Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6/18/2025 - Minutes AOAN0 L "As-, County of Roanoke rst BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS 1838 Wednesday, June 18, 2025 PUBLIC HEARING MINUTES BZA Members Present: Mr. Richard Jones, Chairman Mr. Eric Thomas, Vice-Chairman Mr. Jeffrey Armstrong Ms. Charlotte Moore BZA Members Absent: Mr. Rick Pevarski Staff Present: Ms. Rebecca James, Secretary Mr. William Richardson, Alternate Secretary Mr. Doug Barber, Senior Assistant County Attorney Ms. Skylar Camerlinck, Planner Mr. Jason Nowak, Planner Ms. Cecelia Thomas, Recording Secretary CALL TO ORDER Mr. Jones called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There was a motion to approve the agenda, which passed 4-0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES There was a motion to approve the December 18, 2024 minutes, which passed 4-0. PUBLIC HEARING 1. 1. The petition for a variance requested by Hughes &Associates of Section 30-41- 3(B)3 of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance to reduce the rear yard setback from 25 feet to 10 feet. The property is located at 5179 Lakeland Drive, Tax map #: 076.20-07-08.0000 Roanoke, VA 24018. The property is zoned R-1, Low Intensity Residential District, and is located in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District. Stan Puckett, 5179 Lakeland Drive, noted that his wife developed an issue with her vision and her depth perception. He would like to be able to have everything on the first floor, and does not want to have to move to do that. He noted that due to this he has been looking at the area behind his garage. He noted that to do that he will need a reduction in the rear yard setback. He noted that he looked for other options. He explained that he approached his neighbor about purchasing some land so that he could meet the setback requirement. Lumsden & Associates looked at an aerial of the area and noted that if the neighbor did sell him land it would make it about 25 feet off of his neighbors home. This would potentially create the same issue for BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES JUNE 18, 2025 those homeowners in the future should they wish to build off of their home. He noted that he spoke with Balzer & Associates about a potential addition on the front of the garage. He explained that he could build out the front or the back of the garage, but it got pretty complicated. He noted that he would have to build over 1,000 square feet to do that, compared to the 600 square feet proposed with this variance. He noted that to build off of the back of his existing garage is his preferred method. He noted another potential option that could potentially make the requested setback 13 feet instead of the requested 10 feet. He noted that he studied elevators to see if that was an option without messing up the floor plan. He noted that with his wife's vision issues he is not sure that would work either. He explained that they go on vacations in houses that have elevators, and she is scared of the elevators in those. He noted that these are the conclusions he has come to, but he needs a variance to proceed. Mr. Jason Nowak presented the staff report. He noted that there was a concern with building lot coverage. He explained that this does fall within the 50% lot coverage, and would be acceptable. Mr. Jones opened the public hearing, and with no one wishing to speak, closed the public hearing. Mr. Armstrong asked if the applicant would consider moving the addition closer to the sunroom to reduce the setback request further. The applicant noted that he could study that further. Mr. Puckett noted that he could not come up with something that he felt would work. Mr. Armstrong asked about potentially sizing down the addition. He asked if there was any flexibility to the size. Mr. Puckett noted that he copied almost exactly what they have now. Mr. Armstrong questioned using the patio that exists rather than the proposed addition. Mr. Puckett noted that he did not want to disturb the porch because he just closed it 18 months ago. He noted that does not mean that he can not, but he did not want to if he did not have to. Mr. Armstrong questioned the new language in what they should consider for a variance. Mr. Barber noted that it does not lend itself to reasonable accommodation, and does not appear to add a lot to this particular application. Mr. Jones noted that this body has a history of not approving rear setbacks, except in rare circumstances. He noted that part of that is considering the setback of the applicant, as well as the neighbors. Mr. Armstrong made a motion with the request of the applicant that the applicant do the best they can to move the proposed addition closer to the existing sunroom. Mr. Puckett agreed to this request. Mr. Armstrong made a motion to approve the variance request with the amendment of 15 feet . The motion passed 4-0. AYES: Thomas, Moore, Jones NAYES: Armstrong, Pevarski ASTAINS: None Page 2 of 3 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES JUNE 18, 2025 Discussion of Board of Zoning Appeals Bylaws There was a motion to approve the bylaws which was approved. Discussion of Board of Zoning Appeals 2025 Meeting Schedule There was a motion to approve the 2025 Meeting Schedule with the amendment of the public hearing time beginning at 6pm. The motion carried. Recognition of Eric Thomas for 25 years of Service Ms. Rebecca James thanked Mr. Eric Thomas for his service. She noted that when she first started that he really helped her. She noted that she always appreciated his storied and getting to know him and his family. Mr. Bill Richardson thanked Mr. Eric Thomas for his service to Roanoke County. He noted that he has been tremendous. Mr. Richardson noted that he has been with Roanoke County almost as long as Mr. Thomas. He noted that Mr. Thomas has been very important to him and the planners that are not here now. He stated that we have a first rate Board of Zoning Appeals and it is due to the first rate work of Mr. Thomas. Comments of Board and Staff Mr. Armstrong thanked Mr. Eric Thomas for his comments and everything he has shown him. Ms. Charlotte Moore noted that Mr. Thomas is an icon to Vinton and Roanoke County. She noted that we will miss seeing him here. Adjournment With no further discussion, the meeting adjourned at 6:25 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, ecelia Thoma , cording Secretary Roanoke County Board of Zoning Appeals Cyc ebecca James, Secreta Roanoke County Board IZoning Appeals Page 3 of 3