Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-Letter (BOA variance denied) O City of Oshkosh Darryn Burich Dept.of Community Development Director Planning Services Division Planning Services Division O.IMKOIH 215 Church Ave.,PO Box 1130 ��w.� Oshkosh,WI 54903-1130 (920)236-5059 (920)236-5053 FAX h ://www2.ci.oshkosh.wi.us March 12, 2015 Mr. Jay Supple FILED-� Fratello's Waterfront Restaurant BOARD of APPEALS 1501 W. Arboretum Dr. MAR 1 2 2015 Oshkosh, WI 54901 OSHKOSH COM111UNITl'DEVELOPMENT Re: 1302 S. Main St. To Whom It May Concern: On March 11, 2015, the City of Oshkosh Board of Appeals denied your varia.nce request to pernut an off-premise/billboard sign. The decision of the Board was filed in the Planning Office of the Department of Community Development on March 12, 2015. Section 30-6(C)(1) and (2) of the City of Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance allows the same variance request to be heard 3 times in any 12-month period. If this is the first or second time you have requested this variance within 12 months, you may re-apply if you i wish. If your variance request has been denied 3 times within a 12-month period, but you feel there has been a change in the circumstances affecting your request, you may submit a request for an additional hearing stating the changes that have occurred. The Board will review this request, and if three Board members feel there is sufficient change in circumstances to warrant an additional hearing, then you may re-submit your variance request through the normal procedure. You may call me at(920)236-5059 if you have any questions. Respectfully, :., �~�� �"�--'��----�. r --- - Todd M. Muehrer Associate Planner/Zoning Administrator TNIM/dff CC: Inspection Services Division, City Hall Adaptive Properties, LLC, 1302 S. Main St., Oshkosh i.ti Sp[�� �S O� City of Oshkosh ! 1.�1/I 1 � Planning Services Division 215 Church Ave.,PO Box 1130 Allen Davis � Oshkosh,WI 54903-1130 Director °"""""'a' (920)236-5059 (920)236-5053 FAX Community Development Dept http://www2.ci.osh kosh.wi.us BOARD OF APPEALS AGENDA MARCH 11TH,2015 3:30 PM To Whom It May Concern: Please note the City of Oshkosh Board of Appeals will meet on WEDNESDAY, MARCH 11TH, 2015 at 3:30 PM in Room 404 (Fourth Floor) at Oshkosh City Hall, 215 Church Avenue to consider the following agenda. ROLL CALL AND DECLARATION OF A QUORUM APPROVAL OF JANUARY 14,2015 MINUTES HEARING CONTINUANCES None HEARING OF NEW APPEALS & APPLICATIONS I) 1302 S. Main St. Fratello's Waterfront Restaurant-applicant, Adaptive Properties LLC-owner, requests the following variance to permit an off-premise/billboard sign: Description Code Reference Re uired Proposed Prohibited Signs 30-37(E)(5) On-premise Off-premise COMMUNICATIONS None DISCUSSION OF BOA PROCEDURES None 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. BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES March 11,2015 PRESENT: Dan Carpenter, Robert Cornell, Dennis Penney,Kathryn Larson,Robert Krasniewski EXCUSED: Tom Willadsen, Reginald Parson STAFF: Todd Muehrer, Associate Planner/Zoning Administrator; Brian Slusarek, Planning Technician; Deborah Foland, Recording Secretary Chairperson Cornell called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. Roll ca11 was taken and a quorum declared present. The minutes of January 14, 2015 were approved with a question from Mr. Kra.sruewski regarding the reference on page 3 that the Design Standards guidelines would not apply to the handicapped ramp. Mr. Muehrer stated that he would have to check on that and would follow up with a correction to the minutes if necessary. (Larson/Carpenter) It was determined after researching the recording from the January 14�' meeting that the minutes were correct as presented. ITEM I: 1302 S. MAIN STREET Descrintion Code Reference Required Pronosed Prohibited Signs 30-37(E)(5) On-premise Off-premise Mr. Slusarek presented the item and distributed photos of the subject site. He stated that the properiy was zoned M-2 Central Industrial District and is being used for industrial purposes with existing development including a principal struc,ture used by "Davis Painting". The-general area is characterized as mixed-use in nature. The City received a compla.int in October 2014 of an alleged sign ordinance violation at the subject property which revealed signage for "Fratello's Restaurant & Brewery" had been installed on the existing sign structure that was previously used by the "Pioneer Inn" and is defined as off-premise signage as this establishment is physically located at 1501 Arboretum Drive. A code violation was issued to the property owner in November 2014 and city staff inet with the applicants to discuss the violation and the applicant was granted an extension until December 31 St to allow them to explore alternatives. They have since requested a variance to allow the sign to remain however the pre-existing sign structure has not been utilized since 2007 therefore it lost any nonconforming off-premise/billboard rights tied to the Municipal Code. The request does not meet the Board of Appeals standards for approving a zoning variance and granting the request would be contrary to the public interest. Denial of the variance is recommended. Jay Supple, 15Q1 W. Arboretum Drive, stated that when Randy Davis purchased the property he approached Mr. Davis to utilize the billboard on the existing sign structure on the site. He further stated that the Pioneer Inn had utilized the sign for years and he replaced the content of the sign structure with signage advertising his restaurant. Scott Steffen of Wisconsin Signs installed the new signage and the property owner subsequently received a code violation notice regarding the off-premise signage which is not part of his expertise. Scott Steffen, Wisconsin Signs, 311 E. 11'� Street, Fond du Lac, stated that he has been installing signage for over 15 years and he looked at this project as a normal billboard sign and was not aware that it would be considered off-premise in this area. The sign structure with billboards is usually leased out a month at a time and the lease agreement was taken care of prior to the sign installation. The complaint came in after the Boazd of Appeals Minutes 1 March 11,2015 work was completed and he read portions of the City's code relating to signs and to billboards and he felt the ' real issue was if it was considered a billboard. From his understanding of the staff report, the existing sign lost its nonconformirig status from its lack of use for more than a 12 month period and now it is considered a nonconforming sign. He discussed the re-use of other signs on buildings when changes in ownership occur. He explained that the sign is safe and sturdy and gave the dimensions of the sign's structure. He felt that if Davis Painting could use it that there should be no reason that a variance could not be granted to allow the billboard to come back into compliance and be used for this purpose. Mr. Krasniewski questioned if the sign was proposed to be illuminated. Mr. Steffen responded negatively and stated that any electronics related to the previous sign structure had been removed. Mr. Supple stated that he was not interested in illuminating the sign as it was adjacent to residential properties. Mr. Krasniewski commented that t� his recollection the sign was a directional tool providing guidance to the Pioneer Inn when it was still operationaL Mr. Supple responded that it was and that there were two signs for directional purposes for the Pioneer Inn in that area. Mr. Muehrer stated that the City has issued notices to have the signs removed and that it was part of a larger lawsuit underway with the property owner. Mr. Krasniewski commented that the current use was a change in nature from the original use of the existing sign structure and questioned if a permit was necessary to change the content of the sign. Mr. Muehrer stated that once the sign went to a blank structure, it would have needed zoning revie�v from the City for approval of the content for allowing its re-use and the need for a building permit would have to be researched with Inspections Services if the sign structure was to remain intact. Mr. Krasniewski inquired how far the setback was for the existing sign structure. Mr. Steffen responded that it was approximately 10 feet from the sidewalk. 1VIr. Muehrer stated that the structure was nonconforming from a dimensional standpoint but the use also had to be taken into consideration in this case. Mr. Carpenter questioned if the site that is currently occupied by Davis Painting was previously part of the Buckstaff property. Mr. Muehrer replied that after researching the site, a bank owned the property for a time period after ' Buckstaff's discontinued operations and was later purchased by Adaptive Properties in 2013. Ms. Larson commented that she did not see how a variance could be granted for this request. Mr. Krasniewski stated that a billboard could be placed at that location however it would have to be utilized by either Adaptive Properties or Davis Painting. Board of Appeals Minutes 2 March 11,2015 Heidi Supple, 1501 W. Arboretum Drive, questioned if Davis Painting could have signage on the site why they could not lease it out for their use. Mr. Muehrer responded that the code would allow Davis Painting to utilize the existing sign structure but it would have to be for their business only as off-premise signage is not allowed in the city. Mr. Penney inquired if a variance could be granted for a 25 foot setback for the sign structure. ' Mr. Muehrer respo�ded that the code would allow for a 0 foot front yard setback for the sign structure in this zoning district and that the existing structure was conforming as far as dimensions and explained the City's code standards for signage which could be permitted through a conditional use permit if the establishment was located on the Pioneer Inn site. He further explained that the City made every attempt to make this work however it was not possible with the City's ordinance regarding off-premise signage. Mr. Penney questioned if this is against the City's code, could a variance be granted. Mr. Muehrer replied that under the circumstances, the request �s not allowed by the City's code and it is located in a residential neighborhood and is not the traditional variance request that the Board reviews. Mr. Penney commented that it was a financial hardship that could not be considered under the Board's criteria to grant a variance. Mr. Krasniewski added that it would also be considered a self imposed hardship which also cannot be considered. Mr. Steffen questioned if the sign was considered a billboard. Mr. Muehrer explained that when the existing sigri went to blank content for more than 12 months, it could not be utilized with off-premise content as it would be considered a nonconforming billboard. He further explained the circumstances by example of existing taverns in residential areas which are allowed to remain as long as they are operational, however if they are vacant for more than 12 months, they cannot be re- established although the structure would be allowed to remain. Mr. Steffen commented that there are other billboards in the city that contain off-premise content. Mr. Muehrer explained that they are allowed to remain as they were pre-existing to the ordinance,however if they are damaged, removed, or unused for more than 12 months, they could not be replaced or re-used. � ' Mr. Steffen questioned the process to permit a billboard with off-premise content. Mr. Muehrer explained the process of conditional use permits which have been utilized by hotels and motels or the development being located in a planned development area and it was permitted in that fashion. If this sign was within a planned development and approved as part of the development, or if the property being advertised was partnered with the property owner, the sign could be used. Mr. Supple inquired why a variance cannot be granted to allow the sign to remain. Mr. Krasniewski responded that the existing sign should not be there according to code requirements. Board of Appeals Minutes 3 March 11,2015 Mr. Muehrer reiterated the nonconforming regulations for use and structures and discussed how the code was meant to eventually make these situations become conforming by disallowing the use over time as they are not appropriate for the city. Ms. Supple commented that the sign has been there for nine years, not in use, and looked rather unsightly and they have improved the sign and now cannot utilize it. Mr. Muehrer discussed nonconforming situations such as taverns and other issues such as fire damaged homes that have existing garages still standing and how they are handled as well as the new zoning ordinance that is currently in the process of being re-written. He also discussed policy questions regarding businesses that cease operations and how the signage for these facilities is handled or how it should be handled under the new zoning ordinance. Mr. Krasniewski stated that the current code states that signs will be removed after one year of the business ceasing its operations. Mr. Steffen commented that he understands the philosophy regarding items such as the tavern use however with this situation, this location for the sign does not create any safety issues or is not detrimental to the neighborhood so he does not understand the reason a variance could not be granted under these circumstances. Ms. Larson explained that the use of the sign structure would have been grandfathered-in if it was utilized within a 12-month period however that time period has long expired. Mr. Supple questioned if the sign structure could be used if Davis Painting desired to do so and it could be much larger in size. Mr. Muehrer responded affirmatively. Mr. Cornell explained the state statutes and municipal code standards that the Board has to adhere to when considering granting a variance. Mr. Penney described some of the circumstances that would have to apply for the Board to grant a variance. Motion by Krasniewski to approve the requestfor a variance to permit.an off-premise/billboard sign. Seconded by Carpenter. � ' Mr. Carpenter commented that this request does not meet the necessary criteria to allow the Board to grant a variance. Mr. Krasniewski stated that the City should have issued the notice to remove this sign seven years ago. Ms. Larson added that since the 12 month period of not utilizing the sign has expired, a variance could not be granted at this point. : Motion denied 5-0. Finding of facts: Boazd ofAppeals Minutes 4 March 11,2015 . No hardship. Not a unique situation: Ezceeded 12 months. Illegal to grant variance. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 4:04 p.m. (Carpenter/Krasniewski). Respectfully submitted, Brian Slusarek Planning Technician Board of Appeals Minutes 5 March 11,2015 � � STAFF REPORT BOARD OF APPEALS ' MARCH 11,2015 ITEM I: 1302 S. MAIN STREET GENERAL DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND Fratello's Waterfront Restaurant-applicant, Adaptive Properties LLC-owner, requests the following variance to permit an off-premise/billboard sign: Description Code Reference Required Prouosed Prohibited Signs 30-37(E)(5) On-premise Off-premise The subject 2.58 acre property is zoned M-2 Central Industrial District and is being used for industrial purposes according to the City of Oshkosh Assessor's web page. The parcel is located on the east side of S. Main Street between E. South Park Avenue (north) and E. 14�'Avenue(south). Existing development on site includes a one-story principal structure used by "Davis Painting". It was built in 1947 and has a total area of 14,350 square feet. Adjacent land uses to the subject parcel include single family residential and commercial to the west, industrial to the north and south, and infrastructure to the east. The general : area is characterized as mixed-use in nature. 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 egists 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 hardship? Will granting of a variance result in harm to the public interest? The City of Oshkosh Department of Community Development received a complaint in October 2014 of an alleged sign ordinance violation at the subj ect property. The initial inspection revealed signage advertising "Fratello's Restaurant & Brewery" had been installed on the existing ground sign structure generally located in the southwest corner of the property located at 1302 S. Main Street. The signage installed is defined as off- premise (see definition below) which violates Section 30-37 (E)(5) of the municipal code since "Fratello's Restaurant & Brewery" is physically located at 1501 Arboretum Drive. Subsequently a code violation notice was issued to the property owner on November 6, 2014 with a compliance date of November 30, 2014. On November 14, 2014 city staff met with the applicants on-site to discuss the violation in greater detail and answer questions. Following the meeting the city granted the applicant's request to extend the : compliance deadline (i.e. December 31, 2014) to allow them to explore alternatives. The applicants are requesting a variance to permit the off-premise/billboard signage to remain. STAFF REPORT BOARD OF APPEALS ITEM I -2- MARCH 11,2015 The subject sign structure was previously used by the "Pioneer Inn" to advertise the resort located east on Pioneer Drive. However, the resort closed circa 2005 and "Google Earth" imagery verifies the subject structure in question has not displayed off-premise (or : any sort o fl signage from at least October 2007 through September 2013 (see attached photos). This information was used to establish the structure lost any nonconforming off= ; premise/billboard rights tied to Section 30-4 of the Municipal Code. The request does not meet the Board of Appeals Procedures and Regulations standards (see Article VII) for approving a zoning variance. Specifically, there are no physical property circumstances present that would prevent code compliance of displaying only on-premise signage for Adaptive Properties LLC. Also, the purpose of Section 30-37 is to provide the minimum standards to safeguard property and public welfare by regulating : the quality of materials, appearances, etc. of all signs and sign structures. Since the regulations specifically prohibit off-premise/billboard signs, granting the request would : be contrary to the public interest. RECOMMENDATION Based on the information provided within this report; denial of the variance as requested is recommended. Defuutions (30-01): Off-Premise Si�n: A sign which directs attention to a business, commodity, service, entertainment or attraction sold, offered, or existing elsewhere than upon the same lot where the sign is displayed. : Please Type or Print in BLACK INK Return to: Department of Community Development 215 Church Ave. P.O. Box 1130 Oshkosh,WI 54903-1130 CITY OF OSHKOSH APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE Please submit a complete reproducible site plan (maximum size 11" x 17"). (A complete site plan includes, but is not limited to, all structures, lot lines and streets with distances to each.) Please refer to ; the fee schedule for appropriate fee. FEE IS NON-REFUNDABLE.The fee is payable to the City of Oshkosh and due at the time the application is submitted. Address of Parcel Affected: 1302 S. Main Street,Oshkosh,WI Petitioner: Fratellos Waterfront Restaurant-1ay Supple Home Phone: 920-203-3295 Petitioner's Address: 1501 W.Arboretum Dr., Oshkosh,WI 54901 Work Phone: 920-232-23 4 Signature Required: �ate: �'�I3�{1� Owner(if not petitioner): Davis Painting& Decorating, Inc. Home Phone: Owner's Address: 1302 S. Main Street, Oshkosh,WI 54902 Work Phone: 920-426-2386��-�� ,; i Signature Required: �I"'�`'� f' � Date: �,���(��� In order to be granted a variance, each applicant must be able to prove that an unnecessary hardship would be created if the variance is not granted.The burden of proving an unnecessary hardship rests upon the applicant.The attached sheet provides information on what constitutes a hardship. (Attach additional sheets, if necessary, to provide the information requested.Additional information may be requested as needed.) : 7 : 1. Explain your proposed plans and why you are requesting a variance: Fratellos was notified in November 2014,that a billboard that was installed on an existing sign structure located in the southwest corner of the property located at 1302 S. Main Street is in violation of Section 30-37(E)(5)of the Municipal Code,that"Off-premise signs, except for hotel/motel directional signs" are prohibited. It is our position that this sign is a billboard, not an off-premise sign. Billboards are defined under Section 30-1 (147)(d) Billboard:A sign that directs attention to a business, commodity, service or entertainment conducted,sold, or offered at a location other than the premises on which the sign is located. We are requesting a variance to the stated prohibition regarding off-premise signs, because in reality this is a billboard, not an off-premise sign. We do not own the sign or the property, but instead we are leasing the sign and have installed a temporary flex face, since it is not intended to be a permanent sign. This is consistent with any of our billboards and the signage industry,to use a temporary sign during the term of the lease,and then the next billboard lessee will then replace the face with their temporary flex face. 2. Describe how the variance would not have an adverse effect on surrounding properties: The repair work done to the sign consisted of replacing a missing panel, which is consistent with ! "ordinary maintenance and repairs", but did nothing to modify the size of the sign. However,the repair work to the dilapidated sign is definitely an improvement to the surrounding properties. Hwy 45 is a gateway into Oshkosh from the south, and no longer are residents and visitors alike viewing a blank billboard with a missing panel as one of the first visuals as they drive into Oshkosh. (Note Photos 1-3) In addition,the signage is consistent and complementary to other billboard signage in the area, including the wall billboards located on 9th Street advertising both The Roxy and Fratellos. (Note Photo ' 4) 3. Describe the special conditions that apply to your lot or structure that do not apply to surrounding lots or structures 4. Describe the hardship that would result if your variance were not granted: This variance needs to be granted to properly define this as a "billboard" and to continue to improve economic commerce in Oshkosh as well as to the surrounding properry values and visual attractiveness of one of the main entrances into Downtown Oshkosh We believe this variance will be consistent to the remaining billboards that were used by the Pioneer, including this one we are referencing in this request,as well as the future use for other lessees to utilize the billboards located on the former Pioneer Drive. (Note photos 5-7) 8