Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA199200026 Action Letter 1992-08-12 41.A.F;.tir , _ U 4w, ilRGIt4�P COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Zoning 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596 (804) 296-5875 • August 12, 1992 Margaret B. Martin P. 0. Box 54 Free Union, VA 22940 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Action VA-92-26 Tax Map 29, Parcel 45A - Dear Ms. Martin: This letter is to inform you that on August 11, 1992 , during the regular meeting of the Albemarle County Board of Zoning Appeals, the Board (3 :2) approved your request for VA-92-26 subject to the following conditions: RC ' /1 1/1) Health Department approval for adequacy of the existing -ri septic field, and 'A 1l2) Screening approved by the Zoning Administrator shall be aP , 011, installed the length of the trailer, within six (6) months c�ti•\ �'" of this approval. \T) Subject to approval of special use permit. t° dThe variance approval grants relief from Section 10.4 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance to a) reduce the side setback from 25 to 10 feet to allow an existing mobile home to remain as built and b) to increase the density by reducing the acreage required per dwelling unit from 2 to 1. If you have any questions, please contact our office. Sincerely, dirfdticid, Amelia G. McCulley, A.0 .P. Zoning Administrator AGM/st cc: Gary Rice, Thomas Jefferson Health Department Zoning Administrator 0.2 mile east of the intersection of Route 601 and 653, in Free Union. REQUEST: The applicant requests relief from Section 10.4 Rural Areas - Area and Bulk Regulations, for a mobile home which has existed on the property since 1972, for the following variances: 1. The requirement of a minimum area per dwelling of 2 acres, and a resulting maximum density of 1/2 dwelling unit per acre. The mobile home and another residence currently exist on the property. The applicant requests a reduction in the minimum area from 2 to 1 acre, and resulting density from 1/2 to 1 dwelling per acre. 2 . The requirement of a 25 foot side yard setback. This is to allow an existing mobile home to remain as one has been located since 1972, 10 feet from the side property line. This situation of an improperly approved mobile home was first discovered recently when the applicant heard of the recent Board of Supervisors' action regarding mobile home rentals, and inquired with the Zoning Department as to whether or not this unit could be rented. After review, it was discovered that the mobile home was originally approved administratively as a temporary permit. That would explain why the setback was not met, because temporary permits are not required to do so. However, it is not understood how a second dwelling was allowed without sufficient acreage, despite the temporary nature. The applicant and her husband (now deceased) owned the property at the time of the original approvals, and it has not decreased in area or changed dimension. This variance and a special permit which is pending the variance, are necessary to properly approve this situation. A complete history proceeds this section. The applicant's justification includes: 1. This situation has existed for 20 years and would not be changed by the granting of this variance; 2 . The applicant sought all the proper approvals from the County to create this situation. It is by no means a self-imposed hardship; 3 . Approval of this variance and accompanying special permit would allow the mobile home to remain, and to begin to provide ' supplemental income by rent; 4. Denial of this variance would result in undue hardship - both economic and practical. The mobile home would have to be sold, and the occupants relocated; 4 5. This situation of County approval dating back to 1972, and as recent as 1987, is evidence of a unique situation which is not shared generally. 6. This property is located across from the Virginia Department of Transportation yard in Free Union. The closest house is approximately 1/3 mile away, and is only partially visible. HISTORY: • Mobile Home Permit #179 was approved for a temporary mobile home in 1972. This was for temporary storage of a mobile home under S.P. #146. ▪ December, 1971, Special Permit #146 was denied by the Board of Supervisors. This was a request for a permanent mobile home on 2.0 acres with an existing house. The mobile home was already onsite with the temporary permit. • Sometime after February, 1972, S.P. #152 which was applied for in December, was voided. This was the same request as for S.P. #145. • **The relevant approval for the mobile home occurred on January 31, 1972 under M.H.P. #207. This permit was issued under Article 2-1-23A for "a property owner residing on the premises in a permanent home wished to place a mobile home on this property in order to maintain his - or her immediate family or full time agricultural employee. " This was for a 10 ft. x 48 ft.. 1967-68 Americana. ▪ A replacement mobile home permit, M.H.P. 87-15, was granted for a 1977 Oakwood 12 ft. x 60 ft. This was done in June, 1987. RECOMMENDATION: The owners of the property adjoining the encroaching setback have written objection to the special permit and variance for the mobile home. This property consists of pasture adjacent to the mobile home, with a residence in the distance. They have stated concern about items of trash in their pasture, which might harm the cattle. They ask that the mobile home be moved so as to meet the required 25 foot side setback. The rear of the subject property consists of a limited pasture area. The septic field is located beside the mobile home and behind the house. The well is beside the house. We were unable to confirm septic locations, and would like confirmation that they are functioning properly. Staff recommends that Health Department approval of such be a condition of any approval of this request. The mobile home is located in what appears to be the most practical location for a second dwelling. 5 S vp V.Hp!( 90 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Zoning 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596 (804) 296-5875 December 1, 1992 Margaret B. Martin P.O. Box 54 Free Union, VA 22940 Re: SP-92-47 and VA-92-26 Tax Map 29 Parcel 45A Dear Ms. Martin: This letter is to inform you that you have met the conditions of approval for the above noted variance and special use permit. The evergreen hedge (sixteen Ligustrum shrubs) you have planted at four (4) foot intervals satisfies condition 2. of the variance. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. It was a pleasure to work with you. Sincerely, Marcia Joseph Design Planner MJ STAFF PERSON: Amelia Patterson PUBLIC HEARING: August 11, 1992 STAFF REPORT - VA 92-26 OWNER/APPLICANT: Margaret B. Martin TAX MAP/PARCEL: 29/45A ZONING: Rural Areas ACREAGE: 2 Acres (approximately) LOCATION: On the north side of Route 653, approximately 0.2 mile east of the intersection of Route 601 and 653 , in Free Union. REQUEST: The applicant requests relief from Section 10.4 Rural Areas - Area and Bulk Regulations, for a mobile home which has existed on the property since 1972, for the following variances: 1. The requirement of a minimum area per dwelling of 2 acres, and a resulting maximum density of 1/2 dwelling unit per acre. The mobile home and another residence currently exist on the property. The applicant requests a reduction in the minimum area from 2 to 1 acre, and resulting density from 1/2 to 1 dwelling per acre. 2 . The requirement of a 25 foot side yard setback. This is to allow an existing mobile home to remain as one has been located since 1972, 10 feet from the side property line. This situation of an improperly approved mobile home was first discovered recently when the applicant heard of the recent Board of Supervisors' action regarding mobile home rentals, and inquired with the Zoning Department as to whether or not this unit could be rented. After review, it was discovered that the mobile home was originally approved administratively as a temporary permit. That would explain why the setback was not met, because temporary permits are not required to do so. However, it is not understood how a second dwelling was allowed without sufficient acreage, despite the temporary nature. The applicant and her husband (now deceased) owned the property at the time of the original approvals, and it has not decreased in area or changed dimension. This variance and a special permit which is pending the variance, are necessary to properly approve this situation. A complete history proceeds this section. Staff Report VA-92-26 Margaret Martin Page 2 The applicant's justification includes: 1. This situation has existed for 20 years and would not be changed by the granting of this variance; 2 . The applicant sought all the proper approvals from the County to create this situation. It is by no means a self-imposed hardship; 3 . Approval of this variance and accompanying special permit would allow the mobile home to remain, and to begin to provide supplemental income by rent; 4 . Denial of this variance would result in undue hardship - both economic and practical. The mobile home would have to be sold, and the occupants relocated; 5. This situation of County approval dating back to 1972, and as recent as 1987, is evidence of a unique situation which is not shared generally. 6. This property is located across from the Virginia Department of Transportation yard in Free Union. The closest house is approximately 1/3 mile away, and is only partially visible. HISTORY: . Mobile Home Permit #179 was approved for a temporary mobile home in 1972 . This was for temporary storage of a mobile home under S.P. #146. . December, 1971, Special Permit #146 was denied by the Board of Supervisors. This was a request for a permanent mobile home on 2 . 0 acres with an existing house. The mobile home was already onsite with the temporary permit. • Sometime after February, 1972 , S.P. #152 which was applied for in December, was voided. This was the same request as for S.P. #145. . **The relevant approval for the mobile home occurred on January 31, 1972 under M.H.P. #207. This permit was issued under Article 2-1-23A for "a property owner residing on the premises in a permanent home wished to place a mobile home on this property in order to maintain his or her immediate family or full time agricultural employee. " This was for a 10 ft. x 48 ft. 1967-68 Americana. A replacement mobile home permit, M.H.P. 87-15, was granted for a 1977 Oakwood 12 ft. x 60 ft. This was done in June, 1987. Staff Report VA-92-26 Margaret Martin Page 3 RECOMMENDATION: The owners of the property adjoining the encroaching setback have written objection to the special permit and variance for the mobile home. This property consists of pasture adjacent to the mobile home, with a residence in the distance. They have stated concern about items of trash in their pasture, which might harm the cattle. They ask that the mobile home be moved so as to meet the required 25 foot side setback. The rear of the subject property consists of a limited pasture area. The septic field is located beside the mobile home and behind the house. The well is beside the house. We were unable to confirm septic locations, and would like confirmation that they are functioning properly. Staff recommends that Health Department approval of such be a condition of any approval of this request. The mobile home is located in what appears to be the most practical location for a second dwelling. It is staff's opinion that this application meets the three variance criteria as outlined in the State Code. With respect to the suggestion of moving the mobile home for aesthetic or non- health or safety reasons, staff believes this to be an undue hardship. Mature trees which exist on the adjoining side property, provide some degree of screening. If there is some evergreen planting which would thrive despite the overhead canopy from the adjoining mature trees, staff recommends that they be planted. Therefore, staff recommends approval for cause: 1. The applicant has provided evidence that the strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship. Removal of the mobile home after 20 years would create practical and economic hardships. Relocating the mobile home so as to meet the side setback would be an undue hardship, and would result in substantial restriction of the pasture area. 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. Staff is not aware of any properties in this district or vicinity which shares this hardship. 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. The character of the district and the area would remain, because nothing would change. Unless there is or would be failing septic fields, there would be no substantial detriment to the area. Staff Report VA-92-26 Margaret Martin Page 4 Should the Board find cause for approval, staff recommends the following conditions: 1. Approval from the Health Department of the adequacy of the existing septic field(s) ; 2. An evergreen buffer of shrubs shall be planted the length of the mobile home, unless a State forester or approved equivalent expert determines such planting to not be viable in this location. If they are to be required, the size and spacing shall be approved by the Zoning Administrator.