Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVA199000066 Action Letter 1990-10-17 8!OIi�r GGuuOO _� I iR(:il�l- COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Zoning 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596 (804) 296-5875 October 17 , 1990 Rio West Limited Partnership P. O. Box 6640 307 West Rio Road Charlottesville, VA 22901 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Action VA-90-66, Tax Map 61X1, Parcel 2 Dear Sirs: This letter is to inform you that on October 16, 1990, during the meeting of the Albemarle County Board of Zoning Appeals, the Board approved your request for VA-90-66 subject to the following condition: 1. That the 3 individual directional signs be limited to 15 square feet, 2 . That the height be limited to 3 feet, 3 . That the sign to the north will be removed, and the sign to the south will be removed and reconstructed in the location indicated and that the variance for the prior sign would apply to this new sign, 4 . That no identification signs be allowed on parcel 2B, 5. That no directional signs be allowed on parcel 2 or parcel 2B, 6. That the proposed sign material and color be approved by the Zoning Department, and 7 . no illumination. This approval allows relief from Section 4 . 15. 3 .5 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow 3 directional signs totalling 45 square feet and one (1) 50 square-foot identification sign. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, r:TL 44.z)-11 John Grady Deputy Zoning Administrator cc: VA-90-66 Grophen Signs STAFF PERSON: John Grady PUBLIC HEARING: October 16, 1990 STAFF REPORT - VA-90-66 OWNER/APPLICANT: Rio West Limited Partnership TAX MAP/PARCEL: 61X1/2 ZONING: PUD, Planned Unit Development LOCATION: Located at 301 West Rio Road. REQUEST: : The applicant requests relief from Section 4 . 15. 3 . 5 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, which states: 4 . 15. 3 "Permitted Signs 4 . 15. 3 . 5 . . . Planned Unit Development (PUD) Identification Signs: Provided : (a) not more than two (2) square feet in area. . . (b) not more than one (1) on a lot or parcel. . . " The applicant proposes to erect 3 identification signs along an internal private road that serves 3 separate commercial buildings. The applicant also proposes to increase the area of identification signs from 2 square feet to 110 square feet. The signs will be approximately 6 feet by 4 feet in size. The sign material will be flex face vinyl and aluminum. The applicant's justification includes: 1. The signs will be effective in directing public traffic in a difficult multi-use area. 2 . The signs should pose no visual impact from Rio Road. 3 . The owner proposes to remove the 52 square foot sign located on parcel 2B. 4 . The proposed signs will be tasteful and discreet 5. The need for these signs meets generally accepted commercial signage standards. RELEVANT HISTORY: Staff recognizes that each variance is reviewed on its own merits, and is not its face, precedent-setting. The following history is provided for information: Page 2 Staff Report - VA-90-66 VA-78-70 Variance was granted to Douglas L. Zerbel for freestanding indentification sign on parcel 2 . This is the West Park Plaza sign that the applicant is willing to remove in favor of the current variance request VA-90-66. Jan. 17, 1989: The Board of Zoning Appeals approved a variance for the applicant on this parcel to increase an identification sign form 2 square feet to 50 square feet and to reduce the 30 foot setback requirement to 1 foot. The condition of this variance was that the applicant pay for moving the sign if Rio road is widened. RECOMMENDATION Staff concurs with the applicant that removing the existing plywood sign on parcel 2B would be a substantial improvement to the character of the district. It is also evident that the smaller identification signs erected in the parking lot area would have less visual impact along Rio Road than the current West Park Plaza identification sign on parcel 2B. However, the applicant does not meet criteria one of two listed below and therefore should be denied for cause. 1. The applicant has not provided evidence that the strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship; 2 . The applicant has not provided evidence that such hardship is not shared generally by other properties in the same zoning district and the same vicinity. CONDITIONS: Should the Board of Zoning Appeals find cause to approve the requested variance, staff would offer the following conditions: 1. That no identification sign be allowed on parcel 2B. 2 . That no directional signs be allowed on parcel 2 (Rio Road) or parcel 2B (West Park Plaza) . 3 . That proposed sign material, height, and color be approved by the Zoning Department.