Orange County — Board of Zoning Adjustment

VA-00-03-010 — James Hanis

Request: Variances in R-1A zone to erect a 20 ft. x 20 ft. accessory building as follows: 1. located in front of principal building in lieu of rear; 2. 10 ft. from front property line in lieu of 25 ft.; 3. 13 ft. from side street property line in lieu of 15 ft.

Decision: Denied

Hearing: The lot is located along the curve of Hull Circle, within a small established neighborhood lying east of Ferncreek Avenue, between Curry Ford Road and Kaley Avenue. Staff recommended denial of this request. The proposed structure, a 400 square foot detached garage, would cause a traffic sight visibility problem and would negatively impact spacial rights within the neighborhood. Staff submitted a memorandum from the County's Traffic Engineering Department confirming the sight visibility problem. The applicant stated he is designing and building his own home on the property. He stated that in order to build the type of house he had designed, it was necessary to locate his car parking and storage area as such on the property. He suggested as an alternative that one-half of the proposed structure closest to the curve could be a single open carport with only one column, and the balance could be enclosed for personal storage. Eight commentaries/letters were received in opposition to this request. Three residents on Hull Circle were present in opposition at the BZA hearing. The neighbor directly across the street spoke in opposition stating he is the neighbor most directly impacted by the sight visibility problem. He stated this is a sharp corner, and a number of traffic accidents have occurred because of it; to now put a structure in that sight line would make matters worse. A second resident stated this is a tight neighborhood where Hull Avenue is a street in heavy use by pedestrians and children. Many drivers try to use Hull Circle as cut through and are the cause of traffic accidents at the curve. The BZA felt the request did not meet the criteria to warrant any variance approval. It was noted that the applicant, who is an architect and an engineer, should have critiqued and planned the project with more consideration to the issues regarding taffic safety and neighborhood aesthetics.