Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA199300001 Action Letter 1993-02-09 STAFF PERSON: Babette Thorpe PUBLIC HEARING: 2/9/93 STAFF REPORT - VA-93-01 OWNER/APPLICANT: John Stein (owner) ; Todd Shields (contract purchaser) TAX MAP/PARCEL: 45-100 and 101 ZONING: C-1 ACREAGE: Parcel 100 - .8 acres; Parcel 101 - 1. 414 acres LOCATION: North side of Rio Road approximately . 4 miles west of its intersection with Route 29 North, next to Photoworks and Premier Video. REQUEST: The applicant proposes to build a family fun park on these parcels, with bumper cars and boats, miniature golf, batting cages and an arcade. In order to place the golf holes and associated ramps ten feet from the right-of-way line, the applicant requests relief from Section 21.7. 1 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance. This section requires all structures to be located 30 feet from the right-of-way of public roads. The applicant' s justification includes the following: Hardship The strict application and interpretation of this ordinance goes beyond the intent of the ordinance for the proposed type of development. Since there is ambiguity in the ordinance as it relates to the proposed use [setbacks for certain things] , its strict application goes beyond the intent of uniformity in the building setback line. Therefore, it seems that the proposed use should be exempt from the 30-foot setback and be required to conform to the parking setback at ten feet. Uniqueness of Hardship The proposed use is unique to this zoning district and there are no other examples within the zoning district to compare it to. Character of the Area The proposed use will not change the character because the building line and setbacks will be consistent with the adjacent properties. The building arcade and miniature golf improvements on the golf holes will comply with the setback. The golf holes are more similar to parking than a building and should conform to the ten foot setback requested. RELEVANT HISTORY: The applicant has applied for the special use permit necessary for commercial recreation facilities in this zoning district. The applicant has also submitted a site plan for VA-93-01 Page 3 before the properties were developed. Those plans stopped at this parcel, making it difficult to plan this project. 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 variance is not for a building, but for miniature golf holes and ramps. It is staff's opinion that the visual impact from Rio Road will be slight, probably less than the parking lot which would be allowed at ten feet from the right-of-way without a variance. This Department has received no letters of objection to this request. Should the Board approve this request, staff recommends the following conditions: 1. The variance is limited to four miniature golf holes and their associated ramps and walkways. 2 . No portion of any structure, including ramps and walkways, shall lie closer than ten feet to the proposed right-of-way line. 3 . Applicant shall provide method of preventing balls from entering the VDoT right-of-way. 4. The applicant shall provide a fence or vegetative buffer between the right-of-way line and the golf hole nearest that line to encourage miniature golf players to maintain a safe distance from the right-of-way. This fence or buffer shall be designed and installed to the satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator. 5. Applicant shall place street trees within the golf course to lessen its visual impact upon Rio Road. The location of these trees, which may be scattered throughout the golf course, shall be approved by the Zoning Administrator. ,d, I _ ,O ,040 COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION P.O.BOX 2013 RAY D. PETHTEL CHARLOTTESVILLE,22902 D.S. ROOSEVELT COMMISSIONER RESIDENT ENGINEER January 21, 1993 Route 631, Albemarle County Ms. Amelia G. McCulley Zoning Administrator County Office Building 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Dear Ms. McCulley: Reference is made to your memo of January 20, 1993, concerning matters before the Board of Zoning Appeals. I refer particularly to item VA-93-01. Your memo indicates this property is located on the north side of Rio Road approximately .4 miles west of Route 29. The request is to reduce the front setback from 30' to 10' . The Department is in the process of developing improvement plans for this section of Rio Road. The project will widen the existing two lane road to a four lane curb and gutter cross section with sidewalks and bike trails. The project will require considerable additional right of way. At present the plans have not been developed sufficiently to determine what additional right of way will be needed for this project. I recommend that no action be taken which would allow improvements to be constructed on private property closer to the existing road than now exists. Please consider our concerns when reviewing this request to reduce the front setback. Yours truly, rot) Z"srie D. S. Roosevelt Resident Engineer DSR/smk RECEIVED • JAN 25 1993 ALBEM,RL_E COU' ZONING DEPART' ronkIconDTATI1N cm,TWF 91CT CI=NTI IRY STAFF PERSON: Babette Thorpe PUBLIC HEARING: 2/9/93 STAFF REPORT - VA-93-01 OWNER/APPLICANT: John Stein (owner) ; Todd Shields (contract purchaser) TAX MAP/PARCEL: 45-100 and 101 ZONING: C-1 ACREAGE: Parcel 100 - .8 acres; Parcel 101 - 1.414 acres LOCATION: North side of Rio Road approximately .4 miles west of its intersection with Route 29 North, next to Photoworks and Premier Video. REQUEST: The applicant proposes to build a family fun park on these parcels, with bumper cars and boats, miniature golf, batting cages and an arcade. In order to place the golf holes and associated ramps ten feet from the right-of-way line, the applicant requests relief from Section 21.7. 1 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance. This section requires all structures to be located 30 feet from the right-of-way of public roads. The applicant's justification includes the following: Hardship The strict application and interpretation of this ordinance goes beyond the intent of the ordinance for the proposed type of development. Since there is ambiguity in the ordinance as it relates to the proposed use [setbacks for certain things] , its strict application goes beyond the intent of uniformity in the building setback line. Therefore, it seems that the proposed use should be exempt from the 30-foot setback and be required to conform to the parking setback at ten feet. Uniqueness of Hardship The proposed use is unique to this zoning district and there are no other examples within the zoning district to compare it to. Character of the Area The proposed use will not change the character because the building line and setbacks will be consistent with the adjacent properties. The building arcade and miniature golf improvements on the golf holes will comply with the setback. The golf holes are more similar to parking than a building and should conform to the ten foot setback requested. RELEVANT HISTORY: The applicant has applied for the special use permit necessary for commercial recreation facilities in this zoning district. The applicant has also submitted a site plan for VA-93-01 Page 2 review. In addition, the applicant has submitted a rezoning request for a strip of land along the northern property line. The applicant hopes to have this land rezoned to C-1 and added to this parcel, so he can meet the parking setback required by the Ordinance from residential property. RECOMMENDATION: The applicant would not need a variance for the project proposed were it not for the additional right-of-way required by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDoT) for improvements along Rio Road. Although these improvements are shown in the Six-Year Plan, there were no road plans providing the exact location of the right-of-way until after this site plan was submitted. The applicant and his engineer have shown a great deal of patience in working with both the County and VDoT to reserve the additional right-of-way required for the improvements. The Planning Department has reviewed this request and made the following comment: It is the opinion of the Planning Department that consideration should be given to the applicant for his efforts in facilitating a public project. Further, it is the opinion of the Planning Department that it is only the applicant's reservation of right-of-way that creates the request for a variance [sic] for these reasons the Planning Department supports the applicant's variance request. This Department did receive a letter of concern from Mr. D. S. Roosevelt, Resident Engineer for VDoT, dated January 21, 1993 (attached) . In a phone conversation with Mr. Roosevelt on February 1, I notified him that Mr. Robert Hofrichter of VDoT had determined how much right-of-way the improvements would need and that the variance was measured from this proposed line, not the existing right-of-way. This conversation appeared to allay his concerns. Staff recommends approval for cause: 1. The applicant has provided evidence that the strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship. Were it not for the reserved right-of-way, the applicant would not need a variance. The applicant did not know at the time of submittal how much additional right-of-way would be required, nor has the owner been paid for the additional right-of-way. 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. While other properties in this vicinity have been affected by the widening of Rio Road, detailed plans showing the right-of-way required were in place • VA-93-01 Page 3 before the properties were developed. Those plans stopped at this parcel, making it difficult to plan this project. 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 variance is not for a building, but for miniature golf holes and ramps. It is staff's opinion that the visual impact from Rio Road will be slight, probably less than the parking lot which would be allowed at ten feet from the right-of-way without a variance. This Department has received no letters of objection to this request. Should the Board approve this request, staff recommends the following conditions: 1. The variance is limited to four miniature golf holes and their associated ramps and walkways. 2 . No portion of any structure, including ramps and walkways, shall lie closer than ten feet to the proposed right-of-way line. 3 . Applicant shall provide method of preventing balls from entering the VDoT right-of-way. 4. The applicant shall provide a fence or vegetative buffer between the right-of-way line and the golf hole nearest that line to encourage miniature golf players to maintain a safe distance from the right-of-way. This fence or buffer shall be designed and installed to the satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator. 5. Applicant shall place street trees within the golf course to lessen its visual impact upon Rio Road. The location of these trees, which may be scattered throughout the golf course, shall be approved by the Zoning Administrator.