Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Zoning Signage topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board of Zoning Appeals approves sign variance for business at 1510 North Ohio

Augusta Planning Commission / Board of Zoning Appeals · December 11, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Board of Zoning Appeals granted a variance allowing a wall sign larger than the C-2 zoning limit at 1510 North Ohio after staff cited a unique building setback and a preexisting sign; staff recommended limiting the number of oversized signs as a condition.

The Augusta Board of Zoning Appeals approved a variance allowing a larger wall sign at 1510 North Ohio after staff concluded the building's setback and a prior zoning change create an unnecessary hardship for strict application of the sign-size limit.

Planning staff told the board the property is zoned C-2 (local commercial) and that the proposed wall sign submitted with the application was 122 square feet, while the zoning code limits nonresidential wall signs to 32 square feet. Staff reported it had discovered an existing, previously installed sign on the building and that the applicant told staff he was not aware the sign had been installed.

Staff reviewed the site's history and findings of fact, noting a legal nonconforming primary sign installed in 2009 (staff referenced a 76.5-square-foot primary sign) and a pharmacy sign previously 40 square feet. The staff report said the building face is set back roughly 300 feet from the street compared with a more typical 80–100-foot setback for similar C-2 buildings, and that visibility constraints and the 2020 overhaul of the sign regulations together create a hardship specific to this property. "The request is intended to allow reasonable adjustment of sign size while minimizing potential impacts on neighboring properties," staff said.

One resident, Eric Grooms of 2500 Lake Point Court, asked whether the board's use of a variance was consistent with an earlier case discussed at council and whether the property should be treated as part of a strip center; staff and board members said the Dillon's building (recorded in the file as "Dylan's") is a standalone structure on a separately platted lot and not a multi-tenant strip center, and that the variance route was used in part because the sign had already been installed.

After closing the public hearing, the board moved to approve the variance. The chair announced the motion carries. Staff recommended conditions limiting the number of signs that exceed the current maximum sign face to reduce the potential for excessive signage at the busy intersection.

The board's approval is subject to any written conditions the board applies and will be reflected in the final board order.