Orange County — Board of Zoning Adjustment

VA-20-05-023 — Jim Dolfi

Request: Variances in the P-D zoning district to allow a screen enclosure as follows: 1) To be set back 0.5 ft. from the east side lot line in lieu of 5 ft. 2) To be set back 0.5 ft. from the west side lot line in lieu of 5 ft.

Decision: Approved

Hearing: SYNOPSIS: Staff noted that previously, an interpretation of the code allowed interior townhouse lots to construct screen enclosures along the entire rear of the house, as interior townhouse lots have zero side setbacks. However, since the code does not differentiate between single family detached and attached, the new interpretation is that if an enclosure goes into the rear setback, which it is permitted to do, it must adhere to the five (5) ft. side setback requirement. Staff noted that a review of aerial photography from 2019 revealed that there were 38 enclosures encroaching in the 20 ft. setback that extended entirely or nearly entirely across the rear of the homes, and the majority were constructed with valid permits. Staff recommended that the applicant be granted the side setback variance, but that the enclosure be located not any closer than 15 ft. to the rear property line. Staff noted it had received two (2) correspondence in support, and none in opposition. In addition, the HOA approved the enclosure as submitted. The applicant noted that they were simply trying to build what their neighbors already had. They felt increasing the setback from the rear property line from 10 ft. to 15 ft. would be a significant loss to the area of the screen enclosure. There being no one wishing to speak in favor or opposition to the request, the public hearing was closed. The BZA concluded that the fact that there were so many enclosures in this community similar or identical to what the applicant was proposing clearly showed the applicant was not requesting any special consideration. The BZA recommended approval of the variances subject to four (4) of the conditions in the staff report and removed condition #5, as the applicant requested, which would have required the screen enclosure to have a 15 ft. setback in lieu of the proposed 10 ft. setback on their site plan.