Board of Zoning Appeals

1 2 REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS 3 City Council Chambers 4 300 Park Avenue 5 Falls Church, Virginia 22046 6 November 12, 2015 7 7:30 p.m. 8 9 1. CALL TO ORDER 10 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: I would like to call to order the 11 November 12, 2015, City of Falls Church Board of Zoning Appeals 12 meeting. 13 Roll call vote please. 14 15 2. ROLL CALL 16 MR. BOYLE: Mr. Howell. 17 MR. HOWELL: Here. 18 MR. BOYLE: Mr. Krasner is maybe in route. 19 Mr. Williamson. 20 MR. WILLIAMSON: Here. 21 MR. BOYLE: Mr. Calabrese. 22 MR. CALABRESE: Here. 23 MR. BOYLE: Mr. Jones. 24 MR. JONES: Here. 25 26 3. PETITIONS 27 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: Are there any Petitions before us? 28 MR. SWETNAM: Yes. 29 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: Do you have a Variance application 30 before us? 31 MR. SWETNAM: I do. 32 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: A Petition would be something separate 33 from that. 34 So, seeing none, we will move to New Business then. 35 I would just like to ask if anyone who is going to speak 36 before us tonight, please rise and raise your right and I'll swear 37 you in. 38 (Witness sworn.) 39 40 4. NEW BUSINESS: 41 a. Variance application V1578-15 by Hal Swetnam and Lisa Young, 42 owners and applicants, for a variance to Section 48-238(3)(a) to 43 allow an interior side yard setback of four and four tenths (4.4) 44 feet instead of fifteen (15) in order to convert an existing deck 45 into a room addition on premises known as 200 Brook Drive, RPC 46 #53-120-006 of the Falls Church Real Property Records, zoned R-1A Low 47 Density Residential. 48 49 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: Okay. We'll proceed with New Business. 50 You can come forward. 51 We're looking at Variance Application V1578-15 by Hal 52 Swetnam and Lisa Young, owners and applicants, for a variance to 53 Section 48-238(3)(a) to allow an interior side yard setback of four 54 and four tenths feet instead of fifteen feet in order to convert an 55 existing deck into a room addition on premises known as 200 Brook 56 Drive, RPC #53-120-006 of the Falls Church Real Property Records, 57 zoned R-1A Low Density Residential. 58 So I think before we hear from the applicant, I'd just like 59 to ask for a summary on this from staff. 60 MR. BOYLE: Thanks, Mr. Chair. 61 This came to staff's attention through building permits 62 that were being considered for an expansion to this house on Brook 63 Drive. 64 And staff first considered whether the proposed addition 65 was within our authority to approve in that where the house is 66 already in a setback, staff can approve a continuation of that 67 non-conforming setback for a travel of 15 feet with the caveat that 68 it can't be less than ten feet. 69 So, we did a little research and found that a Variance had 70 been applied and approved on this property back in 1996. I think 71 that was in the Board's pack. 72 So we thought, could we, was it within our authority to 73 continue this Variance and apply it to the new construction. And 74 since the Board at the time in 1996 didn't appear to allow their vote 75 to include any future expansions, like we've sometimes seen, staff 76 felt that the 1996 Variance did not set the setback for any 77 additional structures. 78 So with that, the only option for the proposed structure 79 would be to come before the Board and request the Variance that you 80 have before you. 81 In the information pack, the applicants provided a plat of 82 the property, their cover letter stating a hardship, and I believe 83 letters of support from the impacted neighbors and the elevations and 84 plans for the proposed structure.  85 With that, I think I will defer to the applicant for their 86 presentation. 87 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: And before you do, you mentioned a copy 88 of the 1996 minutes. 89 MR. BOYLE: Yes. 90 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: I don't think they were -- at least they 91 weren't in my packet. If you would just share those with us on the 92 dais, we can have a look at that. 93 MR. SWETNAM: It's interesting, I think the same arguments 94 apply. 95 MR. CALABRESE: Was this work done? This Variance was 96 acted upon? 97 MR. SWETNAM: Yes. 98 MR. BOYLE: Yes. Yes, this is the way the house exists 99 today, as depicted on the plat in your information package. 100 And this is not the current owners obviously. This was 101 owners at the time in 1996. And I think one of the basis for 102 approval is what this Board typically sees, is that the house is 103 already in the setback for God knows why, but there it is, and that 104 the expansion or enclosure of a deck or addition to the house doesn't 105 go any closer than the current structure. That's a very typical 106 Variance that we see. 107 And again, had this been, say, ten feet off the line with a 108 15 foot setback required, staff could have approved this addition to 109 10 feet for a travel towards the rear of 15. But because of its 110 proximity to the property line, less than 10, the new Variance is 111 required. 112 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: Okay. Are there any clarifying 113 questions from staff or should we just hear from the applicant? 114 I want to let you know, as you can see, we have one member 115 not present, so we don't have a full Board. So as a result, you do 116 have the option of continuing until next month when we may have a 117 full Board. You will need three affirmative notes in order for your 118 application to be approved. 119 MR. SWETNAM: Okay. 120 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: It's up to you. 121 MR. SWETNAM: No, I'm fine with trying to proceed at this 122 point. 123 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: Okay. Thank you. 124 Please proceed. 125 MR. SWETNAM: So, as John noted, we went ahead and setting 126 these permits not really certain we would need to make the Variance 127 because we are continuing that setback line. As you will see in the 128 plat in 1996, it's that 8 foot one inch that was assigned in the 129 application in 1996 was to enclose that room. That was done at that 130 time. A deck was added on after that point and permits were granted 131 for that deck. At this point we are simply looking to enclose that 132 deck. 133 As it stands, by doing so this is really the only way to 134 create a flow within that house to connect both parts of the kitchen 135 to a family room. 136 The people that are impacted most would be our neighbors at 137 202 Brook Drive. They've been our neighbors for 18 years. You will 138 see a letter from the Ciprianos on the last page of your packet. 139 They had work done last year, 2014, and as a result they now have a 140 kitchen area that sits to the right of our deck and when we stand on 141 our deck we look directly into the kitchen. So they were more than 142 happy to write a letter because actually this room will indeed grant 143 them more privacy. 144 Since we have placed the application and provided the 145 packet to you, we have had visits from two of the neighbors in 146 Tollgate. The rear of their townhomes look to our home, their 147 driveway. And they seem to be content with the intention. We have 148 not heard anything from them. They were pleased to hear we were 149 moving forward and it certainly doesn't impact them in a way that the 150 Ciprianos are impacted. 151 In fact, one actually came to see the house to say, let's 152 see what that's going to look like. So to John's point, that we're 153 probably thinking, we should be doing the same thing. 154 But what we've done here as we noted in the cover letter is 155 this is a substandard lot. It's approximately 65 feet across and we 156 hope that the Board will again grant this Variance to continue that 157 line directly on and enclose that deck. 158 It is a fairly straightforward construction. It is simply 159 one room. And current plans reflect, as I said, the only means 160 possible of attaching the kitchen to the new living space. 161 Other than that and the fact that it does not project any 162 further into the side yard setback, we hope the Board will approve 163 the application. 164 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: Okay. Thank you. 165 Any questions for the applicant? 166 MR. CALABRESE: If I could ask, sir, this Board has to 167 evaluate three criteria to determine the merits. One is, which 168 sounds like it's been satisfied, the neighbors, there is no concern 169 from the neighbors. Another is that this is not a problem shared by 170 others in the neighborhood, which doesn't appear to be the case. 171 MR. SWETNAM: Right. 172 MR. CALABRESE: And the last one, and the one that's 173 probably the most relevant is the hardship. And I guess in this case 174 I would see the hardship and really evaluate it in two ways. Number 175 one, what would happen if you didn't do this. What would the 176 hardship be? And then number two, are there other options: 177 architectural designs that can achieve the same result and wouldn't 178 implicate the setbacks. 179 If you could just address those. 180 MR. SWETNAM: Happy to speak to those. 181 There were other things considered. Honestly, they are 182 much pricier options. The issue we have is, as you all notice and 183 you probably can't tell from the plat, on that far left side, that is 184 the kitchen in the back and there is a door there that will be left 185 outside. It will not allow us to get entrance back into the kitchen. 186 In other words, it will close off that part of the house. 187 So unless we can build all the way to the door which is as 188 about as far over as you can possibly get, that part of the kitchen 189 gets completely left off the house. 190 So there's not really another construction option on the 191 table. We've looked at some things. We also have a fairly 192 significant set of trees in that back yard. We don't want to go any 193 further back into the yard. That's another option we considered. We 194 did look at that. But as we went back and looked at the 1996 195 application, we were hoping that again, we could continue that 196 setback along that same line. 197 MR. CALABRESE: Thank you. 198 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: Any other questions for the applicant? 199 MR. HOWELL: Yes, just to clarify that point you were just 200 making about the hardship option and the construction. 201 MR. SWETNAM: Yes, sir. 202 MR. HOWELL: It occurred to me looking at the plans that if 203 you had what we might describe as a conventionally shaped lot, there 204 would be other construction issues. 205 MR. SWETNAM: Absolutely. 206 MR. HOWELL: As it is, the garage comes right up to the 207 house, almost squashed around by the line backing onto -- 208 MR. SWETNAM: It is a very uniquely shaped lot, yes, sir. 209 It is a lovely backyard but it is a very narrow backyard. And yes, 210 that brick garage is right there on that backside so it doesn't 211 really give us much of a chance to go in that direction. 212 MR. HOWELL: Thank you. 213 MR. SWETNAM: Thank you. 214 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: Any other questions for the applicant? 215 I have a question for staff if you don't mind. 216 Does this present any lot coverage issues? I guess with a 217 deck you have, you go to rainfall to obviously go to the ground. 218 Does covering this deck up, does it present any coverage issues with 219 any other zoning requirements? 220 MR. BOYLE: We checked that and I'm not calling the 221 percentages but at the time of the building permit applications, it 222 was not a problem. 223 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: Okay. Good. 224 All right. Any other questions for either the applicant or 225 for staff? 226 Anyone in the audience to comment on this? 227 (No response.) 228 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: Hearing none, we'll close it off unless 229 there is anything else you want to add. 230 MR. SWETNAM: No, I appreciate your time. I thank you for 231 coming. I realize I am the only gentleman on the -- 232 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: We came here just for you. 233 MR. SWETNAM: You came just for us. I very much appreciate 234 it. I think we've covered everything. 235 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: All right. Any discussion among the 236 Board before we move to make a motion? 237 I would just ask if someone on the Board chooses to make a 238 motion, that it be sufficiently detailed as we discussed a couple of 239 meetings ago. I would just appreciate that, making it clear on why 240 you're making the decision, which we can then turn into a Resolution 241 as we see before us. 242 MR. CALABRESE: I can make the motion. 243 I guess just to clarify what the Chair's asking, to be 244 sufficiently detailed would be using essentially the same language 245 that's in the request here? 246 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: I think what I'm referring to is, for 247 example, this prior Resolution does detail some of the, it's a 248 sub-standard lot, things of that nature, more of the rationale. 249 MR. BOYLE: Configuration of the lot and substandard lot 250 size for hardship. 251 MR. CALABRESE: Okay. Then I would make a motion to grant 252 Variance Application V1578-15 by Hall Swetnam and Lisa Young. 253 If you want to incorporate -- I'll ask you to incorporate 254 the rest of that paragraph into that. 255 MR. BOYLE: Yes, sir. 256 MR. CALABRESE: And then in terms of the rationale, as was 257 just noted, the lot is a substandard lot. The configuration is 258 unusual, not shared by other homes in that area; that the neighbors, 259 at least one, appear supportive, no objections. And then as the 260 Board considered hardship, the applicant described sufficiently the 261 hardship that they would face if they were not able to make the 262 proposed change. 263 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: Is there a second? 264 MR. HOWELL: I'll second. 265 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: Roll call vote please. 266 MR. BOYLE: Mr. Jones. 267 MR. JONES: Yes. 268 MR. BOYLE: Mr. Calabrese. 269 MR. CALABRESE: Yes. 270 MR. BOYLE: Mr. Williamson. 271 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: Yes. 272 MR. BOYLE: Mr. Howell. 273 MR. HOWELL: Yes. 274 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: Mr. Swetnam, congratulations. You have 275 your variance. Good luck with your project. 276 MR. SWETNAM: Now the hard work begins. Thank you again, 277 sir. 278 279 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 280 Approval of the October 15, 2015, meeting minutes 281 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: Okay. Next item on the Agenda is the 282 approval of the minutes. Although I did not attend this meeting, I 283 think I will be able to take us through it. 284 (Minutes reviewed.) 285 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: Hearing no changes, is there a motion to 286 approve the minutes? 287 MR. HOWELL: I move. 288 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: Is there a second? 289 MR. CALABRESE: Second. 290 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: Okay. Roll call vote. 291 MR. BOYLE: Mr. Howell. 292 MR. HOWELL: Yes. 293 MR. BOYLE: Mr. Williamson. 294 MR. WILLIAMSON: Yes. 295 MR. BOYLE: Mr. Calabrese. 296 MR. CALABRESE: Yes. 297 MR. BOYLE: Mr. Jones. 298 MR. JONES: Yes. 299 300 6. OTHER BUSINESS: 301 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: Any Other Business? 302 (No response.) 303 304 7. OLD BUSINESS 305 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: Any Old Business? 306 (No response.) 307 308 8. ADJOURNMENT 309 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: Is there a motion to adjourn? 310 MR. CALABRESE: So moved. 311 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: Is there a second? 312 MR. JONES: Second. 313 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: Roll call vote. 314 MR. BOYLE: Mr. Jones. 315 MR. JONES: Yes. 316 MR. BOYLE: Mr. Calabrese. 317 MR. CALABRESE: Yes. 318 MR. BOYLE: Mr. Williamson. 319 MR. WILLIAMSON: Yes. 320 MR. BOYLE: Mr. Howell. 321 MR. HOWELL: Yes. 322 CHAIR WILLIAMSON: All right. This meeting is adjourned.