Case #2016-BZA-00004New First Colonial Road Associates LLC

April 6, 2016

PREPARED BY: CHRIS LANGASTER DESCRIPTION: A variance to a 10 foot side yard setback adjacent to a street (Chantilly Ct) instead of 30 feet as required and to a 15 foot side yard setback (Northwest) instead of 20 feet as required for a proposed office building, 829 FIRST COLONIAL RD Zoning: O2 GPIN: 2407792914 YEAR BUILT: New construction AICUZ: noise zone greater than 75dB DNL REPRESENTATIVE: Nathan Lahy of MSA PREVIOUS BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ACTIONS: On January 3, 2001, a variance to a 9.8-ft setback from the property line adjacent to Chantilly Ct, instead of 30-feet as required when adjacent to a street was Granted for a proposed building addition to an existing office building. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to demolish an existing one-story office 2,100 sq ft office building and construct a proposed 4,000 sq ft one-story office building on the south east portion on the lot. A variance to a 10-foot side yard setback from the property line adjacent to Chantilly Ct instead of 30-feet as required; and to a 15-foot side yard setback from the northwestern property line instead of 20-feet as required are sought with this request. An existing office building is presently 9.73-feet from the property line adjacent to Chantilly Ct. The proposed office building will essentially be setback at the same distance at 10-feet from the property line adjacent Chantilly Ct; however, the building will be shifted towards the rear of the lot. Parking required for the proposed office building will be installed in the front of the lot and shall only be accessible from First Colonial Rd. The rear of this lot abuts an existing apartment development. A 20-foot category IV landscaping buffer is required and is shown on the plan, where the site abuts the apartment zoning district. CONSIDERATIONS:

The lot is only 20,037 sq ft rather than 43,500 sq ft as required today if subdivided. Therefore, this lot is nonconforming in regards to the minimum lot area required in this zoning district

The proposed office building will essentially maintained the same setback as the existing

office building

A more functional parking lot including the handicapped parking spaces as required by ADA will be added with this proposal and the appropriate interior parking landscaping will be installed

The new building is expected to be more aesthetically appealing than the existing office building

Category IV landscape buffer will be installed where the lot abuts an apartment district providing a natural buffer between the site and the adjacent apartment development

RECOMMENDED CONDITION:

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

Case #2016-BZA-00005MHM Bay Development, LLC & Keely Arnold

April 6, 2016

PREPARED BY: CHRIS LANGASTER DESCRIPTION: A variance to a 12 foot side yard adjacent to a street (Frazee Lane) instead of 30 feet as required and to waive the off-street parking requirements for a proposed single family dwelling, 1089 FRAZEE LN Zoning: R10 GPIN: 2417505552 YEAR BUILT: New construction AICUZ: APZ II noise zone greater than 75dB REPRESENTATIVE: Dan David of Rose & Womble SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to construct a two-story single-family dwelling 12-feet from the property line adjacent to Frazee Lane, instead of 30-feet as required. In addition, the applicant is seeking a variance to waive the two 9’ x 18’ all-weather off-street parking spaces as required for a single-family dwelling. Presently, a concrete foundation is existing on this lot suggesting a single-family dwelling was once placed on the lot. Based on a 2011 site plan provided in the file, the previous dwelling maintained a 13.3-foot setback from the property line adjacent to Frazee Lane. The 2011 site plan also depicts various easement where the lot front (west side) Birdneck Rd. In 1991 portions of this lot were conveyed to the City of Virginia Beach along Birdneck Rd and the northeast corner along Frazee Lane. In addition, Frazee La was installed by the city requiring a taking of 9,116 sq ft from the parcel directly to the south of this lot. This lot exceeds the minimum lot area (10,000 sq ft) for this zoning district; however, is nonconforming regarding the minimum lot width (90-ft) for a corner lot. The proposed dwelling will face Frazee La; although, the front of the lot is considered the property line that fronts Birdneck Rd. The proposed parking is mostly depicted in the right-of-way of Frazee Lane. Staff finds it appropriate to access the lot from Frazee La due to traffic volume on Birdneck Rd. However, staff recommends constructing a side loading garage on the east side of the dwelling as well as provide the required parking on the east side of the lot. This will required the proposed floor plans to be modified and the dwelling could potentially have to be shifted towards Birdneck Rd to provided adequate space on the lot for the required parking pads. CONSIDERATIONS:

The lot is nonconforming in regards to minimum lot width required for a corner lot in this zoning district

The two required 9’ x 18’ off-street parking spaces can be installed on the lot without a

variance. Some modifications will be necessary; however, it appears to be a plausible option

RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS:

1. The proposed two-story single-family dwelling shall be constructed in substantial adherence to the submitted site plan and building elevations or as acceptable to the Zoning Administrator or her designee.

2. Two 9’ x 18’ off-street all-weather parking spaces shall be installed on the lot.

Case #2016-BZA-00006Jonathan & Susan Macy

April 6, 2016

PREPARED BY: CHRIS LANGASTER DESCRIPTION: To permit a building height of 37 feet instead of 35 feet as allowed for a modification to the existing single family dwelling roof structure; and to a 5.7 foot side yard setback (east) instead of 8 feet as required for a proposed generator, 3834 JEFFERSON BLVD Zoning: RDR(SD) GPIN: 1580205026 YEAR BUILT: 2007 AICUZ: noise zone less 65dB DNL REPRESENTATIVE: Jonathan & Susan Macy, Homeowners BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ACTION: On September 7, 2011, a variance to allow 38.25% in lot coverage, instead of 35% in lot coverage was Granted to add a second and third story decks. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicants are proposing to change the existing roof pitch of an existing single-family dwelling and is seeking a variance to allow 37-feet in building height, instead of 35-feet in building as allowed. Additionally, a variance to a 5.7-foot east side yard setback, instead of 8-feet as required is requested for a 36kW Generac stand-by home generator. This existing single-family dwelling was converted from duplex back in 2013. Currently, the dwelling is 35.50’ in height and the new roof will increase the height approximately 1.25’. The applicants decided to request a variance to allow an increase to 1.50’ in building height to ensure the height increase will be covered with the roof pitch change as measured from the existing grade. Based on the topographic measurements provided, the lot grading elevation differential is approximately 3.7-ft from the lowest to the highest portions of the lot grading as measured within 6-feet of the foundation. The proposed home stand-by generator will be installed on the east side of the dwelling. Presently, a 6-foot vinyl fence separates this property from the property to the east. The existing fence will screen the proposed generator from the property to the east as well as provide sound mitigation. This model generator will produce sound outputs of 64dB while in normal operation mode and 58dB while in exercise mode, as measured at a distance of 23-feet. CONSIDERATIONS:

The lot grading differential is consistent with height variance requested and the minor roof pitch change is not expected to create a detriment

The proposed Generac “Quietsource series” generator will be screened from the adjacent

neighbor to the east and it is not expected to have an impact during normal operation or while in exercise mode.

RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS:

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

2. The proposed 36kW 60HZ Generac “quietsource series” standby generator shall be

installed in substantial adherence to submitted site plan and shall only be operated during emergency power outages and for the purposes of maintenance as recommended by the manufacturer’s specifications

Case #2016-BZA-00007Doyle Palmer & Heather Robinson

April 6, 2016

PREPARED BY: CHRIS LANGASTER DESCRIPTION: DESCRIPTION: To a 5.5 foot side yard setback (north & south sides) instead of 8 feet each as required for proposed building additions and decking; and to an 8 foot setback adjacent to the public beach of the Atlantic Ocean (east) instead of 30 feet as required for proposed building additions and decking, 8804 OCEAN FRONT AVE Zoning: R5R GPIN: 2510515981 YEAR BUILT: 1970 AICUZ: noise zone 65dB DNL REPRESENTATIVE: Doyle Palmer & Heather Robinson, Homeowners SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicants are proposing to construct several building additions as well as make other improvements to an existing single-family dwelling. The applicant are seeking variances to a 5.5-foot setback from both the north and south side yard setbacks, instead of 8-feet each as required for proposed building additions and decking. In addition, a variance to an 8-foot setback from the east property line, instead of 30-feet as required when adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean is sought with the proposal. Though it appears that the dwelling is nonconforming in regards to the rear yard setback; staff was unable to determine how or when the second and third floor decks were constructed in the required rear yard setback. When this dwelling was built in 1970, the minimum rear yard setback was only 10-feet. The decks are presently only maintaining an 8-foot rear yard setback. All of the proposed additions will be constructed within the footprint of the existing dwelling; essentially enclosing existing unenclosed areas on the first floor of this three-story dwelling CONSIDERATIONS:

The present setbacks will not decrease with this request; the additions will be constructed within the existing setbacks

Both letters of opposition and support for this request have been received

It appears the rear second and third floor decks were constructed in the required rear yard

setback without a building permit or setback variance. Therefore, staff concluded the decks are not nonconforming and were constructed illegally at some point since the dwelling was built

The rear second and third floor decks could be reduced to increase the rear yard setback or completely removed

RECOMMENDED CONDITION:

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

Case #2016-BZA-00008Joseph & Beth Clevenger

April 6, 2016

PREPARED BY: CHRIS LANGASTER DESCRIPTION: To a 7’ side yard adjacent to a street (Baltic Ave) instead of 15’ as required for a proposed addition & roof modification; & to a 10’ side yard adjacent to a street (Baltic Ave) instead of 15’ as required for an existing sunroom; & to a 4.9’ side yard setback (west) instead of 5’ as required for an existing shed; & to a 1.5’ side yard setback (west) instead of 5’ as required and to a 7’ rear yard setback (north) instead of 10’ as required for an existing above ground storage tank, 501 HIGH POINT AVE Zoning: R5S GPIN: 2427123946 YEAR BUILT: 1955 AICUZ: noise zone 70-75dB DNL REPRESENTATIVE: Mark Janik of Inlet Contracting BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS HISTORY: On July 15, 1981, a variance to a 7-foot setback from the property line to Baltic Ave instead of 20-feet as required when adjacent to a street was Granted for a residential addition SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicants are proposing to make several additions and improvements to the existing single-family dwelling. The following variances are sought with this proposal:

A variance to a 7-ft setback from the property line adjacent Baltic Ave, instead of 15-feet as required for an addition and roof modification

A variance to a 10-ft setback from the property line adjacent Baltic Ave, instead of 15-feet as required for an existing sunroom addition

A variance to a 4.9-ft west side yard setback , instead of 5-ft as required for an existing shed A variance to a 1.5-ft west side yard setback instead 5-ft as required and to a 7-ft rear yard

setback instead of 10-ft as required for an existing above ground storage(oil) tank The majority of the variance requests mentioned above are clean up variances; in which, staff could not deem nonconforming or find variances in the city records to justify the existing encroachments. Based on the site plan submitted with the 1981 variance, the existing sunroom addition, shed and above ground storage tank was not depicted. Therefore, it’s reasonable to assume these were added somewhere between 1981 and today without obtaining building permits. The sunroom is setback further from the property line adjacent to Baltic Ave than house that received a variance to a 7-ft setback. The shed encroachment is very minor in nature and staff does not much benefit having the shed moved a tenth of a foot. The existing above ground (oil) storage tank could have potentially installed many years ago and just was not depicted on the previous site plans. After conducting an inspection, a civil inspector observed the existing above ground oil storage tank was not installed in compliance with National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) regulations. The above ground tank doesn’t meet the minimum 5-foot setback from the side property and it is not anchored nor does it have a gauge installed on the tank. Staff also observed a 4-foot white vinyl picket fence that appears to be installed on the property lines adjacent Highpoint Ave and Baltic Ave. According to the fence ordinance; maintenance-free fencing (under 4-ft in height) installed on the property line adjacent to a street requires category I landscaping to be installed behind the fence where it is parallel with a street.

CONSIDERATIONS:

The existing dwelling was built in 1955; however, the lot nor the dwelling is nonconforming to the presently zoning ordinance

The proposed roof modification and dormer addition will be made within the footprint of

the existing dwelling. The proposed addition on the southeast corner will align with the existing dwelling, where it is parallel with Baltic Ave and comply with the required front yard setback

Though the existing sunroom appears to have been built some time ago without a building permit or a setback variance; it is setback further from the property line adjacent to Baltic Ave

RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS:

1. The proposed addition, roof modifications and dormer shall be constructed in substantial adherence to the site plan and building elevations.

2. An ‘after-the-fact’ building permit shall be obtained for the existing 4-foot fence and

category I landscaping must be installed behind the fence, where it is parallel with a street.

3. The proposed above ground oil storage tank shall be relocated in compliance with the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) standards and the required setback requirements. The above ground storage tank must be in compliance prior to receiving a final inspection for the proposed improvements noted in this request

Case #2016-BZA-00009Bob & Kathy McNaughton

April 6, 2016

PREPARED BY: Karen Lasley DESCRIPTION: A variance to a 42.5 foot front yard setback (west) instead of 50 feet as required for a proposed covered front porch larger than 6' x 12', 1524 BAY POINT DR Zoning: R20 GPIN: 2409318371 Year Built: 1972 AICUZ: Less than 65 dB Ldn REPRESENTATIVE: Bob & Kathy McNaughton, Homeowners Description of Request: The subject site is zoned R-20 Residential District and contains a single family dwelling. In the R-20 District, the required front yard setback is 50’. The Zoning Ordinance allows a covered, front porch to be added to any single-family or duplex dwelling that was constructed prior to May 12, 2009, provided the porch has a maximum depth of six feet and a maximum width of 12 feet. The setback from the nearest lot line to the porch foundation cannot be less than five feet. The applicant’s home was built in 1972 with a 52.95’ setback from Bay Point Drive. The home does not have a covered entrance. The applicants desire to add a covered front porch with a depth of 8’ and a width of 20’. The proposed front porch would have a 42.5’ front yard setback, rather than 50’ as required. Because the desired porch is larger than 6’ by 12’, it does not qualify for the administrative reduced setback. An architectural rendering of the proposed porch has been submitted showing a porch with four support columns and a 1’ 4” overhang beyond the columns. The plan calls for three stair treads and four risers. The third stair tread will be covered by the 1’ 4” roof overhang. Considerations: The applicants indicate that the 8’ porch depth, rather than the permitted 6’ depth, was recommended by their builder for safety. The 20’ width is desired so that the porch extends past the first windows on either side of the door. Support columns on a 12’ wide porch would visually conflict with the windows. The submitted architectural elevation shows that the proposed porch would be a positive addition to the architecture of the home, which currently has a plain front elevation with no covering at the entrance. Approval could be recurring in nature. The applicants submitted a petition of support signed by six neighboring property owners. Conditions:

1. The front porch addition shall substantially adhere to the submitted site plan and architectural elevation.

Case #2016-BZA-00010JMDH Real Estate of Virginia Beach

April 6, 2016

PREPARED BY: Karen Lasley DESCRIPTION: To allow 176 parking spaces instead of 223 parking spaces as required for an addition to an existing retail building; and to modify the conditions of a variance granted on 10.07.2009, 5112 VIRGINIA BEACH BLVD Zoning: B2 GPIN: 1467864495 Year Built: 1969 AICUZ: Less than 65 dB Ldn REPRESENTATIVE: R J Nutter of Troutman Sanders Variance History On May 5, 1976, the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) approved a variance to allow a zero setback from Virginia Beach Boulevard for a bus shelter, rather than 35’ as required. The subject site was formerly occupied by a Value City retail store. On November 3, 1993, the BZA denied a variance to allow a 204 square foot wall sign instead of 150 square feet as allowed. On October 7, 2009, the BZA approved a variance request by Jetro Cash and Carry to allow 155 parking spaces, rather than 308 parking spaces as required. At that time, the required parking ratio for retail use was 1:200. The ratio is currently 1 space per 250 square feet. The variance is subject to 3 conditions as follows;

1. The parking variance is for a retail facility that will sell food service products and equipment to only restaurants, caterers and non-profit organizations or similarly restricted retail.

2. The submitted architectural elevation for the renovated retail use shall substantially be adhered to.

3. Landscaping shall be added along Witchduck Road and along the front of the retail store as shown on the submitted landscape plan.

Description of Request The Restaurant Depot, which has been operating successfully at this location since 2010, sells food products and restaurant equipment only to restaurants, caterers and non-profit organizations. The retail store is not open to the general public. Experience has shown that this specialized retail use does not generate the need for parking at the required rate of one space per 250 square feet. With the variance approved in 2009, the Restaurant Depot is operating with 155 parking spaces for the 61,656 square foot retail space or 1 parking space per 398 square feet. At this time, the Restaurant Depot would like to expand by adding a 16,587 square foot addition onto the front of the existing retail building. A variance is being requested to allow the addition with a total of 176 parking spaces, rather than 223 spaces as required for the proposed addition to the existing retail building. This proposal would allow one parking space per 445 square feet of retail space, rather than one parking space per 250 square feet of retail space as required. Architectural renderings were submitted showing the proposed 16,687 square foot addition. A large, 78’ by 260’, open canopy area is also shown, which will project out into the parking area.

Considerations –

Although additional parking exists along the Virginia Beach Boulevard frontage, the submitted site plan indicates that this acre of frontage property will be developed for outparcel use.

The submitted architectural renderings show that the building will have concrete panel

walls with a brick stamp pattern. The addition will have a dark blue strip and signage in keeping with the existing structure. The open canopy area will be similar in appearance to the existing canopy.

The proposed addition does not have a well-defined entrance as found on the existing

building.

Although the rear of the building is adjacent to residential townhomes, there is little landscaping to buffer the view of the commercial loading area. There is about 20’ of grassed area adjacent to the townhomes where Category IV landscape screening could be added. A 15’ buffer with Category IV landscaping is required where new commercial development adjoins residential or apartment districts.

Air photographs of the site indicate that little of the existing parking is utilized and that

this specialty retail use does not appear to generate the need for standard parking requirements. The applicant is performing parking counts during peak periods that they believe will further demonstrate that parking will be adequate at 176 spaces. The parking counts will be available at the public hearing.

Conditions –

1. The parking variance is only for a retail facility that will sell food products and equipment to restaurants, caters and non-profit organizations or similarly restricted retail use.

2. The applicant shall work with the Planning Staff to provide a better defined entrance acceptable to the Zoning Administrator. Except for this change, the submitted architectural elevations shall be substantially adhered to.

3. Category IV landscaping shall be installed in the grassed area along the northern property line.

Case #2016-BZA-00012Michael Resh Revocable Trust & Arland Homes

April 6, 2016

PREPARED BY: CHRIS LANGASTER DESCRIPTION: To a 10 foot side yard setback (east and west) instead of 20 feet each as required for a proposed single family dwelling; and to a 10 foot side yard setback (east) instead of 15 feet as required for proposed HVAC units, 1053 Old Dam Neck Rd Zoning: AG1/AG2 GPIN: 2415545303 YEAR BUILT: New construction AICUZ: noise zone greater than 75DB REPRESENTATIVE: William King SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to construct a two–story single-family dwelling 10-feet from both the east and west side property lines, instead of 20-feet each as required. In addition, the applicant is seeking a variance to a 10-foot east side setback, instead of 15-feet as required for proposed HVAC units. This undeveloped lot was platted in 1950 and is presently nonconforming in regards to the minimum (150’) lot width and (1 acre) lot area. A platted 20-ft wide private right-of-way provides the only access to this lot as well as for (3) other platted undeveloped lots. Considering the width of this lot is 40-feet less than the minimum lot width required in this zoning district; the side yard setback relief requested is reasonable. Presently, there is only one other adjacent property owner for the four adjoining platted 60-foot wide lots. Therefore, staff does not expect this request to be detrimental to the adjoining property owners or surrounding community. CONSIDERATIONS:

This lot was recorded in 1950 and is nonconforming in regards to the minimum lot width for this zoning district

The proposed dwelling is reasonable in size and the side yard setback variances

requested is considered practical given the width of this nonconforming lot RECOMMENDED CONDITION:

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

Case #2016-BZA-00013Michael Resh Revocable Trust & Arland Homes

April 6, 2016

PREPARED BY: CHRIS LANGASTER DESCRIPTION: To a 10 foot side yard setback (east and west) instead of 20 feet each as required for a proposed single family dwelling; and to a 10 foot side yard setback (east) instead of 15 feet as required for proposed HVAC units, 1053 Old Dam Neck Rd Zoning: AG1/AG2 GPIN: 2415545303 YEAR BUILT: New construction AICUZ: noise zone greater than 75DB REPRESENTATIVE: William King SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to construct a two–story single-family dwelling 10-feet from both the east and west side property lines, instead of 20-feet each as required. In addition, the applicant is seeking a variance to a 10-foot east side setback, instead of 15-feet as required for proposed HVAC units. This undeveloped lot was platted in 1950 and is presently nonconforming in regards to the minimum (150’) lot width and (1 acre) lot area. A platted 20-ft wide private right-of-way provides the only access to this lot as well as for (3) other platted undeveloped lots. Considering the width of this lot is 40-feet less than the minimum lot width required in this zoning district; the side yard setback relief requested is reasonable. Presently, there is only one other adjacent property owner for the four adjoining platted 60-foot wide lots. Therefore, staff does not expect this request to be detrimental to the adjoining property owners or surrounding community. CONSIDERATIONS:

This lot was recorded in 1950 and is nonconforming in regards to the minimum lot width for this zoning district

The proposed dwelling is reasonable in size and the side yard setback variances

requested is considered practical given the width of this nonconforming lot RECOMMENDED CONDITION:

2. The proposed two-story dwelling shall be constructed in substantial adherence to the submitted site plan and building elevations