HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA198700015 Action Letter 1987-03-18 0 -
,x-r( OF A L B EAn
GOv ypF A•lga <�
2
`�RGlti�r
DEPARTMENT OF ZONING
401 MCINTIRE ROAD
CHARLOTTESVILLE. VA. 22901-4596
(804) 296-5875
May 14, 1987
Princeton Homes Corporation
c/o R. H. Jiraneck
P. 0. Box 2086
Danville, Va. 24541
Re: Board of Zoning Appeals Action
VA-87-15, Tax Map 32 , Parcel 74
Dear Mr. Jiraneck:
This letter is to inform you that on May 12 , 1987, during
the regular meeting of the Albemarle County Board of Zoning Appeals,
your application for VA-87-15 was approved for a period of two (2)
years with the following conditions:
(1) Sign not be illuminated, and
(2) No other sign can be erected on the property
This variance approval allows relief from Section 26.10 of
the Albemarle County Zoning •Ordinance to reduce the from and side
yard setbacks from fifty (50) feet to twenty-one (21) feet
respectively for the location of a freestanding business sign.
If you have any questions, please contact our office.
Sincerely ,
Nicdded 14! Pu4gedd
Charles W. Burgess
Zoning Administrator
CWB/mlm
cc: VA-87-15
STAFF REPORT - VA-87-15
APPLICANT: Princeton Homes
TAX MAP/PARCEL: 32/74
ZONING : HI (Heavy Industry)
ACREAGE: 1 . 0 acres
LOCATION: West side of Rt . 29 at its intersection with
Rt . 1570
The applicant seeks a variance from Section 26 . 10 of the
Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance . This section states :
"26 . 10 Minimum yard measurements ;
26 . 10 . 1 Adjacent to public streets : no portion of any
structure except signs advertising sale or rental of the
property, shall be erected closer than fifty (50) feet to
any public street right-of-way . . . .
The applicant has erected a freestanding business sign and
seeks a variance to reduce the setback from fifty (50) feet to
twenty-nine (29) feet from Route 29 , and twenty-one (21) feet
from Route 1570 . The applicant believes the visibility of the
sign to motorists would be minimal without benefit of the vari-
ance .
RECOMMENDATION
The application should be denied for cause :
4
1) The applicant has not provided sufficient evidence to
show that a strict application of the Zoning Ordinance
would produce a demonstrable hardship approaching con-
fiscation as distinguished from a special privilege or
4 convenience .
2) The applicant has not demonstrated that the perceived
4 hardship is unique to his property in contradistinction
to other properties in the same zoning district and
general vicinity.
3) The applicant has not provided evidence to demonstrate
that the authorization of the variance will not be of
substantial detriment to the adjacent properties or that
the character of the district will not be altered .
In the event the Board of Zoning Appeals finds cause to
approve the applicant ' s request , the following conditions should
be considered :
1) that the sign not be illuminated
2) that no other signs be erected on the property .