Winchester BZA approves variance allowing sign to be rehung at 2426 Valley Avenue

The Winchester Board of Zoning Appeals on Aug. 13 approved a variance allowing a nonconforming freestanding sign to be rehung at 2426 Valley Avenue, a commercial property now zoned Neighborhood Design District. The board voted 4-1 to grant the relief requested in BZA-25-2, with conditions including that a sign permit be approved, work be completed within one year, the sign not encroach on the public right-of-way or create a visual obstruction, the sign area not exceed six square feet, and the sign use no more than three colors.

The variance was necessary because the sign structure sits within the five-foot setback the Winchester zoning ordinance requires for freestanding signs. City staff said Section 18-8-8 and Section 18-8-9(b)–(c) of the Winchester zoning ordinance prohibit enlarging or structurally reconstructing nonconforming signs. Staff told the board that the pole and sign structure are within five feet of the property line and therefore nonconforming under the current ordinance.

City staff described alternatives, including moving the structure back five feet so the sign would conform to the ordinance. Staff also told the board it could not consider financial hardship alone as the basis for a variance because of Virginia law. A staff presentation noted that moving the pole back likely would require a site-plan revision, the installation of protection bollards, and could remove parking spots in a heavily used portion of the shopping center.

A representative of the property owner, identified in the application as Joseph Ordely and speaking on behalf of the Akins Group, said the empty arm-and-pole structure looks neglected and that rehanging signage would improve the appearance and visibility for tenants set back from Valley Avenue. The applicant said relocating the pole five feet would remove parking “and that’s hard” for the center’s tenants. The applicant also said, “leaving it blank just leaves it looking neglected.”

During discussion, board members acknowledged that several other freestanding signs along Valley Avenue are similarly close to the property line, in part because sidewalk and right-of-way expansions have moved the curb and sidewalk closer to properties over the past decade. One member voiced concern that granting the variance could set a precedent for other nonconforming signs in the corridor; others said the proposed sign would not be enlarged, but rather the existing pole would be used to hang a sign and that the requested size and color limits were consistent with surrounding signage standards.

The motion to grant the variance included five conditions staff recommended: (1) a sign permit must be submitted to and approved by staff; (2) work must be completed within one year or the variance becomes null and void; (3) the sign shall not encroach on the public right-of-way nor create a visual obstruction for vehicular traffic; (4) the proposed sign shall not exceed six square feet of sign area; and (5) the sign shall have no more than three colors. The board recorded a roll-call vote: Vice Chair Whitaker — yes; Mr. Paul — no; Ms. Shaner — yes; Mr. Wilson — yes; Chairwoman Marsha — yes. The motion passed.

No other business required action; the board closed the meeting after confirming the agenda approval included approval of the minutes and adjourning.