Case #1Douglas & Deidre Barnes

July 18, 2012

PREPARED BY: CHRIS LANGASTER DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: request a variance to a 12 foot rear yard setback (South side) instead of 20 feet as required (Proposed 2 Story Addition) LOCATION: 1285 Mossy Oaks Court Lot 53, Colonial Oaks Lynnhaven District #5 GPIN: 1498-95-8837 ZONING: R-10, RMA YEAR BUILT: 1976 AICUZ: Noise zone 65-70dB DNL SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicants are requesting to construct a 12’ x 26.7’ two-story addition 12-foot from the rear property line, instead of 20-feet as required. This addition will be constructed on the south side of the dwelling and is intended to expand the living area of an existing two-story single-family dwelling. Though the front of this dwelling faces Mossy Oaks Court, the actual front of the lot as determined by the City Zoning Ordinance is adjacent to Tanglewood Trail. Therefore, the south side of the lot is considered the rear of lot. The south side property line is angled. As this property line approaches the Mossy Oaks Court, it angles closer to the existing dwelling. As stated by the applicant, the proposed addition will be used to house relatives who will move in to assist with the medical care of one of the applicants. This lot has several mature trees and landscaping installed along the south side property line. These trees and landscaping will provide screening from the adjoining property owners. The dwelling that directly abuts this lot is setback approximately 250-feet from the proposed area of construction. However, the dwelling on the lot over is a little more than 100-feet away from the proposed addition. Given the distance of the proposed addition from the adjoining dwelling this request is not expected to have detrimental impact on the adjoining property owners or surrounding community. Furthermore, the proposed addition will maintain 12-foot setback from the south property line, which consistent with the required side yard setback in this district. If approved, the following conditions are recommended:

1. The proposed two-story addition shall be constructed in substantial adherence to the submitted site plan.

2. The proposed two story addition shall be constructed with colors and building materials compatible with the existing dwelling.

Case #2Norbert Kuhn

July 18, 2012

PREPARED BY: KAREN LASLEY DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: requests a variance to a 12 foot side yard setback (Southwest side) instead of 15 feet as required (Proposed Room Addition) LOCATION: 3128 Quimby Road Lot 236, Kings Grant Lynnhaven District #5 GPIN: 1497-09-9965 ZONING: R-20, RMA YEAR BUILT: 1961 AICUZ: Less than 65 Db DNL SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: This property owner desires to construct two additions onto his one-story brick home. The existing one-car garage will be removed and replaced with a two-car garage and a room above. This addition will have a 12’ side yard setback on the southeast side, rather than 15’ as required in the R-20 Residential District and a variance is being requested to allow the addition. The subject site is an irregularly shaped waterfront lot that narrows toward the street. Only two small corners of the addition encroach into the required 15’ setback. A second brick addition, one-story with 640 square feet, will meet all setbacks. The applicant has submitted an architectural rendering showing that the addition will be attractive and well integrated into the existing home. If approved, the following condition should be required: The proposed addition shall substantially adhere to the submitted site plan and architectural elevation.

Case #3Lola Morris

July 18, 2012

PREPARED BY: KAREN LASLEY DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: requests a variance to allow a freestanding sign on a building lot where a freestanding sign is prohibited (Proposed Freestanding Sign) LOCATION: 3772 Shore Drive Lots 1 & 2, Ocean Park Bayside District #4 GPIN: 1489-38-4947 ZONING: B-2, RMA AICUZ: Less than 65 dB DNL HISTORY: April 15, 1981 – BZA approved a variance to allow an 18’ front yard setback from Shore Dr. November 21, 2007 – BZA approved a modification of the 1981 variance to allow an addition with an 18’ front yard setback. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant had a 12’ tall, freestanding sign with a 32 square foot sign face (approximately) that was destroyed by a recent storm. Because the subject site does not technically have 100’ of frontage, the nonconforming sign cannot be replaced. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow a new freestanding sign to be erected. The proposed sign is monument style with a 32 square foot face that will contain the name of the center plus tenant name plaques. An elevation of the proposed sign has been submitted. If approved, staff recommends the following conditions:

1. The submitted sign plan/elevation shall be substantially adhered to, except the sign shall have a maximum height of eight feet.

2. The portion of the sign where tenant names are displayed shall be of a uniform color.

3. The sign must meet all visibility requirements and have a minimum 7’ setback from Shore Drive.

4. The sign shall be landscaped with low level plant material to allow good visibility at this corner location.

Case #41792 Princess Anne Road, LLC

July 18, 2012

PREPARED BY: KAREN LASLEY DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: requests a variance to a 4.7 foot front yard setback (Indian River Road) and to a 7.7 foot setback for side yards adjacent to a street (Princess Anne Road) and to an 8 foot front yard setback (Princess Anne Road) instead of 35 feet each as required (Proposed/Existing Buildings) LOCATION: 1796 Princess Anne Rd Princess Anne District #7 GPIN: 2413-02-4049 ZONING: B-2/AG-2 YEAR BUILT: 1908 AICUZ: 65 – 70 dB DNL SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: On April 24, 2012, City Council approved the rezoning of this site and a conditional use permit for fuel pumps. It is the desire of the applicant to renovate Munden’s Store, built in 1908, in two phases. The submitted site plans and architectural drawings were proffered with the conditional rezoning of the property. The renovated structure will contain a general store with convenience items on the first floor. A canopied fuel sales operation will be conducted behind the renovated store shielded from view on Princess Anne Road. A full service restaurant on the second floor will be accessed by a two-story addition that is stepped back to give the existing Munden’s Store building prominence. The Munden’s Store exterior will maintain the rural character of the area. The store’s covered wraparound porch, clapboard siding and hip roof will be retained. A covered colonnade walkway off the addition leads pedestrians across the front of the existing Verizon building to the parking area. The covered colonnade terminates at a gazebo used as a parking drop-off for the Munden’s Store and restaurant. The remaining property to the south will be used for the sanitary drainfield, the pretreatment tank field and open space until Phase II construction begins. The second phase includes plans for three additional commercial structures with parking behind the buildings. The proposed Phase II buildings shall be complimentary to the architectural style and materials of the Munden’s Store. At this time, the applicants are requesting a variance to allow a 4.7’ front yard setback on Indian River Road and to allow a 7.7’ setback for side yards adjacent to a street on Princess Anne Road, instead of 35’ each, as required. These variances are for the existing Munden Store and a proposed addition that will align with the existing store.

A variance also has been advertised to allow an 8’ front yard setback on Princess Anne Road, instead of the required 35’ setback. This variance allows for the three additional retail buildings proposed for Phase 2. These Phase 2 buildings are proposed to align with the existing historic Munden Store. The variances are required to implement the rezoning of this site as approved by City Council. The proposal will allow renovation and reuse of Munden’s Store, a Pungo Village landmark. The proposed development is consistent with the City’s Rural Preservation Plan and the recommendations for the Southeast Quadrant of the Pungo Rural Community Area. The reduced setbacks are needed to retain the village character of this historic intersection. If approved, the following condition should be required:

Development shall substantially adhere to the submitted site plans and architectural renderings.

Case #5William & Beth Romig

July 18, 2012

PREPARED BY: CHRIS LANGASTER DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: request a variance to a 1 foot side yard setback (North side) and to a 4.2 foot side yard setback (South side) instead of 15 feet each as required (Proposed Pier Addition) LOCATION: 1601 Quail Point Road Lot 3A, Quail Point Bayside District #4 GPIN: 2408-83-9120 ZONING: R-20, RPA YEAR BUILT: 1997 AICUZ: noise zone 65-75dB BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS HISTORY: On January 21, 1998 a variance to a 1-foot northeast side and to a 5-foot southwest side instead of 20-feet each as required was Granted for a pier and boatlift. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicants would like to expand an existing pier and boatlift 1-foot from the north side property line and 4.2-feet from the south side property line, instead of 15-feet each as required. Per a previously approved variance, a160-feet pier is presently installed 1-foot from the north property line and 5-feet from the south property line. A 3’ x 6’ expansion to the pier is planned for the northeast portion of the pier and a 3’ x 32’ will be added to the south side of the pier. This pier is installed on a 35-foot wide strip that extends off the east portion of the lot. This portion of the lot is flanked by one adjoining lot to the north side and three lots to the south side. Each of these lots also has waterfront access to Linkhorn Bay and presently has a pier, boatlift or dock installed on them at various points along the shoreline. Staff was unable to establish or identify a hardship with this request. Though the portion of the lot that has access to Linkhorn Bay is narrow, the applicant has a sizable pier and boatlift that appears to accommodate the applicant’s watercrafts. A setback variance was previously granted for the pier and boatlift. This variance alleviated any undue hardship associated with the narrow portion of the lot that provides the only access to the Linkhorn Bay. Therefore, staff believes the minimum relief necessary has been granted to have reasonable use of this waterfront property. *Letters of opposition can be found in the file.

Case #6Clyde Hughes, Jr.

July 18, 2012

PREPARED BY: CHRIS LANGASTER DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: requests a variance to a 21 foot front yard setback instead of 30 feet as required (Proposed Roof Replacement) LOCATION: 1848 Steve Lane Lot 16, Hilltop Manor Beach District #6 GPIN: 2407-59-3070 ZONING: R-7.5, RMA YEAR BUILT: 1963 AICUZ: noise zone greater than 75dB DNL SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant would like to replace an existing flat roof on an existing (13’ x 21’) carport with A-frame roof presently located 21-foot from the front property line, instead of 30-feet as required. Due to numerous roof leaks, the applicant would like to change the pitch of the roof to improve the roof drainage. After reviewing city records staff was unable to determine neither when the carport was constructed nor when the required front yard encroachment occurred. At the time the dwelling was constructed, the required minimum front yard setback was 30-feet. Therefore, staff has determined the existing carport is not nonconforming. The carport will not expand with this request. Though this carport appears to have been constructed in the required front yard setback and is presently in violation, this request is not expected to create a detriment to the adjoining property owners. Changing the existing flat roof to an A-frame roof is expected to improve the aesthetic of the carport and existing dwelling overall. If approved, the following conditions are recommended:

1. The proposed roof addition shall be installed within the footprint of the existing carport and in substantial adherence to the submitted site plan.

2. The carport shall remain unenclosed.

Case #7Ryan & Corinne Angold

July 18, 2012

PREPARED BY: CHRIS LANGASTER DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: request a variance to allow 52% in lot coverage instead of 40% in lot coverage as allowed (Proposed Garage/Addition) LOCATION: 2415 Whaler Court Lot 6, Chesap Bay Shores Lynnhaven District #5 GPIN: 1590-21-1140 ZONING: B-4 (SD), RMA YEAR BUILT: 1978 AICUZ: noise zone less than 65dB DNL SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant intends on replacing a two-story attached townhouse unit with a three story townhouse unit. A variance to allow 52% in lot coverage, instead of 40% in lot coverage is sought with this request. The proposed footprint will extend approximately 13.3-feet to the south side of the existing footprint and will encroach approximately 5-feet into an existing 25-foot utility easement. However, the proposed addition will comply with the required (20’) front yard setback. This 312 square foot expansion will increase the lot coverage 11%. The applicant has been working with the Public Utilities Office to vacate portions of the 25-foot utility easement. If the easement cannot be vacated, an encroachment agreement will have to be obtained from City Council to temporarily encroach onto this easement. With either of these scenarios; the applicant will have to submit a plan to Development Service Center to relocate the water line and sanitary sewer cleanout locate in the easement. Based on the city maps, the townhouse units and lots vary in size throughout this townhouse community. Therefore, lot coverage allowances can varies from lot to lot. The applicant mentions several variances have been granted to increase the lot coverage allowance for many of the adjoining lots. However, it’s important to note each of these variances request were granted on the merits of each individual request. Staff understands the applicant’s desire to expand this townhouse unit. However, the applicants intend to completely demolish this townhouse unit and rebuild it from the ground up. Its staff’s opinion, a proposed townhouse unit could be designed to increase the floor area without expanding the existing footprint. Though several of the adjoining townhouse units are larger in size, these units are on larger lots. In turn, the larger lots have a greater lot coverage allowance. This townhouse unit is presently 1% over the lot coverage allowance for this zoning district. Increasing the lot coverage an additionally 11% for a total of 12% above the lot coverage is not keeping with the intent or spirit of the zoning ordinance.

Case #8Jason Adams

July 18, 2012

PREPARED BY: CHRIS LANGASTER DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: requests a variance to a 15 foot rear yard setback (Northwest side) instead of 20 feet as required (Proposed Porch Enclosure) LOCATION: 2608 Saint Regis Lane Lot 32, Lake Placid Rose Hall District #3 GPIN: 1495-90-0444 ZONING: R-7.5 YEAR BUILT: 1983 AICUZ: noise zone 65-70dB DNL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS HISTORY: On February 17, 1999 a variance to a 15-foot rear yard setback instead of 20-feet as required. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant would like to enclose an existing rear screened porch presently 15-feet from the rear property line, instead of 20-feet as required. This proposal will include enclosing an existing screen porch with windows and doors. This will convert the screen porch into a permanent sunroom. Neither the roof nor the footprint will increase with this request. Additionally, the rear yard setback will not increase with this request and all setback requirements will be met. As noted above, a variance was previously obtained to a 15-foot rear yard setback. Because the setbacks will not increase with this request, staff does not anticipate this request will create a detriment to the adjoining property owner. If approved, the following conditions are recommended:

1. The existing screen porch shall be enclosed as depicted on the submitted building plans entitled “Aluminum Studio Enclosure Connections Details”.

2. The proposed sunroom shall not be expanded without further consideration

from the Board of Zoning Appeals.

Case #9Classic Design Builders

July 18, 2012

PREPARED BY: CHRIS LANGASTER DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: requests a variance to a 5 foot rear yard setback (West side) instead of 20 feet as required (Proposed Single Family Dwelling) LOCATION: 5013 Creek Cove Court Lot 47A, Chesapeake Beach Bayside District #4 GPIN: 1570-41-0259 ZONING: R-7.5, RMA YEAR BUILT: new construction AICUZ: noise zone less than 65dB DNL SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to construct a single-family dwelling 5-foot from the rear (west) property line, instead of 20-feet as required. This irregular shaped corner lot fronts both Creek Court and Athens Boulevard. Although, Creek Cove Court has more adjoining lots fronting it than Athens Boulevard, the narrowest lot line fronts Athens Boulevard. As a result, where the lot fronts Athens Boulevard is considered the front of the lot and the west property line is determined as the rear of the lot. With the exception of the required rear yard setback variance sought with this request, the proposed dwelling will comply with all other required setbacks. This existing “infill “corner lot complies with the minimum lot dimensional requirements for this zoning district. However, it is irregular in shape and the fact that it fronts two streets presents a challenge in constructing dwelling in compliance with the required setbacks. The proposed dwelling will maintain a 5-foot setback from the west side property line. This will be consistent with the required side yard setback for this zoning district, if Creek Cove Court was considered the front of the lot. Due to the irregular shape of the lot, its staff’s opinion applying the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance would produce an undue hardship. Additionally, fronting the proposed single-family dwelling on Creek Cove Court will be more in keeping with the adjoining dwellings and surrounding community. If approved, the following conditions are recommended:

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

2. The front of the dwelling shall face Creek Cove Court.

Case #10Mary Herbert Daly

July 18, 2012

PREPARED BY: CHRIS LANGASTER DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: requests a variance to a 1.7 foot side yard setback (West side) instead of 8 feet as required and to a 13.5 foot setback for side yards adjacent to a street (Ocean Front Avenue) instead of 18 feet as required and to a 7.3 foot rear yard setback (South side) instead of 20 feet as required (Proposed Replacement of Existing Screened Porches and Steps) LOCATION: 100 56th Street Lot 5, Ubermeer Lynnhaven District #5 GPIN: 2419-80-4589 ZONING: R-5R YEAR BUILT: 1920 AICUZ: noise zone 65-70dB DNL SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant would like to replace an existing (9.8’ x 26.3’) first and second-story porch presently 1.7-foot from the west side property line, instead of 8-feet as required. In addition, the applicant would like to also replace a (7.7’ x 13.1’) screen porch presently 13.5-feet from the property line adjacent to Ocean Front Avenue instead of 18-feet and 7.3-feet from the rear property line, instead of 20-feet as required. Based on city’s records, this dwelling was built in1920 prior to the adoption of the City Zoning Ordinance. Staff was unable to conclude the existing screen porches were built at the time the dwelling was built; however staff can reasonably assume the porches are nonconforming. The screen porches and steps will not expand beyond the original footprint with this proposal. The railing has been removed from the second-story porch and is presently in violation of the Uniform Statewide Building Code. Replacing the porches in accordance with the Uniform Statewide Building Code is not expected to create a detriment to the adjoining property owner or surrounding community. In fact, replacing the porches will improve the aesthetic of the overall dwelling and eliminate a grievous building code violation. If approved, the following conditions are recommended:

1. The screen porches shall be replaced in substantial conformance with the submitted site plan and Uniform Statewide Building Code.

2. The porches shall only be enclosed with screening material. 3. The porches shall not be expanded or enlarged without further consideration

from the Board of Zoning Appeals.

Case #11Jeff & Robin LaFrance

July 18, 2012

PREPARED BY: CHRIS LANGASTER DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: request a variance to a 15 foot rear yard setback (North side) instead of 20 feet as required and to a 2 foot side yard setback (Northeast side) instead of 5 feet as required (Proposed Inground Swimming Pool) LOCATION: 3008 May Court Lot 2, Bernard Farms Princess Anne District #7 GPIN: 1495-31-9902 ZONING: R-5D YEAR BUILT: 2011 AICUZ: noise zone 70-75dB DNL SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicants are proposing to install a 15’ x 30’ inground swimming pool 2-feet from the north east rear property line, instead of 5-feet as required. *The applicants have requested to modify the above request to exclude the variance request to a15-foot setback from the property line adjacent to Cereta Way. The northeast property line abuts a parcel that has been conveyed to the Bernard Farms Home Owner’s Association for open space. This through lot is oddly shaped; however, it appears the applicants could install a reasonable size pool within the minimum setback requirements. The applicants reduced the length of the proposed and increased the width in efforts of maintaining the required 20-foot setback from the property line adjacent to Cereta Way. If the width of the proposed pool is reduced 3-feet, it would allowed for a 12’ x 30’ inground swimming pool and it also would comply with all required setbacks. When considering this option to install a reasonable size pool without setback variances, staff is not able to identify a hardship with this request. The required 5-foot setback is minimal; allowing a 2-foot setback in lieu of the required 5-foot setback is not in keeping with the intent or spirit of the zoning ordinance. Furthermore, approving this request is expected set an unfavorable precedent for others seeking to install an inground swimming pool without a legitimate hardship. Staff recommends the applicants consider the modifications suggested above.

Case #12Stephen Watts

July 18, 2012

PREPARED BY: CHRIS LANGASTER DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: requests a variance to a 20.6 foot front yard setback (Hill View Boulevard) instead of 30 feet as required (Proposed Room Addition) LOCATION: 5533 Westward Drive Lot 108, Homestead

Kempsville District #2 GPIN: 1466-11-3878 ZONING: R-10, RMA YEAR BUILT: 1965 AICUZ: noise zone less than 65dB DNL SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to construct a (28.5’ x 31.5’) second-story addition above the garage (west side) of an existing one-story single-family dwelling. The applicant is seeking a variance to a 20.6-foot setback from the (front) property line adjacent to Hillview Boulevard. Although, the front property line technically fronts Hillview Boulevard, it appears Westward Boulevard was determined as the front of the lot at the time this dwelling was constructed. Therefore, the property line adjacent to Hillview Boulevard was considered a side property line adjacent to a street. At that time, the minimum setback from a property line adjacent to (Hillview Boulevard) a street would have been 20-feet. The existing dwelling presently meets all other required setbacks for this zoning district. Hillview Boulevard is a (60’) right-of-way and dead ends at the rear (south side) property line, where this lot is parallel with Hilllview Boulevard. The proposed room addition will be constructed on the west side of the dwelling in alignment with the footprint of the existing dwelling. Therefore, the existing dwelling and proposed addition will be approximately 80-feet from the front property line of the adjoining property to the west. Based on the submitted drawings, the proposed second–story room addition will be architecturally compatible with the existing dwelling. For the reasons mentioned above, this request is not expected to create a detriment or have adverse impact on any of the adjoining property owner or surrounding community. If approved, the following conditions are recommended:

1. The proposed second-story room addition shall be constructed in substantial adherence to the submitted site plan and drawing/building elevations.

2. The proposed room addition shall be constructed with colors and building

materials compatible with the existing dwelling.

Case #13Wave Church

July 18, 2012

PREPARED BY: KAREN LASLEY DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: requests a variance to allow 97 square feet in total signage instead of 35 square feet in total signage as allowed (Proposed Building and Freestanding Signs) LOCATION: 2655 Seaboard Road Princess Anne District #7 GPIN: 2404-60-6318 ZONING: AG-2 YEAR BUILT: AICUZ: SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: YEAR BUILT: 2005 AICUZ: Less than 65 Db DNL SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: On July 11, 2006, City Council approved a conditional use permit to allow construction of a church on this site zoned AG-1 and AG-2 Agricultural District. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow two signs with a total of 97 square feet. Religious uses are permitted a maximum of 32 square feet in signage in the Agricultural Districts. A 32 square foot freestanding sign is proposed to be located at the church entrance on Seaboard Road. Information regarding the appearance of this sign has not been submitted. The applicants would also like to place a 65 square foot sign on the building. An elevation of the proposed building sign has been submitted showing an attractive sign with the church symbol and name. The applicant believes that a large building sign is needed because the building will be located approximately 900 square feet from Seaboard Road. The zoning regulations clearly limit church signs in the Agricultural Districts to 32 square feet and no changes to these regulations have been proposed by City Council or the Planning Commission. This church does not appear to be unique or have a special hardship. Church plans approved by City Council did not show signage on the building.

Case #14City of Virginia Beach

July 18, 2012

PREPARED BY: KAREN LASLEY DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: requests a variance to a 22 foot front yard setback instead of 35 feet as required (Proposed Thalia Fire Station and EMS) LOCATION: Columbus Street Kempsville District #2 GPIN: 1477-24-8107 ZONING: B-3/I-1, RMA/RPA YEAR BUILT: Proposed new construction AICUZ: Less than 65 dB DNL SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The City is constructing a new two-story fire station at this location. Since the site is within the Pembroke Strategic Growth Area, it is the desire of the City to design an urban fire station. Although the City is working to adopt more appropriate new urbanism-style zoning regulations for all the Strategic Growth Areas, such regulations are not currently in place for this portion of the Pembroke Strategic Growth Area. In keeping with the recommendations of the Pembroke Strategic Growth Area Plan, the City desires to move the structure toward the street and a variance is being requested to allow a 22’ setback from Columbus Street, rather than 35’ as required. Architectural elevations of the proposed two-story fire station have been submitted. If approved, the following condition should be required:

The fire station shall substantially adhere to the submitted site plan and architectural elevations.