The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutVA200400006 Review Comments 2004-05-04 STAFF PERSON: Jan Sprinkle PUBLIC HEARING: May 4, 2004 STAFF REPORT VA-2004-006 OWNERS/APPLICANTS: Lorraine Monroe, Executor for Dorothy Monroe Estate (owner); Kevin Quick (applicant) TAX MAP/PARCEL: 121/95 ZONING: RA, Rural Areas ACREAGE: 16,081 square feet or 0.369 acres - LOCATION: East side of Rt. 715 approximately 0.6 mile south of its intersection with Rt. 20 TECHNICAL REQUEST AND EXPLANATION: The applicant requests relief from Section 4.1.6 to allow the septic drainfield req �u irem �ent to be based on a two-bedroom house rather thanethree-bedroom housertl U _Aep . ` Ae- ;, ft) Fla a-z4, Section 4.1.6 states: For lots not served by a central sewer system, no building permit shall be issued for any building or structure, the use of which involves sewage disposal, without written approval from the local office of the Virginia Department of Health of the location and area for both original and future replacement septic disposal fields adequate to serve such use. For residential usage, at a minimum, each septic disposal field shall consist of suitable soils of adequate area to accommodate sewage disposal from a three (3) bedroom dwelling as determined by current regulations of the Virginia Department of Health. (Amended 11-15-89) The applicant can provide 100% primary and reserve septic drainfield areas for a house with no more than two bedrooms. Therefore, the variance is for one bedroom. .{ ! ' i, //,4.� a. a RELEVANT HISTORY: This for elates zoning in Albemarle County. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND QUALIFYING CONDITIONS: Mr. Quick is in the process of purchasing the property from the Dorothy Monroe Estate. The County's real estate records indicate that this land has been in the Monroe family since the real estate department records started. sr: - a, The lot is nonconforming(with respect to its size of only 16,081 square feet (about one- 3aK third of an acre) and with respect to the current building site requirement. Section 4.2.2 requires a building site of 30,000 square feet with adequate area for the location of two septic disposal fields as approved by the Virginia Department of Health in accordance with Section 4.1.6. When the County setbacks for the primary structure are_applied, 1e 100 sF lot has a building area approximately 42 feet wide and 50 feet deep. It also has approximately 15% slope from the road in front to the rear of the lot. According to the VA-2004-006 2 May 4, 2004 company who designed the septic system, there are poor soils with either shallow rock or a high water table covering the parcel. In addition drainfields cannot be constructed in a portion of the front of the lot due to the 100-foot required setback from the well serving the house across the road (a Health Department regulation). Similarly, when the well is established on this lot, the drainfields may not be within 100 feet. The applicant has worked with the company Enviro-Klean to develop a septic system that uses a pretreatment system and shallow sub-surface drip line disposal. This type of system is authorized by both the State Health Department and the County; however, both the State and the County are considering adopting regulations that would require third-party maintenance contracts for engineered systems. Should this variance be approved staff recommends conditioning a third-party maintenance contract and requiring that document be put to record in the title to notify future owners about the requirements for maintenance of the system. aStaff is of the opinion that due to the small size of the parcel, the Zoning Ordinance, in combination with the Health Department regulations, unreasonably restricts the use of the property. Because the reduced house size (two bedrooms instead of three) can be served by a full septic reserve, we are not concerned about public health or safety as we might otherwise be. Therefore, a variance of this Zoning Ordinance section is justified. APPLICANT'S JUSTIFICATION AND STAFF COMMENT: A review of the variance criteria provided by the applicant and comments by staff follows: (Staff comments are written in italics and follow the applicant's comments.) (11 )I ¢U� Chu MA-ez Hardship The applicant notes that the variance is necessary because: • The lot would not be buildable. 43pi.eIJi0u_51, .t Staff agrees that a hardship is created due to the unusually small size of this existing parcel. It rs about 1/3 of an acre while the minimum lot size in this district is 2.0 acres_ This Jot is less than 1/6 of the minimum lot size. It would be an undue hardship to prevent the construction of a two bedroom house on this property as a result of the ordinance requirements that there be sufficient soils to support septic fields for a three bedroom house. 1. The applicant has provided evidence that the strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship. VA-2004-006 3 May 4, 2004 Uniqueness of Hardship The applicant notes: • This is a pre-existing lot that should be allowed to be developed. Staff notes that this is a unique situation. This is a very small lot and although there are many small lots to the south of this parcel, there have not been other similar variance requests in the same vicinity. 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 character of the district will not be changed. Staff is of the opinion that the variance requested will not negatively impact the character of the area. 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 of the criteria for approval have been met, staff recommends approval of this request with the following conditions: 1. If r:;�= .':y�: engineered septic disposal system is utilized, a third party maintenance contract shall be obtained and renewed until such time that some other means of sewage disposal is available to serve the property. 2. A document describing the septic disposal system and the required maintenance contract shall be put to record in the chain of title prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for a dwelling using the system described herein. N 41....14 „zz/ ...-------."...------ ..N1 -iZ� 4 pl d )?' .,-----0 1 \\\51. v zja Q'�'Z� • b- 'q ,. 4 4 ii , `5‘ ,, • 7 ir . _ ..). , „..,\ , , .� i _, \ oZik ``\ 121-36B i,,, 41 O �`,- 121-36A `� 6 j�' • w IA ,. 1 �/ -i ,•� _.., . co/ \ tzvx, \ o , , . . , \ �� y /,, .. . /--__ ID 7 3` 0.4,7_1 .V14.v-A, .:D:,:'.9'0.-„- Z-6-7ll-.l-_9, 724 , Zu -tiZti .. 89A 2O /2'�r 2,`94 s ; J v / :' ti� i4 /21_82 72 .- /27. ' a9� 1..› e _--,/ 7 ,., ( 77 / --. / 71 72 7 j' �'r, / O� 2G 82 cr,iq �� 2 7 2i, �G,i 121-83 ��, , f - 66 e /-�-_-`�•-_'�___ �'�____� - 121-82C 72� 1 _ It ' rn s\ 17i_Qg ,l _, iv,/ sh9 e-yavyruo8 ?v, C"-nopT -ic.---,r--4- ., , --p -?-pf„e. cw-770-4/?-0, ssai ---$ 92/- aloirit3 -14 - _o-rx_e_o-g. ... rt„...,„_,:nZ ..24.4_,„„v ,-,/ -1-7gM ju ssb7 a� \ o -.L S '' '' ''n 'nC 0 \ , N i,. \ � ' • f 7� \ ��1 4v440,(6P5°‘' Os 04 a 0 Z 0! p J� \ \U ' '' \ Z.,> ' r<//,// / 4 e/7,, ,,..,,,,..///, ,c,v ' \\(--'4' , ///a),;ip• /./0-N-i /////) l ,,,x,2„ /•-• .. , , ,/,-/ , �r •�✓ jam/j// i ! '`, / o .f� s / •i t l 9' v ; im �Zr? � l , 15 l 00 . L • 1 STAFF PERSON: Jan Sprinkle PUBLIC HEARING: May 4, 2004 STAFF REPORT VA-2004-006 • OWNERS/APPLICANTS: Lorraine Monroe, Executor for Dorothy Monroe Estate (owner); Kevin Quick (applicant) TAX MAP/PARCEL: 121/95 ZONING: RA, Rural Areas ACREAGE: 16,081 square feet or 0.369 acres LOCATION: East side of Rt. 715 approximately 0.6 mile south of its intersection with Rt. 20 TECHNICAL REQUEST AND EXPLANATION: The applicant requests relief from Section 4.1 .6 to allow the septic drainfield requirement to be based on a two-bedroom house rather than a three-bedroom house. Section 4.1 .6 states: For lots not served by a central sewer system, no building permit shall be issued for any building or structure, the use of which involves sewage disposal, without written approval from the local office of the Virginia Department of Health of the location and area for both original and future replacement septic disposal fields adequate to serve such use. For residential usage, at a minimum, each septic disposal field shall consist of suitable soils of adequate area to accommodate sewage disposal from a three (3) bedroom dwelling as determined by current regulations of the Virginia Department of Health. (Amended 11-15-89) The applicant can provide 100% primary and reserve septic drainfield areas for a house with no more than two bedrooms. Therefore, the variance is for one bedroom. RELEVANT HISTORY: This lot predates zoning in Albemarle County. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND QUALIFYING CONDITIONS: Mr. Quick is in the process of purchasing the property from the Dorothy Monroe Estate. The County's real estate records indicate that this land has been in the Monroe family since the real estate department records started. The lot is nonconforming with respect to its size of only 16,081 square feet (about one- third of an acre) and with respect to the current building site requirement. Section 4.2.2 requires a building site of 30,000 square feet with adequate area for the location of two septic disposal fields as approved by the Virginia Department of Health in accordance with Section 4.1.6. When the County setbacks for the primary structure are applied, the lot has a building area approximately 42 feet wide and 50 feet deep. It also has approximately 15% slope from the road in front to the rear of the lot. According to the VA-2004-006 2 May 4, 2004 company who designed the septic system, there are poor soils with either shallow rock or a high water table covering the parcel. In addition drainfields cannot be constructed in a portion of the front of the lot due to the 100-foot required setback from the well serving the house across the road (a Health Department regulation). Similarly, when the well is established on this lot, the drainfields may not be within 100 feet. The applicant has worked with the company Enviro-Klean to develop a septic system that uses a pretreatment system and shallow sub-surface drip line disposal. This type of system is authorized by both the State Health Department and the County; however, both the State and the County are considering adopting regulations that would require third-party maintenance contracts for engineered systems. Should this variance be approved, staff recommends conditioning a third-party maintenance contract and requiring that a document be put to record in the title to notify future owners about the requirements for maintenance of the system. Staff is of the opinion that due to the small size of the parcel, the Zoning Ordinance, in combination with the Health Department regulations, unreasonably restricts the use of the property. Because the reduced house size (two bedrooms instead of three) can be served by a full septic reserve, we are not concerned about public health or safety as we might otherwise be. Therefore, a variance of this Zoning Ordinance section is justified. APPLICANT'S JUSTIFICATION AND STAFF COMMENT: A review of the variance criteria provided by the applicant and comments by staff follows: (Staff comments are written in italics and follow the applicant's comments.) Hardship The applicant notes that the variance is necessary because: • The lot would not be buildable. Staff agrees that a hardship is created due to the unusually small size of this existing parcel. It is about 1/3 of an acre while the minimum lot size in this district is 2.0 acres. This lot is less than 1/6 of the minimum lot size. It would be an undue hardship to prevent the construction of a two bedroom house on this property as a result of the ordinance requirements that there be sufficient soils to support septic fields for a three bedroom house. 1. The applicant has provided evidence that the strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship. VA-2004-006 3 May 4, 2004 Uniqueness of Hardship 6\1 The applicant notes: (P\'‘r,\/)Vse � • This is a pre-existing lot that should be allowed to be developed. Staff notes that this is a unique situation. This is a very small lot and although there are many small lots to the south of this parcel, there have not been other similar variance requests in the same vicinity. 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 character of the district will not be changed. Staff is of the opinion that the variance requested will not negatively impact the character of the area. 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 of the criteria for approval have been met, staff recommends approval of this request with the following conditions: 1. If t":'' '-engineered septic disposal system is utilized, a third party maintenance contract shall be obtained and renewed until such time that some other me99s of sew g disposal is availa le to s9rye the property. mgy 4 44eqii-ei Ot 9 Wi Paw • 2. A document describing the septic isposal system and the .q quired maintenance contract shall be put to record in the chain of title prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for a dwelling using the system described herein. STAFF PERSON: Jan Sprinkle PUBLIC HEARING: May 4, 2004 STAFF REPORT VA-2004-006 OWNERS/APPLICANTS: Lorraine Monroe, Executor for Dorothy Monroe Estate (owner); Kevin Quick (applicant) TAX MAP/PARCEL: 121/95 ZONING: RA, Rural Areas ACREAGE: 16,081 square feet or 0.369 acres LOCATION: East side of Rt. 715 approximately 0.6 mile south of its intersection with Rt. 20 TECHNICAL REQUEST AND EXPLANATION: The applicant requests relief from Section 4.1 .6 to allow the septic drainfield requirement to be based on a two-bedroom house rather than a three-bedroom house. Section 4.1 .6 states: For lots not served by a central sewer system, no building permit shall be issued for any building or structure, the use of which involves sewage disposal, without written approval from the local office of the Virginia Department of Health of the location and area for both original and future replacement septic disposal fields adequate to serve such use. For residential usage, at a minimum, each septic disposal field shall consist of suitable soils of adequate area to accommodate sewage disposal from a three (3) bedroom dwelling as determined by current regulations of the Virginia Department of Health. (Amended 11-15-89) The applicant can provide 100% primary and reserve septic drainfield areas for a house with no more than two bedrooms. Therefore, the variance is for one bedroom. RELEVANT HISTORY: This lot predates zoning in Albemarle County. • PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND QUALIFYING CONDITIONS: Mr. Quick is in the process of purchasing the property from the Dorothy Monroe Estate. The County's real estate records indicate that this land has been in the Monroe family since the real estate department records started. The lot is nonconforming with respect to its size of only 16,081 square feet (about one- third of an acre) and with respect to the current building site requirement. Section 4.2.2 requires a building site of 30,000 square feet with adequate area for the location of two septic disposal fields as approved by the Virginia Department of Health in accordance with Section 4.1 .6. When the County setbacks for the primary structure are applied, the lot has a building area approximately 42 feet wide and 50 feet deep. It also has approximately 15% slope from the road in front to the rear of the lot. According to the VA-2004-006 2 May 4, 2004 company who designed the septic system, there are poor soils with either shallow rock or a high water table covering the parcel. In addition drainfields cannot be constructed in a portion of the front of the lot due to the 100-foot required setback from the well serving the house across the road (a Health Department regulation). Similarly, when the well is established on this lot, the drainfields may not be within 100 feet. The applicant has worked with the company Enviro-Klean to develop a septic system that uses a pretreatment system and shallow sub-surface drip line disposal. This type of system is authorized by both the State Health Department and the County; however, both the State and the County are considering adopting regulations that would require third-party maintenance contracts for engineered systems. Should this variance be approved, staff recommends conditioning a third-party maintenance contract and requiring that a document be put to record in the title to notify future owners about the requirements for maintenance of the system. Staff is of the opinion that due to the small size of the parcel, the Zoning Ordinance, in combination with the Health Department regulations, unreasonably restricts the use of the property. Because the reduced house size (two bedrooms instead of three) can be served by a full septic reserve, we are not concerned about public health or safety as we might otherwise be. Therefore, a variance of this Zoning Ordinance section is justified. APPLICANT'S JUSTIFICATION AND STAFF COMMENT: A review of the variance criteria provided by the applicant and comments by staff follows: (Staff comments are written in italics and follow the applicant's comments.) Hardship The applicant notes that the variance is necessary because: • The lot would not be buildable. Staff agrees that a hardship is created due to the unusually small size of this existing parcel. It is about 1/3 of an acre while the minimum lot size in this district is 2.0 acres. This lot is less than 1/6 of the minimum lot size. It would be an undue hardship to prevent the construction of a two bedroom house on this property as a result of the ordinance requirements that there be sufficient soils to support septic fields for a three bedroom house. 1. The applicant has provided evidence that the strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship. VA-2004-006 3 May 4, 2004 Uniqueness of Hardship The applicant notes: • This is a pre-existing lot that should be allowed to be developed. Staff notes that this is a unique situation. This is a very small lot and although there are many small lots to the south of this parcel, there have not been other similar variance requests in the same vicinity. 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 character of the district will not be changed. Staff is of the opinion that the variance requested will not negatively impact the character of the area. 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 of the criteria for approval have been met, staff recommends approval of this request with the following conditions: 1. If the proposed engineered septic disposal system is utilized, a third party maintenance contract shall be obtained and renewed until such time that some other means of sewage disposal is available to serve the property. 2. A document describing the septic disposal system and the required maintenance contract shall be put to record in the chain of title prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for a dwelling using the system described herein. .0 a." MTN 7,11r, 7T low AI VA w" �\ a � to 71