Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: MONDAY, April 2, 1990 TAG: 9004020248
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: A3 EDITION: EVENING
SOURCE: MARK LAYMAN STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
In the mid-1980s, it approved 90 percent of the requests for variances it received.
But in the past eight months, the approval rate has dropped to 50 percent.
"The BZA [Board of Zoning Appeals] has changed, hasn't it?" Supervisor Steve McGraw said recently. "They've gotten nasty!"
The trend began in 1987, after the Board of Supervisors went to court to try to overturn a variance given to county Commissioner of Revenue Wayne Compton, who wanted to subdivide a lot and convert a backyard garage into a single-family residence.
The subdivision would have created a "pipe-stem lot" with only 10 feet of road frontage. The county's zoning ordinance requires that lots in neighborhoods served by public water and sewer have 60 feet of frontage.
The supervisors were not picking on Compton. But they were becoming more and more frustrated by how frequently variances were being approved.
The Board of Zoning Appeals hears appeals of decisions relating to enforcement of the zoning ordinance and requests for variances from the ordinance.
A variance is supposed to be approved only when there is a genuine hardship, not just an inconvenience. "It's a safety valve," county Attorney Paul Mahoney said. "But if the safety valve becomes an open faucet, you're going to wash away your zoning ordinance."
"Anytime you're approaching a 90 percent approval rate, . . . there's a serious problem," Supervisor Bob Johnson said. "Our zoning ordinance is not that bad."
The court did not overturn Compton's variance, but it did order the zoning appeals board to reconsider it in light of stricter guidelines that had recently been set by the state Supreme Court.
The variance was approved again. But the Board of Supervisors had made its point.
The supervisors followed up last year when they asked the General Assembly to change the county's charter to allow them to appoint members of the Board of Zoning Appeals. The change took effect July 1. Before that, the Circuit Court appointed members of the zoning appeals board.
Only two of the people who were on the Board of Zoning Appeals at the time of the flap over Compton's variance are still on it today - Carlton Wright, the chairman, and M.E. Maxey. Two of the other three members resigned before their terms ended. The third did not seek reappointment.
Taking their place are Harold Richardson, appointed in 1988, and Eldon Karr and James Harrison IV, appointed last summer. All three were named by the Circuit Court before the supervisors took over the appointive power last July 1.
"Anytime you have a change, things are going to be done differently," Wright said. "That's what people are seeing. We've practically got a brand-new board now."
Variances are harder to come by now. And, Mahoney said, "They're taking the heat for it."
The Board of Zoning Appeals landed in court in March. Eldenridge Developers, a partnership that includes one-time Roanoke City Council candidate Larry Fenzel, wanted a variance for a house it had built 1 1/2 feet too close to Oakland Boulevard Northwest. The zoning appeals board refused to approve the variance.
Circuit Judge Kenneth Trabue approved the variance after concluding that the developer had been caught unaware by the county's stricter enforcement of the zoning ordinance.
Trabue was "sympathetic" to the Board of Zoning Appeals, however, Mahoney said. "I'm interpreting the court's position as, `The next case will be different.' "
Because of Trabue's decision, the county is not contesting a similar lawsuit filed by Vaughn Pruitt, who failed to get a variance for a house on Sunflower Drive in Vinton that is too close to the side lot line.
"I think the BZA is probably right," said former county attorney Edward Natt, who represented Eldenridge Developers. "But I don't think the word has gotten out to the general public."
The county is trying to take care of that.
Wright is planning to speak at a general membership meeting of the Roanoke Valley Home Builders Association this spring. "I'm sure I won't be a popular fellow that night," he joked.
And people applying for building permits will have to fill out a new form certifying that setback and side-yard requirements are being complied with. Until that form is signed, Mahoney said, the county will not do final inspections on footings or frames on a new building or an addition to an existing building.
That's "an excellent approach," Natt said.
"We haven't had these problems in the past couple of years with the big construction firms," Mahoney said. "It's the smaller ones and the individual builders. . . . There are some people who are careful and pay attention to details and others who don't."
Now the word is getting out that "you'd better not come in and ask for a variance just because you screwed up," he said.
But the Board of Zoning Appeals still has "a great deal of compassion and concern for citizens," Wright said. "And there are cases when they need relief, no question about it."
by CNB