Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA199700005 Review Comments 1997-06-03 STAFF PERSON: Jan Sprinkle PUBLIC HEARING: June 3, 1997 STAFF REPORT VA-97-05 OWNER/APPLICANT: Preston O. Stallings TAX MAP/PARCEL: 56/110A ZONING: HC, Highway Commercial and RA, Rural Areas ACREAGE: 17.113 LOCATION: The south side of Rt. 250 approximately 1 mile east of its intersection with Rts. 635 and 240. REQUEST: The applicant seeks relief from Section 21.7.2, which states (among other things), "No portion of any structure, excluding signs, shall be located closer than fifty feet to any residential or rural areas district." A variance of 50 feet is requested to decrease the setbacks on three sides of the HC portion south of the creek from 50 to 0 feet for the construction of a pole barn to be used for building material storage. The current shape of the HC zoning area creates a usable area within the setbacks that is 65 feet by 300 feet to be used for the pole barn. A rectangular building of those dimensions could then be constructed and accessed from all around by using the setbacks as accessways. If the variance is granted, the space available for the pole barn would open up to 165 feet by 350 feet, thus allowing the use of a "U-shaped" building where the access would be inside the "U" and the outside of the building could be sided. The applicant's justification includes the following: HARDSHIP Yard and setback requirements are common in zoning ordinances. Generally, in the case of an intensive use adjacent to a less intensive use, the purpose of the setback is to provide protection for the less intensive use. Because such requirements are common and serve a public service, they would not normally be considered to produce an undue or unusual hardship. In this case, however, the woring of the ordinance and an unusual zoning situation creates a hardship by unduly limiting the use of a significant internal portion of parcel 56-110A in a way that clearly is not the intent of the ordinance. In this case, when considering the question of undue hardship, it is appropriate to consider hardship to others as well as to the applicant. The setback requirements of the ordinance and the 1994 rezoning of the property in question share a common reason: to shield other, either adjacent property owners or highway passersby, from commercial uses which some might find objectional. Variance Application Tax Map 56, parcel 110A May 5, 1997 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Zoning Ordinance section 21 . 7 . 2 specifies that in any commercial district adjacent to a residential or rural areas district "No portion of any structure, excluding signs, shall be located closer than fifty (50) feet to any residential or rural area district. " As shown on the attached sketches, Parcel 110A, Tax Map 056 is partially in the HC district and partially in the RA district. This request applies only to that portion of parcel 110A which was rezoned from RA to HC as a part of a zoning swap approved in April, 1994 and is identified as "NEW STORAGE AREA" on the sketches. By the same action, a two acre area adjacent to U.S. 250 was rezoned from HC to RA. The impetus for the 1994 zoning swap was to make any expansion or relocation of the existing building materials storage yard at Blue Ridge Builders Supply (BRBS) less visible to the public. The rezoning included proffers that the area rezoned to HC would be used for building material storage only and that no structure other than a pole barn would be erected on the HC property. Preliminary site plan approval for development of the storage area has been granted. The preliminary site plan includes a pole barn approximately 65' x 300 located in ,the center of the HC district, with a minimum setback of 50' from the surrounding RA district. The operators of BRBS would prefer to build a "U" shaped pole barn with the outside of the building, in some cases, less than 50' from the RA district. Sketches are attached which show the area in question and the alternate configurations for the pole barn. This request is for a variance of 50' , from a setback of 50' to a setback of 0' along the northern, southern and eastern edges of the HC district. No variance is requested with regard to the western edge of the HC district. If the requested variance is not granted, a pole barn with open sides will be erected in the middle of the HC district as shown on sketch #1 . If the site is developed in this way, building materials stored outside, between the pole barn and the limits of the HC district, and materials inside the pole barn may be visible from U.S. 250 or adjacent tax map parcels, to the very limited extent allowed by the topography of the storage area, existing natural screening and any additional screening which may be required as a result of the final site plan approval process. If the requested variance is granted, a pole barn with closed sides on the outside will be erected in a "U" shape approximately as shown on sketch #2 . In this case, to the extent that anything is visible from the north, south or west, it will be only a closed side of the pole barn, painted dark green or such other color as may be required by the Architectural Review Board. 2 Variance Application Tax Map 56, parcel 110A May 5, 1997 It is important to stipulate that the applicant recognizes that granting of the requested 50' variance by the BZA does not guarantee that the pole barn can be built with zero setback from the applicable zoning lines. To the contrary, the applicant understand and accepts the fact that other agencies, including but not necessarily limited to County Staff, the Planning Commission and the Architectural Review Board, can and are expected to impose requirements, including but not necessarily limited to storm drainage facilities and screening, that will necessitate some space between the pole barn and the zoning lines for which the variance is requested. Granting a variance of the full 50' will simply allow the maximum possible design flexibility to the applicant and the agencies responsible for reviewing the final site plan. JUSTIFICATION FOR REQUEST, BASED ON THREE (3) CRITERIA: 1) That the strict application of this ordinance would produce undue hardship. Yard and setback requirements are common in zoning ordinances. Generally, in the case of an intensive use adjacent to a less intensive use, the purpose of the setback is to provide protection for the less intensive use. Because such requirements are common and serve a public service, they would not normally be considered to produce an undue or unusual hardship. In this case, however, the wording of the ordinance and an unusual zoning situation creates a hardship by unduly limiting the use of a significant internal portion of parcel 56-110A in a way that clearly is not the intent of the ordinance. In this case, when considering the question of undue hardship, it is appropriate to consider hardship to others as well as to the applicant. The setback requirements of the ordinance and the 1994 rezoning of the property in question share a common reason: to shield others, either adjacent property owners or highway passers- by, from commercial uses which some might find objectional . To the extent that observing the setback required by the ordinance makes the storage area more visible to others than it would be if , the requested waiver is granted, and to the extent that such visibility constitutes a hardship to others, that hardship would be mitigated by granting of the requested waiver. This is a case where granting the requested waiver to the wording of the ordinance will result in a design which will clearly be more responsive to the intent of the ordinance and to the reason the zoning swap was approved. 2) That such hardship is not shared generally by other properties in the same zoning district and the same vicinity. 3 • Variance Application Tax Map 56, parcel 110A May 5, 1997 Clearly, the setback requirement was intended to apply to the common situation where a tax map parcel with commercial zoning shares a property line with a tax map parcel zoned residential or rural area and the setback would be along the perimeter of the parcel to be developed commercially. The extremely unusual situation in this case is that separate parcels are not involved, and the wording of the regulation makes an internal portion of parcel 56-110A unusable. This is a hardship not shared generally, if at all , by other properties in Albemarle County. Granting the requested waiver would still leave a buffer of approximately 180' to 360' between the proposed structure and the three adjacent RA or residentially zoned parcels. This buffer would be approximately 3 .6 to 7 . 2 times the 50' setback which the ordinance clearly anticipates is sufficient to provide protection to adjacent parcels. 3) 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. Not only will the granting of the requested variance not be detrimental to the area, it will significantly help in development of the area as contemplated by the zoning swap. This HC district was created specifically to lessen the impact, particularly the visual impact, of the building material storage yard on the surrounding properties and traffic on U.S. 250. The site plan shows the storage area cut into a hillside and sets a limit on the height of the pole barn such that both the outdoor storage and the pole barn are for all practical purposes invisible to persons on adjacent parcels to the east, south and west. In order to accomplish this grading, the Planning Commission approval of the preliminary site plan included a waiver of Zoning Ordinance section 21 .7 .3 . which is obviously a companion to Section 21 .7 . 2 . , the subject of this variance request. Approval of this variance request will allow a site configuration which in turn will result in the pole barn being built with closed sides to the outside so that the stored building materials will not be visible at any time of the year from the north, south or west. I hereby certify that the information provided on this application and accompanying information is accurate, true and correct to the best o my knowledge and belief. 0 L4U SS h) at a at Receipt I ate t• home\donw\wp\docs\blustorg\variance 4 1W