Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA199800002 Review Comments 1998-03-03 STAFF PERSON: Jan Sprinkle PUBLIC HEARING: March 3, 1998 STAFF REPORT VA 98-02 OWNER/APPLICANT: Innkeeper Properties, Inc. TAX/MAP/PARCEL: 61 Z/03-11 C ZONING: PUD, Planned Unit Development-Commercial 4. Er, ACREAGE: 2.621 LOCATION: Southeast quadrant of the intersection of Rt. 29 and Branchlands Boulevard REQUEST: The applicant requests relief from Section 4.15.12.4, height of signs in the PUD zoning district, which has a maximum height of 12 feet for a freestanding sign. A variance of 13 feet is requested to allow a freestanding sign to be 25 feet. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND VARIANCE JUSTIFICATION: This property was created and acquired by the applicant on September 4, 1996. A final site plan for the Fairfield Inn was approved on April 24, 1997. Although the property has frontage on Rt. 29, the building site is at a much lower elevation than the roadway. The elevation of Rt. 29 varies along the frontage from approximately 474 feet at the high end to approximately 465 feet at the low end, while the hotel's finished floor elevation is 443 feet. With this variation, a traveler approaching the property from the south sees only the roof of the building and would not be able to see a 12-foot sign behind the guardrail. From the north, the entire building is visible, but is tucked back behind the Applebee's restaurant that is between the hotel and Branchlands Boulevard. A sign meeting the ordinance would be difficult to see due to the adjacent slope and the viewing angle from the southbound lane of Rt. 29. The purpose of the sign ordinance is to allow a business to advertise its location or commodity. Proper site identification also allows approaching traffic the proper time to safely adjust to the proper turn lanes. Due to the limited visibility of a sign that meets our ordinance, neither of these would occur in this case. The Fairfield Inn sign has already received Architectural Review Board approval of its style, color and material composition at the either the 12- or the 25-foot height. RELEVANT HISTORY: SP 96-19 was approved on August 14, 1996 to allow a 121- room hotel to be constructed on this site. The property was previously vacant. There have been a number of variances approved in the Branchlands PUD through the years, but none affect this parcel. Similar to this request, VA 95-08 was approved on June 6, 1995 to allow a 20-foot freestanding sign for Applebee's Restaurant. N VA 98-02 Page 2 March 10, 1998 Reviews of the variance criteria provided by the applicant and comments by staff follow. Hardship The applicant asserts hardship for the following reasons: • Our hotel business will rely upon being visible from U.S. 29. • Strict application of the ordinance would not allow us to have a visible sign along the U.S. 29 right-of-way. • A 12-foot tall sign would be too short to be visible because of the steep slope and guardrail located above the sign. This would be very detrimental to our business. Staff agrees that the hardship as described qualifies under the Code of Virginia for the granting of a variance. The exceptional topographic conditions of the parcel and the extraordinary situation of the roadway immediately adjacent to it effectively prohibit the use of a sign that would meet our ordinance. A 12-foot sign placed at the required 5- foot setback would have its top edge at an elevation of 468 feet. With the elevation of the roadway at 466 feet and a 28-inch guardrail separating the road from the steep slope, it would be impossible for motorists from the south to see the sign. 1. The applicant has provided evidence that the strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship. Uniqueness of Hardship The applicant comments: • Our property is unique in that it is adjacent to U.S. 29, but it is at a much lower elevation than the roadway. • Businesses on more level sites don't share our visibility problem. • Applebee's has a similar hardship, but to a lesser degree. Their signage problem was remedied by a variance allowing a taller sign. Staff agrees that this hardship is not shared generally by other properties in the same vicinity and zoning district—only Applebee's which has already received a variance. 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. Impact on Character of the Area The applicant offers: • The allowance of additional sign height would not be detrimental to the district or adjacent properties. H.1GENERALI SHAREIBLD&ZONIJANIVA98-02.doc VA 98-02 Page 3 March 10, 1998 • The net effect of the taller sign as viewed from U.S. 29 would be that our sign does not appear any taller than signs of other nearby businesses. Staff agrees that the 25-foot sign will be essentially the same as if the property were on the same level as Rt. 29. (The elevation at the base of the sign [452'] plus the 25 feet equals 478, while the elevation of Rt. 29 [466'] plus 12 feet equals 478.) The adjacent properties are all commercial, have their own freestanding signs and will not be affected by the addition of this sign. 3. The applicant has 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. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Since the applicant has met all criteria for approval of a variance, staff recommends approval with the following condition: • The landscaping materials for the base of the sign, as shown on the approved landscape plan, shall be planted with the installation of the sign or no later than the next planting season. H:I GENERAL I SHAREIBLD&ZONIJANI VA98-02.doc