Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA199600008 Review Comments 1996-06-25 • J g�+ COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Zoning, Room 223 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5875 FAX (804) 972-4035 TDD (804) 972-4012 June 25, 1996 Geoffrey Mattock 5160 Advance Mills Road Earlysville, VA 22936 RE: Variance Application, VA-96-08 Tax Map 31, Parcels 35 & 35A1 Dear Applicant: For your convenience and to allow you to organize your thoughts prior to the Board of Zoning Appeals meeting on Tuesday, July 2, 1996, please find enclosed the staff report for your case. It will be necessary for someone to be present to speak for the variance application If you have any questions, please contact our office. Sincerely, 74, ._ )"(Lkkft,Vje- S n Sprinkle Zoning Assistant cc• Buck Mountain Episcopal Church JS/db r .. STAFF PERSON: Jan Sprinkle PUBLIC HEARING: July 2, 1996 STAFF REPORT VA-96-08 OWNER and APPLICANT: Buck Mountain Episcopal Church TAX MAP/PARCEL: 31/35 and 35A1 ZONING: RA, Rural Areas ACREAGE: 3.39 and 1, respectively LOCATION: East side of Rt. 743 approximately 0.5 mile north of its intersection with Rt. 660 REQUEST: In order to divide the property and sell the Rectory, the applicant seeks relief from Sections 4.1.3 and 12.3. Section 4.1.3 states: "For a parcel served by neither central water supply nor central sewer system, there shall be provided a minimum of 60,000 square feet per commercial or industrial establishment or per dwelling unit as the case may be." Section 12.3 identifies the minimum standard level, conventional development, area and bulk in the Village Residential zoning district as 60,000 square feet also. The request is to reduce both minimums to one acre, or 43,560 square feet, a variance of 16,440 square feet. The applicant's justification includes the following: Hardship - To maintain the parking area between the parish hall and the Rectory and still meet the minimum 60,000 sf, an elongated area which protrudes behind the parish hall must be included in the Rectory parcel which is to be sold. - Currently the church maintains an extensive green belt along the property lines of the Earlysville Heights parcels. Loss of additional land may necessitate clearing the woods and the loss of an outdoor altar/chapel built sometime in the 1920's. - Selling 60,000 sf rather than one acre necessitates a higher selling price which may price the building out of the range of the first-time home owner or other likely purchaser. The condition of the house and the work needed will require additional expenditures Uniqueness of Hardship - The uniqueness of our property and of its usage precludes other properties from sharing the same hardships. - Adjacent residential properties are generally less than one acre. Impact on Character of the Area - Historically the Rectory has existed as an extant plot since the early 1900's. It is identified by the county as a separate parcel (35A1) consisting of one acre although never subdivided. Staff Report - VA-96-08 Page Two - The proposed property line merely establishes the de facto line that through nearly one hundred years of usage has existed. - The character of the district will not be changed in any manner whatsoever because what is requested is what exists. - Homes surrounding the Rectory are on plots of corresponding sizes and no changes of any sort will be evident. HISTORY: None. STAFF COMMENT: This property was acquired in good faith by the current owner. It has existed in its current configuration with the current improvements since at least the mid-1930's. This property has been the same size and shape since December 10, 1980, the effective date of the current Zoning Ordinance. It is fairly long and shallow with the church sanctuary less than 50 feet from the southern end and the Rectory less than 50 feet from the northern end. In between are the parish hall, cemetery and parking for all uses. There are developed residential lots to the north, east and south. These surrounding residential lots, in effect, confine the church to its current parcel configuration. In the considerations for granting a variance, State Code allows for consideration of "extraordinary situation or condition of such piece of property," and "the use or development or property immediately adjacent thereto." This is the case with Buck Mountain Church. The County's designation of parcels 35 and 35A1 is related to tax configuration. Since the church structure, parish hall and cemetery are not taxable, the County set up a separate identification number so that the Rectory, which is not used for "church" purposes can be taxed appropriately. This is totally unrelated to land and parcels of record. We are advised by the State court's legal precedent that variances cannot be granted in cases which should be resolved by rezoning. Section 12.3 does have standards for both cluster development and conventional development bonus level which allow for lots less than 60,000 sf to as little as 25,000 sf. However, due to its small size and existing development, this property cannot qualify for those reductions. The availability of these standards does however demonstrate that rezoning is not necessary, in this case, to reduce the lot size. Section 4.1.3 is part of the ordinance requirements of "Area and Health Regulations Related to Utilities." These general regulations are designed to meet the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance, such as, "To protect against one or more of the following: overcrowding of land, undue density of population in relation to the community facilities existing or available, obstruction of light and air..." and "To include reasonable provisions, Staff Report - VA-96-08 Page Three and groundwater defined in section 62.1-44.85(8) of the Code of Virginia;" and, "To promote affordable housing." In addition, another goal is, "To protect against destruction of or encroachment upon historic areas." In this case, the development already exists and granting a variance will not contribute to overcrowding or obstruction of light and air, nor would it be inconsistent with water quality standards. Staff opinion is that granting the variance will aid in protecting the historic setting of the church. By allowing more land to be maintained at this northern end of the property, next to the parish hall, the southern end closest to the historic church may not be needed for expansion area of either structure or parking. The Buck Mountain Episcopal Church is on the National Register of Historic Places. Although this is not its original site, retaining as much of the area as possible will help maintain the historic integrity of the structure. The statement of significance for its citation reads, "It is noted for being only one of two remaining colonial Anglican churches in Virginia's Piedmont section. It is also one of some half-dozen frame colonial churches in the State. The survival of this sternly simple edifice affords the opportunity of approximating the general form of colonial churches erected in this region of Virginia." The subdivision ordinance requires Health Department approval of the primary and secondary drainfields needed to meet Section 4.1.6. If this subdivision can be accomplished with only one acre and meet the requirement of primary and secondary drainfield area for a three bedroom dwelling, staff opinion is that the intent of the ordinance is met not only for the drainfields, but for historic preservation also. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval for cause. 1) The applicant has provided evidence that the strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship. The applicant has demonstrated that by reason of the exceptional shallowness and shape of this parcel, which was created prior to any zoning regulations, coupled with the historical value of the existing development, the strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship 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; This is the only parcel in the area with similar uses, development and characteristics. This particular set of circumstances and the magnitude of their combination is unique, and is not shared generally by other properties in the same zoning district. Staff Report - VA-96-08 Page Four 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 will be not be changed by the introduction of a new property line. All the existing development will remain the same. Should the Board find cause to approve this request, staff recommends approval with the following condition: 1. Health Department approval of compliance with Section 4.1.6.