Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA199300014 Action Letter 1993-05-12 ��RGIN�P COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Zoning 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596 (804) 296-5875 May 12, 1993 Adam and Joan Haverson 5845 Lexington Lane Farlysville, VA 22936 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Action, VA-93-15 Tax Map 98, Parcel 18 Dear Mr. Haverson: This letter is to inform you that on May 11, 1993, during the meeting of the Albemarle County Board of Zoning Appeals, the Board denied your request for VA-93-15. 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, e_eagal Amelia G. McCulley, A.I.C.P. Zoning Administrator AGM/sp STAFF PERSON: Amelia McCulley PUBLIC HEARING: May 11, 1993 STAFF REPORT - VA 93-14 OWNER/APPLICANT: Adam and Joan Haverson TAX MAP/PARCEL: 61K / Section 8B / 14 ZONING: R4, Residential ACREAGE: 8120 sq ft or 0.19 acre LOCATION: on the south side of Ricky Road, just past the intersection with Frederick Circle, and just 300 feet off Barracks Road. REQUEST: The applicant seeks a variance of the minimum lot size, for subdivision of an existing duplex on one lot into two lots. This is a request under Section 15.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance. It involves a reduction from the required lot size of 1/4 acre or 10,890 sq ft, to 0.093 acre or 4,060 sq ft per lot, which equals a variance of 0.16 acre or 6,830 sq ft for each of two lots. The lot yard setbacks from the proposed property lines after subdivision, will be met. The house was completed in 1970, when the property was zoned the previous R2, Residential district. The house is a side-by-side duplex with a common wall. It is served by public water and sewer. It has separate entrances and parking areas. It has been rented much of the time, including most recently. The applicants have received numerous complaints about these renters and the condition of the property, and intend to subdivide and sell the property for owner-occupants. Hardship The neighborhood is a good one. In the past year and a half, there have been numerous complaints of noise. Dividing the property will allow me to sell to families, and renters will no longer reside. This is much better for the other residents. Uniqueness of Hardship Most of the surrounding properties are not duplexes, they are single-family detached. STAFF REPORT - VA-93-14 Page 2 Character of the Area Authorizing the variance will make the neighborhood residents happy. It will increase property value and make the neighborhood a better one. RELEVANT HISTORY: Staff found no zoning files. The County Real Estate records show that the house was completed in June, 1970. Because it did not conform to the zoning regulations (recently adopted), it can only be assumed that they began construction prior to zoning (December, 1969). Staff has not found information as to the date construction began or the building permit was issued. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is sympathetic to the applicant's difficulty with irresponsible renters, and recognizes the effort to be sensitive to the neighbors' concerns. Three things should be noted, however: 1) There is no guarantee that even if the property is subdivided, it will be owner-occupied; 2) The applicants have the option of selling the property as-is, one duplex unit, without subdivision; 3) The applicants have the option of remodeling the house into one larger single-family detached home. Staff is not aware of any substantial detriment caused by allowing subdivision of this property. If the property were vacant or built with only one unit, it would be a completely different matter. Staff would not be able to support additional development. In this case as with others where the development exists and a subdivision line is proposed, there will be no discernable change in the character or use of the property. It is possible to assume that it is more likely the property will be maintained well if it is subdivided. It is also likely that future owner/occupants would improve the property. This improvement is also likely to involve an expansion of the unit(s), due to their minimal size. Subdivision of the duplex will require construction of a 2-hour firewall between the units. This is required by the Fire Code, and is necessary prior to recordation and sale of the units. The current common wall will not meet this standard, and it will require expensive reconstruction. The new wall should in containing the fire, improve the situation for this building. For this and the preceding reasons, this proposal will meet the criteria #1 and 3: STAFF REPORT - VA-93-14 Page 3 1. The applicant has provided evidence that the strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship. It would be a hardship of some degree to not be able to sell the units individually. Therefore, there is an unavoidable rental situation. Because property surrounding this is also developed to what appears to be the maximum, it would not be easy if at all possible, to obtain the necessary land area to avoid the necessity of a variance. 3. 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. Staff is not aware of detrimental impact(s) due to this proposed subdivision. There will be no material change. It is impractical to expect that this nonconformity would discontinue in the future. There is no reasonable way to combine this duplex into one single-family dwelling. This neighborhood is a mix of both single-family and duplex. The duplexes are on this side of the street, and are adjacent to either side and the rear. Based on the tax map, they appear to be unsubdivided and on small lots. The Queen Charlotte subdivision plat created similar sized lots, some of which are built with twice the density, a duplex. Therefore, staff cannot say that criterion #2 is met, and must therefore recommend denial: 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. Should the Board approve this request, staff recommends the following condition: 1. Building Official approval prior to subdivision of the property; 2. This variance is limited to the existing number of bedrooms. Any expansion shall require amendment of this variance.