Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA200200019 Review Comments 2002-09-10 STAFF PERSON: Jan Sprinkle PUBLIC HEARING: September 10, 2002 STAFF REPORT VA-02-019 OWNER/APPLICANT: Paraskevi Beziriandis - TAX MAP/PARCEL: 062A1-00-0K-022A0 ZONING: R-2, Residential ACREAGE: less than 1 acre LOCATION: 2423 Wakefield Road is at its intersection with Huntington Road in the Northfields Subdivision. TECHNICAL REQUEST AND EXPLANATION: The applicant requests relief from Section 14.3, Area and Bulk Regulations in the R-2 district, which requires a 25' front yard on an internal subdivision street. A variance of 3 feet is requested to allow a house built in 1973 to remain as constructed. RELEVANT HISTORY: None. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND QUALIFYING CONDITIONS: This property was acquired in good faith by Ms. Beziriandis in September 1979j The parcel is the same viA-A, r size and shape now that it was in 1980 when the Zoning Ordinance was adopted. At f�3 less than one acre, this is a small and almost triangular parcel. It does have topographic conditions that may be considered in a variance request. The site consists of only one fairly level area where the house is built, 22 feet from Wakefield Road (Rt. 651) and 32 feet from the opposite side property line. From the house, the lot slopes downward both in the front (or east) to Huntington Road and on the left (or south) side to the adjacent property. The slopes appear to be 10 to 20% which could have been the reason the house was pushed back towards Wakefield Road. The setbacks shown on the 1974 plat are 30' from both state roads but they were reduced to 25' with adoption of the 1980 Zoning Ordinance. The property is improved with a single family dwelling and a shed. The Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code became effective in Albemarle County in September 1973. Therefore, this dwelling may or may not have been built under that Code. There is no remaining record of a Certificate of Occupancy for the structure. The County did issue building permits based on subdivision review, but did not issue CO's until after the Building Code was enforced. Ms. Beziriandis does not want any addition or expansion of the dwelling. She simply wants to have this variance approved to make the existing house conform to our Zoning regulations so that she can sell the property with a clear title. Staff finds that this is a reasonable request. The house has been in existence since 1973 with no complaints Variance Report, VA 2002-019 2 September 10, 2002 and no associated problems. The house is set at an angle to the roads in such a manner that only a small corner encroaches into the setback. When placing the current 25-foot setbacks on the plat, the total area of encroachment is approximately 7.5 square feet. Staff opinion is that the strict application of the regulations in this instance would be an unreasonable hardship. APPLICANT'S JUSTIFICATION AND STAFF COMMENT: A review of the variance criteria provided by the applicant and comments by staff follows: Hardship The applicant comments that the variance is necessary because: • The violation has been in effect since 1973 and it has made it impossible for the applicant to sell her house. As stated, staff finds that it is an unreasonable hardship to strictly apply the Zoning Ordinance in this case. 1. The applicant has provided evidence that the strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship. Uniqueness of Hardship The applicant notes: • The lot is a very unusual shape with frontage on two roads making the building area small. Also, the topography made the location of the residence where it currently is. Staff agrees that this is an unusual case where the house was built and probably received County approvals, but probably not a Certificate of Occupancy. Also, the small encroachment that has not been noticed in almost 30 years is unique. 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 residence has been in its present location since 1973, so granting the variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, and the character of the district will not be changed C:I DOCUME-11AkilmerlLOCALS-11 Temp\VA-2002-019.doc Variance Report, VA 2002-019 3 September 10, 2002 Staff agrees that granting the variance will not change the character of the district. It will simply enable the present owner to gain clear title so that the property may be more easily transferred. 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: Since all three criteria have been met, staff recommends approval with the following condition: This variance is for the existing dwelling only. Any additions or accessory structures shall meet the yard and setback regulations at the time of application. C:I DOCUME-11Akilmerl LOCALS 11 Temp 1 VA-2002-019.doc ALBEMARLE COUNTY ■ •MINIIIIIIIIIIIIIIMMINIIIIIIIM VA-2002-019 Paraskevi Bezinandls TM/PARCEL 062A1-00-0K-022AO 4.$4 • • L ‘406') 4#1062 A(. lik \Q moo nO 0 7 i gA / 10 •°.RIV•7060 _ 116 /5 4 . ©� 1• \ i / / o I, d i /-' 1s \ ` ROAD 7 '• s Jo'? It l l) 19 17 • 6 I / 11 1) „.. : :: M•Rf FIE4. 1 20 \F° r1 1•• I •\ \ \;. I°9 II "44 v WAKEFIELDWAKEFIELDppRot, • _ 4rEaa, O / ' I 11 1�• tP y y \ Is 2 ¢ 7 /ai lO NORTHFIELDS , •I 4,?P 2 \ WAKEFIELD D.B 385Pp 167 `'(3J/• '3 ii Fountain Court Condominiums `, D B 748 P 655 \ i each sevenonrom,4 units �; LOW 835 4 thru 0 • 840 4 ' 0 i. • 845 A • F • 850 4 • 0 • 855 A • F • 8604 • a /' 865 A • F • 870 A • 0 ▪ 875 A • F • 880 A • 0 • 890A • a • 900 A" 0 V I /Il I rq, 20r Z°° RID DISTRICT SECT I ON 62A( I ) ALBEMARLE COUNTY 9CAt E IN FEET ,00 600 sm, MM9 I I-