoning Appeals, the Board
unanimously approved your request for VA-91-12 , subject the
following conditions:
1. Compliance with the planting plan dated April 29, 1991
by Van Yahres Associates on or before October 30th, 1991.
The Department of Forestry shall be consulted to earliest
dates for viable planting.
2 . No additional dishes nor increase in size, without review
by the Board of Zoning Appeal .
3 . At such time that the dish no longer serves the intended
purpose, consideration shall be made to remove the dish.
(This approval was for a dish for business and not enter-
tainment purposes. )
This variance approval allows relief from Section 30. 5. 6. 1 of the
Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance to reduce the setback from a
scenic stream for a satellite dish, from 65 to 58 feet.
Pursuant to Section 35. 0 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance,
the actual costs of any notice required under the code shall be
taxed to the applicant, to the extent that the same shall exceed
the applicable fee set forth in this section. Please see the
attached bill for the amount due of $17 . 92 .
June 18, 1991
VA-91-12 Coleman
Page 2
If you have any questions, please contact our office.
Sincerely,
0/1->•jAsAt
Amelia M. Patterson
Zoning Administrator
AMP/sp
cc: Mr. and Mrs. William S. Coleman, Jr.
Enclosure
STAFF PERSON: Amelia Patterson
PUBLIC HEARING: June 11, 1991
STAFF REPORT - VA-91-12
OWNER/APPLICANT: William S. Coleman, Jr.
TAX MAP/PARCEL: 42/44
ZONING: RA, Rural Areas
ACREAGE: 211 acres
LOCATION: On the north side of Rt. 678 (Ridge Road) and
south side of Moormans River, known as Fox
Ridge Farm.
REQUEST:
The applicant requests relief from Section 30. 5. 6. 1 of the
Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, which states:
30. 5. 6. 1 SA - STREAMS
"Except as herein otherwise expressly provided, no buildings
or structures other than necessary accessory appurtenant
fences and/or walls shall be constructed within sixty-five
(65) feet of the edge of any designated stream at mean annual
flow level. . . "
The applicant requests a variance to reduce the setback from the
Moorman's River, a scenic stream, from 65 to 58 feet to allow an
existing satellite dish to remain. The dish is essential to Mr.
Coleman's personal money management, his primary source of income.
It is utilized to receive information from global stock and
commodity exchanges, which is unavailable from any other sources.
The property is in an Agricultural/Forestal district, in the land
use program, and under an open-space conservation easement. It is
improved with several residences and farm buildings. Mr. Coleman
works (his own personal investing) from the property in order to
also train horses.
The applicant's justification includes:
1. The existing dish location is the only viable location to
assure adequate reception at a 95% capacity. The entire farm
was shown by computer study to be blanketed by microwave
interference. Prior to location of dish, two tests were
conducted, including on-site testing for a period of two weeks.
Therefore, the dish location is not arbitrary nor does it
serve merely personal preference.
2 . Relocation of the dish to comply with setbacks would render is
ineffective. This or complete removal would prohibit Mr.
Coleman's personal business. It is this business which
supports the property and the agricultural use thereof.
The Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan uphold agri-
cultural purpose as the primary goal in the Rural Areas.
Staff Report - VA-91-12
Page 2
3 . Cable service to this property was explored. It was not
available.
4 . Efforts have been made and additional measures are proposed, to
protect the integrity of the River and the intent of this
overlay district. Mr. Coleman has been a good steward of the
land. Dead trees have been removed and approximately 200 new
trees planted. A proposed screening plan by a landscape
architect shows twelve (12) new evergreen trees 5-8 feet in
height to supplement existing vegetation to create a screen
along the field of view from the River. Plantings are to be
indigenous species (white pines and red cedar) so as to blend
in rather than call attention to itself. The slower growing
cedars will provide a dense long term screen, while the fast
growing pines will provide the effective short term screen.
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:
There is no variance or other zoning application history.
A complaint was received (CP-90-204) in October, 1990 about the
presence of the dish within the scenic overlay. The owner was
contacted, and found to be unaware of the regulations and the
resulting violation. He responded with a November 22nd letter,
complete with documentation as the necessity of the dish and the
use of its current location. This was followed by application for
variance.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is staff's opinion, that the use for which the satellite dish
is required, is not directly related to reasonable use of the
property. This is based on the findings that Mr. Coleman's work
is accessory to the primary residential and agricultural uses of
the land. Staff has taken this position on accessory structures
such as sheds and garages. It is therefore our opinion that undue
hardship does not exist. This is an individual hardship based on
the convenience of working from one's property.
Staff does recognize that if the Board should find this use
necessary and reasonable, the Ordinance does create undue hardship
to Mr. Coleman. In addition, this hardship is unique and not
shared generally. It is our further opinion, that the proposed
planting plan will prevent substantial detriment to the scenic
value of the river.
Staff Report - VA-91-12
Page 3
However, 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.
Should the Board find cause for approval, staff recommends the
following conditions:
1. Compliance with the planting plan dated April 29, 1991 by Van
Yohres Associates on or before October 30th, 1991. The
Department of Forestry shall be consulted to earliest dates for
viable planting.
2 . No additional dishes nor increase in size, without review by
the Board of Zoning Appeals.
AFFADAVIT
DATE: ir)6
1 Pi, 9Y
I, Renee Paige, hereby certify that the attached notice (s) was
sent on the above date to all persons listed on said notice.
7/2
' 42A-a
Renee Paige
Given under my hand in the County of Albemarle, State of Virginia
this ( day of , 1991.
-1\.(k l l SYN C , .- 0, It
NOTARY PUBLIC
My commission expires February 8, 1994 .
FILE: V A-Ci(- 19