Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sign Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
BZA vote on Palmetto Citizens sign variance fails; height and setback issues left unresolved
Summary
The Lexington County Board of Zoning Appeals considered a sign variance for Palmetto Citizens Federal Credit Union seeking a taller, wider sign and a reduced setback. A motion to deny the variance failed for lack of the required four affirmative votes, leaving the application unresolved at the meeting.
LEXINGTON COUNTY — The Lexington County Board of Zoning Appeals considered Zoning Variance 02-25, a request by Palmetto Citizens Federal Credit Union to change and replace a freestanding sign at 1835 Southlake Drive (TMS 006500-03-087). The board voted on a motion to deny the variance; the motion failed for lack of the required four affirmative votes, and no final approval was recorded.
Taylor, a county planner presenting the request, said the existing sign structure is nonconforming because its overall height from base to top is 19 feet 6 inches, while the Scenic Corridor 3 maximum height is 10 feet. The proposed new display would be about 40 inches wider than the existing face and — if centered on the current pole — would reduce the road-right-of-way setback from 11 feet to approximately 9 feet 4 inches, Taylor said.
Chris Turlanden, chief marketing officer for Palmetto Citizens (representing 14 branches), told the board the credit union completed a branding refresh and proposed the new rectangular sign shape to match the updated logo. "The shape of the logo did change, which is why we were trying to do it a little bit more rectangular than the square version that we have now," Turlanden said.
A board member moved to deny the variance, arguing the applicant had not met the four statutory criteria for a variance; another member seconded the motion. When voting, board members Travis Spainhower, Bruce Inesini and Kevin Eubanks voted "opposed" to the motion to deny (i.e., they opposed denying the application). Board members Debbie Heim and Charles Kaufman voted "in favor" of the motion to deny. The motion did not receive the four affirmative votes required to deny the application, and the denial motion therefore failed.
After the vote, the applicant’s representative asked staff whether a sign reduced to meet the 10-foot height limit would be acceptable; staff clarified that a simple face change (leaving the exact structure and dimensions) would not trigger a requirement to reduce the height, but because the overall structure was changing the new sign must come into full compliance with code. The presentation also noted that if landscaping in front of the sign (such as crepe myrtles) were removed or altered, replanting or adjustments would be subject to permit review.
Because the denial motion failed and no subsequent approval motion was recorded in the meeting transcript, the variance application remained unresolved at the close of the agenda item.
