Orange County — Board of Zoning Adjustment

VA-18-10-125 — ALEXIS DE JESUS

Request: Variances in the R-1 zoning district as follows: 1) To allow two existing accessory buildings with a cumulative square footage of 1,077 sq. ft. of floor area in lieu of 500 sq. ft. (BZA amended to approve a total of 950 sq. ft.). 2) To allow an existing accessory structure to remain in front of the principal building in lieu of the side or rear.

Decision: Approved

Hearing: Staff provided commentaries, 2 in favor and 1 opposed. Staff explained that the subject property, while zoned R-1, was .7 acres in size, 6 times the minimum lot size. There is a smaller 10 ft. x 14 ft. shed on the property. Due to the presence of a pool and other improvements to the rear property, there was insufficient room in the rear yard to locate the building. Also, due to poorly drained soils, the applicant had to have a mounded septic drainfield, which prohibited access to the rear of the property. However, the building could potentially be located on the rear 50% of the lot, and at 900 sq. ft., it was 80% larger than what was permitted, which was excessive. In addition, the applicant was raising chickens on the property, which is not permitted. Staff is recommending denial. Applicant stated they collected classic cars, they stored better vehicles in the large accessory structure, along with parts. would remove the smaller shed to keep the larger one. Chickens belong to their mother, who only feeds the hens, who do not lay eggs. He understands that they are not allowed, and must go. BZA asked applicant if they would consider fully enclosing the structure, which is open on 2 sides. The applicant indicated that they would do so if needed. BZA also asked if the applicant would consider moving the structure to the back side of the 60 ft. 30 ft. slab on which it currently sits. The applicant indicated that they would also do so if need be. There being no one present to speak in favor of or against the application, the public hearing was closed. The BZA discussed the possible location of the shed and concluded that current location was actually preferable. They concluded that, given the size of the property, and the applicant's willingness to remove the existing smaller shed, the variance was warranted. A condition was added that the existing 10 ft. x 14 ft. shed be removed prior to final inspection of the 900 sq. ft. garage/carport. Rec approval of 950 sf