PITTSYLVANIA COUNTY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
REGULAR MEETING
November 9, 2010
MINUTES
VIRGINIA: The Pittsylvania County Board of Zoning Appeals met on Tuesday, November 9, 2010, in the General District Courtroom, Edwin R. Shields Courthouse Addition, Chatham, Virginia. Mr.Easley called the meeting to order at approximately 6:30 p.m. Mr.Merricks gave the invocation. Mr. Sheltoncalled the roll.
PRESENT
Kenneth Talbott– arrived at 6:55 p.m.
R. Allan Easley
Larry Estes
Mrs. Helen Glass
Ronald Merricks
Carroll Yeaman
Odie H. Shelton, Jr.
ABSENT
H. Blair Reynolds
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
By motion of Mr.Estes, seconded by Mr. Yeaman,and by unanimous vote the Minutes of theOctober 12, 2010,meeting were approved as presented.
Old Business
Mr. Sheltonand the Board briefly discussed the definitions that had been discussed at the previous meeting. Mr. Shelton also mentioned some information he had obtained on the internet sweepstakes cafés. He stated he had visited Mr. Reynolds and he hoped to return soon and thanked the Board for their cards and concerns.
New Business
Mr. Shelton reported there would be two (2) Special Use Permit cases for the December cycle and answered some questions regarding them.
CHAIRMAN’S REPORT
There was no Chairman’s report.
THE ZONING PRECEPTS WEREREAD BY Mr. Talbott to OPEN THE PUBLICHEARING at
approximately 7:00 p.m.
Board of Zoning Appeals
Page 2
November 9, 2010
CaseS-1, Roger Collins,S-10-011 – Mr. Talbott opened the public hearing at approximately 7:01 p.m. Mr. Shelton,Director of Code Compliance, reported that Roger Collins hadpetitioned for a Special UsePermit on 0.296 acre, (part of 1.19 acres), located on State Road 718/Dry Fork Road, in the Tunstall Election District (for a non-conforming lot for a water pump station for public utilities). Brian Lewis with LE&D Professionals was present to represent the petition.He stated that he had nothing to add. There was no opposition to the petition. Mr. Talbott closed the public hearing at approximately 7:02 p.m. The Board discussed the petition as the Committee of the Whole and determined that there were no adverse effects. Upon motion of Mr. Easley, seconded by Mr. Merricks, the following motion was adopted: Whereas, Roger C. Collins has petitioned the Board of Zoning Appeals for a Special UsePermitfor a non-conforming lot for a water pump station for public utilities and, Whereas, we find no substantial detriment to adjacent property, that the character of the zoning district will not be changed thereby, and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Ordinance, I move the Special UsePermit be granted. Motion passed unanimous.
Case S-2, S-10-012, Withdrawn
This concludes the Special Use Permit case.
Case V-1, Tammy Adkins Warren, V-10-002 – Mr. Talbott opened the public hearing at approximately 7:04 p.m. Mr. Shelton, Director of Code Compliance, reported that Tammy Adkins Warren had petitioned for a Variance on 3.41 acres, located off Highway 41/Franklin Turnpike, in the Chatham-Blairs Election District toSection 35-231, Maximum Number Of Units Allowed (for placement of a second dwelling, a single-wide mobile home, to be used for the care of her elderly mother). Tammy and Bob Warren were present to represent the petition. Mr. Warren explained the petition and also thanked Mr. Shelton for his and his staff’s help with the petition. There was no opposition to the petition. Mr. Talbott closed the public hearing at approximately 7:07 p.m. The Board discussed the petition as the Committee of the Whole and determined that there were no adverse effects. Upon motion of Ms. Glass, seconded by Mr. Estes, the following motion was adopted: Whereas, Tammy Lenora Adkins Warren has petitioned the Board of Zoning Appeals for a Variance to Section 35-231, Maximum Number Of Units Allowed, of the Pittsylvania County Zoning Ordinance and, Whereas, the application does fulfill the minimum requirements for a variance from the provisions of the ordinance and, Whereas, the board finds that the strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship, that the hardship is not shared generally by other properties in the same zoning district and the same vicinity, that the authorization of the variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property and that the character of the district will not be changed by the granting of the variance and, Whereas, 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, I move the Variance be granted with the following conditions:
(1) The dwelling (mobile home) is to be for the exclusive use of the grandson.
(2) The dwelling (mobile home) is to be removed within ninety (90) days of the grandmother
not residingon the property.
Motion passed unanimous.
This concludes the Variance case.
Board of Zoning Appeals
Page 3
November 9, 2010
Z-1, Atkinsons, LLC, Z-10-005- Mr. Talbott opened the public hearing at approximately 7:10 p.m. Mr. Shelton, Director of Code Compliance, reported that Atkinsons, LLC had petitioned for a Sign Permit on
1.83 acres, located on U. S. Highway 29, in the Chatham-Blairs Election District (for a 10 x 30 (300 square feet), double-sided (total of four (4) panels), illuminated, off-site advertisement sign). Jo Ann Atkinson was present to represent the petition. She stated she had nothing to add. Mr. Talbott closed the public hearing at approximately 7:11 p.m. The Board discussed the petition as the Committee of the Whole and determined that there were no adverse effects. Upon motion of Mr. Merricks, seconded by Mr.Yeaman, the following motion was adopted: Whereas, Atkinsons, LLC, has petitioned the Board of Zoning Appeals for a Sign Permit for a 10 x 30 (300 square feet), double-sided (total of 4 panels), illuminated, off-site advertisement sign and, Whereas, the application meets the requirements of Section 35-95 of the Pittsylvania County Zoning Ordinance, I move the Sign Permit be granted with the following condition:
(1)The lighting must be internal or point downward.
Motion passed unanimous.
This concludes the Sign case.
The meeting adjourned at approximately 7:15 p.m.
______
Kenneth Talbott, Chairman
______Hannah Orgain, Clerk