HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA199800030 Review Comments 1999-02-23 lots '11.1{j,1
lr Muir 1N
t J c.
`` ,.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Building Code and Zoning Services
401 Mclntire Road, Room 223
Charlottesville,Virginia 22902-4596
Building Code Information FAX(804) 972-4126 Zoning Information
(804)296-5832 TI-D(804)972-4012 (804)296-5875
1VILIVIORANDUM
TO: Board of Zoning Appeals
FROM: Jan Sprinkle, Chief of Zoning Administration
DATE: February 23, 1999
RE: Rehearing of VA 98-30 on March 2, 1999
The applicants requested a rehearing based upon an error on the previously used plat and
their contention that the recreational easement they enjoy on their neighbor's property was
not fully considered. The variance need has also increased in dimension from a 5-foot
variance to a 17-foot variance.
Staff opinion is still the same. the request does not meet state criteria for the granting of a
variance. The plat prepared by B. Aubrey Huffman & Associates, Ltd. and originally
submitted did have an error, but it was unrelated to the property line from which the
variance is requested. Further, the surveyor staked the property line incorrectly on the
ground, causing the applicant to ask for the wrong dimension of variance. However, the
dimensions on the plat used by staff to calculate the garage locations, both attached and
detached, were correct.
The result is still the same: a single-car, attached garage can be constructed without
variance; an attached two-car garage would require a variance of 9 feet; the desired three-
car, attached garage requires the requested 17-foot variance; and a detached garage of
one to three cars can be constructed without variance Using the plat and measurements
taken in the field, staff finds that in the worst cases, the distance from the corner of the
adjoining house to the closest corner of either the attached garage or the detached garage
would be the approximately same-60 feet. Also note that if the variance were granted and
the attached three-car garage constructed, to back out of the bay closest to the property line
and to turn and exit the lot would require backing into the easement area on the adjacent
property.
There is no unreasonable restriction or hardship approaching confiscation in this case The
granting of the variance would be a special privilege or convenience for the applicant.
II COB_11VOL31DEPT\Buddurg&ZoninglReports\MernoVA98-30R doc