Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA199200015 Action Letter 1992-05-13 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Zoning 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596 (804) 296-5875 May 13 , 1992 Anthony A. Valente 2155 Devonshire Road Charlottesville, VA 22901 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Action VA-92-15, Tax Map 62A1, Parcel K20 Dear Mr. Valente: This letter is to inform you that on May 12, 1992, during the meeting of the Albemarle County Board of Zoning Appeals, the Board denied your request for VA-92-15. Anyone aggrieved by a decision of the Board can appeal their decision to the Circuit Court of Albemarle County within thirty (30) days of the decision. If you have any questions, please contact our office. Sincerely, eabOW., \:2114,eye Babette Thorpe Zoning Assistant BT/sp cc: VA Land Trust STAFF PERSON: Babette Thorpe PUBLIC HEARING: 5/12/92 STAFF REPORT - VA-92-15 OWNER/APPLICANT: Virginia Land Trust (owner) Mr. Anthony A. Valente (contract purchaser) TAX MAP/PARCEL: 62A1-K-20 ZONING: R-2 , Residential ACREAGE: .76 acres LOCATION: Northfields Subdivision, in northeast quadrant of intersection of Huntington Road and Route 651 REQUEST: In order to build a three-bedroom house, the applicant requests relief from Section 4.2 .2 . 1 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, which states that building sites shall have adequate area for location of two septic drain fields. The applicant's justification includes the following: the lot cannot be built upon without reducing the size of the reserve septic field by 50 percent. RELEVANT HISTORY: This section of Northfields Subdivision was approved on June 6, 1973 . This lot is vacant; the lots on either side are developed with single-family houses. In September, 1989, Virginia Land Company commissioned E. O. Gooch and Associates to test the soils on this lot for their suitability for septic fields. This study identified two possible sites for septic fields, one of which the Health Department rejected because it was located in a drainage swale. RECOMMENDATION: The topography of this lot, steeply sloping down to a drainage swale, makes meeting the requirements for both primary and reserve septic fields difficult. The size of the house proposed is standard and not unreasonable for this area. Generally, staff recommends two options before suggesting that a property owner seek a variance to reduce the size of septic field required. Firstly, we ask that the property owner examine the feasibility of hooking up to public sewer; secondly, we suggest they discuss with their neighbors the possibility of using adjacent property to make up the reserve septic field. Given the small size of adjoining parcels, the second alternative does not seem practicable. This lot lies within the Albemarle County Service Authority's jurisdictional area for public sewer. Both staff and the applicant have discussed with the Service Authority the feasibility of hooking up this parcel to public sewer. According to Paul Shoop, Director of Engineering for the Service Authority, extending public sewer to this lot would require a regional pump station. When the service authority petitioned landowners in this area, they requested that public sewer not be extended to this area. Given the expense and the landowners' wishes, Mr. Shoop has said that it is unlikely that sewer will be extended to this property, barring an emergency. Staff recommends approval for cause: 1. The applicant has provided evidence that the strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship. This lot of record would be unbuildable without a variance. 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. The drainage problems affecting one of two potential septic sites on this property are not shared by other properties in the area. 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 granting the variance. Should the Board approve this variance, staff recommends the following condition: 1. Approval is for a house with a maximum of three bedrooms. Any additional bedrooms shall require amendment to this variance.