The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutVA200700012 Legacy Document 2007-11-16STAFF PERSON: William D. Fritz, AICP PUBLIC HEARING: December 4, 2007 VA 2007 — 12 Richard Palermo Owner/Applicant: Richard Palermo Tax Map/Parcel Number: 060AO-09-00-008H0 Zoning: R- 6, Residential Acreage: 6,789 square feet (0.16 acres) Location: Property is located on Greentree Park in the Greentree subdivision. off of Georgetown Road and adjacent to Georgetown Veterinary Hospital. Technical Request and Explanation: The applicant requests relief from Section 16.3 Area and Bulk Regulations. The requested variance is to reduce the size of an existing nonconforming lot from 6,789 to 5,983 sq ft, a variance of 1,277 from the minimum lot size of 7,260 sq ft. The purpose for the variance request is to allow the boundary line with an adjacent property to be adjusted. The proposal is to transfer 806 square feet from this property to the adjacent property. (Attachment B, the parcel requesting the variance is shown as Lot 5L) Relevant History: The plat creating this lot was approved by the County on May 14, 1979. Property Description and Qualifying Conditions: The Zoning Ordinance in Section 34.2 establishes the review criteria for a variance. Staff will provide comment on the criteria for granting a modification. The ordinance states: When a property owner can show that his property was acquired in good faith and where, by reason of the exceptional narrowness, shallowness, size or shape of a specific piece of property at the time of the effective date of this ordinance, or where, by reason of exceptional topographic conditions or other extraordinary situation or condition of such piece of property, or of the use or development of property immediately adjacent thereto, the strict application of the terms of this ordinance would effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict the use of the property or where the board is satisfied, upon the evidence heard by it, that the granting of such variance will alleviate a clearly demonstrable hardship approaching confiscation, as distinguished from a special privilege or convenience sought by the applicant, provided that all variances shall be in harmony with the intended spirit and purpose of this ordinance. The property owner acquired the land in good faith in 2002. The lot was created by a subdivision plat approved in 1979 at which time it meet the minimum lot size for the zoning district. In 1980 this lot was rezoned to R-6, Residential during the VA 2007-12 Richard Palermo December 4, 2007 Page 2 of 6 comprehensive rezoning of the County. As a result of the rezoning the lot became non- conforming to the minimum lot size. This lot is currently 6,789 square feet. The smallest lot in the Greentree Subdivision is 3,003 square feet. (Minimum lot size in the R-6 district is 7,260 square feet.) The property under review is developed with a residence and therefore has a reasonable use. A reduction in lot size would be a convenience and does not alleviate any hardship. Specifically the ordinance establishes the review criteria to address the above. No such variance shall be authorized by the board of zoning appeals unless it finds: (a) that the strict application of this ordinance would produce undue hardship; (b) that such hardship is not shared generally by other properties in the same zoning district and the same vicinity; and (c) 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 will analyze each provision of the ordinance and provide comment. The applicant's justification is also included. Staff comments are in italics. Hardship that the strict application of this ordinance would produce undue hardship The applicant has stated: The reason for this variance application is so that TMP 60A-09-17 can have ownership of the area shown on the accompanying plat for the purpose of maintenance of a swale located within the adjusted area. This exchange of ownership will not produce hardship to any surrounding property. Staff opinion is that no hardship currently exists. This property and the adjacent property, have existed as -is since the early 1980's. Both properties are developed with existing uses. The proposed boundary line adjustment does not alleviate any hardship, relieve any existing nonconformity or permit necessary improvements to occur. Uniqueness of Hardship that such hardship is not shared generally by other properties in the same zoning district and the same vicinity The applicant has stated: The hardship will be the responsibility of TMP 60A-09-17 in that they will maintain the swale and associated banks. (TMP 60A-09-17 is the adjacent parcel that would be receiving additional land.) Staff opinion is that this is not a hardship. The area does include a swale but maintenance of it is not a hardship which is unique to this or any other property. The VA 2007-12 Richard Palermo December 4, 2007 Page 3 of 6 intended purpose can be achieved with the establishment of an easement with specific agreement about maintenance. The reason for this variance application is due to the fact that the lot does not currently meet minimum lot size and will become more nonconforming if the boundary line adjustment were to occur. Several lots in the Greentree Subdivision are nonconforming due to lot size. Lot size and the existence of a swale are not unique features. Staff can identify no hardship that would be imposed by denial of this variance. Impact on Adjacent Property and District 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. The applicant has stated: The area proposed to be owned by TMP 60A-09-17 will only improve surrounding parcels, causing less debris buildup and unwanted erosion. Staff opinion is that a transfer of ownership has no effect on debris buildup or erosion. While staff does not agree with the applicant's assessment of the impact on adjacent property or the district we are able to find that approval of this variance would have no detrimental impacts to adjacent property or the character of the district. This opinion is based on the fact that no physical features would be altered and approval of the variance does not permit any additional development. Summary and Staff Recommendation: Of the three criteria for granting a variance staff finds that this request meets one criterion: that granting the variance would not result in substantial detriment to adjacent property or change the character of the district. A further provision for the granting of a variance is: No variance shall be authorized unless the board of zoning appeals finds that the condition or situation of the property concerned or the intended use of the property is not of so general or recurring a nature as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of a general regulation to be adopted as an amendment to the ordinance. Staff opinion is that the condition or situation of the property is of so general or recurring nature as to make amendment of the ordinance practicable. Therefore, the Board may not grant a variance even if it finds that the criterion for a variance has been met. Staff recommends denial of this application. Attachment A — Tax Map Attachment B — Proposed Boundary Line Adjustment Plat. Attachment C — Greentree Subdivision Plat VA 2007-12 Richard Palermo December 4, 2007 Page 4of6 ATTACHMENT A VA 2007-12 Richard Palermo December 4, 2007 Page 5 of 6 A ATTACHMENT B yo IM VA 2007-12 Richard Palermo December 4, 2007 Page 6of6 ATTACHMENT C 7A'!.6/VF/(//7/7 /STP'//p7+(3'/.is'�/XS✓/ . J et � .�� r - i .1i5 �.S/it8'rs•/d75c&'/ �/d�d17I71/_is/G� �p � ��i �9/ .t9.a�hh9h Ci9iP h � �" Q• ;i ��Q ��r� � M1 � � � � � q 125fu�i � ,'S �r 'pb•ua .'sem n L ? A' .r.�i•ua� r..,r ^ � 4YI`, - - - 1 *I V 101 "irf 5` bs :�✓7 k!x�rcuaniG- s - -� u rY�r.n.r_trifry�, �h,.. CLrin>/U �'9/Ga'�ri% mY,P�rv3 �oyi Frr M J.H/P cd/ 6///�///w. rb /:r 53 f9'2'Sto'/Z5� '1/c No �/r/rIss�i�/ �f _S%KX.�vrA7 est ��ntsr�r� rrpre�' �rx�afr« Su6�i�iaya 1L2 T8a ./�i' �!•�i�r/iy, ,��sar�zjr.�, �6�'.�`s'�//r�7, �fi��rsri/.�, 6!�i9/nia llYl'�//i a'r�'/AX21� l 7A'!.6/VF/(//7/7 /STP'//p7+(3'/.is'�/XS✓/ . J et � .�� r - i .1i5 �.S/it8'rs•/d75c&'/ �/d�d17I71/_is/G� �p � ��i �9/ .t9.a�hh9h Ci9iP h � �" Q• ;i ��Q ��r� � M1 � � � � � q 125fu�i � ,'S �r 'pb•ua .'sem n L ? A' .r.�i•ua� r..,r ^ � 4YI`, - - - 1 *I V 101 "irf 5` bs :�✓7 k!x�rcuaniG- s - -� u rY�r.n.r_trifry�, �h,.. CLrin>/U �'9/Ga'�ri% mY,P�rv3 �oyi Frr M J.H/P cd/ 6///�///w. rb /:r 53 f9'2'Sto'/Z5� '1/c No �/r/rIss�i�/ �f _S%KX.�vrA7 est ��ntsr�r� rrpre�' �rx�afr« Su6�i�iaya 1L2 T8a ./�i' �!•�i�r/iy, ,��sar�zjr.�, �6�'.�`s'�//r�7, �fi��rsri/.�, 6!�i9/nia