Board of Zoning Appeals
Regular MeetingSmithfield, VA · April 18, 2023
Minutes
The Smithfield Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) held its regular meeting on Tuesday, April
18th, 2023. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m.
Members present:
Gregory Brown – Chairman
Gene Monroe – Vice Chairman
Christopher Gwaltney
Beth Haywood
Members absent:
Faye Seeley
Staff present:
Tammie Clary – Community Development & Planning Director
William H. Riddick III - Town Attorney
Mark Kluck – Planner
Nadya Jaudzimas – Administrative Assistant
Judith Lally – Board Member, Board of Historic and Architectural Review (BHAR)
Press: 0
Citizens: 6
Chairman Brown called the regular meeting to order.
2023 Elections
Chairman Brown reported that as it was the first meeting of the year elections would need
to be held for the offices of Chairman, Vice Chairman, and Secretary.
The Town Attorney opened the floor to nominations for Chairman.
Ms. Haywood nominated Greg Brown as Chairman. Mr. Monroe seconded the nomination.
The Town Attorney inquired if there were any additional nominations, and hearing none
nominations were closed. He called for a collective vote, all members present were in favor, with
none opposed.
The Town Attorney opened the floor to nominations for Vice Chairman.
Chairman Brown nominated Gene Monroe as Vice Chairman. Mr. Gwaltney seconded the
nomination.
The Town Attorney inquired if there were any additional nominations, and hearing none
nominations were closed. He called for a collective vote, all members present were in favor, with
none opposed.
The Town Attorney reported that the office of Secretary needed to be approved, which was
generally held by the Town Clerk, Lesley King. He recommended the reappointment of Mrs. King.
Chairman Brown made a motion to reappoint Lesley King as Secretary. Ms. Haywood
seconded the nomination.
The Town Attorney called for a collective vote, all members present were in favor, with
none opposed.
Smithfield Board of Zoning Appeals
April 18th, 2023
Community Development & Planning Director’s Report:
Tammie Clary, Director of Community Planning and Development, reported that there
were no additional updates.
Board Member Comments:
Ms. Haywood expressed that she was looking forward to continuing to serve the Town and
thanked the members for including her.
Chairman Brown welcomed Ms. Haywood to the Board of Zoning Appeals.
*Public Hearing* SPECIAL YARD EXCEPTION (SYE) Application – Lot 99 Smithfield
Boulevard
Mrs. Clary reported that the applicants had applied for a Special Yard Exception for two
encroachments into the required, thirty-five-foot (35’) front yard setback (pursuant to Smithfield
Zoning Ordinance (SZO) Section 3.B.F.2.A.1). She continued that the first encroachment was 3.58
feet, and the second encroachment was 16.17 feet. She added that the encroachments were to
accommodate a new single-family dwelling and were constituted by a portion of the front corner
of the proposed single-family dwelling and the attached garage.
Mrs. Clary stated that due to the large Resource Protection Area (RPA) adjacent to the
property, the only viable way to accommodate this proposed dwelling is to encroach into the front
yard setback. She reported that Town Staff recognized the obstacles present and recommended the
BZA make an accommodation for this parcel.
Chairman Brown opened the public hearing and reported that there were sign-ups to speak.
Russellette Savi reported that she was the applicant and had mistakenly signed to speak
thinking that it was an attendance sheet. She said that she did not have any additional information
to add to the staff report given.
Chairman Brown inquired if there were any additional attendees that wished to speak.
Seeing and hearing none the public hearing was closed.
The Town Attorney explained that the lot was platted well before the Chesapeake Bay Act
was adopted in 1979. He continued that if the lot had been designed at a time when they knew that
there would be a 100 foot RPA, then it would have been designed differently. He reported that in
discussions with Mrs. Clary, it was speculated that lot 98 was unbuildable. The Town Attorney
said that with that information in mind, the encroachment would likely not affect any neighbors.
He explained further that the applicants had the choice of encroaching on the RPA, which was
frowned upon, or seeking relief in this way.
Mr. Monroe asked why the plans could not be moved further to the left on the property.
The Town Attorney explained that the proposed structure was already at the 15-foot side
yard setback and could not be moved further.
Mr. Monroe stated that he had looked up the address on Google Maps and it looked as if
there were no structures on lot 97 or 98.
Mr. Gwaltney agreed with the Town Attorney’s statement that lot 98 was unbuildable with
the observance of the 100-foot RPA.
2
Smithfield Board of Zoning Appeals
April 18th, 2023
Chairman Brown pointed out that if the street had terminated into a dead-end as opposed
to a cul-de-sac, then they would not have an issue with encroaching on the RPA.
Mr. Gwaltney agreed that the cul-de-sac crossed into the lot. He noted that the only real
encroachments were a porch and driveway, and historically the BZA prioritized protection of the
RPA. He added that the plans looked similar to applications that they had approved in the past.
Chairman Brown agreed that the geometry of the lot and the setbacks were similar to an
application approved last year.
Ms. Haywood reported that she drove out to see the property and spoke with some residents
of the neighborhood. She said that the neighbors she spoke with had no safety concerns with the
house being close to the road and had expressed enthusiasm for someone utilizing the property.
Mr. Gwaltney made a motion to approve the application as presented. Ms. Haywood
seconded the motion.
Chairman Brown called for a collective vote, all members present were in favor, with none
opposed. The motion passed.
*Public Hearing* SPECIAL YARD EXCEPTION (SYE) Application – 132 Lumar Road
Mrs. Clary reported that the applicants have applied for a Special Yard Exception for an
encroachment into the required (pursuant to Smithfield Zoning Ordinance (SZO) Section
3.B.F.2.A.2), fifteen foot (15’), side yard setback, by approximately two feet (2’), to accommodate
a 12’ 6” by 34’ 9 5/16” addition, resulting in approximately twenty-five (25) square feet of the
addition located in the required side yard setback. She continued that this encroachment would
accommodate the proposed addition, enabling it to remain uniform with the primary structure.
Chairman Brown opened the public hearing. He reported that there were a few attendees
signed up to speak.
Kristin Munford of 134 Lumar Road in Smithfield reported that she did not take issue with
what her neighbors were proposing for the addition to their house. She stated that she was speaking
to request a delay of approval until a new survey could be completed. She reported that the survey
that had been attached to their application did not line up with the markers from a survey that was
done for her property. She described the discrepancy of the values given in each survey, which
equated to 10.1228 ft taken off the front of her property. She continued that she had included the
plats from the neighboring properties to illustrate that none of the other properties had been skewed
in such a way.
Mr. Gwaltney thanked Mrs. Munford for including all of the information that she brought
for the Board’s review. He explained that surveying equipment had become more precise over
time, and a common practice of surveyors had been to use existing surveys to calculate bearings
when measuring out a lot. He recognized her concern that she may be losing property, but
explained that though the numbers may not match, it was still the same box that it was supposed
to be.
Mrs. Munford stated that the survey for her neighbor’s home was no longer square but was
a trapezoid shape. She expressed concern about the timing of when the surveys were completed
for her property versus the other properties on her road and that the compass directions on the
surveys were not all showing from North - South.
3
Smithfield Board of Zoning Appeals
April 18th, 2023
The Town Attorney stated that the direction did not matter as the calls could be reversed.
He stated that he could explain further after all who wanted to speak at the public hearing had
spoken.
Chairman Brown reported that there was one other person signed up.
The Town Attorney pointed out that Mrs. Munford and the other speaker were presenting
at the podium together.
Brian Lally of 226 South Church Street in Smithfield stated that it was revealing when
looking at the adjacent properties from the standpoint of when the original survey was completed.
He continued that the lots on that road were almost perfect rectangles for a distance of about 1200
feet. Mr. Lally explained that he had reviewed many surveys and it was unusual to see plats that
lined up at zero (0) degrees, zero (0) minutes, and zero (0) seconds. He continued that to see lot 6
skewed in the midst of the aligned neighboring lots was due to the position of the pins. Mr. Lally
reported that they had looked today and could not locate the pins on Lumar Road. He stated that
per the current survey it showed that 134 Lumar Road was 8 feet off the paved road onto the other
side of the drainage ditch and questioned if that was really where the property line was.
The Town Attorney confirmed that the property line was on the back of the drainage ditch.
Mr. Lally stated that if that pin placement was correct then from lot 7 to lot 6 the line was
off three (3) degrees, which equated to 10 feet onto Mrs. Munford’s property.
Mrs. Munford confirmed that she was able to speak along with Mr. Lally. She reported that
her lot was the smallest on Lumar Road and this discrepancy would take her lot from 69 feet along
Lumar Road to less than 59 feet.
The Town Attorney pointed out that Mrs. Munford’s survey listed her property as having
69 feet.
Mrs. Munford recognized that was on her survey, but her survey did not line up with the
survey for 132 Lumar Road.
The Town Attorney explained that Mrs. Munford did not need to worry about another
property survey.
Mr. Lally and Mrs. Munford stated that the driveway at 132 Lumar would then be on her
property.
The Town Attorney replied that their driveway was in the wrong location.
Mrs. Munford agreed, but her point surrounded what the impact on her property would be
if the survey done for 132 Lumar Road would be allowed to remain in place.
The Town Attorney clarified that the BZA did not have bearing on the survey and the issue
was a civil matter between Mrs. Munford and her neighbor.
Mr. Lally replied that the BZA was approving the survey for 132 Lumar Road.
The Town Attorney said that the BZA was not approving a survey.
Mr. Lally stated that the BZA was approving zoning.
The Town Attorney explained that Mrs. Munford’s pins defining her property were in place
and illustrated that was her property and encouraged her not to worry about her neighbor’s survey.
Mrs. Munford acknowledged that the box used to mark her property was hers, but
questioned what happens when her neighbor is building off of numbers that overlap her box.
4
Smithfield Board of Zoning Appeals
April 18th, 2023
The Town Attorney pointed out that lot 6 and lot 7, which was Mrs. Munford’s lot, showed
iron pins were present.
Mrs. Munford again expressed concern about how the North-South direction was shown
on the survey for lot 6.
Mr. Gwaltney explained that the surveyor for lot 6 had used the State Plane Coordinate
System that was required for new subdivisions, and it was different than magnetic coordinate
systems. He agreed with the Town Attorney’s assertion that her property was drawn to the pin, or
monument.
Mr. Lally stated that he agreed, but he thought a licensed surveyor would note if a pin was
relocated.
The Town Attorney reasserted that the pin had not been relocated.
Mr. Lally pointed out the position of the gravel driveway and Mrs. Munford stated that was
not her concern at this point as the driveway was in different locations on each survey.
The Town Attorney explained that all of Mrs. Munford’s concerns may be exactly right,
but it did not have any bearing on what the application and public hearing were for.
Chairman Brown agreed that the BZA could not address the concerns she raised.
The Town Attorney reiterated that the BZA was being asked to grant relief from the setback
on the other side of the property which would allow them to complete the addition. He added that
the location in consideration does not impact Mrs. Munford. He explained that at the time the home
was built, the County Zoning Ordinance was utilized. He continued that the County Zoning
Ordinance at that time did not match the Town Zoning Ordinance presently and that the issue could
be seen across the Town. The Town Attorney stated that the way to cure the zoning violation was
to obtain a yard exception. He concluded that the BZA’s possible approval of the application did
not sanction their survey or Mrs. Munford’s survey.
Mrs. Munford reiterated that she did not have a problem with her neighbor’s project, but
only took issue with the survey’s not lining up.
Mr. Gwaltney repeated his opinion that the difference was due to advancements in the
technology used for measuring coordinates now versus previous methods.
The Town Attorney added that there was always the possibility of human error having been
involved. He reported to Mrs. Munford that surveys were not recorded in the courthouse.
Mr. Monroe asked how Mrs. Munford thought the application was going to affect her.
She reiterated that she thought she would have 10 feet of her property taken off. She
apologized and again stated that she had no issues with her neighbor’s addition.
Ms. Haywood thanked Mrs. Munford for presenting her concern to the Board.
Mr. Gwaltney complimented her research.
Chairman Brown inquired if there were any additional attendees that wished to speak.
Seeing and hearing none the public hearing was closed.
The Town Attorney recapped that Smithfield had taken a modern zoning ordinance and
placed it over an annexed area of Town. He reported that when the homes were built, they were in
compliance, however, presently they were not, which caused the Board to have to review the issue
on countless occasions.
The Board members discussed the issue with Ms. Haywood as she was new to the BZA.
5
Agenda
Wednesday, March 29th, 2023
TO: BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
FROM: TAMMIE CLARY, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & PLANNING
DIRECTOR
RE: APRIL MONTHLY MEETING
The Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) will hold its regularly-scheduled monthly meeting on
Tuesday, April 18th, 2023 at 7:30PM at the Smithfield Center, 220 North church Street.
If you have any questions or concerns, please contact Tammie Clary at 1-(757)-365-4200 or
tclary@smithfieldva.gov.
cc: Town Council
William H. Riddick, III, Town Attorney
The Smithfield Times (or)
The Daily Press
File
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & PLANNING DEPARTMENT
310 Institute St, PO Box 246 / Smithfield, VA 23431 / 1-(757)-365-4200 / Fax 1-(757)-357-9933
www.smithfieldva.gov
SMITHFIELD BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS (BZA) MEETING AGENDA
Tuesday, April 18th, 7:30 PM
1) 2023 Elections
2) Community Development & Planning Director’s Report:
3) Upcoming Meetings and Activities
Monday, April 24th – 3:00 PM – Town Council Committee Meetings
Monday, May 8th– 6:30 PM – Town Council Meeting
Tuesday, May 9th – 6:30 PM – Planning Commission Meeting
Tuesday, May 16th – 6:30 PM – Board of Historic & Architectural Review Meeting
Tuesday, May 16th – 7:30 PM – Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting
4) Board Member Comments
5) *Public Hearing* SPECIAL YARD EXCEPTION (SYE) Application – Lot 99 Smithfield
Boulevard (TPIN: 22E-01-099), C. Monroe Wells, Jr. and Russellette C. Savi, applicants. (Staff
report, applications, and assorted attachments enclosed.)
6) *Public Hearing* SPECIAL YARD EXCEPTION (SYE) Application – 132 Lumar Road
(TPIN: 21A-25-006), Built by Babb C/O John Babb applicant. (Staff report, applications, and
assorted attachments enclosed.)
7) Approval of the Tuesday, August 16th, 2022 continued meeting minutes (enclosed).
8) Approval of the Tuesday, August 16th, 2022 meeting minutes (enclosed).
9) Adjournment.
***ATTENTION***
Owing to the pandemic, we are encouraging remote public comment on all land use applications,
whether or not a public hearing is required. If you do not feel comfortable with attending a
meeting in person, please submit your comments in writing to Mrs. Tammie Clary, Community
Development & Planning Director. Your comments will be conveyed to the appropriate Board or
Commission. Mrs. Clary can be reached via email (tclary@smithfieldva.gov) or mail at the address
below:
Town of Smithfield Community
Development & Planning Department
ATTN Tammie Clary, Director
PO Box 246
Smithfield, VA 23431
NOTICE OF INTENT TO COMPLY WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA)
Reasonable efforts will be made to provide assistance or special arrangements to qualified individuals with
disabilities in order to participate in or attend Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) meetings. ADA compliant
hearing devices are available for use upon request. Please call 1-(757)-365-4200 at least twenty-four (24) hours
prior to the meeting date so that proper arrangements may be made.
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS (BZA) STAFF REPORT: SPECIAL YARD
EXCEPTION (SYE)
PUBLIC HEARING: TUESDAY, APRIL 18TH, 2023, 7:30 PM
Applicants C. Monroe Wells, Jr. and Russellette C. Savi
113 Lumar Road
Smithfield, VA 23430
Owners Same as above.
Property Lot 99 Smithfield Blvd
TPIN 22E-01-099
0.75 ac N side Smithfield Blvd.
565’ corner of Barclay Crescent & Smithfield Blvd.
Zoning Neighborhood Residential (NR), Chesapeake Bay
Preservation Area Overlay (CB-O), Floodplain Overlay
(FP-O) & Environmental Conservation (EC)
Adjacent Zoning Same as above.
Project Description The applicants have applied for a Special Yard Exception
for two encroachments into the required, thirty-five-foot
(35’) front yard setback (pursuant to Smithfield Zoning
Ordinance (SZO) Section 3.B.F.2.A.1). The first
encroachment is for 3.58 feet, and the second encroachment
is for 16.17 feet. These encroachments accommodate a new
single-family dwelling and are constituted by a portion of
the front corner of the proposed single-family dwelling and
the attached garage.
Staff Comments Due to the large Resource Protection Area that encumbers
this property, the only viable way to accommodate this
proposed dwelling is to encroach into the front yard
setback; therefore, staff recognize the obstacles present on
this parcel and recommend the BZA make an
accommodation for this parcel.
Please direct inquires to Tammie Clary at 1-(757)-365-4200 or tclary@smithfieldva.gov.
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS (BZA) STAFF REPORT: SPECIAL YARD
EXCEPTION (SYE)
PUBLIC HEARING: TUESDAY, APRIL 18TH, 2023, 7:30 PM
Applicants John Babb
132 Lumar Rd
Smithfield, VA 23430
Owners Hallwood Properties I LLC
132 Lumar Rd
Smithfield, VA 23430
Property 132 Lumar Rd
TPIN: 21A-25-006
0.27 ac S side Lumar Rd.
670’ corner of John Rolfe Dr. & Lumar Rd.
Zoning Neighborhood Residential (NR)
Adjacent Zoning Neighborhood Residential (NR)
Project Description The applicants have applied for a Special Yard Exception
for an encroachment into the required (pursuant to
Smithfield Zoning Ordinance (SZO) Section 3.B.F.2.A.2),
fifteen foot (15’), side yard setback, by approximately two
feet (2’), to accommodate a 12’ 6” by 34’ 9 5/16” addition,
resulting in approximately twenty-five (25) square feet of
the addition located in the required side yard setback.
Staff Comments This encroachment would accommodate the proposed
addition, enabling it to remain uniform with the primary
structure.
Please direct inquires to Tammie Clary at 1-(757)-365-4200 or tclary@smithfieldva.gov.
S
RECORD NORTH
79 ft
E W
LOD
LOD
LOD LOD
LOD
LOD
D
LO
D
LO
LOD
LOD
LO LOD
D
N LOD
LOD
26 ft
LOD
LOD
13 ft
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD LOD
LOD
LOD
SCALE: 1" = 30'
TH OF
E AL V I
DATE: 02/24/2023
W FILE NUMBER:23.005
COMM RG
ON INI FEMA PANEL:51093C0151E
"Lu-Mar Homes"
GUARIONEX ADORNO A
Lic. No. 3070 DATE MAP: 12/02/2015.
FLOOD ZONE DESIGNATION:X
PROPERTY ADDRESS:
132 LUMAR RD , SMITHFIELD, VA 23430.
LA 02/24/2023 TAX MAP NUMBER:
21A-25-006
SELLER:
ND OR OWNER:HALLWOOD PROPERTIES LLC.
S UR V E Y REFERENCES:PB:4 PG 185
NOTES:
-THIS SURVEY HAS BEEN PREPARED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF A TITLE
REPORT AND DOES NOT PURPORT TO REFLECT ALL EASEMENTS,
MLS GROUP ENCUMBRANCES OR OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES AFFECTING THE TITLE TO THE
SUBJECT PROPERTY.
CONSULTING LLC. -FENCE LOCATIONS (IF SHOWN) ARE APPROXIMATE.
-THIS PLAT IS NOT INTENDED TO BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES.
-THIS PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENT SURVEY REPRESENT A CURRENT FIELD SURVEY & IS
CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE, INFORMATION & BELIE
-THE BEARING SYSTEM SHOWN HEREON IS REFERENCED TO PLAT AS RECORDED.
MLS
GROUP
CONSULTING LLC.
L TH O F
EA V
W I
COMM RG
ON INI
Carlos R. Sierra A
Lic. No. 402060870
O EE
PR FE 02/24/2023 R
SSI IN
ONAL ENG
House Addition
HALLWOOD PROPERTIES
132 LUMAR RD
HALLWOOD PROPERTIES LLC
SMITHFIELD, VA 23430.
House Addition
GPIN 21A-25-006
132 Lumar Rd
Smithfield, Va 23555.
MLS
GROUP
CONSULTING LLC.
L TH O F
EA VI
W
COMM RG
ON INI
Carlos R. Sierra A
Lic. No. 402060870
O EE
PR FE 02/24/2023 R
SSI IN
ONAL ENG
HALLWOOD PROPERTIES LLC
House Addition
132 Lumar Rd
Smithfield, Va 23555.
MLS
GROUP
CONSULTING LLC.
L TH O F
EA VI
W
DEMO COMM RG
ON INI
AREA Carlos R. Sierra
Lic. No. 402060870
A
O EE
PR FE 02/24/2023 R
SSI IN
ONAL ENG
DEMO
AREA
BACK SIDE OF HOUSE
LEFT SIDE OF HOUSE
HALLWOOD PROPERTIES LLC
House Addition
132 Lumar Rd
DEMO Smithfield, Va 23555.
AREA
RIGHT SIDE OF HOUSE
DEMO
AREA
LEFT SIDE OF HOUSE
MLS
GROUP
CONSULTING LLC.
LAUNDRY ROOM BATHROOM
L TH O F
EA VI
W
COMM RG
ON INI
Carlos R. Sierra A
Lic. No. 402060870
O EE
PR FE 02/28/2023 R
SSI IN
ONAL ENG
HALLWOOD PROPERTIES LLC
House Addition
132 Lumar Rd
Smithfield, Va 23555.
MLS
GROUP
CONSULTING LLC.
L TH O F
EA VI
W
COMM RG
ON INI
Carlos R. Sierra A
Lic. No. 402060870
O EE
PR FE 02/24/2023 R
SSI IN
ONAL ENG
HALLWOOD PROPERTIES LLC
House Addition
132 Lumar Rd
Smithfield, Va 23555.
S
RECORD NORTH
E W
N
SCALE: 1" = 30'
TH OF
E AL V I
DATE: 01/15/2023.
W FILE NUMBER:23.005
COMM RG
ON INI FEMA PANEL:51093C0151E
"Lu-Mar Homes"
GUARIONEX ADORNO A
Lic. No. 3070 DATE MAP: 12/02/2015.
FLOOD ZONE DESIGNATION:X
PROPERTY ADDRESS:
132 LUMAR RD , SMITHFIELD, VA 23430.
LA 01/16/2023R TAX MAP NUMBER:
21A-25-006
SELLER:
ND O OWNER:HALLWOOD PROPERTIES LLC.
S UR V E Y REFERENCES:PB:4 PG 185
NOTES:
-THIS SURVEY HAS BEEN PREPARED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF A TITLE
REPORT AND DOES NOT PURPORT TO REFLECT ALL EASEMENTS,
MLS GROUP ENCUMBRANCES OR OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES AFFECTING THE TITLE TO THE
SUBJECT PROPERTY.
CONSULTING LLC. -FENCE LOCATIONS (IF SHOWN) ARE APPROXIMATE.
-THIS PLAT IS NOT INTENDED TO BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES.
-THIS PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENT SURVEY REPRESENT A CURRENT FIELD SURVEY & IS
CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE, INFORMATION & BELIE
-THE BEARING SYSTEM SHOWN HEREON IS REFERENCED TO PLAT AS RECORDED.
S
RECORD NORTH
E W
LOD
LOD
LOD LOD
LOD
LOD
D
LO
D
LO
LOD
LOD
LO LOD
D
N LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD
LOD LOD
LOD
LOD
SCALE: 1" = 30'
TH OF
E AL V I
DATE: 02/24/2023
W FILE NUMBER:23.005
COMM RG
ON INI FEMA PANEL:51093C0151E
"Lu-Mar Homes"
GUARIONEX ADORNO A
Lic. No. 3070 DATE MAP: 12/02/2015.
FLOOD ZONE DESIGNATION:X
PROPERTY ADDRESS:
132 LUMAR RD , SMITHFIELD, VA 23430.
LA 02/24/2023 TAX MAP NUMBER:
21A-25-006
SELLER:
ND OR OWNER:HALLWOOD PROPERTIES LLC.
S UR V E Y REFERENCES:PB:4 PG 185
NOTES:
-THIS SURVEY HAS BEEN PREPARED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF A TITLE
REPORT AND DOES NOT PURPORT TO REFLECT ALL EASEMENTS,
MLS GROUP ENCUMBRANCES OR OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES AFFECTING THE TITLE TO THE
SUBJECT PROPERTY.
CONSULTING LLC. -FENCE LOCATIONS (IF SHOWN) ARE APPROXIMATE.
-THIS PLAT IS NOT INTENDED TO BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES.
-THIS PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENT SURVEY REPRESENT A CURRENT FIELD SURVEY & IS
CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE, INFORMATION & BELIE
-THE BEARING SYSTEM SHOWN HEREON IS REFERENCED TO PLAT AS RECORDED.
The Smithfield Board of Zoning Appeals held a continued meeting on Tuesday, August
16th, 2022. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m.
Members present:
Gregory Brown – Chairman
Christopher Gwaltney
Gene Monroe
Jeff Brooks
Members absent:
Faye Seeley
Staff present:
Tammie Clary – Community Development & Planning Director
William H. Riddick III - Town Attorney
Mark Kluck – Planner
Press: 0
Citizens: 6
Chairman Brown called the continued meeting from May 24th, 2022, back to order.
*Public Hearing* Special Use (Front Yard) Exception Application – 261 River Oaks Lane
(TPIN: 22-02-002) – Mark and Nicole Rutter C/O T. Carter Williams, applicant.
Chairman Brown reported that the application was withdrawn by the applicant before the
Tuesday, May 24th, 2022 BZA continued meeting was conducted.
Approval of the Tuesday, March 15th, 2022 meeting minutes
Mr. Monroe made a motion to approve the minutes. Mr. Brooks seconded the motion.
Chairman Brown called for a collective vote, all members present were in favor, with
none opposed. The motion passed.
Approval of the Tuesday, March 22nd, 2022 meeting minutes
Chairman Brown made a motion to approve the minutes. Mr. Monroe seconded the
motion.
Chairman Brown called for a collective vote, all members present were in favor, with
none opposed. The motion passed.
The meeting adjourned at 7:38 p.m.
________________________ ______________________________
Greg Brown - Chairman Tammie Clary - Community Development &
Planning Director
The Smithfield Board of Zoning Appeals held its regular meeting on Tuesday, August
16th, 2022. The meeting was called to order at 7:38 p.m.
Members present:
Gregory Brown – Chairman
Christopher Gwaltney
Gene Monroe
Jeff Brooks
Members absent:
Faye Seeley
Staff present:
Tammie Clary – Community Development & Planning Director
William H. Riddick III - Town Attorney
Mark Kluck – Planner
Press: 0
Citizens: 6
Chairman Brown called the regular meeting to order.
Election for Vice Chair
Chairman Brown reported that an election needed to be held to fill the seat of Vice Chair
Barnes, who had left the BZA. He asked for nominations from the other Board members.
Mr. Monroe nominated Christopher Gwaltney as Vice Chair. Mr. Brooks seconded the
motion.
Chairman Brown called for a collective vote, all members present were in favor, with
none opposed. The motion passed.
Community Development & Planning Director’s Report:
Tammie Clary, Director of Community Planning and Development, reported that at the
conclusion of the meeting staff would like to take a group photo of the BZA members.
Board Member Comments:
Chairman Brown welcomed Mr. Brooks to the Board of Zoning Appeals.
*Public Hearing* Special Yard Exception Application – 810 South Church Street
(TPIN:21A-01-528) – Jeffery and Rebecca Wiles, applicant.
Mrs. Clary reported that the applicants have applied for a Special Yard Exception under
SZO Article 12.F.7.a., where the adjacent lot has a similar nonconforming side yard, for an
encroachment into the required (SZO Article 3.G Section F.2.A.2), fifteen foot (15’), side yard
setback. This proposed encroachment would provide for approximately thirteen feet, four inches
(13’ 4”) on the west side of the property, and eleven feet, one and three-sixteenth inches (11’ 1
3/16”) on the east side of the property. This encroachment would allow the construction of a
Smithfield Board of Zoning Appeals
August 16th, 2022
twelve-foot (12’) wide by thirty-two-foot, ten inches (32’ 10”) addition to the rear of the existing
single-family residence and will result in the encroachment into the side yard 2 feet +/- on the
west side of the property and 4 feet +/- on the east side of the property.
She continued that this application is in conformation with SZO Article 12.F.7.a. which
provides a special exception for yard conditions, where on an adjacent lot there is front, side, or
rear yard that does not conform with such yard regulations similarly to the exception applied for.
Chairman Brown opened the public hearing and confirmed that the applicants were
present to answer any questions if necessary. He reported that there were no sign-ups for public
comments.
Chairman Brown reviewed that the picture provided showed that when the house was
built it was already non-compliant, and the application was to take down a portion in the back
and replacing it with a new addition.
The Town Attorney asked the applicant to come up to speak.
Jeffery Wiles, applicant, stated that the structure in question was thought to originally
have been a porch that was turned into a bathroom/laundry room by a previous owner. He
described the ceiling height in the bathroom and laundry as very small and in need of repair. He
added that the foundation underneath was cracked and crumbling.
Chairman Brown reviewed that the lot shape is such that the further back it goes, the
narrower it gets. He added that even if the applicant was keeping to the width and lines of the
existing structure there would still be encroachment in the rear of the property.
Mr. Brooks asked for clarification about the open porch area.
Mr. Wiles reported that it is no longer an open porch area, and that it is currently
enclosed and within the footprint of the house.
Mr. Brooks inquired if Mr. Wiles had discussed the renovation with his immediate
neighbor.
Mr. Wiles confirmed that he had. He added that he believed that Mrs. Clary had received
an email from them as well.
Mrs. Clary reported that Town staff had received a comment in support of the application
from the neighbor at 808 South Church Street.
Mr. Monroe stated that he found the addition to be perfectly fine and reasonable. He
questioned the garage’s infiltration 10 feet into the other yard as shown in one picture.
Mr. Wiles stated that he was unsure when the garage was built. He pointed out that one of
the survey lines crossed into the opening of one of the neighbor’s garage bays placing the
structure about a foot onto his property.
Vice Chair Gwaltney reported that the survey listed it as an “existing common use
garage.”
Mr. Wiles stated that he didn’t have an idea what that might mean, but he owned about
2/3 of the structure and the neighbor owned 1/3.
Chairman Brown reconfirmed that the garage is shared with Mr. Wiles’s neighbor.
Mr. Wiles stated that it was his understanding the garage was built by the neighbor at 812
South Church Street’s father and was shared between neighbors.
2
Smithfield Board of Zoning Appeals
August 16th, 2022
Chairman Brown stated it was his understanding that the area in question had been added
to the Town at a later period.
The Town Attorney reminded the Chairman that the public hearing needed to be formally
closed.
Chairman Brown closed the public hearing.
The Town Attorney asked to give Mr. Brooks additional information as he was new to
the BZA. He stated that the Town of Smithfield was an old Town with an extensive history. He
reported that the area of South Church Street had been outside the Town limits, and estimated
that it had been annexed in the 1970s. He continued that a modern zoning ordinance had been
imposed on a very unmodern community and as a result there were many areas in the Town that
had yard violations that were not created by the current residents. He stated this was the case
with this particular application, and the Board may give them a yard exception which would
remedy the violation allowing them to proceed with what they were requesting.
Chairman Brown gave an example of a similar issue previously heard by the BZA last
year that had been on the other side of South Church Street.
Mr. Wiles reported that his home had been built in 1934, and they had been trying to
restore it back to that time period in the interior.
Vice Chair Gwaltney noted that the parcel numbers indicated that the property had not
been subdivided in modern times as they had no alphanumeric included.
Chairman Brown stated that he did not see any issue with the application.
Vice Chair Gwaltney made a motion to approve the application as presented. Mr. Monroe
seconded the motion.
Chairman Brown called for a collective vote, all members present were in favor, with
none opposed. The motion passed.
Approval of the Tuesday, May 17th, 2022 meeting minutes
Chairman Brown made a motion to approve the minutes as presented. Vice Chair
Gwaltney seconded the motion.
Chairman Brown called for a collective vote, all members present were in favor, with
none opposed. The motion passed.
The meeting adjourned at 7:50 p.m.
________________________ ______________________________
Greg Brown - Chairman Tammie Clary - Community Development &
Planning Director
3
Get email alerts for Smithfield
A daily email when new agendas and minutes are posted.