Minutes

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES

PUBLIC HEARING

September 19, 2007


The Board of Zoning Appeals held three (3) advertised public hearings in the Council Room of the Vienna Town Hall, 127 Center Street, South, Vienna, Virginia, on September 19, 2007, beginning at 8:00 PM with Donald Chumley presiding as Chairperson. The following members were present: Marshall Potter, Gregory Haight, Robert Dowler, Robert Petersen, Charles Brewer, and Peter VanderNat. Also attending and representing the staff were Gregory M. Hembree, Director of Planning and Zoning, and Jennifer M. Murphy, Board Clerk.


ITEM NO. 1:
Request for approval of a Conditional Use Permit to construct a new storage building (to be addressed as 249 Nutley Street, NW), and to authorize all current uses within the Town’s Park Maintenance Yard, on property located at 247 Nutley Street, NW, and in the RS-12.5, Single-Family Detached Residential zone. Filed by Catherine Salgado, Director of Parks & Recreation, and agent for the Town of Vienna, owner.


Ms. Catherine Salgado, Director of the Department of Parks & Recreation was sworn in to speak. Ms. Salgado explained that she will be presenting the item on behalf of the Town who is seeking a Conditional Use Permit for the Maintenance Yard, located at 247 Nutley Street, NW. It is precipitated by the proposed construction of a records storage building to be addressed as 249 Nutley Street, NW, located on the same grounds.

Ms. Salgado explained that the Town of Vienna currently stores all of their records off-site at a storage facility located on Mill Street, NE. The Town is in need of a facility where they can store all of their records under one roof. It would save the Town some money as it is a cost to store them. The storage facility will also allow the various departments space for additional records that they acquire every year. The Town has to meet storage requirements for both the state of Virginia and the Federal Government. The result is that they are required to maintain a large amount of paper documents as it pertains to each of their departments.

They have found that the Nutley Street Property Yard will be adequate for building such a storage facility. The site previously housed the Department of Public Works Property Yard. They have since moved those facilities to the North Side Property Yard, located at the end of Mill Street, NE. The relocation has freed up space allowing for approximately eleven to twelve Parks and Recreation Departmental employees. A portion of the site was converted to park land known as Sarah Walker Mercer Park. These changes have significantly reduced the size of the facility along with a reduction in traffic that impacts the neighborhood. She explained work that was done at the site, which includes an interior renovation to the maintenance office area and remediation of existing buildings that were dilapidated. This has also resulted in the reduction of the amount of buildings located at the site.

The Town is proposing the installation of an 1,800 square foot record storage building. It will sit in line with the existing maintenance building, which they have found to be the best location. It will allow for proper access to the water tower and for emergency vehicles to be able to access the site at the North end. Ms. Salgado explained that they looked at a number of options, one of which was to locate the building along the fence line on Nutley Street, NW. They found that the curve of the property line would take up too much space.

The Town has been in operation at the site since 1949. As was noted in the staff report, staff has not been able to locate any records that they received a use permit for the site. As a result, they are seeking a Conditional Use Permit for the site.

Mr. Brewer asked what the pitch of the roof will be. Ms. Salgado was not certain but agreed that the roof will be shallow. Mr. Brewer asked if the building will be located fifteen feet from the fence line. Ms. Salgado answered yes. Mr. Brewer noted that no plantings have been proposed to buffer the adjoining property. Ms. Salgado stated that the site is currently heavily vegetated with large pine trees so that the site will stay dense year round. The neighboring house is also set back as far as possible from the fence line. Mr. Brewer asked if Ms. Salgado had spoken with the neighbors of the site. Ms. Salgado answered no as staff had sent the adjoining property owners letters advising them of the application. She noted that she had spoken to them in the past about other items but not specifically about the proposed building. To date, she has not had any feedback from the neighbors since they received a letter. Mr. Brewer asked staff if the site had been adequately posted with signage. Mr. Hembree answered yes.

Mr. Petersen congratulated Ms. Salgado on her efforts in giving the Town two new parks. He stated that as a neighbor to one of the parks, it is very much appreciated. He asked if Ms. Salgado could address two elements, the setback issue and lot coverage requirements. Ms. Salgado stated that the lot coverage for the site will remain the same. The building will be built over existing paved asphalt. Mr. Hembree stated that originally the site was calculated at 90% lot coverage. Turning a portion of the site to parkland has reduced the site calculation to 55% lot coverage. Because of this action, they are moving towards compliance. Ms. Salgado noted that the proposed building is where the underground tanks were located. With respect to setback issues, they are limited as to where the building can be placed and maintain function to the site. The building will have to set somewhere along the fence line. Placing it in the middle of the yard they would still have to allow for vehicles to travel in and out of the bay garage area. The Town’s water tower and pump house require full radius access for emergency vehicles. She stated that upon review of all of these requirements they found that any location would have to be close to the fence line. The site that they have chosen is the best in terms of location of the densest vegetation and the highest pine trees. Mr. Hembree noted that the distance between the house and the proposed building would be seventy feet, which is equivalent to two, 35 foot rear-yard setback measurements. He stated that a lot more information was sited in the staff report to the Planning Commission because they are the ones who review site plan modifications and recommend it forward to the Mayor and Town Council. The Planning Commission did support it as they determined it to be a triangular shaped lot that provides additional screening, adequate distance and vegetation between the two buildings as Ms. Salgado has testified to.

Mr. Dowler stated that the Board’s staff report indicated that the lot coverage was calculated at 80%. He stated that the rendering appears to be significantly less than 80% coverage. Ms. Salgado explained that there are additional paved surfaces at the site. Mr. Dowler asked if the hours of operation will be from 7 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Ms. Salgado answered yes. Mr. Dowler asked what the exception will be. Ms. Salgado answered that there are emergencies and events that they handle such snow emergencies and leaf pick-ups.
Mr. Brewer asked what they mean by “special events.” Ms. Salgado answered that the events that their department hosts such as the 4th of July, Viva Vienna, which takes place all weekend long, The Halloween Parade and the Church Street Stroll. In effect, whenever the department is working an event that requires them to get vehicles and/or equipment in and out over a weekend.

Mr. Dowler asked which property has the foliaged area with evergreens. Ms. Salgado answered that it is the neighbor’s property.

Mr. Brewer asked if construction would affect the root structure of the trees. Ms. Salgado answered no, as the trees are very hardy pines. They will have to dig a small amount in order to lay the slab, which should not harm the trees.

Mr. Petersen asked what other possibilities were examined during the planning phases of the project. Ms. Salgado answered that they looked at the current storage facility, which requires approximately $30,000.00 a year in fees. They also looked at the Northside property yard, which has a site plan in place. Mr. Hembree noted that two of the approved four phases of the project for the site have been completed. After completing all four phases there is not a lot of room left over. Ms. Salgado stated that they also looked at the possibility of purchasing a piece of property for the site but property values are extremely expensive. Mr. Hembree stated, in addition, there are security factors that need to be met for departments such as the Police Department.

Mr. Dowler asked if they are reviewing a Conditional Use Permit and a variance for all of the requests. Mr. Hembree answered that the Board is reviewing the current use for a Conditional Use Permit for the entirety of the site. He explained that it is technically a housekeeping Conditional Use Permit because it was never requested or granted in the past. Mr. Dowler asked if there is not a variance request before them. Mr. Hembree answered no, explaining that those are site plan modifications that were recommended for approval by the Planning Commission to the Mayor and Town Council.

Ms. Salgado proceeded to list off the uses that currently take place at the site. The uses include; a three bay garage, greenhouse, the large water tower, storage pile for materials, storage of parts and materials such as rubber for the synthetic field, the pump house for the water and sewer department, the proposed building and there are currently two locked storage bins for chemical storage. She explained that the use of the site is for the Department of Parks and Recreation, the Department of Public Works Water and Sewer and all of the necessary job functions related to services provided to the Town residents. She noted that there is some minor equipment repair but all major repairs to Town vehicles are done at the Northside Property Yard.

Chairman Chumley asked for proposed cost of construction. Ms. Salgado answered that the Town currently has $175,000.00 dollars budgeted for the project. Chairman Chumley asked if the building will have room to grow. Ms. Salgado answered yes, stating that they plan on organizing the Town’s storage more efficiently to allow for expansion. Chairman Chumley asked if they should consider requiring that Town records be scanned into electronic format for storage. Ms. Salgado answered that is currently being reviewed by the Town.

Mr. Petersen asked staff if they are being asked to approve two separate items, to authorize all current uses and a Conditional Use Permit for construction of the new building. Mr. Hembree answered yes.

Mr. Dowler asked which chemicals are kept on site. Ms. Salgado answered paint supplies. Mr. Dowler asked if gasoline tanks are kept. Ms. Salgado answered that they are only kept in hand containers similar to what one would use at home. She explained that all of their gasoline and oil is obtained from the Northside property yard. Mr. Dowler asked if the garage is purely for storage purposes. Ms. Salgado answered yes. Mr. Dowler asked how many employees work at the site. Ms. Salgado answered that they are fully staffed with eleven employees. They work predominantly out in the field approximately 95% of the day. During the summer there are a total of ten employees for seasonal work.

Mr. Chumley thanked Ms. Salgado for her testimony. Chairperson Chumley asked staff why the Planning Commission had a 5-3 vote. Mr. Hembree explained that one of the Commissioners had concerns that the tower might burst possibly flooding the records facility. Another Commissioner was concerned that the building would no be constructed out of brick. The last Commissioner was concerned with both of those issues and decided to go along with the vote. Chairman Chumley asked if staff, has since, had a response to those issues. Ms. Salgado stated that it is highly unlikely that the water tower would burst. It has been at that location for a very long time. Mr. Hembree noted that the water tower, which was recently renovated and repaired during 2000, is regularly inspected and maintained.

Mr. Dowler asked what security is involved at the site. Ms. Salgado answered that there is a security system in place at the site. Mr. Dowler asked if a sprinkler system is an option. Ms. Salgado answered yes, explaining that they were still reviewing the best options. She explained that there are other options to consider besides water so that, in the event of a fire, a sprinkler system would not destroy the records.

Mr. Petersen stated concern about the proposed setback and asked if they are confidant that they have summarized their argument as strongly as they can. Mr. Hembree noted that at the intersection of Nutley and Knoll Street, NW, there is a Conditional Use Permit granted for a modular classroom that the Board granted for Louise Archer Elementary School. That application was for a shorter side-yard setback. He stated that because there is a 70 foot distance between the building and the neighboring house, staff can support the request.

Mr. Haight noted that in the memorandum dated September 18, 2007, from Chairman Mel McCoy of the Planning Commission, there was a vote of 6-2 in support of the request. Mr. Hembree explained that there were two votes on two items for this application taken by the Planning Commission. The vote of 6-2 was for the Conditional Use Permit aspect of the application.

There being no further questions or testimony the public hearing was closed.


ITEM NO. 2:

Request for approval of a replacement Conditional Use Permit for the use of outdoor lights and public address system at Waters Field, located at 130 Cherry Street, SE, and in the PR-Park and Recreational zone. Filed by Catherine Salgado, Director of Parks & Recreation, and agent for Fairfax County Public school system, owner.

Ms. Catherine Salgado, Director of the Department of Parks & Recreation was present representing the application. Ms. Salgado stated the application is for Waters Field, which is the field in town that had the synthetic turf installed. It is located just across the street from Town Hall.

Chairperson Chumley asked if the Town owns that field. Ms. Salgado answered no, explaining that she is present as an agent on behalf of the application. She explained that the field is owned by the Fairfax County school system and that the Town has agreed to be the caretaker of the field. A copy of a memorandum explaining the agreement between the two jurisdictions has been included in the Board’s packet of information.

Ms. Salgado stated that synthetic turf was added to Waters field approximately two years ago February, which has been a huge success. Caffi Fields are not included in the request because they still utilize grass. Those fields still require that they be covered every winter with turf blanket and therefore cannot be used. With respect to Waters Field, as was mentioned in the staff report, they calculated approximately eight different Conditional Use Permits for both of the fields. Conditional Use Permits were granted at differing times, the last one issued in 1976. They did manage to locate one that was withdrawn in 1987. They are attempting to combine all of the various pieces of the differing Conditional Use Permits into one. They are also requesting an additional provision for year-round use of field lights to be used at Waters Field only.

Ms. Salgado explained that five years ago the lighting system had been replaced at Waters Field. The new lighting systems are much more efficient in that they reduce unwanted “spill-over” into areas that do not need to be lit. The result is that the neighboring town homes are not lit when the field is lit. She proceeded to read aloud, for the record, specific times that the lights would be on. March 1st through September 15th of each year from dusk until 11 pm. Beginning September 15th through the first Saturday of December of each year from dusk until 10:30 pm, Sunday through Thursday, and dusk until 11 pm Fridays and Saturdays. She explained that these times are currently a part of the Conditional Use Permit. Request C is for the new portion, which reads: the first Sunday in December to the last day of February of the following year from dusk until 9:30 pm. They are requesting until 9:30 p.m. because the field falls within a system of synthetic turf fields where a time limit has been placed upon all of the fields. All play must cease and desist and the lights must go out at 9:30 p.m. They ask that some conditions be placed upon the Conditional Use Permit in keeping with the current Conditional Use Permit. Those conditions are that Waters field lights will be used for Vienna based youth and adult programs and leagues only. The public address system may be used between the hours of 9 a.m. and 10 p.m. between March 1st through the first Saturday in December. It will not be used from the first Sunday in December to the last day in February. The field shall be kept clear of all refuse and such clearance shall be performed on a nightly basis.

Mr. Petersen stated that the proposal strikes him as unnecessarily complicated and bureaucratic with respect to the time limits. He asked what difference it would make with respect to the time of the year that they utilize the lights and/or the public address system. Ms. Salgado explained that there is a long standing list of Conditional Use Permits in the Town records. In those records there were a lot of comments made by Town residents that play in the leagues and live in the neighborhoods. They have always tried to compromise among all of those comments in order to balance the needs of the youth groups with the neighbors who surround the fields. In addition to that there are Fairfax County rules and regulations that they have to follow, which she noted is complicated and bureaucratic to say the least. It states when you can use the fields, who can use them, and what can be done on them for every day of the year. Waters Field is still a Fairfax County field and they are trying to follow those rules and regulations.

Mr. Brewer noted that the lights are currently on at the neighboring Field and did not think that anyone was using it. Ms. Salgado disagreed stating that they are currently holding football practice on that field. Mr. Brewer asked if the lights are left on all of the time whether there is a scheduled event. Ms. Salgado answered no, explaining that the system is controlled by computer. When practice or a game is finished they can call in or log into the system to shut down. The electric bills can be very expensive so that the Youth groups try to be very diligent about not wasting the electricity.

Mr. Dowler asked if they have received any complaints over the years from the surrounding neighbors. Ms. Salgado answered no, not during her tenure. That is why they have certain turn-off dates and times listed. The Conditional Use Permits were set in response to neighborhood reaction and/or feedback. She noted that the trees that surround the fields and neighborhoods have grown larger and more mature since the original Conditional Use Permit issuance. Mr. Dowler asked if they have received complaints regarding the speaker system. Ms. Salgado answered no. Mr. Dowler asked if the system faces away from the residences. Ms. Salgado answered yes. Mr. Dowler asked what “Vienna based organizations” are. Ms. Salgado answered that they are organizations that are operated by all the not for profit organizations such as VYI (Vienna Youth Incorporated), Greater Vienna Babe Ruth League, Vienna Youth Soccer, and Vienna Girls Softball League. Mr. Dowler asked if they are Vienna based because they have “Vienna” in their name. Ms. Salgado answered yes, stating that they all have a long standing tradition of playing in the Town and serving the Town youth. They provide a great deal of volunteer support and a huge amount of monetary support to do all of the things that get done for Caffi Fields and all of the other fields in Town. Mr. Dowler asked if it were necessary to list off all of the youth leagues by name in the application for the Conditional Use Permit. Ms. Salgado stated that is her preference. Chairperson Chumley stated that they could add a condition to state, “and such other organizations that meet certain connections with the community.”

Mr. Dowler asked if they typically would clean the fields after the lights are turned off. Ms. Salgado answered that it is done prior to the lights being turned off but there is a safety light that would stay on. It is located closest to Cherry Street, SW. It stays on for an extra fifteen minutes to ensure safe passage of everyone off of the fields. Mr. Dowler asked if that light would stay on until approximately 11:15 p.m. Ms. Salgado answered yes, stating that it is a small amount of light for safety purposes only.

There being no further questions, Ms. Salgado was seated.

Mr. Bob Forbes, President of Vienna Youth Sports, was sworn in to speak. Mr. Forbes stated that they support eight sports and 3,500 families who participate in one or more of their organized sports. The new regulations of the Conditional Use Permit would only benefit Lacrosse. It will permit them to utilize the field an additional five hours a day, seven days a week for the entire month of February. Youth and high school Lacrosse is the fastest growing sport in the United States. The Town has increased its Lacrosse participation by 400% within the last eight years, with over 600 kids playing girls and boys Lacrosse. The new hours will allow for every child to have the opportunity to play for two hours, twice a week.
Mr. Forbes stated that Vienna Youth, Inc. has raised $400,000.00 to pay for Waters Field. They not only want to maximize their investment but the more kids that are playing organized sports the better it will be for the Town as a whole.

There being no further questions, Mr. Forbes was seated.

Mr. Clark Gray, President of Vienna Great Babe Ruth League, was sworn in to speak. Mr. Gray stated that he is representing Diamond sports and their relation to Waters Field. He is also the Commissioner for the Northern Virginia Baseball League, Coordinator for the Vienna Little League Transition League and a Liaison to the Northern Virginia Fall Ball League, the Ponce De Leon over 65 League, and Men’s Senior Baseball League who play with Kids ranging in age from 18 to 65 years old.

Mr. Gray stated that baseball has expanded its use of Waters Field by adding 55 to 65 extra games. They have been able to host tournaments that they have never been able to host before. The lights have allowed Lacrosse to utilize the field instead of parking lots. Until that time they were practicing in parking lots and streets. The addition of the lights will be a huge benefit to Vienna Youth sports. Diamond Sports completely supports the request for additional light times on the field. He noted that Ms. Salgado has done a fabulous job of coordinating all of their efforts for the Conditional Use Permit.

There being no further questions, Mr. Gray was seated.

There being no further questions or testimony the public hearing was closed.


ITEM NO. 3:

Request for approval of a variance from Sections 18-24E and 18-208 of the Town Code to construct an addition beyond the rear-yard setback line on a nonconforming lot located at 902 Carole Court, SE, in the RS-12.5, Single-Family Detached Residential zone. Filed by R. Blair Jenkins, agent for Michael B. Chang and Stephanie A. Salmon, owners.


Mr. R. Blair Jenkins of 370 Holmes Drive, NE, and representing the application was sworn in to speak. Mr. Jenkins stated that they are present to request a variance for 902 Carole Court, SE, as the size and shape of the lot is very odd. He stated that one of the owners, Mrs. Salmon is present but her husband, Mr. Chang could not attend as he is abroad in Islamabad, Pakistan working for the State Department.

Mr. Jenkins stated that the applicant would like to build an addition on to the back of the house. The addition will allow for an increase in living space. They have lived in the house since 2001. They like the neighborhood and want to stay there. All of the neighbors around them have added additions on to their homes, noting that AyrHill Homes has built a few homes behind them that are quite large. The size and shape of the lot does not allow them to build in any direction except for the back where 80% of the usable lot space is located in the far north corner, which is well away from the existing home. The addition being proposed would be a one story addition that would not exceed the size of the existing roofline of the house. It would occupy the space where a deck is currently located. That deck, which received a variance in 1989, is no longer useful and has been taken down before it falls down. They are proposing to build an addition that will be a foot or two wider and two feet deeper than the previous deck, locating it within the same footprint of the deck on the lot.
Chairperson Chumley asked staff if the lots are all different sizes in that cul-de-sac. Mr. Hembree answered yes. Chairperson Chumley asked what the homeowner can do with a lot like theirs. Mr. Hembree explained that the whole development was governed by the width of the parcel where they could obtain the square footage necessary to build the houses. The result has been that there are long deep lots on the end of the cul-de-sac and more shallow lots on either side. Four lots are similarly affected by having a shallow rear yard. Prior to 1988 there was the ability to lot average so long as the lots met the requirements of the Town Code. Chairman Chumley stated that if they wanted to add anything on to the house they could only build where they are proposing to build or build up. Mr. Hembree agreed.

Mr. Brewer stated that the request is for a modest 16x 24 foot addition. He asked what is located to the right as shown on the plat survey. Mr. Jenkins answered that is an areaway or concrete slab as part of a walkout basement that was original to the house. Mr. Brewer asked if they considered building the addition at 14x26 feet in depth to reduce the size of the request. Mr. Jenkins stated that they originally applied for it to be 16x24 feet; they would be willing to scale it down to 12x24 feet not needing anymore distance but are in need of depth as it is to be a part of a kitchen and great room addition.

Chairperson Chumley asked staff if the addition would be consistent with the neighboring houses in the cul-de-sac. Mr. Hembree answered yes.

Mr. Brewer asked how close the rear property neighbor is to the subject property. Mr. Jenkins noted that the property owner was present to speak but that he measured it at thirty-eight feet. Mr. Brewer stated that would put them at almost sixty-three feet.

Mr. Dowler asked Mr. Jenkins what his relationship is to the owners. Mr. Jenkins answered that he is the contractor for the homeowners. Mr. Dowler asked if Mr. Jenkins would be building the addition. Mr. Jenkins answered yes. Mr. Dowler asked if Mrs. Salmon is present. Mr. Jenkins answered yes.

Mr. VanderNat asked if their hardship is basically anything that they would want to do would require a variance. Mr. Jenkins agreed, stating that the way that the house sits on the lot, according to his measurements, they are within 4 inches of the required 30 foot front-yard setback and within the 24 feet of the rear-yard setback. Anything that they would want to do would involve some sort of variance request. With respect to “popping the top” he noted that the house is a split foyer. The budget that he was given to build with and the way that the neighborhood is situated, would be very difficult to accomplish and would end up looking “McMansionish,” not conforming or looking good in the neighborhood. They are proposing to build on the back a great room/kitchen addition. It would be very low in profile and would not be visible from the cul-de-sac or for some of the neighbors.

Mr. Brewer asked if there would be a basement underneath. Mr. Jenkins answered no, it is to be built over a crawl space.

There being no further questions Mr. Jenkins was seated.

Ms. Stephanie Salmon, owner was sworn in to speak. Ms. Salmon stated that her husband is out of the country for the year and could not attend. She stated that they are lucky enough to live in one of the best neighborhoods and it is really important that they maintain the character of the cul-de-sac. Their house was built in 1972 and is in need of improvements such as a new roof, and carport. They are a family of five and, like a lot of people, find that they live predominantly in their kitchen. The kitchen is really small. They would like to maintain the character of the house and their cul-de-sac. They have spoken at length to their surrounding neighbors to gauge their opinion and have found that all of their neighbors are supportive of what they want to do.

There being no further questions Ms. Salmon was seated.

Mr. Robert Harootyan, of 854 Shady Drive, SE, was sworn in to speak. Mr. Harootyan stated that a letter of support has already been submitted from he and his wife. They support the application as it will help out the family, giving them the additional living space needed. He noted that making the addition wider and shorter would not be feasible due to the existing utility lines there but in general they are very happy with the proposed plans.

There being no further questions Mr. Harootyan was seated.

Chairman Chumley asked staff if they received any comments regarding the application. Mr. Hembree answered no, not other than the written comments received in the Board’s packets.

Mr. Frank Davenport III, owner of 900 Carole Court, SE, was sworn in to speak. Mr. Davenport stated that they have lived in their home for almost thirty-years. They support the application and appreciate their sensitivity to the needs of the neighbors in consideration of their building plans. They are wonderful neighbors and would like to see them stay in the neighborhood.

Chairperson Chumley thanked everyone for their comments.

There being no further questions or testimony the public hearing was closed.

BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES

REGULAR MEETING

September 19, 2007


The Board of Zoning Appeals held a regular meeting session to discuss three (3) advertised requests in the Council Room of the Vienna Town Hall, 127 Center Street, South, Vienna, Virginia, on September 19, 2007, beginning at 8:00 PM with Donald Chumley presiding as Chairperson. The following members were present: Marshall Potter, Gregory Haight, Robert Dowler, Robert Petersen, Charles Brewer, and Peter VanderNat. Also attending and representing the staff were Gregory M. Hembree, Director of Planning and Zoning, and Jennifer M. Murphy, Board Clerk.


ITEM NO. 1:
Request for approval of a Conditional Use Permit to construct a new storage building (to be addressed as 249 Nutley Street, NW), and to authorize all current uses within the Town’s Park Maintenance Yard, on property located at 247 Nutley Street, NW, and in the RS-12.5, Single-Family Detached Residential zone. Filed by Catherine Salgado, Director of Parks & Recreation, and agent for the Town of Vienna, owner.


Mr. Petersen made a motion to approve a Conditional Use Permit for all current uses at 247 Nutley Street, NW. Mr. Brewer seconded the motion.

Mr. Dowler noted that there has never been a use permit issued for the site. He would like to include two conditions to the motion so that the working hours of operation are 7 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. for both the existing and new hours and also that the eight foot fence will be maintained around the yard.

Chairperson Chumley asked if the Town were to change the working hours, would that overly bind them. Mr. Hembree stated that there was some language structured into the proposal. He stated that it could read 7 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. regular work hours plus emergency work hours and special emergency events as discussed such as in the event of a hurricane. Additional discussion followed and was determined that the language used for Mr. Dowler’s conditions would be added to the motion as a friendly amendment.

Motion: Petersen
Second: Brewer
Approved: 7-0

Mr. Dowler made a motion to approve the proposed plans for a records storage facility as submitted to include the same provisions for hours of operation per the Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Potter seconded the motion.

Mr. Petersen stated that he would have to vote against the motion as he was not convinced of an adequate hardship.

Mr. VanderNat stated that after listening to testimony he was swayed by the point that the distance to the nearest house is seventy feet, which is twice the amount of required distance of a rear-yard setback. Although the letter of the law has not been met, in some ways the spirit of it has been met with respect to distance between the two buildings. He stated that with those considerations in mind and the fact that the facility has been there for a very long time he feels that it is an improvement to the property and not a diminishment. Those factors have persuaded him that he can vote in support of the motion.

Mr. Dowler stated that he does not see anything detrimental with respect to building this type of facility at this location. It being a storage building will not create a lot of unnecessary traffic, it will not affect the health and safety of the neighborhood, and it appears to be placed in a reasonable location. For those reasons a Conditional Use Permit would be in order.

Mr. Brewer stated that the considerations for site distance have been made in a judicious manor.

Mr. Potter noted that the paved surface was already present and there has not been an objection made by any of the adjacent property owners. Adequate testimony has been given that it will create an efficiency for the Town because it will pay for itself within a short amount of time.

Mr. Haight asked staff if issues of setback are handled by the Planning Commission. Mr. Hembree explained that the Planning Commission reviews the application for a site plan modification and votes to approve or deny a recommendation to the Mayor and Town Council. It is the Mayor and Town Council who vote to approve or deny the application for site plan. Mr. Haight stated that it is not the same criteria that would have to be met for a variance. Mr. Hembree answered no. Mr. Haight stated that the provision for a hardship does not apply. Mr. Hembree answered no. Additional discussion followed.

Mr. Petersen stated given that the issue that the thirty-five foot setback requirement is not at issue before the Board then he has no reason to vote against the motion. He stated that he is then prepared to vote in support of the motion.
Motion: Dowler
Second: Potter
Approved: 7-0


ITEM NO. 2:

Request for approval of a replacement Conditional Use Permit for the use of outdoor lights and public address system at Waters Field, located at 130 Cherry Street, SE, and in the PR-Park and Recreational zone. Filed by Catherine Salgado, Director of Parks & Recreation, and agent for Fairfax County Public school system, owner.


Mr. Potter made a motion to approve the Conditional Use Permit as submitted. Mr. Petersen seconded the motion.

Mr. Dowler stated that he would like the motion to include that the lighting equipment used should have the most direct focus on the field, limiting spillage to the surrounding neighborhoods.

Chairperson Chumley asked if Mr. Potter would be amenable to amending the motion. Mr. Potter agreed.
Mr. Petersen thought that introducing language specific to focusing the lighting is unnecessarily restrictive. The lights are well positioned and well used so that the Board does not need to add additional language about focusing the lighting used. He is in support of the motion because he sees that it can only increase the quality of life for, not just the youth, but for the entire Town who will make use of the facility throughout the entire year.

Mr. Potter stated that it will expand the capacity of the field and will be a positive effect on the Town.

Chairperson Chumley asked that they vote on the original motion as made and if staff could add a comment to the notes portion of the order. Mr. Hembree agreed, stating that it will be a part of the findings of fact per the testimony made by Ms. Salgado that the new lighting was installed precisely for the purpose of limiting spillage to the surrounding neighborhoods.

Motion: Potter
Second: Petersen
Approved: 7-0


ITEM NO. 3:

Request for approval of a variance from Sections 18-24E and 18-208 of the Town Code to construct an addition beyond the rear-yard setback line on a nonconforming lot at 902 Carole Court, SE, in the RS-12.5, Single-Family Detached Residential zone. Filed by R. Blair Jenkins, agent for Michael B. Chang and Stephanie A. Salmon, owners.


Mr. Brewer made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Mr. VanderNat seconded the motion.

Mr. Brewer stated that although they are proposing to build closer to the property line than normal the rendering shows the lack of choices that the applicants have. The neighbors have testified both in person and in writing their favoring of the application. It does appear that there is an existing screen of vegetation that will minimize the visual impact to the rear-yard neighbors.

Mr. VanderNat agreed, stating that almost anything reasonable that they would want to do to the house and/or property would require a variance. They have thought about that issue and have chosen a design that is in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. The neighbors have testified their support of the application, concurring with the proposed plans. For those said reasons he is in support of the application.

Mr. Dowler stated that he has struggled with the application as there are a lot of new houses that have been built within the neighborhood. He stated that they are the types of houses that the Board sees from time to time requesting a variance because the builder has built to the maximum proportions of the lot. With respect to the application, lot averaging done when the house was built was a hardship that has limited the property. The Board is in a position to correct a hardship that is caused by lot averaging noting that the property is also of a peculiar shape.

Mr. Petersen appreciated Mr. Dowler’s points made regarding lot averaging. He agreed that what has been proposed both in scale and architectural integrity has been maintained for setting on the cul-de-sac. He is therefore in support of the motion.
Mr. Haight stated that he would be voting in support of the application for the same reasons.

Chairperson Chumley stated that he too would be voting in support of the application. He stated that it is on applications such as this one that he feels proud to be a member of the Board.

Motion: Brewer
Second: VanderNat
Approved: 7-0


APPROVAL OF MINUTES:

Mr. Petersen asked that a change be made to page 9, second paragraph from the bottom, 3rd line beginning with “Furthermore...” He asked that the Board approve it to read, “Furthermore, considering the area of ground under consideration, not granting the requested variance would not result in some unnecessary hardship that is not generally shared with other properties within the same zone.”

Mr. Brewer made a motion that the minutes from the, June 20, 2007, meeting be approved as amended.
Motion: Brewer
Second: Petersen
Approved: 5-0-1
Abstain: Potter


NEW BUSINESS:

Mr. Potter announced that he would be having a birthday party on December 29, 2007, at the Fire House. He stated that everyone will be invited noting that there are to be no gifts. Chairperson Chumley asked if there would be chocolate cake. Mr. Potter answered yes. Chairperson Chumley commented that he might attend if there was to be chocolate cake.

There being no further business to discuss, the meeting adjourned at 9:39 P.M.


Respectfully submitted,



Jennifer M. Murphy
Board Clerk

Town Government  / Town Services  / Regulations & Ordinances  / Town Information  / Town Departments  / Mailbox