HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-105APRIL 13, 2010
10 -105 RESOLUTION
(CARRIED 7 -0 LOST LAID OVER WITHDRAWN )
PURPOSE: APPROVE AMENDMENT TO PREVIOUSLY APPROVED
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AT JACKSON STREET
AND MARION ROAD TO MODIFY THE GROUND SIGN
INITIATED BY: MORTON PHARMACY, PETITIONER
PLAN COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Approved with condition
WHEREAS, the Common Council previously approved a planned development,
as amended, for construction of a pharmacy with a drive -thru, to include, but not limited
to, a 137' x 14'6" ground sign with an electronic message center on the bottom portion
of the proposed sign; and
WHEREAS, the petitioner desires to increase visibility of the sign by increasing
the elevation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of
Oshkosh that the planned development at the corner of Jackson Street and Marion
Road for a Morton's Pharmacy is hereby amended to approve a revised 16'2" overall
height ground sign with a maximum 57' brick base with an electronic message center
on the bottom of the sign near the base, per the attached, and the original previously
approved sign development standards be maintained.
OYHKUIR
ON THE WATER
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the Common Council
FROM: Darryn Burich 0�
Director of Planning ervices
DATE: April 8, 2010
RE: Approve Amendment to Previously Approved Planned Development at Jackson Street
and Marion Road to Modify the Ground Sign
BACKGROUND
In 2009 Council approved, in part, a request for a 14'6" wide x 137" high ground sign at the corner of
Jackson Street and Marion Road with an electric message center (EMC) on the bottom portion of the
proposed sign for the new Morton Pharmacy being constructed in the Marion/Pearl Redevelopment
Area. The petitioner originally submitted a request to modify the sign by moving the EMC portion
from the bottom to the top of the sign and moving the project id sign from the top to the bottom. The
request is being made to elevate the EMC portion of the sign to make it more visually prominent to
motorists on Jackson Street and to elevate it over potential conflicts in the environment such as the
decorative fencing, landscaping, and utility boxes that could potentially block messages on the EMC.
The Plan Commission laid over this item at its March 16th meeting due to concerns with aesthetics and
safety. In the interim, Morton Pharmacy has agreed to keep the order of the signage but is requesting
to raise the overall height of the sign by increasing the height of the brick base
ANALYSIS
Placement of the ground sign will not require any modifications to setback requirements and is well
within sign area limitations. The Plan Commission reviewed the request and the concerns presented
by Mr. Morton and recommended that the height of the sign be increased to 16'2" and that the brick
base be 57'.
'.
FISCAL IMPACT
None anticipated.
RECOMMENDATION
The Plan Commission approved of this request at its April 6, 2010 meeting with conditions.
Approved,
. , , Zr' .�
City fa a ger
ITEM: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AMENDMENT APPROVAL FOR A
GROUND SIGN AT THE INTERSECTION OF JACKSON STREET AND
MARION ROAD (RIVERFRONT LANDING)
Plan Commission meeting of April 6, 2010
Note: This item was tabled/laid over at the March 16 th , 2010 Plan Commission meeting for
further review of the proposal based on potential landscaping and fence feature placement.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Petitioner: Mary Mettler, Green Bay Sign & Design, LLC
Owner: City of Oshkosh Redevelopment Authority
Action Requested:
Green Bay Sign and Design previously received planned development approval (Council Resolution
09 -243) for a ground sign containing an electric message center (EMC) sign for the Riverfront
Landing project and Morton Pharmacy in the Marion Road /Pearl Avenue Redevelopment District
on a redevelopment site currently under development with Morton Pharmacy and Accu -Com.
The current request is to modify the ground sign by moving the location of the EMC from its
location near the base of the sign to the top of the sign above both the Morton and development ID
signage as well as changing the type /design of the " Riverfront Landing" development ID
component.
Applicable Ordinance Provisions:
Criteria for Planned Development Overlay Districts are located in Section 30 -33 of the Zoning
Ordinance.
Property Location and Type:
The subject property is located in the Phase II Marion Road /Pearl Avenue Redevelopment Area.
The Phase II area is comprised of approximately 13 acres of former industrial lands with roughly
half having river frontage. The Marion Road Redevelopment Area is located between UW- Oshkosh
on the west and the central business district on the east. The Phase II area is generally abutted on
the east by two older industrial uses (Mercury Marine and Lamico) as well as by a new apartment
project (Morgan Crossing), which was also developed as part of the Phase II redevelopment plan.
Subiect Site (Phase II Area)
Existing Land Use
Zonin
Under commercial development
C -3PD
Adiacent Land Use and Zonine (Phase II Area)
Existing Uses
Zoning
North
Institutional across Pearl Avenue
C -3PD
South
Undeveloped Redevelopment Area
C -3PD
East
Commercial /City Center property across Jackson Street
C -3
West
Industrial
M -2
Comprehensive Plan
Land Use Recommendation
Land Use
10 Year Land Use Recommendation
Mixed Downtown Development
20 Year Land Use Recommendation
Mixed Downtown Development
ANALYSIS
The petitioner is requesting an amendment to the previously approved Planned Development
(Council Resolution 09 -243) to modify one of the ground signs located along Jackson Street by
moving the EMC from its approved location near the base of the sign to the highest location over
both the Morton Pharmacy ID sign and the overall project sign (Riverfront Landing). Additionally,
the petitioner is proposing to change the material and style of the "Riverfront Landing" sign
component.
The apparent reason to elevate the EMC sign is to make it more visually prominent to motorists and
increase the sight viewing distance up and down Jackson Street. At the previous Plan Commission
meeting, it was also noted by one of the business owners that the change is needed in light of a
landscaping and fence plan, which had not been disclosed to staff previously. The landscape plan
and fence details, which are included in this packet, depict two segments of decorative fence and
multiple plantings along the perimeter of the parking lot on Jackson Street, roughly parallel with the
center of the sign. The landscape plan does not specify plant types or indicate their mature heights
but the decorative fence elements are detailed as a thirteen foot long prefabricated metal fence
bisected every eight feet with one foot -four inch wide stone veneer columns. The columns are
designed at three foot -eight inches high and the fences' metal pickets are designed at three feet -three
inches high.
As previous reported, staff has two major issues with the proposal to relocate the EMC; aesthetics
and safety. These concerns remain even with the introduction of the landscape plan. A copy of last
meetings staff report is included in your packet for reference.
Direction from the Plan Commission was that staff analyze the landscape elements in relation to the
request and discuss the situation with the petitioner. In the review of the landscape plan, it was
observed that the EMC placement on the approved sign was at three feet from grade so that there is
a discrepancy between the fence column height and the EMC sign bottom by eight inches. Plant
types, as previously mentioned, were not noted so mature plant heights are unknown. This leaves
two potential scenarios using the approved sign allowing the EMC to clear the topmost element of
the fence column; 1) the brick sign base be increased by eight inches; or 2) the fence height be
reduced to three -feet. As the decorative fencing is an important architectural feature of the overall
area development plan and is designed to mitigate the impact of the parking lot, staff is inclined to
recommend the sign base height to be increased eight inches, enough to have all advertising
elements of the sign to clear the fence height. Plant elements of the landscape are not felt to be a
factor review as they can be chosen to grow to a specific height below or above the signage and be a
Item -PD Amdmt- Morton Sign at Marian Road Redevelopment
plant that can be pruned /trimmed as needed.
The petitioner has indicated that the developer desires to raise the sign base by as much as eight feet
to make an overall sign height in excess of 20 feet tall and possibly include additional signage for a
potential post office. Staff is very much concerned with the concept of a 15 foot wide by 20 foot tall
sign with an EMC at approximately eleven feet high and believes that the concept does not reflect
the City's development and planning policies within the redevelopment plan area, that it is not
architectural compatibility, and would negatively contribute to the physical appearance of the area.
Staff feels that the sign would basically be a "wall" that is out of character with adjacent and nearby
existing and planned development in terms of scale, mass, height, bulk, design, and view.
The material and style change to the "Riverfront Landing" portion of the sign consists of
substituting internally illuminated routed aluminum letters backed with black perforated vinyl for
the previously approved aluminum channel letters with "halo glow" at the back of the lettering. It
was noted by the applicant that the change is proposed as a cost savings. Staff believes that the
change is a major shift in design and quality and believes that the previously approved design was
higher quality and better reflects the design principals of the redevelopment area. However, the
Plan Commission must determine if the proposed sign is consistent with the planned physical
appearance of the area and should consider the design and material on its own merit not focus on the
change from the originally approved concept.
RECOMMENDATION /CONDITIONS
The Department of Community Development recommends that the height of the signs brick base be
permitted to be increase by eight inches to provide a maximum overall sign height of 14 feet -three
inches.
The Plan Commission approved of the planned development amendment with revisions. The
following is the Plan Commission's discussion on this item.
Mr. Burich presented the item and stated that it had been laid over at the March 16, 2010 Plan
Commission meeting for further review of the proposal based on potential landscaping and fence
feature placement. He reviewed the redevelopment area, the location of the signage, and the
previously approved sign which was 13' 7" in height. He explained that the revised request was due
to concerns by the petitioner that the fencing would create a visual obstruction for the LED portion
of the sign and that City staff was recommending keeping with the originally approved format for
the sign with an increase to the height of the sign's brick base by eight inches to resolve the
visibility issue. There is a good sight line both up and down the block and the additional height to
the base should be adequate to address the matter without further changes to the originally approved
signage. He further stated that Steve Morton from Morton Pharmacy is requesting that the sign be
raised three feet for visibility purposes or flip the order of the signage to place the LED sign at the
top of the sign. Mr. Burich reviewed the proposed fencing for the site as well as other EMC signs
on other sites in the city.
Mr. Fojtik asked for clarification of the staff's recommendation in that it would be to raise the base
of the sign by 8 inches with no change in the order.
Mr. Burich responded that the material change for the sign construction could also be considered as
the petitioner was proposing to change the original design of the "Riverfront Landing" portion of the
Item -PD Amdmt- Morton Sign at Marian Road Redevelopment
sign substituting internally illuminated routed aluminum letters backed with black perforated vinyl
for the previously approved aluminum channel letters with "halo glow" at the back of the lettering.
Mr. Thorns questioned what the issue was with raising the sign's height and inquired if 8 inches
would be adequate as it appeared that it would put the LED only a few inches above the fence and
questioned where the fencing would be located in relation to the location of the sign.
Mr. Burich displayed on the site plan the location of the fencing and signage.
Mr. Thorns then inquired about the landscaping for the site.
Mr. Buck responded that species of the landscaping had not yet been identified for the site.
Mr. Thorns asked if any trees would be placed on the site.
Mr. Burich replied that trees were not planned to be located in this area and a sign of this height was
not appropriate for a redevelopment site such as this one.
Mr. Buck added that monument -type signage is usual for downtown as they are more urban style
signs whereas a sign that is 15 feet in height is more appropriate for the highway corridor setting.
Mr. Thoms commented that it seemed that there could be a compromise that would satisfy the
business and keep the appearance appropriate for the redevelopment site.
Mr. Burich discussed zoning requirements for signage and the planned development district's
limitations on signage. He stated that the proposed sign would meet the requirements however the
issue was if a pylon -type sign was appropriate for a redevelopment site.
Mr. Bowen stated that it appeared that the fencing was about 40 feet north of the proposed sign.
Mr. Burich commented that it was not close enough to be a visual obstruction.
Mr. Thorns stated that the fence and landscaping features are both issues however the landscaping is
an issue that can be controlled.
Mr. Bowen inquired about the height of the Sawyer Street sign for Morton's Pharmacy.
Mr. Burich responded that it was 16 feet.
Mr. Bowen commented that with the addition of eight inches to the proposed sign, it would place
this sign at 14'3 ".
Steve Morton, Morton Pharmacy, 200 City Center, distributed handouts displaying different
versions of the proposed sign and a rendering of the completed site with the signage in place. He
commented that the sign would be 84 square feet and he would not consider it to be a pylon sign and
the desired screening of the parking lot was driving the issue to raise the signage. He also discussed
the change in the materials that was a cost savings of $7700 from the original $25,665 expense for
the originally proposed version. He stated that his main concern was to get the sign raised three feet
to provide adequate room to be placed above any visual obstructions. He also reviewed the
Item -PD Amdmt - Morlon Sign at Marian Road Redevelopment
difference between the halo and routed aluminum signs and stated that the additional three feet
would put the sign at 167 in height. He also distributed photos of a utility box on the site that he
was concerned would obstruct the view of his sign which he estimated to be about 4 '/z feet in
height.
Mr. Monte asked if the rendering displaying the completed site was accurate as far as the location of
the fencing.
Mr. Morton responded that he was not sure at this time.
Mr. Burich added that no landscaping plan had been submitted at this time to verify the location of
the fence and landscaping features.
Ms. Propp questioned if Mr. Morton did not agree with the eight inches recommended by staff for
raising the sign.
Mr. Morton replied that he was still concerned with the utility box obstructing the view as it would
only be visible from the bridge or immediately passing the sign.
Mr. Thorns inquired how far from the utility box the sign would be located.
Mr. Burich displayed on the site plan the location of the utility box and the sign.
Ms. Propp stated that the design of the sign had been changed as well and questioned which one Mr.
Morton would like to proceed with.
Mr. Morton responded that he would like to add three feet of brick to the base of the sign with either
the halo or routed aluminum letters. He would proceed with the originally proposed design if so
desired.
Mr. McHugh commented that although the utility boxes were necessary, the Plan Commission
needed to limit the installation of these boxes in the city.
Mr. Thorns suggested that landscaping could be placed around the utility box and allow the sign to
be placed higher as Mr. Morton requested.
Mr. Bowen stated that he was concerned about setting precedent in a redevelopment area and
suggested that placing the height of the sign at 16'2" would make it comparable to the Morton's
sign on Sawyer Street.
Mr. Morton responded that he would be satisfied with that proposal.
Mr. Borsuk commented that he had concerns with the city and developer's agreements and felt that
it was important that developers understand what is expected of them. He also stated that the city
needed to review the sign ordinance for the entire community.
Ms. Propp stated that quality commercial developments have low lying signs and in this
redevelopment area, the sign may still be too high.
Mr. McHugh suggested that the transformer box could be incorporated into the base of the sign and
Item -PD Amdmi- Morton Sign at Marian Road Redevelopment
that he did not wish to have the sign stand out more than the development.
Mr. Monte questioned what entity was in possession of the utility box.
Mr. Burich responded that he believed it belonged to AT &T.
Mr. Monte commented that looking south on Jackson Street, the utility box would obstruct the view
of the LED sign and agreed with Mr. Bowen that the sign should be allowed to be the same height
as the sign on Sawyer Street.
Mr. Nollenberger stated that aesthetics were important on a redevelopment site
Motion by Nollenberger to approve the planned development review amendment approval
for a ground sign at the intersection of Jackson Street and Marion Road as requested.
Mr. Thorns commented that he agrees with Ms. Propp somewhat and although he is concerned with
aesthetics, he feels that we should allow the business owner to advertise his business. He further
stated that he felt the sign for the most part fits the design of the site and it is proportionate to the
size of the development and he feels it should be allowed to be higher than the increase of eight
inches as recommended by staff.
Motion by Bowen to amend the approval for the ground sign to allow the design as
originally approved with the overall sign to be 16'2 " with the brick base of 57 ".
Seconded by Monte. Motion carried 7 -2. ( Ayes- Borsuk/Bowen /Thoms /Fojtik/Hinz /McHugh/
Monte. Nays -Propp /Nollenberger.)
Seconded by Propp. Motion carried 7 -2. ( Ayes- Borsuk/Bowen /Thoms /Fojtik/Hinz /McHugh/
Monte. Nays - Propp /Nollenberger.)
Item -PD Amdmi- Morton Sign at Marian Road Redevelopment
;ill `utilsa] g tjrji� Apq Aa.jo of A1916IPRIALUI alq?,Ae.,l si lEill paDjpu", aq Illm �IONJP m jl joy eal p
'U6ISPh '8 UbIS ka LJ%JO LLJOJJ 1.10isseiijad TOLIJIM to LIJIM.1-PICll Aq P oq �i-omlip siqlo ucij,jod Aup pInOLIS jall spuelsepun JGPPH lsanb�J Llodn Clj 'LjGLs-qj 5 it i Apo ua .jL) :�j A�jr.
11 LI.IrOP.1 Ol PILT 'MM PAll ALIP 01 fJfl'-Mjll? SILIJ aSOJO SID 01 JOLI S J&PICH r lU '07 'IJNS2C 1 3 0515 469 LJ&OJO 10 LICIs.sw]Od Liallum i A1 j jnr!ijlItA Sjomoe siql @unpojdai Jo 'a Inquisip 'cfuojc
JPJJP 01 JOU S"0156 IaPIOH V. idiaoa.j sli Aq - o - n � bq Ape u% in of kip.laudoid of �W AJ~J I lLr-. SjI Ul pvjqF-uAd. WE PPLIIPJLIO� LIC I j?UJA01iii a) I rjjb ')I.jomj.jc 2ij I 'iAiinoop SILL
C016*69VOU -'"A -C6LS*ZLO*OZ6 :Hd* CLOS IM '"I N33ZFD- i L US *aa aNV183N3Vd I C08Z . � : I . I I
... ..............
Awom Smr f6z6
N E3 I S3C3 N E31 S 14SONHSO
NOMOIN 3ARGAA1 M A131,1V I I I 3L q 1 01 9AJd 4 Nb V
N - a
ii
z rn
4k
uj
m is
z
0 —
Z,
z:z
o
'311 'u0lsea g uBls Reg uaaig of Rlalelpawwl olgekd sl Wgti pOMo aq IIIM>Now4n sga jo! Pala 'all
'uolsaa S ubls Reg umE) waq uolsspied NoLp.M io ipun JaploH Rq pasn eq )po#4je slgl to uopjod Rue pinogs Imp spue3siepun iaplaH lsenbw uodn all 'u6l S uOls beg usaig of R sw pewq
I um>aJ of pue'RUed pmp,Sue of )pomjn slgl asolas!p o37ov saai6e �aploH aul 'all 'u6lsaa g uOls Reg uaax� to uolsslwrad uapu�n PUI Noy>!m ypoNgie slot aonpadar io 'a�nq�gslp 'a6ueyo
rape of lou saaJOe iPPIoH PUl ima4 ldlaow su F9 'all 'u6lsaa R uBls Reg uaa�g of Rngaudad Pie pue RIa�AuP sr! ul paW6uRdoo are pauleWoo uogeuuolul PW pue >uoMUa aqt WawnoW SfUl
£OL6'60'096 7(Vd •E6lSSTLt'OZ6 :Hd• ELM IM UO N33aO- LL US WI CINV1113XMM I £OSZ
/ °'°°
9v9i•eXOZ6 o-.i =.vn "D'S
N J 1 S 3 Q N J I S m . HS so N" IS NOV--)W
l. Noiaowus�Hwna tiariv ° °` ° °'" u�warn�,3o aornmty
9 N 3;
1
S
V _
z
n}- 0
O L
0
W S J
Ix o_
r
,w i
II� 11
U•
g�
Y
Z
gQ
zw.
NFU
�
LU
w C
�
z — J X
0 C J
W L Q d
F Z
0
�g c
U
z < w
O0 Lu
U
zc�
Z
Q Z
LU
J C Q
� W
gg0
W m W 2 Q
�m >�m
h
�� �- 04 j
W m "
�ic6mo0
c�o p
C O LL
LJ
0
v
y
2
a
W
N
26
m Y
R O
�G.
I:
?..
V'
N Z
Z '0
O
"K
r
Q
0
W S J
Ix o_
r
,w i
II� 11
U•
g�
Y
Z
gQ
zw.
NFU
�
LU
w C
�
z — J X
0 C J
W L Q d
F Z
0
�g c
U
z < w
O0 Lu
U
zc�
Z
Q Z
LU
J C Q
� W
gg0
W m W 2 Q
�m >�m
h
�� �- 04 j
W m "
�ic6mo0
c�o p
C O LL
LJ
0
v
y
2
a
W
N
26
m Y
R O
'0l1'u V uBIS Reg uaarg a, Nalelpawwl ol*vd sI 3ErR PaBrego aq BIM rdWR SlIP M sel a O - n
uBlsad uBIS Reg uaarg wart uolssluuad �o ylun japlOH Rq pasn aq >uoNVe slyl la uogmd Rue pinogs>eLA spueMgpun,!appR zsanbar uodn oil 'Asap V uBIS Reg uaaJg of 4Plpawurl
A umlai al pue'4md pn4! Rue Ol )pOk4R SM asgaslp 01 ou saa�Be �aploH ayL'077 'uBlsap g uBIS Reg uaarg to ucqssWad
RFdoa is paulquo uogeurrolul ayl pue'Kroe i 'Armp
y�e e9L4 7uawnaop sILLL
hale of Sou saaine JaploH at# jowaq idle= 0 AS '3M Wisea @ uBIS Reg uaarg of R�elapdwd am pue Rtarpua q ul pa14 P
COLb'bLb'OZ6 �Xifd • CUSILVOZb :Hd• CLOS. IM %V9 N3310• LL 31S ICI CNVM3MDVd I COOZ
9Y9L'6LC'OS6
t euu VA °me MSOHHSO AND U NOMW ""'ix
N J I S 3 a !Aa t»'dw 1N3WdOl3n30 3JNMTN ""°"
NOIMOW 3Ausmwna ww
N 3l
u.
fA
w
W
q
N O V
U W
Z -F- 0, �0
Z
O
v
m %
0 cn
O
U m w
m
Z O
(�
O O N
CO
O N IO N
O
C �
S
Z
O
Q
C
Z
Oc
X
4.
W
g � U)
G [!7 W
C
< Z
a
cm
I II
Imo
dSO
L
co CO
LL R
6
•.
^
'..
i•
a t'...
t
iris',
i°
4 0
"
H
`
�h >•.
Z4�:�T�,x
..
A
r��sU• �
�
`��,
ff
i.
0
A7 R7
.' L-,£ L
C �
S
Z
O
Q
C
Z
Oc
X
4.
W
g � U)
G [!7 W
C
< Z
a
cm
I II
Imo
dSO
L
co CO
LL R
6
'HGOAHGO
NGNO
m
jN3N INO'8�'c�3AN IHI
- 3q dnwo Rm"
) I
s e 11 , L
I [ I i V ----------------- Lkii,
•
M
rw1.swW•ya — n++ w v mrvwcwwnffll /0
Y
n
Q
m
m
v
d Q
w
0
H I 9 � I b m gym ;t 9 �a I i i �
I
I
I I
I
i
I
I
I
I
i
i
I
I
I
i
i
i
r i IL I
e B$ i
I IDoea� n
hICH m a
LU i s
FL
I
i
w 1
Lt
34'dT�9 V < f
2OZE
I� I
�r
ITEM: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AMENDMENT APPROVAL FOR A
GROUND SIGN AT THE INTERSECTION OF JACKSON STREET AND
MARION ROAD (RIVERFRONT LANDING)
Plan Commission meeting of March 16, 2010
GENERAL INFORMATION
Petitioner: Mary Mettler, Green Bay Sign & Design, LLC
Owner: City of Oshkosh Redevelopment Authority
Action Requested:
Green Bay Sign and Design previously received planned development approval (Council Resolution
09 -243) of a ground sign containing an electric message center (EMC) sign for the new Morton
Pharmacy under construction in the Marion Road /Pearl Avenue Redevelopment District on a
redevelopment site identified as "Riverfront Landing" currently under development by Alliance
Development with Morton Pharmacy and Accu -Com.
The request is to modify the ground sign by flipping the location of the EMC from its location near
the base of the sign and putting it at the top of the sign above both the Morton and development ID
signage.
Applicable Ordinance Provisions:
Criteria for Planned Development Overlay Districts are located in Section 30 -33 of the Zoning
Ordinance.
Property Location and Type:
The subject property is located in the Phase II Marion Road Redevelopment Area. The Phase II area
is comprised of approximately 13 acres of former industrial lands with roughly half having river
frontage. The Marion Road Redevelopment Area is located between UWO on the west and the
central business district on the east. The Phase lI area is generally abutted on the east by two older
industrial uses, Mercury Marine and Lamico as well as by a new apartment project, Morgan
Crossing, also developed as part of the Phase II redevelopment plan.
Subiect Site (Phase II Area)
Existing Land Use
Zonin
Undeveloped
C -3PD
Adiacent Land Use and Zoning (Phase II Area)
Existing Uses
Zoning
North I
Institutional across Pearl Avenue
C -3PD
South
Undeveloped Redevelopment Area
C -3PD
East
Commercial/City Center property across Jackson Street
C -3
West
Industrial
M -2
l�
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Recommendation Land Use
10 Year Land Use Recommendation Mixed Downtown Development
....
.............................. .. _ .........- ................... .......... .................... ........ ........ ....... .
20 Year Land Use Recommendation Mixed Downtown Development
ANALYSIS
The petitioner is requesting to modify the ground sign by moving the approved EMC from its
approved location near the base of the sign to the highest location over both the Morton Pharmacy
ID sign and the overall project sign (Riverfront Landing).
The apparent reason to elevate the sign is to make it more visually prominent to the driving public
and increase the sight viewing distance up and down Jackson Street. Staff has two issues with the
proposal, one for aesthetic reasons and one for safety reasons.
In regard to the safety issue, during the staff development plan review meeting, staff from the Police
Department and Transportation Division expressed concern about raising the height of the EMC
closer to the height of the traffic signals in the area which are mounted at 20 feet. Their concern is
that by bringing the EMC sign more in line or closer with the traffic lights that it creates a potential
driver distraction that is lessened by keeping the sign nearer to the ground and keeping more of a
visual separation between the EMC and the traffic signals.
In regard to the aesthetic issue, this is a City redevelopment area where the City has literally
invested millions of dollars to acquire, demolish, and install public improvements and to create
redevelopment sites in hopes of attracting high quality development, which it has. The Morton
Pharmacy building is architecturally very appealing and integrates nicely into the redevelopment
area as does the new Accu -Com building. The sites will be well landscaped and there are
architectural features being installed on the site to mitigate the impact of the parking lot.
Signage is an aspect of the development process that is often overlooked until well after
construction and because its nature can enhance or detract from development on the site. In this
case for the previously approved sign, the ground sign, while large, appears to be a high quality sign
incorporating the overall development (Riverfront Landing) on top, the individual development
(Morton Pharmacy) in the middle, and an EMC sign at the base. This order gives visual preference
and identity to the overall development on top (Riverfront Landing) as there is and will be more
than just one development in Riverfront Landing thus the development should be given more
priority. The middle area of the sign is provided for the individual project (Morton) and the bottom
for the EMC with the changing message.
The petitioner now wishes to flip this order and move the EMC to the top giving it the visual
priority and moving the overall project ID to the base. Aesthetically, staff feels that giving priority
to the EMC sign makes it akin (attention -wise) to some of the electronic billboards in the 41
corridor that compete for the driver's attention and that it detracts aesthetically from the overall
development. There are better examples already in place in the community where EMC signs have
been integrated near the base as originally proposed and approved with this sign.
One of the reviewing criteria of the Planned Development district in Section 30 -33 (E)(3)(b)(iii) is:
• Compatibility of the proposed development with adjacent and nearby existing or planned
development in terms of scale, mass, height, bulk, uses, activities, design, structure
placement, privacy, views and similar concerns.
Item -PD Amdmt- Marion Road Redevelopment
�3
Staff continues to be concerned with development on this site that may detract aesthetically from
what is a high quality development and that it would set precedence for other similar requests in the
redevelopment area going forward.
Additionally, Section 30 -33 (E)(3)(b)(v) states:
• Effective mitigation of any potential negative impacts of the proposed development either
on the site itself or off the site.
Police and Transportation have expressed concerns about raising the height of the EMC and that it
may pose a driver distraction that is lessened by keeping it in its approved location.
RECOMMENDATION /CONDITIONS
The Department of Community Development recommends denial of the request to modify the
ground sign as proposed.
The Plan Commission tabled this item at the March 16, 2010 meeting. The following is the Plan
Commission's discussion on this item.
Mr. Burich presented the item and stated that he was opposed to the original request for the
electronic message center signage however it was subsequently approved by both the Plan
Commission and Common Council. He reviewed the site and the originally approved signage with
the development identification on the top, Morton Pharmacy in the middle, and the LED placed on
the base of the signage. He also reviewed the proposed new signage which is proposing the LED on
the top, Morton Pharmacy in the middle, and the development identification on the bottom. He
stated that this new proposal creates safety issues as the LED signage will be placed at a higher level
and could possibly cause driver distractions on Jackson Street. He further stated that this is a
planned development area, and although from a design standpoint, it may be satisfactory in other
areas, it is not appropriate for a redevelopment /planned development site that the City has invested
substantial funding into creating a high quality environment. Flipping the order of the signage to
place the LED on the top puts the priority on the LED sign where most signs of this nature are
located on the bottom. He felt it detracts from the development and the City, in this case, is
responsible to oversee the redevelopment site. He would like to see the signage remain as
previously approved and reviewed the site plan and also other LED signs in the community.
Mr. Bowen commented that he noticed that there appeared to be another major change in the
signage as the Riverfront Landing portion of the sign was previously back lit illuminated channel
letters and now appears to be black/white letters on perforated vinyl panel, or essentially a box sign.
He considered this to be a major shift in design and quality.
Mr. Borsuk stated that he had concerns about the distractions to drivers with the LED sign on top.
Mr. Thorns asked for further explanation of why this would create distractions for drivers.
Steve Gohde, Assistant Director of Public Works, stated that the close proximity of the LED to the
traffic signals distracts drivers' attention from the traffic signals to the signage particularly when
they are colored red, green or amber. Locating the LED on the bottom of the signage is less
hazardous as it has more separation between the signage and the traffic signals.
Item -PD Amdmt- Marion Road Redevelopment -
J�
Mr. Hinz questioned if there was any way to prohibit the use of red, green or yellow coloring in the
LED sign.
Mr. Gohde replied that is possible but would be extremely difficult to enforce.
Mr. McHugh asked if the sign would block the view of drivers attempting to turn onto Jackson
Street from Pearl Avenue.
Mr. Burich responded that it would not.
Mr. Vajgrt commented that the moving marquee is also distracting for drivers.
Mr. Hinz suggested maybe there could be a compromise by putting the LED sign in the middle of
the signage.
Steve Morton, Morton Pharmacy, 200 City Center, stated that a landscape plan had been developed
for the site when the sign was proposed with the LED three to six feet from the ground to mainly
advertise daily specials. The new sign component for the Riverfront Landing portion would still be
back lit but would now be constructed in a cut out aluminum sheet for cost savings. He distributed
photos of competitor's signage which is mainly Walgreens and stated that he did not believe that the
LED sign on top would be a distraction from the traffic signals as the sign would be 8 to 11 feet off
the ground and the traffic signals are about 20 feet. He also commented that he would be satisfied
with signage similar to the Walgreen's sign on Jackson Street and Murdock Avenue. He suggested
eliminating the landscaping proposed around the base of the sign or raising the sign by three feet.
Mr. Thorns questioned how tall the proposed signage would be.
Mr. Morton responded that it would be 13 feet 7 inches tall.
Mr. Thoms then asked if the sign was allowed to be raised up three feet, could the sign remain as
originally proposed.
Mr. Burich replied that the Department of Community Development had not reviewed the landscape
plan as yet and would have to review landscaping as well as the height of the fence before an
effective review and recommendation could be made by city staff.
Mr. Borsuk suggested that the item be laid over for two weeks to a month for a more accurate
recommendation.
Mr. Thorns agreed that staff should work with the developer on the issue and see if a compromise
could be reached and lay the request over until the next meeting.
Mr. McHugh commented that the landscaping plans should be submitted at the time a request is
brought forward for approval.
Ms. Propp stated that she felt the LED sign placed on the top was not appropriate and that the style
of lettering for the Riverfront Landing portion was not as attractive as the original proposal. She
still wanted to see the development identification on the top of the signage and supported the
suggestion to lay the item over until the next meeting.
Item -PD Amdmt- Marion Road Redevelopment 4
Mr. Nollenberger also agreed.
Motion by Thoms to lay over the planned development amendment for a ground sign at the
intersection of Jackson Street and Marion Road.
Seconded by Hinz. Motion carried 9 -0.
Item -PD Amdmt- Marion Road Redevelopment
he
0
Q_fHIQ./ n
ON THE WATER
City of Oshkosh Application
Planned Development Review
11 Conditional Use Permit Review
— PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT USING BLACK ]NK *•
APPLICANT INFORMATION
Petitioner:
7
Petitioner's Address: 2.803 tad. ,k E r t a...1 d b r. 6te g ity:
SUBMIT TO:
Dept of Community Development
215 Church Ave., P.O. Box 1130
Oshkosh, Wisconsin 54903 -1130
PHONE: (920) 236 -5059
Date:
State: 01 zip: 5
Telephone #: (�2e) - 2 5 713 Fax: (12,,) C121' 1 '7 03 Other Contact # or Email: IYA4 C- 46 5 ,1 67AI"b
Z��iC-ritl. ° C ff
Status of Petitioner (Please Check): n Owner LXRepresentative ❑ Tenant ❑ Prospective Buyer /
Petitioner's Signature (required): Date: ! 2 7 //.
OWNER INFORMATION
Owner(s): A-LL T 0. b1C4C Date: 2' An
Owner(s) Address: 230 Ck i O 57 &t f- Z.0 City: 6sh, k0 s Gk State: ZC:( Zip:
Telephone #: &w) 3 — 1 1 1&4/ , ,5 Fax: (92,) Z-36, &4i �r4 Other Contact* or Email:
Ownership Status (Please Check): D Individual ❑ Trust XPartaership D Corporation
Property Owner Consent: (required)
By signature hereon, I/We acknowledge that City officials and/or employees may, in the performance of their functions, enter upon the
property to inspect or gather other information necessary to process this application. I also understand that all meeting dates are tentative
and may be postponed by the Planning Services Division for incomplete submissions or other administrative reasons.
Property Owner's Signature:
SITE INFORMATION
Date:
Address /Location of Proposed Project: JeL.Clson jtl Rd.n'bn _kd, Pear Ai. Parcel No.
Proposed Project Type: IMfLL:LUJ 6f Tekltfi..i1 �1
Current Use of Property: VALCa..{;t, �' �GxY1•t yy7 C c (.i Tc L ` �- Zoning:
Land Uses Surrounding Site: North: t, oyyi m e u
South: Co I'Yl. ►'1 -1 �° C;. �e...fj
East: H U �. ±i f UyLt (!f
West: (d m rn.0 rci`aj
**Please note that a meeting notice will be mailed to all abutting property owners regarding your request.
➢ Application fees are due at time of submittal. Make check payable to City of Oshkosh.
➢ Please refer to the fee schedule for appropriate fee. FEE IS NON - REFUNDABLE
For more information please the City's website at www.ci.oshlosh-wi.us/Community
dYA
Staff Date Recd
/-1
Briefly explain how the proposed conditional use/development plan will not have a negative effect on the issues below.
I . Health, safety, and general welfare of occupants of surrounding lands_
rhC fiui ld�'+� des ,'Sh 1 �r��ri �c5 icK%lC a s
I�Ye, 5- . -,ery, and heAj?'+
2. Pedestrian and vehicular circulation and safety.
7hG �i�t des /��+ `�pCGZseS drr i „z�r - cv-�d C'cn.��etiv� � yule Suyi'�rt�rd,v�
i1CTd�hlo�shc�cl, if xi5z ;>nvrdes vhcre dPt#dOjl5 far mevcrrrc', e 71rr�u �c�r J yhe arnt
3. Noise, air, water, or other forms of environmental pollution.
frc W,t! Medf 3e4e'fy Crde5
4. The demand for and availability of public services and facilities.
- Proj e ct i 'es f=ety m ec�l ,- Pu.b /ie 3 -ereTl
5. Character and future development of the area
Hodern 1J1tddi'J5 OVE C.c =n.S,`rJ4!fed Sam c�:,.d die � by ► roc
e,n wrn fl-rrerwf 5 ,
SUBMITTAL REOUIREMENTS — Must accompany the application to be complete.
A NARRA77VE of the proposed conditional use/Development Plan including:
❑ Existing and proposed use of the property
❑ Identification of all structures (including paving, signage, etc.) on the property and discussion of their relation to the project
❑ Projected number of residents, employees, and/or daily customers
❑ Proposed amount of dwelling units, floor area, landscape area, and parking area expressed in square feet and acreage to the
nearest one - hundredth of an acre
❑ Effects on adjoining properties to include: noise, hours of operation, glare, odor, fumes, vibration, etc.
❑ Compatibility of the proposed use with adjacent and other properties in the area
❑ Traffic generation (anticipated number of customers, deliveries, employee shift changes, etc.)
❑ Any other pertinent information to properly understand the intended uselplan and its relation to nearby properties and the
community as a whole
A complete SITE PLAN and BUILDING ELEVATIONS must include:
❑ Two (2) full size (minimum 24" x 36") scaled and dimensioned prints of site plan and building elevations
❑ Two (2) 8 %2 x 11 (minimum) to 11" x 1T' (maximum) reduction of the site plan and building elevations
❑ One compact disc or diskette with digital plans and drawings of the project in AutoCAD 2000 format with fonts and plot style
table file (if plans have been prepared digitally)
❑ Title block that provides all contact information for the petitioner and /or owner and contact information of petitioner's
engineers/surveyors/architects, or other design professionals used in the preparation of the plans
❑ The date of the original plan and revision dates, if applicable
❑ A north arrow and graphic scale.
❑ All property lines and existing and proposed right -of -way lines with dimensions clearly labeled
❑ All required setback and offset lines
❑ All existing and proposed buildings, structures, and paved areas, including building entrances, walks, drives, signs, decks, patios,
fences, walls, etc.
❑ Location of all outdoor storage and refuse disposal areas and the design and materials used for screening
❑ Location and dimension of all on -site parking (and off -site parking provisions if they are to be employed), including a summary
of the number of parking stalls provided per the requirements of Section 30 -36 City of Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance
• Location and dimension of all loading and service areas
• Location, height, design, illumination power and orientation of all exterior lighting on the property including a photometries plan
❑ Location of all exterior mechanical equipment and utilities and elevations of proposed screening devices where applicable (i.e.
visible from a public street or residential use or district). Mechanical equipment includes, but is not limited to; HVAC
equipment, electrical transformers and boxes, exhaust flues, plumbing vents, gas regulators, generators, etc.
'011'uBlsap'i uBls 6e8 uaaig a4 6lap:lpawu4 alge6xd sl ]e44 P0 aq JIM 3 POM4.e slgiJC4 aaj e'011
'uBlsap q uBls 6ea uawg wa4 uolsslwlad,lnotw jo LMm jeploH 6q pasn aq VoAwe slot j0 uopiod hue pino4s Mg spuelsiapun iaplaR zsenbaj uodn oll'uBisap q uBls 6x8 uaaJg of 6lamlpawwl
4 Mw as pue'Od pig hue of )poise slgl asopsip as jou saajoa raploH 8tj1 'ggl 'uBlsap , u619 6e8 uaaig jo uolss"d uaup m atp jnmmm )POKE slgl aonpoidai jo 'einglgsip'a6ueqo
1qo of jou smbe rdploH a4j joajag }dhow sp 68 'MI'umsap v uNs 6x8 umg al 6Lgapdoid an pux Alwp a sll ul MOp6doo On paupquoo uogewJojul aqj PUB VO#4n agj'juawnoop slgl
COL6'WOU -*XVI•C6LS'LLV0L6 :Hd• CLEM IM`VI MUG- LL31SI(IUNIPIUIMM'SC08L EEMEM
iWL 6L£'0S6 .0•.L =.0 /L .w=s 6051-6
`• l ° Im °jOU SO
W)IHso A= U NOSA W
NJIS3a �I:J�S
7d��4 I N01HOW ISLS/�IWnO AMY 1N3Wd013A3C130NMTIY ° pN
8 N'3191
F
f
v
I :LRi
0
m Lo Lo
0 to
6.
O W
L) m w
Y m
9 CD
0`�`�
s a
a
z
H
c
z
0
gg c
SpL)
J Lu
} 0 (
Co uj
z g u
z
Lu
J LL c ( ]
m J du
=oz
god
mQ
Z O w
cd 66
a-wg.
LL M
LL H J
17
rt
W
W
LL
W o
z 0
g 5-
ui ° o
mJp
J �
Z r%
ow
FA
a
v
O
P-4
. }.y,..
O
13rI. ..
W
W
LL
W o
z 0
g 5-
ui ° o
mJp
J �
Z r%
ow
FA
a
'gll 'u6lsa0 9 tAS Reg u=E) of RPlepawwl 9ma ed sl M PaWelo a9 BPN )PoepR sill J0194 a 'O'n
'u6lssa 4 ublS Reg u-S woL4 uolsslwmd wqm m Wien iaPloH Ry Pasn a9 WMUe sill to uWAW Rue pinols 1e41 sW Wapun JaPloH 7sanbw uodn g g uOeS Reg ums 01 Rlep:pawuq
A wnW of pue 'RUed Pi!W Rue (1 )pom41e sgp asolosp of lou saaju rappH all 'g q uDIS Reg uaajg to uolsspwad www all lnOt WPOKA sill aanpaidai jo 'avq=p 'aDuep
pile of lou saa& JaPIOH all loasq idiom q AS 'Oil Asa0 9 uOIS Reg uaaig of AMaudwd am pue RWMR q ul Pa34ePFdos aye WN Woa uop:wmWl all PLR VOKA aLp'W2UNIOW sPLL
L'OLCUVObb WJ •£6LS'LLb'OL6'Hd• 8L£6S WIN N33110• LL US la allM3XDVd I EOSL
MI.WC •oze ' .o- .L =.vn o►azI '°a
N E3 I S 3 a N'J' I S ""` uA "so�HSO "" u"as»vr "°'°"'
�.� P taotaow MRS/IMwna AaNV :4 o v u�wdrn a aornrmv
9 N3�
r
5
z
0
v
0
N
d
w
H
J �
m
m Y
U � w
2 m
g O
J L
co S J
I
U C
9
Z w
g�
R P
me
no
z
`
c2 w w
S
z �
f Q
�Z
z U
Lm
Q v��
zc�
ui U
s Z
^
w
m m -20
zQQ LO
Q
m 6g -u
to ot
co
!�
CV,Z
z
.
F.7
{ t
A
W
W
O
a
0
a
a
0
v
0
N
d
w
H
J �
m
m Y
U � w
2 m
g O
J L
co S J
I
U C
9
Z w
g�
R P
me
no
z
`
c2 w w
S
z �
f Q
�Z
z U
Lm
Q v��
zc�
ui U
s Z
^
w
m m -20
zQQ LO
Q
m 6g -u
to ot
co
!�
'all 'u6lsoa S uOls he usalg o3 AIWIpowwl eigcALd sl p/q1 Pa6figo aq pun )PON4n s!Ul 101 ea! a 'a'n
'u61soo 4 u6ls Feg usalg wou uolsslwled 10 0 4PA 10 W 1eploH Fq pasn aq )poAg1e sigl p uoglod Fue pings P:qi spumopun laplaH isanbai uodn a 'ublsaa g ub!s he wlw9 of FloWipewwl
A ulrgal of pue `hued pllgl hue ai )PoNgm slgi asoloslp onou sa2l6e lapioH ag1 - n ulksoa is uom hg uaalg jo uolssluuad uappm alt lnowim vomm sp sanpo1da1 'alnqulslp'eouega
'191e of iou saaJOE laploH aq1 Wwaq idImi sp. AS OTI 'Ualsao g u6ls Fee uaalg o> Flelaudold ale pue F>alpus sll ul pMOpFdoo ale pouleauoo uogewlo;ul 8 1 4 pug ` PON4.m aq; `wauutoop s!ql
COL61WOZ6 WA •E6L9'ZL4'0Z6 :Hd• CLEN WON N3330• LL US la ONVMWVd'S CM
NJIS :El Q NJIS
� N3�
oum
:ne P--Id Yv
N012aOW 3A31SIMWna AaNY
J
SV9l'6LC'OL6 � A , Ia.V /L ° O ' S 60'S 1-6 '4a
VA eras HSO) = Ago IS Nomooyf O°
1NMd013A3a 3ONVM '
l
NQ
zF
z
ink
41 �2
l
'HSONHSO
oul
...... ffv
�AN 3HI
-m dwo—Z INC�IJY
It, av
-M/%gcl wniy m2N Y
V
f � �
PON
L1
IV
A�;),
i,
5 '
I
E �ls uos���r
Lu
LU
J (L
L 0z 0
�— O U-
L NJtA��F -0
ui iL a
lu ;:I� �
Z uj J Z N
QIL0 L jw
W U) -
W 20
W
J � J
ry i 1 gu
u► ,a by e �. alb � `'�
�,9k �� \
r °a O
W Q-
LU
O sS J
N
- o
-- - -- _ 3
9
4 3�
i
VJ�
-_f -l-G _RD --- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - -- - 0
M
a o rr
Yw7e
e,
�
e
r ,
U
tl
i
,t
t
." �k .
DISCLAIMER O
This map is neither a legally recorded map nor DEVELOPMENT SIG NAG E
a s urvey and 't's not intended t o be used as one. MARION R D & JACKSON ST N OfHKOlH
This drawing is a compilation of records, data
and information located In various city, county ON THE WATER
and state offices and other sources affecting
the area shown and it is to be used for reference City of Oshkosh
purposes only. The City of Oshkosh Is not re- Department Of
sponsible for any inaccuracies herein contained. Scale: 1 " — 150' Community Development
If discrepancies are found, please contact the
City of Oshkosh.
Created by - dff 10/26/09
n_
a
�
�.
°`7
N k{ tr.
�.
°`7
a9l
Y
W V _• I I
V „V C
LI
A
O
M -2 JOH VE. to V
E
w Co
? W. LIN LN E.
U) F
Y Q
U) cr
w
O
L�
w z
F-
NAVE. z
BOG
" SUBJECT
IRVI � A
STON PL.
At�`9 R
'9
SITE
D
LE AVE.
ERS AVE.
U)
�
UNION E. °
ID q
�
OXFORD
°.
O� to
PW
z
Z 1-: °
m
W
HUDSON
-
2 C7 cq
Lo
tiU z
6 yq LL O
z �- z o
< O
o °
CO
C -2
°
M-
Av
,
Q �� ,�
Q D
SH ' A V
09
R,o
�Al
El
W- RD AVE. <, C -2P
C -'DOS
D
W
�'
AVE.
_
�
P
° o � AVE
O
u') 6TH
�
AjO�
0:
m
7TH AV o
FF�O M -2
�4?
o
8TH AV C �
E.
700 600 0
400 300 200 ib
0 E.
W. 9TH AVE.
W.
OTH A
-
E
.J
J
D 11TH
A °
E
O '3P
2TH A�V
z
Q
CD
AV
SOUTH UTH R .
DISCLAIMER
DEVELOPMENT
S I G NAG E
0
This map Is neither a legally recorded map nor
a s
This i s dr awing and It Is not Intended to be Us ed as one. drawing Is a compilation of records, data
MARION R D & JACKSON
ST N
Of HKO.f H
and Information located In various city, county
and state offices and other sources affecting
the area shown and It is to be used for reference
oR THE WATER
City of Oshkosh
purposes only. The City of Oshkosh Is not re-
s s Inaccuracies found, plea contained.
If di are found, please contact matt the
If di
�� —
Scale. 1
.f
1 000
Department Of
Community Development
City of Oshkosh.
Created by - dff
10/2
a9l
f! f
SIGN
LOCATIONS
DISCLAIMER
This map is neither a legally recorded map nor
a survey and it is not intended to be used as one.
This drawing Is a compilation of records, data
and information located in various city, county
and state offices and other sources affecting
the area shown and it is to be used for reference
purposes only. The City of Oshkosh is not re-
sponsible for any inaccuracies herein contained.
If discrepencies are found, please contact the
City of Oshkosh.
Created by - dff
DEVELOPMENT SIGNAGE
MARION RD & JACKSON ST
Scale: 1" = 150'
O
N O.fHK fH
ON THE WATER
City of Oshkosh
Department of
Community Development
10/26/09
Mao