HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA199200009 Application 1992-03-09 N. .illbt
'ilD to
(6-. ALB4 \CARCa _act
FILE NUMAPPLICATION FOR: ��' Y(check one) IIIII[f .. - q(1 9,
VARIANCE ) �� DATE SUBMITTED
❑ SPECIAL USE PERMIT ,,
vezF
❑ REZONING "P FEE PAID (see reverse)
fr
❑ ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT IRGIt a-13--9
❑ MOBILE HOME DATE OF PRELIM CONF.
❑ HOME OCCUPATION iot/P P /_ h‘❑ ACCESSORY TOURIST LODGING AFFF AT PRELIM. CONF.
39
\ OWNER (as currently listed in Real Estate) Day Q� L.J - 8/S
Name M« t%<E L L of.) Phone( )
Address )‘ 66381 33Go 13(1,6kS t , Gi(il1k, 21 Jo‘
)S APPLICANT (if different from owner) Day Z/3 8147
• Name MIKE" M,FLLvv Phone (_)
Address PO go)‘. 66 J 8j 33 60 P p ub ok Jl . C'Yll 22 JO6
4 CONTACT PERSON (if different from above) Day Zg� t9Z.y
Name NEit(.. 6 R-VPer1 Phone (_)
Address 70o {-(/42R-1 S sr, G(✓t u-e- Z2 b i
LOCATION: G1eN5 . Ho tii, Ce6 V W BV i L 6]/N j
TAX MAP/PARCEL NUMBERS (use reverse if needed) 4.5=i048I
1. D 4 5- DO - 0U- .0 - fd4131 4. - - -
2. - - -
EXISTING ZONING G✓. PROFFERED? Yes _ No y" Acreage if different ,Cr,
DESIRED ZONING
� PROFFERED? Yes _ No _ Acreage if different
EXISTING USE I ii.G ( i5Myr
PROPOSED USE �, �
ORDINANCE SECTION(S):OF,�.�x'� . 0.(0,J5.a `' G I `<.►`t ✓1yi 1 �' ia- .4,I 34
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: fl U7 a' 3 411.r. A4' -t9e
X/ JUSTIFICATION FOR REQUEST: ,..5,c°•F_ 47-1;06Ahr4
• The foregoing information is complete and correct to the best of my
knowledge. I have read and understand the provisions of the Albemarle County
Zoning Ordinance /applic�aabblee to this application.
,� • Signed h o1Q /%/�"('' Date 3 - 4 - , 19 ii--,
( r, Contract Purchaser, Agent)
Fee $ ____4__.G U Date Paid s3 (]WFO- Received By ,.i
Notes: Agzi ,
6) VA-92-09. The Gardens Partnership. Property in the Gardens Shopping
Ctr, on the E side of Rt 29, N of Albemarle Square, and S of Woodbrook
Shopping Ctrs. This is the lot B, beside Pier 1, TM45/P104B1, Zoned Cl,
Commercial, in an EC overlay. Applicant requests wall sign variances to
' a) increase the size of an individual sign from 35 to 100 sgft, and b)
increase the aggregate area from 50 to 274 s ft.
' q \qlr\
C Board of Zoning Appeals Date: -,i /�/Lte ' 'AL,i3_v_-- [� -
9htp,,, Lot(L O7G ,._ CI, S.ire '40.
4 ,
p,,L ill- - - , C''
f
i'
i
iI
I!
..-T.
L . ..-- AtZt N4.7 -1,..7c vcI }
w:iAtyl,A-(5k Le-t&t., e4a0.0_,. Jos_.,401;cf-5 . 5t-de cIt',47yee_,
; ,&)2., t. ver21):444ea.. .
i •e — �cze, . i .blet__ ct6-1-17t- F .46" red
137* ! A 6 ‘',7LC., -7'ex-
,6 �c`o-71 d-->1i -fie
..egeE
. 0• .tL Vik Li.-
:to i
1 .
,c6iiii/eit.,d.c,
pe617,&, ______,40
• A- . 11 ./6-c - /,.; , -
I Aid A i tortg, . 76_
.. ( �' Al ��-1,�,4 ��.,-��
•
,I Fo R
. . ..• . .,, N A,R :D. • etto
1/
40
, .1,, ,,....„.4 ii..... ._ 1,44,), i2 ii:ize74-64‘66254,601. ....
. .1'! keeci 4,1(laci-cie' If‘fl
Vpism6g- 4, P i5_7_,..../VeeCI 12(/>W
I 46 in, a 3..„ eed $'4. gilt
02 it&,D dvp''. s ,_pcf k_„ ,=i-zo,)-, .
.
d ... � � hivit G „ n d,4141_ 4
�i2�
I
1 .. .. 'J ii / ` vtriamt, Gz l .-e-G�- !It" // ,,
April 10, 1992
Gardens Partnership
P. O. Box 6598
Charlottesville, VA 22906
Board of Zoning Appeals
of Albemarle County
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22901
REFERENCE: VA 91-28 Tax Map 45 Parcel 104 B, 1, 2.
VA 92-09
VA 91-10
Gentlemen:
I am writing to you in connection with the referenced variance application.
The Gardens Partnership L. P. is the owner of the Gardens Shopping Center which
is a phased development located in the prime commercial district on Route 29N
next to Albemarle Square and across the street from Rio Hills Shopping Center and
Lowe's. The Shopping Center has leased approximately 37,000 square feet out of a
total approved plan of approximately 72,000. The final construction phase is
planned to begin in the near future.
The Gardens Partnership L. P. is talking to potential tenants which include a mix
of local independent business owners, local franchise operators and regional or
national tenants such as Pier 1 Imports. In all cases, signage requirement are of
extreme importance. In an attempt to reduce the amount of requests for such
actions and to present a consistent signage plan, the Gardens Shopping Center has
proposed a comprehensive signage plan.
Board of Zoning Appeals
of Albemarle County
April 10, 1992
Page 2
A stated in staff comments, the requested wall sign variances are: a) to increase
the size of the individual sign from 35 to 100 square feet, and b) to increase the
aggregate area of all wall signage to a ratio of one (1) square foot for each one (1)
linear foot of business frontage. There will be a minimum of 40 square feet per
sign, and a maximum of 100 square feet. In no case shall the total allowable
signage exceed the total for the entire Shopping Center based upon the ratio of one
(1) square foot for each linear foot of business frontage. This involves variances to
the Entrance Corridor sign regulations Section 30. 6. 5. 2 and the underlying district,
Section 4. 15. 3. 6.
In support of referenced requests for a variance, the Gardens Partnership L. P.
presents the following information to establish the existence of the necessary criteria
for granting a variance as set forth in Section 34. 2 of the Albemarle County
Zoning Ordinance:
UNDUE HARDSHIP
1. The Gardens Shopping Center consists of four planned buildings (three
constructed, one to be constructed) which is designed and marketed as a
unified shopping area. Tenants are required to comply with specific
operating declarations and share specific common area maintenance charges.
Although the subject property consists of four separate parcels zoned C-1, the
nature of the shopping center and business requirements of retail businesses
dictates that a logical comprehensive signage plan be presented to current
and future tenants.
2. In order for this to be a viable store location, signage must be adequate to
identify a tenants location and must be comparable to commercial signs along
the Route 29 North corridor. This is why a minimum amount of signage
(40 square feet) per tenant is requested. The maximum amount of 100
square feet would be allocated to users who would occupy space of 100
square feet of frontage or more. In no case would the total allowable
square footage for the Shopping Center exceed the ratio of one (1) square
foot for each linear foot of business frontage.
Board of Zoning Appeals
of Albemarle County
April 10, 1992
Page 3
HARDSHIP NOT SHARED BY OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED
3. Variance have been granted to other shopping center properties over the past
36 months, often in reliance that the proposed new sign ordinance would
allow 1. 5 square foot of sign area for each linear foot of building frontage.
Under this formula, the total area requested by the Gardens Shopping Center
would increase by 50%. Examples of variances granted to other similar
properties are as follows:
a. VA-90-18, Tax Map 45B(1), Parcel 1B, Wendell W. Wood (Applicant)/
Federal Express Center. Variance granted permitting applicant to
erect 1,150 square feet of sign area in HC district, exceeding 200
square foot ordinance maximum of 950 square feet. Wall signs to be
measured by 1. 5 square feet to 1. 0 linear foot of business frontage,
limiting 1 sign per tenant and no wall sign to exceed 200 square feet.
b. VA-89-69, Tax Map 61Z, Parcel 03-11, BPT California, Inc. (Applicant)/
The Centre at Branchlands. Variance granted permitting applicant to
erect 1,150 square feet of sign area in PUD district, exceeding 20
square foot ordinance maximum by 1,130 square feet. Wall signs to
be determined on basis of 1. 5 square feet of sign area per linear foot
of business footage, limiting each tenant to 1 wall sign with a
maximum 200 square foot limit for each wall sign.
c. VA-88-57, Tax Map 45, Parcels 93A, 93C, 94, 94A and 108, First
Interstate Charlottesville Limited Partnership (Applicant)/Rio Hill
Shopping Center. Variance granted permitting 2,400 square feet of
sign area in PDSC district, exceeding 200 square foot ordinance
maximum by 2,200 square feet. Area of wall signs determined on the
basis of 1. 5 square feet of sign area per linear foot of business
frontage, limiting each tenant to a maximum of 200 square feet of sign
area.
4. The placement of the Shopping Center, at an intersection of U. S. Route 29
North and a private access road, coupled with the decision to avoid the use
of a free-standing sign, mandates that signs be placed on the building --- on
a large enough scale that the signs are visible from Route 29 North and the
private access road.
Board of Zoning Appeals
of Albemarle County
April 10, 1992
Page 4
NO SUBSTANTIAL DETRIMENT TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES
5. The Gardens Shopping Center lies within an area designated on the
Albemarle County Master Plan as a shopping district and is located along the
main U. S. Route 29 North business corridor. It is bounded on the South
by Rio Hill Shopping Center, on the North by Grand Furniture and the
Woodbrook Shopping Center, and on the West by Colonial Auto Center and
Rio Hill Shopping Center. Woodbrook Subdivision, a residential district, lies
immediately to the East of The Gardens Shopping Center, but none of the
tenant signs will face toward the East. The character of district will not be
impaired by granting this variance. Letters of nearby property owners in
support of this variance request adjoining property owners are attached.
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
6. Given the location of the building and its relative visibility from Route 29
North, and in light of the fact that no free standing signs are being sought
by The Gardens Partnership, it is important from a health and safety view
point that the signs be large enough to be visible to vehicular traffic
travelling 45 mph.
7. The overall development plan for this shopping center calls for limiting its
tenants to using monument signs and wall signs only.
8. The methodology for computing sign area that each character be counted
individually has been used by the County in calculating the Ames sign (Rio
Hills VA 88-57 and Pier 1 Imports VA 91-15). If this is a significant issue,
The Gardens Partnership would agree to a computational method of counting
an entire group of characters. However, the real issue is that the small
local merchant who takes one space should be guaranteed a minimal amount
of signage (as requested - 40 square feet).
9. The Gardens Partnership would submit an update of each tenant's signage as
computed against the total frontage (774 feet). The reason The Gardens
Partnership would not exceed the total using a minimum of 40 square feet
per tenant is because approximately 60-80% of tenants in all Shopping
Centers occupy multiple units without maximizing the total allowable
signage. In the alternative, The Gardens Partnership would request a ratio
of 1 1/2 square foot of sign area to 1 linear foot of business frontage per
business. The point is that perspective tenants require signage in order to
operate a retail business. Any administrative issues can be managed.
Board of Zoning Appeals
of Albemarle County
April 10, 1992
Page 5
For the foregoing reasons, The Gardens Partnership L. P. requests that the Board
approve the variance request because the strict application of the ordinance would
produce undue hardship of a nature not shared generally by other properties in the
same zoning district and vicinity, and because the variance will not be of
substantial detriment to adjacent property and the character of the district will not
be changed by granting the variance.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
2/eloy
Michael J. Mellon
cc: Amelia M. Patterson, Zoning Administrator
Robert Kroner, Esquire