05SN0242-June22.pdfJune 22, 2005 BS
STAFF'S
REQUEST ANALYSIS
AND
RECOMMENDATION
05SN0242
B. J. Patel
and
Jeram Bhas K. Patel
Clover Hill Magisterial District
North line of Hull Street Road
REQUEST:
Amendment to zoning (Case 86Sl15) relative to signage. Specifically, the
applicants are requesting deletion of a condition requiring signs comply with Special
Sign District standards.
PROPOSED LAND USE:
A motel has developed on the property and was developed as part of the shopping
center on adjacent property to the north. Signage in compliance with Ordinance
standards is proposed. Specifically, a freestanding identification sign with
changeable copy is proposed. However, with approval of this request, other signs
will be permitted to comply with Ordinance requirements.
PLANN1NG COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Recommend approval for the following reason:
Proposal conforms to Ordinance requirements.
(NOTE: CONDITIONS MAY BE IMPOSED OR THE PROPERTY OWNER(S) MAY
PROFFER CONDITIONS.)
Providing a FIRST CHOICE community through excellence in public service
GENERAL INFORMATION
Location:
North line of Hull Street Road, east of Courthouse Road. Tax ID 749-686-7962 (Sheet 10).
Existing Zoning:
C-5
Size:
0.8 acre
Existing Land Use:
Commercial
Adiacent Zoning and Land Use:
North, South, East and West - C-5; Development; Commercial
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 Route 360 Corridor Plan which suggests the property is
appropriate for community mixed use.
Area Development Trends:
The area is characterized by commercial development along this portion of the Hull Street
Road corridor. It is anticipated commercial uses in this area will continue, in accordance
with the Plan.
Zoning History:
On November 26, 1986, the Board of Supervisors, upon a favorable recommendation
from the Planning Commission, approved rezoning, a Conditional Use Planned
Development and accepted proffered conditions on property that included the request site
(Case 86S115). With approval of this request, a proffered condition was accepted
requiring that all signs conform to the requirements of the Special Sign District
2 05SN0242-JUNE22-BOS
(Proffered Condition 6 for the B-3 Tract of Case 86S 115). For out parcel development,
these requirements allow location on the freestanding project identification sign rather
than a separate freestanding sign.
Development Standards:
The property has developed as a motel and is an outparcel of the shopping center on
adjacent property to the north. Except as regulated by Case 86S115, development must
conform to the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for Emerging Growth Districts
which address access, parking, landscaping, architectural treatment, setbacks, signs,
buffers, pedestrian access, utilities and screening of dumpsters and loading areas.
Signs:
Signs for the site are currently regulated by a proffered condition of Case 86S 115. Such
conditions do not allow a freestanding sign to identify the use located on the site. Rather,
as part of a larger project, the use would be allowed signage on the freestanding project
identification sign, as would other tenants within the project
The applicants are requesting deletion of this sign condition to permit signs to be
regulated by current Ordinance standards. Specifically, they are requesting a
freestanding sign with changeable copy. The current Ordinance would allow one (1)
freestanding sign with a maximum sign area of twenty (20) square feet and up to eight (8)
feet in height. The Ordinance also allows any freestanding sign area to be increased up to
twenty-five (25) percent, so long as the increase is for the purpose of including
changeable copy. This would allow the use an additional five (5) feet of sign area, for a
total maximum of twenty-five (25) square feet, with the inclusion of changeable copy.
With this change, other signs would also be permitted to comply with current Ordinance
standards.
CONCLUSION
The proposed amendment complies with Ordinance requirements relative to signage. Given these
considerations, approval of this request is recommended.
CASE HISTORY
Planning Commission Meeting (5/17/05):
The applicant accepted the recommendation. There was no opposition present.
On motion of Mr. Gulley, seconded by Mr. Gecker, the Commission recommended
approval.
3 05SN0242-JUNE22-BOS
AYES: Unanimous
The Board of Supervisors, on Wednesday, June 22, 2005, beginning at 7:00 p.m., will take under
consideration this request.
4 05SN0242-JUNE22-BOS
o
0
U