Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
VA200300001 Review Comments 2003-05-06
Ma Martha Jefferson Outpatient Care Center , _ _ . . _, t t, ,,,„,, t_ t .______ _ , .. _ . _ . L, r-.11-1 .` iMartha ,, i ' Jefferson per h-----A------(11 • 1 4 ;75).-- -----.. ._ L -116.' - 1 ----' :-.c-' '.---/ ii t _ }' f _ -# k- -/ i 1 Exterior Signage Zoning Board of Appeals Review January 29, 2003 Prepared by: corbin 109 East Front 304 Traverse City,MI 49684 231 947.1236 - _ _ ' a,- `^ Outpatient Care Center 1 --- --- ---- _ _ \\ l�-A Exterior 6 T \ (� Location Plan \ C...) i i t t_---- ----+- �\i \\ vi (�� 1) Release Date Note • 1 C �`\iai (� \ (J 0 i1i�!'. r '•" A . 1 12 26 02 Preliminary Study (,, I II rp C --� �_ �`t��<\\_ •`, \ 2 1 9 03 Electrical Specs '1 " - "� f-f ��bV \ JJ 3 1 29 03 For Review 110 i • �� Proposed Caduceus Proposed Entrance i'y Icon sign' ��s1 Legend ________ _________ .,___ x \Identification Sign r1r •J/ (Outpatient Care Center) Proposed Building�J� o IM Main ID&Address sign ;�__ / �_ �\� (Int Ilium w/standard stone bas M`"� entification Sign �w�' .1 • i DV Directional Sign(Int Ilium) '`T?1 1 lip �f a Vii \ Mi;I�� r ID-3 Directional Info Sign(Int Ilium) ------------,-J I--Al. F. ) ii 664 P . \ Oj Q• DP Pedestrian Walkway Sign �Q• �\\•_ \\ �i IB Building ID(on building,Int Illurt • 8117 %%Ii �` O d — M� - IE Entrance ID(on canopy,Int.Illurt •� b • 6 / )ooc DR Donor Recognition(on building) Qa \\ 6. • '1•a 6\\4 !� Proposed Building ❑ LD Loading Dock ID Sign %1 ° v Identification Sign ji _• b &P V- �'6‘ CI Caduceus Icon .t - --. / , !j - 5 % R.1 No Entry Regulatory +" / R.2 Stop Regulatory i i s N., ` / Q3 R.3 Permit Parking::u:: c06 6 i0q R 4 Permit Parking Regula ""e1 '• AS R.5 Fire Lane Regulatory 1ID t srar SI�_ i/ 06 R.6 Drop-off Only Regulatory �, Proposed Entrance, STOP .7 0 0 Identification Sign Signs to be considered by the °j=_.=�- /��o 1 1 s (Urge-rirCare) Zoning Board of Appeals 3 h. . 1 II 1 P. P .3' 1, ,_ la I� in_ 3 i 1; 1, Provide 20A circuit breaker for signs requiring power. \\ \ Provide weather protected (NEMA 3R junction box at proposed center of N sign cabinet. 0 Et 1115111&. Martha Jefferson Hospital �_ _ p P \ j61 Jg% Outpatient Care Center ems_" 1 Charlottesville, VA .�, ► �,r/�, •'• ir Ahl Corbin gip Aftlilli"7 �l4 109 East Front 304 •�� i Traverse City,MI 49684 Me/ / cTh ` P C \ 231 947.1236 -Phase Descript' Main Building ID Outpatient Care Center ,` � (� 1 01.03.03 PreliDesign Study /J�C� ^ 2 01 14 03 Desi n Presentation O ���)► 4 01 22 03 Refined Design OSCALE 1/2"= 1'-0"(on an 11x17 sheet) NORTH ELEVATION • 5"thick, face-lit, individual letters using white neon. 1/8"aluminum returns with frameless white acrylic faces s. to glow at night. Returns painted to match the color of the roof(dark gray).Transfomers to be housed Inside letters. 3'-4" *Jewel-trim Is NOT acceptable. 211( ` \ junction 2"thick, 1/8"aluminum, custom electrical box to 6" _ feed electrical wires. Electrical feed from building to have A one connection only(located behind this custom junction box). Box painted to match the color of the brick. 3'-4" pp, 1/2"conduit to connect the letters that do not touch the custom junction box. Estimated Area=98 ft2J Martha Jefferson Hospital Outpatient Care Center Charlottesville, VA corbin 109 East Front 304 Traverse City,MI 49684 231 947.1236 Phase Description MN Caduceus Icon Outpatient Care Center I Release Date ••-- 1 01 03 03 Preliminary Study 2 01.14 03 Design Presentation 3 01.20.03 Design Intent 4 Ol 22 03 Refinement OAt e IIV SCALE: 1/2"= 1'-0"(on an 11x17 sheet) I I , O " ' " fp (11 I North Elevation Scale: 1/16"=1'-0" ISOMETRIC DETAIL NOT TO SCALE 8'-0" —1 3/16"Typ. thickness. ---3/4"Typ. spacing" — Wings 1 3/16"thick, built-upp individual acrylic pees. Back lit using white Colite Signature LED StaffPiece 410pro; or equal. Three/pieces total: wind each other. gs, staff, snakes.(LP-3) / *"IIIII" Faces and returns"painted to from l match Matthews Snakes brushed aluminum. f \ , 41&\‘‘,411 4110 ' ,, Wings (Bottom) , it" / — 6'-8" Staff(Middle) 1 Snakes (Top) r , _ . \ - I \ 4 \. v izogit frra �--� Martha Jefferson Hospital Outpatient Care Center Area=21 ft2 Charlottesville, VA Side View corbin 109 East Front 304 Traverse City,MI 49684 231 947.1236 7 .E. • k \ - i II iii if II in \411,1,, lk:i ...? ',, �;..11ik S10P , %,,� ;' ......rwilniiiiii i i . , i .., I, : t- 44 '. �%`,,, ti, .`r '� s'`1 _ "tea_` 'tr. go• r.t}- ..,:.IJ ' +I t. ilk - a 11 ..... .v N, , . _ 1• , .,,,,p....... , it • . • ,406 . . t . . ... id , .....,,, .... fi • '.' -..('‘.4• ' -... ' -• trt:',-.t. '. ‘...0 • . a ;^..$ ' .;f ':.1:0A-1:i11116:1411'4.45:.4.411:1.rdb..7.. ' 1..1 . Tra ; It\E4 .- • ....Itilig..,. • .3... • IP ,."-., ... • ,..mom TI•Nple G.4,1orgiort,,.. i A Milnrato."...411 ) 4t... --. 4 01:0.1; ( N, I • '.-.fit , ..V hr.' 1 • . . - ,, . I ,.- v:Zi•-• '-, 0 mill I 6,,." ' '•,.4410 4'..................... SI • VIII ...',...•‘,. ' • • '. .0.- i . .1 • ......$......7 ., A114 .'' • ,. SO. 1 k I.1111 I .''....'. • •.. . . 0. • I , , 1 . .._ . i . .... . . . i ..., ?r) ts'• . ;re .".• • ' , •s ,\ . .. . . . i . . .24— . , • .3,1 , .• • . . ..• . • . .1. • 1 . • a .. . .. ... „.. • Aie, • • .........i.... . '. .. • 1 ..0' . . , V . • , . • t , f 0 I c` Ey �1 -44s y�.. •t '•, ,. - • , :Km, • ,+r am. w, TL'_..4- _ -` :�t...-�.,r. - '� ^^ `r= _, -� j ! Rom. ✓ i '� �, - ow --` "+ ._ 2_ i- !c :' •.cam . - `=• �� s . • -�'ti p'y: R • L '1 V ' . • / `1\ , . _,..... ' ,,••• , or 41 1'.. ....,•'•-. .• 0.1. • ..... I 1;.., -',------ '. d. NW,,,i 0,",, it . •,. , .". ' - 1 f -..,. r" - 1 1:.,-, ,'-• -:-. .... N41, , .,0 _ _ s' . 4% • ' :7-1 ' '' • ' rejil ,, • •* ' ' ii.:4 , 'I. i 'NA d N. ,,,..A1, ‘, -,,' i , •! . . .f , , , '..t • • 4 • •I V k li 1 - • ,‘ , • . ; ' .•'\ • -j kg-1111/4110, .„,4 lifk, ... . ...., .., ;It-,:1 •- ' • "1 ••• :• 41,iii.;.9P-iit,----- • 1 .. .. ''Di?,`. 1.: '• zlit.•._ , , i .:, ..,... ::• • , - pit . hilutu, 9 at • .J.- ..... i.00,0 ___ ‘Nti-,•-•-i----44- :-- .,,f ; , „AI _. , .44 • '. i. .., 440.7-.! 1.1111.19. ..s. , •,.‘.. ,.•• %VI!N -''.' ".Y'.._ „.. '' Q. ••'It r ' lk...j , A INA' AO VI Mb/OIL', I 1 I •,—.. ‘.t+ 16241141.11/1 I iTtr41114)116. '-' .1. I I, V• •• • f , :K. tr,!.** • • . . . ' : ' s 110Por. ' -_...--, . ,.. , A Mk,- iiii P (' .k, .i, i ... .9 4,...' • . t • 4 . ..• • \ • . I.., • \ .. QS 2 C 71'(' y 4 . /014,. . ' 7. =L t flit. f� < . . , .:. • • . . if. `yob ."._ 1' , ,,. , • b it , -ram. - iii.iiiii ilk, C. c` ` , • a•• • yC ' :tii, S7; O } "11 * ,to _ 1. A . ; r • •,ft . 0 .• j a � I. I. . , 1 A it. It l .i ,op.) 44 , f • I�•I. 1 q .'1rz 0i y f A(, f 1 45 a : f I �(, `.• a �~ ',4 } 1'" I, w L `f f f f I AV i. t irillillilli , ,4%, fir. 111 i, ,r i ,i s,l., Ai ii11i1 iiaii� Jeil . IN ii 1 11 11 11 11 11 II %. SOU Inv- NilI1111g1 r „��..4 , 1 waft 04/30/03 ..--- 78„.tt r .....T______e„...ff. 'IsfAitf\ ift—it pg.r Ktegl 0 n �1 -to iiun nnii iti�ii ii�ti i'- 111 ! . �„ .17 f 'h .y ..-' fir- --_ rr n r� +®. �• L nn mr nrr T�� - r- T ; '- _4! ', r _ y ` ems- � A t th.: 11 ,` 1•- * 4 '+ • ., r $ • =1+4. , 04/30/03 Fron, Pti-er Ttf---fe,se...„ air/LW/1,y Ail i\of fdep'kDfo "'fit . ,,--� �" '`„t _ �.. r "."' •=`.. .111) tir:7 . • Z)Pl..‘ . 'f r r '4 r •• -' r,---1 ,-•lM . .r -_* ..sr. vim. ..7or+r`. •... f , 04/30/03 — • - .- - •.• ':nle.1.-:.. .,, -, 4,4.ti;,.:::??... --,‘.. . i. ..r.:N:r4... . V • imp • •,) 1'‘-. 'I 4' • •., i'' :•:.:. .' • '-' • • . . ,- :'•..,4,1, • -.- 1)14,...,. .z.i . .. -- 1- `1•••••••••••-q ot, . tepy.• ,-. . .„, •,, • l• . • .,:.. , * . , .. VI. • -- ' 4a I. -• liW zt l t:, ._.i.4, 4,-..:', • _.,1,;:: .,...,-,::.-.. .,_ ,::,:t,-.=.:._ ._ •d ... - -' ...•:.- -.... . ' •,. • "•- ....,",--.,,t, iii:tr:4' .'., 1...:.. - . .101,.4•;.:. 2 'r • ..,.-.4 1 111111! . ' j .% . ' ,.., '. . . . _ . .4: • • ...III. ..'..,I ‘.1, .4.• ' ' V 1..'. .•. ....•. •MP, .46, , • --*I.,.• •. ' . r. . .+. . - .8.. - l'•:.4. ••'- ' V.A...-i '-*1%;"-44 ••. i 1$‘:4?.‘'...; 4 Cr• '..s„....rai...,. r....' l•-• e...., !!'OP. . . •?:11'itili:tit.. 'S ': 4.0-r. .-:•• • •,.. • • ...1%. .11* ,i if• °. ' ••• .• -.. 40r ..0 :Or • W.4.' ••.. 4a...' • 4r- - ,„ i ,....., '11 1.' -`.. ..,2. 41110;14'• . -•,-7,;;:- ...• i All • .'.:'•.11, .-Z- J.-. 6: A . . • .Air 1#1111111111111 -4•0 --r . ,.. 6 "111111111110*.... A.,... •e•-• ' . • 4 • 04/30/03 R,--)--, NOT- -/--- i -ibitt-ofo / - !(t)rr:oa T s m u, i.. ± • -l --L- s ti ll€; •�� , ' '-1► • r yy w r ! M1 • sat' 1P1::: .,,, , - . " iil �Itr r111444��� r' .a 2.5e 04/30/03 2-1- 2 Th1ep1wfo /es 1,.i1% '''" ''21 mil .1mrs- r ri i: wok,' n 1 II 1 11 feller.°, ir 1 . 1 _ . . v.. . , •. , : . _ .,L... 3 , ' •,-,. - . . '. • . ...., ,,,, ... IL. 1 - ,r",_,".. ' . ...___ ,#• 6.111.;iik:,V. .0'':.. ' ' '0 - : - **,.... i • - • -.. , - -....• • - ... .. .. , ... .-3 _.... -,4114.• :-..,. %we' `4.9fts . , .. ... _ . ' - . .• . . ‘ ,.._, . , , -.,..---- .......'.. . 44: I. ..• . .... . . -.. ..;,,,,10.,.--, r,o-• ...„- ;1,,s4P ., ,- -- • - .. ....: . .; -.07.i•-ti.„-... ,._ i' . - Ntr •, ' "' :..."" •44..r , . - • . ,, ..r.„, ,,.. ., , ,:.,..? . ..2 .., • ... ..... • ,.. N,...V. ' ''.4r I" •* % h.'''. • • >'4 • 4 . adj.?' -gr. ' 4 . r, •.!-..,,,...- ; - ,ti'. ., .-11 A1„,,,H, ...„ - e ,II ..,4 • .,. , -1,-, , ,,,... . . • . .,.. • i. . ,,... . .. .. ,-.. . . ., .. . ...: .-....— -, .. . . ,' •t. ; .v./....it.-.0'..."- f„,;',. • • \IV", 1., ... . , ,• .. • , e 'A . 1 r 0 . . . 4 . Ta04/30/03 f: _,....---,?7,, fde,p140'1"0 te., A,S _,.. _ ` • '''." ',"' nr a - poi .4 'r ti•.� 1 •fM.. r r ' •4` 4 • F 't- • - • •5,- w • : 'S '. ;,... t 04/30/03 .0"--r � 50 L + le4LD+ 0...1.0141-a_l_ J.QN 0 42 --144-6)j co,o,,p0 , ,. ..... , ,. , . , ..,, „, ., , .,„. ,,. •, • A:, . A 4 ...ix,,: ' I , a.. . . ..- Lt.'11‘4t ' :. di i . 1'' I .. • ' I . ' 'Alt, • b• \ I A r 1,110 ...1 - . 404t.- 4001111' r ,yr, . • • . _ . 0 ' taboo-at, .. hi -•-• 011110' _ ...._--- .41111‘''.4. 1111(- ,,„„1„..„,74... . „..., ,.• 1r -. _ --....,-.----- • -5......*.mr...." '1- A e . .. - A...MP .ill. .., . - ...r - . 4 ,-. ........., eit 4/4so' - . 1 ---.1114‘.400t IL-,r.,..__r_.,. '. . . r4 r It _ t or •. ..._ -, 0. ... * 1 41, L ka ....,-.,....... . 4 - . ,A1Firn- ...,.- • -, ..!.... iii/ 4,- ..., 1 — 4 �y1 s Aln�6� �in 1J _!_ L: �, • 4 i f 1�9IPrsositrov •� _ti I :, t „� , ~ ice• -VV / r • ir J • / 04/30/03 ...-. , co o . • • ._ _ . 0 . N.. . . ._ . , .••. ? •••• . ••1••.1p.14; . •• . •-••Ne . '. • . . .. \•'.1.i.4.' 1414. • •.... 4'.• '‘..k. ..,.11. •s.:.., •• •• , 4 -100.1 T.: I 1,. . , P . , • . 't, . ..i- . ' . •- - * 1 -- ; . 1-*:. • .- - \\ - 8 .t.dElliaini. +• 1, 1 A 4 t 1 • tr roi I , ... . 113 . i i i rP 4. _ it i 0 - i� o r }r - is -0• ' 7 • O �, , iii.'. 0.r. • 1 J r t .!• (� j. '' 1 T.- . ii. , . ‘ kt 1 Nla Et'• f cD. . c 0 _..... ) , , - •:r • . ' . 1411if t 1 4 . it • , II:. , • . " "..- • . • • *IN: ; : 4 .. • 4 . t.- .4 IL • . .% *r.. • '- 1 I. il.-4; , .V. ' ^,..—• .1... , , , . 4.-.1,' .". ...• ••,,,,, i,„ ....4p,„,...z. 1414.‘„ N.• • ' • t , a •.,,,,„„:'4,4. "e t 4.... .-.4 It*, s', ' •••••S, ..1, • ', '4.t 4. • ',LT-, .,•', 11 ' 6:"•` • _. . 1 :, lir t •it -- t%,. 4rk‘114114. 1_ F_I ' I .• 4 . - .. .-e . - .. k •••:,-- ... . ••-1 . , \ , • t . -, - 9 1 • • _ . ... -9 . ., i . f 't % VII '• T 1,111 .. , • , 4 . IN 1111 MI 1.1 •• . , ... . .. .. . I! : . . . .. - .• •..., - ,., ... '-: ' '0, .....• 1: . - . .. , 1.;;• 4:. :. . ......, - . . . 1'... . ...!* . .. . .• ‘. r.1,4,,:.4..;;.1. .,'..,. ,I. :.: _ .:-. [ , . .. , .• 011 Iiii.r..4 - • . .... .,.•... - . 1... . 1 . ,l. I ‘ " ... • VW A ".`•i *' . ',.. ,.. Ais... .,... t. .74 - IN -- .-----,.:... ....„. • • \ :.-:.--, - . _. ,,,iii,.. ....,..„, •,, 1.• ' •t I=...Ng ' •-11rPt-1-: • Ir.' i '111111r • 1 'i . , 4 , . si JrI b.. ! ,o• . IP. ., • ,,e . .. , I. . c ) • • cr,, • ... -zr . ., c... . . ..r. . ,,. . ' . .•I 11. .., . • .".S.•'-' : 1 • - ..... . .,, .,, -3.• . "i'us"F; ‘ ,r.' • ' - •t'*,k 'it ',.Itt:+1:7:. • • '' -1'1**‘ ---.•-k• . -;-•- - .. .. . .* • ' N• Vit.. 2 . , ,- • , . , . s i • , . •r '--•:.L•,. ' '4-1: • , (4‘1[P3:.I.. 1 , ta it , ,.. . . ' • \ ....1 \.•L 1 ''..i.... :: . ' .i.. :'s :: .z. ' f I ; .. • . iii, ' • s • r f • . ..t. 'AI° 1 1,- ., . . t .,:t../.. .... .. .... ..,' - I ...,...§‘,.;14 • ., ji. '''•- -- , ... • . i... , ., . • '• i 11.-: 1 '• ..,....., i• : it a . . • . m k. . . .„0. ,..r.„. _ „ , , . • . • ••. . RE: Martha Jeff wall sign Page 1 of 2 a , Amelia McCulley To: vlong©mcguirewoods.com Subject: RE: Martha Jeff wall sign Valerie, Thanks for your response. I appreciate you talking about the freestanding sign issue. I'm not sure I will agree that a wall sign visible from Rt. 250 is the most appropriate wayfinding signage. Guess we'll agree to disagree. Thanks for the info on the schedule. I understand and that's fine about moving the sign. Unless we need to talk further, I'll plan to see you Tuesday. Origmal Message From:vlong@mcguirewoods.com[mailto:vlong@mcguirewoods.com] Sent:Thursday,May 01,2003 6:26 PM To:AMCCULLE®albemarle.org Cc:ronald.cottrell@mjh.org;mikem@matthewsdevelop.com Subject:RE:Martha Jeff wall sign Thanks for your message. Since you were not available when I called around,I thought it might be helpful for me to respond by email so you could review this at your convenience.Of course,feel free to call me in the morning (Friday),I plan to be in the office all day. Regarding your question for wall signage versus a free standing sign,there are several factors at work. The most significant is that MJH does not own the land adjacent to Route 250,and the owner of that land was not willing to agree to a freestanding sign for the Outpatient Care Center.Even if it were,as you know a special use permit for an "off-site"sign is required. But even if MJH could obtain the right to a freestanding off-site sign,they do not feel that it would be effective for "wayfmding"purposes. For a visitor to the office park would still have to figure out which of the various buildmgs at PJP is the Outpatient Care Center.This is already challenging given the 3 buildings that are complete,and will only mcrease as the park is further built out,particularly once the hotel is complete. I'm glad you were able to view the banner,and hopefully the members of the BZA were as well.I will be viewing it this evening. When I was in the area earlier this week(before the banner was hung)I too was struck by the size of the berm and its impact on the visibility. Similarly,I was struck that when traveling west on Route 250 I could not see the OCC until I was almost even with the turn lane for PJP Parkway. Since there was little traffic I was able to make the maneuver into the turn lane relatively safely,but I think it is an example of how a few extra feet m height for the sign can make a difference in ensuring that motorists have the most time possible to react and to thus make the turn safely. Finally,I wanted to clarify the plans for the banner. MJH will continue to hang the banner at the current height(the height approved by the BZA)through tomorrow.However,for purposes of our variance case,I think it is important for us to view it at the higher height and to take pictures of it. As such,we would like to move the banner up on Monday and have it that way for the day. We certainly do not want to create any confusion with the BZA or anyone else,but we think it is important for our purposes to provide additional evidence to justify the request.Let me know what you think: Again,I'm in the office all day on Friday,so please feel free to contact me at your convenience at 977-2545. I know you have your staff meeting in the morning. Thanks,Valerie 5/2/2003 RE: Martha Jeff wall sign Page 2 of 2 Valerie W.Long McGuireWoods LLP Court Square Building 310 Fourth Street,N.E.,Suite 300 P.O.Box 1288 Charlottesville,Virginia 22902 434.977.2545(Direct Line) 434.980.2265 (Direct FAX) vlong@mcguirewoods.com This e-mail may contain confidential or privileged information.If you are not the intended recipient,please advise by return e-mail and delete immediately without reading or forwarding to others. Original Message From:Amelia McCulley[mailto AMCCULLE@albemarle_org] Sent: Wednesday,Apnl 30,2003 2:43 PM To:vlong@mcguirewoods.com Subject:Martha Jeff wall sign Wanted to pass on some thoughts. I just did the field visit today to view the banner. Thank you all for domg it-it really was helpful I guess my overriding question is why wall signage is being used instead of freestanding signage,even by variance and/or special permit. It is rare to try to use a wall sign for identification or even directional guidance,for a bldg that is 1,300 feet from the road. It doesn't seem to make as much sense as using a freestanding sign. That said,today I noted something that I had not previously seen as directly relevant: the berms along rt.250. These berms limit visibility fairly significantly. I will mention that to the BZA. Since the prior variance has been granted,I am trying to focus the review on the 33 ft.4 in(prior variance)versus the requested variance(almost 41 ft). The issue that I see becomes the limitation to visibility of a sign at 33 ft.4 in. 5/2/2003 McGUIREWOODS Number of Pages (including Fax cover sheet): 3 DATE: 5/6/2003 If all pages are not received, please call the Fax Operator indicated below. TO: Amelia McCulley OFFICE/COMPANY/FIRM: Director of Building Code and Zoning Services —Albemarle County LOCATION: PHONE NUMBER: 296-5832 FAX NUMBER: 972-4126 FROM: Valerie W. Long OFFICE: Charlottesville, VA DIRECT FAX NUMBER: 434-980-2265 (See list below) SENDER'S DIRECT DIAL PHONE` � NUMBER: 434-977-2545 �` 5-i, REMARKS: Rt.., = I !J f V L tCU ,QJ ( - Lte �' ` v 1 This Fax is intended for the recipient indicated above. It may be confidential or protected from disclosure by the attorney- client privilege or work-product doctrine. If you have received this Fax in error, please destroy it immediately. Thank you. Sender Name: Hazel Livesay Charge No.: 0607126-0236 7 Employee No. 04571 Total Charge: OFFICE,.' I :: ! . ,,.,,,, :'GENERAL FAX°NUM.BER. '' SwITCHBOARD:HH: „`FAX OPERATOR. ATLANTA, GA 404/443-5599 404/443-5500 404/443-5500 BALTIMORE, MD 410/659-4599 410/659-4400 410/659-4400 CHARLOTTE, NC-South 704/373-8990 704/373-8999 704/373-8999 CHARLOTTE, NC-North 704/373-8935 704/373-8999 704/373-8999 CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 804/980-2222 804/977-2500 804/977-2517 CHICAGO, IL 312/849-3690 312/849-3699 312/849-3699 JACKSONVILLE, FL 904/798-3207 904/798-3200 904/798-3200 NEW YORK, NY 212/548-2150 212/548-2100 212/548-2100 NORFOLK, VA 757/640-3701 757/640-3700 757/640-3817 PITTSBURGH, PA 412/667-6050 412/667-6000 412/677-6000 RICHMOND, VA 804/775-1061 804/775-1000 804/775-7456 TYSONS CORNER, VA 703/712-5050 703/712-5000 703/712-5430 WASHINGTON, DC 202/857-1737 202/857-1700 202/828-2850 j ALMATY, KAZAKHSTAN 011-7-3272-60-83-05 011-7-3272-60-83-00 011-7-3272-60-83-00 BRUSSELS, BELGIUM 011 (32-2) 629 42 22 011 (32-2) 629 42 11 011 (32-2) 629 42 11 MOSCOW, RUSSIA 011-7-502-937-0776 011-7-502-937-0774 011-7-502-937-0774 MW Form: Fax Cover.dot McGuireWoods LLP 7/24/00 459 Locust Avenue All Departments Physician Referral&Program Information Charlottesville,VA 22902 (434)982-7000 Hospital (434)982-7009 (800)633-6353 Toll Free (888)652-6663 Toll Free www.marthajefferson.org Martha Jefferson Hospital May 6, 2003 TO: Amelia McCulley Albemarle County Zoning Administrator Dept. ofs uilding Code and Zoning Services FROM: Ronal. '. Cottrell, VP State.ic Planning & Corporate Development SUBJ: OCC Building Signage For your review prior to our meeting this afternoon, these boards compare the visibility of OCC building signage at approved and requested heights. The photos were taken at approximately the same locations along Route 250, as indicated on the map. I look forward to meeting with you later today. STAFF PERSON: Amelia McCulley PUBLIC HEARING: March 4, 2003 STAFF REPORT VA-2003-001 OWNER/APPLICANT: Martha Jefferson Hospital Foundation — Outpatient Care Center TAX MAP/PARCEL: 78 / 311 ZONING: PDMC, Planned Development Mixed Commercial ACREAGE: 14.044 acres LOCATION: The proposed Outpatient Care Center is located off Peter Jefferson Parkway at the intersection with Peter Jefferson Place, on the south side of Route 250 East in Peter Jefferson Place development. TECHNICAL REQUEST AND EXPLANATION: The applicant requests relief from Section 4.15.13 of the Zoning Ordinance, which limits the height of wall signs to 30 feet in the PDMC district. (This is the maximum height for wall signs in any zoning district.) The applicant proposes two wall signs at a height of 41 feet, a variance of 11 feet. The signs are proposed on the new Outpatient Care Center, which is currently under construction in Peter Jefferson Place. The signs are proposed on the north elevation and will be visible from Route 250 and from the internal road, Peter Jefferson Parkway. One sign of individual channel letters states "Martha Jefferson" and the other is a caduceus icon (the medical symbol with wings, staff and snake). The Martha Jefferson sign is approximately 98 square feet and the caduceus icon is 21 square feet. These signs do not exceed the maximum sign area allowed. RELEVANT HISTORY: Final approvals for this site plan were given in July, 2002. The plan proposes an 80,000 square foot 3-story building. This parcel was created by a subdivision plat approved in December, 2001. These sins are subject to Architectural Review and will be heard by the A.R.B. on March 3r , one day before this Board of Zoning Appeals meeting. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND QUALIFYING CONDITIONS: This property is substantially above the grade of Peter Jefferson Parkway (about 50 feet) and Route 250 East (about 75 feet above). It is also set back about 1500 feet from Route 250 East. The property is not unusually small or odd-shaped but it includes some difficult topography. The design of the building, although not technically appropriate grounds for a variance, combined with the topography and distance from Route 250, are the basis for a higher wall sign. A wall sign at the required maximum height would have limited visibility from Route 250. v,y wvJ-uv7 manna Jefferson Hospital 2 March 4, 2003 A full description of the proposed uses is found at the end of the applicant's submittal for the hardship criterion. The proposed use of the facility involves various hospital services. APPLICANT'S JUSTIFICATION AND STAFF COMMENT: A review of the variance criteria provided by the applicant and comments by staff follows: Hardship Staff comments are written in italics and follow the applicant's comments. The applicant notes that the variance is necessary: • If the ordinance were strictly applied, no building identification sign visible to the public traveling along Route 250, the major point of access to the site, would be permitted on this building. The hardships include: a) Given the type of necessary healthcare services being delivered in the facility as described below, the public must be able to identify the facility from the public thoroughfare. The signage for this building is essential directional signage. No other viable signage option exists as described herein, thus creating an undue hardship if not approved; b) The unique design of the structure does not offer another location for the placement of a building identification sign due to unique physical and architectural constraints. Two brick-enclosed courtyards that conceals the service side of the building facing Route 250, including the mobile technology dock where tractor-trailer sized mobile units such as lithotripsy or MRI services will be located, block the sight line to any sign located lower on the building. This hardship is a function of both the height of the enclosed brick courtyard, over 35' above the lowest grades, and the manner in which the site slopes steeply away from the building; c) Meetings with County planning and zoning staff, particularly the architectural review staff, have indicated that no other location on the public-facing façade of the building would likely be'-acceptable for a sign, and that the proposed signage location requiring this variance may be the preferred location. Locating the sign lower on the building to conform with the ordinance would result in a sign that 1) conflicts with the carefully detailed fenestration patterns and articulation of the brick bands, 2) would not be visible from the street, and 3) would be in conflict with the architectural standards if such sign were suggested for the face of the courtyards themselves. The Martha Jefferson Outpatient Care Center is a 93,000 square foot healthcare services facility that includes an urgent care center, an ambulatory surgery center • I warcn', zvvs containing three licensed operating rooms, diagnostic medical imaging including MRI, CT, and X-ray, a woman's health center, physical therapy/ occupational therapy, cardiac rehabilitation, a neonatal diagnostic center and a small medical office space. The majority of the space in the building is licensed by the Commonwealth of Virginia as hospital services. It is vital that patients seeking these services be able to identify the facility. Staff is sympathetic to the applicant's request but we are limited by the State Code criteria for a variance. A hospital's emergency services are unique and important services to the public. It is the kind of facility that someone not familiar with the area may need to find quickly. A variety of signs and sign types need to be used to identify the facility and the routes towards it. Given the fact that this building is set back fairly significantly from Route 250 and that there are 3 entrances into Peter Jefferson Place, adequate signage along the major access route, Route 250 is essential. The topography of this site presents a challenge for visibility from the surrounding roads, Route 250 and Peter Jefferson Parkway. However, staff needs to clarify the basis for the hardship criterion. The hardship must be based on peculiar aspects of the property. The design of the building is not grounds for a hardship but becomes a self-imposed hardship. (Staff agrees that the building design limits the visibility of a wall sign at the required height although it does not seem to completely obstruct it.) In addition, the relevant hardship discussion relates to the property on the effective date of this ordinance, as stated in this excerpt from the Zoning Ordinance: When a property owner can show that his property was acquired in good faith and where, by reason of the exceptional narrowness, shallowness, size or shape of a specific piece of property at the time of the effective date of this ordinance, or where, by reason of exceptional topographic conditions or other extraordinary situation or condition of such piece of property, or of the use or development of property immediately adjacent thereto, the strict application of the terms of this ordinance would effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict the use of the property or where the board is satisfied, upon the evidence heard by it, that the granting of such variance will alleviate a clearly demonstrable hardship approaching confiscation, as distinguished from a special privilege or convenience sought by the applicant, provided that all variances shall be in harmony with the intended spirit and purpose of this ordinance. Staff recommends the full use of directional signage along Route 250 and Peter Jefferson Parkway in order to properly identify the access to and location of this facility. Given the location of this building with respect to Route 250 and the design of the building, it is possible that a wall sign on this building face may not be the best identification of the facility. While staff is sympathetic to this request, we are not able to find grounds for hardship. I, March 4, 2003 1. The applicant has not provided evidence that the strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship. Uniqueness of Hardship The applicant notes: • The hardship is not shared by other properties in the same PDMC zoning district, nor in the same vicinity, due to the unique location of this building pad and the intricate architectural detailing of the public-facing façade. The Outpatient Care Center is a large building located on the highest point of the Peter Jefferson Place office park property and as such, great care was taken in locating the building in its current configuration to respect the desires of the ARB, the Peter Jefferson Place Architectural Control Committee and Monticello. This includes the oblique angle of presentation to Route 250, the large, brick-enclosed courtyards and the long, steep slopes. These unique conditions of building style, building type, building orientation, topography and sight lines from the public road are not shared elsewhere in the district and are not expected to occur elsewhere in the district. Staff again takes the position that the unique aspects of the building itself are not grounds for a finding of uniqueness of hardship. With respect to the hardship related to the property, staff finds that the topography presents a unique challenge to development. It is not typical that the building pad is located 50 to 75 feet above the grade of the access roads serving it. While the distance from Route 250 is a challenge to properly identifying the building, it can not be the sole grounds for a finding of uniqueness. This property, zoned Planned Development Mixed Commercial, and this particular area of development have been reviewed and approved by the County. As such and based on its location within the Development Areas, it has been intended for development. Finally, the hospital services use, while not technically considered as grounds for a variance, can not be ignored. Since staff finds no hardship, staff is unable to find that the hardship is unique. However, as noted in the preceding, staff can identify several unique circumstances relating to the property and the proposed development. 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. Impact on Character of the Area The applicant offers: • March 4, 2003 • The authorization of this variance will not be a detriment to the adjacent properties and the character of the district will not be changed. Indeed, each will be enhanced by providing essential wayfinding to the public that will be seeking healthcare services. The facility is located entirely within an established office park. The aesthetic qualities of the signage are strictly regulated by the Albemarle ARB to preserve the integrity of the district and of adjoining districts. The signage is designed at the minimum size and of minimum text to identify the building. It is located at the minimum possible height to be visible to the public and to respect the architectural integrity of the building. The proposed signage is in keeping with the character of the district and the adjacent property. Staff concurs with the applicant. The proposed signage is less than the minimum allowed by the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant has invested in appropriate input from other entities (such as ARB) in their design of the building and signage. 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 only one of the three criteria for approval have been met, staff recommends denial of this request. Should the Board find cause to approve it, staff recommends the following condition: 1. This variance is approved for signage as proposed by the applicant and subject to approval from the Architectural Review Board. J ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD STAFF REPORT Project#: Name ARB-2003-15: Martha Jefferson Outpatient Care Center Signs Review Type Certificate of Appropriateness for Signs, Advisory Review for a variance Parcel Identification Tax Map 78, Parcels 20C and 20M Location 595 Peter Jefferson Parkway in Peter Jefferson Place, on the south side of Rt. 250 East Zoned Planned District Mixed Commercial(PDMC) and Entrance Corridor(EC) Magisterial District Rivanna Proposal To install wall-mounted signs ARB Meeting Date March 3, 2003 Staff Contact Janet Miller PROJECT HISTORY A Certificate of Appropriateness was issued for this building on March 22, 2002. The approval included no signs. PROJECT DETAILS The applicant proposes to install one channel letter wall sign and one icon sign on the north face of the building, and one channel letter wall sign and one cabinet sign on the east face of the building. A variance is required fpr the proposed sign heights on the north side of the building. A monument sign proposed for the entrance to the site off of Peter Jefferson Parkway is not expected to be visible from the EC. Wall Signs (North face): Sign Type: Channel letters Illumination: Internal neon, white Text: Martha Jefferson in 2 lines Sign Size: 3'-4" high for each line (7'-2" total height) x **' long (92 SF) Overall Sign Height: 40'-6" to top of sign (requires a variance) Colors: White faces, dark gray (PMS ***) returns (to match the color of the roof) Electrical Junction Box: Located between the the text "Martha" and Jefferson"; 5 3/4" high x *** long; painted to match the color of the brick Location: 4' below the roof line, 2' from the northeast corner of the building and north of the "porthole" Sign type: Graphic image (Caduceus icon) Sign Material: Built-up acrylic pieces Illumination: Back-lit using white LED Sign Size: 6'-7" high x 8' long (21 SF) Overall Sign Height: 44' to top of sign (requires a variance) Graphic & Colors: Caduceus: faces and returns painted to match Matthews brushed aluminum Location: 4' below the roof line, 8' from the northwest of the building and south of the "porthole" ARB 3/03/2003 Martha Jefferson OCC Signs --Page 1 ;Far .70 v cs V v � , Wall Signs (East face): Sign Type: Channel letters Illumination: Back-lit and face-lit using white LED Text: Martha Jefferson in 2 lines Sign Size: 1'-2" high for each line (2'-4" total height) x **' long (** SF) Overall Sign Height: *** to top of sign Colors: White faces and returns Location: Within the signband located over the door, left of the cabinet sign Sign type: Cabinet sign Illumination: Internal illumination LED, text only Sign Size: l'-6 3/4' high x 12'-6" long (37 SF) Overall Sign Height: ***' to top of sign Text & Colors: Outpatient Care Center in white, blue background (PMS2725) Location: Within the signband located over the door, to the right of the channel letters ANALYSIS: The north and east sides of the building are visible from the Route 250 EC and north side of the building is visible from a distance when traveling eastbound on Route 250. The south side is minimally visible from the EC although the proposed wall signs above the building entrance are not expected to be visible from the EC. Signs for the north side of the building Channel Letters • The proposed size of the signs appears to be coordinated with the building. • The signs meets Zoning Ordinance requirements for area and but exceeds the overall height limit by 10'-6". • The proposed location appears to be appropriate for the building. Reducing the overall height to the required 30' limit would place the sign in a location that would compete with building elements and would not work well with the design of the building. Graphic • The proposed size of the Caduceus icon appears to be coordinated with the building. • The icon sign meets Zoning Ordinance requirements for area and but exceeds the overall height limit by 14'. • Historically, the ARB has limited the use of graphics on buildings to reduce visual clutter and to provide for more coordinated appearances along the EC. Limiting illumination could serve the same pruposes. • The Caduceus icon is back-lit. Signs for the east side of the building Channel Letters • The proposed size of the signs appears to be coordinated with the building. Cabinet Sign • The ARB Design Guidelines state that backgrounds of internally illuminated signs must be opaque. The background of the cabinet sign meets this guideline. • The signs meet Zoning Ordinance requirements for area and height. • The size of the signs appear to be in proportion to the building element on which it is placed. ARB 3/03/2003 Martha Jefferson OCC Signs --Page 2 RECOMMENDATIONS: • Staff can support the proposed variance request and recommends that the ARB forward the following recommendation to the Board of Zoning Appeals: The ARB expresses no objection to the proposed sign height on the north side of the building with the condition that the Caduceus icon not be illuminated. Staff recommends approval of the channel letters as proposed. Staff recommends approval of the Caduceus icon with the following condition: 1. The icon shall not be illuminated. Staff recommends approval of the cabinet sign as proposed. ARB 3/03/2003 Martha Jefferson OCC Signs --Page 3 j effieA-,12v tog6 4 T-64- Dwy_ acied V-P .4 " Aw- dead' no¢ BIZ 1 ';;-. ,`3i.N.-• tit < {Toi, titer 4* , )e/1 1S < eook ti\I Ate, . / -- , 1".0 :4 "� , #',YG Yr rya"' } .tF; /1 '�!t':•,,. �• ,Qi(CC c ,laNtz>„,11:c1,1 •41'''\ , Si it ..e+"""r./ �:� r.. 'r•: .kY.Ytrif.1:1:0; � :.a ii I, .� 1 •�•i a a1 '3i:� b .01(-0, :''i'L:,.);' -e1;0„ ,;.'431,...,4# ..i..l ,,..•4.„-if• S�\c\ lei. '•i' i 0 .. ,y yil,e...:....„t...4?...,,,,.,3."•,/7vi e, 1_, y ,il�q5, 1:,.i_..k.- % , ��.(� tit .} l8,4 : F,i 1 i.'{ l lrt,41114': 1 C\S' LDS , i.`,., 1,1,4:.:!1;1%•;:;:f...0*.t-i'7 ikil-"ligelV.) .10 :1..::lis,,Ittili '>-.- -.2,-t1-9tr,:-:-q.Zi: 2 i/d-i 01414 .\."S• ' ' -w `wt''�S_ is. _ '1. .'2.;es-: `'F3y y;V:.t x�i.��` ,G • ti..ry'??' 21 t I s tei R?.`'iii _;"3.? C), I -Ie•. t':'' .' 4•::Iei•;•iui,V '4 \ -7 G • / ..O'4�\ iIv �y L f' an y`" ' ..I -4 .. - .: '.I, l• : 0 \--30, r , : ,V.. .v...-1 ' - ie. - -3ri:i?.., V ' „,,,fp.'-',--5 74 .; , ,t,' 4- 1' ..**Ih• *''' ;Pr ---''-'4,- ' --T..- 's. - ec2e,k-er ' _gt W r r u5t.4 G i 5' ;,13 ./., 6 4 } S ti7 }: 0. ka *)k ` m o`ra/ r R.'j:'F. �' x -y e F 'ri_,,,;i47-i,,r'''.-/e•-•;1*.(•!-1 I.is- _.,'-;:'• .•'••• ; ,..„..,,•41-k .., ;,`•� �gy n1CD ; �. ,.• • 8 . te ;+. , .. r .t. fi ++ .`S i_ r n.4 <5;:.! s' ZI $▪ •a.i. •rp 4G{?�{ -::.,-{'.;..,.i.. �Lr''t?2'y •`r> ':°.. 7k �.'e '.may;,:. , `.�..;▪ y.�+Y.`" �`'��i '1R->'''�t(y..,f�)s r 'at ^a �i v fix' ; �ZI.��' !fir-'Y . ., . : 1 L . ��... -,....-A.---!,," ' 1 5.� 1 Ty A INTERS TATE 6 WESTB -__—_ __. OUND) Proposed Land Use Plan NORTH • 242 acres total in PiP • 83 acres of opera space • 3.- milk of nprlpcirian traile Ulf Jl/ LUUJ ID. JL 4J'47 f L f rFilJC UJ County of Albemarle Department of Zoning 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 (804) 296-5875 FAX (804) 972-4060 DATE: 7 q3 VA- ,: ).W 3 --00/ STAFF: FEE. $120.00 �(1 VARIANCE APPLICATION OWNER (as currently listed in Real Estate) Name M A g:114 A .T E f F CTZ SO4 f JP11*L FOL,AAW7lpsi Phone (4 4 ) 182• - 73 v.3 Address 45.1 LOGvST /}JC, G}lA fCzar7r.sVi I.LE VA 2-7- APPLICANT (if different from above) Name S 4MC Phone ( ) - Address CONTACT PERSON (if different from above) Name MIGHAKL MA-Trt{gJS Phone (¢34 ) q71.- 77b4 Day Phone ( ) u - Address ONE $oAQS NEAT) PO/Are / G CATTCSdit.4 2-7.9ti3 LOCATION: Whi42Tf 1'EfFFR.soiJ Ot/TP T Ff /'rid GEMT P— �S P+ J '{ PKw� G ,Lor cc( 2.2so% PLEASE PROVIDE A DESCRIPTION AND JUSTIFICATION OF YOUR REQUEST ON THE BACK OF THIS SHEET. � �y OFFICE USE ONLY O) &() - co - (0 -- /1 O TAX MAP , PARCEL ; TM , P ; TM , P ZONED: D/VIC 0 DINANCE SECTION: , I S • 13 Board of Zoning Appeals D e: / / % 1 ' 1 V {h17, a‘ ( ) Special Permit ( ) Variance ( ) Proffers 16)._ 1 14"" B ZA ACTION: hst,ftYfri/ fJ nit/PIT]- 6(4xick tz7 3- ApprcVVC Kai I'Z//r7t &dA24-4,-N_ C,2, 7 A7a,u AA - �� �- J1! J1/ LJJ3 17: 3L 43µylLl (r i•wi Ir .wD ucv ' rrtiaL. cr.+ L DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Sec ATr4C0() JUSTIFICATION SHALL BE BASED ON THESE THREE (3) CRITERIA: 1) That the strict application of this ordinance would produce undue hardship. 5CE Arr Ctt h 2) That such hardship is not shared generally by other properties in the same zoning district and the same vicinity. .56E A-TD4Ctft1) 3) 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. 5Eg f}Ti'* tte) The application may be deferred by the staff or the Board of Zoning Appeals, if sufficient information necessary to this review has not be submitted by the deadline. I hereby certify that the information provided on this application and accompanying information is accurate, true and correct to the best of my knowle e and belief . ` _ z� 41o3 157 7D Z3 i a ur Date Receipt# ate VA-2003-001, (Signs # 1 & 2 ) Martha Jefferson Hospital Foundation (owner/applicant). Located in Peter Jefferson Place at the proposed Outpatient Care Center off Peter Jefferson Parkway. Request to increase the maximum wall sign height from 30 to 41 feet, a variance of 11 feet. TM 78 / Parcel 311, zoned Planned Development-Mixed Commercial / Entrance Corridor overlay. VA-2003-001, (Signs # 1 & 2) Martha Jefferson Hospital Foundation (owner/applicant). Located in Peter Jefferson Place at the proposed Outpatient Care Center off Peter Jefferson Parkway. Request rehearing to increase the maximum wall sign height from 30 to 41 feet, a variance of 11 feet. Prior BZA approval was for 35.5 ft. TM 78 / Parcel 311, zoned Planned Development-Mixed Commercial / Entrance Corridor overlay. Martha Jefferson Outpatient Care Center Peter Jeffeison Place Zoning Variance Application February 4, 2003 DRAFT Description of the Request: The request is a variance from the maximum sign height limitation of 30' above ground level. This application would permit a building identification sign at a greater height as detailed on the attached exhibits and as described below. Justification for the Request 1)That the strict application of this ordinance would produce undue hardship: If the ordinance were strictly applied,no building identification sign visible to the public traveling along Route 250, the major point of access to the site, would be permitted on this building. The hardships include: a) Given the type of necessary healthcare services being delivered in the facility as described below, the public must be able to identify the facility from the public thoroughfare. The signage for this building is essential directional signage. No other viable signage option exists as described herein,thus creating an undue hardship if not approved; b) The unique design of the structure does not offer another location for the placement of a building identification sign due to unique physical and architectural constraints. Two brick-enclosed courtyards that conceals the service side of the building facing Route 250, including the mobile technology dock where tractor-trailer sized mobile units such as lithotripsy or MRI services will be located,block the sight line to any sign located lower on the building. This hardship is a function of both the height of the enclosed brick courtyard, over 35' above the lowest grades, and the manner in which the site slopes steeply away from the building. c) Meetings with County planning and zoning staff,particularly the architectural review staff,have indicated that no other location on the public-facing façade of the building would likely be acceptable for a sign, and that the proposed signage location requiring this variance may be the preferred location. The matter is being heard before the Architectural Review Board on March 3. Locating the sign lower on the building to conform with the ordinance would result in a sign that i)conflicts with the carefully detailed fenestration patterns and articulation of the brick bands ii)would not be visible from the street,and iii)would be in conflict with the architectural standards if such sign were suggested for the face of the courtyards themselves. The Martha Jefferson Outpatient Care Center is a 93,000 square foot healthcare services facility that includes an urgent care center,an ambulatory surgery center containing three licensed operating rooms, diagnostic medical imaging including MRI, CT, and X-Ray, a woman's health center,physical therapy/occupational therapy, cardiac rehabilitation, a neonatal diagnostic center, and a small medical office space. The majority of the space in the building is licensed by the Commonwealth of Virginia as hospital services. It is vital that patients seeking these services be able to identify the facility. 2) That such hardship is not shared generally by other properties in the same zoning district and the same vicinity This hardship is not shared by other properties in the same PD-MC zoning district, nor in the same vicinity, due to the unique location of this building pad and the intricate architectural detailing of the public-facing facade. The Outpatient Care Center is a large building located on the highest point of the Peter Jefferson Place office park property, and as such, great care was taken in locating the building in its current configuration to respect the desires of the Architectural Review Board, the Peter Jefferson Place Architectural Control Committee, and Monticello. This includes the oblique angle of presentation to Route 250,the large,brick-enclosed courtyards, and the long, steep slopes. These unique conditions of building style, building type,building orientation,topography, and sight lines from the public road are not shared elsewhere in the district and are not expected to occur elsewhere in the district. 3)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. The authorization of this variance will not be a detriment to the adjacent properties and the character of the district will not be changed. Indeed, each will be enhanced by providing essential wayfinding to the public that will be seeking healthcare services. The facility is located entirely within an established office park. The aesthetic qualities of the signage are strictly regulated by the Albemarle County Architectural Review Board to preserve the integrity of the district, and of adjoining districts. The signage is designed at the minimum size and of minimum text to identify the building. It is located at the minimum possible height to be visible to the public and to respect the architectural integrity of the building. The proposed signage is in keeping with the character of the district and the adjacent property. ---L-J------- . ---\ AN 62 °AMA r MEYOII,eI reiu � •�I 1 NAt� R/ � 1� �AI\ » r am/ T,, m tii.- -4 -T+w+ �s '...-1 , . '\• p • 441 ;1 ' \ ilt, ' ��0` SECT�oty lea `.\ - .. 0417!„,.., __.=__ w , :-Idogitfr-414, / . \\ „F....4,, , „_. ,,a , " /---- "" / 4416. 4' IP. ,A--': ,7: ti\A a c[/ 41\ , Isic P ?/.4s/i" ',\r3ws* Alr,141 !), / .—..--=-Zia)A e �1 _ '`.`tea * © ,rip. , , , ( 0.re , 2p 5 IKI ik0474 LOC \\\ ^�= !I InIMMEN/I Ts 101!rOi- HA ---7=- —gr- 5, \\\ . 0,04 W /.__:* / AI= .a iL (( • i 20N ' x '' '-- kNil o[r•�.os Lle ' '• °A / sjg (_T 77 � kks / 32 jN 3 y L \ J4\ 41� W .S// wiuweos[ cewoos NsNRA . units 1,if7 otyR T 32A � 33C . '7 .» ,� LL ...----1 -0.00000 ------ :. „„.... a 4 1 �� , - ., 338/ T RI 250 ,,,,/ ,.....\ 330 VA-2003-001 Martha Jefferson Hospital 1 Foundation (owner/applicant) Tax Map 07800-00-00-03110 I MONTICELLO 1V 22 \ \\*.\''Ali-,--villiiillilliii;to, /K/ 00v 6"`° \ .------ - ,7' , _.,fc- ...., 1 I ' I / 0! MILLS \ / / / �/ /EC 10 j1! ✓ I i �/ , ,,,, . .- )7-g---- c // 53 \ y 26 25• =R �� /l/ m.,, //i/ 92 SCALE AI FEET SCOTTSVILLE AND "' "[ "" O. .� RIVANNA DISTRICTS SECTION 78 4 • Martha Jefferson Outpatient Care Center �_ _ ; Martha L. Jefferson , Outpatient Care Cz .e: ' LRe"'eC F--0. 1.'--e' ,_< k.....—.. .r.i17:. ......1.1L=a: `J f` `^a l -, f ��1 Exterior Signage Y Zoning Board of Appeals Review January 29, 2003 Prepared by: corbin 109 East Front 304 Traverse City,MI 49684 231 941 1236 Main Building ID Outpatient Care Center t .ii\V `/ t(KI/)l/INS 1 2 0103.03 Preliminary Study ,/S 01 14.03 Design Presentation 1v1 �PXfa'�/hl�l;l® 4 01 22 03 Refined Design 0 SCALE 1/2".1-0"(on an 11x17 shoat) NORTH ELEVATION 5"thick,tece-iit,IndNIdual letters using white neon 1/8"aluminum returns with frameless white acrylic faces 0,4 ..w., to glow at tight. Returns painted to match the color of[he 3'-4" roof(dark gray) Transfomers to be housed Inside letters 'Jewel-trim 1s NOT acceptable. r . br ' 2"thick,1/8"aluminum,custom ekctrk:al Junction box to feed electrical wires Electrical feed from building to have .n..• ., one connection only(located behind this custom Junction box) Box painted to match the color of the brick 3'-4" 0 � n7� 1/2"conduit to connect the letters that do not touch the ` I ` •eo .. custom Junction box Estimated Area-98 R1i Martha Jefferson Hospital Outpatient Care Center Charlottesville,VA corbin 109 East 7a619 300 Traverse Cea to 49691 231 1147.1226 . �r l , \ \-]:. .:.:•kc:3 _ 0 • ..� w.....i...v.rw._.w._._ t`" t — 4'b N� Outpatient Care Cent • _ ---+ lV (.-" -` _ • 7J�^^-•�.�•.��.. °cation Plan a. / i (..S. it I (� + _ J ',�4�" u�) 1 12ze02 0i. n ary spIcc 2 pe%,.. t9Ol ElenS+ • t. 3 12903' % sCaduceusProtrance_ • - \Identjfication Sign 1jq ) - ;•'1r<-�a ~�- •_,-__ - _`+r (Outpatient Care Center) ` / - Proposed Bulldlnq��' "� tom pi Main ID a Address sign r + ( `--identification Sign y// lint uwm.wr standard stow Jf•�.-.._..-„• ,' DV Dvucroon.l Sign(Int.Munk.) / ," 1:(/ +am` `4 :� it . �� `�` ^'�` r 1D-3 Directional Info.Sqn(Int m ( CCC/// • •\ Q DP %%stn.walkway sign • .,/7 • ' , IS Building ID(on budding, nq,I 11'11// ' • _ I! Entrance 10(on canopy,Int + if m DR Donor Recognition(on•udder.: _• i Proposed Building ❑ to loading Dock ID Sign • ;I�� ' Identification Sign i� cc Caduceus Icon i J a a 1" L., . O R.1 No Entry Regulatory �..J \ I ` / ®'' R.2 Stop Rpulatory i lr�� / O3 R.3 Pvmd Panting Rpulatory \ 06 OI R.1 PermA Parfunq Van A[[esf 0.e �e R.3 Fue Lane 0.pulNary ,�y� � ` A f R.f Drop-off Only Regulatory 0 VVV___UUU 1111 Proposed Entrance)11 • Identification Sign Signs to De considered by the ', 1�y e` (Urgen�Care)�' O zoning Board or Appeals di :.6AA A, Aa : 14 . • o Provide 20A circuit breaker for slgr requiring power ` , Provide weather protected(NEMA junction box at proposed center of / N sign cabinet a Eit) IIIII/4111111416.. Martha Jefferson Hospital �� ,f,,, Outpatient Care Center Charbttesvllle,VA i. MI1 196e1 -. Corbin /� �� lir Eau Ha Front 4 Traverse city. / ^ O r \\\ 3319171336 Caduceus Icon Outpatient Care Center 1 01.03.03 Prehmnery Study 2 01 14.03 Devon Presentebon • T 3 0122.03 Devon Intent � Ol 22.03 Refinement 452 srue lfr.la(on anluli sheet) . -: 1717) North Elevation el Scale' 1/16-.1,0' ISOMETRIC DETAIL NOT TO SCALE 8'-0" 1 3/16"Typ.tlNdu sss. 11-1-3/4- Typ spacing" W I I 1 3/16"thick,built-up Individual acrylic pkges Back-lit using white Coke Signature LED (LP-3 Staff Piecor es sl Three Daced 11/2e from wall and ces total. each staff, snakes.) III Faces and returns painted to match Matthews Snakes brushed aluminum 4 i I • = � Wings(Bottom) 6'-8' • 1,�� Staff(Middle) (� n Snakes(Top) II ` y, r Martha Jefferson Hospital Outpatient Care Center Area-21 ft1 Charlottesville,VA Side View corbin 109 East Front 304 Traverse Coy,MI 49664 231 947 1236 North Elevation 1 12 26.02 Prvidninary Study 2 01 29.03 For Rime. .- SCALE 1/16-.1,0'to 9.1 11917 shoot) • • • • . . . ----- - -,-- 1111 TM MT mi TM fir! il et mg it —1, • sr> : r r 1111 . .. Clt • ,--aIIIIIIIIIIIIIIhi-- ... n4. ,. mrn m , :.„.,..._„_.......,.,_,,,i.:,..: ,.„._,.,:,.....,„ ,,.,..,_,..„,:_____, ,,_,„,„.„.........„.„..„ „..,..„.„.„.• .....:,„„„ ...„.„,..;______ ...''''''''''INPM•IIIMIII,'.1;1*""TIM! ::•--=!ita- ---- ..— -- -- , ----- t, IIMIMIIIIMIIIMmi. ...._...--- —f Martha Jefferson Hospital Outpatient Care Center • Charlottesville,VA ......._ corbin 109 East Front 304 Travers.Coy,MI 49684 231 947 1236 F_,KL5I bU t 6 ; ff;�.0 ;, � PROPOSED ROADWAY ALIGNMENT 00 `� � r �� 0.�£ }E `_ ROADWAY ALIGNMENT PER 4Z' �M , zr.. ev ; 1996 APPROVAL ZZ. O �P���P e eel '. \ fr , �. x,��'��''' ;y r �► INTERSECTION SIGNALIZATION•kc �, %:f:„.,..-..=.;`-';:::::-.'::— 4. ", :. •,,K.1,-• ' ,„„,,sv—:.4•4•4W. , { ISHA , l #.. `.s-r..14 7171: =•1 �`.. ,-i •t '+! ..e- �5' M AVENUE ' 4:. .{..!,., St:. O r - .?•Any F,./' .j ,, fESttLu•Sr� • - ! ,i:g:"' ,1:.' , WILLIS DRIVE �•Y y :4'!�'s :, 'f::@ it vvf l'v., C\ • : . �' Access coact PAP bu11� / /•.� ! J,.-.II n{•'11i ' /it .! 'W .1.... PERSON PARKWA 'j" Fir+= `i`" il :'� . '''' •/ i 1k1i., fi ' '. '..tr::ti.+ ./,i.. jg..°1. .y.o,SS--..9 nj .g Oil, ',} V t\\\\.. .l:.i t.c llri .ti .,s i/ , .. . � ''" � '. _ i ti IT Park U /, k/1':i.. '.I. t'4; y>l,C'r: iy JM1SK :h. •4 �`".'`::r.,1''±tal►t:t.•%. MtWit /•. i n ' 9 k S4 r!, e. .. _ ��( I gyp %` �'� NIti .r F Jw' , , t I ;11: \ ..),. ‘ i457 CYO ��iCP Fu.fI.,,-e, r r �} ��� *� > IN !OAit, _ ! � 1 / Maid :. i, 1NfiERSfixCI t �- : z � ixv b� BOUND L- __. s5r.:�.�1�6,.s;r. ;:.- rx'� ,£ • EXIT 124 t NORTH r,a'_ -ytC;Fi .,:.;`.;;p+. ,.• •.r:-,, - •t- • i k.,� _. .: ,:w'C',i53 r'•• - '- 0' ,. _ r - /Al A .� ®gym COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Building Code and Zoning Services 401 McIntire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville,Virginia 22902-4596 FAX(434)972-4126 TELEPHONE(434)296-5832 TTD(434) 972-4012 MEMORANDUM TO: Members, Board of Zoning Appeals FROM: Amelia G. McCulley, Zoning Administrator l� "�v DATE: April 25, 2003 RE: Martha Jefferson Hospital Foundation Wall Sign Variance (VA 2003-001) —Rehearing As the Board may recall, the applicants requested a variance of 11 feet to allow the proposed wall signs to be located at a height of 41 feet. A modified variance was approved on March 4, 2003 for a height of 33 feet 4 inches or below the third brick band at the top of the building. The applicants requested this rehearing based on new information that could not have been available at the original Board meeting. In granting the rehearing, the Board requested three things: 1. The applicant should submit new information, such as drawings showing sight lines. These drawings are not yet complete and will be available for the May 6th BZA meeting. 2. The applicant should erect a banner of the same letter size as the proposed sign and at the height approved by the Board. The applicants intend to have this banner erected by Monday, April 28th around 3:30 p.m. 3. Zoning staff should provide a written review of the new information. This memorandum will address the new written justification (found in the revised staff report). Once the banner is erected and the sight line drawings are available, staff will provide further comment. Staff has revised the staff report (Attachment A) to reflect the applicant's revised justification. We continue to recommend denial because only one of the three criteria have been met; however, we reserve the right to revise this recommendation after reviewing the new information as listed in #1 and #2 above. Attachments: A. Staff Report (revised for rehearing) B. Staff Report (original hearing) cc: Valerie Long Martha Jefferson Foundation Michael Matthews Ronald Cottrell Janet Miller STAFF PERSON: Amelia McCulley PUBLIC HEARING: Rehearing May 6, 2003 STAFF REPORT VA-2003-001 REHEARING * This is a revision of the original report for March 4th OWNER/APPLICANT: Martha Jefferson Hospital Foundation — Outpatient Care Center TAX MAP/PARCEL: 78 / 311 ZONING: PDMC, Planned Development Mixed Commercial ACREAGE: 14.044 acres LOCATION: The proposed Outpatient Care Center is located off Peter Jefferson Parkway at the intersection with Peter Jefferson Place, on the south side of Route 250 East in Peter Jefferson Place development. TECHNICAL REQUEST AND EXPLANATION: The applicant requests relief from Section 4.15.13 of the Zoning Ordinance, which limits the height of wall signs to 30 feet in the PDMC district. (This is the maximum height for wall signs in any zoning district.) The applicant proposes two wall signs at a height of 41 feet, a variance of 11 feet. At their meeting on March 4th, the Board approved the wall sign variance for a height of 33 feet, 4 inches. This is a rehearing of that previously approved variance to reconsider a variance for a height of 41 feet. The signs are proposed on the new Outpatient Care Center, which is currently under construction in Peter Jefferson Place. The signs are proposed on the north elevation and will be visible from Route 250 and from the internal road, Peter Jefferson Parkway. One sign of individual channel letters states "Martha Jefferson" and the other is a caduceus icon (the medical symbol with wings, staff and snake). The Martha Jefferson sign is approximately 98 square feet and the caduceus icon is 21 square feet. These signs do not exceed the maximum sign area allowed. RELEVANT HISTORY: Final approvals for this site plan were given in July, 2002. The plan proposes an 80,000 square foot 3-story building. This parcel was created by a subdivision plat approved in December, 2001 . These signs are subject to Architectural Review and have been heard by the A.R.B. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND QUALIFYING CONDITIONS: This property is substantially above the grade of Peter Jefferson Parkway (about 50 feet) and Route 250 East (about 75 feet above). It is also set back 1 ,300 feet from Route 250 East. The VA 2003-001 Rehearing MJ Hospital Wall Sign May 6, 2003 Page 2 property is not unusually small or odd-shaped but it includes some difficult topography. The design of the building, although not technically appropriate grounds for a variance, combined with the topography and distance from Route 250, are the basis for a higher wall sign. A wall sign at the required maximum height would have limited visibility from Route 250. This will be easier to visualize, once the applicants erect the banner. (They intend to show with the banner and drawings, that the wall signs even at the approved height of 33 feet, 4 inches, will not be fully visible from Rt. 250.) APPLICANT'S JUSTIFICATION AND STAFF COMMENT: A review of the variance criteria provided by the applicant and comments by staff follows. The revised variance justification dated 4-25-03 has been substituted for the prior justification. Hardship Staff comments are written in italics and follow the applicant's comments. The applicant notes that the variance is necessary: Section 4.15.13 of the Zoning Ordinance limits the height of wall signs to 30 feet in the Planned Development-Mixed Commercial district. The strict application of this section of the Ordinance would produce an undue hardship on the Martha Jefferson Hospital Foundation because it prevents the hospital from providing the most reasonably safe and effective signage at the future Outpatient Care Center (the "OCC") under the circumstances, results in signage that is less safe for its patients and for the public as a whole, and results in a direct conflict with the public's interest in protecting the County's designated Entrance Corridors as articulated in the Zoning Ordinance. By serving as a "wayfinder" for a health care use (including an urgent care facility), the OCC sign must have a heightened level of effectiveness to adequately serve the public. This is particularly important for serving the needs of patients traveling to the OCC from outside the area who will be unfamiliar with the area and the development. The hospital has requested a sign at a height of 41 feet above ground level. At this height, the signage would result in a higher level of public safety since it would be visible to passing motorists slightly sooner than it would be at either 30 feet, the maximum height permitted by the Ordinance, or at 33 feet, 4 inches, the height permitted by the previously approved variance. In addition, because it would be located in a more appropriate location on the building, it will reduce the "anticipation time" of motorists, which allows the hospital, as a provider of urgent health care, to provide the most safe signage reasonable under the circumstances, and thus meet its duty to its patients and the public as a whole. Additional evidence supporting the creation of the hardship is contained in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (the "MUTCD") published by the Federal Highway Administration, which contains requirements and recommendations for safe and VA 2003-001 Rehearing MJ Hospital Wall Sign May 6, 2003 Page 3 effective signs. The hospital's sign consultants designed the proposed OCC sign and its location on the building using the criteria contained in the MUTCD. The MUTCD provides that the basic requirements for a highway sign are that "it be legible for those for whom it is intended, and that it be understood in time to permit a proper response. This means high visibility, lettering or symbols of adequate size, and a short legend for quick comprehension of a driver approaching a sign at high speed. Simplicity and uniformity in design, position, and application are important." At its closest point, the OCC is 1 ,300 feet from Route 250, a designated Entrance Corridor. The speed limit along this portion of Route 250 is 45 miles per hour, there are several travel lanes and turn lanes in each direction, and numerous stoplights and median breaks with vehicles crossing traffic in both directions. In addition, the elevation of Route 250 varies significantly in the nearby vicinity, for patients approaching the OCC from the west will crest a steep hill (Pantops Mountain), and then have a relatively short distance in which to locate the facility and the appropriate turn. The Pantops Mountain area of the County is a designated development area under the Comprehensive Plan and is designated for high-density development. The area is already heavily developed and heavily traveled, which will only increase in the coming years as this development continues. In addition, the office park where the OCC is located is still developing, and contains numerous other non-medical uses. One such use is a planned four-story hotel that will be sited directly along Route 250, between Route 250 and the OCC. The hotel's location will add to the challenge of ensuring that the OCC sign has a heightened level of effectiveness, for a motorist will have to look beyond the hotel for the OCC sign, and the hotel could distract the eye of the motorist searching for the OCC, particularly given the other factors at work, such as the traffic. Given that the OCC will be located among this hotel and these other buildings, the hospital has a duty to its patients and the public as a whole to reasonably maximize the ability of members of the public who are traveling to the OCC to quickly distinguish it among the other office buildings. Again, this is particularly important for motorists who are unfamiliar with the area. Thus, members of the public will be traveling along Route 250 at relatively high speeds, encountering significant traffic, navigating shifting elevations and multiple lanes of traffic, and looking for the building that is set far from the road and sited among other tall buildings. Patients must rely on the OCC signage to help them find the OCC among the other buildings in the area generally, and within the office park specifically, as quickly and safely as possible. The sooner a driver can locate a sign, the more time he or she has to react, which increases one's ability to safely change lanes, locate the entrance to the office park, and execute the required turn. In addition, because the medical uses at the OCC include an urgent care center and a surgery center, many of the individuals attempting to find the OCC will be traveling under stress. Furthermore,.since a significant number of patients visiting the OCC will be senior citizens, who often have challenges with their vision and may also have slower driving reflexes, the heightened level of visibility of the sign is necessary to achieve the MUTCD goal of a sign that is "legible for those for whom it is intended." Thus, the signage does not merely have to VA 2003-001 Rehearing MJ Hospital Wall Sign May 6, 2003 Page 4 be particularly effectively for the average motorist seeking the OCC, it must to be exceptionally visible and effective to be legible for a senior citizen traveling under stress. The combination of these factors alone constitutes an extraordinary circumstance affecting this property and which would result in a hardship if the Ordinance were strictly enforced. However, there are additional characteristics of the property which also factor into the creation of the hardship. First, because the property does not front on Route 250, it does not qualify for a sign along Route 250, so the importance of the building sign in serving as a "wayfinder" for the health care use is particularly important under the circumstances. Second, at its closest point, the building is 1 ,300 feet from Route 250, a great distance away. Third, the property is located in one of the most heavily regulated areas of the County: along two designated Entrance Corridors (Route 250 and Interstate 64) and in the viewshed of Monticello. As such, the design of the building on the property and the aesthetic characteristics are particularly important, and the hospital must strictly comply with the ARB guidelines and policies. The combination of all of these conditions of the property results in a extraordinary situation or condition of the property, such that it is extremely important that the signage have a heightened level of effectiveness, which requires that it be visible as quickly as reasonably possible, yet factors make it extremely challenging to make the signage so effective under the circumstances. In addition, the development of the adjacent property as a high-density office park further exacerbates the need for effective signage for the property. The OCC will be a medical facility sited among a group of office buildings, and it is important that motorists be able to locate the OCC among the adjacent office buildings as quickly as possible. Thus, for each of these reasons, a strict application of the Ordinance will create a hardship, because the hospital would not be able to meet its duty to the public to provide such appropriately visible and effective signage with the limitations on the height of the sign. Although the difference between the requested height of the sign and the previously approved variance may not appear to be significant enough to impact the ability of motorists to safety locate the facility, when the height difference is considered in light of the combination of conditions of the property, the result is an extraordinary situation. The sooner one can locate the sign the better, and when considered in light of the speeds traveled, and further, given the distance of the property from Route 250, the variation in the elevation of the roadbed (cresting the top of Pantops Mountain), and the requirement to navigate the increasingly heavy traffic, multiple travel lanes, and traffic signals, it is clear that every foot of height in the signage becomes more important. This is particularly important for individuals who are not familiar with the area, and for elderly individuals. The hospital has a duty to provide signage to its patients and to the public as a whole that is as reasonably effective as possible, and unnecessary height restrictions which prevent the hospital from achieving that goal create a significant hardship. VA 2003-001 Rehearing MJ Hospital Wall Sign • May 6, 2003 Page 5 Furthermore, the MUTCD also provides that one of the aspects of a successful identification signage system is a high "anticipatory value" — improving the ability of a motorist to anticipate the signs in the surrounding environment. Positioning a sign high on a building helps increase that anticipation time. To a certain degree, driver anticipation is improved when signage elements are placed in a typical location at or near the upper section of the building. In addition, by associating the typical location of the sign at the upper section of the building, the driver's intuitive awareness is maximized, which increases anticipation times, and thus improves safety. As noted above, the MUTCD also provides that "simplicity and uniformity in design, position, and application are important" to providing safe and effective signage. In addition to the importance of the height of the sign on the OCC building, the position of the sign relative to other architectural features of the building is also important for maximizing the safety impact of the sign to the most reasonable extent possible. At the proposed height of 41 feet, the sign is aligned with the top row of windows and the brick banding on the building, and achieves the goal of such uniformity of position. By contrast, at the approved height of 33 feet, 4 inches, the sign is awkwardly positioned between the two rows of windows and out of alignment with the brick bands. This awkward position makes it more difficult to locate, for it creates a level of clutter that is significant when considered in light of all of the unique characteristics of this property. The result is a less than uniform position on the building, which negatively impacts the sign's effectiveness for "wayfinding" by decreasing anticipation times and thus safety, which prevents the hospital from providing the most reasonably effective signage to its patients and the public as a whole. In addition to the fact that the strict application of the Ordinance would create a hardship on the use of the property in limiting the effectiveness of the sign for quickly and safely allowing the OCC patients to identify the building, the strict application of the Ordinance also is directly in conflict with the public's interest in protecting the County's designated Entrance Corridors. Section 30.6.1 of the Ordinance provides that the purpose and intent of the Entrance Corridor Overlay District is to "implement the comprehensive plan goal of protecting the county's natural, scenic and historic, architectural and cultural resources including the preservation of natural and scenic resources as the same may serve this purpose; to ensure a quality of development compatible with these resources through architectural control of development...to protect and enhance the county's attractiveness to tourists and other visitors, to sustain and enhance the economic benefits accruing to the county from tourism, to support and stimulate complimentary development appropriate to the prominence afforded properties deemed to be of historic, architectural or cultural significance, all of the foregoing being deemed to advance and promote the public health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the county and visitors thereto." As such, the County has clearly articulated its interest, and that of the public as a whole, in VA 2003-001 Rehearing MJ Hospital Wall Sign May 6, 2003 Page 6 protecting the Entrance Corridor Overlay District, by "ensuring a quality of development compatible with these resources," which would include such historic resources as Monticello. The hospital worked closely with the Architectural Review Board (the "ARB") staff throughout the permitting process to ensure that the building design complies with the ARB's published guidelines and criteria, and thus the County's stated goal of protecting the Entrance Corridor and nearby historic resources. Although the ARB did eventually approve the sign at the location established by the previously approved variance, it did so with great reluctance and regret. The ARB made clear that the interests of the County, and the public as a whole, would be better served by the location of the sign at the 41-foot location. As such, by strictly applying the Ordinance to limit the sign height to 30 feet, or by granting only a limited variance to permit the location at 33 feet, 4 inches, an undue hardship is created on the property in that it cannot fully comply with the Zoning Ordinance's goal of ensuring a quality of development compatible with the area's resources. For all of these reasons, the strict application of the Ordinance limiting the height of the sign to 30 feet, and the granting of a limited variance, both create a hardship on the property, in that the hospital cannot fully meet its duty to its patients and the public by providing signage that has a heightened level of effectiveness and further because it creates a direct conflict between the clearly-articulated public interest in protecting the designated Entrance Corridors. Staff agrees with much of the applicant's justification for variance but offers some precautions. As noted previously, by State Code, a hardship must be based on peculiar aspects of the property. The design of the building is not grounds for a hardship but becomes a self-imposed hardship. A second precaution relates to the argument about increasing height to improve visibility. This argument is relevant and on point with the variance criteria only when the increased height is necessary due to difficult topography or some other aspect of the property. Staff reserves further comment on this criterion until we can view the banner at the approved height and we can review the drawings showing sight lines, to determine the visibility of the proposed signs. In staff's opinion, unless new information results in a different finding, we are not able to find grounds for undue hardship. 1. The applicant has not provided evidence that the strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship. Uniqueness of Hardship The applicant notes: VA 2003-001 Rehearing MJ Hospital Wall Sign • May 6, 2003 Page 7 The hardship created by the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance and by the limited variance previously approved is not shared generally by other properties in the same zoning district and the same vicinity. The hardship created is a result of the extraordinary situation and condition of the property that cause it to be vitally important that its signage be as effective as reasonably possible under the circumstances but also makes it difficult to provide the appropriately effective signage given the restrictions of the Zoning Ordinance. As a health care provider (particularly as an urgent care provider), the hospital has a duty to its patients and the public as a whole to provide signage for the health care facility that has a heightened level of effectiveness. However, the combination of factors unique to the property, when coupled with this public duty, creates an extraordinary situation that is unique to this property and not shared generally by other properties in the same zoning district. The combination of the following factors are unique to this property: its location of over 1 ,300 feet from the roadway, its location within a larger developing office park with very different uses, the use of the property for an urgent care facility, the need for visitors to the property to quickly and safely locate it among other buildings within the office park while traveling at relatively high speeds, the absence of signage directly on Route 250, and the property's location along two Entrance Corridors and within the Monticello viewshed, among others. Other properties in the same zoning district and the vicinity do not share these characteristics. Therefore, the hardship created by this extraordinary situation is not shared generally by other properties and can only be remedied by the granting of a variance from the height restrictions. Staff does not concur with all of the factors cited as unique to the property and again takes the position that the unique aspects of the building itself are not grounds for a finding of unique hardship. While not consistent with the statutory grounds for a variance, the unique aspects of the hospital services use cannot be ignored. With respect to the hardship related to the property, staff finds that the topography presents a unique challenge to development. It is not typical that the building pad is located 50 to 75 feet above the grade of the access roads serving it. While the distance from Route 250 is a challenge to properly identifying the building, it cannot be the sole grounds for a finding of uniqueness. It is possible that freestanding directional signage on Rt. 250, even if allowed only by variance, may be more appropriate than wall signage, for directing visitors and patients to the correct access routes for the hospital. At this point, since staff finds no hardship, staff is unable to find that the hardship is unique. However, as noted in the preceding, staff can identify several unique circumstances relating to the property and staff will be reviewing new information supporting the hardship criterion. 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. VA 2003-001 Rehearing MJ Hospital Wall Sign May 6, 2003 Page 8 Impact on Character of the Area The applicant offers: The authorization of such variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, nor will the character of the district be changed by the granting of the variance. Rather, by enabling visitors to the OCC to more quickly and safely find the building, granting the variance to allow the higher sign will benefit adjacent properties by improving the safety of the area as a whole. In addition, granting the variance at the requested height will enable the property to fully comply with the ARB regulations and design guidelines, which further enhances adjacent properties. Furthermore, the proposed signage is in keeping with the character of the district and the adjacent property, and is smaller in overall size than is permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, the authorization of such variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, nor will the character of the district be changed by the granting of the variance. Staff concurs with the applicant. The proposed signage is less than the minimum allowed by the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant has invested in appropriate input from other entities (such as ARB) in their design of the building and signage. 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 only one of the three criteria for approval have been met, at this point, staff recommends denial of this request. As noted, we will be reviewing the new information once available, and we may revise our recommendation. Should the Board find cause to approve this request, staff recommends the following condition: 1 . This variance is approved for signage as proposed by the applicant. ATTACHMENT B STAFF PERSON: Amelia McCulley PUBLIC HEARING: March 4, 2003 STAFF REPORT VA-2003-001 OWNER/APPLICANT: Martha Jefferson Hospital Foundation — Outpatient Care Center TAX MAP/PARCEL: 78 / 311 ZONING: PDMC, Planned Development Mixed Commercial ACREAGE: 14.044 acres LOCATION: The proposed Outpatient Care Center is located off Peter Jefferson Parkway at the intersection with Peter Jefferson Place, on the south side of Route 250 East in Peter Jefferson Place development. TECHNICAL REQUEST AND EXPLANATION: The applicant requests relief from Section 4.15.13 of the Zoning Ordinance, which limits the height of wall signs to 30 feet in the PDMC district. (This is the maximum height for wall signs in any zoning district.) The applicant proposes two wall signs at a height of 41 feet, a variance of 11 feet. The signs are proposed on the new Outpatient Care Center, which is currently under construction in Peter Jefferson Place. The signs are proposed on the north elevation and will be visible from Route 250 and from the internal road, Peter Jefferson Parkway. One sign of individual channel letters states "Martha Jefferson" and the other is a caduceus icon (the medical symbol with wings, staff and snake). The Martha Jefferson sign is approximately 98 square feet and the caduceus icon is 21 square feet. These signs do not exceed the maximum sign area allowed. RELEVANT HISTORY: Final approvals for this site plan were given in July, 2002. The plan proposes an 80,000 square foot 3-story building. This parcel was created by a subdivision plat approved in December, 2001 . These signs are subject to Architectural Review and will be heard by the A.R.B. on March 3r , one day before this Board of Zoning Appeals meeting. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND QUALIFYING CONDITIONS: This property is substantially above the grade of Peter Jefferson Parkway (about 50 feet) and Route 250 East (about 75 feet above). It is also set back about 1500 feet from Route 250 East. The property is not unusually small or odd-shaped but it includes some difficult topography. The design of the building, although not technically appropriate grounds for a variance, combined with the topography and distance from Route 250, are the basis for a higher wall sign. A wall sign at the required maximum height would have limited visibility from Route 250. s a vH ZUUi-U411 manna Jefferson Hospital 2 March 4, 2003 A full description of the proposed uses is found at the end of the applicant's submittal for the hardship criterion. The proposed use of the facility involves various hospital services. APPLICANT'S JUSTIFICATION AND STAFF COMMENT: A review of the variance criteria provided by the applicant and comments by staff follows: Hardship Staff comments are written in italics and follow the applicant's comments. The applicant notes that the variance is necessary: • If the ordinance were strictly applied, no building identification sign visible to the public traveling along Route 250, the major point of access to the site, would be permitted on this building. The hardships include: a) Given the type of necessary healthcare services being delivered in the facility as described below, the public must be able to identify the facility from the public thoroughfare. The signage for this building is essential directional signage. No other viable signage option exists as described herein, thus creating an undue hardship if not approved; b) The unique design of the structure does not offer another location for the placement of a building identification sign due to unique physical and architectural constraints. Two brick-enclosed courtyards that conceals the service side of the building facing Route 250, including the mobile technology dock where tractor-trailer sized mobile units such as lithotripsy or MRI services will be located, block the sight line to any sign located lower on the building. This hardship is a function of both the height of the enclosed brick courtyard, over 35' above the lowest grades, and the manner in which the site slopes steeply away from the building; c) Meetings with County planning and zoning staff, particularly the architectural review staff, have indicated that no other location on the public-facing façade of • the building would likely be acceptable for a sign, and that the proposed signage location requiring this variance may be the preferred location. Locating the sign lower on the building to conform with the ordinance would result in a sign that 1) conflicts with the carefully detailed fenestration patterns and articulation of the brick bands, 2) would not be visible from the street, and 3) would be in conflict with the architectural standards if such sign were suggested for the face of the courtyards themselves. The Martha Jefferson Outpatient Care Center is a 93,000 square foot healthcare services facility that includes an urgent care center, an ambulatory surgery center 4 'Vial GII 4, LUU3 containing three licensed operating rooms, diagnostic medical imaging including MRI, CT, and X-ray, a woman's health center, physical therapy / occupational therapy, cardiac rehabilitation, a neonatal diagnostic center and a small medical office space. The majority of the space in the building is licensed by the Commonwealth of Virginia as hospital services. It is vital that patients seeking these services be able to identify the facility. Staff is sympathetic to the applicant's request but we are limited by the State Code criteria for a variance. A hospital's emergency services are unique and important services to the public. It is the kind of facility that someone not familiar with the area may need to find quickly. A variety of signs and sign types need to be used to identify the facility and the routes towards it. Given the fact that this building is set back fairly significantly from Route 250 and that there are 3 entrances into Peter Jefferson Place, adequate signage along the major access route, Route 250 is essential. The topography of this site presents a challenge for visibility from the surrounding roads, Route 250 and Peter Jefferson Parkway. However, staff needs to clarify the basis for the hardship criterion. The hardship must be based on peculiar aspects of the property. The design of the building is not grounds for a hardship but becomes a self-imposed hardship. (Staff agrees that the building design limits the visibility of a wall sign at the required height although it does not seem to completely obstruct it.) In addition, the relevant hardship discussion relates to the property on the effective date of this ordinance, as stated in this excerpt from the Zoning Ordinance: When a property owner can show that his property was acquired in good faith and where, by reason of the exceptional narrowness, shallowness, size or shape of a specific piece of property at the time of the effective date of this ordinance, or where, by reason of exceptional topographic conditions or other extraordinary situation or condition of such piece of property, or of the use or development of property immediately adjacent thereto, the strict application of the terms of this ordinance would effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict the use of the property or where the board is satisfied, upon the evidence heard by it, that the granting of such variance will alleviate a clearly demonstrable hardship approaching confiscation, as distinguished from a special privilege or convenience sought by the applicant, provided that all variances shall be in harmony with the intended spirit and purpose of this ordinance. Staff recommends the full use of directional signage along Route 250 and Peter Jefferson Parkway in order to properly identify the access to and location of this facility. Given the location of this building with respect to Route 250 and the design of the building, it is possible that a wall sign on this building face may not be the best identification of the facility. While staff is sympathetic to this request, we are not able to find grounds for hardship. March 4, 20,03 1. The applicant has not provided evidence that the strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship. Uniqueness of Hardship The applicant notes: • The hardship is not shared by other properties in the same PDMC zoning district, nor in the same vicinity, due to the unique location of this building pad and the intricate architectural detailing of the public-facing façade. The Outpatient Care Center is a large building located on the highest point of the Peter Jefferson Place office park property and as such, great care was taken in locating the building in its current configuration to respect the desires of the ARB, the Peter Jefferson Place Architectural Control Committee and Monticello. This includes the oblique angle of presentation to Route 250, the large, brick-enclosed courtyards and the long, steep slopes. These unique conditions of building style, building type, building orientation, topography and sight lines from the public road are not shared elsewhere in the district and are not expected to occur elsewhere in the district. Staff again takes the position that the unique aspects of the building itself are not grounds for a finding of uniqueness of hardship. With respect to the hardship related to the property, staff finds that the topography presents a unique challenge to development. It is not typical that the building pad is located 50 to 75 feet above the grade of the access roads serving it. While the distance from Route 250 is a challenge to properly identifying the building, it can not be the sole grounds for a finding of uniqueness. This property, zoned Planned Development Mixed Commercial, and this particular area of development have been reviewed and approved by the County. As such and based on its location within the Development Areas, it has been intended for development. Finally, the hospital services use, while not technically considered as grounds for a variance, can not be ignored. Since staff finds no hardship, staff is unable to find that the hardship is unique. However, as noted in the preceding, staff can identify several unique circumstances relating to the property and the proposed development. 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. Impact on Character of the Area . The applicant offers: 4 March 4, 2003 • The authorization of this variance will not be a detriment to the adjacent properties and the character of the district will not be changed. Indeed, each will be enhanced by providing essential wayfinding to the public that will be seeking healthcare services. The facility is located entirely within an established office park. The aesthetic qualities of the signage are strictly regulated by the Albemarle ARB to preserve the integrity of the district and of adjoining districts. The signage is designed at the minimum size and of minimum text to identify the building. It is located at the minimum possible height to be visible to the public and to respect the architectural integrity of the building. The proposed signage is in keeping with the character of the district and the adjacent property. Staff concurs with the applicant. The proposed signage is less than the minimum allowed by the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant has invested in appropriate input from other entities (such as ARB) in their design of the building and signage. 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 only one of the three criteria for approval have been met, staff recommends denial of this request. Should the Board find cause to approve it, staff recommends the following condition: 1 . This variance is approved for signage as proposed by the applicant and subject to approval from the Architectural Review Board.