Occoquan Considers Revisions to Sign Ordinance

Proposed changes to the sign ordinance have some Occoquan town members happy with the promise of what they see as an improved streetscape in the historic district, while some merchants worry about the possible effects on the visibility of individual shops.

In an Oct. 6 town hall meeting, the Architectural Review Board Task Force presented recommendations for changes to the current sign ordinance. The Task Force has been working on this project since May, conducting many interviews and inspecting the sign ordinances of 30 towns with historic districts, including Leesburg.

Among the most controversial recommendations were the introduction of A-frame signs as a pilot project and the continued ban on neon.

The changes were organized under seven headings.

Flags

Businesses in the historic district would be allowed to fly commercial and decorative flags, with a total of two flags allowed. However, if the business were to choose to fly a commercial flag, that flag would count as one of the two signs allowed per business. Thus, a business could display two signs and two decorative flags, or one sign, one commercial flag and one decorative flag. A business would not be able completely replace its signs with flags, as only one flag could be used to substitute for only one sign.

Banners

Under these recommendations, merchants would be able to display a banner for 10 consecutive days twice a year. Businesses that are newly opening or closing in the town could display a banner for 20 consecutive days. Though right now, the Task Force recommendations insist on 10 consecutive days in two separate periods, they hastened to assure merchants that they were not “married to that,” and might be willing to change the number or whether they had to be consecutive. In addition, the town might later allow exceptions on a case-by-case basis.

Exceptions would include such scenarios as a heavy snowstorm or the flooding of a few months ago, where hanging a banner advertising a sale would bring in no customers on the days that the weather was most severe. However, merchants would be responsible for applying to receive an exception, and could not simply remove their banner and decide themselves when they would use those consecutive days.

Kristyn Gleason of the Polka Dot Divas asked for a banner exception for craft show weekends to provide greater visibility for stores that were still open.

With the streets filled with tents, signs, and vendors, “one more banner isn’t going to hurt,” she said.

A member of the task force suggested that she use an “open” flag instead.

Neon and Electronic Signs

Possibly the most controversial topic that night was the proposed continued prohibition on neon, LED and electronic message boards in the historic district. Some town residents and merchants argued that the use of neon would encourage the town’s development of a nightlife. Others found the use of neon distasteful, and not in keeping with a historic district.

James Phelps was the first to ask why the recommendations continue to ban neon.

“There’s a precedent for exemptions for historic neon - 1920s to 1950s, not a precedent for reproductions or more modern neon,” said Dr. Abigail Gray with the Task Force. “This all applies to the historic district, not outside.”

Another Task Force member argued that you would never see neon in Williamsburg.

“I’m not sure I’ve heard a rationale for banning neon that makes sense,” Phelps replied. “In the 1930s, these stores had neon signs. The reason that Williamsburg doesn’t have neon is that it’s from a specific era. I’m not sure there’s a rationale for banning it that makes sense for the town. In Occoquan, it’s not like we have a single period of time that we’re trying to protect in the town.”

Gleason agreed with Phelps.

“I’m not a fan of the Route 1 flashing open signs, but if someone does want to invest in a historic neon sign, they should be able to do so,” she said.

Gray warned that if the town made exceptions for historic neon, merchants should be aware of the environmental impact of the mercury inside the sign.

“Personally, I think it’s just as tacky as can be,” said Lavern Carson, task force member and owner of Occoquan shop The Golden Goose.

Occoquan resident Betty Dean said she hopes a future Occoquan will be open in the evening.

“The thing about neon is that it lights up an area, which is very convenient if it’s open after dark,” she said.

Signs Exempt from Regulation

The proposed changes to the sign ordinance would now allow balloons. Like Leesburg, the Task Force recommended limiting balloon circumference to 50 inches.

The Task Force also recommended limited political signs to three per business or residential property in the historic district. Phelps pointed out that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that there can be no limit to the number of political signs a landowner may put up.

Gleason clarified Phelps’ point.

“A landlord can limit the number of a signs that a merchant can put up, but a merchant who owns the property has no limit,” she said.

Under these recommendations, a digital window display may be put up if it is no closer than one foot from the window.

Outdoor Merchandise

If these recommendations are adopted, merchants may display their merchandise outside as long as it is not covering an architectural feature or is in the public right-of-way. Architectural features include things like windows, railings, projections, and awnings, but not walls. The public right-of-way is most simply defined as the sidewalk, but also extends to storefronts where the storefront comes up to the sidewalk.

Signs showing the pricing of merchandise would be allowable, so long as the business name was not on the sign.

Noise and Architectural Features

Signs that produce noises, smells, or smoke would be prohibited in the historic district under the proposed sign ordinance. No signs may obscure architectural features, whether the signs are mounted on the wall or not.

Portable Signs

The Task Force and the Architectural Review Board disagreed on the introduction of A-frame chalkboard signs as a pilot project.

ARB acting chair Brenda Seefeldt said they disagreed with the Task Force on the portable sign issue “mostly because of safety and VDOT right-of-way standards.”

“This is a non-issue,” Porta said. “VDOT has already said we could not put signs in the right-of-way, but Tastefully Yours could put a sign on their porch.”

“If they’re allowed, they’re going to creep farther and farther out,” Carson said. “It’s not an objection, it’s just something to discuss.”

Gray said that since it was just a pilot project, it “could be pulled back, with enforcement.”

The Task Force encouraged the town to put up signs directing customers to less visible portions of the shopping district.

Portable signs also include chalkboard signs that are not A-frames. Off-premise signs would still be prohibited. If a store has one public entrance, it may have one portable sign. If a store has two or more public entrances, it may have two portable signs.

At the next council meeting, the council will vote on the recommendations they want to adopt, and then those recommendations will be converted into ordinance language. There will also be a public hearing at some point in the next few months.

I apologize for the lateness of this article - I had to leave town Thursday night for my sister’s open heart surgery. Look for a more complete summary of the Task Force recommendations later today.