HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOARD OF APPEALS
~
~
OJHKOfH
~ffi"".
City of Oshkosh
Dept. of Community Development
215 Church Ave., PO Box 1130
Oshkosh, WI 54903-1130
(920) 236-5059 (920) 236-5053 FAX
Jackson R. Kinney
Director
September 29,2005
Shelly Muza
ALPS Charter School
108 W. New York Avenue
Oshkosh Wisconsin 54901
Re:
108W."N'ew'Yõrk Avenue'
Dear Ms. Muza:
On September 28, 2005 the Board of Appeals approved your request for a variance to construct a second
changeable copy ground sign at Merrill Middle School with greater signage area than is allowed by code
with the following conditions:
1. The removal of the two existing ground signs for Merrill Elementary School, located on Kentucky St
and WNewYorkAve.
2. Cooperation ofthe Merrill Elementary School and ALPS Charter School with the Planned
Development process for the entire school site.
The decision of the Board was filed in the Planning Services Division Office of the Department of
Community Development on September 29, 2005. Per Section 30-6(C)(3) and (4) of the City of
Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance, your variance will expire on March 28, 2006 unless you have started
construction for the activity allowed by the variance. If you fail to begin construction by this date, you
must reapply for a variance if you intend to go ahead with the activity allowed by the variance.
Please be advised that any person or persons aggrieved by any decision of the Board of Appeals may
commence action in Circuit Court within thirty (30) days after the filing of the decision. Permits may
be issued on approval of the Board, bnt you should be aware that further action could take place
until as much as 30 days after the date of the decision.
Building permits may be applied for from the Inspection Services Division in Room 205 at the Oshkosh
City Hall between 7:30 - 8:30 AM and 12:30 - 1:30 PM, Monday thru Friday, or call (920) 236-5050 for
an appointment. Please bring all required building plans and information necessary for review when
obtaining your building permit.
If you have any questions, feel free to call me at (920) 236-5059.
--:c5:t~~
David Buck
Associate Planner
DB/pal
cc: Ms. Kelly Schwegel, Merrill Elementary School, 108 W. New York Ave.
Mr. Ron Heidlmann Jr., Oshkosh Area School District, 215 S. Eagle St.
..
BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 28, 2005
PRESENT:
Dan Carpenter, Moss Ruedinger, Edward Wilusz, and Larry Lang, Vice Chairman
EXCUSED:
Robert Cornell, Dennis Penney, and Cheryl Hentz, Chairman
STAFF:
David Buck, Associate Planner, and Patty LaCombe, Recording Secretary
The meeting was called to order by Vice Chairman Lang. Roll call was taken and a quorum declared
present.
Motion by Mr. Wilusz to layover the minutes from August 24, 2005 meeting. Seconded by Mr.
Ruedinger. Unanimous.
Motion by Mr. Wilusz for approval of the September 14, 2005 minutes. Seconded by Mr. Carpenter.
Unanimous.'
I:
108 West New York Avenue
The applicant is requesting a variance to construct a second changeable copy ground sign at Merrill
Elementary School with greater signage area than is allowed by code. Section 30-37 (F)(I)(a) and
Section 30-37 (F)(I)(c) of the Oshkosh Municipal Code limit both identity signage and changeable copy
signage (a.k.a. bulletin boards) to one of each type per site and to a maximum signage area.
Mr. Buck introduced the item and explained the history of the site, which is unique as it was foimerly
(' one school ar¡d now is occupied by three schools. The zoning code for the City of Oshkosh was
designed to address school sites as one entity. The Oshkosh Municipal Code does allow two ground
signs per school site, one identity ground sign of 50 sq. ft. and one changeable copy/bulletin board sign
of 24 sq. ft. with setback and height limitations. Currently there are four ground signs on the site (two
identity signs for the elementary school, one changeable copy sign for the middle school and one
identity sign for the middle school) exceeding the maximum allowed number of two. There are also two
awning signs on the entrances for the elementary and middle school. In 2001 the middle school received
a variance for a changeable copy sign to go up at 32 sq. ft., our records don't show any other permits
issued on site for any other signage.
Mr. Buck also stated during a field inspection they discovered numerous violations ranging from
dumpsters not being screened, unscreened mechanical equipment, parking and playground equipment
within the setback area and lack of any transitional yard screening for parking. They did meet with the
school district to discuss a lot of the issues on the site and the ability to get a planned development into
effect.
Mr. Buck also stated that ALPS Charter and Merrill Elementary schools are under a time constraint, they
received a grant to put up the sign before realizing that they needed a permit or that it was exceeding the
maximum allowable number and maximum allowable area. Mr. Buck also stated he felt the school
district feels the site should be looked at as one entity and that even though there are three different
schools in the building, it is one school site.
Mr. Carpenter stated he wanted to abstain from the voting, as he works with the ALPS Charter school
children.
"
Board of Appeals Minutes
-2-
September 28, 2005
Kelly Schwegel, Principal of Merrill Elementary School, 108 W. New York Ave., and Shelly Muza,
Principal of ALPS Charter School, 108 W. New York Ave..
....""
Ms. Schwegel stated they have proposed to remove the elementary signs, located on W. New York Ave.
and Kentucky St. They cannot be seen from the road and it is a hardship for the parents. The removal
of those two signs would put the signage for the elementary to one awning sign and one changeable
copy sign that would be shared between Merrill Elementary and ALPS Charter School.
Ms. Muza stated they started this process in June of2005 knowing they needed to have a variance with a
company who has worked with other schools in the Oshkosh Area School District. They felt with
starting this process in June and going with that company, this process would have been resolved much
sooner than now. They are under a budget restriction and ALPS did receive a grant for this sign and all
funds do need to be encumbered before September 30, 2005. They do not know if they will have that
money in the future, it is a considerable hardship on the school district and the site not to take advantage
of that funding through the Department of Public Instruction.
Ms. Schwegel stated part of the Charter school audit does state you need to advertise your school and
also need to advertise the purpose of your school. Ms. Muza added you need to have signage identifying
that you exist as a school and currently right now ALPS has no signage and no one knows they even
exist within Merrill.
Ms. Schwegel stated the reason they need to have a larger sign than normal is because they need to
advertise for two different schools, which means two different PTO meetings to advertise for, two
different events that may be going on around the same time. Merrill Elementary School has applied to
convert over to a Charter School as well and if that happens they will also need to advertise their
existence and have good communication with the parents. A changeable copy sign would provide that
service.
...,
Ms. Muza stated they worked with the sign company to know that if the name changes, they can change
out that piece without having to have an additional sign.
Ms. Schwegel stated she wanted to address the Development Plan, and the school would appreciate
having something worked out where they didn't have to address an individual variance for every little
thing that happened, they should have an overall plan. They are willing to work with a Plan
Development, but in the mean time they still need to have a sign now.
Mr. Lang asked what steps they have taken in what has seemed well in advance.
Ms. Muza discussed her dealings between the sign company and the Planning and Zoning Office and the
grant deadline of September 30, 2005.
Ms. Schwegel included that they have tried to do everything according to what was done past and
present to the school. They looked at the way the other schools proceeded with their variances, they
would discuss plans with the sign company, the sign company would then talk to the Planning and
Zoning Office. They followed the same steps as the other schools and they received a phone call from
Ms. Kepplinger, explaining that everything they were doing was inappropriate. Ms. Schwegel stated she
told Ms. Kepplinger that she would be willing to work with them on this and they had a meeting on the
issue and nothing was accomplished.
.J
Board of Appeals Minutes
-3-
September 28, 2005
r Mr. Lang questioned if they were going to take down the two identification signs. Ms. Schwegel replied
that she wasn't sure ifboth of the signs were listed in our staff reports or not but they were planning on
removing both of them.
Mr. Ruedinger asked staff where would the school be if they removed two signs to erect one.
Mr. Buck stated even though the two schools were operating as one as far as this signage request goes,
with the middle school operating independently with their signage as well, and you took down the two
ground signs, they would still have one extra changeable copy sign than is permitted on the site.
Ms. Muza stated they are three schools, the middle school is quite large, 750 kids and with the ALPS
Charter School and the Elementary school, they would need to have quite a large changeable copy sign
and they are under a financial timeline.
Mr. Wilusz asked ifthey could please explain the financial situation.
Ms. Muza stated the ALPS Charter School applied for and was granted a charter and in that they were
granted money to operate. Part of the Charter School law states you have to identify yourself as a
school, so they were going to use the money for a sign. Right now the fund source, because it is a grant,
goes from October 1, 2004 to September 30,2005 on a grant cycle and all funds need to be used by this
time or you lose the money. You cannot apply for an extension; it's all or nothing.
Mr. Wilusz asked who the grant was being funded by. Ms. Muza replied the Department of Public
Instruction. Mr. Wilusz asked if this is an on-going program that the D.P.I. have for Charter Schools.
Ms. Muza stated Charter Schools are supported for three years with dollars then after that the district
takes them for one year and then they can apply for two more years for the grant dollars and after that
you are sustained by the school district. Ms. Schwegel stated if the school system cannot sustain the
charter school after the sixth year period, the sign still would have a purpose, they can easily convert the
sign to Merrill Elementary.
Mr. Wilusz asked where they were in the six-year window and ifthis grant runs out can they apply for
another grant. Ms. Schwegel stated they are in year two. Ms. Muza stated they have applied for another
grant but does not know until the middle of October if they have been awarded the grant or not.
Mr. Wilusz asked staff how long does the planned development process take. Mr. Buck stated it all
depends on the negotiations back and forth and it needs to go to the Plan Commission and the Common
Council.
Mr. Wilusz asked staff how the signage might differ under the Planned Development. Mr. Buck stated
he was not sure but suspected it would be one of two things; one sign with three different sides or three
individual signs fronting separate streets as the schools are situated in that way. Most of the current
signs are on the New York Ave frontage.
Dr. Ron Heilmann Jr. 1200 Washington Ave., Superintendent of Oshkosh Area Schools
Dr. Heilmann Jr. stated everyone is in agreement that a planned development is in need, the one thing he
disagrees on is that in the school district's eyes this property will never be viewed as one school. Since
they have had Merrill Elementary it has been viewed as two schools. Dr. Heilmann Jr. also stated that
unless you see a significant change in national politics, you will not see a move away from charter
Board of Appeals Minutes
-4-
September 28, 2005
schools. Wisconsin will receive approximately $170 million dollars over the next three years in charter
money. If you specify you wanted to do project and you don't complete it, it's very hard to convince
them again when you come into the next budget cycle that "we didn't do it before but we would like to
do it now". The district is committed to the overall concept of the site development, the key thing to
remember is if you are driving in front of the school along West New York Avenue you will see three
signs there. One for Merrill Elementary, that is set back away and is hard to see, the changeable copy
sign for Merrill Middle and granite memorial sign. If this is approved you will only see two signs in
front ofthe school. The granite sign memorial isbeing moved to the Central Street side of the school.
Mr. Carpenter stated in the past that this committee has considered other schools that have both an
elementary and middle school as two schools. Mr. Carpenter questioned staff that if we were to treat
this like the other schools, would the number of signs be an issue. Mr. Buck stated that as far as the
code treats it, it treats it as one site.
Mr. Lang seconded Mr. Carpenter's comments on the other schools; he does not remember any issues on
the variance for Webster Elementary or Webster Middle School. However he does remember a
discussion for a second changeable copy sign, they may have tried sharing one changeable copy and it
didn't work for them. Having a larger sign did go down with defeat, a much smaller sign was
compromised on and that same issue came up on Roosevelt School. Mr. Lang raised some issue on the
visibility, the petitioner commented that this is what gets approved and we will have to live with the
disability issue, which distresses Mr. Lang. Mr. Lang then stated he is really disturbed that the process
could begin in June and now it is September 28th, two days before the deadline for the grant.
Mr. Carpenter stated that they have had issues in the past about the lighting of the signs and he has gone
past during the evening hours and noticed the streetlights wash out the lights from the signs and he can't
believe it is a big problem for the neighbors. He also stated it is really nice for the neighbors to know
when something is going on at the schools so they can plan ahead.
Mr. Wilusz questioned staff about characterizing this as a change of policy to these types of situations
rather than piling on the variances. Now it seems like the city is saying this is not the best way to do it,
lets do it the planned development route.
Mr. Wilusz questioned petitioners about the reason why this project wasn't started until June.
Ms. Schwegel stated they were originally going to go with an electric sign but that wasn't going to be
approved in a residential area, so they had to start all over and get new quotes.
Mr. Wilusz asked if the petitioners and staff thought the planned development is the better way to go.
Ms. Muza stated they thought it was a good idea, but they are not sure the plan will come up with
anything different. They do not think they should do that instead of the sign, they still need the sign and
are willing to work with the planned development. They would have to spend $10,000.00 in equipment
in two days. In order for them not to do that, they would have to request a change in her item line from
the state and wait for an approval and that would not happen before the deadline. It is not responsible of
them to spend the money for the sake of spending the money; they would have to give it back to the
state.
Mr. Wilusz stated he is concerned with the petitioner's statement of maybe there's a change or maybe
there's not under this planned development process. Mr. Wilusz also stated he thought at the end of this
process that it's going to cost someone some money, something may change. From the taxpayer's
"-tII
....I
...I
Board of Appeals Minutes
-5-
September 28, 2005
standpoint he doesn't see much reason in spending $10,000.00 because "we have to spend the money",
when the sign may have to be removed under the planned development. Spending state money for the
sake of spending the state's money, he doesn't see this as a qualifying hardship.
Ms. Muza stated it was her understanding that if you have a variance process, you have the means to be
legal. If they go ahead with the plan and look at all the things they are not in-compliance with and how
they improve and change them, they still have a legal variance for two signs.
Mr. Buck stated the planned development would set sign regulations whether they include what your
approved variance is for or differently and make it noncompliant is yet to be seen.
Dr. Heilmann Jr. stated they do have other issues at the site, such as on the middle school side there is
parking problems. The district doesn't look at expanding the property by purchasing homes around the
school, ifthey did that they will be changing the whole aspect ofthe neighborhood, you have less homes
from which children will come to that school.
Ms. Kepplinger, Principal Planner City of Oshkosh, 215 Church Avenue
Ms. Kepplinger stated she was the original staff person who spoke to the petitioners, she has been
involved with the master planning process and she is also the individual in the planning office who is in
charge with neighborhood planning, especially in a low to moderate income census track areas. Ms.
Kepplinger also stated the issue in which they handle schools and signage is evolving. The zoning code
does not address combined schools having their own identities, we are getting to the point that schools
r are viewing these signs as an entitlement. It is creating a lot oftension between the city and schools
. feeling that they need and what tile zoning code provides. We are not in the position to make any
administrative changes to the zoning code, just administrative exceptions. The property needs to be
addressed without doing a whole code change. Applying a planned development over the site would
allow the Planning and Zoning Department to try to accommodate the school's desire for a sign as well
as trying to accommodate central neighborhood historic planning issues that could impact not only the
sign but also the other noncompliance issues on the site. The purpose of us asking for the master plan
was not to preclude identification signs for the school but to try to come up with a solution that would
better address what their needs are and address our planning issues identified in the comprehensive plan
for that central city area.
Mr. Lang asked staff if there has been a change in the zoning regulations since the Webster Stanley
came to the Board. Ms Kepplinger stated there has not been any change. Mr. Lang then asked staff if
Webster set a precedent by allowing multiple signs, then why since June 2005 is another school told
different. Ms. Kepplinger stated they are not comparable sites; this is a very tight central city site. The
setbacks are less and the area is more densely developed. Webster Stanley is a newer school and is built
under the newer zoning code, which Merrill is not.
Mr. Lang asked staff if they are requesting a special setback. Ms. Kepplinger stated not to her
knowledge, they are asking for a variance for the sign. Mr. Lang requested the minutes reflect that Ms.
Kepplinger made the comment that this is a tight situation and has special setbacks. Mr. Lang wanted to
correct the record that there isn't a request for special setbacks and it is compliant to the zoning. Ms.
r Kepplinger stated her comment regarding the setbacks referred to the substand,ard setbacks for the
playground and the parking in various locations on the property, the sign they are requesting does not
have a substandard setback.
Board of Appeals Minutes
-6-
September 28,2005
Dr. Heilmann Jr. stated they are not arguing beyond the issue with the signage the master planning route
is absolutely the route to go. There are issues with parking at the site and the amount of green space in
general, they do need to address these issues.
o.J
Mr. Wilusz stated that historically speaking, Appleton Sign Company did an excellent job. Ms. Muza
stated they were planning on having the sign match the brick ofthe building. The sign is going to be
something the children, parents and community can be proud of it.
Mr. Lang seconded Ms. Muza's comment. Split/merged families communication from the school is a
difficult challenging task and the taxpayers would like to know what is going on at the school, signs are
an excellent way to communicate that.
Motion for approval by Mr. Lang ofthe variance to construct a second changeable copy
ground sign at Merrill Elementary School with greater signage area than is allowed by
code. Seconded by Mr. Wilusz
Mr. Wilusz stated he agrees with staff and feels the planned development is the best way to go. He
wonders if this is relevant to the narrow question in front ofthe board. There is an existing code and an
existing situation in front ofthat code and a variance request. He questioned ifthe planned development
option is relevant to this narrow question if this particular variance should be granted.
Mr. Ruedinger stated he doesn't like the idea of the school spending that large amount of money for a
sign that mayor may not be there after the planned development is complete.
Mr. Carpenter stated this is a unique situation, the school district has a grant and it expires in a couple of
days the money has to be spent on something either a sign or something else. He doesn't believe they
will be spending the money for a sign and have a plaimed development that will not allow it later, they
are removing a couple other sign and he feels this is done in good faith.
.J
Motion for approval with the of the variance to construct a second changeable copy ground
sign at Merrill Elementary School with greater sign age area than is allowed by code.
Motion denied 2-1-1.
Motion by Mr. Ruedinger for approval with the following conditions:
1.
The removal of the two existing ground signs for Merrill Elementary School, located on
Kentucky St and W New York Ave.
Cooperation ofthe Merrill Elementary School and ALPS Charter School with the
Planned Development process for the entire school site.
2.
Seconded by Mr. Lang. Motion carried 3-0-1.
Finding of facts:
Mr. Lang doesn't believe it will be detrimental to the neighborhood; it will
enhance the neighborhood and provide communication of the schools activities to
the neighbors. Mr. Carpenter stated the willingness of the applicants to adhere to
the planned development and the removal of the two other existing signs.
.J
~
O~~qfH
c;ty of Oshkosh
Dept. of Commnnity Development
215 Chnreh Ave., PO Box 1130
Oshkosh, WI 54903-1130
(920) 236-5059 (920) 236-5053 FAX
Jackson R. Kinney
Director
BOARD OF APPEALS AGENDA
SEPTEMBERa18, 2005
3:30 PM
To Whom It May Concern:
PLEASE NOTE the City of Oshkosh Board of Appeals will meet on WEDNESDAY,
SEPTEMBER 28, 2005 at 3:30 PM in Room 404 at the Oshkosh City Hall to consider the following
agenda.
ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF AUGUST 24, 2005 MINUTES
APPROVAL OF SEPTEMBER 14, 2005 MINUTES
I.
108 W. NEW YORK AVENUE
Ms. Shelly Muza-ALPS Charter School and Ms. Kelly Schwegel-Merrill Elementary School,
applicants, Oshkosh Area School District, owner, request a variance to construct a second changeable
copy ground sign at Merrill School with greater signage area than is allowed by code. Section 13.37
(F)(I)(a) and Section 13.37 (F)(I)(c) of the Oshkosh Municipal Code limit both identity signage and
changeable copy (a.k.a. bulletin boards) to one of each type per site and a maximum signage area.
II.
LOT SOUTH OF 1931-1951 SOUTH WASHBURN STREET
Mr. Art Dumke-GDS Properties, LLC, owner, requests a variance to divide the existing lot into two
and create one with a substandard lot area of 1.406 acres. Section 30-34 (D)(5)(a) of the Oshkosh
Municipal Code-Highway 41 Corridor Overlay District requires all lots be a minimum of 1.5 acres in
area.
OTHER BUSINESS
Discussion of BOA procedures
ADJOURNMENT
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CALL THE PLANNING SERVICES DIVISION AT
(920) 236-5059, BETWEEN 8 AM-4:30 PM, MONDAY THRU FRIDAY
STAFF REPORT
BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 28, 2005
ITEM 1:108 WEST NEW YORK AVENUE
GENERAL DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
Ms. Shelly Muza-ALPS Charter School and Ms. Kelly Schwegel-Merrill Elementary
School, applicants, Oshkosh Area School District, owner, request a variance to construct
a second changeable copy ground sign at Merrill School with greater signage area than is
allowed by code. Section 30-37 (F)(1)(a) and Section 30-37 (F)(I)(c) of the Oshkosh
Municipal Code limit both identity signage and changeable copy signage (a.k.a. bulletin
boards) to one of each type per site and to a maximum signage area.
The subject property is zoned R-2, Two Family Residence District and is being used as
the site for three individual schools within the Oshkosh Area School District: 1) Merrill
Elementary School; 2) Merrill Middle School; and 3) ALPs Charter School. All three
schools are located within one structure. The general area can be characterized as a low-
density residential neighborhood with the land use being predominately single and two
family homes.
ANALYSIS
In reviewing a variance request, the following questions should be addressed:
When considering an area variance, the question of whether unnecessary hardship or
practical difficulty exists is best explained as "whether compliance with the strict
letter of the restrictions governing area, set backs, frontage, height, bulk or density
would unreasonably prevent the owner from using the property for a permitted
purpose or would render conformity with such restrictions unnecessarily
burdensome."
Are there any unusual or unique physical limitations of the property which create a
bardship?
Will granting of a variance result in harm to the public interest?
The subj ect property is not so much unusual or unique in and of itself as much as how its
use has changed over time. This site was developed as a single school site within a low-
density residential area. The school building has been divided into three individual
schools including Merrill Elementary School, Merrill Middle School and ALPs Charter
School. The zoning code was designed to address school sites in residential districts as a
single entity and therefore limited signage as such.
Signage for schools is addressed in Section 30-37(F), which allows two ground signs per
school site. One is an identity sign with a maximum height often feet and a maximum
area of 50 square feet, setback at least 25 feet from the property line. The other is a
changeable copy sign (a.k.a. bulletin board) with a maximum height often feet and
maximum area of 24 square feet, setback at least 15 feet from the property line.
There are currently four ground signs located at the Merrill School site; two identity signs
for the elementary school located on New York Ave and Kentucky Street and one
identity and one changeable copy sign for the Middle School, both located on New York
Ave
STAFF REPORT
ITEM I
-2-
BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 28, 2005
Additionally, there are two awning signs above entrances on the west and east sides of
the school containing two lines of 8-12" letters identifying Merrill Middle and Merrill
Elementary School entrances. The ALPs school does not currently have any signage.
Merrill Elementary and the ALPs Charter School are requesting a variance to locate an
additional changeable copy sign that is 7.5' tall and 28.5 sq ft in area on the site setback
15.6' from the front property line. The applicants have stated that the sign is needed to
service two of the three schools and would help to distinguish them from the middle
school as well as to publicly advertise individual upcoming events. Additionally, the
applicants have stated that the charter school, by law, must have adequate signage and
must publicly advertise their existence and purpose. In an attempt to limit any adverse
impact to neighboring property owners, the applicants have stated they would light the
sign by timer to be lit only between the hours of 6 a.m. and 8 p.m. and will be placed
perpendicular to New York Avenue.
As noted, the signage currently installed on site is nonconforming in regard to number
and setbacks. The City's records do not indicate any permits being issued for signage on-
site with the exception ofthe existing changeable copy sign for the middle school, which
received a variance to increase its size from 24 sq ft to 32 sq ft in 2001. A Correction
Notice has been issued for the removal of the middle school monument sign as it was
very recently erected but the remaining signs will be considered legal non-conforming
and will be permitted to remain.
Staff conducted a field inspection of the site to look at the signage and has determined
that it is in violation of the zoning code in other areas as well. These violations include
but are not limited to having exposed dumpsters, unscreened mechanical equipment,
parking and playground equipment within setbacks, and lack of transitional yards or
screening for parking.
Staff understands that the zoning code may not address the current needs of schools and
may be outdated. Staff strongly suggests that the site be placed in a Planned
Development Overlay District rather than piecemealed into compliance through multiple
variances. The PD process would include development of a site master plan that would
take into consideration current non-conformities and planned site changes and the steps
that will be taken to mitigate any adverse impact of these on the abutting residential uses.
Staff has set up a meeting with the Oshkosh School district for Friday, September 23,
2005, to discuss the many issues of the site as a whole as well as to address potential
future issues through a Planned Development that would take into consideration current
and future needs and allow them by right without the need for variances. An overview of
the discussion will be presented by staff at the September 28 Board meeting.
While staff understands the fact that the District is operating under a time constraint for
spending the money for the proposed sign, it does not appear that said constraint is a
sufficient condition to validate the issuance of a variance. Staff believes that the approval
ofthis variance is unnecessary at this time and signage issues and other site development
issues can be dealt with more appropriately through the Planned Development process.
STAFF REPORT
ITEM I
-3-
BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 28, 2005
We strongly feel that the site must be addressed as a single entity containing three
schools, which work cooperatively with each other as well as with the school district as
the property owner to identify, advertise and manage their common site. The current
signage situation does not represent a cohesive, cooperative approach to site use and
granting of the variance request will only further exacerbate the zoning issues on this site.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the information provided in this report, staffrecommends denial of the variance
request to construct a second changeable copy ground sign at the Merrill School site.
Return to: Department of
Community Development
215 Church Avenue
P.O. Box 1130
Oshkosh, WI 54903-1130
CITY OF OSHKOSH
APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE
Please write legibly with black ink and also submit a complete reproducible site plan (maximum size 11" X17"). (A
complete site plan includes, but is not limited to all structures, lot lines with streets with distances to each.) There is a
$125.00 fee for each variance application. The fee is payable to the City of Oshkosh and due at the time the
application is submitted.
Address of Parcel Affected: 108 W. New York
Petitioner: Merrill Elementary School, Kelly Schwegel, Principal Home Phone: (920) 231-6771
Petitioner: ALPs Charter School, Shelly Muza, Director Home Phone: (920) 426-9217
Petitioner's Address:
Work Phone: (920) 424-0420 or (920) 424-1354
Signature Required:
Date: September 6, 2005
Signature Require:
Date: September 6, 2005
Owner (if not petitioner):
Home Phone: N/A
Owner's Address: 215
Work Phone: (920) 424-0160
Signature Required:
Date: September 6, 2005
----
In order to be a granted a variance. each applicant must be Ie to prove that an unnecessary hardship would be
created if the variance were not granted. The burden of pr ing an unnecessary hardship rests upon the applicant.
The attached sheet provides information on what constitutes a hardship. (Attach additional sheet, if necessary, to
provide the information requested. Additional information may be requested as needed.)
1. Explain your proposed plans and why you are requesting a variance:
Merrill elementary and ALPs Charter Schools would like to have a 4' x 8' changeable copy sign built and installed on the
south side of the building, perpendicular to New York Avenue. With this as the front of the complex, placing the sign in
this location would further distinguish Merrill Elementary and ALPs Charter School from Merrill Middle School. The
proposed sign would service two of the three schools housed at this property, Merrill Elementary School and Alps Charter
School. With two schools being serviced by one sign, the surface area needed to advertise the individual needs of each
school would exceed that provided by a typical changeable copy sign. This sign would provide the capability of both
schools to adequately advertising their individual upcoming events. In addition, with ALPs operating under the Charter
School umbrella. Charter School laws state that the school must have adequate signage identifying them as a charter
school and must also publicly advertise their existence and purpose. For this to occur through a changeable copy sign,
adequate advertising space would need to be provided. Another point to note is that Merrill Elementary School is
currently applying to become a charter school as well, which would place them under the same Charter School law ALPs
operates under regarding signage and advertising. According to the code, the size of the sign and its location would
require a variance.
2. Describe how the variance would not have an adverse effect on surrounding properties:
The sign would identify each institution and communicate to its constituents equally, which would clearly communicate the
nature of the individual institutions while satisfying charter school law. Since Merrill is a neighborhood school, the
families of the school are being provided with a service that they have identified as a need; such as school closing and
upcoming events. With the design and engineering of this sign, we feel we have been able to accommodate our families'
need to know without compromising our neighbor's environment. We recognize that the sign should not have a negative
impact on neighbors, therefore the sign would be controlled by an electronic timer. with lit hours from 6:00 a.m. to 8:00
p.m. In addition, the sign would be placed perpendicular to New York Avenue so that no one house would have the direct
impact of the lighting. Street lights would further diffuse the impact of the lighting, for New York Avenue is fully lit during
the hours any sign would be lit during hours of darkness.
q\~
3. Describe the special conditions that apply to your lot or structure that do not apply to surrounding lots or
structures:
Merrill property is comprised of a large surface area which minimizes the intrusiveness of a larger sign. In addition, the
houses that would potentially be affected by the sign are on the opposite side of the street with street lighting
overshadowing the impact of the proposed amber lit sign. There is no housing on the West and East sides of the building
that directly face the area of the proposed sign and both homes are located at a distance far enough away as to not be
directly impacted by the lit sign.
4. Describe the hardship that would result if your variance were not granted:
The ordinances do not reflect the present needs of educational institutions, particularly in the case of school
consolidations. This can be recognized by the number of variances approved in recent years, Le., Merrill Middle,
Roosevelt Elementary, Tipler/Sunset, Webster Stanley MiddlelWebster Stanley Elementary, etc. It's imperative for the
Merrill Elementary and ALPs Charter communities to have multiple tools available to respectively communicate to the
large and diverse Elementary and Middle School student populations and their parents/guardians. With these two schools
needing adequate advertising space, and with both having the potential of operating under charter school law, the signage
proposed would satisfy all requirements while providing a valuable service to our individual school populations.
5. ~~~e.~~~
JAMES LUEDERS
1219 KENTUCKY ST
OSHKOSH WI 54901-3753
CYRSTAL DEXTER
302 W NEW YORK AVE
OSHKOSH WI 549001-3763
HARVEY HARTMAN
219 W NEW YORK AVE
OSHKOSH WI 54901
GAIL McNEIL
213 W NEW YORK AVE
OSHKOSH WI 54901-3761
PAUL NICKOLAI
209 W NEW YORK AVE
OSHKOSH WI 54901-3761
STACY DEATON
203 W NEW YORK AVE
OSHKOSH WI 54901-3761
HELEN FRANK
215 N WESTFIELD ST 730
OSHKOSH WI 54902-4198
STEVEN/DIANE LEACH
121 W NEW YORK AVE
OSHKOSH WI 54901-3759
JASON MENTZEL
113 W NEW YORK AVE
OSHKOSH WI 54901-3759
PINE APARTMENTS IV LLC
3389 COUNTY RD A
OSHKOSH WI 54901-1414
GREGORY/MARY BOSSERT
32 W NEW YORK AVE
OSHKOSH WI 54901-3758
Site Plan
Merrill Elementary School
108 W. New York Avenue
Oshkosh, WI 54901
920-424-0420
w
s+.
N
* Not to scale *
~
...: Q
00 ....
2':
~ ë
.... c.
= c.
~ ..
e
Q ...:
.=: 00
-= -;¡
.... ..
'0 ....
.- =
~ ...
.... U
Q Q
..;¡ ....
CD
::I
C
CD
~
~
~
~
Z
E
Kentucky Street
Playground
Central Street
I'\
~
'.§
~
\:
!It
s;
~
;;:¡
!
,ì!
~.
,~
,~
t
! ~
~ Q $-':
¡" ¡....
'.
"""'«"'0 ,,"¡ g¡.
~
"""""""".1
,!'
'"
'"
~
'"
'"
~
.~
~
§
0',
'"
~
"-
'"
~
i I
i I
i I
II
I I
I I
~I '
...1 I
~Il ,
- 21
~al
~'
$],
:;.
¡5
!i1
:;J'J:
êi ~
.. ~,
"'3<0
¡¡¡~:.:§
:¡I;¡;l:J
;;23
:-
""
:0
~.
",I
:]
i
'j
g1
"'[
i
I
I
i
-I
::::1
*', I
31
",
"I ~'
n .
G.""'~.'.' ;.;
~¡ ~ :
¡; ~ ~
'~ '~11
'" "'::'
ji
";
,.¡
21 '
ii1
~I
.$1
æ:
'"
=.
"'.....
"':::;
¡:¡~'¡¡¡
¡;~¡¡¡
.....¡¡;èO
:1;""""'
w"'"
~ . '"
",,;=0
:::~
~-
~
, II
' _0
Ih
l £: i .;c.
¡ '; ~ Z..il'
ii, ¿s ..
I i
II' ! ,{.,;
-- I ~~,~;
~~' ¡ ~.I" ~, ~
"" "I i;) ,; ::!
" ¡.,' ::¡ ,j; ~
~ -')' '" 11: 'g.
c ,'~ IE .;:
'~I 11; il ~
"',"'I"'" ....
Merrill Elementary School - Existing Signs
Merrill Middle School - Existing Signs
Zoning Enforcement Inspection
Merrill School - Multiple Violations
Exposed dumpsters
Unscreened mech",icaJs
existing ground sign
Photos taken 08/23/05
David Buck
Zoning Enforcement Inspection
Merrill School - Multiple Violations
Playground in sethack
existing gronnd & awning sign
unknown work
Playground in sethack
Existing awning sign
Photos taken 08/23/05
David Buck
w.
CUSTER
AVE.
dID
~
N
H
~ ~"
21
"O,,
,~,'
DISCLAIMER
City of Oshkosh Wisconsin
Community Development
OJHKOJH
N
A
Thi, map " neither a legatly reeo,ded map nor
a sumy and it i, not Intended to he n..d as one.
This drawing Is a compilation of reeords, data
and Info,mation located In vanou, city, county
and ,tate offic.. and other sonms affeetlng
the ><ea ,hown and it Is to he nsed for refmnce
pu'po.., only. The City ofO,hko,h " not,..
,ponslble for any Inacenncles herein contained.
If dismpend.. are fonnd, ptea.. contaet the
CityofO,hko,h.
108 W. New York Ave.
1" = 125'
Created hy - pi
9/14/05
This map is neither a legally recorded map nor
a ,urvey aDd it i, noe intended to he u,ed ae one.
Thi, drawing ¡, a eompilatioo of reeords, data
aDd information located in varions city, county
and state offices and other ,onms affecting
the acea shown and it is to he used for reference
pnrpose' only. The City of Oshkosh i,notre-
'pou,ible for any inaccnmiee herein contained.
If diSCrePencie~::;;eo~~~~k::~~se contact the 500
I
=¡i=~IBílTo:=1 h'[ hlJI ~ ~ =t==~=;=~=:q
I- ~ f- LJJIIIJJ=:j Cl W ~ JJ-c- -+- ~ - - Iz -.;
e~ L-;'- ill R¡~~~;BeNT il~IAve g~~~§
- IT g==I--~. ~ 1--- 1---
- ¡j I-- I--~
=E p Subied Site ç,[[ - - t=F, t=;;;;;¡J -
~~ -~ B1 ,~ ,~,~ I ~ c~
=~- C-~ ~ HEQ]I te~ ~ w, cus~ œAve ~ g~;a I J I
-- ~-, fJJ~ f---- ~ 77 1R-'
- 1- ~ '-- '- I;; I-- f---- I---~
-1- ~I-- - . \--1-- I-- >----,..:7-
-_æ'--~~~ I-- - ~ ~.:{'~
~~¡~~!~ -\Z¡: II; !.~~ ~)lli
~'110llID [J ~I'~~ ~~ III~
~ I-- '----~ ~ 7Æ ~ r--- Ave
~ if~ ~ I-- r---'c'= [I'll
- H 1= U~PROSlpeCT Þ= JL-HTIOJIIÏJ~~~~t y! ~ ~ i !
~ ~f-- ~LillLJlJ~11 ~ TT " §
~ I-- ~ g,;; M"VIN A , T ~ M"V1N AVE, E,MELV1NA\
- - - -- ~~ -
E~ ~§~~~~ê"~~ H~~:~~ß¿~~IIAV< ~!
I-- W - - W -.-'- W f--j-- W - -= . -= - r z ~ "
~ -- -+- f--j-- _I;; '-i ~ ~
h= T- -f-- 1=1- -- - ........ z P-- ~
I I T --T-T f:irii :I- -- T,-- ~L LlNCO~ Ave. E
ro-r-l I " " I " I I
108W.NewYorkAve. N
A
DISCLAIMER
City of Oshkosh Wisconsin
Community Development
OJHKOfH
ON "'EWATER
0
500 Feet
_,
Created by-pI
09/14/05