|
Garage approved, but horses nixed
BY CHARLES GARRATT • STAFF WRITER
WARM SPRINGS - The Bath County Board of Zoning appeals approved a conditional use permit for a new vehicle repair business on Pond Hill, but denied a variance requested to allow horses on a 14-acre tract zoned residential this week.
David Puffenbarger applied for a conditional use permit to operate an automotive repair garage on property he owns just south of Jason's Pizza on U.S. 220 north of Warm Springs. Puffenbarger plans to tear down an existing garage and build a new 24'x36' building.
Last month, the planning commission took the unusual step of passing Puffenbarger's application to the BZA without recommendation. The planners normally review permit requests and recommend either approval or denial. The BZA is not obligated to follow the planners' recommendation, but as vice chair Terry Kershner noted, "We rely on those recommendations."
A petition and letter from adjoining landowners opposing the application was presented to the planning commission, but no one attended that meeting. The same letter and petition was presented to the BZA and a couple of those signing the petition attended Monday.
Leta Norfleet lives about one-quarter mile south of the site and spoke on behalf of Mark and Angela Wolfe, who own the lot adjacent to Puffenbarger on the south. She expressed concerns shared by the others who spoke against the permit, saying, "This is not the location for an auto repair garage." Norfleet also emphasized this was not a personal issue, calling Puffenbarger is "a friend forever."
Puffenbarger addressed concerns ranging from disposing of oil and chemicals to spillover from nighttime security lighting. New BZA member Richard Barnes, representing the Millboro district, asked Puffenbarger how he would handle extra lights required for customers to pick up and drop off vehicles after hours.
Barnes said the county had recently become concerned with lights at night. Puffenbarger said he would not need lights at this stage since there was already enough spill over lighting from two dusk-to-dawn lights at the business next door. But he agreed to use dark skies compliant lighting to shield other property owners from light if additional lights were needed.
Two nearby residents, including Puffenbarger's father, spoke in favor of the operation. Steve Hodges said he had two granddaughters who live below the site. "I don't see anything wrong with it," he said.
Board members questioned Puffenbarger on parking, junk cars, car parts, disposal and other issues. In each case Puffenbarger was willing to proffer conditions to alleviate potential problems.
In response to another round of questioning on junk and disabled vehicles, Puffenbarger assured the board his business would not be run like some others in the area with cars needing repair or held for parts sitting around. "You get 'em in, you get it out, you get paid," he said.
The board was satisfied with Puffenbarger's conditions for the business and approved the permit with conditions for five years.
Horse barn rises and falls again
Allen and Ann Layman faced an uphill battle for approval of their request for a variance to allow horses on the 14-acre residential lot they own in Mitchelltown. The board had denied a variance request last month which was partly based on mistakes alleged to have been made by county employees.
With the Layman application, as it did with the Hise application last month, the board ruled errors by zoning and building officials and money spent on improvements based on those errors do not constitute hardship. The code of Virginia and local land use regulations require an applicant to establish a "clearly demonstrable hardship approaching confiscation" before the board can grant a variance, according to Kershner.
The Laymans purchased property in Mitchelltown in 2002. At the time, the land use regulations allowed horses and other livestock in residential districts with a conditional use permit. The Layman property is zoned R-2 residential.
Attorney Betty Cauley represented the Laymans Monday. She presented the board with a time line from the purchase to the present. In the time line, the Laymans received verbal assurance in March 2004 they would be able to build a barn and have horses on property. They began clearing land and purchasing materials for a barn at that time.
In November 2004, supervisors changed the land use regulations and removed the provision for animal husbandry in residential districts. Only landowners with horses or other livestock on property prior to the change in the law are allowed to continue as a grandfathered noncomplying use.
The Laymans had not built the barn or moved horses to the property by that time, so they no longer qualified to have horses on the property, according to Ryder. However, in June 2005 a barn was constructed followed by the house.
Mitchelltown resident Carl Chestnut recalled hearing the construction and notifying the county. Chestnut spoke against granting the variance. "We don't want horses or barns in R-1 or R-2," Chestnut told the board. "The law is there to protect R-1 and R-2. Had it been done right in the first place, we wouldn't be here now."
The majority of the nearly two dozen people on hand for the second public hearing supported allowing the Laymans to have horses on the property.
Neighbor Jeff Ford sold the property to the Laymans. He said, "As a Bath County taxpayer, I'm embarrassed how the Laymans have been treated." As owner of Valley Supermarket, Ford borders the Layman property on two sides. Ford felt allowing horses on the large lot "goes along with the rural nature of the county." He said he was in support as a residential and business neighbor.
In the end, the argument fell to the legality of using a variance for a change in use where the hardship was not clearly shown. Williamsville board member Patricia Clark made a motion to deny the variance based on the intent of R-2 district and the sections of state and local code defining the proper application of a variance. The motion passed 3- 1 with Barnes voting against.
Barnes noted the request was more of a legislative issue than a judicial one. He said, "There is a movement afoot to change the land use regulations by amendment" to allow horses in residential districts with specific restrictions. "I think this is the best way to get us out of this bind," Barnes said.
Ryder said the planning commission will review a first draft of proposed changes to land use regulations to allow horses in residential districts Monday. Planners will look at ideas for regulation changes submitted by Ryder and commissioners. Ryder said the new regulations could be before the board of supervisors in four to six months.
The planning commission meets Monday, Nov. 26 in room 115 of the courthouse at 7 p.m.
In other business, board members requested Ryder prepare changes to bylaws to require applicants and those presenting materials in support or opposition to an application deliver copies of all written material to the zoning administrator at least 10 days before a public hearing.
Board members expressed frustration with being inundated with photos and printed matter during the hearing, and then not having time to review all the materials. Ryder told the board 10 days would give her time to make copies to send to board members the week before a hearing.
The Bath County Board of Zoning Appeals will not meet in December. The next meeting will ben on the third Monday, Jan. 21, 2008 at 7 p.m. in room 115 of the courthouse.
| 
