[00:00:01]
I WANTED TO CALL TO ORDER THE MARCH 27TH, 2023, BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS.
THANK YOU. OKAY, LET'S STAND FOR THE INVOCATION.
AND WOULD YOU LEAD US IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE? OKAY, WELL, LET'S START WITH THE INVOCATION.
AND WE ASK LORD THAT WE HAVE THE WISDOM TO MAKE DECISIONS THAT PLEASE AS MANY PEOPLE AS WE CAN, JUST GUIDE US AND DIRECT US IN OUR THINKING AND IN OUR SPEECH.
THANK YOU FOR THE BLESSINGS OF THE DAY.
OKAY. AND NOW WE NEED TO ADOPT THE AGENDA.
[ADOPTION OF AGENDA]
DO I HEAR A MOTION TO DO SO? I MOVE, WE ADOPT THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED.THANK YOU. OKAY AT THIS POINT IN THE MEETING.
[ORDER OF BUSINESS]
WE WILL LOOK AT OUR ORDER OF BUSINESS.AND OUR FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS IS TO WELCOME SHANNA STORY AS A NEW MEMBER TO THE BOARD.
IN THE LAST YEAR, THIS BOARD HAS CHANGED CONSIDERABLY.
I LOOK AROUND AND EVERYBODY FEELS NEW.
BUT ANYWAY, THANK YOU FOR AGREEING TO SERVE AND THE TIME THAT IT TAKES TO MAKE THAT COMMITMENT.
AND NOW WE NEED TO ADOPT THE REVISED BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS 2023 MEETING SCHEDULE.
AND IF I LOOKED AT THAT CORRECTLY, THE CHANGE WAS THE AUGUST 21ST MEETING MOVED TO THE 27TH.
OKAY. DO I HEAR A MOTION TO ADOPT THAT CHANGE? SO MOVED. SECOND.
I'M SORRY. WHO SECONDED? CARROLL. CARROLL. THANK YOU.
NO, YOU'RE FINE. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I PICKED UP THE RIGHT VOICE.
WE HAVE TWO SETS OF MEETING MINUTES THAT WE NEED TO ADOPT AND APPROVE.
THE FIRST SET IS FROM THE AUGUST 22ND, 2022 BOARD MEETING.
ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS, QUESTIONS OR NOTATIONS ABOUT THAT MEETING? ALL RIGHT, MADAM CHAIR.
I WAS LOOKING AT MR. NORRIS WAS NOT HERE.
CAROL WOODWARD. PRESENT, PRESENT, PRESENT.
I MOVE WE ADOPT THE MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 22ND, 2022 MEETING AS PRESENTED.
YOU ONLY HAVE TWO. I CAN SECOND THAT.
AND MR. NORRIS, YOUR COMMENT IS.
OH, WE ONLY HAVE TWO OF FIVE, SO YOU CAN STILL VOTE ON IT EVEN IF YOU WERE NOT THERE.
JUST. AND THAT'S FINE IF YOU WANT TO.
IT'S AUGUST. I THINK WE NEED TO MOVE ON.
IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THESE MINUTES? I MOVED. IS THERE A SECOND? AND I'LL SECOND IT. OKAY.
OKAY. THE NEXT SET OF MEETING MINUTES ARE THE JANUARY 23RD ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING FOR 2023.
HAVE YOU REVIEWED THOSE MEETING MINUTES? I WASN'T AT THAT MEETING, SO.
[00:05:05]
SO AGAIN, WE'RE LOOKING AT ONLY TWO OF.AT THIS POINT IN THE MEETING WE HAVE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
THIS IS OPEN TO ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK.
TO THE BOARD ON ANY TOPICS THAT ARE NOT BEING HEARD AS PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS THIS EVENING.
ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WANTS TO SPEAK THAT'S NOT INVOLVED WITH.
CASE THIS EVENING. NOT SEEING ANYONE COME FORWARD.
WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
[NEW BUSINESS - PUBLIC HEARING]
AND WE'LL TURN THE NEW BUSINESS, WHICH IS OUR PUBLIC HEARING OVER TO THE STAFF.GOOD EVENING, MADAM CHAIR, MADAM VICE CHAIR, MEMBER NORRIS AND THE NEW MEMBER, MS. STORY, WELCOME TO THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS.
THE ITEM FOR THIS EVENING IS VARIANCE.
THIS IS THE REQUEST OF JAMES R JONES BUILDER INC.
FOR A 12 FOOT VARIANCE TO SECTION 90-157, WHICH REQUIRES A FRONT YARD SETBACK OF 75FT IN A 9.4FT VARIANCE TO SECTION 90158 SUBSECTION A, WHICH REQUIRES A MINIMUM LOT WIDTH OF 150FT AT THE SETBACK LINE.
THE VARIANCE REQUEST IS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING LOCATED AT 6201 ANTELOPE COURT. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS IDENTIFIED AS TAX PARCEL 12 E01000550 AND THE PROPERTY CONTAINS 1.20 ACRES AND THE ZONING IS R-E.
THE NEXT MAP IS A AREA MAP IN THAT'S A COPY OF THE SUBDIVISION PLAT THAT WENT TO RECORD IN THE ANY PROPERTY THAT'S IN QUESTION IS HIGHLIGHTED ON IN THE RED COLOR SHADED AREA.
THE NEXT MAP IS AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE PROPERTY.
IN THE BACKGROUND INFORMATION.
IS THE APPLICANT CONDITIONALLY REZONE APPROXIMATELY 97.86 ACRES OF LAND OFF OF MIDDLE ROAD FROM R-A RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL TO R-E BACK IN NOVEMBER OF 2002 TO ALLOW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 70 LOT SUBDIVISION AND THAT WAS THE ZONING MAP CASE 02-005. THE APPLICANT AS A PART OF THE REZONING PROFIT A MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF ONE ACRE AND IN THE APPLICANT ALSO PROFIT MINIMUM HOUSE SIZES AS FOLLOWS THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE FOR A ONE STORY RESIDENCE IS 1600 SQUARE FEET OF ONE AND A HALF STORY RESIDENCE IS 1800 SQUARE FEET AND A TWO STORY RESIDENCE IS 2000FT². THE SUBDIVISION PLAT ENTITLED BRICKHOUSE LANDING SECTION ONE WAS APPROVED BY PRINCE GEORGE ON JULY 2ND OF 2008.
[00:10:07]
THE SUBDIVISION PLAT SHOWS THAT THERE ARE 11 LOTS THAT ARE IMPACTED BY BOTH A 50 FOOT GAS LINE EASEMENT AND A 50 FOOT POWER LINE EASEMENT.THE SURVEY PLAT SUBMITTED WITH THE APPLICATION SHOWS THE LOCATION OF A HOUSE WITH A FRONT YARD SETBACK OF 63FT AND.
AND 140.6FT OF ROAD FRONTAGE AT THE SETBACK LINE. THIS IS A SUMMARY OF WHAT THE APPLICANT WISHES.
IN ORDER TO BUILD THE HOUSE AS LOCATED ON THE SURVEY PLAT, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A 12 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE FRONT YARD SETBACK AND THEY ARE REQUESTING A 9.4FT VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM LOT WIDTH.
THE APPLICANT'S DETAILED RATIONALE FOR THE REQUESTED VARIANCE IS IN THE FULL STAFF REPORT, BUT THIS IS A SUMMARY OF THE RATIONALE GIVEN BY THE APPLICANT.
THE APPLICANT HAS STATED THAT STRICT APPLICATION OF THE TERMS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE WILL UNREASONABLY RESTRICT THE USE OF THE PROPERTY. THE LOT IS PIE SHAPED IN THE REAR OF THE LOT, HAS A 50 FOOT GAS LINE EASEMENT AND A 50 FOOT POWER LINE EASEMENT WHICH LIMITS THE BUILDING SITE SUBSTANTIALLY AND PRETTY MUCH MAKES THE BUILDING LOT NON BUILDABLE WITH THE CURRENT 75 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK.
IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN THE EXISTING BUILDING AND QUALITY STANDARDS SET IN THE BRICKHOUSE SUBDIVISION AND A PREFERRED MINIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE OF 2000FT², THE FRONT YARD SETBACK NEEDS TO BE ADJUSTED SINCE THE 75 FOOT SETBACK IS ALSO THE 150 FOOT MINIMUM LOT WIDTH FRONTAGE.
IT REQUIRES A REQUEST TO ADJUST BOTH THE FRONT SETBACK LINE AND THE MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE.
THE APPLICANT ALSO STATES THE PROPERTY WAS ACQUIRED IN GOOD FAITH AND THAT ANY HARDSHIP WAS NOT CREATED. BY THE APPLICANT, AND THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE WILL NOT BE A SUBSTANTIAL DETRIMENT TO ADJACENT PROPERTY AS IT WILL NOT ENCROACH OR SIT IN FRONT OF OTHER PROPERTIES.
THE NEXT SLIDE SHOWS A SURVEY PLAT.
OF THE PROPERTY WITH THE PROPOSED HOUSE THAT THEY WANT TO BUILD.
SURVEY PLAT SHOWS THE ENCROACHMENT INTO THE 75 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK LINE.
IN THE NEXT SLIDE SHOWS THE FRONT VIEW OF THE PROPERTY TAKEN FROM THE STREET.
THE NEXT COUPLE OF SLIDES WILL SHOW WHAT THE ADJACENT HOUSES LOOK LIKE.
THAT'S NEXT TO THE VACANT LOT.
NEXT IS THE STATE CODE'S DEFINITION OF A VARIANCE.
A VARIANCE MEANS IN THE APPLICATION OF A ZONING ORDINANCE, A REASONABLE A REASONABLE DEVIATION FROM THE PROVISIONS REGULATING THE SHAPE, SIZE, OR AREA OF A LOT OR PARCEL OF LAND OR THE SIZE HEIGHT AREA BULK OR THE LOCATION OF A BUILDING OR STRUCTURES.
[00:15:02]
WHEN THE STRICT APPLICATION OF A OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD UNREASONABLY UNREASONABLY RESTRICT THE USE OF THE PROPERTY, AND SUCH NEED FOR A VARIANCE WOULD NOT BE SHARED GENERALLY GENERALLY BY OTHER PROPERTIES, AND PROVIDED THAT SUCH A VARIANCE IS NOT CONTRARY.A THROUGH EITHER EITHER A REZONING OR A.
THE NEXT COUPLE OF SLIDES WILL SHOW.
THE THE CRITERIA THAT HAS TO BE MET FOR THE GRANTING OF A VARIANCE. A VARIANCE SHALL BE GRANTED IF THE EVIDENCE SHOWS THAT THE STRICT APPLICATION OR TERMS OF AN OF A OF AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO PLANNING, SUBDIVISION OF LAND OR ZONING WOULD UNREASONABLY RESTRICT THE USE OF THE PROPERTY, OR THAT THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE WOULD ALLEVIATE A HARDSHIP DUE TO A PHYSICAL CONDITION RELATING TO THE PROPERTY OR IMPROVEMENTS ON THE PROPERTY AT THE TIME OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF PLANNING, SUBDIVISION OF LAND OR OR THE ZONING ORDINANCE, OR THAT IT WOULD ALLEVIATE A HARDSHIP BY GRANTING A REASONABLE MODIFICATION TO A PROPERTY OR IMPROVEMENTS ON THE PROPERTY REQUESTED BY OR ON BEHALF OF A PERSON THAT IS THAT'S DISABLED.
STAFF FINDS THAT THE REQUEST RELATES TO A PHYSICAL CONDITION OF THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE LOT HAS A HAS A IRREGULAR SHAPE IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY BEING RESTRICTED BY A 50 FOOT GAS LINE EASEMENT AND A 50 FOOT.
POWER LINE EASEMENT, WHICH BOTH SERVE TO TO CONFINE THE BUILDING'S FOOTPRINT FOR A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING.
OH, I'M SORRY I SKIPPED AHEAD.
HOWEVER, IT IS THE OPINION OF STAFF THAT THE REQUEST IS NOT A TRUE HARDSHIP DUE TO THE FACT THAT A HOUSE CAN BE CONSTRUCTED ON THE PROPERTY WITHOUT THE NEED FOR THE REQUESTED VARIANCE TO THE FRONT YARD.
IT APPEARS THAT A SMALLER HOUSE IN SIZE LESS THAN THE 3000 PLUS SQUARE FOOT HOUSE DESIRED BY THE APPLICANT, CAN BE PHYSICALLY LOCATED ON THE PROPERTY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SETBACKS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE RAY DISTRICT.
THEREFORE, STAFF FINDS THAT THE REQUEST IS IS MORE OF A MATTER OF A CONVENIENCE RATHER THAN THE ALLEVIATION OF A HARDSHIP.
THE SECOND CONDITION THAT HAS TO BE MET IS THAT THE PROPERTY INTEREST FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS BEING REQUESTED WAS ACQUIRED IN GOOD FAITH AND THE HARDSHIP WAS NOT CREATED BY THE APPLICANT FOR THE VARIANCE.
THE APPLICANT WAS ALSO THE DEVELOPER OF THE PROPERTY.
THE APPLICANT KNEW OF THE BUILDING CONSTRAINTS ON THE LOT.
THE SUBDIVISION PLAN WAS APPROVED BY PRINCE GEORGE IN IN 2008.
THE THIRD CRITERIA THAT HAS TO BE MET IS THAT THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE WILL NOT BE OF SUBSTANTIAL DETRIMENT TO ADJACENT PROPERTY INTO NEARBY PROPERTIES IN THE PROXIMITY OF THE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA.
[00:20:05]
STAFF FINDS THAT THE PROPERTIES THAT ARE MOST IMPACTED BY THE REDUCED FRONT YARD SETBACK AND THE REDUCED FRONTAGE ARE THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 6204 AND 6205 ANTELOPE COURT.STAFF MADE A SITE VISIT TO THE PROPERTY AND AND AND IT APPEARS THAT THE PROPOSED HOUSE LOCATION WOULD NOT SIT IN FRONT OF THE TWO ADJACENT HOUSES OR HAVE ANY NEGATIVE IMPACTS.
THE CONDITION. NUMBER FOUR IS THAT THE CONDITION OR SITUATION OF THE PROPERTY CONCERNED IS NOT OF SO GENERAL OR RECURRENT IN NATURE AS TO MAKE THE REASONABLE PRACTICAL AS TO MAKE IT REASONABLY PRACTICAL.
FORMULATION OF A GENERAL REGULATION TO BE ADOPTED AS A AMENDMENT TO THE ORDINANCE.
STAFF FINDS THAT EVEN THOUGH EVEN THOUGH THE GAS LINE AND POWER LINE EASEMENTS SIMILARLY SIMILARLY AFFECT TEN OTHER LOTS IN THE SUBDIVISION, THE THE SUBDIVISION, THE SITUATION IS NOT OF SO A GENERAL OR REOCCURRING NATURE AS TO REQUIRE A CHANGE TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
CONDITION FIVE IS THAT THE GRANTING OF VARIANCE DOES NOT RESULT IN A USE THAT IS NOT OTHERWISE ALLOWED ON SUCH PROPERTY. THAT FINDS THAT THE GRANTING OF THIS VARIANCE WOULD NOT RESULT.
IN A USE THAT IS NOT OTHERWISE ALLOWED ON THE PROPERTY.
IN THE LAST CRITERIA CRITERION IS THAT THE RELIEF OR REMEDY SOUGHT BY THE APPLICATION IS NOT AVAILABLE THROUGH A ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE, A SPECIAL EXCEPTION OR A MODIFICATION TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
STAFF FINDS THAT VARIANCE TO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK AND FRONTAGE REQUIREMENTS ARE NOT AVAILABLE THROUGH AN ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE.
TAKING THE CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE BCA, THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MUST DETERMINE IF THE APPLICANT'S VARIANCE REQUESTS MEET THE STANDARDS FOR A VARIANCE AS OUTLINED IN IN STATE CODE SECTION 5.2-220 AND THE CRITERIA SET OUT IN THE D CODE OF VIRGINIA, SECTION 15 .2-2309.
IF THE BOARD DECIDES TO GRANT THE VARIANCE, CONDITIONS MAY BE IMPOSED TO MINIMIZE THE IMPACT TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED ONE CONDITION FOR THE BOARD'S.
CONSIDERATION, WHICH IS A PART OF THE DRAFT RESOLUTION.
AND THE CONDITION IS STATED JUST SIMPLY THAT THE VARIANCE IS GRANTED ON TAX 12 E0100005 AND SHALL RUN WITH THE LAND.
NINE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS WERE NOTIFIED BY MAIL.
THE LEGAL AD RAN IN THE PROGRESS-INDEX ON MARCH 10TH AND AND.
THE APPLICANT RECEIVED A COPY OF THE STAFF.
REPORT PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING.
NO COMMENTS OR OPPOSITION HAVE BEEN RECEIVED FROM THE PUBLIC.
AND THAT'S THE END OF MY PRESENTATION.
[00:25:02]
AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF ME, I'M AVAILABLE AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION? THE TEN OTHER LAWS OR NON OTHER LAWS THAT WERE IMPACTED BY THE GAS AND ELECTRIC EASEMENTS WERE THEY ALREADY THERE WHEN THE OTHER HOUSES WERE BUILT OR DID THEY COME ALONG LATER AND IMPACT THOSE HOUSES ALSO? UM, ONCE THE PLAT WENT TO RECORD THE POWER ON THOSE EASEMENTS, RAN THROUGH THOSE OTHER LOTS TOO.
YES. SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, THE PREDATE THE SUBDIVISION. YES, THE EASEMENTS WERE THERE.
WHAT SIZE? HOW MANY SQUARE FEET IS THE HOUSE BEING CONSTRUCTED? UM, I, UM.
THE APPLICANT GAVE ME THE SQUARE FOOTAGE, AND IT WAS IN EXCESS OF 3000FT².
OKAY. THE GARAGE IS 940, AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE THE OFFICE ADDED THAT TO IT.
THE HOUSE IS ONLY. 268FT² ON THE.
THE FOOTPRINT YOU'RE LOOKING AT IS 2268FT² OF LIVING SPACE AND 940FT² OF GARAGE.
THAT WAS THE FIGURE THAT WAS GIVEN TO ME BY THE APPLICANT.
SO WE'RE LOOKING AT A SINGLE STORY HOUSE.
IS IT A SINGLE STOREY HOUSE? SINGLE STOREY. WE HAVE ON THE PLAN.
WE DON'T WANT TO DO IT WRONG. SORRY.
SO WE'RE JUST. LET ME ON THE PLANS WE HAVE.
WE ASKED THE THE PERSON WHO DREW THE PLANS TO MOCK UP A BONUS ROOM OVER THE GARAGE, BUT THAT IS NOT SOMETHING WE'VE DECIDED THAT WE ARE DOING FOR SURE YET.
SO THAT IS STILL QUESTIONABLE.
HE MAY SEE THAT WHICH IS AN ADDITIONAL 440FT², WHICH STILL DOES NOT GET YOU OVER 3000.
IT TOTALS 2708 HEATED SQUARE FEET.
THE GARAGE ATTACHED OR ITS ATTACHED.
AND I DO WANT TO MAKE KNOWN ABOUT THE OTHER LOTS.
WHEN SOMEONE HAVE A CALCULATOR? YES, SIR. THAT'S WHAT'S RIGHT HERE.
SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS LOT, IT HAS DIFFERENT ASPECTS COMPARED TO WHAT'S TALKING ABOUT.
AND I DON'T THINK IT'S NOT JUST THE IRREGULAR SHAPE, IT'S NOT JUST THE 75 FOOT LINE.
IT'S NOT JUST THE TOTAL OF 100FT, 50 FOOT GAS, 50 FOOT POWER OR THE YOU HAVE TO HAVE 35FT ON EACH SIDE OF THE HOUSE WITH ONE SIDE BEING 15 FOOT.
IT'S WHEN YOU IF YOU LOOK ON THE PLAT, WHEN YOU PUT ALL THOSE BOUNDARIES, 75 FOOT BACK, 100 FOOT OFF, 35FT, SOMEWHERE WITH ONE BEING 15FT OFF THE LINE, YOU HAVE A PRINT LIKE THIS LEFT ON THIS PLAT.
IT'S LITERALLY LESS THAN A QUARTER OF AN ACRE.
IF YOU SQUARE OUT THAT THAT WE'VE GOT TO SIT THE HOUSE IN BECAUSE OF EVERYTHING ELSE PUSHING IT THIS WAY BECAUSE OF THE CUL DE SAC AND IT NARROWING IN AND OUR SETBACK LINE, THAT'S BECAUSE THE CUL DE SAC NARROW ENDS UNLIKE A LOT OF THE OTHER LOTS THAT ARE SQUARE IN THE 150 FOOT LINE IS AT THE BASE AT THE ROAD.
SO AS HE SPOKE OF, WE THOUGHT WE WERE GOING TO GET AN ADMINISTRATIVE RIGHT, BUT BECAUSE WE MOVED TWO THINGS THEY DIDN'T DO ADMINISTRATIVE AND THEN THEY WENT FROM SEEING ADMINISTRATIVE TO NOT AGREEING THAT IT'S A HARDSHIP AFTER A LOT OF DISCUSSION.
[00:30:07]
I'D ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THE PICTURES THAT ARE IN YOUR PACKET ARE NOT ACCURATE.THIS IS THE STREET VIEW THAT SHOWS YOU THE ENTIRE LOT.
NEITHER OF THE PICTURES IN YOUR PACKET SHOW YOU THE ENTIRE LOT.
THEY CUT IT SHORT BECAUSE WE'RE WHERE YOU SEE THE EDGE.
OUR HOUSE IS TO THE LEFT OF THAT STILL BECAUSE WE'RE INTO THE TREES THAT ARE LEFT.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE OVERHEAD VIEW OF THE LOT BECAUSE OF SHIFTING IT THERE AND WE GET SO FAR, IF YOU LOOK AT THE HOUSE TO THE RIGHT, LOOKING AT IT, IT'S THE ONLY 18, 1900 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE IN THE WHOLE SUBDIVISION AND IT'S PUSHED TO THE FAR BOUNDARY LINE OF THEIR EDGE BECAUSE OF THE GAS LINE AND THE RIGHT OF WAY.
I JUST. I APPRECIATE THE INFORMATION.
THE ONE QUESTION I DO HAVE, IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, NOTHING HAS CHANGED SINCE IT WAS APPROVED IN 2008, SINCE..
WE JUST FOUND A LOT A FEW MONTHS AGO AND WE WENT TO TRY TO FIND A LOT AND BUILD A HOUSE.
WE DREW OUR PLANS TRYING TO FIT IT INSIDE THE LOT AND ALL THAT.
I'VE KNOWN MISS WALTON MY WHOLE LIFE, MOST OF MY LIFE.
I'M DONALD HUNTER, THE SECOND, BY THE WAY.
SHE TOLD ME I HAD THE BEST CASE SHE'S EVER SEEN FOR A VARIANCE.
AND THEN HERE WE ARE THREE MONTHS LATER BEING TOLD THEY DON'T THINK IT'S A HARDSHIP.
SO I'M COMPLETELY CONFUSED WITH THE PROCESS.
AND WHEN YOU MEANT BY LIKE 2008, WE HAVE NOT CHANGED THE COVENANTS RESTRICTIONS OF BRICKHOUSE LANDING AT ALL, MEANING THE 1600FT², THE 2000FT². BUT LITERALLY YOU HAVE THE OH, I WOULD SAY 80% OF THOSE HOUSES ARE 2500FT².
SHE ACTUALLY PICKED ALL THIS IS BASED ON THE SALES DATA ON THE COUNTY WEBSITE.
THERE ARE TWO HOUSES THAT ARE EIGHT IN THE 1800 RANGE.
AND THE DETAILS OF THOSE ONES LIKE 1880 AND THE OTHER ONES LIKE REAL CLOSE TO 19, THERE ARE 27 HOMES IN THE 2000 SQUARE FOOT RANGE, MEANING 2000 2999.
THERE ARE 26 THAT ARE 3000FT².
THERE ARE THREE THAT ARE 4000 AND ONE THAT ARE 5435.
THERE'S ONLY 70 LOTS IN THE SUBDIVISION AND I COULD FIND TEN THAT ARE EITHER IN THE PROCESS OF BEING BUILT ON OR IN A WHOLE 14, 15, 16, OR PEOPLE ARE THERE AVAILABLE FOR SALE.
SO JUST SO I'M CLEAR, Y'ALL ARE, YOU'RE NOT JAMES JONES.
I'M TARA JONES. MY HUSBAND OWNS JAMES R JONES BUILDER.
THESE ARE THE POTENTIAL HOMEOWNERS OWNERS, DONNIE AND JENNIFER HUNTER.
I APOLOGIZE. WE DID NOT SAY THAT.
AND I'M SORRY. HE'S FRUSTRATED BECAUSE HE DID A LOT OF THE LEGWORK ON THE FRONT END.
BEFORE WE HAVE SUNK $2,500 IN THIS TO THEN GET SOMETHING THAT'S KIND OF CONTRADICTS EVERYTHING WE'VE BEEN TOLD UP UNTIL LAST MONDAY, WE PAID TIMMONS TO PLOT ALL THIS STUFF AT HIS REQUEST, THEIR REQUEST, AND THEN WE HAD TO PAY 350, WE'RE 2500 IN.
AND THEN NEXT THING, LIKE I SAID, I MET WITH MISS WALTON PERSONALLY ON DECEMBER 28TH, AND HER EXACT COMMENT WAS, I WOULDN'T SEND YOU HERE IF I DIDN'T THINK IT WAS THERE, BUT IT'S GOING TO BE A NEW BOARD, I DON'T KNOW.
AND THEN FROM THEIR OFFICE TO COME OUT WITH A NOT THEY'RE AS FLABBERGASTED ME AT THE NICE WORDS.
SO I THINK MISS JONES SO YOU WERE INVOLVED IN WITH THE ORIGINAL SUBDIVISION AND THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARENT PARCEL? CORRECT. YOU AND YOUR HUSBAND? YES. I MEAN YOUR COMPANY.
SO THAT WAS A LITTLE BIT BEFORE MY TIME.
I WAS JUST IN LIKE IN THE BEGINNING STAGES I WASN'T WORKING FOR THE COMPANY AT THAT TIME ..
BUT IT WAS JAMES JONES BUILDERS THAT SUBDIVIDED IT, DEVELOPED IT ALL.
AND MY HUSBAND SAID, AND UNFORTUNATELY, HE COULDN'T BE HERE.
HE HAD TO TAKE OUR SON TO SOCCER PRACTICE.
THAT'S IT. TO BE CENTERED IN THE LOT AND TO KEEP THE MINIMUM SETBACK AT 75 AND THE MINIMUM WIDTH OF 150 AND TO KEEP THE STANDARDS OF BRICKHOUSE LANDING.
YES, THE COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS STATE A SINGLE FAMILY, ONE STORY SHOULD BE 1600 SQUARE FEET, BUT NONE OF THE HOUSES IN BRICKHOUSE LANDING ARE THAT WAY. AND WE DON'T WE DON'T WANT TO DIMINISH THE QUALITY OF BRICKHOUSE LANDING JUST TO GET THIS LOT
[00:35:04]
SOLD. SO THERE WAS ONE OPTION, LIKE WHEN WE WERE AT TIMMONS AND YOU'RE MOVING THE HOUSE AND CAD, THERE WAS ONE OPTION WHERE YOU COULD ONLY NEED TO MOVE ONE THING ONE LINE AND NOT THE OTHER, BUT LITERALLY THE HOUSE WOULD BE TILTED LIKE THIS.SO YOU'D BE LOOKING LIKE THIS INSTEAD OF LIKE THIS DOWN THE ROAD.
ASK WHAT SIZE HOME COULD YOU BUILD THERE AND BE WITHIN ALL OF THE SETBACKS AND THAT SORT OF THING.
AND SO I THINK YOU ANSWERED THAT QUESTION.
BUT WHAT SIZE HOUSE COULD YOU BUILD IT? YOU COULD BUILD A 1600 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE, RIGHT? OR A STORY AND A HALF AN 1800 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE.
BUT IT'S JUST THAT THE ORIENTATION WOULD BE OFF.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? SO I WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK TO TIMMINS TO DEFINITELY BE 100% SURE AND TO MAKE SURE THAT THE SETBACKS WOULD BE FULLY CAPABLE.
BUT MAJORITY OF OUR HOMES ACTUALLY ARE IN BRICK HOUSE ARE ONE STORY OR A STORY AND A HALF.
THERE'S VERY FEW THAT ARE ACTUALLY TWO STORIES.
I WOULD SAY 2% OF THE POPULATION IN BRICKHOUSE HAVE ACTUALLY KIDS.
SO MOST ALL OF THE HOUSES ARE ARE ONE STORY OR ONE STORY AND A HALF WITH LIKE A BONUS ROOM ABOVE.
I WOULDN'T I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE THIS BECAUSE TO GET TO SHOVE THE HOUSE ALL THE WAY TO THE LEFT, IT LITERALLY WOULD START OVER, LIKE HERE AND LIKE SO ALL THESE TREES WOULD HAVE TO COME DOWN BECAUSE THE PROPERTY LINE ISN'T HERE.
AND THEN THERE'S SOME ANGLES BACK THERE.
AND THEN THE OTHER PROPERTY LINE UP FRONT IS SOMEWHERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF THE FIRE HYDRANT.
AND AS YOU IF YOU LOOK AT ONE OF THE OTHER PAGES THAT SHOWS THE OUTLINE OF THE PROPERTY, YOU'LL SEE THAT THE BACK POINT IS ALMOST KIND OF WITH THE CORNER OF THIS PRIVACY FENCE OVER HERE.
I ACTUALLY WENT TO LOOK AT THE LOT MYSELF, AND..
IF YOU WALKED ON IT, YOU PROBABLY SAW ALL OF OUR STAKES OUT THERE.
YEAH. HOW IT WOULD REALLY IMPACT IT.
WHICH I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S A HARDSHIP OR NOT, BUT I WAS SURPRISED THAT YOU DIDN'T HAVE NEIGHBORS.
POTENTIAL NEIGHBORS WHO WOULD HAVE.
ANYTHING TO SAY ABOUT THIS LOT AND.
WELL. WELL, OF COURSE, BECAUSE WE'RE STILL WORKING IN THE SUBDIVISION.
SO THEY DEFINITELY CAME AND ASKED US QUITE A FEW QUESTIONS.
SO AND WE KIND OF EXPLAINED WHAT WAS GOING ON.
SO WE DID HAVE THEY DID HAVE COMMENTS ABOUT IT, BUT THEY CAME TO US TO MAKE SURE.
I MEAN, THEY DON'T AND WE HAVE MADE CONCESSIONS.
SO WHEN WE STARTED THIS PROCESS, THE CONVERSATIONS HE'S REFERRING TO, WE WERE LOOKING AT A 20 FOOT VARIANCE FORWARD AND REDUCING THE LINE TO 135FT.
WE'VE IT'S SINCE GONE BACK AND 12 FOOT WELL.
OKAY. SO IT'S ONLY IT ALL DEPENDS ON HOW YOU LOOK AT IT BECAUSE THE ONLY DOCUMENTS WE HAD AND ALL THE OFFICIAL COUNTY RECORDS HAVE THE STRAIGHT LINE, NOT A CURVED LINE.
I CAN'T FIND ANY COUNTY PLAT OF A SUBDIVISION THAT HAS A CURVED SETBACK LINE.
THEY'RE ALL FLAT, EVEN THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
[00:40:03]
SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE BACK STRAIGHT LINE AND THE FRONT STRAIGHT LINE, YOU'LL SEE THAT THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE IS LITERALLY LIKE TWO FEET IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING LINE, WHICH IS INDICATED AS A BUILDING LINE ON THE COUNTY PLAT . BL, IT'S OVER TO THE LEFT MARGIN.YOU CAN'T SEE IT HERE BECAUSE YOU GOT TO SEE THE BIGGER VIEW OF THE TIMMONS DOCUMENT.
SO THE GARAGE, THAT PIECE THAT STICKS OUT IS ONLY SEVEN FOOT SEVEN.
THE PORCH IS SIX AND THE GARAGE STICKS OUT A FOOT MORE.
SEVEN. SO WHERE YOU SEE THE HOUSE COME STRAIGHT ACROSS JUST IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING LINE, AND THEN YOU SEE THE GARAGE COME OUT, YOU'LL SEE THE FRONT PORCH AND YOU'LL SEE THE PORCH IS SIX FOOT.
SO IF YOU LOOK AT IT STRAIGHT LINE, A STRAIGHT LINE, AT BEST, IT'S TEN FEET.
BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT THE COMPARISON OF WHAT FOUR POINT WHATEVER FEET IS ON THE BACK CORNER, LOOK AT THAT SPACE AND YOU LOOK AT THE SPACE BETWEEN THE BROKEN LINE AND THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
IT CAN'T BE I KNOW IT'S NOT FOUR FOOT BECAUSE THOSE DISTANCES WOULD APPEAR THE SAME.
IT'S 1 TO 2FT IF THAT'S TO SCALE, WHICH ACCORDING TO TIMMONS, IT IS.
THE ONLY NUMBER THAT'S GOING TO GIVE YOU 12 IS THE CURVED LINE VERSUS THE CURVED LINE.
AND. SO SO IN CONSIDERING THE VARIANCE IN MY INTERPRETATION, ONE OF THE.
STRONGEST TRIGGERS IS THAT WE HAVE TO CONSIDER IS WHETHER OR NOT IF WE DECIDE TO DENY YOUR REQUEST.
ARE WE PREVENTING YOU FROM HAVING ANY POSSIBLE USE FOR THAT PROPERTY? FOR US, YES.
WE'VE ALREADY WE ALREADY HAVE MADE CHANGES TO THE ORIGINAL SET OF PLANS LIKE THE GARAGE.
THE INITIAL PLAN THAT HE AND I DREW TO SCALE ON GRAPH PAPER.
THE HOUSE WAS STRAIGHT ACROSS THE BACK.
SO TO TRY TO TO MINIMIZE AND TWEAK AND GET TO THIS, TO TRY TO NOT EVEN ASK FOR A VARIANCE, WE'VE MOVED THE GARAGE BACK AND WE HAVE SLID THE HOUSE TO THE LEFT.
IT IS NOT PERFECTLY CENTERED ON THE LOT.
YOU'LL SEE ON YOURS ONE SIDE OF THE HOUSE, 23FT AND THE OTHER SIDE IS, NO, IT'S OVER.
IT'S LIKE 35FT BECAUSE YOU GOT 20.
YES. SO YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE AT LEAST HALF MORE OF THAT DISTANCE.
SO YOU'RE 30FT ON ONE SIDE AND YOU'RE 20 SOME FEET ON THE OTHER.
OF THE CHARGE, AND I'VE FORGOTTEN THE CODE SECTION.
I CAN'T KEEP THOSE IN MY HEAD ANYMORE.
BUT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT NOT BEING A HARDSHIP FOR TAKING.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT.
AND IT MAY BE KIND OF TWOFOLD.
IS THERE ANOTHER? DO YOU WOULD YOU STILL HAVE THE USE OF THAT PROPERTY TO BUILD A HOME, ALBEIT DIFFERENT SIZE, DIFFERENT ORIENTATION, WHATEVER? AND I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT.
UH, AND SO THAT'S A PRETTY HIGH STANDARD FOR A VARIANCE.
UM. SO YOU'VE TOLD US YOU COULD BUILD A SMALLER HOME OR A STORY AND A HALF, BUT IT WOULD BE KIND OF POMPOUS.
MAY I SAY SOMETHING? THIS IS NUMBER ONE OF THE PIECES OF A VARIANCE.
IT SAYS, THE EVIDENCE SHOWS THAT STRICT APPLICATION OF THE TERMS OF AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO PLANNING, SUBDIVISION OF LAND OR ZONING WOULD UNREASONABLY RESTRICT THE UTILIZATION OF THE PROPERTY.
IT DOES NOT SAY ELIMINATE ANY POSSIBLE USE.
IT SAYS REASONABLY UNREASONABLY RESTRICT.
AND WE FEEL ALL THE COUNTY SETBACKS AND REQUIREMENTS AND THE EASEMENTS AND UNREASONABLY RESTRICT.
I HAVEN'T FOUND ANYTHING THAT SAYS ELIMINATES USE OF THE PROPERTY.
SO IT'S A IT'S A MATTER OF INTERPRETATION, I FEEL, OF THE LANGUAGE AND HOW YOU ALL WANT TO APPLY IT.
[00:45:02]
WE DO. SO YOU ARE.YOU ARE AREN'T LAND OWNERS YET? NO, THEY DON'T SELL JUST THE LAND.
THEY ONLY SELL YOU THE LAND WITH THE HOUSE CONTRACT.
WHICH IS WHY SHE HAD THE BUILDER.
THE DEVELOPER HAD TO SUBMIT ALL THE DOCUMENTS BECAUSE THEY OWN THE LAND.
AND YOU BUY IT ALL LOCK, STOCK AND BARREL AT THE END.
AND I FEEL THAT SHE HAS SOME GREAT POINTS.
I MEAN, THEY HAVE DONE A LOT OF WORK.
WE HAVE MET WITH THEM FOR 3 TO 4 HOURS.
THEY HAVE ADJUSTED THEIR PLANS.
AND I JUST FEEL LIKE SHE HAS A GREAT ARGUMENT OF WHAT SHE FEELS AND THAT'S WHY I BROUGHT HER.
I MEAN, AND I DIDN'T EVEN RECOGNIZE YOU.
WE DID DO IT VIRTUALLY, THOUGH.
AND MEANING THAT WE COULD POTENTIAL I DON'T KNOW.
WE HAVEN'T EVER SAT DOWN WITH TIMMONS TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS CAN BE POSSIBLY DONE.
MY PROBLEM IS, WHEN JAY DID THIS SUBDIVISION, HE WAS PLANNING ON DOING ALL OF THESE HOMES BETWEEN THE THE COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS, BUT NONE OF THESE HOMES HAVE BEEN MET.
THAT CRITERIA, MEANING THEY'VE FAR EXCEEDED THOSE.
SO I JUST DON'T WANT TO PUT A HOME ON THIS LOT.
AND I'LL GO BACK TO WHAT I WAS SAYING BEFORE TO DO OUR CONSIDERATION RESPONSIBLY, WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE CODE REQUIREMENTS ARE.
AND TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE, IF WE FEEL THAT FOR WHATEVER REASON THIS IS A PERMISSIBLE DECISION FOR US TO MAKE TO ALLOW THE VARIANCE WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO JUSTIFY THAT DECISION.
OKAY. NOT CONVENIENT, NOT WHATEVER.
IT'S JUST JUSTIFY THAT WE HAVE ANALYZED THE CODE AND DEPENDING ON OUR ANALYSIS OF OUR REQUIREMENTS WHY WE'RE MAKING THE DECISION WE'RE MAKING.
AND YOU HAVE MADE EXCELLENT POINTS, SO I'M NOT DISCREDITING ANY OF THAT.
SO I JUST WANTED YOU TO KNOW THAT WE HAVE AN OBLIGATION, NOT BASED ON CONVENIENCE, AND I'M SORRY TO USE THAT TERM, BUT ON OUR ANALYSIS OF WHAT'S BEST AND WHAT'S PERMISSIBLE UNDER OUR OBLIGATION.
SO I HAVE HEARD YOU COULD BUILD WHEN I SAY SMALLER, YOU COULD.
YOU COULD RECONFIGURE A HOME ON THAT PROPERTY, RIGHT? POTENTIALLY, YES.
THEN THE OTHER CONSIDERATIONS ARE THE IMPACT, IN MY OPINION, ON THE COMMUNITY.
THAT'S NOT IN THE CODE, BUT I THINK IT'S PART OF THE LOGIC FOR US TO CONSIDER.
I'M STRICTLY BY THE CODE KIND OF GIRL, BUT I, I FEEL LIKE YOU'VE MADE SOME VERY GOOD POINTS AND I APPRECIATE YOUR INDULGING ME TO KIND OF HELP ME WALK THROUGH IN MY MIND WHAT I FEEL LIKE OUR OBLIGATION.
MAY I SAY ONE MORE THING? I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND.
I'VE BEEN IN HR HUMAN RESOURCES FOR 23 YEARS.
I LIVE AND DIE BY A MANUAL, SO I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND.
AND I DO THINK YOU ARE CORRECT IN IT IS IN THE CODE.
AND POSSIBLY PUTTING A 1000 HUNDRED SQUARE FOOT HOME SUBDIVISION HAS DECIDED TO STAY TWO, THREE, FOUR, 3000FT², PUTTING A 1600 OR 1800 SQUARE FOOT HOME AMONGST A POPULATION OF PREDOMINANTLY 2 TO 4000 SQUARE FOOT HOMES COULD NEGATIVELY IMPACT THEIR HOME VALUE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.
THEY MAY HAVE OTHER QUESTIONS.
WERE YOU GOING TO ASK QUESTIONS? SO THIS IS MY FIRST MEETING.
AND I HAVE READ THIS AND I HAVE I'M TELLING YOU, I FEEL LIKE I HAVE JUST LIKE I'M SUPPOSED TO.
[00:50:06]
PIECE OF PROPERTY PROPERLY.ARE YOU WILLING TO GO DOWN ANY SMALLER? I MEAN, BECAUSE YOUR SQUARE FOOTAGE I KNOW THE CONVERSATION WHEN YOU FIRST STARTED, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THE SIZE OF THE HOUSE.
IT'S THE ENTIRE FOOTPRINT OF THE STRUCTURE.
IF YOU DO THE MATH ON BOTH THE HEATED SPACE AND THEN THE GARAGE SPACE.
LIKE HAVE YOU HAVE YOU LOOKED AT TRYING TO SQUEEZE THAT IN JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE SO THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE THIS? YES. SO WE IF YOU TAKE IT FROM 12 FOOT TO 10 FOOT, THAT GIVES YOU TWO FOOT, NOT 12.
I WAS TRACKING WHAT YOU. YEAH.
SO CAN YOU GO SMALLER? SO THEY MADE THE WHOLE RIGHT SIDE OF THE HOUSE ACTUALLY SMALLER, LIKE THE BEDROOMS ARE LIKE TEN BY TEN BY TEN BEDROOMS. THE KEY IS, IS THAT 35 FOOT DEPTH ON THAT RIGHT SIDE EITHER..
SO I REALLY, TRULY THINK THE KEY WOULD BE HAVING A TWO STORY HOME.
WE'RE NOT AND WE'RE NOT INTERESTED IN A TWO STORY HOME.
I PLAN TO GET OLD, SO I'M PLANNING NOT TO GO UP AND DOWN STAIRS.
SO IF THAT DOESN'T WORK, THEN IT DOESN'T WORK.
BUT I FEEL LIKE WE'VE WE'VE BEEN FLEXIBLE AND WE'VE TRIED TO MAKE CONCESSIONS AND WE HAVE.
AND I DO THINK, AS WE'VE SAID, YOU KNOW, YOU START DWINDLING DOWN, THEN THE HOUSE IS GOING TO STAND OUT AGAINST ALL THE OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE SUBDIVISION.
SO I JUST I HONESTLY, I'M LIKE TARA AND THAT IT IF THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IS GO DOWN OR TRY TO HAVE A HOUSE THAT GOES MORE UP AND THEN THAT'S FINE.
THAT'S THE DECISION YOU ALL HAVE TO MAKE.
BUT I DO FEEL ALL OF THE EASEMENTS AND SETBACKS AND SIDE LINES COMING TOGETHER AT ONE.
IT'S LIKE THE PERFECT TORNADO HAPPENING OF IT ALL BEING ON THIS ONE PROPERTY.
REALLY RESTRICTS THE USE AND WHAT CAN GO ON IT.
AND I WILL TELL YOU, WE HAVE VERY LIMITED LOTS LEFT.
SO IT IS MOST OF THE LOTS THAT ARE AVAILABLE ARE THE LEAST DESIRABLE, I WOULD SAY.
WE JUST HAVEN'T GONE THROUGH THE BUILDING, YOU KNOW, AND SIGNING THE CONTRACT.
BUT THEY'RE RESERVED, SO IT'S VERY LIMITED ON WHAT THEY HAVE LEFT TO EVEN PICK FROM.
SURE. I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU BROUGHT THEM HERE, BUT WITH YOU ALL BEING THE NURSE AND THE DEVELOPERS, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO ADD TO THIS? SO IT MAY MAY COME OUT THAT THIS JUST ISN'T THE RIGHT LOT FOR YOU TO BUILD A 3200.
SACHSE. IT'S NOT A 3200 SQUARE FOOT STRUCTURE.
2268 EIGHT PLUS 968, THAT'S 3236.
RIGHT. BUT YOU DON'T INCLUDE A GARAGE.
WELL THEN THESE, THESE NUMBERS AREN'T A FAIR COMPARISON THEN.
BECAUSE IF I GO BACK AND ADD THE GARAGES TO THESE, ALL THESE ARE GOING TO GO UP.
NO, NO, I UNDERSTAND THAT. SO JUST JUST WHEN WE'RE HOLISTICALLY THEN.
THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF A GARAGE AND A HOUSE.
I THINK BASED ON THE TIMMONS SURVEY THAT THEY DID, I MEAN, THEY DIDN'T CUT OFF THE GARAGE.
I MEAN, THEY INCLUDED ALL THE CORNERS OF THE PROPERTY.
BUT IT'S THE WHOLE HOW THE STRUCTURE SITS.
IF YOU WERE TO PICK IT UP AND PUT IT DOWN, WHERE IS IT GOING TO SIT? SO WHETHER IT'S THE HOUSE AND THE GARAGE OR HOWEVER YOU WANT TO WORD IT, IT'S THE SAME STRUCTURE.
YES. AND THOSE ARE THOSE ARE EXCELLENT POINTS.
WHAT WE'RE UP AGAINST IS AS THIS BOARD, WE TAKE OATH TO GO BY THE THE RESTRICTIONS AND THE LEGALITIES OF THE ORDINANCES OF THE COUNTY.
AND THAT'S PROBABLY WHERE WE'RE ALL STRUGGLING A LITTLE BIT.
[00:55:06]
I MEAN, WE'D LOVE TO TELL EVERYBODY TO TAKE YOUR PROPERTY AND DO WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO.AND I CERTAINLY HAVE A LOT OF APPREHENSION ABOUT SAYING NO TO A SITUATION THAT WOULD WORK FOR YOU ALL WITH JUST A LITTLE BIT OF A SLAP FROM US.
I DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT ELSE TO SAY.
DOES THE STAFF HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD TO ANY OF THIS? I THINK, YOU KNOW, PERSONALLY, I'M OBVIOUSLY SYMPATHETIC TO THE SITUATION.
THE ISSUE THAT I GET TO IS SIMPLY THE LEGAL CONDITIONS.
YOU KNOW, I MEAN, SO IF WE'RE IF WE'RE GOING THROUGH, YOU KNOW, THE QUESTION IS, DOES THE STRICT APPLICATION OF THIS UNREASONABLY AFFECT THE UTILIZATION OF THE LOT? THEY SAY IT DOES.
SO, YOU KNOW, THE NEXT STEP WOULD BE, IS IT YOU KNOW, IS IT DUE TO CONDITIONS THAT WERE THERE BEFORE THE ORDINANCE WAS APPROVED? NO, IT WASN'T. THESE WERE PREEXISTING CONDITIONS AND THEN THERE WERE NOT A SITUATION WITH A DISABILITY.
SO IF WE MOVE ON AND WE ACCEPT THAT THE STRICT APPLICATION DOES, YOU KNOW, UNREASONABLY AFFECT THEM, THEN THE QUESTION IS, WAS IT A PREEXISTING, YOU KNOW, DID THE APPLICANT SELF CREATE THE SITUATION? AND WHAT YOU HAVE SAID IS THAT YOU DID.
SO THAT'S SOME OF THE ISSUE THAT I'M HAVING FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT IS SIMPLY THE APPLICANT ON OUR APPLICATION IS THE BUILDER WHO WAS ALSO THE SUBDIVIDER WHO CREATED THE CONDITION.
SO THAT'S KIND OF THAT'S THAT'S MY ISSUE FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT.
AND AND I WOULD HAVE TO SUPPORT THAT.
THAT'S WHY I ASK WHO OWNED THE LAND AT THIS POINT, IF IT WERE YOUR LOT..
AND MAYBE WE SHOULD HAVE MODIFIED THE COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS BECAUSE NONE OF THE HOUSES ARE EVEN IN THAT THOSE SETS OF 16, 18 AND 20 OR 2000FT².
AND SO MAYBE WE SHOULD HAVE MODIFIED THE COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS BECAUSE I FEEL AT IT IS BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE A DETRIMENTAL TO BRICKHOUSE LANDING IF WE BUILD A HOUSE ON THIS LOT BECAUSE IT'S NOT IT WILL MOST LIKELY BE WITHIN THE COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS BECAUSE IT HAS TO BE.
BUT IS IT GOING TO BE WHAT WE HAVE MADE BRICKHOUSE LANDING TO BE? YEAH. SO I THINK TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION, IF YOU BUILD A TWO STORY ON IT, ABSOLUTELY, YOU'LL BE ABLE.
CLOSE TO WHAT YOU'RE EXPECTING FOR.
I MEAN, BASED ON WHAT YOU SAID, THAT WOULD BE MY ANSWER.
AND I DON'T KNOW THAT IT WOULD NECESSARILY MESS.
YES. AND I DON'T KNOW THAT EITHER PARTY CAN SAY DEFINITIVELY YOU CAN FIT A TWO STORY HOUSE.
EVEN IF WE TAKE THAT PIECE AND PUT IT ON A SECOND STORY, YOU HAVE TO TAKE AWAY THE SCREEN COVERED PORCH OR GO TO EIGHT BY EIGHT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, BECAUSE THE WAY THE EASEMENT COMES AT A DIAGONAL AND THE BUILDING LINE IS STRAIGHT ACROSS, YOU HAVE TO GET SO FAR OVER TO THE LEFT TO GET A SECOND STORY HOUSE MAY BE DEEPER THAN 35FT.
I THINK THAT THE POINT IS THAT THERE IS ADDITIONAL OPTIONS THAT COULD BE TAKEN WITH THAT.
IN THIS. OH, ONE MORE QUESTION.
SHOULD WE GIVE YOU THE OPPORTUNITY BY TABLING THIS QUESTION TONIGHT SO THAT YOU CAN GET SOME ENGINEERING ADVICE ABOUT THE FEASIBILITY OF TWO STORY HOUSE OR WHAT HAVE YOU.
STORY AND A HALF AND THEN COME BACK.
WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING THAT I'LL ADDRESS? TARA FORGOT YOUR JONES.
JONES. SORRY. I'LL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO TALK TO DEREK OR JARED AT TIMMONS TO SEE WHAT TYPE OF HOME.
[01:00:07]
AND THAT'S WHERE WE ARE.I THINK ALL OF US SITTING AT THIS TABLE ARE FEELING CONSTRAINED BY THE CODE.
NOT THE ORDINANCES OF THE COUNTY, BUT THE CODE OF VIRGINIA.
I WANT TO SAY SO WE COULD BUILD A HOUSE CROOKED AND LOOK AT THE OTHER ONE.
WE WOULDN'T EVEN BE HERE BECAUSE IT WOULD BE ADMINISTRATIVE.
AND THEY WERE GOING TO ADMINISTRATIVELY DO IT.
BUT BECAUSE THE LINE AND THE 75 MOVING, IT MADE IT TOO.
THEY WOULD HAVE HATED IT BECAUSE I'D BE LOOKING AT MY NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE.
BUT INSTEAD WE CAN'T BUILD THE HOUSE BECAUSE WE WANTED IT TO LOOK RIGHT ON THE TEN FEET.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO BUILD OUR HOUSE.
AND YOU TELL ME HOW MANY OTHER NICE LOTS ARE IN PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY AND NICE SUBDIVISIONS AND TELL ME WHERE ONE IS, BECAUSE I WANT TO GO SEE IT BECAUSE THERE'S NOT MANY LEFT. SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS I'M 50 AND I'M RETIRED.
WE WANT TO MOVE INTO A NICE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THERE'S NOT MANY LEFT.
AND MR. HUNTER, I WANT TO ADDRESS.
EVERYONE HERE IS TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT THING.
YES, MA'AM. I UNDERSTAND. I FEEL LIKE EVERYONE HERE IS TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT THING.
UM, AND I THINK WHAT WE'RE ALL STRUGGLING WITH IS THAT WE KNOW THE CHARACTER OF THAT SUBDIVISION.
AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS A.
AND I THINK YOU NOW UNDERSTAND WE'RE STRUGGLING WITH THE CODE OF VIRGINIA.
AND THAT'S NOT FOR YOU TO ANSWER, SO I'LL STOP THERE.
IF WE DECIDE TO TABLE, THAT WOULD BE A DECISION OF, OF THE BCA.
OKAY. I THINK WE'RE ALL STRUGGLING WITH, WITH WANTING TO HELP YOU, BUT WE'RE FEELING CONSTRAINED.
AND SORRY I DID NOT VISIT THE LOT.
I WAS OUT OF TOWN AND DIDN'T HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY.
IT WOULD MAKE. THIS WHOLE THING.
HAVE A LITTLE. IT WOULD MAKE THE WHOLE THING DIFFERENT.
YOU CAN'T SEE. THAT'S WHY WE WANTED TO MAKE IT PRETTY.
THAT'S ALL WE WERE TRYING. UH, WOULD YOU ALL BE AGREEABLE TO TABLING IT FOR A MONTH? THAT'S UP TO THEM. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE A MONTH.
THEY HAVE ALREADY PUT THEIR HOUSE ON THE MARKET AND WE WERE.
YOUR DEADLINE REQUIRES TWO MONTHS DELAY.
WE HAD TO HAVE THIS IN BY FEBRUARY 10TH FOR THIS MEETING SO WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE IT IN THE THERE.
WE'RE NOT INCURRING ANY MORE MONEY.
YEAH, I MEAN, WE'RE 2500 IN AND NOW I GOT A PIECE OF THAT VERBAL.
YEAH, IT LOOKS GREAT. GO AHEAD.
WOULDN'T SEND IT IF IT WOULDN'T PASS THE TEXT.
THAT SAID, IF I DIDN'T THINK YOU HAD THE RIGHT, I WOULD.
THAT'S WHERE I'M REALLY FRUSTRATED BECAUSE I STARTED.
WE'RE NOT PUTTING ANY MORE MONEY IN.
MR. GREEN STAFF RECOMMENDED APPROVAL.
HISTORICALLY, STAFF DOESN'T GIVE THE BDA A FORMAL RECOMMENDATION.
WE GO THROUGH THE SIX CRITERIA THAT THE STATE SAYS THAT A VARIANCE HAS TO MEET. SO MY REPORT STATED THAT I DON'T FEEL THAT THE APPLICATION MEETS THE FIRST STRICT APPLICATION WHICH WOULD CAUSE A ACTUAL HARDSHIP. BECAUSE AS STAFF SAID, THAT A HOUSE CAN BE CITED ON THAT LOT.
AND A HARDSHIP IS BASICALLY SAYING THAT IF YOU APPLY THE ZONING REGS, THE LOT IS NON BUILDABLE.
YOU HAVE TAKEN THE VALUE OUT OF THE LOT, MAKING IT BASICALLY A TAKING OF SOMEONE'S PROPERTY.
[01:05:01]
NOT FAIR.COULD THIS BE A MATTER THAT COULD BE HEARD AT OUR NEXT MEETING? AND THE NEXT MEETING IS THE 25TH OF APRIL? WOULD THERE HAVE TO BE A QUESTION? I DON'T THINK YOU HAVE TO BE THERE.
NO, BASICALLY THEY WOULD HAVE TO PROVE TO STAFF OR SHOW US SOME SOMETHING FROM A SURVEY SAYING THAT NO SIZE HOUSE IS ABLE TO BE BUILT THERE.
THAT'S THE ISSUE WITH THE VARIANCE.
I MEAN, IS IT A BUILDABLE LOT? I MEAN, IS IT CAN IT BE 600, 1600 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE? OH, IT COULD BE.
BUT JUST LOOKING AT THE PLAT, LOOKING AT THE DIMENSIONS, STAFF CONCLUDED THAT A HOUSE.
THAT A HOUSE OF SMALLER SIZE CAN BE BUILT THERE.
YEAH. SO EVEN IF EVEN IF WE COULD REASONABLY HEAR IT IN APRIL, THEY MIGHT NOT HAVE THE TIME TO GET.
BECAUSE THE STATE CODE SAYS THAT THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON THE APPLICANT.
A IF THEY CAN BRING Y'ALL WHATEVER SURVEYS TO SHOW THAT NO SIZED HOUSE OF REASONABLE, YOU KNOW LAYOUT CAN LOCATE THERE THEN THE BURDEN IS ON THE APPLICANT.
WE'RE REQUIRED UPON BOTH THE COUNTY ORDINANCES AND THE STATE CODE.
THERE'S NO AVENUE TO MAKE A I DON'T KNOW EDUCATED CHOICE FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS.
I MEAN, THIS BECOMES AN EMOTIONAL DISTRESS, RIGHT? DISCRETION. DO WE HAVE THE DISCRETION TO MAKE A VARIANCE AGAINST THE CODE.
CAROL, YOU'RE A LAWYER. I'LL ASK YOU A LITTLE BIT, I GUESS, TO FOLLOW ME DOWN THE RABBIT HOLE.
IF WE WERE TO ACCEPT THAT THE STRICT APPLICATION OF THE ORDINANCE UNREASONABLY BURDENS THE PROPERTY, THEN EVEN THOUGH THE TECHNICAL APPLICANT IS THE BUILDER, CAN WE MOVE TO LOOK AT IT BEYOND THAT TOWARDS THEM AS THE PURCHASER, AS THE ULTIMATE BENEFICIARY OF THE VARIANCE? THAT ARE ACTUALLY SUFFERING THE HARDSHIP VERSUS THE BUILDER? I DON'T THINK SO. I THINK WE'RE CONFINED.
BY THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT.
BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THEY HAVE NO LEGAL INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY.
SO GORDON AND VIRGINIA CODE 15.2 2310 APPLICANTS FOR VARIOUS APPLICANTS.
I DON'T THINK THEY MEET THOSE CRITERIA.
I WISH I HAD THAT RIGHT THERE.
I MEAN, THAT'S HOW I WOULD READ IT, THAT WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE FACTS IN FRONT OF US AND.
I THINK WE HAVE TO PROCEED WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING AT SOME.
RIGHT. I THINK THERE'S ANY NEED TO DELAY IT.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR PRESENTATIONS OR THOUGHTS WHILE WE'RE STILL UNDER THE HEADING OF PUBLIC HEARING? CAN YOU OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ME? CHAIRMAN. OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ME.
OKAY. OPEN IT NOW OR OPEN IT BACK WHEN WE STARTED.
SO YOU CAN OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING NOW.
OKAY. SO PART OF THE PRESENTATION, I THINK THEN AT THIS POINT IN THE IN THE CONVERSATION, THE PRESENTATION, I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
[01:10:12]
ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS? ARE THERE ANY ANY OTHER INFORMATION THAT COULD MAKE THIS DECISION A LITTLE EASIER AND NOT SO CUT AND DRY.MAY I ASK A QUESTION? CERTAINLY. CAN I PLEASE GET THE CODE SECTION THAT SAYS IT HAS TO ELIMINATE? IN ORDER TO GRANT A VARIANCE.
WHATEVER'S PRESENT ELIMINATES OR PROHIBITS ANY USE VERSUS UNREASONABLY RESTRICTS.
OR WHAT? OR WHAT CODE SECTION IS IT BEING INTERPRETED AS? AS LONG AS A HOUSE CAN BE BUILT THERE.
MEANING, I GUESS THE 1600 SQUARE FEET, THEN NO VARIANCE WILL BE APPROVED.
1950. AND I'M SURE MR. GREEN'S OFFICE CAN PROVIDE A COPY OF OR YOU CAN GOOGLE IT.
YOU CAN JUST PUT IN THE CODE NUMBER AND IT'S 15.2 2201 CODE OF VIRGINIA 1950.
NORMALLY I COME IN HERE WITH A SET DECISION, YOU KNOW, HAVING GONE TO THE PROPERTY.
BUT THIS IS ONE OF THE HARDEST ONES I'VE ENCOUNTERED.
UM. I FEEL LIKE THE APPLICANT HAS MADE EXCELLENT POINTS.
THE BENEFICIARY OF THE APPLICANT HAVE MADE EXCELLENT POINTS.
I WOULD BE WILLING TO ENTERTAIN.
REVIEWING THIS AGAIN AT A FUTURE TIME.
IF THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT A.
AT THE MOMENT, I'M NOT REALLY READY TO MAKE A MOTION AT THE MOMENT, BUT.
I MEAN, THERE'S REALLY NO REASON NOT TO.
I JUST HAVE ONE OTHER QUESTION.
SO WHEN YOU SAY THAT BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY, BUT IF I SOLD THEM THE LOT, WOULD THIS BE A DIFFERENT STORY? AND COULD WE COME BACK? NOT AT THIS POINT, BECAUSE NOW THEY KNOW.
YEAH, BECAUSE Y'ALL WERE SAYING THAT, SO I JUST WANTED TO ASK THAT, BUT.
BUT I UNDERSTAND WE HAVE TO KEEP IT.
WHO IS THE APPLICANT? WHO'S THE OWNER? WHO HAS THE INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY? THAT'S WHY THAT'S WHERE WE ARE.
AND I JUST LIKE DONNY SO MUCH.
IT'S ESPECIALLY HARD WHEN WE KNOW THE APPLICANT.
OKAY. DOES ANYBODY ELSE ON THE BOARD HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY? ANY DESIRE TO MAKE A MOTION? OR ARE YOU READY TO TABLE IT? FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION.
[01:15:01]
THE STAFF SEEMS TO SAY THAT THEY CAN FIT IT ON.THAT. MR. NORRIS, CAN YOU SPEAK INTO YOUR MICROPHONE, PLEASE? I'M SORRY. WE CAN'T HEAR YOU.
IS THAT A THAT A DIFFERENTLY SIZED HOUSE CAN FIT THAT MEETS THE ORDNANCE REQUIREMENTS? THAT'S STAFF'S POSITION THAT PRETTY WELL OUR.
WAY UP THERE. ONE OF US HAS TO.
DOES DENIAL COME WITH ANY RESTRICTIONS? LIKE A SET TIME PERIOD FOR ME TO REAPPLY? SHOULD SOMETHING CHANGE OR SHOULD BE DIFFERENTLY? DO THAT VERSUS TABLE? YOU KNOW, LIKE IF YOU GO FOR MR NORRIS, COULD YOU SPEAK INTO YOUR MICROPHONE, PLEASE? I'M SORRY. I CAN'T HEAR YOU.
DOES DENIAL SET A TIME PERIOD FOR REAPPLICATION? I THINK SIMILAR TO LIKE A REZONING.
IF IT WAS DENIED, YOU WOULD HAVE A YEAR WAITING PERIOD.
IS THERE ANY SIMILAR RESTRICTION? I WOULD HAVE TO ASK THE COUNTY ATTORNEY.
AFTER THE 30 DAY APPEAL PERIOD BASED ON OUR VOTE TODAY.
GETTING. YOU CAN ALWAYS COME BACK.
WELL, NOT FOR THIS PARTICULAR, BUT FOR SOMETHING BRAND NEW.
MOVING UP. I GUESS WHAT I WAS GETTING AT WAS IF THE INFORMATION CHANGED.
IF THEY DID. ADJUST SOMETHING WITH THAT, AND I GUESS THEN IT WOULD BE A NEW APPLICATION COMPLETELY.
OKAY. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE THIS REQUEST TO THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING OF THE BCA.
IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED.
HAVING MADE AND APPROVED THAT MOTION.
AGENDA. IF THERE ARE ANY CHANGES, IF THE GARAGE COULD BE RETURNED SOME OTHER WAY, IF SOMETHING COULD CHANGE TO MAKE THE HOUSE FIT, WE'D LOVE TO.
CAN I ASK IF YOU WOULD MAKE CHANGES TO MAKE IT FIT ON THE PROPERTY? WE DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK BECAUSE THEN WE WON'T NEED A VARIANCE.
SO I UNDERSTAND THAT TO THAT POINT, WE HAVE BEAT OUR HOUSE PLANS.
I GOT PLANS TO SHOW YOU THAT OUR BEDROOMS ARE ALREADY TEN BY TEN.
WE CAN'T MAKE AN EIGHT BY EIGHT BEDROOM FOR MY SON TO BE IN.
THOUGH. HE'S THERE A COUPLE OF WEEKS, SO.
SO WE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE IT SO THAT IT MEETS THAT WE NOT IN THE SETBACK.
I MEAN, OR IF I COULD PROVE THAT.
ACCORDING TO THE COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS OR ACCORDING TO THE REAL ESTATE VALUE THAT IS IN.
WELL UNDERSTAND WE'RE NOT CONCERNED ABOUT THE REAL ESTATE VALUE.
SHE'S COMING FROM THE DESPERATE IMPACT.
THAT'S WHAT SHE'S REFERRING TO.
DID YOU HAVE TO CONSIDER THE IMPACT TO THE PROPERTIES AROUND IT? OKAY. ON Y'ALL, THE COUNTY'S VARIANCE FOR.
OKAY. SO I GO BACK TO THAT POINT IS THE COUNTY CONSIDERS THE LOT BUILDABLE. SO WHETHER IT'S BUILDABLE AT A CERTAIN VALUE ADDED OR NOT IS NOT REALLY SOMETHING THAT THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS IS CONCERNED ABOUT.
IT IS THE LOT BUILDABLE? OKAY. I JUST WISH THE PERSON WHO SHOULD KNOW MORE.
WHAT IT TOLD US THAT BEFORE WE PUT ALL THE MONEY IN.
SO SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK WHAT YOU'RE SEEING HERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE TRYING TO FIND A WAY.
[01:20:03]
AND I DEFINITELY SEE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO FIND A WAY.RIGHT? SO WE ALSO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO CONSULT WITH AN ATTORNEY. THE COUNTY ATTORNEY MAYBE, WHO JUST SAID HE DIDN'T.
THEY REFERRED THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS TO SOMEONE ELSE.
RIGHT. HE DOESN'T REPRESENT US.
SO, MADAM CHAIR, WHERE ARE WE NOW? I HAVE NO IDEA WHERE WE ARE NOW.
SO LET'S LET'S GO BACK AND LOOK AT THIS AGENDA COMMUNICATIONS.
[COMMUNICATIONS]
WE'VE THE PUBLIC HEARING.WE HAVE A REPORT ON COMMUNICATIONS AND UPCOMING CASES.
I JUST HAVE TO GIVE YOU AN UPDATE ON THE UPDATED CASES.
WE WILL HAVE ONE NEW CASE IN APRIL, AND THAT IS A CASE FOR, UM, IT'S A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW FOUR OR MORE DOGS ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT'S ONE ACRE OR LESS IN SIZE.
AT THIS POINT, WE'VE WELCOMED NEW MEMBERS.
WE'VE HAD ONE OF THE LONGER MEETINGS THAT WE HAVE.
IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE? WHEN YOU WEREN'T HERE, WE HAD A 20 MINUTE MEETING.
YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE MADE ME CHAIRMAN.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS OR ANYTHING ELSE THAT NEEDS TO BE SAID BEFORE WE CLOSE THIS MEETING? OKAY. I'M NOT GOING TO GIVE YOU VERY LONG TO THINK ABOUT IT.
I MOVE, WE ADJOURN. MADAM CHAIR.
SECOND. OKAY, WE'LL TAKE A VOTE.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.