Lot Coverage? Let the Exceptions Begin...As Usual Starting with Vienna
From the papers:
Vienna Council OK's Record-Storage Facility by BRIAN TROMPETER, Staff Writer (Created: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 5:38 AM EDT)The Vienna Town Council on Sept. 24 approved numerous waivers to allow a records-storage building to be constructed at the Nutley Street Property Yard.
The new building triggered provisions of several ordinances enacted after the town took possession of the 1.9-acre property in 1949, said Vienna Planning and Zoning Director Greg Hembree.
“The whole site is weird,” he said.
The council approved a setback of just 15 feet from the side property line - half of what would be allowed with a residential dwelling. The new building will be 70 feet from the nearest residence and is amply screened by an 8-foot fence and a series of pine trees, which may be located on an adjacent property, Hembree said.
Council members approved an overall lot coverage of 80 percent, which more than three times the 25 percent permitted in residential areas. Hembree said the property was about 90 percent paved when the town took ownership of it, and efforts have been made since to add greenery.
A 0.58-acre section of the property is being used for the new Sarah Walker Mercer Park, which, if included in the calculations, brings total lot coverage down to 55.84 percent, Hembree said.
The council also approved a tree-canopy waiver for the site, which has no trees. The town normally requires 20-percent tree coverage after a 20- year growth period in residential areas.
The 1.31-acre section of the site used by the property yard also is home to an existing brick building, a greenhouse, water storage tank and several smaller storage buildings. The site served as the town's primary property yard before the new Northside facility opened in 2002.
The proposed 14-foot-tall, 1,800-square-foot storage building would be just 6 feet from the site's brick building - 4 feet shorter than the normally required offset if the building were residential.
The storage building's close proximity to the other building was necessitated for vehicular access, and is allowable because it does not serve as a residence, Hembree said.
“It's a low-volume building that will be sitting there, quietly holding plans,” he said.
Because of cost factors, the new building will not have an environmentally friendly “green” design, said Vienna Parks and Recreation Director Cathy Salgado.
Comments
What a bunch of goofs.
Posted by: HV | September 26, 2007 10:34 AM
We hate Bukont for all his evil-doing but the NW property yard which was never to be used again will now have a new building which won't be "green," over lot coverage and no trees.
They suck.
Posted by: vienna mommy | September 26, 2007 10:56 AM
A few years ago, I had to decide between simply resurfacing my patio (and continuing to use it as such) or setting up a carport on the side of my house. As it happens, the patio was built before current zoning laws took effect--as a result it is too close to my neighbors' house to be built from scratch today. I was told at Town Hall that resurfacing the existing patio would be OK, but putting up a carport--above the existing patio--would not be permitted. Just for kicks, I asked for the logic behind all that. The functionary I was speaking to could only say "huh, logic?"
Posted by: Pontific8tor | September 26, 2007 11:15 AM
A Greg Hembree quote: "a lot of things happen over the weekend."
Posted by: frustrated citizen | September 26, 2007 03:43 PM
Hey there Pontific8tor. From your posts, it sounds like you live in one of the older, modest dwellings on Tapawingo Road. I hope you realize that the HV.com crowd thinks you have no right to exist in that house. Your house is a teardown, and if you had the slightest shred of decency, you'd sell out and allow one of your social superiors to build a multimillion dollar mansion in place of your inadequate little house. You may take comfort in the fact that the HV.com cabal has defined a role for little people like you: You have their permission to buy one of the condos they want built along Maple Avenue, assuming you can afford it. Why do you selfishly want to deny successful people access to your land when all you are entitled to is a fraction of the living space perched on top of a parking garage behind the SunTrust Bank?
Posted by: Yeonas United | September 26, 2007 09:18 PM
The Town of Vienna Yeonas housing stock is a tear down whether you like it or not. That doesn't mean anyone is bad for living there, or less than or anything frankly. That Yeonas housing stock is a teardown is a fact grounded in dollars and cents, not some slight of the people who live there. Are you planning on rolling the clock back to stop the development happening all over Vienna? Explain how that will work TC/Town Management offspring...oh I mean "Yeonas United".
Posted by: HV | September 26, 2007 09:29 PM
your house is a teardown, and if you had the slightest shred of decency, you'd sell out and allow one of your social superiors to build a multimillion dollar mansion in place of your inadequate little house.
I've lived in a house built in 1945 and one built in 1958 for almost 7 years. We choose to build new since we would need to replace nearly all our plumbing and electrical. Plus, we simply needed more space for a family of five. To look down on either the owners of older homes or the new homes is silly. No one is better or worse than the other. We all do what we need to do for our family.
Posted by: vienna mommy | September 27, 2007 01:36 PM