TO: Zoning Commission
THRU: Craig Harmon, CZO - Senior Planner
FROM: Demetrios Moutos, AICP - Planner II
DATE: April 14, 2026
RE:Title
A26-11. Order of Approval - Findings of Fact: SteelFab of Virginia, Inc. requests a variance from UDO § 30-5.D.4 to retain a six-foot chain-link fence at 0 Shaw Mill Rd (PIN 0429257544000). This fence secures an industrial steel fabrication site and requires relief from the four-foot height limit and minimum setback requirements for front and corner side yard fencing. Chuck Craig represents SteelFab.
Title
end
end
COUNCIL DISTRICT(S):
Council District(s)
City Council District 3 - Council Member Antonio Jones
b
Relationship To Strategic Plan:
This request supports the City’s FY2025 Strategic Plan to provide “quality and sustainable public services” for communities and businesses.
Direct Alignment
• Goal I - Safety & Security (Objective 1.3): The applicant claims that the current fence height and location deter unauthorized access and illegal dumping on an active industrial site. This supports the City's goal of maintaining community safety and reducing property and violent crime.
Secondary Alignment
• Goal II - Diverse & Viable Economy (Objective 2.4): The request allows the established industrial business to operate securely, preventing disruptions from relocating or downsizing the fence. This helps sustain a favorable climate for business growth.
• Goal III - City Investment Planning (Objectives 3.2 and 3.4): The City uses land use regulations to tackle ongoing dumping and trespassing, which the applicant cites as a quality-of-place issue. These measures promote effective code enforcement and neighborhood revitalization.
Executive Summary:
SteelFab of Virginia, Inc. requests a variance for the property at 0 Shaw Mill Rd (PIN 0429257544000) to keep an existing 6-foot chain-link fence in its current location. UDO § 30-5.D.4 restricts such fences to 4 feet in front and corner side yards and mandates a 10-foot setback. The applicant argues that the variance is essential for site security, preventing unauthorized dumping, and allowing an internal road within the fenced area. The Commission unanimously approved the variance on March 10, 2026.
Background:
Zoning Permit Request and Staff Determination
On January 15, 2026, the applicant submitted a zoning permit request to replace a damaged chain-link fence at 0 Shaw Mill Rd (PIN 0429257544000). Zoning staff denied the request, citing UDO standards that require a 10-foot setback and limit fence height to 4 feet in front and corner side yards for chain-link fences used for other developments.
Applicant Response
The applicant stated that the previous fence was 6 feet tall and that the replacement would restore this height. They argued that a 4-foot fence would compromise security, making the site vulnerable to theft, safety risks, and illegal dumping.
Variance Application
Following the denial, the applicant filed a variance application (Project #2029178) seeking relief from UDO §30-5. D.4 regarding fence height and minimum setback. The applicant requests to maintain the 6-foot fence, as the ordinance allows only 4 feet for chain-link fences in front and corner side yards. They assert that the higher fence is necessary for security, preventing dumping, and ensuring internal road access remains secure.
Ownership Documentation
The case file includes a recorded deed confirming SteelFab of Virginia, Inc. as the property owner.
Issues/Analysis:
Fence Standards for This Request
The UDO outlines standards for fence location, height, and appearance to promote visual harmony, protect adjacent properties, and ensure safety and privacy.
Key Provisions:
• Location & Visibility:
o Fences must be outside the public right-of-way and cannot exceed 30 inches in height within required sight triangles.
• Chain-Link Heights & Setbacks:
o Chain-link fences for nonresidential developments may reach 4 feet in front and corner side yards, and 6 feet in interior and rear yards, with a 10-foot minimum setback from the front and corner side yard. If the property line extends into the right-of-way, measure the setback from the edge of the sidewalk or 10 feet from the pavement edge.
• Landscape Screening:
o Fences over 4 feet tall within 15 feet of a public right-of-way require landscape screening and must be at least 5 feet from the right-of-way edge.
• Appearance Standards:
o Finished sides of fences must face outward, and fence segments along one lot side must use a uniform style and compatible colors.
Applicant’s Request
The applicant seeks a variance from UDO § 30-5.D.4 to maintain a 6-foot fence height, exceeding the 4-foot standard for chain-link fences in front and corner side yards. The applicant states that the property, located near commercial and industrial businesses, serves an industrial steel fabrication site.
Variance Decision Standards
Decision makers may approve the variance only if:
1. Strict application causes practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships.
2. Unique land circumstances (location, size, topography) create uncommon hardships.
3. The variance allows reasonable use with minimal deviation from the ordinance.
4. The variance aligns with the ordinance’s purpose and intent.
5. The variance assures public safety and welfare, achieving substantial justice.
Evidence Provided by the Applicant
The applicant cites the following to support the variance:
• Practical Difficulties:
o Strict application makes the property vulnerable to unwanted visitors and illegal dumping. Moving the fence would hinder production and increase access for trespassers.
• Unique Circumstances
o A 4-foot fence placed far back leaves the industrial site exposed to safety issues.
• Minimum Action:
o The variance would secure the site, include the access road within the fence, and reduce illegal dumping.
• Harmony with Ordinance Purpose:
o The area is industrial and commercial, and the fence would help deter illegal dumping.
• Public Safety:
o The fence would prevent unauthorized access to potentially hazardous areas.
Related Fence Requirements
Since the applicant requests a 6-foot fence without the required setback, any segment over 4 feet within 15 feet of a public right-of-way triggers UDO’s landscape screening requirement and mandates a 5-foot offset from the right-of-way for screenings.
Insufficient Justification for a Variance:
The following do not justify a variance under UDO § 30-2.C.14.g:
• The presence of conforming or nonconforming signs, uses, or structures in the same or different zoning districts.
• Requests for signage types that are explicitly or implicitly prohibited in the zoning district.
• Claims based solely on branding preference, customer familiarity, economic hardship, or increased profitability.
Findings:
The statements below reflect the findings set out in the draft Order to Approve A26-11. The Commission made these findings after considering sworn testimony, admitted evidence, and arguments presented at the evidentiary hearing.
1. Practical difficulties and unnecessary hardships:
a. Strict enforcement of the ordinance would create practical difficulties and unnecessary hardships. Reducing the fence to four feet and relocating it would compromise site security, fail to deter unauthorized visitors and illegal dumping, and place the site road outside the fenced area, disrupting daily operations.
2. Unique circumstances; not self-created:
a. The practical difficulties result from conditions specific to the property, not from actions by the owner. These hardships stem from the sites location, layout, and the operational need to secure the industrial steel fabrication property and keep the internal road enclosed.
3. Minimum action necessary:
a. The requested variance is the minimum action necessary to allow reasonable use of the property. It is limited to retaining the existing six-foot chain-link fence in its current location, ensuring the industrial site and its road remain enclosed.
4. Harmony with the Ordinance; spirit preserved:
a. The variance supports the general purpose and intent of the Ordinance and preserves its spirit. The property is in an industrial/commercial area, and the fence is intended to improve security, reduce unauthorized access, and prevent illegal dumping, consistent with the stated objectives of safety, security, and privacy.
5. Public safety and welfare; substantial justice:
a. Granting the variance promotes public safety and welfare and upholds substantial justice by helping to prevent unauthorized entry into an industrial work site where injury could occur.
Budget Impact:
This variance request does not directly change City expenditures or revenues. Staff expect any fiscal effects to stay limited to normal administrative costs for application intake, noticing, staff review, and the quasi-judicial hearing process. If the fence stays nonconforming without approval, the City may incur routine compliance and enforcement workload as part of standard code administration.
Options:
1. Approve the drafted Findings of Fact, which match the draft Order to Approve A26-11 and the hearing record.
2. Approve the Findings of Fact with revisions, the Zoning Commission requests, and the hearing record supports.
Recommended Action::Recommended Action
N/A
end
Attachments:
1. Order to Approve A26-11 - Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law