Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA199100018 Action Letter 1991-06-20 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE „OY.,,,,,,,, emi, I MEMORANDUM TO: VA-91-18, Zoning Staff, BZA Members, File FROM: John Grady, Deputy Zoning Administrator L. DATE: June 20, 1991 RE: Residential Structures built prior to December 1969 Staff has agreed that it may use administrative approval for additions built prior to the first ordinance (December, 1969) , which comply with the first ordinance but are no less conforming to the current Zoning Ordinance. Structure additions must still comply with Health, Safety regulations and inspections that may be required from other Albemarle County agencies such as Inspections Department, Health Department, Albemarle County Service Authority, etc. For example, a structure built in the Rural Areas at a 30 foot setback from the front line, may expand so long as the new structure is no closer than 30 feet from the front line. It permits additions with an established building setback which would be no more non-conforming than the current structure, provided that it complies with the original Ordinance requirements. As another example, structure built in the Rural Areas prior to December, 1969 with an established building setback of 55 feet may be expanded as long as the new additions are no closer to the front line than the original structure. STAFF PERSON: John Grady PUBLIC HEARING: May 14, 1991 STAFF REPORT - VA-91-18 OWNER/APPLICANT: Neil W. Clark TAX MAP/PARCEL: 27/21 ZONING: Rural Areas ACREAGE: 7 . 0 acres LOCATION: On the north side of Route 674 approximately 1 mile east of Route 810. REQUEST: The applicant requests relief from Section 10. 4 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordina "10. 4 AREA AND B 17) ' 1 6 Yards, min . front 75 ►"' setback from The applicant reques r 1� ontom and storage 75 feet to 56 feet f L ;��c� t. The addition room on an existing I:_` 32 feet X 16 will be a single sto feet. The applicant's just 1. The existing home by the Clark family. 2 . The addition will hardly be visible from Route 674 because the existing garage screens this side of the house. 3 . The addition is not visible from any adjacent property owners home. 4 . The addition will be 10 feet farther from Route 674 than the existing house and 40 feet farther from Route 674 than the existing garage. 5 . Placing the addition on the rear of the house would require relocating an existing electrical meter and additional wiring expense. 6. This location is the most practical as it allows the family room addition to align with the existing living room area. Staff Report - VA-91-18 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: Staff is sympathetic to the applicant's request. The applicant has chosen what appears to be to be the most practical location for the family room addition. However, as with past applications, staff does not consider construction of garages, family rooms and the like, to be necessary for reasonable use of the property. Therefore, in staff's opinion, the request for this addition does not represent an undue hardship. The applicant satisfies one of the three criteria of approval: 1. The proposed addition will not be a detriment to the adjacent property nor will the character of the district be changed by the granting of the variance. 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. If the Board should find cause for approval, staff recommends the following: 1. Approval shall be limited to the construction shown in Building Permit NNR #91-416. 2 . That contruction shall start within a year of variance approval.