The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutVA199400015 Review Comments 1994-11-09 STAFF PERSON: John Grady PUBLIC HEARING: November 9, 1994 STAFF REPORT - VA-94-15 OWNER/APPLICANT: D. C. Partnership TAX MAP/PARCELS: 45/153, 154, 155, 157, 158 ZONING: CO, Commercial Office ACREAGE: 3.254 acres LOCATION: On the west side of Berkmar Drive, .1 mile north of the Rio Road and Berkmar Drive intersection. REQUEST: The applicant requests relief from Section 4.15.12(c) of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, which states: "Freestanding signs shall be permitted in all districts to those lots with one hundred (100) feet or more of continuous highway right-of-way frontage." The applicant proposes to place freestanding signs on five lots, 153, 154, 155, 157, and 158 within Greenfields Court that do not have one hundred feet of highway frontage. The applicant does not have any design or color guidelines for the signs at this time. The applicant's justification includes the following: Hardship The loss of freestanding signs limits the marketability of the lots. Some buildings could be approximately one hundred (100) feet from the road and limit the readability of wall signs for customers and emergency vehicles. This subdivision was approved prior to any sign limitations or the adoption of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance. Furthermore the commercial park was not established to circumvent any County requirements. Uniqueness of Hardship Businesses adjacent to this commercial subdivision and in this vicinity either have freestanding signs or the ability to erect freestanding signs. STAFF REPORT - VA-94-15 Page 2 Character of the Area The proposed signs would meet the location and size limitations currently allowed in the commercial district. Furthermore, County staff can limit any visual impact on adjacent properties by review of site plans and proposed sign requests. RELEVANT HISTORY: N/A RECOMMENDATION: The primary purpose for the one-hundred (100) feet of frontage limitation was to reduce the amount of freestanding visual clutter in commercial districts. It is staff's opinion that in small commercial parks such as Greenfields that limited speed limits, approximately ten (10) to twenty (20) miles an hour would lead to better wall sign identification and negate the need for large freestanding signs. The road that serves Greenfields Court is short in length and ends in a cul- de-sac which supports staff's opinion concerning slower speeds and adequate business identification by the use of wall signs. Staff agrees with the applicant on part one of the criteria that a strict application of the ordinance may produce undue hardship. The depth of a couple of the lots together with narrow frontages along the cul-de-sac could push building sites to the rear of the lot to accommodate parking and landscaping thus limiting the visibility of wall signs. However, staff does not feel like the applicant has met the remaining criteria necessary for approval and therefore must recommend denial for cause. (2) The applicant has not provided evidence that such hardship is not shared generally by other properties in the same zoning district and the same vicinity; Several lots located in Berkmar Park which are in the same vicinity of Greenfields Court share the hardship of frontages with less than one-hundred (100) feet thus restricting the use of freestanding signs. (3) The applicant has not provided evidence that the authorization of such variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property and that the character of the district will not be changed by the granting of the variance; It is staff's opinion that authorization of the request on small frontage lots will add to the visual clutter along the County's commercial strips and diminish the aesthetic quality that staff is trying to create. Should the Board find cause to approve a variance in this case, staff would recommend one of the following options listed below. STAFF REPORT - VA-94-15 Page 3 In the options listed below the applicant shall be required to develop a comprehensive sign package for the entire site. All of the lots within Greenfields Court are undeveloped and under the same ownership at this time. This should aid the owner in development of a comprehensive sign package for staff review. Staff should also point out that parcels 152 and 159 exceed the frontage requirement for a freestanding sign. However, the applicant in an effort to create sign uniformity within Greenfields Court has agreed to restrict the aggregate freestanding sign area from thirty-two (32) square feet to sixteen (16) square feet each for lots 152 and 159. Staff recommends that the signs shall be of the same aggregate size, height and style. Staff will address the colors used on the signs on an individual basis. Option I Parcel 152 shall be limited to one (1) freestanding sign not to exceed sixteen (16) square feet and one (1) freestanding site location sign not to exceed thirty-two (32) square feet. The thirty-two (32) square foot site location sign shall be for site location only and shall not contain individual business names on logos. Parcels 153 and 154 will share a thirty-two (32) square foot sign. Parcels 155 and 157 will share a thirty-two (32) square foot sign. Parcels 158 and 159 will share a thirty-two (32) square foot sign. Furthermore, each parcel shall be limited to no more than sixteen (16) square feet per sign face. Option II Parcel 152 shall be limited to one (1) freestanding site location sign not to exceed thirty-two(32) square feet and one (1) freestanding business sign not to exceed sixteen (16) square feet. The freestanding site location sign shall not display individual business names or their logos. Each of the remaining parcels, 153 through 159, shall be limited to one (1) freestanding sign a piece. Furthermore, each sign shall be limited to no more than sixteen (16) square feet of sign area. IOT 3 LOT 4 \ LOT 5 I.OT 2 j w 0 WELL LOT 4° 0. 194 Ac. LOT 9 0 634 Ac. LOT 20 LOT 10 0.558 Ac. T.M.P 45-94 D B. 1329. P.80 (Plat) `S 1 14 LOT 8 0 483 Ac. _OT 19 I 771 32 ill 611grt.- — 5,04 LOT 11 i 0.357 Ac. LOT 7 .......,,. 0 298 Ac. sz 0 .34,0 d LOT 18 Ili 6/0/L LOT 6 i LOT 12 0 0.298 Ac. D IIRo1 �*4 � / , . i, Rev. LOT 5 / 6,64 /0644$AIS 1 0.432 AC. I ' i tak.#10°' 0 7 ,‘c; 32 46 s,Tfi oPl' �P��PP /6 fr ,oa c,$1 1l 0' PLAT SHOWING LOTS 5 to 11 AND THE WELL LOT GREENFIELDS COURT i , OFF BERKMAR DRIVE EXTENDED / NORTH OF CHARLOTTESVILLE CHARLOTTESVILLE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT ROUDABUSH. GALE. AND ASSOCIATES ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION SURVEYORS. PLANNERS. ENGINEERS o4e unurtrriin nnen • 4 I01- 3 LOT 4 \ LOT 5 LOT 2 w 0 WELL LOT i 0.194 Ac. LOT 9 0.634 Ac. LOT 20 LOT 10 0.558 Ac. T.M P. 45-94 !67 Skid D.B. 1329. P.80 (Plat) )1i LOT 8 gp it sU� C 0 483 Ac. _OT 19 rg ------ 411 LOT 11 \N 0 357 A \ LOT 7 L. \\ 0.298 Ac. 1.-- Ib cb 11614 \ /4473I(- M LOT 18 —� LOT 6 i LOT 12 0 0.298 Ac. �ci� Ito s4 0 (A I 61 Ill 0 fil.i014 dna ti..Z /� $i�g / W� W AppRo�tiwo� { w i� / J , �` / / 5/4N /oc + I0?4S 1 0B432LAAc.5 ) i % 4,04''''''' 3 2 ItI s trk \ oP,4•z /oc4;04 S14/4 *-P��P PLAT SHOWING LOTS 5 to 11 AND THE WELL LOT / GREENFIELDS COURT OFF BERKMAR DRIVE EXTENDED / NORTH OF CHARLOTTESVILLE CHARLOTTESVILLE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT ROUDABUSH, GALE. AND ASSOCIATES ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION SURVEYORS. PLANNERS. ENGINEERS 914 MnNrtrfiin anon