Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA199700003 Review Comments 1997-06-03 STAFF PERSON: John Grady PUBLIC HEARING: June 3, 1997 STAFF REPORT VA-97-03 OWNER/APPLICANT: OCB Reality Co. T/A Old Country Buffet APPLICANT: J. D. Tettertone ZONING: Planned Unit Development/Entrance Corridor ACREAGE: 1.613 LOCATION: Located at the intersection of Route 29 North and Branchlands Boulevard. REQUEST: The applicant is requesting an amendment to the conditions of VA-89-72 to allow a second wall sign. The conditions of that variance are as follows: 1. That each tenant be allowed one (1) business wall sign. 2. That the wall sign area for each tenant be determined on the basis of one and five tenths (1.5) square feet of sign area per linear foot of business frontage. 3. That the criteria for the sign as submitted should be followed and be controlled by the Zoning Administrator along with the approved colors of red, yellow, green, blue and white. The proposed sign is approximately 82 square feet in size(2.6 feet high and 32.8 feet long). The sign is a channel letter design with red copy and internal illumination. The design and color of the sign will be subject to ARB approval. The applicant's justification includes the following: Hardship The existing variance limits the business to only one wall sign. This greatly restricts the visibility of the building in terms of signage. The sales at this location have dropped by 40%. OCB as a corporation depends almost exclusively on its signage for advertising in the community. Needless to say the draw of customers from the surroundin rea is greatly limited by having only one sign on the building. The total square footage for t et o 'gns combined will be 196 square feet. This is within the allotted two hundred(200) square f t maximum. At this point in time the viability of the business at this location is in question, he e the great hardship. friasi4,Jcir.,•)5 ,3 Uniqueness of Hardship The hardship in this location is unique in that the parcel is lower than the surrounding area. It is true in sign design that the faster the rate of travel on a road the higher the eyes of the driver go to search STAFF REPORT VA-97-03 Page 2 for signage and directional information. Due to this fact and given that the land is much lower than the surrounding roadways the situation is unique to this property and is significantly different from other properties in the same vicinity. Impact on Character of the Area The authorization of the variance as requested would in no way be a detriment to the surrounding properties. The sign design was specifically designed to match the architecture of the building. The additional sign will, in fact, aid customers in the area in finding the restaurant and thereby lessen confusion on the part of drivers. Many businesses in the district have signs on more than one wall face so this request will in no way adversely affect the character of the district. Relevant History There is no additional history on this site except the previously mentioned variance (VA-89-72). STAFF COMMENT: Staff has prepared changes to the sign ordinance that will affect the PUD-zoned properties. The proposed changes will allow the PUD-zoned properties to calculate sign area using the following formula, (one square foot of sign area x one linear foot of wall frontage). A business that fronts on more than one public street or easement will be allowed additional wall signs for those frontages. The additional wall signs will be calculated at one third the rate used in calculating the primary wall sign. The total aggregate area of the wall signs may be added together and divided by the applicant. The current proposal by the applicant would meet the proposed ordinance changes for the number of wall signs, but exceed the aggregate area that is being recommended. The applicant is requesting an additional 82 square foot sign to match the existing 82 square foot sign that faces Route 29. The proposed sign ordinance change would only allow for an additional wall sign of 45 square feet or smaller. The BZA should be mindful that the proposed sign ordinance changes have not been reviewed or approved by the Board of Supervisors. These ordinance changes are in line behind site plan and subdivision amendments, the water resource ordinance and the mountain side protection ordinance. As of yet, there are no tentative dates set as to when the proposed changes will be presented to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff is of the opinion that the applicant has met part three of the criteria necessary to approve this request: 3. The applicant has provided evidence that the authorization of such variance will not be of STAFF REPORT VA-97-03 Page 3 substantial detriment to adjacent property and that the character of the district will not be changed by the granting of the variance. The other commercial properties adjacent to the Branchlands PUD along Route 29 do not share the same sign restrictions as do those businesses located within the Branchlands PUD commercial area. The other commercial businesses along Route 29 that have additional frontage on a public street may have additional wall signs for those frontages. Therefore, there should be no detriment to the adjacent property or change to the character of the district. However, it is staff's opinion that the applicant does not meet the remaining criteria necessary to recommend approval of this request and therefore must recommend denial for cause: 1. The applicant has not provided evidence that the strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship. The applicant has stated that the limitation of the previous variance for only one wall sign thus only being able to advertise from one frontage has placed the viability of the business at this location in question. It is staff's opinion that this is somewhat of a self-imposed hardship as there should have been more consideration given to the sign limitations prior to development of the site. 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. I I The applicant feels that t the site is limited and unique due to the topography as the majority of other businesses along Route 29 are at the. level or higher than the road level of Route 29. Staff tends to agree with the applicant that �' ould be somewhat limited to any business that chose to build at this location. However, site selection and building location on a site are primary items to be considered prior to development. Therefore, it is staff's opinion that this is also somewhat of a self-imposed hardship as site location and should have been considered prior to construction. 1. %l; 1 Should the Board find cause to approve this request, staff recommends the following condition: 1) A second wall sign limited to 45 square feet or smaller is allowed. Or, the existing sign could be removed and replaced with a new sign, provided that the total sign area shall not exceed 127 square feet. VA-97-03.WPD- May 14,1997 ALBEMARLE COUNTY 4.4 a . 33a i�'' IB is.° ' • e S, mNNmmm 66 C 36 men ' 44 p12 e / .c. �. e� .. 1 i�� GEE it L .. 61U- VILLAGE OFFICES FMI D.B 747 pg.176-207 •*l �« �n •max 0.8 820 Pg 351-356 ®© 10 11 J loo 0 ton :oo 300 ® O U iI%'r:yy Om mar all:IWAVI 11111, 19 v Pt`p��dE 137) NV IOW O ��„rig sr abp aroma tame Ail I 41*5RW('=v. vm aet arn* &I• . ono 11111113$4 0� f. itel i2 air ,4A� o�v �� a ID �� so o 0 11 s4m ttik b ®�OAllky „, 6IM- BERKELEY COMMUNITY SEC I, DB 337, Pgs 336,337 Obiliii311 .-41111W BERKELEY COMMUNITY SEC 2, D B SW. Q°° ` BERKELEY COMMUNITY SEC 3,DB 360,Pgs 144A,I44B 61M LOTS 7 , \ DB 797 pp 249 .� 111, BERKELEY COMMUNITY SEC 4 08373Pg79 0 6IU - 0 BERKMAR D.B.398Pq.501 0 BERKMAR CENTER D B 589 Pg 229 REV 11/1/61 :r 0 �: ... .0 m CHARLOTTESVLLE DISTRICT SECTION 61-M-U . V.Illfr 1 4•0741740. 0 4-111--. . . r , . ; , , „ . , . , „,, , , ! , , . .. ,.,,,, ,....,,,„,..„„_____ . _.___ ____, ...........,,_. I , . .'.vim 0. 7W./ lgv! ii — : I. . NW • ■IIIIINF- IIM1_- r- rr.'— e..._�..l1l . air- M r01' ® e3 ®i �11-,-. ■e I� vw nnlml'-- ==-ram - - -. aural uN .:_ niNa Tr RACEWAY SEC110N s g N '-Y;' I) MD ALUMINUM SACK (.N'• 2)DID DARK BRONZE ALRETURNL RETURN w+.! 3)GOLD TRIP CO I JL�'B� 0 E4ti' 5)RED NAN TUBE I t, '4iiii M 6)METAL RACEWAY PAED OK.BRONZE 0 EMIR : tt'' 6 B)JB 7) 170►u VOLT 6E a M A 1 iumsPORORN / 1- L ! I4 o o _ N e,,aG21 !AQ PROJECT THIS DRAWINC Is DIE PROPERTY OF S�/.l LOTTESYILLE vlFSRFP. SCALE vA- -O- CUSTOMER APPROVAL DATE S25 MI lESOTA AVE N. iii 1610E CUFF RD. CHnRLOTT.CDR RICK 8 AOORESC _n l a STATE DATE vDRAMN BY PHONE/SO/SOMN 67s 266 J 1 PHONE/R6 2 89/•262) `�\�l VIRGINLA 2/3/97 D.PHIPPS -- FAX/SO7-S672675 schad-tracq signs FAX/612.696.2746