SP 2005-025 Jarman’s Sportcycles (Sign #32) - Request for special use permit to allow outdoor display of vehicles in accordance with Section 220.127.116.11(b) of the Zoning Ordinance which allows for outdoor sales, storage and/or display in the EC Entrance Corridor Overlay Zoning District. The property contains 2.219 acres zoned EC Entrance Corridor and HC Highway Commercial. It is described as Tax Map 78, Parcel 33B and is located in the Scottsville Magisterial District on the south side of Richmond Road (US 250 East) approximately .14 miles west of its intersection with Sleepy Hollow Lane (a private right-of-way). The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Rural Area 4. (Margaret Maliszewski)
Ms. Maliszewski summarized the staff report.
· This special use permit request is to store and display vehicles at a site on Route 250 East. As you know 250 East is an Entrance Corridor and outdoor storage and display requires a special use permit when it is proposed on an Entrance Corridor. The focus of this type of review is specifically limited to the potential impacts of the proposed development on the Entrance Corridor. The site is located on the south side of Route 250 East a short distance east of the I-64 interchange adjacent to the building that they commonly refer to as the Farmer’s Market Building. In this proposal the display of vehicles would be limited to the porches of the proposed building, which was shown in yellow highlight on the plan. The proposal has been designed to compliment that adjacent building. Again, the focus of this type of review is specifically limited to the potential impacts on the Entrance Corridor.
· The ARB has reviewed the proposal. The ARB had no objections to the request and recommended conditions related primarily to the location of the display and to the maintenance of the existing wooded area on site. There are also conditions recommended on lighting and signage because those are items that could have an impact on the character of the Corridor.
· Staff is recommending approval of the special use permit with the conditions listed in the staff report.
· Staff received comments from one adjacent property owner. Those comments were from the Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation, which were emailed to the Commissioners last week. Copies of the email were distributed to the Commission.
Mr. Edgerton asked if there were any questions for staff.
Ms. Higgins stated that on condition 3 with the recommendation where it talks about the existing woodland on site is indicated by the “existing tree line” shall be retained in its entirety. Her interpretation is that starting at the tree line at the back of the site there are septic drain fields there which will have to be cleared. She asked if staff meant with the exception of what has to be cleared for a septic drain field because that area was all wooded. It is the edge completely out of sight from the Entrance Corridor because it falls off a steep slope there. But, she just wanted to make it clear if she made it a condition that they don’t preclude that it is not compatible with the septic drain field.
Ms. Maliszewski agreed that it seemed reasonable.
There being no further questions for staff, Mr. Edgerton opened the public hearing and invited the applicant to address the Commission.
Charles Hendricks, representative of the Gaines Group, stated that he was with the architectural firm on this project and was available for any questions about the site plan or the building.
There being no questions for the applicant, Mr. Edgerton invited comment from other members of the public. There being none, the public hearing was closed to bring the matter back before the Commission.
Ms. Joseph asked that condition 3 be modified by adding with the exception of that area necessary for installation of the septic field as previously suggested.
Mr. Rieley asked to make one suggestion. Since they had a letter from Monticello pointing out the importance of Shadwell and the fact that it was under an easement and its historical significance, it seems that some additional understory planting on that side, which is the northeast side of the property, would be in order. There are existing trees along there and there is no reason why they couldn’t be underplanted with Hollies or something that are shade tolerant.
Mr. Cilimberg asked for clarification on the proposed location of the trees from the corridor because that is why it is a special use permit.
Mr. Rieley stated that it was along the northeast side.
Mr. Cilimberg stated that it would be the area most adjacent to 250 on the east side of the building, and Mr. Rieley agreed.
Mr. Kamptner stated that there needs to be a connection between the outdoor display and this condition.
Mr. Edgerton stated that they were showing the primary and secondary drainfields to the southwest. So there would be no reason for them to clear any of the trees along this area.
Ms. Higgins stated no and that it was pretty thickly wooded. She asked staff what the tree growth was like.
Mr. Rieley stated that it was very young tree growth. He suggested that the condition stated that the trees be installed to the back of the building and it was adjacent to the outdoor display.
Mr. Kamptner stated that he did not see any problem with the nexus in this case because of the purpose of the landscaping is to protect the Entrance Corridor which has that direct connect and part of its purpose if Shadwell and Monticello. He felt that the nexus was clearly made here.
Mr. Rieley asked that the screening of shade tolerant evergreen trees like Hollies be installed on the east side of the building from Route 250 right-of-way to the back of the building under the direction of staff.
Motion: Mr. Rieley moved, Ms. Joseph seconded that SP-2005-025, Jarman’s Sportscycles, be approved subject to the following conditions as amended that reference the “Jarman’s Sportscycles Preliminary Site Development Plan” with revision date of 10/21/05 (two sheets) prepared by B. Aubrey Huffman and Associates, LLC.
1. The outdoor display of vehicles shall be limited to the covered porches of the building only. Vehicles shall not be displayed elsewhere on the site, or between the northern parcel boundary and the EC.
2. Vehicles shall not be elevated anywhere on site.
3. The existing woodland on site, as indicated by the “existing tree line,” shall be retained in its entirety, with the exception of that area necessary for installation of the septic field.
4. The existing four Sycamore (or London Plane) trees (Platanus x acerifolia or Platanus occidentalis) located along the Route 250 East side of the property shall be preserved.
5. Tree preservation measures shall be included on the E&S plan and the grading plan (submitted with the final site plan) to provide for conditions #3 and #4, above. The E&S plan and grading plan shall include notes and details consistent with chapter 3.38 “Tree Preservation and Protection” of the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook (current edition). Tree preservation measures shall be coordinated throughout the site plan set and E&S drawings. In the event that any site plan or E&S drawings show inconsistent information regarding tree protection, the drawing(s) showing the greatest tree protection shall prevail.
6. Site and building lighting shall be limited to the satisfaction of the ARB as illustrated in an ARB approved lighting plan submitted with the final site plan.
7. Site and building signage shall be limited to the satisfaction of the ARB as illustrated in an ARB approved drawing included with the applicant’s final submittal for a Certificate of Appropriateness.
8. The three board fence proposed along the Route 250 East side of the property shall align with the fence on the adjacent property to the west. The color of the proposed three board fence shall match the color of the fence on the adjacent property to the west.
9. Shade tolerant understory evergreen trees, similar to Hollies, shall be installed and maintained on the east side of the building from the Route 250 right-of-way to the back of the building.
The motion passed by a vote of 7:0.
Mr. Edgerton stated that SP-2005-025, Jarman’s Sportcycles, would go to the Board of Supervisors on January 11 with a recommendation for approval.
Return to PC actions letter