The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutVA197600001 Application 1976-01-26 -= Application for Variance Special Exception TO: THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA tRIANCE NO. VA-76-0 ( The undersigned applicant is(are) the owner of the following described property: A PLAT OF MIS PROPERTY MUST BE ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE • • APART OF THIS APPLICATION. GIVE LOCATION BY REFERENCE-TO NEAREST ROAD INTERSECTION. DIMENSIONS OF SITE MUST BE GIVEN. I/We Ritter Loans. respectfully request the Zoning Administrator of Albemarle County, Virginia to grant the Variance or Special Exception stated below in the Ch'ville Magisterial District and described as County Tax Map 45C Parcel 1-B containing acres and zoned B-1 . J. Ramsey for Ritter Loans APPLICANT' S SIGNATURE Daru Design Cc�any Loans Date Jan. 26, 1976 . .The petitioner request that the Zoning Administrator grant: a variance from Article 15A-6-2 (c) of the sign section of the Zoning Ordinance to allow 'a sign to be above the eave line. The applicant make this request because: . Action Taken by the Zoning Administrator: Approved Denied x Signed Zoning Administrator DATE Jan. 26, 1976 MEMO TO: Board of Zoning Appeals FROM: Patricia L. Fleshman SUBJECT: Permits for Woodbrook Village Shopping Center DATE: March 9, 1976 In checking the files dating back to October 23, 1969 the following permits were issued: Sign Permits S-71-121 Eways Carpet Land - Business sign April 2, 1971 S-71-148 Woodbrook Village Inc. - Location sign August 17, 1971 S-71-149 Woodbrook Village Inc. - Business sign August 17, 1971 Building Permits 71-525 Service Station Tax Map 45C, Parcel 1C August 17, 1971 73-04 Woodbrook Village Corp. - Schooping Center Tax Map 45C, Parcel lA January 3, 1973 , '. . Date //710 TW91/_.5. Time Time Permit Type of guested Made Number Ins ection Comments ...a." g; C-->'). C,)1 ..‘ . • .-- A2 : .. 6 // .1 ' . ./ .- /. .. ,_5e S- 7 - c4 : ,i - //„//r cf'. , :,"•-.. , c- ,-. /2 ' 1 y, . / A' .- ,.A. , ,, e -•..•• . , - . // . ; . . ,2 : 43 ! ',7(•< - 3. . , -Y.:„- - :---,, ., /.--,-„ (--,., .-, ..,,,, .3 : /D , 731 ,c7,-`? i 6 . J). • , ,...... ..-----;,-=-:.,,,,7-„,,/3 •,._. . 8 .',. - -6-- 7-7- 29'3 ' C.' e7 ,---i , / -,.• / ----.- • : , ,,,,, • IL-7 ': 1 ...,..' '"''''.' , ,". r' 7 2.4- 94- ("' . e?. /e e 4 --/ d., . -- 7=-: ,•- S 2.. - (.4?e • ::-...".-.c . A./r--5- 74' ci--/24- , ..."', 1: : ;.../ ...-I, -,..,..:...:- .'n -2 / Wt...c-- -- -...e. p,--.1•7: ,-- --...-,. ,-;-!,e--....- .. 1 . • // : • . 1 i i .....— tt i , i 4 ,,. I I 1 RITTER FINANCE • • V. RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR CERTIORARI H. P. CLARKE Comes now the respondent, Hartwell P. Clarke , Zoning Administrator, by counsel, and for response to the petition for certiorari heretofore filed on behalf of the petitioner herein, says as follows : (1) That no response is required to petitioner ' s petition under §15 .1-497 of the Code of Virginia (1950) , as amended; (2) That, insofar as the response to the said petition is required, • the respondent says as follows : (a) The allegations contained in paragraphS (6) , (7) , (8) , (9 ) , (10) and (11) of the said petition are admitted; o'TCi (b) That of the allegations contained in paragraphs (1) , (4) ;t/d (5) of the said .petition, respondent is without knowledge sufficient to either admit or deny and calls for strict proof thereof; (c) That of the allegations contained in paragraph (2) of the said petition, respondent admits that petitioner sought approval of the Albemarle County Zoning Department for the erection of a sign) but is without knowledge sufficient Vto.admit or deny the allegation contained in the said paragraph concerning the representation% of the petitioner 00 the character of the petitionerls proposed sign or of other signs in the immediate neighborhood; (d) As to the allegations contained in paragraph (3) of the petition, your respondent is without knowledge sufficient to either . 6414aA,. admit or deny the allegation and further says that the facts eaf&the allegation are relevant to this cause as a matter of law. • (a) As to the allegations contained in paragraph (12) of the said petition, respondent admits that petitioner ' s application was denied, but is expressly denied by respondent that such action was arbiteary; (f) The allegations contained in paragraphs (13) , (14) and (15) are denied. H. P. CLARKE, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR By Counsel FREDERICK W. PAYNE-- 416 Park Street Charlottesville, Virginia 22901 Counsel for Respondent Certificate I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was mailed to Lindaay G. Dorrier, Jr. , Esquire, 100 Court Square, Charlottesville, Virginia 22901, this day of 1976 . FREDERICK W. PAYNE • • 1 • srAFr REPORT ] UP-76-01. Roof Signs in B-1 Business and M-2 Industrial Zones Ritter Finance Company, Inc. , has petitioned the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission to amend Article 15A of the Zoning Ordinance + ' to permit roof signs as Signs Permitted in the B-1 Business and M-2 Industrial zones (see attachment) . `, The staff is of the opinion that the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors N, have made adequate provisions for signing in the Zoning Ordinance. More specifically, free standing, projecting, and wall signs are Signs Permitted in the B-1• and M-2 zones. ., Therefore, staff recommends denial of this petition. If the Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission approve this request, the staff recommends the follcwing amendments:1 "' 15A-6-2.1 Business Signs: Roof: (a) Sign shall in no manner be illuminated; (b) the aggregate area of all such signs shall not exceed 100 square feet; (c) sign shall be in vertical plane; (d) no portion of sign shall project above the roof peak including mansard and fake mansard roofs. aa On a parapet wall, sign shall not project above the parapet wally ;;. ` 15A-8-2.1 Business Signs: Roof: (a) Sign shall in no manner be illuminated; (b) the aggregate area of all such signs shall not exceed 100 square feet; (c) sign shall be in a vertical plane; (d) no portion of sign shall project above the roof peak including mansard and fake mansard roofs. On a parapet wall, sign shall not project above the parapet wall, . -is'air ov, `,.'' 4 ( 1 too,' �,y.� 1,r i c: L, ,yi,`tl'fl.%, 16-30.1 EAVE: The lower portion of a roof that overhangs the wall. ` � 16-65.1 PARAPET: That part of any wall entirely above the roof. C'i 16-80-15.1 SIGN ROOF: Any sign so erected or affixed to a building wholly upon the 1 _— roof of the building or any sign that projects above the intersection of the roof decking and wall face shall be deemed T a roof sign, or any sign extending above the eave or parapet " s ,, shall be deemea a roof sign. kveN 16-75.2 ROOF, MANSARD: A roof having two slopes on all sides with the lower portion having a steeper slope than the upper portion. 4�' '`�.>. This definition shall apply to any roof having a flat .° upper portion and sloped sides. c:a 16-75.1 ROOF, FAKE MANSARD: A roof constructed in the fashion of a mansard _ roof, any potion of which extends below the intersection of the wall face and roof decking. VIRGINIA IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE COUNTY OF ALI3EMARLE RITTER CONSUMER FINANCE COMPANY, INC. , • Petitioner V. i i ALBEMARLE COUNTY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS c/o Hartwell P. Clarke, Zoning Administrator County Office Building 411 East High Street •^•• Charlottesville, Virginia, Respondent PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI 1 To the Honorable David F. Berry, Judge of Said Court: Comes now your petitioner, Ritter Consumer Finance limialCictoul ny, Inc. , by counsel, and represents unto the Court that. aggrieved by a decision of the Albemarle County Board ning Appeals, rendered on March 9, 1976, for the following ns: • (1) Your petitioner states that in October 1975 it ram.• iated a lease for rental of office space in Woodbrcok 1 ing Center, Albemarle County, Virginia. M (2) Your petitioner sought approval from the Albemarle -14 � Y+`ty Zoning Department regarding erection of a roof sign similar �� eral other roof signs already installed, namely, Pittsburgh Store, Purcell Carpet and Booker Real Estate.by (� (3) Your petitioner was given verbal approval by r lbemarle County Zoning Department for the erection of `�r a sign such as the Pittsburgh Paint sign. -. , • (4) Your petitioner states that signs were ordered ' from Daru Design, after approval by the landlord, and Daru r`_ , Design was instructed to obtain the necessary permits and erect the signs as soon as possible. • (5) Your petitioner states that it made plans to begin erection of two signs, reading "Ritter Loans, " in ')` Vf---d January 1976 and it began installation on January 13 and 14,• �� 1!c 19 7 6 . .tN�ct& LL.i n c i p't- <.t c/t rh !1f__- T'ytCtt�u 7`� V � 4 , (6) Your petitioner states that County Zoning �1 \\ • < Administrator, Hartwell Clarke, then notified Petitioner ✓ �; t ti t M:(\:‘,1� that the signs were being erected illegally as no permit. . C N t� v had been issued. �2ril - '�" U'''y� j-t tAt�tcs !' . by rr t.jc ` tv ti\_ �4 (7) th January 15, 1976, petitioner obtained a ' ,` I p. _ ~t� n k, h sign permit from the Albemarle County Zoning Department and '✓ s proceeded with erection of the above-mentioned sign:. - --_ i j2II - " • (0) After one sign was erected by Daru Design, the I i County Zoning Administrator stopped petitioner and stated that ` ' the sign permit was issued in error and that the signs in ---- -- -; s1 . - �" question were technically roof signs and were not allowed l k � ---.4 under the zoning ordinance. ,--"3.---+ (9) Petitioner immediately contacted the County ✓ .- ] Zoning Administrator and the Deputy County Zoning Administrator i ,' 1\ k1�F� and after a lengthy discussion was advised that its only recourse was application for a variance to the Albemarle County Board of Zoning Appeals. . � (10) Petitioner filed an application with the County 11111 • 0\a--- Board of Zoning Appeals for a variance. I (11) At a meeting of. the Board of Zoning Appeals on • k(61t- February 10, 1976, the matter was deferred for further study. - (12) At a meeting of the Board of Zoning Appeals on MN th\"\\\k( l March 9, 1976, the Board of Zoning Appeals arbitrarily denied —- 1 ��`\{�j\` petitioner's request for a variance. 0 (13) The ruling of the Board of Zoning Appeals is elerroneous, arbitrary, capricious and without basis in law and - (3 fact, and, further, the decision of the Board works a great 111111 111 2 _ 't • I 1\i `l;'10n your petitioner who has expended a large sum �- of money to erect this sign. (14) Furthermore, the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals is discriminatory, since petitioner's signs V\\\ were of a design similar to other roof signs located in the }Woodbrook Shopping Cent r and in other shopping centers j throughout Albemarle County. (15) In addition, there was an abuse of discretion R4� on the part of the Board of Zoning Appeals in its refusal to grant the petitioner a variance. - , a WHEREFORE, your petitioner, by counsel, prays that the Court grant a writ of certiorari to review the aforesaid decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals in accordance with Section 12-7 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, and � 3 -------' �`"' afford relief to your petitioners by directing the Board to -`� .grant the necessary variance, and that your petitioners may --i"" have such further relief as may he deemed meet and proper. —'� RITTER CONSUMER FINANCE COMPANY, INC. By Counsel PAXSON, SMITH, BOYD, GILLIAM & GOULDMAN, P. C. 500 Citizens Commonwealth Center P. 0. Box 1151 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 Bys . Lindsay G. Do rier, CERTIFICATE ice~ I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Petition was delievered to Hartwell P. Clarke, Zoning Administrator, this day of April, 1976. VIRGINIA IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE RITTER CONSUMER FINANCE COMPANY, INC. , Petitioner v. ALBEMARLE COUNTY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS c/o Hartwell P. Clarke, Zoning Administrator County Office Building 411 East High Street Charlottesville, Virginia, Respondent PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI To the Honorable David F. Berry, Judge of Said Court: Comes now your petitioner, Ritter Consumer Finance Company, Inc. , by counsel, and represents unto the Court that it is aggrieved by a decision of the Albemarle County Board of Zoning Appeals, rendered on March 9, 1976, for the following reasons: (1) Your petitioner states that in October 1975 it negotiated a lease for rental of office space in Woodbrook Shopping Center, Albemarle County, Virginia. (2) Your petitioner sought approval from the Albemarle County Zoning Department regarding erection of a roof sign similar to several other roof signs already installed, namely, Pittsburgh Paint Store, Purcell Carpet and Booker Real Estate. (3) Your petitioner was given verbal approval by the Albemarle County Zoning Department for the erection of a sign such as the Pittsburgh Paint sign. (4) Your petitioner states that signs were ordered from Daru Design, after approval by the landlord, and Daru Design was instructed to obtain the necessary permits and erect the signs as soon as possible. • (5) Your petitioner states that it made plans to begin erection of two signs, reading "Ritter Loans," in January 1976 and it began installation on January 13 and 14, 1976. • (6) Your petitioner states that County Zoning Administrator, Hartwell Clarke, then notified Petitioner that the signs were being erected illegally as no permit had been issued. (7) On January 15, 1976, petitioner obtained a sign permit from the Albemarle County Zoning Department any proceeded with erection of the above-mentioned signs. (8) After one sign was erected by Daru Design, the County Zoning Administrator stopped petitioner and stated that the sign permit was issued in error and that the signs in question were technically roof signs and were not allowed under the zoning ordinance. (9) Petitioner immediately contacted the County Zoning Administrator and the Deputy County Zoning Administrator and after a lengthy discussion was advised that its only recourse was application for a variance to the Albemarle County Board of Zoning Appeals. (10) Petitioner filed an application with the County Board of Zoning Appeals for a variance. (11) At a meeting of the Board of Zoning Appeals on February 10, 1976, the matter was deferred for further study. (12) At a meeting of the Board of Zoning Appeals on March 9, 1976, the Board of Zoning Appeals arbitrarily denied petitioner's request for a variance. (13) The ruling of the Board of Zoning Appeals is erroneous, arbitrary, capricious and without basis in law and fact, and, further, the decision of the Board works a great • - 2 - Ave hardship on your petitioner who has expended a large sum of money to erect this sign. (14) Furthermore, the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals is discriminatory, since petitioner's signs were of a design similar to other roof signs located in the Woodbrook Shopping Center and in other shopping centers throughout Albemarle County. (15) In addition, there was an abuse of discretion on the part of the Board of Zoning Appeals in its refusal to grant the petitioner a variance. WHEREFORE, your petitioner, by counsel, prays that the Court grant a writ of certiorari to review the aforesaid decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals in accordance with Section 12-7 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, and afford relief to your petitioners by directing the Board to grant the necessary variance, and that your petitioners may have such further relief as may be deemed meet and proper. RITTER CONSUI.LLR FINANCE COLui N' , INC. By Counsel PAXSON, SMITH, BOYD, GILLIAM & GOULDMAN, P. C. 500 Citizens Commonwealth Center P. O. Box 1151 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 By: Lands . Dorrier, Jr. CERTIFICATE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Petition was delievered to Hartwell P. Clarke, Zoning Administrator, this 74& day of April, 1976. • - 3 - JITTER CONSUMER FINANCE COMPANY, INC. CliURCH ROAD AND GREENWOOD AVENUE • WYNCOTE • PENNSYLVANIA • 19095 • (215) 887-3200 March 29, 1976 Mr. H. P. Clarke Zoning Administrator County of Albemarle Office of Building Inspection 411 East High Street Charlottesville, Virginia 22901 Dear Mr. Clarke: Ritter Finance Company, Inc. , of Virginia, Woodbrook Village Shopping Center, Route 29 North, Charlottesville, Virginia, was recently denied a Variance for a sign under Application VA-76-01 on March 9, 1976. The fact that there are many nonconforming roof signs already in existence in Albemarle County was brought out at the hearings of February 10 and March 9, 1976. Ritter Finance Company, Inc. , of Virginia requests an amendment of Article 15A Signs Permitted and 16 - Definitions of the Albemarle County Ordinance to Allow for the Installation of Roof Signs in the Business and Manufacturing Districts. We are submitting the following additions to 15A-6-2 and 15A-8-2 and 16. The bracketed portions are the proposed addition to the Ordinance, 15A-6-2 BUSINESS SIGNS; WALL-IROOFSJ : Provided : (a) if illuminated, no moving, flashing, blinking, color changing, or exposed, bare or uncovered neon illumination, or lighting; (b) the aggregate area of 111 such signs shall not exceed 200 square feet; (c) no portion of such 1-Tall sign shall be greater than 30 feet from ground level or the eave line of the roof of the main building located on the premises upon which such sign is erected, whichever is greater; [(d) no portion of such roof sign shall project above the roof 's peak including a mansard roof or fake mansard roof on a building) 15A-8-2 BUSINESS SIGNS : WALL-fROOFS1 : Provided : (a) if illuminated, no moving, flashing, blinking, color changing, or exposed, bare or uncovered neon illumination, or lighting; (b) the aggregate area of all such signs shall not exceed 300 square feet; (c) no portion of such wall sign shall be greater than 30 feet from ground level or the eave line of the roof of the main building located on the premeises upon which such sign is ez•:cted, whichever is greater; C(d) no portion of such roof sign shall project above the roof's peak including a mansard roof or fake mansard roof on a building.) H. P. Clarke March 29, 1976 Page 2 [16-80-20 SIGN, ROOFS: Any sign painted, erected, constructed and main- tained wholly upon or over a roof of any building, or any sign that projects above the intersection of the roof decking and wall face shall be deemed to be a roof sign, or any sign extending above the eave or parapet. We are enclosing herewith our check in the amount of $20.00 to cover the advertising costs. Would you please advise the writer when a public hearing will be set for this proposal. Very truly yours, ---- / J. C. Dougherty' '2 Assistant Vice President i JCD:rea ,/ Enclosure C.W.WARTNtN CO.,NO.S01.8 4 Q ommontutalt j of Virginia IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE SUBPOENA IN CHANCERY ALBEMARLE COUNTY BOARD OF ' ZONING APPEALS % Hartwell P. Clarke, Zoning Administrator County Office Bldg. 411 E. High St. , Ch 'ville, Va. The party upon whom this writ and the attached paper are served is hereby notified that unless within twenty-one (21) days after such service, response is made by filing in the Clerk's Office of this court a pleading in writing, in proper Iegal form, the allega- tions and charges may be taken as admitted and the court may enter a decree against such party, without further notice, either by default or after hearing evidence. Appearance in person is not required by this subpoena. Done in the name of the Commonwealth of Virginia, this 7th day of April , 19 76 . eeK,ft r � �� , CLERK. '' " 2 t`t , DEPUTY CLERK. � Lindsay_ G porri_er-,._-Jr.. , p. q. 500 Citizens Commonwealth Center Charlottesville, Va. (OFFICE ADDRESS) • VIRGINIA IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE RITTER CONSUMER FINANCE COMPANY, INC. , Petitioner v. ALBEMARLE COUNTY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS c/o Hartwell P. Clarke, Zoning Administrator County Office Building 411 East High Street Charlottesville, Virginia, Respondent PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI To the Honorable David F. Berry, Judge of Said Court: Comes now your petitioner, Ritter Consumer Finance Company, Inc. , by counsel, and represents unto the Court that it is aggrieved by a decision of the Albemarle County Board of Zoning Appeals, rendered on March 9, 1976, for the following reasons: (1) Your petitioner states that in October 1975 it negotiated a lease for rental of office space in Woodbrook Shopping Center, Albemarle County, Virginia. (2) Your petitioner sought approval from the Albemarle County Zoning Department regarding erection of a roof sign similar to several other roof signs already installed, namely, Pittsburgh Paint Store, Purcell Carpet and Booker Real Estate. (3) Your petitioner was given verbal approval by the Albemarle County Zoning Department for the erection of a sign such as the Pittsburgh Paint sign. (4) Your petitioner states that signs were ordered • from Daru Design, after approval by the landlord, and Daru Design was instructed to obtain the necessary permits and erect the signs as soon as possible. (5) Your petitioner states that it made plans to begin erection of two signs, reading "Ritter Loans, " in January 1976 and it began installation on January 13 and 14, 1976. (6) Your petitioner states that County Zoning Administrator, Hartwell Clarke, then notified Petitioner that the signs were being erected illegally as no permit had been issued. (7) On January 15, 1976, petitioner obtained a sign permit from the Albemarle County Zoning Department and proceeded with erection of the above-mentioned signs. (8) After one sign was erected by Daru Design, the County Zoning Administrator stopped petitioner and stated that the sign permit was issued in error and that the signs in question were technically roof signs and were not allowed under the zoning ordinance. (9) Petitioner immediately contacted the County Zoning Administrator and the Deputy County Zoning Administrator and after a lengthy discussion was advised that its only recourse was application for a variance to the Albemarle County Board of Zoning Appeals. (10) Petitioner filed an application with the County Board of Zoning Appeals for a variance. (11) At a meeting of the Board of Zoning Appeals on February 10, 1976, the matter was deferred for further study. (12) At a meeting of the Board of Zoning Appeals on March 9, 1976, the Board of Zoning Appeals arbitrarily denied petitioner's request for a variance. (13) The ruling of the Board of Zoning Appeals is erroneous, arbitrary, capricious and without basis in law and • fact, and, further, the decision of the Board works a great - 2 - hardship on your petitioner who has expended a large sum of money to erect this sign. (14) Furthermore, the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals is discriminatory, since petitioner's signs were of a design similar to other roof signs located in the Woodbrook Shopping Center and in other shopping centers throughout Albemarle County. (15) In addition, there was an abuse of discretion on the part of the Board of Zoning Appeals in its refusal to grant the petitioner a variance. WHEREFORE, your petitioner, by counsel, prays that the Court grant a writ of certiorari to review the aforesaid decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals in accordance with Section 12-7 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, and afford relief to your petitioners by directing the Board to grant the necessary variance, and that your petitioners may have such further relief as may be deemed meet and proper. RITTER CONSUMER FINANCE COMPANY, INC. By Counsel PAXSON, SMITH, BOYD, GILLIAM & GOULDMAN, P. C. 500 Citizens Commonwealth Center P. O. Box 1151 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 By: Lindsay G. Do rid er, Jr? CERTIFICATE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Petition was delievered to Hartwell P. Clarke, Zoning Administrator, this day of April, 1976. - 3 - MEMO TO: Board of Zoning Appeals FROM: Patricia L. Fleshman SUBJECT: Permits for Woodbrook Village Shopping Center DATE: March 9, 1976 In checking the files dating back to October 23, 1969 the following permits were issued: Sign Permits S-71-121 Eways Carpet Land - Business sign April 2, 1971 S-71-148 Woodbrook Village Inc. - Location sign August 17, 1971 S-71-149 Woodbrook Village Inc. - Business sign August 17, 1971 Building Permits 71-525 Service Station Tax Map 45C, Parcel 1C August 17, 1971 73-04 Woodbrook Village Corp. - Schooping Center Tax Map 45C, Parcel lA January 3, 1973 ---- .......1.1111111111111mommillaillMINIMOINIMIlmirmr,Mm.....m............... , I,11 : , , . . CZ:n) • C> . . .-'\ '1. . .. ,. . lt, . • , , . . . ...I ...r.....„ rtl.r....SVPIMMIYO.1141.0.011.............1•1* ••-......r...-.... . . I 1 II . =....1 r: I 1 • r 1 . 1 , 1 I \. . . , ! • . r i 1 1 • • --. 1 ' . 1 ) i 1 ' 4 I P :i..., . . ., . . . I . . . T.I i = 1 . s' 4 / I 771 , i..............._ i . : .. i , I 1 . , I I 1 • • , . I . 1J1 tv C:i - i 1 . . . ( r . .' f iiii .. , , I l'I f! . 1-1 ; . . . ; . ., . . . . . . . o *.k i • c:5 a I.' ( DI t,'7, . •a tp, 11 . f•-• : L ,— 1-....„...../1-1-:....) ----I Z•N % ' . • . • .a - . . ,. • ...„„,__________ „j. _______•›.... r tr. . • ,• . . . In , . STAFF REPORT VA-76-01 Ritter Loans Existing Zoning : B-1 Business Tax Map : 45C Parcel: 02-3 Request : a variance from Article 15A-6-2 (C) of the sign section of the Ordinance to allow a sign to be above the eave line . LOCATION On the east side of Route 29 North approximately 4 mile north of the intersection of Route 29 and Woodbrook Shop- ping Center. STAFF COMMENT The Ordinance does not cover this situation. A variance would make this sign legal until an amendment could be passed. • • APPLICANT'S LIST OF ADJACENT OR ABUTTING PROPERTY OWNERS • The Planning Department will list all Map and Parcel Numbers of Adjacent or Abutting Property Owners. Applicant is to then take this form to the Real Estate Office where personnel in that office will aid applicant in listing property owners and addresses of all Map and Parcel Numbers given below. Real Estate Office is to return blue copy to Planning Department. • Map Parcel Name Address 45C-02-2 Woodbrook Village Carp . / 2007 Earhart Building Charlottesville , VA. 22901 c/o C . W. Hurt 45-104A F. H.K. Corp . / 1290 Seminole Trail Henry C . Miller Etal/ Cbarl ntra:c ii 1.1p ,va P.O. Box 7284 45-93C Robert K & Juline B. Griesbach/ Charlottesville, Va 22902 Ban45-108 Richard H. DeButts Btal/ Routeens 7 , Boxk320Trust Co Charlottesville , Va 22901 * Note - This form is for REZONING, SPECIAL PERMITS, VARIANCES, CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS VA-76-01 Application Number • IANC*j, NO. VA-76- TO: THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS f/We Ritter Loans hereby appeal the ruling of the Zoning Administrator of Albemarle County on the foregoing • application, and respectfully request a reversal of his/ her decision by granting the request for a variance or special exception as stated on the variance%3M. KROEptiati application. APPLICANT' SIGNATURE !"! J. R. Ramsey, Daru Design Belleview A . for Ritter Loans ADDRESS 1313216530, Charlottesville, Virginia PHONE NUMBER 293-7446 Action By The Board of Zoning Appeals: Date of Hearing: SIGNED: Chairman, Board of Zoning Appeals Date: