Case #1 Target Corporation - August 6, 2014

 
Case #1 Target Corporation - August 6, 2014
Case #1
                                                           Target Corporation
                                                                          August 6, 2014
PREPARED BY: KAREN LASLEY

DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: requests a variance to permit 5 onsite signs instead of a
maximum of 3 as allowed

LOCATION: 525 First Colonial Road
          Beach District #6

GPIN: 2407-77-6111

ZONING: B-2, RMA
YEAR BUILT: 1998

AICUZ: Greater than 75 Db Ldn

SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: This existing
Target retail store currently has three signs;
one freestanding sign fronting on First
Colonial, one building sign facing Donna
Drive and one building sign facing Interstate 264. A variance is being requested to erect
an additional building sign with approximately 120 square feet facing First Colonial Road.
A variance is also being requested to allow a 36 square foot information sign on the front
of the building for the new pharmacy, to read; “Pharmacy.” Elevations of the proposed
signs have been submitted showing red lettering in keeping with the existing signs. The
variances would allow a total of five signs for this site, rather than three as permitted.

CONSIDERATIONS:

   1. The sign regulations allow three main signs on this site. The existing sign facing
      Interstate 264 is only minimally visible due to vegetation. This sign could be
      removed and placed on the First Colonial Road side of the building without a
      variance.
   2. The Retail Design Guidelines found in the City Zoning Ordinance allow retail
      buildings with facades greater than 200 feet in length, such as this big box retail
      store, to have three directional or informational signs on the front facade with 1.5’
      high letters and a maximum of 30 square feet. The proposed Pharmacy sign could
      be slightly reduced in size and permitted without a variance under this code
      section.
   3. Staff is working to make sure the applicant understands what signage options are
      available by right.
Case #1 Target Corporation - August 6, 2014
Case #2
                                                                      William Adams
                                                                              August 6, 2014
PREPARED BY: CHRIS LANGASTER

DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: requests a variance to a 2.8 foot side yard setback adjacent to a
street (First Colonial Road) instead of 21 feet as required and to waive the required Category I
Landscaping for an existing 6 foot tall privacy fence

LOCATION:   1333 Paramore Drive
            Lot 66, Great Neck Farms
            Lynnhaven District #5
GPIN: 2408-36-6115
ZONING: R-10, RPA/RMA
YEAR BUILT: 1983
AICUZ: NOISE ZONE 65-70dB DNL

SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant would
like to retain a recently installed
6-foot privacy fence presently 2.8-feet from the
property line adjacent to First Colonial Road
instead of 21-feet; and waive category I
landscaping as required when a fence is installed within 5-feet of a property line adjacent
to a street.

The applicant explains the previous fence was damaged by a vehicle in January 2014. It
was no way to determine when the original fence was installed; however, it appears the
new fence was replaced in the same footprint as the previous fence. This fence was
replaced without obtaining a fence permit or consulting with the zoning staff prior to
installing the fence. Because the nonconforming status was substantiated by the
applicant or staff, a letter of violation was issued to applicant in April 2014 by a zoning
inspector.

Staff recommends the applicant consider relocating the existing fence 19-feet from the
property line adjacent to First Colonial Road. Though the fence will not align with the
dwelling presently at a 21-foot setback and comply with the zoning ordinance; it will
allow the fence to be relocated and avoid the swimming pool apron.

CONSIDERATIONS:
   A fence permit was not obtained prior to installing the fence.
   The applicant has the option to install the fence in line with the existing dwelling
     and comply with the fence ordinance.
   The zoning ordinance was amended specifically to offer setback relief for fencing
     installed with nonconforming dwellings on corner lots. Allowing the fence to
     remain in close proximately to a property line adjacent to street is not in keeping
     the intent and spirit of the zoning ordinance.
   This request is not in keeping with the intent and spirit of the fence ordinance and
     is expected to set a negative precedent for others in the surrounding community.
   No opposition has been received regarding this request.

RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS:
  1. The existing 6-foot fence shall be relocated to a 19-foot setback from the property
     line adjacent to First Colonial Road.
Case #1 Target Corporation - August 6, 2014
Case #3
                                                             Paul & Terry Griffey
                                                                               August 6, 2014
PREPARED BY: CHRIS LANGASTER

DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: request a variance to a ‘0’ foot rear yard setback (North side)
instead of 10 feet as required for a proposed raised walkway and stairs and; to an 8.4 foot rear
yard setback (North side) instead of 10 feet as required for a proposed deck and; to a 3.6 foot
side yard setback (East side) instead of 10 feet as required for an existing freestanding stone
fireplace

LOCATION:   4340 Sandy Bay Drive
            Lot 46, Baylake Beach
            Bayside District #4
GPIN: 1570-81-6369
ZONING: R-15, RPA
YEAR BUILT: 1967
AICUZ: noise zone less than 65dB DNL

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS HISTORY: On
January 6, 2010, the following variances were
Granted:
    A variance to a zero setback for the property
      line adjacent to Joyce Avenue, instead of 30-
      feet as required for a proposed 8-foot fence and to waive category I landscape
      screening where required when adjacent to a street
    A variance to a 10-foot setback for the property line adjacent to Joyce Avenue,
      instead of 30-feet as required

SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicants are proposing to construct a 4’ x 31’ raised
walkway with a 10’ x 10’ platform at a 0-foot rear yard setback, instead of 10-feet as
required. In addition, the applicants would like to retain a free-standing brick fireplace
presently 3.6-feet from the east side property line, instead of
10-feet as required for accessory structures. The proposed raised walkway will extend
north across the rear property line onto property owned by Thomas Ammons Trust. This
walkway will provide the homeowners with direct access to the adjacent beach that is
presently encumbered by (sand dunes) topography.

CONSIDERATIONS:
    Many of the property owners that also front this strip of unimproved property
      owned by the trust have installed similar raised walkways to provide access to the
      beach. Therefore, these proposed improvements are consistent with the
      improvements that have been made along the property owned by the trust.
    This request is not expected to create a detriment to the adjoining property
      owners.
    No opposition has been received regarding this request.
 RECOMMNEDED CONDITIONS:
   1. The proposed raised walkway and platform shall be constructed substantial
      adherence to the submitted site plan.
   2. The walkway and platform shall remain uncovered and shall not be expanded
      without further consideration from the Board of Zoning Appeals.
   3. The free-standing fireplace shall not expanded or altered and all appropriate ‘after-
      fact’ building permits shall be obtained within 7 days of this hearing.
Case #1 Target Corporation - August 6, 2014
Case #4
                                   Thomas Ammons et al Trustee
                                                                       August 6, 2014

PREPARED BY: CHRIS LANGASTER

DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: requests a variance to a ‘0’ foot side yard setback
(South side) instead of 25 feet as required for a proposed elevated walkway and stairs

LOCATION: Baylake Beach North
          Lots 46-64 and Parcel C
          Bayside District #4

GPIN: 1570-91-5219

ZONING: R-15, RPA
YEAR BUILT: N/A

AICUZ: noise zone less than 65dB DNL

SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant
is seeking a variance to allow a zero
setback from the south side property
line, instead of 25-feet as required for a
portion 43’ of a raised walkway. The
raised walkway will be owned by the adjoining property owner and will extend from lot
46.

(See case #3 for a detail description of the
proposal)
Case #1 Target Corporation - August 6, 2014
Case #5
                                                              James Hummel
                                                                       August 6, 2014
PREPARED BY: KEVIN KEMP

DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: requests a variance to 10.5 foot front yard setback
adjacent to unimproved Ocean View Avenue (North) instead of 20 feet as required and
to 37% in lot coverage instead of 35% as allowed and to 81% in impervious surface
coverage instead of 60% as allowed for a proposed single family dwelling and; to a 13.6
foot front yard setback adjacent to unimproved Ocean View Avenue (North) instead of
20 feet as required for a proposed generator

LOCATION: 4828 Bay Bridge Lane
          Lots 7 &8, Chesapeake Pk
          Bayside District #4,

GPIN: 1570-52-2792

ZONING: R-5R(SD)

YEAR BUILT: New Construction

AICUZ: Less than 65 dB DNL

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
HISTORY:

      On April 20, 1983 a variance of 9
       feet to an 11 foot front yard setback (Ocean View Ave) instead of 20 feet as
       required and of 2 feet to a 6 foot east side yard setback instead of 8 feet as
       required was Granted.

SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant wishes to demolish the existing
condemned dwelling on the site and construct a new single-family home. The
applicant is requesting a variance to locate the home 10.5 feet from the property
line adjacent to Ocean View Avenue, instead of 20 feet as required. A generator
that is located underneath the upper level decking is also included in this
request. Additionally, the applicant is requesting a variance to exceed the
allowable lot coverage and impervious cover.

The existing lot is two parcels. The applicant plans to vacate the interior lot line;
creating a 50 foot wide parcel. The legal front of the property is adjacent to Ocean
View Avenue, which is unimproved right-of-way. The lot is accessed by a 16 foot
wide, paved access easement at the rear of the property.

The footprint of the proposed home is similar in size to the one being
demolished, only moved towards Ocean View Avenue. The submitted plans show
a concrete driveway at the rear of the property that extends the entire width of the
lot. The remaining portion of the lot is shown as gravel ground cover with a paver
Case #1 Target Corporation - August 6, 2014
path extending along the west side and rear.

The submitted building elevations depict a two and a half story home. The bottom
level of the home is a two-car garage that faces the rear of the property. The
upper two floors contain the living space. The south side of the home features the
entrance to the home and a staircase accessing the rooftop deck. The north side
of the home, facing the Chesapeake Bay, is predominately windows, and contains
balconies on both upper levels. The proposed home has a flat roof that will be
used as a rooftop deck.

CONSIDERATIONS:

      The applicant’s request for a 10.5 foot setback adjacent to Ocean View
       Avenue is in character with the adjacent properties that have setbacks of
       9.2 feet and 8.5 feet. Additionally, several other properties on Bay Bridge
       Lane have been granted variances to the setback along Ocean View
       Avenue.
      The portions of the proposed home that are located closest to the front
       property line are unenclosed decks. The side of the building is located
       19.55 feet from the front property line.
      The proposed generator located 13.6 feet from the property line adjacent to
       Ocean View Avenue is situated underneath the proposed upper level
       decks.
      This request is consistent in nature and scope to the variance that was
       granted on this property in 1983, that allowed for an 11 foot setback
       adjacent to Ocean View Avenue for the existing dwelling.
      The legal front of the lot is adjacent to an unimproved vegetated sand dune
       adjacent to the Chesapeake Bay.
      When the interior lot line is vacated, the subject lot will meet all
       dimensional requirements for the R-5R (single-family) zoning district;
       however, it should be noted that 800 square feet at the rear of the lot is
       reserved as an access easement.
      The applicant is requesting 37% lot coverage rather than 35% allowed. This
       equates to 120 square feet of addition lot coverage being requested. It
       should be noted that as this is new construction, it appears to staff that
       modifications to the design could be considered to decrease the proposed
       lot coverage to conform to the requirement.
      800 square feet of the lot is the paved access easement. This easement
       accounts for 16% of the impervious cover. In addition to the easement, the
       applicant requests an additional 5% of impervious cover, totaling 81%
       coverage for the lot.

RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS:

   1. The site shall be developed in substantial adherence to the submitted site
      plan entitled, “PROPOSED SITE PLAN EXHIBIT FOR ZONING VARIANCE,
      LOTS 7&8, BLOCK 17, CHESAPEAKE PARK”, dated 06/02/2014 and
      prepared by Mid Atlantic Surveying-Land Design.
   2. The dwelling shall be constructed in substantial adherence to the
      submitted elevation drawings entitled, “4828 BAY BRIDGE LANE, HUMMEL,
      PRELIMINARY HOUSE PLANS”.
   3. When developed, the lot coverage on the site shall not exceed 35%, as
      allowed per Section 502 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Case #1 Target Corporation - August 6, 2014
Case #6
                                                                  Harbor View
                                                                     August 6, 2014
PREPARED BY: KAREN LASLEY

DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: requests a variance to a 5 foot setback adjacent to
Page Avenue (Northwest) instead of 30 feet as required for a 6 foot tall fence

LOCATION: 2300/2301 Page Harbor Ldng
            Lynnhaven District #5
GPIN: 1489-89-8341
ZONING: B-4(SD), RMA
YEAR BUILT: Existing condominiums and
fence – 1997. Proposed new fence.
AICUZ: Less than 65 Db Ldn

VARIANCE HISTORY: A variance was
approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals
on September 7, 1994 to allow development
on this site to have a 12’ setback from Page
Avenue.

SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: This residential condominium complex desires to
replace old fencing with new maintenance free, open (less than 50% opaque)
white vinyl, 6’ tall fencing. All of the proposed new fencing meets requirements of
the City Zoning Ordinance except along Page Avenue.

 An existing 4’ tall, open, white vinyl fence and entrance gates is currently located
with what appears to be a zero setback from Page Avenue. The applicant is
asking for a variance to locate the new fence with a 5’ setback with an entrance
gate at 16.6’ from Page Avenue. The submitted plan shows landscaping on the
exterior of the fence along Page Avenue, however, no specifics regarding the
type of landscaping have been submitted. The applicant’s narrative does indicate
that landscaping will be installed in keeping with other developments in the
vicinity. Pictures of the proposed fence have been submitted.

The applicants believe that this request should be approved because other
residential developments in the vicinity have received variances to allow similar
fences to be located with a 5’ setback from Page Avenue. They also indicate that
customers from CP Shuckers have been cutting through this condominium
complex after hours to reach cars parked on Page Avenue and the applicants
hope a new higher fence will end this trespassing.

The Department of Public Utilities reports that there is a sanitary sewer manhole,
fire detector meter and domestic water meter fronting the property line along
Page Avenue. A 10’ by 12’ easement needs to be dedicated over these facilities. It
appears that this easement was not obtained when the condominium project was
developed. The proposed fence is not expected to interfere with the existing
utility improvements.
Case #1 Target Corporation - August 6, 2014
CONSIDERATIONS:
   Approval of this variance would be recurring in nature. Other condominium
    complexes are similarly situated and other similar variances were approved
    along Page Avenue prior to 2000. If the community finds this type of
    fencing appropriate with a 5’ setback, a general amendment to the fence
    regulations is a practical solution.
   The intent of the fence regulations is to prevent city streets from being
    lined with unsightly fences. The proposed open, maintenance-free fence
    with landscaping on the exterior does not present serious aesthetic
    concerns.
   The existing fence regulations do not appear to unreasonably restrict use
    of this property and no unique physical condition has been identified.

CONDITIONS:

If approved, the following conditions should be required:

      1. The fence shall be in keeping with the submitted plan and pictures
         showing a 6’ tall, white, open, maintenance free, aluminum fence.
      2. Landscaping shall be installed on the exterior of the fence in keeping
         with the landscaping at Lynnhaven Dunes Condominiums. A landscape
         plan shall be submitted to the Zoning Office for review and approval.
      3. Prior to obtaining a building permit for the new fence, an easement must
         be dedicated over the existing public utility improvements along Page
         Avenue. The fence must be located in a manner that will not interfere
         with the improvements. Contact Don Piron in Public Utilities at 385-8478
         for more information.
Case #1 Target Corporation - August 6, 2014
Case #7
                                             James & Michelle Wood
                                                                    August 6, 2014
PREPARED BY: KEVIN KEMP

DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: request a variance to a 14 foot rear yard setback (South
side) instead of 20 feet as required for a proposed building addition

LOCATION: 4941 Bradpointe Lane
          Lot 11, Chesapeake Park
          Bayside District #4

GPIN: 1570-31-9509

ZONING: R-7.5

YEAR BUILT: 1988
AICUZ: Less than 65 dB DNL

SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The
applicant wishes to construct a 19.5
feet by 14 feet, one-story, single car
garage addition attached to the west
side of the existing home. A variance to
the required rear yard setback is required because the proposed addition would
be located 14 feet from the rear property line, instead of 20 feet as required. The
applicant also intends on several other renovations to the existing home,
including a new roof, new windows, new exterior stain and replacing the existing
garage door to match the proposed addition.

CONSIDERATIONS:

      The subject lot is approximately 7,800 square feet and meets the
       dimensional requirements for the R-7.5 zoning district; however, because it
       is located on the bulb of a cul-de-sac, it has an irregular shape that causes
       the depth to decrease significantly towards the western portion of the lot.
      The home was constructed in 1988, when the required rear yard setback
       was 10 feet. Additionally, the home is situated on the site at an angle,
       leaving little room at the rear or sides of the property for expansion.
      The encroachments into the required setbacks of the proposed addition
       appear to be minimal in order to serve its intended function. The proposed
       addition will not encroach further into the rear yard setback than the
       existing dwelling and will conform to all other zoning requirements.
      The applicant states that they met with the property owners to the rear and
       sides of the subject lot, and no concerns were brought to their attention.
Case #1 Target Corporation - August 6, 2014
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS:

  1. The site shall be developed in substantial adherence to the submitted site
     plan, entitled “PHYSICAL SURVEY OF LOT 11, CHESAPEAKE PARK,
     EXCLUSIVELY FOR JAMES A. WOOD AND MICHELLE G. WOOD”, dated
     October 1, 2008 and prepared by Alphatec Surveyors Ltd.

  2. When developed, the addition shall be constructed in substantial
     adherence to the submitted elevation drawing, entitled “JAMES A. &
     MICHELLE G. WOOD, 4941 BRADPOINTE LANE VIRIGNIA BEACH 23433”,
     prepared by WAFF Development.
Case #8
                                                           Donald Clark, Jr.
                                                                     August 6, 2014
PREPARED BY: CHRIS LANGASTER

DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: requests a variance to a 44 foot front yard setback
(Pinewood Road) instead of 50 feet as required for a proposed generator

LOCATION: 130 Pinewood Road
            Lot B, Linkhorn Park
            Beach District #6
GPIN: 2418-53-7696
ZONING: R-40
YEAR BUILT: 1952
AICUZ: noise zone 70-75dB DNL

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
HISTORY: On April 3, 2013, a variance
to a 33-foot front yard setback, instead
of 50-feet as required was Granted for
two-story room addition

SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The
applicant would like to retain a “20kW
Generac Guardian series generator” recently installed 44-feet from the front
property line, instead of 50-feet as required. Although, Pinewood Road is defined
as the front of this lot, the front of the existing dwelling faces Holladay Point.
Therefore, the generator was installed in the rear of the dwelling directly adjacent
to recently constructed room/garage two-story addition.

Per the applicant the generator was installed as an afterthought while
constructing a room/garage two-story addition. No permits were acquired prior to
installing the generator.

CONSIDERATIONS:

      The generator is setback 11-feet more from the front property line than the
       existing dwelling.
      The generator was installed without obtaining the required permits prior to
       installing the generator.
      The generator is installed at a significant distance from any of the adjoining
       property owners.
      At a distance of 23-feet this model generator will produce sound outputs of
       66dB while operating normally and 60dB in test mode.
      The applicant has agreed to install additional landscaping to screen the
       generator from view.
      This proposal is not expected to have a detriment impact on the adjoining
       property owners.
      No opposition has been received regarding this request.
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS:

  1. An after-the-fact permit for the generator shall be obtained within 7 days of
     this hearing date.
  2. Landscaping capable of screening the generator from view shall be
     installed around the generator.
  3. The generator shall only be operated during emergency power outages and
     for testing and/or maintenance purposes as recommended by the
     manufacturer’s specifications.
Case #9
                                                   Florian & Janet Hofer
                                                                     August 6, 2014
PREPARED BY: KAREN LASLEY

DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: request a variance to a 15 foot rear yard setback
(North) instead of 20 feet as required for a deck

LOCATION: 2208 Sandfiddler Road
            Lot 17, Sandbridge
            Princess Anne District #7
GPIN: 2424-96-7472
ZONING: R-20
YEAR BUILT: Dwelling constructed in 1983.
AICUZ: Less than 65 dB Ldn

SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: A large deck
attached to this single-family home has
existed since the applicant purchased the
property in 1988. The deck has a 15’ rear
yard setback, instead of the currently
required 20’ rear yard setback. The former
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance in place until April 1988, allowed a 15’ rear
yard setback for properties in this zoning category (formerly R-3 Residential
District). The deck is in need of repair and the applicant desires to replace the
deck in its current location. Because portions of the deck do not meet the
required 20’ rear yard setback, a variance is needed.

CONSIDERATIONS:

      The deck will not be expanded, just repaired and replaced in its current
       location.
      The deck was built prior to 1988 under the Comprehensive Zoning
       Ordinance when the rear yard setback for this site was 15’.
      The rear yard of this lot adjoins an undeveloped portion of the Dam Neck
       Navy Base.
      The lot is on a curve in the road and is slightly irregularly shaped. The
       home sites at an unusual angle.
      The current 20’ rear yard setback does not unreasonably restrict the use of
       this lot. The home and a substantial portion of the large deck meet all
       required setbacks.

CONDITIONS:

If approved, the following condition should be required:

       Approval is to repair or replace the existing deck only in the current
       location. The deck cannot be expanded, enclosed or covered.
Case #10
                                                                   LIN-CON, LLC
                                                                          August 6, 2014

PREPARED BY: CHRIS LANGASTER

DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: requests a variance to a 10.1 foot side yard setback
adjacent to a street (Dutch Street) instead of 18 feet as required and; to a 6.1 foot side
yard setback (North) instead of 8 feet as required for a proposed single family dwelling

LOCATION: 200 Thalia Road
            Lot 1, Jacksondale
            Lynnhaven District #5
GPIN: 1477-94-1708
ZONING: R-5D, RMA
YEAR BUILT: new construction
AICUZ: noise zone less than 65dB DNL

SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is
proposing to construct a two-story dwelling
10.1 foot from the property line adjacent to
Dutch Street instead of 18-feet as required
and 6.1-foot from the north side property
line, instead of 8-feet as required. An
existing dwelling is presently located on the property line that separates Lots 1 &
2. The existing dwelling is planned to be demolished and single-family dwellings
will be constructed on each of these nonconforming lots.

CONSIDERATIONS:

      This corner lots is nonconforming in regards to the minimum 60’ lot width
       and 5,000 sf lot area for this zoning district.

      This proposal is consistent with the redevelopment trend occurring
       throughout community.

      Approximately 9-feet of right-of-way separates the property line adjacent
       Dutch St and the edge of pavement. Therefore, the proposed dwelling will
       be setback over 18-feet from the edge of pavement.

      This proposal is not expected to have a detriment impact on the adjoining
       property owners.

      No opposition has been received regarding this request.

RECOMMENDED CONDITION:

   1. The proposed single-family two-story dwelling shall be constructed in
      substantial adherence to the submitted site plan and building elevations.
Case #12
                              Dean Muriano & Edward Muriano
                                                                       August 6, 2014

PREPARED BY: KEVIN KEMP

DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: request a variance to a 16 foot front yard setback
(Ocean View Avenue) instead of 30 feet as required and to a 5 foot side yard adjacent
to a street (Bayview Avenue) instead of 30 feet as required and to a 17 foot rear yard
setback (Southwest) instead of 20 feet as required for a proposed single family dwelling
and; to a 4.1 foot front yard setback (Ocean View Avenue) instead of 30 feet as required
and to a 3 foot side yard setback (Northwest) instead of 5 feet as required for an
existing shed

LOCATION: 2537 Bayview Avenue
            Lots 19 & 20, Chesapeake Pk
            Bayside District #4
GPIN: 1570-43-5058
ZONING: R-7.5
YEAR BUILT: New Construction
AICUZ: Less than 65 dB DNL

SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The
applicant is requesting a variance to the
front, side yard adjacent to a street and
rear setbacks in order to construct a
new single-family dwelling. The
applicant intends on removing the one-
story structure that is currently on the
site, as well as a small shed located at the rear of the property. There is a second
accessory structure on the site located near the property line adjacent to Ocean
View Avenue. The applicant plans to remove a small portion of the structure that
crosses over the side property line; however, the structure encroaches in the
front and side yard setbacks, and is thus included in this variance request.

Constructing a home on the subject site is challenging due to the lot’s location,
size and shape. The legal front on the lot is adjacent to Ocean View Avenue, an
unimproved vegetated sand dune. Additionally, there is an unimproved right-of-
way located adjacent to the east property line (Bayview Avenue), which is used
for beach access. The site narrows as it approaches Ocean View Avenue, and is
substandard to the required lot width. The 5,910 square foot lot is also
substandard in size for a lot being created under the requirements of the current
Zoning Ordinance in the R-7.5 district.

The footprint of the proposed dwelling is approximately the same as the structure
that it is replacing. The submitted building elevations depict a three-story home.
The bottom level contains the multi-car garage. The main access to the home is
from the second level, along the south façade of the home. There are multiple
second and third floor decks shown along the north and east façades.
CONSIDERATIONS:
   The lot is substandard in both size and width to the dimensional
    requirements for the R-7.5 zoning district as per the Zoning Ordinance. The
    lot is 5,910 square feet instead of 7,500 as required, and approximately 50
    feet in width, instead of 85 feet as required for a corner lot. Additionally, the
    lot narrows as it approaches the legal front. However, because this is new
    construction, it appears to staff that adjustments could be made to lessen
    the encroachments into the side yard adjacent to Bayview Avenue and rear
    yard setbacks. Staff feels that a 10 foot setback adjacent to Bayview
    Avenue is reasonable, as that would be the setback if the beach access
    were not considered public right-of-way. Staff also feels that it is
    reasonable for the proposed dwelling to meet the 20 foot rear yard setback.
   The front of the lot is the property line adjacent to Ocean View Avenue, an
    unimproved vegetated sand dune adjacent to the Chesapeake Bay.
   It appears to staff that the proposed dwelling and existing sheds, as
    depicted on the submitted site plan, exceed the allowable lot coverage
    (35%) for the R-7.5 zoning district. Staff has not received resolution from
    the applicant regarding this matter.
   Both of the small accessory structures located on site appear to be
    weathered and deteriorating. As the applicant proposes to remove the
    existing home on the site, it appears that the opportunity exists to move or
    remove these structures so that they meet the requirements of the Zoning
    Ordinance.

RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS:

1. When the site is developed, the side yard setback adjacent to Bayview Avenue
shall be ten (10) feet.

2. When developed, the principal structure and any attached decking over 16
inches in height from the ground, shall meet the twenty (20) foot setback as
required in Section 502 of the Zoning Ordinance.

3. All existing accessory structures located on site shall be moved or removed to
meet the setback requirements of Section 502 of the City Zoning Ordinance.

4. When developed, the site shall not exceed 35% in lot coverage, as allowed per
Section 502 of the City Zoning Ordinance.

ADDITIONAL NOTES:
   Staff has spoken with the applicant’s representative and architect
     regarding the proposed plan exceeding the allowable lot coverage. The
     applicant’s architect is working to adjust the design to meet the 35% lot
     coverage requirement, as well as addressing staff concerns with the
     proposed side yard setback adjacent to Bayview Avenue, rear yard setback
     and location of the existing shed located adjacent to Ocean View Avenue.
     Should the new plan and design be given to the Board prior to the Board
     reaching a decision regarding this variance request, the above conditions
     may be altered to accommodate the new proposal.
Case #13
                                                                Michael Shocket
                                                                          August 6, 2014
PREPARED BY: CHRIS LANGASTER

DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: requests a variance to a 13.5 foot side yard setback
adjacent to a street (43rd Street) instead of 30 feet as required for a proposed single
family dwelling and; to a 10.5 foot side yard setback adjacent to a street (43rd Street)
instead of 25 feet as required for proposed HVAC equipment

LOCATION: 4288 Ocean Front Ave
            Lot 47, Cavalier Shores
            Beach District #6
GPIN: 2418-96-6688
ZONING: R-7.5
YEAR BUILT: new construction
AICUZ: noise zone 65-70dB DNL

SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is
proposing to construct two-story single-family
dwelling
13.5-feet from the property line adjacent to
43th Street, instead of 30-feet as required. In
addition, the applicant is seeking a variance to a 10.5-foot from the side yard
setback adjacent to 43rd Street for proposed HVAC equipment. This is lot
presently vacant and is nonconforming in regards to the minimum lot 85’ width
required for this zoning district. Based on city’s records, it appears this property
has not ever been developed. Only minor improvements have been made on the
site such as a brick walkway, table, block wall and fencing.

CONSIDERATIONS:
   This lot does not conform to the required lot width 85-feet for corner lots in
    this zoning district.
   The setback variance is sought from the property line adjacent to the
    unimproved portion of 43rd Street.
   This portion of 43rd Street is not expected to ever be developed and will
    continue to be used for each access .
   This proposal is not expected to have a detriment impact on the adjoining
    property owners.
   No opposition has been received regarding this request.

CONDITIONS:
  1. The proposed two-story single-family dwelling shall be constructed in
     substantial adherence to the submitted site plan and building elevations
     entitled “Shocket Residence” prepared by Cox, Kliewer & Company , P.C.
     and dated May 27, 2014.

   2. A minimum 4-foot fence/wall enclosure with category I landscape
      screening shall be installed around the proposed HVAC equipment.
Case #14
                          Allison & Anthony Sitar/Margaret Davis
                                                                      August 6, 2014

PREPARED BY: CHRIS LANGASTER

DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: request a modification of the conditions of a variance
that was granted on July 3, 2013

LOCATION: 200 & 202 64th Street
          Lot 1, Cape Henry
          Lynnhaven District #5

GPIN: 2419-72-3937

ZONING: R-5R

YEAR BUILT: 1999

AICUZ: noise zone less 65dB DNL

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
HISTORY:

      On July 2, 1997 a variance request to a 10-foot setback from the property
       line adjacent to 64th Street instead of 20-feet as required and to a 8-foot
       south side setback instead of 10-feet as required and to allow 37% in lot
       coverage instead of 35% as allowed was Denied for a proposed garage and
       second story addition to a duplex
      On January 21, 1998 a variance request to a 10-foot setback from the
       property line adjacent to 64th Street instead of 20-feet as required was
       Granted for a two- story duplex addition
      On December 1, 2010, a variance to a 10.9 foot setback for side yards
       adjacent to a street (64th Street) instead of 20 feet as required and to
       (39.6%) 2,967.6 square feet in lot coverage instead of (35%) 2,625 square
       feet in lot coverage as allowed and to 5,770 square feet in total building
       floor area instead of 5,250 square feet in total building floor area as allowed
       was Denied for a proposed garage, deck and spiral stairs
      On July 3, 2013, a variance to allow 36% (2,735 sf) in lot coverage instead
       of 35% (2,625sf) in lot coverage was Granted as conditioned for a second
       story deck and stairs
      On May 7, 2014, a variance to a 15.1 foot rear yard setback (West side)
       instead of 20 feet as required and to allow 37% in lot coverage instead of
       36% as granted by a variance on July 3, 2013 was Denied for a proposed
       2nd floor deck and stairway (unit 212)
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicants are proposing to modify condition
(condition #1) of the previously approved lot coverage variance for a proposed
8’ x 14’ second-story deck and stairs by shifting the deck 2.2-feet (north) towards
64th Street. The proposed deck will comply with the required 20-foot setback from
the property line adjacent to 64th Street as well as all other required setbacks. In
addition, the lot coverage will not increase with this request. Although, the
surface (deck boards) area of the deck will be 8’ x 14’, three (8’ x 8’) support
columns will be installed4.5-feet east of the proposed deck. Eight (8) 2’ x12’
beams will attach the deck with the support columns, essentially creating a 4.5’ x
14’ trellis and extend the deck to the east.

According to applicant, shifting the deck will allow the deck to align with 4
existing windows located on the east side of the duplex unit. The support
columns extending 4.5-feet east the deck is proposed to avoid the concrete
installed below the proposed deck.

CONSIDERATIONS:

      The previously approved variance to allow 36% in lot coverage will not
       increase with this request.
      Aligning the proposed deck with the existing windows is expected to be
       more aesthetically pleasing than it offsetting the windows and proposed
       door.
      The 4.5’ x 14’ support (trellis) columns on the east side of the deck will give
       the appearance the deck is larger than it is. The support columns could be
       installed directly under the deck without creating a trellis.
      Opposition has been received regarding this request. A copy of the email
       can be found in the file.

CONDITIONS:

   1. The deck and stairs shall be constructed in substantial adherence to the
      submitted site plan and building elevations.

   2. The deck shall not be covered above or enclosed beneath it.

   3. The existing shower enclosure located on the east side shall be removed
      and no other structures shall be permitted below the deck.
Case #15
                                                Galleon Investors X, LLC
                                                                           August 6, 2014
PREPARED BY: KAREN LASLEY

DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: requests a variance to a 4.91 foot side yard setback
(East) instead of 10 feet as required for existing multifamily dwelling units and to a 1.87
foot side yard setback (East) instead of 10 feet as required for existing balconies

LOCATION: 1173 Old Virginia Beach Rd
            Linkhorn Bay
            Lynnhaven District #6
GPIN: 2417-47-7638
ZONING: A-12
YEAR BUILT: New Construction
AICUZ: Greater than 75 dB Ldn

SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Three of the
newly constructed townhouse-style units on
this site do not meet the required 10’ side
yard setback on the east side. A variance is
being requested to allow the new homes to
remain with a 4.91’ side yard setback on the east side. The problem was caused
by the Civil Engineering firm’s error when surveying the property. Some old
surveying monuments were found that caused the mistake.

CONSIDERATIONS:
   Only the corners of the three townhouse units encroach into the required
    10’ setback. The angle of the buildings minimizes impact on the adjoining
    property to the east.
   Larger portions of the two-story decks encroach.
   A true hardship is not self-inflicted. The problem was caused by an
    accidental surveying error.
   Encroachment impact can be reduced by the installation of landscape
    screening along the eastern property line. A single family home exists
    adjacent to the east that would benefit from landscape screening.
   The required setbacks do not appear to unreasonably restrict use of the
    site.

CONDITIONS:
  1. Approval is for the three townhome style units and open decks only in
     keeping with the site plan.
  2. Storage sheds and other accessory structures are not permitted within the
     required 10’ side yard setback.
  3. The encroaching decks may not be expanded, covered or enclosed.
  4. Category IV screening shall be installed along the eastern property line
     where space permits, as approved by the Zoning Administrator.
You can also read
NEXT SLIDES ... Cancel