Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA199300028 Action Letter 1993-08-11 �. A 1114-19 • COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Zoning 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 • (804) 296-5875 FAX (804) 972-4060 TDD (804) 972-4012 August 11, 1993 Tom Gale Roudabush, Gale & Associates, Inc. 914 Monticello Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Action John C. Vermillion; Tax Map 62, Parcel 28A Dear Mr. Gale: This letter is to inform you that on August 10, during the meeting of the Albemarle County Board of Zoning Appeals, the Board (4:0) unanimously approved your request for VA-92-28, subject to the following condition: 1) The use of the twenty-five (25) foot pipestem shall be limited to one parcel and one development right. This variance approval allows relief from Section 10.4 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance to reduce road frontage required from 150 to 25 feet in order to create a two (2) acre lot. If you have any questions, please contact our office. Sincerely, uea-b-e-i4e atigife_ Babette Thorpe Zoning Assistant • BT/sp cc: John C. Vermillion STAFF PERSON: Babette Thorpe PUBLIC HEARING: 8/10/93 STAFF REPORT - VA-93-28 OWNER/APPLICANT: Mr. John C. Vermillion TAX MAP/PARCEL: 62 , Parcel 28A ZONING: RA, Rural Areas ACREAGE: 27. 070 LOCATION: Located on east side of Route 20 just south of Franklin subdivision. REQUEST: The applicant wishes to use an existing pipestem for access to a two-acre parcel which would be subdivided from the Franklin estate. This subdivision would require a variance of Section 10.4, which requires 250 feet of frontage on public roads. The pipestem would provide only 25 feet of frontage. The applicant has provided the following justification for this request: Due to a previously recorded pipestem, it would be awkward to create the new lot in question and provide access without it being part of the lot. The route from Franklin Drive lays favorably such that little or no grading will be required to install a driveway. The map shows a significant difference in elevation between Cason Farm Road and the proposed house site (over 75 feet difference in elevation) . It also shows a much longer route, from any other access alternative, in order to serve the proposed house site. Finally, the proposed house site is a very attractive and logical one and a favorable septic system site has been found to support this location. RELEVANT HISTORY: Now a part of Tax Map 62 , parcel 28A, the property adjacent to parcel 37 was approved by the County as part of Franklin Subdivision in April, 1976. In 1989, the Vermillions bought the lot and combined it with the Franklin property. Had the lot not been combined, it could have been developed as the Vermillions propose without a variance. This Board has approved a similar request for Roy Clark (VA-92-06) in order to allow him to subdivide and use as access an existing pipestem. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department has reviewed this request and made no comment. Franklin was built in 1732 and is on the Virginia register of historic landmarks. The outbuildings and landscaping on the site contribute to the historic significance of the site. It is unlikely that the existing driveway could be extended to serve the parcel to the rear without variances being required for the outbuildings or landscaping removed. The Vermillions have also VA-93-28 Page 2 established a Christmas tree farm on their property. Many of these trees would lie in the way of extending the driveway. The applicant's other option for access would be extending a driveway from Cason Farm Road, an unimproved private road serving several lots. This would be neither desirable nor practical. There is a perennial stream running along the Cason Farm Road to the south. Building an entrance and driveway would require modifications to the 100-foot buffer required along this stream by the County's Water Resources Protection Ordinance. As the applicant has pointed out, the difference in grade between the road bed and the house site would make the driveway expensive, steep and environmentally undesirable. Staff recommends approval for cause: 1. The applicant has provided evidence that the strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship. Given the size of this parcel, it is unlikely that the applicants would enjoy reasonable use if subdivision were prohibited. Using an access other than the pipestem would damage both the environment and the site's value as an historical landmark. 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 historic significance of Franklin, the fact that the pipestem exists, the topography and stream combine to make the hardship unique to this property. 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. Using the pipestem as access for one lot and one-single family dwelling will not affect the character of the area. This Department has received no letters of objection to this request. Should the Board approve this request, staff recommends the following condition: 1. The use of the 25-foot pipestem shall be limited to one parcel and one development right.