Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA199600003 Review Comments 1996-03-05 .iy v:?aCr COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Zoning, Room 223 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5875 FAX (804) 972-4035 TDD (804) 972-4012 February 22, 1996 David Sutton Tiger Fuel Company P 0 Box 1607 Charlottesville, VA 22902 RE: Variance Application, VA-96-03 Tax Map 78, Parcel 4 Dear Applicant: For your convenience and to allow you to organize your thoughts prior to the Board of Zoning Appeals meeting on Tuesday, March 5, 1996, please find attached the staff report for your case Sincerely, Jan Sprinkle Zoning Assistant JS/db STAFF PERSON: Jan Sprinkle PUBLIC HEARING: March 5, 1996 STAFF REPORT VA-96-03 OWNER/APPLICANT: Star Enterprise/Tiger Fuel Company TAX MAP/PARCEL: 78/4 ZONING: HC, Highway Commercial ACREAGE: 0.877 acres LOCATION: The northwestern quadrant of the intersection of Rt. 250 and Rt. 20 at Pantops. REQUEST: The applicant seeks relief from Section 21.7,1, Minimum Yard Requirements, which states, "No portion of any structure, except signs, shall be erected closer than thirty feet to any public street right-of-way." A variance of 26 feet is requested to decrease the front yard setback from 30 to 4 feet for the construction of a gas pump canopy. The entire proposal includes one building which will have a gas station, convenience store and a Wendy's restaurant. The canopy will not be attached to the building. The applicant's justification includes the following: 1. The taking of additional right-of-way by VDOT forced the demolition of the existing canopy and pump islands. The taking of r/w created a severe hardship by reducing the useable land and making it very difficult if not impossible to locate a building and canopy on the remaining lot. 2. Other properties were not reduced in size or were allowed to keep their improvements as they existed prior to VDOT's taking as grandfathered uses. 3. The character of the district is highway commercial with gas stations, convenience stores and fast food restaurants adjoining the property. The r/w owned by VDOT is excessive (35') and results in the canopy being forty feet from the road surface so it will not appear to be close to the road. RELEVANT HISTORY: This site was developed as a full service gas station prior to our first zoning ordinance in Albemarle County. There are several files of violations, variances and sign permits in our office but none are currently applicable. The site has been unused for several years. Currently, SP-95-32 was approved on December 13, 1995 to allow a drive-through window for the proposed Wendy's Restaurant. STAFF REPORT - VA-96-03 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: The applicant's justification for this variance relies heavily upon VDOT's taking for the widening of both Routes 20 and 250. However, this justification is misplaced in this case. Condemnation proceedings are the forum designed to compensate the landowner for losses due to this type of action; not variance requests. The plan before you which was presented in support of the Special Use Permit request for a drive-through window for a Wendy's restaurant also includes both a gas station and a convenience store. This parcel still has sufficient space to have any one of the proposed uses, but not necessarily all of the proposed uses. Restaurants and drive-through windows are recognized as intensive development in our Zoning Ordinance. That is the reason for the high parking standard (13 spaces per 1000 square feet of gross area) and the Special Use Permit requirement for drive-through windows. Please consider also that the Architectural Review Board has not reviewed this site plan. In reviewing other sites with canopies, the ARB has stated that they prefer the canopy to be attached to and to be an integral part of the building as opposed to the freestanding style shown here. If this canopy were attached, it may or may not require a variance depending on the site design. There is no hardship involved when reasonable use of the land exists. The site was previously used as a gas station and can still be used as a gas station. The applicant further states that other properties in the area were not reduced or were allowed to keep their improvements and grand fathered uses. This site may have lost its pump island and canopy, but the building still exists and still meets setbacks. There is sufficient area to replace both the gas pumps and the canopy and to meet setbacks. Although several variances have been granted for retrofitting canopies on older sites to allow them to modernize and meet the gas companies' current standards, the BZA has not approved a request like this for new development. This site has been unused as a gas station for several years and the owner is proposing to raze the existing building and is essentially starting from an undeveloped stage. Other sites in our commercial zoning districts which have been recently developed as combination gas station and convenience stores have been in excess of one acre. Similarly, the newest individual fast food restaurants have been on one-acre-plus sites while three older sites in the Pantops area have averaged 0.893 acres, closer to this site's 0.877-acre size. To attempt to combine these three uses and/or to build the proposed size may be overdeveloping the site. Staff recommends denial for cause: 1) The applicant has not provided evidence that the strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship; Staff opinion is that there would be sufficient space for some development such as the combined gas station and convenience store complete with pump islands and canopy and STAFF REPORT - VA-96-03 Page 3 the site would still meet all the applicable setbacks. It is also possible that the restaurant alone could be developed without variance. The strict application of the terms of this ordinance does not effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict the use of the property. 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; All properties in the same area and the same zoning district will have to meet the same setbacks. Other properties are corner lots or have been reduced in size by highway acquisition. 3) The applicant has provided evidence that the authorization of such variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property. The applicant has not provided evidence that the character of the district will not be changed by the granting of the variance. Staff agrees that approval of the variance to allow the canopy as shown on the site plan would not be detrimental to the adjacent properties. The corner of the canopy closest to the existing pavement of either road is 31 feet. The Architectural Review Board will also review any site plan and signage proposed on this site since both Rts. 20 and 250 are Entrance Corridors. Their review will insure that the development is aesthetically pleasing. Should the Board find cause to approve this request, staff recommends the following conditions: 1. Development of the canopy shall be in general accord with the site plan entitled "Pantops Texaco" by B. Aubrey Huffman and Associates, revision dated 2-16-96. 2. Any future construction shall comply with the setbacks or shall require amendment of this variance.