Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 3 · column 2 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
the property is greatly reduced if no house can be built, as well as arguments from opponents of the variance.
BZA member Alex Sharp made the following motion: “Tb approve the variance requested to locate a 40 by 60 foot house in the band shown on the attached plat... — subject to the BZA’s review of a contract purchaser’s site plan within six months. At this review the BZA shall act to minimize the size of the variance granted as it deems practical.” This motion was seconded by board member Farrell Nicholas.
Members Kenneth Estes and Ji nnifer Mathews both expressed concern that there was no detailed site plan displaying the exact proposed location of a house for the BZA to examine and approve prior to granting the variance and were not satisfied with a proviso for reviewing one later.
Chairman Robert Weinberg weighed in, saying in part: “I agree with Mr. Estes’ point and Ms. Matthews’ point on the inadequacy of the plat... In addition, and most fundamentally, I don’t think that the applicant has proved a case under the standard of the Virginia Supreme Court’s decision... As I understand that decision, the applicant would have to prove that denial of the variance would amount to a hardship approaching confiscation, and I don’t think that the evidence submitted so far has shown that.”
The Board voted down Sharp’s motion on the AFRC variance in a 3-2 vote, Weinberg, Mathews and Estes in the majority; Sharp and Estes in the minority.
On August 4, Konick filed papers appealing the decision. Konick argues, in part, that denying the variance reduces the value of the parcel so much that it is a hardship approaching confiscation which the BZA is compelled to remedy. Konick also makes several civil claims.
In the near future, attorneys representing the BZA will file a response, and a hearing date will be set. Discussion of the ongoing matter at Wednesday’s meeting was limited to asking whether there were any new actions, briefs or papers determining that there were none, and advising members to look over the transcript of the meeting of July 22..
Bill Kossler can be reached at bkossler@timespapers.com
94.0%