Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Leesburg resident asks planning commission to consider reduced rear setback for screened porch
Summary
Resident Amy Sibley told the Leesburg Planning Commission she wants an enclosed screened porch on a perimeter lot but was blocked by a 30-foot required backyard; staff said they will meet the resident to review zoning options and process steps.
Amy Sibley, a Leesburg homeowner, asked the Planning Commission on Sept. 4 to reconsider how the town applies rear-yard rules for perimeter lots after she learned a planned screened-in porch would not be allowed under existing zoning. "My name is Amy Sibley. I'm representing myself and my husband, Dean. We have been living and working in Leesburg for 15 years," she told the commission, adding her address as 823 Melody Court.
Sibley said the property is a perimeter lot abutting Loudoun County and that the town's zoning rules require a 30-foot minimum backyard for perimeter houses; she asked the commission to treat the county-side landscape buffer and dense woods as equivalent buffering so her required setback could be reduced to the standard 20 feet for non-perimeter lots. "Because our yard is a perimeter house, we are required to have 30 feet of backyard," Sibley said. She added that, per the plat, her proposed porch would actually be farther from the property line than the existing deck and that the town's utility easement (TEC) has not been used in more than 30 years.
Why this matters: the question affects how the town applies setback and buffer rules at municipal edges and whether staff and applicants can treat adjacent county buffers as substitute mitigation. During the meeting, Director David said staff will contact Sibley and walk through the applicable zoning regulations and any process options (variances, administrative exceptions, or other permits) she can pursue.
Details from the presentation and follow-up
- Zoning cited: Sibley referenced what she read as "zoning restriction article 10.4 0.5 0.5" describing allowed decks, patios and the sentence she quoted that says "Enclosed roof decks are not permitted within required yards." The commission did not make an ordinance change at the meeting. - Setbacks and buffers: Sibley said the adjacent Loudoun County property is a planned general government office site and is already buffered by landscape design and extensive existing woods; she asked the town to accept those buffers in lieu of the larger perimeter setback. - Easement: Sibley told the commission the TEC easement has not been used for more than 30 years and that utility companies have reported no conflicts.
Next steps and staff direction
Director David told the commission staff will call Sibley, review the zoning rules with her, and identify any application routes or design options she can pursue. No formal motion, variance or vote on Sibley's request was taken at this meeting; the matter remains at the public-comment/staff-review stage.
Community context and practical limits
Because the lot borders Loudoun County, any permanent change in setback policy for perimeter lots would require careful review of interjurisdictional boundaries and of the town's zoning text. The petitioner offered to have commissioners view the property in person. The commission did not indicate any immediate change in policy; staff will return to the resident and, if needed, bring options back to the commission for formal action.
Ending
Staff contact: Director David (Department of Community Development) will follow up with Amy Sibley to discuss code text, application options, and whether a building permit or variance route is applicable.
