The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutVA199800005 Action Letter 1998-05-08 r ®i;r iRbrsv COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Building Code and Zoning Services 401 McIntire Road, Room 223 Charlottesville,Virginia 22902-4596 Building Code Information FAX(804)972-4126 Zoning Information (804)296-5832 TTD(804)972-4012 (804)296-5875 May 8, 1998 • Michie, Hamlett, Lowry, Rasmussen & Tweel, P.C. Attorneys at Law 500 Court Square, Suite 300 P. O. Box 298 Charlottesville, VA 22902-0298 ATTN: John V. Little, Esquire RE: Request for Rehearing Variance Application, VA-98-05 Tax Map 109, Parcel 33 Dear Mr. Little: This letter is to inform you that your request for a rehearing of variance application, VA-98-05, for International Cold Storage, was considered by the Board of Zoning Appeals on Tuesday, May 5, 1998. The Board ruled (5:0) to deny your request for a rehearing. Anyone aggrieved by a decision made by the Board can appeal the decision to the Circuit Court of Albemarle County within thirty (30) days of the decision. The date of the decision is the same as the date of the Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting, April 7, 1998. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact our office. Sincerely, • Janice D. Sprinkle Chief of Zoning Administration cc: International Cold Storage Attn: Gifford Childs 5678 Heards Mountain Road Covesville, VA 22931 ��}• 11/t/'•1/ • Jil`IIIII /:- ▪C- am® -- 41 . W -rr COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Building Code and Zoning Services 401 McIntire Road,Room 223 Charlottesville,Virginia 22902-4596 FAX(804)972-4126 Zoning Information (804)296-5832 TTmation Building Code 8D(804)972-4012 (804)296-5875 t1M1EMORANDUM • TO: Members of the Board of Zoning Appeals FROM: Jan Sprinkle, Chief of Zoning Administration dp DATE: April 30, 1998 RE. Rehearing Request for VA-98-05 Last month you approved VA 98-05 for International Cold Storage on tax map 109 near Covesville. They had requested variances to make their existing building and parking comply with the HI zoning district setbacks. They needed these variances because they have also petitioned the Board of Supervisors to rezone the property to the HI zoning district t' ..'I.lows their basic use Their use has been nonconforming to the LI district that the county put on the property when the zoning ordinance was adopted in 1980. Their ultimate reason is an expansion of the existing building where the new building will meet the HI setbacks. Attached is a letter from attorney, John Little, representing an adjacent property owner to ICS, Otto Sce st number Mr. Scitems ultz is requesting that that were incorrectly presented to you onu rehear this rithe appliication, inethh on what he feels e staff report and atthere a number of items public hearing You need to read the grounds on which the rehearing is being requested and decide if you feel that your decision would be affected or may have been different if the facts represented by Mr. Little had been presented at the original hearing The only information that I can offer regarding the information in Mr Little's letter is that the county's 1980 aerial photo of this site clearly shows the shed used to house insulation surface tanks f onth the h area back f the of the main building that is claimed to have been built after 1980 Althoughthe concrete slab cannot be conclusively identified in the photo, the cleared area appears to be the same as in the 1990 photo and it is very"white", as if it were concrete, not asphalt, grass or any other surface that would photograph darker. A copy of the photo is attached. Please be prepared to discuss this and make a decision to rehear or not to rehear at your next meeting, May 5, 1998. O\: 1 _ 1 r��lT�lllll �r ®jim i 1 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Building Code and Zoning Services 401 McIntire Road, Room 223 Charlottesville,Virginia 22902-4596 Building Code Information FAX(804)972-4126 Zoning Information (804)296-5832 TTD(804)972-4012 (804)296-5875 April 29, 1998 Michie, Hamlett, Lowry, Rasmussen & Tweel, P.C. Attorneys at Law 500 Court Square, Suite 300 P. O. Box 298 Charlottesville, VA 22902-0298 ATTN: John V. Little, Esquire RE: Request for Rehearing Variance Application, VA-98-05 Tax Map 109, Parcel 33 Dear Mr. Little: This letter is to inform you that your request for a rehearing of variance application, VA-98-05, for International Cold Storage, will be considered by the Board of Zoning Appeals on Tuesday, May 5, 1998. The request will be placed first on the agenda. The meeting will be held at 3:00 p.m., in Meeting Room 241, Second Floor, County Office Building, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact our office. Sincerely, jiff"). 5riitI - Jan D. Sprinkle Ptv Chief of Zoning Administration cc: International Cold Storage Attn: Gifford Childs 5678 Heards Mountain Road Covesville, VA 22931 I:\GENERAL\SHARE\BLD&ZON\SHARON\98-032-April 29, 1998 • • wr,"I APR 2 31998 LEROYR HAMLETT.JR.EDWARD B LOmRY MICHIE, HAMLETT, LOWRY, RASMUSSEN & .-WEEL, P.C. s . .1 PETER MCINTOSH _ GARRETT M SMITH BRUCEONAD. .TWEELSEN Attorneys at Law ' 11 (', Js ['onI�.IAM C.$COTT 1V RONALD R.TWEEL y ' GARY W.KENDALL -'- '�""'�'--" Y+n«+JENNIFER A JONES ROBERT A KANTAS JOHN V LITTLE M BRYAN SLAUGHTER KEVINW RYAN 8o4-977-3390 FACSIMILE: 804-295-068i DIRECT DIAL: 804-980-9506 ELIZABETH P COUGHTER O�CouruCl JAMES P.Cox in E-MAIL:jlittle@mhlrt.com THOMAS J MICHIE ROBERT W JACKSON April 23, 1998 Board of Zoning Appeals County of Albemarle do Department of Building Code By Hand and Zoning Services 401 McIntire Road, Room 223 Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 Board of Zoning Appeals Action Variance Application VA-98-05 International Cold Storage, Inc. Tax Map 109, Parcel 33 Ladies and Gentlemen: We represent Otto G. Stolz and Jill V. Stolz, an adjacent property owner. On April 7, 1998, the Board of Zoning Appeals granted the variance request of International Cold Storage, Inc. ("ICS") subject to certain conditions. This letter is to request that the Board grant a motion for rehearing of the variance request of ICS pursuant to§7.1.2 of the Board's Bylaws. §7.1.2 of the Bylaws provides: A motion for rehearing may be granted by concurring affirmative vote of three members provided: a) That new evidence can be presented which, in the opinion of the Board, is pertinent to the recorded decision and could not have been presented at the original hearing or b) that, in the opinion of the Board, some condition or situation has changed in such a manner as to have bearing on the decision previously recorded. The Board shall set the date for the rehearing and shall cause notice of such hearing to be executed in such manner as is prescribed for any other appeal. The grounds for rehearing are that(i)the Board's decision was based upon misrepresentations contained in the application(a situation that should have bearing on its decision), and (ii) Mr. and Mrs. Stolz were out of town until the weekend before the hearing and were unable to present new evidence that has since been obtained as to the prior use of the property. 500 COURT SQUARE, SUITE 300 • P.O. BOX 298 • CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22902-0298 Misrepresentations in the Application ICS's application for variance stated that ". . . [t]his manufacturing business began in 1975 and has remained the same since the beginning ". The application also stated that ". . . this . . . parcel. . . . has been used in a similar fashion by Wayland Machinery Co. since the 1930's . . . " Staff findings were based on these representations, including a finding that ". . . these buildings have been the same size and shape since before [the County zoning] ordinance." These statements contained in the application were not correct. We disagree that ICS's business has remained the same. The type of units built by ICS has changed significantly since 1975. Instead of fruit handling equipment, ICS now manufactures walk-in coolers. At the hearing, company representatives said that they have doubled production volume at this facility in the last four years. A second shift has been added. When Ms. Stolz bought her property about 10 years ago, there was no manufacturing or permanent storage of large units outside the building facility. Now the first step in manufacturing process takes place outside. It's faulty logic for ICS to say that enclosing this work space will confer a benefit on the neighbors when ICS shouldn't even be doing this in the first place. Neither did Wayland use the property in similar fashion. Wayland made fruit grading equipment until the early 1970's. The size and shape of the buildings have also changed from those use by Wayland and since the adoption of the zoning ordinance in 1980. ICS built the concrete slab in the mid-1980's so that units could initially be stored and processed outside. ICS also built a shed to house insulation foam tanks on the back of the building at some point. The parking lot has been enlarged significantly and paved resulting in erosion and runoff from the facility. A house on the property was also torn down(which served as a visual and noise buffer between the facility and the road) so that a septic field could be installed. In short, the size and scope of the use of the property and the nature of the business enterprise have changed significantly. This is a change in character of the 1980 use of the property by ICS. The Board's decision may have been different had it been aware of these misrepresentations at the time of its prior decision. Accordingly,this is a changed situation that should have a bearing on the Board's previous decision. Presentation of New Evidence Mr. and Mrs. Stolz were out of todvn until the weekend before the hearing on the variance. For this reason, they did not have an opportunity to talk with neighbors or consult with counsel about the prior use of the property. Accordingly, they were unable to present new evidence that has since been obtained as to the prior use of the property that should be pertinent to the Board's decision. 1 We are continuing to review the prior use of this property and reserve the right to present additional information in support of this request. Summary For the foregoing reasons, we would respectfully request that the Board(A)reconsider and vacate its prior decision and(B) grant a rehearing of this variance request. Because Va. Code §15.2-2314 provides that a petition for certiorari must be filed within 30 days of the Board's decision, it is important that the decision be vacated so that Mr. and Mrs. Stolz may avoid the necessity of filing an appeal to the Circuit Court of Albemarle County pending any rehearing on this matter. Should you have any questions, or need additional information, please let me know. 0V: . yours, • . Little cc: Ms. Janet D. Sprinkle (by hand) Mr. Ronald Keeler (by hand) Mr. Gifford Childs, International Cold Storage Mr. and Mrs. Otto G. Stolz