Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA201000002 Legacy Document 2010-04-27 (3)STAFF PERSON: Amelia McCulley PUBLIC HEARING: April 6, 2010 STAFF REPORT VA 2010-02 OWNER/APPLICANT: Farrar Woltz TAX MAP/PARCEL: 29 / 41 E ZONING: RA, Rural Areas ACREAGE: 17,652 square feet or 0.41 acre LOCATION: Located at 4289 Free Union Road in the southeast corner of the intersection of Buck Mountain Road (Rt. 665) and Free Union Road (Rt. 601) in Free Union. TECHNICAL REQUEST AND EXPLANATION: The applicant requests relief from Section 18-4.1.3 to reduce the area requirements for a dwelling and proposed commercial establishment (2 uses) on private well and septic, from 120,000 square feet to 17,652 square feet. This is a request for a variance of 102,348 square feet. 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." This variance is requested to allow an antique store to locate on this property. An antique store is not a use by -right and will be subject to approval of a special use permit. Based on our policy and practice, a variance application is decided prior to the legislative action (special use permit or rezoning). The special use permit has not yet been submitted and reviewed. The proposed antiques shop would occupy the front three rooms of the building, a total of 677 square feet or just under'/4 of the total building area. RELEVANT HISTORY: • S.P. 75-536 Shelter Associates was approved on December 10, 1975 to allow a mill/planning shop on this property. • S.P. 80-25 Lee Caplin was approved on June 18, 1980 to allow a country store on this property. It was approved subject to four conditions, of which one is Health Department approval of well and septic system. The country store use was not commenced. • A home occupation permit (HO 2004-152) was approved for an office for the current owner. VA 2010-02 Farrar Woltz Page 2 • The current owner applied for an accessory apartment permit on January 21, 2004. The accessory apartment portion of the permit was voided by the owner on February 18, 2004. The interior alterations permit was pursued. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND QUALIFYING CONDITIONS: This lot was created in a subdivision plat approved on May 5, 1966. It predates the adoption of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance in 1969. It is legally nonconforming to the area and bulk regulations of the Rural Areas zoning district with respect to lot size, among other things The property is improved with a two-story structure which was originally built in 1925 and then remodeled in 1975. The applicant notes that there was a country store in 1889. There are currently no grandfathered commercial uses remaining on the property. It has been used as a single-family residence for some time. The property is served by private well and septic. It is not in the jurisdictional area for public water or sewer. The current owner purchased the property in 2004. Therefore, none of the applicable zoning regulations were amended after she purchased the property so as to further restrict the use of the property. As noted previously, she has a home business approval. She also applied for and then withdrew an accessory apartment permit (see relevant history). STAFF COMMENT Section 4.1.3, the ordinance provision requested for variance, is based on land area necessary to support a well and primary + reserve septic fields. It is possible with more recent advances in sewage disposal technology (such as an engineered field), to slightly reduce the area necessary for a septic field. According to William Craun with the Health Department, the septic system serving this property was installed in 1999 and appears to be working fine. He has stated further that there is a small area that may support an alternative system for a reserve area for a 2 bedroom (4 person occupancy) dwelling. Neither the Health Department nor the Building Code will require that public bathrooms be made available for an antique store use. The antique store employees (primarily the property owner and her husband) will use the existing bathroom in the residence. This property has an unusually small size and in that respect it is unique. Staff agrees that even with a small lot, the owner is entitled to a reasonable use of the property. However, it is our opinion that the current residential use of the property is a reasonable use of the property. We are concerned that any further usage, however limited, may VA 2010-02 Farrar Woltz Page 3 further tax the well and septic system. While an alternative system may be possible on this property, it will have limited capacity and will be expensive. In 2006, the Board adopted zoning regulations to implement the Comprehensive Plan goal of preserving existing country stores. This zoning text amendment (ZTA 2006-00) was a response in part, to reverse the trend in which our historic country stores were becoming threatened with some demolished. Under this ordinance amendment, if the applicant chose to open a country store instead of an antique store, a variance would not be necessary. (Country stores were explicitly exempted from Section 4.1.3.) At the time, it was decided that to allow other retail uses in historic country store buildings, would be too difficult to manage. APPLICANT'S JUSTIFICATION AND STAFF COMMENT: A review of the variance criteria provided by the applicant and comments by staff follows: Hardship Staff comments are written in italics and follow the applicant's comments. The applicant notes that the variance is necessary: A. The proposed second use of 677 square feet requires absolutely no water or septic. It would be a hardship on me as the owner of this historically commercial property to lose the opportunity to use an otherwise suitable building and site due to a requirement for septic capacity that is in no way necessitated by the proposed second use that requires no water or septic at all. B. The current septic system was installed in 1999 with unusually deep trenches, 80 inches deep and it has been regularly maintained by pumping. It has every likelihood of a long lifespan ahead of it. C. Were the current septic system to fail, there is a solution: the installation of a nonconventional septic system that requires little space and has a proven track record. These systems have been recommended for Albemarle's historic country stores. D. I have confirmed that access and parking are suitable for the proposed two uses. While staff agrees that the area proposed for the antique store is relatively small, the applicant currently enjoys reasonable use of the property with the residence. It is not necessary to have two uses in order to enjoy reasonable use. 1. The applicant has not provided evidence that the strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship. Uniaueness of Hardshi The applicant notes: VA 2010-02 Farrar Woltz Page 4 This is a unique property with an unusually large building relative to the size of the land in this part of the county. The building to land ratio is more along the lines of parcels in the City of Charlottesville and is very uncommon in rural Albemarle. Within the village of Free Union, there are some other unusual properties, but none of which I foresee having this particular issue. Staff finds that there are unique characteristics of this property, such as its small size. However, because we have not found evidence of an undue hardship, we are not able to find the hardship is unique. 2. The applicant has not 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: • My building in Free Union is surrounded by commercial properties on two side and residential on two side, therefore a mixed residential and commercial use would be entirely in keeping with the current uses in the immediate vicinity. The rest of the village of Free Union is a similar mix of residential and commercial uses. • Granting a variance should have no detrimental effect to adjacent property and should provide a fun retail destination for customers of the several other existing businesses in the village of Free Union. The proposed use is very low impact and would not involve a high volume of traffic. My next door neighbors and a number of other community members are aware of and support my plans. • Opening a retail business such as a small antiques store would complement not compete with existing businesses and draw locals and non -locals to enjoy the charm of the village of Free Union in its most classic country store building, 4289 Free Union Road. • The building at 4289 Free Union Road is eligible, by right, to re -open as a country store due to the 2008 zoning amendment, although it would be impossible to meet the parking requirements. Furthermore, Free Union is already well served by the Maupin Brother's country store directly across the street. My request to open an antiques store in my part of my building adheres to the intent of the 2008 zoning amendment which invites businesses selling a wide variety of goods. This property is within a rural village known as Free Union. It is surrounded by properties which are primarily residential with some commercial. Staff is not aware of VA 2010-02 Farrar Woltz Page 5 cases in which there are two uses — commercial and residential — in one structure on other properties in this area. Because this proposal would result in a mixed use (commercial and residential) in one structure on a small property, it is not in keeping with the character of the area. 3. The applicant has not 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 staff has not been able to find that this application meets all three criteria, we recommend denial of this variance. Should the Board find cause to approve it, staff recommends the following conditions: 1. No public bathrooms may be provided for the commercial use; 2. The commercial use is limited to a maximum of 680 square feet within the existing structure; The recommended conditions result from the fact that the Building Code and Health Department reviews for adequacy are based on the proposed size with no public bathrooms. Obviously, a larger antique store and/or public bathrooms, can increase the well and septic demand. The Board is reminded that issues such as whether the antique store use should be permitted on this property in terms of traffic, parking and the like — are issues for consideration with the special use permit.