Loading...
07-14-2015PITTSYLVANIA COUNTY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS REGULAR MEETING JULY 14, 2015 MINUTES VIRGINIA: The Pittsylvania County Board of Zoning Appeals met on Tuesday, July 14, 2015, in the General District Courtroom, Edwin R. Shields Courthouse Addition, Chatham, Virginia. Mr. Talbott called the meeting to order at approximately 7:00 p.m. The Board observed a few moments of silence. Mr. Shelton called the roll. PRESENT Kenneth Talbott Helen Glass Joseph “Jay” Craddock Carroll Yeaman R. Allan Easley Leon Griffith Ronald Merricks Odie H. Shelton, Jr. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES By motion of Mr. Yeaman, seconded by Ms. Glass, and by a unanimous vote, the Minutes of the June 9, 2015, meeting were approved as presented. Old Business There was no old business. New Business Mr. Shelton reported on the cases for the August, 2015 cycle. Mr. Talbott reported on the order the cases would be heard at the meeting. CHAIRMAN’S REPORT There was no Chairman’s report. THE ZONING PRECEPTS WERE READ BY Mr. Talbott to OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING at approximately 7:03 p.m. Case S-1, Brendle Stone, S-15-005 – Mr. Talbott opened the public hearing at approximately 7:05 p. m. Mr. Shelton, Director of Code Compliance/Zoning Administrator reported Brendle Stone had petitioned for a Special Use Permit on .69 of an acre, located on U. S. Highway 40/East Gretna Road, in the Banister Election District to allow for placement of a 1989 single-wide mobile home for her daughter’s residence. He further reported the Planning Commission, with no opposition, recommended granting the petitioners’ request. Ms. Stone was not present to represent the petition. Mr. Talbott stated the application would speak for itself. There was no opposition to the petition. Mr. Talbott closed the public hearing at approximately 7:07 p.m. The Board discussed the petition as the Committee of the Whole and determined there were no adverse effects. Upon motion of Mr. Merricks, seconded by Ms. Glass, the following motion was adopted: Whereas, Brendle C. Stone has petitioned the Board of Zoning Appeals for a Special Use Permit for placement of a 1989 single-wide mobile home for her daughter’s residence and, Board of Zoning Appeals Page 2 July 14, 2015 Whereas, we find no substantial detriment to adjacent property, that the character of the zoning district will not be changed thereby, and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Ordinance, I move the Special Use be granted. Vote passed unanimously. Case V-1, William and Dorothy Meredith , S-15-003 – Mr. Talbott opened the public hearing at approximately 7:07 p. m. Mr. Shelton, Director of Code Compliance/Zoning Administrator, reported William and Dorothy Meredith had petitioned for a Variance on 2.14 acres, located off State Road 978/Lakeside Road, (on Emerald Point) in the Callands-Gretna Election District to Section 35-269. AREA REGULATIONS. (A.) MINIMUM Lot Size §4, Minimum state maintained road frontage measured between side lot lines is equal to seventy-five (75) feet, of the Pittsylvania County Zoning Ordinance. The petitioners are requesting relief from the road frontage requirement in order to subdivide this parcel into two (2) lots to allow for a family member to build a new home on the property. He further reported the Planning Commission, with no opposition, recommended granting the petitioners’ request. Bill Meredith was present to represent the petition. He stated he had nothing to add. There was no opposition to the petition. Mr. Talbott closed the public hearing at approximately 7:09 p.m. The Board discussed the petition as the Committee of the Whole. During the discussion it was stated this lot was an unusual shape and size and that this was a very pretty location and well maintained. Mention was also made of an undue hardship pertaining to this parcel. Upon motion of Mr. Yeaman, seconded by Mr. Easley, the following motion was adopted: Whereas, William and Dorothy Meredith have petitioned the Board of Zoning Appeals for a Variance to Section 35-269. AREA REGULATIONS. (A.) Minimum Lot Size, §4, of the Pittsylvania County Zoning Ordinance and, Whereas, we find the application does fulfill the minimum requirements for a variance from the provisions of the ordinance and, Whereas, the board finds that the strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship, that the authorization of the 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 and, Whereas, the condition or situation of the property concerned is not of so general or recurring a nature to make reasonably practicable the formulation of a general regulation to be adopted as an amendment to the ordinance, I move the Variance be granted. Vote passed unanimously. Case V-2, Jeffrey Scott Crider and Rhonda Barker Crider, V-15-004 - Mr. Talbott opened the public hearing at approximately 7:14 p. m. Mr. Shelton, Director of Code Compliance/Zoning Administrator, reported Jeffrey and Rhonda Crider had petitioned for a Variance to Section 35-369 Minimum Yard Dimensions. (A.) Front Setback, (B.) Side Setback, and (C.) Rear Setback of the Pittsylvania County Zoning Ordinance for 157 feet Front Setback, 190 feet Right Side Setback, 154 feet Left Side Setback, and 54 feet Rear Setback to allow for a kennel for boarding and grooming dogs. The petitioned parcel of land is .45 of an acre, located on State Road 685/Chalk Level Road, in the Banister District. Mr. Shelton also stated the Board needed to discuss approval of the Special Use Permit and Variance to approve both cases or deny both cases due to the fact the Special Use Permit could not be issued without the Variance approval. He further reported the Planning Commission, with no opposition, recommended granting the petitioners’ request. Mr. Crider was present to represent the petition. He stated he had nothing to add. There was no opposition to the petition. Mr. Talbott closed the public hearing at approximately 7:22 p.m. The Board discussed the petition as the Committee of the Whole. During the discussion the number of dogs, approximately 20, to be boarded was discussed. There was also a discussion regarding the sanitary sewer and that the dogs would be contained in a lot when put outside, under supervision. The amount of the setbacks needed was also discussed. The Board discussed that this was a well-kept area, this building was presently an eyesore and that this business would increase the value of the property. It was also stated that the neighbors were in support of the petition. The Board also mentioned that not issuing a variance would unreasonable restrict the use of the property. Upon motion of Ms. Glass, seconded by Mr. Craddock, the following motion was adopted: Whereas, Jeffrey Scott Crider and Rhonda Barker Crider have petitioned the Board of Zoning Appeals for a Variance to Section 35-369. Minimum Yard Dimensions. (A.) Front Setback, (B.) Side Setback, and (C.) Rear Setback, of the Pittsylvania County Zoning Ordinance and, Whereas, we find the application does fulfill the minimum requirements for a variance from the provisions of the ordinance and, Whereas, the Board finds that the strict application of the ordinance would Board of Zoning Appeals Page 3 July 14, 2015 produce undue hardship, that the authorization of the 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 and, Whereas, the condition or situation of the property concerned is not of so general or recurring a nature to make reasonably practicable the formulation of a general regulation to be adopted as an amendment to the ordinance, I move the Variance be granted. Vote passed unanimously. Case S-2, Jeffrey Scott Crider and Rhonda Barker Crider, S-15-008 - Mr. Talbott opened the public hearing at approximately 7:28 p. m. Mr. Shelton, Director of Code Compliance/Zoning Administrator reported Jeffrey and Rhonda Crider had petitioned for a Special Use Permit on .45 of an, located on State Road 685/Chalk Level Road, in the Banister Election District to allow for a kennel for boarding and grooming dogs. He further reported the Planning Commission, with no opposition, recommended granting the petitioners’ request. Mr. Crider was present to represent the petition. Mr. Crider answered questions regarding the disposal of animal waste and the layout of the kennel. He stated insulation and vinyl would be added to the building to diminish noise. He further stated the building would be air conditioned. There was no opposition to the petition. Mr. Talbott closed the public hearing at approximately 7:32 p.m. The Board discussed the petition as the Committee of the Whole and determined there were no adverse effects that could not be mitigated by conditions. Upon motion of Mr. Merricks, seconded by Mr. Griffith, the following motion was adopted: Whereas, Jeffrey and Rhonda Crider have petitioned the Board of Zoning Appeals for a Special Use Permit for a kennel for boarding and grooming dogs and, Whereas, we find no substantial detriment to adjacent property, that the character of the zoning district will not be changed thereby, and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Ordinance, I move the Special Use be granted with the following conditions: (1) Fulfill all Health Department requirements. (2) No outside housing of dogs. Vote passed unanimously. Case S-4, Shady Cove Cabins of VA, LLC, S-15-010 - Mr. Talbott opened the public hearing at approximately 7:35 p. m. Mr. Shelton, Director of Code Compliance/Zoning Administrator reported Shady Cove Cabins of VA, LLC, had petitioned for a Special Use Permit on 41.42 acres, located off State Road 609/Brights Road, (on Hines Chapel Roads), in the Staunton River Election District to allow for a private recreational facility with cabin rentals. He further reported the Planning Commission, with opposition, recommended denying the petitioner’s request; however, the motion to deny failed by a 3 to 4 vote (1 member was absent); therefore, the petitioners’ request was recommended for approval. Russell Nixon, land surveyor, was present to represent the petition. Mr. Nixon gave an overview of the case and discussed the number of proposed cabins and stated one cabin was under construction and that this cabin would later be converted into the rental office. He further stated the owners would reside on this property. Several people, approximately four (4) spoke in opposition to the petition as reflected in the record. Their concerns were, but not limited to: noise, the safety of the road, fires, transients, security and pets. Mr. Nixon offered a rebuttal. Mr. Talbott closed the public hearing at approximately 7:58 p.m. The Board discussed the petition as the Committee of the Whole and determined there were no adverse effects that could not be mitigated by conditions. During the discussion it was stated this is agricultural property. Upon motion of Mr. Merricks, seconded by Mr. Easley the following motion was adopted: Whereas, Shady Cover Cabins of VA, LLC has petitioned the Board of Zoning Appeals for a Special Use Permit for a private recreational facility with cabins rentals and, Whereas, we find no substantial detriment to adjacent property, that the character of the zoning district will not be changed thereby, and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Ordinance, I move the Special Use be granted with the following conditions: (1) A 100 foot natural boundary against adjacent property to be maintained. (2) Pet regulations be posted at each cabin. (3) Fire rings and hazard monitoring with fire band when appropriate. Motion passed unanimously. The Board took a brief recess. Board of Zoning Appeals Page 4 July 14, 2015 Case S-3, Carson Lester, S-15-009 - Mr. Talbott opened the public hearing at approximately 8.37 p. m. Mr. Shelton, Director of Code Compliance/Zoning Administrator reported Carson Lester, had petitioned for a Special Use Permit on 10.24 acres, located off State Road 744/Lester Lane, in the Chatham-Blairs District for an automobile graveyard/junkyard/salvage yard. He further reported the Planning Commission, with opposition, recommended granting the petitioner’s request. Carson Lester and Sheila Cody were present to represent the petition. Ms. Cody and Mr. Lester gave an overview of the case and discussed that his son owned a transport business and that cars were stored at this site. He further stated they did sale parts but cars had not been disassembled at this location since 2009. There was also a discussion of DEQ requirements and permitting. Numerous people spoke in opposition (approximately 18) to the petition and several (approximately five (5)) people spoke in support of the petition, as reflected in the record. Their concerns were, but not limited to: pollution, appearance of the property, pollution of the wells and drinking water and regulations. Those speaking for the petition stated the operation had been improved and Mr. Lester’s positive actions as a business person. Ms. Cody and Mr. Lester offered a rebuttal. Mr. Talbott closed the public hearing at approximately 10:01 p.m. The Board discussed the petition as the Committee of the Whole and determined there were no adverse effects that could not be mitigated by conditions. During the discussion the Board discussed adverse effects and how they could be mitigated, the situation at the site had been improved, this would improve the situation, the business had been in operation for many years, stormwater testing and the accountability for the operation. Upon motion of Mr. Yeaman, seconded by Mr. Easley the following motion was adopted: Whereas, Carson Lester has petitioned the Board of Zoning Appeals for a Special Use Permit for an automobile graveyard/junkyard/salvage yard and, Whereas, we find no substantial detriment to adjacent property, that the character of the zoning district will not be changed thereby, and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Ordinance, and Whereas, there are no significant adverse effects upon adjacent property that cannot be mitigated through conditions, I move the Special Use be granted with the following conditions: (1) Meet all DMV, DEQ and Pittsylvania County Licensing requirements. (2) No outdoor storage of unmounted tires. (3) Engage an independent, competent firm to collect stormwater runoff samples per DEQ specifications. (4) No “U- Pull-It” operations. (5) No stacking of vehicles. (6) The applicant must ensure that the Zoning Administrator receives copies of all DEQ tests and correspondence. The vote passed by a five (5) to two (2) vote. Those voting for the petition were: Mr. Talbott, Mr. Easley, Mr. Griffith, Mr. Craddock and Mr. Yeaman. Those voting against the petition were: Mr. Merricks and Mrs. Glass. The meeting adjourned at approximately 11:15 p.m. _____________________________ Kenneth Talbott, Chairman ________________________________ Hannah R. Orgain, Clerk