Board of Zoning Appeals

127 Center Street South Town of Vienna Vienna, Virginia 22180 p: 703.255.6341 TTY 7111 Meeting Minutes Board of Zoning Appeals Wednesday, March 15, 2023 7:30 PM Council Chambers - Vienna Town Hall Roll Call The Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) held two advertised public hearings in the Vienna Town Hall at 127 Center St S, Vienna, Virginia, on Wednesday, March 15, 2023, at 7:30 pm. Chair Mr. Dhanjal called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm. Roll Call: Mr. Lowther, Mr. Petersen, Mr. Dowler, Mr. Creed, Mr. Gadell, Mr. Nash, and Mr. Dhanjal were present. Members Absent: None Staff present: Zoning Administrator Andrea West and Board Clerk Yaska Camacho Castillo. Public Hearings: Town of Vienna Page 1 Printed on 5/18/2023 Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes March 15, 2023 BZA-23089 311 Valeview Ct. NW - Request for approval of a variance from Sec. 18-24. - Area requirements. E. Rear yard., of the Zoning Code, to construct a sunroom on an existing single-family dwelling located at 311 Valeview Ct. NW, in the RS-12.5, Single-Family Detached Residential zone. The Zoning Code requires a rear setback of 35’. Approval for construction of the sunroom would result in an encroachment of 9.6’, thereby having a rear yard setback of 25.4’ on the property. Application filed by David Jacobstein and Eleonora Ibrani, property owners. Ms. Andrea West – Zoning Administrator – 127 Center St South Vienna, VA – was sworn in to speak. Ms. West presented the Board of Zoning Appeals with a PowerPoint presentation detailing the existing structure, the proposed structure changes, and the home's permit history. She stated that two decks were built with permits. However, a variance was approved for one of that decks, which was later converted to an enclosed structure without a permit. Ms. West explained that the only thing that can encroach into the 35 feet under the current code is open decks without a roof. The existing structure is non-conforming with the current code; any structure replacement requires a variance. Mr. Creed asked for clarification on the request. He asked if the Board was only dealing with the image labeled as A on the PowerPoint since it is an enclosed structure with no permit behind it that will be coming down to become an enclosed screened porch with a roof. Ms. West responded that she would like the applicants to explain their request for the variance. Mr. Creed then asked for confirmation that the request was for an enclosed screen porch and not a room, to which Ms. West replied that either way, it would require a variance. Mr. Nash asked if adding the roof to the screen porch was the main issue. Ms. West confirmed that adding the top to the enclosed screen porch requires a variance. Applicants present: Eleonora Ibrani & David Jacobstein – 311 Valeview Ct NW – The property Owners – were previously sworn in during last month’s Board of Zoning Appeals meeting. Ms. Ibrani stated that the request was for a screened porch. It will not be a three-season room or anything of that nature. It will be a screened area with a roof. Mr. Dowler asked if the replacement structure would be the same dimension-wise. Ms. Ibrani said there might be a slight difference, but it’s not a significant change. Mr. Dowler then asked if the structure was there before they bought the house and if they thought they were buying a home with a sunroom. Ms. Ibrani responded that he was correct. She explained that they purchased the house in good faith and enjoyed having that space. The structure is old and wasn’t built in the greatest way, so they’d like to improve that. Furthermore, the applicant noted that the way the property is situated, there isn’t another place where they could place that kind of structure. Mr. Gadell asked if the reason for the hardship was the shape of the lot. Ms. Ibrani responded yes. Mr. Creed made a motion to close the public hearing, and Mr. Nash seconded the motion. Mr. Gadell made a motion to approve the request for a variance from Sec. 18-24. - Area requirements. E. Rear yard., of the Zoning Code, to construct a sunroom on an Town of Vienna Page 2 Printed on 5/18/2023 Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes March 15, 2023 existing single-family dwelling located at 311 Valeview Ct. NW, in the RS-12.5, Single-Family Detached Residential zone, as the applicants have met the five (5) criteria for the variance. The five (5) criteria for a variance are as follows: 1.The property interest for which the variance is being requested was acquired in good faith, and any hardship was not created by the applicant for the variance; 2. The granting of the variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property and nearby properties in the proximity of that geographical area; 3. The condition or situation of the property concerned is not of so general or recurring a nature as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of a general regulation to be adopted as an amendment to the ordinance; 4. The granting of the variance does not result in a use that is not otherwise permitted on such property or a change in the zoning classification of the property; and 5. The relief or remedy sought by the variance application is not available through the conditional use permit process or, when permitted by this chapter, determination. Motion: Mr. Gadell Second: Mr. Nash Mr. Creed made a motion to amend Mr. Gadell’s motion. He amends the motion to state a screen porch or enclosure under a roof, not a sunroom. Mr. Gadell accepted the amendment to his motion. The board discussed the motion and stated the reasons why they are in support of the variance. Mr. Dowler stated that the shape of the lot qualifies as a hardship. Mr. Creed commented that the applicants purchased the home that way, and they had expectations with that area of the house. Additionally, he noted how there is no other way to build around it. Mr. Lowther agrees that the applicants meet the five (5) conditions for a variance stated in the motion. Mr. Gadell made a motion to close the discussion, and Mr. Dowler seconded the motion. Motion: Mr. Gadell Seconded: Mr. Nash Ayes: 7 Nays: 0 Motion Carried 7-0 Town of Vienna Page 3 Printed on 5/18/2023 Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes March 15, 2023 BZA-23090 101 Cedar Ln. SW - Request for approval of a variance from Sec. 18-17. - Fences., (a) Any fence from the rear lot line to and including the front line of the building shall be no more than six feet (6’) high, of the Zoning Code, to construct a ten-foot (10’) fence on the northeast end of the multi-sport court located at the Cedar Lane School, at 101 Cedar Ln. SW, in the RS-12.5 and RS-10, Single-Family Detached Residential zone. The Zoning Code requires fences within the Town of Vienna be below 6’ in height. Application filed by Navdeep Kaur of Fairfax County Public Schools, and Oscar Leon, of Vienna Youth Soccer. Ms. West provided the Board with a brief presentation that included the school’s background history, and recent modifications and noted that the property was split-zoned. She said about 125 feet off of Cedar Lane is zoned RS-12.5, and the remainder of the site is zoned RS-10. She explained that schools and other institutional uses are conditional uses in the zoning code on all residential districts. Ms. West stated that the request is to modify the existing 6 ft fence adjacent to the classroom trailers in the rear of the property. It will be between the sports court and the classroom trailers. The closest residential property line is 255 feet away from where the fence will be. Ms. West noted that there needed to be more clarity in the legal notice sent out, emphasizing that the request was for a small portion of the fence on the interior of the lot. She clarified any misunderstanding with residents who shared concerns about the variance request before the meeting commenced. Ms. West presented the Board with an image of the sports court’s previous appearance. She said the existing paved area was improved after going to the Board of Architectural Review for approval, including the six ft fence allowed by the code. The applicants are now asking for a variance to modify the six ft fence to a ten ft fence. Applicants present: Oscar Leon from Vienna Youth Soccer - 311 Maple Ave W & Assistant Principal Doreen Dougherty were sworn in. Ms. Dougherty stated that they are requesting a ten ft fence due to incidents that occur over the weekends, including broken windows requiring emergency work orders due to safety concerns. She provided the Board with pictures of the recent damage to the windows. She believes a higher fence will help prevent the balls from going over and hitting the windows and noted that the community members also use the field. Mr. Petersen asked the applicants why they hadn’t considered using safety glass in the windows, assuming it would be less expensive than changing the fence. Ms. Dougherty responded that they do not control what type of glass is used on their modular since it would fall under FCPS facilities and management, but it could be something they can explore. She would have to present that option to the school principal. Mr. Leon stated that the windows were not the only issue. The building (class trailer) is also getting hit with the balls. Mr. Nash commented that the applicant claims hardship from the soccer and sports balls hitting the building; however, their use of the property is causing the hardship. Mr. Creed inquired about the class trailers. He wanted to know when the modules Town of Vienna Page 4 Printed on 5/18/2023 Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes March 15, 2023 will be removed from the campus and wondered if the class trailers need to be presented to Town Council to get an extension. Ms. West stated she found no record related to the trailers but believes they have existed at the school for some time. Mr. Creed recommended that if the board approves the variance, the variance doesn’t run with the land but runs as soon as the modular structures are gone or replaced. Mr. Dowler asked why Section 18-17 applies to the request. The section is associated with the boundary lines of the property. Any fence from the rear lot line to and including the front line of the building shall be no more than six feet high, except that on a corner lot, the fence along the side yard fronting on the street shall not be more than four feet high. He stated that what was before the board was not on the lot line but in between. Additionally, he also referred to section 18-126.2. The installation and use of safety fences, backstops, and other types of fencing integral to a particular sport or activity and at variance with section 18-17 outdoor lights and electronic public address systems associated with any of the uses associated as enumerated in section 18-126.1 or above. He believes it is not forbidden, and the applicants should be able to build what they are requesting. Ms. West stated that if the code gets interpreted as he described, it will allow fences of any height in all residential properties. Hence, all barriers must be lower than four feet tall in front of the house’s front wall and up to six feet for the rear. There was a discussion on different scenarios requiring a variance for fences over six feet in height. Mr. Creed noted that the issue present is that other ball fields and parks are zoned as parks. In this unique situation, the school is zoned as residential with a continued conditional use permit to operate as a school. Mr. Lowther stated that the school created the issue because of the way they constructed the court. The goal is in front of the windows. They wouldn’t have this issue if they built it differently. Mr. Dowler stated that Cunningham Park School, zoned as Parks and Recreation, has the same court and a fence greater than ten feet between the soccer and basketball portions to keep the basket from going out. Mr. Leon replied to Mr. Lowther’s comment about causing the issue by building the court the way it was made. Mr. Leon stated that the space was already being used for PE activities. When the initial application was presented, the fence was 10 feet tall, but they were asked to bring it down to six feet instead. The school returned to BYS to inform them they were having issues with the windows; therefore, they needed the fence higher. BYS was willing to extend the fence, fund its extension, and present it to the town. Mr. Dhanjal asked for clarification on what Mr. Leon meant when he said the futsal field was previously an athletic field. Mr. Leon stated that it was a black top used for P.E. activities which they later updated to its current uses. With no comment from the public, a motion to close the public hearing was in order. Mr. Gadell made a motion to close the public hearing, and Mr. Lowther seconded the motion. All board members were in favor. Mr. Dowler made a motion for the approval of the request for a variance from Sec. 18-17 of the Towns Code to construct a ten-foot (10’) fence on the northeast end of the multi-sport court located at the Cedar Lane School at 101 Cedar Ln. SW, be granted. Mr. Creed proposed an amendment to Mr. Dowler’s motion. He suggested that the Town of Vienna Page 5 Printed on 5/18/2023 Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes March 15, 2023 variance does not run with the land; instead, it is exterminated when the temporary buildings are removed. There being no second for Mr. Creed’s amendment, Mr. Dowler’s motion was on the floor. Motion: Mr. Dowler Second: Mr. Gadell The board discussed Mr. Dowler’s motion. Mr. Dowler stated that damage to the windows and the school building is a hardship to support a 10-foot fence. Mr. Gadell stated that although he agreed with Mr. Petersen’s suggestion of using safety glass for the windows, that does not prevent the dents in the building from the balls. Additionally, the configuration of the self-created problem as far as the goals being faced to the building, he can see how the school will eventually add basketball hoops at either end of the court so the problem would be moved from side to side or parallel to the building. Therefore a fence is the most cost-effective solution, not only by solving the problem but also by allowing the school to grow and adding sports activities to the court. Mr. Petersen stated that he did not favor the motion because there was a more straightforward solution to the problem by using the safety glass. The applicants have acknowledged that they have not considered that option. Mr. Petersen believes there are better answers to the problem than a variance. Mr. Creed stated that he supported the motion. There is a problem that needs a solution. Whether it is using safety glass or a fence, he said that placing a fence wouldn’t cause any issues in the community. The fence won’t be in public view since it will be far away from nearby houses and won’t affect the adjoining properties. He also noted that the building damage is coming from the court, and placing the fence will protect the windows and the facilities. Mr. Nash stated that he did not support the motion. He feels that the request did not meet the requirements of a variance. Mr. Dhanjal stated that he supported the motion. He feels Vienna Youth Soccer has done a great job promoting youth soccer in the town. He noted that this futsal court is one of the few in the area. He believes that if a 10-foot fence is allowed for baseball, it should also be allowed for soccer. Motion: Mr. Dowler Second: Mr. Gadell Ayes 5 ( Mr. Dowler, Mr. Gadell, Mr. Lowther, Mr. Creed, Mr. Dhanjal) Nays 2 (Mr. Petersen & Mr. Nash) Motion Carried Regular Business: Approval of the minutes Mr. Creed made a motion to accept the February 15, 2023, meeting minutes into the record, and Mr. Dowler seconded the motion. Town of Vienna Page 6 Printed on 5/18/2023 Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes March 15, 2023 Meeting Adjournment Mr. Lowther made a motion to adjourn, and Mr. Nash seconded the motion. The meeting adjourned at 8:27 pm. Respectfully submitted, Yaska Camacho Castillo Board Clerk THE TOWN OF VIENNA IS COMMITTED TO FULL COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT STANDARDS. TRANSLATION SERVICES, ASSISTANCE OR ACCOMMODATION REQUESTS FROM PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES ARE TO BE REQUESTED NOT LESS THAN 3 WORKING DAYS BEFORE THE DAY OF THE EVENT. PLEASE CALL (703) 255-6341, OR 711 VIRGINIA RELAY SERVICE FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED. About the Board of Zoning Appeals Town of Vienna Page 7 Printed on 5/18/2023 Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes March 15, 2023 About the Board of Zoning Appeals: The Board of Zoning Appeals is a quasi-judicial board comprised of seven members – all of whom are residents of the Town of Vienna, VA. The Board serves as an arm of the Fairfax County Circuit Court, as all members are appointed to the Board by the Court after receipt of recommendation from the Vienna Mayor and Town Council. The Board is empowered by the Code of Virginia to: •Hear and decide appeals from any order, requirement, decision or determination of the Zoning Administrator. •Grant variances from the Zoning Ordinance – as defined in Section 15.2201 of the Code of Virginia – as will not be contrary to the public interest, when, owing to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the provisions will unreasonably restrict the utilization of the property to a degree that is not shared generally by other properties within the same zone or district, and its authorization will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent properties or change the character of the neighborhood •Hear and decide applications for interpretation of the Zoning District Map when there is any uncertainty as to the location of the boundary line. •Grant Conditional Use Permits in accordance with the provisions of Section 18-209 – 216 of the Vienna Town Code. The Board of Zoning Appeals does not have the power to change the Zoning Ordinance or the rezone property. Those powers rest with the Mayor and Town Council. Please be advised, the Board decides each application on its own merit – there are no precedents. The Board will first consider each application during the Public Hearing portion of the meeting. As part of the Virginia Court System, the Board of Zoning Appeals takes sworn testimony and each participant will be sworn in prior to offering comments. During the public hearing each agenda shall be closed a decision will be rendered. The grant of a Conditional Use Permit, Variance, or appeal from a decision by the Town’s Zoning Administrator requires an affirmative vote of no less than a majority of membership, of the Board. The Board consists of 7 members and a majority consists 4 members. If the applicant is unable to stay for the Board’s decision portion, the applicant may learn the Board’s decision by contacting staff. The second portion of the meeting – the Regular Meeting – is for approval of meeting minutes and new business and will convene after the Public Hearing has been closed. If any party is not satisfied with the decision of the Board, an appeal may be filed with the Circuit Court of Fairfax County within 30 days after the issuance of the Board’s decision on the matter. Town of Vienna Page 8 Printed on 5/18/2023