Orange County — Board of Zoning Adjustment

VA-18-03-171 — THEODORE BRIEN

Request: Variances in the R-1A zoning district as follows: 1) To permit installation of a 5 ft. tall wrought iron style fence in the front setback in lieu of a 4 ft. fence. (Approved w/Conditions) 2) To allow an existing accessory structure to remain 1 ft. from the side (north) property line in lieu of 5 ft. (Denied) 3) To allow a cumulative total of 840 sq. ft. of existing accessory structure to remain on the subject property in lieu of 500 sq. ft. (Denied) Note: The applicant cites security issues due to the presence of several institutional uses in the area. The applicant has provided seven (7) letters of support from neighbors. A review of past permits for the subject property indicates that the accessory structures were never permitted. A review of historic aerials indicates that the structures have been in existence since at least 2005. This is not a result of code enforcement.

Decision: Partial Approval

Hearing: Staff explained that the applicant had applied for the variance for the fence due to security concerns raised by several institutional uses in the neighborhood. Staff had added the two variances regarding the accessory structures. Staff noted that due to the large expanse of pavement at the intersection of Coletta Dr. and Cornelia Ave. caused by the angled intersect, the subject property faces directly into the intersection. The fence would help to define the applicant's yard, and would be in following with CEPTED principles. However due to the age and size of the accessory structures, staff was not supporting the two variances regarding those structures. Staff noted that the applicant had the support of eight (8) neighbors in the area. The applicant noted that one structure was an aluminum carport which had been brought over from their brothers home to the north. The other was a tarp supported by poles. The BZA asked if the applicant could get permits for the tarp structure. Staff noted that the tarp structure could not remain permanently, as it could not meet Code, especially wind load. It may be possible to obtain permits for the aluminum structure. The applicant would need to obtain specifications for it. The applicant agreed that they would remove the tarp lean-to and move the aluminum structure and obtain permits. There being no one present to speak for or against this application, the public hearing was closed. The BZA concluded that the variance for the fence was the least variance needed, and that the location at such a large expansive intersection was unusual and specific to the property. The fence was in harmony with the residential nature of the area, and would provide superior security to a four (4) ft. tall fence. A motion to recommend approval of variance #1 and denial of variances #2 and 3 passed unanimously.