The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutZTA201000005 Legacy Document 2012-08-13 (5)pF AL �i a� �'fRGII3�p` COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: ZTA 2010 -00005 Proposed Sign Ordinance Zoning Text Amendments SUBJECT /PROPOSAL/REOUEST: Public Hearing — Proposed Sign Ordinance Zoning Text Amendments BACKGROUND and ORIGIN: STAFF: Greg Kamptner, Ron Higgins, Stewart Wright, Margaret Maliszewski PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING DATE: September 13, 2011 On January 6, 2010, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors adopted a "2010 Albemarle County Action Plan" (see Attachment B) which included as item #6 the following: "Sign Ordinances — The sign ordinances need to be re- examined to ensure they do not overly restrict economic vitality of area businesses. Staff should work with local retailers to develop new ordinances that will help promote good business practices as well as maintaining quality aesthetic values. " The Board of Supervisors adopted a Resolution of Intent on the Sign zoning text amendments (ZTA) on May 12, 2010 (see Attachment Q. Throughout this process we hosted three roundtable discussions to seek input from those in the sign industry, business community, local elected and appointed officials and various other groups, to hear what they had to say about the present sign ordinance and sign permit approval process and, finally, to comment on the proposed ordinance draft. On August 16, 2010 we held a work session on the Potential Sign ZTAs with the ARB. They were asked to comment on a number of items, including: the predictability of the sign review process in the entrance corridors; improvements in sign application materials and application process; changes in sign regulations for planned developments; making some standards more consistent (e.g. wall sign allowances, freestanding sign setbacks); window sign regulations and applicability; review of sign packages and coordination with site plans; entrance corridor guidelines, and; increased heights for wall signs. The ARB supported changes and suggested that regulations be simplified in most cases. We brought the results of the roundtables, ARB discussions and other comments to you for discussion at your work session on October 19, 2010. At that session we presented a number of proposed changes and received comments and guidance on those. The proposed sign ordinance changes reflect that guidance. DISCUSSION: As you will recall, we heard more about the sign review and approval process than about sign standards throughout the discovery process. It was evident in the discussions with various stakeholders that the perception was that the process took too much time and effort on the applicant's part. To this end the staff and ARB has implemented a number of efforts to streamline the approval process, including: better coaching of applicants on what to provide to get a speedy review; county -wide administrative ARB approval standards, and; improvement to the sign application and materials to better N guide applicants. This has resulted in significant reductions in the time it takes to review and approve sign permits, as we reported at your October 19, 2010 Work Session. Regarding the sign ordinance changes, we heard that these should be limited and result in simplifications and improvements in process that save time for applicants, boards and staff. All of the text amendments proposed are intended to do that. It was important to not develop amendments that would increase staff time in an era of reduced staffing levels. For example, eliminating reviews for special permits for off -site signs in planned developments saves staff time in developing a report to the Board of Zoning Appeals, saves the Board time in reviewing such applications and saves applicants time and money by permitting an administrative review without the costly application fee and advertising fees. Not requiring a permit or review for window signs reduces staff time and the standard simplifies enforcement of the regulations by Code Enforcement Officers. 19 ZI] 0110 117.E 194M) :11113 10F.11 1[y I lF.M114 xi The changes that are represented in the Proposed Ordinance to amend sign regulations include the following, along with some reference corrections and clarifications (see Attachment A): Planned Developments and shopping centers: - -The "site" has been redefined to include the entire planned development in order to address the issue of "off- site" signs in unified developments, thus no longer requiring an SP for these. - -The size for a freestanding sign for planned developments and shopping centers has been increased to allow for up to 54 sq. ft. maximum if "bonus tenant panel" signs are to be included within the primary sign. The current ordinance limits this to 32 sq. ft. in some districts and 24 sq. ft. in other districts. Currently, in shopping centers with at least 100, 000 sq. ft. in gross floor area you can have one anchor sign at 6 sq. ft. for each 100, 000 sq. ft. This provision has been eliminated and replaced with the "bonus tenant panel " sign type. - -The anchor sign provision has been eliminated and replaced with a "bonus tenant panel" definition and provision which eliminates multiple freestanding tenant signs. Freestanding and monuments signs: -- Setbacks have been made consistent (e.g. all 5' instead of some at S' and some at 10' as the current regulations require). Wall Signs: - -The area maximum has been made the same in all commercial and planned districts (e.g. 1 %2 sq. ft. of area for each 1 linear foot of wall)? Currently it is 1:1 in some and 1 % :1 in other areas. - -The height would now be allowed to be above the current 30' maximum in non - residential development for buildings that are taller. This is now defined as "not to exceed the cornice line and the "cornice line" has been defined. Temporary Signs: - -The number per year has been increase from the current limit offour to six. - -The length of time they are up remains the current limit of 15 days. However this can be done in any combination of time periods as long as the aggregate does not exceed the current calendar year limit of sixty (60) days. - -The fifteen day limit does not apply to a temporary sign erected while a permanent sign is being made. However, the sixty day calendar year limit would still apply to such signs. -- Sandwich board signs would now be allowed in all planned development districts as they currently are in the Downtown Crozet district. Planning Commission Public Hearing, September 13, 2011 Window Signs: -- Window signs would not be subject to permits or ARB approvals. -- Window signs would now have a 50% maximum coverage area per window. -- Window signs that exceed 50% coverage would now be prohibited signs. PUBLIC PURPOSE TO BE SERVED: As stated earlier, all of the changes would result in more clarity for applicants, reduced staff and board time and reduced cost to the applicants. The changes would not have an adverse impact on aesthetic values present in the county. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the Board of Supervisors, approval of the proposed Ordinance to amend various sign regulations in the Zoning Ordinance as found in Attachment A. ATTACHMENTS: A: Proposed Ordinance to amend the sign regulations, dated 8/29/2011 B: Board of Supervisors "2010 Albemarle County Action Plan" C: Board of Supervisors May 12, 2010 Resolution of Intent D: Current Schedule for the Sign ZTA urocess Planning Commission Public Hearing, September 13, 2011 3