Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFDP201500002 Correspondence 1995-06-08COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Zoning 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902.4596 (804) 296.5875 FAX (804) 972.4060 I'DD (804) 972-4012 June 8, 1995 Richard A. Cooper P.O. Box 62 Crozet, VA 22932 RE: Variance Application, VA-95-05 Tax Map 57, Parcel 31A Dear Mr. Cooper: This letter is to inform you that on June 6, 1995, during the meeting of the Board of Zoning Appeals, the Board unanimously approved your request for VA-95-05, subject to the following conditions: 1. The variance is granted for the work currently proposed with the building permit, AC-94-530 (for 1-story only). Any additional square footage which would . encroach the required setback, or any change which is determined to be substantial by the Zoning Administrator, shall require amendment of this variance; 2. Virginia Department of Transportation approval of sight distance at all intersections impacted by this structure. In the event that the building addition reduces the sight distance, that area of addition shall not be permitted; 3. This variance approval is contingent upon approval of any other applicable applications, including die site plan and the public sewer service. This approval is contingent on approval of a certificate of appropriateness from the Architectural Review Board. Richard A. Cooper June 8, 1995 Page Two Under Virginia Code Section 15.1.496-1, if you disagree with this decision you may appeal within thirty days of the date of this letter by filing with the Circuit Court of Albemarle County. If you do not file such written appeal within thirty days, this decision will become final and unappealable. If you have any questions, please contact our office. Sincerely, // (� e S kt C C/J—fz. l"�QI,�I � Amelia G. McCulley, A.I.C.P. 4 Zoning Administrator AGM/db cc: File STAFF PERSON: Amelia McCulley PUBLIC HEARING: June 6, 1995 STAFF REPORT - VA 95-05 OWNER / APPLICANT: Richard A. Cooper / T/A Cafe No Problem TAX MAP / PARCEL: 57 / 31A ZONING: C1, Commercial and EC, Entrance Corridor ACREAGE: 1.387 acres LOCATION: Bounded by Rt. 240 on the south, Rt. 680 the east and Lickinghole Creek on the north and west. It is located just off U.S. Rt. 250 West at the Mechums River and & 0 Railway bridge. REQUEST• NM the C The applicant seeks relief from Section 21.7.1 of Commercial Districts, Generally, in order to construct a building addition. This is a request to reduce the building setback from 30 feet from public streets, to 7 feet from Rt. 680 and to 9 feet from Rt. 240. The building is currently located 16 feet from Rt. 680 and 18 feet from Rt. 240. (The Board may recall this proposal in the appeal, AP 95-02, heard at the last meeting. The appellant is in the process of seeking approval for those zoning violations discussed by that appeal.) The applicant has submitted a site plan for a building expansion, which includes the addition of a second floor for an apartment. The current variance request does not include a parking setback reduction; therefore, any new parking is expected to comply with the 10 foot setback required from public streets. The applicant has also submitted a request to the Board of Supervisors to provide public sewer to the proposed site plan. In addition, a special permit will be necessary if there will be fill in the floodplain. In the event the Board finds cause for approval of this variance, it will be subject to the conditions of these other approvals. Hardship Almost half of the existing structure is nonconforming as it sits and has sat for thirty-five years. A porch has been located there as well. The hardship resulting from moving half our building and porch is great. Staff Report - VA-95-05 Page Two Unigueness of Hardship As the site plan reveals, the topography of the site does yield exceptional conditions. We are bounded by a creek that requires a setback to accommodate our parking lot - most of which is in the floodplain. Impact on Character of the Area I am unaware of any detriment that would result from granting this variance. Many, if not most of the structures located nearby are 2-story structures and some are three stories. our structure would not change the character of the district. It is largely isolated. RELEVANT HISTORY: This restaurant was built prior to zoning in Albemarle. It has been called "Pop and Ethells," "The Gallerie," and "The Ridge." The current owner has named it "Cafe No Problem." The full history was discussed with the appeal, AP 95-02. The Board of Zoning Appeals, on May 2, 1995, confirmed the determination of zoning violations rendered by the Zoning Administrator. STAFF COMMENT AND RECOMMENDATION: Further development of the property is limited by several factors: the property is triangular in shape, with public roads on two borders and a creek on the third. The presence of public roads imposes a 30 foot building and 10 foot parking setback on two borders. The creek has associated floodplain and additionally, that border has setbacks imposed by the water resource protection ordinance and the runoff control ordinance. The location of the existing development of the property further dictates available area of building expansion. Building addition to the rear is towards the creek, to the east and south is towards Rt. 680 and Rt. 240, and to the west side it would encroach into the available parking area. The parking area is constrained from expansion by the creek floodplain and buffer area setback. The applicant has explained that the proposed building expansion is not an expansion of use. The building changes in the restaurant area (downstairs) will not increase the seating capacity, but will shelter what was previously outdoor seating. There was a trellis around 3 sides of the building, with terrace seating. This plan proposes to place these areas inside the building. The second floor residence is permitted within the commercial district for a night caretaker. Staff Report - VA-95-05 Page Three In this case, there are two things we should consider: the extension of public sewer and the issuance of the building permit. Mr. Cooper extended the public sewer line a significant distance, including through areas of rock. This was necessary to provide permanent and approvable sewage disposal. Some of the work has already been done according to the approved plans. This includes the digging of footings and forming for the foundation of the building extension. Mr. Cooper had proceeded in good faith reliance on the County's approval of the building permit. In the event the variance is not granted, he has estimated a cost of at least $10,000 to redesign the plans and to finish out the building extension to return it to the existing structure setback. Staff is sympathetic to the time, cost and effort that the applicant has expended; however, this hardship does not appear to be an undue hardship approaching confiscation. It is difficult to substantiate that the proposed addition is necessary to reasonable use of the property. And, the hardship caused by the approved building permit is in some part, self-imposed. The location of a 2 story structure in proximity to the road does not justifiably improve the character. The building renovation itself, with new facade and the like, will improve the character of the area. Staff does agree that the constraints of the property, ranging from shape to topography and the location of roads, are unique. Expansion of the building is limited by these. Staff recommends denial for cause: 1. The applicant has not provided evidence that the strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship. It is staff's position that further development of the property is not necessary for reasonable use of the property. Although work on the building addition has begun, the hardship is in some part, self-imposed. 3. The applicant has not provided evidence that with the authorization of such variance, the character of the district will not be changed. The building renovation, without building extension, will itself improve the character of the area. There is no justification that this specific proposal will not change the character of the district. It will result in a 2-story structure being relatively close to two public roads. Staff Report - VA-95-05 Page Four Should the Board find cause for approval, staff recommends the following conditions: This variance is granted for with the building permit, AC footage which would encroach change which is determined to Administrator, shall require the work currently proposed 94-530. Any additional square the required setback, or any be substantial by the Zoning amendment of this variance; Virginia Department of Transportation approval of sight distance at all intersections impacted by this structure. In the event that the building addition reduces the sight distance, that area of 'addition shall not be permitted; 3. This variance approval is based on approval of any other applicable applications, -including the site plan and the public sewer service. This approval anticipates review and approval of a certificate of appropriateness from the Architectural Review Board.