Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA199100032 Action Letter 1991-08-14COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Zoning 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596 (804) 296-5875 August 14, 1991 Alonzo P. or Brenda W. Minor 838 Ridge Street Charlottesville, VA 22901 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Action Tax Map 90B, Parcel A33 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Minor: This letter is to inform you that on August 13, 1991, during the meeting of the Albemarle County Board of Zoning Appeals, the Board unanimously approved your request for VA-91-32, subject the following conditions: 1. Approval shall be limited to building permit NR 88-634 or a replacement permit to use the same footing and foundation should it be required by the County. 2. New construction shall commence within 6 months from this date of lose the variance. This variance approval allows relief from Section 10.4 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance to reduce the front setback for Marshall Court Road right-of-way from 50 to 40 feet for construction of a new house. If you have any questions, please contact our office. Sin erely, John Grady Deputy Zoning Administrator JG/sp STAFF PERSON: John Grady PUBLIC HEARING: August 13, 1991 STAFF REPORT - VA-91-32 OWNER/APPLICANT: Alonzo and Brenda Minor (owners) TAX MAP/PARCEL: 90B/A33 ZONING: Rural Areas ACREAGE: Approximately 2 acres LOCATION: Located at the end of the cul-de-sac of Marshall Court Road in Marshall Manor Subdivision. REQUEST: The applicant requests relief from Section 6.5.2 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, which states: 116.5 Nonconforming Lots 6.5.2 Except as otherwise provided in section 30.5, scenic areas overlay district, in the case of any subdivision approved and defined as such pursuant to Chapter 18 of the Code of Albemarle after December 22, 1969, and prior to the adoption of this ordinance and which was of record at the time of the adoption hereof, the rear, side and front yard and setback regulations of the Zoning Ordinance in effect at the time of such approval shall apply to all lots within such subdivision. In all other cases, the rear, side and front yard and setback regulations of this ordinance shall apply. The applicant requests a ten (10) foot variance in order to complete a single family residence located forty (40) feet from the front property line of Marshall Court Road. The footings and foundation of the house were located with an assumed 30 foot building setback line. This resulted in a 20 foot discrepancy between the assumed and the required building setback line. The footings were inspected by the County and approved on February 6, 1990. The error is the result of an incorrect building setback requirement that was given to the applicant by staff when construction was started. Staff had assumed that when Marshall Manor Subdivision was approved in February, 1974 that front buildings setback requirements were 30 feet from the front property line. In fact the subdivision was approved under a Rural Suburban zoning which at the time carried a 50 foot front building setback. The error was not discovered until last month when the owner tried to sell the property to a prospective buyer who wishes to use the existing foundation and complete the house that was proposed in building permit #88-634. Staff Report - VA-91-32 Minor Page 2 RECOMMENDATION It is unfortunate that the location error was not detected early enough to allow a footing relocation. The financial loss to the applicant for removing the existing block foundation, losing the concrete footing and relocating it 10 feet further back would be substantial: $6,000 - $7,000. At this point, there is no practical solution to the applicant other than a setback variance. Staff recommends approval for cause: 1. The applicant has provided evidence that the strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship; The hardship is both practical and financial. In addition, it is due to mutual error. 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. Should the Board find cause for approval, staff recommends the following condition: 1. Approval shall be limited to building permit #NR 88-634 or a replacement permit to use the same footing and foundation should it be required by the County.