HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA199900014 Review Comments 1999-07-13 STAFF PERSON: Jan Sprinkle
PUBLIC HEARING: July 13, 1999
STAFF REPORT VA-99-14
OWNER/APPLICANT: Forrest Marshall, Owner/ Bryant Bibb, Applicant
TAX/MAP/PARCEL: 90B/A16
ZONING: RA, Rural Areas
ACREAGE: 1.3±
LOCATION: West side of David Road approximately 1100 feet south of
its intersection with Lenora Road in Marshall Manor
Subdivision
TECHNICAL REQUEST AND EXPLANATION: The applicant requests relief from
Section 10.4, Area and Bulk Regulations [RA zone], which requires a side setback of 25
feet. A variance of 15 feet is requested to allow a house to be constructed 10 feet from
the southeastern property line.
RELEVANT HISTORY: None
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND QUALIFYING CONDITIONS: Since it is only
approximately 1.3 acres, this lot (created in 1976) is nonconforming to our current
zoning ordinance. As well as being small and irregularly shaped, the lot has critical
slopes on both sides of a small ridge running through the center, from David Road to
the back of the lot. The house needs to be located on this ridge, as close to the road as
possible, in order to reserve the rear portion of the lot for a gravity-fed septic system.
The small size and pie-shaped front area are conditions which restrict the buildable area
on the lot. When combined with the topographic conditions of critical slopes on both
sides of the parcel, the restriction could be viewed as unreasonable.
The applicant is a contract purchaser who would like to insure that he can build a house
that meets the subdivision's private deed restrictions of at least 2000sf, as well as meet
his family's needs and desires. Because of the restricted building area he has already
reduced the house's width by 15 to 18 feet and changed the access to the garage from
the side to the front.
Lot 15, which shares the property line and critical slope area where the variance is
desired, has no building site close to lot 16's building site. Lot 15 also has a pie-shaped
front portion with its building site all the way at the rear of the lot where it widens
sufficiently for both house and septic. This will insure that there is adequate separation
between dwellings for light, air, convenience of access and an attractive harmonious
neighborhood.
APPLICANT'S JUSTIFICATION AND STAFF COMMENT: A review of the variance
criteria provided by the applicant and comments by staff follows:
Staff Report, VA 99-14 Page 2 July 13, 1999
Hardship
The applicant comments that the variance is necessary:
• The original desire was for a one-story house;
• The subdivision covenants require a minimum of 2000 sf finished area which made
the footprint 40' x 55' and does not fit on the lot;
• The revised house plan is now only 45' x 45' and a two-story Cape Cod design;
• The lot has critical slopes on both sides of the proposed building site that prevent the
building site from being 25' from the southeast property line.
Staff opinion is that the size, shape and topographic features of this lot do constitute a
hardship as described under the Code of Virginia relating to granting a variance.
1. The applicant has provided evidence that the strict application of the
ordinance would produce undue hardship.
Uniqueness of Hardship
The applicant notes:
• This lot is one of only four remaining in the subdivision which was developed in the
1970's;
• Being one of the smallest and one of the few lots that is located on a ridge, the
building site is limited due to the critical slope and necessary drainfield areas;
• It is unique because of the specific and limited building location.
Staff finds that in the RA district and the same vicinity, there are only a few other lots
that may have similar hardships (nonconforming size, critical slopes restricting the
buildable area, etc.) but they will not be known until someone attempts to develop them.
These should be viewed on a case-by-case basis as they come along.
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.
Impact on Character of the Area
The applicant offers:
• The proposed dwelling is very much in line with the rest of the subdivision.
• The adjacent lot is currently vacant and shares the same slope restriction;
• The area of the adjoining lot where the variance is requested is unsuitable for
building but could be used as an entrance [driveway];
• By locating the house within the building site to the rear of lot 15, the maximum
distance from lot 16's varied building site will be obtained.
C.IJAN'SuANVARIVA99-14.doc
Staff Report, VA 99-14 Page 3 July 13, 1999
Staff agrees that granting the variance and allowing the house on lot 16 to be 10 feet
from the side property line will not change the character of the district. As previously
stated, the building site on the adjacent property is far enough away to insure that the
houses can be adequately separated.
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.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff agrees with the applicant that this request meets all
three criteria for approval of a variance and is in harmony with the spirit and purpose of
the ordinance.
•
C.IJAN'SJANVAR1VA99-14 doc