Loading...
02SN0285-Sept18.pdfA'agust 20, 2002 CPC September 18, 2002 BS STAFF'S REQUEST ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION 02SN0285 S. Wayne Funk (The Ironbridge Property, L.P.) and The Bank of Southside Virginia Dale Magisterial District East line of Iron Bridge Road REQUEST: Amendment to Conditional Use Planned Development (Case 85S154) relative to signs. Specifically, the applicm~t ~Sshes to delete Condition 8 which requires the removal of an outdoor advertising sign on an adjacent property to the north ("Primm Property") prior to the release of occupancy permits on the subject parcels. PROPOSED LAND USE: A self storage facility is proposed. In addition, other uses as permitted in the General Business (C-5) District are allowed. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RECOMMEND APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION ON PAGE 2. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval for the following reasons: With the approval of Case 85S154, it was anticipated that access to the subject property would be through a portion of the adjacent parcel to the north (fon2erly known as the "Primm Property"), on which the outdoor advertising sign is located. The relocation of this access no longer necessitates the incorporation of this northern parcel into the development of the subject property. Providing a FIRST CHOICE Community Through Excellence in Public Service. With approval of this amendment, Condition 8 of Case 85S154 will continue to remain in effect for the development of a portion of the adjacent northern parcel ("Primm Property"), thereby requiring the removal of the outdoor advertising sign prior to the release of occupancy permits on development that incorporates the portion of that parcel affected by Case 85S 154. (NOTE: CONDITIONS MAY BE IMPOSED OR THE PROPERTY O~WER MAY PROFFER CONDITIONS. THE CONDITIONS NOTED WITH "STAFF/CPC" WERE AGREED UPON BY BOTH STAFF AND THE COMMISSION. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "STAFF" ARE RECOMMENDED SOLELY BY STAFF. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "CPC" ARE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.) CONDITION (STAFF) In conjunction with the approval of this request, Condition 8 of Case 85SI 54 shall be deleted for the subject property only. (P) (Note: With the exception of Condition 8 of Case 85 S 154, all previous conditions of Case 85S154 shall remain in effect. Condition 8 shall remain in effect for Tax ID 772-673-3836.) (CPC) Prior to release ora building pennit, the outdoor advertising sign located on Tax ID 772-673-3836 shall be removed. (P) (Note: This condition supersedes Condition 8 of Case 85S154 for the request property, only. Condition 8 of Case 85S 154 remains in effect for that part of Tax ID 772-673-3836 which was the subject of Case 85S154.) GENERAL iNFORMATION Location: East line of Iron Bridge Road, south of Kingsland Road. Tax IDs 771-672-8290 and 772- 672-3298 (Sheet 17). Existing Zoning: C-5 Size: 8.4 acres 2 02SN0285-SEPT18-BOS Existing Land Use: Vacant Adiacent Zoning and Land Use: North South East West - C-5 with Conditional Use Plarmed Development and A; Vacant - A; Vacant - A; Single family residential or vacant - C-5 and A; Commemial (day care); single family residential or vacant UTILITIES; ENVIRONMENTAL; AND PUBLIC FACILITIES The requested amendment will have no impact on these facilities. LAND USE Comprehensive Plan: Lies within the boundaries of the Central Area Plan which suggests the property is appropriate for community mixed use. Area Development Trends: Properties along the east and west lines of Iron Bridge Road are characterized by a mix of commercial, industrial and agricultural uses or remain vacant. It is anticipated that properties along the east line of Iron Bridge Road at Kingsland Road will develop for commercial uses as currently zoned, while properties located on the west line of Iron Bridge Road will experience light industrial development, as suggested by the Plan. Zoning History: On October 24, 1984, the Board of Supervisors, upon a favorable recommendation from the Planning Commission, approved rezoning from Agricultural (A) to General Business (B-3) of 4.5 acres plus Conditional Use Planned Development to permit bulk exceptions on a total of nine (9) acres (Case 84S 162). Conditions required that access to the property be directly from Iron Bridge Road until such time as the adjacent property to the south developed for commercial or industrial uses, then access would be permitted from a fifty' (50) foot easement running from Iron Bridge Road along the southern property line. On June 26, 1985, the Board of Supervisors, upon a favorable recommendation from the Planning Commission, approved an mnendment to Case 84S162 relative to access (Case 85S067). Specifically, access to the site could either be provided directly from Route 10 or from the easement located along the southern line of the property. 3 02SN0285-SEPT18-BOS On January 22, I986, the Board of Supervisors, upon a favorable recommendation from the Planning Commission, approved amendments to Cases 84S162 and 85S067 relative to access, setbacks, screening of storage yard and buffers (Case 85S154). Specifically, due to legal questions regarding the right to construct a public road access within the fifty (50) easement along the southern property line, the applicants requested that the property access be relocated from the southern to the northern boundary. To accommodate this access, the applicant included a portion of the adjacent northern property (Tax ID 772-673-3836: "Primm Property"). This northern portion contained an outdoor advertising sign. With approval of this request, the Board required that, prior to the release of any occupancy permits for the entire subject property, the billboard would be removed from the "Primm Property." This case permitted site access along the northern boundary, as well as maintained access options approved with Case 85S067, which included direct access to Route 10 or from the southern property boundary. Site Design: The request property lies within an Emerging Growth Area. Development of the site must confom~ to the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and conditions of Cases 84S162, 85S067 and 85S 154 which address access, parking, landscaping, architectural treatment, setbacks, Signs, buffers, utilities and screening of dumpsters and loading areas. As previously noted, a site plan is currently under County review for a portion of the subject property which depicts access to this project from a right of way located along the southern property boundary. (Case 02PR0287 - Iron Bridge Self Storage at Quaiff Lane) CONCLUSIONS With the approval of Case 85S154, it was anticipated tbat access to the subject property would be through a portion of the adjacent parcel to the north ("Primm Property"), on which the outdoor advertising sign is located. Access to the subject property is now proposed from a right of way to the south, no longer necessitating the incorporation of this northern parcel into the development of the subject property. Hence, the subject property and the "Primm Property" will be developed as two (2) separate projects. With approval of this amendment, Condition 8 of Case 85S154 will continue to remain in effect for the development on a portion of the "Primm Property," thereby requiring the removal of the outdoor advertising sign prior to the release of occupancy permits for development incorporating the affected portion of the parcel. Given these considerations, approval of this request is recommended. 4 02SN0285-SEPT18-BOS CASE HISTORY Planning Commission Meeting (8/20/02): The applicant accepted staff's recommendation, but did not the Commission's recommendation. There was no opposition present. Mr. Litton noted that the affect of this amendment was to relieve the applicant of the requirement to remove the outdoor advertising sign and to place that responsibility upon the adjacent property owner to the north on whose property the sign is located. Further, should development of this adjacent property to the north exclude the portion affected by Case 85S 154, the sign could remain indefinitely. Mr. Litton therefore indicated that he felt it inappropriate to relieve the applicant from the requirement to remove the sign to accommodate development on the request property and further felt the original condition should be eanended to require the sign to be removed prior to release of a building permit, as opposed to the current condition which requires removal prior to release of an occupancy permit. On motion of Mr. Litton, seconded by Mr. Gecker, the Commission recommended approval of this request subject to the condition on page 2. AYES: Unanimous. The Board of Supervisors, on Wednesday, September 18, 2002, beginning at 7:00 p.m., will take under consideration this request. 5 02SN0285-SEPT18-BOS I ! ! ! I I I F- W ·