Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA199300031 Action Letter 1993-09-15 J 1� COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Zoning 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596 coRfitifiMpy September 15, 1993 Andrew Dracopoli Worrell Land & Cattle Co. P. O. Box 5386 Charlottesville, VA 22905 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Action Tax Map 78, Parcel 20B Dear Mr. Dracopoli: This letter is to inform you that on September 14, 1993, during the meeting of the Albemarle County Board of Zoning Appeals, the Board (3:0) unanimously approved your request for VA-93-31, subject to the following conditions: 1) The sign shall be in substantial compliance with the sign drawings submitted by the applicant. 2) Landscaping plan for the entrance shall be approved by the Design Planner. 3) Lighting plan for the sign shall be approved by the Design Planner. The variance approval allows relief from Section 4.15.12.6 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance to increase the number of freestanding signs from 1 to 2. If you have any questions, please contact our office. S ir/-rely, John Grady Deputy Zoning Administrator JG/sp STAFF PERSON: John Grady PUBLIC HEARING: September 14, 1993 STAFF REPORT - VA-93-31 OWNER/APPLICANT: Worrell Land and Cattle Company LC TAX MAP/PARCEL: 78/20B ZONING: Planned Development Mixed Commercial ACREAGE: 7.116 acres LOCATION: On the south side of Route 250 East, approximately 1/2 mile west of the Route 250 and I-64 interchange. REQUEST: The applicant seeks a variance from Section 4.15.12.6 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance to increase the number of freestanding signs from one (1) to two (2). The applicant has withdrawn the request to reduce the setback from 5 (five) to 4 (four) feet. The proposed sign will now meet the five (5) foot minimum setback requirement for this district. The proposed signs will be approximately fourteen (14) square feet each and will be mounted within an inset of the retaining walls on each side of the entrance. The sign material will consist of a slate panel with sandblasted metallic gold lettering. The applicant's justification includes: 1) The sign ordinance does not offer a category for subdivision signs in the PD-MC district. This creates an undue hardship as the plans for this development show a residential subdivision to be built within this district. 2) The aggregate area of the proposed signs will not exceed the sign area allowed by the ordinance for a freestanding sign in this district. 3) The proposed sign has been well designed using natural materials such as brick and slate. This will be an effective and aesthetically compatible sign for both Peter Jefferson Place and the entrance corridor. RELEVANT HISTORY: There are recent applications for this parcel that have been approved by the Board of Supervisors and Architectural Review Board. ZMA-92-12 (application plan) and SP-92-66 (residential use within a C-1 zone) were approved by the Board of Supervisors on March 17, 1993; ARB- P(SDP)-93-01 was reviewed and approved by the Architectural Review Board. The Architectural Review Board's recommendation to the Board of Zoning Appeals is to approve the two (2) entrance signs as submitted with the following conditions: 1) Landscaping plan shall be approved by the Design Planner. 2) Lighting plan shall be approved by the Design Planner. STAFF REPORT - VA 31 Page 2 STAFF COMMENT AND RECOMMENDATION: Staff concurs with the applicant's justification. In addition staff offers additional comments for the Board's consideration. Staff intends to recommend this type of dual entrance sign for the Board of Supervisors approval in the next set of amendments to the sign ordinance. This will allow commercial and residential complexes of this nature to split sign area and create dual entrance signs. At this time dual entrance signs are only allowed in the PUD, PRD, and the remaining residential zones. The applicant has blended together artificial and natural elements to create a well defined entrance sign. The proposed signage is also four (4) square feet smaller than the aggregate allowed in this district. The right-of-way margin along Route 250 at this location makes the proposed sign approximately fifty (50) to sixty (60) feet from edge of pavement. Therefore, for the above reasons, staff recommends approval for cause: 1) The applicant has provided evidence that the strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship. Given the design of the entrance and the sign setback, one sign would not be adequately visible. Also, staff intends to offer this type of signage to the business community in its next set of amendments to the sign ordinance. 2) The applicant has provided evidence that such hardship is not shared generally by other properties in the same zoning district and the same vicinity. Staff is unaware of any other large scale and/or mixed commercial and residential use that does not allow a sign of this type to identify its entrance. The closet compariable is UREF's University Research Park. 3) The applicant has provided evidence that the authorization of such variance will not be of substantial detriment to the adjacent property and that the character of the district will not be changed by the granting of the variance. The proposed signage is unobtrusive yet large enough to identify the entrance to this complex. This sign has been designed to be aesthetically compatible, rather than detrimental to adjacent property. The proposed sign has also received the approval of the Architectural Review Board. Should the Board find cause for approval, staff recommends the following conditions: 1) The sign shall be in substantial compliance with the sign drawings submitted by the applicant. 2) Landscaping plan for the entrance shall be approved by the Design Planner. 3) Lighting plan for the sign shall be approved by the Design Planner.