Urbanna BZA defers decision on Riddick setback variances after dispute over earlier approvals

The Town of Urbanna Board of Zoning Appeals on a motion agreed to continue consideration of variance application 2024VAR01 (Riddick) and re-advertise a public hearing after the applicant and board members disputed whether prior site-plan approvals exist in the town record.

Chris Riddick, the applicant, identified himself as an architect who bought the Watling Street parcel in 2019 and said he relied on a town-approved utility plan (2020) and a site plan approved in 2022. "This reorientation changes the playing field mid game and creates an unnecessary hardship for me on this site," Riddick said, arguing that a newer zoning administrator had treated an access easement as a street and effectively reduced his previously approved buildable area.

Town staff told the board the application seeks three variances: to authorize an existing 10-foot front-yard setback where 40 feet is required, a 12-foot rear-yard setback where 25 feet is required, and to locate a proposed accessory building at 35 feet from the front property line where 40 feet is required. Staff’s written report recommended against granting the variances, saying the hardships appeared self-imposed and that the applicant had not met the factual criteria set out in town code sections cited in the staff report.

Andrea Gerard, the town attorney, told the board the applicant bears the burden of proof and that if the applicant could not produce written proof of the asserted prior approvals, the board would have to decide based on the materials before it. "If the applicant does not have proof of the action that he is referencing in writing," she said, "the board would have to vote on what is in front of it tonight."

Neighbors and a town council member who spoke at the hearing urged caution. Mary Hansen (240 Watling Street) said she was "on the fence" about granting multiple variances on subdivided parcels and asked that the board attach written conditions if any relief is approved to avoid creating precedent problems for similar lots.

After discussion about ambiguous or missing records from past administrations and an earlier appeal by adjacent owners that the Supreme Court of Virginia declined to hear, the board agreed to close the public hearing only to reconvene the matter with time for staff to locate stamped site-plan approvals and minutes. The board set the next public hearing for November 20 at 6:00 p.m., to be re-advertised so additional public comment can be received as required by recent changes in state law.

The board did not reach a decision on the three variances at the meeting; instead members directed staff to compile a chronology of prior actions, to search for an approved (stamped) site plan or equivalent documentation from 2022, and to share the findings with the applicant and the board ahead of the continued hearing.

Next steps: the board will re-advertise the hearing, staff will search town records and minutes for prior approvals, and the board will reconvene on Nov. 20 at 6 p.m. to consider the requested variances and any additional public comment.