08SN0286STAFF' S
REQUEST ANALYSIS
AND
RECOMMENDATION
08SN0286
Victory Lady
Midlothian Magisterial District
North line of Midlothian Turnpike
RE VEST: Conditional Use topermit acomputer-controlled variable message electronic sign.
PROPOSED LAND USE:
A computer-controlled variable message electronic sign, incorporated into a
freestanding identification sign for a fitness center is planned.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMEND APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION AND ACCEPTANCE OF
THE PROFFERED CONDITION ON PAGE 2.
AYES: MESSRS. BASS, BROWN, HASSEN AND WALLER.
ABSENT: MR. GULLEY.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Recommend denial for the following reasons:
A. The proposed computer controlled variable message electronic sign does not
conform to the adopted Electronic Message Center Policy relative to height,
spacing between such signs and color of copy.
B. The requested exception to the Policy could set a precedent for similar requests.
Providing a FIRST CHOICE community through excellence in public service
(NOTE: CONDITIONS MAY BE IMPOSED OR THE PROPERTY OWNER(S) MAY
PROFFER CONDITIONS. THE CONDITIONS NOTED WITH "STAFF/CPC" WERE
AGREED UPON BY BOTH STAFF AND THE COMMISSION. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY
A "STAFF" ARE RECOMMENDED SOLELY BY STAFF. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A
"CPC" ARE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING
COMMISSION.)
rnNnTTTnN
(CPC) The total area of the freestanding sign shall not exceed 75.9 square feet. The sign
height shall not exceed twenty-one (21) feet. (P)
PROFFERED CONDITION
(CPC) In addition to Ordinance requirements, any computer-controlled, variable message,
electronic sign shall conform to the following standards:
a. Copy shall be limited to a maximum of two (2) lines which shall not move
nor fade;
b. The message or display shall be programmed or sequenced to change no
more than once every ten (10) seconds;
c. The copy display color shall be red;
d. Flashing and traveling messages shall be prohibited;
e. Bij ou lighting and animations effects shall be prohibited; and
f. Such sign shall be located on Midlothian Turnpike. (P)
GENERAL INFORMATION
T ,ncati nn
North line of Midlothian Turnpike, west of Robious Road. Tax ID 749-709-1045.
Existing Zoning:
C-3
Size:
1.9 acres
Existing Land Use:
Commercial
2 08SN0286-APR28-BOS-RPT
Adjacent Zoning and Land Use:
North - 0-2 and R-7; Office, commercial and single-family residential
South - C-5; Office
East and West - C-3; Commercial
UTILITIES; ENVIRONMENTAL; AND PUBLIC FACILITIES
This use will have no impact on these facilities.
T,ANn TIFF.
Comprehensive Plan:
Lies within the boundaries of the Northern Area Plan which suggests the property is
appropriate for general commercial use.
Area Development Trends:
The area is characterized by commercial and office uses along the north and south lines of
the Midlothian Turnpike Corridor, with single-family residential, office and commercial
uses along Robious Road.
Sian Design:
Currently, the Ordinance permits two (2) freestanding signs, one along Midlothian Turnpike
and one along Robious Road, identifying the project in which the subject fitness center is
located (two additional properties located west of the subject property are also encompassed
with the project limits). The existing freestanding sign along Midlothian Turnpike currently
measures 89.3 square feet in area and twenty-one (21) feet in height.
The applicant plans to incorporate an electronic message board into the existing freestanding
sign. The adopted Electronic Message Center Policy indicates that electronic message
boards should not be incorporated into non-conforming signs unless such signs are brought
closer into conformance with Ordinance requirements relative to area and height. New
freestanding signs are currently limited to a height of fifteen (15) feet and an area of 62.5
square feet with the incorporation of changeable copy. As such, the area and height of the
existing sign should be averaged with that of current standards for new signs, bringing the
proposed sign closer into conformance with the Ordinance. This would yield a maximum
sign area of 75.9 square feet and a maximum sign height of eighteen (18) feet. The
applicant has agreed to reduce the sign area, but proposes to maintain the sign height at
twenty-one (21) feet, contrary to the Policy. (Condition)
The proposal would comply with the Policy relative to lines of copy, timing of message
changes and lack of flashing and traveling messages, bijou lighting and animation. Further,
at the request of the Midlothian District Commissioner, proffers would prohibit the copy
3 08SN0286-APR28-BOS-RPT
from moving or fading with message changes, whereas the Policy would permit the latter.
Proffered conditions also require that the sign be located along Midlothian Turnpike and not
Robious Road, consistent with the Policy relative to such signs not being visible from
residentially or agriculturally zoned properties. (Proffered Condition)
The proposal would not comply with the Policy relative to spacing between such signs and
color of copy, as discussed herein.
Spacing:
The Policy requires a minimum 2,000-foot spacing between electronic message signs.
Currently, an electronic message center sign identifying a hotel is located on the north line
of Midlothian Turnpike, approximately 1,700 feet east of the subject property (Tax ID 750-
708-6184 -see attached map). As such, the request does meet the spacing requirements per
the Policy.
Displace:
Display colors for electronic message centers are limited to white or yellow. The applicant
wishes to use red, contrary to the Policy.
CONCLUSION
The proposed computer-controlled variable message electronic sign does not conform to the
adopted Electronic Message Center Policy relative to height, spacing between such signs and color
of copy. Approval of this requested exception to the Policy could set a precedent for similar
requests along the Corridor.
Given these considerations, denial of this request is recommended.
CASE HISTORY
Planning Commission Meeting (9/16/08):
The applicant accepted the Commission's recommendation but did not accept Staff s
recommendation. There was no opposition present.
Mr. Waller indicated support for the proposed red copy but expressed concerns relative to
maintaining the existing sign height given the goal of bringing signs closer into
conformance with current Ordinance requirements.
Messrs. Bass and Brown indicated support for maintaining the existing height noting the
signs location within an older commercial corridor and the improved flexibility and
appearance of the electronic panel over a standard replacement panel.
4 08SN0286-APR28-BOS-RPT
On motion of Mr. Waller, seconded by Dr. Brown, the Commission recommended
approval subj ect to the Condition and acceptance of the Proffered Condition on page 2.
AYES: Messrs. Bass, Brown, Hassen and Waller.
ABSENT: Mr. Gulley.
Board of Supervisors' Meeting (10/22/08):
On their own motion, the Board deferred this case to their regularly scheduled March
2009 public hearing. The purpose of the deferral was to allow the Planning Commission
to complete their evaluation of the "Electronic Message Center Policy".
Staff (10/23/08):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than January 5, 2009 for consideration at the Board's
regularly scheduled March 2009 public hearing.
Staff (2/ 19/09)
To date, no new information has been received. The Commission has scheduled a work
session on March 17, 2009 to review the status of the Planning Commission Committee's
work on the "Electronic Message Center Policy".
Board of Supervisors' Meeting (3/11/09):
On their own motion, the Board deferred this case to their July 22, 2009 public hearing.
Staff (3/12/09):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than May 6, 2009 for consideration at the Board's July 22,
2009 public hearing.
Staff (6/24/09):
To date, no new information has been received. The Commission has set a public hearing
for August 18, 2009 to consider proposed Code amendments relative to electronic
message centers.
5 08SN0286-APR28-BOS-RPT
Board of Supervisors' Meeting (7/22/09):
On their own motion, the Board deferred this case to their October 28, 2009 public
Baring.
Staff (7/23/09):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than August 10, 2009 for consideration at the Board's
October 28, 2009 public hearing.
Planning Commission Meeting (8/18/09):
The Commission recommended denial of proposed Code amendments relative to
Electronic Message Centers and directed Staff to bring forward recommendations for
amendments to the Electronic Message Center Policy at the Commission's November 17,
2009 work session.
Board of Supervisors' Meeting (9/23/09):
The Board did not set a public hearing on the proposed Code amendments relative to
Electronic Message Centers.
Staff (9/28/09):
To date, no new information has been received. The Commission has scheduled a work
session for November 17, 2009 to consider amendments to the Electronic Message
Center Policy.
Staff (10/28/09):
The location of an existing electronic message center sign was identified within 2,000
feet of the current proposal. The applicant was advised that the proximity of the existing
and proposed signs did not meet the spacing requirements of the Policy.
Board of Supervisors' Meeting (10/28/09):
On their own motion and with the consent of the applicant, the Board deferred this case
to their November 18, 2009 public hearing.
6 08SN0286-APR28-BOS-RPT
Staff (10/29/09):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than November 2, 2009 for consideration at the Board's
November 18, 2009 public hearing.
Staff (11/3/09):
To date, no new information has been submitted.
Board of Supervisors' Meeting (11/18/09):
The applicant did not accept Staffs recommendation but accepted the Planning
Commission's recommendation. There was support and opposition present. Those in
support noted the importance of electronic message centers in effectively communicating
the business message and the need to develop a policy to better address the future of these
signs in the county. Those in opposition referenced the need to evaluate effects of such
signage on traffic safety and revitalization efforts along aging commercial corridors; and
stressed adherence to current policy requirements.
Mr. Gecker acknowledged the established use of electronic message centers in the
county; and the need to examine the current policy, particularly as it related to the eastern
Midlothian Corridor being an area with minimal adjacent residential development. He
proposed the formation of a committee of Corridor business interests to study the policy
and impacts of such signage on area revitalization efforts; and a deferral of this case
pending the outcome of committee discussions.
On their own motion and with the consent of the applicant, the Board deferred this case
to their April 28, 2010 public hearing.
Staff (11/19/09):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than February 8, 2010 for consideration at the Board's April
28, 2010 public hearing.
Midlothian Corridor Business Representatives; Staff; Clover Hill District Commissioner; and
Midlothian District Supervisor (1/6/10):
A committee meeting was held to discuss the use of electronic message centers within the
eastern Midlothian Turnpike Corridor. It was generally agreed by the business
7 08SN0286-APR28-BOS-RPT
representatives that the existing regulations on these signs should not be relaxed. As a
result, the committee was disbanded.
Staff (3/17/2010):
To date, no new information has been submitted.
The Board of Supervisors, on Wednesday, April 28, 2010 beginning at 6:30 p.m. will take under
consideration this request.
8 08SN0286-APR28-BOS-RPT
a -
1 ~
U
1 1
I ~
1 ti o
1 ~ _ -
Q -
~ ~ ~
` 1 p N38
U ' ~
I ~
~ ~
r ~ ~ '
~ / ~~
~ ~ ,~ ~
Q ~ ~ ' ~
.~ ~
,~
~ 1
f
~ 1
l '
t
1
l ~ ~
1 ~ ~
~ I ~
1 } ~
T ~ I
U
j ~ I
~ ~ ~
~ ~
~~ ~
~ ~ I ~ ~~-
~ ~ ~~ N
U
~ N ~ `
o ~ •,
~~ , I
o ~,~ / p
~~ 1
N I ~• !
°~ ~ '~ ~~ ~ ~a ~
~'b
Q ~ ....... ~ d p~~
:::::::: `~ 1d ~~pOW ~
I U
N ~ t ~ `n I "
I ~ LLJ
Z VJ
I ~ ~ > a--~
~~ - > N
~ ^ I O LL
~ °No~pd Z ~
U ~ ~_
~~~ U
J ~ ~ N
I ` _ ~ I
~~ V
0 ~ N
O , U O -
'- ~ ~a~ pol 8~If11S W ~ O
~~^ ~ 0
~~ 0 ~
~ - OC
~ ~ W
~ ~ ~ o
~ o0
~ ~, j Q ~ v O
~ N'vOW"'
~ ~ ~ o~
m~ ~ ~ I ~ ^
OJJ
O
U VJVW o ,~
~ N ~
. ~ oo
6 ~ ~ .
Y tip ~ / ~ ~ ~ Q .
~~ ~ i~~Q
N 1;
+d
T~ i ~
/` ~
• ~
_
• ~
°~ ~ ~ w
;~~
~,
,Pr m "m
V!
~ i
n
W
N N
c
w
W a
~
y ]
T ~ ~
O
~ ^ O uJ
'
~~ :'91: ~
:Mt.
U
'X •~ R
~
y
V`
~
T /A
'
~ l
~ ~' f
® O ~
~ ~y
V
~
~~ //y~
V J ~ ~
~
®
~ •Tp
~
~ V
~L ~ ~
u!£Z u!£~ a ~~
O v
~.
Q ®9 ~ ~
~ ~
. ~~
~
m
~~
®~
~~
~~
~~
®
v
Q ~,~,
~
~
~~
_ ~~
P W C~
~~
~~
.~ Z ~
~ ~ ~
~
~~ ~
LLI F--
0'' ~
~~
~ ~
~~
~-
' ~ui st ~ui si W ~
~~ ~ ~-
C~ ~
~
®
U
(6 _
i
C
N
i
..:. , +~
~ o
u' V
~°4
~
°O Q ~ L.l~
J ,~~ ~ ~ o
~ ~
E-^ O
'~ ~
++ / (
l.7 f
_
®, v ~ V
~ ~ ~
. ' ~ LL
I®, .
~
`j
~
'~rD9