The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutVA199900003 Review Comments 1999-02-02 STAFF PERSON: Jan Sprinkle PUBLIC HEARING: February 2, 1999 STAFF REPORT VA-99-03 OWNER/APPLICANT: Donald E. Seal/Virginia Oil Company TAX MAP/PARCEL: 56A1/01-124 ZONING: C1 , Commercial and EC, Entrance Corridor ACREAGE: 0.775 (33,766 square feet) LOCATION: Northwest corner of the intersection of Rts. 240 (3 Notch'd Rd.), 788 (Railroad Av.) and 810 (Crozet Av.) near the center of the Crozet community. TECHNICAL REQUEST AND EXPLANATION: The applicant requests relief from Section 21 .7, [General Commercial] Minimum Yard Requirements, which states, in part: 21.7.2 Adjacent to residential and rural areas districts: No off-street parking or loading space shall be located closer than twenty (20) feet to any residential or rural areas district. and, 21.7.3 Buffer zone adjacent to residential and rural areas districts: No construction activity including grading or clearing of vegetation shall occur closer than twenty (20) feet to any residential or rural areas district. Screening shall be provided as required in section 32.7.9. Two variances are requested. The first, from Section 21 .7.2, is to allow parking 10 feet from the adjacent R2 zoning district—a variance of 10 feet. The second, from Section 21.7.3, is to allow grading, clearing, and the construction of retaining walls up to the parcel line adjacent to the R2 district—a variance of 20 feet. The applicant proposes to raze this entire site and replace the existing structures with one new gas station-convenience store-restaurant of approximately 4000 square feet. To accomplish this some grading and clearing will be needed as well as constructing retaining walls along the northern property line to allow full use of the parcel. Currently, there is graveled parking for customers of the gas station and storage of cars, car parts, farm implements and tires along that boundary, approximately ten feet from the property line. The applicant's plan is to clear out all of that storage area and construct retaining walls to keep his development at a higher elevation than the adjoining house. With this plan, the parking area for the new business will replace the stored materials. The new parking will be no closer to the residence and will appear more orderly. Staff opinion is that the impact of removing the existing vegetation can be mitigated by screening landscaping that can be required during the site plan review for the new construction. VA99-03 Staff Report Page 2 February 2, 1999 RELEVANT HISTORY: This site was developed as a full service gas station prior to our first zoning ordinance in Albemarle County. The parcel was combined out of three small pieces in 1986. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND QUALIFYING CONDITIONS: This 0.77-acre parcel is small for the type of commercial development desired by the applicant. Other sites in the County which have been developed as combination gas station and convenience stores have been in excess of one acre. Three older retrofitted gas station sites averaged 0.89 acres. In examining these other six sites, staff found that the building coverage of the sites ranged from 6.90% to 13.59%. The new construction will meet the zoning ordinance setbacks for the buildings and gas pumps including the canopy. The shape of this parcel is somewhat odd due to the rectangular portion in the rear or northern-most corner. Due to the prior development, the topography is fairly level with a gradual slope from Rt. 788 downward toward the adjacent residential property to the north. The subject parcel is very restricted by yard requirements. There is approximately 19,500 square feet, or 58% of the parcel, within either the right-of-way for Rt. 810, the 30-foot front yards adjacent to Rts. 810 and 788, or the 50-foot building setback from the adjoining residential district. Only the remaining 14,000sf or 42% can be used for buildings. Although not approaching confiscation, the strict application of the ordinance in this case does unreasonably restrict this property. The parcel is developed with a cinderblock building currently used for storage, Seal's Exxon station (including two gas pump islands), and an old trailer also used for storage. All of these structures are nonconforming due to their encroachment into the front yards. The three buildings total approximately 4800 sf. The applicant proposes to remove all of these, as well as all the junk parts and inoperative vehicles that cover a large portion of the site. Although a site plan has not been submitted, the applicant has stated that he intends to construct one building that would contain a gas station, convenience store and some type of food service/restaurant. (He has specifically said no fast food and no drive through.) His current plan indicates a building of approximately 4000 square feet (not inclusive of the canopy) which requires a minimum of 20 parking spaces. This reduction in total square footage of interior space is indicative of the applicant's desire to develop the site proportionally rather than attempt to overdevelop. Using the 4000sf building, the coverage proposed is 11 .85% of the total site which fits within the range of the other six sites examined above. This parcel is located in the center of the Community of Crozet. Our Comprehensive Plan recommendation for Crozet states in part: • Strengthen the downtown as a shopping area, and the focal point of the Crozet Community by encouraging all new commercial uses to locate in the downtown as opposed to Rt. 250. • Encourage new commercial development in the downtown through redevelopment, reuse of existing structures and infill development. New development should occur in a style, scale and setback in keeping with traditional buildings. C:IJAN'SIJANVARIVA99-03.doc VA99--03 Staff Report Page 3 February 2, 1999 To redevelop this central site will help meet these goals. The variance to reduce the parking setback and buffer requirements will allow the applicant to replace the existing nonconforming parking and storage of cars and assorted junk with neatly aligned parking stalls and to bring the site into conformance by way of variance and screening. This control afforded by the site plan review will improve the residential neighbor's view. Without the parking variance, the applicant may determine that it is not economically feasible to do the necessary clearing, grading and retaining walls that could "clean up" this storage area. Without the buffer variance, the applicant can apply to the Planning Commission for a modification of the buffer requirements, but again, may choose not to do anything at all in that area due to the expense if there is no parking allowed. APPLICANT'S JUSTIFICATION AND STAFF COMMENT: A review of the variance criteria provided by the applicant and comments by staff follows: Hardship The applicant comments that the variance is necessary: • The corner placement of this parcel together with the shape, depth and setbacks leaves only 61% of the site unusable for buildings. • Because canopy covered pump islands are subject to the building setbacks, and the safest place for these structures and parking is away from the road intersection, the structures will effectively shut off the rear portion of the parcel. • The 20-foot buffer eliminates 4, 072 square feet of parking use. • The economic viability of the service station at this location is dead. Other services are needed to make the use viable and these create pressure on parking requirements. Although our numbers are slightly different, staff agrees with the applicant that the site is unreasonably restricted. The severity of restricting 58% of the site does qualify as hardship under the Code of Virginia relating to granting a variance. Granting both the parking and buffer variances will add sufficient usuable area to accommodate the proposed construction. 1. The applicant has provided evidence that the strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship. Uniqueness of Hardship The applicant notes: • We see no parallel situation in downtown Crozet that sits at a similar crossroads configuration with this projected use. C.IJAN'SIJANVARIVA99-03 doc VA99:-03 Staff Report Page 4 February 2, 1999 Staff also finds this to be an unusual situation where there are two road frontages and the commercial-to-residential setback. All commercial parcels must follow the same setbacks, but this parcel is unique in the amount of land restricted. 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: • Virginia Oil has proven at other locations its commitment to architectural design sensitive to its physical surroundings. Virginia Oil will provide many services much needed in the downtown Crozet area with the departure of this service station and the Crozet Pharmacy. • The current gravel drive is located at or about 10 feet from the property line in question. Virginia Oil through retaining walls and plantings will greatly improve this situation. • Thus, this variance greatly enhances the character and economic viability of Crozet. Staff agrees that allowing the existing parking/storage area that is already only ten feet from the property line to be cleaned up and brought into conformance by variance will not change the character of the district. Similarly, allowing the grading and construction of retaining walls may even improve the adjacent property. 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 all three criteria have been met, staff recommends approval of both variances. If the Board finds cause to approve only one request, please consider the following: a) The parking variance could be approved without the buffer variance. The applicant could then ask the Planning Commission to authorize a modification to the buffer. However, without either the BZA or PC's modification of the buffer, the parking would be unusable. Therefore, if the intention is to allow the parking, it would be best to approve both and leave only the screening to be determined at site plan review. b) To approve the buffer without the parking would not accomplish the goal of more usuable space which is the basis for the positive responses to the criteria. If the buffer variance is approved, to insure protection of the adjacent residential property, staff recommends the following condition: 1. Planning staff review of the site plan to insure that: - minimum screening requirements of Section 32.7.9 shall be met; and, - existing landscaping in excess of minimum requirements shall be substantially restored. C:IJAN'SIJANVARIVA99-03.doc ALBEMARLE COUNTY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COUNTY OFFICE BUILDING 401 MCINTIRE ROAD MEETING ROOM #241, 2:00 P.M. DRAFT AGENDA TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 2, 1999 I. Call to Order II. Establish a Quorum III. Variance Public Hearings VA-98-32 Charles Dunnivan, et al Estate Staff Person: Amelia McCulley VA-99-01 Carlton and Nancy Luck Staff Person Amelia McCulley VA-99-02 Rio Associates Limited Partnership (owner) Interspace (applicant) Staff Person Jan Sprinkle VA-99-03 Donald E. Seal (owner) Virginia Oil Company (applicant) Staff Person Jan Sprinkle IV. Old Business V. New Business VA-98-30 Phillip & Katharine Buchanan Applicant Request for Rehearing VI. Adjournment C:\i:\zonmg\bzal\agenda for Dec 1 meeting.doc SCALE F = 20' zo 0 o m _ � w L cu H SCALE IN FEET 1 H 0 cn Q epic �a a 0, J J W � r � w H H SANITARY M. H. TOP=701.06 I ZO H TMP 56A (1) -123 INV=694 06 w x o ZONED C-1 '77.83 CD — --- — — VJt1'5B'3!" \ SANITARY M.H. TOP=695.93 \ rNV=699.13 En } W I TMP 56A (1) -125 y e U) w ZONED C-1 Q a Z y 5 2\ o W d LLI O Z �ASPNALT I- 4 O W J N38 3 '55"E �. t'• � TEL.G ELEC. 7 A POLE ~ IRON 7 _. - REVISIONS SITE OBSERVATIONS• FNO I 1 STORY I BUILDING 1. TOTAL SITE SQUARE FOOTAGE: 33,766 i BLOCK i F. F. 2. TOTAL SITE USABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE CIO ONOTIN HEATING OIL TAW I9 h on FOR BUILDINGS: 13,241 I PR&PA� • O raNk !� OHEaTA TM 3. PERCENTAGE OF NON -USABLE AREA FOR a I�¢ i ZONED R-220 DATE DECEMBER 22, i99e BUILDING 61 WANTS: 4. CURRENT BUILDING VIOLATES SET -BACKS. y K cs 1. THROUGH THE USE OF BUFFER SCALE a Q FIL ) `0 P°"`s "- MG�ITGp� �' wEL, MATERIAL AND GRADE CONTROL 5. PUMP ISLANDS WITH CANOPIES WOULD ��. DEVICES RETAINING WALLS ETC. VIOLATE SET BACKS. o ) VIRGINIA OIL 6. EXISTING GRAVEL AREA ` p G'�sTG� 9� �Q I BE ALLOWED TO PARK 10 FEET FROM PROPERTY LINE CONTOUR INTERVAL 2 FEET FOR PARKING AND �F STORAGE IS SET AT +/- 10 FROM RESIDENTIAL p I ADJACENT TO R-2 ZONED PARCEL. PROPERTY LINE. p /SlA�oti MONITOR I NELL cc \�\\7 ul MONITOR Q ; • WELL ASPHALT� NO ® FND. i ii M. V. II�1 IRONN RHO. F-1 `.CONC: StOEWALK 'tl '6UYS -C N ArrQy TEC M., w v m RIONT - OF NAY W.V. a tL H Z lz Z Q i, .. .... 5a0.-'5fi14 "IL 1 �D7 - y ___—__—__—_ _ — —i H H N ¢ O (D "j u > 5 CROZET AVENUE ST. RT. B10 30 NT-OF-WA Q ¢ a ID W H > i T TEL. En EL 6 STORM RESCUE -.t AD POLE mi �..� N a > 0 ~ UY m POLE GRATE STOP SIGNETSIGN SIGN Z J Cc.) H H En X W EXHIBIT "A" FILE NUMBER 6985 SHEET