HomeMy WebLinkAboutLOD200500051 Legacy Document 2014-03-20OF AL8
U u�u
v�iNtP
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Steve Tugwell, Planner
From: Jan Sprinkle, Chief of Zoning and -Deputy Zoning Administrator
Division: Zoning and Current Development
Date: November 28, 2005
Subject: OFFICIAL DETERMINATION of Authorization for Adjustment of
Boundary Lines for Tax Map79A1, Parcels D1, D2, D20, D25, D33, E2, E3,
E4, E7 and E9
You have asked me to review the plat entitled, "Redivision of Tax Map79A1, Parcels D1, D2,
D20, D25, D33, E2 E3, E4, E7 and E9" dated October 25, 2005 and drawn by SL Key Inc. and to
exercise my discretion as deputy zoning administrator under Section 6.4. The following is an
excerpt from the applicable Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance regulations.
Sec. 6.4 Nonconforming lots.
A nonconforming lot may continue, subject to the provisions, conditions and prohibitions
set forth herein.
C. Division combination, or adjustment of bounda line ine o nonconforming lot authorized.
A nonconforming lot may be divided, combined with any other lot, or have one or more of
its boundary lines adjusted, provided:
1. The resulting lot or lots comply with the requirements applicable to the district in which
the lot is located and all other applicable requirements of the Albemarle County Code; or
2. In the opinion of the zoning administrator, the resulting lot or lots more substantially
conform to the requirements of section 4.0 (general regulations) of this chapter and the
area and bulk regulations applicable to the district in which the lot is located, and comply
with all other applicable requirements of the Albemarle County Code.
In this redivision plat, the purpose is to combine existing lots, not to create new lots. Therefore,
the zoning regulations that apply to new lots (such as minimum lot size and other requirements in
§ 10.4) do not apply. In this case, we look only at Section 6.4, Nonconforming Lots, and make a
determination under that language. The Zoning Ordinance regulations do not include
consideration of the intent of the Comprehensive Plan or of the Rural Areas zoning district.
For this plat, It :is my opinion that the resulting ten lots satisfy the criteria in Albemarle
County Zoning Ordinance § 6.4(C)(2) and can be approved. The proceeding will describe
Determination on Keswick Meadows Redivision Plat November 28, 2005
Although Tax Map 79A1 shows a total of only ten parcels and one proposed road in the area
bounded by I-64, West Keswick Drive (Rt. 731), and East Keswick Drive (Rt. 730), there are
actually 37 individual lots plus an area reserved for a proposed road. These lots were created by
the Royal Acres subdivision plat, recorded in 1948. Several of theses lots were then partially
taken in 1967 by the Commonwealth of Virginia for the I-64 corridor right-of-way. An official
zoning determination of parcels and development rights was made September 15, 2004 which
found that each of these 37 lots is entitled to one theoretical development right. This
determination was not appealed and is now final and unappealable.
In reviewing this redivision plat, we first find that the resulting ten lots more substantially
conform to the area and bulk regulations of the Rural Areas (RA) district in which they are
located (Section 10.4.)
Following is a step-by-step analysis comparing the ten combined lots on this plat to the Rural
Areas district requirements for new lots.
1. The RA district requires a minimum lot size of two acres for new parcels. The Royal
Acres subdivision plat does not show the sizes of the original 37 lots. However, many were
small—arotmd 10,000 square feet (sf). Even the larger lots appear to have been less than the
RA district's current two -acre minimum. Several of the original 37 lots had portions of
them taken by the state and the residues of those lots appear to be 5,000 sf or less.
Therefore, the ten lots resulting from the redivision plat, all being a minimum of 1.5 acres,
and ranging to 2.5 acres, are substantially more conforming with the RA district's minimum
lot size. In no case is a proposed lot diminished from its existing nonconforming size. In
most cases, the proposed lots are six or more times the size of the existing lots.
2. There is a gross density of 0.5 dwellings per acre in the RA district. With the total area of
21.277 acres shown on this redivision plat, this regulation would permit ten dwellings if new
lots are being created. In the Royal Acres subdivision, with its existing 37 separate lots and
corresponding theoretical development rights, up to 37 dwellings could be constructed now
if houses could be sited and sewage disposal accommodated either on each lot or by virtue of
an easement on other property. If 37 dwellings were constructed, the resulting density would
be 1.7 dwellings per acre—more than three times the permitted gross density in the RA
conforming with the RA district's gross density since it actually produces a density of 0.47
dwellings—less than the RA district's maximum. [Our opinion is that it is unlikely that all 37
lots would be developed. However, if even half the lots (18) were developed, the density
would still be 0.8 units per acre—more than 1.5 times the RA's maximum of 0.5 units per
acre.]
3. The frontage requirement for new lots in the RA district is either 250 feet on a thoroughfare
.I � __ r . 1 1 1. _ 1 T___i1__ --- J___'._____ __1_1 __._ ____ -_a___ TS T_..4
Keswick Drive to be a thoroughfare road and 'East Keswick Drive to be an internal
IICob-dts011CityViewLnkIDocsl2005 Applications12005 SUBsISUB200500332 Keswick Meadows1Z2jds_SUB_Kesw1ck
MeadowsDetl.doc2
Determination on Keswick Meadows Redivision Plat November 28, 2005
subdivision road. Therefore, the proposed Lots 1 through 8 would need 250 feet of frontage
while Lots 9 and 10 would only need 150 feet of frontage. Of Lots 1 through 8, two meet
the applicable frontage requirement and, of those six remaining, the least frontage _provided
is 144.59 feet. Both Lots 9 and 10 have more than 150 feet of frontage. Of the existing 37
lots, only two meet current ordinance requirements. Since twelve of the existing 37 lots
have no frontage, eleven have 100 feet or less on the proposed road, and only the two
fronting on East Keswick Drive of the remaining fourteen meet the frontage requirements,
the redivision plat demonstrates that the proposed lots more substantially conform to the RA
district's frontage requirements.
Our second finding is that the resulting ten lots more substantially conform to the requirements
of Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance Section 4. 0, General Regulations. The applicable
portions of § 4 are discussed next.
1. Section 4.1.3 states: For a parcel served by neither a central water supply nor a central
sewer system, there shall be provided a minimum of sixty thousand (60, 000) square feet per
commercial or industrial establishment or per dwelling unit as the case may be. Only a few,
if any, of the existing 37 lots contain 60,000 sf. Since the smallest of the ten proposed lots is
66,341 sf, the proposed lots will all confonn to the requirement of this section. This.
increase in lot size will provide additional area in which to locate adequate drainfield areas
with separation for wells and dwellings.
2. Section 4.2.1 defines and requires a building site on each lot. The surveyor has certified that
a building site meeting Section 4.2.1 exists on each of the ten proposed lots. It is our
opinion that at least 20 of the 37 existing lots do not contain the minimum sized building site
of 30,000 sf; therefore, the ten proposed lots with a minimum of 60,000 sf are substantially
more conforming to this section.
3. Section 4.6.1 Frontage and Lot Width Measurements states in part:
Lot frontaze and the minimum lot width shall be established as follows:
a. Except as otherwise provided in sections 4.6.1 and 4.6.6, every lot shall front on an
existing public street, or a street dedicated by subdivision plat and maintained or
desikned and built to be maintained by the Virginia Department of Transportation,
except that private roads shall be permitted in accordance with section 14-514 of
Chapter 14 of the Code of Albemarle.
c. Minimum lot width shall be at least the same distance as theronta., e�required for the
district in which such lot is located. The depth offront and rear yards shall be
established where minimum lot width is achievable but shall not be less in depth than
required for the district in which such lot is located. Minimum lot width shall be
.maintained between the front and rear yard. Lot width shall not be reduced under
section 4.6.1(b).
be obtained) and another eleven have frontage on the unbuilt road, this redivision plat is more
I1Cob-dts011CityVmewLnkIDocs12005 Applications12005 SUBsISUB200500332 Keswick MeadowsIZ2Jds_SUB_Keswick
MeadowsDetl.doc3
Determination on Keswick Meadows Redivision Plat November 28, 2005
substantially conforming to Section 4.6.1(a) in that it provides all ten proposed lots with some
frontage. Similarly, the 37 existing lots are nonconforming to the lot width provisions and
although they will not completely comply, the proposed lots will be more conforming. Most of
the existing lots are 100 feet or less in width and of the proposed lots, only two of the ten lots
narrow to 100 feet at any location and all but one have building sites that are more than 150 feet
wide. These ten proposed lots are more conforming with respect to Section 4.6.1(c).
We know of no other applicable requirements of the Albemarle County Code with which the ten
lots do not comply. Many other regulations will be applied when applications for building
permits are received. Until then we will not be able to judge setbacks or our regulation that
depend on health department approvals.
In summary, the proposed redivision plat combines 37 existing nonconforming lots into ten lots
which more substantially conform to the requirements of Section 4. 0, General Regulations,
and the area and bulk regulations applicable to the RA district in which the lots are located,
and comply with all other applicable requirements of the Albemarle County Code.
If you are aggrieved by this determination, you have the right to appeal it within thirty (30) days
of the date notice of this determination is given, in accordance with Section 15.2-2311 of the
Code of Virginia. If you do not file a timely appeal, this determination shall be final and
unappealable. An appeal shall be taken only by filing with the Zoning Administrator and the
Board of Zoning Appeals a notice of appeal which specifies the grounds for the appeal. In order
for an appeal to be considered complete, it shall include a completed application and $120 fee.
The date notice of this determination was given is the same as the date of this letter.
Sincerely,
Janice D. Sprinkle
Deputy Zoning Administrator
Cc: Kingma Developers, Inc, 1994 Martin Farm Lane, Charlottesville, VA 22901
SL Key, Inc., P.O.Box 1346, Charlottesville, VA 22902
Brian Cowan & Connie Hallquist, 3555 Keswick Road, Keswick, VA 22947
Marcia Joseph, 481 Clark's Tract, Keswick, VA 22947
I1Cob-dts091CityViewLnklDocs12005Applications12005 SUBsISUB200500332 Keswick Meadows1Z2Jds_SUB_Kesw1ck
MeadowsDetl.doc4